Boris Johnson's Blatant Neo-Colonialism and Neo-Imperialism

Recently British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, joked that British businessmen, not Libyans, would build cities to rival Dubai were it not for dead bodies littering Libyan streets.

The joke was in very bad taste. Let us not forget the leading role the British played in putting Libya in the problems it faces today..

On 19 March 2011 the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution authorizing a no fly-zone over Libya. Ostensibly as part of that enforcement British forces, with participation of their American counterparts, fired one hundred and ten Tomahawk missiles at Libya.

I am not a military expert but I have never understood Tomahawks to be capable of attacking airborne targets.

I will leave it to the experts to explain what ground attack weapons have got to do with enforcing a no-fly zone. At no point had Libya ignored the no-fly zone or fired at coalition aircraft at the time the ground attack began?

What I want to make very clear is that it was British who began the process that ultimately left Libya without effective government, leading to streets littered with dead bodies that Boris is joking about today..

Please, understand that pointing out the above is not in any way amount to praising Gadhafi.

The African Union had made proposals for a negotiated transition which would have prevented the collapse of Libya. The President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, literally had to beg the powerful Western forces to take those proposals to Gadhafi which, according to him, the later accepted.

The proposals included a ceasefire which would have saved lives and prevented bodies littering streets.

After his demise, Gadhafi's body was carted into the desert where not even one member of his family could let a tear drop on his grave let alone lay a flower. I do not know if those who did it are superstitious. If they are, I am sure they performed rituals to make sure that even his ghost could not find its way home.

Gadhafi's influence in Libya ended with his death. Most of the fighting that littered streets with bodies, took place afterwards is among the militias that were armed and sponsored by Western countries. This means that even Gadhafi's ghost cannot be blamed for the bodies that Boris is joking about.

Now that we understand the role Britain played in putting Libya in the chaotic predicament it faces today, I can not imagine anything more callous than the British foreign secretary bandying about jokes about dead Libyans.

No matter what our leadership situation in the developing world, imagined or real, we do not want it to be compounded by callous and heartless rich people who have nothing better to do with their money and weapons other than make us suffer so that they can find subjects to joke about.

Clearly Boris sees countries whose people do not prioritize making weapons as nothing more than a playgrounds of death. His joke is an exemplification of the racist indifference that his  kind regard us with. A subconscious racism that attaches little value, if any, to human beings who live in poor parts of the world.

His kind probably feel more pity for a dog that gets run over in the street, than for the Yemeni children decapitated, blinded, disfigured and maimed by the weapons his country makes and profits from. He personally takes part in the decision making that sees weapons sold and used in places like Yemen and Libya where they result in the body-littered streets that he now jokes about. It is sad, but the truth.

The toady man’s joke suggests he is more than tone-deaf, maybe brain-deaf. I must say I am strongly tempted to replace the F in deaf with a D.

The dismissive way in which Theresa May finger-waves away the episode as just a minor bad choice of words, shows that she either does not have a clue or does not care. The prime minister of Britain does not think jokes about people dying in a chaotic mess her country helped create are worth her serious attention.

To twist the knife in Libya’s back, Borizozo claims his critics have "no knowledge or understanding of Libya". I wonder whether he has more knowledge than the Libyans, from both sides of the current divide, who also complained? How could he say Libyans have no knowledge or understanding of their own country and its suffering?

My personal judgment is that it is him who has no knowledge or understanding, not just of Libya, but of the disastrous role his country played in putting Libya where it is today.

Maybe Boris should borrow a page from Barack Obama's book.  The later at least had the decency to admit that his handling of Libya was the worst mistake of his presidency.

It is unfortunate, but the fault of Boris, that I now have to juxtapose that with the indecency of him joking about Libyan streets being littered with dead bodies.

By they way if you think the rest of his speech was sensible let think of its colonialist connotations. He talked about British business people building and, by my understanding, owning prime real estate on the Libyan coast.

Can Libyan people not build and own those hotels themselves? After all they have money from their own oil. It seems in Boris’ mind only the British can own and develop that land properly in Libya.

We have to wonder, did Britain lead the way in attacking Libya so that British business people could end up owning prime properties on the Libyan?

Donald Trump is Out of His Depth

History is full of some ridiculous moments that are not crowed about today because in hindsight they look, and in fact are, so stupid.

One such moment is the events surrounding the Galveston Giant, John 'Jack' Johnson becoming the first African world heavyweight boxing champion a day after Christmas in 1908.

At the turn of the century boxing like many other sports was segregated and the world heavy weight championship was de facto reserved for white boxers. When a good black boxer Jack Johnson came onto the scene the then world heavyweight champion James Jeffries refused to fight him. Jeffries retired without fighting Johnson.

Eventually a Canadian, Tommy Burns, became world heavyweight champion and agreed to fight Johnson, for a healthy purse of course. Johnson defeated Burns and became the first black world heavyweight boxing Champion.

This triggered resentment and animosity among whites and it was called for James Jeffries, then regarded the best boxer of all time, to come out of retirement and defeat Johnson. He was dubbed "The Great White Hope".

Jeffries agreed to the fight and in his own words, "I am going into this fight for the sole purpose of proving that a white man is better than a negro."

Thus on July 4, 1910, James Jeffries faced Jack Johnson "for the sole purpose of proving that a white man is better than a negro." By the 4th round it was clear Jeffries was not going to win. He spend much of the rest of the fight running and ducking away from Johnson.

By the 13th round it was clear Jeffries wouldn't last the distance. In the fifteenth round Jeffries was knocked down, he got up he and was immediately knocked OUT OF the ring. Punch drunk, he clawed and staggered his way back  into the ring and was immediately knocked down for the third time.

The referee was not stopping the fight so James Jeffries' manager rushed into the ring and got between the two boxers. He was not gonna let his man die trying to prove that "a white man is better than a negro".

That was in boxing over a century ago. Long before the time of Muhammad Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard, Mike Tyson and the Klitschko demolition pair.

The same ridiculous scene seems to be playing itself out, this time in American politics. Whenever Donald Trump is faced with tough questions he brings up Obama's presidency in negative light. When quizzed by a reporter over recent deaths of American soldiers in Niger, without being prompted Trump started casting himself in better light than Obama.

Despite the media reacting in a way that made it clear they were not buying that line of defence, a day later Trump brought up Obama in negative light again. Again the reporter had not asked about Obama.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that Trump probably imagines himself the Great White Hope of politics. A man on a mission to prove that a white male president is better than a black president.

His obsession with Obamacare, his tinkering with the Iran deal against the advise of all America's allies except Israel, suggest that he is on a mission to prove that whatever Obama did, it was wrong. Donald Trump, a white man, can do better no matter what the circumstances.

On the contrary, I think he has spectacularly managed to prove that the man called Donald Trump is small minded. I think he is definitely unfit to be president of any country not just America. Not only is he unfit but he is dangerously irrational.

I do not consider Obama to be the best American president ever, but he is way way better than Donald Trump. American congress has to step into the ring and stop Trump from dying trying to prove he is better than Obama,

The Blame Mandela Game: Honest Truth

Recently President Robert Mugabe blamed Mandela for "leaving whites with too much power" in South Africa. He is not the first to sing that refrain. Few may understand his thinking, but an important clue is that his criticism started during the course of the incident involving his wife bashing a young South African lady.

I will explain that later but first let me make it clear that Mandela is not to blame for South Africa's current situation.

If a man leads you across a difficult desert up to the edge of a sea, you should praise him for navigating the desert and not blame him for leaving you without boats.

Those who want total economic emancipation should not blame Mandela for bringing an end to statutory apartheid but not leaving the boats to cross the sea of total economic emancipation. Blaming him for that is like blaming your father-in-law for not delivering your wife already pregnant. He has done his bringing her up. What job do you expect of yourself if you want her already pregnant?

An end to the idiotic but nonetheless statutory apartheid was a necessary first step. That crossing of that desert may not have been sufficient to complete the journey, but it is up to the current leadership to build the boats to go the rest of the way.

Some like in my country Zimbabwe have even set off back in the direction of the desert. Despite all the bravado about liberation, the truth is that the moment you dis-empower your people economically you leave them vulnerable to recolonization. Like a fish to bait, a hungry man will swallow anything that looks like food.

People should also remember that CODESA was not a one man show. Mandela was not sitting alone in front of a platoon of Afrikaners nodding like a jumping jack saying "Yes Baas! Yes Baas!" to everything they said..

A comprehensive delegation on the ANC side attended the negotiations and they consulted, and were closely advised, by the Frontline States. So any Frontline State leader who says Mandela made the wrong concessions should bear in mind that it was probably because they gave him the wrong advice.

The liberation of South Africa was a collective effort by the region and Africa. Therefore it is wrong to blame one man for what is not perfect while wanting to take credit for what is right. The success was collective and any shortcomings are also collective, not just on the South African people but on the Frontline States leaders who made their input as well.

Many of them wanted the wars and destabilization efforts sponsored by the apartheid idiots in their countries to end. The ANC as a collective, who had been hosted by various Frontline states, would have understood the difficulties in the states hosting them particularly Angola and Mozambique and would not have wanted to prolong those situations.

As for President Mugabe, his irritation with "too much white power" probably stemmed from Afriforum's involvement in his wife's saga. In Zimbabwe hordes of supposed veterans from the liberation war would have invaded the farms Afriforum members in retaliation.

He probably perceives it a weakness of the ANC's position, not a strength of South African law, that the same cannot happen in South Africa.

Kenya Supreme Court Made a Wrong Call

I have been following the Kenya elections saga, particularly after the elections were nullified by the Kenyan Supreme Court.

While everyone has been going hoarse singing praises to the court I beg to strongly differ.

From the look of it the court nullified the elections for no reason other than that the opposition was not happy.

The court found that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission had “committed irregularities and illegalities in the transmission of results” and "other issues" which it did not bother to specify.

It looks like no one including the opposition has any idea what these illegalities, irregularities and other issues were. In other words there are no solid facts behind the judgement.

If the same standard were to be applied to the chad debacle in the United States election where George 'Dubya' Bush faced off with Al Gore in 2000, that election would have been rerun umpteen times.

In that election there were clearly identified issues with voting machines which made chads instead of punching holes in the voting paper. Automatic counting machines then discarded these votes is spoilt ballots.

After the technical problem had been clearly identified, the US authorities fell back to manually counting the votes. Even then there were issue as some of the impressions and chads made by the voting machines left the voter's intentions debatable. Still that did not nullify the election.

No such clearly defined problem with the voting process has been identified in the Kenyan election. Instead it seems the issue has been with the transmission of results.

Mwari wangu why not just order a simple recount! Or simply ask voting stations to phone in their results.

Why put the country through the risk of violence, not to mention wasting billions? After all independent international and local observers found no problem with the integrity of the election. Their independent tallies largely matched the official result.

What is it the Kenyan Supreme Court saw that hundreds of observers did not see?

The answer is probably nothing apart from the judge's political leanings. Being African I know how these things work in Africa. I need a little bit more information before I pass a final judgement, excuse the pun. I want to know the judge's village of origin and how far it is from Odinga's.

Secondly the margin of Uhuru's victory was not by any means a close call. There is a clear nine percent gap between him and the unhappy candidate. Is there any likelihood that those irregularities and illegalities, that the judge did not bother to specify, could have wiped out that margin? I don't think there is such a likelihood.

To those who are busy singing praises, I would like to say a political judgement is bad no matter who it goes for. If you put the contents of a Kibera latrine a bottle labelled 'Honey' it does not turn them into honey.

The fact that this judgement went for the opposition does not change that there is no solid legal facts to nullify the election. There is no proof of the actual voting process being significantly compromised. Nobody has given details of exactly what was done wrong. Therefore it is a bad judgement irrespective of who it went for.

If we are to nullify the elections on the basis of "transmission" that means all elections before the advent of computers and telecommunications were invalid.

My personal opinion is that the Kenyan supreme court made a terribly wrong call. We can go about nullifying elections simply because someone is not happy they have been defeated.

In any election there is always someone who is not happy with the result. Hillary Clinton is still grumbling about the US election of last year as we speak.

The Empress Is Naked

Grace Mugabe had got used to tossing around Zimbabwe government officials despite her not being part of government. A recent example example is when she picked on the permanent secretary for the ministry of information at a rally.

"Iwe George simuka!" (Wena George yima! Hey George stand up!). She then gave him a gale force verbal dry cleaning as he forlornly stood there. Ending it with "Chigara pasi!" (Now go sit down!). Even teachers of kindergarten classes show more respect than that for their pupils.

At past rallies and Zanu-PF Politiburo meetings she has claimed that she has a right to sit next to the president. It is clear in her mind the fact that she sleeps with Robert Mugabe gives her more authority than his official deputies.

She has unashamedly used that self-granted authority to wreak havoc in Zanu-PF and the Zimbabwe government. She effectively haunted one of Mugabe's deputies, Joice Mujuru, out of the party and government, throwing a stream of invective and insults after her.

Zimbabwe officials mostly deferred to her out of respect for her husband. Most of their complaints have been under the table, out of the public eye. However Grace herself brought to light some of what was being said under the table when she thundered at a rally, "Handizi hure raMugabe." (I am not Mugabe's prostitute.)

Everyone knows Mugabe has a hectic travel schedule. I know quite a number of Zimbabweans have been saying that is because of the 'young wife syndrome'. However as age has caught up with him he has looked increasingly frail. He has been unable to keep up the hectic schedule, so Grace has increasingly taken to travelling on her own.

Apparently it has never dawned to her that when she travels on her own she doesn't enjoy the protection of her husband's status. Nor does she carry any status incumbent with being a government official because she is not one.

Previously she was involved in a similar incident when she launched herself catlike, claws, fangs and all, at a reporter in Hong Kong. On that occasion she was in the company in the company of her husband, whose diplomatic immunity was extendable to his accompanying family members.

In South African instance the storm caught her without her umbrella. She was alone on a private visit without her husband.

She needs someone brave enough to tell her 'Empress, you are naked." The authority she granted herself in the Zimbabwe government is like bond notes. It cannot be exported to foreign governments.

I am sure there is a lot of quiet glee in Zimbabwe government circles, what we call in ChiKaranga (Shona) 'laughter that doesn't escape the ribs'. Many are quietly reciting the ChiKaranga saying "Zvaiwana ngwarati kudya ivete" (Finally the sable has been caught eating while lying down).

Her only possible saving grace is that the ANC is strong allies with Zanu-PF and they run the South African government. They might decide to do a Bashir on her. She can be Guptaed out of the country through an airforce base or granted immunity.

However it does not help her case that she is not being contrite and apologetic. Instead those acting for her have variously planted rumours that the victim attacked her. Or that she was a drug supplier for the errant Mugabe children.

In the first case her bodyguards should be fired immediately. How can they allow the First Lady to fight tooth and nail for thirty minutes to defend herself against a slight twenty-year old female while they watch.

In either case she should have shown trust in the South African authorities by reporting the transgressions against her. My advice to them is to stop the evasive nonsense. They should focus on getting a settlement.

Never mind what AfriForum says. Settlements are routinely made in some criminal cases. Bill Clinton settled with Paula Jones over more serious allegations than assault. This is a relatively minor case and the only reason to rule out settlement is to maximize the humiliation of Grace Mugabe.

Obviously that is an outcome the they are interested in. However despite their high horse, their motives seem less than noble. Some people are already crying racism over their involvement in the case.

Nonetheless there is no denying that the empress has just discovered that she is naked. There is no authority in being the wife of a president or even a queen. Prince Philip of Britain regularly gets taken to the cleaners for mere slips of the tongue.

Hellen Zille's Lies

So Helen Zille has been suspended over claims that colonialism brought motorcars, aeroplanes, tarred roads among other technology to Africa. The DA got it right.

Hellen Zille's narrative is wrong on several fronts. It paints all whites with the colonialist brush. Many were simply migrants running away from poverty and disease (such as The Black Death) in Europe.

She claims colonialists brought technology which did not even exist when colonialism happened. If colonialists are to be credited with bringing motor cars and aeroplanes to South Africa then the ANC should be credited with bringing smartphones. It is a fact we all started using smartphones during ANC rule.

Her tweets also reveal that she holds a deeply racist belief that Africans could not have adopted technology had they not been colonized. To me that is as good as telling me that I cannot be a competent engineer today because I am African. If you believe my forefathers were too stupid to learn technology why should you believe that, I a person with their genes, am competent enough to learn to say design a power system or build a motor car?

Below I highlight just three of the lies that Helen Zille seems to treat as gospel truth.

Lie number 1. Colonialism brought whites to Africa.

Despite people's perception Jan Van Reibeck did not come as colonialist. He was simply a migrant riding on a boat, seeking better life and wealth. Just like the thousands trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea today.

Thousands of other Europeans who came to this continent over three entire centuries, between Vasco da Gamas journey to India in the 15th century and the late 19th century, also did not come as colonialists. They were simply migrants seeking wealth.

Things turned nasty when vampires like Cecil John Rhodes, Lothar von Trothar and Leopold II of Belgium started grabbing everything of value and murdering Africans en masse.

Colonialism is not the only means of migration. When did China colonise the USA for there to be so many Chinatowns there.

Besides Robert Moffat in the late 19th century there were many Europeans living 'native'. These were wiped from history books because mentioning them would have proved that segregationist policies and laws were nonsense.

The immorality laws that were passed in Rhodesia and South Africa were aimed at stopping white men from 'going native'. Those laws did not stop white men from breeding an entire Coloured race with black women.

Lie Number 2: Colonialism brought technology to Africa

If I may ask, what model car was Cecil John Rhodes driving? What was his private aeroplane like? There is no answer because those things did not exist at all during his time. When he organised his band of bandits he called the pioneer column, to go and colonise my country, it was not transported by a fleet of superlink trucks, but ox-drawn wagons, most of the oxen stolen from the natives some bought.

Therefore Cecil Rhodes and his fellow colonialists could not have brought cars, airports and tarred roads to Africa because those things did not exist in the whole world.

Yes indeed technology was improved worldwide during the time Africa was colonized. However, through denial of rights to Africans, colonialism actually held Africa back from adopting the emerging technology together with the rest of the world. Africa was not short of people with intellectual capacity. Rather most of them were forced to abandon their chosen professions and fight the system that oppressed them. Nelson Mandela first chose to be a lawyer but he ended up holding a gun fighting for his freedom, and ultimately a prisoner.

Lie Number 3: Africans do not have the capacity to adopt technology

Helen Zille clearly implies that if there was no colonialism, Africans could not have adopted new technology. None of the things she mentions was invented in Russia. Can she tell us, when was Russia colonized for it to become a manufacturer of jets, cars and even nuclear bombs? We could ask the same question of China and Japan.

Adoption of technology was happening in Africa without colonialism. Some clans on the central plateau had acquired gunsmithing and gun powder making skills from the Portuguese. The term gokoro re unga is Shona for the place for making gunpowder. Some families including my great-grandfather owned such locally made muskets.

Africans definitely had mining and metalworking skills as well. We did not import spears from Europe did we. All that mining and metalworking skill, however rudimentary it was, was eradicated not enhanced by colonialism. That not one post-colonial African can identify iron ore and make spears, is an example of how colonialism removed African knowhow and replaced it with nothing.

Yes we do have skilled Africans today, most of us were only allowed to acquire those skills after colonialism ended.

In short Helen Zille's views on colonialism are not only based on false assumptions, but reveal a deeply racist psyche.

Helen Zille Thinks Blacks are Stupid and Can't Run a Country

Helen Zille claims the benefits of colonialism where

Independent judiciary - Does she even know that much of democratic norms evolved after colonialism. For example women were not even allowed to vote. Only in 1918 did Britain allow women who were over 30 and married to vote, meaning my friend Unathi would not have had the right to vote.

Secondly the monarchical system that prevailed in the UK everything depended on the monarch. Most enterprises and companies were enable by royal charter not any fair justice system. Zimbabwe my country was colonized by a private company (British South Africa Company) which had been given a royal charter by Mrs Victoria Wettin, British ruler at the time.

Transport infrastructure, piped water - I would love for Helen Zille to tell us what model car Cecil Rhodes was driving and what his private aeroplane was. She cannot. There were no cars therefore no tarred roads in the whole world. There were no aeroplanes or airports. In short colonialists could not have brought what they did not have at all, to Africa. They did not bring roads, they did not bring airports, they did not bring water engines, they did not bring tractors to farm the land.

