Humans were created to have dominion over everything created. Problems are a result of the inability to confront fear, leading to falsehoods. However, confronting does not necessarily involve physical handling. Although, the inability to directly look at someone, straight in the eyes, can manifest the inability to confront. The idea of confronting can, actually, be done by a child to an abusive parent.
Young children, in particular, are known to succumb to keeping secrets, regarding iniquities committed by parents. Imagined consequences, induced by fear, are often used, to persuade Children’s silence. Newspapers reveal fathers raping their own daughters. Crimes of that nature are often hidden, with mothers threatening their daughters against accessing justice. This is assumed as preserving family dignity.
A girl-friend, or boy-friend, avoids disclosing past misdemeanours, due to fear of rejection. The scourge of domestic violence is a result of the inability to confront, which should not be mistaken for arguments or manhandling. Confronting implies truthfully communicating, while looking directly into the eyes of the concerned person, so as to access the truths.
This requires honesty. Nevertheless, there are cases where confrontation attracts violence. The accused may even threaten to sue. This is common, especially when involving those regarded reverently, like the men of the cloth. The abused congregants get threatened with litigations or expulsion from the denomination. Church leaders are often always reverently treated, making it hazardous to attempt divulging pastoral misbehaviours.
Those strongly taking defensive lines, when accused, are cowards. A man with a clean heart can never feel hurt, even though accused falsely. One way of telling whether one is guilty of a crime is by his defensive reaction. When lacking human behavioural handling skills, the investigator may become apologetic.
Those failing to confront are as evil as the person committing evil. Our political environment is unacceptable and pathetically toxic. But the bad condition is a result of failure to confront, by the opposition outfit, being viewed as an alternative to the ruling party. For convenience, let us shelve the gruesome violence perpetrated against ZAPU, in the early 1980s. I will dwell on the evils committed from the year 2000.
The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was invigorated, aiming at wrestling power from ZANU PF. The unprecedented violence was unleashed against unarmed civilians. The Courts were intimidated, effectively failing to handle cases of violence. Fearful people carry good reasons for not confronting.
Due to the inability to confront, the seed of violence was sown. This developed into a culture, which starts very small, before spreading across the nation. Unbeknown to many people, the MDC party, tolerated ZANU PF misbehaviour. Thereby, allowing the seed of violence to germinate. Human beings are not necessarily evil. But what is evil is their inability to confront what is evil.
Failure to confront is a manifestation of cowardice. Although people often give excuses like, “There is nothing I could do because the man was armed.” This sounds plausible, but not when aware of the technology of confronting. Terrorists are as human as the intimidated people are also human. Holding a gun does not make one superhuman. Jesus, also, admonished against fear.
“What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:27-28 NIV).
Jesus revealed the principle of confronting. A human being is a spirit, capable of confronting. A truthful person fears nothing. Greatness implies a willingness to confront evil. Cowards get manipulated to defend evil, rather than goodness.
The MDC allowed the seed of violence to sprout, leading to the violent 2002 Presidential elections. The culture of violence got cultivated, leading to the Army Commander making a landmark declaration, stating that the Presidential post was a straitjacket, designed for those with liberation credentials.
Out of ignorance, ZANU PF assumed that the Army General had a right to make such utterances. That statement did not only lack moral ground but was also treasonous. There was no serious opposition from the MDC. Many theories have been advanced, including that the opposition party had been riddled with CIO agents. Whether true or not, that remains yet to be unveiled.
The treasonous Army General deserved litigation, for reasons of posterity. Surprisingly, even with legal experts in their ranks, the MDC could not confront such a treasonous statement. The MDC regarded itself as an opposition outfit but was unable to legally challenge constitutional violations.
The Army Commander’s utterance was triggered by cowardice. Possibly fearing that a different political administration would uncover past evils, like those of Gukurahundi? On the other hand, the MDC feared the Western puppetry label, more than advancing the principle of constitutionalism. They could not handle the propaganda, labelling them as puppets of the West. The bottom line was a failure to confront the germinated culture of violence.
There may be truth in that the group, masquerading as the opposition party, had spies within its ranks; which caused the 2005 split. Tsvangirai’s faction had some modicum of respect from the populace. But, as lacking the principle of confronting, that faction was also poised to fail.
Two years later, Morgan Tsvangirai escaped an assassination attempt, in prison. With a history of unchallenged falsehoods, even the wrongful incarceration of Tsvangirai was treated as normal. The undertones were heard, from some quarters, that Tsvangirai’s illegal incarceration was necessary to make him iconic, as a political figure. I totally disagreed with that notion.
Zimbabwe had become a liberated state. Problems were a result of an inability to confront wrongness. Those who nearly killed Tsvangirai in prison, were cowards, just as those who failed to confront the injustice were cowards. MDC was at home with violence, against its supporters, having yielded to the Army General’s treasonous remark.
During the 2008 election campaign, President Mugabe had unambiguously stated that the ballot could not determine the electoral outcome. Implying that the forthcoming plebiscite would be a waste of time. Nevertheless, the opposition participated, in that election, without challenging the exposed illegality. Outsiders could not figure out the rationale, of participating in such shambolic elections?
Ordinary people had resigned to the assumption that Mugabe and his party were scared of elections. Violence had then become a culture, where people randomly got killed, for merely supporting MDCT. The number of those killed is yet to be disclosed. All this resulted from the sprouted seed of violence, planted in the year 2000. Nurtured in 2002 and then galvanized in 2008.
There was cowardice on the part of ZANU PF when resorting to violence, instead of confronting realities on the ground. However, there was no clarity on the part of MDCT. Possibly out of sympathy for him having been bashed in prison, most people voted for Tsvangirai, who later won with a landslide victory. With an army of legal experts, MDCT did not know what to do after winning.
It had to take five months for ZEC to announce election results, although it had become clear that MDC T had won. Anyone can blame ZEC for an appalling job, but as a winning party, what did MDCT do, to confront ZEC’s ineptitude? Their inability to challenge suggested that the MDC was not different from ZANU PF.
Fear can also be defined as lacking integrity. The violence, following the fictitious presidential rerun, was unprecedented. MDCT saw it coming but had become numb to violence. What they failed to confront in the year 2000 had ripened. Blaming ZANU PF shows a clear failure to confront wrongness.
Evil things should not be associated with human beings. Both ZANU PF and MDC T had weaknesses, associated with failure to confront criminality. All this is a result of cowardice. MDC T took a stance of being a victim, while the ZANU PF’s failure, as a perpetrator, was anchored on cowardice.
One can conclude that the Zimbabwean problems are a result of the inability to separate between human beings and evilness. The way to freedom lies in the ability to separate between the two. Evilness should never be ignored, as threatens both the victim and the perpetrator.
No one benefits from evil conducts. Of course, the perpetrator might appear as benefitting. But the effects would also eventually catch up with the perpetrator. Injustice should never be tolerated. Addressing evil manifestations should be the responsibility of every citizen.
The MDC T political outfit is used here, as representing the multitudes of supporters. Otherwise, problems of failure to confront, resulting from fear, are found across all social strata. Wrecked marriages result from cowardice and failure to confront. Migrating to other countries cannot solve a person’s problems, remaining intact, as long as not confronting problems of origin.
As long as not confronted, the problems of cowardice remain forever. The person may be comfortable, in this present lifetime. But, certainly, his/her progeny would be facing an uncertain future. Failure to confront is more serious than appears to be, in the short run. The current miserable conditions result from failure to confront, by those of the previous generations.
Instead of dwelling in the past, life is currently within any person to address the future. MDC may have regarded itself as better than ZANU PF when regarding the nostalgic achievements of the 2009—2013 period. Ordinary people had also hoped that past misbehaviours would diminish. The MDC T’s failure was more in the area of inability to confront the causes of intractable violence.
With pomp and fanfare, people hoped for the best, including the drafting of the new constitution. But, without addressing the fundamentals, nothing could materialize. The year 2013, created more critics against the MDC. Among those critics was Dr Ibbo Mandaza of SAPES Trust.
MDC T allowed ZANU PF clowns to disrespectfully treat the GNU. Typical of the inability to confront, the cycle of violence was regurgitated, notwithstanding SADC having undertaken patronage of the GNU. We were later informed that MDC, actually, rejected SADC’s advice to avoid participating in that plebiscite without electoral reforms.
The same old story was repeated: ZANU PF being accused of having rigged the elections. This time with an overwhelming majority, using a foreign organization, called NIKUV. The general plausible theory being that MDC T had become too comfortable with ministerial and parliamentarian pecks, during GNU.
As Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai was dubiously awarded a mansion in Mt Pleasant, without following due processes. Rather than for developmental purposes, parliamentary debates were anchored on pecks for the MPs. Instead of blaming ZANU PF, the Zimbabweans ought to know that we had an opposition outfit without integrity. We were back to square one.
Unconfirmed sources reveal that there was unorthodox communication between Morgan Tsvangirai and the Army Generals. Madam Khuphe was sidelined, at the behest of the Army generals. The question had focused on, who would take over as President of the MDC T, after Tsvangirai’s demise? The Army Generals had sought to lend support to the MDC but required clarity on who would take over, after Tsvangirai’s demise.
This is how Mudzuri and Chamisa were catapulted to vice president posts. The MDC National Council had settled for Eng. Elias Mudzuri. But Morgan Tsvangirai had not been comfortable with Mudzuri, hence using his executive powers to elevate Chamisa. This resulted in MDC having three vice presidents.
Remember, these guys had failed to confront the Army Generals, after the treasonous utterances. This is what led Tsvangirai to unconstitutionally sideline his deputy. He could not truthfully confront Khuphe with the truth, concerning the interference by the Army Generals.
This explains how the discord was sown in the MDC camp, leading to the current intractable Mwonzora conundrum. The majority of people appear unaware of what caused the current MDC challenges. Such are the effects of the inability to confront evils, due to lacking courage, but succumbing to fear.
Today, the entire nation languishes under violent rulers, resulting from the fear syndrome. While the rulers fear losing power, the citizens fear the consequences of opposing those ruling with terror. Failure to confront that terror, is most serious, leaving us without any hope to regain integrity.
The hullabaloo about ED this! ED that! —Mwonzora this! Mwonzora that! —reveals the inability to confront, syndrome. Another forty years could be on the horizon, as long as the culture of falsehoods prevails. To come out of confusion, Zimbabweans need to confront the falsehood without wincing.
The problem of fear cuts across the entire humanity. Humans are the same, regardless, of nationality. Addressing evil is tantamount to addressing the syndrome of fear. It is wrong to ignore evil, on reason than it would be in another’s territory. Evil is contagious, affecting even those not involved.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilization, 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, bringing relief to those having witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions––leading to the current economic and social decay. In a simple conversational tone, most Zimbabweans should find the book as a long-awaited providential oasis of hope.
The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99
Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com for $6.99