KATIKA SIASA HAKUNA MALAIKA WALA SHETANI

Hivi karibuni kumekuwa na matukio mbalimbali kwa upande wa chama kikuu cha upinzani CHADEMA kinachonisukuma kusema kuwa tunachoona hivi sasa ni historia. Bila kupoteza muda mrefu kujaribu kuzungumzia matukio naona kuwa watanzania tungefaidika zaidi kuelewa vyema zaidi nini hasa tunachokiona.

Lazima tukubali kuwa lengo moja kuu (kama si lengo kuu pekee) ya chama chochote cha kisiasa ni kuingia madarakani. Vyama hivi vinaweza kutushawishi kuwa wanataka madaraka haya kwa sababu wanataka kutusaidia na ni haki na wajibu wetu kutathmini na kuamua ni chama kipi kitatusaidia kama jamii kufikia malengo tutakayokubaliana nayo. Lakini kwa kifupi wanataka madaraka. Tukishakubali hali hii, basi tunaweza kuangalia tukio lolote la kisiasa kama ushindani wa kutwaa madaraka. Na ni muhimu tutambue hili bila kujaribu kudai kuwa eti mwanasiasa au chama fulani kinatupenda na kutujali zaidi na kadhalika. Hilo ni suala la mtazamo na kwa sasa tuliweke pembeni.

Ninachotaka tujaribu kuangalia ni kuwa ushindani huu wa kutwaa madaraka pia yapo ndani ya chama chochote cha kisiasa. Na ni kitu kizuri sana. Naamini ndani ya CCM, CHADEMA, CUF, NCCR tutaendelea kuona malumbano kwa sababu ya uchaguzi mkuu 2015. Ni uchaguzi wa kihistoria kwa sababu rais aliyopo madarakani hatagombea tena (hakuna incumbent) hivyo hata mgombea wa CCM atakuwa ‘mgeni’ kwa wapiga kura. Hivyo vyama vya upinzani vina nafasi kubwa sana wakicheza karata zao vizuri. Lakini pia ndani ya CCM, hakuna mteule mpaka sasa – kwa hiyo yoyote anaweza kuibuka kuwa mgombea. Tukishaweza kuangalia hali ya kisiasa kwa jicho hili tutaona kuwa ndani ya vyama kuna makambi ambayo yanaona kuwa wao wakiendesha chama sasa wanaweza kukihakikishia ushindi chama chao. Hivyo uongozi wa chama nao unawaniwa. Na ninarudia hakuna ubaya wowote tena ni kitu kizuri. Kwani asiyekubali kushindana si mshindani – na ukweli ni kuwa mgombea ambaye atateuliwa tu na chama chake bila kupitia ushindani mkubwa ndani ya chama chake, mara nyingi hawi mgombea mwenye ushwawishi mkubwa.

Ninakiri kuwa mi ni muumini wa ushindani katika nyanja zote kwani ninaamini ushindani hatimaye huleta matokeo mazuri kwani maoni mbalimbali yakigonganishwa basi tunaweza kupata kitu bora. Kwa bahati mbaya, ushindani katika historia ya nchi yetu haikuwa neno zuri au dhana iliyokubalika – katika sekta ya uchumi na hata siasa. Tunaweza kukaa na kuongea na kuleta nukuu za Baba wa Taifa kuwa alipenda ushindani lakini ukweli halisia ni kuwa kulikuwa hakuna uhuru wa kusimama na kum-challenge yeye kama kiongozi, au chama (mfumo wa chama kimoja), ushindani wa kibiashara nk. Na ili kuweza kukamilisha maoni yangu nitaomba tukiweke hiki kiporo, na mvumilie mawazo yangu kwa sasa.

Sasa basi ni katika historia hii ndo tunaona vyama vya upinzani hapa nchini vilizaliwa na kwa kweli historia itakuja kutambua mchango mkubwa wa wale wachache waliokuwa na uthubutu wa ku-challenge system wa wakati huo. Lakini sasa kipindi kile cha awali cha kuunda umekamilika, kwani hivi leo kuanzisha chama cha siasa, NGO au kampuni si kitu cha ajabu. Kinachofuata sasa ni UIMARISHAJI wa vyama hivi.

Vyama hivi vinahitaji kuimarishwa kwa sababu ni lazima vitoe taswira mpya na tofauti na chama kilichopo madarakani tangia uhuru – ya kuwa demokrasia ya kweli ni mfumo yaani taasisi na si ya kikundi fulani. Na hapo ndipo ninapoona tatizo. Vyama vya upinzani vimejaa kutokuaminiana. Hii inatokana na kuwa wakati wa kuundwa kwao – juhudi za wazi na za siri zilifanyika kuwahujumu na hadi leo hii juhudi hizi zipo kwani narudia kwenye kile nilichokizungumzia hapo juu kuwa vyama vya siasa vinataka madaraka. Yule aliyopo madarakani hatakubali kuondoka kwa hiari, hivyo ndiyo maana demokrasia inahitajika kuhakikisha kuwa kwa njia ya wazi, anayekuwa madarakani anakubalika na walio wengi, na hatimaye awapishe wengine. Sasa hapo ndipo tunapokuja na kuleta dhana hii hii ndani ya chama chochote cha siasa. Ushindani huu ni muhimu, ili kujenga imani. Na ningependa nitoe mfano wa nchi ya Marekani ambayo kwa karne nyingi kumekuwa na ushindani wa kisiasa tena mkali sana.

Mwaka 1968 chama cha Democratic ilikuwa na mkutano wake mkuu jijini Chicago yaani National convention. Wajumbe na wanachama walikuwa wametofautiana mawazo kutokana na kuwa mgombea mmoja Hubert Humphrey (makamu rais) alionekana kubebwa na kupendelewa na viongozi wa chama na rais wa wakati huo Johnson (ambaye alitangaza kutogombea tena). Wanachama na wafuasi  wa mgombea Eugene McCarthy walikataa matokeo na maandamano makubwa yalifanyika katika eneo lililozunguka mkutano mkuu. Ni vyema kujua pia kwamba McCarthy alikuwa mgombea pekee ambaye mapema kabisa alikuwa tayari kum-challenge rais Johnson ambaye mwanzoni alikuwa tayari kugombea. Katika kura za awali katika mkoa (state) ya New Hampshire, McCarthy alipata 42% na Johnson 49%. Hii ilimshtua rais Johnson ambaye hatimaye alijitoa na kumpendekeza makamu wake.  Uthubutu wa McCarthy ya kum-challenge rais aliyopo madarakani na kupata sapoti kubwa pia iliwahamsisha wagombea wengine kuingia ulingoni kama Robert Kennedy ambaye aliuwawa wakati mchakato wa uchaguzi wa ndani ukiendelea. Hivyo basi kwenye mkutano mkuu, ushindani huu uligeuka kuwa ugomvi na mapigano kati ya wafuasi wa McCarthy na kile kilichoonekana ni uongozi wa kimabavu wa chama. Polisi waliitwa kutuliza ghasia na badala yake ghasia ilizidi, na wanachama wengi walipigwa na kuumizwa napolisi. Humphrey alitangazwa mshindi ingawa ushindi wake ulikuwa wa mashaka kwa wanachama wengi. Na Humphrey alienda kugombea urais na hatimaye kushindwa vibaya katika uchaguzi mkuu.

Je chama cha Democratic ilifanya nini? Ilimtimua Eugene McCarthy? Iliwatimua wafuasi wake? Hapana. Mara baada ya uchaguzi mkuu, uongozi wa Democratic party ulikaa na kuunda kamati iliyoongozwa na Senator George McGovern na baadaye Donald M Fraser. Na mabadiliko makubwa yalifanyika NDANI ya chama – ikiwa ni pamoja na kuwa na UWAZI mkubwa zaidi hususan katika chaguzi mbalimbali. Matokeo yake ni kuwa katika mikoa au states mbalimbali walianzisha mfumo wa primaries – yaani ngazi ya chini kabisa wanachama waliweza kupiga kura ya mgombea wanayemtaka. Si tu wagombea wa serikali za mitaa, bunge yaani Senate na House of Representatives, lakini hata za rais – presidential primaries. Kupitia njia hii ya wazi, chama cha Democratic ilijikuta kuwa hata kufikia 1984, mmarekani mweusi wa kwanza alitaka kuwa rais wa Marekani – Jesse Jackson – na alithubutu na kujaribu kutwaa ugombea rais wa chama ingawa hakufanikiwa. Hatimaye 2008, mmarekani mweusi Barack Obama alifanikiwa kuutwaa ugombea rais wa chama chake kama mwanasiasa mgeni asiye na uzoefu mkubwa – akimbwaga Hillary Clinton ambaye alikuwa ameshachukuliwa na viongozi wa chama kuwa ndo mgombea mteule. Kupitia mfumo huu wa uwazi, Obama na Hillary walichuana vikali sana kiasi kwamba wataalam wa masuala ya siasa wanasema Obama alipata mikikimikiki mingi zaidi katika uchaguzi wa ndani ya chama kuliko wakati wa uchaguzi mkuu. Mfano mzuri ni kashfa ya mchungaji wake Rev Wright ambayo iliibuliwa na kambi ya Hillary Clinton. Kambi ya Hillary pia iliandaa matangazo ya TV na radio ya kumbeza Obama kuwa akiamshwa usiku wa manane kuwa kuna janga limetokea atashindwa kutoa suluhu kwa sababu si mzoefu. Matangazo kama haya yalikuwa mengi kwa kambi zote mbili, ila Hillary Clinton alianza na pesa nyingi na sapoti ya viongozi wa chama. Lakini kama tunavyojua Obama alitumia mbinu ya kutafuta sapoti ya wanachama wapya – hususan vijana na wafanyakazi. Swali je Obama na timu yake wangekuwa Tanzania wangeruhusiwa kugombea?

Mfano huu wa Marekani utatusaidia vipi kuelewa hali ya sasa hivi? Chama chochote nchini si tu CHADEMA ni lazima iwe tayari kufanya yafuatayo ili iendelee kuimarika:

1.       Uwazi mkubwa katika uongozi wake – katika matumizi ya fedha na kadhalika

2.       Ushindani wa wazi katika kuwania uongozi  na kuhakikisha kuwa uongozi uliopo madarakani inaweza kuwa challenged kwa uwazi

3.       Mfumo au utaratibu wa wazi wa kugombea nafasi za uongozi – primaries kwa ngazi zote

Lakini mi si mtaalam wa masuala ya siasa na ninaamini katika vyama vyote wataalam wapo wengi na wasomi wanaoweza kuja na reform ya chama chao ili kurudisha imani miongoni mwao.

Hivyo basi tunachokiona leo hii ndani ya CHADEMA ni changamoto kubwa lakini pia ni nafasi ya kipekee kwa chama hiki kikubwa cha upinzani kuandika historia. Kwani suluhu si kutimuana, “kuvuana nguo”, kuitana majina – hii itafanyika wakati wa mchakato rasmi – ila kwa sasa ni muda wa kujitafakari. Ni nafasi ya kipekee kwa chama hiki kukaa na kutafakari na kupokea ukosoaji wote wa pande zote na kisha kuzifanyia kazi. Huu si wakati wa kurudi kwenye dhana ya zamani ya kusema eti ushindani ni kitu kibaya.  Wananchi wengi nilioongea nao na kuwasiliana nao wanaonyesha hofu na wamekata tamaa wakisema chama hiki kikubwa cha upinzani kikipasuka hakuta kuwa na ushindani wa vyama. Mi binafsi nasema mpaka sasa tamko la Zitto na la Kitila kuwa hawaondoki ndani ya chama na watabaki ni habari njema. Kwani mikwaruzano, na malumbano haya ndani ya chama kinaweza kuimarisha chama kama pande ZOTE zitaweza kutambua kuwa lengo lao kuu hatimaye ni kushika madaraka ya nchi. Na sisi wananchi tutambue kuwa katika ushindani huu hakuna malaika wala shetani, ni mgongano wa mawazo.

