“Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:21-24 NIV).
The above Scripture deals a deadly blow to sectarian worship, but conveniently so, to the partisan agendas in our country. The Jews had all along claimed authenticity, through their access to Jerusalem. The Samaritans had been considered disdainfully, as having worshipped God outside Jerusalem.
On speaking to the Samaritan woman, Jesus revealed that locational worship was no longer necessary. God was to be worshipped in spirit and in truth. This was revealed when a certain lawyer asked Jesus to give His own description of a neighbour.
In reply, Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he travelled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine.
“Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’ “Which of these three do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:30-37 NIV).
The above parable settles all matters of prejudice, having ravaged the Jews and the Samaritans, similarly to how the Zimbabwean story applies. Zimbabwe is rich with peaceful people but spoiled by political polarization. Whatever good ideas, provided by either of the political divisions, is always regarded disdainfully.
Regardless of how good, a service provided by a ZANU PF person gets rejected on the basis of partisan considerations. The same applies to services provided by the opposition, from the ZANU PF viewpoint. This describes how wicked, partisan representation can be. This should never have been allowed in Zimbabwean.
This partisan agenda portrayed its wickedness, in the early stages of our independence. Dr Herbert Ushewonkunze, introduced an iniquitous bill, removing a quota system, originally designed to feed the nation. This was because he had failed to meet the quota, applicable to commercial farmers, at that time. The reason given was that the quota system had been a Rhodesia Front idea.
The legislation had required commercial farmers to submit a certain quota of their grain to GMB. Minister Ushewonkunze had failed to produce the required quota, from a farm he had acquired, near Harare. Minister Ushewonkunze would have lost that farm, as having failed to meet the required quota.
The ‘clever’ minister later tabled a motion in parliament, to reverse the Rhodesia Front laws. Using the advantage of the ZANU PF majority. Members of Parliament were whipped to adopt the rescinding of the quota system. The Rhodesia Front had introduced the quota system as another form of good management of our resources.
The partisan principle means that even questionable motions can be passed, on the basis of supporting comrades. The RF quota system had facilitated a good supply of grain to GMB. For cattle farming, it ensured a good supply of meat to CSC.
No sane person could view that legislation as racist. But, in his clownish behaviour, through whipping, Ushewonkunze managed to persuade ZANU PF legislators to endorse its rescinding. But the benefit would only be for Ushewonkunze. Independence had been expected to bring goodness to the black majority, not just one clown.
There was nothing good about reversing that quota system. Beneficiaries had been the marginalized blacks, more than the white commercial farmers. The legislators celebrated the taking away of the existent privilege for black people. Nevertheless, they had failed to use good laws from the previous administration.
Stupidity was in partisan considerations. There was no objectivity in the new government when removing progressive laws. Instead, they adopted laws like the Law and Order Maintenance Act that had been used by Smith’s government to suppress them. White commercial farmers had a wonderful friend in Ushewonkunze.
Had there been any need to oppose the black majority rule, by those whites, after all? Meanwhile, black legislators were congratulating themselves for voting out such a progressive bill in parliament. The poor blacks who had voted for ZANU PF were clearly shortchanged.
Their dorsal submission served them to merely enjoy the propaganda jingles on the radio. Most of them had no time to read the Hansard, let alone know about its existence. Anyone can blame illiteracy, but such stupidity includes the considered highly erudite professors in our nation.
In fact, there is no truth in that people from rural areas are illiterate. The majority of them can read and write and are capable of thinking logically. But the whipping system throws them into total confusion. Hence, they now have ED sitting as their president, but professing to never have voted for him!
The only way to cure this is by giving power to legislators, using the provision for electing independent legislators. That is the only window for the citizens to take control. This is what makes the Citizens Convergence for Change highly sellable. It grants responsibility to citizens.
Wrong things can be corrected by allowing independent legislators to represent their constituencies. To facilitate a sane government, Citizens have to choose their own legislators, without being whipped, partisanly. The citizens would have chosen their legislators without party consideration. Those they choose would be well-known to the community, being of high integrity.
The legislator would be answerable to them, not to the party they belong to, necessarily. The Citizens Convergence for Change idea is the best. Even political violence would be a thing of the past. A typical example is that of Temba Muliswa, seen as doing well for his constituency, as an independent MP.
He is not answerable to anyone, but to his constituency. In other words, one cannot express himself, independently, as long as in parliament under a party ticket. The reverse example is that of Killer Zivhu, recalled from Parliament, for merely stating his rational opinion.
As a republican country, Zimbabwe should never be treated as a monarch. The nation becomes highly civilized, as long as citizens are allowed to think independently. This can be facilitated by a properly coordinated Citizens Convergence for Change. If this portrays the thrust by the besieged MDCA party, I say BRAVO, to them. This could spell the end of ZANU PF shenanigans.
Ordinary ZANU PF cadres, having been abused, over the years, can never be abused again. Partisan consideration can only be used for presidential elections. Even the devolution becomes easy to implement, through this Citizens Convergence idea.
Just imagine, if this idea had been implemented in 1980? Ian Smith’s best innovations could have been taken advantage of. That government had managed to withstand the United Nations sanctions, against it, to maintain itself as a highly developed state.
Those innovation experts were Zimbabweans who simply needed recognition, by a new government. Separating between racism and good ideas is what was needed. Only an insane person fails to see the difference. Dwelling on ecstasy for independence, without thinking ahead, was the stupidest idea.
While the skin colour makes whites look powerful, that is an illusion. Blacks and whites are the same. There is nothing wrong with sharing space between whites and blacks. Instead of migrating to urban areas, the rural folks ought to have sought to improve conditions in rural areas.
Instead of relocating to low-density areas, blacks ought to have sought to improve living conditions in high-density areas. Nothing would have stopped some whites from relocating to high-density areas, or rural areas. Yet it was as if taboo for whites to mingle with blacks in high-density areas.
It seems independence legalized the suppression of black people. The influx of blacks stampeding to relocate to low-density areas, made one shudder, imagining how the whites viewed blacks? Many people unknowingly assumed that this was necessary for black emancipation. However, this was a sign of a lack of freedom.
By definition, independence includes the ability to control the environment, rather than the environment controlling you. If uncomfortable to live anywhere, one would be in bondage. A free person is able to experience anything, rather than feeling uncomfortable sharing space with other people.
He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day, he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.” Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:16-21 NIV).
Freedom is desirable by normal humans, as implying self-determinism. For instance, if one is a Christian, but uncomfortable in his beliefs, that person would still be under bondage. Freedom does not mean being under some authority.
Freedom requires applying what goes according to own determinism, concerning what is right or wrong. God communicates through the Spirit. If unable to defend whatever one believes, that person is in bondage. Paul advised Thessalonians on how to handle this principle.
“Do not quench the Spirit. Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all; hold on to what is good, reject every kind of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:19-23 NIV).
The common mistake is to assume truth, on the basis of what is received from the pastor, for instance. Truth comes from the individual, without anyone having to evaluate on his behalf, necessarily. What is true to one should be true, according to him.
“But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behaviour in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.” (1 Peter 3:15-16 NIV).
There is no need to refer to someone, on matters of truth. Independence causes unity, rather than the furtherance of division, such as between whites and blacks. In other words, while there was an influx of blacks relocating to low-density areas, there ought to have been whites relocating to black suburbs, as well. This would have described a pure nonracial society that the freedom fighters had fought for.
There is no independence without responsibility. The Citizens Convergence for Change idea may bring this to the fore. Local authorities ought to belong to the people, rather than the central government. When looked at, carefully, the Citizens Convergence for Change idea agrees with Christ’s concept.
A Good Samaritan was viewed as a brother to the Jew, just as a Jew was a brother to the Samaritan. A ZANU PF member should be viewed as a brother to an MDCA member, just as an MDCA member is a brother to a ZANU PF member. The principle is what unites people, rather than partisan considerations.
This is just as good sermons can come from any of the polarized denominations in Christianity. The consideration of goodness should not be evaluated on the basis of denominational representation. For Christians, only Jesus remains the focus, just as the constitution directs everyone’s allegiance to the ethos of our nation.
If required to change the constitution, this idea could be the only progressive amendment since independence. May those in the diaspora come back home, and participate in the implementation of Citizens Convergence for Change. The year 2022 could be exciting, rebuilding our ravaged nation, through the Citizens Convergence for Change.
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
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
