Magufuli didn’t ban all forms of politics...

[Jospina]

Shekeli at works

 

[Simplicity.]

No Political activities till 2020 or else you will talking to Police force.

Sasa kuna mtu ameamua kupingana na Rais na kauli yake, yeye nani? Yaani yeye anajua hadi mawazo ya Rais? Analeta habari potofu kabisa. Vyombo vya habari vimeripoti kwa namna ambayo kila mtu ameielewa, na uzuri hakuna hata chombo kimoja kimeshtakiwa kwa upotofu wa habari wala tamko lolote kutoka Ikulu kwamba kauli ya Rais ilieleweka vibaya!

Siwezi kukuelewa, Rais yupo hai, hajasema hata siku moja vyombo vya habari vilininukuu vibaya au sikumaanisha hivyo, badala yake anatokea mchumiatumbo kutoka kusikojulikana na kupotosha kauli ya mheshimiwa!

Haiwezekani!

 

[chabuso]

Kwa hiyo kwa jibu lako la uhusiano wa njaa na siasa za Tanzania, uelewa wako unakuambia kuwa mwanasiasa ndiyo anayetengeneza sera? Na mwananchi asiye fanya siasa kama zako hana nafasi hiyo?

Magufuli didn’t ban all forms of politics ​

View attachment 364452 ​

On 23 June 2016, President Magufuli of Tanzania discouraged direct political discourses which prevailed during the general elections as political contestants from various political parties were competing for key offices.

In the alternative, he encouraged indirect political discourses through the parliament, district councils and ward development councils, where the elected politicians can compete through formal arguments, both written and oral. He said nothing about direct democracy at the Local Government Authority level. (Check the video: Video)

The next morning, it was too obvious that the most active segment of the civil society--the media-- either misunderstood the logic of the President’s statement or deliberately engaged in self-misdirection for ulterior motives.

For example, Mtanzania daily newspaper reported, “Mafufuli: Hakuna siasa mpaka 2020,” literally meaning, “Magufuli says no politics until 2020.” All other media houses fell into the same unethical trap of public disinformation through the fallacy of equivocation.

In the same spirit of equivocative communication, Zitto Katwe, the ACT-Wazalendo Supreme leader slammed the President for declaring a war on multiparty democracy by allegedly banning all forms of political discourse. Professor Kitila Mkumbo too, through his recent article in Raia Mwema newspaper, has accused the President of virtually banning all forms of political discourse until 2020.

As a result of this widespread misrepresentation of the Presidents statements, the general public has ultimately been made to believe the same—that, the President has banned all forms of political discourse until 2020.

Due to this disinformation through the Tanzania’s media, Chadema’s youth wing (BAVICHA) and CCM’s youth wings (UVCCM) are now in a fierce linguistic war as to whether the forthcoming CCM’s national convention is violative of the president’s directive or not. BAVICHA believes holding the convention will violate the president’s directive, while UVCCM thinks not. I think UVCCM is right and BAVICHA is wrong. Let me explain.

When the president said that “electoral politics are over” he rightly banned direct political discourses at a national level. He did not ban indirect political discourses both at a national and sub-national levels. National conventions and other indoor meetings in accordance with the constitutions of political parties are not direct political discourses. Thus they were not banned by the president.

It is my hope that, this line of reasoning will most probably stand out clearly if we look at the definition of the word “politics.”

MY DEFINITION OF POLITICS

According to the Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-tung, “Politics is war without bloodshed, while war is politics with bloodshed.” And according to the Prussian General Karl von Clausewitz, “War is nothing but a continuation of politics with the admixture of other means.”

While the relationship between war and politics is often quite close, there is a world of difference between political and violent means to achieve one’s objectives. But recognizing how close these two essential human dynamics are to each other should elevate our appreciation for the importance of a healthy and robust politics in our societies and lives.

For this reason, I will take the word “politics” to refer to any process whereby two or more persons decide, through persuasion and without resorting to physical violence, who gets what value, when, where, how, and why.

In this definition, the keyword "value" means any sought-after value in life. It refers to any object, activity, idea, principle, goal, or other phenomenon upon which large numbers of people place appreciable value, something which is considered by many individuals and groups within the political community to be good, desirable, attractive, useful, rewarding, beneficial, or advantageous.

One set of values may be tangible, or material, in form, that is, in the form of money, property, or other economic goods, services, and conditions. Another set of values may be intangible; that is, the values may be symbolic, ideological, cultural, ethical, moral, or religious in character.

Examples of intangible values in politics include the expressed goals of political activists who assert that they are concerned primarily with "social" or "family" issues, that they seek mainly to promote and defend "social" or "family" values.

The keyword “WHO” refers to the winner-loser-contestant in a political conflict, for example, Magufuli versus Lowasa in an electoral contest, MP’s versus MP’s in a medicare budget fight, two or more aspiring managers in a match of office politics, or a neighborhood civic group versus a real estate developer in a community zoning dispute.

The keyword “WHAT” relates to the stakes in the battle, for example, preservation of an endangered species in an environmental politics fight, creation of a voting district designed to empower a particular group in a redistricting process, or custody of the family dog in the personal politics surrounding a contested divorce.

The keyword “WHEN” suggests that timing often can be a critical element in determining the achievement of a political goal. For example, maneuvering one’s boss for a pay raise will be a lot more difficult after an unfavorable earnings report; promoting passage of a death penalty statute may be substantially more successful after a grisly and callous murder.

The keyword “WHERE” indicates that political possibilities may differ from one terrain to the next. For example, passing gay rights legislation in America will be easier than in conservative Tanzania; locating a halfway house for substance abusers in a highly organized and affluent suburb can be much more difficult than in a poorly organized and disadvantaged neighborhood; paying hospitals for providing the same service will result in different levels of payment for urban teaching versus rural community institutions; getting one’s spouse to spend time with the in-laws may be easier if those relatives live in the same geographic area as opposed to an island in the Caribbean.

The keyword “WHY” synthesizes all of the above to explain why some person, group, or other entity (1) got what they wanted, (2) did not get what they wanted, (3) got what they did not want, or (4) did not get what they did not want.

And the key phrase “THROUGH PERSUASION AND WITHOUT RESORTING TO PHYSICAL VIOLENCE” places politics on a continuum of methods by which rights and resources within a society are distributed.

At one end of the continuum is democratic political action in a civil society; at the other end are violence, dictatorship, and war where normal civic functions have been eliminated or have lost their capacity to work. In other words, political action is the principal alternative to violence in figuring out how to deal with the disparate needs, desires, and values in society.

This concludes the bigger part of my expository analysis of the word “politics.” But it is not all. One helpful way to test the usefulness of a definition is to try it out with familiar categories. Following are some recognizable categories of politics presented here to test the definition of politics as the way people decide who gets what, when, where, how and why, but without resorting to violence.

DEMOCRATIC ELECTORAL POLITICS

Who gets the office—public or private—after being chosen by vote? This could be the Tanzania’s president, MP, councilor, school committee member, ward committee chairman, student council president, labor union secretary treasurer, condominium association president, chair of a local gay rights organization, minister, or thousands and thousands of other positions.

DEMOCRATIC BUDGET POLITICS

Who gets what levels of resources from federal, state, county, municipal, or private budgets, for what purposes, and from whom? Governments obtain their revenues from a variety of sources and then pursue a political process to determine how those funds will be allocated. In government, for example, choices are made among uses such as education, municipal aid, prisons, health needs, environmental programs, transportation and public works, tax cuts, public assistance, courts, and much more. Each one of these uses has a host of interest groups, lobbyists, and activists determined to get the largest possible share of the pie.

HEALTH CARE POLITICS

How much money is allocated for health purposes, and how are those funds distributed to, for example, hospitals, physicians, health plans, home health programs, public health initiatives, and community health centers? Within each of these categories, controversies also emerge concerning who gets what: teaching versus community versus rural versus public hospitals; primary-care physicians versus specialists; inpatient versus outpatient services; home and community versus institutional services. Who gets what rights when they belong to a managed-care organization? Who gets the right to have physician-assisted suicide?

REDISTRICTING POLITICS

Who gets what populations and borders when the time comes to redraw political district boundaries? Officeholders will seek to get and hold onto as many like-minded voters as possible and to minimize concentrations of voters who may not be as supportive. A familiar subtheme of this topic in America involves racial and ethnic issues, namely, who gets how many African Americans and/or Hispanics drawn into their districts?

CIVIL RIGHTS POLITICS

Who gets what protections written into law to guard against discriminatory treatment? Who gets special consideration to mitigate the effects of past discrimination? Who, if anyone, gets preferential treatment for jobs and educational admissions? In this political arena, as in many others, we can observe both internal politics—among and within various organizations for dominance and influence—and external politics involving these groups and non–civil rights groups opposed to or supportive of their goals and activities.

EDUCATIONAL POLITICS

Who gets to teach evolution versus creationism? Who gets a new school building in their community, and who pays for it? Who gets tenure, and who does not? Who gets public education resources: the traditional public school system or quasi-public charter schools? Who gets public dollars to promote higher education: the state university system or scholarship programs to help students attend private universities?

OFFICE POLITICS

Who gets the best office, the one with the corner window? Who gets the job title, the promotion, the raise? Who gets the burden of having to sit next to the copier machine? Who gets access to other employees’ E-mail folders?

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS

Who gets public permission via zoning approval to build an extension onto his or her house? Whose neighborhood gets the new subsidized housing for mentally ill individuals? How late will the corner tavern be permitted to stay open? Who gets to be (or gets stuck as) the leader of the local block association?

FAMILY POLITICS

Who takes care of the kids on the weekend? Who gets what household chores? Who gets to watch their favorite television program when there’s a conflict in scheduling? Who gets the kids or the house or the car in a marital separation? Who gets to have Thanksgiving dinner at their house?

CONCLUSION

In light of the above analysis, it does not appear to me that President Magufuli banned all political discourses in this nation. I think not. Thus, there is a need for our civil society, and our media houses in particular, to upgrade their "information analysis and evaluation" skills when it comes to reporting political matters.

Kiswahili lugha ya taifa,Watanzania walio wengi kingerea ni kizunguzungu, Nimiesikia majuzi tu kuwa kiswahili kimependekezwa kisungumzwe kwenye bunge la EAC,yaani kiswahili kiwa ndio lugha mama.Sasa huu ulembukeni wa kuandika kingereza. ni kuwa huyu mwandishi aonekane kasoma sana,au hii habari kalenga kwa watanzania wa tabaka fulani tu,,,,,

Hapa nimepata bumbuwazi nini hasa lengo lake la kutuma huu ujumbe wake kwa lugha ya kingereza,naomba msaada wa kufamshwa

 

[Nguruvi3]

.
Tofautisha kati ya "any form" na "specific forms" then utaona pointi yangu.

Unaposema 'any form, una maana aina zote za mikutano, iwe ya ndani, nje au popote.

Hapa unatueleza mikutano hiyo isiwe jangwani, mahotelini au popote

Ukisema 'specific forms' una maana ipo iliyoruhusiwa(upekee) na iliyokatazwa.
Kwa mfano, ukikataza mkutano wa jangwani (wazi) hiyo ni specific.
Unaweza kuruhusu ya ndani (kama vikao vya kawaida) nayo ni specific

Kwa mantiki hiyo, any form zinazuia mkutano mkuu wa CCM pia.

Specific Form zinazuia mikutano kama ule wa Zitto na ACT pale Millenium tower au wa CCM kule Dodoma.

Sasa tufafanulie kwa dhana ya any form na Specific form unalenga kutueleza nini?

