Neoliberalism as the Base of Zimbabwe’s Populist Politics.

By Takura Zhangazha*

Recently there has been a bit of chatter about ideology or lack thereof in Zimbabwean politics.   Accusations and counter accusations of the same have been historically perennial between the ruling party and our now evidently multiple opposition parties (in and out of Parliament). 

For all their political spats, all large (or those that claim to be large) political parties in Zimbabwe have as their primary ideological outlook, neoliberalism.  Some couch it in nationalism, others in argumentation about the international community and funding.  Others still give it a religious flavour or claim proximity to powerful people in Washington, London or all weather friends in Beijing.  But it is the base of their political intentions or desires organisationally and also individually. 

The most obvious reason why this is the case is because neoliberalism is the most dominant global ideology at the moment.   It is also the one that drives contemporary capitalism in its free market trickledown economics hegemony that prioritises private capital (property) and high levels of individualism, consumerism with great disdain for any state led people-centred development. 

So it is much easier to embrace by our local politicians for a number of reasons. The most obvious being a desire for (individual) recognition by global private capital and the other being that it already has a given template.  So one does not really have to be a ‘thinker’ to be an advocate of neoliberalism.  It’s a given that you simply follow the dictates of the market and allow those that already have the money to make more money as you prioritise listening to their preordained ideas and implement them. 

But in this write up I am not so much keen on exploring this exploitative ideology in and of itself.  But more its end effect(s).  Particularly where and when we look at how it affects our national political discourse and actions.  

Neoliberalism, this side of the world, has a fundamental impact of creating at least two things.  The first is immense economic inequality in the society in which it is implemented.  And secondly it creates because of these high levels of inequality, a new individualism motivated by envy, desire and consumerism.   Individualism because it foregoes the state’s responsibilities to create societal equality to the ‘free market’.  The primary role it values of the state is the protection of private property and of course individual rights of those that are particularly already “private propertied”.   

Envy and desire come into the picture because those the poor in our society desire that which they cannot have but will work assiduously and in some cases religiously/superstitiously to at least mimic the lifestyles of the propertied/rich.  It is a mimicry that comes with a great loss of a collective sense of being and many feelings of comparative but also competitive inadequacy.  And a desire to depart from either the rural or even urban poverty stricken backwater. Individually. Or at best with immediate family. 

The consumerism element is closely linked to that of desire and envy.  The best goods and services acquired by neoliberal elites create a desire for somewhat similar materialist recognition even among the poor.  Clothing brands, music taste, foodstuffs, schools’ children are sent to, movies watched, holidays done, cars driven, rich celebrities admired or houses bought/built or rented tend to demonstrate this.

The broader societal economic equality debate is lost in translation.  Instead of a progressive political discourse on equitable access to actual public heath, transport, education, water, energy, housing, pensions or entertainment we again get lost in our individual desires, envies and consumption. 

Where we now turn to the direct political effect of this, we will be able to discern that because of the celebrity culture that is created from our envy, desires and individualism the ideology that is neoliberalism then sets the ground for populism.  The latter being a blind desire for a recognition of your anger at your situation via a relatively popular collective feeling that is not based on any particular idea or clear understanding of lived collective societal realities.  While this is not unique to Zimbabwe or the global south, it has a unique framework in our context.  It has a double envy.  That of the global north lifestyle (hence we are dying trying to illegally cross for example the Mediterranean Sea) and also envying the lifestyles of our local rich elites.  Never mind how they got their wealth through either privatisation of states assets or whispered allegations of corruption (including during the fast track land reform programme). 

And this breeds what I refer to as unprincipled messianic politics.  The disadvantaged majority poor of our society then place their hopes in singular political parties or individuals that bring them closer to achieving their individual materialist desires.  As opposed to the collective equitable well-being of all of society. 

Naturally the question that emerges, particularly from those that deem themselves as either having ‘arrived’ at success or those that are prisoners of their envy and desires to neoliberalism is, “So what?”  Or for those that have learnt to cope with their existential circumstances and hoping to eventually arrive at least by way of mimicry the question is, “What’s the alternative?”

The alternatives are varied but rely largely on a value system that understands that all Zimbabweans, in the contemporary should live in an equitable society in which the state plays its primary role of ensuring our social welfare, safety, security and collective livelihood outside of the neoliberal ideological framework. 

Where we do this, we will not be burdened with the political populism embedded in and as a result of the neoliberalism that we see today. 

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