Politics of Convenience

Originally published on another blog on  10/11/2012 06

The thing about politics is that very often you'll find an otherwise brilliant chap called into the fray where every sense of rectitude is thrown to the dogs. Often people are shocked to the core as they're forced to witness people, who only yesterday they had respected, destroy themselves with amazing nonchalance. I'm no pessimist; I believe that politics, national politics, is one of man's greatest social inventions that has proven beneficial as a tool for positively changing the destiny of nations and communities. More importantly, it's a platform for putting into practice the sterling personal qualities of individuals that over time is articulated as national ethos. However, in the last few years, I've also come to view national politics as a huge fraudulent machine that persistently and with monotonous consistency manufactures a special species of dishonest people called politicians. Too many times, before our very eyes and against all the dictates of our common values, we're forced to witness the transmogrification  of honorable chaps into bums and loose canons who threaten our survival. That is why I've learned to judge people who are thrust into national politics not by their so-called "intelligence", "wisdom" or "technocratic wizardry" that is prior to their becoming politicians. Perhaps the great image Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream provides the clearest and most telling commentary on how we'd view politicians in particular. How so often, like Nebuchadnezzar, we focus so much on this image's head which is Pure Gold, and neglect the feet which is partly iron and clay. Unlike Nebuchadnezzar's great image which is destroyed by an invisible hand, our politician self destructs. Unfortunately, that self destructive tendency ends up destroying the party or as in Nebuchadnezzar's case, the Empire that so fought to build. 

I followed the enthusiasm that greeted Mitt Romney's nomination of Paul Ryan as his running mate in the just ended elections in the US. Then on August 29, 2012, I listened to Ryan's Acceptance Speech at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida. It was a Speech everyone was waiting to hear. It was billed to achieve one important purpose: to provide Ryan the opportunity to sell himself as a worthy partner of Romney. Under such circumstances credibility is always key. To unseat one's political opponent, one must be seen to be credible. Well, Ryan blew a beautiful opportunity. That Speech revealed an aspect of him that until then may not have been known: he can conveniently twist facts in order to demonize his opponents.  In an article by Cal Woodward & Jack Gillum appropriately titled FACT CHECK: Ryan takes factual shortcuts in speech published on August 30, 2012, Wooward & Gillum show that several of the things Ryan said in his speech were factually inaccurate. Done Deliberately! I will quote just one example:

 RYAN: "The stimulus was a case of political patronage, corporate welfare and cronyism at their

 worst. You, the working men and women of this country, were cut out of the deal."

THE FACTS: Ryan himself asked for stimulus funds shortly after Congress approved the $800 billion plan, known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Ryan's pleas to  federal agencies included letters to Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Labor Secretary Hilda  Solis seeking stimulus grant money for two Wisconsin energy conservation companies. One of them, the nonprofit Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corp., received $20.3 million from the Energy Department to help homes and businesses improve energy efficiency, according to federal records. That company, he said in his letter, would build "sustainable demand for green jobs." Another eventual recipient, the Energy Center of Wisconsin, received about $365,000.

Ryan couldn't shed this image of a lying politician the day of election. Did it hurt their chances? Of course, one's it was proven that he lied the Democrats made credibility one of their issues against Romney and Ryan.

In Ghana, Dr. Bawumia is Nana Addo's running mate. I'd viewed him as a boon to Nana's campaign. Now, I've my doubts. He has been presented as the whiz kid; a potent and brilliant counterpoint to his former boss, Amissah Arthur. So far, that's only true in terms of his confidence and speaking skills. But I'm yet to be convinced about the logic of his economic analysis. More importantly, I'm worried that all his arguments have been dominated by attacks on State Institutions, especially the Statistical Service. That is a dangerous path to take. It doesn't work. He adopted the same tactic during the debate at Takoradi. In terms of expression, Bawumia did better than than Amissah. But who made the soundest arguments? Amissah. If Bawumia does not want us to believe the figures provided by the Statistical Service, who should we believe? If we believed the same Institutions during the NPP era, why should we doubt them Now? Especially, when it's the same guys still at post. The real  danger is that Bawumia was at the Bank of Ghana. He knows how such negative opinions affect investment decisions and the economic climate. That's exactly Amissah's point. No country can be built on a deliberate political strategy of running down the integrity of State Institutions. By Bawumia's logic, we might as well let his wife and other house wives provide us with figures on the economy. Politicians loss elections not because they have a bad case, but because they have a bad argument and posture. For example, rather than saying the NHIS is collapsing, it'll be better for the NPP to focus on the NDC's deception or failure to introduce the one-time payment policy. This is because for the many people who're still benefiting from the NHIS, it'll be difficult to convince them that the program is collapsing!