Ethnic identity is the embodiment of African society and organising people around identity is as old as our history. That worked well until Zimbabwe and ZANU PF happened and started redesigning the fabric of reality. And ethnic identity was politicised for the benefit of certain population groups. People started thinking with their clans ignoring all ethical norms of humanity. We have witnessed in the independent Zimbabwe, the power, and risks of organising communities around identity.
What the ZANU PF led state terrorism, Gukurahundi, achieved in the early 1980s after its use of the 5th Brigade – an exclusively Shona militia – to butcher unarmed people of Matabeleland was the entrenchment within mainstream socio-politics of the dangerous idea of Shona supremacism, the idea that the country belongs to a certain population group, ethnic Shona people to be precise, and the rest should find pockets into which they can fit in and maintain an existence of silence. Mainstream politics socialises people to embody the values and attitudes of Shona supremacism.
An important ethical question of identity politics in Zimbabwe is the way in which it sets up obstacles to the self-development of individuals and communities in Matabeleland. The direct association with the socio-economic inequalities between Matabeleland and Mashonaland is unequivocal.
Progressive voices are rising to be heard; there are efforts by some people of Matabeleland to challenge the Shona supremacist narrative. However, the biggest challenge of the Matabeleland movement is how to build and sustain the movement.
We must constantly critique the ethnic Shona supremacist culture which is normalised by state media and rendered unproblematic. The lived experience of Matabeleland shows that Shona supremacism is problematic, and it must be made extinct and not preserved.
It is imperative that people of Matabeleland understand they cannot empower Matabeleland and break through mainstream politics by tiptoeing around its leaders. We need to use our vote wisely, every Matabeleland vote going to the mainstream party, be it the ruling or the opposition party, is a vote lost to Matabeleland empowerment.
To change values and attitudes, we need to understand not only what creates them but what maintains them. Tribally inclined politics which is a ZANU PF flagship policy, and the associated perception of the ownership of Zimbabwe by the majority ethnic Shona people is the trigger and perpetuator of supremacist ideals causing socio-political challenges as conceived today.
Naturally, victims of marginalisation adopt either a fight or flight mode, many in Matabeleland appear to have settled for the latter. It is because of ethnic Shona supremacism that people of Matabeleland believe change in the country can only be affected by ethnic Shona people hence, the blank cheque given to ethnic Shona leaders whenever they set foot in Matabeleland.
We argue that it would be self-defeatist to rely on ethnic Shona people to liberate Matabeleland from tribalist systems and institutions of which they are direct beneficiaries, they are simply not primed for that. Tribalism is too embedded in Zimbabwean politics that even liberal ethnic Shona people fail to understand how they can and/ or do embody Shona supremacist values and beliefs even though they may not embrace tribalism as prejudice or domination, they cannot recognise the ways their actions support and affirm the very structure of tribal domination and oppression that they wish to see eradicated in society.
Change that would be instigated by Matabeleland is possible, but there needs to be a strategic evolution first. From the extremes that invoke cessation to the docility that frets at the thought of waking the proverbial bear ‘Mashonaland’ up. The latter group holds the policy that cosying up to mainstream, Shonalised politics would achieve the gains for Ndebele people in Zimbabwe. That view holds that if we are non-confrontational, and seeing our suffering, ethnic Shona people will be moved to change their feelings. That is a fallacious assumption as it is dependent on the ethnic Shona dominated mainstream politics having a conscience – it has none.
Local activity indicates a steady pool of Matabeleland people who recognise that passivity will not help the region and are now more inclined to supporting localisation policies and demanding of their representative legislators to press government to trigger into action the constitutionally available devolution of power statute. This growth of an aggressively critical Matabeleland movement must be welcomed.
Dreaming big is good and we understand the passionate calls for cessation, but we must guard against being overwhelmed and drowning in our own set of dreams. Political innovation and strategic flexibility are critical, and incremental gains would be vital in our attempts to reclaim political control.
Progressive gradualism would be a go to solution for the Matabeleland political space as a building block; instead of trying to extinguish and re-design the culture of the entirety of the Matabeleland society, the Matabeleland movement needs to target and re-design the sub-culture of the local communities. If the results of experiments are satisfactory, then they can be adapted elsewhere and scaled up for use in the whole region.
In conclusion, individuals and groups from Matabeleland who still believe in the opposition within the mainstream politics to be a solution to our problems have the right to be deluded but they must keep their delusions to themselves. People of Matabeleland need to face the reality that Zimbabwe’s mainstream politics is not broken and in need of repairing, it is rotten and must be replaced. The system is not broken, it was built this way, and it is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It was built to oppress. It lives off our ignorance and we can no longer afford more ignorance.
MTHWAKAZI INDEPENDENT 