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

[Sophist]

Well in corporate world, the aim of a manager is to maximize shareholders wealth. Why do you go for a competition with all techniques, strategies, etc knowing that you won't win the market at all despite all your efforts?

Research shows you can't sell pork in Saudia and you are busy doing the same. That's insanity

I think you are making the mistake of totalising politics as the game of one end goal - winning elections. This seems wrong to me but may possibly apply to as you said, the corporate world. The concept and practice is quite different in with respect to a political project.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

.
Just assume mkuu wa kaya atakuja kukazia kauli yake in his voice "SITAKI VYAMA VYA UPINZANI VIFANYE MIKUTANO, TUNAFANYA CCM TU, HAPA KAZI TU. POLISI FANYENI KAZI YENU " upo tayari kuandika makala nyingine ndeefu kwa mujibu wa ibara hiyo hiyo ya 18, kupingana na kauli hiyo.?

.
Niko tayari.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

Mtoa mada alitakiwa aiweke hotuba ya magu , ili tulinganishe kati alichokiandika yy na hotuba

.
Nitaiweka soon.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

Mkuu
.Deus J. Kahangwa you are missing a point. What you are clarifying should be directed first to the Law enforcers! Also if you think loud enough can't you see other influential persons like the former presidents are uttering words which are tantamount to banning political activities? Don't you think this hullabaloo is caused by disregarding the constitution and the laws of the land?

.
My contribution is toward answering the question: On the occasion of receiving the general elections report from NEC chief, did President Magufuli ban all forms of political discourse? My answer is in the negative. Yours are different lines of inquiry which I can resort to given time and other resources.

 

[yomboo]

.
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.

Unaamini uchambuzi wako??

 

[yomboo]

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.

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.

Mimi ni na maswali matatu tu

1) raisi yuko juu ya katiba ya nchi??
2) upembuzi wako ulioufanya unauamini??
3) makusanyiko ya kisiasa yanavunja katiba??

 

[Msengapavi]

A very good read in a language that most JF members may not understand. Na haya kama siyo matatizo ya C&P basi ni shida ya lugha inayotumika na wengi. Ingekuwa vema kama ingekuwa kwa kiswahili. Wangenufaika sana wasomaji.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

Ndo uzuri wa kusoma, ukiwa na jamii ya watu wakasoma ni faida sana na hakuna jambo litapinda. Asante sana ndugu yetu kwa mada hii tamu, hakika umesaidia katika kuijenga na kuiimarisha a modern political society. Namwona Prof. Laswell kwa mbali.

.
Umepatia, definition hiyo ya "politics" nimeitengeneza kwa kutumia mawazo ya watu watatu:

-David Easton (1965) defines politics as the authoritative allocation of values for a society
- Hannah Arendt in his The Human Condition (1958) states that: “To be political, to be in polis meant that everything was decided through words and persuasion and not through force and violence.”
- Harold Lasswell seapks of pilitivs in terns of “Who Gets What, When and How” through his book “Politics: Who Gets What, When and How? published in 1958

 

[Mbasembase1970]

Kahangwa, you would better know that our political parties together with their fanatic CSOs have only known and versed in the one way of doing politics, political rallies, basi! They know nothing other than that. They are void of political planning, strategizing, organising and the like. No wonder 25 years down the road no party is boastful of overt strong public support based on clear mainstream policy as alternative to the establishment. Parties are merely surviving on 'clouding politics of confusion' in a situation neither leaders nor members are clear of their respective parties' runs strategies. They are mere bunches of opportunists, period!

Sophist kila nikisoma comments zako na thread ya leo inanikumbusha JF nilisukumwa kujiunga. Maana hata kama ninatofautiana kiitikadi iwe mimi ama mtu mwingine yeyote mwenye akili timamu atakubali kukubaliana ama kutokubaliana kihoja. Ni vizuri kuona tunao watu kama ninyi ktk hii forum. Ombi msikatishwe tamaa na matusi ya makada wa vyama maana mtanzania wa kweli anaweka maslahi ya taifa kwanza bila kujali itikadi. Hongera mkuu.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

Kahangwa. Unachokisema hata mimi nilijaribu kuhisi ndio nia nyuma ya kauli ya Mr President. Kwamba politics zisizotakiwa at least for now ni zile za kusema fulani hakustahili kuwa raisi bali ni mimi. Politics za kumpigania mtu nadhani ni kweli hupoteza muda sana. Howeve, kutokana na kukosa kuwepo taasisi zinazojisimamia zenyewe na zinazotegemea sana ni nani yupo madarakani bado huleta mkanganyiko mkubwa na kuzikwamisha nchi zetu kufikia ndoto zake...politics hizi zimeendelea kututesa siku za karibuni ambapo sina uhakika wa professionalism ku matter katika utendaji.anyway Mr Kahangwa, pia sina uhakika sana kama umeconfirm kwa mkuu wa nchi kama haya mawazo yako ndicho alichomaananisha wakati anatoa hii kauli. Of which to me kama ndivyo hakuna dhambi na mkutano wa tarehe 23 hauna kipingamizi.

Pamoja na kwamba ulisoma PCM na ulikuja kuwa.Engineer lakini nakupongeza kuwa umeendelea kushow love kubwa kwa literature kama ulivyokuwa Tambaza. Natumaini pia na muziki pia bado unakompose.

Last but not least, I recommend: 1. ufanye study ya uchambuzi wa shabihisho la theses yako na matukio mbalimbali yanayoendelea nchini kwa sasa....tutapenda kusoma hilo andiko. God bless you. Let the Null hypotheses (H0)be alichokidhamiria mkuu sicho alichokitamka alternative hypotheses (HA) be alichokidhamiria mkuu ndicho alochokitamka. More the same..if your research will lead you to accept the Null hypotheses you need to recommend that it matters kuwa na mwandika hotuba wa highest office ili kihakikisha kuwa maana inayokusudiwa ndiyo iloyotolewa/ kutamkwa. Not all that, if your research will lead you to accept the Alternative Hypotheses and reject the Null hypotheses you need to come back to your theses and conclude that the conclusion you drew was basically derived of how you felt could be the best way of seeing things important to avoid worsening the matter. Thank you for good writing. Wewe bado ni hazina kuu kwa nchi yetu

.
Duh! we inaelekea unanifahamu tangu Katoke. Maana huko ndiko nilikuwa nasomea music composition. Mawazo yako yote nimeyachukua. Tuwasiliane via inbox for further chats.

 

[Ninaweza]

Kama kumbukumbu zangu zipo sawa... CHASO Dar es salaam walifanya mahafali na mgeni rasmi alikuwa Mh.Lowasa na Meya wa Dar es salaam.!! sikumbuki kama ule mkutano ulizuiliwa...

mimi naamini kama taratibu zitafuatwa vizuri hii mikutano ya kisiasa inaruhusiwa kufanyika!! ila ninachokiona apa kuna matumizi mabaya ya huu uhuru wa kufanaya mikutano ya siasa na kama hakutakuwa na utaratibu wa kuratibu hii mikutano kuna madhara yanaweza kutokea...

sio kila mda ni kufanya mikutano tu... na kama inatakiwa kufanyika basi ifuate sheria!!

ndugu unadhani polisi, wakuu wa mikoa na wilaya nao wanaelewa haya mambo?????

 

[Nyakageni]

I think you are making the mistake of totalising politics as the game of one end goal - winning elections. This seems wrong to me but may possibly apply to as you said, the corporate world. The concept and practice is quite different in with respect to a political project.

A problem with my lovely country is opposition parties participate in politics against all machineries. Bulembo said last year during rallies in Kigoma that no matter what it takes CCM was not ready to handle office to opposition (even if opposition wins?? ). That means they would use all its machines to remain at the helm

Now your point is, there is no need for them to be at the topmost position (if I read between the lines). Why don't we trust the Constitution that we have and even the president was sworn to abide it

[quote uid=36641 name="Nyakageni" post=16791897]What about all the governmental machineries working in favour of the ruling party?? Have you ever paid a glance?<br /><br />Competing against CCM is very easy but it's hard to compete against Jechas[/QUOTE]<br />Improve on political marketing, planning, strategizing and organising. There is no need to fear the government machination. Politics is not all about winning elections. It is beyond, including building and maintaining identity in ones political space. We need to get our heads off conceiving political project the way we treat our merchandise projects replete of turnover management; rate of stock turn and order point concepts. No!

