Thanks Muraya for weighing in and for sharing the useful resources.
I've been trying to understand why African elites choose unsustainable political strategies - where, despite short/medium-term wins, they generally end up losing in the long run. Why keep doing something that has been repeatedly proven to be unsustainable?
Would leaders do things differently if they (or their advisers) took a more holistic view of the broader implications of their chosen strategies or tactics? The only way to get different results is to experiment with different ideas (political R&D) and holistic analysis can be the key to new insights as to why some strategies always seem to fail when sustained over an extended period of time.
For example, the idea of inclusive, issues-based politics in Kenya (and Africa) is often dismissed as impractical, but the reasons given are often one-sided and disjointed. A closer look reveals a pattern of negative side-effects that may not be readily apparent or directly attributable to the political exploitation of the posited rationale. Some examples:
1. Voter Ignorance: Majority of voters are deemed too ignorant to make intelligent contributions to policies and governance. But there is little incentive within leadership to minimize public ignorance as status quo has the effect of giving leaders a "blank cheque" to work with (i.e. low expectations & low accountability - key ingredients for corruption and/or mismanagement).
An often overlooked consequence of mass-scale ignorance is that it also leads to low levels of economic productivity. It turns out that the thinking & research skills needed to contribute intelligently to policies and governance are the same ones that enable people to come up with high-value innovations and/or business models!
Consequently, leaders who rely on mass ignorance to acquire and/or maintain power have no option but to permanently depend on external handouts and/or debt, instead of economic surplus, for development - hence unwittingly giving up sovereignty to wealthier nations since excessive dependency always leads to a loss of decision-making control over internal policies. This often backfires on the leaders as they are then perceived as dispensable / easily replaceable by wealthy external actors - as has historically happened in Africa whenever great powers compete to maintain or increase dependency arrangements over smaller/weaker countries.
This could also explain why leaders/elites of prosperous nations generally prefer an intelligent (hence more productive) electorate. It works out in their best interests over the long run - hence a win-win.
2. Voter Indigence: Majority of African voters are trapped in a day-to-day survival crisis such that they cannot afford to care about higher-level politics (hence the appeal of "unga" / campaign handouts / vote buying).
The hidden problem of voter indigence is that it increases voter susceptibility to "big-money" manipulation (local or foreign) - which not only promotes corruption but also raises the risks of political volatility. When power is acquired through bribery, it becomes very expensive to maintain - which drives leaders towards tyranny and oppression (the results of which are seldom sustainable).
Evidence suggests that countries where majority of the population are doing well financially, are more stable and easier to govern - hence the exploitation of voter indigence is not a sustainable political strategy.
3. Political opportunism: Voter ignorance is perceived by some politicians as a political asset (a social "back-door") that simplifies the acquisition and maintenance of power.
However, just like technology back-doors, social back-doors are indiscriminate and can be exploited by anyone (whether local/foreign/benevolent/malevolent) and that could explain the disproportionately high historical levels of foreign political interference, bad leadership and instability in Africa.
4. Leadership opportunism: Ignorant masses may be perceived by incompetent (or competent but malevolent) leaders as easier to "manage" (or exploit / oppress) because
they tend to delegate cognitively arduous governance issues to those
perceived as more competent (basically embracing sheephood and handing
out governance blank cheques).
The problem with predatory leadership is that it tends to neglect holistic economic development, leading to greater dependency on external support and associated problems as discussed above. It also breeds discontent which increases the associated risks.
5. Tragedy of the commons: The conflict between self-interest and group-interest: for a society to be harmonious and realize gainful collective synergies, some aspects of individual self-interest have to be relinquished in favor of collective interest.
But voting (especially via secret ballot) is a private affair which creates an opportunity for secretly advancing self-interest at the expense of collective interest - without worry of group reprisal. Toxic (e.g. greed/fear based) politics is designed to exploit this.
However, once the public is trained to prioritize self-interest over collective interest, they become disloyal / unpatriotic and can be manipulated by any entity that has sufficient resources (internal or external). This is why the ideas of national identity and national cohesion are so important.
6. Tribes are the real "nations" in Africa: This is a flawed notion because it ignores the fact that the idea of a nation state is premised on cultural cohesion, which can be "engineered" within a single generation via deliberate strategy (e.g. Tanzania). It also ignores the reality of modern states (a failure to adapt to new realities - historical factors notwithstanding) and the fact that modernity favors scale (big countries with big populations tend to have big economies and stronger militaries - hence can shape the agenda for weaker countries).
It doesn't take much research to realize that ethnic chauvinism is one of the most self-destructive short-sighted practices embraced by leaders in present-day Africa. It works against us in numerous ways and has allowed opportunistic nations or associated corporate entities to quietly plunder our resources while subjecting us to the horrific indignity of pervasive indigence for more than a century.
Basal instincts like fear, mistrust, vanity, envy, anger and/or greed can be exploited by anyone (local or foreign) - and that explains yet another contributor to Africa's endless cycles of volatility. We really need to ask ourselves how come ~90% of Africans - despite living in the most resource-rich continent in the entire planet, are trapped in poverty?
Furthermore implementing the leadership's agenda in a tribalized environment becomes difficult because of pressure to reward ethnic bases for loyalty - which, besides fanning (potentially destabilizing) resentment from the "out groups" (and upping stakes during subsequent elections), also guarantees corruption and incompetence, which in turn sabotages the leaders' development agenda - leading to loss of credibility, even within the tribal base. As you can see, tribalism is a poor self-defeatist strategy: a slippery slope towards failure and/or conflict. For more on this, please look-up the "Hobbesian Trap" as well as the book "Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes.
CONCLUSION:
If a strategy has proven to be unsustainable or sub-optimal, it makes sense to review it and try new approaches. As long as old short-cut strategies are maintained, African leaders will continue to struggle with governance, economic performance and stability because "easy-button" strategies come with undesired side-effects, a few of which were discussed above. Political strategy advisors should weigh short-term gains of chosen strategies against their long-term risks. A holistic analysis of political strategies can lead to more robust political frameworks and strategic decisions that yield sustainable beneficial outcomes for leaders / elites and the general public. African leaders should consider the idea of establishing political R&D teams and centers to help find innovative solutions to political problems.
Have a nice weekend!
Brgds,
Patrick.
Patrick A. M. Maina
[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations]