The Institute for Public
Affairs in Zimbabwe (IPAZ)
GRAVITAS Dialogue
Series Brief No.1/2017
06 February 2017 Contact: gravitas@ipazim.com
#ThisFlag and #Tajamuka: Nine Theses
on Democratic Counter- Narratives in Zimbabwe.
|
By: Tamuka C Chirimambowa and Tinashe L Chimedza¥
1. Zimbabwe’s current political economy is indefensibly decaying
and doing so with cataclysmic effects on people’s livelihoods. The economy has
all but stagnated and the informal sector has become an income mainstay – we
are talking about buying and selling tomatoes; buying and selling second hand
clothes on pavements. Agriculture is locked in perennial turmoil and command
agriculture is only helping the elite expropriate more state largesse. The
state bureaucracy has become an extractive network of state institutions –
everything is commoditized and taxed; toll gates are pervasive; police
roadblocks are given targets; council debt collectors have become aggressive;
usurious custom duties are normal and the list goes on. There is pervasive
agreement that the status quo must be transformed; the War Vets have openly
rebelled and there is growing demand for opposition coalitions to build
political power to upend an ancien
political order. Even those within ZANU PF are increasingly calling for the
‘owners of this project’ to press for change. On the economic front the bond
notes are just a provisional ineffective patchwork to a deep seated structural
malaise which cannot be resolved without addressing the non-productive economy.
By actively campaigning to expose those with political power, #This Flag’s
Pastor Evan and Advocate Fadzai Mahere, #Tajamuka’s Promise Mkwananzi and other
activists going back to Itai Dzamara’s #Occupy Africa Unity Square are
expanding the ranks of those that have struggled against a political regime
which has decayed and only exists to profiteer with people’s taxes, literally –
if you doubt this profiteering witness a first lady who spends $1,5million on a
ring which is equivalent of paying for close to 200 nurses salary for a whole
year.
2. The advent of ICTs like
Facebook Live, Youtube Channels, Facebook forums, WhatsApp groups, live
streaming applications, Twitter and Instagram has shifted and expanded the
concept of the public sphere and the public forum. Communication is power and
with it comes the possibility of building counter-narratives and eventually
counter-power contrasted to those with nationalist authoritarian state power.
The advent of these forms of communication also imply that the old forms of the
‘public forum’ are being disrupted, re-organized and partially displaced by innovative,
creative and even cheaper forms of instantaneous communication. In the 1990s
and partly into the 2000s the Public Forum that used to be held in hotels, or
the Town Hall meeting was a necessary forum yet this form of citizen engagement
was an unwilling prisoner of geography. It is now possible to argue assertively
that these new forms of communication actually constitute effective public
forums in themselves. In certain instances, these forums of citizen engagement
have escaped the nervous eye of police surveillance and organizers do not have
to contend with state security harassment. Facebook Live and or a Youtube
Channel can actively engage thousands of citizens in some cases far beyond what
the old town hall meeting or the rally can do – some of the videos are shared
virally. While there are limitations to these forms of citizen engagement these
are not debilitating.
3. It is necessary to
build counter-narratives that expose the decadence of the ‘party-state’ and
social media plays a critical role in this process. The recent interview, live,
of Joyce Mujuru by Fadzai Mahere (viewed and shared by over 35,000) makes
possible the direct questioning of those with political power, putting pressure
on them and putting them on notice that the alert citizen is watching. The
ruling political class has maintained a Stalinist hold on public media
especially TV, RADIO and they recently rejected the launch of Kwese TV. The
discussions on social media can no longer be dismissed as a ‘past-time’ for arm
chair critiques because opinions are being shaped by these mediums like
Twitter, Youtube Videos, Facebook Live, Facebook Forums and WhatsApp groups.
Social media is becoming a ‘gold mine’ for the technology savvy political actor
– in Zambia President Lungu now has a weekly broadcast on Facebook live; in
Kenya President Uhuru Kenyatta, has bypassed the ‘older generation’ to get the
younger voters and more excited electorate. The independent newspapers like
Newsday, Daily News, Independent and Standard have kept this flame burning. Let
us be truthful the 17/18year old is likely to read H-Metro, watch Youtube videos, follow Facebook live, or follow
Twitter, or Facebook forums debates and know more about ‘Stunner and Olinda’ or
‘Andy and Bev’. This is the generation that will vote, it has no time for
rallies, for polemic political essays, for newspapers and research papers; it
is the selfie obsessed narcissistic generation and they consume news in
sound-bites not rumbling speeches done by old pot-bellied men.
4. Brian Raftopoulos
argued that Zimbabwe’s political economy has been re-configured. The almost
complete disappearance of ‘working class’ and its numeric power means that
projects to mobilize and engage citizens have to be re-thought, re-organized
and in some cases the old way of doing things must be creatively discarded.
This reconfiguration has very concrete bearing on the strategies and tactics of
those engaged in the project for a democratic Zimbabwe. The question that
arises is how does those wanting a better Zimbabwe organize the different
social groups: the ‘shrinking working class’, students, youths, women, vendors,
public sector workers, commuter omnibus operators, tuck-shop owners,
cross-border traders and ‘new farmers’. What it implies here is that mobilizing
the citizen has become a much more sophisticated theatre and old tactics wash
away like soap in water and the social and political power of civil society
become all but ‘thin air’ interspersed by bombastic press statements issued
without the backing of political power. Such things tyranny glees at.
5. In the 1990s and
running into the 2000s, civil society generated political and social power by
actively focusing on material questions that affected the everyday life of people.
The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions did not conjure its social and political
power from prophesies, heresy or from supernatural sources. The political and
social power of the ZCTU, the student movement, the women’s movement, the
residents’ association and human rights groups was built from engaging directly
with the citizen and projecting the people’s agenda at a national level. The
battles of the last two decades spectacularly achieved in delivering
‘institutions’ that unfortunately now spent more resources on organizational
development, monitoring and evaluation reports, donor roundtable meetings and
strategic planning sessions. Manoeuvring within the maze of donor networks and
institutional conundrums consume far more energy than organizing concrete
social and political power. What has set in is the old ‘square-cube law’: as
the institutions grow in size so is the energy and resources needed to just
keep it alive which has nothing to do with the initial objective of setting up
the institution at all.
6. There is a class of
leaders, activists, NGO workers and labour activists who made immense
contributions to the struggle for democracy in Zimbabwe. Unfortunately, they
now constitute a self-congratulatory ecclesiastical impenetrable order given to
its own mendacity. Their place in history is indelible and is marked in the
advent of the new Constitution for Zimbabwe as a culmination of an intense
political struggle. Their place in history and on the side of the citizens is
sealed, it is not in doubt. Often, this has been achieved with high personal
costs and sacrifices. But here is a point of excruciating pain: rather than
recruit, train, equip, support and mentor new waves of younger leaders,
activists and so on they have become comfortable in singing yesterday’s
battles. Yes, they sing in nostalgic fashion gloating over their wine and beer
glasses, designing frameworks to define authentic activists and anything that
falls outside their ancient reminisces is quickly thrown out as ‘sell out’ and
‘reactionary’. When this ‘high priest hood’ organizes any sort of forums it
becomes a forum for reminiscing old networks, everyone in the room is familiar
with each other and there is no one new. The man or woman at the presentation
table continues thundering and hammering points to a converted few, with the
same ideas and at the same venue they met 19 years ago.
7. There are new opinion
makers on the rise, they are building influence to a very wide audience
including within social groups that have been politically inactive and at times
indifferent. One does not have to agree with their methods but a little bit of
intellectual honesty will point to the fact that they are opinion makers when
they Tweet, do a Youtube Video or post a Facebook message and it instantly reaches
sometimes 50,000 people. The social media presence also projects the ordinary
citizens’ views into the African and global arena where ZANU PF’s ideologues
have distorted what is as stake in Zimbabwe. As the old saying goes ‘truth is
incontrovertible’. While the ‘old guard’ is ensconced in its boardroom chairs
‘earned’ there are new opinion makers that are emerging. History is replete
with examples where, those who have attempted to defy the winds of change have
been overtaken by time. Institutions and people that do not reform themselves
and insist in old Burke’s wisdom that ‘the old is good’ have always found
themselves redundant. The immutable ‘law’ sketched by Darwin kicks in here and
we re-state it again: it is not the
strongest but the best able to adapt that survive.
