'It's high time Zimbabweans demand rival politicians be given platform to debate'

With the last election now water under the bridge and the next election still far off the political horizon it is prudent upon us to start questioning the calibre of the people we gave the stewardship of our lives and judge them accordingly so that come 2018 we don't fall into the same rut that has compounded our misery.

Indeed, as we approach the New Year, this is the right time to take stock of the achievements or lack thereof by the people who we dutifully gave the mandate to steer this limping economy to recovery.

Are you sure that when you put your X on the ballot, it was beside the person that you believed would add value to the fortunes of this country? Or yours was a decision borne of that imbecilic premonition of choosing a candidate simply because he or she belongs to a party that takes your fancy?

If we use the public choice theory, we can easily see that the Zimbabwean voting pattern is largely based on inherent tribal and collective realism rather than individual analysis. This trammels all efforts of economic development because even if a preferred candidate has no political acumen compared to the rival politician, he will still be chosen.

That also brings me to one aspect of democracy that is lacking in our society which we seriously need to effect in our body politick above all partisan biases.That is the issue of political debates of candidates before elections. A lively debate is undoubtedly the hallmark of a democracy.

Although debates are almost non-existent on the entire African continent, South Africa did try this ahead of the 2014 elections. This was a good starting point towards true democracy but we all know that the debates were confined to the lower echelons of the political strata, not the presidential candidates.

It is high time that Zimbabweans demand that rival politicians be given a platform to debate and articulate their vision for the country's future once they are voted into political office.

This way we will get to know our politicians at a more significant level that makes us make informed decisions on where to put our Xs come election day.

Here in the US debates of candidates; from presidents to governors to mayors, have helped voters determine if they have the right candidates. Political debates in the US were first initiated between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas in 1858  for a senatorial seat. Since then they have become a permanent feature of the political playfield.

Imagine a debate between Morgan Tsvangirai and President Robert Mugabe, trading intellectual barbs. Or Welshman Ncube debating with Dumiso Dabengwa or Simba Makoni.

That way, we would get to know who has the right ideas to take Zimbabwe to the next level. Zimbabweans must demand the right to hear their leaders debate because this is a corner stone to a democratic society that is not only progressive but informed.

Right now some people are asking who is Phelekezela Mphoko? If he had been subjected to intense debate, say with some other VP hopefuls or even Emmerson Mnangagwa himself, we wouldn't be having all these questions and assumptions.

Right now when we look at the calibre of the people we threw into the political dustbins you begin to wonder whether our choices were well informed or they were merely based on mere conjecture.

Not only do debates bring out the best in politicians but since they put the spotlight on the candidates, their dark inner secrets, if they exist, are ushered out by those who know the candidates at a personal level.

Somewhere out there, among the more than 10 million residents of Zimbabwe is an astute leader who can take the country to the next level. But without a robust mechanism that encourages unfettered debate our democracy will remain fledgling but never well-defined.

Political debates will remove the wool from our eyes and we will begin to see that the sky is really blue.