Stop the struggle-era rhetoric

Stop the struggle-era rhetoric

By: Christof Maletsky

ON March 21 some 45 years ago Luther King Jnr began a march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. Five years earlier, in South Africa’s Sharpeville, apartheid forces mowed down 72 people and outlawed the African National Congress.

Namibia entered the annals of history 20 years ago when the day marked the end of decades of colonial rule with the South African flag lowered at midnight, and a new nation was born with Sam Nujoma as the first President of the Republic.
That was the turning point in the struggle against apartheid and the beginning of a new struggle for economic development.
The following 15 years, at each Independence anniversary, former President Nujoma went big on struggle-era rhetoric.
I found this became dull over the ensuing years. It had been understandable in the first five years as his main role was to unite the country by promoting the concept of national reconciliation, peace and stability. He had to hammer it into our minds.
This he did diligently at every opportunity.
When President Hifikepunye Pohamba took over five years ago I, and many others, had different expectations.
Though many, especially foreigners, punted the view that Pohamba was a Nujoma look-alike, I expected new ways of doing things even though I didn’t expect a 180-degree turn!
His maiden speech on March 21 2005 was well rehearsed and crafted.
He came out punching on graft, spoke about the right people for the right jobs and, more than that, inspired confidence in the future.
Among others, he spoke about changing the fortunes of State-owned enterprises, curbing foreign trips, engendering more ministerial accountability and a host of other measures aimed at enhancing efficiency and eliminating corruption.
That’s the last time I enjoyed one of his speeches.
They’ve since become uninspiring and monotonous, exposing us to the usual service-delivery mantra, importance of peace and, occasionally, promises of reining in on corruption.
No real eloquent articulation of a call to responsibility.
Yet some of the most important ingredients in public speaking deal with the voice volume, eye contact and posture.
Sometimes, from the way the speech is delivered, one wonders whether the President understands or even has good grasp about the issues he addresses. Movements and posture could assist in creating a better perception.
In many instances, when he addresses the nation through pre-recordings or ceremonies such as the opening of Parliament, the President’s tone lets him down big time. Even distinctive phrases that can define, or make history, are used ‘by the way’.
The result is that he ends up boring people like me whose job it is to listen to him.
I know that results rule but words can help to inspire.
We do not expect the ‘masterful’ style of the Barack Obamas of this world but even the President knows he can do better.
Having said the above about the President’s presentation style, I also wonder whether there is any real effort made by those who write his speeches.
The majority sounds like a repetition of the previous one. In fact, it is almost like a cut-and-paste job.
There is nothing wrong with emphasising the importance of certain topics like the fact that he won’t brook corruption, inefficiency and laziness, but sometimes even the NBC ‘Talk of the Nation’ show with a group of dull and verbose diplomats from the frontline states (like last Tuesday) generates more interest than what our President has to say.
On Sunday he needs to map the agenda of his administration for the next five years in very clear and decisive terms and give us good reasons on the policy choices and how they will be prioritised during his last term.
Needless rhetoric and sugarcoating will do us no good.

* This article first appeared in The Namibian