A Dying Progressive Global North, War and Consciousness.

By Takura Zhangazha*

In conversation with a comrade (yes I generally have many of those), we discussed what in our African context constitutes a ‘World War’.  We didn’t have an evident answer except to borrow from history . 

We knew about the First World War at the turn of the 20^th century which led to among many others, the Russian revolution in 1917.  We also knew it led to the rise of the nefarious Hitler and his Nazi republic that killed not only many but established a regrettably enduring culture of racism and assumptions of exceptionalism of colleagues in the global north.

We also learnt via Eurocentric history text books of the Second World War and its full import on how eventually the Union of Soviet of Socialist Republics (USSR) as led by Stalin, with the eventual assistance of the British, the Americans and in part the French defeated Hitler in 1945 Berlin.

We however did not know enough of the fact that in both world wars, Africans had been key in winning the wars on behalf of what we now know as the global west/north.  Our forefathers from all corners of the African continent and former African colonies had fought on behalf of colonial empires against two German regimes that intended to dominate the global political economy.  With the one under Hitler intending to be globally and a racist hegemony. 

As is now historically given, wars and battles were fought.  As Africans we won some in for example Ethiopia.  We lost many lives (African and African American) in the European hinterland where we are now no longer wanted.  Even though we have many recruits in their armies by both descent and now contemporary voluntary recruitment. 

We learnt the hard way in the second world war that, as an historical fact that, we are as human as ‘white people’ and also that ‘they also die in war’.  That is, if they get shot, they die too.

From thence we also learnt to launch our own liberation struggles as learnt from the USSR and the emergent philosophy of the Chinese and its metaphoric/ideological Maoist linking of the people as “fish to water”.    

Eventually we won our liberation struggles for African independence barring the Saharawi Republic by 1994, a case which remains outstanding with the African Union (AU). 

And in our naïve assumptions we thought the age of global war, cold or otherwise was over.  We thought we had become equal nations before the global United Nations (UN) except for the fact of the UN Security Council veto of the five member states of the same.  A matter that remains outstanding today.

As African, people,  states and governments, never mind our democratic credentials as measured within the context of  international allegiances based on the then global Cold War, we  punched above our global weight and formed not only the Organization of African Unity (OAU) but also further expanded it into regional anti-colonial organizations such as the Southern African Development Community (SADC) which thankfully we still have in the contemporary. 

But there is one thing that as Africans we have generally agreed on.  Given this historical background and across many of our regions, we know that we have experienced war.  We have experienced it in an immediate pre-colonial context (where we have some victories), a colonial context in which we lost some major wars such as the First Chimurenga in Zimbabwe and subsequently won the Second one in the late 1970s (even if the white settler regime negotiated and refused to accept complete defeat, we still won that war.)

The key point however of this blog is that we know war.  We have experienced it and we have said to ourselves, as Africans, that never again should we allow it to visit not only our shores but also our interiors. 

The only problem is that we are not the ones with a proclivity to war.  Given what is going on in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya and  what failed but might be revived in Afghanistan or what might happen in Iran, we know who the real war mongers are.  Globally. 

It is the governments’ of the global north (North America, Western European and now Eastern European).  Be they conservative or liberal.

One may ask what is the basis for proclivity to war by people in power in the global north and east.  The easy answer is always access to strategic resources such as oil, gold and of late lithium. 

The aforementioned point is generally accepted across ideological divides.  Including progressive ones in the global south or the global north.

What remains a bit more perplexing is that ‘progressiveness’ in the global north is no longer a flag post as to what can happen in the global south.

Progressive leftists and liberals are losing ground in the global north.  They are becoming fewer and far between for reasons that they are probably best able to explain themselves.  With the cold reality that they are unable to win national or even local government elections as an example to comrades in the global south,

I wanted to write this short blog almost as an indictment of the progressive global north comrades.  But that would be unfair. 

I am of the firm view that whether we are in the global north or global south, progressive ideological thinking is dying.  Electorally but more sadly, organically.  But I remain optimistic.

Indeed I will argue with many colleagues in European and North American capitals about why they voted for Trump, Steimer or a conservative government that hates immigrants of colour in particular .  They generally tend to say ‘we tried’.  The only catch is that we are also trying over here.  Perhaps in less free circumstances.  But we are trying.

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

 

 

Understanding Wicknell and His Money as Ambiguous Influence in Zimbabwe

By Takura Zhangazha*

Controversial Zimbabwean businessman Wicknell Chivayo has been quite literally dishing out both luxury and basic utility cars to celebrities and individuals at an alarming rate.  Both unilaterally or upon social media requests/ pleas from long known celebrities.   

He has also been helping, at least according to his social media accounts and some media reports, well known national figures in their times of medical, accommodation or welfare needs. 

This is a very interesting political and social development in our country.  Both by way of its meaning and also how it is popularly perceived by many urban and rural Zimbabweans.  Some of whom have actually joined social media to make their claims to whatever fortune they think he has in order to help with both deep or abstract social problems them may be facing. 

I will not mention names (tisataure mazita) but indeed a good number of local celebrities in the sporting, music and film entertainment circles have been recipients of his astounding 'generosity'. 

Officially I know of one legendary one who has stubbornly refused at least two offers while asking questions as to where the money is coming from.  

An issue that for now, is probably falling on the deaf ears of our now very national and populist ‘mbinga syndrome’.  

Almost as though we are all hymning in the back of our minds that again popular song from Marshall Munhumumwe and the Four Brothers, “Ane Mari Ndiye Mukuru’ (literal translation- he who has the money is the eldest). 

For those that are in mainstream media, civil society, opposition politics and social media influencers against corruption or shady relationships between the state and individuals, this should have been  relatively easy anti-corruption activity material.

Except that it has not been off the mark as anticipated. Neither will it be in the short term. 

When you have popular both historically and in the present sports, culture and journalistic celebrities gratefully receiving gifts in cash or ‘car’ kind from Chivayo, there is limited ground to gain counter narrative popular traction against it.  Mainly because it is a difficult task to challenge our new found Zimbabwean ‘Mbinga Syndrome’.

As argued above, a greater majority of Zimbabweans are not really seeking an understanding of the importance of societal equitability in the country as an ideal.  Let alone understand the massive national socio-economic inequalities that we are faced with in the contemporary and the foreseeable future.

We generally tend to have a perception that whoever has made their money, however they have made it, let them use it how they wish. Except where it relates to political partisanship and factions. 

Moreso if they are going to be somehow philanthropic by starting for example a football club that wins promotion to the national Premier league, or construct multiple boreholes or in the much more publicized Chivayo cases, help artists, musicians and others in their vehicular or other needs. While supporting one faction of either Zanu Pf or the CCC and whatever remains of it.  Things that the Mbingas themselves do not hide either side of the political divide. 

