It Is Possible To Remove Mugabe Through Popular Mass Demonstrations!

I write this in solidarity with the ISO-Zim comrades who are in detention in Zimbabwe. Their crime being that they met to discuss events in Tunisia and Egypt. This has prompted me to interrogate the feasibility of non-military and non-violent street engagement with the Mugabe regime.

I have read a number of discouraging articles speculating that it is impossible to remove Mugabe through popular demonstrations. I would like to posit the contrary.
Zimbabwe has a rich heritage of organizational ability towards political and non-political mass engagement. We have a people that have, from the time of the 25th July 1960 Bulawayo Mass demonstrations, through the 1973 Chimukwembe demonstrations to the 2002-2005 mass action been able to organize and against all odds challenge the system of oppression. This alone gives us the assurance that either by genetics or by conscious will Zimbabweans are predisposed towards rejecting any form suppression through mass engagement.

Others will point out that the mass action called by MDC were largely ineffective against the regime. Here people should note that, there is no mass action in Zimbabwe that was ever called by MDC to specifically topple the regime except the 2 June 2003 “Final Push” which was aborted and renamed at the last minute.

I remember one of our most successful mass protest was the 18 March 2003 Mass Action that shut the whole of the country for at least 2 days. Indeed it was a mass action but one that was ‘mass’ in the sense that many people took part but rather lacked on the ‘action’ part because most people resorted to staying at home. With a bit of hindsight we can see some of the weakness of the Stayaways. Firstly, they were time specific but without specific measurable outcomes of success. We wanted the Mugabe regime to feel the power of the people. Actually MDC then issued 15 demands to Mugabe during this Mass Action which were supposed to be met by the end of that month or risk an all out mass action to remove him.

To me, this was the highest point that the people of Zimbabwe reached in their peaceful struggle against the Mugabe dictatorship. We had put the government in a tight corner. ZANU was smelling an end as witnessed by the numerous pleas for people to return to work. What we lacked was a specific announcement of a clearly spelt action to remove the regime. Had the energy we wasted in sporadic battles in Chitungwiza, Budirio, Kadoma, Mbare, Glenview etc been channeled towards a single well-organised action towards the centre of Harare we could have achieved far greater results although I think at some expense of human life.

Spurred by the successful response to the 18th March Stayaway, the MDC decided that it was ripe to tackle the regime in a penultimate showdown dubbed the “Final Push” on the 2nd June 2003. This action was supported by the traditional allies of MDC- labor and students. I still remember the zeal that students showed when they attended an all-night prayer at a church in Avondale just across the police station. We wanted change and were willing to die for it. Ironically as we left the church there were fireworks at Celebration Center and we all thought the soldiers were mutineering at the State House. We wanted to run there at that moment. Such was the zeal and preparedness for change.

On the eve of the demonstrations Mr Tsvangirai received a court order barring MDC from participating in the Mass Action. This is where things began to go wrong. We began to receive mixed signals on what we were supposed to do next. We were told MDC had resolved that the demonstrations were no longer about going to the City Centre then the State House. They were now supposed to be localized in different suburbs. We were heartbroken but as students we resolved that we were going to continue with the march.

On the 2nd June we woke in zeal and resolved not to march to town but to take a shortcut to the State House. Indeed we were confronted by helicopters, water-cannons , dogs and guns. We lost the battle. There were lessons to be learnt. The mighty of the army was all concentrated against the University of Zimbabwe and a few others in isolated areas like Budiriro and Mabvuku.

These events show that Zimbabweans have the capacity to challenge the regime. Some argue that Zimbabweans have been beaten to submission. I would like to say that there is no better time than now. We have a youth that has so far not yet experienced the brutality of the Mugabe regime. Most of the youths in the age range of 16-22 were about 8-14 during that time making them too young to have been part of these demonstrations. These are the crucial factor in any demonstrations especially in the initial stages. They have not much in terms of property and less responsibility coupled to enthusiasm of youth. Once we are able to harness this energy then Zimbabwe will be ready to explode.

But the soldiers! Indeed the army and police in Zimbabwe are not neutral. They are controlled by the regime. Some of them are very overzealous as witnessed by the verve with which they carried out Operation Murambatsvina . I have two incidents that have shaped my thinking on this issue.

It was in December 2002 at Makoni Shopping Center in Chitungwiza. About 500 Border Gezi Youths descended on the place beating people randomly. They were housed at the notorious Madzibaba Nzira’s shrine. We re-organised ourselves and began to fight back. We were joined by the local police and we managed to drive them back before the arrival of riot police. Actually the police were the ones at the forefront of mobilizing beer-drinkers and vendors to retaliate. We knew most of these policemen because they stayed with us.

In another incident, I was put under room arrest when we wanted to go and address the students in 2004. I was with Arthur Masuka. A senior police officer from Avondale Police Station entered my room holding a revolver. He told us that he wanted to arrest us but because he was sympathetic with our cause he would not. After about 15 minutes he said “You know what just go and demonstrate but make sure you don’t get arrested!” This policeman later became one of us and would give us information on students on the wanted list.

These two incidents give credence to the fact that there are many within the force who are willing but unable at this time to support the popular will. This may not be easy but where there is a concerted and coordinated effort to remove the regime the army and the police would be left with no option but to join the people or risk being left to the mercy of the people. A few weeks ago this statement would have been dismissed as wishful thinking but events in Libya today give it weight.

The biggest question is how to bring Zimbabweans to protest. Everyone is putting an eye on Mr Tsvangirai but I know that neither him nor MDC leadership are in a position to. Firstly Tsvangirai is Prime minister of the same government that we want to remove. Secondly, he is an easy target for persecution and lastly his involvement may polarize the protests and affect the neutrality that such action may demand. The same applies to the party he leads.

What they can be are just tacit supporters of the initial moves by availing their structures and resources towards the buildup. We have a civic movement in Zimbabwe that used to be vibrant. There used to be a ZCTU and a ZINASU that could rally people at any level to resist the regime but incessant economic , political and physical battering has left these organizations a shadow of their selves. Do they still have the capacity to organize? I would say no but they have the capacity to influence.
So who can organize? I would say there is no demonstration that can be called purely spontaneous. All demonstrations have an element of organization. The responsibility lies on all of us. The major voices of Zimbabwe’s oppressed should agree on a date on which the protests should begin. This date should be publicized to all and sundry. They should avail their structures towards the organization of the movement unconditionally.

Once a date has been set, the duty falls now on the media and other communication agents. The power of the internet should not be overlooked as statistics show that about 22% of adult Zimbabweans may have access to it. We would expect online news platforms like NewZimbabwe, Daily News, Nehanda, Zim Diaspora, Zim Online and others to be on the forefront in publicizing the event. On the ground all pro-people newspapers like NewsDay, The Standard, Zimbabwean and The Independent should be found in the fore front of beaming positive messages towards action. Finally we would also expect mobile operators like Econet to avail their facilities through sms towards the movement. The media is the ignition of resistance.

Finally the demonstrations should not be central to Harare alone, rather I envisage a situation whereby Masvingo , Bulawayo, Mutare and Gweru are taken simultaneously even before Harare. This allows the regime to be stretched. Secondly we have a cunning system that deploys soldiers born in Matebeleland to Mutare and those from Masvingo to Matebeleland. Usually these soldiers would be ruthless towards these people because they are not related to them, but a situation of simultaneous uprising may force conscience on soldiers because they would realize that their mothers and fathers too could be subjected to the same ruthless treatment as that they would be intending to subject other protesters in areas away from their origins.

There is no better time than now. Mass Demonstrations are appealing in that they are shorter and less destructive as compared to civil war. There will be casualties. It could be me, it could be you but that should not discourage us because death is a definite end which we all have to go through. To me, death in the line of national duty is more honorable than life in the shackles of self-pity.

I am convinced more than ever that if Gaddafi; he who troubled Americans, he who evaded assassinations, he whose army we called invincible, he whose entourage can jam cellphones wherever he goes can be so shaken by a people whose only weapon is determination; then even Robert Mugabe is just a flea on the thumb of people’s destiny!

In the mean time I salute ISO-Zim- they inspire Zimbabwe!

Your Truly

Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action

I write to you on Africa Day; the day we put aside to celebrate our unity as Africans. Our problems are there for everyone to see. There are many academics who have built their standing from the study of African politics and economy. We have a vast array of literature that deals on African economy; but why is it that despite all that knowledge at our disposal Africa is not progressing?

Politically, we have witnessed coups, civil wars, electoral fraud, violence and an increased emergence of dictatorships. Economically; even though Africa’s GDP is expected to grow from 5.5 to about 6% in 2010; there are millions of people living in extreme poverty and as it stands there is a chance that Africa is going to miss the Millennium Development Goal of halving the number of people living on less than US$1 per day. Africa is still struggling to cope with the burden of HIV/AIDS pandemic which in developed countries is no longer regarded as a killer disease yet in Africa millions die every year.

These are manifestations at a macrocosmic level. We know that we can blame the West for colonialism, we can blame USA for destabilizing Africa through its regime change policies that claimed the lives of people like Patrice Lumumba and plunged DR Congo into this crisis they have up to today. Indeed, we can blame whites for apartheid and colonialism that has left many of our people marginalized but the question we ought to ask ourselves is: assuming that colonialism had not taken place, would we as a people been any different today?

Let us take Ethiopia as an example. Save for five years under Mussolini, Ethiopia was largely uncolonized. Under Haile Selassie, the distribution of wealth was skewed towards the ruling elite, the landowners and elements of the clergy. The plight of the peasants is well documented. Upon the deposition of the emperor, the Derg adopted Marxism and communism as their working ideology. Hundreds of thousands were killed due to red terror, forced deportations, or from using hunger as a weapon. Despite the egalitarian rhetoric of the Derg, high-ranking government officials retained privileged economic positions. Even today under Meles Zenawi government officials and a few high-ranking professionals control the country’s mode of production.

There are many people who give colonialism as an excuse for Africa’s failure to thrive. Here is a country that has never been fully colonized, a country that had African rulers from time immemorial- a typical African country that we fantasize about in our excuses. Why is it that we still find oppression and suppression of voices in such a country? Why are Ethiopians amongst the poorest in the world? Why isn’t there such camaraderie as that punctuates our rhetoric when we speak of “WE AFRICANS”?

We give excuses that we had limited access to basic education thus our failure to engage in meaningful economic activity largely due to colonialism and apartheid. Let us look at a country like Zimbabwe which has the highest literacy rate of 92% in Africa. If educating an African was such a factor why do we find such levels of poverty and oppression in Zimbabwe? Why don’t we see Africans in Zimbabwe sitting down in true “African spirit” to discuss amongst them how to lift each other from poverty?

Is it really that “WE AFRICANS” are victims of history or we have inherent characteristics that predispose us to poverty?

Firstly, we as Africans lack the drive for scientific adventure, neither are we inclined towards innovativeness. Have we ever asked ourselves why it is almost everyone’s dream to be a medical doctor? It is because of job security. We are more worried about failing to get employment than our ability to be our own employers. No one wishes to study natural sciences like Physics in Zimbabwe because all of us are afraid of ending up as secondary school teachers somewhere in the deserted lands of Dzaramba. None of us ever think that we could be the Isaac Newtons of our time.
I remember one day being fascinated by a toy bird made by the Chinese which could balance on anything solid using its beak. There were no electronics used, nor expensive material, just plastic. It took me a while to figure out that whoever made that toy applied see-saw physics that we learn in the first few years of secondary education. When we are learning that, do we ever think that this could be harnessed to generate wealth?

In contrast, the level of research in the field of sciences in Asia and the West is so advanced to the extent that we sometimes feel that they major on minors. What we fail to realize is that we are the ones who drive these researches as we are the ones who end up buying finished products from them feeding their inventors with royalties from patents.

Maybe this also has to do with our lack of vision and our acute inclination towards consumerism-without-production. How many of us look into the future and plan for it? We seek instant rewards without investment. It is our expectation that one can miraculously wake up with a bank account pregnant with money without working for it.
There have been efforts by some Africans especially those in the diaspora to bring together their few resources in various collective investments schemes. This was after a realization that what we earn from a regular job will never be enough to cater for our ambitions and secondly that access to capital is limited in Africa. Unfortunately not many of our people understand the power of collective investment. This is usually because as human beings we desire to be powerful. We desired to be on top, thus the aspect of collectiveness- where we rise together as a group- is not attractive lest we may not have those to whom we can show off. Secondly we do not want to start small. We feel that by saving a dollar and investing it to get a cent is not worthy it; rather we hope to start after we have saved a thousand dollars. Unfortunately, we rarely manage to reach that stage when we have a thousand at our disposal; thus we die hoping and blaming.

We blame the Americans for what they do to us; but do we ever stop to think about our own inadequacies when it comes to money and power? If we are as morally upright (botho, unhu, ubuntu) as we always claim to be why is it that the Americans always find people amongst us willing to be paid to do mercenary work for them. People like Mobutu and Savimbi. Even amongst us right now we have people especially in destabilized economies like Zimbabwe and Eritrea who go about preaching things that do more harm than good disguised as Civic Society at the instigation of donor agencies whose agenda in most instances is to propel American Foreign Policy. It is again this love for riches without sweat that drives us to lose our conscience.
Perhaps we need to first look at what power means to an African. I think from time immemorial power in Africa meant proclamation of self and total submission of others. Power to us means influence to expropriate and not inspiration to nurture. Many of us at individual level do not appreciate that our children can teach us to be wise. Many still believe that women are objects for suppression even within marriage. It is because of this bigoted behavior that we find geriatrics like Mr Mugabe looking with contempt at people of younger age. It is again because of this wrong understanding of power that we find people like Joseph Kony, Charles Taylor and Al Bashir using death as a means to prevail over others.

The big reason why we as Africans fight each other every day is usually because of our wish to expropriate things that do not belong to us. We have a severe failure of positive imagination. When a man builds his house out of his own sweat, we find it worthwhile to seize and own it. This behavior dates back beyond the times of Shaka. Idi Amin, chased Asians from Uganda because he was jealousy of their hard work. What did he do; expropriated their possessions to the same African man whose poor vision drives him to make drums out of his own house’s roof forgetting that rain will one day pound him. Out of sheer vengeance and jealousy Mugabe did the same in Zimbabwe; the people he gave land found it sensible to sell pipes instead of using them for irrigation.

