The Battle lines are drawn

Filed under: Latest News,Politics |
PF leader Sata addressing a rally in the run up to 2011 elections in Luapula province. Photo source: Post

PF leader Sata addressing a rally in the run up to 2011 elections in Luapula province. Photo source: Post

By Daivd Kapoma

We are now within the last ninety (90) days of the first five (5) years of the Patriotic Front in power. In 2011 the PF promised to do miracles within ninety days of the party being in power. We know how that story went and now is the time to look for what comes next.
With the campaigns officially launched, it has become almost clear that the battle lines are drawn. I can however NOT rule out the possibility of a third force that may just come as a shocker, bearing in mind that these are politics and anything can happen anytime. I also know and acknowledge the fact that comedy will not miss this time around as our favourite Alex Muliokela just launched his  campaigns for presidency.  Such is what makes politics interesting.
History indicates that Zambia has been a pillar of democracy in Africa and yes it is obviously everyone’s hope that our country will continue on that path. We have just entered the days of great suspense and expectations. This is a very sensitive time when those responsible of managing our elections will be accused of raising dust in water. It is the time when those in government will be accused of using national resources to finance their campaigns. The opposition will be accused of being bitter and unreasonable. All these are not new things in the history of this country’s elections. We see the same things happen every time our country is going towards elections.
What is however important at this point is for all those aspiring for different position to realise that they are seeking to serve the people and ensure that they give the citizens a better fight against poverty, create more jobs, and enhance the enjoyment of human rights among other things. I hope that our politicians will tackle these issues during the campaigns and tell us how best they will solve the problems our country is currently faced with. So far I have heard ‘mpaka litente’, ‘Zambia forward’, ‘ifintu ni Lungu’ etc. Maybe due to lack of ‘isukulu’, until now I don’t get the real meaning of such.
I further appeal to all functionaries, the electoral commission, political parties, candidates and personalities to refrain from any act, statements or dissemination of information that may adversely affect the peaceful and orderly conduct of elections on 11th August 2016. It is every citizen’s responsibility to ensure that credible elections are conducted in a conflict free and fair environment. We all have a role to play in ensuring that we sustain the peaceful nature of this country.
This is the time we have to all be careful with how we use our mouths. We only have one Zambia and we therefore must put our interest aside and put the interest of our nation first before anything. We have to remember that beneath the armour of skin, tribe and minds, all of us are amazingly the same. We are one people supporting different ideas. We therefore don’t need to crush and use dreadful idiom on each other, we need to coexist.
Our greatest power as a nation and individuals is not the ability to employ assault weapons, insults and drones to destroy each other. The greater more creative powers with which we may arm ourselves are grace and compassion sufficient enough to love and save each other as country men and women.
I wish all those contesting at different levels all the best.
God Bless Zambia.


7 Responses to The Battle lines are drawn

  1. Well articulated. It is upto the loving zambian to digest what you have outlines.

    May 18, 2016 at 10:27 am

  2. I wish many can read and comprehend. Lets do more of such write ups.

    May 18, 2016 at 10:47 am

  3. I coat( Zambia is a pillar of democracy). yes last time we did it even now we can do it together we can fight all undemocratic devices to remain united. one Zambia one nation and one leader who so ever will imagine victorious we should all support him to build our mother Zambia

    mususa mwape
    May 18, 2016 at 11:27 am

  4. Yes this is important, but even before your ink has dried up the PF have already started tearing other peoples campaign materials. To me PF is showing primitivity of the highest order. UPND should strongly warn its cadres against such primitive behaviour. Only Barbarians (an equivalent of ISS) do such kind of things. UPND cadres should be above board. PF cadres obey no one including the President. The police is inept. They lack the freedom and capacity to deal with such issues. The remaining former Ministers are there specifically to encourage and oversee such nonsense. Such is the modus oparandi of the PF!

    May 18, 2016 at 12:38 pm

  5. I am in agreement with the view that one major aspect of genuine patroitism is if are going to ensure that credible elections are conducted in a conflict free and fair environment. Any body who truly loves Zambia will ensure that we sustain the peaceful nature of this country because our greatest power as a nation and individuals is not the ability to employ assault weapons to destroy each other.

    Having said this, allow me to make a clear distinction between the concepts of power and violence. Violence is an instrumental character. It stands in need of justification for some future purpose and of implements to carry its resolution. Power, on the other hand is characterized by legitimacy. It stands in need of numbers and mass support. Even though power and violence can be found in conjunction with one another, we need to realize that violence is incapable of creating power. Instead, violence appears where power is in jeopardy. If i have to explores these two concepts by using a means-end relationship, I would say violence is used a means to attain the end of power. Violence is only effective for short-term goals and cannot create power. In this argument I will explicate Arendt’s argument, by expounding the distinction and relationship between power and violence. I will then use Martin Luther King’s concept of nonviolent direct action as a means to negotiate and Malcolm X’s concept of voting as a means to achieve justice to evaluate the argument.

    “Violence can destroy power; it is utterly incapable of creating it”. In this statement. Violence can never create power because power is distinguished by an initial situation of “getting together”. As an instrumental character, violence is the means used to achieve an end. Some of the intended ends may include the creation of power, security, liberty or self-defense. Violence has become an irrational logic used to create obedience and coercion, not legitimacy and power: Out of the barrel of a gun grows the most effective command, resulting in the most instant and perfect obedience. What can never grow out of it is power. Technology, once used to support human life, is now used to destroy it. Violence, carried out by the use of mass weaponry, creates a “terror state” of rule through violence where all power has been destroyed. This irrational logic depicts the belief that violence can be used to re-gain or gain more power. In reality, violence creates obedience and does not obtain support from the masses needed for legitimacy and power.

    With the knowledge that violence lead to power, it can be concluded that when power rules absolutely, violence is absent. Power, unlike violence, is grounded on the foundation of legitimacy: “Legitimacy, when challenged, bases itself on an appeal to the past, while justification relates to an end that lies in the future”. This legitimacy is based on an initial “getting together”, as seen in the social contract, where consensus is drawn and established. Power also stands in need of numbers, referring to the consent of those being governed: “The moment the group, from which the power originated to begin with disappears, “his power” also vanishes”. When the governed consent to empower a representative to act on their behalf, they allow for one to rule without the need of implements or justification. In terms of the means-end relationship, let me state that, “Power is an end in itself. The power structure itself precedes and outlasts all aims so that power, far from being the means to an end. Here we can differentiates power as an end and violence as a mean. Power, like peace, is an end and cannot be used as a means to achieve goals. An example of power can be seen in a constitutional government. Constitutional governments do not use violence to maintain power because of that initial situation that has predetermined legitimacy and acceptance of the power given to the government.

    Dr Imasiku Liamunga
    May 18, 2016 at 5:22 pm


    May 18, 2016 at 5:48 pm

  7. Thanx bo Dr Imasiku Liamunga. You have articulated issues very well!!!

    Big Bang
    May 19, 2016 at 6:45 pm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.