AFRICAN FIRST PEOPLES: THE BUSHWO/MEN

THE concept of freedom gets one thinking. Freedom, what does it mean? Does it mean the same thing to all people? There are people who would like to do anything their whims impel them to do, anytime, anyhow and anywhere, regardless of what other people think or wish. With them it is okay to act on impulse and damn the rest of humanity. Is that what the concept as commonly understood implies? None, except the eccentric, would be inclined to that interpretation.

In everyday parlance, freedom implies that one's action and conduct is sensitive to the morals, values and sensibilities of your fellow human beings. This is not always achieved, so we have customs, etiquette and laws to sanction the deviants.

In social relations, those who take their freedom to indiscreet heights can be regarded as anti-social or lunatics. Administratively, they may be in a class of common law criminals or anarchists, renegades, outlaws or felons who have no track with laws promulgated to protect society in its quest for stability and social harmony. Human society being as diverse, dynamic and spiritualist as it is, the concept of freedom becomes rather complex to analyse and conceptualise. It is only in studying the history of mankind in different eras and under different conditions that one can come close to a definition which might mean the same thing to Jim, Mpho, Shanti, Nadia and Vasco, everywhere.

In the course of our history, we seem to have arrived at some consensus, which recognises that humans need to adopt certain freedoms, to enable them to survive in relative decency. We are familiar with the following basic freedoms: freedom of association, freedom of movement, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. In due course, these basic freedoms have been magnified to cover other essential elements whose presence in a situation negate freedom. Therefore, we have freedom from want and freedom from fear to supplement the other basic and perhaps uncomplicated types of freedoms. Freedom from want implies an entitlement to economic goods and services. Under this freedom, all healthy and fit persons are entitled to a useful and remunerative job, every family is entitled to a decent home, the right to adequate protection from the economic hazards of old age, sickness, disability and unemployment and every child has the right to a good education. Poverty is banished from human society in terms of this freedom. Rulers are their subjects' keepers.

Freedom from fear might sound abstract and psychosomatic, but it is recognised as one of the freedoms: it implies a social environment of peace and stability; a world without political conflicts, insurrection, war and refugees. These place immense responsibilities on the shoulders of those who govern.

In order to come anywhere near these freedoms, the governed themselves must be alive to these rights they are entitled to. There must be a clear understanding by the masses, that they are not entitled to these freedoms and rights as a birthright or that the rulers of the day will always provide these rights, unhurried. Thomas Paine was wrong when he said, "Man is born free, but everywhere he goes, he is in chains." Man is not born free. And everywhere, where s/he does not stand up for his/her rights, s/he is in chains. The freedoms that human society enjoys, to a relative degree, have been achieved by human sacrifice, struggle, sweat and tears. Some societies have had to sacrifice and struggle harder than others and others have had the luck of finding these rights there for their enjoyment. This does not guarantee that these rights, these freedoms will always be there to be enjoyed by future generations. These freedoms are capable of depreciation, unless carefully nurtured, maintained and renovated.

Batswana are tremendously lucky because - unlike other nations who have had to undergo torture, imprisonment and spill blood to achieve their freedoms - they had their freedom and independence, metaphorically speaking, on a silver platter. They did not have to invent the wheel. The wheel was there for them to use and service, so that it served them for the foreseeable future.

The general elections are here. The opportunity to service the wheel has arrived. We forego it at our own peril. Those who have missed the opportunity to exercise their right to vote by failing to register as voters in the coming elections must be told that they are doing their country and posterity a disservice. Should the country happen to stagnate or retrogress into political instability and chaos, inadvertently, they may not escape the ultimate responsibility of the inadvertence. So shall be those who have registered to vote, who - for some flimsy reason or other - will fail to turn up at the polling station when polling day arrives. Batswana must never think that because Botswana has always been peaceful and relatively successful, it will always be so. It does not follow. Look to the north of us in Cote d'Ivoire. Here is a country that was a model of prosperity and tranquillity, admired and respected by friend and foe. Today in Cote d'Ivoire things are falling apart, the centre cannot hold. The Cote d'Ivoirians, at some stage, must have been overtaken by complacency, allowing tragedy to strike.

"The price of freedom," someone has said, "is vigilance!" There can be no greater truth. It is normal for a nation to put their trust in the leadership on which they have imposed the onerous task of running their affairs. Nor is it wrong to do so. But it is wrong for a people to give their trustees, however apparently diligent, initially, an eternal carte blanche; particularly when an opportunity presents itself at regular intervals to assess the lacklustre or otherwise of their immediate past.

"...all men are created equal,...they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights,...among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. ...to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;...whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organising its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

The ringing declaration in the American constitution reminds us of our "inalienable" rights as human beings, not only as Americans. The custodians of these rights are governments, elected by the people who have a responsibility to demonstrate interest in the government performance. While the government has a right to introduce the PBRS on the civil servants, the electorate have an inalienable right also, to impose PBRS on their government. Let us watch and see who PBRS's who!