Good governance, democracy not products of the West

personally see how cruel and murderous Europe and America have been to Africans. As if exposing the African race to slavery was not enough, the continent went on to be colonised by the same savages in 1883.
This is how bad the West has been towards Africa. The British Felon Act enforces the deportation of all British citizens who disrespect the Queen to overseas and yet if such a law was to be legislated by Africans it would be regarded draconian.
Zimbabwe has experienced an agonising treatment ranging from displacement, segregation, ill-treatment, harassment, an excruciating liberation struggle and lately the heinous illegal economic sanctions.
In all these unforgivable experiences, Zanu-PF has been found giving a defined course of action. Its leader has remained principled and nationalistic in character.
However, the low self-esteemed MDC formations are found praising our erstwhile colonisers, showering them with adjectives that vindicates them from any demonic practices. Shame! It is clear that the MDCs glorify the West in order to get funding for use in bribing voters to be voted into office. Is this what democracy is and how it is practiced?
Fellow Zimbabweans, during the colonial and liberation eras there were no donors, NGOs, civic societies, and human rights that helped Africans to acquire the right to self-rule. Oh! by the way Red Cross was there, but only significant in making noises that had no substance.
Of course during the liberation struggle they provided medicines; that means they were only useful to the sick and the wounded whom they regarded as not being effective to cause harm to the colonisers.
What boggles the mind is where were these plethoras of donors and NGOs when Zimbabwe and Africa needed them the most? Who formed them and for what purpose?
Who funded or is funding them and for achieving whose objective? Does colonisation not constitute a violation of human rights? Why is it that civic societies and NGOs are mainly found in African states?
What is significant about the opposition groups that make civic societies work with them?
All NGOs are agents of the imperialists who play to the tune of Anglo-Saxon. Never do they play to Afro-centric tunes nor hear the call by our ancestors such as Mbuya Nehanda and King Lobengula, telling us to rise and demand back our Zimbabwe’s stolen land. 
They do not practise our cultures, values and traditions. When they hear the enemy demonising Zimbabwe they join in and shout the loudest in supporting of the enemy. When the enemies celebrate victory they celebrate the most as they are allowed to enter the lion’s den to wine and dine together with the enemy.
NGOs are the Anglo-Saxons’ African foot soldiers whose assaults and victories are, in fact, a victory for the West. During the colonial era most Africans who dare challenged the colonial powers were needlessly harassed, imprisoned, tortured and maimed or killed. 
Europe and America never encouraged or funded any civic organisation such as the Crisis Coalition of Zimbabwe. Roy Bennett, Ian Kay, David Coltart, Eric Bloch and Eddie Cross never thought of joining hands with Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo. Mugabe and Nkomo were fighting for their God given rights.
When the liberation struggle was taking place, Rhodesia was not in crisis to warrant the West partnering defenders of democracy such as those who were in Zanu and Zapu. Now that Zimbabwe acquired its political independence and is strengthening it by empowering the people through land reform and indigenisation, it is now regarded as a country in crisis. 
As a way to deal with the so-called “crisis” of taking land from the white minority farmers and asking all foreign owned businesses to embrace the Indigenisation and Empowerment Act, the British and Americans found it necessary to form and fund the Crisis Coalition of Zimbabwe. 
The colonised-beyond-redemption such as Lewanika and the coterie of Crisis Coalition in Zimbabwe has become usable tools for regime change.
There are a plethora of NGOs and civic organisations that, together with Britain and the United States, claim to be fighting for democracy, rule of law, good governance and human rights. The question is: whose democracy, whose rule of law and human rights are being protected by these Western founded and funded NGOs? 
Why the increase of these NGOs after the landmark 2000 land reform programme? Why the hype and noise about lack of democracy, transparency and rule of law only arise when Zimbabweans demand what is rightfully theirs?
The donors that existed during the colonial demolition period were only concerned with social pittances, that is, helping the refugees with used clothes and feeding them with yellow maize that was meant for cattle fattening schemes that were rampant during that era.  No meaningful funding came from Europe and United States.
Only China, Russia and some East European socialists’ countries helped Africa with weaponry systems plus food and clothing to demolish the colonial powers.  In fact, Britain and United States, covertly supplied arms and weapons, chemical weapons for that matter, used by the colonial armies to annihilate freedom fighters. 
People who were fighting to liberate themselves were regarded as terrorists. In today’s scenario, those who were fighting to free themselves and are now empowering their people are called dictators.
What is astonishing is the fact that all NGOs and opposition parties team-up with the former colonial powers in branding those who liberated them as dictators. People like Madhuku, Lewanika, Mavunga, Mwonzora, Ncube and Biti are now busy messing up the hand that fed them. They have forgotten that for Zimbabwe to practice multi-party democracy, millions of people died to make it happen.
People must be aware that the donor community only invests where their masters have got interests.  Believe it or not, all NGOs, including the opposition parties, are funded by the West. In the monograph titled “Security Sector Reform in Africa: The promise and practice of a new donor approach”, Daniel Bendix and Ruth Stanley said: “Despite a broad consultative process, a number of analysts question whether Sierra Leone’s security requirements are likely to be settled in favour of the British position given Sierra Leone’s dependency on external funding.” 
In the same monograph it is stated that: “In the case of Liberia, there is a consensus that the international community and civic organisations have failed to respect the principles of local ownership.”
Fellow Zimbabweans, reading from Bendix and Stanley who hail from colonial Europe, what makes you feel that the donor community and NGOs in Zimbabwe are going to respect local ownership of our social, cultural, political, economic and security processes? 
Are Zimbabweans not being fore-warned to guard against the element of belief that donors and NGOs will bring inheritable development to Zimbabweans? Reading from NGOs and opposition parties’ propaganda newspapers, does any right minded Zimbabwean hope to get empowered through policies enunciated by the donor community and the MDC formations?
If your feeling is motivating you to say yes, why do you think they failed to do it, not only in colonial Rhodesia, but in independence Sierra Leone and Liberia? Why, if the MDC formations are for real democracy, would they take on board Roy Bennett, Ian Kay, Martin Rupiya, Giles Mutsekwa and Advocate Matinenga; all known members of the notorious Rhodesian Force (Mapuruvheya) and Selous Scouts (Maskuzu Apo).
People must not forget that good governance and democracy only dawned in Zimbabwe after a bitter struggle where heroes such as Herbert Chitepo, Jason Moyo, Josiah Tongogara and Nikita Mangena died.  Does Zimbabwe see any sincerity in the preaching of democracy and its asymmetric lobby by NGOs and civic groups? 
I bet the good answer is a big NO and those opposing this African-centred position must be ready for a rude awakening when the Anglox-Saxons, donors and NGOs fail to win back Zimbabwe for Rhodesians and the West. MaMDC musatengese nyika pamusana pemari veduwe.