Hivyo basi katika ushindani huu ndani au nje ya chama – tujue kuwa ile principle ‘All is fair in love and war” – yaani kila kitu ruksa katika vita na mapenzi – hata hapa hutumika. Ninamaanisha kuwa ili kutwaa madaraka, pande zote zitapanga mikakati, zitajadili njia za kumdhoofisha mpinzani wake, zitatumia njia hata za kutuma ‘majasusi’ wa kisiasa kupata taarifa kuhusu pande wa pili, zitatoa taarifa za uongo za kuchafuana, zitatumia uzushi. Hii pia ni sawa kabisa na si kitu cha ajabu. Tusijidanganye, huu ni ushindani tena mkali. Upande utakaokataa kuwa haifanyi au haitumii mbinu hii utakuwa hausemi ukweli au utapotea bila kujielewa. Siasa ya vyama vingi ni ya ushindani na ushindani si lelemama. Kama kuna mtu anadhani Obama aliingia Ikulu ya Marekani kwa huruma, na kambi yake haikutumia mbinu na hila basi anajidanganya. Kama mtu anafikiri kuwa Magreth Thatcher aliongoza Uingereza kama waziri mkuu kwa sababu waingereza walimwonea huruma, wajue wamepotoka. Kama mtu anafikiri Tony Blair au David Cameron waliingia madarakani kutokana na ujana wao tu, wanahitaji kusoma zaidi historia. Viongozi wote hawa wameshika madaraka kutokana na kuwa walijiandaa mapema tena kwa SIRI, walikuwa na timu kali iliyowapangia mikakati yao ya ndani ya siri. Kuna wataalam wa mikakati yaani political strategists ambao wanafanya hii kazi kitaalam na huajiriwa na kambi za wagombea ili kuwaandikia mikakati. Hii si kitu cha ajabu na muda umefika hata sisi Tanzania tuwe tayari kuona ukweli kuwa pande zote husika katika siasa zetu, ndani na nje ya vyama vya siasa hutumia mbinu na hila. Kusema eti kambi fulani haiitumii mbinu na hila ni uongo, wako katika ushindani mkali wa kudhoofishana machoni mwa wanachama wao. Hivyo utasikia kambi moja inamwita mgombea mtarajiwa wa kambi nyingine “msaliti”, kambi nyingine inamwita mgombea mtarajiwa wa pande wa pili “mbadirifu”.  Lakini lazima wakiri hatimaye kuwa wanachogombania ni madaraka. Angalau katika mkutano wao na waandishi wa habari, Zitto na Kitila wamekuwa wa kweli na kukiri hilo. Pande wa pili pia ifanye hivyo ili sasa ushindani wa wazi uanze. Lakini pia ikumbukwe kuwa katika harakati hizi chama kitakachokinzana na CHADEMA yaani CCM inatumia fursa hii kuwadhoofisha – na itaendeleza ushindani huu wa kutwaa uongozi wa ndani ya chama na kuukuza. Na hii pia ni sehemu ya ushindani wa kisiasa. Hatutakiwi kukataa au kujidanganya katika hili.

Kitu ambacho sikubali kabisa ni pale watu wanapojaribu kusema eti “hii ni Tanzania, hatuendi hivyo”. Mi naomba nijibu hiyo hoja – demokrasia na mfumo wa vyama vingi havikutungwa Tanzania. Kama tumekubali kutumia huo mfumo tufuate kama ilivyolengwa. Vinginevyo turudi kwenye uchifu. Tanzania tunaweza kujenga jamii ya kidemokrasia  na itajengwa na SISI wananchi na si wanasiasa. Kwa sababu wanasiasa wako bize kutwaa madaraka - mwanasiasa yoyote yule – tusidanganyike! Hivyo basi sisi wananchi tukiwa kama wanachama wa vyama, kama wapiga kura, tuhakikishe tunakuwa mashabiki wa demokrasia na uwazi kwanza na si mashabiki wa vyama na wanasiasa. #ChangeTanzania

Maisha kwanza, kesi baadae!

