“Doomsday exponents” or democracy activists?

The video above features Jonathan Shapiro – known to must of us as ‘Zapiro’ – the South African political cartoonist who has a gift for nailing the truth in images that can be completely hilarious or utterly shocking. His cartoons of Zimbabwe have often given me boost because sometimes it is wonderful to have the truth amusingly reflected right back at you. Zapiro is in a spot of trouble at the moment, because he turned his lethal pen on Jacob Zuma, and Zuma didn’t like it one little bit. (The full details of what’s happening between Zuma and Zapiro can be read here on GlobalPost.)

The end of the video clip concludes with Zapiro saying:

I’ve been asked over the years, so many times, whether we could go the Zimbabwe route, and I have poo-poohed it, and laughed it off, and said never, never, never. For the first time in my life, in the last few months, I’ve seen signs of some of that stuff that is really worrying…

There are many people in our country who, like Jonathan Shapiro, have worked tirelessly and bravely to help ensure that the will of the people – now evidenced in opposition MPs securing their seats – was heard. Should we look to Shapiro and consider, as he is now, the terrible possibility that Zimbabwe could get to be like South Africa? Where  the politicians we  have placed so much faith and trust in could end up perverting the very things we believe in and hoped they believed in too?

It’s a provocative question, and for many, it will be unthinkable to ask it so soon, right at the very shaky beginnings of our process, but one I would argue we must keep in our minds, because the type of country we aspire to depends on it.

Recently we received an email from someone who has written a play. He said the play is titled ‘The Ghost of Ndira’ and in it, Tonderai Ndira comes back from the dead to talk to Morgan Tsvangirai:  Ndira asks MT if the decision to “join Zanu PF” was what he (Ndira) was killed for? In his email, copied widely to a range of people to canvas opinions, the playwright asked: “Do you think its the right time to do such a play or we should wait or now is the time?”

Only one of the people he sent the email to replied copying everyone back and therefore making their response visible to us. They said:

Its a good move for the sake of democracy but would not want you in particular to fall victim to the group who have risen to criticize MT. so let the dust settle and pick up more issues of non compliance from the other guys on issues around the GPA, rule of law and the unwillingness to accept paradigm shift. Am sure you can built up a good story, right now people are still ‘hoping’ for the best for this government, and it will be sad if you then woke up to find out that people think you are not progressive, but just an opportunist who thrives on protest politics. Me thinks. [Emphasis added]

At the time we received the email I found myself feeling surprised that it was a question that even needed to be asked, but I was more surprised by the response that came back (which I’ll come back to later). Last week we received another email titled ‘Give Morgan a fair chance’.  It contained a copy of an article written by Senator Obert Gutu,  the article titled “No quiet diplomacy for the MDC” and which opened with the following emotive words:

Zimbabwe’s all-inclusive government is under siege. Already, doomsday exponents have taken out their daggers and the new government is literally being torn apart; like a lamb to the slaughter. [Emphasis added]

The angry tone feels disappointingly familiar to me.

In the run-up to the elections last year – especially around the time Simba Makoni stepped into the fray – I was frequently asked ‘Who are you going to vote for?’ My response would be the most imperious “My vote is my secret” that I could muster. But it wasn’t long before I realised that “My vote is my secret” is a poor relative to the never-expressed but often applied Zimbabwean mantra which is “Your allegiance is my assumption”. And how sweeping those assumptions are! God help a person if they openly voiced a criticism of either of the MDC parties because the listener would automatically assume an allegiance to the other party – labelled and pigeon-holed in an instant.

The idea that a person who supported a party could also be critical of it is a concept too difficult for some to hold.

Things hit a sticky point after the March elections  – tempers frayed, disappointment, bitterness and heightened emotions leading to some very acerbic exchanges between supporters of different formations.  The one that sticks in my mind the most came from a die-hard MDC-T supporter who was arguing  in a forum that everyone, regardless of their (MDC) political preferences, should throw their weight behind Tsvangirai. He said: “You’re either on the side of good, or you’re on the side of evil” – and others agreed with him. In other words, if you’re not with MDC-T, then you’re with Zanu PF.

For me, political tolerance is a hallmark of a solid democracy and evidence of the lack of it should sound alarm bells.

