Good Governance in Africa.
Allan Savory.
Summary
To be done
Introduction
African countries post independence have almost universally experienced problems
diverting them far from their independence ideals and dreams. In some cases the people
have endured greater suffering under post colonial home grown tyranny than they did in
latter colonial times. While the political leaders and parties first leading their nations at
independence have generally been blamed, when a similar problem emerges in different
countries under different leaders it suggests there might be something structurally or
conceptually wrong with the legacy of democracy inherited by African nations. This
possibility is further strengthened by the observation that changing leaders and or parties
in power has generally not produced good governance and at best marginal improvement
in people's lives. Blaming individuals or parties who happened to be in power, rather than
looking at the deeper causes is neither constructive nor likely to serve the people well. I
intend to highlight the scientific reasons why good governance evades all nations
(developed and so called under-developed) and the to comment on the belief systems and
structural reasons for "democracy's" dismal performance in Africa while offering ideas
that could, if applied, lead to a better less tyrannical and violent future.
Until all people feel secure and well governed none are. Poor land leads to poor people,
poverty, violence, political instability and genocide. These beliefs have dominated my
adult life as an African scientist of several generations born in Zimbabwe. Such beliefs
led me into political life briefly and into exile. While the connection between the health
of the land and political, social and economic stability was for years denied it is today
increasingly gaining acceptance.
The views I express have been gestating over the thirty years since I served in my
country's Parliament. Holding politicians in low regard, as many people do, I entered
Parliament in desperation to fight racialism, environmentally destructive policies and to
try to end an insane war. To the opposition party that I subsequently led I consistently
stressed that I was only a wartime leader and would withdraw from politics as soon as we
could end our war for independence. The reason for my refusal, despite requests, to
continue in politics was simply that I knew I was not capable of providing good
governance. And I knew that for some years till black Africans gained self-confidence
there would be nothing but token roles for white Africans in political affairs. While the
role of critic is easy. I knew that ensuring good governance was beyond my capacity or
understanding.
Over the last thirty years the need for good governance in my nation seldom left my mind
as I worked on the underlying cause of poverty and violence and studied the performance
of politicians in many countries. What is it that prevents even the best of well meaning
politicians from providing consistent good government in any nation and not just my
own?
While concerned with Africa and in particular Zimbabwe, I draw parallels with America
and other nations for the lessons we can learn. For example, why are friendly generous
Americans internationally envied but so hated? Why despite America's vast wealth,
abundance of scientists, universities and extension services is environmental degradation
so bad that America exports more eroding soil than all other products combined? In
answer to both questions clearly government policies are mainly responsible. When the
only wealth that can ultimately sustain any nation is derived from the photosynthetic
process (solar energy through green growing plants in healthy living soils) as any
scientist knows this does not bode well for America. Historically armies and wars have
changed civilizations while environmental degradation (mainly agriculture) destroys
them. Moving to America as an exile during the cold war and seeing what I did as an
ecologist made me conclude and state that "The USDA (United States Department of
Agriculture) was a greater threat to the USA than the USSR ever was or could be". The
US is not alone as South Africa and other nations also "export" a greater tonnage and
value of eroding soil than all other exports combined. Globally it is estimated that
approximately four tons of soil is going down the world's rivers for every human alive
today. Answers to such questions are important to our African aspirations for good
governance because degraded land can ultimately only result in violence and instability.
Global climate change and desertification are two sides of the same coin and will demand
a greater need for good governance than any time in history. Denial over human induced
climate change is almost over and desertification has already destroyed many
civilizations. The threat to humanity posed by accelerating desertification and climate
change is greater than wars ever fought, greater than any nuclear threat or anything
humans could ever have imagined. It is of our own making and it will inevitably have to
be placed on an international "war footing" with all nations working together above and
beyond religion, race, tribe or any other divisive issues. The level of collaboration
required will demand good governance more than at any time in history.
I write as a practical scientist deeply concerned for the fate of not only my people but all
people. I believe the ideas expressed apply to most countries, developed or underdeveloped, and I hope they are useful to others as we face the future with more sensible
and sensitive governance than we currently enjoy.
Scientific reason why no government can currently provide good
governance.
Main role of government
Had I, as a political party leader, not been forced to develop a party platform and policies,
I never would have understood that the single greatest role of government is the
formation of policies.
While policies are formed by governments in all areas of our lives, it is environmental
policies that have the most profound long term influence on prosperity, stability and
harmony. On the quality of life people lead – whether they live in peace or ultimate
chaos.
Currently policies cannot address complexity
Government policies are formed for one of two reasons – to address a problem or to
prevent a foreseeable problem. To be successful any policy needs to simultaneously
address the complexity of society, the environment and economy.
Desertification inevitably leads to greatly increased flooding, droughts, poverty, social
breakdown, violence, genocide and the breakdown of governments and the failure of
civilizations. In fact desertification leads to most of the symptoms with which African
governments and supporting international agencies and NGOs grapple and from which
millions of people suffer and die. My life's work as a scientist has involved unraveling
the mystery why no government in history has ever been able to successfully address
desertification or reverse it. Contrary to mainstream scientific views desertification is not
caused by all the many things blamed such as overpopulation, overstocking and
overgrazing, communal tenure of land and so on. New scientific insights of the last fifty
years led to discovering that it is caused by the way people and governments make all
conscious decisions. And this in turn led to discovering that all governments,
international agencies and NGO's use the same underlying decision making framework
when forming policies and projects.
Only with the development of a holistic framework for decision making, that took place
in Zimbabwe and the U.S. mainly, did it become possible to practically and inexpensively
reverse desertification. Greater detail is available is described in "Holistic Management:
A New Framework for Decision Making" Island Press 1999". Today desertification is
being slowly reversed through managing holistically on over 30 million acres in America,
Africa, Mexico, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and elsewhere. Contrary to the media
and institutional scientific view today's alarming rate of desertification is not a result of
climate change but rather a major contributor to climate change.
Accidental discovery why resource management policies almost universally
unsound.
As mentioned, the holistic framework involving new scientific insights was specifically
developed to understand and reverse desertification practically and inexpensively. Only
after its development was it discovered that it could be used to more effectively deal with
social, environmental and economic complexity in policy and project analysis and
formation. Something that is almost impossible using the universal framework used by all
governments. For example in the early 1980's some 2,000 officials of the American
government after a week of training in the use of the holistic framework, analyzed many
of their own policies. All without exception were found to be faulty with no chance of
success. One group of officials in training made the unanimous statement that "They
could now recognize that unsound resource management was universal in the United
States". Similar training with this essentially Zimbabwean discovery in India, Lesotho
and Zimbabwe has resulted in similar findings. The problem is I believe universal to all
governments and governments incapable of forming sound resource management policies
are automatically incapable of good governance over the long term.
The framework used by all governments.
Although there are today in business and academic institutions many sophisticated
developments concerning decision making processes if all are peeled down to the core
the decision framework is universally the same and has never changed.
All decisions to deal with any problem in policy formation are made toward the
achievement of an objective. The only tools with which to manage the environment at
large considered in any policy are various aspects of technology, the use of fire or the
resting of the environment. And all actions in the subsequent policy designed to
achieve the objective are based on one or more of many factors. Factors such as - past
experience, expert opinion, research results, public opinion, cost, compromise,
expediency, cultural beliefs, intuition, peer pressure, fear, propaganda, cost, cash flow,
profitability and so on.
There is no exception to the use of this simple framework in all conscious decision
making from a simple pastoralist family to the most sophisticated scientific team
involved in addressing global climate change or space exploration. And all governments
unwittingly use this framework underlying all resource management policy formation.
Areas of success and of disappointment using the universal framework.
Successes.
The universal framework has proven successful in the complicated realm of ever
developing technology from the stone age to space travel and as we see with the marvels
of technology we today enjoy. The staggering success of technology is today
overwhelming in improving people's lives, but also blinding wealthy people to the
realities for most of humanity and our environment.
Our remarkable technological successes are only successful in reality as long as we
ignore the effects on our environment and society, which as we are coming to understand
have reached the level of serious threat to global civilization.
Areas of disappointment.
In those areas of our lives that involve complexity, such as social, economic and
environmental situations always do, the universal decision making framework has led and
continues to lead to escalating problems and conflicts world wide. Many are the apparent
minor successes, but if looked at on the large scale and with honesty while appearing to
win many small battles we are losing the war.
Flaws in the universal framework.
For brevity I mention only the two main flaws in the universal framework.
First objectives and goals (and through them the attainment of missions and visions) do
not and generally cannot address social, environmental and economic complexity short
and long term simultaneously. While most objectives and goals in policy formation are
achieved, the nature of complex systems is such that almost universally we witness
unexpected consequences and the need for ever escalating fixes of fixes. Whole books
have been written on this problem that I need not belabour.
Secondly in technology, fire and rest there is no tool that can reverse desertification in
two thirds of the world's land surface subject to seasonal and or erratic rainfall. The
general belief is that there are thousands of "tools" available to scientists and
governments to deal with environmental problems from desertification to global climate
change. In reality train in any profession in any university in the world and unwittingly
you will only be trained to use technology, fire or resting the environment to deal with
our environment at large. Consequently most actions and policies involve the use of
technology or fire (a major contributor to global climate change).
Thus for scientific reasons it is now understandable why no government, or international
agency for that matter, ever can produce what I would call holistically sound policies.
And it is also now understandable why despite more than ten thousand years of effort and
billions of dollars spent no nation has ever been able to prevent desertification occurring
in seasonal rainfall environments. Holistic policies that are simultaneously economically,
socially and environmentally sound short and long term will only emerge when
governments understand and adopt such new discoveries as made the development of the
holistic framework possible.
Note: There are minor cases in perennially humid environments where it is possible for
governments to create holistically sound policies. A fuller explanation as to the scientific
reasons for current world wide poor governance first appeared in the Spring 2007
edition of World & I, published by The Universal Peace Foundation.
Governments using a holistic framework is not adequate – more is
required.
Not only have we to address the inability to devise holistically sound policy, but
providing good governance, in which all people feel secure and well governed, requires a
fit with people's deep beliefs as well as a supporting civil service capable of carrying out
government policies. To enable good governance the use of a decision framework that
can deal with complexity is essential as is limiting the power of corporations to corrupt
governments.
Reining in corporate power and corruption essential to good
governance.
Working in many countries with different cultures and religions I have come to
understand that most, but by no means all, people are good at heart.
Although I here use the example of the United States, Americans do not have a monopoly
on bad governance. International hatred for Americans is not hard to understand if one
looks at America's foreign policy since independence from Britain under either political
party. General Smedley Butler on retiring from the US Army had this to say "I spent 33
years and 4 months in active military service… And during that period I spent most of my
time as a high class muscle man for the Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In
short I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. Thus I helped make Mexico and
especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba
a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the
raping of half a dozen Central American Republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I
helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking house of Brown Brothers in 1902 1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I
helped make Honduras right for American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I
helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested." Governments forming
foreign policy to serve corporate interests rather than their citizens interests has become
more, not less, pervasive since General Butler's time.
Thus good and friendly people in many nations are prone to end in conflict and war
based, not on the interests or wishes of their citizens but, on corporate interests corrupting
party politics and foreign policy. Britain had eventually to reign in the East India
Company but not until the company's army was larger than Britain's and it had its own
judges and was even passing death sentences. The Boston Tea Party where people threw
the company's tea from their ships into the harbour was one of the early steps leading to
the American Revolution.
The Founding Fathers of America attempted to ensure citizen interests would prevail in a
people's government and tragically George Washington's final Address to the Nation in
which he warned the people of the dangers of political parties as well as corporate and
military power went unheeded. Corporate manipulation, with willing compliance by
political parties and the American judiciary, over the years has led to corporate power
virtually running America regardless of which party is in power.
Many corporations operate legitimately in the public interest as intended, but as with
political power, too much wealth and power corrupts. Only good governance can curtail
corporate abuse, military power and corruption. While democracy is today the best form
of governance we know, as practiced it is not leading to good governance in any nation I
am aware of. This we see with governments unable to deal effectively with complexity
and an inability to reign in corporate power and corruption as well as what can be called
the tyranny of the majority under current party systems. In this global hour of need new
thinking should be seriously considered.
Providing good governance.
Earlier I described that only through governments using the holistic framework can
holistically sound policies be formed. The holistic framework requires what is called a
holisticgoal to serve as a constant toward which to test objectives, and the actions to
achieve them during decision making and the formation of policies and projects.
While objectives, goals and through their achievement missions and visions are essential
and desirable they have two main flaws. First as mentioned earlier they do not enable us
day to day to handle environment, social and economic complexity in conscious
decisions. Secondly differing objectives and goals without reference to a holisticgoal are
one of the main catalysts for conflict at many levels in society and between societies. As
there was nothing in any religion or branch of science that even indicated what could lie
beyond goals, missions and visions the new concept of a holisticgoal was developed to
provide the required constant reference point tying people's values to their life support
system. Somewhat like Magnetic North guiding your life so that no matter what twists
and turns you had to make you were always generally on course to your desired
destination.
The holistic framework can be used in all situations from single working person,
household to national or international level – just as the universal framework is used in
every conscious decision today in all areas of our lives today. The holistic framework
briefly entails adding missing components in the universal framework. Namely the
holisticgoal, the acknowledgement of two new tools to influence the environment at large
and a set of filtering questions that ensure all actions, objectives, goals and policies deal
with the complexity of social, environmental and economic considerations
simultaneously. While the holisticgoal is formed by every decision maker in most
management situations at the national or international level this is not practical and thus a
generic holisticgoal is used to guide policies or projects. Such a national generic
holisticgoal reflects what 99% of the people want and serves as the lighthouse guiding all
policy objectives to safe harbour. Let's look at a national holisticgoal for my country
Zimbabwe.
National Holisticgoal for Zimbabwe.
Quality of Life: (What we want our lives to be based on what we value most in life)
We want to live in peace and harmony with ourselves and neighbouring countries. We
want prosperity, physical and financial security. Good education for our children at all
levels. Freedom to pursue our own cultural, religious and spiritual beliefs. Good housing
and amenities in our towns and cities. Stable families with adequate food security, safe
and healthy food and abundant clean water. To live in balance with our resources with
balance between urban and rural populations so that all can live in peace and prosperity.
Fair and equitable access to resources. Freedom from racial, tribal, sexual or any other
bigotry with justice available and affordable by all. Pride in ourselves our country and
its achievements. International respect. Playing our part as a nation in international
affairs as respected equals.
Forms of Production: (what has to be produced for our citizens to live such lives)
Open society with freedom of expression.
Affordable high quality education opportunity at all levels.
Armed services loyal to our constitution and holisticgoal ideals for their families.
Independent professional judiciary media and press.
Stable economy measured in social and environmental as well as economic ways
encouraging entrepreneurship and investment.
Access to justice for all in an inexpensive and speedy manner.
Policies that always address social, economic and environmental aspects.
Abundant internally produced clean & healthy food and water.
City populations in balance with our environment and rural population.
Modern amenities throughout our small towns and rural environment.
A corruption and crime free society led by government example.
A society that is free from racialism, tribalism and gender inequality.
Education and empowerment of women throughout society.
Level playing field for all Zimbabweans.
Future resource base: (How we have to behave and what our land has to be like a
thousand years from now to sustain successive generations living such lives)
Behaviour: As a nation we have to be honest, fair, friendly and open with a good
attitude to outsiders and other nations.
Land: Our soils on croplands and rangelands have to permanently covered and building,
retaining water and converting solar energy to wealth and life. Rivers have to be running
perennially.
Addressing the need for sound resource management policy.
Policies and actions of governments are without exception formed to achieve an
objective, goal, mission or vision.
The need to address problems or prevent problems through policy or project formation
will always exist and thus policies will continue to be formed toward objectives even
when governing holistically. The difference is that all objectives, goals and actions are
subjected to testing to ensure that they are moving in the direction people desire
expressed in the holisticgoal that ties humanity daily to our life-supporting environment.
Any government can begin to formulate sound policies with greater success using the
holistic framework guided by a national holisticgoal as shown in the above example
which would be similar for many nations. What is required is the structure to ensure that
policies are formulated in this manner and the will to do so. Thus we need next to look at
the structural and belief systems contributing to poor governance today.
Although I have omitted the testing toward the above national holisticgoal all
suggestions, including structural changes to ensure good governance that follow have
been subjected to such testing and are in line with the national holisticgoal.
Addressing structural requirements toward good governance.
Belief in the need for political parties prevents good governance.
Knowing that inevitably one-party systems end in abuse of power and violence, the
widespread belief in multi-party democracy is understandable, as is the desire of the
Western world to thrust such beliefs on fledgling democracies in Africa. However, the
belief that political parties themselves are essential to democratic government blocks
creative thinking and precludes the achievement of good governance. That I am not the
first to see the dangers of political parties was referred to earlier in George Washington's
Farewell Address to his nation September 1796 in which he had this to say ": Without
looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely
out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to
make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration.
It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the
animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It
opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the
government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of
one country are subjected to the policy and will of another"
Widespread evidence suggests the mere existence of political parties leads to poor
governance and violence in many countries. For reasons I will explain, the party system
is simply not working, certainly in Africa, and never can provide good governance. I
intend here to explain how a non-party state could operate with a higher chance of
providing good governance for its citizens. The concept of a non-party state described
bears no resemblance to the idea briefly tried in Uganda.
Party system encourages or condones corruption.
Much evidence suggests that political parties are so prone to corruption in many forms
that they do little to prevent it. While this is not always so it is common enough to believe
that many countries would be less corrupt without political parties. Corruption takes
many forms, one of which is undue influence on a government to follow policies more in
the interest of corporations or special interest groups than of citizens who elected the
party to power. How else can one possibly explain governments going to war to protect
corporate interests in direct conflict with the interests of their citizens?
If governments genuinely wanted to prevent corruption, particularly at a government
level frankly they could do so. A poll of citizens in America, Britain, France, Italy and
Russia would almost certainly indicate the majority are not in favour of the international
arms trade. Despite this lack of citizen support the international arms trade is one of the
largest businesses in the world, dominated by America, Britain, France, Italy and Russia
and sustaining endless conflicts, suffering and slaughter of people and wildlife. As I write
the British government is embroiled in a high profile massive scandal over arms dealing
with the Saudi family.
Predetermined policies cannot deal successfully with complexity.
Parties seek election on the basis of their stated platform expressing the general beliefs
and the policies most of the people supporting that party will pursue if elected. Such a
party platform involves major decisions and actions already pre-determined. However
complexity in social, economic and environmental systems can never be successfully
handled in any such predetermined manner designed around emotional or short term
economic voter appeal. Thus it is no surprise that the winning party, representing the
beliefs of its supporters, always leaves those who backed other parties unhappy and doing
their best to oppose such failing policies.
When later the inevitable mediocre performance of the party in power becomes apparent,
citizens start counting the days to the next election. Should another party assume power
the cycle repeats itself as it has over centuries of party power seeking. Due to the ease
with which political parties succumb to corruption in their drive for funding many party
policies are heavily influenced by corporations and other special interest groups. There is
little doubt today that transnational corporations assisted by governments of powerful
nations and international agencies such as World Bank, IMF and others are taking over
where colonialism left off. The threat to African nations from this new form of
colonialism is grave indeed and is being furthered by African political parties.
Good governance cannot be based on Party "…isms".
Political parties world wide have as their fundamental policy foundation tried all manner
of "…isms". Capitalism, communism, socialism, racialism, tribalism, cronyism with
corporatism emerging currently. No party based on any such "…ism" can provide good
governance for not only the scientific reasons outlined, but also because inevitable a
proportion of any population does not share the beliefs, ideology or dogma of such
parties and thus feel neither secure nor well governed.
Parties based on personalities or religion cannot govern well for the good of all.
Parties based on personalities or religion tend to lead toward dictatorship or tyranny
ending in violent overthrow at some stage either internally, or through invasion when
their policies threaten neighbours of another persuasion. Considerable experience shows
that parties in power tend to create conflicts or encourage distractions in order to distract
people from issues as a means of retaining power. Unfortunately religion, involving
fundamental deep beliefs, provides for easy highly charged emotional distraction
particularly when directed against another religion. Any party representing a religious
group presents a further problem in that today's organized religions are themselves
divided and often in conflict. For example 1,000 branches of Christianity alone, poses a
problem with any party based on Christianity. Whichever branch should assume power,
inevitably other branches of Christianity resist as years of Catholic Protestant conflict in
Ireland demonstrated.
Generally religions present the same problem as theoretically even if any one faith was
absolutely united not all citizens of any nation are of one faith. An example is Bhutan
which is striving for a democratic system and the measurement of progress by Gross
National Happiness for most Bhutanese while the Christian minority is I understand
suppressed.
Parties in power focus on elections rather than governance.
Rather than having a long term focus on governance parties inevitably exhibit a short
term obsession with the next election and retaining power. Good governance demands
long term planning and continuity which is not the forte of parties facing elections every
few years. Neither is long term thinking the forte of corporations controlling or
influencing parties when after all they are legally bound to provide profits for
shareholders, report results quarterly and are not answerable to any nation's electorate.
When do political parties bury collaborate in the national interest?
Governments based on any party system only come close to national unity of purpose
when political parties collaborate in the national interest under external threat as in war.
Wartime collaboration however still falls short of what is required for good governance
and the moment the war is over inevitably the parties are once more locked in power
struggles.
In many countries today people show their disgust and frustration with politicians by a
sense of hopelessness and not taking the trouble to vote. Commonly I hear people saying
"What is the point of voting it makes no difference". Personally feel this way. Deprived
of my vote in my own nation I am eligible to vote in America but see little point other
than in trying to minimize damage being done to Americans by voting for the least
damaging party. Voting against the most damaging policies rather than for any that are
sound is not what appealing to any intelligent person.
National Loyalty of Armed forces.
In Africa, and elsewhere, parties in power regularly manipulate the various arms of
government encouraging, even enforcing loyalty to party above nation. As a soldier and
politician I lived and fought through Zimbabwe's long war for independence ending as
leader of one of the three parties fighting the illegal government of Ian Smith to bring
about a democratic future. I and a handful of army officers were fully aware that the war
could have been avoided had our generals abided by the oath of allegiance we swore on
being commissioned. Our Oath of Allegiance was to our nation and to no political party.
The Rhodesian Front party led by Ian Smith on assuming power soon replaced noncompliant party-supporting generals. The newly appointed generals aligned the armed
forces with Ian Smith's racial political party. Almost immediately the party took control
of media and judiciary and overnight any criticism of Smith, or his party, was construed
as disloyalty to the nation. For using commonsense and saying Smith should talk to
Nkomo and Mugabe I was faced with calls for me to be tried for treason. The subsequent
protracted war and loss of life was inevitable as was my eventual exile.
That the armed forces of Zimbabwe after independence aligned themselves with
Mugabe's party rather than the nation of Zimbabwe was in no manner unusual in Africa.
Party control of Judiciary, press and media spells disaster.
Unfortunately all too often parties in power appoint judges sympathetic to their beliefs
thus making a mockery of a truly impartial and independent judiciary essential to good
governance and justice.
Seldom do parties stop with influencing the judiciary in their obsession with power but
generally they manipulate radio, television and press and commonly ban any independent
press. Even in nations where politicians cannot get away with control of the media
collusion with corporations controlling the media is barely disguised. I grew up during
the Second World War believing in the independence and impartiality of the BBC, but
then witnessed Margaret Thatcher's attempts to control the BBC during the Falklands
War. From much evidence I firmly believe political parties place greater emphasis on
gaining and hanging onto power than they do in trying to genuinely govern well and they
will stop at nothing, including mutilating the instruments and structures of government to
achieve their aims.
We Zimbabweans should have learned this lesson. So unobservant are most people of the
daily effects of control of media that to this day most former white Zimbabweans are
unaware that Ian Smith never ever even risked facing any democratic election as party
leader. Barely known he assumed party leadership of a legitimately elected party through
an internal party coup, but before ever facing the electorate as party leader had taken
control of press, radio, television, army and judiciary making a mockery of democracy
and fools of most whites. Both black and white Zimbabweans opposed to racialism were
left no alternative but war to remove him and his party.
Loyal Opposition essential to party system.
Essential to peaceful, civilized behaviour in party politics during elections is the need for
the citizens to believe deeply the idea of a loyal opposition. This concept that arose after
centuries of struggle and conflict in Europe is an idea people in African, and many other
countries, simply do not believe. The belief is rather that whichever party gets into power
will enjoy the spoils, and had better remain in control at all cost because they will never
again enjoy such easy access to wealth.
Historically in Africa parties clinging to power at any cost to the nation has generally
proven to be true. When African nationalist parties were fighting for one man one vote
during the ending of colonialism many, like myself, involved in former British colonies
supported African nationalist aspirations in our hearts. However in our minds we knew
the nationalist call for democracy through "One man one vote" elections would probably
mean literally only one vote. And history showed this to generally be the case. Once the
people had enjoyed their first and only vote that brought the party of choice to power that
was the end of any semblance of democracy for years to come.
Only after much suffering generally is the party in power replaced with another and the
cycle continues with successive parties doing all they can to remain in power by denying
citizens any further democratic choice through various, generally devious, corrupt and
often violent, means.
This behaviour should elicit no surprise where people do not believe in a loyal
opposition. It would frankly be abnormal human behaviour if there was no manipulation
and violence to varying degrees by any incumbent political party.
Some democratic multi-party states, like Britain, exhibit their cultural belief in a loyal
opposition through the behaviour of both government and electorate. Each contending
party knows that if it does not win it will not be banned with its members beaten up,
killed or tortured. It will form an effective opposition and have a fair chance of gaining
power at the next election. In such countries the party in power allows other parties to
stand for election and the electorate to determine the outcome, as the British government
did when the Communist Party sought election. Other countries such as America pay lip
service to the concept of a loyal opposition as evidenced when the Communist Party
emerged. In America, unlike Britain, the electorate was not allowed to determine the
outcome. The government banned the Communist Party and engaged in appalling witch
hunts destroying the lives of prominent citizens.
In America through many devices two barely distinguishable parties hold sway
effectively blocking any other party ever gaining power. Over the years the democratic
and republican parties have so manipulated the system that today an uneven playing field
ensures no newcomers can play unless possessed of obscene wealth. Although
theoretically any party can stand American voters are effectively allowed to vote for what
amounts to either the left or the right wing of the same corporate party.
A Non Party Sate essential for good governance.
All of these things that I have observed, and lived through, have convinced me that
political parties need to give way to non-party democracy if people are ever to experience
good governance. Until non-party democracy comes about good governance will remain
an idea only and never a reality people can enjoy.
Earlier I indicated that others like George Washington had apparently foreseen the evils
and dangers to the people of political parties and unquestionably in my view America,
and the world, would be a better and safer place had the American people followed his
advice. African nations would be wise to heed the advice of such earlier wise leaders
struggling with their newly gained independence.
Forming a government in a non-party state.
As I have outlined, the problems associated with the political party system are so great
and insurmountable that a non-party state offers more hope for the people. So let us look
at how a non-party state might function in the interests of all with people elected on merit
forming a government.
From the outset such an election in which individuals stand for election on their merit
rather than representing any group's preformed desires or issues, renders it hard for the
armed forces, press or media to support anything but the state. There is a world of
difference between people standing for a party regurgitating party policy, supported by
the party leader vouching for their character and enjoying expenses covered by
corporations or party supporters, and people funding themselves while appealing for
support on the basis of their reputation and standing in their community.
The funds required to seek election by an individual in his or her constituency are
miniscule compared with the funds required for example for an American (or any other)
president or a party to seek election nation-wide. More so with elections increasingly
fought over costly television favouring television appearance over substance in real life.
There is no known link between wealth and the wisdom, experience, balanced
personalities and intelligence required to run for political office. Some of the most
balanced and intelligent people I have dealt with over a long life have been illiterate and
poor in monetary terms although not in life.
A non-party system of elections removes the tinder waiting to burst into flame when large
masses wearing party T shirts and mouthing emotive slogans, supported by the police and
army demand destruction of the opposition and victory at any cost. The present need for
vote rigging, vote buying, manipulation of constituency boundaries, character
assassination, intimidation, murder and torture disappears with the lack of any party to
support or condone such actions that are not within the rules of any nation claiming to be
civilized. And of course such behaviour severely discourages public capital investment
confidence resulting in later financial loss of independence and vulnerability to the new
corporate colonialism.
A further benefit of such non-party state elections is that they do away with the damaging
delays and dangers of violence when defeated political parties demand recounts and
recourse to the courts.
An election of individuals of character funding their own campaigns makes it hard for
special interest groups or corporations to bribe, fund parties or otherwise tamper with
elections. While this is true in principle superpower corporations and special interest
groups are not going to disappear overnight. Like tobacco companies have done and oil
& coal companies do, they will persist in their drive for short term profit while leaving
society to bear the true environmental, social costs and human suffering. Owing to
present moves by powerful multi national corporations, enjoying profits greater than
many national budgets, to control the undeveloped countries in what amounts to a new
form of colonialism we can expect continued massive campaigns of disinformation.
Power hungry corporations, like the leopard that does not change its spots will simply
change tactics. Thus there is a need for a living constitution to respond to changing
special interest tactics.
Electing and forming a government in a non-party state?
With all political party activity and parties banned how could people's representatives be
elected and a government be formed? With the country divided into many electoral
constituencies the electorate would, from each constituency, elect their representatives to
Parliament based on intellect, character and leadership in their communities.
I use arbitrary numbers for ease. Assume the state has 200 constituencies based on
population distribution or guidelines formed by the judiciary. At elections, held every
five years, there are 200 members elected to Parliament and these representatives of the
people then constitute an electoral college. From their ranks they elect one of their
members as Prime Minister for a term of years (preferably no less than five). The person
so elected to form a government proposes his or her cabinet members from amongst the
other 199 Members of Parliament. Each of the Prime Minister's cabinet choices are
discussed and approved by simple majority vote of all Members of Parliament and thus a
government is formed.
The remaining people's representatives in Parliament constitute back benchers who can
be drawn upon for the many committees required and will naturally participate in debates
and approval or rejection of policies of the government. Unlike party selections, this
serves to prevent committees of Parliament being selected on any pre-formed party basis
causing conflict and resulting in people selected for reasons other than competence.
Term limits would be applied to any Prime Minister that could only be extended with
some constitutionally specified very high approval by all Members of Parliament.
Removal of an incompetent government.
At any time during it's tenure the government can be removed by the Members of
Parliament through a vote of no confidence. At such time there would be no need to
return to nation-wide elections because the people's representatives in Parliament could
elect a new Prime Minister to form a new government.
Removal of an incompetent Member of Parliament.
Should any representative be not performing, his or her constituency could call for
removal given a petition signed by a significant number of people (2,000 for example).
That person would then face others in a fresh election in that constituency. In the interest
of brevity I outline here the principles only on which a government could be formed or
replaced smoothly in a non-party state.
Now let me turn to other structural adjustments required and that would need to be
entrenched in a non-party state's constitution to address further current failings of party
states.
Civil Service.
President Mugabe shortly after assuming power made an astute appeal in one of his
public addresses, in which he appealed to scientists to come up with solutions to the
many problems his government faced because as he said, the politicians could only act on
the advice of their advisors. And when things went wrong it was the politicians and not
their advisors who took the blame. What Mugabe did not realize is that while this is true
of scientists it is likewise true of the civil service.
Most states today have a permanent civil service running the country day to day. In some
the entire service theoretically remains intact following elections. In other states senior
members of the civil service are automatically replaced by the incoming party often
rewarding people for party loyalty, financial support or simply nepotism rather than
competence. This we witnessed with President Bush's appointment of the person in
charge of disaster relief who subsequently proved so incompetent in dealing with the
New Orleans flood.
President Mugabe after assuming power was served by a reasonably competent civil
service for a while and all went well. Then his party took the step so many African
countries have of "Africanizing" the civil service. Appointing people on the basis of
race, tribe, family and party loyalty. Good people, commonly with no training,
experience or culture of service, took over positions replacing experienced civil servants.
Lacking competence in the civil service the ripples soon flowed throughout the country
and economy leading to a loss of investor confidence (it could take over a year to get an
answer to a business letter), severe job losses, followed by the rise of an opposition party.
Not holding the belief in the concept of a loyal opposition all the tragedy that has
followed and that I need not outline was almost inevitable. While publicly we blame
individuals at the helm, this downhill procession was inevitable due to the system no
matter who was at the wheel and we risk repeating this cycle if we do not address what it
takes to ensure a competent civil service to carry out government policies.
Ensuring efficiency and effectiveness in the Civil Service to sustain good
governance.
The ideal of a predominantly permanent civil service arose for good reason and so it
should remain. Bureaucracies such as those serving any government were developed to
ensure efficiency in what was known as the Age of Enlightenment promoted so widely by
Napoleon throughout Europe. They aimed at doing so by engaging suitably qualified and
educated professional people to fill positions. The intent was to end past practices where
people, rather than earning their positions, inherited or bought them or in this case were
appointed for reasons of race, family connection or tribe.
In modern System Science Thinking the civil service bureaucracy is what is known as a
"Soft System". Briefly this means that human organizations are complex, selforganizing, operate with parts missing and exhibit unintended and unplanned "emergent
properties". These characteristics of soft systems are unlike what are called hard systems
- computers, cars and all our technical wonders which are complicated, do not operate
with crucial parts missing, are not self-organizing and do not exhibit unexpected
emergent properties. (A computer or watch for example does what it is designed to do
and no more). It is the unplanned emergent properties of human organizations, including
government bureaucracies that constitute a serious problem for all nations. While such
bureaucracies do achieve efficiency as intended, their unplanned emergent properties
commonly lead to the downfall of the government they are supposed to serve.
A feature of complex soft systems is that problems arising from unplanned emergent
properties are almost incapable of solution, as opposed to problems arising in hard
systems that are relatively easy to solve. Serious emergent properties of bureaucracies
brought to light by John Ralston Saul who wrote "Voltaire's Bastards" covering his
extensive research are that no matter how qualified, brilliant or well intended the
individuals in any bureaucracy are, the way complex wholes function results in two
common undesired outcomes or emergent properties. Saul concluded that from brilliant
and well meaning minds in a bureaucracy anything emerging tends to lack commonsense
and humanity. Subsequent government policies and actions, lacking humanity and
commonsense, inevitably result in poor governance and equally inevitably the party in
power and not the civil service is blamed by the opposition.
Civil service and other bureaucracies slowness to accept new thinking blocks good
governance
There is a further emergent property of bureaucracies and that is such institutions are
almost watertight to new knowledge conflicting with their prevailing paradigms or deep
beliefs. Individuals within any bureaucracy can no more change this emergent property of
complex systems than can citizens. The most quoted case is that of the Royal Navy taking
almost 200 years, after it was first demonstrated, to accept that lime juice would prevent
scurvy despite the importance to Britain and the number of sailors who died. The
Merchant Navy also headed by brilliant and dedicated officers took a further 70 years to
accept this vital knowledge. A more modern example is that of overgrazing so crucial to
solving globally accelerating desertification and climate change while millions of people
are suffering from the symptoms of desertification – drought and flood, poverty, social
breakdown, violence to women and children, genocide and war. The paradigm or belief
of professionally trained bureaucrats in universities, environmental organizations,
governments and international organizations is that overgrazing is due to too many
animals on the land. This is a belief not science.
Scientifically it was discovered fifty years ago that overgrazing has nothing to do with
animal numbers but rather time of exposure of plants to grazing and their re-exposure.
Published in five major languages such scientific findings were put to use by independent
scientists in several countries but fifty years later this knowledge has not been
institutionally accepted by any of the above mentioned bureaucracies in any nation
despite the human suffering. In Zimbabwe even after conducting a eight year official
trial to confirm that land would benefit from increased animal numbers the civil service
has not adopted such knowledge forty years later while the country continues to desertify.
Bureaucracies are amongst the first to adopt new thinking in the prevailing paradigm.
Thus we find government agencies, universities or environment organizations being
amongst the first to use the latest computers, software, etc. as nothing here clashes with
deep beliefs.
Because they unplanned emergent properties of such complex systems are almost
impossible to solve, bureaucracies constantly spouting outcomes lacking common sense
and humanity and being watertight to new paradigm thinking have not yet been overcome
by any nation. However good governance requires that, while we may not be able to
solve such complexity problems, we can at least develop structures to minimize such
shortcomings in otherwise efficient organizations. I have never heard or read any concern
from any politician, other than Lord Eric Ashby, about such obstacles to good
governance although well researched by academics and widely published. I will outline
below structural changes that if implemented could largely overcome these undesirable
emergent properties of any civil service.
