There is no magic to the country’s revival, except in educating young people to appreciate that value is in each individual. And value becomes value, only when it is given away to benefit other people. Zimbabwe is valuable or not valuable, according to its productive capacity, based on ideas of its own people.
Zimbabwe is judged negatively as a country, especially, when compared with the Western countries. Unfortunately, it is the majority of our young people that contribute immensely, in the productive capacities to enhance the economic outlook of those Western countries. Common sense shows that one cannot address the effects without first addressing causes.
We are a poor country, largely because most of the highly productive people serve to benefit other countries—leaving Zimbabwe in debilitating state. Any country’s fortunes cannot be measured by abundant natural resources, necessarily. But by the effective utilization of its human resources. See [The Zimbabwean story]
How can Zimbabwe, as a country, reach its productive capacity, to benefit other countries? This is different from the question: How much can Zimbabwe benefit from other countries? What surprises is that most people know that a human being is more valuable than pieces of gold, for instances.
Under normal circumstances, everyone knows that a human being cannot be compared with inanimate objects. This is why people are even prepared to invest on casket coffins for their deceased relatives. Human beings are more valuable than gold, diamond or any mineral resource of a country.
However, it seems it is only the cunning politicians who value people—only when they attend their rallies, more than they worry about empowering them. To restore normalcy, the starting question ought to be:
Are our youthful Zimbabweans serving to benefit political parties or serving to benefit the Zimbabwean economy? There is difference between the survival of political parties and the economic survival, for the benefit of everyone.
It is particularly in Africa where politicians project a theory, suggesting that the demise of a political party marks the demise of a country. Most of the energy is expended on organizing the productive youths to revitalize political parties.
The shrewdest political leaders are the ones whose political parties survive longer. It takes an analytical person to ask the question; but to whose benefit are such resilient political parties surviving?
This website has featured articles that project two divergent philosophies—determining either survival or demise of an individual or a country. Survival is determined by occupying one’s mind with what benefits other people.
While the demise is determined by occupying one’s mind with receiving from others, without giving anything in return. There is a reason why in Africa, the strongest political parties are the strongest economic killers.
Politicians encourage young people to occupy their minds with what they can receive—as to value politicians who promise to give things for free. For instance, what climaxed the slide into abject poverty in Zimbabwe was proportional to the parcelling of free land and the so-called youth empowerment.
While projected as empowerment, in reality this behaviour ought to have been labelled as youth dis-empowerment. Whatever is received without obligation to pay back, serves to dis-empower the recipient.
There is no way a recipient of free handouts can be empowered. That person is dis-empowered to the level of whatever is given to him/her for free. You empower the individual, only when you address his/her capacity to generate value, in him/herself. See [Why Zimbabwe’s Indigenization policy is untenable]
People value those who are productive, as to benefit others. No-one values a person who only seeks to receive what is produced by others. This is why criminals are unacceptable in any normal environment.
Yet, in countries where receiving is normalized, productive people are the ones who get victimized or criminalized. A government that teaches people to feel empowered when receiving free handouts, actually, enhances the criminal nature of those youngsters.
The phenomenon of developing into that state of affairs is where politicians encourage people to appreciate receiving free handouts. That behaviour becomes beneficial to the politician—taking a position of being a benefactor to the unproductive populace.
Therefore, everyone finds survival being dependent on political connections, rather than production. Charisma becomes most effective in promising people, even what would be unachievable. The politician gets value in people who would vote for him/her—based on empty promises made to the unsuspecting voters.
Anything that goes wrong, under those circumstances—cannot be levelled against the assumed benevolent politician. There has to be a scapegoat that the cunning politician would use to incite people against—instead of him/her.
The only reason why a politician wants to be voted for, is power. With power comes control, and with control there is leverage to manipulate circumstances according to the politician’s own schemes (self-centredness).
People can whine and whimper about things not being right—without seeing the fault as emanating from disempowerment, in the pretext of empowerment. At one stage, the Zimbabwean people used Western sanctions as scapegoat. But currently, this has shifted to President Mugabe—being the sole stumbling block.
Everyone blames Mugabe’s misrule, for the country’s misfortunes. Anyone can actually form a formidable party, based on how bad President Mugabe has been—bringing the country to its knees. See [The price of falsehood in our society].
Hence, the opposition political parties are united with one objective—removal of Mugabe from power. However, Mugabe is not different from any other politician—manipulating the misinformed populace.
The trouble starts with associating empowerment with receiving free handouts. Rather than occupation with valuable activities to benefit one’s fellow humanity. Empowerment should be associated with giving, rather than receiving.
The Zimbabwean scenario is even complicated by the mega-churches, whose charismatic preachers equally manipulate people—ripe in assuming that value is in receiving, instead of what one can give.
This Christian treachery is not different from cunning politicians who promise lies to unsuspecting people, just to obtain their votes—necessary to keep those politicians in positions of authority. However, such authoritative positions serve to manipulate.
Politicians use the politically manipulated national constitutions, which empower politicians with the right to receive—without exchanging anything of value. As long as the person being manipulated does not recognize his/her area of weakness—he/she continues to be taken advantage of.
However, real empowerment has little to do with politicians or those dubious charismatic preachers. It is more to do with appreciating that value comes with giving rather than receiving. What are you giving, as associated with value?
It is not the politician, who first has to understand this principle and change his/her behaviour, necessarily, before things become right. It is also not the Charismatic preacher, expected to change, necessarily. It takes only an introspective individual to change behaviour—regardless of background.
A person receiving anything without giving anything in return is disempowered. This is why, even a rich President from a poor country cannot enjoy the status of respect, although categorized among the richest of the world. Truth lies in that value does not come from receiving.
Recently, I engaged in talking to one young man who was lamenting over the economic problems in Zimbabwe. But the way the young man was dressed, showed that he was not necessarily as poor as he wanted me to believe.
I then put a simple question before him: “If I am given an option to choose between you and ten kilograms of gold, which one do you think would appeal as more valuable to me?” Anyone can assume this being an easy question.
His quick answer was that I would choose him, because a human being is more valuable than any inanimate object. I agreed with him—but at the same time asking him to prove to me—how my forfeiture of the ten kilograms of gold, for having him, would be a worthwhile decision.
Suddenly, the young man became confused. But after exchanging more illustrations with him—in our conversation—he eventually saw the sense. He realized that choosing him would, actually, be an unacceptable liability, rather than the envisaged benefit in obtaining the ten kilograms of gold.
Any person’s worth is in terms of what he/she can give, rather than what he/she receives. Thieves may appear as enjoying free life-styles—when able to acquire the most expensive properties. But they live with an inward scar—causing them to be very uncomfortable, wherever they may be.
Value is determined by what one gives, and not necessarily by what one receives from others. The supposition of happiness coming out of freely acquired wealth is an illusion. Such a person would have entrenched him/herself into a deeper ditch. See [Value is in Positive violation of the Law of exchange].
Receiving things for free, serves to expose a person to profound misery. Actually, the most dangerous condition in this life, is the inability to add value on other people’s lives. There is a man called Jesus, who lived a life that could be mistaken for a pauper, but His wealth endures to this day.
Jesus pursued and focused only on one direction, and it was the direction of service, instead of being served (Matthew 20:28). This universe is governed by laws of nature. Poverty is not by accident, just as wealth is not by accident.
There is one way of behaviour that leads to misery, just as there is another way of behaviour that leads to abundance. Ignorance exposes people into unnecessary problems, of which poverty is known to be one of them. See [The meaning of poverty and its impact on Zimbabwe]
One of Nkosana Moyo’s appealing political ideas, is seeking presidency without worrying about his political base among the populace. I understand those who accuse him for not first building a political support base, before aspiring to become president.
Such people are used to political manipulations, as currently prevailing. They are so used to being abused by politicians, so that not being abused is foreign to them. This is why I, actually, indicated that it is not fair to blame those politicians, who simply take advantage of the prevailing stupidity within the populace.
I suppose people like President Robert Mugabe will remain highly successful, in the eyes of common men—used to being manipulated. Kwadzinorobwa matumbu ndiko kwadzino mhanyira. (They rush to where they are lashed with whips).
It may be true that Nkosana Moyo will remain unpopular for not seeking to manipulate people, but to empower them. However, this does not take away the fact that his ideas are demonstrably more workable than the current manipulative political environment.
Nkosana Moyo gave me an impression that sounded like bringing a totally different political methodology. The appointment of people into government ought to be meritorious, not according to political considerations.
The prevailing status quo is that good people cannot be meritoriously considered, without first considering their political background. Sadly, in politics, decisions are driven more by group instinct than common sense.
