Historical issues are meant to teach, and not necessarily for justice. Fixing historical issues is a complex and layered process. Some corrections address inaccuracies or biases; others may involve rewriting entire narratives to align with modern values or agendas. Adjusting history can be viewed as moral rectification or as an attempt to erase or reshape it. Such corrections often become necessary when new information emerges that challenges existing interpretations—whether through fresh evidence, a reinterpretation of old sources, or the recognition of omissions, including biases.
The goal is to make historical accounts as accurate and unbiased as possible, reflecting a fuller picture of the past by including marginalized perspectives and questioning dominant narratives that might reinforce stereotypes or inaccuracies. Still, this process comes with challenges. It requires a careful balance between correcting and distorting, since changes risk bending facts to fit current agendas. Ultimately, revising history is a nuanced and subjective task that demands thoughtful consideration of both its impact and its ethical implications.
Whether historical wrongs can be fixed is equally complicated and layered. As interest grows in tackling past injustices through financial reparations, formal apologies, and truth and reconciliation efforts, debate continues over how valid and effective these approaches really are and whom they truly benefit. In the twenty-first century, some people are obsessed with attempting to address historical issues. The African continent is betrayed by those who attempt to correct colonial injustices previously committed by powerful nations. The lives lost during colonialism can never be restored.
Lately, many African Americans have been committed to exploring their African heritage, though this journey comes with challenges. First, it’s impossible to fully connect with the culture from the time of ancestral slavery. Second, being born in America means they are Americans. Third, they can’t easily reconnect with their tribal identities in Africa. Fourth, language is a barrier, especially as many African languages are disappearing. Fifth, inconsistent administrative systems across Africa, often affected by greed and corruption, make the process even harder.
The more slavery issues are discussed, the more vulnerable some Black communities may remain enslaved. The best course is for marginalized groups to work toward eradicating racial tensions, as outlined in the United Nations Charter on Human Rights. Seeking isolation as a way to address past injustices is unlikely to succeed. In Zimbabwe, tribalism remains a sticky issue. The Mthwakazi Republican Party (MRP) strongly promotes its tribal agenda, encouraging Ndebele speakers to separate from Shona-speaking communities.
The aim is to establish a Ndebele kingdom, separate from the Shona-speaking administration, in the belief that this would address the tribal injustices of the early 1980s. However, much like the genocidal and irrational perpetrators of Gukurahundi, the proponents of this agenda seem driven by misguided thinking and a fixation on that tragic event. Two main reasons highlight the flaws in this idea. First, it confuses language with tribal identity—language alone does not define a tribe; it simply serves as a shared means of communication in a given area. Second, the MRP appears to rely more on emotion than reason.
The Gukurahundi perpetrators had a single goal: to crush opposition so everyone would fall in line with their one-party, dictatorial vision. Some short-sighted people agreed without considering whether such an agenda would actually work. In some countries, such as China, a one-party state runs the show, which can be much like a monarchy. If implemented with clear and honest intentions, a one-party system could function as well as certain monarchies do. The real trouble starts when dishonesty creeps in.
Instead of holding a public referendum, corrupt leaders pretend to stand for democracy while chasing dictatorship, aiming to fill their own pockets rather than help ordinary citizens. In essence, such people are bent on criminality rather than having any genuine interest in ordinary people. The hardest part is distinguishing between the honest and the corrupt. As the apostle Paul pointed out, there is a timeless principle worth following for survival.
“Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said,
‘I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty’” (2 Corinthians 6:14–18 RSV).
The formation of the ZANU party in 1963 didn’t follow democratic principles and seemed to carry a hidden agenda. It wasn’t established through an inclusive congress, raising questions about its origins. Some argue it was based on tribal motives, but this doesn’t hold up since its founders weren’t bound by tribal ties. Enos Nkala, in whose home ZANU was formed, was from Matabeleland, while its first leader, Ndabaningi Sithole, wasn’t purely of Shona descent.
The tribal angle may have been used to undermine Nkomo’s support in Mashonaland by fabricating language differences to fuel division. There are also claims that the CIO at the time played a role in creating ZANU to weaken the African push for independence. Language itself does not inherently define tribal identity. As revealed through studying the mind, the reactive mind can be manipulated to stir tribalism among uneducated people.
The human mind has a reactive side, tied to irrationality, and an analytical side, enabling progressive analytical reasoning. When speaking from emotion, people draw on the reactive mind, which is unreasonable but effective and causes confusion. This is why events like the Rwandan genocide cannot be fully understood by traditional historians without examining how the mind works. True understanding requires knowledge of the mind’s mechanics.
For example, when it came to those who killed him, Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34 KJ21). These individuals acted from a reactive mind rather than through analytical reasoning. Criminals often exploit people with reactive minds to serve their own harmful agendas. In 2 Corinthians 6:14–18, Paul described such exploiters as nonbelievers, bent on manipulating those unable to reason clearly because of the reactive mind. He warned against those who take advantage of people stimulated by faulty reasoning stemming from a reactive mind. God is associated with order and rationality.
People with reactive minds, unlike analytical thinkers, are not necessarily intentionally evil—unless influenced by those who are. In the early Church, Demetrius stirred up a riot among idol worshipers in Ephesus to protect his idol-carving business. This showed that, aside from their ignorance, the rioters were not inherently malicious, though Demetrius clearly aimed to sabotage Paul’s ministry by taking advantage of their ignorance. Ultimately, it was the city clerk who stepped in to resolve the chaos (Acts 19:23–41).
Zimbabwe is currently sitting in a quandary because its legitimate revolutionary party associated itself with the clique that formed ZANU in 1963. Without applying Paul’s principle, the uninformed Nkomo’s party found itself unequally yoked with criminals, assuming that this was fostering unity in 1976. The fight against colonialism was marred by this misstep, eventually contributing to the Gukurahundi tragedy. Was Mugabe truly Nkomo’s comrade in the PF alliance?
Though widely celebrated as a victory for the liberation struggle, the Frontline States’ advocacy for the Patriotic Front formation led to Nkomo’s acceptance of that alliance, without thoroughly vetting ZANU before agreeing to it. He should have realized that nothing genuinely patriotic could emerge from merging a legitimate and illegitimate party. This was as unreasonable as suggesting getting into an alliance with Tshabangu’s formation. According to Paul’s teaching (2 Corinthians 6:14–18), the PF alliance was as dangerous as linking positive and negative electrical charges.
The trouble with a long struggle is that it’s easy to be tempted by anything, even shady deals. For example, Margaret Thatcher never supported the PF; while she agreed to Zimbabwe’s independence, it was strictly on Britain’s terms. The Conservative Party’s Cold War fears, combined with the idea that ZAPU was backed by the USSR, led them to favor Mugabe over Nkomo. Propaganda painted ZANU as more communist, but those in the know understood that Mugabe’s support came from China, not the USSR.
Although Nkomo had backing from the Russians, history shows his policies were purely democratic. During the Lancaster House talks, the British spotted divisions between PF leaders, Nkomo and Mugabe, which they exploited. While both spoke of democracy, Mugabe aligned more with British interests than with true democratic values. The roots of Gukurahundi can be traced to this very story. Even the 1987 Unity Accord, often hailed as a success, was empty—driven not by principle but imposed on a weakened PF-ZAPU.
It might have seemed like a fresh start was taking shape through that unity accord, but it was actually leading the country down the wrong path toward destruction. Insurgencies of dissidents may have been suppressed, creating an appearance of peace nationwide. Yet peace deals without principles can be even more damaging than an honest conflict. Mixing good and bad can never lead to real peace, just as combining positive and negative forces brings disaster. Without understanding these truths, people will keep stumbling in confusion.
The 1987 Unity Accord’s harmful nature is evident in the thousands of people in Matabeleland known to be without national IDs. The MRP has linked the atrocities of Gukurahundi to all Shona-speaking individuals, mistaking this for tribalism. Some believe the perpetrators should face trial in The Hague to ensure justice is served. Still, no justice can truly match the severity of such horrific acts committed by mentally disturbed individuals. With this awareness, only the new generation can work toward restoring order—but only once they understand that the creation of ZANU was never driven by good intentions.