Kama kawaida, nilikuwa napata masimulizi ya hapa na pale katika saluni – na nilisimuliwa jinsi mama daktari wa kujitolea mgiriki alivyofariki dunia, jijini Dar, chanzo na mtiririko wa matukio.

Hii ni simulizi na si habari iliyothibitishwa. Kwa kifupi mama huyu mgiriki alikuwa anatembea Ali Hassan Mwinyi Road na vibaka walipita na gari na kuvuta begi lake la mgongoni (back pack) na kumburuza mita kadhaa na gari. Hatimaye walichukua begin a kumwacha huyu mama. Sehemu hii imethibitishwa – ni kweli ilitokea. Ila sasa nilichoendelea kusimuliwa ni kuwa wagiriki wenzake walihangaika tokea saa 12jioni hadi saa 2 usiku wakijaribu kupata form ya polisi – kwani bila hiyo fomu hupokelewi hospitalini. Walifika hospitali ya Aga Khan saa 2 lakini pamoja na kujitahidi kwa madaktari wenzake wagiriki (ambao waliamua kuingia katika harakati za kumwokoa) lakini mama huyu alifariki.

Katika simulizi hii yote kilichonisikitisha ni kuwa mtu anapopata ajali ni lazima apate fomu ya polisi kabla ya kutibiwa! Hii si sawa! Nimewahi kushauriwa na polisi afisa mmoja na hata leo saluni walinishauri “Ukikuta mtu kagongwa barabarani, usihangaike kusimama. Utasumbuliwa na unaweza ukakuta kesi inakugeuka” Hii haiingi akilini! Hivi kweli tumefikia hatua ya kuacha binadamu wenzetu wakivuja damu barabarani kwa sababu ya sheria mbovu? Hivi kweli tumeshindwa kushinikiza bunge, serikali nk kwamba sheria hii ibadilishwe! Mtu ambaye amepatwa na ajali hata awe mhalifu ana haki ya kupata huduma ya kwanza!  Na mtu yeyote asibugudhiwe atakampomfikisha mtu aliyejeruhiwa hospitalini, bali waendelee kuchukua maelezo yake huku mgonjwa akiendelea kupata huduma ya kwanza. Okoa maisha kwanza! Suala hili mi binafsi nitalifuatilia lakini naamini ni jukumu letu sote kuhakikisha sheria hii inafutwa na badala yake uwekwe utaratibu mzuri ambao utathamini maisha ya mwananchi wa Tanzania, kuliko kesi ya polisi. 

Mgomo wa madaktari na kuthaminiwa kwa wasomi

Mgomo huu wa madaktari wa mwaka 2012 ambayo sasa iko katika awamu ya tatu imejadiliwa kwa kirefu na kwa kiina na wengi na mimi sitapenda kutoa chanzo, sababu nk. Ila ningependa kuongelea mada moja ambayo nimeshawahi  kuigusia kwenye blog hii ya IMHO inayohusu utawala wa walio wa kati au uwezo mdogo. Kwa kifupi wale wenye ujuzi na uwezo huwekwa pembeni katika mfumo ambao upo sasa wa kiutawala na uendeshaji kwa ujumla.

Lakini kibaya zaidi mufmo mzima unaonekana kutothamini usomi na ujuzi. Tukiwasikiliza kwa makini madaktari, walimu na wasomi wengine – tunasikia wakisema “sisi mshahara wetu ni …. Na mbunge ambaye hata hajamaliza darasa la saba anapata milioni 10” Tunaweza kuleta mjadala mkubwa kuhusu sentensi hii na kuwaita waroho, au tukawaambia hakuna kinachowasimamisha kugombea ubunge. Lakini tukifanya hivyo tutakuwa hatujaelewa kile kilichojificha katika sentensi hii.

