Time, Mortality and our African Covid19 Context.

By Takura Zhangazha*

The World Health Organization (WHO) Africa regional office recently issued a statement that the continent should expect more Covid19 infections.  

As reported in the media,  it estimates that over a quarter of a billion of us Africans will eventually be infected.  Though, again according to WHO fewer of us may die than in other continents due to what they consider our younger population as well as our ‘different lifestyles’.  The latter point being with reference to demographic issues such as population density and/or nature of settlements (urban or rural). 

The report commissioned by the WHO is essentially scientific.  So there would be no need to argue about any implied ‘othering’ of Africans. Even if again, where and when it comes to pandemics on the African continent, its target audience is likely those that can provide further direct support to prevent the spread of Covid19.  And the African Union as well as its member states to try and establish better long term approaches to combating Covid 19.

What is however interesting has been our reaction as Africans to this sort of information.  Not just by way of what our governments decide to do or tell us. Either as advised by WHO or global philanthropists. 

What is in vogue, at least to me at least, is how we are reacting to Covid19 stories that would otherwise be considered apocalyptic.  Or if in anyway what we have always considered to be the passage of natural time/life/ and mortality is any more different than before.

These would be partly philosophical, somewhat anthropological and possibly religious considerations. As a blogger my own angle to these issues is more self-reflective than academic or based on specific research.

When the pandemic was officially confirmed by WHO earlier this year, its danger appeared to some as distant to the African continent. And in some cases it gave rise to social media motivated/distributed rascism against people in the global east. From the viewpoint of not only us as Africans but also as inspired by the same as it came from the global north and in particular the current president of the USA. 

And in this, a mistaken perception we have had of our mortality in the context of Covid 19, was that it could not kill Africans.  And in this we unwittingly did not see how we as already historically ‘othered’, were wrongly othering ‘others’ in the global east and global north.  

We now know the reality of the pandemic including the recent official WHO predictions of its potentially devastating effect on the continent. A development which should immediately compel us to reflect deeply on our own context and how better to address the challenge.

Sadly, we may not be up to the task in the fullness of the challenge it represents. And this is where it becomes more complicated. Our perceptions and fears of Covid19 are viewed, by us, from the prism of the global north.  Not only on the basis of anticipation of a vaccine or cure being derived from there but also to the extent of limiting our contextual search for local solutions to the same. And not just in relation to scientific treatment but also charting a new approach to how we re-structure and revolutionalise our public health services and attendant social welfare systems for the benefit of our majority poor. 

What our governments are inclined toward are public-private frameworks enabled by lockdowns in aide of what we now know to be ‘disaster capitalism’. 

In this, we are still not optimally prepared for the storm that is predicted to be coming.  And a decent number of us would know that where you are warned of a pending storm it is preferable to be prepared for it than to hope that those that predicted it were wrong.

What we should not do is to resign ourselves to what can only be described as an assumed African historical fate in the wake of global pandemics. Or even wars. That is assumptions that it is coming and therefore inevitable.  We instead require greater urgency and people centered agency.  Beyond what we have been accustomed to as either philanthropy or anticipation of the benevolent hand motivated by colonial legacy responsibility for the ‘natives’.

The passage of time and perceptions, including our pessimistic own, of African mortality should be something that we consider in rejuvenated progressive ways. As opposed to taking the route of accepting an ‘inevitabilism’ (I borrow this term from Soshana Zuboff’s great work on surveillance capitalism) as of colonial, post-colonial and neo-liberal old.  

While we may not be able to build hospitals in a week, the fact of the matter is that we must build them with urgency in order to prevent this attitude of ‘inevitabilism.’

As cited above the WHO Africa regional office indicates that Covid19 may be with us on the continent for a more foreseeable period than potentially elsewhere.  

One cannot argue with their scientific findings.  We know the import of the passage of time. What we may need to think about is challenging the perception of inevitability more robustly and with the majority poor in mind.  This may mean even seeking to re-mould our African states beyond the profit motivated expectations of globalized and financialised capital.  We need to understand the import of Covid19 on the African continent as outlined by science. But in doing so we must keep the people in mind. Together with the urgent quest for a new African welfare state that while struggling sets a new path to a progressive people driven global world order.

