UNDERSTANDING ALPHEOUS FROM IDEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE 

I have seen and received complaints, mainly from progressive camps that Alpheous Nxumalo is not a good government spokesperson.

The amount of criticism and character assassination directed to Nxumalo on social media suggest that pressure groups are not happy with him. Supposedly, if members of political parties were to be happy with him, I know that he would have long lost his job. From an ideological perspective, Nxumalo’s job is not only to defend public policy for the central government, but to also protect the ideology of the country’s political system, which is detested by those who are calling for the dismantlement of the Tinkhundla System of Government.  Ideologically, Nxumalo, I know for a fact, is regarded as one of the best government spokespersons the State has ever produced. Being hated and ridiculed in the exercise of your duties as a government spokesperson continue to score important points for Nxumalo.

This, therefore, demonstrates convincingly to his employers that he is the right man for the job. It is a standing rule that joining North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) binds countries to defend each other. Likewise, joining government compels the government press secretary to always see beauty in the country’s political system. Some people need to understand that a government communicator in a political party system cannot execute his duties in the same way a spokesman in a non-party State would do. In a multiparty democracy, government communicators are prohibited from straying into areas that are party-political or which cannot be linked back to the core responsibilities of the government.

Ideology

In a non-party State, government communicators become politicians because they are expected to defend ideology and the decision and significance of having a non-party government. I would be astonished, in fact, absolutely flabbergasted at hearing the UMkhonto WeSizwe party congratulating the African National Congress (ANC) on a good public policy statement.
For instance, emaSwati are not expecting People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) to issue a public statement, on any other day, heaping praises on Nxumalo, the Government Press Secretary, for a job well done, neither do I expect Nxumalo to also hail PUDEMO for a successful march or rally.

If I were to adopt this mindset, I am no different from someone who expects archangel Michael to sometimes find it in his heart to praise the devil. I am quite aware that Nxumalo is hated in mainly quarters marshalled by members of the political movements. If I were to be allowed to address a political question, I don’t anticipate Christiano Ronaldo intentionally scoring for Turkey. Nxumalo was contracted at a very critical time when the criticism was not only about poor service delivery by government, but the political system, on which the central government is founded - Tinkhundla System of Government. The job description, therefore, I presume, entails that he shall, at all costs, defend the Tinkhundla System of Government and collaborating with Percy Simelane, the Director of Communications at the King’s Office, in protecting and defending the institution of the monarchy.

Basically, Nxumalo was not contracted by the State to achieve a harmonious and satisfying equilibrium between proponents of multiparty democracy and supporters of the Tinkhundla System of Government. He and Simelane have to execute their mandates with the same distinction and vigour Swaziland Liberation Movement (SWALIMO) and Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC) would undoubtedly require from their spokespersons. Imagine Penuel Malinga criticising PUDEMO for attacking Tinkhundla. Come clean and let us not engage in a social media game of likes, comments and laughing emoji memes, we have to discuss politics here. It is important that I emphasise that there is a difference between defending government’s core responsibilities and protecting ideology. Concerning a political system, it is a matter of ideology in practice that the spokesperson is expected to defend.

Support

This must be understood in the context that those who support Tinkhundla believe that this political system is effective. They do not see what you are seeing in their political system. And, they have to defend it through their communication division. Regarding government, spokespersons all over the world sometimes apologise on behalf of government for errors committed solely to restore trust in public institutions. But, those errors or oversights do not give them a leeway to portray their governments as failures or uncaring. Instead, they promise improved service delivery. When doing so, they are politically correct. They are expected to project a good image of the government they serve.

Pertaining to the political system on which government is founded, they cannot, therefore, go astray or find fault in a system they were employed to protect. What do you think can happen if Nxumalo would blast government for not granting permission to a political party to march on Gwamile Street? What can happen if Penuel Malinga would support a government position regarding its refusal to grant permission to PUDEMO to march? For sure, he would be labelled a sell-out that deserves total ostracism. Sometimes, a spokesman functions like a police officer who serves the government of the day. To Nxumalo or Simelane, it is always about loyalty to the State and government.

