We need a nanny state

As Africa grapples with the strenuous task of finding lasting solutions to her problems under the mantra “African solutions to African problems”, we should perhaps retreat a little and adorn microscopic lenses to focus on particular problems, understand them and be able to suggest what could potentially set Africa on a successful trajectory towards development and prosperity.

Africa is confronted with a myriad of depressing problems: corruption, poverty, violent crime, HIV/Aids, underdevelopment, kleptomania, famine, civil conflicts and all manner of imaginable ills. When we attempt to address these problems generally the common mistake we commit is to exert our limited energy towards dealing with consequences of some of these problems under the misguided impression that we are dealing with the causes. Our default approach is to employ what is commonly believed to be the best approach. The nature of global geo-politics is varied. Circumstances vary from one country to another. No common approach can be employed though there may be a common thread among all these varied continental problems.

It is best that one specifically look at South Africa where all her poblems are what currently define our conflicting existence. The dawn of freedom ignited intense flames of passion and hope for a better, united and prosperous South Africa and ordinarily with such freedom arose the challenge of striking an optimal balance with responsibility and accountability, be it by society in general or those entrusted with the duty of governance. Though the ideal of liberation was the complete removal of the shackles of apartheid, the agonising reality is that at such infancy of liberation we may have perhaps hastily moved to emancipate toddlers before reaching their maturity. Our liberal Constitution, though lauded as one of the most progressive, had unintended consequences such as breeding an unfortunate dependence on the state through the guarantees of basic services such as housing (get an education, work and build your own house!). Promoting and safeguarding the welfare of the people is a primary and fiduciary duty of the state, which it cannot and should not abrogate.

There may be instructive lessons we can draw from China. This is a nation that has managed to transform itself from an inconsequential communist state to the second most biggest and powerful economy in the world. Communist China has achieved its success not through accident of circumstances but through a clear vision to regain her fu qiang (wealth and power), dignity, international respect and territorial integrity. Chairman Mao rose to power through a successful revolution that overthrew the Chiang Kai-shek Nationalists and established the People’s Republic of China in 1949. An important part of the spectrum of Chinese political outlook is still deeply rooted on Mao’s vision and ideology of socialism.

George Orwell in his classic novel 1984 said: “Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.” The revolution, led by Mao, as Orwell aptly put it, established in China what we know today as the “people’s democratic dictatorship”.

Contrary to popular belief that democracy is the easiest pathway towards prosperity, China has propelled herself to unimaginable economic growth through the “people’s democratic dictatorship” as defined in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China. This is premised on the belief that under such benevolent dictatorship the state “represents and acts on behalf of the people, but possesses and may use dictatorial powers against reactionary forces”. A benevolent dictatorship does not in any measure equate to tyrannical rule under which the people are terrorised and live under permanent fear of the state. It may perhaps be viewed similar to strict parenting where love and care is unconditionally offered to children in full knowledge that their delinquency would result in drastic consequences.

Benevolent dictatorships are an intrinsic part of our modern existence and have led great human achievements and transformed the world as we know it today. Global corporations are totalitarian institutions that turn the wheels of the global economy. They are benevolent dictatorships governed through a set of hierarchies, which define the chain of command. There is no democracy in corporations. What the board of dictators says, goes! Failure to abide by the rules and operate within the set corporate guidelines, including failure to achieve set objectives, would result in drastic consequences. However, greater reward generally awaits those who outperform and achieve desired results. It is within the strictures of such benevolent dictatorship that wealth has been generated and social progress indirectly benefited.

It may sound preposterous to those driven by individualism rather than common good to grasp benevolent dictatorship as an alternative to transforming society, the economy and normalising their structural faults. The obvious concern by fanatical proponents of democracy is the abuse of power. Sadly, the abuse of power is not an exclusive preserve of dictators and tyrants. Even men such as former US president Abraham Lincoln, a dictator who history has been too kind, abused power during the American Civil War.

Lincoln’s name is hardly mentioned along with murderous tyrants such as Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Joseph Stalin, despite documented evidence on his despotic and murderous escapades in the south where he waged war against defenceless civilians. Today US President Obama, an unquestionable democrat, appears to draw some greater measure of inspiration from the same Abraham Lincoln.

Power has the potential to corrupt any individual in the absence of all necessary controls. Unethical lapses and abuse of power by politicians within the confines of a benevolent dictatorship generally appear to be condoned, so long as such dictatorial benevolence does not threaten their lives. A problem often arises when a benevolent dictatorship is based on the cult of personality rather than an established governance framework. It is under such cults of personality that political misfits and murderous tyrants are born.

China’s constitution appears to provide a framework within which her rulers can operate towards realising a common ideological goal. China has grown steadily at an average of about 9.7% a year in the last 28 years and the list of the super-rich is ever expanding. World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz on his visit to China in 2005 said: “China, as we all know, has been the fastest growing economy in Asia for the past 20 years and has lifted more than 400 million people above US$1 a day poverty levels in that time.” The lives of millions of Chinese have changed for the better. While the international community is rightfully concerned about China’s human-rights abuses it should equally acknowledge the discipline and commitment by the people of China towards realising their nation’s aims. Closer to home, Botswana is the most successful benevolent dictatorship that masquerades as a democracy.

No system is without its flaws. Our individual circumstances should dictate what is best applicable and aligned with our common goals. South Africa has no long-term economic strategy. Any nation’s collective hope can only be sustained by meaningful and discernable progress towards realising her noble aims. Once we have outlined that which binds us as a nation, we can chart the path through which we could, side by side, travel towards a unified and prosperous South Africa. Our current state of lawlessness, chronic idleness, poverty and dependency on the state does not require a general one-size-fits all. Our problems may possess striking similarities with the rest of the developing nations, but circumstances differ and require tailored solutions.