John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address inspired Americans across the board to see the importance of civic action and public service. His historic words, “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country,” challenged every American to contribute in some way to the public good. As we start the New Year, it is important, as a nation to reflect on our individual and collective civic action and public service to advance the goals set out by government.
The salvos shot at the government in general, and at President Hage Geingob in particular, at the end of 2015, packaged themselves into an ugly catalogue of subtle political campaigns, primarily aimed at tarnishing the illustrious political history and acumen of the President and putting spanners in his plans for the prosperity of Namibia.The vilification of President Geingob has become a fixture in the private media and on social networks, with hurtful, malicious and unwarranted criticism of the President dominating debates. Unlike the first and second presidents of Namibia, Geingob has been under attack at every opportune time.
His every move, including appointments of Cabinet, his salary, and his handling of the media has been criticised and caricatured. The President is being portrayed as a visionless leader, who has assembled a Cabinet without planning or foresight; who is populating State House and governance structures with close friends and cronies. It is not suggested here that the President should be exempted from criticism – far from it.
It is also not the view of this author that everything in the governance realm of Namibia is beyond reproach. Such a scenario only exists in Utopia. However, psychologists believe that criticism is the only reliable form of autobiography because it tells you more about the psychology of the critic than the people he or she criticises. Astute professionals can formulate a viable diagnostic hypothesis just from hearing someone’s criticisms. Critical people are certainly smart enough to figure out that criticism doesn’t work. They do so out of frustration and envy and because criticism is an easy form of ego defense. It often stems from an inferiority complex and the feeling of being devalued by the behavior or attitude of the one being criticised. Jean de la Bruyére once said “Criticism is often not a science; it is a craft, requiring more good health than wit, more hard work than talent, more habit than native genius.
In the hands of a man who has read widely but lacks judgment, applied to certain subjects it can corrupt both its readers and the writer himself”.Constructive criticism is essential, because it offers valid and well-reasoned opinions, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in an advisory rather than an oppositional manner.
Our criticism of government and leaders should be primarily aimed at improving what is on the table and not rubbishing everything. Such constructive criticism is a valuable tool in raising and maintaining performance standards of our leaders and government. Most importantly, criticism must always focus on the work rather than the person. We should avoid personalizing issues. Constructive criticism is more helpful if it is timely, clear, specific, detailed and actionable. It is not about singing praises in whatever language. There is a popular adage which says that “before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, when you do criticize him, you will be a mile away and have his shoes”.
Instead of being too critical of government, we as a nation need to reflect on our individual and collective civic action and public service responsibilities. Each one of us has a responsibility to make Namibia a better home for all of us. Civic engagement is the broader motif, encompassing service-learning but not limited to it. In this regard, individual and collective actions designed to identify and address issues of public concern should be encouraged in support of government efforts.
Civic engagement can take many forms, from individual voluntarism to organizational involvement and it may include efforts to directly address an issue, working with others in a community to solve a problem or interact with the institutions of government. A vivid example in our context is the role being played by Affirmative Repositioning, which, together with government, is fully focused on addressing the housing and land challenges faced by Namibians. Had the leaders of Affirmative Repositioning decided to become arm-chair critics, we would be reveling in voluminous tirades of criticism of government day in and day out.
They, however, took the bold civic step, and today they are a force to be reckoned with for propelling the housing and land agenda to the forefront of government programmes. It is therefore important for all Namibians to set aside their negative views about the President and his administration and rather focus on helping our government achieve the plans set in motion by President Geingob. Failure to doing so, we would have failed as a nation in our civic responsibilities of assisting government to implement its programmes as promised before, during and after elections. Dr. Charles Mubita holds a PhD in International Relations from the University of Southern California.