Chinese firm prepares to hand over new US$140 million parliament to Zimbabwe

reer

BANTUWEYNE
VIP
There's something called institutional path dependence, The more you delay a change in institutions the harder it will become to change into something else. Democracy is not something you can choose to implement anytime.

Africa should strive to be real democracies, one party states/dictators are just too dangerous, the risk of imploding isn't worth anything else.

Look at Kenya v Ethiopia/Somalia
Ghana v Mali/Liberia
Tanzania v Congo
Tunisia v Libya
bruh. tunisian president fired the whole government and restructured the government which is looking like a dictatorshio. and kenya is a kikuyu deep state for nearly 60 years.
 
I don’t support one man dictatorship. They are very fragile.

In that case, I apologise for mis-characterising your political position.

But in the case of Rwanda, how do you expect such a complex and advanced administration like the one you proposed to be formed? It’s just a fantasy.

I really can't speak on how it would be done in Rwanda, but I know how it could be done in my own Nation.

It would take well over a decade for such a system to be put into place at the local and State levels -- and another decade for it to take root at the Federal level.

A forward thinking, technocratic minded segment of Rwanda's best would have to create their own administrative political academies and gradually push for these reforms as they target the current power centres in the Rwandan political environment.

It must be made clear that no one is asking for Paul Kagame to be removed, however, his son cannot replace him.

I’m dealing with the reality of the situation that there isn’t any better alternative than Paul Kagame.

I definitely appreciate the tremendously important role he played in stabilising Rwanda after the genocide, however, I don't think he has any unique economic or administrative credentials or insights that should make him a permanent fixture in the political environment.

Paul Kagame should probably remain in place for another 10-15 years while an ideologically defined and Sovereignty affirming institutional State is gradually put into place.

This is my perspective for my own Nation as well; I do not believe in any sudden disruptions or violent revolts.

For me personally, a one party state based on meritocracy is the best system. Like in China.

I understand the rationale for a one party State, but how do you then prevent State capture by a small coterie of men?

Political parties would still exist in the State I envision, however, they wouldn't be able to form Government; and they wouldn't even be present in parliament because they would be restricted to pushing for policies that a sortition filled parliament could then deliberate on.


The President/leader should not have too much power either, but should serve more as a figurehead.

The 7 person Executive Council in Switzerland wields significant but diffused power and this is precisely what we should put in place in every African State.

This system would remove the tensions and divisions caused by political contests for power by different parties while guarding the Nation against State capture by a small group of self-interested individuals.

We need to strike a balance between democracy and epistocracy.
 
I understand the rationale for a one party State, but how do you then prevent State capture by a small coterie of men?

Political parties would still exist in the State I envision, however, they wouldn't be able to form Government; and they wouldn't even be present in parliament because they would be restricted to pushing for policies that a sortition filled parliament could then deliberate on.

The 7 person Executive Council in Switzerland wields significant but diffused power and this is precisely what we should put in place in every African State.

This system would remove the tensions and divisions caused by political contests for power by different parties while guarding the Nation against State capture by a small group of self-interested individuals.

We need to strike a balance between democracy and epistocracy.
I think that’s just stupid no offence. If 7 people have to decide then no progress can be made because everyone has to agree. A leader is required. The 7 person Executive Council in Switzerland came from the French directory, power was divided by 5 members in France. It was awful and eventually Napoleon took control and abolished it. He kept it in Switzerland because it was easy to keep them divided. Just because Switzerland seems to be doing good, doesn’t mean that it’s a good example to use elsewhere.
 
There's something called institutional path dependence, The more you delay a change in institutions the harder it will become to change into something else. Democracy is not something you can choose to implement anytime.

Africa should strive to be real democracies, one party states/dictators are just too dangerous, the risk of imploding isn't worth anything else.

Look at Kenya v Ethiopia/Somalia
Ghana v Mali/Liberia
Tanzania v Congo
Tunisia v Libya

I definitely want us to have real democracies in Africa, but they should conform to our own unique socio-political realities, stages of development and challenges.

Western style democratic electoralism is entirely unsuited for Africa; the system I've spoken about is actually more democratic than what is currently in place in any Western State, but it has significantly more safeguards and guide-rails.

Our Houses of Representatives and Senates should be filled through sortition -> jury-duty applied to politics; this would be significantly more representative; this would remove divisive elections; and it would greatly reduce the prospects of sinister State takeover, nepotism, kleptocracy and corruption.

Sortition members would be subject to a security and criminal and background check; and an extensive character assessment.

There would be an education requirement, which at minimum would be a high school diploma; there would also be a mandatory and thorough psyche evaluation...


..And a comprehensive education and training program in the laws of the Nation, economics, human rights, separation of powers and the organs of Government; this training program would last for 6 months to 1 year. This is where sortition members would learn the ins and outs of committee hearings and the intricacies of drafting legislation.

In addition to mandatory psychiatric evaluations necessary to screen out grandiose, psychopathic and sociopathic people... a body should be established to determine the most suitable individuals; this body would screen out hostile, vain, uncooperative, incompetent and corrupt people.

Elections would still take place but they would be for platforms and policies instead of politicians and personalitie; and they wouldn't be decided by millions of people that couldn't be properly informed on policy; or by people that could be easily swayed by charlatans and charismatic demagogues.

It would be significantly easier to properly inform 99 demographically representative members in Citizen Assemblies of the details of each policy proposal with the help of experts and policy representatives.

I'll use the Australian State of NSW as an example:

We have 8 million people spread over 128 councils and 90% of the 5 million enrolled voters are said to have participated in the State election in 2019.

The Citizens Assemblies model would randomly select 99 demographically representative members of each of the 128 councils and have them informed of the different policy platforms of each party over a 90 day period...

..This would mean that only 12, 672 people would cast a vote; these votes would be significantly better informed than the votes of 5 million people.
 
Last edited:
I think that’s just stupid no offence. If 7 people have to decide then no progress can be made because everyone has to agree. A leader is required. The 7 person Executive Council in Switzerland came from the French directory, power was divided by 5 members in France. It was awful and eventually Napoleon took control and abolished it. He kept it in Switzerland because it was easy to keep them divided. Just because Switzerland seems to be doing good, doesn’t mean that it’s a good example to use elsewhere.

As opposed to the brilliant track record of one man rule in Africa?

No where in the world are leaders more empowered than in Africa and the results have been absolutely disastrous; I simply don't trust the current crop of Africans with that much Executive power; and if the system needed to be tweaked with a rotating Presidency, then that would be still much better than what we have now.
 

reer

BANTUWEYNE
VIP
As opposed to the brilliant track record of one man rule in Africa?

No where in the world are leaders more empowered than in Africa and the results have been absolutely disastrous; I simply don't trust the current crop of Africans with that much Executive power; and if the system needed to be tweaked with a rotating Presidency, then that would be still much better than what we have now.
both overlap alot. after the coup in somalia the supreme revolutionary council was formed. the council had disagreements. so the council said our disputes will go to the head of the council he has the final say.:manny:
 

Trending

Latest posts

Top