The Flip Side with Kuthula Matshazi
Neutral observers and progressive elements, and enemies are shocked and delighted respectively when Zimbabweans engage in discourses aimed at solving problems in our country because the way we do it is laughable at best and awry at worst.
The neutral observers are shocked because of our tendency to misrepresent facts only to satisfy our respective dialogical positions. For instance, in many instances, when Zimbabweans discuss our preferred economic model, or political issues, we tend to depoliticise these subjects. We strip these discussions of the politics that is inherent and discuss them as if they have no political dimensions at all. More...
13 comments:
Eish, little wonder Zim is in such a mess, if your 'reasoning' represents the above average Zimbabwe's intelligentia:
"The first group deliberately does it as a strategy of smuggling their discredited neoliberal project or ideas that are alien to the Zimbabwe situation, which of course would, if introduced, work to their benefit. The second group is simply ignorant"
Whow, your analytic powders are arseome man!!!!
Well, thanks for the comments. You could have just engaged me instead of resorting to profanity. It would be interesting to know the basis of your profanity...engaging and me because our comments are unfortunate. Maybe you are worked up by my reference to ignorant people. Its a fact. There are ignorant people and many times their response to discussions is to resort to violence, in its many forms. I hope you are not one of them.
But I am sure, as Zimbabweans we are now used to your type. And indeed "Eish, little wonder Zim is in such a mess".
I disagree with your assumption that if we were to change Zanu PF thigns would not improve. For one, in order for things to improve there has to be a reasonable discourse between the parties. At this point Mugabe or Zanu PF is too caught up in there desire to point out hypocracy to even think if communicating in a sane manner. The west is also tired of Mugabe and his antics and it seems have simply decided to ignore this little pip squeak. Let's not be fooled, Zimbabwe is not important in the scheme of things for Britan or the US and if Zimbabwe were to disappear tomorrow they would hardly notice. The departure of Zanu PF in and of itself would not be the catalyst however it would allow Zimbabwe to put itself into a position where a discourse with the west could be instituted and we would be well on our way to debt cancellation, increased trade opportunities and revitalised tourism. They will never cancel our debt with the old man in power, people will continue boycotting our trade fair and tourist will keep visiting the Zambian side of Vic Falls.
In addition I think a lot of Zimbabweans would be tempted to return to Zimbabwe with a change in leadership, this alone would spark the economy, people such as yourself would bring back their experience and knowledge for the benefit of the economy. Also, now that many of us have been living abroad don't think we are going to go back to Zimbabwe with no new business ideas and new ideas about how things should be run. Many of us will have connections in Australia, UK, Canada, the middle east and the States tht we will be able to take advantage of.
None of the things I mentioned require anything more than the departure of Zanu PF and the expectation of a brighter future after Mugs.
Then again maybe I am just one of the ignorant people you speak of.
Am coming back to you tomorrow morning Canada Time - engaging your issues. But your assumptions beat me. Its more of wishes than realistic assumptions. I am not sure where I can categorise you now. I will be frank when I respond to your e-mail. The ignorance is dependant on what you say. You are judged by what you put on paper. I cannot be held responsible for anyone who is ignorant. And I do not expect to see someone trying to muzzle me from expressing my opinion based on facts that some people are indeed ignorant. People must know that they are not the only ones who have the right to freedom of expression.
If we are accused sometimes of being academic why should we not also accuse some people of being ignorant? No one must feel bad about being labelled correctly based on facts not malice. If someone delves into things they do not know based on assumptions and presumptions then surely they should be called ignorant. If a person is ignorant, they are ignorant. I can't be held responsible for their ignorance. And I will not feel bad for calling them such...unless you tell me the euphemism for ignorance.
By all mean call anyone you want ignorant. I have no doubt that Zimbabwes current situation is a result of an overflow of ignorance that is currently quite pervasive throughout the leadership in Zimbabwe. It is an even greater ignorance that see Zanu PF still garnering support throughout some areas of Zimbabwe.
Back to my comments though I do not think they are based on wishes at all. I will go though my 3 "wishes" and explain why they are based in reality.
1. Our neighbor Zambia has had it's debt cancelled and I see no reason why Zimbabwe should not suffer the same fate should a new leadership that shows new direction in terms of policy be put into power.
2. Zimbabwe had a vibrant tourism industry, it was destroyed once this administration decided to allow violent attacks against it's white citizens. The US is currently warning it's citizens to aviod all travel to Zimbabwe especially now that the violence is no longer just for whites but for black troublemakers as well.
3. After independance how many Zimbabweans returned to Zimbabwe? My father was one of them and he went back as a trained engineer. Now I am not sayig a majority of Zimbabweans will return but a good many will in order to take advantage of the many opportuinties that will be available for those with money and a little knowledge.
I cannot say for sure that these things will come to pass but I think of it as I would the stock market. No one can tell you what will happen but we can make educated guesses about what will happen should certain events occur.
An example occured recently, oil dropped today as a result of Obasango transferring power to the new president. Some of the dissidents are considering ceasing their violence at the request of this new president. Who knows what this new president will do or how he will turn out and it may be wishful thinking to assume he will be any better than Obasango but people are willing to allow their wishful thinking to translate into real world progress. The same thing I believe could happen in Zimbabwe.
I see no hope whatsoever as long as the tyrant remains.
You talk about debt cancellation in Zambia and yet it has nothing to show for its debt cancellation even if their economy has been growing at about 5% annually. What can you demonstrate that has shown that Zambia benefited from debt cancellation? What do you mean by “new direction”? A direction dictated by the West? We have our model of development and the international community through development institutions should help implement our programme and not try to force neoliberalism down our throats. Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania and Ghana have taken the “new direction” and they have nothing to show for it except economic growth that benefits the few elites in Zambia and their foreign investors in their respective countries. In Zimbabwe we do not subscribe to that model of development. We want a people driven economy (Refer to my article My Vision for a Viable Zimbabwe)
Yes Tourism was vibrant but Zimbabwe had to take decisions that would make it unpopular with some privileged people. We could not sustain the skewed land ownership. Interesting what you say about US warning its citizens not to come to Zimbabwe. In case, if you did not know, that constitutes economic sanctions!!
While it is possible that some Zimbabweans would come back home in case there is a change of government, that does not necessarily mean that everything is going to be okay. There so many fundamental issues to consider, which right now many are ignoring thinking that they are insignificant, but will realise them later. How would a new Zimbabwe deal with issues in the stalled Doha trade talks (Singapore Issues - Market access, government procurements, investment protection, etc and its effects? How about the farm subsidies? How will you deal with neoliberal based globalisation since we have seen that it increasing poverty, inequalities and shedding jobs like there is no tomorrow.
So it is on this basis that I only think that you have wishes and not realistic arguments. We have to have national economies and redefine prosperity for us to get ahead. Unless these and many other issues are addressed, then for get that the removal of Robert Mugabe is the answer to our prosperity. It gives a feel good situation not realism.
The economic situation obtaining in Zimbabwe is not limited to Zimbabwe alone. I say this because many people want to make us believe that many more other countries are on the path to development. Also, I am not suggesting that the situation in Zimbabwe is ok and we should maintain it. We should improve and development. But in trying to develop, we have these impediments placed by neoliberalism and of course some of our government officials who are corrupt. Some countries have massive poverty, violence and crime in the midst of one-digit inflation figures.
I was talking to Peter Stollery on my radio show, a Canadian Senator who chaired the Standing Senate Committee on International Trade and Foreign Affairs when they produced a report on the failure of development assistance in Africa. He was expressing the same grim scenario about SubSaharan Africa unless there is change of the international economic system that is currently prevailing. He says our people are worse off than they were 45 years ago and not because of individuals but of the obtaining international economic system. Many people and literature has said this too. For someone to simplistically say that the removal of Mugabe is the answer to a greater part of our problems is unfortunate. You can read the report on http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/fore-e/rep-e/repafrifeb07-e.pdf
And this article is interesting: http://www.carleton.ca/Capital_News/n3.shtml
Ahh you have again misunderstood and overstated my position. At no time did I say Mugabes removal was a cure all. What I said was that his removal would allow Zimbabwe to put itself into a position where it could engage the west in meaningful dialogue that could result in improved economic activity. All of these challenges you have highlighted, I don't know how they will be dealt with by a future Zimbabwe but I do know that Mugabe has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that his administration cannot handle these issues. I am not concerned with how others might handle these issues, neither you nor I can predict the future.
The fact remains that Mugabe and his cronies cannot change the current direction of the country and in fact have only made it worse in each year they have been in power. I think your scenario of gloom and doom is just as wishful thinking as mine and I quote:
"it has nothing to show for its debt cancellation (Zambia)even if their economy has been growing at about 5% annually. What can you demonstrate that has shown that Zambia benefited from debt cancellation?"
