Fortifying freedom of expression and distancing it from hate speech is integral to democracy, yet the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), an organisation that markets itself as a champion of democracy in Zimbabwean politics seems to believe that right is only applicable to action favourable to the organisation’s interests. Right now, a CCC member – Sengezo Tshabangu – has become a target of hate speech from the organisation which has seen him being subjected to demeaning statements, abuse, name-calling, and threats of violence from a sector of the organisation.
Incitement of violence by CCC members condones and legitimises violence as a political intervention. It not only illustrates an organisation-wide low threshold for tolerance of dissent, but also how ingrained ZANU PF politics of violence and intimidation is in society and how little things have changed since the Unity Accord of 1987.
The level of intolerance on display by CCC is shockingly worrying, but what is unsurprising is who are behind the objection to Tshabangu’s well-defined political position. It is apparent that the highest number of abusive comments are mainly from a base of individuals with no experience of what Tshabangu and many Matabeleland people endure as daily ‘life in Zimbabwe’, a life of subjugation under tribal institutions.
Calling Tshabangu ‘shady’, ‘a nobody’ in opposition politics, a ‘ZANU PF puppet’, etc., mirrors ZANU PF’s politics of muddying those who dare contradict groups who believe it is their exclusive right to dictate the political narrative of the country, and opponents are constantly subjected to psychological and/ or physical harm/ threats.
We will not ignore the evident tribal nuances in the furore. There is a traceable pattern to the origination of incitement and threats of violence; while all or many contributors are from the Citizens Coalition for Change, most are from Mashonaland. No surprise there, old habits die hard, they mutate, only to resurface in an altered, stronger form but retaining all their prejudices and target; a precedence was set in 1983/4 and a sense of entitlement entrenched; people of Matabeleland are expected to agree to a Mashonaland political messaging or risk being forced to comply.
Regardless of social background and political allegiance, those who incite violence against Tshabangu inspire citizens towards hate and violence and must be made accountable for the outcomes of their hate speech.
Defending one’s beliefs or rejecting ideas you disagree with is one thing, inciting violence against those who hold and act on ideas you oppose is another; it is an act of terror coming from a deep, but misplaced, sense of entitlement.
It is one thing to argue against Tshabangu’s recalls, it is an act of barbarism to incite violence against him for exercising his democratic rights, but this is an action with a past. Aggression, violence, and hostility against Ndebeles were normalised in the early 80s and from that point, violence was enabled against all dissenting voices in Zimbabwean politics; but today we want to put a stop; anyone who puts their hands on us will not be given the chance to put their hands on anybody else again.
Nelson Chamisa is on the attack because he feels vulnerable and powerless. He is quoted in The Zimbabwean allegedly responding to a follower urging him to “never negotiate with” Tshabangu and his team but rather let them go and form their own party, Chamisa’s alleged reply:
I will rather engage the puppeteer than the puppets. ZANU PF is behind all this embarrassing nonsense. They are the engineers of this tomfoolery!
Nelson Chamisa
To reject Tshabangu’s actions outright as foolishness projects arrogance and political immaturity. It is also interesting to note that it has taken a challenge from a person from Matabeleland for him, a man who has spent most of his active political life opposing ZANU PF to suddenly wake up to the idea ZANU PF is not too bad after all and express his openness to engaging it.
We do note the context of Chamisa’s sentiment and would not want to blow things out of proportion, yet such views may be seen as insensitive by victims of ZANU PF misrule in Matabeleland.
Not to sound cynical, but one may argue that for many reasons, Chamisa does identify more with ZANU PF political sentiment of Shona supremacism, and he can tolerate ZANU PF if that means avoiding being contradicted by Tshabangu, a Ndebele person whom the system deems inferior.
Questions of Sengezo’s ascension to the interim Secretary-General of CCC position are misplaced without raising similar concerns about Chamisa’s rise. The CCC design made it possible for these individuals to assume leadership roles without due diligence; the organisation does not provide for that process.
Those who only believe in free speech when it is a validation of their beliefs do not believe in it at all. Inciting violence against dissenting voices points at despotism; we argue that nothing good has ever come out of violence and those who advocate violence against any section of the population legitimise it against everyone; instead of inciting violence and intimidation, CCC should be looking within and encouraging rule of law, encouraging civil conversation, and working on an effective formula to address dissent. Turning leaders into kings and gods is dangerous to democratic processes and must be avoided.
MTHWAKAZI INDEPENDENT 