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

.
Mimi ni na maswali matatu tu: (1) raisi yuko juu ya katiba ya nchi? (2) upembuzi wako ulioufanya unauamini? (3) makusanyiko ya kisiasa yanavunja katiba??

.
Rais hayuko juu ya katiba wala sheria yoyote.
Na sijaona mahali ambako amekuwa juu ya katiba.
Kama unao mfano ulete tujadiliane.

 

[jerrytz]

Do we have a constitutional provision which allows President or anyone to ban some "forms of politics" ?!

What are those " forms of politics"?! Can you list them?

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

A very good read in a language that most JF members may not understand. Na haya kama siyo matatizo ya C&P basi ni shida ya lugha inayotumika na wengi. Ingekuwa vema kama ingekuwa kwa kiswahili. Wangenufaika sana wasomaji.

.
Sina tatizo la C&P (copy and paste). Naongea kwa haraka na kuandika vizuri lugha zote mbili. Nilitafakari sana kuhusu jambo hilo na hatimaye kuamua kuandika Kiingereza. Tofauti kati ya direct politics/direct democracy na indirect politics/indirect democracy inaonekana haraka tukiandika kwa Kiingereza. Lakini pili, walengwa wakuu (viongozi wa BAVICHA na UVCCM) wanaelewa lugha hii. Nikipata muda nitatoa tafsiri ya Kiswahili.

 

[Deus J. Kahangwa]

Do we have a constitutional provision which allows President or anyone to ban some "forms of politics" ? What are those " forms of politics"?! Can you list them?

.
I have listed some forms of politics in my analysis: electoral politics, budget politics, etc. Read it well. Some forms become dormant automatically. For example, electoral politics automatically die immediately after election results. Do you see this?

 

[alberaps]

Pale ambapo mtu aliongea Kiswahili mbele ya hadhara na kila mtu akamsikia, Huku wakuu wa mikoa (Morogoro) to be specific wakiimplement kilichosemwa. Wakuu wa polisi wakifanya vivyo hivyo alafu anakuja MSWAHILI anamtafsirria. Kwa KINGEREZA. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

 

[Egwugu]

.
Umepatia, definition hiyo ya "politics" nimeitengeneza kwa kutumia mawazo ya watu watatu:

-David Easton (1965) defines politics as the authoritative allocation of values for a society
- Hannah Arendt in his The Human Condition (1958) states that: “To be political, to be in polis meant that everything was decided through words and persuasion and not through force and violence.”
- Harold Lasswell seapks of pilitivs in terns of “Who Gets What, When and How” through his book “Politics: Who Gets What, When and How? published in 1958

Ni kweli mkuu, ilikuwa ni course yangu nikiwa mwaka wa kwanza. Pia, Politics is "the art of possible"

 

[Bome-e]

.
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.

Mimi naona hapa ni uhamishwaji wa magoli baada ya maamuzi ya kukurupuka wakijua wanawakomoa wapinzani!Tulishuhudia mkutano wa Act ukipigwa ban,tena ulikuwa unafanyikia ndani ya Ukumbi kwa kisingizio cha agizo la Rais!Mikutano mingi ya ndani ya wapinzani ikazuiwa pia!Huwezi justify kilichotokea kwa maelezo mepesi!Serikali ilishajitanabaisha kama isiyopenda kukosolewa!

 

[Nyakageni]

.
I have listed some forms of politics in my analysis: electoral politics, budget politics, etc. Read it well. Some forms become dormant automatically. For example, electoral politics automatically die immediately after election results. Do you see this?

How do you expect '' electoral politics'' to die with the likes of Jecha et al doing things in favour of their masters???