Are you thinking rationally? Zimbabwe has 2000%+ inflation versus 5% growth in Zambia and you ask what they have to show for their debt relief? How about food?
I find your mode of thinking to be totally unrealistic, sure the current economic system is really going to change for the benefit of a few African countries. I am sorry to say but this is foolish, Zimbabwe will have to learn to work within the current system to prosper because things are not going to change. Many countries have managed this why not Zimbabwe. Vietnam is doing very well, Botswana is growing, many third world countries are managing to overcome these barriers and yet you seem to think it is impossible for Zimbabwe. I agree, with Zanu PF it is impossible, you cannot disengage the west and expect to prosper.
Yes, warning citizens not to travel to Zimbabwe can be seen as economic sanctions but so what? Is that not the fault of Zanu PF for running amok with its violent campaigns? Remember there was no such warning before the violence. To protect its citizens the US should by all means warn against travel to Zimbabwe. True economic sanctions would be a ban on travel to Zimbabwe which has not occured.
Zanu PF is a failure, their removal at least opens the door to development. Do you understand what potential is? With Mugabe there is no potential. A new leadership might not be able to fix anything but there would be potential.
Isn't the definition of an insane person one who thinks they can do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome each time? That is you, you think we can stick with Mugabe PF and somehow come out with a different outcome.
By the way I am not the original poster who responded first.
Please define your use of the term neoliberalism? My understanding is that neoliberalism espouses the following:
Fiscal rectitude, meaning that governments would cut expenditures and/or raise taxes to maintain a budget surplus
Competitive exchange rates, whereby governments would accept market-determined exchange rates, as opposed to implemented government-fixed exchange rates, as had prevailed under the Bretton Woods System
Free Trade, which means the removal of trade barriers, like tariffs and regulatory trade barriers
Privatization, which means the transfer of previously-public-owned enterprises to the private sector.
Undistorted Market Prices, meaning that governments would refrain from policies that would alter market prices
Limited Intervention, which the exception of intervention designed to promote exports, education or infrastructural development.
Zimbabwe has done the opposite of each and every one of these ideals and is dealing with the consequences. Where are these job losses you speak of due to neoliberalism, seems to me the west has a better case against neoliberalism since jobs have shifted to low cost environments like India and China.
I am so sick of opinions like your that blame the world economic situation for their problems. As far as I recall it was Zimbabwe that expelled its knowledgable farmers without first training others to take over, it was Zimbabwe that decided to disengage the west with their so called look east policy that has resulted in a flood of cheap and inferior Chinese imports which are being dumped on us, it was Zimbabwe that has stifled economic investment by implementing an exchange rate system that disadvantages its own people, Zanu PF leaders have access to forex at 250:1 to this day and sell it to business at 40,000:1. Yet you still want to blame "the stalled Doha trade talks". You would feel quite at home in America where the national past time seems to be the "it's not my fault" game. You remind me of the woman who spilt coffee in her lap and sued the restaurant for serving her coffee that was too hot. Who could imagine that coffee would be hot? Well the world of economic growth is not plain sailing either and to blame Zims problems on a difficult world is like the woman blaming hot coffee for her problems.
I could go on and on everything you say just sounds wrong and defeatest to me.
I look forward responding to your post. I will do so Friday morning Canada Time.
Kuthula
Honest Zimbabweans will tell you MDC approved sanctions two days before the first sanctions were voted in.
You can lay the matter to rest by requesting the video futage from Sky News who did interview him in the afternoon from his house in Harare.Leaders should tell the truth.
I remember shading tears because this man did not realise what it meant.
How can investors come into the country without ministers visiting their countries and explaining their polocies.
Please MDC leave the economy alone and fight your way into power by proving to the population you are worth a government which I doubt you will ever be.
Thanks
You define neoliberalism very well, but the problem is that you depoliticise it and make it as if it’s the next best thing after human rights. It is rather simplistic to say that the Zimbabwean government has done exactly the opposite of all that. Also, the government is not obliged to take up a violent economic system. Neoliberal ESAP disseminated the health sector, reduced jobs, (in short, reduced public sector investment) with dire consequences. I am surprised that you do not even know that the violent neoliberalism killed our developed social programmes. I must say you have a very good command of neoliberal economics language.
