I
am not surprised that political discourse in our Ethiopian community
abroad and within Ethiopia is polarized by ethnicism, social status,
wealth, education, personal ambition, vengeance and on and on�a
general reflection of our Ethiopian society. Maybe that is within
the norm as politics goes for the rest of the world as well. What is
surprising to me is the manifest dictatorial tendency of censorship
and dogmatism that �educated� Ethiopians seem to favor judging
by their e-mails, chat postings, and articles�a desire for
uniformity and supportive of a single point of view! Although I may
wish the magnitude of such problem to be much lower than what I have
roughly calculated from my readings of website postings and chat
submissions by Ethiopians, nevertheless, it is alarmingly high even
for a sample that is not representative of the sentiments and
attitudes of the larger population of Ethiopians. (Most Ethiopians
do not have access to computers or the time to indulge in such
expensive endeavors.)
If
we look at several of Ethiopian websites, it seems that political
discourse has become some form of a chorus-line affair where a
particular type of political song and political dance is being
played out endlessly. I tried to draw some rational that I can
understand for such behavior of Ethiopian intellectuals writing on
the current political situation in Ethiopia and about the
Opposition. In this Website, I have tried to post diverse views from
different political camps and individuals hoping such diverse views
will enrich our understanding of our political problems. I have
written several times that politics is a complex subject that we
cannot afford to deal with in an amateurish and dogmatic manner. In
Ethiopia, we are faced with very serious political problems that we
need help our compatriots to solve. It seems that some of our
intellectuals who are posting articles and our internet brawlers in
chat groups are in a debo, in a kind of frenzy riding popular political bandwagon,
which is a dangerous use of a system only useful in certain aspects
of rural life. Under such taxing situation, our culture of debo is not at all useful.
Of
course, there are several intellectuals who have tried to discuss
our current political problem as a serious subject that deserves
rational and deliberative discourse. Even in chat groups individuals
like �gooch� have tried to moderate views, which may not be part
of the popular songs being presented by the political chorus-line,
in order to bring some sane discourse on a serious matter like our
national political future. For example, because I have posted an
article by Getachew Mequanent that questions the political
leadership of CUD and even further makes the point by supporting the
YARA award to Meles Zenaw, some writers accuse me as if I am
promoting such positions. One need only read further down to see
another article by Amare B who is discussing in his short article
that it is time for the current Ethiopian Government to leave and be
replaced by new leadership. My own political stand is that I support
the change of government. However, did not support the YARA award.
In short, our effort at this Website is to encourage discourse, and
help our readers consider diverse views before they reach any
conclusion based on limited understanding of the depth of our
political problem. The danger of closing our mind from considering
diverse ideas and several alternative solutions is that we will end
up maintaining our political decisions through dogmatic and blind
political faith, as opposed to basing or reaching our decisions on
rational and deliberative processes.
The
first step in any healthy political discourse is to be open or be
willing to accept criticism. I am not denying the fact that being
criticized in any form is hurtful even when it is offered as a
constructive friendly gesture. It is only very human to feel
personal pain under such criticism. However, it is the least price
that every one of us be willing to pay to help advance democracy in
our community and country. To be truthful, I must say that I am very
disappointed how bad and vicious some writers in some websites and
people in chat groups seem to be. We are confronted often with the
postings of �vomits� of individuals who seem to think that
public forums such as chat groups are their privies. It is
impossible for me to think that such ignorance and vulgarity could
advance our political pluralism, tolerance, respect of the rights of
people, et cetera.
Labeling
people with their alleged ethnic identity such as Tygrean
intellectual, Oromo politician, Gurage businessman et cetera or
labeling people with negative identification such as anti-Amhara,
anti-Moslems, anti-Oromo et cetera is not helpful in enlightening
anyone. Such labeling is empty of substance. How about bringing out
the basic material that led anyone to use such labeling and
discussing it fully if there is a problem? At any rate, it is
unfathomable to me to see how our national interest can be advanced
by such negative polarizing labeling, rhetoric, or argument. We
Ethiopians have been damaged to some extent by our upbringing, our
social interactions, and our political system to such a degree that
we truly must make a conscious effort to change the very matrix of
our very being. Let us face the fact that the Ethiopian family is
more of symptomatic of a dysfunctional family. How could it be
otherwise having lived through a century of turmoil bordering civil
war? Major reevaluation of our interfamily relationships must be our
first step toward understanding why often we behave in a juvenile or
destructive manner in our political interactions with each other. It
is a puzzle to me how one can fight for democracy by utilizing
undemocratic method. Even if limited as a sample, a clear example of
our political immaturity is to be observed in the way we talk to
each other in chat groups and the way we denigrate each other in
personal attacks (not legitimate criticism supported with evidence)
in articles posted in several of our websites.
If
the character or past activities of an individual are at issue,
there is a legitimate method to discus the personality of the
individual in question. Some authors in articles and chat postings
in websites often offer allegation of wrongdoing, without any
supporting evidence. As readers, we must challenge such postings by
demanding a much better standard from writers posting in websites.
There are also problems of logical fallacies, the use of slanters,
and the question of relevance in such posted materials. We must not
point our fingers at anybody without adequate and relevant reason.
The use of ethnic slurs and ethnic identity to accuse individuals of
some form of political malfeasance has no place in any rational
discussion and especially so by individuals who want to preserve the
territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ethiopia.
I
have stated in previous articles that our first effort should be
geared toward the preservation of Ethiopia as a state, but that does
not mean that we drop everything else from our consideration. For
example, we have on our hand the current crises where Opposition
leaders and others are being detained and charged with crimes. We
cannot afford to ignore such important political and human problems.
We need to demand and exert all the political pressure we can muster
in order to have such detainees freed without any precondition.
However, the effort we exert for the freedom of such Opposition
leaders and others does not of itself bar us from examining the
political and economic programs of the Opposition and the activities
of the other detainees. In fact, it is quite absurd to think that
our political life and all political discussions come to an abrupt
standstill due to the detentions of political leaders and others and
that their political program is sacrosanct and should not be
discussed or criticized.
We
have already experienced what it means to be ruled by self-appointed
violent leaders. The one single most factor common to all
dictatorships is the suppression of discourses, especially
discourses dealing with political matters. We owe it to ourselves to
discuss several issues dealing with political and economic programs
that should have been discussed before the date of election. In
fact, it is the lack of proper discourse on the political program
offered by the Opposition as a whole, and the contradictory programs
of the members of the Opposition that prompted me to suggest in
several articles that we use the May 15, 2005 election as an
indicator in order to form a transitional government in order to
prepare another election in a couple of years. The two year period
would give us all a chance to examine carefully the programs of
contending political organizations, and if necessary to form new
political organizations that may serve our best interest. Now, what
seems to be happening is that under the existing state of confusion
and based on a protest vote, which the Opposition itself repeatedly
appraised as corrupted, that the Opposition be allowed to take
power. Demanding that Meles Zenawi be removed from power is one
thing, but demanding that the Opposition should assume power is a
very questionable demand.
Voting
in Ethiopia or elsewhere in the developing world is not much
different than a contentless ritual that sounds civilized and
democratic on the surface, but has no real impact on the political
life of the people of such nations. I believe we need more than
ritualistic acts of going to the polls and stuffing ballot boxes
with meaningless slips of paper, in order to bring about meaningful
political change in Ethiopia. Consider what would have happened the
day after the Opposition assumed political power and has formed a
government. Formed a government? I doubt that it would even be
possible to form a government with the types of actors in play
within the Opposition. What would be the most logical outcome of
such development is the formation of another dictatorship, which
would have run in time the usual course we have witnessed evolving
in the ascendance of Mengistu Hailemariam, as well as Meles Zenawi,
to dictatorial power. It is the familiar process of the elimination
of political contenders and the creation of sycophantic subordinates
with economic corruption underfoot.
It
is not that difficult to see why supporters of the Opposition tend
to cast their expression of support in terms of support of one or
two personalities. How else could anyone be able to form a
government under such inadequate politicization and minimal
discourse except to form a dictatorship of a single individual? So
much for our idea of democratic governance! No leader in the history
of humankind ever ascended to power by promising to destroy the very
society he wants to rule. Let us not be so na�ve in our judgment to
believe the mere words of politicians as sufficient guarantee for
their future proper behavior. Instead, what we must pursue is a
political process including open discourse in order to put in place
structures that will not be so easily breached to advance the
individual ambitions of politicians at our cost.
With
this in mind, I suggest the following questions/areas for our
discourse: 1) What form of political struggle is needed to help us
resolve the current crises of the dictatorship of Meles Zenawi? Is a
transition government necessary if Meles Zenwi is ousted? Should we
allow CUD to be our transition government? Or would it be proper to
form a coalition government with EPRDF and CUD? What type of
economic program would be most appropriate for Ethiopia at this
time? Should we form another political organization that has no
members in its leadership from WPE, EPRP, Maison, EPRDF leadership?
Should we emphasize rural development to the extent that we
completely reform our budget allocations? How are we to reform land
ownership in Ethiopia? Should the Ethiopian government return all
nationalized property (land and buildings) in both rural and urban
areas to their owners as identified prior to the nationalization?
What would be the fate of the AU and other international
organizations? How do we define the correct relationship between
Ethiopians in the Diaspora and those back home? END
Tecola
W. Hagos
December
10, 2005
Washington
DC
|