So if “WE AFRICANS” are like this, what should be done? This is the question that we need to explore to its fullest extent, apart from that we have to go beyond mere rhetoric and work towards tangible results.

We have to primarily change our focus. Let us educate our children to be productive. African education should not just be academic but should reflect empowerment. Beyond elementary education, a student should be allowed to follow his career out of passion not as a product of how much she can recall in an examination. A student who is able to tend to two pigs until they multiply to six in a year should be graded better than one who sits in an examination and recalls the theory of tending pigs without practically showing that indeed she can do that. Likewise we do not expect a person to graduate from a University without showing that beyond the theory he can actually harness it to produce a gadget or product that can be useful to society. This should not be misconstrued to mean that arts and social sciences should to be sacrificed. Summarily, the education system should be changed.

It does no good however to change the education system of a society that does not understand the value of such education. Doing so is tantamount to giving a torch to a baboon. Thus as Africans we should begin to teach our children to strive to be innovative, self-sufficient, independent and dignified. When your kid makes a wire car that is a stage above those made by his peers, reward him for that so that he appreciates hard work and inventiveness. Our children should know how to create and multiply wealth from a tender age. Give him a stone and tell him to carve something of better value out of it, pay him and tomorrow he will sell you purified oxygen! In all that he does tell him to value his conscience; tell him bloody money is dangerous. Teach him to do good.

Why put emphasis on the individual? We know that by concentrating on the atomic make up of a substance we may as well influence its gross appearance. If we build a generation that knows how to work and create wealth; who knows maybe we will be able to choose our member of parliament from them.

It is only when we have people who have been groomed to work hard, to respect others and to be innovative that we can possibly have a government that protects Intellectual Property Rights, General Property Rights and Human Rights. A government that can do away with the so-called Development Aid and use home-grown and less-expensive solutions to wiggle out of debt and poverty. We cannot expect a child soldier who eventually grows into a head of junta to respect the power of a mere ballot paper. To him it is only a bullet that matters and indeed; in Africa the bullet is still mightier than the pen.

These few thoughts are by no means exhaustive. It is my hope that we can build upon the rich history that we have; use it as pool of knowledge that can inspire us into a more successful people without marginalizing each other. Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action!

INDIGENISATION: A mosquito seeking to treat malaria

There has been a flurry of activity following the gazzeting of the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment (General) Regulations. A lot of emotions have been expressed: joy, dismay, anger and indifference. These have been the typical responses to most of the sensitive issues that have challenge our country and it is expected in such a highly polarized country. This divergence has done a lot of disservice to our country in that public opinion is usually dictated by voices wearing political and therefore blinkered voices. Indigenization and Economic Empowerment are issues that need to be looked at holistically as they are the cornerstone of justice and ultimately peace in any country.

There are number of facts that we need to note before probing the status quo. It is true that prior to 1980 non-white Zimbabweans were discriminated against economically, socially and politically. Economic discrimination took root on inaccessibility of Education, mode of production and business freedom. Blacks in Rhodesia were restricted from economic activity. Commercial agriculture was skewed towards whites as they alone had unfettered access to commercially viable land. Blacks had other restrictions too which included bottle-necking at schools. One had to be exceptionally brilliant and lucky to reach university while whites found comfort in numerous whites-only schools, scholarships and government assistance. In short; historically blacks were disadvantaged.

Independence brought with it freedom and schools. People could now walk freely in Harare’s First Street. People could now drink brown bottled beer and whisky which used to be a criminal offence prior to independence. Primary and Secondary Schools mushroomed all over the country and education was opened up to every Zimbabwean. In 2000 Zimbabwe had more than six universities as compared to one in 1980. Zimbabwe had reached a milestone in education.

Did political independence bring with it economic independence to blacks? This can be answered by examining the distribution of wealth and resources across races.

The Land Apportionment Act of 1930 prohibited blacks from owning land in the lucrative “European Areas”, it even prohibited them from owning land in Tribal Trust Lands which were of ecologically poor. This act guaranteed that less than 1% of the nation owned approximately 80% of arable land in Zimbabwe. Very few blacks managed to purchase land in urban and commercial farming areas where private ownership of land was allowable. Most of them had to be contend with life in the communally owned Tribal Trust Lands. The implication of this Act on black empowerment can never be overlooked as it unfairly disadvantaged blacks especially regarding access to capital. Communally owned lands cannot be used to guarantee loans whilst title deeds from private ownership of land are major collateral. Secondly, this Act forced blacks into marginal areas where economic activity was minimal reducing them to cheap labor and not a people capable of economic activity.

Let us look at the distribution of industrial and commercial enterprises in Zimbabwe after independence. In a report done by OTM Consultancy for IBDC in 1994 it was noted that blacks who happened to be 95% of the population owned only 1% of these. Whites who were 3% of the population owned 30% of the industries and commercial enterprises whilst the Zimbabwe Government owned 4%. The rest was owned by foreign multinational companies. These figures show us that despite their huge population, blacks in Zimbabwe were owned very few businesses.

It is clear therefore that political independence in Zimbabwe did not come with economic empowerment of those who had for long been marginalized. The question we now ought to examine is whether this lack of economic power was all due to historical injustices or some other causes. This interrogation can help us approach the issue of Indigenization with an open eye.

Firstly let us look at the government’s policies towards private business. When the Marxist government of Robert Mugabe took over, it adopted a socialist approach towards business. More emphasis was placed on formation of cooperatives and not private business. A lot of Ujamas erupted across the country. These flourished for a short while but because a cooperative is usually tedious and full of mistrust and suspicion many crumbled. Those who dared to enter into private business found the environment hostile to capitalism. The government introduced price controls between 1980 and 1981 which made it economically unviable for emerging business people. These restrictions stifled growth.

The financial system that the government inherited and adopted was risk averse with more emphasis on conservatism than business adventurism. What this meant was that most financial institutions demanded high collateral for any loans that they would issue. Despite the knowledge of the handicaps that blacks faced, the government did not intervene to assist; rather it left everything in the hands of institutions like Small Enterprise Development Corporation (SEDCO) which issued short-term and long-term loans which obviously were guaranteed by collateral.

This is the issue that led to phenomenon that was then called “Institutional racism”, where blacks failed to gain loans from financial institutions whilst whites seemed to easily secure them. Blacks had no collateral, whilst whites could afford it.

Not all blacks didn’t have start-up capital; some did have but why did they fail to start thriving businesses in Zimbabwe? Let us again examine the Zimbabwe Government’s hand in this. There were pieces of legislation in Zimbabwe that made starting up a business tedious rather than exciting. Let us for example consider the processes that were involved in starting up a company. First there was Company Name Search, followed by Memorandum and Articles of Association, then Certificate of Incorporation. This alone could take up to a year to complete even though officially it was projected to be a month. If one wanted to then enter into Hotel and Catering, he would have to apply to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority which was under Ministry of Environment and Tourism, if he intended to then ferry his clients around in a bus he would have to apply for another license from the Ministry of Roads and Transport. His premises had to be inspected by the Local Government and he also needed a clearance from the Ministry of Health. All this could take another two years. How on earth did the government expect its people to participate in economic activities under such strenuous and unfriendly demands?

The government knows about these restrictive laws that are present because in 1994 the Deregulation Committee set up by the government to look into the laws identified 28 Acts that were impediments to business and therefore needed to be amended urgently. Unfortunately very few were amended and even today the government still uses these shamed laws to act on its citizens.

We need not look further than Strive Masiiwa’s battle to set-up Econet wireless to identify the hypocrisy of the Zimbabwean Government. In 1993, Masiiwa secured a US$40 million loan from Standard Chartered Bank to launch his telecommunication business. Here was a black man with a brilliant idea, who approached a foreign owned-bank in Zimbabwe and secured a loan. He approached Post and Telecommunications Corporation (PTC) for licensing but they told him that only PTC could do such a business under the Zimbabwe PTC Act. Initially he had approached them for a joint venture but they declined saying that there was no immediate demand for mobile technology in Zimbabwe. He appealed to the High Court and got a favorable verdict from Judge Gibson. PTC appealed to the Supreme Court and they won.

Masiiwa then made a constitutional challenge which ruled in his favor in August 1995. Unfortunately, President Robert Gabriel Mugabe invoked the Presidential Powers Act to issue a Presidential Decree requiring private parties to obtain a license from the Ministry of Information, Post, and Telecommunications before setting up a cellular network effectively overturning the decision of the Supreme Court and restoring PTC’s monopoly. The battle took another two years and it was only after the intervention of Joshua Nkomo to force Rejoice Mujuru then the Information minister and currently the Vice-President to license Econet.

Masiiwa is not the only black businessman who has been persecuted by Zimbabwe’s government and its horrendous laws. Many names come to mind, Mushore, Muponda, Kuruneri, Makamba and many minor ones like Daniel Chingoma whose dream of flying his helicopter will never see light of the day due to restrictions imposed by the aviation laws.

Let us not forget the then emerging black businessmen like my brother Tobias who owned five tuckshops in Chitungwiza which were all razed down during the infamous Operation Murambatsvina in 2005. I have no doubt that if the ZANU PF government had not destroyed his tuckshops he could be having a decent supermarket maybe employing ten more people. Today he is a pauper selling matches and cigarettes at Makoni Bus Rank.

The question we ask today as Minister Kasukuwere gazettes his regulations is whether the Government of Zimbabwe is being truthful in its quest for indigenization or it’s another ploy to empower a few using the guise of futile populism.

Let us not forget that this is the same government that has presided over Zimbabwe for the past 30 years. It is the same government that has presided over the demise of the country. It is the same government that been brutal to its own people and it is the same government that has grabbed and expropriated land amongst itself. What has really changed today that this brutal government has suddenly become sensitive to its people?

I ask these questions not because I want to scare people away from riches. I am only saying; let us not develop a tendency of expropriating wealth. Let us create wealth. Historical injustices are not made right by just multiplying the people that eat the cake but by multiplying the cake and the people who eat it.

If ZANU PF is serious about black empowerment I challenge it to walk the talk and begin by accepting that most of the damage to black entrepreneurship in the past 30 years was due to its bad governance and impunity. After that we share its proceeds of corruption and plunder before we demand the 51% from foreigners!

What it means to be Zimbabwean: A search for identity

I have stayed in foreign lands for some time now. I have seen Zimbabweans being killed, I have seen them being segregated and I have seen them living worse than dogs. Back home I have seen my people degenerating into thieves, fraudsters and murderers; our once righteous women turning into nocturnal body-sellers. Out of pain, I decided to undertake a dialectical journey to the core of our existence; to explore what it means to be Zimbabwean, what it should mean and why it means what it means right now to be a Zimbabwean. This could be the works of a troubled mind but my hope is that someone would find sense out of it.

Sometimes I sit wondering why some people behave the way they do. I wonder why Robert Mugabe is that arrogant, why General Zvinavashe agreed to pronounce that infamous statement on the eve of the 2002 Presidential elections, why Jonathan Moyo keeps vacillating like a pendulum and why Morgan Tsvangirai overruled a democratic consensus that later led to the split of MDC. Most of the times, I end up indifferently concluding that maybe that’s how human beings behave. This time I decided to interrogate the source of these behaviors even deeper without giving myself a chance to resign.
The first question that I asked myself was; “what makes a man a man?” Apart from the physical how can we differentiate between a man and a dog? This question came about because of some things that we have seen happening in Zimbabwe that we would normally say; they are not fit to be done by human beings but by dogs or savages. So what is it that makes a man a man and a dog a dog?
There are certain characteristics that are common between a man and a dog which compel us to conclude that a man is primarily an animal. They both desire food, water, shelter and other basic needs. They both have the five scientific senses. They are both calculative- a baboon may bury wild fruits in sand to facilitate ripening just like a human being. Most importantly, they both act instinctively in the face of danger to avoid death. But still a baboon is a baboon and a man is a man- why?
Somebody argued that a man is a man because he can differentiate between good and bad. Again we ask; is good universal to all men? Why is polygamy good in some societies but bad in some? Who defines good? If we can follow the dictates of society on good and bad can’t that be said of a dog that is conditioned to know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to its master?
However, even if good or bad is not universal to all men the concept of goodness and badness is common across all people. But even this concept derives from a deeper intrinsic awareness in man which is I prefer to call the consciousness of value. It is therefore arguable that apart from the physical and the genetic make-up, human beings also share a common characteristic- attaching value to nature.
Notwithstanding the fact that animals also attach value to things out of instinct, it is only man who has the ability to attach value and defend it on worthless material and on non-material things. For example, man fight to defend religion, they fight to defend their rights because they place value unto these things and they are willing to risk death for things that are intangible.

Man in as much as he places value on other things also places value upon himself. He believes that he is worth a certain value. This is what is called self-worth. The product of this self-evaluation is called dignity. Because man is naturally a social being, that is he desires to be desired by other man. He expects other man to evaluate his worth by other man, he expects other man to evaluate his worth to its real value. When they undervalue him, he gets angry and when the evaluate him to his real worth he feels pride. This desire to be recognized by other man, is the one that drives man to behave in ways that defy natural animal instinct.
Let us look at Zimbabwe. On one hand we have a ruling class that is unwilling to recognize other ordinary Zimbabweans as people amongst other people, on the other we have a people that is yearning for such recognition. This ruling class which is mainly ZANU PF , behaves in a manner that seeks to undo history.
I say ZANU PF is seeking to undo history because it is taking the human philosophical function back to the primitive state when man , although social beings, interacted with each other violently. A period in history when man’s worth was evaluated on how much one was willing to risk death for pure prestige. Remember Alexander or Chaka .
Unfortunately, other Zimbabweans are unwilling to engage ZANU PF in such a primitive manner which to some may appear as cowardice. In circumstances, where one part is willing to engage in violence and another is unwilling there is greater possibility that their relationship terminates in lordship and bondage in which as is in Zimbabwe, ZANU PF gains the recognition of being the master and everybody else looses the dignity of being a man and becomes a slave.
But is the unwillingness of Zimbabweans to engage in violence a symbol of cowardice? The answer could be both YES and NO.
YES in that, cowardice itself begins when a man fails to overcome the fear of death and let his animal instinct of self-preservation override the human characteristic of seeking recognition. So out of cowardice, Zimbabweans decided to forfeit their worth for a chance to live.
NO in that, a human being is also calculative and can temporarily forgo his human desires for a particular reason. For example a man may choose not to eat even if he is hungry because he is on hunger-strike. So there could be a reason why Zimbabweans chose to forfeit their worth. One of which could be that they know that most of the primitive members of ZANU PF are close to death due to aging. From their calculations, they can do without dignity for a few years until this generation is wiped out. They can derive hope from the fact that a number of younger ZANU PF members have been attracted to the idea of change like Simba Makoni, Daniel Shumba, Walter Mzembi and others.
What is certain in Zimbabwe however is that the ZANU PF regime is not evaluating its people’s worth justly. Zimbabweans are conscious of this, unfortunately; as in all dictatorships, two groups of slaves arise. One that feels unjustly evaluated and is willing to regain its dignity and another that knows and feels theindignation but is content to live like that as long as they are alive.

