Lusambo: loyalty and bootlicking are not the same!

Bowman Lusambo claims loyalty and bootlicking are the same. They are not. Loyalty is commitment to something, someone in a more noble, principled way. Loyalty is the state or quality of being loyal; faithfulness to commitments or obligations. It is

faithful adherence to a sovereign, government, leader, cause, and so on and so forth. And this, in itself, is not bad or wrong. Bootlicking is, in itself, bad, wrong.

Bootlicking is to seek the favour or goodwill of in a servile, obsequious or degraded way; toady to. How can bootlicking, which is synonymous with abject, adulatory, bowing, brownnosing, compliant, cowering, crawling, cringing, flattering, ingratiating, kowtowing, mealy-mouthed, parasitic, prostrate, scraping, sniveling, spineless, sycophantic, be a good thing, something one should be proud of? How can behaving like a sycophant toward someone be a good thing, a virtue?

How can attempting to win favour from the President, influential person by flattery be something one should be proud of?

Bootlicking politicians like Bowman pose a very serious danger to our politics. Bootlicking is a dangerous trend in politics as it results in people seeking favours, whilst at the same time blocking objective thinking and informed discourse. Bootlickers hardly look at things objectively because their main goal is to please their paymaster, the appointing authority, the President at any cost. Elements like Bowman would like everyone to look at Edgar as God chosen, a divine appointee whose decisions and actions are beyond reproach.

But Bowman is not alone in this sycophancy. This very dangerous culture of sniveling is being nurtured in the Patriotic Front to the detriment of the country. Today, servile self-seeking flatterers such as Bowman are praising Edgar’s God anointed leadership, but this culture is likely to lead to the nation’s failure because bootlickers never criticise or correct their masters; they want to be warmhearted to them all the time. The truth is there is no way things are going to go well in this country when most members of the ruling Patriotic Front are comfortable being praise singers, worshippers of Edgar rather than paying attention to the political administration and economic management of the country.

It is said that bootlicking reflects awkward and uncultivated behaviour which has the potential to throw the country into political and economic abyss. What we need are politicians who have spine and possess good ideas, ministers and members of the Patriotic Front central committee who do not easily submit to Edgar’s wishes, but are ready to criticise him so that he see things in realistic terms and then lead us away from the current problems bedeviling the nation.

From Bowman’s own confessions about being Edgar’s bootlicker number one, it is clear that his ascendancy to any office is entirely dependent upon Edgar whom he bootlicks, for without him, he is nothing, he cannot be anything. But bootlickers like Bowman who fawn on Edgar day in day out have one goal: to be safely ensconced in the corridors of power for access to material resources and influence at the expense of the majority. Seeking personal interest at the expense of national interest will only result in the destruction the country. This culture has to be nipped in the bud because apart from stifling proper discourse, it also leads to the establishment of a culture of fear as those who criticise Edgar face victimisation or become derision to the country.

Our country must trod back to the rudimentary and pristine ethics on which it was founded by Kenneth Kaunda and his comrades. Failure to do so might result in our politics being totally reduced to the kind of activity in which people feel they have to bootlick in order to get ahead.

Bootlickers like Bowman expect us to see no evil in Edgar whom they would want us to treat like a demi-god when he is nothing but a little evil ogre. It is shocking how Bowman and his ilk do not understand that criticising Edgar does not mean hatred toward him, but is simply a way of evaluating or analysing the best possible outcomes for the common good of our country. They must learn to embrace criticism and critics because they aid in pointing out the right way, not bootlickers who contribute nothing to the cause of the country.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *