Ethnicity, economy and empathy define our democracy’s development and maturity

Territory, population and identification are three concurrent and most essential elements in any modern state. The last of them, identification, is the most important of all.

Population and territory are given by history or by chance, but identification is built, not given. Identification is achieved in a democratic society through a mixture of shrewdness and results.

Identification is the thread that puts the tapestry together…it links us up. That is why public relations, symbolism, media support and information flow are so important in today’s politics.

Identification is a hard uphill task in plural or multicultural societies. The greatest headache for any politician in a pluralistic setting is achieving that sense of identification that makes us feel we are together... Tuko pamoja!

A good way of achieving identification is to steer key projects in the same direction. This makes us feel together, pull together… These projects may be ideological, cultural, social or infrastructural.

For example, Chavez’s slogan “patria, socialismo o muerte” (country, socialism or death) was an ideological project; Kenyatta's Harambee call was social; Uncle Sam’s figure was cultural; and our Lapsset corridor project is infrastructural.

LEVELS OF IDENTIFICATION

Democracies rely heavily on identification. There must be something that identifies me with a candidate. That sense of identification will define my voting pattern.

Identification is not artificial or automatic; it cannot be easily manipulated. Identification goes hand in hand with the voter’s civic maturity and education.

There are three levels of identification. I call them the three “Es”. They are ethnicity, economy and empathy.

These three “Es” are indicators or catalysts that show us how identification is achieved in a given democracy, and define the type of democracy we live in. They tell us how developed, mature and refined our democracy is.

These three “Es" will also give us a guide on how to project the expected voting pattern in an upcoming election.

Ethnicity is what defines voting patterns in traditionally rural and agricultural democracies. These democracies are still at the basic level of the first “E” or E1. The measurement of success at this level is not based on the purchasing power as such, but the elders’ advice on how to vote.

At this level, the purchasing power makes little or negligible impact on our political choices. Cash flow from the big cities is scarce, just like infrastructure programmes, and they make no real impact on the lives of citizens. Communications are also scarce. TV, radio and the Internet are inaccessible or tightly controlled by a central government that is far from the people.

PURCHASING POWER

What matters at this level is to have your candidate in power, for he provides the most basic of all securities: land and peaceful coexistence for my community. The rest is practically irrelevant.

As societies evolve, the second “E”, for economy or E2, acquires more relevance and power to change voting patterns. In these young democracies people are usually guided by their pocket.

“How much can I buy with this amount of money?”, people ask themselves, and they usually compare with what they could have bought last month, last year or before they elected the current leaders. This is basically the purchasing power and, every time the president appears in public, they remember what they could buy with this money before he came into power, and compare.

As democracies mature, leaders tend to ensure that everyone, or almost everyone, can satisfy basic needs, social service delivery systems function, justice is available and effective, impunity is eradicated from the social, economic and political arena, and personal security is guaranteed. Then, the attention of the state is directed to the third “E” for empathy, E3.

Empathy for the environment, for those who suffer in the world at large, for the poor countries, for refugees… Empathy in terms of foreign policy. Empathy for the fight against injustice in the world. This empathy brings people together and identifies them under one candidate or agenda that determines the outcome of general elections.

IRREVERSIBLE CHANGE

Where is Kenya? I have asked myself this question many times. I still do. Certainly, I have seen Kenya evolve from a thoroughly ethnic and rural setting, but I am not entirely sure we are at the economic level yet. Truly, the 2008 post-election violence sent us back a number of years. Are we still in E1 or E2? Perhaps E1.5?

In any case, there is no point in trying to run the country as it was run in the old days and expect people to be happy. The liberalization of the media, the mobile revolution and the rural electrification programmes have triggered an irreversible change.

People are connected. They know what is going on and they have greater basis and knowledge for making comparisons in time, between now and yesterday, and in space, between Kenya and other countries.

In my conversations with some leaders, I have noticed that a number of them are fully aware of these changes. They know they are speaking to an audience that is a lot more sophisticated, engaged and knowledgeable than it used to be 10 or 20 years ago.

Sadly, a good number too, mostly in Parliament, are still stuck in the old days, E1. Their political discourse keeps on drawing us back to the first “E” and we get stuck there. Many of them are unaware of the changing circumstances and the historical responsibility the country has placed on them.

THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENT

Parliament has three key functions: political, legislative, and overseeing. In these three functions Parliament keeps throwing the country back to the first E.

A modern democracy must evolve. A democracy cannot be sustained on E1 or E2 for ever. Unless it jumps upward, to the next E, it runs the risk of imploding and destroying itself. A country that gets stuck in E1 or E2 will eventually become a tyranny.

Although we usually fix our eyes and place our hopes on the Executive, the truth is that Parliament has the upper hand. The Constitution designed it so.

Parliament was traditionally the executive’s rubber stamp, but the Constitution has swapped those roles. Now Parliament sets the pace before the Executive “executes” and the Judiciary “judges”.

This is why parliamentary discipline is so essential. I am certain that the next 10 years will see unimaginable changes, and Parliament needs to be up to standard in the exercise of its three key functions.

The Executive needs a working and demanding Parliament. The most dangerous tyrant is a democratic leader with no sensible and mature opposition.

Dr Franceschi is the dean of Strathmore Law School. [email protected], Twitter: @lgfranceschi