Colonialists came here because they were running away from disease (black death, plague, etc) poverty and hunger in Europe. We were rich they were poor. They only became rich and us poor after they took our land, minerals, and in some cases livestock.

Much of the technology we take for granted today, evolved DURING colonialism. It did not exist in Europe before colonialism, therefore colonialists could not have brought it.

The real truth is that because of racist restrictions to the self-determination of Africans, and wholesale theft of their resources, land and minerals, colonialism was a jackboot on the neck that prevented Africa from keeping pace. It was not an enabler of any sort.

How could Africans keep pace when their land was taken and they could not even build homes where they wanted? Africans as squatters (informal settlers) to this day because of that land theft. How could Africans keep pace when their movement, hence corrdination was restricted?

How could Africans keep pace when their organisations and associations like the ANC were banned. How could Africans keep pace when their inteliintisia like Mandela were thrown in jail. If Mandela and thousands of other Africans did not have to spend their lives fighting just for self determination who knows what they could have achieved.

In her twittirade Helen Zille compares Singapore to South Africa for the past 50 years, supposedly to juckstapose the progress of the former to the lack of thereof of the latter. What befuddles my little mind is how could she do that and fail completely to mention the role apartheid had in those years. Is she simply being dishonest or is she trying to erase apartheid from our memories? Pretend as if it didn't exist.

It is clear Helen Zille lays responsibility for the past 50 years at the feet of the current black leadership of the country. Juxtaposing it with Singapore is just her own round about way of saying blacks are stupid and can't run a country.

Take also her assertion that colonialism 'brought' things that clearly were invented or evolved after it happened. It his her way of saying Africa could not have adopted that technology if there were no white present on the continent. That also boils down to the same racist blacks are stupid thinking.

Helen Zille is evidence that someone can be a racist without knowing it. Maybe they know but just want to pretend to be progressive.

Criminality in South Africa: An Eco-System Fed By South African Officialdom

The President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, is right when he says people are fed with crime. He just does not understand the extend of his own involvement in creating the perception that foreigners are deeply involved with criminal intent in South Africa.

Let us be honest. Criminality in South Africa is not the exclusive preserve of black African migrants of low social status, who are the only victims of xenophobic attacks.

Radovan Krejcir is not a black African. Nor was Mark Thatcher who was convicted of organizing coups from South Africa. The Guptas have not been convicted of anything but the stories swirling murkily around them are not nice.

Secondly where criminality occurs it is often in collusion with South Africans including officials in some cases. Krejcir literally had a hit squad of police officers on his pay. Former police commissioner, Jackie Selebi, served time in jail for receiving bribes from a criminal who was not a black African migrant. That is like the FBI director taking bribes from say Osama bin Laden.

Even in cases where African immigrants are involved in criminality, you will find that somewhere there is the connivance of officialdom. Take for example issue that seems to have triggered the most recent upheaval, brothels full of human-trafficked women. The police know exactly where those brothels are. In the suburb I live, the street that runs right in front of the police station is full of such brothels. They are left undisturbed because the pimps 'eat' together with the officers.

In that same street there is an illegal shebeen within a couple hundred metres of the police station's main door. Other shebeens that spring up further away are quickly shut down. The rumour is the shebeen owner is related to one of the police officers.

One of my relatives was once arrested for public drinking and urination in that street. When I went to pay a fine for him, I personally witnessed about 10 girls being released from the police cells directly into the custody of a man who seemed Nigerian. Apparently the man had 'forgotten' to 'take care' of the police officers which is why 'his' girls had been rounded up the previous night.

A few years back when I was reporting as the condition of my work permit the male home affairs official serving me complained that virtually every female officer he worked with was living with a Nigerian. He said for that reason whenever a law enforcement operation was planned, the criminals would be told in advance and disappear only to come back after the operation.

Last year a journalist did an investigative report on how a police officer involved with a drug dealer was helping him by arresting his rivals.

The real problem that needs to be tackled is corruption and inefficient service.

The people who do not have proper documentation are usually not involved in hard high value criminality. Most of the time they are working without papers.

Often that is because home affairs has not responded to their applications for permits or asylum on time. And uncle of mine with a degree from Europe and working as an Oracle expert for NHS spend two years waiting for a permit. His old permit expired and for the second of those two years he was technically illegal. He eventually got the permit.

The hard criminals often have 'valid' documentation. They have the money to pay hefty bribes to officials, and buy whatever documents they need.

I am not calling the Guptas criminals but they are an example of high value migrants who carefully cultivate connections with senior government officials. I believe I do not need to mention names or the level of government they are connected to.

The Guptas have not been convicted of anything but money laundering to Dubai, attempting to plant functionaries in the country's cabinet, and trying to smuggle suitcases of diamonds out of the country are among the accusations that been publicly made against them.

Very often high value migrants, among them criminals, also afford to pay for 'marriage' to South African women. A former workmate of mine once told me that her cousin was getting paid about R1000 every month for 'marriage' by a Nigerian.

She wanted to know if I could enter into the same arrangement with her.

The bottom line is that for every criminal migrant, there is several South Africans working with them. This does not just apply to migrants and South Africans of low social status. It goes way, way up the social strata. People who make a lot of noise about migrants are often themselves eating from the hands of migrants.

But many are hypocrites like Edward Zuma who once complained about foreigners without batting an eyelid about his father's close friends.

I told you Donald

No sooner had I mentioned that Donald Trump was ignorant to ban people from some countries for fear of terrorism, than the story broke confirming my fears.

Diplomatic officials from a country not on his list, Venezuela, and clearly not meeting his criteria of potential terrorist source, had a racket going selling fake national documents to people some from countries on Donald's list. Iraq and Syria were mentioned.

It is nothing new, that corrupt officials take backhanders. Hollywood has created the impression that it is only the mafia that pays bribes and the police who take them. In the real world it is anyone with cash can pay bribes. Big corporations, intelligence agencies and, yes, terrorists often pay huge bribes.

In many developing countries, officials often openly extort small bribes from ordinary citizens for basic services. Such officials usually consider those approaching them with offers of large amounts of cash as a 'score'. What in Zimbabwean parlance we would call 'kubata mhene'. That roughly means catching a golden goose with your bare hands.

When people pay bribes, they do not announce their ultimate motive to those they are bribing. Nobody is going to approach an embassy or a national registry and announce, "Hey, I am a terrorist. Give me a fake document so that I can go bomb America". They will approach officials with very innocent sounding stories like "My uncle has found me a job in America, I need to go there quickly"

I am just giving these scenarios as an example. In the majority corrupt officials do not care a raindrop's chance in hell what the bribe payer is going to do with the documents. In fact, they may not see the ultimate recipient of the documents, but deal with pushers and middlemen.

The pushers may be runners tasked by the officials to find clients, or maybe cashing in on 'knowing the right people'. These middlemen mostly do not allow their 'clients' to be in contact with the officials they deal with. Knowing 'the right people' is high value intellectual property, so to speak.

Do not imagine that the officials taking bribes are just low ranking officials. It can be anyone up the command chain. In South Africa, Jackie Selebi was convicted of taking bribes when he was national police commissioner (the equivalent of FBI director). The CNN story suggests that people as high as a minister may be getting a cut from the sale of fake Venezuelan documents.

Also in South Africa the minister of defense was accused of smuggling a person illegally into South Africa on an official plane. Not to mention that the man now president has a friend who was convicted of paying bribes to him. Oh, what about the foreign wedding cortege that landed at the country's most secure airforce base.

Mind you when people take bribes, the official policy of they governments counts for nothing. All they want is the money. Sometimes they are socially engineered. Recent media stories mentioned how Nigerians often start affairs with civil officials so that they get close to an inside person.

In most developing countries, officials will take bribes faster than Donald Duck can say 'Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeez' in a cartoon. Excuse the pun. Countries that are economically stressed like Venezuela, are especially susceptible.

Donald Trump's immigration ban was drowning in naivete, even before it was floated.

Dear Donald

Dear Donald

I never thought you would want to become a duck, but it seems you are working very hard to make yourself a sitting one.

Whoever told you that people can be terrorists on the basis of their religion forgot to tell you that Christians have been terrorists since the times of crusaders. We are in a modern enlightened world but your actions and so called convictions are no different from those who burned Joan of Arc at the pyre for being a heretic. I demand that you remove my African brothers and Muslims from your pyre of hate.

The chaos and legal setbacks that immediately succeeded your dictatorial order suggest that you are ignorant of the laws of the country you lead. On a whim, you have thrown people who have diligently followed the laws of your country to the dogs, literally leaving some of them stranded in the air.

I would expect such behaviour from small minded dictators like Kim Jong-un. It seems the two of you share more than hairstyles. You both think your personal word and beliefs constitute the law of the land. Please do not take America back to the dark ages. The world needs an enlightened America not the fascist fiefdom you are trying to make it.

Your behaviour would have seen Benito and Adolf puffing up their chests with pride in you. If anyone can muster a smile inside The Inferno they are probably chuckling now.

Your executive order does not improve security in slightest. Determined terrorists can easily arrange fake passports from numerous countries not on your list. The fact that you can even imagine that such a measure will work suggests that you are clueless about how international travel and national registries work worldwide.

Your pompous ignorance is what is a real danger to American security. You are like a man who is busy showing the village how good he is at dancing to fireworks, by setting his house is on fire - divorced from reality.

Whatever you criteria for selecting countries whose citizens to ban was, it has precious little to do with terrorism. Otherwise you would not have left out a country whose nationals organised the biggest terrorist attack on American soil, the World Trade Centre plane attack. A nation who citizens are said to be among the chief sponsors of the terrorist organisation you claim to be fighting, ISIS.

In case you haven't noticed, your rhetoric is already inspiring terrorism. A terrorist who has professed admiration of you has just killed six people in Canada. Given that you inspire terrorists, perhaps it is time you signed an executive order barring yourself from the USA.

I am glad you are discovering that it takes more than tweety fingers to run a country. Especially one as big and critically important in the world as the United States.

Please stop making America unsafe. It also makes the rest of the world unsafe,

Zimbabwe: There is absolutely nothing to blame SADC for

Those who insist on blaming SADC for Mugabe's continued rule in Zimbabwe are completely wrong. Recently SADC has been negatively contrasted with ECOWAS after the recent events in The Gambia. Some people also cite ECOWAS' role in the Ivory Coast.

These people are comparing snort apples (matobwe) and bananas. ECOWAS had solid grounds to support both Quattara and Barrow. SADC never had similar grounds.

In The Gambia Barrow was declared the winner and the Colonel General Professor Doctor Jammeh (profound apologies for leaving out the rest of the half-page paragraph of his titles) even conceded defeat. ECOWAS had solid grounds to support the official outcome of an election.

In the Ivory Coast, like Zimbabwe, there was a first round of elections in which there was no winner. A second round was held and Quattara won 54%. Gbagbo then CANCELLED the results of seven districts that supported Quattara resulting in himself becoming the winner.

The United Nations and ECOWAS decided to uphold the official results announced by the IEC. They had solid grounds for supporting an official election outcome.

In the case of Zimbabwe there was a first round is which THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL WINNER. A second round was held. Tsvangirai then WITHDREW from the second round GIFTING Mugabe a clear victory. I had actually wanted to say 'the coward Tsvangirai' but I will hold that back.

Tell me what should SADC have done? Force Tsvangirai back into the election?

In any case Mugabe had offered to negotiate with Tsvangirai BEFORE the runoff. The latter rebuffed the offer.

After Mugabe's UNCHALLENGED victory, what SADC then facilitated was a coalition given the opposition's official strong showing. That was a very pragmatic approach and Tsvangirai should thank SADC for helping him get into government after he had officially lost the election, and failed to negotiate for himself despite Mugabe's willingness.

To those who claim rigging let me point out that not once have Zimbabwe elections or outcomes ever been challenged in court. The one time that Tsvangirai did make noises about a court challenge, in2013, he later withdrew it. Himself, cited the lack of rigging evidence for the withdrawal.

There is nothing to blame SADC for.

Pragmatism: Why The Gambia Type Scenario Won't Work in Zimbabwe

I want to be sauntering lackadaisically in the lush green plains of Manyene listening to the side splitting jokes of my elders like mudhara Hahuhunazvi (nickname meaning "you won't lick this beer").

I want to be able to go to Chambara or Nyamhere clinic and get painkillers if I have a headache. I long for the days as I child when I would dread a visit to the clinics because it was guaranteed I would get a 'jekiseni' (antibiotic injection).

Those days are no more. Our country is in a terrible state. Ruled by people who would rather spend millions of US dollars going kusikero (post-natal baby inspection and weighing) in a foreign country than spend a few hundred thousands dollars making sure every clinic is well stoked with medicines.

I want to be building my homestead (kuvaka musha) rather than toiling in a foreign land trying to raise some cash to send my relatives back home. I want the economic gangrene that has infected Zimbabwe to be amputated and thrown onto the rubbish heap of history.

I want my country to stop being the shebeen example (and every sundry drinking place) of bad management. A country that any drunkard so sloshed that they have got only a few brain cells left in working order, if you ask them "Which is the worst managed country in the world?" they will slur out "Zimbabwe" in that half passed-out state.

I want my skills and expertise to benefit my people without risking starving myself. I want a country that simply works.

No matter how desperately I want proper leadership in Zimbabwe, I will not be fooled into thinking that a Gambia scenario will work in my country. The Gambia is a country that is barely 20km across and maybe an odd 150km long. The length of the country would fit in the distance from my home town of Chivhu to Harare. The width of the country would leave out places like Mhondoro Mubayira and Manyene if Simon Mazorodze road were a line running down the centre of the country. Chitungwiza would be a border town.

It is entirely surrounded by Senegal except for a thin sliver of beautiful beaches on the Atlantic. Its army is made up of a mighty 2500 soldiers. It has never fought in any wars. The army's most strenuous experience has been harassing Jammeh's opponents. Relative to Zimbabwe it is a toy army.

Zimbabwe has more than 80'000 militarily trained personnel (army, air force and police) in active service. The armed forced have fought in several engagements in the past few decades, from Mozambique to the DRC. The Gambia's most strenuous engagements have been sending 200 soldiers on UN peace keeping missions.

There is no regional army that can take out Zimbabwe's army in a few hours of marching like was done in the Gambia. You can be assured that any war will be brutal, lengthy and have no guaranteed outcome.

Having foreigners occupy the fiercely proud people of Zimbabwe will also be a problem. You can be guaranteed that triggering violence will lead to lengthy internecine violence like Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

We need to solve the Zimbabwe situation, but let us not imagine that a The Gambia scenario is one of the solutions.

The Rusty Musket

It was the mid-1970s. The second Chimurenga was raging in the then Rhodesian country-side. Fireside talk in the villages was all about guns, anti-airs, bazookas and landmines. I was even nicknamed Chimbambaira (Landmine) because I used to blast apart the newspaper filled plastic bags that we used as footballs in the dusty plains of Manyene.

That morning I was with my grandfather. I was between 8 and ten years. We walked towards our fields, my grandfather occassionally stopping to examine the ground. The expert farmer he was, he could tell which type of weed was gonna be bothersome come the rains.

We reached a heap of grass and maize stalks (mashanga). My grandfather started pushing the stalks and grass aside until he retrieved what to me looked like a rather elongated lump of rust. He extended his hand towards me showing me the lump.

"Ndiro ranga riri gidi rababa vangu iri." he said. (This was my father's gun.) "Vaivhima negidi" (He used it for hunting.)

From his fireside tales I know that my great-grandfather, a man named Chikwiramakomo Punungwe had fought in the Chindunduma war (Chimurenga). The chief of the are where he lived (Mutekedza) was an ally to Mangwende of Murehwa and my great-grandfather was one of the men send to assist.

It is from these fireside stories that I know my great-grandfather was a great hunter who used magidi (muskets) to hunt.

Originally from Rusape Chikwiramakomo had been left without a mother by a raid presumed to be by the Ndebele. The story of how he ended up in Njanja area is getting lost in the mists of time. How the family consensus is that he was looked after by an elder sister named Dziyaidzo who got married in the area.

He became such a good hunter that he was offered wives by several families, including from the royal clan, to supply them with meat. My great-grandmother, VaNjaidza, was from the royal Mutekedza clan, the chiefs in the area.

Back to the 1970s, my grandfather crossed a barbed wire fence. He walked into the Savannah farmland, past dense clusters of acacia trees standing sentinel around ant-hills. He came to a large ant-bear burrow.

My grandfather threw the gun down the slanted hole. He took a stick and pushed it as deep as he could. His fear was that if the Rhodesian security forces searched our homestead and found it then he would be in serious trouble for owning a gun.

Little did I know then that a valuable piece of my history and heritage was disappearing down the hole. Nowadays days I often wish I had written down a lot of the things my grandfather told me about his father.

Now I know that as those little bits and pieces of facts disappear into the mists of time, so does my heritage and identity. As facts about who I am and where I came from disappear, so does my pride, confidence and sense of self-worth.

Treatment of Dave Emberton Disgusting

Recently I came across photos of a well known former ZBC news anchor, Dave Amberton. He was handcuffed forlornly starring at the camera looking lost. Apparently he was being accused of stealing bacon from a Spar shop.

My puzzlement turned to disgust and anger when I found that he had been arrested while he suffers from dementia.

Having had relatives who suffered from the disease I know it's toll. One grand uncle was found walking 20 km from home. He was saying he was just going to open the kraal for the cows. Yet the kraal was only a couple hundred metres from his house.

People suffering from dementia can easily loose their sense of location, time and sometimes even forget who they are. No competent court would ever convict Dave. He should never have been handcuffed, let alone paraded in front of cameras as a criminal.

What is even more disgusting is that some people celebrated his plight because he is white. That is simply racist.

We may have extremely bitter memories from the time of colonialism but that is not an excuse to abuse a humble soul like Dave. Dave served Zimbabwe faithfully for a long time. He most likely would have faced abuse and ridicule from those whites who are hardcore racists for continuing to serve in a black run ZBC. Racism is ignorance.

We cannot repay him with ridicule over a disease that comes from old age. No ndaramba. I disagree with the treatment that Dave was given. It is just crass ignorance to arrest a person suffering from dementia.

I therefore would like to ask minister of information Christopher Mushowe to please pay Dave a visit and find out if he is okay. Can he please give him our regards and let him know that we are so grateful from the service he did for our country.

As for the Spar shop that is accusing him of stealing bacon, can they please contact me on punungwe@gmail.com. I will pay for that bacon, but that will be the last thing I will ever buy from that Spar.

Why do eggs explode when microwaved?

Why do eggs explode when microwaved but not when boiled?

There are two fields of science involved thermodynamics (heat transfer) and electromagnetics (radio waves).

Let's deal with the thermodynamics first. Heat transfer happens in three ways by conduction, convection and radiation.

Conduction happens when heat is transferred from one part of a substance to another because of a temperature gradient.

Radiation happens when electromagnetic waves excite molecules inside a substance, causing the temperature to rise.

Convection happens when hot fluid, gas or liquid, moves from one area to another taking heat with it. Convection may be natural, such as hot air rising or forced such as an airconditioner blowing air into a space.

Conduction happens in a solid when there is a temperature gradient between two points. i.e. the heat energy is gradually transferred from the hot point to the cooler point. If there is no outside source of energy the hotter surface gets cooler and the cooler surface gets hotter until they are at equal temperature.

If you apply a constant temperature to the hot surface (through an external heat source) the cooler surface gets hotter until it almost reaches the temperature of the hot surface. It will not exceed that temperature.

When you are boiling an egg, you are heating it by conduction. First you are applying heat to the water. They water then boils at a constant boiling temperature. That temperature is applied to the outside of the egg. The heat of the water is then conducted into the egg cooking it. The temperature inside the egg will never exceed the boiling point of water. You won't get steam inside the egg. It won't explode.

Remember when boiling you are transferring heat to the egg by conduction by maintaining its outside surface at the boiling temperature of water.

When you are microwaving an egg, you are transferring heat directly inside it by RADIATION. The microwaves are heating the water molecules directly inside the egg. Therefore it is possible to heat the molecules to a temperature ABOVE the boiling point of water. Remember the boiling point of water is dependent on pressure (it is 100°C at sea level atmospheric pressure).

Let us also look at the pressure cooker. The pressure cooker cooks food faster by trapping steam inside a confined space thus raising the pressure inside. That raises the boiling temperature of the water inside that confined space. If your pressure cooker does not have very strong walls, it will explode or crack because inside it there is more pressure than the atmosphere outside.

When you are microwaving an egg, you are heating it by radiation from inside. The eggshell acts as a pressure cooker but a rather flimsy one. It will hold some steam inside making the temperature inside rise slightly above the boiling temperature of water. Once the pressure rises high enough it will crack the eggshell. When it cracks because the water inside is slightly above the boiling point of water at atmospheric pressure, it will instantly evaporate into steam. That steam explodes the egg.

Also keep in mind that the egg-white is firmer and holds less water than the york when boiled. So the temperature may rise higher in the york before the egg-white builds enough pressure to crack the shell and itself.

My Heritage

People change their minds about their beliefs all the time. Some convert from Islam, Hinduism and so on to become non-religious. In Zimbabwe is not considered good unless they profess some allegiance to Christianity. Never member that most of those 'Christians' still primarily live according to traditions and perform traditional rituals regularly.

I am atheist.

By the way atheism is lack of belief in anything supernatural, be it gods, a god or spirits. Those who believe in something supernatural usually believe everything supernatural with their publicly displayed belief based on what makes them look good to society.

Privately they may follow the belief they think is more powerful or yields better material results. That is why you find priests and preachers visiting n'angas at night!!

Being atheist does not mean you are against religion of belief systems. All it means is that you just don't believe all those things yourself. To me that boils down to not wasting my time and other resources on any of them.

Given that Christianity is a missionary (preaching based) religion, of course lots of people convert to it. Otherwise preachers would not be doing a good job.

Most of the converts are from other belief systems. Most people who go to church every Sabbath or Sunday, perform the rituals of multiple religions regularly. Most of those attacking me for being atheist included!

Some even perform rituals of their own invention. I am talking about people like Robert Gumbura who managed to convince tens of women that having orgies was part of Christianity! And David Koresh who did the same thing in America.

Very few families raise children to be atheists so there a few people who convert from atheism to a religion, but it does happen. However all this does not change that religion, and the various books that come with it, have a history. If you remove the spiritual aspect, that history gives you the physical activities of people of the time.

In short that history gives people living this very day, a heritage. Based on that heritage people can make claims to a whole lot of things including land. As we speak today, a country exists solely on the basis of people making a claim to their heritage, Israel. Israelis are claiming territory on the basis of the activities of their ancestors like Abraham, Moses, Jacob, David, Solomon, Joseph among others.

Let us ask ourselves, can all the bible waving pastors like Makandiwa and  Magaya go and claim even a single square metre of land in the Middle East based on the activities of Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon? No they can't. I there dare claim Israel as theirs because they follow the bible they will be kicked out like dogs by Netanyau and his security. If they dispute what I am saying they can go try it today.

Where can they claim their own space and land? Is it not here in Zimbabwe. Now if I may ask how did they get be present in this part of the world. Is it not because Nehoreka, just like Moses moved with his people. Is it not because Chaminuka, Muguni, Tovera among others moved with their people.

Is it not because Munhumutapa Gatsi Rusere with the help of a warrior general called Nengomasha fought for this territory. The very same way Israelis fought Philistines and others to have the land they claim as theirs today.

Now if I may ask, if you are to claim your heritage which history helps and identifies you, a history of a warriors called Samson, Goliath and David. Rather is it not the history of general Nengomasha, Nehoreka, Tovera and the Munhumutapas. Now if you are being told to call them demons, and you agree, how are you going to claim your living space and land? Others claim that god gave their ancestors promised land. What do you claim god gave you, if your very first act of belief is to deny your own heritage, identity and history.

My pride in my chiKaranga heritage has got nothing to do with spirituality. It has got everything to do with my identity and therefore the claim to the living space that my ancestors created for me. If I am to call myself 'mwana wevhu' I have to know how I came to be entitled to that 'ivhu'. I have to know how vaBarwe of the Makombe clan fought fiercely against the Portuguese to defend this territory for me.

Those who ridicule and insult my heritage, calling it insulting names like ungodly, savage, backward, primitive are doing so for the purpose of claiming my living space for themselves. If I give up my heritage I am eventually going to find myself called a squatter in my own land. I will be called a problem on my soil.

If I go to the land of those claiming mine, they call me an illegal immigrant and a problem. Now if I am a problem everywhere, where do I belong. If I say I belong here in Zimbabwe, what basis do I have for that if not my history and heritage.

It is for this reason that I, mwana wemu Barwe, Humba, Makombe, Nyanguru, Nyakupfuya, Chirimanemuromo, will never ever agree with anyone that my heritage is backward, demonic or whatever other insult they wish to throw.

My heritage, including the activities of my ancestors whatever their beliefs where, is the ultimate source of my identity and pride.

The Import Ban is a Scam

It looks like Zimbabwe is trying to blackmail South Africa into giving it credit lines.

Never mind that, Zimbabwe has got far much more to loose from a trade war with South Africa.

Zimbabweans have little buying power and as such it is not as important a market for South Africa as the Zimbabwean government would like to imagine.

Yes Musina has grown from Zimbabweans buying there but it is still a very small town by South African standards. Louis Trichardt is actually bigger.

The fact that such a small town can serve as the buying centre for almost the entire country of Zimbabwe is testimony of just how much the Zimbabwean economy has shrunk. An entire country should need a very large city to serve it not a small town.

Zimbabwe should not overestimate its hand. South African business can afford to ignore Zimbabwe and concentrate on the much richer mining markets north of Zimbabwe.

The South African businesses making a lot of noise are only the small shops in Musina, not the real big players.

Anyway given the way the import ban harps on about dairy products like yogurt, powdered milk and cheese, that is a very strong indication that the ban may actually be a ruse to try and make Zimbabwe a captive market for a few politically connected companies.

Most of the politicians will not be affected by the import ban as they either just give themselves the licences, or smuggle in the goods.

It is my considered view that the import ban is intended to eliminate competition for the companies of the political connected.

After all politicians using regulatory power to interfere with markets and line their own pockets is not new to Zimbabwe.

The legendary trillion percent inflation was caused by the government printing cash. Politicians had first access to that cash. At one time a woman, who one politician described is his 'casual intimate girlfriend' was found with her car boot full of crisp new notes that had not yet been officially released.

To benefit from printing cash the politicians running Zimbabwe imposed an artificial official exchange rate which they used for government transactions. Foreign currency was strictly allocated and politicians had first access.

Here is how it worked, if the official rate was say US$1 to ZW$30 and the black-market rate was US$1 to ZW$3000. A politically connected person could be easily allocated foreign currency.

Let's work with an amount of US$100. At the government exchange that would be ZW$30000. On the black market you could be bought for just US$10. Thus someone could get US$100 from the reserve bank, take just US$10 of that go to the black market, buy ZW$30000 go and pay it to the reserve bank as the official equivalent of US$100. They would pocket the US$90.

This practice was called 'burning' money and is primarily what caused hyperinflation in Zimbabwe. Politicians used their regulatory authority to force an exchange that they knew was not practical. They then used the disparity between the official exchange rate and the black market rate to skim money out of government coffers.