The little that could be done is to compensate the Gukurahundi survivors whose relatives perished. However, that still cannot reach the innermost reconciliation of the affected people. Of course, to people from a degraded country such as ours, compensation of any magnitude would be acceptable. But when looking at it from a dignified perspective, no monetary compensation appeases a person’s loss of beloved ones. There is only one workable therapy for both victims and perpetrators, suggested by Christ:
“But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest; for He is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful. Judge not, and ye shall not be judged. Condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned. Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. Give, and it shall be given unto you: good measure, pressed down and shaken together and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete, therewith it shall be measured to you again” (Luke 6:35–38).
The most fascinating declaration is: “For with the same measure that ye mete, therewith it shall be measured to you again” (verse 38). Any wrongdoing toward others comes back to us, either in this life or the next. The key point is that the world was never intended to be peaceful, yet striving for peace in the face of evil offers a dignified hope in the future Kingdom of God. In relevant prayer guidance, Jesus included: “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (Matthew 6:12 KJ21).
Few people genuinely believe the physical body has little significance, aside from being a tool to promote peace in a troubled world. This perspective is mirrored in how Jesus was treated on the cross, teaching that no one should regret suffering for righteousness. While it is natural to protect the body from harm, when it happens, the person causing it often needs more prayer than the harmed one. It might sound unconventional, but it is both true and practical. Everything Jesus said can, in fact, be proven to work through science.
“Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy.’ But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you” (Matthew 5:43–44 KJ21).
I have never come across a passage of Scripture where Jesus instructed His disciples to pray for their friends. Jesus never instructed them to pray for friends in the entire four Gospel books. This is profound but very true. Jesus provided us with a pluralistic prayer model. But the disciples were instructed to pray for their enemies. The perpetrator is more vulnerable than the victim. The perpetrator needs prayer more than the victim or one’s friends.
God would not be worried about those praying for friends and cursing enemies out of ignorance. But God is certainly disturbed when a true believer disregards Christ’s instruction, where the effects can be more than committing suicide. Christianity should never be taken as a casual matter. The person who harms other people needs more prayers than the friends—but why? Jesus did not die for the physical person, but for the spiritual person who cannot be seen by physical humans. This explains why Jesus declared:
“He that findeth his life, shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for My sake, shall find it” (Matthew 10:39 KJ21).
Losing one’s life for Jesus’ sake means embracing His character as the way, the truth, and the life. Those who commit to this principle are promised eternal life, while those who reject it lose that same promise. This highlights why Christianity may seem unappealing to some. Yet Jesus did not present this principle as a guaranteed formula for eternal life. Simply applying His teachings conditionally may not lead to any reward. The true key lies in valuing genuine repentance before inviting Jesus into one’s life. As Paul proclaimed:
“And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith so that I could remove mountains, but have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not charity, it profiteth me nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:2–3 KJ21).
One can carry the Bible throughout one’s life but never apply its teachings. Without God’s revelation, these mysteries remain impossible to understand. To be freed from life’s hardships, one must genuinely forgive and pray for those who do wrong, remembering that many may have committed such evils in ignorance. Even criminals can receive mercy after repentance, thanks to the unfailing grace of our Lord.
I recall a caption once spoken by Adv Fadzayi Mahere: “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” I believe there is truth in this, with the strength rooted more in the spirit than in the physical body. What harms the body can strengthen the spirit, while what harms the spirit can fortify the body, destined to perish sooner or later. The key is recognizing that the spirit is the most important part of a person, far more than the temporary physical body. The safest approach is to let go of the past, live fully in the present, and focus on making positive contributions toward a better future. The past is irredeemable.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilisation, which lays out standards for lifting Zimbabwe out of its current economic depression and into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, offering relief to those who have witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions leading to the current economic and social decay. Most Zimbabweans should find the book to be a long-awaited providential oasis of hope, in a simple conversational tone.
The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99
Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com for $6.99