The forthcoming elections and the recent hue and cry over the candidacy of the main opposition party’s choice can and must be looked at from dimensions that are other than is now the wide debate points.
Normally it has been the tendency for the public in general to look only at the superficial issues and most times even non issues are taken up, made into issues and debated. Well of course, elections in Sierra Leone, under the former one-party constitution and as well as the recent democratization process, has always been highly polarized and ruled by egoism or many a scholar has called “pocketbook” voting. This is a situation wherein the voter casts votes rewarding parties that advance their own personal economic interests and punish those that they fell threaten those interests.
When it is elections time, parties as well as voters look at the issues of bread and butter, prices of basic commodities and other such parameters as the determining reason for voting for or against a party, whether incumbent or aspiring.
This kind of voter decision has its advantages as well as disadvantages but by and large can be a retarding factor in national development. The advantages of course Centre largely on the fact that a degree of democracy of choice can be expressed by the electorate.
With regards, change in the socio-economic dynamics of the country, this cannot be ,in certain cases the correct outlook for testing and changing the good will of the political status quo.
It is not due to the simple fact that every government in power has something good it does during the term of power of that government and for voters looking only at the egoistic issues might vote out a government now only for the impact of policies and projects to be realized during the term of the next government they vote into power.
Some of these policies and projects might also be the actual needs for a medium and long term change which will bring about a realization of the personal economic needs of the voters by way of putting in place the right infrastructure that will allow economic activates that shall provide jobs and hence take care of the Bread and butter issues.
On the opposite side of the same voters decision influence, a government can genuinely be voted out for not doing what it takes to provide the enabling environment and infrastructure that will make it possible for the bread and butter issues to be realized.
In such cases the voter(s) do not look at the egoistic issue but at what impact the government has had on providing those needs that will provide the way for personal issues to be realized. Voters who vote in or out a government based on such outlook do not ask “What a government or political party has done for them personally but instead what a government or political party has done for the nation. This kind of voters choice is what is termed the sociotropic or retrospective economic voting.
Simply put a voter votes for a political party or government based on the past performance and what is predicted to be the future performance of that party or government.
Instead of looking at how a connection with a politician or party will be a conduit for the realization of personal aims, aspirations and goals, the voter(s) look at the track record of a party or government in the overall handling of the affairs of state and make judgments about the performance legitimacy of that party or government from a point of view of what was and is shall be.
In such voting situations all factors of national divide such as regionalism, ethnicity, family relationship etc. are put aside and those of national consolidation are given top consideration by the electorate. In such a case, campaign promises are weighted against the know performance of a party or government in as much as they affect the overall national development and the visible signposts of such development such as roads,electricity,watersupply,educational facilities, curriculum and conditions of service of the functionaries in that sector ,to name a few.Judgement of the electorate in such a case is based on whether that party or government has had a past tenure and how the electorate feel about that past.
For the Sierra Leonean electorate, there is a reasonable amount of visible change from which they can make judgments now after the democratic dispensation has been in force since 1995.
Since 1995and more so 2000 after the end of the decade long war, the political dynamics and infrastructural situation has seen some changes. It is now left with the electorate to determine which party has had the greater impact on change and what actions they see taken by those parties to make this change happen.
It is now time for the electorate to demonstrate some level of maturity with regards what national aspirations they see being fulfilled and by which government or party.
On the converse side of the picture, there are now candidates who have had past tenures of office from which the electorate can make judgments. Such judgments must be based on what these candidates did during that past tenure or what they are doing as at now which the electorate feel will have a positive impact on the overall economic and developmental processes of the nation.
So instead of the government and political parties standing a test of and for stewardship it is a tow way process of which the other process is a test of the electorates capability to make right judgments and vote for a system they feel will bring about the change that will as soon as possible make life better not only for a few and but all in the nation .
If the electorate makes the right decision in the forthcoming elections then change and development is sure to take place .If otherwise and based on the usually factors of personal aspirations or of regional, ethnic and such limited outlooks then the cycle of putting new wine in old bottles continues.
In otherworld it is now time for the people of Sierra Leone to vote based on the power of influence they hold over the politicians and not based on which politician has spent the most money to buy votes or which politicians comes from where and how that is going to make life for the voter better because of having someone who is a kinsman, party colleague, tribesman etc.
Otherwise, there is a danger of voting a wrong government in if the voters continue to look at now only and not the past and the future changes that will be nationwide. So whichever way, anyhow, the forthcoming elections, both Parliamentary and Presidential, are a test for the electorates more than it is for the political parties and their candidates.
The elections will be the litmus test of how far the electorate understands and implement the actual meaning of democracy not how best the electorate uses the democratic process to vote a wrong political status quo in to power.
THE 2012 ELECTIONS IN SIERRA LEONE: A TEST OF AND FOR THE PEOPLE
Translated into Swedish by: BOYEJAY
The forthcoming elections and the recent hue and cry over the candidacy of the main opposition party’s choice can and must be looked at from dimensions that are other than is now the wide debate points.
Normally it has been the tendency for the public in general to look only at the superficial issues and most times even non issues are taken up, made into issues and debated. Well of course, elections in Sierra Leone, under the former one-party constitution and as well as the recent democratization process, has always been highly polarized and ruled by egoism or many a scholar has called “pocketbook” voting. This is a situation wherein the voter casts votes rewarding parties that advance their own personal economic interests and punish those that they fell threaten those interests.
When it is elections time, parties as well as voters look at the issues of bread and butter, prices of basic commodities and other such parameters as the determining reason for voting for or against a party, whether incumbent or aspiring.
This kind of voter decision has its advantages as well as disadvantages but by and large can be a retarding factor in national development. The advantages of course Centre largely on the fact that a degree of democracy of choice can be expressed by the electorate.
With regards, change in the socio-economic dynamics of the country, this cannot be ,in certain cases the correct outlook for testing and changing the good will of the political status quo.
It is not due to the simple fact that every government in power has something good it does during the term of power of that government and for voters looking only at the egoistic issues might vote out a government now only for the impact of policies and projects to be realized during the term of the next government they vote into power.
Some of these policies and projects might also be the actual needs for a medium and long term change which will bring about a realization of the personal economic needs of the voters by way of putting in place the right infrastructure that will allow economic activates that shall provide jobs and hence take care of the Bread and butter issues.
On the opposite side of the same voters decision influence, a government can genuinely be voted out for not doing what it takes to provide the enabling environment and infrastructure that will make it possible for the bread and butter issues to be realized.
In such cases the voter(s) do not look at the egoistic issue but at what impact the government has had on providing those needs that will provide the way for personal issues to be realized. Voters who vote in or out a government based on such outlook do not ask “What a government or political party has done for them personally but instead what a government or political party has done for the nation. This kind of voters choice is what is termed the sociotropic or retrospective economic voting.
Simply put a voter votes for a political party or government based on the past performance and what is predicted to be the future performance of that party or government.
Instead of looking at how a connection with a politician or party will be a conduit for the realization of personal aims, aspirations and goals, the voter(s) look at the track record of a party or government in the overall handling of the affairs of state and make judgments about the performance legitimacy of that party or government from a point of view of what was and is shall be.
In such voting situations all factors of national divide such as regionalism, ethnicity, family relationship etc. are put aside and those of national consolidation are given top consideration by the electorate. In such a case, campaign promises are weighted against the know performance of a party or government in as much as they affect the overall national development and the visible signposts of such development such as roads,electricity,watersupply,educational facilities, curriculum and conditions of service of the functionaries in that sector ,to name a few.Judgement of the electorate in such a case is based on whether that party or government has had a past tenure and how the electorate feel about that past.
For the Sierra Leonean electorate, there is a reasonable amount of visible change from which they can make judgments now after the democratic dispensation has been in force since 1995.
Since 1995and more so 2000 after the end of the decade long war, the political dynamics and infrastructural situation has seen some changes. It is now left with the electorate to determine which party has had the greater impact on change and what actions they see taken by those parties to make this change happen.
It is now time for the electorate to demonstrate some level of maturity with regards what national aspirations they see being fulfilled and by which government or party.
On the converse side of the picture, there are now candidates who have had past tenures of office from which the electorate can make judgments. Such judgments must be based on what these candidates did during that past tenure or what they are doing as at now which the electorate feel will have a positive impact on the overall economic and developmental processes of the nation.
So instead of the government and political parties standing a test of and for stewardship it is a tow way process of which the other process is a test of the electorates capability to make right judgments and vote for a system they feel will bring about the change that will as soon as possible make life better not only for a few and but all in the nation .
If the electorate makes the right decision in the forthcoming elections then change and development is sure to take place .If otherwise and based on the usually factors of personal aspirations or of regional, ethnic and such limited outlooks then the cycle of putting new wine in old bottles continues.
In otherworld it is now time for the people of Sierra Leone to vote based on the power of influence they hold over the politicians and not based on which politician has spent the most money to buy votes or which politicians comes from where and how that is going to make life for the voter better because of having someone who is a kinsman, party colleague, tribesman etc.
Otherwise, there is a danger of voting a wrong government in if the voters continue to look at now only and not the past and the future changes that will be nationwide. So whichever way, anyhow, the forthcoming elections, both Parliamentary and Presidential, are a test for the electorates more than it is for the political parties and their candidates.
The elections will be the litmus test of how far the electorate understands and implement the actual meaning of democracy not how best the electorate uses the democratic process to vote a wrong political status quo in to power.
disponible dans : 