8. #ThisFlag, #Tajamuka
and #Occupy Africa Unity Square point to the fact that the pro-democracy
movement is socially and politically active only outside the parochial
definitions of the last decade. What has shifted is the methods of engagement,
the forums of contestation and in some cases even the players are new. While
the old activist will only respect the ‘tent’ with the biggest numbers the
terrain is shifting and new forms of social movement contestation are emerging.
A close reading of history reveals
that no transformative political movement gladiates teleologically from one
victory to another victory, such things even the Papacy cannot conjure.
Political struggles develop in a non-linear way especially when confronting a
fascist tyranny which has morphed into becoming the state itself. The tyrant
does not sleep at all, he organizess listening posts amongst the people and
continues panicking. Every whisper, conversation, movement and song is listened
to and treated like a subterranean ferment because the tyrant always thinks
here they ago again these plebeians sharpening the guillotine for my neck. The
evidence of non-sleep in the laager
is galore just watch how everyone is required to pitifully prostrate themselves
and declare that the ‘dear leader is God chosen’, ‘only second to Christ’, a
‘modern Moses’, is now a ‘spirit
medium’, must be declared ‘life President’, recantations that ‘I have no
ambitions’, that there is only ‘one centre of power’ and that ‘only a Mugabe
can rule Zimbabwe’. Watch the First Lady vociferously ‘slashing and burning’
opponents publicly declaring that the dear leader’s ghost will ‘rule either
from a wheel chair’ or ‘from the grave’.
Remember Stalin’s mausoleum – they pulverized it when Russia recovered
her senses.
9. The old and the new
have to gel together in couching new counter-hegemonic narratives to construct
counter-power so as to democratize the state and expand opportunities for
citizens. So, the question that most people ask: does social media replace the
more traditional modes and strategies of organizing? Here we mean public
display of political power and engagement like rallies, or the door to door
campaigns, or the more contentious street protests and or boycotts of certain
political targets. The responsibility of a dynamic leadership is to adjust and
respond adequately to the objective demands of the concrete conditions. The
political struggle does not make its participants ‘fall in love’ at the ‘touch
of a hand’ there is constant intense exchange of ideas. ZANU PF has bequeathed
to us a viciously atavistic violent state apparatus which extracts and
intimidates; which strikes terror and indoctrinates; which rots the national
moral fibre and corrupts its young; which expropriates and feeds obese and
whose leaders view the citizens as subjects to be superintended over like the
colonial native. Ultimately, we are searching for a democratic, prosperous
Zimbabwe where every citizen can freely assert their self-initiative without
the ghost or the spectre of the police state constantly irritating his or her
mind - in that struggle the ranks and pews of the believers must be actively
replenished – purposefully.
The Institute for
Public Affairs in Zimbabwe (IPAZ) is a public research organisation focused on
empirical and theoretical research, debates, dialogues and exchanges pointed at
enhancing public participation to expand, deepen and project citizen engagement
and keep public power democratic, accountable, responsive and transparent.
This paper is
published as part of an ongoing public engagement and thought leadership
series. The dialogue series will carry articles on a Fortnightly Basis and
articles can be send to: gravitas@ipazim.com
¥Tamuka. C Chirimambowa is a co-founder of
IPAZ and currently studying a D Litt et Phil in Development Studies at the
University of Johannesburg & Tinashe L. Chimedza is co-founder of IPAZ has
published on democracy and elections in Zimbabwe and studied Social Inquiry.
Great article Tamuka and Tinashe. I found it enthusing in particular how yester-year spaces of engagement particularly within civil society generate regurgitated and 'tired' discourses. However, it would be interesting to interrogate how evidence (empirical data) can be used in these 'emerging' platforms to enhance the counter- narrative?
ReplyDelete