A few days ago, one Laga-boy
Mntungwa posted on Facebook that freedom in Swaziland will remain a
dream. In his post titled, “WHY FREEDOM WILL REMAIN A DREAM FOR THE PEOPLE OF
SWAZILAND?”, he mentions some of the reasons for his conclusion, albeit without
offering any evidence for the allegations.
Since his assertions have also been raised by some people in the
past, and will surely be raised by others in future, I thought it important
that these issues be addressed. In my response to him, I reproduce some of his
quotes as sub-headings and give a direct response thereunder.
1. “First of all we
don't have Political Parties in Swaziland, but we have groups who call
themselves Political Parties.”
Laga-boy’s claim that there are no political parties in Swaziland
is obviously absurd. He knows for a fact that there are political parties
though they remain banned since 12 April 1973. He does, of course, recognise that
there are political parties (groups who call themselves political parties, as
he says), hence he soon thereafter claims that these groups are “just there to
poach donors so that their leadership can do nothing but to enrich themselves
just like the Tinkhundla Regime.”
Thus, in Laga-boy’s world, there are groups in Swaziland who 1)
poach donors, 2) for their leadership, 3) to enrich themselves, and 4) so that
these leadership(s) live like the tinkhundla regime. Unfortunately, like all before
him, he neglects to bring such evidence. He does not even care that he has not
provided any evidence for such spurious claims. It is even worse that he claims
that the members of political parties who have over the decades been victimised
by the regime want to live like the tinkhundla regime. Does Mr Laga-boy
understand what the regime does to those with dissenting voices? Surely, he
cannot claim that he has not seen the regime’s wrath! How can members of banned
parties ever live like the tinkhundla regime when in fact they operate
illegally? Only Laga-boy knows! And all that knowledge lives only in his brain,
not in reality.
Nonetheless, let us engage more on this question of “donors”. Others
before him have alluded to this phenomenon as well – also without offering
evidence. Let us, for now, ignore that Laga-boy has no actual knowledge of the
existence of “donors” save for what he has heard from others who also offered
no evidence to him, which he regurgitates in his post, predictably without bringing
evidence or expanding on the matter.
Firstly, supposing that the existence of “donors” claims is true,
whatever the actual source of the funds, where does Laga-boy and crew think
political parties will ever get funds to wage the struggle? Does he think that moving
groups of people (members) from one place to another is free? Does he think that
they do not eat, drink, etc? If political parties do not go out there and scout
for funds, how will they fund democracy campaigns? For instance, how does Laga-boy
think that political parties would move their members from Nhlangano to Mbabane
to take part in a march or rally? Often such measures have to be undertaken covertly.
This demands even more funds. Nothing is ever free! Political parties should therefore
never apologise for scouting for and receiving funds from any source, whether such
sources are classified as “donors” or other classification.
Secondly, Laga-boy does not understand – and I bet he does not
even care – what happens to those who dare their lives to actively take part in
democracy campaigns or join political parties. Activists and members of political
parties – particularly the more radical parties – often become unemployed and
unemployable. Has Laga-boy and crew ever donated any funds to those who are
kicked out of schools and tertiary institutions, for example, and rendered
unemployable in Swaziland? That is the question he needs to reflect on, instead
of attacking political parties for soliciting funding from other sources –
internal and international. Dear Laga-boy, political parties often become home
to the countless victims of the tinkhundla regime, who sometimes even get
kicked out of their families, and these comrades cannot live without eating,
drinking, shelter, food and all basic needs. The victims of the regime, those
who have faced the worst wrath of the regime, remain grateful to the
contribution of political parties with regard to picking up the pieces, and many
of these victims have gone on to practically contribute to the growth of parties
and generally the struggle for freedom. Will Laga-boy ever join with these
victims in the struggle instead of castigating them? The jury is still out on
that!
2. “It's even worse
because even those groups they don't have a vision.”
Next, Laga-boy claims that Swaziland’s political parties “might
have a mission but they absolutely have no vision,” hence, in his mind, they are
trapped somewhere going nowhere – and thus “betraying the masses who believe in
freedom.” Since Laga-boy is involved in an uncritical analysis on the role of political
parties, he has failed to even give some back up to any of his claims. If he stands
in opposition to the visions of the various political parties, he should state
such opposition instead of claiming that they have a “mission” and “no vision”.
I doubt he would ever be able to engage in such a discussion, however, since,
as it appears, he has not even read any of the documents of the various political
parties, let alone trace their history, including the trials and tribulations over
the years.
3. “The second reason
why freedom will continue to be a dream in Swaziland is because of the number
of the so called Political Parties that exist in this country.”
At first Laga-boy claimed that there are no political parties in
Swaziland, yet here he is claiming that there are too many political parties. Which
is which, Mr Laga-boy? Either we have them or we do not! Nonetheless, let us,
for now, ignore this obvious contradiction!
If the reader ever had any doubt whether Laga-boy had bothered
to read up on the various revolutions that have happened in history, his point
about too many parties should clear it up. He claims that since freedom has not
been achieved yet, there is no point in having “so many political parties”. People
who fail to do the simplest of tasks – read on the various ideologies or
outlooks of the different political parties – often fall for such conclusions. The
same applies to those who have not read on revolutions across the world.
In the history of struggles, the oppressed people have never organised
themselves into one single political party. This is because of their different outlooks
and objectives. Hence, they often decide to unite – together with workers’,
students’ and civil society organisations – under one umbrella in the fight for
a common goal. In the case of Swaziland, there has been in the past the Swaziland
Democratic Alliance, and recently the Swaziland United Democratic Front. The Communist
Party of Swaziland has for some time been advocating for the Liberation Front. Thus,
Laga-boy’s fantasy that there will ever be one political party simply because freedom
has not been achieved is just that; a fantasy! If only he could take a few
steps to enter into the real world, he would understand that the struggle is a
practical one, and if he participates in it he would realise that 1) individuals
have different outlooks, 2) the organisations under which they unite also have
different outlooks, and thus 3) the best thing that the various organisations can
do under such circumstances is to unite under an umbrella organisation or front
for a common minimum goal, in our case the goal of multi-party democracy. Laga-boy’s
armchair approach has failed him yet again!
4. “The third reason why Swaziland will continue to dream and
fantasize about freedom is that the leaders of these groups have a lot to lose
as compared to the achievement of freedom”
Following his baseless accusations against the progressive
movement, Laga-boy can only land on a baseless conclusion. There may be some truth,
of course, that some individuals in the progressive movement may feel that they
may have more to lose with a determined fight for freedom. But this is why those
individuals are correctly classified as counterrevolutionaries. For the most
part, democracy would be to the great benefit of most of the political parties,
their members and the oppressed people of Swaziland.
Conclusion
I do realise that Laga-boy may be a student, and a member of the
Swaziland National Union of Students. Thus, he is a young member of Swazi society.
One of the most widespread problems among the youth of Swaziland – even when
they are active in student politics – is that they still think that someone
else will fight for them while they sit and analyse politics. Laga-boy is one
of those. If he were to study the history of all revolutions, he would realise that
many revolutions were sparked by the actions of young people, and many others
were actually led by very young people. He would also realise that those
revolutions advanced primarily because those young people stood up and waged
the revolution. Revolutions have never been driven by armchair critics, though they
may be helpful in the making of reflections as the struggle continues.
As Karl Marx remarked in 1845: Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; but the point is to change it! Swaziland shall be free. Only those who are brave enough to stand in a “freedom or death” struggle have a chance of bringing about that freedom; visionless spineless doubters will always point to problems but fail to show and lead the way forward!
