Deflection, protection, and denial seems to be the preferred operative mechanism adopted by the pro-Chamisa media and political analysts. There is obvious disproportionate amplification of his strengths followed by calculated minimisation or even blaming of his weaknesses on everyone else but him. In one such analysis, a YouTuber argued that Chamisa was more popular than his party accusing everyone who has ever held a different view from him of disingenuity and back biting.
Undercutting checks and balances and elevating any living man to a status of immortality is naivety. It is to create a dictator to be your master and hope he will see it within himself to protect you from vulnerabilities resulting from your powerlessness, including the marginalisation from the decision-making process.
No one disputes that Chamisa is an important figure in the mainstream opposition politics matrix, but he is one among many, some of whom have suffered unconceivable physical and emotional harm in the hands of a brutal state machinery for their strongly held democratic views and equally strong opposition to ZANU PF. For that reason, we reject attempts to build within the public a sense that without him people are helpless and ineffectual and opposition politics is dead.
To confuse populism with leadership is to condemn to the scrapyard the many capable leaders in our communities for conducting their business outside the glare of the media. Leadership is not a popularity contest, and it must be made clear that popularity is not always an indication of quality neither is it evidence of good leadership nor a proper case of merit.
We have yet to see Chamisa’s popularity being transferred to tangible policy to benefit the nation. Chamisa has only popularised the ‘God is in it!’ slogan. As we speak, it remains unclear how, in practice, a Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) led government would differ from ZANU PF, all thanks to the ‘strategic ambiguity’.
Indeed, part of the popularity with Chamisa has less to do with the content of his message and more to do with the form that he portrays himself – as being a divine man, a God chosen leader, a young leader who speaks with boldness and fearlessness for the masses in the fight for democracy and in defence of the constitution and is willing to pay the consequences.
Leadership is solving problems, not insulating yourself from them. When those you lead stop bringing their problems, you are no longer leading them, they have either lost trust in you, or they do not believe you take them seriously. This is the time to look at your style and capabilities as a person and leader.
Reflection is only possible when a leader is subject to checks and balances. There is no reason to believe the opposition has robust checks and balances when it does not even have mechanisms to elect members to its national executive council (NEC).
Now, revisiting the Chamisa leadership conundrum, we argue that there are fundamental character and leadership style issues that feed into and maintain his inability to effectively deal with or accommodate differences in opinion within his camp. Perhaps as an active member of the clergy, Chamisa is not used to an environment where having his authority challenged is expected.
There is a noticeable pattern of unwillingness and failures to build strong, independent bodies including conflict resolution mechanisms in the organisations in which he has been the leader. Coincidence or negligence or failure of leadership?
Journalists and bloggers aligned to Chamisa’s camp have tended to blame those individuals and groups who dare challenge Chamisa’s views and accuse them of being power hungry and disloyal, but they conveniently ignore the observation that Chamisa has consistently failed to mould consensus within his leadership teams both in the MDCs and CCC.
There are reasonable grounds to suggest he is uncomfortable with dissent, he does not know how to deal with being challenged and finds people who challenge him frustrating and intimidating hence, would ride roughshod over everyone’s opinion.
In the lifespan of his leadership, Chamisa has happily used his charisma and popularity to sacrifice and seek to malign and marginalise any dissenters. The result is split after split of the opposition movement, and these splits have been erroneously, if not conveniently, credited to ZANU PF meddling because Chamisa and his base cannot take responsibility where failure is concerned.
Debate should be on the quality of leadership than the mere popularity of an individual. To imply that opposition to Chamisa’s views is an existential threat to opposition politics is highly contentious, disingenuous, and dangerous journalism. The failure for Chamisa to use his undeniable popularity to take his supporters where they should be is a serious indictment on his leadership quality. Popularity is one thing, quality of leadership is another; Chamisa lacks the required humility, tolerance, and wisdom. It has proved impossible for him to work with, trust, and reward those whose perspective, ability, and judgment are radically different from his. When faced with strong internal opposition to his views, he has not hesitated to tap into his popularity and watch his base abusing his critics.
MTHWAKAZI INDEPENDENT 