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

An Initial Case for a Zimbabwe Media Bailout Fund .

By Takura Zhangazha*

Zimbabwe’s mainstream and emerging media have always been faced with the challenge of sustainability in a number of respects.  Top of the list in recent years has always been the challenge of viability and ability to generate revenue to remain going concerns.  Other’s relating again to sustainability include maintaining its integrity and professionalism so as to remain valued by the Zimbabwean public for its essential democratic role.

In the wake of Covid 19 this question sustainability has become even more apparent if not downright debilitating for the mainstream media as a key element of a democratic state. The democratic assumption of its role as a ‘fourth estate’ of society is evidently under siege as it relates to its short, medium and long term sustainability. 

Due to government ordered lockdowns, the mainstream media has like any other industry been faced with a reduction in its capacity to disseminate public interest news and entertainment.  Be it in electronic (radio/TV), print media, community media or emerging online news platforms that focus on professional journalistic content. 

While it remains the print media that is hardest hit in relation to actual sales or advertising revenue, the very fact that all other media platforms that rely on producing ethical, professional content for readers, viewers and listeners in the public interest are incapacitated makes this a sector wide dilemna. 

It also makes the sustainability crisis of Zimbabwe’s media one that requires all hands on deck in order to keep the essential democratic role of the media in enabling freedom of expression and access to information.  This, as outlined in not only our national constitution’s bill of rights (sections 61 and 62) but also as observed as international best practice and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 19). 

The media therefore must exist. Where it is facing serious challenges to its viability as is the case with the Covid19 pandemic, it must be assisted to stay afloat in order to fulfill its democratic public interest role of enabling free expression and access to information. 

In my view, the urgency of keep in free expression, access to information and media freedom as key democratic priority areas requires a media bailout funding framework.  Not just for state owned/controlled media or public media  but also privately owned/controlled media. In their various forms and mediums. 

In other sectors such as tourism, banking or manufacturing  this is also sometimes referred to as a stimulus package for what governments refer to as critical industries. 

The media may not be on priority lists of economic pundits vis-a-vis its democratic national importance or necessity in times of crisis. However in the current context, before Covid 19 and in the future, the media is an essential democratic service that requires new sustainability frameworks that support it to remain operational.  Especially in light of lockdowns.

A key question that emerges is where would any funding for bailing out struggling media entities come from?  

An easy answer tot that is that the primary guarantor of such bailout funding should be the state.  Just as much as the state has to set up funding frameworks for arts and culture, tourism or mining, it is clear that it has a democratic obligation to enable media sustainability.  Even if the government of the day does not agree with editorial positions of various media houses an independent funding framework enabled by the state is entirely possible. 

Enabling however does not mean there are no other stakeholders that should play a role.  Those that can and who have free expression and access to information in a democratic society at heart should be able to either participate or set up their own media sustainability funding frameworks. Based on their own philanthropic or other values, the contributions of other stakeholders in helping keep Zimbabwe’s media not only afloat but professionally, ethically and democratically viable can only be encouraged and welcomed with open arms.

The mechanisms of this media bailout fund would be expressly for those that need it. In our case, one way or the other it is a majority of mainstream and emerging online journalistic media that would require it.  It would function more like an assistance fund, where grants are given in the immediate to media hoses based on a set of criteria arrived at by all stakeholders.  This criteria will include also assistance for media houses that are focusing on new ways of working and disseminating journalistic news. All via a democratically independent adjudication process.  

And for this, I think it is imperative that Zimbabwean media stakeholders meet to initially address and hopefully agree on what would be the objectives, operational mechanisms and expected results of such a media bailout funding framework.  However complex it may initially appear and whatever divergent ideological vies of the media.

What remains evident is that the media in our context cannot simply be viewed as a business.  It is an essential aspect of our democracy.  However flawed the latter may be viewed to be.  While media owners, journalists and media support organisations may currently be struggling with new ways of working, they should not however lose sight of the democratic necessity of their existence.  Even more so in a time of the pandemic that is Covid 19 and increasingly arbitrary means of controlling the public by governments across the world.

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

Esi Isusu

(Shinga Mushandi Shinga!)

Na Takura Zhangazha*

Patinoti Shinga Mushandi Shinga!

Hatirevi kuti shingirira muhuranda

Tinoreva kuti shingiririra mupfungwa

Nemu hupenyu

Funga mhuri hongu

Esi fungawo nyika

Tsanangudza hupfumi hwevanhu

Usavanze

Wona zvirikumashure

Wona zviripo

Zvese uchiita kuti uwone zvirimberi

Dzamisa pfungwa

Zviuyi zvingauya

Asi chenjedza meso

Nyangwe zvichiita sezvisingaiti

Sezvisingakundiki

Tarira seri kwazvo

Wona mberi, tarira mberi

Simbisa mafungiro

Tambira pako paunowona panokodzera

Funga vamweni

Funga utano nezvese zvineraramo rweruzhinji

Pinda pakati pazvo

Tsvaga tsanangudzo,

Nzwisisa

Tsanangura ruviri, runa

Enda mberi neruzhinji rwavanhu

Zvinobudirira

Ruzhinji rwuchaona

*Takura Zhangazha akanyora oga akazvimirira (takura-zhangazha.blogpot.com)

Re-Imagining Progressive African Cities after Corona.

 By Takura Zhangazha*

Living in a contemporary African city if argued from an historical perspective is to the greater extent a construct of colonialism. Both in its initial or later phases. Including its post/neo-colonial construct as envied or mimicked by those of us who would come to consider the African city, ‘home’. 

In the wake of the global corona virus (Covid19) pandemic, the African city as a geo-political and economic construct has been thrown sharply into focus.  Even if inadvertently. 

African cities have been generally perceived as sites of developmental progress.  While their majority populated surrounding and agro-economy human settlements areas have been considered ‘rural backwaters’.  The latter being viewed not only in the sense of abject poverty but also as a primary source of perceived ignorance and in some ceases, biological pandemics.  Never mind where the latter would have originated from. 

An immediate historical point would be the fact that Africa has never been entirely ‘rural’.  Ancient cities, such as the Great Zimbabwe Monuments in Zimbabwe, Southern Africa, are regularly held up as epitomes of African civilization.  Except that they did not have electricity and Macadamized roads as in the contemporary.

The key element to consider though has been the historical fact that the contemporary African city, South of the Sahara, is one that emerged with the onset of colonialism. From Dakar through to Johannesburg, it does not require spectacular intellect to know how these settlements were established.  Cocooned in the ambit of a colonial (mercantile) capitalism, the majority of the cities we, as Africans, live in, were never designed in either their civil engineering or economic planning for a majority of us. They were to the greater extent, exclusionary. 

But that is not the issue at play here.  We have cities that we have come to regard as our own.  This is despite the fact that we still mythologize the city as a living space of modern progress.  And this is probably across the board within African territories that are former British colonies.  Initially not just on the basis of the fact that most of these cities came to include Africans on the basis of either forced rural to urban migration/labor via uncouth rural taxation and loss livelihoods. Even more significantly because the capitalist/colonialist system made it appear historically inevitable.  

The colonial/post-colonial city came to be viewed as not only the seat of power over rural hinterlands previously unknown or even in the contemporary, unexplored.  It also came to be seen as aspirational for many young Africans trying to flee enforced rural poverty for ravenous colonial labour markets. 

Ironically however the city in our African contexts is still not viewed as permanent place of abode. Though this may come to pass.  There is always the anticipation of demonstrating success at having conquered it.  Many of us would still ideally envision a coming back home (rural) to demonstrate evidence of success via a newly built ‘modern’ or city like house or purchase of livestock. Except for the fact that it is still not like life in the city proper.  It is only in order to mimic it. 

With the arrival of the global pandemic that is Covid19 the African city with its historical colonial baggage comes to be viewed as a source of contagion as opposed to hitherto enlightenment or a source of material progress. 

Those that are generally considered the urban African poor in the midst of Covid19 sought departure from the affliction of the rich by trying to trek back to their rural homes. Places where not only, for now, were there less cases of Covid19 but also where life is invariably cheaper even if with less potential sources of income.     

The key challenge here becomes the centrality of the city as emblematic of human progress.  By way of perception as well as grounded in economic history. Be it colonial, post-colonial or as is the case now, global.

And in considering this challenge, what obtains is the necessity of a new perspective/thinking of the African city after Covid19. 

The African city or metropolis needs to be demystified in a number of respects.  The first being that for many of us arrival or being born in it make it appear as the epitome of individual progress. All compared with what we would unfortunately consider as rural backwaters where one way or the other our ancestors originally come from.  

In this, we therefore still face the primary challenge of perceiving of the city as a habitat that connotes 'arrival'.  As opposed to a perspective that foregoes the arrogance of the colonial gaze and instead recognizes the humanity of both the urban and rural inhabitants. 

In this, we need a new perspective that understands that for all our electricity tiled roofs in the urban, the rural matters.  And that it is equal. 

But for the city itself, we need to reconsider how to move away from colonially motivated urban planning.   Where we still retain the structural effects of the ‘African township’ by limiting not only the size of landed property for workers and the urban poor we need to move away from a mine compound approach to the urban.  That is where we have a settlement structure that treats the working class as deserving of poor housing and a lack of social amenities.  That may have happened in Europe during phases of their agricultural and industrial revolutions but we have no logical historical reason to mimic the same in the present.  Nor in the future.

In the wake and hopefully livable aftermath of Covid-19, the African city needs to be less capitalist and recognise the rights of the informal economy by allowing it to thrive in safer, healthier and more accountable spaces.  As opposed to arbitrarily razing structures because of the opportunistic fears that Covid19 has presented in the immediate. What's wrong with a tuckshop or vendors stall anyway where and when it is closer to its target market?

The African city needs to shift from capitalism not only in its political management but the colonial legacy pretext of its existence. There are no replicas of New Yorks or Londons that should be expected on the continent.  At least not anymore.  We need African cities that respond more to contextual human livelihood needs. And cities that also come to a climate change balance with rural areas while emphasizing the need for equitable basic amenities (health, transport, water, education, communications) regardless of geographical location. 

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

Struggles for New Normals after Corona

By Takura Zhangazha*

A now common phrase that has come with the global Covid-19 (corona virus) outbreak has been that ‘things will never be the same/normal again’.  It is one laden with many attendant questions as to its full meaning.  

Key among these would be, ‘What was normal in the first place?’ Another being, ‘What is actually obtaining/happening?’

Even if we fail to get a satisfactory answer to the foregoing we will also still have to ask ourselves a third question, ‘What should/will change?’

The first question is perhaps the easiest to answer.  Before the outbreak of Covid219 there were multifaceted ‘normals’ in our various countries.  Largely by way of class. And I am really going simplify this here.   

The rich could normally expect to get sick and get the best medical treatment. The middle classes while still aspiring to be rich could enjoy the consumerist lifestyles that come with neoliberal economics (purchasing cars, small properties, having access to private health care, education, fast food, movies etc).

The  working class (urban and rural labour) in both their formal and informal indenture had a normal that was characterised by job losses, low incomes and lack of access to adequate basic social services like health, education and affordable public transport.  All with the continued dangling of a neoliberal populist carrot claiming that the free market works for everyone.  When in reality it does not and was never designed to do so.

In considering what was normal before Covid19 it is fair to argue that it was not an equitable or just state of global or economic affairs.  A point that may be lost to many of us in the global south because once again, we are going to be subjected to a barrage of ‘solutions’ as defined by the global north. 

The other critical question that needs to be answered relates to what is obtaining in the pandemic moment. This is specifically with regard to the fact that what occurs now will have a tremendous impact on a post Covid19 ‘normal’.  

The global shutdown of capitalism has not necessarily meant it is dead or dying.  Instead, what is apparent is that, with the help of government ‘stimulus’ packages, it is gearing up for a more robust return.  Be it in the airlines, mining, manufacturing and financial markets. 

