False Political Narratives and the Social Media’s Role in Promoting them

By Agar Mayor Gai-Makoon

South Sudan social media environment is infested with misinformation, hate speech and false political narratives. What is even alarming about this new found problem is how it is increasingly causing hatred, division and emotional breakdown to the victims. Imagine sharing a bad image, or misconstruing someone’s message for comic purposes or personal gain, and making them go viral.

You are not only making social media space a tool for misinformation and defamation, but also putting lives of the victims at a greater risk. Like a virus, misinformation and lies can thrive very well outside their original context. Moreover, for a nascent republic as South Sudan, the devastating effect of this virality has always gone unpunished prompting much more misuse and abuse of social media spectrum.

Many analysts and opinion writers including this author have written about social media misuse many times. And even with that, the trend keeps increasing day by day. More fascinating about this trend is how politicians and prominent figures in the country have also joined in and are using the social media platforms to either progress their political interests or for activism purposes. And basically, this is the purpose for this particular article today.

Some local politicians are very difficult to understand, given the fact that their political perspectives change with employment circumstances. Someone who has been relieved from office has a distinct perspective on the workings of government from the active postholder even when they are from the same party. In political terms, there is an ongoing crisis between individualism and collectivism in South Sudan. We can mirror this crisis in the actions of our politicians. While in government, they presume to be working for the party and the country. Contrarily, when they are relieved of their duties, their eagle eyes now open and are able to examine failures of the government. Though not all politicians have found themselves in this sociopolitical problem, political shift towards individualism is rising and with the aid of social media, it is determined to spread across all South Sudan political spectrum if nothing is done by the parties especially, the ruling party. The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement should revise its direction and if need be, re-train political cadres to always be loyal to the party and its ideology regardless of employment.

Patterns of false or not political narratives in South Sudan

Various political narratives have been in our social media spaces for so long. Some have already been bought, consumed, digested and used or passed out as a waste. While others are still in the market waiting and ready to be sold. I will examine only two, namely; remembering and honoring sacrifices of the heroes and heroines who fought for this country, and most recently the analogy of wun wong aken ben. These two political narratives are very critical, and they were stated by prominent politicians and generals.

Last year, in the funeral ceremony of late Gen. Bior Ajang, a prominent figure both during the liberation, transitional period and postindependence times, echos of neglect and suffering of freedom fighters were heard from almost every mourner. But what stood out was the furious and emotional speech from Gen. Garang Mabil, who is also a liberator and obviously among the neglected group, calling on his liberation colleagues who are now in the government to remember them and what they fought for.

This was not only a genuine call, but is also as per the constitutional parameters of South Sudan. It is clearly viewed as a mandate of the government to remember martyrs, honor the struggle and take care of heroes and heroines. We find this mandate right in the preamble of the transitional constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011. In the preamble, there’s ” Recalling our long and heroic struggle for justice, freedom, equality and dignity in South Sudan”, and ” Remembering and inspired by the selfless scarifices of our martyrs, heroes and heroines”. The basic interpretation of this piece is that while recalling the past, the promises of the hard-earned freedom must be fulfilled. And for that information, all our political parties should derive the foundation of their ideologies from here. Garang Mabil’s call was not just about freedom fighters. It was an urge to revisit struggle and examine how it connects with the present state of affairs, for it must truly connect.

Additionally, it’s been two weeks now since another political narrative flooded all Facebook feeds for South Sudanese online community. Wun wong aken ben came from another prominent figure, Hon. Ateny Wek, the former Press Secretary in the Office of the President, when Hon. Adut Kiir was appointed as the presidential envoy for special programs. The “wun wong aken ben” analogy is an Aliab Dinka proverb that is widely used across all Dinka communities to describe the relationship between ownership and action. It denotes that when you are the center of something, expecting no much help or lesser action from someone than you would, obvious mean that you will take a very swift and immediate action. Because you do it with the thinking that just as it is solely yours, its consequences are also yours alone.

However, protection and preservation of president’s legacy does not fall in this category of items that can be solely owned and protected by an individual or family, not even the cabinet. Public opinions, historians and journalists are the custodians of president’s legacy or work and achievements during his tenure. It’s something that is seen and felt by everyone. Take for example, president Kiir’s legacy of liberating South Sudan. It’s already in the history books, and we have South Sudan as an independent nation. If there are other achievements, they should follow a similar pattern, and no single government official will ever hide or deny them.

And even if Hon. Ateny was referring to shaping future legacy or making more achievements for president Kiir’s government, the analogy is still misplaced for the following reason; it is difficult or at least for constitutional reasons impossible, for a sector to perform well without dictate of the president. Part Six, article 101 (b), states clearly that the president shall supervise constitutional and executive institutions and provide exemplary leadership in public affairs. Here, it means that the president can work with constitutional postholders and fulfil his mandate. It does not matter whether his relative or whosoever, so long the person will be committed to the agenda of president which is always to serve the people. Hon. Adut’s position is part of the offices that the president supervises. Thus, Hon. Ateny’s argument would have made much sense if the position gives Hon. Adut Kiir more supervising powers over other institutions, much like a co-president.

The writer has a background in sociopolitical philosophy. He currently studies medicine at Ain Shams university, Cairo, Egypt. He can be reached on +201129107334, or thieng.thiengwada@gmail.com.