To Vote or Not to Vote

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?

William Shakespeare - To be, or not to be (from Hamlet 3/1)

There is absolutely no question about the fact that Swaziland's hybrid regime can never be changed through the ballot. Unlike in Swaziland, elections in Zimbabwe and the U.S.A will usher in a new set of leaders and possibly a new set of policies. The question that many Swazis ask themselves is whether it is worth-while to vote or not. Swazi opposition parties and the unions have vowed to once again boycott the forth-coming elections and current events suggest that they are following their plan.

How effective has this strategy been in terms of building up the movement for democracy? In other words, what does a boycott achieve that a well-planned lobby-group in parliament couldn’t possibly achieve? The grass-roots movement that could have been the basis for a mass-uprising is nowhere near as big as it should be after so many years of struggle and it is doubtful that any armed insurrection is looming. It is within this context that it must be acknowledged that opposition parties might lack the creativity and acumen to seize what might be a defining moment.

To illustrate this fact, it is worth noting that an economic research based in Pretoria predicted that if the movement launched by reformists won the elections and the regime either cheated them of their win or refused to open parliament, it could result in an upheaval similar to the one in Kenya. What the research group was speculating on was the very real possibility of agitating the people on the ground by using a well- established and non-radical medium-the elections. In other words, while it is true to say that the winning of elections cannot bring about any real direct change in the status quo, it is not true to say that they cannot be used to achieve a more advantageous position for the movement.

In the event that the progressive movement has decided to ignore this possibility because they do not have the patience to wait for the people’s response and have decided to resort to arms, it is just as justified for them to ensure that they have a parliament that is sympathetic to their deeds. The terrorist bill is currently being debated in parliament and it is not surprising that the current parliament will pass it without even bothering to define what a terrorist is and whether it would be right to pass a terrorist bill without first ridding the country of the conditions that cause terrorism, such as the lack of freedom of speech and other things central to achieving democracy in a peaceful way.

The Obama phenomenon

It is very difficult for any person of African descent, or any person for that matter, to ignore the historic event currently happening in America. The significance of an African American being one step away from the highest and most powerful office in the U.S.A. is more remarkable than Neil Amstrong's moon landing.

The question posed is: "What does Obama mean to sub-Saharan Africa?" This is his fatherland, the continent that he has kept close to his heart and has never been ashamed to be associated with, even as other bi-racial celebrities like Tiger Woods have chosen to distance themselves from their African roots. In short, beyond his stint at the white house, however it might be, what will be the most significant legacy of having a proudly African-American president to young Africans across the continent?

The answer to young Swazis is more complex that it is to those in democratic countries because despite the "Audacity of hope for a better country", ordinary Swazis have absolutely no chance of ever being the heads of States of their country. And their hope might as well remain nothing but pipe-dreams unless they step-up to the challenge as this young man has done. To dare to challenge convention is a revolutionary thing in itself. A black-man with a Kenyan father daring to cross-over to the mainstream voting population to profess his dream of a better America is as revolutionary as fighting for democracy in the country by any means necessary.It is hoped that there will be young Baracks coming from the population.

June 16 In Swaziland

The Student uprisings in Soweto on June 16 1976 were meant to be an example to all youth in the continent, not least those in Swaziland, that a certain amount of freedom can be achieved if the youth themselves break the barriers that have been imposed on society and fight for their rights.

Perhaps the events of June 16 were triggered by matters that were more overt than what the current youth of the country currently face. Overt or not, the underlying reasons for the uprising are similar to those in Swaziland. There is the factor of an elite that lives off the riches of the underlying classes while subjecting them to an ineffective and very limited educational system. It might not be called Bantu Education and its "international status" might make it seem more acceptable but present realities within the country highlight the fact that children in Swaziland are merely being "schooled" and indoctrinated instead of being Educated. An example of this is the controversial IGCSE curriculum that was recently adopted. While the curriculum in itself is not a bad concept, it requires certain conditions to be met if it is to be effective. Access to text books and other learning material are obvious examples. Without which, the concept fails to make sense and instead becomes a more limited version of the old syllabus.

While the pupils are subjected to this inferior education system, the children of the elite classes, notably the Royal family, are educated in private schools inside and outside of the country. If this is not a reason for a student uprising then nothing is.

Elementary Terrorism

When the SBIS ( Swaziland National Brodcasting Service) studios first burned down, it was condidered an act of negligence on the part of the employees. In the second attempt it was reported that the fire was actually the result of arson. It is, of course possible that radical forces were involed in the attempt to subbortage the radio station.

However, certain questions remain unanswered. For example: "Why would a government not increase security at the studios after it had been gutted down twice before ." Moreover," if people are able to evade security at the studios then it is possible that the culprits are actually people who have daily acess to the station." These are the questions that need to be answered before anybody can sincerely take the idea of a terrorist burning down a building and then leaving behind evidence that will incriminate his/her organisation.

With a court case still pending on the PUDEMO members that were arrested when arson first became a trend in the country, it could be that some agent provocateours are intent on causing alarm within the country so as to give the state support in the event that it decides to enforce the very dubious "Terrorism Bill" that parliament has been ordered to approve.