By Takura Zhangazha*
When President Mugabe was sworn in on August 22 2013 some in his party’s circles and sympathetic analysts equated the inauguration ceremony as being the
equivalent of the historical 1980 arrival of a newly independent Zimbabwe. In
reality it turned out to be a comparatively less celebrated ceremony and more an
immediate post-election event minus any euphoric expectations of the future.
Almost two weeks after the inauguration, there is limited reason to expect that
it still remains carved in the collective memory of a majority of Zimbabweans.
What obtains is more or less a wait and see attitude about what the now singular ruling party can and
will do for all Zimbabweans.
So as it is, its recent sweeping victory (contested and as
real as it is) signifies, more than anything else, a return of Zanu
Pf to singular political hegemony over our country.
And this is not new political territory for the ruling party or the
people of Zimbabwe. The only difference is that it has occurred after a drawn
out four year period of power sharing guaranteed by the regional body, SADC. This makes the electoral triumph
of Zanu Pf bitter sweet. However, that they had found themselves in a situation where
they had to share power in the first place was (and probably remains) evidence
of their weakened political hegemony.
With this electoral victory there are however
signs of concerted attempts by the ruling party at a ‘revivalist hegemony’. This was particularly evidenced by their quick reference to the recent inauguration
ceremony as being akin to that of 1980. The reality of the matter is that it is
not going to be an easy road for this new found revivalism in Zanu Pf.
The reasons why it is a difficult task for the ruling party
are many and begin with understanding that electoral victory alone is not enough
to define hegemony. And that power acquisition can sometimes end up as being power
for its own sake while counter-hegemonic forces (if there are any) work toward taking
over.
Perhaps the leaders of Zanu Pf realize this, even if by
default. This ‘default’ mode was more defensive and in aide of their retention of their
hold on power than it was organic. It relied fundamentally on three pillars.
Namely, stubbornly holding onto the nationalist (liberation war) narrative and
its justification for the use of violence; the compulsory acquisition of land
and the ongoing though haphazard economic indigenization programme. All of the
latter pillars are the ones that have in part led to some pundits (including a former
South African President) explaining why Zanu Pf not only won the July 2013
election but also why they seem to be on the ascendancy again, even without internal
leadership renewal.
It is however the aftermath of the victory that is most
problematic for Zanu Pf’s hold on its new-found revivalist hegemony. The pillars
upon which the election rested required a visible and lived counter hegemonic
project in the form of the MDC-T as well as the inclusive government. Going into the next five years without such
an opposing view and action point is in itself a serious challenge for the
ruling party. Particularly with regards
to constructing a new cultural edifice around not only the legitimacy of its electoral
retention of power but also its usage of the latter.
The questions that emerge is how does Zanu Pf shift its electoral
strategies into sustainable economic and democratic realities not only for those
that voted for it but for all Zimbabweans? Or alternatively Is it capable of overcoming its electoral contestation
mode in order to govern without direct reference to a real or imagined opponent
for the better of all Zimbabweans?
The answers to these questions, depending on where they come
from, will be fraught with emotion and arbitrary defensiveness if not outright
dismissal. What however remains apparent is that for all its victory celebrations
(which we shall certainly be seeing a lot of in the coming months), Zanu Pf
faces a monumental challenge in broadening and even democratising the
imperatives of its hegemony.
Five years is not a long time in politics. It is most
certainly true that Zanu Pf will not be able to sing the same songs over and
about indigenization, land reform or the liberation struggle in 2018. At least not to the same guitar or drum
rhythms. It is party that is going to be judged less on the basis of its past
or electoral rhetoric as pitted against a strong counter-hegemony. Instead the judgment
calls will be more on the basis of its ability to perform democratically and in
the best interests of all Zimbabweans.
So as it is, while many may be pleasantly surprised or thoroughly
shocked by Zanu Pf’s victory in the July 2013 elections, a deeper analysis
points to a fragility of the same. The ruling party’s return to full government may be
indicative of the revival of its complete hegemony over Zimbabwean politics but
a return is not the final arbiter of its effectiveness. It’s the performance of
the same that is. And on that, I am certain there will be new counter-hegemonies
to challenge for state power in 2018.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity. If
you decide to use this article elsewhere, please acknowledge that you got it
from takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment