A GENERATION DARING TO DARE: TRIBUTE TO YOUTHS DEMANDING TO BE PART OF THE NATIONAL CONVERSATION

 A few months ago, I was having one of my many conversation an Uncle in South Africa. Like many other in the Diaspora, at the backdrop of any socio-political development, he always calls to check up on life back home. There is always a need to balance what you consume on social media. As we engaged, he says to me “Nephew, I’m impressed by your level of political consciousness. During our college days, we only knew about Robert Mugabe and the Minister of Education. Everyone and everything else was irrelevant to us. Life was easier. You simply graduated, found a job, married and died”. What he was marvelling at, was my ability to explain political developments with clarity. I do not think of this as some special gift. It is our political circumstances that has conscientized my generation. And indeed, by each passing day, I’m convinced that a daring and determined generation is rising to claim a position in our national political discourse. But the critical question is, will the generation organize and act? Will the generation find homage in established political formations to make their mark? Looking at the three main political parties in Zimbabwe, this opinion piece will explore what’s at play.

History simply repeating itself.

The tragedy faced by revolutionary parties is how they are ideologically strong to a point of being stubborn. Whereas ideology is the foundation on which political institutions are built, the inability to embrace change and be dynamic signals the death of these very institutions. Liberation movements, with time, are faced by an identity crisis where the very thing they represent loses traction among new generations. Experiences simply shape realities. The realities of the 80s are not the realities of 2020. These realities shape the political consciousness of people living during those peculiar times. For instance, the fact that ZanuPF fought for colonial independence easily becomes tired Nationalism to a generation which seeks other liberties. Unless that ZanuPF transforms and become alive to those new demands, to those new generation, that ZanuPF simply become that which it fought. Land acquisition is meaningless to an individual looking forwards to advancements in Information Technology. Strangely, liberation movements behave as if realization of both, is mutually exclusive. Perhaps it is a correct prognosis. Perhaps the mandate of the Liberation generation was the realization of political independence from white settler colonialism. Perhaps the next step was to pass that torch.

It is impressive to note that the membership of the generation that has become a political albatross in 2020, was quite young when they embraced the wagging of the liberation war as a generational mandate. Save for a few, the ZanuPF government of 1981 had very young women and men in ts composition. Their tragedy is, they resisted letting go. Their fate however is captured by the understanding that you can only do so much, for so long. The inevitability of a new generation rising up to ask critical question was only a matter of time. And indeed, the Zimbabwean political landscape today is being populated by many daring young women and men, across the political divide. Expectedly, conservatives and gate-keepers, across the political divide, keep pushing back. Tragically, when the time is right, the clock will always work without batteries.

Experiences in ZanuPF

The irony in the political behaviour of gatekeepers in ZanuPF is their spirited attempt at stopping a new generation from becoming what they became in the 1970s, when they waged the Liberation war. I say so tongue in check, because saying ZanuPF fought or waged the liberation war is both a dilution of history and a tragic generalization. Regardless, the core of Zanupf leadership today, has people who fought for the country’s liberation. But they were just a component of selfless Zimbabweans, of different race, religion, and political identities. To date, the greatest indication of the party’s attitude towards change in general, and young people in particular, is exposed by the characters who have led the Liberation party’s Youth League.

