The debates on neo liberalism and revolutionary democracy in Ethiopia

BY Tadesse H.
tadeth@gmail.com

At the height of the 2010 election debates, there is always the big issue that needed to be resolved by the ballot box. It is whether the country is better off with any of the two major political views once known as the leading ideologies that separated the face of the world. The remnants of socialism have developed into a face saving strategy of taking the time to achieve the goals of capitalism by curbing their own theory with a home grown approach. The theme is about adopting a revolutionary form of democracy until the time comes to practice the neo liberal vision of the west. While the ruling party, the EPRDF adheres to the procedural progressive method of developing its own constituents, the opposition parties spearheaded by EDEPA’s Lidetu Ayalew, do not hesitate to openly admire the neo liberal ideals to the extent of crediting even the food stamp system for the unemployed to prove the humanist approach of the neo liberals toward their own poor. It seemed like he knew a lot more about the American dream than most in America; the reason why he, like his peers, thinks neo liberalism can be as good as it gets to any sub Saharan countries.

Comparing Ethiopia to the neighboring countries like Kenya, Sudan, Uganda and even Somalia made it easy for the opposition to prove their points of how giving away what the ruling party thinks a matter of sovereignty, created business opportunities that widely improved the technological aspects of those countries. EPRDF likes to enjoy its own view about the rest of Africa by underscoring the major impediments of the sub Sahara countries that unconditionally adopted the full version of free market economy. It is undeniably true that the ruling party has introduced free market economy not long after it assumed power with the notion that selling away all the major economic sectors of the country to foreign investors should be handled with care. That is why the government is fully engaged in micromanaging the major departments like the electric power, telecommunication, education, and defense technology, among others. It is worried about the profits from the investments going outside rather than being reinvested in the country. Mr Bereket, the EPRDF representative, openly explained the impact that kind of policy by other African countries has had on their economy, which he claims has not showed impressive progress for quite a while. On the other hand, the opposition insists micromanaging the major sectors is a government monopoly that can hinder the economic progress because of lack of involving diversified business prospects to privately support select parts of the huge sectors. That way, it can improve employment and enhance home grown expertise to contribute to the economic growth.

I believe, taking the reality on the ground into consideration, mainly the fact that Ethiopia is 80% rural economy, it is an undeniable fact that the political choices of the country’s visionaries should strive to create a formula where bringing about equality between the rural and urban economies becomes a possibility in a short run. Only then can the country have a good feel for how vibrant its economy can be. The debates are evidently a good way of helping people get a clearer view of what is good for them. It is not only a good start but the tradition should bloom and continue.