Mark Twain rightly said ‘Loyalty to the country always.” Khushboo Pal, writing for the Times of India, said taking pride in one’s country, culture and values constitute loyalty. Why then some people think that Alpheous must support a line of thinking contrary to the values of the Tinkhundla System of Government? Pal says loyalty to government means allegiance to political and ideological values. He says it also means to have unwavering faith in the government. But it gives unquestioned power and authority to the government.It is a fact that in order to have good governance and development of the country, it is necessary to have checks and balances. But, it is not the duty of Nxumalo to hold the government accountable for its decisions and actions. I concur that there has to be transparency in the functioning of the government to ensure responsibility in lieu of the power it yields as stated by Pal. Those who are calling for transparency in government must not expect to get a supporting voice from the person who was employed by the State to defend it.

Promises

Imagine you are reading such a headline: “Government has failed or Tinkhundla will collapse, says Alpheous’. It is very essential that we criticise our government when it does not fulfil its promises, but we should also expect a spokesman to come in and defend the government. In settings such as ours, spokespersons exhibit a sense of citizenship in its basic and fundamental meaning. The Centre for the Study of Citizenship uses the Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition of citizenship: ‘membership in a community’. Experts define citizenship as a legal status and relation between an individual and a State that entails specific legal rights and duties. They say citizenship is generally used as a synonym for nationality. Where citizenship is used in a meaning that is different from nationality it refers to the legal rights and duties of individuals attached to nationality under domestic law.

In some national laws, citizenship has a more specific meaning and refers to rights and duties that can only be exercised after the age of majority (such as voting rights) or to rights and duties that can only be exercised in the national territory. We cannot blame a government spokesperson for being patriotic to the State and the government that employs him. Britannica defines patriotism as the feeling of attachment and commitment to a country, nation, or political community. Patriotism and nationalism (loyalty to one’s nation) are often taken to be synonymous, yet patriotism has its origins some 2 000 years prior to the rise of nationalism in the 19th century.

Barbara Hauer Frietschie and Morris Janowitz concur that Greek and, especially Roman antiquity, provide the roots for a political patriotism that conceives of loyalty to the patria as loyalty to a political conception of the republic - kingdom in our context. They say patriotism is associated with the love of law and common liberty, the search for the common good, and the duty to behave justly towards one’s country. This classical Roman meaning of patria reemerges in the context of the Italian city republics of the 15th century.In contrast to the classical republican conception of patriotism, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s considerations on the Government of Poland can be seen as an early example of the link between nationalism and patriotism. While Rousseau advocated the love of the nation and the celebration of national culture, he believed that national culture is valuable primarily because it helps foster loyalty to the political fatherland. Thus, Rousseau’s nationalism stemmed from and served his typically republican emphasis on securing citizens’ loyalty to their political institutions.

Attachment

These experts say a more explicit link between nationalism and patriotism can be found in the work of German philosopher Johann Gottfried von Herder. In Herder’s view, patriotism refers not to a political virtue, but to a spiritual attachment to the nation. MaSwati lamahle, do you understand? Spiritual attachment to the nation. There is that spiritual attachment of the spokesperson to the Tinkhundla System. Any disconnect means he is not doing his job. In this context, educationists say fatherland becomes synonymous with the nation and its distinct language and culture, which give it unity and coherence.

Thus, instead of linking patriotism to the preservation of political liberty, Herder associates love of one’s country with the preservation of a common culture and the spiritual unity of a people. While in the classical republican tradition, “fatherland” is synonymous with political institutions, for Herder, the nation is prepolitical and love of one’s national culture is a natural inclination that allows a people to express their distinctive character. On this account, patriotism is associated with the exclusive attachment to one’s own culture and thus stands in opposition to cosmopolitanism and cultural assimilation. I have read some books that say freedom is equated not with the fight against political oppression, but with the preservation of a unique people and patriotic sacrifice with the desire to secure the long-term survival of the nation.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: