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] On Friday, June 28, 2019, 11:43:30 AM GMT+3, S.M. Muraya <murigi.muraya@gmail.com> wrote: Patrick, Maybe organizations such as Mzalendo are helping politicians think about their ways in parliament? https://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Best-and-worst-MPs-and-senators-revea...  Business daily, quote: "The Treasury had allocated Parliament Sh38.5 billion and awarded the Judiciary Sh17.45 billion in the BPS.." https://www.businessdailyafrica.com/economy/MPs-reward-counties--Parliament-...   Somewhere, there is a Public Participation bill (2018) but yet to find information @ http://www.parliament.go.ke/the-national-assembly/house-business/bills-track...  Maybe Parliament.go.ke will use 1% of their budget (KES 380 Mln) to increase/improve Access to Information? It would help if MCAs were LEGALLY required to live (reside) in the wards (villages) they represent. If so this will help increase security and commerce for everyone. https://www.businessdailyafrica.com/news/CA-launches-street-name-plan-for-do...   Public participation will become easier to accomplish online (digitally) and on the ground, physically.    On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 4:54 PM Patrick A. M. Maina via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Dear listers, Is there a way we can use our skills/talents to try and help turn our local politics into something more healthy and inclusive? Somalia's 20+ years of lawlessness is a grim reminder that toxic politics can backfire massively in an unpredictable and uncontrollable way that does not yield any winners over very long periods of time. There is no human society that is immune to the dangers of toxic politics, therefore it is important for stakeholders (be they professionals, business people, politicians and/or intellectuals) to voice their good-faith concerns against toxic politics, ideally in good time - when there is still a good chance for the country/leaders to change course, because ultimately we all get to bear the heavy socioeconomic costs associated with political uncertainty and volatility. To quote UNDP (see link #1): "Societies whose political institutions are more inclusive and participatory tend to be more peaceful and resilient, just as societies practicing exclusion tend to be more vulnerable to fragility and conflict." As long as leadership and/or resource/opportunity allocation is associated with ethnic identity, and/or an exclusive mindset, there will always be discontent among the have-nots, which leads to aggressive political competition as different ethnic communities clamor for their "turn to eat". It is therefore in our best interest, as a country that desires stability and prosperity, to push towards inclusive and participatory frameworks of governance (see link #2). Let me open the floor with some ideas / suggestions based on the above-mentioned themes. Hoping we can have a non-partisan idea-focused discussion in the spirit of searching for creative solutions to a shared problem. IDEAS / SUGGESTIONS:-------------------------------- 1. Our country needs moments of guaranteed pause in our politics where everyone (including media) gets to take a break from elective politics and focus on development: doing things that create opportunities and prosperity for all. What if election laws were amended to make campaigning illegal unless it occurs within 18 months prior to an election? 2. What if promises for maendeleo (development) were limited to election time only - and required in writing (lodged at the registrar), with measurable pledges and indicators (e.g. x number of jobs annually) such that the promises form a performance contract between the (winning) politician and voters across the whole country? 3. What if politicians agreed that failure to achieve x% of the committed pledges/targets, without credible extenuating circumstances, would be deemed a fair and reasonable ground for impeachment/recall. This would help minimizefalse/unrealistic promises and help reshape the perceptions of leadership from the more toxic "opportunity to rule", into the healthier opportunity to serve the country. 4. What if politician salaries were pegged to the median salary in the country - and any extra perks (e.g. performance bonus) to be linked, via a tiered system, to the delivery of agreed socio-economic performance targets and paid lumpsum at the end of the political term? This would incentivize a growth mindset and also minimize the perception that politics is a shortcut to easy wealth (meaning politics would attract people who truly want to make a difference; stakes would be lower during elections and we would have more of in-touch leadership styles). 5. What if political leaders and senior administrators were offered actual housing (instead of a monetary allowance) in median level neighborhoods (e.g. Eastlands) - to avoid their developing the out-of-touch elitism that seems to comes with moving to places like Karen or Muthaiga? What if government only offered them cover limited to public health services (I've seen this being discussed in the news)? Perhaps our country will be transformed much faster if our leaders lived among the median demographics and had a personal stake in improving the median standards of living? 