During my mother’s memorial in Mangochi, my aunt was distributing t-shirts at my grandmother’s house, when she fell and fractured both bones in her right leg. They rushed her to the hospital near my home [where my mom passed on], and I quickly rushed over to check on her.
Like most hospital visits, it turned into hours of waiting and conversation.
It was there, in that setting that a question about the economy began to take shape.
Two former Members of Parliament came up in conversation—both known in the area.
One is Victoria Kingstone, who had represented Mangochi Central under the Democratic Progressive Party.
The other is Roza Fatch Mbilizi, who would go on to win the same seat in the 2025 elections.
I have known both women over my life, and have the privilege of calling them both aunt, as they have been friends of my parents.
I asked how the result had turned.
The nurse seated next to me had her explanations:
Roza’s campaign symbol was a maize cob.
Victoria’s was a storage barn.
People saw the maize and voted.
People just want to eat.
There was no mention of manifestos. No reference to policy. No discussion of long-term plans.
At first glance, it reads like a failure of political judgment. It is not.
It is a precise reflection of the conditions under which economic and political decisions are being made.

Delve into Business and International Development with Nthanda Manduwi
Systems Don’t Have to Be Broken to Produce Bad Outcomes
I contemplated not publishing an episode this week [I explain why in the podcast], and then ended up recording my longest episode yet.
And to make up for publishing a little late the past two weeks, I am publishing this a day early. You’re welcome, or I am sorry?
I woke up to a message from a friend sharing a video of President William Ruto demanding Veto power for African nations at the 80th United Nations General Assembly [I happened to be in attendance], and I jumped out of bed and got to writing about my favorite beverage: tea! I also got to pen about slave trade, and colonization, and war [I know, what does any of this have to do with Hibiscus tea??!]
This week’s episode explores one of the central ideas behind the third book in the Lessons Book series – Systemic Nonsense: what if many of the frustrations we experience in institutions are not accidents or failures, but predictable outcomes of how those systems were designed?
It often feels like bureaucracy feels so resistant to change, and that reforms often produce more process than progress. It also seems that good intentions so rarely translate into meaningful outcomes. If you’ve pondered on these thoughts before, then these conversations are for you.
This Week’s Book
📖 Systemic Nonsense [Book 3]
This week only, from 27–31 July, the Kindle edition of Systemic Nonsense is available free as part of its Founders Edition launch.
Systemic Nonsense explores several ideas on international development in much greater depth. It asks a simple question:
What if the system isn’t failing? What if it’s doing exactly what it was designed to do?
Whether you listen, read, or dive into the book, I hope it leaves you asking better questions about the systems we inherit—and the ones we choose to build next.
How to Read
To receive your free Kindle copy:
* Click the Amazon link below.
* Select the Kindle edition while the promotion is active.
* Add it to your Kindle library.
You do not need a Kindle device. The free Kindle app works on iPhone, Android, tablets, Macs, and PCs, allowing you to build your digital library wherever you read.
Helpful Links
📚 Read this week’s book for free [search on Amazon or in Kindle for the book that is free for the week, and feel free to purchase the others]:http://amazon.com/dp/B0FQNJ61SB
📰 Subscribe to The Lessons Conversation:
Africa paperback pre-orders:https://forms.office.com/r/RMRMKTNd1M
Enjoyed listening to the Lessons Conversation? This post is public so feel free to share it.
This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit podcast.lessonsconversation.com
![Book 3: Systemic Nonsense [lessonsbooks.com]](https://byntha.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/podcast-episode-image-5a3bbb435029c89d668c5fa2682893ef-768x768.jpg)
In Malawi’s 2025 general elections, voter turnout was approximately 76 percent, and Afrobarometer surveys show that over 80 percent of Malawians consistently report that they intend to vote. People participate. They queue. They show up. They care.
At the same time, they are voting in an environment defined by economic strain.
Recent reporting shows that inflation has remained above 20 percent for multiple consecutive years, and more than 70 percent of Malawians live below the international poverty line for low-income countries. Food insecurity is not peripheral—it is central. Afrobarometer data indicates that roughly 58 percent of Malawians identify food shortage as one of the most urgent issues government must address.
Under those conditions, political participation does not disappear. It adapts.
When people are operating under economic pressure, the structure of decision-making changes.
Choices are no longer anchored in long-term system performance. They are anchored in immediacy.
The maize cob is not symbolic in the abstract. It is materially relevant.
Voting for maize is not irrational. It is economically consistent with a system where survival is the dominant constraint.
Most public conversations about development begin with infrastructure.
The roads are poor.
Electricity is unreliable.
Water systems are inconsistent.
Internet access is limited.
The conclusion follows:
the government is not delivering.
There is a truth in this. These failures are real. They affect productivity, mobility, and quality of life. Governments are responsible for addressing them.
But the analysis often stops at the level of service delivery.
It assumes that fixing the economy begins with fixing infrastructure. It assumes that governments can generate these systems independently of the economic structure beneath them.
This is where the reasoning becomes incomplete.
An economy is not a set of policies. It is a structure of production.
People work.
Firms organize that work.
Goods and services are produced.
Value is exchanged.
From this process:
From those taxes:
The direction of causality matters.
Production precedes public investment.
If production is limited, everything that depends on it is constrained.
Malawi’s constraint is not effort. It is structure. The economy remains heavily concentrated in:
Industrial production is limited. Manufacturing capacity is narrow. A large share of economic activity does not generate high, stable, taxable income.
This becomes visible in labor market data.
Each year, approximately 270,000 young people enter Malawi’s labor force, while the formal sector generates only around 40,000 jobs annually. The majority are absorbed into informal or underproductive work.
This is misalignment between labor supply and productive capacity.
Government revenue depends on the economy it governs.
The IMF’s 2025 Article IV consultation for Malawi notes that the country’s fiscal capacity is constrained by a narrow tax base, including limited value-added tax coverage and the difficulty of capturing revenue from a largely informal economy.
This has direct implications.
If:
then:
This is not only a policy issue. It is a structural one.
Governments absolutely play a central role.
They:
But they do so within the limits of the economic base.
A government cannot sustainably fund large-scale infrastructure from an economy that is not generating sufficient taxable value.
This does not remove responsibility. It clarifies the constraint within which responsibility operates.
At the center of this system is the workforce.
Economic transformation occurs when a workforce:
This is what expands the economic base.
Without it:
The macroeconomy cannot expand independently of the microeconomy.
The interaction between economic structure and political behavior creates a reinforcing loop.
This loop is not theoretical. It is visible.
The vote for maize sits inside this loop.
The question that follows is practical:
What can we as individuals do within this system?
The answer is not abstract.
Individuals influence the economy through:
When these decisions shift toward:
the economic base expands.
This expansion:
Over time, it changes both economic and political outcomes.
The vote for maize is not the problem. It is an outcome of a failing [failed] system.
It reflects:
If the underlying structure changes—if production expands, if incomes stabilize, if food security is less fragile—the nature of decision-making changes with it.
Voters begin to prioritize:
Not because they are told to, but because their conditions allow it.
The conversation about development often begins at the level of government.
It focuses on:
But it cannot end there. It must not.
Because the capacity of any government is tied to the economy it manages.
And the economy, at its core, is built through production.
Governments manage what economies produce.
If the productive base is narrow, the system remains constrained.
If the productive base expands, the system follows.
That is where the work begins.
If you’d like to go deeper into my journey — from Malawi, through the United Nations to Microsoft, you can find it in my books.
P.S. for 2026, you can get any of my books via Kindle for only $2.99.
This offer is valid till the end of the year.
Links to purchase are as below: