Zimbabwe’s ruling establishment or military political
complex are consistently referring to how they intend to stop focusing on ‘politics’.
Instead, as claimed by President Mnangagwa, they want to put all their energy
into what they have called ‘the economy’.
Some ruling party pundits have gone so far as to equate that
the ruling establishment’s slogan of ‘Zimbabwe is open for business’ also
applies to politics.
And here they essentially are arguing that there is no
longer any need to make politics as polarised as before, but more significantly,
to remove any assumptions of high stakes end games as was the case with their predecessor
leader Robert Mugabe (arguments which can only be made by those that anticipate
an electoral victory.)
The more significant intention however appears to make the opposition
appear somewhat agenda-less or even in some instances, irrelevant.
This is one of the arguments that Herald columnist Igomombe
recently put into the public domain. Referring
to the ‘death of party politics’ he writes, ‘Looking in the crystal ball, Zimbabwe after July 30 will pass for a
highly de-politicized Nation. There is likely to be a net swing to
wealth-creation and the founding of a technocratic ethos which it needs to
underpin that swing.’
The fortification of the ‘ease of doing business’ mantra,
together with the ruling military political complex anticipation of a July 2018
electoral victory means that they do not want an opposition. Or that they will work effectively to
undermine it by giving it a rope long enough to hang itself. This in the form of speaking the language of
global capital, neoliberalism accompanied with strands of state
capitalism.
The assumption is that once they take away the economic
agenda from the opposition by courting global capital on the basis of
incumbency before and after the 2018 election, it will cease to be taken as
seriously as it was at its peak. Add to
this the internal structural weaknesses of the opposition would also make the
intention/task easier.
And all under the guise of a ‘new dispensation’.
The ruling establishment’s functionaries are therefore keen
on constructing a new domestic ‘hegemony’ that is in tandem with the hegemony
of neoliberalism. And to reduce opposition politics to nothing but a mere aberration
that would never get into power. Or
having the political arrogance to assist what remains of it to ‘democratically’
exist.
Regrettably these evident political intentions of the ruling
military political complex for the 2018 elections will only be popularly
realised after the event. The opposition
may have an idea of these ruling establishment intentions, but has become to
enamoured to electoral movement squabbling and campaigning as to be unable to
think beyond their individual political careers.
To create an initial form of counter-hegemony Zimbabweans
need to challenge the ruling establishment’s neoliberal narrative on the basis
of clear alternative social democratic values that embrace more the people than
they do capital. The opposition
political parties need to learn to seek to distinguish themselves from the
ruling party on the basis of values as opposed to personalities and age.
Once the ruling military political complex’s narrative is
challenged, it is important that there be the use of relevant public platforms (online
and offline) to increase the public debate on a different understanding of what
would be a more people-centered national political economy.
This would also mean that the value proposition of elections
should also change. That is, we would
still need to change the political culture that considers elections, electoral
processes only as national events. I know that this is a hard ask, but it is entirely
possible.
While I cannot suggest who should do this, I know that the primary
responsibility to do so is with those that would want to be elected, the
political parties. And in particular,
those that are in the opposition, who the ruling establishment is only too
happy to see in their weak state.
But even more so, for pro-democracy activists, who while not
co-opted into ‘incremental change’ frameworks, understand the undemocratic intentions
of the ruling establishment. Knowing
full well that incremental change leads to an political elite permanence in
power, pro-democracy activists need to be ideologically clear in how they
intend to put out counter-narratives as well as how they raise the democratic accountability
of political parties. Internally and
externally.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment