Dilemma of Political Populism in Zimbabwe

*By Takura Zhangazha

Political populism is a well-studied term.  Or at least now it is more ‘googled’ than studied. And it is also no longer as much a contentious issue as it was in the heady days of political ideological argumentation. It has however generally changed formats historically across the globe.  Especially after the end of the Cold War and the assumed triumph of neoliberalism and the now proverbial prediction that the ascendancy of the latter signified “an end of history”.

In its contemporary occurrence, particularly in our own Zimbabwean context (and probably many other African country contexts) populism is not just political.  It is reflective of a national culture, including enabling communications technologies, national and global political economies.  Together with attendant historical processes as they occur or are remembered. 

In its essentially ‘us’ versus ‘them’ simple format political populism pits an assumed elite versus what would be considered “the people”.  With the people being in radical ascendancy in the hope of victory or conquest.

What is interesting is the interchangeability of both terms, the ‘elite’ and the ‘people’.  With the question being who represents who? And at what point? 

Even more significantly, populism generally requires messianic political figures. Who may or may not have some sort of ideological grounding but would all the same be in complete control of whatever agenda they are setting. Even if it creates or follows general political sentiment.

In Zimbabwe we have an interesting encounter with populism.  It is a mixture of many things.  A dabble of ideology, a heavy dose of national emotion, religion, history and individualised political and economic experience.  Not forgetting a specific mimicry of how it occurs elsewhere on the African continent and globally.

The ‘dabble of ideology’ largely relates to nationalism as it relates to history and the liberation struggle.  That on its own has been used by the ruling party to retain a certain instrumental populism. 

The “heavy dose of national emotion” relates to the general anger over the passage of at least three decades at the state of the national political economy since national independence. This has been used to great effect by mainstream opposition parties or movements. And as aided and enabled by an even heavier dose of religiosity and individualised materialist desires.  With the latter being motivated by what we see on television and on social media as being the assumedly enviable “good life” of the global north. Aligned with an unbelievable intention and desire at mimicry politics and its attendant recognition.

In contemporary African and global politics this is not unique to Zimbabwe.  It is populism that led to colour revolutions in the last two decades.  All of which were reversed almost at the blink of an eye by either military coups, big business and/or global superpower foreign policy interests.

 The damaging end effect of political populism is however not seen in the immediate. Mainly because it is ephemeral and highly emotional. Only in the immediacy of its occurrence or its moment.  And this is a key point.  Political populism, whatever it gets its progenitor, is unfortunately easily reversible and easily swayable in the opposite direction of why it existed in the first place.  Even if, with a dabble of ideology or religiosity it had initially appeared noble.  And tragically it also costs peoples lives and livelihoods because it is never designed to be organic with the people but with the political moment.

Again in our Zimbabwean context and in the contemporary we have to accept the reality that our national politics are largely driven by populism for many reasons. These as outlined above can range from some ideological considerations of the liberation struggle, emotive anger at the state of the economy, materialist individual desires and religion.

As such, we have come to stubbornly accept populism as though it were progressive politics. Especially because it responds to our emotions and waits for the next electoral cycle.  It does not do posterity.

If one were to ask if in the short term there is an alternative, I would despairingly say no. Mainly because this is a global and inter-generational phenomenon. More so when it is based on the fact that our democratic processes, particularly in Zimbabwe, are based on a first past the post system at a majority of levels. 

But in the long term I can easily argue that this is a dying phenomenon that is dependent more on our own recognition of progressive cultural and political habits based on our past, present and how we want to own and imagine our national political futures.  

To conclude, in conversation with some war veterans of Zimbabwe’s second liberation struggle, one can sense the angst that they have that a lot of young people do not understand or positively recognise their national stature. This is not necessarily the young people’s fault.  It is the coming to full circle of political populism in its immediacy. And in the opposite direction.  

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