In our own non-partisan political instance we do not ask about the source of these individual’s incomes as much as we would even want to.  Either for fear of being excluded or for fear of being sued and in the last instance for a final lack of actual evidence of wealth related to corruption after acquittals of these individuals at the highest Zimbabwean court levels. And as usual criminal defamation charges that still subtly hang over us today.  

But our desire to receive gifts and generosity for one real or perceived problem is not limited to our celebrities only.  And besides given our dire economic circumstances, particularly for young and gendered Zimbabweans, there is no time to ask a religious pastor throwing around United States dollars in a street in Chitungwiza or Kwekwe where he got the money from.  

The pertinent and quite violent issue is to grab as much as you can while it is being thrown out of a moving vehicle while shouting ‘Mbinga Mbinga!’

So what we have now obtaining is a very complicated culture around wealth, access to it, and celebrity induced misunderstanding of how to get rich quick that can be recognized in one social media message by a ‘Mbinga’ to your favourite musician, footballer or any other person who either has national gravitas. Or has serious personal problems that social media users ask for help for.

Our political and economic realities however indicate that this is highly unsustainable.  It is an almost a live for the moment sort of situation.  Yes you can get a vehicle from the “Mbinga’.  Questions arise as to you did you even want it?  Or if you are allowed to sell it?  Or even get support to maintain it?

And before comrades accuse me of jealousy, vehicles are essentially just that. Especially if they are donations.  As are mansions that even if you build them, if you cannot maintain them, they became derelict former castles.

What I have however come to realize with most of us as Zimbabweans is that we tend to live in the moment.  Or in the materially immediate.  At highly individualized levels in which the only common thread is again our newfound high levels of individualism. 

And its easy for those that are linked to state resources, especially after the Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) such as urban land barons, miners, "tenderpreneurs"and farmers can create competitive wealth in order to become the new ‘untouchables’.  As long as they have proximity to contemporary state power. 

So popularly, in both a political and economic sense, barring a major political change in Zimbabwe, the likes of Wicknell Chivayo will be revered as enablers of some sort of individual material progress for celebrities and other national figures.

But if you ask me whether we should fear them for their money?  My answer is an easy no.  We should fear them for their values and their cross generational individualistic impact.  As we are witnessing it in the ghettos and the peri-urban rural areas for now. And we should find ways and means to counter this even if at the moment it seems bleak. 

What I also do know is that in the culture and sports industry, if the state was more organic, our legends would not be as materially vulnerable as they are today.

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

. 

 

 

Mothers as Flawed Revolutionaries

 

By Takura Zhangazha*

Mothers are correctly sacrosanct in Zimbabwean culture.  More-so given the  popular adage ‘kusina Mai hakuendwe, kune rima’ (where there is no mother, you do not go there, there is darkness) is deeply ingrained in most of our national consciousness. Especially as popularized by Simon Chimbetu  and the Orchestra Dendera Kings in the famous hit single “Kusina Mai”.      

Hence we revere motherhood.  No matter its circumstances.  Be it single, married, step or widowed motherhood. 

And whether you are female or male, you tend to hold your mother in absolute awe.  Both by way of your own personal history but also your present circumstances and your future (marriage, illness, wealth and even notions of the afterlife)

But there is a key consideration that we sometimes overlook.  This is the fact that mothers are at the heart of our national consciousness in Zimbabwe.

Be it in the past, the present and the future. 

If its in relation to the past we need not look beyond the first and second Chimurenga’s for an understanding of what ‘mothers of the revolution’ meant politically and socially.  With even the emblematic Nehanda Nyakasikana proving to be a major motivation for a subsequent struggle against the colonial Rhodesian state.  It was not just her femininity but also the assumed role of being a motherly spirit medium that embedded her to our national political consciousness. 

And this stemmed largely from a point where culturally we all know that the last stop for protection for a child is the mother.  And the first step of learning to walk, sleep or go to the toilet is in normal societal circumstances, the mother of the child. 

This applies to both the past and the present.  And will most likely apply to a nearer Zimbabwean future. 

In the present however, the meaning of motherhood has been shifting significantly.  Its no longer as cultural as it was in the past.  Its increasingly about both domestic work and also formal work where roles of motherhood and making money continually clash in our capitalist society. And where gender related vulnerabilities exploit motherhood to an extent that leads many to a path of assumptions that materialism is the only thing that makes the world go round.  Despite religious affiliations and loyalties.

This has been both empowering and disempowering.  The cultural norms that are traditional and the expected roles of mothers still obtain. Ones in which giving birth,  care, love, affection and being the last bastion of material and emotional refuge of children remain valued and important both to men and women in our society.  But mothers are also working women and therefore they have newer demands to who they are and what they are expected to deliver.

In other words they definitively have a double work load.  The traditional function of motherhood and the material importance of the same in modern times.  They are no longer expected to wait for their men/husbands to bring the money but also to earn it. 

This however comes with a consciousness dilemma.  Motherhood, from a distant analysis perspective is increasingly bout the fact of the material and the children.  It is less about what we are culturally attuned to about either agricultural activities and waiting for the father to send anticipated income. 

At the same time it is increasingly clear that these new nodes and regrettably religiously motivated understandings of what it means to be a mother are now more complex due to economic constraints.

This however does not change the indelible fact of our mothers as revolutionaries.  AS argued above they have taught us out most basic consciousness.  And will continue to do so.  They are both the harbingers of our everyday culture and also the ones that instill seeds of societal ambition in us. 

The key questions that emerge are however their ideological outlook of Zimbabwean society.  Or in some cases their lack of it. 

In most cases this is largely a materialist mimicry of mothers in the global north.  Without much argumentation.  Whether we look at it religiously or in the material sense. 

I know that this viewpoint may ruffle a few feathers but it is important to point out that our initial consciousness comes from our mothers.  Who we quite literally worship but in some cases forget that they are also human beings like the rest of us.

So we need to continually respect our mothers.  They are revolutionary because of what they made a majority of us becomes.  They also have their flaws as highlighted above but as Nkrumah once wrote, “Educate a Woman, You liberate a Nation”.   And this is for the future.   

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

 

 

 

Africa and the Potential of a World War 3

 By Takura Zhangazha*

A young Zimbabwean cde asked me about the meaning of ‘global war’.  His question was coming from a context of the general narrative of a globalilsed world war between Russia, Ukraine and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).  And of course the celebrity narrative or even movie like narrative that comes with pitting Biden, Putin and now Trump (his favourite) against each other.

This was a 'small-small' conversation about the prospects of a global third world war. Or what has been referred to as the potential of/for a World War 3 due to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.    

What was interesting in this conversation was the assumption of distance of Zimbabwe and Africa from this assumed prospective World War 3 (WW3) territories.  

For the young cde this was an important point.  Because his major understanding was that it would all play out in Europe and North America.  That is it was all about the Russians versus the Americans and the Europeans. 

