By Takura Zhangazha*
There is an arrogance to the recent cabinet reshuffle by President
Mugabe. It is an arrogance
that is less motivated by a desperation but an intention to instill a new order
within his party’s rank and file.
The fairness or lack of it is for those directly
affected to determine. But there is a
reconfiguration which is obviously part of a major plan instituted by those
within the party and state intelligence services in the aftermath of a dramatic
purge of former leaders.
If such
re-configurations were limited to internal party processes they would be of limited consequence. That they have spilled over into government means they have a bearing on the state, its citizens
and its future.
The overall initial import of these ongoing changes in Zanu
Pf appear to be more personal and ambition laden. The reality is they go beyond succession and
are in search of a new permanence to Zanu Pf’s long duree rule. Inclusive of attendant and emergent
ethnocentric dimensions.
Purging the former vice President Joice Mujuru and her
allies, unprecedented in that party’s history as it was, is not the actual
focal point of its new shift. With more
than a two thirds majority in parliament and a 61% presidential vote count, it
is using its 2013 electoral victory to set the standard for the 2018 harmonised
poll. With or without its incumbent leader, Robert Mugabe.
It wants to emerge equally if not more victorious in 2018.
But in a less factionalised manner. Not that
there will be no factions among its rank and file. They will just be more manageable and less
about alternative centers of power. And
as some of its own media columnists have been arguing, it is not that it will
not want an opposition. Instead it will want
an opposition that will never have as real a chance of ousting it from power electorally
as was almost the case in 2008.
So it has no problem cajoling or setting up stages where
other political leaders feel they can challenge for power. Especially if they have been expelled from
its membership. The intention is to consolidate its current hold on
functional power through use of repressive tactics while attempting to court
global capital, with lessons from China, and retaining full political control in
a free market, neo-liberal economic ideological setting.
This latter point of a neo-liberal, free market economy is particularly
interesting given the fact that Zanu Pf’s political raison d’être has been a
radical nationalism that is both historical but largely elitist in output and
endgame. In fact, any other measurement of
the success of this radical nationalism have largely been by default and not
necessarily planned organizational intent.
Hence the increase in occurrences of reversal such as the eviction of
settlers from ‘prime land’ earmarked in colonial state blueprint plans for modernist
‘development’.
So essentially, Zanu Pf has ended the populist phase of its
Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP).
It will however insist that the latter is irreversible and also insist
on it being revolutionary. The jury is still out on such an assertion.
What is now apparent after President Mugabe’s state of the
nation address last month is that these radical national economic policy phases
are basically over and that Zimbabwe is open for business. So long one does not raise the issue of
property rights prior to the FTLRP. And
so long one understands that the indigenization policy is neo-liberal. It must just involve black Zimbabweans in the
process of making money off state/public assets such as water, land, health and
education among others.
The primary intention is therefore to make Zanu Pf the only successful
political organisation, despite its internal upheavals, in the country going forward. That is why the ruling
party has its fingers in every major pie of the political economy. From housing
schemes (land barons), convoluted reform processes (IMPI, constitutional commissions),
redesigning the capital city, privatization of basic services (water,
health, electricity, public transport, education) and retention to the greater
extent the base and superstructure of the settler state political economy, and
you have a recipe for the hegemonic retention of power via state largesse.
This would mean even those who campaign against the ruling
party will eventually mimic its strategies and materialism. Unless they are
indeed revolutionaries of a new ilk and with the firmest of political convictions.
The end effect, if not already evident, shall be clearer by
2018, that is the individuation of Zimbabwean society. It remains evident that with
the tragic demise of the extended family, the fissures between the rural and
the urban, emigration and exportation of our youngest and brightest minds, the material value placed on common existence
has become individuated. Common values, shared beliefs are fewer and far
between, especially if there is no anticipated material benefit. Unless they
fall into the ambit of Zanu Pf’s understanding of its own hegemony.
Given the shared neo-liberal ideological grounding of the
opposition parties manifestos with Zanu Pf, a thing the latter party is
completely aware of, our politics toward 2018, will be routine with personalities dominating the agenda as opposed to issues. That is, an
anticipation, that yes, there will be political opposition, but it will never
accede to executive power through being fundamentally different from the incumbent ruling party. So long it remains abstract and panders to global
best practices without application to our national context. And as in Orwell’s
Animal Farm, we all run the risk of eventually looking not being able to tell
the difference.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment