Like it or not, no politician in Zimbabwe has commanded as much widespread support as Nelson Chamisa. Some might argue that Morgan Tsvangirai was just as popular, but the evidence suggests that Chamisa himself—apart from his political party—is the most popular figure in the country. Yet, strangely, some people grow agitated at the mere mention of his name, blaming him for the current turmoil. This view is often held by those with only a surface grasp of Zimbabwean politics. Chamisa remains the nation’s most credible leader, even if he is not without flaws.
The only time I ever questioned the people’s favourite politician—known for the “Mukomana ngaapinde” mantra—was over a comment he made at the Oxford Union Society. He appeared to admire “young” Robert Mugabe while criticizing “old” Mugabe. I could not quite understand why he would praise the younger version of Mugabe. Was it Mugabe’s performance during the liberation struggle he admired, or his early leadership after independence?
Given Chamisa’s age and likely knowledge of Mugabe’s early political path, I assumed he might have been referring to the period from 1976 up to the Lancaster House Agreement. Back then, I too had placed my hopes in Robert Gabriel Mugabe, envisioning a peaceful, united Patriotic Front under his intellectual leadership. Though I had long supported Joshua Nkomo, I naturally preferred the younger Mugabe to lead a united PF.
In 1976, inspired by the rise of the eloquent Robert Mugabe, I was eager to cross the border and join the liberation struggle. My greatest disappointment with him came in 1979, shortly after General Tongogara and Nkomo had announced that the two parties would unite under the PF banner for the elections. I still recall the sinking feeling when the evening news aired an interview with Mugabe from Tanzania, declaring that ZANU would run separately from ZAPU. That moment has stayed with me—whether it was an abrupt change or part of ZANU’s plan all along remains unclear.
I had taken Tongogara’s unity statement as proof that ZANU possessed a reasonable side, but Mugabe soon revealed a darker truth. As co-leader of the Patriotic Front, he stated that ZANU would prefer to contest the elections separately. My gut told me the British were behind this reckless move. Naively, I could not imagine anyone voting for someone with that mindset, but the election results proved otherwise. They revealed a collective madness across Zimbabwe, supporting Mugabe on that stance. It should have been obvious that the country was on a path to ruin.
Some people were irritated by Jonathan Moyo’s Hondo ye Minda jingles in the early 2000s, but I wish they had heard the “Jongwe Rakakunda” jingles from the early eighties. Almost overnight, ZBC became a tool for tormenting those who still thought critically. I lost several friends I had stood with in support of the Patriotic Front during the liberation war.
It soon became obvious that Zimbabwe had not truly achieved independence—only the appearance of it. At the time, I was in the Air Force, and trying to persuade friends who had backed the Patriotic Front alongside me that this was the wrong path was incredibly difficult. Most were simply celebrating that black leaders had taken over, without realizing what lay ahead. They seemed to think that independence came without responsibility.
Honestly, in that sham of independence, the British came across as more gracious victors than the Zimbabwean people themselves, regardless of race. Hearing Chamisa’s Oxford Union speech left me confused. I initially thought he was talking about Mugabe’s rule in the early 1980s, and that realization caught me off guard. It made me suspect he was aiming to impress his British audience. Even now, that comment sticks with me, as I am still unsure what the most popular young politician really meant when praising young Mugabe’s leadership.
Praising Mugabe’s early years without confronting the deep-rooted problems that took hold from the flawed start in 1980 will not solve the nation’s issues. I would even argue the older Mugabe might have been better than his younger self, especially since he backed Chamisa in 2018. To the British, who even knighted him in the early eighties, young Mugabe appeared admirable. But for the black majority, those years were some of the darkest, despite the initial excitement. It was the era of the Matabeleland and Midlands massacres, while white farmers and businessmen thrived under his leadership. Many unsuspecting black citizens were simply carried along by the “Jongwe rakakunda” political chants.
Although I was among the few labelled as a sceptic, our fears proved true when Gukurahundi swept through Matabeleland and the Midlands as early as 1981. The country’s dire conditions sickened me before the distasteful 1987 unity agreement that introduced an executive President. I resigned myself to the belief that nothing good could ever come from Zimbabwe, though I took some comfort in not having joined the armed struggle. When Edgar Tekere’s ZUM achieved almost nothing in the 1990 elections, I knew there was nothing left for the country called Zimbabwe.
There is still some optimism around Chamisa as a political figure, but the “Mukomana Ngaapinde” slogan stirs debate. Does it truly reflect the hopes of Zimbabweans, or was it more about appealing to Western interests? The reasons behind the armed struggle for independence still feel unsettled. Back then, Rhodesia’s economy was built on deep-seated racial inequality, and from the white perspective at the time, declaring independence unilaterally seemed like the best course of action.