The first group knows that an honest reason for its situation is simply that they are cowards but because they deem themselves to be of certain worth they can’t accept that they are after all mere animals whose fear drives them into submission. So, instead of confronting their fears, this group devices methods by which it can fool itself that it is still capable of functioning as human beings. They feel the anger because firstly they lost dignity in the eyes of the master and secondly because they have been reduced to ordinary amongst the ordinary. They begin to seek to be recognized again as extra-ordinary by their fellow ordinary peers.
They know that they can never be recognized as extraordinary by acts of bravery because already their peers know that they are mere cowards. They are left with no option but to be industrious. They now relate their value to the value of their ability and what they own. Their motive becomes to amass as much as they can so as to attract attention and recognition from primarily their peers and eventually the ruling class. This is what happened in America after independence where those who had not participated in the revolution ended up also part of the ruling class because the ruling class was rational enough to recognize these people’s dignity through their ability and what they owned.

The driving force behind this kind of man is the will to be free- to be a dignified human being capable of unrestricted moral choice. But this kind of man is also caught up in the conflict of desire to be recognized and the desire for self-preservation. It is this man who becomes capable of defining what is good and what is bad because he has consciousness of slavery and a will to be a master. He is capable of defining good because he feels that all things that lead to perpetuation of life (self-preservation) represent morality and good whilst those that lead to violence, war, animosity and death (out of the need to be recognized) are bad. It is this group that is dangerous to TYRANY and ZANU PF knows it.

ZANU PF knows that a man who is unwilling to fight may become even more dangerous if he becomes prosperous because prosperity without freedom is not satisfying to man. They know that man derive satisfaction from owning property not because of necessity but because other man recognize it as theirs and they have made sure that nobody owns property beyond necessity. To them a slave should not be capable of being industrious and if by chance he does so; they are more than happy to grab and expropriate.


Under these circumstances it becomes totally impossible for the ordinary to be extraordinary. Two realities now exist for this group; they are no longer a people amongst people and there is no chance to redeem their dignity through work. Only two options remain: to leave the country altogether or to revert into the lower group that survive as if they do not exist.
When the desire to live supersedes the desire to be human, men begin to drift towards primitiveness. He loses his dignity; he also loses the consciousness of being human. Survival becomes the primary object of his existence. He loses the basis of morality and ultimately the basis of humanness.

When the whole society loses the basis of morality it becomes hard to differentiate or dictate what is good and what is bad. Corruption for survival becomes good, so becomes prostitution, theft, fraud and murder. The feeling of guilty is gone because we are no longer able to evaluate ourselves to our real worth; rather we become worthless and therefore incapable of understanding justice or even to judge ourselves.
This is what happened in Zimbabwe. We had a people that earned less than one dollar a day but survived on five dollars every day. It did not matter where the money was coming from because EVERYBODY was doing it. We celebrated thieves and fraudsters because they were the symbol of survival.

Now, let us turn our sight to those who decided to leave Zimbabwe. These people had lost dignity but not the ability to evaluate themselves. They hoped to transfer their perceived value in Zimbabwe to other societies. They hoped that those societies would assess their worth justly.

What most did not realize was that dignity is built through interaction. They hoped to be given back their dignity in foreign lands through work since these foreigners respected and recognized each other’s property. But what happens when those in the foreign lands realize that you are mere animals running away from death. You lose the basis for just evaluation and revert to being less than the ordinary of that society.
Eventually it becomes hard to get dignified work. It becomes a matter of survival. One needs to eat, drink and shelter. So even in foreign lands we then sacrifice our dignity for survival. Teachers become housemaids, Nurses become child-minders and accountants become gardeners. Those who had hope become prostitutes. This becomes the basis of xenophobia. We become animals, as worthless as a wild dog which can be axed to death in the townships of Alexandria.

Logically, it becomes easier to define who a Zimbabwean is and what it means to be a Zimbabwean today. A Zimbabwean is an animal which is nothing, owns nothing and is ever loitering in search of survival! This is what ZANU PF has reduced us to.
So when I evaluate the so-called Government of National Unity, I have to base my assessment on whether this government has restored dignity to its people. Are Zimbabweans now man amongst man? Do they own something or are they free to own something? Have they gone beyond scavenging for survival?
A friend called me and said “man the shops are full, everything is there”. The first question to strike my mind was- if everything is there, is everything there for everybody?

If a slave master opens a shop at his farm to sell sugar which was not locally available at the farm, if he sells unto them at wild prices so as to confiscate their meager savings and orders them not to buy anywhere else; should we call that freedom? Should we call that prosperity? Is it a change in history? No, the slave is still a slave and the master still the master only that the slave is able to point at the grocer and say, “ A long time ago we had to scavenge as far as South Africa but we now have our own dumpsite here!”
If the slave was able to build the shop, sell his sugar and multiply his wealth without restriction from the master then that would be significant because the slave would have regained his dignity firstly by having the master recognize his rights to private property and freedom to be industrious and secondly because he would have re-ignited and re-calibrated his consciousness of value to that which reflects the progress in history.

So abundance in Zimbabwean shops does not necessarily reflect a gain in dignity rather it only assures Zimbabweans that if they commit their labor to their slave-master they will be able to buy food and survive. Other than that they would die.

The challenge we have s to differentiate between the appearance of freedom and the reality of freedom. For how else can we explain the phenomenon in Zimbabwe: you are only free as long as you are willing to live like an animal but that freedom ends when you decide to be a human being- when you begin to interrogate the truth and seek your worth? So yes Zimbabweans are free today as is a dog that is only free when it is willing to track behind its owner who would not hesitate to shoot it if it decides to challenge him.

Having sacrificed a lot of time on what is and has been happening in Zimbabwe; we have an obligation also to enquire on ways that may help us be human again. That, I hope will become the object of my next article but as it is let us think clearly about whom we are , what we want to be and build ourselves for the future battles to regain our dignity!