Between 2000 and 2014, the ZanuPF Youth League was led by Absalom Sikhosana. He first held that post at the age of 51 only being replaced at the age of 65. In December 2017, Togarepi Pupurai became Youth League Boss again after having previously been fired by Robert Mugabe. He was again fired by President Mnangagwa on the 5th of February 2020, at the age of 56. His replacement, was a 34 year old, Kudzanai Chipanga who had led a vote of no confidence against his boss, in March 2016 when President Mugabe dismissed him for the first time. Kudzanai’s reign proved to be a grave political mistake by ZanuPF standards. He was later on replaced by the same man he had replaced, Togarepi Pupurai, who not only holds the record of being fired from the same position twice, but being in the youth league together with his own son. The important thing about Sikhosana and Pupurai is not whether or not they were able to deliver. Rather, it is about the message which was sent by deliberately having someone in their 50s masquerading as not only a youth, but a youth Leader. The message was simply that, the youths cannot be trusted to lead neither the party Main Wing, nor the Youth League, which is supposed to be a Leadership college. As for Kudzanai Chipanga, his mistake was being politically incorrect. Whereas he was by and large, a political microphone, he was daring. He would say things that made conservatives uncomfortable. He once described the conservative faction within the party as “sickening rabble-rouser”. On the 16th of February 2016, he famously said: “if we (the youth) say let us go to war today, how many war veterans are there? They are very few. We (the youths) constitute 65 percent of this country….So be ready and we are going to call you when the time comes…They are not going to do anything. We will give them a 100 metre race and they will fail to run. They are sick with sugar (diabetes)”

What rattled the old guard was not just a youth Leader, but also a woman, the party Secretary for Women Affairs, the immediate former first Lady, Dr Grace Mugabe. She also disturbed the political norm. In the new dispensation, ZanuPF corrected this. In 2017/18, ZanuPF decided to go back to 1997. The party President appointed a 50+ year old, as party Secretary for the Youth League. With the first lady, ZanuPF began reshaping the narrative. Towards the first months of President Mnangagwa’s rule, the media began “political gender socialization”, through his wife, Amai Auxillia. As a clear departure from the daring, and at times motor-mouth Grace Mugabe, the First Lady is paraded all over State media doing philanthropic work and “traditional” wife duties all over the country. At one rally, the ever kneeling First Lady was given a gift by the party’s Women’s League and thanked for “….bringing back the dignity of the First Lady”. The idea was not only to mock her predecessor, but equally to shape gender politics. The first Lady represents the political positioning of women in ZanuPF. She does not address party rallies, unless there are her own individual philanthropic activities. She is now Grace Mugabe, before Grace Mugabe became Grace Mugabe. The challenge with this socialization is that the consequences are fare reaching. ZanuPF through the media is simply socializing its female members and women in general. More so, young women who might find themselves as spouses to politicians.

It looks very much as if ZanuPF is not home to young people who can stand on their own, and dare to lead their institution. There is deliberate “political glass-ceiling” where Leadership is a straight jacket for “decorated liberation cadres” of certain age. And there are many other considerations as well. For young people, especially those who had found themselves leading the Youth League, they were simply used and dumped. The ZanuPF youth league today only becomes vocal when there are some factional battles. They either show up to defend or attack real and perceived enemies. On matters of political substance, they are nowhere to be found.

The MDC of Tsvangirai.

Watching Dr Khupe address her first presser as MDC-T Acting President at Harvest House, I shook my head and laughed in disbelief. It wasn’t because of the bizarre claim of ownership over 103+2 MPs. Rather, it was a certain statement which for a second had me confuse her with Ambassador Simon Khaya Moyo. It became clear her MDC-T outfit had embraced the ZanuPF “chinhu-chedu” political cancer, forgive the pun. She looked at the individuals who immediately surrounded her and labelled them, “the original Leaders, Labour Unionists, and founders of the MDC”. It was strange obviously, considering that except for herself and Morgen Komichi, everyone else who immediately surrounded her, has no known history in Labour Unions as before 1999. Douglas Mwonzora, came from the Legal component, as he was part of NCA and gave Morgan Tsvangirai legal advice. To his credit, he attempted to cryptically rewrite this history in some old tweet soon after the demise of Dr Tsvangirai, by tracing his relationship with the political giant, long before 1999. The other Leader, Elias Mudzuri is part of a small yet daring constituency of the MDC Leadership. He is a war veteran. There aren’t too many of his ilk in the party. It thus sounded strange, listening to Dr Khupe point at these four gentlemen and call them “the original founders from Labour Unions”.

