| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Magaisa tames, shuns social justice struggle
By
Kuthula
Matshazi
ZIMBABWEANS are not delusional and confused as indicated by Dr. Alex
Magaisa (Taming the Restless Zimbabwean
bull, 7/12/06) about their struggle for recognition and social justice
as well as against the aggression of the Western countries led by Britain.
It is important for Magaisa to understand that the actions of the current government have the backing of the majority of Zimbabweans.
Rather than viewing their conduct as actions of a few misguided individuals, Magaisa must accept the unpleasant reality that it is largely an agenda that most Zimbabweans identify with.
These are social justice issues such as the land reform, seeking respect and recognition as human beings of equal status as every body else in the world including the Westerners. That being the case, Zimbabweans have therefore a right to fight for their dignity and recognition, politically, socially and economically.
They want to equitably own and benefit from their resources and wealth; they want to engage in profitable trade with other countries like everyone else (and just as Magaisa wishes) however, in a fair manner as opposed to the current unfair and violent manner, which Magaisa chooses to ignore and even tacitly support.
The reason why such a romantic scenario of trade and international relations as envisaged by Magaisa and that which we also dream of is flawed, is because of the imperialist and neo-colonial approaches used by the Western countries. It is not delusion that the Western countries indeed desire to entrench these approaches. The contrary is true. The activities of the non-governmental organisations sponsored directly and indirectly by Western governments through their aid agencies are well documented.
Magaisa himself wrote an article criticising the actions of such NGOs and their donors in poisoning our politics. He even tacitly suggests that the roles of these donors in Zimbabwe should be curtailed and open way for more Zimbabweans to participate. Then, Magaisa was in one mind with the Zimbabweans. I quote his article titled Donors, Diaspora and Zimbabwe Democracy. He says: “Problems arise however, when the independence of civic and political organisations becomes compromised by the dependence on foreign funding. Further, weaknesses emanate when the lack of autonomy means that their policy, agenda and strategies are determined not by the party or group and its constituents but according to the interests and demands of the foreign donor community.
Yet the agenda must be restated and reworked, in the image of the citizens whom the organisations purport to represent. More than newspapers and radio stations, these citizens need tools and resources to work the land and create value to ensure their social and economic security. There is too much talk of aid by civic society organisations but surely the citizens need the fishing nets and rods not simply the fish itself.
It is common knowledge that the agricultural sector has been messed up by the state but what do right advocates have to say about empowering those that are struggling on the land other than endless discussions on human rights? In the absence of economic independence, civic and political organisations will continue to parrot the dominant language of human rights, in a version that makes great sense in London and Washington, but flies above the heads of most people on the ground, who need to survive and have access to the means of production."
So the people of Zimbabwe, through their elected representatives are not under delusion. In fact, some of us now wonder why Magaisa is flip-flopping. Magaisa believes Zimbabwe is a “junior bull” which causes unnecessary and hopeless” fights. That is not true because we do not seek to make unnecessary and hopeless fights. We are just citizens of the world who are equal to everyone else and are exercising our right to pursue our interests. It does not make us “junior bulls” because the Western countries are richer than us.
If we start legitimising such viewpoints, then we might as well situate such scenarios in Zimbabwe and allow those who are “big bulls” to exercise their status. Why not? How do we apply double standards whereby some bulls are allowed to flex their muscles whilst others cannot? I think Magaisa did not pause to understand the implication of his statement.
Generally, it is unacceptable for junior bulls to cause “unnecessary and hopeless” fights, but Zimbabwe is not wrong as Magaisa evidently shows in his article that I have quoted above. We cannot surrender Magaisa. If he has surrendered, then he should not attempt to take everyone with him. The struggle is too long and indeed costly to undertake. It does not need someone like Magaisa, who, because he has surrendered, suddenly believes that those pursuing the social justice struggle are under delusion.
Magaisa suggests that the stand-off Zimbabwe has with the West results in the country missing a train, ostensibly of opportunities. But one does not just jump onto a train because it is moving. For all we know, the train might be going to a different destination from where we want to go. The train that Magaisa sees is the neo-liberal and imperialist train, which is not good for us and was not good for him when he wrote his article critical of the Western donors. Yes, most statistics, as socio-economic indicators are terrifying and life is hard, but statistics alone do not tell the whole story. Statistics have to be read within a particular context. Buried under those statistics is the strong will of the people of Zimbabwe to fight for recognition by the “big bulls”. It is self-serving to look at statistics only.
The liberation war would not have been waged if we only considered statistics. If we were to go with statistics, we could have abandoned neoliberalism long ago because of the trail of poverty, destruction and landlessness that it is causing. Yet, we still endure it and some people even see it as a “big bull” that we should succumb to it.
Magaisa says the Zimbabwean leadership see the country as the “sole target of imperial machinations”. Maybe he has heard many leaders say that but I have never heard it that way. Sure they have mentioned that Zimbabwe is a target of the imperial machinations but not that it is the only one in that violence. Magaisa misleads us and that is unfair. There are so many other developing countries that are fighting imperialism and neo-colonisation as of today.
Magaisa also wants to make us believe that there is only an “imaginary” East-West Divide. Again, here Magaisa is unfair to his readers. There is a divide on many issues, cultural, political and economic. It is these seemingly harmless statements that distort facts. And it must be said that Zimbabwe only went to the East because the West was committing economic violence on the country; not that the East is paradise. I am sure we are not under delusion as to overly romanticise our relations with the East. But if we elevate it to the Super Romantic level then we conveniently position it for easy criticism. But of course, there are so many good things to commend from the relationship.
While we have ourselves to blame for some of our problems (including Magaisa), Magaisa seems to deny that Britain has a great role in the obtaining situation including natural calamities like drought. It is very worrisome why Magaisa, a usually articulate man, could suddenly follow such a disturbing line of thinking. Sure, we know drought causes calamities (being an agro-based economy) and indeed the economic sanctions that Britain forced upon Zimbabwe. Are we then going to deny now that these two factors do not have a bearing on the welfare of Zimbabwe?
As evidenced by Magaisa in the quoted article, Zimbabweans are in a social struggle for human rights and social justice. Not even our ulterior motives can change that much as we want. I think it is disrespectful and being reductionist of Zimbabweans to think that they are only annoying and senseless “junior bulls” in their fight for social justice. If Magaisa’s quotation above is true then it boggles one why he thinks we should suddenly surrender the social struggle.
Kuthula Matshazi is a Zimbabwean journalist writing from Canada. He can be contacted at: kuthulamatshazi@yahoo.co.uk
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