Exploring the possibilities of non-violent reform in Zimbabwe

When Morgan Tsvangirai was sworn in as the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe in a loose coalition with Robert Mugabe, there was hope that his presence could influence reform in the country. This government is only a few months old but it has become clearer that ZANU PF is not willing to give up its autocratic hold on power. It has become necessary again to take a closer look at past and present events and try to predict the likely course of future events. This way, pro-democratic forces in Zimbabwe may live conscious of what may become of them or may be required of them when such events begin to unfold.

There is substantial evidence that MDC holds minimal power in the current setup. Examples that quickly crop up are the continual invasion of farms at the instigation of ZANU PF leadership despite calls by the Prime Minister for them to stop. MDC members continue to be persecuted and harassed by ZANU PF supporters with no action from the police. The Reserve Bank continues to engage in quasi-fiscal projects despite Finance Minister Biti’s order. Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono and Attorney General Johannes Tomana are still occupying their positions despite MDC’s protestations. Robert Mugabe continues to make key appointments to government unilaterally and most of those appointments have stood. So, it could be argued that ZANU PF is still the core of the Zimbabwe Government with MDC coming in as auxiliaries.

It is also evident that little reform to the political and economic systems of the country has occurred since the Unity Government was formed. The constitution-making process has stalled amidst claims that ZANU PF is sabotaging the process. Draconian laws like AIPPA and POSA are still being used to maintain the state’s grip on civil liberties. Government-assisted hostile takeovers of businesses are still common in the country. There has been a noticeable change though in the economic climate of the country since the introduction of the United States Dollar as the official trading currency. Most notably is the massive decrease in inflation and an end to shortages of basic commodities in the country. There is little hope that substantial reforms will be instituted in the near future given the public contradictions in beliefs held by the two parties.

Given the little influence that MDC seems to be holding in the GNU, it is also evident that its presence in this government is unlikely to bring much positive reform to the country. Changes in ZANU PF on the other hand seem more likely to bring considerable reform in the political and economic terrain of the country. Let us explore such changes, their likelihood and their likely impact on the country:

Voluntary reorganization of ZANU PF

This explicitly refers to change of leadership within ZANU PF. People have discussed the need to revamp and restructure the party particularly the succession of its geriatric leader Robert Mugabe. A wholesome change of leaders in ZANU PF might result in the party being led by reform-minded young people who appreciate the need for contemporary reforms and modernisation of the political and economic systems of the country.

Are there people like that in ZANU PF? This question is hard to answer when looking at the current crop of the party’s leadership even from its youth ranks. There are a number of people who were nurtured by ZANU PF who eventually decided to leave it because of its unwillingness to embrace change. This can point to the presence of people within its system who may not be averse to reformist ideas.

How likely is this change? Succession in ZANU PF is not an idea that can be thrown around without scars and scalps. When Eddison Zvobgo brought the issue of Mugabe’s succession in 1990; the results were not pleasant. He was sidelined from government and his closest ally Dzikamai Mavhaire was suspended from the party for 2 years. The infamous Tsholotsho Declaration was allegedly hacked by some senior members in ZANU PF to influence the structure of the presidium. The results were not pleasant; six provincial chairmen were suspended from the party and eventually Jonathan Moyo had to leave ZANU PF. Currently, there is commotion over the successor to Joseph Msika with the old guard again throwing spanners to ensure that another geriatric takes over.

As convenient as it may sound, there is no indication that the executive of ZANU PF is willing to retire and leave power to younger and competent people. Moves by certain sections of ZANU PF to declare Mugabe the Supreme Leader of the party may as well signal that Mugabe wants to die in office.

It can therefore be concluded that the possibility of ZANU PF reorganisation in the lifetime of Robert Mugabe is close to impossible.

Forced reform of government

There are situations where a government can be forced to reform due to unsustainable internal and external pressure. The reformation of the Soviet system in the 90’s was a result of both the constraints that the global economy was placing on its government and the overwhelming reformist sentiments shown by the massive support that Boris Yeltsin got when he became president in 1990. Pressure from within and without also helped bring down authoritarian rule in Hungary, East German and South Africa.

Is domestic pressure feasible in Zimbabwe? In 1989, Arthur Mutambara and Munyaradzi Gwisai led University of Zimbabwe students in protests against ZANU PF’s intention to impose a one-party state in the country. They were arrested and brutalised. So was Morgan Tsvangirai when he wrote to the Herald newspaper in support of the two.

When food prices rose by about 40% in 1998, people decided to take to the streets in protest. There were reports of a massive crackdown is high density suburbs of Chitungwiza, Budiriro and Glen View by the army and police to quash any dissent.

From 2000 to 2003 ZCTU and MDC led a number of successful boycotts to force the government to reform. Successful in terms of popular response but rather ineffective in forcing the government to change. It appears as though, these earlier demonstrations and boycotts served to sensitize the regime towards the use of brutal force as a means of containing dissent. The response with which the regime quelled the June 2003 Final-Push goes to show that the system had completed its mutation into a senseless, brutal and unashamed dictatorship with no respect for life at all.

To cap this revolutionary mutation, the establishment went own to disintegrate the social and economic livelihood of its people through operation Murambatsvina. This was clandestinely aimed at silencing the opposition’s powerbase although hidden behind claims of cleaning up the Harare.

If this was under disguise, then the ruthlessness that was blatantly shown in June 2008 run-off elections was a show of how the regime was prepared to kill those who did not submit to its existence.

Despite the culture of resistance that Zimbabweans had developed in the first five years of this decade, ZANU PF managed to beat them into submission. The globalisation of world economy did not help matters too as the middle-class which is usually the most vocal in such situations was the first to flee the country followed by a massive exodus of the generally populace into surrounding countries.

Only a people that had been brutalised into submission remained of Zimbabwe. Their only hope was elections. They voted overwhelmingly for change but their vote did not count. Today they are again stuck with the same violent regime with no hope whatsoever.

It seems as though it is impossible to challenge the system with bare hands. Any further challenge to ZANU PF seems to require that people arm themselves or that they totally lose the fear of death. These are hard choices.

International pressure through disengagement and sanctions has been instituted on Zimbabwe by USA, The EU and Australia. Sanctions are designed to force the targeted government or institution to change. Sanctions on Zimbabwe although designed to target specific individuals had other far reaching consequences on the general populace of Zimbabwe.

Instead of forcing the regime to bow out, sanctions actually gave them an excuse to act irresponsibly and ruthlessly. One example is when Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe diverted about $4, 5 million from Global Fund on HIV, TB and Malaria towards other unknown activities. The result was that donors found it hard to channel resources into the country resulting in massive starvation and health crises.

The government seemed to respond to sanctions by sanctioning its own people too. In 2008 at the height of food shortages, they barred relief agencies from operating in the country. They further barred World Vision, Care International and Catholic Relief Services from moving food from Zambia into Zimbabwe.

What could have contributed to the ineffectiveness of sanctions in forcing reform was the inability by Zimbabwe’s neighbours and other African states to augment western efforts. Only Botswana, Kenya and Tanzania seemed willing to apply pressure on Mugabe.

