WITH DUE RESPECT

Sir,

Is it better for one to die in sleep or while awake? On the surface this very innocent question is easy to answer yet, upon deep reflection, it is not necessarily so. The initial but impulsive answer to this question is, of course, that embracing death while one is in slumberland is a far better option. The rationale being that it is far more peaceful than if death comes while one is awake and in all their senses. This line of reasoning might lead us to another question and another and another, but the base one being how conclusive can anyone attest that dying in one’s sleep is peaceful.

Finality

The point is, the end is still the same whether death, the finality of it all, comes in one’s sleep or while awake. While that may well be, the circumstances and causal factors may vary. Far from the popular belief that dying in one’s sleep is more peaceful, it seems to me that this is the cruelest way to depart earth. Depending on a number of factors, there may be fewer or no interventions that can be mounted if and when life-threatening situations come while one is sleeping. Conversely, similar life-threatening situations can be wadded off with interventions, including resuscitations, coma-inducing drugs and other medications, life-support machines, etc, should they occur while one is awake.

If the two aforementioned scenarios were to be transposed to the political realm, death coming in one’s sleep would represent a political system that is far from being democratic and, therefore, a hopeless situation since political power invariably does not reside with the people in an undemocratic environment.

Represent

Consequently, death coming while one is awake would represent a democratic dispensation with checks and balances as well as strong institutions not to speak of a discerning and vigilant citizenry and, by progression, represents hope. So, if you ask me what is better between extremism in an open democracy, such as that represented by multiparty democracy, and the current political system of the country, I would readily vote for the former. It is by far a better option than a well behaved and quietly conformist legislature starved of debate and ideas in a system whose extremism often includes absence of the rule of law, arbitrary persecutions of dissenters, mismanagement of the fiscus and institutional corruption, among others.

Calling on leaders to account for their abuses of office should not and does not necessarily equate to disrespecting them. As it were, the expectation that leaders must be accorded automatic respect is misplaced and misguided save to feed on their lust for power. A majority of African leaders tried but failed to instil, even by force of arms, this respect on their people. In the majority of cases they only succeeded in alienating and inculcating a culture of fear and loathing that in many instances is often mistaken for peace. Extremism in a multiparty democracy is by far more productive in instilling transparency and accountability than the ruinous extremism of the Tinkhundla System, which is responsible for reducing Eswatini into a basket case notwithstanding the fact that the country is home to many natural resources.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: