The presidential candidate in the government-oriented party, CCM promises to manage the Tanzanite mining projects well as it currently has little benefits to the United Republic of Tanzania. Magufuli emphasises utilisation of Tanzanite as stipulated in the manifesto of CCM (Halmashauri kuu ya Taifa ya CCM, 2015: 24).
97
CCM speech segment 7
MAGUFULI: (1) Hakuna sababu madini kama tanzanite, nchi inayoongoza kuuza madini ya Tanzanite kwanza India, ya pili Kenya, halafu sisi tunakua wa 3 wakati madini hayo hayachimbwi nchi hizo wakati yanaitwa ni tanzanite. (2) Haya nitayaangalia nione ni mahali gani kuna tundu la upenyo linalotufanya tukose haya mapato sisi Tanzania.
[1] There is no compelling reason why Tanzania ranks third in the world in the market of tanzanite. [2] The first is Indi; the second is Kenya, while the mineral is only extracted in Tanzania. [3] I will look into these issues to identify the gap for an income loss from these minerals.
Concerning the first dimension that is argumentation structure, Figure 4.7 in the CCM speech segment 7 demonstrates multiple argument structures (1.1 and 1.2) and subordinative argument structures (1.1, 1.1.1) and (1.2,1.2.1). All arguments support the standpoint on the need to manage well Tanzanite mining contracts and projects. Furthermore, Figure 4.7 presents inductive reasoning since the conclusion is obtained from empirical examination (Van Eemeren et al., 1993). India ranks first; Kenya ranks second; and Tanzania ranks third even though Tanzanite is only extracted in Tanzania. This empirical observation can lead to the conclusion that Tanzanite is not well managed in Tanzania. This is a typical inductively valid argument (Walton, 1987; Hurley, 2012).
98
Figure 4.7 Reconstructed argumentation structure on need for good supervision of Tanzanite mining projects
From the perspective of the second dimension, that is, argumentation schemes, Magufuli uses the argumentation scheme based on an argument by analogy to support the standpoint that mineral extraction projects need to be well supervised. He identifies that, according to the world records, India ranks first, Kenya second, and Tanzania third in the selling market of Tanzanite. This ranking does not make sense to him because Tanzanite is only extracted in Tanzania. Magufuli pledges to investigate why this kind of discrepancy exists. The causal relation argumentation scheme is employed. In Magufuli’s interpretation, poor supervision is the source of such a mismatch between the rank Tanzania has and other countries in terms of selling Tanzanite in the world market.
1 Corruption endangers natural resources.
1.1 Illegal elephant tusks from Tanzania that passed through Dar es Salaam were arrested in Europe. 1.2 It is possible to control tusks as Maasai and Sukuma cows’ horns are managed.
1.3 Airport authorities must be responsible for controlling such coruption.
1.3 The 5th phase government will control such kind of irresponsibility.
1.3.1 The 5th phase
government will improve the benefits of wildlife
management workers. 1.3.1’ Low payments attract
corruption. & Fig ure 0.4 40: Rec onst ruct ed arg um enta tion stru ctur e on nee
99
Relating to the third dimension, that is, topical potential, audience demand, and presentational devices, in the confrontation stage, Magufuli identifies a problem that needs to be resolved. The need for managing the mineral resources sector presupposes previous leaders were not sufficiently competent for this sector. This statement is a negative judgement in the Appraisal theoretical perspective (White, 2011). Employing the commissive speech act (Searle, 1979b), strategically, Magufuli pledges to solve this problem as a way of correcting the mistakes previous leaders made. Minerals are very valuable for the economic development of a country like Tanzania. By identifying that Tanzanite mining benefits little the United Republic of Tanzania, he associates himself with the poor people in the country who have many expectations from the government. Audience demand is a key component of effective rhetoric (Burke, 2014). In the context of Tanzania, in the year 2015, the citizens claimed that they deserved a better living standard, especially from income generating sectors like mining. Thus, putting forward a standpoint to strategise the increase of national income from Tanzanite, Magufuli captures the minds of the audience. Considering Figure 4.7, there are several presentational devices that are presented, evaluated, and analysed in the perspective of the Pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Avoidance is strategically applied. Magufuli does not tell the audience the weakness of the government which leads to his decision to identify the need to supervise mineral resources well. Secondly, he invokes a persuasive persona to present himself as a person intending to help the country to appropriately use its resources.
In the opening stage, Magufuli strategically assumes the role of the protagonist, explaining the need to manage mineral resources for the advancement of the country. He provides justification by admitting that the government has been losing a huge amount of revenue from Tanzanite extraction projects. Magufuli, thus, is the protagonist who defends his standpoint on the need to manage the mineral sector to get more income from mining of, particularly Tanzanite. Development is a common core interest among citizens, whether someone belongs to the opposition party or the ruling party. As Magufuli mentions strategies and the desire to utilise such natural resources, the electorate may perhaps be convinced to vote for him. Magufuli is ready to respond to the unexpressed premises from the public that the government under the CCM is performing up to standard in controlling the natural resources. He strategically associates himself with the public, especially with the opposition party camp, to win the support from the liberal and conservative electorate, that is, those opposing the ruling party and those supporting the ruling party (Zarefsky, 2008).
100
In the argumentation stage, the topic is advanced by suggesting the intensive supervision to get the income Tanzania deserves from Tanzanite. Magufuli creates room for the public sympathy for the natural resources. Thus, he associates himself with especially the economically disadvantaged groups in the struggle to fight for economic freedom. He concludes strategically that he would pursue the matter of investigating why Tanzanian resources are mismanaged. That implies the electorate should vote for Magufuli to provide him with the opportunity to manage contracts and projects in the natural resources of the country. Magufuli provides critical examples that Tanzania ranks third after Kenya and India, who are first and second, respectively. This is the main party of the standpoint on the need to manage well the mineral resources, especially Tanzanite. The presentational device that is exhibited is irony, informing the government that Magufuli is not like the former president, Kikwete, who could not manage natural resources. Furthermore, this is a dissociation strategy, as Magufuli is dissociating himself from the former presidents from the fourth-phase governance who did not perform their duty well to control public resources from being misused by privately-owned mining companies by foreign investors. Magufuli appeals to emotions of the potential electorate with the topic of controlling the Tanzanite extraction. He concludes asking for votes from all that need development for the betterment of the nation. This was a strategy to win conservative and liberal presumptions in the 2015 Tanzanian general elections.
In respect to the fourth dimension of successful observation of the rules for critical discussion, in the speech segment examined from the perspective of the Pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation, various rules are violated. However, given the context in which the election campaigns take place in Tanzania, a more critical approach is needed for the analysis. Magufuli, for instance, observes the freedom rule regarding the public with allegations that the government does not manage well its natural resources. He pledges to take initiatives to rescue Tanzania’s natural resources, but he does that strategically by presenting himself as if he were one of those people who make allegations against the poor performance of the government. It could be contradicting if Magufuli stated that he does not trust the party which nominated him to stand in the national presidential competition against other candidates from the opposition parties. The burden of proof rule is observed as Magufuli proves that there are critical incidences that need serious investigation in the process of controlling the loss of natural resources, particularly Tanzanite. Considering the standpoint rule, the examples Magufuli provides are relevant to the need to supervise natural
101
resources to enable Tanzania to benefit from minerals such as Tanzanite. Maintaining argument schemes relevant to the standpoint, Magufuli succeeds to argue according to the unexpressed premises that the government run by the ruling party (CCM) had not been working up to standard. Magufuli presents himself as a party rescue candidate, thus he argues in a strategy of agreeing with the opposition party views and the citizens in general in the Tanzanian context. Magufuli accepts the starting point that the government had overlooked, among other things, the income the country ought to earn from Tanzanite compared to what it is earning. Therefore, the rules of critical discussion are observed.
Concerning the fifth dimension, that is derailments of critical discussion rules, the only critical observation of fallacies relates to the strategy by Magufuli to conciliate with the public and the opposition party camp that the government of the CCM is not performing up to standard. In contexts where political systems are advanced like in the United Kingdom and in the United States of America, this kind of contradiction within the party could imply the failure of the party, even though the candidate could be strong (Kienpointer, 2013). This facet of the argumentation needs to take shape of African politics, especially in Tanzania where, in practice, the president has much more power than stipulated in the constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. It makes sense if a candidate criticizes his own party in the same capacity, with almost the same views and opinions as the opposition party. However, a ruling party candidate sounds fallacious doing this in the contexts of a multiparty system. The solution is either to convince the candidate to defect to another party with views that he supports. This cannot function if the constitution entails chances that may lead to manipulation of the multiparty system.
