A Zimbabwean View of Black History Month.

 By Takura Zhangazha*

A presentation to Litfest Zimbabwe’s Black History Month Commemorations

Thursday 27 February 2020

Cde Chairperson,

Let me begin by thanking the organisers for extending an invitation for me to be here at this important event.  And also for continuing a spirit of engagement with ideas that relate to the historical linkages of Africans beyond their geographical location.

In discussing Black History Month (BHM) from a Zimbabwean perspective one would still have to make reference to its historical linkages to Pan African consciousness.  This is because a great number of ideas and organizing around the liberation of the African continent initially began with the work of African American leaders such W. E DuBois and Marcus Garvey.  It was DuBois that was to lead in organizing various Pan African congresses such as the ones held in Paris in 1919 or London and Brussels in 1921 where DuBois is quoted as having said

 “The beginning of wisdom in inter-racial contact is the establishment of political institutions among suppressed peoples.  The habit of democracy must be made to encircle the world.” (See Legum C. 1962. Pan Africanism. A Short Political Guide )

Again DuBois was to be present at the famous sixth Pan African Congress held in Manchester the United Kingdom in 1945 where eventual luminaries such as Kwame Nkrumah, George Padmore, Jomo Kenyatta, Peter Abrahams among others were present.

All of these conferences were clear in their call for Africa’s freedom from colonialism and the democratic urgency of ending racial discrimination.  And they indeed sowed the mustard seed for bigger organisations such as the Organization of African Unity (OAU) now known as the African Union. 

I deliberately mention this because often times on social media it would appear that BHM is entirely an African American affair. Or sometimes made to appear like a symbolic show as opposed one that is grounded in an organic history and shared solidarity between people in the, initially forced by the salve trade, African Diaspora and those that remained on the continent.

Even after the slave trade and while African Americans were still fighting for their own domestic civil liberties it was never lost on them that there is the mother continent of Africa that they could and should always show acts of solidarity to.  Or even seek to return to such as the Marcus Garvey led back to Africa movement. 

Where we fast forward to the more exciting civil rights movements as invariably led by Martin Luther King, Malcom X and the (real) Black Panthers in varying respects the umbilical cord between African Americans and us in Africa was never lost.  Reference to anti-colonial struggles was a regular theme and again, the struggle against racial discrimination was shared. 

While a lot of us now have engaged with this history through movies of the era’s black leaders, there were African leaders who also remembered the shared history such as Nkrumah, Nyerere and Cabral. 

But where we now look at the contemporary understanding of this shared history is increasingly being lost.  In an age of rapid globalization and a patent fear of African emigration to the global north, the solidarity has been suffering strenuous pressure. 

This is probably due to at least three reasons.  The first being that the urgency of African liberation from colonialism as linked to racial equality in the USA is no longer apparent.  African countries (barring one, The Saharawi Republic) are now independent and also have to now work with the formal American government as opposed to the likes of WE DuBois.

The second reason is that solidarity between African Americans and Africans while previously having a ‘return to the motherland’ significance is saddled with a ‘leave the motherland’ surge. A desire to emigrate to the United States, possibly via a green card or any other legal means by young Africans means that while race relations progressively got better, American society became more attractive than home.  And there’s the general change of attitude toward Africa by many African Americans who would probably not romantically refer to it as home after seeing and reading the news about African conflicts or disease outbreaks either on social and mainstream media. 

The third is that of a dying pan African consciousness among African American and African leaders.  This is attributable to either a dying intellectualism on the same topic or else a stronger desire to be recognized as universal beings than to claim a uniqueness of Pan African history or Africanness. The previous historic and organic intellectual link has been lost out in the age of globalization and consumerism.  Indeed while we have the globally acclaimed Black Panther move for its portrayal of African Americans, its mythical value can always be turned to confirm stereotypes of the continent (animals, forests, kings and magic). Or alternatively as a momentary and cathartic desire for recognition. 