Na kwa muktadha wa kauli ya Magufuli na waziri mkuu, ni kipi kilikatazwa kati ya any form na specific form . Na Polisi wanafanyia kazi agizo lipi la any form au specific form?

 

[Erythrocyte]

Hivi Tanzania kuna uhusiano gani kati ya siasa na njaa?

Kuna uhusiano mnene sana , wanasiasa wa Tanzania na hasa viongozi ndio wafadhili na walipa kodi za pango za wachumia tumbo na vijana wenye tamaa , hasa wale wasio na kazi yoyote .

 

[Nguruvi3]

Sasa kuna mtu ameamua kupingana na Rais na kauli yake, yeye nani? Yaani yeye anajua hadi mawazo ya Rais? Analeta habari potofu kabisa. Vyombo vya habari vimeripoti kwa namna ambayo kila mtu ameielewa, na uzuri hakuna hata chombo kimoja kimeshtakiwa kwa upotofu wa habari wala tamko lolote kutoka Ikulu kwamba kauli ya Rais ilieleweka vibaya!

Siwezi kukuelewa, Rais yupo hai, hajasema hata siku moja vyombo vya habari vilininukuu vibaya au sikumaanisha hivyo, badala yake anatokea mchumiatumbo kutoka kusikojulikana na kupotosha kauli ya mheshimiwa!

Haiwezekani!

Yeye ana uelewa mkubwa kuliko vyombo vya habari na jamii iliyoelewa tofauti. Hizi ni jitihada za kujikwamua baada ya suala hili kufika mahali ambapo ni aidha wakubali makosa au waendelee na sinema yao!

 

[Edson]

.
NImefanya uchambuzi wangu kama raia mwenye uhuru wa kupokea, kuchakata, kutunza, na kusambaza mawazo na maoni chini ya ibara ya 18 ya Katiba. Wao siwezi kuwasemea.

Umetumia uhuru eakp vibaya...acha kupotosha...weso serikali w

.
NImefanya uchambuzi wangu kama raia mwenye uhuru wa kupokea, kuchakata, kutunza, na kusambaza mawazo na maoni chini ya ibara ya 18 ya Katiba. Wao siwezi kuwasemea.

Umetumia uhuru wako vibaya..

 

[Descartes]

Ninachompendea jamaa ni kauli zake tata, huwa anazirusha kama bomu, halafu anaanza kutabasamu, huku akichekicheki pembeni! Muda unavyoenda hii kazi ya kuwa prezidaa inakuwa ngumu vibaya mno, sasa kichwa kikifikia degree za moto kama ilivyokuwa kwa Jeikei, ndipo utegemee kauli tata zaidi!

Na akiruhusiwa tu hotuba za "freestyle" hapo ndo huwa anaharibu zaidi. Akisoma anakuwa na nafuu. Sasa anajikuta akisoma watu hawacheki na yeye anataka kuwafurahisha.

Hapo sasa,huacha kusoma karatasi.Mabomu huanza kurushwa kama jamaa wa ISIS hajali yanamgusa hata yeye.Hugundua baadaye.

Rejea sakata la UDOM.Vi.laz.a kumbe kuna mtoto wake pia,J anasifa zote hadi za ziada za hilo jina alilowaita watoto wa maskini wasio na hatia.

Barabara hewa.Wakati yeye ndo alikuwa waziri wa wizara hiyo.Kwa kutaja machache...

 

[Simplicity.]

