THE TWISTER
BY BRIAN LIGOMEKA
One avid reader of this column asked me to comment on Atupele Muluzi’s son of Malawi’s ex-president Bakili Muluzi’s announcement that he will gun for the opposition United Democratic Front (UDF) presidency. Here is my reaction.
Most people who have studied sciences, physics in particular, have committed to heart all the three laws of motion by Sir Isaac Newton, which explain the motion of many physical objects and systems.
Although I am not in sciences, I still recall Newton's third law which partially states that to every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction.
It's fascinating to see how many of the laws of physics apply to many life situations. Let the chiefs declare that they are supporting Professor Peter Mutharika, you will hear the next day civil society organisations reacting by crying foul over the chiefs’ endorsement.
Likewise, let Atupele Muluzi declare that he will gun for the UDF presidency, the reaction is obvious. His critics accuse him of being sent by his father to do so.
I am also not surprised that even if Baba John Tembo declares that he will still contest in 2014 presidential race, there will be a reaction. The common one is that he is too old …he should give a chance to new blood.
I like what Zambian president Rupiah Banda said during the inauguration of Shire-Zambezi Waterway. He said presidents should be stubborn when others are detracting from implementing development issues.
“Presidents should be stubborn to achieve their dreams. Nsanje World Inland Port is a reality because Mutharika was stubborn about it. I am also accused of being stubborn in Zambia. My senior brother, Robert Mugabe who is here today is also accused worldwide of being stubborn. Those who are not presidents accuse those of us who are presidents of being stubborn,” said Banda.
The point is Newton in many aspects was right that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When you criticise presidents for development work, they react by being stubborn so that the people benefit. What a beautiful philosophy. I like it because I am also stubborn when it comes to implementation of vital decisions.
While it is natural to react to actions, the only problem, [outside physics], is that the reactions are sometimes disproportionate.
In everyday’s life we are faced with various challenges as actions of others be it, our kids, our spouses, our friends, workmates, individuals, groups, organisations or even political parties have an impact on our lives.
As is expected when someone takes an action against us, we quickly react immediately. There is nothing wrong with that, but sometimes there are consequences when the reaction is not well-thought about or well-planned and executed.
The numerous wars that are being fought in the world are outcomes of poorly managed reactions to actions. Even in social circles, the dissolution of marriages and the premature collapse of love affairs and many other relationships are a result of reactions to actions.
The problem with human beings is that most of the time, we want to react to every action that is taken against us. We don’t even consider the possibility of responding to an action with non-action or silence.
I know when most spouses are arguing, their disputes degenerate into live shouting matches.
“You bloody Casanova! Don’t lie to me! I know you have a girlfriend and this is why you come home late!” the wife would shout.
“You are double foolish! If you were clever, you would have known that my favourite team was playing tonight and this is why I am late. I was watching the match at the drinking joint with my friends,” the hubby would shout back while banging the dining table.
This is a typical argument. Shouting! Threats! Counter-threats! Banging tables and sometimes a few blows. This happens in some families and relationships. Even in politics, business and at workplace, the pattern of “action versus reaction, argument versus counter-argument” is the same because many people fail to manage and plan their reactions.
One expert once said the easiest rule of thumb to follow is: “If you're going to gain or maintain your self-respect, keep your emotions in check when reacting to actions of others. In the cited scenario of a husband arriving home late, the main issues are the wife’s complaint versus the husband’s passion for football. Surely, the issue can easily be discussed while kissing without banging tables and shouting. But common sense is not in abundance in most families.
Good planning
I recently spent sometime reading some literature by Sir Winston Churchill on the final years of World War 2. From Churchill’s account, it was certain that the allies planned carefully and knew that they were going to win the war.
During that war there were many battles, some were won and others were lost as things never went according to the allies’ plan but the heart of the matter was that their overall strategy was to win the war and not just a few battles.
Churchill and his colleagues planned everything to detail to defeat Hitler, and throughout the warfare their master-plan was to win the whole war.
This reminds me of the story about ancient Athenians who attacked Sicily mistakenly believing that their military assault would earn them riches, power and bring to an end Peloponnesian War.
The mistake they made was not to do both PESTLE and SWOT military analysis which would have revealed the dangers lying ahead of them.
When they attacked Sicily, the Athenians were in for a rude awakening as the Sicilians and their sympathisers fought fiercely and crushed them. The heart of the matter is that those who make half-baked emotional plans are as foolish as those who do not plan at all.
History also reminds me of one French politician and historian, Louis-Adoplhe Thiers who when he found himself losing during the elections of 1848, he resolved to make use of Louis Bonaparte, grand-nephew of Napoleon so that he could win support of the masses.
The huge mistake with him was that he did not plan well because what transpired later was that his political puppet finally turned on him by dissolving the Parliament and crowning himself Emperor of France.
The moral of it is that it would have been better for Thiers to do nothing because at least a Parliament would still exist and he would perhaps have a chance of winning another poll.
On planning renowned author I admire so much Robert Greene, according to his Law 29 of Power says: “The ending is everything. Plan all your way to it, taking into account all the possible consequences, obstacles and twists of fortune that might reverse your hard work and give glory to others. By planning to the end you will not be overwhelmed by circumstances and you will know where to stop. Gently guide your fortune and help determine by thinking far ahead.”
When people are acting, be careful with the way you react as it is better to win the overall war than winning a single battle and end up losing the war.
This article first appeared in the column called The Twister published by The Daily Times of Malawi
No comments:
Post a Comment