Metamorphosis, Anatomy and Identity of Chama Cha Mapinduzi

[Rev. Kishoka]

Lets go back to 1950, when it was Tanganyika African Association, then Tanganyika African National Union and later Chama Cha Mapinduzi..

Like wise from Shirazi Party and later Afro Shirazi Party to Chama Cha Mapinduzi..

CCM kilianza kama Chama cha kupigania Uhuru, kisha kikawa Chama cha kujenga Taifa na Utaifa ambao uliambatana na Muungano, kikageuka kuwa Chama cha Kijamaa (Nationalistic and African Socialism), kikaendelea kuwa Chama cha kukomboa nchi zingine za Afrika (liberation movement), kisha kikabadilika na kuegemea kwenye sera za kiliberali za kiuchumi n sasa ni kibepari.


Je chama hiki kina Legacy na Identity gani? Je ni watu ambao hungia humo na kukibadilisha badilisha bila na kuwa na lengo maalumu au kushikilia misingi na mihimili halisi ya tangu TAA, TANU na hata ASP kuwa ni chama cha kumkomboa mnyonge?

Je chama cha Mapinduzi kina itikadi gani itakayokifanya kionekane kwa upekee bila kuonekana kana kwamba ni chama ambacho kipokipo na hakina itikadi, sura au mwelekeo?

Je tukifanyia uchambuzi na tathmini ya tangu asili ya CCM miaka karibu 70 iliyopita mpaka leo hii, tunaweza kudai ni chama madhubuti kinachosimamia misingi yake ya kiitikadi bila kuyumba au ni sawa na gome a pango ambalo kila anayeingia huligeuza na kulirembesha anavyotaka?

Je kutafakari kwetu huku, kunaweza kutupa taswira fasihi ya mfumo wa kisiasa Tanzania na vyama vya kisiasa kuwa ni vyama visivyo na itikadi inayoeleweka na kuishia ni vyama vinavyofanana ila tofauti ni za kibinafsi za kibinaadamu na si za kiitikadi na kifalsafa?

Je misingi ya awali ya kuanzisha CCM itaweza kupimwa vipi kwa kufananishwa na vyama kama Labour na Conservative vya Uoingereza au Republicans na Democtrats vya Marekani?

Je CCM ni chama kinachoelea na kwenda na wakati bila kuwa na mfumo, falsafa na itikadi imara ambayo itawafanya wanachama wake wafuate misingi ya chama na si chama kufuata matakwa ya Wanachama walio na nguvu au kwenye utawala wake?

 

[Regia Mtema]

Kwanza kabisa nimeipenda taito..Imenikumbusha mbali baada ya hapo sasa ndio nisome maudhui yaliyomo.

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Hii ni ajenda ya kikao cha CCM?

 

[Regia Mtema]

Baada ya kusoma maudhui naona nisichangie chochote kwa kuwa mimi sio mdau wa CCM..Naogopa kuchafua hali ya hewa.

 

[Rev. Kishoka]

Gender Sensitive,

THe purpose of this is to provoke the dialogue, to discect CCM and the myth built in Watanzania that CCM is Alpha and Omega.

It is an Open conversation, so go on and pour your heart!

 

[MwanaFalsafa1]

In order for anything to be long lasting it has to adapt. Humans are still around today & not extinct because they adapt. Some families are wealthy from generation to generation because they adapt etc. One principle of adaptation is passing on survival traits to the next generation. I think what is important is to look at how CCM has adopted to the changes of time & what traits it has passed on to the next generation.

CCM(then TANU) started off as an independence movement. It was able to adapt to changes and thus go from a movement to a ruling party(and that is why it bested other parties which were in existence to take over power after the colonialists). It also had to adapt from being a single party to multipartism. The first generation is the Nyereres, Kawawas et al. Their time has since gone. The 2nd generation is the Kikwetes, Lowasas, Mwandosiyas et al. So to know the CCM of today we must first look at the first generation and what traits they inherited to the next generation. Then we will know why CCM is the CCM it is today. Did the first generation which was a generation of freedom fighters and nationalist prepare their next generation for bureaucratic policies? Or are we seeing a generation which got know lessons from the "fathers" and had to figure things out on their own?

Well my friends the future of CCM just lies with which kids inherit power and thus the metamorphosis of CCM. From Nyerere's generation to Kikwete's generation I believe their were "kids" of different kinds. The question is which of their kids did the Nyereres inherit all their power to? Which "kids" are going to inherit power after the Kikwete's? CCM can go either way(good or bad), it depends on who will fill the power vacuum after this generation joins the ranks of the past generation. I'm a very young person so it will be interesting to see which way this goes. Maybe 30, 40 years from now as my generation prepares to hand over power I'll look back on all of this.

 

[Rev. Kishoka]

Mwanafalsafa,

That was deep and a very refreshing perspective!