Process of negative selection in permanent civil service.
Before continuing with remedies we have yet more civil service problems to address. A
major problem is the process of negative selection as people rise in the service. I come
from a civil service family and also spent time serving in both the Colonial Office in
Northern Rhodesian and later Southern Rhodesian civil services. To any observant person
it was apparent that any dissenting voice was discouraged. It was equally obvious that
while undoubtedly brilliant committed people did rise to head departments, this was the
exception rather than the rule. Generally people who did not rock the boat rose while
those who did were forced out or departed in frustration. Working with a number of
departments and agencies over subsequent years in America, Australia, India, Canada,
Pakistan, South Africa and other countries I have come to understand that what I
experienced in the Colonial Office and Zimbabwe is universal.
Laws giving power to regulations obstructing good governance.
Continuing with problems associated with the civil service that have to be overcome is
yet another. When politicians pass new laws it is common to empower the appropriate
Minister to have the civil service draw up regulations under that law and enjoying the
power of the law. While the law is rightly debated in Parliament the regulations seldom
face such public scrutiny. So many are the examples of regulations that lack
commonsense and humanity that I hardly need cite any. Some examples are the American
government after 9/11 making it illegal for private pilots to fly over nuclear facilities, but
refusing to inform pilots where such facilities were as this was secret. (All were found by
the pilots association on the internet). In Zimbabwe rightly laws were passed not
permitting the shooting of elephants without a license. Regulations were then produced
making it impossible to get a license unless a person could first prove that they had shot
an elephant! The frequent chopping and changing of regulations in today's Zimbabwe
resembles comic opera.
Because such regulations assume the power of law through bypassing intelligent debate.
Once more the politicians shoulder the blame for subsequent bad governance and not the
civil service.
Who forms policy in any government – politicians or civil servants?
Politicians come and go while the civil service provides continuity. Theoretically
politicians form policies and the civil service carries out those policies. In reality the
politician heading a portfolio relies on the professionals in that department or agency for
technical advice. In this way it is common for Cabinet member in charge of say
education, health or agriculture to have as his or her principle advisor the head of the civil
service in that department. This person has generally risen to the position through
negative selection - smart office politics, not offending anyone or rocking the boat. And
that person heads an advisory and implementing bureaucracy that can lag anywhere from
a fifty to a hundred years behind available knowledge in that field. The consequences to
any policy developed by that Minister are inevitable and the subsequent anger of the
electorate is once again vented on the politicians and not the civil service. In multi-party
states with democratic elections this pattern results in constantly changing parties in the
belief that next time it will be better. It never is.
Some years ago I ran a ten day training in Holistic Management for the senior civil
servants in the Ministry of Agriculture of Lesotho. Once they understood how to analyse
policy with the holistic framework I had them work on the soil conservation policy of
Lesotho. They concluded their policy would increase soil erosion endangering the rivers
and dams in South Africa. I then posed the question "Who was responsible for producing
this policy?" After blaming politicians, media and the public one woman finally made a
telling statement. She said to the group "The politicians come and go. Look around the
room we have all the senior people here and it us who produce such policies for the
politicians to approve. We are responsible." Because of the unplanned emergent
properties mentioned Lesotho continues erode at an alarming level endangering South
African dams and more.
Overcoming emergent properties of bureaucracy in a non-party state.
As we have seen, electing people to Parliament to form a government in a non-party state
would not lead to good governance because of the emergent properties of the supporting
bureaucracy. Properties that have nothing to do with wrongful motive or lack of
intelligence. Properties that no nation has effectively deal with since time immemorial.
Those elected to form the government need to be served by a supporting civil service
reflecting new knowledge. And to be advised by a technical advisory group not
dominated by a person who may have risen to seniority through a long process of
negative selection. At the same time the efficient functions of the civil service need to be
maintained to implement policy.
Because the problems inherent in any bureaucracy cannot be addressed by simply
employing more educated, dedicated or capable people they need to be dealt with through
structure.
Civil service structure in a non party state governing for the good of all.
One way to achieve what is required is to constitutionally entrench the structure required
to maintain the efficient roles of the civil service, while overcoming those aspects I have
outlined that present problems. Such a structure would look something like this.
Ministerial Advisory Councils.
Each government portfolio is headed by the Cabinet Minister appointed by the Prime
Minister. Each Minister, on assuming office, will form a Ministerial Advisory Council.
The Advisory Council is chaired by the Minister who is required to appoint no less than 3
and no more than 5 (for example) advisors from outside the civil service to his or her
council. Three Council members are to be selected for their knowledge and experience
and two without specialized knowledge in that field but with good liberal arts education.
And appointments can be made from outside the country if needed. The finest candle
makers could never have thought up or developed electric lights!
Without party platforms to bias selection of people, from whatever source, merit alone
qualifies such ministerial advisors. The senior civil servant of the department serving that
portfolio participates as an equal in the council as it is his or her role to subsequently
implement any policy or projects emanating from the ministry. In this way the civil
service is represented but cannot block new knowledge being made available to the
Minister, nor dominate the Minister as is so common. Many a true word is spoken in jest
and reflected in the highly amusing British TV program "Yes Minister".
An added precaution to ensure citizen interests over the vested interests of corporations
or special interest groups influencing Ministers would be to make illegal such acts as paid
professional lobbying and the funding by such parties of any people's representative
candidates seeking election to Parliament. Any corporation legally convicted would face
automatic withdrawal of their corporate license to operate in the country.
Policy and project coordination.
With policy formation being the main role of governments, good governance demands
that policies and projects be holistically coordinated. What does this mean? Such
coordination does not exist in any nation today. Currently governments using, as all do,
the universal framework for policy formation coordinate policies and projects at two
levels – political coordination in line with party beliefs and economic coordination
through the budgetary process. Most, if not all, debate concerns the cost and objective of
any policy or project while in commonly secret political party caucus sessions the policy
is aligned with the party's political ideology.
Ideally any government should want not only to know the cost, but also that all policies
and projects were simultaneously economically, socially and environmentally sound short
and long term, and thus likely to deal with complexity leading toward the national
holisticgoal.
National Holistic Policy Coordinating Council.
In a non-party state, policy and project coordination would be holistically more
comprehensive through a constitutionally entrenched system. Coordination of all
prospective government policies or projects would be the responsibility of a specific
minister supported by constitutionally mandated Holistic Coordinating Council formed
like a Ministerial Advisory Council but staffed with a team of trained people. This
Ministry would be responsible for analyzing any policy or project drafts using the holistic
framework and national holisticgoal. No budgetary debate would go forward without a
supporting report of the Holistic Coordinating Council to ensure all parliamentary
representatives were fully aware of likely social, environmental and economic
consequence.
Example of holistic policy coordination
First how the policy or project would be decided currently.
Because this has never been done by any nation and sound policies and projects are so
vital to good governance let's briefly follow a current proposed project in Zimbabwe
through the present process and the suggested process. The suggested process is very
similar for either a policy or a project. Like riding a bicycle it may appear daunting at
first but is really very simple. As we have learned from over twenty years of Holistic
Management policy training for governments and World Bank it is simpler and faster
than the formation of government policy today. And while forming holistically sound
policy or projects is almost impossible today, using the holistic framework it is relatively
simple.
Remember the common characteristic or both policy and projects is that they always have
an objective designed to deal with a problem or address a foreseeable problem.