In his view, Africans were too far from the conflict to be concerned as though we were watching a movie in a film theatre.  He also hastened to add that Africa has been there before and therefore would survive any escalation of the conflict between global superpowers.

I did not pursue the matter further.  He had made his mind up and there was no need to challenge his thinking.  Mainly because we have to deal with a reality of a newer false consciousness among young Zimbabweans.  One that is stubborn, individualistic, highly opinionated and linked to materialism (influence, cars, money, capitalism and therefore power). 

And also the fact that no matter how much you think you know better, younger cdes will always dispute your opinions based on what they consider either their sharper minds or their access to more information on global events as they occur on mainstream and social media. 

Upon individual reflection, and beyond personalized conversation, it is clear that there is a potential for a WW3.  Not only because the term in itself is familiar from what we studied in global history as Africans but also because of the reality of the Russians bombing Ukraine with new sophisticated weaponry. 

Missiles that their President Vladimir Putin promised to use more broadly if NATO continues to allow Ukraine to use its missiles to attack Russian territory, especially because they will not know what hit them.

Historically, as Africans, we have generally known our place in the context of global wars and subsequent cold wars.  Even if our governments do not acknowledge these for diplomatic and international relations reasons. 

We are the low rung victims of these anticipated globalized or regionalized wars.  In fact we tend more to be proxies.  Where we either send our people to fight in other peoples wars or we become victims of the same.

The assumption is that we are so desperate, naïve and simplistic to be part of either side while at the same time not understanding the global international relations and war complexities of what we are confronted with.

These realities are at least in three parts. 

The first is historical.  Africa and Africans have been part of global wars at least since the First World War.  We have fought and died on behalf of Europeans because of colonial British, French and Portuguese empires.  We also did the same in the Second World War where the West and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) were victorious against Adolf Hitler’s Nazi expansionist intentions. 

We became more conscious after the Second World War and realized that we had to struggle for our own national independences and freedoms.  We had seen the vagaries of war.  More-so in the instances of Mozambique, Guinea Bissau-Cape Verde, Algeria, Zimbabwe for example we had no choice but to wage liberation struggles against the same.

When we became free, barring the Saharawi Republic as recognized by the African Union (AU), we were still embroiled in the vestiges of the then Cold War between the Global West and Global East.  Nuclear war remained imminent and we were and remain bit part players in its potential import.

Where we fast forward to what obtains today, as Africans, we have to come to the realization that many of the globalized (quite literally) wars that occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) were never ours to claim the spoils of war.  Neither were they in any way related to any semblance of the respect of the United Nations Charter. 

By the time we have the current war in Ukraine and its effect on world security, agronomy and food sustainability, Africa has tried to find its voice but has generally been ignored. 

Even if we have the global geo-political conundrum that is similar to the one we had at the time of the Cold War. 

What I know is that Africa has limited say in stopping a WW3.  Its an historically accepted and probably likely racist reality. 

It does not mean we cannot as Africans with our global representatives speak up against this increasingly possible reality. 

We know that the Americans have changed their government.  We know that the Russians have retained their government.  We also know that the Chinese have fortified their foreign and extractive  policies in Africa.

But in any African conversation about the possibility of a WW3, it is important to recall and remind global superpowers that we shall never again be pawns in wars that we did not create or cause.  

While international relations are complex, we have to hold fort against swimming with a global tide that we have no control over.  And I hope the African Union understands this. 

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

 

 

 

 

Re-Explaining Zimbabwe’s Incrementalist / Conservative Politics

By Takura Zhangazha*

What has brought contemporary  Zimbabwean politics to where it is today?  The easy answer is the Southern African Development Community (SADC) mediated Global Political Agreement (GPA) in 2008. 

While we can talk about the legacy of Zanu Pf’s rule, the liberation struggle there is always a time when the past meets the present.  The past is never enough of an explanation of what obtains today.  Nor is it adequate to understand future political nuances as they occur. 

In fact there are always seismic events that change a country’s 'national' political trajectory.  And the GPA was one of them. Not just because of the rise of the initially leftist and labour backed Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in the late 1990s but also because of the passage of time and changing global political-economy dynamics after the end of the Cold War between the United States of America (USA) and the then Union of Soviet Social Republics (USSR) now known as Russia. 

Even more important is the passage of time and a changing generational consciousness.   The politics that were important to my mother or father in the 1980s or 1990s may not be as as important to you or me.  Neither are my own political values as important to my own children. 

And this is a completely understandable development except that it has historical nodes that cannot be wished away. As cited above you cannot forget the liberation struggle, independence, the one party state project, the introduction of Economic Structural Adjustment Programmes (ESAPs) and their eventual impact on a differentiated national consciousness.

Equally one can also not forget the coming into effect of the GPA in the midst of not only political violence but also the economic hyperinflation that lost us a currency and introduced a multi-currency regime that we live and suffer with today. 

The key point to be made is that the GPA has irreversibly shaped our current nationalist and opposition driven politics.  It set the framework for the multi-party parliamentary system that we have today, as controversial as it remains.  Based on both our lived economic-political realities and the negotiated national constitution that we have to live with. 

A constitution that came as a direct result of the tenets of the GPA and one that was also going to fracture the opposition even further than it already was by the time we had the  harmonized general election in 2013. 

And after another five years, brought the opposition together to form what was then referred to as the MDC-Alliance in a bid to finally defeat the ruling Zanu PF party from the presidency in 2018.   

That did not work.  Though it also led to divisions and factionalism in Zanu Pf itself for fear of losing the harmonized general election together with the eventual populist coup-not-a coup in November 2017 that ousted Robert Mugabe from power. 

The GPA is therefore our current political base and superstructure (to use Marxist lingo).  It has spawned a number of long-duree political developments that historically are informing our political culture. 

In the first instance, it, with the unity government formed in 2009, made it more politically acceptable to have liaison between the ruling and opposition political parties.  Something that was etched into the national imagination and is still talked about as some sort of possibility today. Even though the Political Actors Dialogue (POLAD) is generally looked down upon. 

In the second instance, the new negotiated constitution sort of reigned in both the ruling and opposition parties about what the courts/judiciary could do to their political or other ambitions based on not only the newer Bill of Rights but also the clauses that limited the powers of the President and Parliament.  Together what were then considered progressive electoral reforms that everyone still keeps harping on  about even after the 2013 constitutional referendum and subsequent electoral act amendments. 

More significantly, the economic policy intentions of both the ruling party and opposition were never markedly different since 2013.  The key issues were around who would get greater regional and international capital’s attention.  Including of course the global West and East superpowers willingness to either lift sanctions or provide bilateral aid. 

What has however not happened between 2013- 2018 is a growth of the political opposition in Zimbabwe, proper.  Whereas the assumption that the GPA laid a significant base for the expansion of an organic opposition politics, it became more populist.  The fact that with the 2017 November coup-not-a coup developments came with opposition support while it was largely a  Zanu Pf internal succession matter  did not make matters any better.  

These developments essentially meant that the opposition cannot talk about revolution anymore.  Nor will the ruling party.

What we have is a ‘slow change’ approach to our national politics.  Almost as though the parameters of what political ‘change’ can be have already been set.  Both electorally and in relation to any understanding of how the state power relates to private global and local capital.  Hence the general narrative of the ‘ease of doing business’. 

Whereas the opposition had been formed on the basis of a social democratic ideological agenda, it regrettably has been co-opted into a narrative it no longer controls and one in which it has demonstrated little desire to challenge anyway. 

One could almost argue that we are all now neo-liberals imbued with religious and inferiority complex fervor.  We no longer engage intellectually as we did prior to the GPA and its subsequent government of national unity.  We are more straitjacketed in our political views and are highly emotional but we do not have time for thoughts or opinions that are not ours.  

And our national consciousness is much more materialistic both by way of our newfound conservatism and very majority female controlled perceptions/ assumptions that God saves.  And we are losing our young minds to the Global North. Both intellectually, culturally and physically. 

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

SADC is Organically Historical. It is Not Going to Go Away

By Takura Zhangazha*

There are many conversations I have had with many comrades about the importance of what we now know to be the Southern African Development Community (SADC).  And most times these conversations have bordered on the dismissively ahistorical. 

Wherein colleagues view SADC as this anti-democratic organisation in the region that is preventing new/ nascent opposition political parties from gaining state power after periodic elections. Except when those that they support are endorsed by the same.

At the moment in this penultimate week of November 2024, Zimbabwe is hosting an Extraordinary Summit of SADC.  Officially to discuss mainly the dangerous situation in the east of member state Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) among assumed concerns about the recent Mozambique elections.

We are not privy to the discussions of the heads of state and government of SADC. But we will know when the final communiqué is issued as to what has been either resolved or what will be put into some sort of action.  Though we know that previous decisions have been made by SADC to support some sort of military interventionism from the region via its Organ on Politics, Defence and Security which is generally referred to as the Troika.  It authorized this in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique and in the Eastern DRC where its peacekeeping mission has been working in tandem with the United Nations (UN) one. 

But back to my skeptical African colleague who derides SADC,  I always talk back to them politely and try to explain that this regional organization is not the European Union (EU). Nor is SADC the Organization of American States (OAS).  Neither is it the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN).

It is also not like the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).  Or the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in East Africa.   

Its dynamics, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, is in no way similar to the aforementioned regional blocs.

And this is not a public relations piece on its behalf. 

It is more an explanation of the historical reality and importance of SADC as a regional bloc.  Both politically and economically with solidarity being a key functional element to who we are within the formal bloc but also as a people from this much colonized and maligned Southern African region. 

SADC is formed of the Frontline States (FLS) in the early 1970s.  These states were initially Tanzania, Mozambique, Zambia and Angola until others which became free such as Zimbabwe joined. 

The FLS had been established in order to accelerate the liberation of Southern African people from colonialism.  And to support the then Organization of African Unity (OAU) liberation committee’s work in this Southern African region as it was led by the late General Hashim Mbita. 

But it is necessary to re-emphasize a particular point about being a Southern African. 

Even if those in South Africa (the country) think that they are more exceptional despite the fact that any conscious continental African knows that we helped them to become free.

As Southern Africans, without a doubt, we have a shared history. Both in pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial epochs.  And even now, in this disastrous neo-liberal populist age that we have to live in. 

We had the fact of our own pre-colonial migration and emigration which has made this region as diverse as it can be.  Whether ethnically or by way of societal interactions. We have had less wars than many other African regions barring the ones in the apartheid motivated ones in Mozambique or those that are in the DRC at the moment. 

Even at the onset of economic colonialism we rose above the Native Labor Associations such as the one that regionally controlled our physical male bodies the Witwatersrand Native Labour Association (WINELA) and became our own liberators.  Either by waging war or by long duree civic activism. 

By the time the FLS became the Southern African Development Coordinating Community (SADCC) our history of solidarity and freedom was already solid in the 1980s.  We knew we had to free Namibia and South Africa from colonialism and apartheid (Remember Robson Banda anyone?) 

And we also knew that we had to free Mozambique, Angola and ourselves from the clutches of South African apartheid sponsored rebel wars. 

By the time we became the Southern African Development Community (SADC) we had achieved peace. We had prevented invasions of many of our members, including Zimbabwe under the then global ideological aegis of ‘liberal interventionism’ as led by Tony Blair and George Bush (leaders of the United Kingdom and the United States respectively at that time). 

As a Zimbabwean I generally do not mind derogatory conversations that make SADC seem like a ‘wrong’ idea.  I understand  where some cdes come from ideologically.  And its fair enough. Their perceptions of how SADC endorses contemporary election results contrary to what is referred to as global best practices.  

Wherein we all know that there is no longer such a proper organic term in what is evidently a multi-polar, conservative and increasingly nationalist system (electoral college anyone?) 

But if you ask me proper, or if a fair debate has to go down to the wire, SADC is the most revolutionary regional organization on the African continent. Both by way of history and also by way of pursuing peace in an increasingly  and newly contested global political economy between what we knew as the global east and the global west.

We suffer. We continue. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Deliberately Forgetting Cultural Changes in Zimbabwe.

By Takura Zhangazha*

On a recent trip to Bikita, Masvingo we did not have the now ubiquitous flash drive for uninterrupted journey music.  What was interesting was that we could purchase one without music and then get someone else to transfer music to it. The person that was to transfer the music to it was of the apostolic faith movement and he said so.  He also advised us that most of his music would be gospel related.

We just told him to give us what he had so that in between cities where there is limited radio coverage we would at least listen to some Zimbabwean music.  We did not ask him about where he got the music. But at the back of our minds we knew that the music had been probably acquired since the early 200s when Gramma and Teal records employees realized that the long playing (LP)record and the compact disc (CD) were on their way out due to an emergent digitalization of music era.

So we got this flash drive and its gospel laden music. What we did not know is that even a member of the apostolic sect does not only listen to gospel music.  He had a mix of gospel (as expected) but also Sungura and Chimurenga music that he had sold to us for US$1.

As our journey progressed we had to ask ourselves significant cultural questions. The most obvious being that the the cost of the flash drive and the addition of music to it had been about at most US$3.  And what that meant for the evolution of music in Zimbabwe vis-à-vis copyright laws and the income of musicians. 

My colleague and I couldn’t agree on this particular issue because as I argued for artists to get their due for their amazing music and talents, he simply brushed it off by saying that the issue is the new technologies that we now use to consume what would be creative cultural products. 

He continued that musical artists now make money off of their marketing and social meida presence.  And the more a song or songs are played via a flash drive the more likely a live show will be well attended. 

I couldn’t argue with this as we listened to Madzibaba Nicholas Zacharia between Gutu and the Roy turnoff along the Masvingo- Mutare highway. 

Mainly because he had a very significant point about how we now consume our cultural entertainment, what we value and its end products.

This was also before a dancehall artist called Silent Killer popped up on the playlist singing about whatever is called ‘Kuf Kaf’.  It turns out it meant ‘kufa kana kufenda’.  Or something close to that. 

By the time we reached Nyika Growth point (they should probably make it a town given its expansion), we had listened to legendary music from Dembo, Mapfumo, Chimbetu, Chimombe, Chibadura and many others.

What we could not explain was the contradiction in what music meant in the contemporary. At our ages (forties) we could not quite get the Zimbabwe Dancehall music that was on the given playlist. 

We however agreed that new music in Zimbabwe is increasingly forgettable. Especially when we consider our past cultural experiences of what ‘songs’ meant.  Culturally, historically and and politically. 

We are now in an age/era in which we live for the moment and are easy to forget.  Its almost a generational trait.  One in which younger Zimbabweans are very keen on the immediate but not the past or the future.

So we have a real ‘clash of cultures’ in Zimbabwe. One which appears to be characterized by contestations about authenticity over what is past, what is present and what can be the future.   

By the time we got to Chikuku business centre we were now discussing why young Zimbabweans are enamored to an ephemeral music culture.  And we realized that its linked to a now existent urban and rural lifestyle where what makes you happy for one day simply makes you happy.  Tomorrow will most likely solve itself.

This being a sign of a society in a specific decadence.  And we were only discussing this in relation to music and its impact on Zimbabwean society.  

We realized our current music consumption reflects the possibility that we are not as culturally smart as we assume we are.  We are now in a phase of what makes us happy is what makes us wake up tomorrow.  Individually. 

There were many more arguments to be had beyond the music on the flash drive but we had arrived at our destination.  We had to deal with dying cattle because of the drought. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

A Resurgent Colonialism in Africa.

By Takura Zhangazha*

It was Franz Fanon that wrote on what he referred to as “A Dying Colonialism”.  In this collection of essays, Fanon was generally optimistic about the future of Africa and its revolutionary and liberatory ethos.  Already in “The Wretched of the Earth” he had also sort of indicated the ambiguity of what liberation meant and how in part ‘mimicry’ of the colonial would occur.  A reality that we live with to this day. 

An over-admiration and again mimicry of global north societies as determined by global capitalism and culture. 

Now there are many angles to Fanon’s argumentation.  And they have been widely explored academically and politically. 

What is however important is to recognize the historicity of his arguments in the contemporary.  And come to an understanding of the same in its occurrence in the contemporary. 

Whereas Fanon, through his articles and speeches assumed we were faced with a dying colonialism, despite being the ‘Wretched of the Earth’ he may have misread the fact of global post-colonial continuity.  And its broader impact on contemporary African mindsets.  Both politically and more significantly economically.

In this brief wirte up I will attempt at a juxtaposition of the revolutionary theory of Franz Fanon and what obtains in Africa today. 

With a particular emphasis on my own region of origin, Southern Africa.  

When Fanon wrote about a "dying colonialism" he was, as stated earlier, relatively optimistic.  His essays as a journalist were designed to give hope to a new consciousness for many an African.  Even though he was from Martinique and had fought in the Algerian struggle for independence. 

The key issue however was the fact that he recognized the continuance of an elitist comprador bourgeoisie taking over African states and claiming a progressive form of liberatory politics.  This was to be an issue further expanded by Julius Nyerere, Robert Mugabe and Thabo Mbeki. 

This may seem an abstract argument but its significance resides in the fact of again its historicity. We were Pan Africanists.  We have to remain Pan Africanists.

Our electoral politics have been reflecting a departure from this.  And our inter-generational praxis clearly has misunderstood the same.

The reality is that we are in a bad space as Africans.  We are willingly forgetting the fact of our history.  And histories. 

Its almost like a Dambudzo Marechera argument where he says “We are what we are not. That is the paradox of fiction” in his acclaimed novella “The Black Insider”. 

The main issues are around a new Pan Africanism.  One that defies what we consider old, abstract and conservative.

In this conundrum is our education system. Wherein we have relatively naïve assumptions that the more European our kids are, in relation to their education, the better they will be in life.  Something we know not to be true. 

The Zimbabwe School Examinations Council (ZIMSEC) is as important as the Cambridge one.  If you suffer from an inferiority complex, its understandable. But take better charge of you family and wife or husband.

As Africans we are faced with a new consciousness era.  One in which our placement in the global placement of politics and economics means we are lesser beings in the global scheme of things.  Whether we are with China or Russia. Or even the controversial United States of America or the increasingly racist European Union (EU).

So we have to heed the call for a new Pan Africanism beyond what Kwame Nkrumah recognized. As he said, "We neither look East or West, but we Look Forward."

In the contemporary and for the future, as Africans, we understand the  fact of who we are. Where we are and where we can be.

Even as we cross borders to sadly die in the Sahel and the Mediterranean Sea.

If Fanon could write about a dying colonialism, we can write about the need for caution about a returning colonialism.  And we must resist this.  We are not that shallow nor that abstract.

We hold true that the African Union and SADC will defend us as they recognize our liberation struggle histories and our contemporary challenges.

As difficult as it may be and seem.    

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Waiting for the Rain: Realities of Zimbabwe’s 2023-24 National Drought.

By Takura Zhangazha*

There is currently a major drought in Zimbabwe.  Its impact is somewhat not as felt in the urban as it would be in the rural areas of the country.

In the urban areas it is more or less about the depth of boreholes and the setting up of support committees to deal with water shortages due to the inability of urban councils to deliver everyday use of water for reasons that vary from general incompetency through to actual water and attendant water-treatment chemicals shortages.

It however rarely appears to be immediate given the fact that those in urban lifestyles have no immediate direct relation to weather patterns and livelihoods. 

This is mainly because urban Zimbabweans go to formal and informal jobs trying to eke out a living that is almost a daily hustle that has limited understanding of the weather.  Or even the physical environment.

In the rural  areas of the country, the impact of the drought is much more immediate.  There is an evident shortage of water for human beings and also inevitably livestock.  There is also a shortage of food, higher costs of basic commodities such as maize for human sustenance. And as a priority food aid has to be given for many rural families that cannot afford to purchase maize on the market.

It is much worse for domesticated animals such as cattle, goats or sheep due to not only a lack of edible green grass but also stock feed and water. 

This also means that these animals are in a precarious situation at the moment.  Particularly in the Southern and Eastern regions of the country which rely more on these for sustenance. While also taking into account the fact that they are much more densely populated.

We are therefore all literally “Waiting for the Rain”, to use the title of Charles Mungoshi’s seminal novel.  Moreso in the rural areas.  The boreholes that are there can only do so much as the underground water levels dwindle. And once a day feeding schemes for primary school level children still does not provide adequate nutrition. 

The Zimbabwean government has already declared the current drought a national disaster. And it appears it is trying to provide the necessary mechanisms through which it can feed people but also prepare them for the next agricultural season.

The point however is that its efforts appear to still be inadequate.  The fact of climate change is no longer as simplistic as it used to be.  It is now a lived reality where a lot of Zimbabweans do not understand changes in weather patterns and how they are now impacting their everyday existence and livelihoods.  

So there is a political economy to our current drought. One that is as global as it is localized.  We have those in central and local government that control the distribution of food resources as well as agricultural inputs. Then there are those that are in control of social welfare for vulnerable families. The latter include food aid organisations that not only predict droughts but source the necessary grains for food sustainability.

Then we also have the animal husbandry industry that provides for example molasses and dried grass for a decent profit.

In this mix is the everyday villager who is looking at his/her family and their food security situation while also thinking about their livestock and how any loss impacts on either their ability to pay school fess for their children or at least be able to afford relish and medication.  

This also includes trying to ensure proximity to the state or food and agricultural donors at village level in order to at least survive the immediacy of the challenges that this drought has wrought on.

Or even in the urban where agricultural commodity prices have already gone up and there is more or less no social welfare back fall for poor urban families.  Unless the government or charities intervene.  Something which they do intermittently and also insufficiently.

What is clear in my mind is that even if it does rain in the immediate, we are already in a drought induced economic fix for at least another six months.  And I am not talking here about listed companies that trade in food commodities on either the local or other international stock exchanges. 

Instead I am referring to lived realities of everyday Zimbabweans who may not know where their next meal comes from. 

Or whether their livestock, which they heavily invested in, can last another day without collapsing and therefore having to be sold on the cheap to opportunistic buyers. 

The latter being business persons who are closely monitoring the drought situation in order to immediately profit from it. Be it through storing critical grain or meat and just waiting for government get desperate enough to pay exorbitant market related prices for it.   

So, yes our current drought has its own political economy.  It differs from the urban to the rural.  It affects largely the latter. And is generally dismissed in the former until you cannot buy ordinary packaged maize.  Or the meat, particularly beef, we consume is evidently more prevalent at cheaper prices due to our livestock dying from hunger and lack of water.

What I do know is that we need to have a broader national conversation about the impact of the national drought we are faced with.  Inclusive of what longer term solutions we can come up with for the rural and urban poor beyond politicizing who has come to rescue us from it as it is occurring. 

In the meantime it appears that we are all just waiting for the rain.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zimbabwe and Mozambique- An Irreversible Historical Reality.

 By Takura Zhangazha*

So I once boarded a plane as an election observer to Mauritius in 2005 or thereabouts.  I was part of a delegation of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Parliamentary Forum.  On the flight I met up with a member of the Mozambique parliament.

In my naivety I thought he was from the Frelimo ruling party.  At that time there was no social media proper but I had the equivalent of a digitalized ‘walkman’. 

In it I was playing a Thomas Mapfumo song “Tongosienda”  which referred to both South African  apartheid leader Pik Botha and Mozambiquan rebel Alfonzo Dlakhama as really evil people. 

So when I learnt that my fellow passenger was from Mozambique, I assumed that he would appreciate the Mukanya song on the relatively short flight to Mauritius. 

He did not.  But he also did not say this until we were at the hotel lobby as we were checking in. I was then informed that he was a member of Parliament for RENAMO. 

I asked some of the colleagues I was with about the fact that Renamo had members of Parliament in Mozambique given what we had been told about how bad their party was. 

In my naivety  I had assumed Renamo no longer existed in Mozambique.  At least militarily because we had been involved as Zimbabwe in defeating Dhlakama at Gorongoza.  As we were taught in high school and on television after Samora Machel was allegedly assassinated by apartheid South Africa in a plane crash in 1986.

We mourned about this and assumed that it would put paid to Renamo. Moreso after Zimbabwe had lost soldiers in fighting the Renamo, South African apartheid regime backed insurgency.

 The contrary turned out to be true.  But more as a political party after the Rome Accords for a peace agreement in Mozambique in 1992 (correct me if I am wrong). 

The big catch was that it was a political reality in Mozambique that could not be wished away.  Renamo continued to exist even after the freedom of South Africa in 1994. It had re-invented itself as a legitimate party in at least Western Mozambique (close to our Eastern borders).  And was evidently electable in those regions with its leader Alfonso Dlakama even becoming a member of Parliament. 

But Frelimo continued to win national elections as they constitutionally occurred. And as Zimbabweans we were sort of comfortable with that. Mainly because we did not and probably still do not see Renamo as an ally after our experiences with “Matsanga” and how they wrecked violent havoc in our Eastern provinces. 

But because we do not speak Portuguese, there are some points we may have missed about Mozambiquan democracy.  As Zimbabweans we may have falsely assumed it was static.  Based on our liberation struggle experiences as informed by historical knowledge. Both as taught in high schools after the great liberator Samora passed away but also on the basis of liberation war narratives we read in setbooks or if you were lucky were told by real war veterans such as the  late  Cde Dzinashe Machingura and Cde Freedom Nyamubaya. Wherein they always included the narrative of the battle of Mavonde.

 Though they never claimed to have been there.  I do however know at least two now war veterans that were there and what they referred to as the “Stalin Gun” that defeated the then Rhodesian army as ordered by Samora Machel.

In writing this, I am trying to demonstrate the organic relations of the people of Mozambique and Zimbabwe. 

And how controversial the relationships between Frelimo and Zanu PF have been.

On social media there has been a familiar narrative about the stealing of elections.  And also images that depict violence over and about the same.  I do not know the realities of the matter. 

What I do know is that Zimbabwe and Mozambique are kindred countries in the fight against colonialism, neocolonialism and post colonialism. 

But if you decide on a specific electoral system you have to accept its results. 

As I sometimes say to comrades, the mechanisms pf democracy are not the meaning democracy” as instructed by Kambarege Nyerere.

What is apparent is that you cannot haunt yourself out of who you are.   Democracy has never been a liability.  It is a strength.  It just has to be organic and ‘uncultist’ as we have been witnessing in recent years.

But back to Mozambique and Zimbabwe.  We belong to each other.  Historically.  Even if you wanted to falsely deny it.

The recent elections are clearly that county’s business.  Whoever they choose as their next president, while having a bearing on Zimbabwe, is essentially their decision. 

What matters more however is the fact of history. Zimbabwe and Mozambique are not a walk in the park countries.  We fought joint liberation struggles to be free.  Our people died. We are not a fiction.   We need to become better at who we can be.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity

 

 

A Changing African Global Political Placement.

