YOUTH Minister Kazenambo Kazenambo’s reaction to the ambush laid by ‘children of the liberation struggle’ on his office this week was refreshing and honourable with lofty intentions which patriots would do well to applaud rather than criticise.
I have waited for this day for quite some time but many of the ruling party’s leaders have diplomatically avoided telling the children ‘in the face’ how they feel about their manners and attitude towards what Government is trying to do for many young people in the country.
Namibia has been independent for more than 20 years, enough time for some of those ‘struggle children’ to have lifted themselves from the misery they find themselves in – if they had really tried to do so and not waited for Government handouts.
Like many others, I recognise the contribution made by the parents of those young people in the liberation of Namibia. I am also fully aware of the fact that many of them had to start from scratch when they returned to Namibia in 1989 and that some did not even have basic documents like Namibian identity cards.
They faced a serious uphill battle in the struggle for identity and survival.
However, they have been riding on the ‘liberation struggle’ ticket for too long now.
So many other children also lost their parents in the struggle – some even within the country – while the past 20 years have seen many white children also marginalised in terms of things like bursaries, as Government intensified efforts to correct the wrongs of the past. Some are still paying for the wrongs of apartheid masters as they are denied certain rights through affirmative action and black economic empowerment policies.
Therefore there is no reason for the ‘children of the liberation struggle’ to be selfish and arrogant as they had been over the past few years. There are thousands of other black children who do not carry the ‘struggle’ tag, who are in the same boat as those who have been accommodated and fed at Berg Aukas – they have no jobs and no free food.
The group of eight who met Kazenambo on Tuesday claimed they had given him enough time (less than three months) since his appointment to act on their demands. The demands include jobs in Government and education opportunities for those who wish to study.
I found this to be unfair to the Minister but also very arrogant on the part of the ‘children’ – some of them already parents themselves.
Last year the Police were forced to use teargas on some of the ‘struggle kids’ in the North after they occupied a bridge as part of their demand for jobs. Others had also camped at various places such as in the centre of Windhoek for months.
Some of those from Berg Aukas are the same young people who last year, when Cabinet announced it has set aside N$2 million for them, said the Government could keep its money and instead give them jobs or bring their deceased parents back from the dead!
I have no objection when people demand their rights but the arrogance displayed by a small group of youth compared to the thousands who drop out of school each year and are left stranded due to lack of opportunities or many others who are discriminated against because of their colour must also be considered at the same time.
A few weeks ago Defence Minister Charles Namoloh announced that 600 of them would be recruited into the army. Many others had been given places in the Police while hundreds of others were taken up in Government.
Last year we were informed by the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Youth, Dr Peingeondjabi Shipoh, that the ‘struggle children’ could cost the Government up to N$300 million through jobs, education, training and assistance in becoming self-employed.
Last year Swapo Party Secretary General Pendukeni Iivula-Ithana said the struggle children must accept that they are part of a bigger challenge and that even some of the people who did not go into exile did suffer for Namibia’s independence.
Until now the struggle children have continued to cock a snoot, not only at Government but also at fellow youth who have been denied similar opportunities as well as law abiding citizens who respect laws such as not loitering in city centres and urinating in public!
Somebody needed to call them to order and Kazenambo was right in the way he did so.
* This article first appeared in The Namibian
Showing posts with label struggle-era rhetoric. Show all posts
Showing posts with label struggle-era rhetoric. Show all posts
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Thursday, April 1, 2010
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