Dr Tapiwa Mashakada, another decorated veteran of the MDC has equally made the same noise. He previously bemoaned the “capture” of the party by “Johnny come late” “Students”. He says the former Student Union Leaders, who came late in 1999 or 2000 at the inaugural Convention and/or Congress, were not part of the original Trade Unionists who started the party. He strangely concludes that it was ZCTU which “….transformed into the Movement”. I questioned my comprehension skills listening to that. How does something transform and remain in its original state? ZCTU which allegedly “transformed” into the MDC, remains in existence to this very day. This is public knowledge. But it does little to dishearten the spirited efforts at reclaiming ownership of the party by the old guard of the MDC. It then becomes tragic seeing a Movement relegating young people and erstwhile colleagues, to the periphery of their party formation and indeed it’s Leaderships.

Their former Leader, the iconic Morgan Tsvangirai, whose legacy they claim to be defending, the same legacy Dr Mashakada even claims to be willing to die for, had a clear vision for his party. He famously shared his thoughts on their party not becoming a one generational Movement. Those protecting his legacy now, by words and deeds, are shaping a tragic identity for their party. As he was aging, it was not lost to him that the torch he had run with, had to be passed on to the next generation, which had to preserve it and indeed pass it on as well. Controversially adding Nelson Chamisa to his party Presidium, Dr Tsvangirai famously said: “I have considered a number of factors, maturities, seniority, demographic considerations. We must not forget that we have a young generation that’s emerging that demanding that we do something about it”. This sort of thinking seems to have become alien to his party’s supposed Leadership. Their current youth leader is already over forty. Perhaps its early days, seeing that the institution is still trying to find its footing outside the nationally embraced MDC-ALLIANCE. But judging from current trends, it does not inspire. No youths of substance can be found in its current leadership composition. At the very least, the party has done little to nothing, to neither attract, no protect young women and men who have found themselves at the mercy of the state due to an alarming rise in human rights abuses.

The MDC-ALLIANCE

The advent of the MDC-ALLIANCE as a party on Zimbabwean body politic is a political conversation that will remain topical for years to come, more so as the party equally continues to possession itself. Reality however is, the party is now here and is home to those who believe in it, and a headache for those who do not. Unlike the other two formations, the ALLIANCE has proven to be unorthodox and daring in its conduct. The most significant move, being the appointment of social media opinion maker, Miss Fadzai Mahere as party spokesperson. But beyond that, its Leader, Nelson Chamisa, was Presidential candidate just four months after turning 40. It is thus no surprise that he did well in the polls, as the majority of voters in Zimbabwe are youths. The interesting things about Advocate Chamisa is the same thing many thought would go against him. It’s his exuberance. He is one to never shy away from being unconventional. From showing up at some Killer T show, to doing press-ups during a march in Harare, to being pictured on a scotch-cart, to being videoed dancing to some Zim dancehall music in a local barber shop. Anyone interested in studying political behaviour can easily tell that the Advocate enjoys “playing stupid”. He deliberately does or says those things you wouldn’t expect from the orthodox and conventional politician, more so an aspiring President. But far from attracting scorn, he has made himself more and more relevant, and a darling to many.

Beyond those behaviours, Advocate Chamisa is very active on social media, especially Twitter. Not only does he post a lot, he actually responds to comments. He is deliberately up to date with all important and silly social media hot topics. Even when something anyone would ordinarily ignore pops up, he comments and defends himself. Those who follow him actually get to have conversations with him. Imagine how a young man in Chisipiti feels about being “followed” by Chamisa on twitter? It’s a new form of politics which is different. But different in a good way. It’s those little things that put him ahead of many, if not all Presidents of political parties in Zimbabwe. Many other politicians who have mastered social media have made themselves relevant and earned the respect of those they engage. Across the political divide, one immediately thinks of Professor Jonathan Moyo, Fortune “Chibabest” Chasi, Obert Gutu, Temba Mliswa, Tendai Biti, and Sen Douglas Mwonzora amongst others. You might not immediately like them, but at the very least, you respect them and their willingness to engage.

