| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Denial: Zimbabwe’s collective psychosis
By Edward
M Sibanda
OVER the years I have watched events unfold in Zimbabwe albeit from
the periphery. I have followed events from various forms of media including
New Zimbabwe.com.
I should hasten to say after reading Chris Chogugudza”s, “Disentangling Mawere and Moyo” I was left with no option but to pen a response to a behaviour that I have seen evolve over the years.
This is nothing more than the cancerous culture of denial and deception. I was following the Mawere – Moyo debate and gaining insight into how Zanu PF operates, which I guess was the reason why the Editor allowed it in the first place.
Then Chogugudza appeared with his paternalistic view, advising the Editor to devote the space to “more pressing issues”. The question is, what is more pressing than understanding how Zanu PF operate and formulate something out of it if need be. It can appear a simple “chikwereti” (loan) but in politics that means a lot.
Why, also, should certain issues be swept under the carpet and be taboo to discuss them? It is this attitude that has brewed the culture of denial in the body politic of Zimbabwe. The fact is that this attitude has been amidst us for as long as I remember. The media system has aided in instilling and reinforcing this negative value in our society. I wish to highlight that denial is endemic in most facets of our society, ruling party, opposition, educational institutions and civil society to mention but a few. It has become Zimbabwe’s collective psychosis and if not checked the dream of a new Zimbabwe will indeed remain a dream.
Let me highlight instances where denial has been exhibited and how this has taken Zimbabwe back. Gukurahundi was unleashed on the people of Matabeleland and some parts of Midlands in what has been described as tribal clampdown and is still viewed as such as there has been no closure. That has been denied to this day. There is even deliberate ploy to downplay the event as if it did not happen.
It is therefore not surprising that no one has accepted responsibility and publicly apologised. The same voices of denial with their paternalistic air argue that these are old wounds that should not be opened for the good of the country. They would rather not have the issue discussed. But the question is, for how long do you keep something at simmering level? The same voices are in denial when it comes to land reform. No one in government would admit that the “process” has been chaotic, yet everyday there is evidence to suggest otherwise.
Commissions have been appointed and presented findings to the effect that there is multiple farm ownership and underutilisation of land. Further reports of looting of equipment on farms have been tabled. Yet the voices of denial in government argue everything is fine and under control. We were once assured by a cabinet minister that food reserves for the country were more than enough only for the truth to out. The same has been said of tourist figures.
We have also seen many so-called turnaround policies or blue prints from the viewpoint of government, yet everyone knows it’s forlorn hope as real problems are denied as if they don’t exist. When one policy is being announced amid the hype and pomp, someone behind the scenes would be thinking of the next turnaround blueprint to address the symptoms of the problems besetting Zimbabwe.
Denial has been exhibited over the years and the art was more than perfected when Prof Jonathan Moyo became part of the government. With the aid of state machinery (state controlled media) he ruthlessly denied there was any problem or crisis in Zimbabwe. In an interview carried by the Sunday Times of 12 August 2001 Moyo when asked why the Zimbabwean crisis was not being discussed at the SADC meeting in Malawi, he retorted, “Crisis? What crisis? There is no crisis in Zimbabwe so there is no need for it to be discussed here” (see report).
I believe the mighty Zanu PF vessel was going down only for it to be propped by the like of Jonathan Moyo. The reason why some of us followed the so called mud-slinging between Moyo and Mawere was to see whether Moyo would admit responsibility for his actions during his tenure in Mugabe cabinet. Again denial was manifested, the learned Professor denies his role or seeks to minimise it. The fact that he was part of government and its mouthpiece for that matter makes it difficult to exonerate him. The Professor should be reminded in the words of Martin Luther King Jr that, “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who perpetrates it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it”.
The art of denial is not only endemic in the ruling party and the likes of Jonathan Moyo. It is something that has been embraced by the opposition with such impunity. Its as if opposition spokespersons are groomed to deny anything at their disposal. Nelson Chamisa for example, is like a chip off Jonathan Moyo. He is still in denial concerning the split of the MDC. The vice-president, secretary general, spokesperson and many others “left” and even hosted a congress, but in his (Chamisa) wisdom or lack of it he maintains a few disgruntled members left. It beats me. Then the numbers game that the MDC factions has been playing is another sign of denying unfolding events. The opposition should learn to accept that one may hold a different viewpoint rather than just jump to conclusion that such person is Zanu PF or CIO. That’s why I was not surprised when Brian Kagoro stated that some people in the opposition had acted as gatekeepers to a system that they are now castigating. This does not do the struggle for change any good if the same Zanu PF tactics are employed.
The culture of denial also characterises our civil society. There is so much hypocrisy in civil society and Brilliant Mhlanga has done a good job in exposing it. The Madhuku issue is case in point and does not need re-emphasis here except simple words of advice from Mahatma Gandhi that “we must be the change we wish to see”.
Having highlighted some instances of denial my argument is that for as long as there is no acceptance that there are problems in Zimbabwe, change will remain a dream. All stakeholders should embrace acceptance . Its accept or die as simple as that. It is common knowledge that alcoholics go to great lengths to deny their drinking problems. For as long as they have not accepted their problem cure is impossible.
Those who have had the opportunity to study the well-being of human beings might have come across the classical work of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross. She wrote a book “On Death and Dying”. She highlighted five stages that a dying person goes through when they are told they have a terminal illness or the stages of grief model. The stages progress through denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. This model has been adopted to other situations like bereavement work where one can only achieve closure when they accept that their loved one is really gone.
Thus, for as long as Zimbabweans continue to deny glaring realities and defend the indefensible no workable solutions will be found. As such Zimbabwe and its problems shall remain a house on wheels gone astray.
Edward M Sibanda
writes in his personal capacity and can be contacted at: edmbizo@hotmail.com
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS
ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
debate@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website