The Blame Game

For how long can you keep blaming your predecessor? I ask this question in light of the many instances I have heard politicians explain their failure to do something as not really theirs, but the fault of the predecessor.

Barrack Obama was elected on a euphoric wave in 2008, promising to change the way America did politics. He marketed  himself as the answer to the failed George Bush policies, promising radical changes to banking regulation, American foreign policy and health to mention a few. Four years down the line, little had changed with the US economy stuttering and the controversial sweeping changes to the health sector surviving a Supreme court ruling proving extremely divisive. The killing of Osama Bin Laden did little to quell the growing sense of frustration with Obama by Americans themselves and even traditionally close allies like Israel.

Personally it was paradoxical on one front. Here was a guy I genuinely liked as a human being and to some extent as the new image of the USA. I had known though that it would be almost impossible for him to meet his pre-election promises. Much of this owing to the deeply layered structural organisation of the USA.

I was one of those who hailed Obama's election for its symbolic value but remained unconvinced on its ability to bring real change in the US or for that matter whether radical changes were actually desirable. We were labeled cynics and "player haters" then but now even prominent African American scholars and writers like Alice Walker  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-21726465) doubt whether there has been anything to write home about except the symbolic value of Obama's presidency.

Four years down the line, Obama was struggling to convince his employers to avail him a second term. His spin doctors predictably used that to justify their call for “four more years” while the detractors, who were growing in number demanded for an end to  the failed experiment, throwing their financial weight behind the republican candidate. Thankfully he survived that.

I found it interesting therefore to listen to Obama's campaign for a second term. When asked about all those promises for "change", Obama had one very well rehearsed answer, of course delivered with much aplomb and calling on all his rhetorical prowess. "the mess left by George Bush was too much that it would take a long time to clean up". He stuck to this position like the proverbial sailor wrecked at sea clings to a piece of driftwood. Assembling an array of impressive speakers including former president Clinton to tow the line and in the end it was enough. He magnified the few points of success and almost entirely blamed his inadequacies on the failed “Bush policies”.

Back home the Patriotic Front has now been in power for close to two years. The many times I have listened to parliament and ministers making statements, one line of thought seems constant. That it “ is going to take a lot of time to clean up the mess that was left by the former ruling party the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD)”. Only a few days ago, the Vice President Dr Guy Scott, a man I greatly respect, was quoted as saying our education system was going to take long to repair owing in particular to the twenty years of mismanagement by the MMD. (A quick note that Dr Scott and president Sata where at one point part of that government. Meanwhile a few of his deputy ministers are card carrying members of the MMD).

The same has been said about the economy, the fight against corruption and even the civil service. If there is any respite it is in the fact thattThe blame game is not unique to the PF. It has also been played by the Movement for Multi-party Democracy to the extent that different regimes of the same party had their fair share. How many times did we hear the late president Mwanawasa blame his predecessor for this or that.

I do not think of myself as a motivational speaker and I don’t need to be one to know that continually blaming someone else for a situation you are supposed to correct only perpetuates it. It (the blame game) robs you of ownership of the situation, a key ingredient for any cogent remedial measure.

In the world of politics it is probably right to incessantly magnify the mistakes your opponent made, real or perceived. I contend however that it is much more important to take responsibility and take meanigful action towards correcting whatever mess might have been left. Surely even for politicians there must come a time when the only person you can blame is yourself.

You can only blame your predecessor for so long. A time must surely come when all excuses are exhausted. The sooner that time comes, the better. Whether it is civil servants still aligned to the former ruling party frustrating government efforts, or millers  who working with the opposition are stifling government efforts at reducing the price of mealie meal, a good leader while acknowledging the challenges will opt to rise above them as opposed to being constantly mired in their distractive web.

To many, me included, excuses no matter how good are at best tales of incompetence and at worst irritating noises.More so when they have been carried on for longer than is necessary. I understand how it is a safe cove and a defensive default position. But apart from generating anger against your predecessor, it does nothing in terms of corrective measures.

I hope the PF will rid their vocabulary of the MMD blame game. Remember they have gone out of their way to co-opt members of this same “bad” party into government. They might get a few laughs in parliament by deriding their opponents, but the real issues of bread and butter facing the masses can only be sorted out by taking responsibility. The sooner they realise this, the better. Remember there is no one who wins when people play the blame game.