This is not to say people should just be considered without looking at their past political records. Meritorious considerations are different from political considerations. When considering merit, rhetoric is replaced with integrity.
Currently, the focus is on what benefits political parties, rather than focusing on what benefits ordinary people on the street. Zimbabwe needs politicians who are primarily concerned with the well-being of ordinary people—aiming at raising their productive capacity to maximum levels.
That politician encourages those ordinary people to appreciate that there is no well-being in a person surviving on free handouts. Also, showing them that there is no reason to despair, as God never created substandard human beings. He/she encourages them to believe in themselves, more than in other people.
For eons, human societies have been victims of what scientists call “herding” behaviour. This implies using the actions of others as guide towards concluding what constitutes sensible issues. This contrasts independent evaluation of information, concerning the likely outcome of the action taken.
Generally, it is this herding behaviour that always causes people to adopt wrong polices. It was the herding behaviour that led to the idea of the construction of the Tour of Babel, against God’s will (Genesis 11).
It was also the herding behaviour that led the Israelites to rebel—influencing Aaron to mould a golden calf to replace their true God (Exodus 32). The same herding behaviour caused the entire Israelites to declare against going into the Promised Land (Numbers 13 and 14).
It is the same group instinct that has ensured President Mugabe to remain in power, even when adopting ruinous policies that have left this country in its current appalling condition.
People want to belong, and it is in the state of belonging, where people behave like sheep. A shrewd politician like President Mugabe, will not fail to take advantage of such stupidity, as displayed in people’s behaviour. It takes a person of highest intelligence to verify data on issues of survival before adoption.
The principle of verifying data is probably only practiced in one of the most obscure religions of this world—called Church of Scientology. That Church is not Christian, but the study technology in their possession could help Christians, a great deal. See [Keys held by Church of Scientology].
Actually, that principle was taught by Jesus—encouraging wise ones to come out of the stupidity of herding behaviour (Matthew 7:13-14). Yet Christians are the ones caught practicing herding—perhaps, even more than any other religion? See [Where Zimbabweans and Christians got it all wrong].
Consider failures on our Zimbabwean scenario. ZANU PF, as a political party is christened into ensuring that everyone caught in its membership has to follow a particular direction, as determined by the leader. There is no room to think differently, without inviting being labelled as a renegade.
While this behaviour appears as instilling discipline—appealing as necessary for tranquillity in the party—it led Zimbabwe to where it is today. Anyone is free to blame leaders for misdirecting people towards catastrophic destinations.
But nothing reveals that those leaders were created as more superior to their fellow human beings. While using ZANU PF as an example, in my analysis, any political party, especially in our African environment, falls into this fallacy.
Zimbabwe does not need political parties, but a’ la carte menu of political ideas—from which people can choose what identifies with their independent analysis. The blame game does not benefit and has never benefitted anyone.
Best ideas do not come from anywhere else, but from people themselves. Each individual has got brilliant ideas. Independent people need the ability to evaluate independently, on issues that constitute workable ideas.
The only known anecdote for failure is in pointing one’s finger at other people, as reason for one’s own failures. It is only a looser who holds good reasons for being a failure. But failure is not in the vocabulary of those who are aware of having been created in God’s image and therefore capable of solving problems.
The critics of Nkosana Moyo preoccupy themselves with the question: How can he form a government without a structured political party with support base? The intelligent answer is in that—Zimbabweans themselves are a structured support base—so far as they distinguish what identifies with their survival requirements.
This is what political independence implies. There is no independence without responsibility—just as responsibility is the only price of freedom. The greatness of any nation ought not to be in mineral resources or any other inanimate object, but in humanity.
Our Zimbabwean people have been taught to believe that they are inferior to diamonds and other resources of this country. Greed has replaced the integrity of humanity, all because of lies peddled by the current crop of politicians.
Zimbabwe does not need political parties, or even Church organizations. But it needs those conscious of their own worth—as being more valuable than anything not created in God’s image. Serving the interests of political parties is different from serving the interests of humanity. See [Created to solve, instead of creating problems].
The vision of Nkosana Moyo could be brought to reality, if his ideas are explored objectively, without the web of political stupidity. It is also important to know that it is only the Zimbabweans who hold the capacity to bring this country to its real worth, not politicians, necessarily.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilization, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from 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 reliefs to those having witnessed 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