Katika dunia ya leo hasa hapa nchini – tunaweka thamani ya mtu kwa kupima kipato chake. Huu ni ukweli tupende tusipende. Mara ngapi unasikia watu wanasema “Mtu anajiona wa maana kumbe anapanda daladala” . Au “Fulani anajisikia, kumbe anaishi ….” Sentensi kama hizi zinaonyesha wazi kwamba ili ukubalike kuwa una mafanikio katika jamii yetu tunatarajia mtu awe na gari na anaishi maeneo Fulani, akivaa nguo za aina Fulani nk. Kwa kifupi jamii yetu imebadilika na hivi sasa tumekuwa nchi ya walaji (Consumer society) ingawa kama nchi hatuzalishi kile tunachotamani (hatuna viwanda vya magari, nguo, nk). Sasa basi kumiliki gari, nyumba, mavazi etc yanahiitaji pesa. Hivyo kama daktari anashindwa kuendesha Range Rover Vogue, lakini mfanyabiashara aliyeishia darasa la saba akiweza, je hii ni kusema tutamheshimu zaidi mfanyabiashara? Inaelekea ndivyo madaktari wanavyoona. Na kwa Bahati mbaya kwa kuwaambia “kama hamjaridhika ondokeni” – imekuwa kama kuwathibitishia imani yao hii.

Ni vyema tukianza kuthamini watu kwa UJUZI wao na si kwa MALI zao. Kumiliki gari kubwa au nyumba kubwa inaweza ikakufanya uishi kwa starehe zaidi lakini haikuongezi akili au ujuzi. Na pia kama jamii tuache dharau kwa watu. Hata kama mtu hamiliki mali nyingi, tuthamini vipaji, ujuzi na elimu yao. Lakini muhimu zaidi, muda umefika mfumo wote uanze kuthamini kwa pesa na kuwazawadia wale wenye ujuzi na si kuwajali ‘wajanja’.

Utatuzi wa mgomo huu na kutoridhika kwa wasomi ni suala ambalo ni vyema sote tukaitafakari na tukianza kubadilika kimawazo – Change Tanzania! 

We are entitled to our opinion but not to our own facts IMHO

Recently I have noted, online and in the media, the proliferation of articles, blog entries, commentaries that touch on historical facts with blatant distortion shrouded at times in half baked information and often drawing on ‘wacky’ conspiracy theories.

A few of us on Twitter started a conversation on this in particular about Freemasonry. Yet it appears many people do not understand the significance of this misrepresentation of historical facts and propagation of false ‘myths’ and at times outright racist/misogynistic distortions.  

Let us take this issue of Freemasonry. Today many Tanzanians have been made to believe that Freemasons are everywhere in Tanzania, they are bloodsuckers, they have to kill humans as rites of passage, they control the world and every successful and rich person is a Freemason etc.

Two historians – Michael Baignent and Richard Leigh have done extensive research about Freemasonry and had an interesting take on so called myths and history. They argue that if propagated for long – such myths or fallacies eventually become the ‘truth’ and eventually history. 

“The lies of a people or a culture... – hyperbole, the exaggeration and embellishment, even the outright falsification and invention – are not purely gratuitous. On the contrary, they bear witness to underlying wants … lacks .. dreams and ..overcompensation. .. And to that extent they serve to crystallize a collective identity or self definition, they create a new truth – or create something which becomes true.” – Michael Baignet & Richard Leigh “The Temple and the Lodge”

So when for those of us who are aware of historic facts that are documented and researched, keep quiet while fallacies and lies are propagated we are guilty of ‘creating a new truth’ that is difficult to eventually undo.

Recently I was outraged when a blogger claimed that homosexuality (new ‘strain’) started in 14^th century. I demanded the retraction of this because it is a blatant lie, deliberate distortion of documented facts. Instead of debating this and citing sources and even links, the author spent time trying to bend the conversation his way by 1. Trying to imply that I am defending homosexuality for ‘conflict of interest’ (whatever that means!) 2. It is his opinion that he is entitled to 3. He is citing ‘independent’ history

I withdrew from that discussion and refuse to take part in any discussion that is based on fallacies and seeks to be self –prophesying  ‘truth’. We should all as Tanzanians – educated and armed with enough knowledge - work on ensuring that any distortion, fallacy, lie is faced with rigid unbending principled stand. There is no ‘ifs’ ‘buts’.

