In the twenty-first century, there are people obsessed with attempting to address historical issues. The African continent is betrayed by those attempting to correct colonial injustices, committed by powerful nations. No one can give life to those who perished during colonialism.
In recent times, Afro-Americans have displayed their commitment to tracing their African roots. However, this can be a daunting task for several reasons. The first reason is that it is impossible to connect with the culture that existed at the time of ancestral slavery. Secondly, by virtue of those complainants having been born in America, they would be Americans.
Thirdly, it is impossible for them to connect with their tribal identities. Fourthly, language would be a barrier, let alone that most African languages are headed for their demise. Fifthly, there are no administrative structural consistencies among those Africans, affected by greed and corruption.
However, the more slavery issues are put on the table the more susceptible to slavery those blacks would be. The best thing is for the vulnerable races to promote the eradication of racial tensions, according to the United Nations charter on Human Rights. Those attempting to address past evils, by pursuing seclusion would be attempting to do the impossible.
The Mthwakazi Republican Party, (MRP) is very clear when advancing tribal agenda. Ndebele speakers are encouraged to separate their relationships with the Shona-speaking people. The objective goal is to create a Ndebele kingdom, dissociated from the Shona-speaking administration.
They assume that to be correcting the tribal injustices perpetrated in the early 1980s. However, just as the perpetrators of Gukurahundi were genocidal and insane, the advocates of the Ndebele kingdom agenda are driven by insanity, attracted by the Gukurahundi genocide. There are two reasons supporting this assertion.
The two reasons manifesting the unworkability of such idiosyncrasies lie in falsehood. The first is mistaking language for a tribe. Language alone cannot exclusively describe a person’s tribal identity. It merely denotes a common communication formula, used in a particular area. The second reason is that the MRP uses emotion more than it ought to use reason.
The perpetrators of Gukurahundi had one common objective. This was to eliminate opposition so that everyone would agree to their dictatorial agenda, driven by a one-party system of governance. The short-sighted ordinary people agreed, but without examining the workability of such an agenda.
Some countries are governed by a one-party-state system. Such a method may not be different from a monarchy. As long as adopted with clearly defined intentions, I suppose a one-party state could be as workable as some monarchial governance can be workable. Problems arise where there would be dishonesty. Rather than Engage the public in a referendum, such dishonest characters purport to champion the cause of democracy but pursue dictatorships.
Those people would be aiming at enriching themselves, more than enriching ordinary people. In short, they would be criminals. The most difficult thing is to distinguish between honest people and criminals. The apostle Paul highlighted an axiomatic principle, deserving adoption, for survival purposes:
“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).
Whether accepted or discarded by many people, the formation of ZANU, in 1963 carried some hidden agenda. There was nothing democratic about its formation. The assertion is merely based on the fact that the formation of that party was not through an inclusive congress. There are those who suggest that ZANU was formed on a tribal agenda.
But that statement cannot be sustainable when considering that the founders were not tribally coalesced. Enos Nkala, in whose house ZANU was formed, came from Matabeleland. This is just as its founding leader was not, necessarily, of a Shona origin.
The tribal dimension may have been manipulated, to de-popularize Nkomo’s supporters from Mashonaland regions. This was done by fabricating spoken languages for tribalism. The language is not necessarily descriptive of tribal identity. This is revealed analytically through the study of the mind.