Concerning the sixth dimension, that is rhetorical effectiveness and reasonableness, Magufuli presents his argumentation effectively. Several presentational devices, persuasive techniques like invoking personal identity, and stylistic devices such as irony, are employed in making sure that a form of argumentation is appropriately focussed on convincing the potential electorate to accept the political will of Magufuli to manage and utilise Tanzania’s natural resources.
Regarding reasonableness, Magufuli reasonably presents the real situation happening in the mining sector, especially Tanzanite in respect to pragmatic consistency. Furthermore, the argumentation is logically consistent since Tanzania is the only country where Tanzanite is extracted, but the country benefits little from it. For achieving argumentation soundness,
102
appropriate argumentation schemes, such as analogy, causal relation, and symptomatic argumentation are invoked. These logical devices result in the validity of the argumentation represented in Figure 4.7 in the 2015 Tanzanian general election campaign cntext.
4.5 STRATEGIC MANEUVERING IN ARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSE ON IMPROVEMENT OF AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
In Figure 4.8 of the CCM speech segment 8, Magufuli pledges to improve the agricultural sector. His pledge relates to the relevant stipulation in the CCM election manifesto (Halmashauri kuu ya Taifa ya CCM, 2015: 9). Magufuli is aware of land conflicts to farmers. He views that challenge as an opportunity to convince his audience that he will solve problems such as land conflicts (see argument 1.1.1a), agricultural facilities (see argument 1.1.2b), and the government giving less value to agricultural products (see argument 1.1.3c).
CCM speech segment 8
MAGUFULI: (1) Ninafahamu kwa wakulima mnatamani mpate miliki ya ardhi. (2) Mnatamani mpate pembejeo. (3) Mnatamani mpate mbegu za gharama nafuu. (4) Mnatamani mpate masoko ya uhakika na bei nzuri za mazao. (5) Suala la wakulima kuikopesha serikali badala ya serikali kuwakopesha wakulima. (6) Hiyo nawahakikishia itakua historia. (7) Mfano unadhihirisha watu wa Kusini kule wamelima mahindi wanaendelea kukopesha serikali. (8) Serikali iwakopeshe wakulima. (9) Mimi hiyo hapana kabisa! (10) Yaani acha kabisa!
[1] As for you farmers, I know you want to own land. [2] You want to get agricultural inputs. [3]You want to buy seeds at a fair price. [4]You want to get reliable markets and better prices for your crops. [5] The issue of the government to lend crops from the farmers instead of the farmers themselves to lend crops to one another, I assure you that will be history. [6]There is a clear example of people from the Southern part who have grown maize and are continuing to lend the government. [7] Such issues of the government to take crops on a credit basis is not acceptable to me at all. [8] That habit has to be abolished.
Concerning the first dimension that is argumentation structure, the argumentation in Figure 4.8 comprises multiple argument structures (see arguments (1.1.1a, 1.1.1b,1.1.1c) and (1.1.2)), and subordinative argument structure (see arguments (1.1, 1.1.1a, 1.1.1b, 1.1.1c) and (1.1, 1.2.1, and 1.1.2.1)). Figure 4.8 demonstrates inductive reasoning (Van Eemeren et al.,
103
2008). The pledges Magufuli makes in comparison with the current situation amounts to empirical observations that lead to the conclusion of the need to improve the agricultural sector.
Regarding the second dimension, that is the argumentation schemes, the CCM candidate employs pragmatic argumentation. He explicitly asserts that farmers need government support for farming activities. More importantly, invoking pragmatic argumentation combines majority argumentation (Andone, 2015). The example of farmers lending seeds to the government, while the situation is supposed to be vice versa, makes the argumentation represented in Figure 4.8 convincing. Magufuli, therefore, demonstrates a pragmatically consistent opinion that, if the government responsibly assists farmers, the agricultural sector will benefit the citizens tangibly. Given the benefit for the majority of Tanzanians, it is worth Figure 4.8: Reconstructed argumentation structure on need for improvement on agricultural sector
Figure 0.653: Reconstructed argumentation structure on need for improvement on agricultural sector
Figure 0.654: Reconstructed argumentation structure on need for improvement on agricultural sector
Figure 0.655: Reconstructed argumentation structure on need for improvement on agricultural sector 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want to own land. 1.1.1a Farmers want 1.1.3c Farmers want affordable seeds. 1.1.3c Farmers want affordable seeds. 1.1.3c Farmers want affordable seeds. 1.1.3c Farmers want affordable seeds. 1.1.3c Farmers want affordable seeds. 1.1.3c Farmers want 1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1 Magufuli understands the expectations of the citizens.
1.1.2 The government should lend farmers seeds and not vice versa.
1.1.2 The government should lend farmers seeds and not vice versa.
1.1.2 The government should lend farmers seeds and not vice versa.
1.1.2 The government should lend farmers seeds and not vice versa.
1.1.2 The government should lend farmers seeds and not vice versa. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp uts/implements. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp uts/implements. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp uts/implements. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp uts/implements. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp uts/implements. 1.1.1b Farmers want agricultural equipments/inp 1.1.2.1 During Magufuli’s presidency farmers will not lend seeds to the government.
1.1.2.1 During Magufuli’s presidency farmers will not lend seeds to the government.
1.1.2.1 During Magufuli’s presidency farmers will not lend seeds to the government.
1.1.2.1 During Magufuli’s presidency farmers will not lend seeds to the government.
1.1.2.1 During Magufuli’s presidency farmers will not lend seeds to the
1.1.2.1’ Magufuli will solve the problems of farmers.
1.1.2.1’ Magufuli will solve the problems of farmers.
1.1.2.1’ Magufuli will solve the problems of farmers.
1.1.2.1’ Magufuli will solve the problems of farmers.
1.1.2.1’ Magufuli will solve the problems of 1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
1.Farmers need government support.
& Fig ure 0.54 5: Rec onst ruct ed arg ume ntat ion stru ctur e on nee d for
104
for voters to support Magufuli for the successful implementation of farming support that he pledges and, more generally, for the development of the country.
Regarding the third dimension, a selection of topical potential in any argumentative discourse in the Pragma-dilectical perspective determines failure or success of the argumentation. In the confrontation stage, Magufuli strategically identifies a doubt on the by then government to neglect the farmers. He believes the government must the farmers not vice versa. A speech act of assertive is implied in the confrontation stage (Searle, 1979b). Like in many other African countries, in Tanzania, subsistence farming is a generally dependable activity for the survival of many people. Aware of the audience demand, Magufuli capitalises on the need to assist farmers in case he wins the election. Persuasion takes place where a persuader manages with reasons to convince their interactants the way he persuades things is a better way but without having an intent of manipulation (Lakhani, 2005).
The critical doubt about the role of the government in facilitating farming activities is the association strategy. Despite being a member of the ruling party and a minister, Magufuli strategically criticizes the failure of the government to support farmers. This strategic move increases credibility to the audience. Indirectly, Magufuli’s suggestion of the government to support farmers might have an emotional impact as far as the Appraisal perspective is concerned (Martin & White, 2005). In the opening stage, he assumes a protagonist’s role that farmers ought to be assisted. His position as a protagonist intends to appeal to liberal and conservative presumptions. In a surface interpretation, it sounds as a contradiction because Magufuli has been part of previous governments when he served and was still serving a position of a minister. Underlyingly, an interpretation of such an argumentative move is sound because, as a minister, he is not responsible and accountable to all ministries; thus, he had no power to intervene in farming activities. In the argumentation stage, he argues that the government ought to lend seeds to farmers and not farmers lending seeds to the government. He takes that role because over 75% of the Tanzanian population mainly depends on subsistence farming. To support his standpoint, he employs the argumentation scheme by example by demonstrating how typically the government has for so long ignored farmers the to extent of farmers lending seeds to the government.
Also, Magufuli dissociates himself from the ruling party and Kikwete’s government to strategically persuade the audience that what Kikwete’s government overlooked would be adjusted in Magufuli’s government. In an equivalent manner, he utilises a strategy of
105
institutionalisation of persuasive persona. Magufuli portrayed himself as a credible CCM member despite a lot of development inconvenience in the government under the ruling party. So, farming facilitation would be implemented regardless of the government will. This is typical of Tanzanian political campaigns as a communicative activity type. Fundamentally, pledges are supposed to exemplify government policies, party manifestos, and more importantly, the national constitution. Magufuli, aware of the contexts in which he makes his speech, takes advantage of the Tanzanian democracy where individuals may sometimes decide what to do instead of adhering to the rules of the constitution. In addition, he appeals to liberal and conservative presumptions. The 2015 Tanzanian general elections competition, especially when two former Prime Ministers defected to the opposition party camp, CHADEMA/UKAWA. Farming as an economic activity of especially family subsistence