But back to the MDC-ALLIANCE, amongst the three, it has proved to be the one willing to grow its political base by having young politicians in its midst. The young people who have been given space to express themselves in the MDC-A have shown that there have so much to offer. They simply need more space. The heritage of 1999, which should always be protected, is not enough to give the MDC to State power. The thinking of 1999 is not enough to shape the MDC-A to meet the aspirations of the 2023 voter. Only its dynamism and deliberate moves to attract new ideas will save the day. Indeed, some of the most relevant young politicians today, belong to the MDC-ALLIANCE. These include the likes of Obey Sithole, Ostallos Siziba, Happymore Chidziva, Jacob Mafume, Brian Dube, my brothers Makomborero Haruzivishe and Majaira Jairos, Takudzwa Ngadziore, Thandekile Moyo and Richard Tsvangirai among many many other. Only recently, three MDC-A YL Leaders, Cecilia Chimbiri, Netsai Marova and the history making Harare Legislator Joana Mamombe were victims of state violence with their abduction trial still ongoing. Others including Davison Chamisa have faced the same fate.

Outside the MDC-A, many more young people have begun making news for all the right reasons, except for those who want to maintain the status quo. A few weeks back, 21 year old Namatai Kwekweza and 23 year old Esther Vongai Zimudzi were arrested for demonstrating against the proposed constitutional amendments. At close evaluation, these two young women have made more noise against the amendments more than all opposition parties. As the clampdown persists, more youth activists have been detained. On the 23th of June 2020, eight students from Chinhoyi University of Technology, who include Faustina Talent Madawa (21), ZINASU National Vice-President Lionel Shayahama (24) Shamisi Whide (26), Nicola Makasu (22), Melody Tsitsi Madalamete (22), Ignatius Lochombo (26), Brian Mushakwe (23) and Norman Makamanzi (24) were released on bail, after being arrested for raising placards during a lecture and distributed them to students. The materials had protest messages against the then detention the MDC-3. This has just been the reality of Zimbabwean politics of late. More and more young people, especially young women have begun being part of political conversations.

Conclusion.

The effects of ZanuPF’s attitude towards young people and women is two-fold because tragically for Zimbabweans, ZanuPF is both a political and a governing party. Consequently, it has control over state apparatus, especially the police. It’s saddening seeing the party unleashing state machinery against young people simply wanting to be part of the national conversation. It is even more tragic to see a supposedly pro-democracy opposition party making pronouncements which makes it unattractive to young activists. It is easy to see which of the three is employing the principle of “representation” to attract young women and men through role models within its Leadership rank and file. But the party still needs to do more. There is nothing to gain from neither playing victim, nor actually being victims. Sympathy only lasts for so long, before people get something else to sympathize at. Young people need to feel safe in their country, more so as politicians. The MDC-A, authentic opposition parties and indeed civil society needs to do more to protect young women and men, from political violence or human rights abuses. Equally so, the politics of using and discarding young people as has been done with the likes of Chipanga, Mathutu and others should be the politics of the past. The “chinhu-chedu” mentality of labeling the likes of Charlton Hwende, Job Sikhala, Daniel Molekeli, Nelson Chamisa and others in the MDC-A as “arrivalists” and Student Leaders yet the majority of them are now beyond 40, all signal a sickening attitude towards young people.

But for the young women and men who are rising to the occasion and demanding to be part of the conversation, kudos to you. I cannot say much, nor give you anything, but implore you to soldier on. Every citizen has a duty to stand up for the well-being of the next citizen, and indeed the country at large. I quote Advocate Chamisa who once said: “If you cant stand up for something, at-least sit upright”.There is no alarm anywhere that will ring and signal that it is time. Organize and speak out. If the wish is to join a political party, do so and participate in nation building. Perhaps that’s the best way of remembering our dear Father Zimbabwe, Dr Joshua Nkomo as we today, June 1st, mark the 21st anniversary of his death. Zimbabwe was way better then, compared to now. Regardless, it was his prophetic conviction that: “Zimbabwe will never die because young people will save”.

Enkosi!!