So, can international pressure force change in future? Sanctions can hopefully bring change in Zimbabwe if they are a concerted global initiative which every country is obliged to observe. The ideological differences amongst members of the UN Security Council remain an impediment. The unwillingness of Zimbabwe’s neighbours to support sanctions is based mostly on reluctance to commit resources to sustain the burden of refugees who would be anticipated to cross into those countries.

Apart from sanctions, international pressure can indirectly be applied on the current regime by constantly and lucratively supporting alternatives in the country. As an example, students’ relief schemes can be put in place to assist those students persecuted by the regime. This would not only assist courageous students but would also serve as incentives for more students to come out and challenge the regime.

It has become hard to find people who are willing to challenge the government through non-violent means; but with proper education and assurances of alternatives people of Zimbabwe may rise again but not within the foreseeable future.


Circumstantial changes in ZANU PF leadership

What will happen if Mugabe dies today? There are many scenarios: The Vice President Amai Mujuru can constitutionally be elevated to the post of President and take care of the transition. A rational woman with limited ego could be what Zimbabwe needs to manage the pressures that may arise from such a situation. What if Emmerson Munangagwa - the current Minister of Defence- decides to challenge her? Remembering that The Tsholotsho Declaration was meant to impede the rise Joyce Mujuru, their rivalry is documented.

If Munangagwa decides to challenge Joice Mujuru, two things may occur; she can give in or decide to fight. If she gives in then Munangagwa becomes the President and given his history of brutality; from the persecution of the Hamadziripi group in the late 1970s, his involvement in the Matebeleland massacres and his subsequent involvement in the 2008 elections, then Zimbabweans would most probably have to brace for a tougher time.

If Joyce Mujuru decides to fight on then we can expect a split of ZANU PF along factional lines. Both factions are guaranteed substantial military support. Solomon Mujuru was the commander of the Zimbabwe National Army until 1992. He still has substantial influence in the army and can be the pillar that his wife can rest on. Not to be outdone, Munangagwa was the Minister of State Security from 1980 to 1988, he is currently the Minister of Defence sealing his control over the military and intelligence of the country.

A civil war may occur. The impact and duration of such an event is beyond the scope of this article but suffice to mention that a civil is the last thing that Zimbabwe needs right now.

It has become clearer that reform in Zimbabwe is dependent more on events within ZANU PF that other things. With Mugabe unwilling to retire, it remains logical that Zimbabweans wait for his death for reform to occur. Unfortunately his death may also signal a cascade of events likely to cause more pain than happiness to Zimbabweans. Finally, let it be known that no condition is permanent- change may as well be on the cards for Zimbabwe.

The heroes of our time: a Heroes Day message.

Our constant exposure to ZANU PF propaganda has made us to believe that a hero is a person who is dead and is buried at the National Heroes Acre. We have never heard them conferring such a treasured title to anyone alive. They all become heroes when they die. What is the point of waiting for death before we can appreciate the works of our people? I am going to break tradition or propaganda and appreciate the works of some of the people I believe are heroes of our time.

Strive Masiyiwa; we all know him as the rich owner of Econet but it is not the money that makes him a hero. It is the struggle that he endured for us to have free airwaves. I cannot imagine how Zimbabwe could have turned if ZANU PF had continued to have monopoly over the Telecommunications industry. Indeed he fought his own war to set up his own business but in that war he managed to unshackle some of the chains that Zimbabwe was bound with. We are aware of the Supreme Court challenge that he made against the Post and Telecommunications Act which at that time gave monopoly to PTC. The argument was that this act violated Section 20 of the Constitution which stated “Every Zimbabwean has a right to receive and impart information without hindrance.” He pioneered the struggle for Freedom of Expression in an unprecedented manner. He helped to unmask Mugabe at a time when most people were busy worshiping him. Today we build our struggle on his humble contributions full of the wisdom that no matter how small our contribution is, we are adding a vital brick to the House of Zimbabwe. For this he is a hero.

Margaret Dongo. In 1995 she broke ranks with ZANU PF and decided to stand independently for the Harare South after the politburo refused her application to run again on a ZANU PF ticket. They favored Vivian Mwashita who was viewed more as Mugabe’s blue-eyed girl. Margaret lost to Mwashita but she took the matter to the courts where it was realized that about 41% of the people on the voters’ role were inaccurate. The election was annulled and she won the resultant rerun. She is one of the very first women in our society who have openly disagreed and challenged Mugabe. She is one of the first people who opened our eyes to the electoral fraud that ZANU PF has come to be synonymous with. She is a hero of our time.

Morgan Tsvangirai. There is no man in Zimbabwe today who can claim that he has sacrificed more than this man for the country. He lost a wife, he lost his freedom and on a number of occasions came close to losing his life. From as far back as 1989 he has been in the struggle for the total emancipation of the people of Zimbabwe. It is always easy to criticize those seated on higher ground but when all is said and done his contribution to the well-being of our political fibre is unparalleled. He is a living hero.

Arthur Mutambara. More often than not people tend to forget the good that people have done as they wallow in the inertia of the status quo. This man is the pioneer of the post independence struggle for democracy in Zimbabwe. His exploits inspired many of us into activism. He still continues to inspire many more people even now as Deputy Prime Minister. He is a hero.

Geoff Nyarota. This man gets onto this list because of his exploits in 1988 when he, together with Davison Maruziva unearthed what was by then the biggest corruption scandal involving high-ranking government ministers. Zimbabwe was still basking in the euphoria of independence when people like Enos Nkala and Maurice Nyagumbo were busy embezzling public funds. Given the barbaric history of ZANU PF when dealing with people perceived to be enemies, it had to take men of courage to carry out such a risky investigative journalism.

Nkululeko Sibanda, Tinashe Chimedza, McDonald Lewanika. These make it to this list as representative of the generation of student leaders who graced our land in the early years of this decade. These people took the struggle for academic freedom to levels that had never been reached in Zimbabwe. They openly challenged the ZANU PF hegemony and constantly organized Zimbabweans to rebel against the despotic rule in Zimbabwe. We should appreciate that the system had by then metamorphosed into a ruthless creature that did not hesitate to kill and to have people who are willing to organize the nation against such powers is just a privilege. The Final Push remains the biggest confrontation between Mugabe and the people. Students led this event. They are heroes of our time.

We have many more people who have selflessly served the people of Zimbabwe but are living somewhere in this world probably oblivious of the difference that they have made in our lives. So, the onus is on us to proclaim the value that these people have added to our lives so that even when they continue they know that the world notices!

Zimbabwe Youth Movement will soon provide the only genuine alternative for the people of Zimbabwe.

When MDC beat ZANU PF in the March 2008 elections, I said; there goes the power of money. When ZANU PF forced MDC out of the run-off election that followed, I said again; there goes the power of the gun. Today as I watch people celebrating the return of food onto the shelves I say to myself; behold the oppressed singing praise hymns to their slave masters!

The lesson we draw from the 2008 elections is that, given an option of food or hunger, human beings would choose food; but given the option of life or death people would rather choose life. Consequently economic pressure on a country ruled by the gun will never bring democratic change. Economic pressure can only bring change to countries whose leadership respects life. We have seen it in Iraq, North Korea, Burma, and Cuba; people died but the regimes continue to flourish.