You perpetuate the idea of Zimbabwe disengaging from the west. Its like it’s the worst sin one can commit. Not that Zimbabwe did it but the opinion you express is like disengaging from the West is the worst sin one can commit. If the West cannot understand our programmes, then tough luck we can go as far as “disengaging”. That’s what you call “policy differences” in your neoliberal parlance.
The fact that some ZPF members access the dollar cheap should then not completely erase the problems of Doha, unless you choose to be very biased and simplistic.
I do not see why you are freaking out about my being in Canada when I have a choice to live wherever I want and have a right to hold opinions. On what basis are you really questioning my location and my own efforts to make it through life? If I can follow your logic, then I would suggest that you hold your current views because you are obliged by the fact that you live say in America!!
How do you justify what Anthony Giddens and Jack Layton (New Dems. Party) Canada criticises Canada and yet if I do so you freak like I have committed the worst crime. You are so intolerant of diverse views and free expression. You seem to one of those people who expect that people should tow their line and lick their boots because they are their benefactors. Well, other people are not like that and that’s why you will find it difficult that they can offer criticism. I know its difficult to understand what I am saying because your inherent disposition.
Well you think that it is obvious for everyone to think that Bloch to use international community. Not for me and a couple of friends. We are not as bright as many other guys who know everything that is “obvious”. Well, I know that he was not referring to East Timor, etc and that’s precisely why I took him to task. I wanted to point out his fallacy of trying to legitimize the illegal sanctions by referring a small section of the countries of the world to suggest that they represent the rest of the world. And it is for that reason I labeled him a white supremacist. I am glad you understand that you friend used inappropriate words. I am not guilty of nit picking. It was correct to nit pick because by international community, one can then pick any country, US, East Timor, Namibia. Are these not members of the international community. I would be wrong if I nit picked some country that does not belong to the international community. My nit picking was very good because it demonstrated the dangers of using language loosely…well for sinister agendas.
Easy. I blame Zimbabweans for failing to understand nation building and its challenges. If we had known what it takes to build a country then we would have done better.
Well, you say it very well that “American mining firms that would love to exploit Zimbabwe's mineral wealth or utilize its cheap labor”. You forget that these governments are the ones that push and apply pressure on these governments through various instruments such as force, war, and destabilization. For these companies to come to a market that does not want to open up, the governments have to apply other tricks. See how Iraq was opened up; the Latin American continent. Read The Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins and then it will explain to you the relationship between state and these corporations. Are you telling me you are this naïve not to know such basic detail? Also read how Lord Browne of BP was able to get a 50% stake in one of Russia’s biggest oil companies. It was through the push of the CIA, Madelaine Albright, Tony Blair and Al Gore not as an individual but as Vice President.
Western economic relations are not based on neocolonialism and imperialism, but for the Africans and Latin America especially places like Honduras, Nicaragua, etc, it is based on these ancient methods.
Well, suit yourself with defining me. As I said in my main article, you are very good at inventing. So suit yourself sir.
The problem with people obsessed with opposing for the sake of opposing or who have an agenda is that they do not even accept the truth. Let them feel good about their beliefs.
People even argue that they are no economic sanctions in Zimbabwe even when they are calling for, with a HUGE banner written economic sanctions.
You claim that I am intolerent of other ideas when I am merely opposed to yours as you are opposed to mine. If I were to agree with you comments then why would I bother posting a response?
I don't see why you are obsessed with proving that there are sanctions.....so what, what does it matter?
Don't over react, I don't think it is a crime for you to live in Canada, I simply said it makes you a hypocrite. You said earlier that calling people an idiot was justified as long as it were true, why do you bristle so at being labelled a hypocrite? You are taking advantage of the gains Canada has gained as a result of the policies you are crying foul about. There is nothing wrong with that.
I find no need to justify the opinions of Giddens or Layton, they are entitled to think whatever they want, unless those thought involve insulting Mugabe, that would be a crime.
As for your attacks on neoliberalism, I think you have been revealed as one who does not truly understand why these programs go wrong, it is not because of neoliberalism but instead the blame goes to those in charge of implementing these programs, take out your agression there if you must. I assume and correct me if I am wrong but you seem to have nothing against neoliberalism in and of itself but rather the results that come when you put corrupt, thieving Zimbabweans in control of the programs. Just look at how farms were doled out, do you call this giving land to the disposessed? or is it a land grab by Zanu PF family and friends?
Ever heard of the saying "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?, this is what you are doing. I am merely tryiong to balance out your rhetoric.
Post a Comment