Meanwhile, the black population was split between ZAPU and ZANU, with rural allegiances often shifting more towards tribal leaders than democratic principles. White rule openly discriminated against black citizens and avoided genuine dialogue with black politicians. Today, some question whether the country’s current troubles mirror the warnings once voiced by white leaders, as poor governance continues to impact the black majority most, leaving many wondering why so little has changed.
Even with signs of economic recovery, many people are still left on the sidelines, which is hard to justify. The push for growth feels more about impressing the West, so criticism of ED’s poor performance shouldn’t just focus on the numbers. The real issue is that the benefits are going to a small elite, raising the risk of sliding back into the deep inequalities of the early 1980s. It’s also worth remembering that the British knighted RGM at the height of the Matabeleland massacres, when Gukurahundi was at its worst.
In recent times, Eddie Cross, one of the Rhodesian remnants, has already endorsed what is currently unfolding in Zimbabwe. It seems clear the country is once again turning toward foreign interests, perhaps driven by the “Zimbabwe is open for business” mantra. Thinking back to the eighties, I recall many black people flocking to white suburban areas, seemingly more eager to emulate the perceived superiority of whites than to seek meaningful substance.
Today, many black individuals still struggle to see value in themselves, and sadly, the same goes for their leaders, who often prioritize wealth over dignity and legacy. They believe money outweighs their own worth, yet money can never be more valuable than human beings, created in God’s image. Jesus did not die for money but died so that humanity could regain its dignity—a truth that remains puzzlingly unclear to many, despite His expressing it in His teachings.
“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
“The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If, therefore, the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:19–24 KJV).
This Scripture can be confusing to many, as people often assume money holds more value than human life. That mindset is partly why some turn to practices like kuromba (sorcery). Our education system fails to instill the truth that human beings are worth more than money or mineral resources combined. It is no surprise, then, that Chinese investors have been allowed to value diamonds above the indigenous people.
While many celebrate new roads and industries, this progress is misleading. If such developments benefit only foreigners or a handful of locals rather than the majority, it is just another form of slavery. This is why some say, “Mukomana ngaambomira kupanda,” when reflecting on this false sense of economic success born from ignorance. They forget that true prosperity comes from the people themselves—the dignified indigenous population is the real essence of a thriving economy.
Economic growth can appear positive yet be deeply negative if driven externally. Instead of using a poor economy as a political weapon, Chamisa should emphasize the importance of genuine independence. Constantly criticizing ZANU PF or mocking their behaviour is unnecessary. Though I once supported the formation of the CCC, it was disappointing to see it torn apart by political opportunists who could not distinguish between the value of humanity and money.
The real issue lies in the obsession with blaming others instead of taking responsibility for what impacts people’s livelihoods. Foolish politicians exploit others’ failures instead of presenting workable solutions for their developmental progress. Politicians should help coordinate and serve humanity to recover its dignity, without enslaving it. Zimbabweans are known for their hard work and honesty, but their weakness lies in failing to guard against exploitation.
To address our situation, we must first understand that independence means self-determination—relying on ourselves instead of placing too much trust in foreigners or questionable politicians. This calls for proper political education and moving away from valuing a political party merely for putting food on the table, rather than for offering the best ideas. True independence is about self-determination, something lost from time immemorial. The most important truth to pass on to our children is that Zimbabwean people matter more than mineral resources.
If they are genuine, investors should start by valuing human capital before mineral wealth. People may lack the formal education to showcase their worth, but no one is without value. The uneducated are like unrefined minerals—their true potential is only revealed after their natural skills have been developed. Educating people is not difficult if they learn to value themselves.
Allowing foreigners to plunder resources in exchange for roads and industries is still a flawed arrangement. The sustainable path is for Zimbabweans to discover their own potential. Quality education is essential for lasting progress. We cannot bear the weight of an uneducated population dependent on donors. Dignity comes from what we contribute, not what we receive.
Foreign investors should operate under strong laws designed to uplift the local population, making ordinary citizens more valuable than gold. Altruism remains key to preserving human dignity. Dictators might not grasp such concepts, but ordinary people must be helped to understand them fully in order to achieve true freedom before disempowering those dictators.
While it is fair to acknowledge the Smith government’s economic innovation, there is no reason to embrace Smith’s discriminatory philosophy. Every human being has equal value, rooted in the belief that all were created in God’s image. Opposition to Rhodesian ideas should never hinge on skin colour. If Ian Smith’s policies were wrong, they remain wrong regardless of whether they are carried out by the Chinese or any other race. No one was created to live under slavery.
Living by the principle of treating others as you would like to be treated works just as well in any circumstance. Acting contrary to altruism borders on madness. Unfortunately, our judicial system often fails to recognize wrongdoing, replacing justice with injustice. This stems from not appreciating that life is as fleeting as the morning dew. Still, personal accountability for one’s actions is what truly matters. Instead of relying on Chamisa for the future, we should each take responsibility for ensuring our own survival in the country.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilisation, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from the current state of economic depression 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, relieving 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