Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Uncommon sense – Rethinking governance for a harmonious future

Home National Uncommon sense – Rethinking governance for a harmonious future
Uncommon sense – Rethinking governance for a harmonious future

In a candid interview, Bob Marley once challenged the status quo by asserting that every government is, to some extent, illegal. To the uninitiated, this claim might appear outrageous, yet Marley was delving into a deeper critique of institutionalized governments that often misrepresent the will of those they purport to serve. This breach of the social contract, according to Marley, renders their actions both illegal and illegitimate.

 Implicit in Marley’s perspective is the idea that the legitimacy of a government is best judged by the quality of life it affords its citizens. While governments may not explicitly acknowledge their illegitimacy, their effectiveness becomes apparent through the tangible outcomes experienced by the populace.

 However, Marley goes beyond holding governments accountable; he places a significant share of responsibility on the shoulders of the governed. He contends that the lack of self-governance necessitates institutional governance, shifting the blame for governmental shortcomings back to the populace.

 The crux of Marley’s argument lies in the belief that humans were inherently designed for self-governance, bestowed with the ability to determine their destinies. However, in neglecting this natural duty, individuals have allowed mismanagement to infiltrate not only personal paths but also social and sexual behaviors. This misgovernance, Marley asserts, leads to suffering, corruption, and societal degeneracy.

 As society descends into this downward spiral, institutional governments emerge as a seemingly necessary solution. Institutions, born out of the rejection of self-governance, step in to manage the populace. Individuals willingly surrender power and, at times, even their rights to these institutions, expecting protection from the consequences of their own misgovernance.

 This shift in power dynamics, from self-governance to institutional governance, poses its own set of challenges. Concentrated power in institutions may lead to a prioritization of their interests over those of the populace. Humanity, to save itself from its own shortcomings, finds itself caught in the paradox of trading one form of misgovernance for another.

 To navigate this complex terrain, the solution will be a path that balances institutional and self-governance. Rather than focusing solely on individual self-governance, the emphasis should be on building community self-governance. Communities, under this model, autonomously determine their destinies, choosing representatives at the institutional level independently. This stands in stark contrast to the current scenario where institutions often impose preferred candidates on communities.

 In this proposed paradigm, it becomes the duty of the community to instill and restore the natural duty of individual self-governance among its members. 

By fostering a sense of community self-governance, the balance between institutional oversight and individual agency can be restored, mitigating the risks associated with concentrated power and ensuring that the governed actively participate in shaping their collective destiny.

As we grapple with the complexities of governance, Marley’s vision offers a thought-provoking perspective, challenging us to reconsider the delicate dance between self-governance and institutional oversight in the pursuit of a more balanced and equitable societal structure.

E-mail: karlsimbumusic@gmail.com

Uncommon Sense is published every Friday in the New Era newspaper with contributions from Karlos Naimwhaka.