6. What if political campaigns were about winning support for a written socio-political strategy and plan; i.e. a competition of ideas - instead of personalities? What if elections were about perceived merits of ideas, implementation strategies or preferred economic direction that the country should take - instead of identities and/or unrealistic promises? 7. All Kenyans have common problems that they would like to hear politicians talking about all the time such as JOBS CREATION and ABUNDANT OPPORTUNITIES for ENTREPRENEURSHIP. I think ICT, manufacturing and agriculture are high-potential drivers where quick results can be attained. How can we encourage politicians to focus on these issues within a nationally inclusive framework? 8. Can/should advertisers influence the News Media to stop fanning divisive narratives, mediocrity, ethnic chauvenism, identity politics and other banal inanities - and focus instead on responsibly shaping the national agenda towards issues that bring growth and prosperity? Can media self-regulate and refocus the Kenyan masses towards sustainable agendas (like entrepreneurship and excellence)? If our media moguls are in doubt about the business case of responsible journalism, I would urge them to study how Somalia's media industry has been performing over the last ~28 years. I think if the clock was pulled back, Somalia's media would think very carefully about the narratives that they want to shape their national discourse. Short term profits can come with a heavy long-term cost. Please consider this. 9. Serializing national goals to maximize focus, prioritize and leverage the domino effect of cumulative wins: Do we really have the capacity to make massively bold and audacious goals that are to be implemented concurrently or are we setting ourselves - and our leaders - up for failure by overreaching far beyond our realistic capabilities and stretching ourselves way too thin? Our economic/policy advisors need to accept the reality - that we are a poor, debt ridden country with crippling levels of corruption, institutionalized mediocrity, short sighted orientation and greater levels of incompetence than competence; a country that seems to be always tittering on the edge of a precipitous political/economic cliff - thus urgently in need of credible stabilizing plans and strategies.  I would like to propose the idea of a serial, bite-sized approach to strategic national initiatives, where the main goals (which can still be big and audacious) are smartly serialized for domino effect and pursued, with laser focus, one at a time. For example we can have the entire nation's development agenda focus on creating jobs and opportunities - and nothing else - for the first 5 years, then in the subsequent 5 years the focus can change to boosting growth and efficiency, say via infrastructure upgrades/enhancements. This makes it easy for political manifestos to be guided by realistic 20-30 year economic master-plans (that already have national concensus), rather than arbitrary perceptions about what is popular at election time. It can also help decouple the economy from political transition cycles which would attract high quality FDI. Attempting very wide scope goals in parallel significantly increases costs - without giving the economy time to catch up and create domino effects; it compounds complexity - yet we have limited capacity to manage significant complexity; it increases the likelihood of mega corruption due to greater ambiguity + an overstretched Monitoring and Evaluation framework; it consumes a counterproductive amount of leadership bandwidth -  such that unexpected events become more of a challenge than would otherwise be; and it magnifies risk of failing to attain ALL the audacious goals to near certainty levels. CONCLUSION: If we serialize our national goals, we will avoid biting more than we can chew and stretching our resources (or bandwidth) too thin. Being focused will minimize the risk of goal-capture by corruption cartels. By prioritizing wealth creation initiatives, we will give our economy a chance to develop domino effects - building a viable case for increasing capacity via infrastructure enhancements. A period of guaranteed pause in politics will allow the country to focus on development. Elections should be about issues - rather than identity. Performance-linked manifestos will encourage politicians to make realistic promises that they intend (and are able) to keep and be held accountable for their attainment. Media is key to ending negative/exclusive ethnicity as it can shape the national discourse towards less toxic narratives. Research suggests that inclusive, participatory governance models are superior to exclusive ones. Inclusivity creates the right socio-political conditions for sustainable stability and prosperity.  Welcoming your thoughts / more ideas on the same. My only request, please, is that we try to have a non-partisan, intellectually honest exchange of creative ideas. Good evening. Brgds,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] Links / References: 1. Inclusive political processes https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/2030-agenda-for-sustainable-develo... 2. Sustainability and Public Participation: Toward an Inclusive Model of Democracy on JSTOR https://www.jstor.org/stable/25610875?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail.... The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. -- SMM "Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32