In our African contexts, a number of governments’ have adopted a corporatist approach to Covid19.  Courting private capital, they are functioning within the parameters of corporate social responsibility.  While we need all hands on deck we should be cautious that we do not let our government lead us to an unpalatable ‘disaster capitalism’.  The latter being a system in which private capital takes complete advantage of a crisis to gain a foothold on social services for profit.  

Or the decimation of the informal sector in the name of restoring ‘urban normalcy’ (read as elite normalcy) to trade or economic activities.

Private capital has also begun downsizing and laying off workers particularly in the tertiary sectors. The issue being that because of weakened unionism, the workers have no choice but to be furloughed with the promise of potentially getting their jobs back if things return to ‘normal’.  A highly unlikely development.   Even if companies get ‘bailout’ from central governments, the likelihood that the money received will be for workers’ wages or livelihoods in the short or long term is limited.  We saw that in 2008 with the global financial crisis.

In other circles, religion has taken a back step to natural sciences on this one.  Even if reluctantly.  While social activities such as sports have had to re-look at their profit making models and even debate, as in the case of football, the reduction of player wages. In arts and culture, the lock-downs have had a debilitating effect on incomes for creatives and in the African context where internet access remains comparatively low and highly dependent on the Diaspora, this is even more challenging.

What is apparent particularly in Zimbabwe is that it is a myth to claim that Covid19 is an equalizer.  Far from it.  It is exposing class and lifestyle divisions.  Hence arguments about what really is ‘social distancing’ and for whom does it work?

The final question to be answered is in two parts.  The first being the more analytical perspective on what is likely to happen. The second being more normative, what should preferably happen for a new progressive normal. 

What is likely to happen where Covid19 is globally contained is that initially private capital will try and cash in on it.  Debates on hospitals, medical equipment will become the main lexicon of many countries for fear of a return of Covid19. But with a populist admiration for philanthropists as being either the ones with the solution or at least the medical equipment to ‘keep us safe’. While not understanding what they truly represent both in terms of their countries’ foreign policies and their own personal profit motives. 

Furthermore, there will be increases in digital surveillance.  Again as technically proposed by the major telecommunications companies with their high tech equipment (including your mobile phone). The right to some sort of digital privacy will be sacrificed at the altar of assumptions of the public health interest. In our African contexts, this may not matter as much as in the global north but it does not mean that it will not happen.

The second part of the question is with regard to what should happen in a return to a ‘new normal’.  Those of us on the left are quite straightforward on what should happen. The state must return as the primary guarantor of all public/social services such as health, transport, education, access to water and free expression.  I deliberately mention free expression because that is always in the public interest.  At the moment it remains controlled either by state functionaries or media oligarchies. Globally.

Post Covid19, we will still be faced with the historical challenge of ensuring the rights of all human beings to a life of dignity and equality.  In the midst of lock-downs, we must sharpen our ability to pursue these values in their organic universality.  All I know for now is that Covid 19 may not be an equalizer in its occurrence, but either way, we have been, will always be, all equal as human beings in our response and recovery from it.  

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

Harness and Time:

Ah the consciousness that is existence. 

Trying to harness time.

 And time doing the reverse. And knowing that still there are no 'singular epiphanies'. 

Just experiences found or lost. 

Hoping that again, if it chooses, the sun shines tomorrow.

Even knowing that it may not. 

With its own regularity night always comes. 

But with stars. 

Or sometimes with a bright African moon. 

Showing that homebound footpath and its shadows. 

But homebound all the same. 

Past the mountain crevices, down into the valley of home. 

The lit fire,  joy of arrival. 

Knowing tomorrow when the sun rises again there are so many new questions to be answered.

Seeking affirmation, hope. 

Yesterday it was all about getting home. 

Arriving. 

Today it is departure. 

With the assumption that home stays the same. 

While waiting for you. 

It changes. 

You change. 

Time laughs. 

You tried its opposite. 

Harness.

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

Ideological Praxis in Fighting Covid-19: Understanding ‘Philanthropy’ and Effect.

By Takura Zhangazha*

The government of Zimbabwe, in its reactions to the Covid-19 (corona virus) pandemic, as expected, has roped in domestic and international private capital.  On the face of it, this is completely understandable.  In times of a global pandemic, one can easily argue that we will always need all hands on deck.  Especially if they contribute to critical lifesaving equipment such as ventilators or safety clothing. 

Already, local businessmen with alleged links to President Mnangagwa have purchased and begun refurbishing previously defunct private or church-owned hospitals to serve as Covid-19 testing or treatment centers.  While social media swirled with allegations that such maneuvers were intended of the treatment of Zimbabwe’s elite, both government and representatives or supporters of the initiatives refuted this.  But the tag will probably be difficult to shake off. 

In similar fashion to when we recently had a cholera outbreak in 2018, again government is courting private solutions to a public health problem.  The consistency of this is not surprising. After all, the government has consistently stated that its economic blue print is a free market and therefore ease of doing business one. 

Except that these should not be times defined by philanthropic whims of those that are already rich.  Because quite straightforwardly, they are not the Zimbabwean state.  Neither do they intend to be.  They have an eye on the feel good factor that comes with a messianic sleight of hand but more significantly a fortification of either already existent or new found relationships with the state power elite. 

For some among us there is no particular problem with such a relationship.  In fact some would even occasionally suggest various chief executives or founders of monopoly private companies as ideal candidates for the presidency of Zimbabwe. While at the same time not seeing the very fact that they would no longer need to be.  Their  business interests and those of the state/political elite, increasingly, on the face of it, would coincide.  One cannot do without the other. 

So it is  not hard to imagine a convergence of interests of those that have the levers of political power of the state and those that control private capital.  Even in a time of global crisis.  Hence many cdes in the global north have been trying to rally against what they have referred to as Corona Capitalism or as outlined in Naomi Klein’s relevant analysis, disaster capitalism. 

For many of us here in the global south, we may see it as abstract.  What may be key is only the immediacy of survival.  After all, particularly in Africa, we may be more used to philanthropy as the primary means through which we eventually either stabilize or overcome pandemics, famines or climate motivated natural disasters. 

The dilemma with that is that we become willing players in the privatization of our well-being and an economic experimentation with our lives that goes well beyond accusations of Africa as a testing ground for vaccines. 

In the context of Covid-19, Africans must ask the much more systematic questions on the solutions that their respective governments and international stakeholders are proposing.  Even in receiving urgent help, and while understanding that we should try and avoid politicizing the pandemic that is Covid-19 before we find solutions to it, we must however most certainly seek to understand why it has spread so quickly, so fast.  At least beyond demographics.  And firmly within the ambit of the global ideological consensus of the politically powerful in tandem with private capital that have given it fertile ground to grow.  It is called neoliberalism. And it has never been an historical or future friend of Africa. 

But it is a reality that we have to deal with.  

In doing so, even as we remain anxious about Covid-19, we need to reclaim what French economist Thomas Piketty refers to as a ‘social state for the 21^st century.’ One that clearly understands the necessity of public services over and above their reliance on private capital for delivery. Even if for the purposes of finding a more cogent solution in the immediate where we know that the reactionary forces of neoliberalism are waiting for things to become either calmer or necessitate the need for an assumedly ‘inevitable’ global surveillance regime.  All in the public-private (profit) partnership  interest.

In Zimbabwe’s context, the lessons are apparent.  We let our public health services succumb to the motivations of neoliberalism and private capital interests.  But as argued elsewhere, the effects of Covid-19 transcend class and geographical location.   Where we revert to a state that is caught in the revolving door of powerful political elites comfortably ‘trapped’ by private capital players we are not solving anything.

The Zimbabwean government must be made to pledge to a complete revitalization of the state as the primary guarantor of all social services as funded by a tax base that weighs heavily on those that would be referred to globally as the 1% (yes we also have them even in Zimbabwe). But all with a value system that makes access to health, even in a pandemic a right all can have equitable access to.  Be they in rural or urban locations.  

What is urgent is our reconfiguration of the role of the Zimbabwean state in being the base of social services for all.   And ensuring that this happens in reality as opposed in the vague frameworks of private public partnerships and generally unsustainable claims of ‘resilient philanthropy’. 

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