Liberation movements of the mid and late 20th Century failed to transition to effective governments in that century and are even more irrelevant in a fast-paced political space of the 21st Century. The media landscape has changed; fundamentally, government narrative no longer dominates informational war, in fact at times it often trails the bourgeoning non-conventional social media competitors.
Othering and immediate whataboutism are no longer the most effective political mechanisms because of a high information constituency. Power grab by the political class is getting pushbacks from a young, frustrated, and often well-informed electorate.
Governing requires more rationality and flexibility than current political leaders are prepared undertake. Indeed, growing the roots for the future that will be safe and accessible to the average citizen requires that we scrutinise the past, pay attention to how it is impacting the present as society walks into the future. At independence, the Robert Mugabe regime sought to transform to reality its longstanding goal of the Shonalisation of Zimbabwean independence, turning the Shona culture and language, norms and values into national dominance. Mugabe and his allies viewed difference and all alternative views as not only wrong, but undesirable, a threat seen as a swamp that needs to be drained.
There is documented historical evidence of ZANU PF-led government’s proximity to genocidal activities in Matabeleland. Gukurahundi was a cruel, inhumane, deliberate and maximalist strategy designed to weaponise fear to exert total control of the country by one political entity and one population group in the independent Zimbabwe geographic and political territory. It was the result of a political misconstruction founded on black-and-white moral absolutism where ZANU PF sought to impose its view of what postcolonial Zimbabwe should look like. In that construct, Shona language and culture, norms and values were Zimbabwe while ZANU PF political ideology, and economic policy were the only accepted worldview, no opposition.
Nationalising the ZANU PF ideological stance of nationalising Shona creed and culture was a disaster-in-waiting; the strategy was always going to fail, and it has imploded. It may have altered the socio-political narrative, but its failure to empower the average ethnic Shona citizen has led to its strategic paralysis. Demonising Ndebele people no longer works as a political strategy. To the average Shona citizen hating an average Ndebele citizen saves no legitimate purpose, it does not improve living standards nor empower him.
Fearing consequences of challenging ZANU PF worldview will not change people’s circumstances in the short and long-term. Previous challenges to State injustices achieved the unthinkable. The challenge that the people of Matabeleland and Mashonaland together faced in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was how to restrict the absolute power of the White colonialists and White minority government. In the twenty-first century, it is the Black government of ZANU PF that has taken on the mantle of absolutism, placing itself above the law. Holding the White minority government of Ian Smith to account was unprecedented and went against the political rationality of the time, holding the ZANU PF government to account is just as audacious and just as necessary.
Strategic innovation is required. We must appreciate that the principle of evil in Zimbabwe is the enervating spirit of ZANU PF absolutism. The system and its structures are too faulty to be fixed; we need to dismantle the system and start afresh.
It is necessary to appreciate that this generation’s interests are different from those of the last generation and cannot be served by policies from that generation. This generation must think big and act bold to come up with a political framework that enables innovative governance pathways. Tribalism may have worked to entrench ZANU PF, but it is a strategy that has been instrumental in paralysing systems for the average citizen; it divides than unites communities and society, so the elites can continue to benefit from extractive policies without accountability as the poor are distracted fighting among themselves.
‘Nacalisation’ is the natural future. We define “nacalisation” as the adaptation of the national interests, structures, and policy design to fit local communities by combining “nationalisation” and “localisation”. This strategy allows national policy design to balance national interests and efficiency with local, tailored preferences.
Taking decentralisation of governance seriously is progressive politics that will unite Zimbabweans and regional economies. Instead of central government holding all the power, it must be limited to enumerated powers (national defence, coining money, regulating inter-province commerce) while regions retain reserved powers (education, public health, intra-province commerce).
Genuine change will require a complete overhaul of the current system and institutions. Effective use of the information space is vital public education and building powerful nonviolent resistance to absolutism that we are subjected to. We must recognise the despotism of postcolonial Zimbabwe for what it is, it is far deeper, more insidious, because unlike the colonial White minority government, it rests on the popular delusion of self-government and independence. Nacalisation is the future.
MTHWAKAZI HUB 
Share your valued views below.