A Casual Neo-Colonial Cruelty: Zim’s Urban Local Government

By Takura Zhangazha*

What is the meaning of the urban and its attendant aspirational lifestyle for many Zimbabweans?  This is a question that rarely gets asked in the now because the answer would be assumed to be historically obvious.  But in most cases remaining oblivious of the same past.  This is a point I will return to during the course of this write up.

Recently there has been a public outcry over the demolition of houses in one of Harare’s densely populated suburbs, Budiriro.  According to mainstream media the now demolished houses were built on illegally allocated residential stands. And that it was the City of Harare (CoH) that went out of its way to seek a high court order to not only evict but demolish the houses that had been built by what one can consider poorer urban residents of the capital city. 

As is known, no public outcry can/will occur without catching the attention of political parties and their leaders. In the immediate aftermath of the demolitions the political blame-games and showmanship began. In reality and on social media.  The ruling Zanu Pf party and senior central government officials accused the opposition MDC-Alliance run CoH of being corrupt and incompetent.  In turn  the opposition leadership not only countered the accusation but went a step further to seek to tour the affected areas.  And in saying ‘affected areas’ I do not mean it in the sense of a natural disaster, but a fundamentally ‘man-made’ one.  

On either end of  the political divide what without a doubt will be quickly and sadly forgotten are the voices of the victims of such violent evictions. Never mind the ineptitude of CoH local authorities and the central national ministry in charge of the latter. 

Some pundits will be wont to argue that there is also the question of the gullibility of those that purchased these allegedly illegal residential stands from land barons.  On the face of it, this is a fair point.  But it misses the fundamental issue I raised earlier in querying the meaning of the urban for many young Zimbabweans.

And this is perhaps where we should put on our thinking caps. Even for a little while. The urban settlement is historically an aspirational one.  Even as we read urban geography books in high school, we were taught about the ‘bright lights syndrome’. As it related to rural-urban migration.  What we never understood was the change of that so called syndrome into one of assumptions of permanence (arrival) and recognition forty years plus after national independence.

Whereas in the settler colonial years of Rhodesia, the city or the urban had gatekeepers who would determine those allowed to come, go or stay along racist lines, in our post-independence years we have not changed these repressive and exclusionary approaches to the same. Save for the fact that we do it to gate keep ‘class lines and sill imagine success in neo-colonial materialist terms. Hence the majority of housing demolitions always happen in previously black only residential areas. 

 Even more importantly we have not sought to make the city/the urban an equitable social livelihood arena for those that seek opportunity in it.  Especially as they arrive from what many of our policy makers probably still consider a ‘backward’ rural. Hence the ease with which Operation Murambatsvina occurring as it did in 2005 has been easily forgotten in urban memory. And its victims’ voices long lost to the rural.   

Returning to the aspirational materialism that the city represents it is a commonly held perception that owning urban property is a symbol of individual success.  In many conversations, and I know that if you are reading this you will attest to it, a key lifetime achievement is to own an urban residential stand, house or flat.  Its something that your parents/guardians, even as they are living relatively frugal lives in rural areas will relate to as not only an achievement of their offspring but also themselves.  Hence even if we were to blame gullibility of individuals for falling into the aspirational and materialist trap of getting illegal housing from ‘land barons’, we would still need to consider their desperation for success in the urban.

What this slightly historical narrative indicates is that we need to rethink the city and the urban.  Not just in relation to legally planned housing Instead a broader approach needs to look at the urban for a post-colonial (as opposed to neo) new paradigm that values equality, inclusiveness and social and economic justice.  This would entail newer architectural re-imagination of urban landscapes that defy repressive colonial frameworks that we still regrettably use to this day.  All within the ambit of ensuring the urban provides equitable housing, education, health, transport, water and other ancillary social services.  While keeping in mind that these services should be availed to rural areas too as we work to create new rural futures. 

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