A Fine Romance Part The Third: The Legacy Years

The campaigns are kicking off, so I had better hurry and finish this three-part musing on Jay Kay before we head into griping about vote-rigging, campaign funding and hamstrung election monitors.

In the last musing I concluded that:

Jay Kay is a pretty good fit for this moment in our political journey: a free-marketeer with a redistributive philosophy, a technophilic democrat, a canny executive and a patient, dedicated, opportunistic man of ambition who lacks the predatory instincts that make the Putins of this world so frightening. While I don't doubt that there are smarter, tougher, cannier men out there who would make 'better leaders,' all in all Jay Kay is at worst inoffensive and at best very useful, which is not a bad range within which to work with for a young African democracy."

I think I still stand behind that statement... the trouble with writing about Jay Kay is that he presents an exercise in indecision. While he remains a 'man of the people' this has taken on a distinctly celebrity-obsessed sheen in the past couple of years. This is supported by his careful selection of public speaking opportunities: no independent journalist interviews, no hot seat, no on-the-spot question sessions except out in the rural areas where folks are too cowed to say anything except 'Thank you Mr. President.' There is a canny indirectness to his accessibility which I find quite pleasantly Machiavellan.

What I really want to talk about is his second term, and his legacy. There can be no doubt that Jakaya Kikwete's first term in office has seen an impressive and peaceable change in our political culture. Having seized the media by their short and curlies, he has set a dire trend for politicians both nationally and regionally. Thanks to him, demonstrated charisma has become an important political asset as have camera-friendly looks.

This same exploding media scene has also seen incredible advances in political coverage- most of it driven by the obsession with grand corruption. Of course Tanzania's media isn't 100% free- TIA. But it is a lot more active than it used to be under Benjamin Mkapa. The irony: Mr. Mkapa was a journalist. Go figure. It took a genuine democrat like Jay Kay to open up that dialogue, even as he avoids dialoguing...

And yet there is still a sort of malaise, born of the sensation that at best this administration has a mixed record of achievement and is dragging its feet. As a friend said once: you can have potential for so long, but if you don't fulfill it you are a failure. I'm paraphrasing. Judging by Jay Kay's continued popularity we are still expecting much from his presidency, and from him.

So what could be better than a second term? Even with the continued growth of our opposition parties, there is no viable alternative to the URT presidency outside of the CCM candidate. Jay Kay is home free with another five years in which to get down to serious business, i.e. the building of a legacy. I wonder what he's going to pick to fill that expectation vacuum.

Legacies tend to be brutally circumspect, and they rarely have to do with the tangibles- no one really remembers who built what dam or dreamed up what 25-year plan. Because, well, who cares? The popular legacy of a Tanzanian President can be identified pretty easily through his nickname. Check it out: Father of the Nation. Followed by Mzee Ruksa. Followed by Mzee Ukapa. Followed by... Handsome Boy?

So as he goes into his second term- with a slogan that promises...more of the same- I am hoping that Jay Kay will show us his serious side and leave the celebrident lifestyle behind him. Judging by some of what this administration has already laid down- the embracing of the market economy, media, (sort of) agriculture and (sort of) education- there is plenty of scope for our incumbent to lock down a President-sized "solid policy initiative" for the ages. Psst: Jay Kay- the trick is to pick something that makes you look good for, like, ever. Might be University of Dodoma. Probably ain't. Let's see shall we?

Liberty, really.

I've been getting a variety of verbal reactions to some of my written musings on Jay Kay, challenging me to 'declare my politics'. The terminally suspicious jingoists are certain that I must be a puppet speaking on behalf of The Kenyan Invasion to undermine This Great Nation Of Ours. The professional malcontents accuse me of, how to put this, applying my reverently puckered lips to the collective backsides of the President and the Establishment. Truth is, I am doing this for reasons far more selfish than anti-patriotism or sycophancy.

Power interests me. This is part of an ongoing project to learn through experience and reading and conversations what our relationship is to formal authority and how that affects how we govern ourselves and who we choose to lead our public institutions. Natch, these 'governance' or 'political' issues affect how I live my day-to-day life: whom I am "allowed" to love, how much I pay for electricity, who has the right to disconnect my water, what I can wear in public, whether or not I can stand for public office, what I can afford to eat, how long I have to wait in line for a passport, so on so forth.

Since I do all that living in Tanzania, evidently I must study Tanzanian power structures. And since, generally speaking, Tanzania suffers from fantastically crap institutions, all roads lead to the President*. And since we choose to defer so much power to the President, it is in my interest to know what kinda guy or gal the incumbent is.

It suits me just fine, for example, that Jay Kay's technophilia and evident love of all things young, shiny and new makes him more of a friend to eMedia than an enemy (for the most part). As a liberal-slash-blogger-slash-aspiring-writer-slash-feminist-etc, I need a Head of State who is friendly towards freedom of expression and I prefer one who is not paternalistic in his approach to power. Jay Kay kinda-sorta fulfills these requirements (hey, everyone is a work-in-progress).

Just because I like him- and you do too, you know that smile is irresistible- doesn't mean that I agree with everything he does, or think that he is The Second Coming with a slice of foie gras on top. Charm can only get you so far. I suspect he's messing up very badly in certain ways, but I can't exactly walk into his office and have this chat over a cup of coffee. That is just not how the system works. However, I am at liberty to communicate in other ways. A liberty I evidently exploit and am ready to defend along with every other form of liberty I currently enjoy and any future liberties I might acquire.

The non-selfish part? No woman is an island, and these things must be negotiated with the rest of the folks out there. As long as people are willing to defend liberty, we all benefit. Kinda like a social JKT. So, I hope that helps clear up any questions you might have had, dear Tanzanian reader-who-is-likely-to-ambush-me-at-a-bar-or-workshop, about why I write about Jay Kay the way I do. It's imperfect- like him I'm learning on the job and I have certainly committed my share of mistakes. But at heart we both love this country and serve it to the best of our abilities. Thanks for asking. Let's talk. Please use the comments section- its there for you!

*Yeah, I know there's other "important" branches of government. But, like, not really. That's the problem.

Food for thought from some fellow bloggers.

Yeah, so- is it just me or does our government behave a lot like one of Hand Relief International's affiliates? Start at the beginning, by the way, or you might get lost around the time the Flying Spaghetti Monster and His Noodly Appendage show up.

Speaking of looking for the underlying motivations, Swahili Street offers this interesting challenge:

"What would be the one factor that a future historian of Tanzania might choose, and for which she would have records, to examine similar [cosanguine] political and business relationships of today?"

What an awesome question. I guess that would have to start with a candid description of the ruling class in Tanzania, a horribly fraught issue...

Is a leader still a good leader if his team is sucktastic?

So long as we are chewing some political fat... Deep in discussion at the dinner table last night about leadership, ideology and politicians, we got to the usual generational impasse. I believe that every individual only gets the one President to love beyond rational thought. My opponent got Nyerere (lucky girl). While I am very fond of the incumbent, it is actually someone else in his government who is the object of my political affections. As we battled back and forth (I called Nyerere a dictator, she scoffed at the impotence of the so-called 'young turks') we hit on that most baffling of arguments: "It is not the President who is ineffectual, he is surrounded by people who let him down." If I had a thousand shillings for every time I heard or read this statement I would be...well, not rich exactly but my entertainment budget would be well padded.

Look. I know that there is a taboo against holding the President accountable for any mistakes, but must we pretend that Tanzanian leaders are exceedingly inept at picking their executive team? The President's executive powers are vast- and apparently in no danger of diminishing anytime soon. He personally appoints ten MPs at his leisure, as well as innumerable Heads of Stuff. Parastatals, government organs, central bank, military generals, regulatory bodies, utility companies, you name it- his almighty finger is in that pie. His word is law, even in times of peace. The Parliament is tame in his mighty grip, he pretty much yeas or neas the head of the judiciary. Checks? Balances? Are you kidding? This is no-nonsense executive superpower at its finest- not quite despotic but certainly close.

And this is the guy who is apparently above reproach because anything can be explained away with the convenient notion that he is 'let down by his team.' I don't think so. Of course the political reality is finely nuanced and full of bizarre compromises, and any president has his work cut out for him if he wants to squeeze good performance out of an institution as big as government. Still, there is something sinister about this habit that prevents us from holding the President responsible for failures of his establishment while celebrating his apparent successes. A bad workman blames his tools.