Just look at what Shapiro is observing taking place in South Africa, the ‘rainbow nation’. He says:

There are two sinister movement in the the ANC, one is controlling – its kind of thought control, and surrounding himself with ‘yes men’, all of that Mbeki stuff.

The other one is threatening the judicial system, threatening the very fabric of society, so its another form of threat to the institutions that the ANC itself has put in place.

When push come to shove recently and I attacked Jacob Zuma and his allies for threatening the judiciary, and I did a cartoon of Zuma being about to rape the figure of Lady Justice but with these other guys holding her down and saying ‘ go for it boss’, I became, briefly, Public Enemy Number 1.

I am no Zapiro, but I am guilty of writing blog posts that have spotlighted questions about the new power sharing arrangement; I definitely didn’t hold back when the Mercedes Benz fiasco cropped up and I still have to bite my tongue over it. Similarly, every time my colleagues register a breach of the GPA in our ZIG Watch project they are being  ‘dissenting’ too.  Our article exposing the horrors of Zimbabwe’s prisons was hard-hitting. We plan to go on being critical over and over again. It’s what democracy activists do!

Does this genuinely make us “doomsday exponents” with “daggers” drawn intent on cutting the new government to shreds “like a lamb to slaughter”. Are we part of a ‘group’ (what mysterious murky group is this?) that has risen only to criticise Tsvangirai? Is it really “unprogressive” to be interrogating what is going on around us in our own country? Is pigeon-holing those who dare to ask questions as “opportunists who thrive on protest politics” really the best way to answer challenging questions? Are the people who make noise and shake things up a bit really “on the side of evil?”

And when you apply the rhetoric to the logic, as I have just down, is it such a stretch to imagine a day when control freakery and fragile political egos spill over and resort to the type of thing Shapiro describes taking place in his country?

There are two fundamental points to be made to those who think that dissent and criticism can be silenced with dismissive asides, personal attacks, moaning about fairness, or straight-out pejorative language; and the first is, it does not work.

When Robert Mugabe called Morgan Tsvangirai a ‘tea-boy’ we all laughed at him and thought he made himself look like a fool – we certainly didn’t think he had a point. When Mugabe described outspoken MDC activists as “agents of the West”, no one believed him and his comments did nothing to counter the valid criticisms raised by the MDC about his party.  When Mugabe said the opposition leaders were ‘puppets who did their masters’ bidding,’ it had no impact on the truth in people’s hearts. In the end, when people went to the ballot box, they  knew there were valid questions that had been asked of Zanu PF, questions  that Mugabe and his party couldn’t be bothered answering, and they made their choices.

And that brings me to the second fundamental point: those who agitate and ask the questions are only asking what ordinary people want to know and are already thinking themselves. Trying to diminish the debate and silence voices by describing activists as ‘doomsday exponents’  and ridiculing their real motives – a desire for a transparent democratic free society – does nothing to answer the questions the public ask: it is the unanswered questions, the doubts left sitting in the minds of the public, the unresolved issues and concerns that will determine the fate of politicians on polling day. Far better for the politicians to address the issues fully and politely and then move on.

My weakness is that I genuinely believe that I have a right to free speech – whenever I want, not just at ‘appropriate times’.  I also believe in the concept of transparency and accountability when it comes to politicians. So when we ask a question, we hope that our Movement for DEMOCRATIC Change politicians will be accountable and respond to it in a way that satisfies the uncertainties the public may have in their minds (I have a near-zero expectation that Zanu PF will ever be transparent). If they are rude, avoidant, or a bit whiny about being put on the spot – well, that reflects on them too, and its worth keeping their reactions to public questions in mind come polling day.

I truly hope we get to see ‘The Ghost of Ndira’. I want to see ‘Ndira’ ask ‘Tsvangirai’ his big question: “did I die for this?” My motivation is not to see ‘Tsvangirai’ squirm on stage, but because I am reasonably sure that one of the things Ndira did risk his life for -  and indeed ended up being abducted, mutilated and murdered for – was the right of young playwrights to non-violently express their thoughts  and views through their art and to freely ask their questions. I think ‘The Ghost of Ndira’ should be seen because the principles and values it embodies are far more important than the fragile egos it might dent. Whether it negatively impacts on the power-sharing government or not depends very much on the calibre of the politicians in power, and how they choose to respond to it.

This entry was posted by Hope on Tuesday, April 28th, 2009 at 6:42 pm. You can follow any comments on this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.