This article was first published by Business Day on 8 July 2024
Much like the notion of increased unity, which seems to be an ever-present feature of our political discourse, the ideal of greater efficiency in government is being touted as a virtue which would represent an unalloyed good in our society. Yet, while it seems at first glance evident that both of these concepts are inherently desirable, merely accepting such a conclusion neglects to ask the vital questions of what it is that politicians are uniting around and what are the actions that they would perform more effectively?
Far too much of our discussions surrounding the newly formed Government of National Unity in South Africa and the Cabinet that will govern under it have centred on who will be implementing policy, whereas considerations of what it is that they will be pursuing have been almost entirely absent.
Put plainly, it is not so much that unity and efficiency are necessary but insufficient ingredients to a government which allows for economic growth, prosperity, and self-actualisation, but rather that when aimed at improper outcomes they could – in fact – be harmful.
Commentators, political analysts, and journalists must, therefore, guard against the all too tempting instinct to have their work devolve into little more than the political version of gossip columns. Recent reports of fighting between parties and politicians have already begun to adopt a tone of scandalous he-said-she-said rumourmongering with the calming reassurance that we’re merely indulging the most sophisticated and important forms of scuttlebutt.
Another (far more sensible) online trend is the adulation of cats – videos of which seem to more than outweigh any possible harms associated with the proliferation of social media. While we are on the topic, we would do well to remember the famous insight of a particular literary feline. In the Lewis Caroll classic, Alice in Wonderland, the following interchange encapsulates as well as any other explication the importance of orienting our efforts before finding the most effective means by which to achieve them:
Alice asked the Cheshire Cat, who was sitting in a tree, “What road do I take?” The cat asked, “Where do you want to go?” “I don’t know,” Alice answered. “Then,” said the cat, “it really doesn’t matter, does it?”
Our discourse has likewise been dominated by debates over who should be executing various functions and the implications thereof regarding who is winning political battles, instead of engaging in discussions about the destination we have in mind when evaluating developments.
The Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences, James M Buchanan once referred to public choice theory – a field of economics which he had largely pioneered – “as politics without romance” and it seems to me that our politics could certainly do with a healthy quelling of any romantic impulses.
The Free Market Foundation recently released its proposed policy agenda for the new parliamentary term wherein we argue for policies that would, amongst other things, reduce the size of government, protect property rights, promote free trade, and focus on cutting unnecessary and harmful regulation.
We believe it to be objectively true that those countries that liberalise their economies, jealously protect private property rights, uphold the rule of law, have open trade with the rest of the world, guard against devaluation of their currencies, and have lean, unintrusive government bureaucracies, also have the best human development outcomes. But perhaps more than anything we believe that such ideas should be open to debate and, moreover, should be debated.
We don’t all have to agree on which policies we believe would best promote a flourishing and prosperous society, but can’t we all agree that it’s at least a conversation worth having? What’s more, does anyone believe that the central question of policy or of what road the government wants take was an integral consideration in establishing the Cabinet? Did anyone care to ask?
Regardless of which social, political, or economic policies one is hoping to advance, or which goals one wishes to prioritise, having our political discussions tethered to specific ideas rather than particular individuals would be far more fruitful.
