Zimbabwe at 32 – Tracing the Fading Democratic Value of National
Leadership: Notes on 32 Years of Zimbabwe’s Independence — by Tabani
Moyo

July 13, 2012

The following originally appeared on the Zimbabwe Committee of the
Peoples Charter blog on April 12, 2012. There are three papers in all,
as the preface below states, to offer the views of a younger
generation of Zimbabwean intellectuals on the meaning of Independence
and democracy. This discussion is important for rethinking Zimbabwe.
TS

Brief Preface:

The three essays cover three topics, national historical
consciousness, reflections of young Zimbabweans on the meaning of
independence and tracing the fading democratic value of leadership in
Zimbabwe. The essays vary in length and are essentially individual
reflections of Zimbabweans. The electronic publication of these essays
has been facilitated by the Zimbabwe Committee of the Peoples Charter.

Kind regards,

Committee of the People’s Charter.

Zimbabwe at 32 – Tracing the Fading Democratic Value of National Leadership

By Tabani Moyo

In our lives as living organisms, we take time to introspect
especially on the day one was born. The same is true four our country
Zimbabwe on a day such as 18 April 2012. It is expected that we all
fall back into the memory lane and try as much as is possible to
rethink how our country has traveled and locating those areas could
have been done differently, if not better.

Though the day might be congested with slogans specifically from those
who wish to sweep the grey areas of the passage of time under the
carpet, but as a collective we need to outdo the drowning partisan
portrayal of our national independence by the few. In the process we
must see to it that we are as candid as we can in the introspective
process. This is the reasoning behind the penning of this essay,
nothing less nothing more, but a frank attempt at charting the
nation’s progression and development.

There is a striking reality in Zimbabwe. It’s a nation that has known
of one leader since independence. This we have nurtured either
consciously or subconsciously. The generation represented by the
ageing leadership has literally surrendered offering sound advice on
the need for renewal and rather joined the wagon in praise singing
acts rather than doing the honourable thing. This same generation and
the ‘supreme leader’ have became a danger to the national thinking and
the sooner the peoples of Zimbabwe realize and act on matter the
better for national progression. In discussing this concept it is
anchored on an understanding that the weaker the leadership, the
weaker the state and nation becomes domestically, regionally and
internationally.

This singular factor, tied up to other trickling tributaries has
accounted to the weakening of the state as those that stampede to
surround themselves around the supreme leader end up thinking on
narrow personal and trivial party interests and entrenchments rather
than serving the nation and its people therein.

This has in a way created a super elite group of primitive
accumulation actors within the leadership. For the purposes of this
article the leadership being a person, who often emerges as the head
of the government, the head of the party and government in totality.
The long and sort of it is that for the past 32 years we have modeled
Zimbabwe around an individual who commands a clientele group of people
at party level, through to the government and in a larger way
controlling how the entire society as a nation is engineered.

This has collapsed organized systems in which a government, a country
and the polity are supposed to operate. The 32 years of our
independence have been a sliding of Zimbabwe from a liberated nation
towards a clientele leadership who spend quite a sizable amount of
time in crafting song, dance and other forms of art in praising an
individual not a collective agenda for the nation. The collective
national agenda espoused in the liberation struggle ethos are
therefore subordinate to the leader, conveniently when it suits
him/her for political capital, rather than pursuing the national
agenda of developing and ensuring the nation state is competitive in
the full measure of progressive and democratic development.

This, the prolific write Wole Soyinka noted in his book, You Must Set
Forth at Dawn when be argued,

“This strange breed was a complete contrast to the nationalist
stalwarts in whose hands we had imagined the country could be safely
consigned while we went on a liberation march… we were bombarded by
utterances that identified only flamboyant replacements of the old
colonial order, not transformation agents, not even empathizing
participants in a process of liberation.”

The views by the Nigerian scholar have become so profound to the
interpretation of our state of leadership in Zimbabwe, 32 years after
independence. I alluded earlier on that leadership in this case is an
epitome of an individual, whose wishes, actions, thinking, sleeping or
breathing becomes the non-progressive definition of a nation. 32 years
on, the actions of an individual: wrong or right; brutal or in good
faith; heavenly or evil, are still defining the axis in which the
nation state orbits.

What has become apparent is that the current crop that emerged from
the liberation front has lost the transformation agency spirit that
guided the struggle. The ideals of the liberation struggles and that
which is unfolding on the ground showcases a serious deficiency in the
letter and spirit of transforming the country into a responsive state
that satisfies the needs of its citizens.

In this regard, Zimbabwe, a nation of close to 14 million people faces
the challenge of failing to secure a renewed effort in choosing the
leader of the Republic who wields the psychological (mental) and
physical (healthy and youthful) strata of leadership that can take
over the liberation struggle agenda to that of transforming a nation
state into an organic one that answers to the citizens’ yearnings. In
our small and humble measurement, we are the SADC Island that fails to
appreciate that there is life after figureheads at the helm of the
state.

But we do protect this figurehead for personal reasons, given the fact
that the bulk of these people who call themselves business people, can
only claim that title because they have made our state a private
enterprise. Without the protection of the state and the state
providing tenders and other protective measures, this group of
clientelism will not survive competing in the business world.

This in the long run is bleeding the state as it becomes an
opportunity cost on the central government to fulfill its mandate of
social service delivery. But the syndicates in this clientele group
will keep on managing spin headlines to the international world, that
the nation state has developed the most skilled minds in Africa, that
the land is back into the hands of the majority and that we have one
man one vote system in place.

Though it might be noted that the land question in Zimbabwe though
controversial but is no longer reversible, it remains necessary to
highlight to the powers that be that the average citizen who was
allocated land in Mazowe, which is prime land in Mashonaland Central
is now being evicted and being pushed back to marginal lands which
they were previously. In their place it is the very same ‘business’
magnates who relay on the ‘captive state protectionism’ for their
tender and other means of survival.

Our curriculum is now structured in a way that it is like a conveyor
belt which fails itself in grading the final product from the raw
ones, but still prides itself of producing the best of quantities as
opposed to the much needed quality outcome. Our voting schedules and
procedures are now resting in the hands of other nations. This is, as
argued by Soyinka, ‘because our state which is a centre of resource
allocation was captured by flamboyant replacements of the old colonial
order, not transformation agents, not even empathizing participants in
a process of liberation.’

Soyinka went on to note that, “We ask ourselves, were these men, who
routinely conducted themselves with such gracelessness, the true
representatives of a national mandate?” On this important day, this
question is no longer pointed at the leaders from the liberation
struggle but to those who started leading the defiance campaign to
those who lost the liberation struggle mandate due to their deeds post
independence. We therefore, collectively place the new government
order under spotlight. How fast has been the process of sublimation?
As in the old time classic,Animal Farm if we are to look at the pigs
and the people, are we going to find marginal differences? This is
what the Zimbabwean nation should answer.

We have been watching them from a distance and noted that the new
entrants into the leadership roles of the government, through their
deeds as contrary to their spoken word seem to send a clear message
that their ascendancy to the national government is the monopoly of
the privileged by the minority. As if to say that the messages on this
occasion of 32 years of independence the language is that of say,
stake your claims. The earlier you position yourselves, the bigger
your slice of the national cake. It is necessary here to reassert my
point that the definition of leadership has not changed.At 32 years of
age, can the country stomach a leadership which scrambles for
aggrandizement through cars, houses, allowances and paid for massages?

In this process of commemorating our national independence, we ought
to make it candidly clear that the call for transformation agency has
really become urgent. This is to say that we must never allow
ourselves to be slaves of our own liberation efforts. It is
paradoxical that at every time we differ in our course of direction, a
ransom demand is made by those who have lost the libation struggle
mandate, reminding the nation, the people and at times defining how
blood can easily be shed. This belongs to savages, barbarians, sadists
and other forms of “isms” that have no place in modern states
configuration. To a larger extent it points to a failed understanding
of the liberation struggle’s compass and its meaning thereof to the
peoples of Zimbabwe, the region and the international world order.

We know very much that our place within the evolving organisms of new
nations shall be redefined. This is more urgent given the fact that
the current leadership does not have adequate knowledge of the net
worthy value of its belongings nor the value of the country. I am yet
to met a single leader with competent knowledge of the interpolation
of the amount of minerals, the amounts of gas, the net worth of wild
life and how best it can be cultivated into the development of our
nation. With such poor leadership, the nation is in danger. Anyone
with access to these unaccounted for resources can easily fund
insurgence. It is more dangerous with a weak state like ours where the
public and even senior officials are clueless of the net revenue
emanating from the country’s trading with the world.

Irrespective of the limited knowledge of the country’s resources, we
continue to structure deals which are nothing short of fraudulent
behavior. One for example cannot competently explain why the
government gave the Chinese ‘unlimited’ access to diamonds in the
Chiyadzwa mine fields in exchange of the company building a military
staff college located in Mazowe. Rationale thinking would point to a
profitable decision of dualising our highway roads in the country in
exchange to such access to the precious minerals. Addressing issues of
the country wide pronounced starvation, health system, education and
the failing industry.

At 32, I hope against the tide we must see to it that we cause change
to happen. Changing of the configuration of the country is a function
of a sound mindset leading it. As is, we have a long way to go, unless
a new breed with new thinking surfaces.

Tabani Moyo can be contacted at [email protected]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to