The July 31 elections and the instalment of a government have ended a historic era, one that some thought would lay the foundation for a better and unpolarised Zimbabwe.
Develop Me with Tapiwa Gomo
Most people hoped for another coalition government for two good reasons. One side of that government had experience, but lacked ideas, while the other had good ideas, but lacked government experience. These two are fundamental requirements for any structure in shaping the future of our beloved country, especially where capable people have been denied the chance to govern in over 33 years.
But then, that did not happen. Elections delivered a Zanu PF government constituted of mostly same old faces whose ideas and ways of thinking are so predictable, so is the aridness and barrenness of our future.
It is a team that boasts the dogma of nationalism, warriors of imperialism and champions of pan-Africanism and yet their history and footprint drip despair and poverty.
It is a team that abrogates itself from the indelible inscription of the worst poverty ever experienced in our post-independence history. Yes, we are poorer now than we were 20 years ago because of them. They can blame the West, but the West does not owe us any favour.
Its team rode the horse of nationalism for three decades and has finally hit a cul de sac. Nothing wrong about nationalism as it is a belief or ideology with which individuals identify with, or becoming attached to, one’s nation.
Nationalism involves national identity, by contrast with the related construct of patriotism, which involves personal behaviours that support the nation’s decisions and actions. Enrolment into that philosophy should not be owned by a few, neither can it be denied to anyone wishing to be one. Nationalism must be allowed to manifest into different forms.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
It is not about who did what during the struggle for independence. In fact there are many more nationalists who are fighting for the development of our country outside the corridors of Zanu PF.
However, ours is crafted and coined by a battalion of those who only see war as the entrance to the school of nationalism. They have even authored an illusionary war on imperialism on the unfounded assumption that Britain wants to recolonise Zimbabwe.
While imperialism implies an unequal human and territorial relationship between societies, winning the battle over it does not translate into poverty alleviation. That imperialism has been recycled and repackaged into many forms and narratives is an indication of the dearth of ideas that predominates the corridors of our leadership.
It seems they have reached a dead end and they are barren of new ideas. And the only option when one reaches a dead end is either to stay in the enclosure of imperialism or reverse. Sadly these are the ideological gears that have been driving our country over the past decade.
Did anyone ever dared to ask when we are going to win this war against imperialism or whether it is winnable? What will then happen the day we win over imperialism? How are people’s lives going to be transformed by that illusory victory? Does it exist at all? If it does not, why then have we invested a lot of resources into a non-existent war? Or maybe we were fooled? Or perhaps someone was cheating us?
Countries that emerged from poverty never fought illusionary wars against imperialism. In fact, in their national plans or political manifestos never sought to fight imperialism, but to drive development and progress.
They invested in their people, local ideas and supported programmes that work without night vigils of singing political songs. China did not pit itself against Europe or the USA to become a global economic giant that it is today even though economic growth attracts enemies. Neither did Japan mobilise its people to fight a non-existence war on imperialism nor did Malaysia blame the West for poor service delivery.
They demonstrated leadership, took the initiative and responsibility to escape poverty. They realised that imperialism is an illusion that enburdens weak-minded States and hence to address the poverty problem does not require incessant verbal attacks on imperialism itself, but to find ways of rising from being a weak State to a strong state.
For as long as countries are interdependent, some States will always dominate others. Trade imbalances will always be skewed against the weaker States and powerful States will always impose themselves on weaker States.
The solution is not to complain about it because that surely does not make Britain stop their appetite for African raw materials. They have a nation to please and voters to entice.
Complaining about the situation without making ourselves stronger makes us even more vulnerable to manipulation and imperialism.