By Takura Zhangazha*

I am from the Global South.  For many that do not quite understand this latter term, it is one that replaced what used to be referred to as the “Third World”. 

This was based on colonialism and assumptions of the superiority of the Western World as well as attendant simplistic perceptions of what was in the 1980s referred to as “underdevelopment”. 

All within the ambit of a global Cold War that defined international relations between the United States of America and its allies (NATO) against the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and its allies post the Second World War. 

So the Global South as an emergent term is historical, geographical and a lived economic reality.  It means that I am from the poorer parts of the world where and when it relates to comparative economic well-being or even societal happiness.  Both at an individual and societal level.

It is something that I know many comrades for the same said Global South cannot shrug off. 

Both materially and epistemologically. 

For me however, there is also the fact that I am from a Global South that is African.  And one that is also  therefore historically and physically othered as  ‘black’.

So I could have been from Venezuela, China, Palestine, Cuba or Aboriginal Australia but I am from the continent of Africa that is viewed in comparatively racist eyes by those that own the Global North but also those that claim closer proximity to it. 

By way of colour or in some cases integrated cultural practices.  As designed by colonial history and again ingrained attendant cultural,  economic and social practices that we live with today.  As well as pass them on to our children in ways we perceive to be progressive and in tandem with what our colonial, religious affiliations or material life experiences or aspirations have taught us. 

But as an African, barring the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and within the context of contemporary international regionalized proxy wars between the global west and east, I am increasingly aware that we are faced with a changing global world order.  One in which we, as Africans have little serious say. 

Not for a lack of words but because of the immediate threat of our weaknesses when it comes war on a global or even regional scale when the elephants are fighting.

Whereas when we fought against direct colonialism, we were emboldened by our own resolve and our allies to find what we then considered human and global egalitarian freedom.

 In the contemporary we are essentially powerless about determining how global wars affect us.  Let alone how to either prevent them or as the general term used in the present to ‘de-escalate’ these same said global wars. 

Be it at the United Nations, the African Union or in our own Zimbabwean instance, at the Southern African Development Community (SADC) level.

In some instances we have been complicit in inflicting harm upon ourselves as was the case with UN Security Council Resolution 1973 on Libya (a security council that included South Africa as a key international player). 

As we all now know, Libya will never be the same.  And that it is now a haven for multiple insurrections and instability across the Sahel region. 

But this is not the essential point to make.

As Africans we need to contend with the point that what has happened since COVID 19 as a global pandemic, the regional and global wars we are now witnessing as in the cases of the Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Palestine-Israel, Ukraine- Russia or in any other regional of the world, are not of our own making. 

In reality we are increasingly bit part players at the hands of those who we either refer to as allies, friends or ‘investors’.  Or in rare cases, enemies. 

What I find most curious is how we as Africans view our placement in global affairs as they occur.  A majority of us are familiar with its racist and repressive past. But tragically an even greater majority of us are not so familiar with its nuanced racist and repressive present.   

Or the groundwork for its racist narrative for the future as it tackles migration and race relations in the Global North.  Inclusive of our contradictory migratory desires to be there anyway despite the evident populist racial discrimination. 

What is important to bear in mind is that Africa in the global scheme of things is in a very bad space.  Particularly where it concerns regional or global wars for both material (economic)  and hegemonic (cultural) reasons.  

Based on recorded UN General Assembly voting patterns we are one day with the USA, another with Russia, on another day we are neutral and on other days we are with China.   Almost as though African countries are global “yo-yos” at as an important an organization as the UN. 

In my view, we need to return to the original spirit and letter of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). 

While we have the African Union as our current major representative in the global scheme of things, including wars and economics, we might have missed the boat at the point of a continual understanding of the fact of our historical global (dis)placement. 

The Global North has limited respect for us.  In fact even progressive comrades who are based there are losing electoral and other social grounds as to either the equality of universal human rights or the fact that for example we need to reign in social media company ownership monopolies. And their control of ‘public progressive narratives. Even in their own backyards.  Twitter’s Elon Musk anyone?

But as the great African revolutionary Amilcar Cabral once wrote, “No matter how hot the water from your well is, it will not boil your rice”.

We need to re-think Africa’s role in global international relations.  Beyond our historical anger and beyond our desires for global mimicry. 

And we need to be more organically radical about this. 

Indeed we may need all the help we can get to meet the demands of modern industrialization and organic democratic governance.  But going forward we should not be proxies of anyone or any country.  We need to believe in ourselves again. Ditto Nyerere.

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

 

 

 

 

Culture and Praxis in Zimbabwe.

By Takura Zhangazha*

A friend recently asked me about what I meant many years ago about “generational praxis”. I will come back to this concept/issue later. But if you want to crosscheck Antonio Gramsci on Google, please go ahead.

 He asked me this in an awkward context wherein we had listened to the new music that is now very popular with the youth of Zimbabwe and also somewhat over-similar in its instrumentation and lyrics. This music is either called dancehall or hip hop as motivated by social media.

We were in Dzivaresekwa high density suburb where I partly grew up. (I also grew up in Chitungwiza and Waterfalls)

The music was blaring at the braai spot and it was not what we were used to when we used to watch Mvengemvenge /Ezomgido. Or go to watch Pengaudzoke or Somandla Ndebele live in concert at Nyaguwa nightclub. Or get over-inspired by Thomas Mapfumo and the Blacks Unlimited’s Chimurenga Music.

The music we were listening to was more brazenly individualistic, self-celebratory and somewhat abstract. But it suited the moment and also helped with memory and nostalgia of belonging. Both to the proverbial ghetto but more significantly of meeting with friends from long back.

In the conversations we had with my friend, I still looked around at the evident poverty of the neighborhood and its contradictory pride. Almost as though, in our dancing and inebriation, the cdes were saying, as in the songs they were dancing to, “ This is who we are! We were born here”

Lyrics that are also derived from popular musician “Killer T” who represents an iconic figure of both recognition of origin from the ghetto but also departure from it. Only to return in pride to prove that things worked out well elsewhere. 

This is not a new comparative argument for many Zimbabweans.  We all encounter it at church, work and in social spaces.  Sometimes with individual pride and competitive work experience.  Or in some cases with individual envy and competitive desire to be better than the ‘other’. Be they from high school, college or university.

It is a very interesting paradox. That is, to want both life experiences in post-independent Zimbabwe.  You were born, grew up and educated in either a rural enclave or urban ghetto and now you can argue about your successful point at arrival in the leafy suburbs of Harare, Bulawayo, Gweru, Masvingo or Mutare among many other towns and cities.  

This is a very realistic and emotional point to make because the majority of colleagues who went to high school, college or university between the late 1980s to the new millennium have this mindset.  The ones that were the first to get colonial education before independence are probably more embedded in specific lifestyles and habits that are too ingrained in them to be challenged intellectually or socially. 