 

[thesonofafrica]

mwanafalsafa,you nailed it down.

 

[Kinyambiss]

Yes, I completely agree with MwanaFA. CCM's identity and ideology although has a status quo in written form, actually evolves with whatever paradigm the current ruling generation has. So to understand CCM it is necessary to dissect the current elite and their way of thinking, and to predict the future we ought to consider the likely successors of CCM in the next 50 to 60 years and then we will be able to roughly discern the overall discourse of the 21st Century which most of us will not live to see to its end, but will be of great interest to our children and grandchildren, notwithstanding global political upsets which are always guaranteed at some level.

So what is the personal philosophy of Kikwete and Sitta, Makamba, Pinda, Simba, Mwandosya, Kimaro, Selelii, Kapuya et al. ? I think from the diverse nature of the incumbent ruling class, it is easy to see why CCM is successful in retaining power and possibly understand why it is a problem at the same time. I am of the opinion that CCM as it stands right now has no particular ideological stance which it derives its moral and political and administrative policies. It seems more likely that the theology that they do have in their doctrines is used much the same way the christian theology was used by the spanish inquisition, that is interpreting anything to fit the ensuing issue so as to get the desired outcome, often not in the interest of the people. All these people are not brought together by a common belief other than that there is an opportunity for them in the CCM hierarchy and by entering politics they may 'get something'. I dont contend that there are leaders out there in CCM even, that are actually trying to help their constituents and electorate in general, but their paramount motives are almost always to do with personal ascension and financial success... So although it is not a case of 'samaki mmoja akioza...' it is still a case of 98% are there for the 'dough' 2% for the people (and this is the same even for opposition parties..wote ni njaa tuu). CCM is all about 'kujitoa' in its current form and all that is left from the days of Nyerere and the concept of being led by ideals and moral high ground... zimebakia nostalgia tuu.

I dont believe that Kiwete has a well composed personal philosophy at all, quite unusual for someone who has been trying to be president for the majority of his adult life, wanting power but knowing why one wants it. In one of his interviews he was quoted as saying that he wants to 'take Tanzania where he found it-here- and take it-up-there.." that is his personal ambition, he said. But from the way he is doing things, it is hard to see how that is going to be so, aside from the fact that it might just have happened anyway if development is linear in form, not taking into account war, natural disasters and other forms of upsetting phenomena.

Those are my general thoughts, but as the others have said, let us discuss the CCM's current paradigm, through its leaders and then we can talk about the future...

 

[MwanaFalsafa1]

Kinyambiss,

I like your break down. You honestly made me think about an answer for a while before relying. Well since you want us to start with the incumbent generation I will base this post mostly on them. Then I will talk about their possible method of hand down of power as it was handed down to them. I mind the readers I'm just critically analyzing what could have happened so it might not be exactly what went down.

The current incumbents did not come from no where to fill the power vacuum. These leaders were there since Nyerere's time. They climbed the ladder of leadership within the party and governments ranks. The reason they got to where they were is because they were given a chance early own to gain the required experience. People like Kikwete, Lowasa, Sitta and a few more were ministers even as soon as their early or mid thirties. These are positions of strong power and influence. I don't know whether this was done on purpose or not but it was the right idea considering that the "founding fathers" themselves came into power at a relatively young age. O.k. so they were given the positions, whether they were strategically being indoctrinated and educated to take power or not your guess will be as good as mine. In my opinion however I feel they were given these positions but "hawa kushikwa mikono" to be shown that this is how you do things etc. It was left to the experience of their own trial and error.

Now I'm going to quote you on something which I think is fundamental to what I want to convey. You said,

"I dont believe that Kiwete has a well composed personal philosophy at all, quite unusual for someone who has been trying to be president for the majority of his adult life, wanting power but knowing why one wants it."

Now we all know all these youngsters were preparing to take power after their "fathers" had gone. It is like a son who knows that one day he is destined to inherit their father and not only take over the assets but responsibilities. I think this generation was so eager to take over the assets(power, influence etc) but they were not groomed to take over the responsibilities(good leadership, patriotism etc). Yes they new they were going to take over the offices but did they also prepare to take over the responsibilities and duties that came with those offices? It could be that they were just waiting to take over that they forgot to prepare. So when it did come time for them to take power they hadn't thought much about what they were going to do with it. I'm sure you have heard the saying "The foreplay is better than the sex". They were so stimulated by the foreplay that when it came to the actual act they had "ran out of all excitement".

What I fear most is the repeat of the same mistake when it comes time for the next generation. Are they preparing to take over the responsibilities or are they just hyped about having a convoy of patrolled cars and salutes from the armed forces? Are the young leaders now actually thinking about what they are going to do with those offices or are they just excited about taking over? I think this is where the fundamental problem lies. What will happen next is yet to be seen.