In the vivacious terrains of Zimbabwe, where the fight against corruption once germinated in the heart of a hopeful young man, now stands a nation grappling with the shadows of its political past. The tale of massive displacements, often overshadowing the lesser-known minorities, is a glaring testament to the ideological discord within the Zanu Pf regime and its predecessors.
The allegory of the Zanu Pf revolution now devouring its own offspring is not merely a tragic saga but a reflection of the shortfall in understanding the core tenets of democracy, independence, and good governance. These virtues, had they been upheld, could have acted as a shield for the minority communities now facing the brunt of massive displacements.
The tradition of concealing crucial information, a tactic employed both by the settler governments of yore and the present-day Zanu Pf regime, is rooted in a sinister aim. Media repression, a tool as effective as hiding a blazing light under a bed, serves to cloak the deeds that may otherwise demand accountability and transparency, particularly concerning minority rights.
The narrative doesn’t veer far from the sinister era of the Smith government, which too shrouded the conditions within keeps from the citizenry, both minority and majority. The reason? To preserve a status quo that thrives on misinformation and sustains illegitimate, hideous, and illegal traits shared between the Smith and Zanu Pf regimes.
As the sun set on April 1980, Zanu Pf’s abortion of transparency and accountability marked the inception of a long-lasting media repression. This repression has ensured that Zimbabweans remain ensnared in a dark abyss about past, ongoing, and future massive displacements, with Zanu Pf TV (ZBC) acting as the puppeteer of a disoriented narrative.
The tale of exploitation isn’t new; the historical narrative of settler governments offers a mirror to Zanu Pf’s contemporary stance. Minority communities like the Chilonga and Nambya, despite their consistent support to Zanu Pf, find themselves estranged, their ancestral lands eyed by profiteers under the guise of Zanu Pf. No consultations, no representation in deliberations, and a glaring absence of respect for their cultures and heritages mark the harsh reality of their existence.
Such exploitative manoeuvres extend beyond mere land grabs. Employment opportunities, especially with Chinese entities for the Nambya people, morph into exploitative labour relations, flouting basic labour and safety regulations. Moreover, the long-standing marginalisation, evidenced by limited exposure to quality education, has placed a glass ceiling on the youth of these communities, thwarting any hopes of social advancement.
The opposition, though hounded out of parliament by a paranoid Zanu Pf, stands as a beacon of hope for institutionalised devolution of power. Such a transition could empower communities like the Nambya to have a say in their governance, mitigating colossal exploitation and rendering dubious special permits impotent.
The unravelled relationship between Zanu Pf and Zimbabwe’s minorities is not just a bitter pill but a wakeup call. It beckons a re-evaluation of political ideologies, a transition from self-enriching agendas to a governance model that respects and protects the rights and heritages of all communities within the Zimbabwean tapestry.
About The Author