But lets get back to “generational praxis” by asking the question of how do we now construct an understanding of a global progressive human existence. Regardless of race, colour, origin or class?

 Within an African context.

The reality of the matter is that this has not yet happened.  Mainly because of our own African materialism and regrettable simplicity over our lifestyles.  As we interact with global capitalism via money, movies and the attendant re-objectification of the female body (black, brown or white).

In this, we are not learning from history. We are entrapped in a neoliberal cycle of assuming that the world is our oyster.  Even as we Africans from all regions die going to the global north in the Mediterranean sea.

Or as we clamour to be recognized as equal human beings via various United Nations conventions that we fought hard for in the past and in the contemporary.

The question that however hangs over our heads is “What  do we now teach our children?” And also one about, “Who teaches them?” 

We all know from an African perspective that mothers are the best teachers of children.  Especially in their infancy. Your first song, sense of understanding of reality always stems from your mother.    

Though with the passage of time, depending on your gender, this can be ahistorically disputable.

But we need to look at the bigger picture. We need to get ourselves to quite literally believe in our being.  As Africans and beyond what we see on television, Netflix, the pastors pulpit or on other social media platforms.

Even if wanted or willed it, we are not all main actors or survivors.  We are a people that should treat each other with equality and fairness.  In as democratic a ways as is possible beyond the bright lights syndrome but an organic understanding that progressive change belongs to everyone. 

Indeed the global political economy sets out the standard for that house, car, trophy husband or wife, but it will never change the reality that life must be lived as honestly and obejctively as possible.  Beyond what you see on television and social media. 

Materialism is not a ‘life standard’.  It helps with how an individual or individuals can be perceived in a given society but it doesn’t change much. Unless you find yourself in a church organization. Or political party with ambitions for both local or national power. Or your remember the Nkrumah maxim, “Educate a Woman, You Liberate a Nation”

The major question however is what are we teaching our children?  Is the praxis of whatever we are teaching them going to make them better Zimbabweans?  At this rate, it is least likely. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zimbabwe’s New Land Policy As Replacement Capitalism

By Takura Zhangazha*

Zimbabwe’s President Mnangagwa recently announced a change to land policy within the context of under what we now historically refer to as the Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP).  This was done at a routine weekly cabinet briefing by his minister of information. 

This new land policy essentially changes the tenure system for the beneficiaries of the FTLRP. There will be changes to the 99-year lease regime to one in which ‘bankable’ title will be given in various forms in order for farmers and investors to either get new loans or on the other side, lose land for failure to pay whatever they owe.

As reported in various online and mainstream platforms, this is a significant shift to the FTLRP.  One that appears to generally be welcomed by 99-year lease or offer letter farmers who were not defaulting on their state guaranteed loans. 

This new framework will prioritize (no surprises) veterans of Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle, youths and women that are already beneficiaries of the FTLRP. 

This new policy will also be appealing to current and potential urban land developers whom it identifies as another priority target group of investors/businesses. 

The referred to ‘bankability’ of the tenure system also immediately means that the financial services sector is another key priority target group.  Especially where and when they can invest in a loan system that can/will cyclically allow them to retain physical capital.  

Be it on behalf of individuals or corporate entities such as urban land developers that already either have permits, 99-year leases or offer letters. 

It will however not affect colonially designed communal land tenure.  That land will still fall under the purview of traditional leaders and Rural District Councils (RDC’s). 

This is also a new policy that will take a little bit of time to be effected due to necessary legal processes that follow such government announcements.

But be that as it may, it is a huge and economically significant one seeing as it is coming from cabinet and in the name of the current president of Zimbabwe, it must be taken with the utmost seriousness it deserves. 

Especially where it has occurred after an already given government position on a compensation deal for former white commercial farmers as provided for by the constitution for developments on the land at least.

Even if it is not yet fully formulated for the purposes of governance and remains a policy announcement.

In this new and sort of expected development there are however some ideological, political and economic considerations that must be part of the public debate or acceptance of the emergent new land policy.

The first being the ideological question of when the liberation struggle was fought was this the envisioned land tenure system?  What exactly did ‘Ivhu kuVanhu’ as a major motivation for the liberation struggle entail? 

The answer to this is multifaceted because we are at least 44 years after independence and its promises.   From our socialist ideals at the inception of our freedom through to our highly unpopular neoliberal  Economic Structural Adjustment Programmes (ESAP’s) and now our newfound state capitalist projects wherein the government is functioning on behalf of private capital in its variegated local and international interests.

Ideologically this new land policy is a return to the privatization of land that though acquired with the ‘revolutionary’ premise of ‘land back to the people’  reflects more of governments intent to do what I would call ‘replacement capitalism’.

It is a pretty basic concept.

It’s a return to a past or pre-FTLRP land ownership political economy.  Except for the fact that the now majority land owners are black, not white.  Almost as though we are flipping an ahistorical coin. 

Those that benefitted from the FTLRP are being given an opportunity to either use it as a bankable investment or sell it to the highest bidder based on the tenure granted to them by government.  Or to lose it based on the fact that they will now be able to get bank loans which if they do not remit, their land will be lost to financial services institutions or loan sharks. 

This is neoliberalism writ large.  Or as a close cde of mine reminded me recently, it can be a form of ‘Socialism for the Rich or Politically Connected’.  

Except that the beneficiaries of the FTLRP are not all rich or politically connected.   They are as vulnerable to these emerging government facilitated market trends as much as the communal farmer with the newly proposed policy. 

Politically though, this is a relatively populist move for many farmers that can either pay back the state backed loans they acquired during the height of the FTLRP or those who recently got the necessary state leases and offer letters.  They will be sloganeering all the way to the banks so long they can develop their acquired farms or pay back the money in one form or the other (sub-lease or sell). 

The key political issue is that it is likely that with this policy, the ruling Zanu PF party intends to create a specific farming political class that it will protect, nurture and create new political meaning about the FTLRP.  It already has the seedlings for this and in all likelihood with this new policy will expand it.  Both at a technical, political and economic level.

And it is the latter that I will seek to lastly deal with.  The economic effects of this are that if you are already a landowner via the FTLRP, you are basically in a position to expand or retain your capital with the support of not only this new policy but also your ability to maneuver around financial investments on your property. 

This also means that government expects that you will understand the necessity of a ‘trickle down economics' benefit for your investments based on the land that you got under the FTLRP to create be it employment or find new ‘markets’. 

In all of this, there is an unwritten and unspoken assumption from officials in the government and the ruling party that Zimbabwe’s agricultural and urban development sector can rise in the same manner that either China or Singapore did.   Mainly via prioritizing private but sitting government friendly global and local capital.

But also giving the impression that they know better in land policy mimicry that will pass the test of time because of radical historical nationalism.  Without revolutionary praxis but impressionable neoliberal false populism. 

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