I think the same thing is happening with the import ban. Politicians are trying to use regulatory authority to create a captive market for themselves, eliminating competition.

They can give themselves the licences ensuring that only their goods reach the market.

It is for this reason that I think the whole import ban thing is a scam.

The Importance of Our Heritage

Would anyone object to naming a child Chaminuka today? Most likely yes. Such a name would be seen as un-Christian and praising a spirit.

Would the same person object to may given name Jupiter? Definitely not. They may actually see my name as being progressive and associated with modern science and astronomy.

The people who claim to be in touch with Jehovah and spiritual world actually know little beyond what they have been carefully fed and brainwashed with in a few scripture texts.

First let me make it clear the purpose of the brainwashing has nothing to do with spirituality or helping anyone find a higher calling. Its simple main purpose is to make people loose their identity by loosing knowledge of their history. History always has two parts, the physical (what actually happened) and the mythological (how people interpreted those happenings as being influenced by divine power).

The physical and mythological history is often intertwined. Both are not entirely accurate by the do help people keep their identity and pride in what is their own.

This is ours. Our forefather nhingi used these magical powers to lead us there. We are proud of it. Our ancestor nhingi was promised this land by that deity Mwari so you guys butt out of our land.

Those who loose their identity end up with nothing they can call theirs. Nothing to be proud of and no claim to a physical presence in any part of the world. A country exists today because people say Jehovah gave it to them. In making that claim they recount the physical history of their fore father's Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Jacob and so on and attach mythology to it.

If you go to the extent of denigrating and insulting your own mythology, it means you have to reject the physical actions of your own forefathers and the land to which they led you.

If you accept that Moses parted water leading people to a promised land then you accept the descendants of Moses claiming that land today.

If at the same time you do not accept that Nehoreka parted rock leading his people to their own promised land, it means that you do not accept the claim of those who are the descendants of Nehoreka to that land.

Now coming to the point of asking about Chaminuka. I wanted to juxtapose it with my own name Jupiter. Most people think it is merely named after a planet.

If anyone finds the name Chaminuka unacceptable for spiritual reasons then they should definitely have even bigger issues with the name Jupiter. It is the name of the king of the Roman gods.

Naming a planet after that god was a way of making sure his name will be called out forever.

While others are denigrating and insulting their heritage, others are naming new discoveries for theirs. That extends to this very day and moment. The NASA probe that is circling Jupiter right now is named Juno. Juno was the queen of the Roman gods.

See what I mean by others expounding their heritage while you insult your own. See how others perpetuate their identity while we are busy burying our own. If we do not want even a road to be named Chaminuka how will we remember how we came to be in this part of the world and therefore can call its soil our soil.

Europeans are naming things after spiritual entities in their history, while we object to the naming of things after our own heritage. Surely if we continue down that path we are well on our way to loosing our heritage and claim to this land.

The Politics of Patronage

For a long time is has been an open secret that the Zimbabwe government has been living hand to mouth using import duties and other taxes collected at Beitbridge, said to be the busiest border in Africa.

Apparently the recent import ban was an attempt to increase the flow of revenue by also charging fines on the import of basic commodities by travellers.

This was like trying to make the goose lay eggs faster by squeezing it around the neck. The import regulations have led to protests that have virtually stopped the revenue stream. And this has happened at a time when the government is seriously strapped for cash, failing to pay civil servants.

While it has managed to pay police and soldiers this month, it would be overly optimistic to think they can pay next month. Especially given that the other revenue stream, collecting spot fines, is facing serious resistance.

At this point my guess is that it is too late for them to save the situation. The only way they could have prevented the crunch from developing was cutting expenses a year or two ago. Even the signs are that they are unwilling to cut expenses.

The Zanu-PF government is a patronage system. In such a system asking anybody to get off the gravy train is treated as a major slight of priviledge, even an insult. Given that the patronage is meant to buy political loyalty, anyone kicked off the gravy train will seek to exact revenge, by showing political disloyalty. That ensures they become immediate political rivals.

This rule of thumb has held true for all expulsions from Zanu-PF. From Didymus Mutasa, Temba Mliswa through Joice Mujuru to even political nonentities like Acie Lumumba, they have become rivals. The only joke being that most of the rivals are also each other's rivals.

Inevitable because no real difference of principles is involved, the political discourse of patronage based rivalry is focused on personal attacks and insults. Those still within the patronage system create a cult around the leader and protector of it.

It is from this sad situation, that we find that Zimbabwe politics of today revolve around attacks on, and defence of Mugabe. There is noone who espouses solid principles that they are prepared to stick to Mugabe or no Mugabe.

Since most ordinary people will not be within reach of the patronage system, they largely loose interest in the politics. This creates apathy. There is no cause for ordinary people to be loyal to.

Engagement with the West Will Not Help

Judging from finance minster Patrick Chinamasa's words the Zimbabwe government is desperate to engage the British. Apparently they believe that will unlock money

That the Zimbabwe politicians think that all that's needed to fix Zimbabwe's economy is engagement with the British, suggests one of two things. Either they don't have they slightest clue what they did wrong in mismanaging the economy. Or they don't want to own up to their mistake and want people to just sweep their thievery under the carpet.

Certainly, They haven't cut down on expenses. The executive is more bloated than ever. They haven't tackled corruption. People who have been dogged by corruption scandals for years still enjoy poltical power.

Instead of holding people to account the government has been 'taking over' debt accumulated from political corruption, a move meant to block creditors from claiming their dues through the courts.

The British right now are too pre-occupied with Brexit to really bother about Zimbabwe.

If they would care to look what they would see is a government that refuses to be accountable for misusing money. A government that focuses on blame shifting.

For example in most countries are announced years in advance, to give businesses the time and opportunity to plan.

What does Zimbabwe do, they draft a statutory instrument overnight on 17 June, by 18 June they are confiscating people's goods.

Can Minister Chinamsa or any other government official who cares, tell us, that does that amount to policy consistency? Shipments that had already been planned before 18 June ended up being stuck at the border for weeks. If the transporters are strict they will be charging demurrage meaning the business person is going to run heavy losses just over the government's policy inconsistencies.

There inconsistencies have driven investors out of Zimbabwe. Companies like Stewart and Lloyds, Biddulphs, Stuttafords to name a few have shifted base to South Africa. Some have closed shop completely.

The policy inconsistencies have also prevented Zimbabwe industries from competing for their fair share of business in the region.

When Zimbabwe Sugar Refineries was opening up export markets for sugar in the mid-2000s what did the government do? They banned exports and introduced price controls to boot. Where is ZSR today?

Yet the simple long term solution sugar shortages would have been increasing production by accelerating production in areas like Muzarabani which already had a nascent sugar industry. Now that too is no more.

The bottom line for Zimbabwe is that engagement with the West without a change in the irrational, haphazard, inconsistent and ignorantly implemented policy framework will not improve Zimbabwe's economy.