admin
Gibson Nyikadzino
Correspondent
To put one’s faith in the opposition in Zimbabwe and believing their actions relating to their loyalty to the country, national events and the flag, is likely the biggest mistake and challenge any conscious citizen can ever make in their lifetime.
If one chooses to have faith in the opposition, that is the beauty of existing in a democracy like Zimbabwe.
At the 42nd independence celebrations last year held in Bulawayo, the opposition CCC attended.
It was nearly three months after the CCC’s “birth” and a little over three weeks after the March 26 by-elections.
For the first time, it appeared like reason was being infused in the opposition.
Back then, its spokesperson Advocate Fadzayi Mahere said: “Whereas there are political differences, there is no debate about honour, respect and acknowledgement of all national institutions, organs, events and programmes. Our loyalty to Zimbabwe and our loyalty to the country is the absolute marker of the preservation of our history, legacy and identity as a people.”
Today, the same outfit that projected that though political differences exist, Zimbabwe’s independence, as a badge of victory, is not debatable, non-negotiable and should be respected, have changed course.
To them, Zimbabwe is not yet “Uhuru” and they still yearn that “it was better to live in the Smith era than in post-independent Zimbabwe.”
These are the errors emanating from the failure to appreciate what consistency is in political terms.
Adversarial nationalists
There are political debates that have been going on over the past week on the virtual space regarding Zimbabwe’s 43rd independence anniversary.
By way of grouping and segmenting the outcomes from the debates, two camps emerged from these discussions.
Major themes deliberated came from what this writer can term pro-Zimbabwe nationalists and the adversarial “nationalists”.
What was disturbing were the narratives from the adversarial or anti-Zimbabwe “nationalists”. They lied that of the 43 years that Zimbabwe has been into independence, nothing good has happened in this period.
They have used the pen and virtual spaces to try disintegrate and fracture the unity that has kept Zimbabweans strong and enduring.
It is widely said and accepted that a history written in blood cannot be erased by lies written in ink. Alternatively, “lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in blood”.
Regarding Zimbabwe’s 43rd independence anniversary, some lies have failed to stick because their efficacy has been doubted, made irrelevant and not worth of recognition in the national discourse. In the post-1980 State, there has been a transformation that has happened regarding the national project relating to what nationalism entails.
The highly emulated view has been and that still holds is that Zimbabwe’s nationalism is one that is civic because of its inclusion regardless of political affiliation, race, colour, creed, gender, ethnicity or language.
As underscored in the Constitution, this form of nationalism is identified and duplicated in what people do. With or without independence, the nationalistic agenda of Zimbabwe envisages the nation as a community of diverse and equal people united in patriotic attachment to our shared values.
The liberty enjoyed by millions today came from the blood of the brave who forfeited their years of teenage-hood and youthfulness, deciding to offer their blood as a precious sacrifice to water the sacred tree of freedom.
To think of “nationalism” as a way of reproducing what thousands of our veterans fought against is a dangerous thought that has not place and should not be entertained in post-independent Zimbabwe. Such a “nationalistic” discourse where people think of being “better living in Rhodesia” is not representative of the founding principles of Zimbabwe.
It is a discourse that undermines the progress Zimbabwe is making under the leadership of the majority government. This brand of adversarial nationalism is not and will not be an integrative force, but remains a fracturing one.
Symbolic territories?
The importance of both Bulawayo and Mt Darwin, as areas that hosted the 42nd and 43rd independence celebrations, should not be seen in abstract terms.
They are symbolic.
The preference of the opposition to be in Bulawayo and not be present in Mt Darwin explains and expresses their failure to be a national outfit, it is only one that has preferences for some areas over others.
What, therefore, is evident is that it is not part of the CCC to integrate and be identified with countryside communities as in their values they still believe they have a special group of “citizens”.
They are oblivious that independence is neither for political parties nor personalities, but for Zimbabwe.
However, if there is need to interpret the symbolism of Mt Darwin to the national independence project, it can only be best understood as an area where peasants drilled in Marxist-Leninist ideology remain a fertile and organic ground that only aspires to see Zimbabwe forever independent.
That is why President Mnangagwa has emphasised that under his administration, it is “leaving no one and no place behind”.
It should not be surprising when Mashonaland Central province votes in numbers to defend the interests of Zimbabwe in this year’s elections.
Think Zimbabwean
This independence anniversary is a signal that Zimbabwe is moving towards decolonisation, one area of investment critical in sustaining the debate of knowledge generation is coming up with intellectual centres that generate ideas of decoloniality to restrict the contamination of adversarial nationalists.
It is the power of thought! Thought creates, but thought also destroys.
The negative thoughts should be dealt with at all institutional levels to promote the good. Zimbabwe needs think-tanks that play a key role in emphasising how decoloniality and total independence can be won through ideas.
Ideas are more powerful than guns!
Zimbabweans, remember we are one! This is homeland.
Online Reporter