The point I am trying to drive home is that, the strategy that MDC sought to apply in order to remove the Mugabe regime could have worked if the Zimbabwean political system was such that they (ZANU PF) respected the right to life. We all know they don’t. We have an unending list of people who lost their lives in the hands of ZANU PF and I am not fearful to label them as barbarians.

Before the 2008 March election I wrote an article published in The Zimbabwe Standard in which I warned Morgan that the Mugabe regime would celebrate popular vote only if it was the one winning. I warned him that even if he was to win, the ZANU PF maniacs would never allow him to rule because they believed in the superiority of the gun over the ballot. In the same article I advised him to beef up his claim to power through military coalitions especially with those who were sympathetic to Simba Makoni. I was labeled a Mavambo activist, and when reality began to unfold unto them; I could not help but feel dejected at the inability of my colleagues to read the signs.

A few years ago an argument on whether Zimbabwe was under blanket economic sanctions would have drawn a strong response from pro-MDC supporters but today given the public acknowledgement by Honorable Tendai Biti that the sanctions existed it has become common knowledge to every body. So ,with a bit of wisdom one can extrapolate that an MDC win in March was more about the stomach than an endorsement of MDC leadership. This dates back to that day in March 2002 when Morgan Tsvangirai came out in the open urging South Africa among other countries to institute blanket sanctions on Zimbabwe. The point here is that; MDC’s approach was as evil to the common man as was the barbaric butchering of people by ZANU PF because we also have evidence of people who died directly or indirectly from the effects of these sanctions.

Some may point to the fact that I was a strong MDC activist especially during my days at the University of Zimbabwe. My response is that, at that time MDC seemed to be on course to revolutionise the way business was done in Zimbabwe. It had always been my hope that it was going to realize its faults and mend them. Unfortunately along time these faults became cracks and allowed selfish elements to take control of the struggle albeit with undesirable consequences.

In an effort to give clarity to those who may be in doubt: The Worker and The Boss were housed together in MDC. It is common knowledge that the primary enemy of the worker is the boss. The food riots in 1998 were a demonstration against the poor working and living conditions of the worker in as much as it was a demonstration against the government. The Worker brought numbers while the Boss brought finances to the movement. The question was always going to be how MDC was going to manage this uncomfortable alliance to its advantage. The worker made all the dirty work, the Student made all the noise against privatization of education but on the policy document of MDC appeared anti-worker policies and pro-privatisation policies.

MDC failed to clearly state its position regarding the redistribution of land going only as far as saying it would not accept the pre-2000 situation nor the current situation. This was a testimony of its willingness to appease both the peasant and the former white farmer. Our expectation as landless peasants was that our party would advance clearly our interests unfortunately it seemed as if our importance would only be noticed when they come around looking for our votes.

We have seen however how the The Boss has used his financial muscle to wrestle power from the once vibrant Worker. It is the unwillingness of The Boss to partake in actions that may result in his loss that made the Mass Actions lose luster. It was the The Boss who betrayed the students when on 2 June 2003 instead of joining, rather chose to chicken out of the Final Push. It was The Boss who led to the split in the party, once upon a time when we had no cent we were one family. We never asked for money when duty called but slowly Mr Boss brought in the culture of mercenarism and loyalism. We began to live with warlords amongst ourselves whose word was final and any divergent view met with thorough bashing. Ask Peter Guhu who was almost thrown from the sixth floor of the Harvest House.

Today people celebrate the Government of National Unity as if it is a creation meant to serve them. What they fail to see is that, both MDC and ZANU PF are simply two evils in search of one another in the midst of darkness. ZANU PF is still the same machinery that killed thousands in Matebeleland, it is the same machinery whose hands are dripping with raw blood of our gallant comrades whose only wish was to be people amongst other people- Lookout Masuku, Solo Maimbodei, Zororo Duri, Talent Mabika, Batanai Hadzizi, Learnmore Jongwe and many more whose names are engraved in our virtual roll of honour. MDC is no longer the party that we cherished in the early years of this decade, it has become a party where the fundraiser is more important than the one in the trenches. A party whose leadership claims to care about us but does the opposite in return.

The GNU was formed to divert the attention of the people from the core of their problems. It was formed because both MDC and ZANU PF realized that people were beginning to question the authenticity of their claims that they cared about them. We all know that these two slave-masters have been fighting for supremacy whose measure could only be from the number of people they have managed to hoodwink. And here they were risking rejection from the same people. My prayers go to Morgan Tsvangirai, he could be genuine but Mr Boss has his leashes on him.

Wait and see the contents of the Constitution!

Some of us pushed for the two to form a GNU simply because we felt they both needed to take responsibility of rebuilding what they had both helped to destroy. I am happy that they are discovering how hard it is to rebuild Zimbabwe. Next time they will act responsibly.

I have tried to explain why MDC faltered. There is no way that it can still be revamped because Mr Boss has all the strings tied to his pockets. The only alternative is to build another movement that has clearer terms of interaction between conflicting entities. Mr Boss cannot be allowed to dictate nor lead a movement whose goal is seek the emancipation of the Worker. The Feudal Lord cannot lead a movement whose intention is to seek the empowerment of the Peasant. They are not us. They do not know what we have gone through. They do not identify with our tribulations. Our problems are but comfort under their beds. We need a movement that maintains its independence even in the face of financial temptations.

Mr Boss can help on his own will but knowing fully well that his help is not a passport to having his ideas getting priority. If Mr Boss has his own struggles, he should know that we are not prepared to fight on his behalf. If we are fighting the same enemy that does not necessarily make us friends but alliances can be built specifically to tackle a specific problem. In the process of forming alliances however Mr Boss should know that we would however not compromise our ultimate goal – to emancipate ourselves. Where we feel that he is an impediment to our progress, we will then not hesitate to confront him too, head-on. The choice is his.

Building such a movement is not an easy task but it is possible. The most important part of such an exercise is building an understanding of what Freedom is. In this regard Education becomes the pillar of our struggle. People should be able to understand that our struggle goes beyond the right to vote, is a struggle for our lives. Fortunately, the many brilliant heads in our movement have been working on how best to educate each other. The result has been the crafting of the Zimist Manifesto which clearly articulates our ideas.

Since its formation in January 2007, Zimbabwe Youth Movement has managed to show the world that a movement of genuinely committed people does not necessarily need donor aid to be effective. We have managed to build the movement into a genuinely independent platform where the youths of Zimbabwe can openly interact and explore their political beliefs without fear of reprisals.

We are where we are today due to commitment and selflessness. There are many comrades in our movement who sacrificed their stomachs simply to be able to board a bus to Chitungwiza to organize the movement there. We have many who have been arrested for volunteering to assist the movement as far as Shurugwi. This is the fabric that builds a true movement. It will be a great disappointment if the future leadership of ZYM shall choose to ignore such selfless comrades in our struggle.

At this point in time, given the overwhelming response that we have gotten from our membership in and outside the country, it will not be an overstatement if I conclude that one day- not so faraway from today- Zimbabwe shall wake up to a new generation of people that is willing to confront the devil head-on. They say the most dangerous man is one with an IDEA and a CONVICTION!

Freeman Forward Chari
Secretary General
Zimbabwe Youth Movement