By Kibisu Kabatesi
For an innocent reader, it must baffle them for ardent propagandists of your opponent to worry about you so much so that they even mellow deceitfully and pretend to be offering free advice.
But to those of us schooled in the art of political propaganda, what David Makali is doing is called “insurgency”; pretended surprise that the predicted Mudavadi seismic eruption of euphoric support has not occurred.
To justify the non-occurrence using peelings of very wanting intellect, Makali would that we believe there was such prediction. The piece displays “wanting intellect” because it lacks credible infusion of reality and is brazen with fictitious assumptions. The fellow stretches our imagination because had there been such a prediction, Makali as is usual would have hit the roof senseless.
Makali who spent his waking moments as a Luhya, repeatedly ridiculed Mudavadi for “hesitation and dithering” while in ODM, but no longer finds him an attractive go-getter and spends his current existence (at the behest of whosoever) mocking Mudavadi’s presidential ambitions. I call such wayward impulses the essence of duplicity and intellectual dishonesty. A fickleness of mind will always produce pedestrian intellect.
The David Makali piece (The Star September 6, 2012) is pronounced deceit and hypocrisy. It is part of orchestrated raw media scripts right from the campaign desk of one of the panic stricken presidential aspirants. From nuptial “Mudavadi cannot afford to leave ODM”; “Mudavadi leaving will divide ODM”; they have graduated into a “Mudavadi was duped” sing-song. “Mudavadi was duped” is purely informed by anti-Kikuyu pedophilia.
To deny the obvious success of Mudavadi, attempt to dispirit his supporters and invent imaginary insider scandalous information is part of “accepted” campaign political propaganda. But this must be done so intelligently and creatively that even the target acknowledges, not the “truth” of it but just the audacity. This I find not in Makali’s six-penny piece. And this is why.
In literary criticism, we are advised that other than when an author is influenced purely by monetary gain, their personal beliefs must be brought into the analysis of their literary product. For a work of literature does not pre-exist the author.
In the USA political punditry, authors are either paid campaign retainers or pen pieces for or against candidates and parties purely out of ideological beliefs. In some cases, ‘neutral’ media provide space for contending campaigns to argue their case against each other. I have no idea which category Makali falls in. But I am certain Makali knows the source of the “swirl of stories” meant to discredit Mudavadi’s candidature because he gives them such credibility.
Still, pessimistic as ever even to the point of derogatory obsession against Musalia Mudavadi, Makali has spent the better part of his “expert” career in media deriding the DPM. The piece is therefore no surprise to those who have followed Makali’s “expert” media comments. He has forever dismissed Mudavadi as a “non-starter” although occasionally he is “hungry” and absentminded enough to heckle that “Mudavadi is the man to watch” on some TV show!
I am completely at a loss why Makali has criminalized Mudavadi’s ambition to be president. Is it that Mudavadi does not deserve to be or that he stopped supporting Makali’s candidate?
There is a menacing disorientation in Makali’s understanding of democracy and indeed what he thinks the new Constitution portends for Kenyan politics. Kenya is travelling the road of reform when political parties are no longer ‘owned’ vehicles of individuals. Mudavadi has practically demonstrated this by ‘joining’ a party and not ‘owning’ it. For this act of adherence to reform, he is derided by Makali who worships another aspirant “who took over The National Alliance complete with his new team of officials”. Next I hear or read anything on change by Makali, I might get sick remembering this ‘Big Man syndrome” sympathies.
A commentator, who is a poor reader of events; promotes delusional clan eccentricities as analytical evidence; relies on hearsay for fact; is scarred by filial fetishes and manufactures fiction for political analysis disgraces society other than being a big con. You would have to be Makali to stare away from the reality that Mudavadi has excited “euphoric support in his Western Kenya backyard”. You would have to be scarred by filial fetishes to think that because your corner of Western Kenya does not display “euphoric support”, then it is lacking.
I am consumed by sadness when a career ‘expert’ begins to lie with words like “there is ‘evidence’. Truth is there is no “evidence” Makali can produce that Mudavadi ‘gambled’ on support of other aspirants in his decision to stand for the presidency.
Mudavadi has stated clearly that all others are competitors and he has taken the fight to them. He does not need “big names” tagging his campaign trail for show. He is looking for votes, not name tags and dramatized publicity. Team Mudavadi is lean, clean and lethal. That’s Freshi for you. The game has changed.
You want to have a feel of what’s happening out there? Leave the comforting clan intellect of the “suit’ buddies, studio and bar talk. But yet you must be Makali to wade off the seismic voter buzz about Macharia in Central Kenya, M’Mukiri in Eastern Kenya, Chacha Mwita and Mulamwua in Nyanza, Salim at the Coast, omwami in Western and Baringo in Rift Valley.
To paraphrase Makali, ‘in an increasingly ethnicized contest” communities don’t give you adoring names for nothing. Your competitors don’t plot against you for nothing. Makali does not write about Mudavadi for nothing, unless, worried his fake premonitions and amateur predictions are about to unravel.