In Zimbabwe the second largest city Bulawayo is running out of water. For comparison
we look first at current ways such a problem is handled. Government becomes aware of a
problem, in this case the city running out of water. Officials in the civil service are
tasked with responding with a policy or project proposal. The project that emerged in
this case, as always has an objective which in instance is to provide water to the city. In a
difficult situation such as this it is generally practice for governments to engage
consultants (World Bank commonly becomes involved) to work with the Ministry
concerned Between consultants and civil servants the proposal is to build a large
holding dam at a cost of over £500 million and to pipe water from the distant Zambezi
River which requires building a dam in a gorge to generate the power needed to pump the
water requiring considerably more funding. The project, as always, will clearly meet the
objective by providing more water. Debate now focuses mainly on the budgetary aspects
and ability to borrow the necessary funds. Contractors and suppliers circle like vultures
over a carcass and bribes flow to influence officials and politicians and the dam is
eventually built, providing the city with additional water. Objective accomplished.
Because we are dealing with complexity almost universally further problems are thrown
up – social disruption, loss of agricultural land, increase in disease (schistosomiasis and
malaria), disruption of river flow, silting, increased urban migration and demand for
water, loss of scenic assets and species for example. Subsequent policies are developed in
similar manner to deal with the most immediately serious problems emerging and due to
complexity further problems arise in a pattern by now familiar to the world. This outline
is not oversimplified or exaggerated as the analysis of hundreds of policies and projects
of governments, World Bank and other international agencies and NGOs has shown.
Thus deserts continue to advance, international aid all too often does more damage than
good, biodiversity continues to decrease, weeds continue to invade, floods and droughts
increase without climate change, soil erosion increases while poverty, violence and
disappointment in those governing continues.
How would holistic analysis and policy formation differ in the non party state
governing toward a national holisticgoal ?
What is suggested goes like this with two levels of check on unsound policies and
projects. Non-party government becomes aware of the problem of Bulawayo running out
of water. The Ministerial Advisory Council is tasked by the Minister of Water
Development (or current portfolio name) to advise cabinet on possible solutions. The
Ministerial Advisory Council using the holistic framework first analyze the problem.
No problem can be permanently resolved by any policy or project without addressing the
root cause of that problem. Assessing the root cause of the problem is almost never done
by consultants, World Bank, or any others using the universal framework for good
reason. It is almost impossible other than in perennially humid environments. However
diagnosing the cause of the problem is both essential and possible using the holistic
framework and is always the first step.
In this case the Ministerial Advisory Council diagnosing with the holistic framework
realizes the problem is the extent and rate of desertification in this region of Zimbabwe
covering the catchment areas of all rivers serving the city and underground aquifers.
Desertification leads to a high loss of water through both flash flooding and through soil
surface evaporation. Annual losses of rainfall received in this region of Zimbabwe can
exceed 90% running to trillions of liters more than the city could ever use. That the city is
running out of water is thus neither surprising nor a problem – it is simply a symptom of
serious desertification. As a result of this diagnosis the Ministerial Advisory Council
realize that building the dam will not solve the problem. Desertification resulting in rivers
flash flooding, silting of existing and future dams and massive loss of annual rainfall to
soil surface evaporation will overwhelm any dam or city. They understand that building
the dams would be a short term costly band aide aggravating an already serious situation
and further endangering the city while loading the nation with unnecessary debt. Building
the dam will leave the country and city with added debt and an unsolved problem as well
as problems associated with tampering with an international river. They also realize from
this analysis that there will be other adverse social and environmental costs associated
with the dams, that are neither necessary nor required.
With this knowledge the Ministerial Advisory Council would work out a policy that
would reverse desertification and improve the effectiveness of the water cycle over the
entire region of the country in the catchment of which the city lies. Reversing
desertification and improving the effectiveness of the water cycle on this vast area would
not only save the present dams from continued silting, it would also ensure replenished
underground aquifers and more permanent flow in the rivers. Together this would amount
to new water every year exceeding three or more dams the size of the proposed dam with
no need to interfere with the flow of the international Zambezi River. Further it would
improve the welfare and prosperity of all citizens in the entire catchment and city while
providing a permanent solution because the problem has been dealt with rather than the
symptom. And the cost would be about one tenth of the cost of the proposed project
requiring neither borrowing or debt servicing.
At this point the Ministerial Advisory Council would switch to a policy to deal with
reversal of desertification. Everything that the country requires to reverse desertification
is already available in the country. The knowledge to do this has been available in the
country for over thirty years but blocked from ever becoming policy by the civil service
adhering to old beliefs not supported by advancing science. The policy to outline the
actions required from the current educational and extension services to begin
empowering the rural population to improve their lives while reversing the desertification
would require no more than a week as this is a very straightforward case involving
curbing the use of fire and training people to run increasing numbers of livestock in a
manner that minimizes overgrazing of plants while covering soil and thus reversing
desertification. As I write figures have come in from one piece of land in North Dakota
following such practices and water infiltration on the upper catchment soils has gone
from 20.32 mm per hour to 157.48 mm per hour. An increase of nearly 775%.
The policy framework developed would now be passed to the Holistic Coordinating
Council for an independent assessment and report before moving to government to
present to Parliament for debate prior to implementation. Both Ministerial Advisory
Council and Holistic Coordinating Council have ensured that the policy and all actions it
embodies are in line with the national holisticgoal and thus simultaneously economically,
socially and environmentally sound short and long term. Subsequent debate would focus
on the merits, costs and benefits of the policy without any influence from party politics or
corporate contractors having bribed officials. Such a policy would be long term as all
should be above politics but today almost none are.
Land Policy.
Until any nation has a holistically sound land policy long term good governance is
unachievable because of the connection of the health of the land to the economy,
frequency and severity of both droughts and floods, poverty, social stability, violence and
ultimate fate of the nation.
Zimbabwe has redistributed land and other nearby African nations are being influenced
by this action so it would be wise to look at it briefly.
At the time that the Zimbabwe government moved to redistribute land (in response to
massive unemployment and the rise of political opposition) almost everyone supported
the need. Like the Bulawayo water problem described Zimbabwe's land redistribution
policy was directed toward an objective – redistributing land. Few would not recognize
that the result has been catastrophic economically, socially, politically and
environmentally. This result was inevitable simply because such complexity cannot be
dealt with successfully by any government toward the achievement of an objective. Had
the displaced farmers or the British or any other government formed the policy toward
the objective of redistributing land the result although less immediate and violent would
in the end have been essentially the same.
When the Zimbabwe government announced it was going ahead a group of Zimbabweans
in Harare participated in workshops in which we sought to see what sort of land policy
would emerge from redistributing land as an objective, tested together with all measures
to attain it, toward achieving the holisticgoal provided. Only in this manner can any land
policy deal with such complexity. The result indicated that had government formed the
land policy in this way it would have resulted in greatly increased employment, the
settling two or three million people on the land, not losing a single farmer, increasing the
tax base of government and the reversal of desertification on the farms and ranches
(which is serious on even the best) as well as increased food production.
Seldom is anything genuinely too late. Even now although much damage has been done
to Zimbabwean agriculture and society through the land redistribution policy one of the
immediate things that any non-party government would have to attend to would be the
land policy. And African governments generally would be wise to consider forming such
policies holistically because violence induced by land degradation and rising populations
is on the increase.
Policies damaging African nations.
For brevity I have not dealt with other policies but mention that Zimbabwe and others
countries have current policies involving such things as not allowing citizens outside the
country to vote and not allowing dual citizenship. While such policies are clearly
designed toward objectives of the party in power, if viewed holistically with the national
holisticgoal as the guide they are soon seen to lack commonsense and humanity and to be
detrimental to capital investment, retaining skilled people and thus the economy. Every
skilled person tends to create jobs and expand any economy while conversely loss of
skilled people leads to job losses and greater poverty for all.
International Aid Assessment.
African countries receiving assistance from the many international agencies, church
groups and major environmental organizations need to ensure such aid does not interfere
with good governance. Having analyzed many aid projects I recognize that although
well-meant and often meeting immediate humanitarian needs the overall result long term
is disappointing to donors and recipients. For this no one is to blame as all such aid
projects are designed with the faulty universal framework. The overall unsound nature of
aid is no different than the conclusion of American professionals concluding that unsound
resource management is universal in the U.S. mentioned earlier.
Increasingly people are beginning to realize that despite many projects and millions of
dollars things are not getting better. In fact evidence suggests aid is currently doing more
harm than good which clearly was never the intent. As soon as any non-party
government has a cabinet level Holistic Coordinating Council one of its functions should
be the assessment of all foreign assistance to ensure it is holistically sound and in line
with the national holisticgoal. Rather than rejecting foreign aid this would result in
modifications to meet the desired intent of both parties.
Surveilance of aid in the manner suggested would go far to avoid millions of dollars of
Western aid ending in private Swiss accounts of African officials as is occurring
currently.
Independent Judiciary.
The need for an independent judiciary is widely recognized although violated by many a
party in power. Anyone doubting the ability of the party system to defy citizen wishes
has only to read "Gangs of America" by Ted Nace to learn how, despite the best efforts of
the Founding Fathers, the will of powerful corporations ultimately prevailed through
using the Republican Party and Supreme Court appointees over time. Had America's
Founding Fathers at the time constitutionally banning political parties perhaps many of
America's wars and invasions of neighbouring countries with great loss of life could have
been avoided. Various mechanisms could ensure an independent judiciary but without
parties to manipulate the selection of judicial representatives there is more chance of
sustaining this ideal.
With no party to confuse loyalty between party and state the armed forces could be more
easily relied upon to defend the constitution and independence of judiciary and press.
Corruption.
Corruption at some levels will unfortunately be around for years to come. However
official government and major corporate corruption run counter to the best interests of the
people in any country and endanger entire economies while causing mass suffering. The
measures that follow could help ensure strict controls on the most damaging official
corruption.
A non-party state's constitution would provide for a permanent Ombudsman's Office
under judicial control. Such office would provide for the concerns of any citizen suffering
unjust treatment to be legally and affordably addressed. This office would also be
charged with investigation and prosecution in all cases of possible corruption with severe
and mandatory penalties. Penalties such as foreign corporations convicted of corruption,
lobbying or funding of parliamentary candidates automatically having their license to
operate in the country withdrawn as well as jail time for local officials involved. And
local corporations so convicted having their corporate license revoked and officials jailed
until all money is recovered. Any citizen being convicted of corruption would
automatically be barred for life from holding public office and jailed till all money
involved is recovered, returned to rightful owners or forfeited to the state.
The key is there are always at least two parties to corruption
It takes two parties at a minimum to engage in corruption and countries moving to a nonparty state would often inherit a backlog of massive official and corporate corruption and
lost revenue. Thus it would be wise initially to allow a six month period of grace. During
this time either party to any corrupt act can report and provide details in confidence.
Following the grace period, during which no one would be aware of who had reported
corruption, prosecutions would follow. Those reporting the corruption and providing
evidence would be free from prosecution although required to return money involved,
while the other non-reporting party to the corrupt act would face full penalties. In this
manner many a confession would be made easing investigation, prosecution, clearing the
backlog and recovery of stolen funds.
Having grown up in an amazingly crime and corruption free country I learned how
devastating it is for most citizens as my country became one of the most officially corrupt
nations in the world today. I also learned that the party system, combined with civil
service incompetence, virtually forced corporations and entrepreneurs to engage in
corruption as the only way in which they could get any business at all done. Doing away
with the party system as well as providing good governance, through the civil service
mechanism described, would go far toward removing much of the reason for people to
engage in official corruption. An adequately paid and professional police force loyal to
the nation and constitution rather than a political party would also go far to address
corruption. As long as party government persists the will to prevent official corruption is
simply lacking as both political parties and corporations have much to gain from
supporting one another under the radar. I see little difference in the prevailing corruption
in Western nations and African nations due largely to the party system other than the
degree of sophistication.
Local Government.
In a non-party state it would be necessary to ensure that what applied at the national level
also applied at local government level. In many African countries this would not only
apply to local government in cities and towns but also to rural traditional government
through the Chiefs. Currently in all African countries I am aware of the party system,
post independence, has continued the colonial practice of disempowering the
Chiefs in favour of central government party political control. A practice that, combined
with unscientific policies of governments and international agencies addressing the
symptoms of desertification, is destroying the culture and lives of rural populations
encouraging further migration to overcrowded city slums.
While some African Chiefs struggle to sustain order and preserve their people's culture
unfortunately the party system and degree of centralized control has corrupted many as
seriously as it has politicians. Thus Chiefs should not be immune from prosecution
through the Ombudsman's Office like any citizen.
Position of President.
While many African countries desire to have a president such position could be
maintained in a non-party state but subject to all the laws applying to any citizen. Any
such President could be appointed jointly by Parliament, the judiciary and armed forces
for life (or retirement on grounds of senility or retirement) and could perform useful
functions.
Honouring parties that gained independence.
Following a long war to gain independence, as in the case of Zimbabwe, it is
understandable that people should feel loyalty to any party that played a major role in
gaining independence. For such a party to fail to sustain the support of the people
through an inability to provide good governance for all the reasons given, to then face
losing an election seems to many to show a lack of loyalty to the party.
Fortunately if Zimbabwe for instance were to shift to forming a constitutionally
entrenched non-party state, any party that played a major role in gaining independence is
honourably set aside and never faces defeat at the hands of its people. Much like retiring
a battleship that has served well at war after the need for it is no longer present. I believe
the greatest service to my nation that those of my vintage who were leaders in our long
and bitter war for independence could perform would be to lead the movement ushering
in a non-party state for the genuine freedom, democracy and independence that so many
gave their lives for.
Conclusion.
I believe most people, including politicians of high motive, in my country aspire to lives
as expressed in the national holisticgoal and would support the ideal of better governance
through a non-party state democracy. Inevitably a minority in power or aspiring to power
and easy wealth through the party system may well oppose a non-party state.
Unfortunately as I write only those involved in political parties in Zimbabwe are vying
for position and power through various means including the likely negotiation of a new
constitution based on the party system. Civil society that has an equal if not greater
moral right to be deeply involved in the drawing up of any new constitution is being
sidelined as in the past. With swords drawn and many past hurts humble and intelligent
debate is difficult and many are calling for international intervention headed by South
Africa itself going down the same path as post independent Zimbabwe and other nations.
No solution imposed from outside will last and I firmly believe we Zimbabweans of all
races, tribes, genders, cultures and beliefs should fashion our own salvation. I hope that
what I have written and suggested brings about more open discussion and agreement than
offence to any party which is not my intent.
As a non-political person but deeply and passionately patriotic and loyal Zimbabwean I
can only wish my people success in the years ahead which I will not live to see. And I
sincerely hope discussion emanating from these ideas helps other nations seeking good
governance.