I had told myself I was not going to comment on the Zimbabwe Big Brother candidate – Munyaradzi Chidzonga’s loss conundrum. I mean, enough criticism already. However, for someone who supported the state’s parting with $1.8 million for the Warriors-Samba Boys friendly, I have recently been accused of hypocrisy for not supporting the Munya (as he is affectionately known) money initiative by some close friends. I have defended the former by saying; at least over 40 thousand people were involved, versus just one person. But that is fodder for another post.

When I watched the unprecedented meet with the president on the news yesterday, I was motivated to highlight that the kerfuffle around Munya and his subsequent reception of 300 thousand USD in ‘compensation fees to cushion him against depression’ served at least one good purpose for me; the opportunity to witness our leaders demonstrate their ability to raise big funds in a considerably short space of time.

One word from a flaky professor and another from an obscure land tycoon and just like that, on a whim, thousands were raised in less than a week. If this were to be done on a sustained basis for more meaningful things, imagine what that would do for our country’s development. Imagine what 300 thousand can do for the non-working traffic lights and potholes littering Harare’s streets; hundreds of needless deaths would be avoided. Imagine what a similar initiative would add to the lives of the displaced folk living and scavenging like animals at Borrowdale race course…

Hopefully none of that money was donated from the collective taxpayers’ pocket.

As I watched the news, I vaguely couldn’t help drawing thin parallels between the big rush for the ‘Diamond boy’ and the diesel n’anga circus. Quite an embarrassment to see such big men getting caught up in such silly things. As someone I know would say it, it just somehow feels super-stupid.

When the First Spin Crowd set to work, the Munya fundraising campaign seemed to suddenly precipitate into something of a publicity gimmick masquerading under the guise of wish granting, with Munya in the centre as the oblivious pawn. Words like youth empowerment, sovereignty, and son of the soil interestingly found their way into the President’s speech at the colourful reception at state house. Talk about grabbing slight opportunities.

And who would have thought Gushungo was a fan or even had the time to watch Big Brother. Perhaps we can put this down to the work of an excellent briefing by the First Spin Crowd, who are we kidding? But one thing is for certain, they conveniently neglected to inform the president that the son of the soil had just come back from a house that harboured totemless, nicotine addicted youths among which were women who often kissed each other full on the mouth. The First Homophobe would have rather died than be remotely associated with such.

For the icing on the cake; asked (Big Brother style) what he was going to do with all that cash, the ever grinning young man looked into the camera and said, “I’m going to use the bulk of it to market and promote my movie,” referring to some obscure production in which he featured, that we are yet to know the full details of. Let’s just say it was a relief to know that speech was going to end and that he was courteous enough not to abuse the redundant and clichéd charity card. Now that would have defeated the whole idea, wouldn’t it?

Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) sent us through this statement supporting the provision of condoms in prisons for important reasons of public health and human rights.

GALZ supports calls by the Ministry of Health and Child welfare to provide condoms to prisoners as a noble move in fighting HIV/AIDS in Zimbabwe’s prisons.

The danger of sexual violence in prisons is extremely increased under conditions of severe overcrowding and malnutrition such as currently prevails in Zimbabwe.

Prison culture encourages men to have sex with men if not necessitating it and you will often find aggressor/victim type relationships. The mere existence of sexual relationships between inmates who do not identify as homosexual or bisexual is powerful testimony to men’s need for and ability to create intimacy when faced with factors such as confinement for longer periods.

Due to the fact that men generally have a high sex drive, they are bound to have sex regardless of circumstances. By making condoms unavailable and by not acknowledging that men have sex with men in prison, the government and prison authorities are encouraging the spread of sexually transmitted diseases like HIV/AIDS and putting pressure on the national health budget.

Gender roles and identities in prison are defined primarily by the ability to exercise power. It is important that those less able to stand up for themselves and not be bullied into unwanted sex, protect themselves. Not providing condoms to prisoners has serious implications. When prisoners are eventually released and come back into society to wives and girlfriends, they may infect healthy partners and thus spread HIV.

This isn’t about condoning homosexuality. It is a practical health based human rights issue that seeks to protect the health of both those who are incarcerated as well as people on the other side of the prison walls.

Government, in it’s bid to stem the HIV/AIDS infection rates should ensure that inmates are provided with condoms. We also call upon the Justice Ministry to improve the conditions of the country’s prison system and address overcrowding in these facilities to ensure that prisoners are not exposed to diseases such as Tuberculosis.

Making condoms available to prisoners does not encourage homosexuality; it protects the health of prisoners and their partners outside of prison.

My friend, being an entrepreneur, has established a t-shirt business. Of course anyone will tell you that the key to a successful retail business is marketing. So, a few week ago, she decided to launch her brand in style with a launch party.

As good citizens, we went to our local police station to get the necessary clearances. Now last year, the Co-Ministers for Home Affairs publicly announced that all anyone needed to get a police clearance for an event was to report the event, who was holding it and how long it would be. The Ministers even said that as this was being done in the interest of public safety, there would be no need to pay any fees. It sounded simple when they said it, and being the Ministers responsible for this, I would think that they knew best.

It even seemed simple when we went to the police station. We told them about the launch, what it was for, and who was the contact person for it. The police checked if the bar had the necessary council licences and we got our clearance.

The afternoon of the party, I received a call from the police informing me that we did not have any clearances and I was to report to the police station. It wasn’t a problem with the licences for the establishment, which were in order; the police had a problem with the company that owned the brand. The exact problem, the officer could not articulate, but it was imperative that we go to the police station immediately.

Panicking, I consulted the bar manager who went, came back and reported: “Ah, they want a bribe.”

The bribe was a couple of T-shirts for the desk sergeants and some officers. It seems a small price to pay to establish a successful business. But isn’t it a sad state of affairs when any service involving a government institution must also necessarily involve bribery?

While my friend could afford to hand over t-shirts to the policemen, what happens to those entrepreneurs who cannot afford to pay? It’s not just the police that are asking for bribes, almost every government department involved in the establishment of business from the Company Registrar’s office to the City of Harare itself is illegally extracting large sums of money and goods from entrepreneurs. Surely the government, and in particular the Ministry of Small to Medium Enterprises must understand that corruption is killing small businesses.

The policy of encouraging entrepreneurship is a laudable one, but it will not work as long as corruption is allowed to flourish. If our politicians really want economic recovery (for further looting opportunities), then before they start looking East for handouts, they must plug the leaks that are happening in their own back yard.

I suppose we have all become accustomed to, and to some extent, accepting of, the torrents of water gushing freely from broken municipal pipes or streetlights that are lit at midday. Perhaps we might grumble about this wastage to friends and family but let’s face it, we are not known for doing much else. We are certainly not going to hold a march against it, or even pen a letter of complaint. Blatant wastage of limited public resources is a given and many of us have resigned ourselves to it.

What I do find a bitter pill to swallow is wastage on a smaller scale, done by individuals, within our homes and in our daily lives. I’m referring to situations where security lights and water sprinklers are left on for the whole blessed day! A look at the piles of refuse littering our open spaces reveals shameful amounts of discarded food and clothing. And I know you are all familiar with that idiot driver who burns fuel speeding at 120km/hr to the red robot just ahead. I find this behaviour especially disturbing because I recall the dire times Zimbabwe has recently emerged from. We’ve been through commodity shortages, endless queuing, power cuts, water cuts, etc. Given our first-hand experience of being without, one would think that people would be more appreciative of what we now actually have. Good sense would advocate for conservative usage of our limited resources especially since we are not out of the woods yet.

Pop psychology does provide some explanation. Apparently, when societies emerge from situations of deprivation – à la Zim 2007/8, the Second World War, Communist regimes – there is a tendency towards one of two forms of reaction. People have been observed to become either ultra-economical, like the survivors of the Second World War, or else, like China’s new nouveaux riche, they develop really extravagant tendencies. (Closer to home, remember the stories of how our previously disadvantaged war veterans lavishly spent their compensation money). In light of this I’m more related in spirit to the WWII survivors, who would also probably be irked by my neighbour’s 24-hour flooding of his lawn.