But as always Black History Month always serves to inspire us here in Africa.  Even if its officially a celebration of African American History.  The latter being a history that would never have existed without reference to Africa and its struggles for liberation.  Not only from the mercantile capitalism that was the Atlantic Slave Trade, but also colonialism, racial discrimination and now neoliberalism. We would do well to build new organic linkages based on democratic values and with an understanding of the need for a revived Pan African consciousness that fully embraces our historical African Diaspora.  Not just via the entertainment industry but also on the difficult political and economic issues of the day.

Thank you.

(Takura Zhangazha spoke here in his personal capacity takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)

Reality vs Preference: Expectations of Change in Zimbabwe

By Takura Zhangazha*

I have a number of politically partisan friends.  Some of them are borderline 'rabid' in their political opinions. Even if one attempts to invoke some sort of rationality to the matter or the issue under debate in invariably animated conversation. Or if one wants to know the facts of the matter under discussion.  Things, issues tend to be viewed with Manichean lenses.  So you will for example get a statement, mid animated conversation like, "Okay, I don't really care for the facts.  I just dont like these guys.  They have (either) destroyed the country (or) they have brought sanctions on the country."

This is exacerbated by social media and its now well known but still existent echo chambers. That is, how the medium (social media) to the greater extent is manipulating our behaviour and emotions over issues that we would hold emotionally hold dear.  Or alternatively telling us exactly what we would like to hear. On repeat.  Mainly based on individual experiences (upbringing, loss of jobs/income or even historical connections to the ruling establishment or the opposition.)

In all of this, some of my friends on either side of Zimbabwe's political divide anticipate  revolutionary change only in its populist form. That is a change that is predicated on the assumed charisma of the people that they would follow.  Not in any ideological sense.  Let alone, if they are sympathetic to the ruling party, in an historical sense.  What would motivate their anticipation of change would be considerations of their ability to live the 'good life' via the benevolence or proximity to those that would yield highly personalised political power. Or those that are feeding directly from the trough.

If there would be anything that could be considered revolutionary about their opinions it is the anticipation of personal livelihood 'revolutions'. Getting a new car, sending the kids to the more expensive and status symbol schools while earning income that sustains, even if temporarily, a lifestyle reflective of arrival at success that is recognized by family, friends and others.  As emanating from either what is said at church or in the movies or social media.

And this is across classes, an interesting phenomenon if ever there was one when analysing Zimbabwean society.  The rural farmer now shares the same aspiration as the urban informal worker who in turn wants to live the life of the middle class.  With the latter also wanting to live the life of the noveau rich, never mind how they get their income or sustain their lifestyles.

There would appear to be no middle road about national change expectations.  We all know we are different.  But we all almost aspire to the same things as measurements of individual success.  As judged by peers.

So there are no fundamentally national standards of what should be progressive change in Zimbabwe. Just individualistic ones.  So instead of public transport, we all want a car.  Instead of a public heath system which is affordable and efficient for all, we would invariably want to have medical aid that takes us to private medical care. Or instead of improved public education we would individually prefer to send our children to profiteering schools that chase more foreign currency than they focus on creating a better future.

We may not be able to see it, but we are losing a common value thread to our national fabric. And that is the first reality that we have to contend with vis-a-vis our desire for change.  Or at least our perceptions of it.  Our nasty version of individualism does not portend any considerations of posterity and even in its materialistic occurrence, is patently unsustainable.

The second reality is that those who are in the ruling establishment now all of this only too well.  they have been riding relatively dangerous waves of public anger at their performance and are not flinching in their neo-liberal intentions.  Because for them, the public anger is exactly that. Anger that is ephemeral and dissipates on the basis of  a national individualism they are very comfortable with and one that they know has no patience for a collective and organic national consciousness. If it becomes a tad too high in relation to emotions, they shut down what they perceive to be its main purveyor, urban social media.

The Zimbabwe government's change template is relatively clear now. It is to manage change expectations to the minimalist standards possible.  Within a legalistic framework that would make Edmund Burke smile in his grave.  It is an incrementalism that tallies with individual egos than it does a national and organic consciousnesses.   For example, the ruling party will within its rights as it has a two thirds majority in both houses of Parliament, tinker withe the constitution.  Legally so.

It will also permit critical expression in so far as it gives pretense at democracy for a global audience (after all the 2018 elections were about international re-engagement.)  It will also allow relatively convoluted anti-corruption crusades again to play to an international private capital gallery. Above all else, it will be seen to be doing something, mixing a neo-liberal political-economic outlook with phases of state benevolence such as providing ZUPCO buses, distributing food aid and occasionally giving the impression of caring about public health institutions while at the same pursuing their privatisation. 

This is a reality many of us would refuse to accept. Especially if we are based in the Diaspora.  But it is a reality that can no longer be wished away.  For now. There is no revolution on the  horizon.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)

CoronaVirus Outbreak and Africa, Fallacy of Othering Others Already Othered With You

By Takura Zhangazha*

How you think of yourself is always about personal standards, values and even assumptions.  Most often from the standpoint of comparison with someone else or the ‘other’.  This is probably the same when it comes to nationalities, ethnicity and/or racial identity. All probably backed up by extensive academic fields such as anthropology, social psychology, literature or post-colonial studies among others.  Together with their underpinning Hegelian philosophies.  For people in the global south this therefore is always something somewhat sensitive.  Both in its individual as well as collective sense.  And in the immediate factual historicity of colonialism. Be it as experienced in Asia, Africa, Australia and even more long duree in South America.  

In this, the considerations of the other, also points to ‘discovery’ of not only material wealth but new animal and plant species as well as diseases such as malaria.  All viewed from the perspective of the enlightened explorer who, if they survive, will eventually embellish the tale of what they encountered in the nether regions where the ‘others’ would exist.  Thus enabling further visits and discoveries together with their relatively fictional narratives.  As told from their own standpoint. (‘Heart of Darkness’ anyone?)

Of course the assumption is that all of this should have ended with the political and economic struggles that liberated not only 'the other' but also their physical territories. But regrettably reality and perception refused to meet. 

Unfortunately, while great efforts at a global understanding and practice of human equality has been done, there is always those that would define themselves as exceptional. Not only historically (which includes hanging on to the long lost grandeur of colonial empire) but with regards to newfound enthusiasm for nationalist gate-keeping in an age of not only economic globalization but ongoing global struggles to enhance human equality and eradicate racism.

Africans are all too familiar with what it means to be ‘othered’ where it comes to being the source of many a potential global health malady/ pandemic The most recent being that of the ‘Ebola’ virus.  Global media stories while telling the factual truth of the tragic loss of African lives are not immune from embellishment.  Or the usual bias in coverage of nationalities that die versus those from their own countries for not only profitable reasons but also a default othering.  Some deaths are always more important than others.  

So when the World Health Organisation (WHO) declares the Corona virus outbreak as a global health emergency as is now the case, some of us would have surprised at the fact that the virus has not been linked in its origin to the African continent.  But even then, that does not make it in any way a palatable fact because it happened elsewhere. This is a global crisis. Full-stop.   

But regrettably it was an opportunity for some people world over to make racist and dehumanizing statements on social media concerning where the Corona virus was first detected. This being in the Chinese city of Wuhan.  And the social media videos which are without doubt cast in racist stereotype went viral globally. 

And of course, some Africans not wanting to be left out, ironically joined in on these unpalatable racist tropes. I have referred to it as ‘ironic’ because it is exactly that.  The othered trying to other those already othered in similar historical fashion.  Almost like an Orientalist’s dream come true where the victim behaves like the perpetrator. 

While one can argue that this is caused by what would be a natural fear of death, that argument alone does not begin to justify racist commentary and attitudes toward the outbreak of a virus that affects all humans.

It all comes back full circle to who we as Africans may unwittingly most want to be identified with.  Even though we regularly face direct and indirect cultural rejection.  Or to subconsciously assume that while we may not be wholly accepted, we would at least be better than those that too would be othered anyway. Even if the corona virus outbreak had not happened.

Or to mix African geo-politics as played out by a scramble for its resources as a reason to want to politicize a clearly global health crisis. And again fall into the same trap of assuming a false proximity to the un-othered.

As advised by the WHO and emphasized by many progressive international organizations involved in global health, the gravity of the situation with the Corona virus outbreak cannot be understated.  What it definitely does not require are racist references that spread not only hate and fear but a return to a repressive past. 

Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)