Let us imagine that a prominent American media commentator would start a discussion saying that “Tanzania got its independence in 1980 only one year before Zimbabwe therefore it will go down the same path like Zimbabwe”. And when we argue that Tanzania it got its independence in 1961, he would respond “It’s my opinion I am entitled to it! So do you agree that Tanzania will go down same path as Zimbabwe or not?”! Ridiculous, we would say. Well this is what is happening right now here with silly articles about Freemasonry, homosexuality and other subjects!

So I want to emphasize that - we are entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts, IMHO

slimcony on change Tanzania: Migongano baina ya wazanzibari na watanganyika hai...

slimcony on change Tanzania: Migongano baina ya wazanzibari na watanganyika hai...: Interraction baina ya wazanzibari na watanganyika haikuanza baada ya muungano mwaka 1964. Kwa mujibu ya wazee waliotutangulia, wanadai, hapo...

Volunteerism and Philanthropy in Tanzania

Recently I was honored to be part of a unique philanthropic action of Flaviana Matata when she donated 500 life vests to the government agency – Marine Services Limited in Mwanza. What struck me was that this young girl was taking a different approach from her peers and even others. Usually our philanthropists who would raise funds from others or be guests of honors and buy auctioned items etc. But the fact that Flaviana personally ordered the life vests paid for everything until the delivery of the life vests to Mwanza makes this action unique. It shows a very focused and personal involvement in her charity activity. And that got me thinking.

If Flaviana would not have acquired the true spirit of volunteerism from her time as Miss Universe Tanzania she would probably have continued to look at any charity activity as simply making an event and raising funds. So philanthropy is volunteerism taken to a higher level once the individual is in position to spend not only his/her time but money as well. But the dedication, involvement and focus have to remain in order to make any philanthropy matter.

One of the most important thing that we need to instill in our young ones is the spirit of volunteerism. This has to be nurtured and cannot be forced. It is important also that when steering the young ones toward taking on volunteer actions that they should have a personal dedication to the given cause. We cannot force them to be active in environment when they do not understand or truly identify with the cause.

But most importantly is that we need to make them understand that volunteerism does not involve any financial or material gain. It is done for achieving the objective of the cause and nothing more. The earlier we instill this in them the better – before they learn what money can buy and before their head is filled by us that ‘nothing is for free in life’

Health awareness and Media

Today I attended a meeting named: “The Promotion of Health Awareness in Tanzania through Media” organized by international media namely RFI, Deutsche Welle, VOA, PRB and Broadcasting Board of Governors. It was a well attended meeting and many interesting inputs, however I had two important observations that I wanted to share with you all.

First and most important is “Who is driving the agenda on health?” Oftentimes we hear as we did today that “health news in media does not sell.” For this reason, all of us in the media tend to seek a ‘partner’ who will fund such stories because we claim, covering it from our own budget is “not worth it”. For this reason we find that often the agenda is driven by the donors and government who fund such programs for one reason or another. What we end up with is stories and reports that reflect such agenda thus a regular viewer may face a barrage of news about HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria or whichever disease or health issue is the ‘trendy’ topic among the donors and other funding bodies. Naturally stories like these do NOT sell because the primary audience is not the viewer or reader or listener but the funding party. IMHO

In order to make health news interesting and sellable, we need to come up with programs, articles, reports that focus on the viewers, readers and listeners. Health is important to everyone and I am convinced that however ‘poor’ we may deem a common mwananchi, they are ready to pay whatever they have, for good health. As we know and probably have seen, heard or experienced, in the unfortunate case of disease people are ready to sell assets and spend their wealth to regain health. Now if we can device an exchange whereby people are able to get information albeit for a small fee then immediately health related news and information will become not only sellable but ‘hot-selling commodity’ IMHO

Now of course this begs the question – how can we do that? I certainly have some ideas but of course in the spirit of this new shift – nothing is for free ;-)