Feedback from a Kubatana subscriber in response to a recent blog from Upenyu:

Mugabe is a freedom fighter leader where democracy is a non-event. Strategy to win the war is mainly by sabotage and by any means possible. Plans are done secretly and the focus is only fixed on winning the war. The politics of freedom fighters are narrowed down and centred on few individuals considered brave and shrewd with charismatic characters.

With Mugabe in particular, being eloquent in English, even though with limited vision, he became a star among less educated freedom fighters, now the war vets. Come independence in 1980, the world expected him to shift his leadership style from freedom fighter leadership to democratic leadership. This paradigm shift was a bit heavy on his shoulders. The concept of ‘how difficult to train an old dog some new tricks’, applied. The same dirty tricks they used during the war are still the same they are using to stay in power today, whatever cost.

An independent nation must reflect a high degree of freedom (emancipation and sovereignty of the people). This stage requires dynamic leadership and this is lacking in Mugabe.

A dynamic leader needs to have a full range of appreciation of all the basic tenets of governance. These include modern politics, economics, technology, environment, globalisation and social justice. He/she works for not more than ten years as a president and retires from office.

To conclude, according to my own opinion Mugabe has no legacy to leave behind expect that of poor leadership.

Use Anuacho as my name if you wish to publish this. In Zimbabwe there is no freedom of expression. We are not yet independent as a nation.

Christopher Hitchens on Fear, Peter Godwin’s latest book:

If you want a catalog of those sins, turn to Godwin’s books. But don’t read them just for outrage at the terrible offense to humanity. They also describe a new sort of Zimbabwean, emancipated from racial and tribal feeling by a long common struggle against a man who doesn’t scruple to employ racial and tribal demagoguery. In those old days of arguing with the white settlers, one became used to their endless jeering refrain: “Majority rule will mean one man, one vote—one time!” They couldn’t have been more wrong. Since gaining independence three decades ago, the Zimbabwean people have braved every kind of intimidation and repression to go on registering their votes. They have made dogged use of the courts and the press, which continue to function in a partial way, to uphold pluralism and dissent. Mugabe has lost important votes in Parliament and—last time—his electoral majority in the country at large. Only the undisguised use of force and the wholesale use of corruption have kept his party in office. One day, the civic resistance to this, which was often looked-down upon by people considering themselves revolutionary, will earn the esteem and recognition it deserves.

From a Kubatana member:

Is Dictatorial Behaviour A Form Of Mental Illness? If So can We Capture Such Individuals And Hand Them Over To Psychiatrists. 4 How Can U Entrust A Whole Country To A Madman?

A man, educated and African, finds himself in the gallows, charged with crimes against humanity. He is a lawyer, educated in England, with a firm belief in Christian values, and has more than just a passing admiration for the Queen and his adopted country. He is a man who has been alienated from his culture, identity and people. Mamadou, a peasant farmer with a sizeable family but limited means bursts into the lawyer’s life begging him for help, or rather mercy. Mamdou’ s cow has expropriated by the government without compensation and now he wants to sue, to take back the rights that were forcibly taken from him. As the story unfolds the lawyer encounters the corrupt and powerful President Junta, who is shortly unseated in a coup led by ‘Tuff Boy’ a rebel leader. It is only when he witnesses the murder of Mamadou at the hands of the rebels that the lawyer finds his humanity, but in his quest for justice he commits unspeakable crimes, for which he is brought before the court.

The facts of the play may be specific to Sierra Leone, but it is the story of every African country cursed with resources. President Junta may be a dictator, but he is a democratically elected one. He is fat and wealthy off the numerous kick-backs and deals he receives from governments and multinational corporations wishing to do business in his country. Western leaders, donors and corporations treat him like a king, as though the country and its people were his personal property; unchallenged, he behaves accordingly.

‘Tuff Boy’ is a grotesque illustration of a rebel leader, high on cocaine, formerly angry and powerless, until he took up arms and waged war on the government. Tuff boy asserts his power through the gun and innumerable rapes of women who feature in the play as nameless, faceless and voiceless victims.

Colonialism lives on in the lawyer, who condescends towards and patronises Mamadou. Despite his high handed Christianity, the lawyer is torn between his disdain of the ignorant and poor ‘native’, and his baser native instinct which drives him to lust after Mamadou’s daughter.

The man who committed thought is a moving play that is an indictment of the hypocrisy of the human rights agenda, aid, and the nations that give it. It illustrates the conflict between humanitarianism and humanism, and shows that right and wrong are not necessarily black and white, but rather, they are painted in shades of grey.

It’s EASTER and according to NEWSNET the only news that we can expect is TOMANA, Shamu and the rest of the apparatchiks ‘”celebrating” EASTER bashing other “religious types” as they only manage to look ridiculous wearing flowing garbs their consciences are screaming to get out of. The other worthy news becomes the “abysmal performance” of some R’n'B artist some of us do not give hoot about but is still expected by Karikoga other such types to “sell ZIM tourism” to the rest of the world. The guy invited to be part of a long list dubious of “performers” (check this out to read about Akon for a few laughs) “snubbed” local fans was no doubt ridiculed by NEWSNET form our “national news” and of course we have to ask if he will be pointing his “chums” to Zimbabwe as a destination of easy money after being “exposed” by NEWSNET. Anyone who expects better ought to be steaming through the ears, be it Tsvangirai, Biti and other women and men of goodwill because as we can all see, there are many who imagine that this country’s woes are going to be solved by a bunch of spoilt post-independence free-spirits dancing the night away to some crappy, neo-liberal, pseudo-Woodstock “make-love-not-whatever-crap”.

I came across an article in Newsday titled ‘Cde. Mugabe it’s time to rest’, the article cites several political analysts who examine the President’s legacy and what the last decade has done to it. The article cites University of Zimbabwe lecturer Eldred Masunungure as saying that while President Mugabe would know best when he should retire, his continued hold on power was eroding his legacy. All the analysts agreed that Mugabe is a committed nationalist and a patriot.

I must confess that I too have some mixed feelings about Our Dear Leader. On the one hand I think some of the policies and acts of his government(s) whether official or unofficial have been at best misguided, and at worst evil. I cannot stomach violence and murder. But on the other hand I appreciate his point of view, and have some admiration for his dogged resolve in the face of so much criticism and resistance. Much like Winston Churchill during the Second World War, Mugabe is a man who knows how to stay the course.

On the issue of his legacy, only time will tell. Was land reform just a political manoeuvre to quell rebellion from war veterans? Or was it part of a grander scheme to restore dignity to the dispossessed black majority? Knowing several war vets of his generation, I am well acquainted with their mistrust of white people. How could they not when they grew up in a world where black people were classified as being of less value than livestock? But does that mean that he and his generation can no longer operate in a time in which race is an increasingly outmoded basis for discrimination? More importantly are his ideas less relevant today than they were when the nationalist movement began? I believe he is one of the last great southern African nationalists, so when his time comes what is the future of the nationalist movement? Does it have a future at all, or will it give way to the homogeneity offered by globalisation?

Reaction to the article was emotional with two comments being moderate and the remaining containing hate speech from people who do not understand that Zimbabwe is greater than the sum of the last ten years, as is Mugabe. A man who can inspire such language must surely have a place somewhere in the chronicles of our country. How will history judge the Commander-In-Chief and what will his place in the history of Zimbabwe be?