My neighbour, whom I suspect might be a relation of a billionaire Chinese, may ask, “What’s my extravagance got to do with you? It’s my water/car/floodlight/ etc and I’m paying for it with my own money!”

This is true and I am definitely not questioning the right to use it, or the ability to pay for it. What I am trying to do is to appeal to humanity and an innate need to live for something more than you. We don’t live alone; we have to be mindful of our neighbours, countrymen and fellow Earthlings. Our individual actions will have an effect on the next person, directly or indirectly, immediately or eventually. Personal efforts to conserve our limited resources will ultimately provide a better life for all beings on the planet, human or otherwise.

So, if we find wastage by public bodies reprehensible, why don’t we question what happens in our own homes? While we can’t come together to stop the waste by the powers that be, surely each of us can switch off a light, close a tap and drive more slowly? Ultimately our individual actions to use limited resources more conservatively will combine to achieve a greater good. Now, that’s a civil action that I think most politically inactive Zimbabweans can civilly engage in!

There are times when it is undeniable that Zimbabweans are a menace to themselves. Now those of us who reside in the Diaspora have got a bad reputation. Where once we were hard working, educated individuals capable of working anywhere in the world, we have quickly turned into global pariahs.

Zimbabweans are committing fraud in America and in the UK, evading taxes and even being jailed for knowingly and intentionally infecting people with HIV, all the while using Robert Mugabe as a scapegoat.

Take for instance the case of Gamuchirai Nhengu an 18-year-old Zimbabwean contestant on UK talent search reality show X-Factor. She made headlines a few months ago when she made it through several rounds of judging and even won praise from the mercurial Simon Cowell for her singing.

Gamu and her family now face deportation. She and her two brothers were allowed to stay in the UK as dependents of their mother while she studied nursing. But the visa ran out and the family’s application to remain in the UK was rejected. It turns out the deportation order was issued as a result of an investigation by the Home Office into £16,000 in benefits wrongly claimed by her mother, Nokuthula, reports The Sun. Nokuthula, received benefits and tax credits for her children, but her visa rules strictly forbade her from any state payouts.

This was followed by Gamu conducting a tearful interview with a Scottish newspaper in which she claimed that she and her family would face a firing squad if they returned to Zimbabwe.

“I’ve been in the public eye now and people there know I’ve fled [Robert] Mugabe’s regime. They will punish us if we go back. They’re going to know where we are; we’re going to be very unsafe. People have been approaching our family members; we think they could be working for Mugabe. And we know how brutal he can be. I would be in danger, it’s blatantly obvious. My family would be in danger.”

Gamu has even been quoted as saying she regrets being on the show as it drew attention to herself and her family.

Gamuchirai Nhengu is a child, whose sole claim to fame is mediocre success on a British reality show. What does she or for that matter her mother know about Roberty Mugabe’s brutality? They didn’t go to the UK as asylum seekers, they are economic migrants, hoping to take advantage of a generous welfare state.

She is a Zimbabwean child seeking to manipulate the image of Zimbabwe as a country in which total chaos exists and in which no one is safe, to justify her mother’s illegal actions. What is worse is the readiness of the British public and even Culture Minister Fiona Hyslop to believe her. It may be lazy thinking to accept her word without the slightest critical examination of her claims; but what else can one expect when Zimbabwe has been reduced to a single despotic individual who is demonised in the media. Their comprehension of the complexities of Zimbabwean politics is superficial and informed by racist thirty-second television spots selling ring tones that depict Mugabe as an incompetent bespectacled hairy, black baboon.

We cannot deny that political violence exists in our society. Even today two years after the 2008 elections, when there is a semblance of stability in the country, we still have incidents of political violence. This situation was and is painful for many people, not least those directly affected. Gamu’s claims diminish the struggle by all those working to make this country a better place, and they are a slap in the face for anyone against whom actual violence was perpetrated.

From the Mail & Guardian, here’s a bit of beautiful writing for you from the Malawian poet, Frank Chipasula:

I will pierce the silence around our land with sharp metaphors/And I will point the light of my poems into the dark/nooks where our people are pounded to pulp