Kiswahili lugha ya taifa,Watanzania walio wengi kingerea ni kizunguzungu, Nimiesikia majuzi tu kuwa kiswahili kimependekezwa kisungumzwe kwenye bunge la EAC,yaani kiswahili kiwa ndio lugha mama.Sasa huu ulembukeni wa kuandika kingereza. ni kuwa huyu mwandishi aonekane kasoma sana,au hii habari kalenga kwa watanzania wa tabaka fulani tu,,,,,

Hapa nimepata bumbuwazi nini hasa lengo lake la kutuma huu ujumbe wake kwa lugha ya kingereza,naomba msaada wa kufamshwa

Mkuu, nenda mwanzoni mwa uzi, utajionea jinsi baada ya mabogus wengi kuzinguliwa na uzitumbo huu, kwa sababu ya lugha, wakasifia sana! Sasa wewe hujawahi kuona watu, mzungu anaongea halafu wao Yes, Yes, mpaka inafikia wakati mzungu anamwuuliza mtu swali, halafu anamjibu Yes, sasa katika hali kama hiyo wazungu huwa wanakasirika vibaya mno hadi kufikia kutukana kabisa hata kama ni kimoyomoyo!

Ipo hivi mkuu, jamaa ameshtukia kuwa wateule wengi hawajui kiinglish (Dcs, DAs, ..), kwa hiyo ili kuwapiku wengine na kuonekana ana kitu cha ziada, ndio amekuja na hii mada ambayo ameindaa mwezi mzima.

 

[Edson]

Mada ya kipumbavu kabisa..
Aliongea zaid ya mara mbili na kila mtu alimsikia..na alisisitiza hakun mikutano ya siasa hado 2020..
Leo unajifanya kuja na mada ya kishenzi wakato kila mtu alisikia alichosema magufuli

 

[Simplicity.]

Kuna uhusiano mnene sana , wanasiasa wa Tanzania na hasa viongozi ndio wafadhili na walipa kodi za pango za wachumia tumbo na vijana wenye tamaa , hasa wale wasio na kazi yoyote .

Huyu mleta uzi kakwepa kujibu kwamba ni njaa tu ndio inamsumbua!

 

[RUSTEM PASHA]

Unaposema 'any form, una maana aina zote za mikutano, iwe ya ndani, nje au popote.

Hapa unatueleza mikutano hiyo isiwe jangwani, mahotelini au popote

Ukisema 'specific forms' una maana ipo iliyoruhusiwa(upekee) na iliyokatazwa.
Kwa mfano, ukikataza mkutano wa jangwani (wazi) hiyo ni specific.
Unaweza kuruhusu ya ndani (kama vikao vya kawaida) nayo ni specific

Kwa mantiki hiyo, any form zinazuia mkutano mkuu wa CCM pia.

Specific Form zinazuia mikutano kama ule wa Zitto na ACT pale Millenium tower au wa CCM kule Dodoma.

Sasa tufafanulie kwa dhana ya any form na Specific form unalenga kutueleza nini?

Na kwa muktadha wa kauli ya Magufuli na waziri mkuu, ni kipi kilikatazwa kati ya any form na specific form . Na Polisi wanafanyia kazi agizo lipi la any form au specific form?

Mkuu Nguruvi3 nimekaa hapa nakunywa gahawa nikisubili nione majibu ya hii nondo,namna atakavyojikanyaga.

 

[RUSTEM PASHA]

Unaposema 'any form, una maana aina zote za mikutano, iwe ya ndani, nje au popote.

Hapa unatueleza mikutano hiyo isiwe jangwani, mahotelini au popote

Ukisema 'specific forms' una maana ipo iliyoruhusiwa(upekee) na iliyokatazwa.
Kwa mfano, ukikataza mkutano wa jangwani (wazi) hiyo ni specific.
Unaweza kuruhusu ya ndani (kama vikao vya kawaida) nayo ni specific

Kwa mantiki hiyo, any form zinazuia mkutano mkuu wa CCM pia.

Specific Form zinazuia mikutano kama ule wa Zitto na ACT pale Millenium tower au wa CCM kule Dodoma.

Sasa tufafanulie kwa dhana ya any form na Specific form unalenga kutueleza nini?

Na kwa muktadha wa kauli ya Magufuli na waziri mkuu, ni kipi kilikatazwa kati ya any form na specific form . Na Polisi wanafanyia kazi agizo lipi la any form au specific form?

Mkuu Nguruvi3 nimekaa hapa nakunywa gahawa nikisubili nione majibu ya hii nondo,namna atakavyojikanyaga.

 

[Shuleless]

BULL CRAP!

 

[Simplicity.]

aisee ni heri tu viroba vipigwe marufuku.........

Ngoja tumwite lofa Elungata aje kumsaidia. Hivi unajua unaweza kuanzisha uzi humu ukaishia kujuta? Ushauri wangu awaombe mods waufute tu!

 

[Kazi Ndiyo Kipimo Cha Utu]

Magufuli didn’t ban all forms of politics ​

View attachment 364452 ​

On 23 June 2016, President Magufuli of Tanzania discouraged direct political discourses which prevailed during the general elections as political contestants from various political parties were competing for key offices.

In the alternative, he encouraged indirect political discourses through the parliament, district councils and ward development councils, where the elected politicians can compete through formal arguments, both written and oral. He said nothing about direct democracy at the Local Government Authority level. (Check the video: Video)

The next morning, it was too obvious that the most active segment of the civil society--the media-- either misunderstood the logic of the President’s statement or deliberately engaged in self-misdirection for ulterior motives.

For example, Mtanzania daily newspaper reported, “Mafufuli: Hakuna siasa mpaka 2020,” literally meaning, “Magufuli says no politics until 2020.” All other media houses fell into the same unethical trap of public disinformation through the fallacy of equivocation.

In the same spirit of equivocative communication, Zitto Katwe, the ACT-Wazalendo Supreme leader slammed the President for declaring a war on multiparty democracy by allegedly banning all forms of political discourse. Professor Kitila Mkumbo too, through his recent article in Raia Mwema newspaper, has accused the President of virtually banning all forms of political discourse until 2020.

As a result of this widespread misrepresentation of the Presidents statements, the general public has ultimately been made to believe the same—that, the President has banned all forms of political discourse until 2020.

Due to this disinformation through the Tanzania’s media, Chadema’s youth wing (BAVICHA) and CCM’s youth wings (UVCCM) are now in a fierce linguistic war as to whether the forthcoming CCM’s national convention is violative of the president’s directive or not. BAVICHA believes holding the convention will violate the president’s directive, while UVCCM thinks not. I think UVCCM is right and BAVICHA is wrong. Let me explain.

When the president said that “electoral politics are over” he rightly banned direct political discourses at a national level. He did not ban indirect political discourses both at a national and sub-national levels. National conventions and other indoor meetings in accordance with the constitutions of political parties are not direct political discourses. Thus they were not banned by the president.

It is my hope that, this line of reasoning will most probably stand out clearly if we look at the definition of the word “politics.”

MY DEFINITION OF POLITICS

According to the Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-tung, “Politics is war without bloodshed, while war is politics with bloodshed.” And according to the Prussian General Karl von Clausewitz, “War is nothing but a continuation of politics with the admixture of other means.”

While the relationship between war and politics is often quite close, there is a world of difference between political and violent means to achieve one’s objectives. But recognizing how close these two essential human dynamics are to each other should elevate our appreciation for the importance of a healthy and robust politics in our societies and lives.

For this reason, I will take the word “politics” to refer to any process whereby two or more persons decide, through persuasion and without resorting to physical violence, who gets what value, when, where, how, and why.

In this definition, the keyword "value" means any sought-after value in life. It refers to any object, activity, idea, principle, goal, or other phenomenon upon which large numbers of people place appreciable value, something which is considered by many individuals and groups within the political community to be good, desirable, attractive, useful, rewarding, beneficial, or advantageous.

One set of values may be tangible, or material, in form, that is, in the form of money, property, or other economic goods, services, and conditions. Another set of values may be intangible; that is, the values may be symbolic, ideological, cultural, ethical, moral, or religious in character.

Examples of intangible values in politics include the expressed goals of political activists who assert that they are concerned primarily with "social" or "family" issues, that they seek mainly to promote and defend "social" or "family" values.

The keyword “WHO” refers to the winner-loser-contestant in a political conflict, for example, Magufuli versus Lowasa in an electoral contest, MP’s versus MP’s in a medicare budget fight, two or more aspiring managers in a match of office politics, or a neighborhood civic group versus a real estate developer in a community zoning dispute.

The keyword “WHAT” relates to the stakes in the battle, for example, preservation of an endangered species in an environmental politics fight, creation of a voting district designed to empower a particular group in a redistricting process, or custody of the family dog in the personal politics surrounding a contested divorce.

The keyword “WHEN” suggests that timing often can be a critical element in determining the achievement of a political goal. For example, maneuvering one’s boss for a pay raise will be a lot more difficult after an unfavorable earnings report; promoting passage of a death penalty statute may be substantially more successful after a grisly and callous murder.

The keyword “WHERE” indicates that political possibilities may differ from one terrain to the next. For example, passing gay rights legislation in America will be easier than in conservative Tanzania; locating a halfway house for substance abusers in a highly organized and affluent suburb can be much more difficult than in a poorly organized and disadvantaged neighborhood; paying hospitals for providing the same service will result in different levels of payment for urban teaching versus rural community institutions; getting one’s spouse to spend time with the in-laws may be easier if those relatives live in the same geographic area as opposed to an island in the Caribbean.

The keyword “WHY” synthesizes all of the above to explain why some person, group, or other entity (1) got what they wanted, (2) did not get what they wanted, (3) got what they did not want, or (4) did not get what they did not want.

And the key phrase “THROUGH PERSUASION AND WITHOUT RESORTING TO PHYSICAL VIOLENCE” places politics on a continuum of methods by which rights and resources within a society are distributed.

At one end of the continuum is democratic political action in a civil society; at the other end are violence, dictatorship, and war where normal civic functions have been eliminated or have lost their capacity to work. In other words, political action is the principal alternative to violence in figuring out how to deal with the disparate needs, desires, and values in society.

This concludes the bigger part of my expository analysis of the word “politics.” But it is not all. One helpful way to test the usefulness of a definition is to try it out with familiar categories. Following are some recognizable categories of politics presented here to test the definition of politics as the way people decide who gets what, when, where, how and why, but without resorting to violence.

DEMOCRATIC ELECTORAL POLITICS

Who gets the office—public or private—after being chosen by vote? This could be the Tanzania’s president, MP, councilor, school committee member, ward committee chairman, student council president, labor union secretary treasurer, condominium association president, chair of a local gay rights organization, minister, or thousands and thousands of other positions.

DEMOCRATIC BUDGET POLITICS

Who gets what levels of resources from federal, state, county, municipal, or private budgets, for what purposes, and from whom? Governments obtain their revenues from a variety of sources and then pursue a political process to determine how those funds will be allocated. In government, for example, choices are made among uses such as education, municipal aid, prisons, health needs, environmental programs, transportation and public works, tax cuts, public assistance, courts, and much more. Each one of these uses has a host of interest groups, lobbyists, and activists determined to get the largest possible share of the pie.

HEALTH CARE POLITICS

How much money is allocated for health purposes, and how are those funds distributed to, for example, hospitals, physicians, health plans, home health programs, public health initiatives, and community health centers? Within each of these categories, controversies also emerge concerning who gets what: teaching versus community versus rural versus public hospitals; primary-care physicians versus specialists; inpatient versus outpatient services; home and community versus institutional services. Who gets what rights when they belong to a managed-care organization? Who gets the right to have physician-assisted suicide?

REDISTRICTING POLITICS

Who gets what populations and borders when the time comes to redraw political district boundaries? Officeholders will seek to get and hold onto as many like-minded voters as possible and to minimize concentrations of voters who may not be as supportive. A familiar subtheme of this topic in America involves racial and ethnic issues, namely, who gets how many African Americans and/or Hispanics drawn into their districts?

CIVIL RIGHTS POLITICS

Who gets what protections written into law to guard against discriminatory treatment? Who gets special consideration to mitigate the effects of past discrimination? Who, if anyone, gets preferential treatment for jobs and educational admissions? In this political arena, as in many others, we can observe both internal politics—among and within various organizations for dominance and influence—and external politics involving these groups and non–civil rights groups opposed to or supportive of their goals and activities.

EDUCATIONAL POLITICS

Who gets to teach evolution versus creationism? Who gets a new school building in their community, and who pays for it? Who gets tenure, and who does not? Who gets public education resources: the traditional public school system or quasi-public charter schools? Who gets public dollars to promote higher education: the state university system or scholarship programs to help students attend private universities?

OFFICE POLITICS

Who gets the best office, the one with the corner window? Who gets the job title, the promotion, the raise? Who gets the burden of having to sit next to the copier machine? Who gets access to other employees’ E-mail folders?

NEIGHBORHOOD POLITICS

Who gets public permission via zoning approval to build an extension onto his or her house? Whose neighborhood gets the new subsidized housing for mentally ill individuals? How late will the corner tavern be permitted to stay open? Who gets to be (or gets stuck as) the leader of the local block association?

FAMILY POLITICS

Who takes care of the kids on the weekend? Who gets what household chores? Who gets to watch their favorite television program when there’s a conflict in scheduling? Who gets the kids or the house or the car in a marital separation? Who gets to have Thanksgiving dinner at their house?

CONCLUSION

In light of the above analysis, it does not appear to me that President Magufuli banned all political discourses in this nation. I think not. Thus, there is a need for our civil society, and our media houses in particular, to upgrade their "information analysis and evaluation" skills when it comes to reporting political matters.

Another Political Shenanigans at its best!

 

[Nguruvi3]

Mkuu Nguruvi3 nimekaa hapa nakunywa gahawa nikisubili nione majibu ya hii nondo,namna atakavyojikanyaga.

Tuvute subira kama atarudi. Na huenda akirudi ni baada ya mabandiko mengi ili kupotezea hoja. Tutasimama kutaka ufafanuzi wa ''any form na specific form'' na Rais alilenga ipi kati ya hizo mbili na Polisi wanafanyia kazi ipi kati ya hizo mbili.

CC
Deus J. Kahangwa

 

[Simplicity.]

Tuvute subira kama atarudi. Na huenda akirudi ni baada ya mabandiko mengi ili kupotezea hoja. Tutasimama kutaka ufafanuzi wa ''any form na specific form'' na Rais alilenga ipi kati ya hizo mbili na Polisi wanafanyia kazi ipi kati ya hizo mbili.

CC
Deus J. Kahangwa

Jamaa aliingia kwa gia kali, duh! Amewaza atokeje, akaona, mbona JF mimi ni verified user, kwa nini nisiende kujitongozesha Lumumba? Hivi inawezekana ametumwa?

Au ni assignment ya Lumumba kabla hujapokelewa?

 

[RUSTEM PASHA]

Tuvute subira kama atarudi. Na huenda akirudi ni baada ya mabandiko mengi ili kupotezea hoja. Tutasimama kutaka ufafanuzi wa ''any form na specific form'' na Rais alilenga ipi kati ya hizo mbili na Polisi wanafanyia kazi ipi kati ya hizo mbili.

CC
Deus J. Kahangwa

Mkuu ngoja tuendelee kuvuta subira,naamini hajatokomea atarudi tu.

 

[Olecranon]

Safi sana kwa hilo jibu lako.

Kichwa cha habari cha uzi wako kinasema hivi "Magufuli didn’t ban all forms of politics''

Zile forms zingine za siasa alizoban, alifanya hivyo kwa mjibu wa nini?

Ndio nilikuwa nataka kulijua hilo pia. Jamaa kaingia mtegoni kiurahisi kabisa. Ninamshauri aondoe huu uzi kwani sasa hauna tena mashiko. Hili la Dodoma nalo polisi wameingia mtegoni bila kujua.