UNDENIABLY, the recent Public Affairs Committee (PAC) meeting at Limbe Cathedral and its subsequent resolution has made a tremendous contribution to the two-years-old dormant revolution now the hottest topic in the media, especially the social media. Additionally, it is common knowledge that the revolution discourse in Malawi has gained its fresh momentum with insights from the Arab Spring, effectively moving it from its initial quiet stage to its current violent stage, if, and only if, the latest frequency and significance of its talk is anything to go by.
Surprisingly, what is missing from the revolution discourse is discussants failure, or say, oversight to name which part, if any, of the Malawi population has the high moral ground, the conviction, and the will to see the revolution through. Always; yes, always, the revolution talk has centred on who gets what when the revolution is actually done, before getting themselves boggled down with the more important question: “who will do the revolution?”.
The assumption here has been that those who talk about the revolution are the ones to do the revolution. Stop it! Those who initiate the revolution are never actual participants of the revolution. On the contrary, they are at best, planners, and always at worst, reapers of the revolution. They galvanise the revolution participants into action while they are inside the comfort of their homes listening to what is transpiring in the revolution on the radio, updating each other on the phones, waiting to reap the sweat of the poor, wretched revolutionists!
But who are these non-participating revolution-talkers? Your guess is as good as mine; these people are the civil society leaders, political party leaders, tycoons, top-notch individuals in society, and what have you, all aiming at hijacking the revolution. It is annoying to note that, either due to naivety, the longing to see just a change, or a wired mentality to take as gospel-truth 'solutions' from above, those that actively participate in the revolution do not question the decision that follow, at least a week immediately after the revolution.
You might ask, “but who are the revolutionists?”. Well, these are your aunties, uncles, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, grandmothers and fathers, friends, and relatives in the villages, mark me right here; these uneducated wise people in the villages, who mostly are subsistence farmers with no gainful employment, using the Agogo-economics, Malume-leadership, and street politics.
These are the revolutionists because when they want to effect a change in their life, they always are not motivated by anything outside them, but rather, something inside. They would participate in the revolution, not because some local or international moneyed, self-acclaimed democrat will pat them in the back, but because that is what they strongly feel they want--something intrinsic. Nor will they participate hoping some carrot will be dangled, No!, but will passionately do the revolution for the revolution's sake, and nothing else.
The local masses are a people who, when circumstances push them, do not have the word 'flinch' in their dictionary, and would advance forward till victory. All what is needed now is unlocking the local masses' doors to self-awareness and the invigoration of their untapped revolutionary people power.
However, civic educating the local masses of their power to bring political, government, and non-governmental leaders to task should they deem them incapable is frustratingly a tall order. This remains a tall order for the next 20 years or so largely because most of the government and non-government organizations claiming to civic educate the local masses of their power to change their life and the environment around them have done so strictly shallowly, and almost always during elections and when it is closest to elections. Then one wonders of the impact such exercises would have to the deep-rooted lack of self-confidence in the local masses themselves!
What is heartbreaking, however, is the painful fact that these revolutionists do not know, if they do, they do underrate their collective revolutionary potential. This means therefore that they are unaware of their people power. And because they are unaware of their coveted potential and no one or organization seems to care, it also means that they cannot initiate a revolution.
All what it remains is them following a revolution. Because they do not share the revolutions organized by educated working class individuals, the local masses tend to participate in the revolution the least or there about. Their impassionate participation is as a result of miscommunication between the organizers and the local masses in terms of what really is the cause of the revolution and the organizers' direct and indirect excusal to physically participate in the events leading to the revolution.
The outcome of this situation is a revolution-dry Malawi, at least up until 2032 when the local Malawi masses will have realized of their people power to make state, political, and organization leaders dance to their music. It is only until Abiti Matiya, that granny in the remotest villages in Machinga district, know that she is the boss to the state establishment will a revolution be possible in Malawi. Till at least 20 years from now, and till then, no revolution in Malawi.