Brief Remarks to the Marxism 2019, International Socialist Organisation 30th Anniversary Commemorations: "Crisis of Capitalism, Failures of Austerity, Neoliberalism
and Elite Convergence."
02 November 2019, Harare Gardens Bowling Club, Harare,
Zimbabwe.
Cdes,
Thank you very much for inviting me to be part of the proceedings
of Marxism 2019 in Zimbabwe. I must also take the opportunity to congratulate
the International Socialist Organisation (ISO) and its Zimbabwe Chapter on its
30th anniversary. As one of
the themes outlined for this year’s meet up state, we are correct to celebrate
these 30 years of resistance and building a Socialist alternative in
Zimbabwe. Not as an act of blind faith
but as a reflection of a critical and progressive national and global
consciousness.
And for many an activist, both old and young, their first
interaction with political consciousness has generally been based on a left
leaning, people centered search for social and economic justice. Even if we did not at that time even know
either Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Fanon or Cabral, many of us clearly had an
inclination toward leftist thought and leaning.
Either based on our scant or propagandised understanding of
the values of the liberation struggle or our own personal encounters with
traumatic social and economic injustice.
Or even upon arriving to adulthood and looking for ideological homes,
either at the workplace, rural working spaces or tertiary learning institutions.
Either way, there is no Zimbabwean who would claim to be critically
nationally conscious without having made contact with Marxism in one form or
the other. And that is the importance of
this annual meeting. It is a national
testament to our continuing pursuit of progressive ideas.
But apart from this ‘weapon of theory’ as advised by
Amilcar Cabral, we must always have a firm understanding of national and
international realities.
In this regard, Marxism’s greatest value in our African
contexts has been its ability for us to not only analyse our colonial, post
colonial and neo-liberal political economies, not just with a view of interpreting
them, but as Marx himself is oft quoted as saying, to change the same contexts.
And to do so in ways that in our reality reject dogma or
false assumptions of the 'end of history'. Either by way of the ‘there is no alternative’ (TINA) or the increasing religious and populist characteristics of
our country.
Or the rise of an
increasingly racist populism of the global north caused to the greater extent
by as the title of this particular session suggests, a crisis of capitalism,
neoliberalism, austerity and elite cohesion.
But back to our own African and Zimbabwean context. We
should be aware that global capitalism has invariably had the most cruel impact
on human livelihoods.
This was as
predicted by Marx, by Lenin and Kwame Nkrumah. Hence when we fought for
liberation the ideological home of every well-meaning, well defined struggle
for liberation on the continent was always grounded in Marxism.
Even in our post-independence, post liberation politics, again
and again a majority of progressive opposition movements initially would revert
to Marxian analysis of the failure of post-independence governments.
What however has also since happened, especially in our own
Zimbabwean context is that the mainstream political actors have all begun to
lose sight of a necessary Marxian consciousness about our national political
economy as placed in a still stridently capitalist global world order.
If ever the term ‘capture’ applied politically, it would be
to say that on either side of the political divide, our mainstream political
actors, not only in Zimbabwe, but across the majority of the continent, have
had this capture done to them by ‘neo-liberalism’. All laced with a strong desire to be
associated with the real capitalists of the global north.
In our particular case, the ruling Zanu PF party has made it
abundantly clear that its raison 'd’etre apart from power itself, is to open up
Zimbabwe to the ravages of neoliberalism. While the main opposition MDC-Alliance
argues that it would be better at doing the same. Except a bit more liberally.
It would be easy to try and argue that the ideological
convergence of the ruling Zanu Pf and the opposition MDC-Alliance is what we
could simply refer to as elite cohesion.
That would not be correct.
Elite cohesion in our case would relate to the collaboration of three
key arms of capitalism. This being the state, capital and bourgeoisie civil
society. These three create what Gramsci
would refer to as hegemony or a unique symbiotic cultural-economic dominance
over society.
In our case we have
the Zanu Pf government intent on constructing such a hegemony. It is courting private capital as a priority. A development which it believes will make it much easier for it to co-opt bourgeois
civil society to accept what would be an elitist social contract.
That there is resistance from the mainstream opposition at
the moment is regrettably not enough until the latter departs from a relatively
baffling commitment to neo-liberalism. Both domestically and globally.
What is however more significant is the perceptions of the
people of Zimbabwe about their current predicament.
If Che Guevara once said
that at the risk of sounding ridiculous, revolutionaries must always be guided by the
greatest feelings of love, in the Zimbabwean context, those who would seek to
understand how to construct a democratic socialist alternative must be guided
by the greatest understanding of collective human emotion as motivated by a heightened materialism/commodity
fetishism.
And in the process to crosscheck the increasingly false
blurring of class differences in which envy and desire for the commodities of
the affluent has come to be sold as the epitome of social success.
This materialism and commodity fetishism as causing a blurring of class differences in Zimbabwe is exactly
what neo-liberalism and global/local capital desires. All in order to give the
impression the ‘free market’ is fair to everyone regardless of whether they are in
Bikita or Borrowdale. Luveve or Hillside.
The end effect of this is a false or unrealistic and unsustainable
aspiration of the individualised citizens of the state. This being a
context in which even relatively minimal progress is temporary and short lived. Thus creating a cycle of false but highly emotional
expectations of what the individual and state can deliver. While at the same time destroying the organic fabric of what should be a distributive, egalitarian state.
This is a difficult point to make in our context largely because
it always has a double meaning. We all aspire to the good life. Our
problem is that we now do so too individually and without a collective sense of
economic and social justice even within what we can control. That is the state.
This is where a Cabralist understanding of democratic
socialist values becomes imperative. There
is an urgent need to clearly outline the alternatives of what we are fighting against with
a firm understanding that it is not enough to tout only individual happiness as
the panacea to solving the economic crisis in Zimbabwe.
This means for the trade unions/ associations,
fighting for salaries in whatever form it is no longer enough to function on the basis of catharsis. We need a holistic framework and understanding
of what neo-liberalism is and what it does.
And this begins by us working together on a democratic socialist
deal for our country. Not just for
ourselves but also as an example for the region and the African continent.
This democratic socialist deal for Zimbabwe would entail
ensuring a fair start and fair life for all. As enabled by rejecting
neo-liberalism. No matter from which quarter it is being pushed from. And it would be characterized by the stopping
of the privatization of social services and goods such as transport, health,
water, education.
Including the strengthening
of the civil service to meet its public service role as opposed to its
purging.
And to ensure that the same said social services are
distributed evenly across class with a special emphasis on a rapid
infrastructure development of our rural areas (as opposed to their urbanization). And again with a clear understanding that
climate change is no longer a rumour but a firm reality that we have been
currently undergoing directly with the increased frequency of droughts and
cyclones.
And that foreign direct investment no matter where it comes from,
does not compromise the people’s welfare or cause damage to the environment. All the while with the state remaining
committed to the observance of the political, socio-economic rights of the people.
Thank you cdes. The struggle continues.
*Takura Zhangazha spoke here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment