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.
Wednesday, 7 June 2017
Friday, 17 March 2017
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.
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.
Saturday, 25 February 2017
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.
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.
Friday, 10 February 2017
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.
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.
Tuesday, 31 January 2017
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,
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,
Friday, 27 January 2017
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.
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.
Wednesday, 25 January 2017
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.
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.
Saturday, 22 October 2016
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.
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.
Wednesday, 17 August 2016
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.
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.
Saturday, 30 July 2016
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.
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.
Wednesday, 27 July 2016
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.
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!!
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.
Sunday, 17 July 2016
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.
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.
Tuesday, 12 July 2016
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.
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.
Monday, 11 July 2016
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.
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.
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.
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.
Import ban probably in breach of trade agreements
At the height of the hullabaloo about the import ban, I pointed out that Zimbabwe was a member of SADC and COMESA, and it was unlikely the ban was within the trade agreements of those bodies.
It looks like South Africa thinks SADC protocols have been broken.
One key political development coming out of the ban is that Zimbabwe could see itself loosing the political support of the region that has been key to the survival of the Zanu-PF government.
Everyone in government including Mugabe himself has witnessed the amount of blame and flak that Mbeki has taken over his quiet diplomacy policy. As part of that policy Mbeki is said to have fended off a British idea to invade Zimbabwe (which again has been talked about).
Indeed at one point a SADC troika over Zimbabwe was setup. That Troika's stance was key to moderating international attitude towards Zimbabwe. If the troika had prevaricated or given the go ahead, mark my words the Zanu-PF government would have been deposed just like Gadhafi in no time at all. Believe me Western government have got the money and power to do it any time they wish.
It looks like South Africa thinks SADC protocols have been broken.
One key political development coming out of the ban is that Zimbabwe could see itself loosing the political support of the region that has been key to the survival of the Zanu-PF government.
Everyone in government including Mugabe himself has witnessed the amount of blame and flak that Mbeki has taken over his quiet diplomacy policy. As part of that policy Mbeki is said to have fended off a British idea to invade Zimbabwe (which again has been talked about).
Indeed at one point a SADC troika over Zimbabwe was setup. That Troika's stance was key to moderating international attitude towards Zimbabwe. If the troika had prevaricated or given the go ahead, mark my words the Zanu-PF government would have been deposed just like Gadhafi in no time at all. Believe me Western government have got the money and power to do it any time they wish.
The most resistance that Zanu-PF can give, is probably go back to the bush, but in this era of drones and night-vision such a guerilla war would be impossible. Not to mention that the support of ordinary rural people that was key in the 1970s would not be so forthcoming this time round.
If you call a pungwe today what do you say you are fighting for? Kuti takatadza kutonga saka tiri kuda kudzokera kunotadza kutonga futi? Kkkkkk.
It shows just how key regional support is for Zimbabwe. If the powers in Harare had any sense, they should be treating that support like a very rare egg.
If SADC leaders were fed up with the Zanu-PF government like say Ian Khama, I have no doubt Zanu-PF would have an extremely hard time holding onto power.
It is a sign of the pathetic ignorance, shortsightedness and greed that the Zimbabwe government seem to have embarked on a path to antagonise a key regional supporter and power with a poorly thought out, hasty import ban.
A ban which in its original form even defeated common sense and international standards by banning goods that travellers intend for personal use, something which is absolutely ridiculous.
If you call a pungwe today what do you say you are fighting for? Kuti takatadza kutonga saka tiri kuda kudzokera kunotadza kutonga futi? Kkkkkk.
It shows just how key regional support is for Zimbabwe. If the powers in Harare had any sense, they should be treating that support like a very rare egg.
If SADC leaders were fed up with the Zanu-PF government like say Ian Khama, I have no doubt Zanu-PF would have an extremely hard time holding onto power.
It is a sign of the pathetic ignorance, shortsightedness and greed that the Zimbabwe government seem to have embarked on a path to antagonise a key regional supporter and power with a poorly thought out, hasty import ban.
A ban which in its original form even defeated common sense and international standards by banning goods that travellers intend for personal use, something which is absolutely ridiculous.
Saturday, 2 July 2016
The situation at Beitbridge: Totally avoidable
One things that is very clear is that the situation at Beitbridge has been caused by the very bad and unreasonable attitude of the Zimbabwe government or whoever is acting its behalf. It could have been avoided completely if the actors in the Zimbabwe government like minister Mike Bimha had been professional and reasonable.
The world over travellers are allowed to carry goods for personal use through borders. That is why borders have got a traveller section and a commercial section.
The simple reason for that is not to inconvenience travellers. Travellers do not need to know the details of statutory instruments, tariff codes, trade agreements and other legal jargon. That is why travellers are not required to make use of clearing agents.
Yet we have been having Zimbabwean officials threatening to impound busses because their passengers should not be carrying goods belonging to this or that tariff code. Really?!!
Despite all the noise about banning certain goods, there is nowhere I have seen a clear and concise list of the goods that are banned or allowed. Not a single newspaper advert listing the products banned, not a single website or even a flyer.
How then, are people expected to know what is banned and what is allowed? When they arrive at the border? Kana ndimiwo, is that reasonable?
I am not a lawyer, but I know that one of the fundamental tenets of law is 'the viewpoint of the reasonable person". Surely it cannot be reasonable to expect someone who wants to buy a few things off a supermarket shelf with the change from the bus-ticket at Park Station to know what is listed on a top secret list of banned goods at Beitbridge.
Moreover as I have always stressed, it is not Mai Chipo with her two cartons of cooking oil from Musina who is destroying the economy. It is people who consider themselves above and not subject to the laws that they themselves make.
Believe me even with this ban in place, a minister several truckloads of the very same goods that the minister decided to ban, will be allowed through the border without even being searched. I have travelled through Beitbridge so many times, and the issue of trucks of the bigwigs is well, well known. They are not searched.
They are not stopped at the umpteen roadblocks inside Zimbabwe as well. Any official who dares do their job properly and inspect such a truck, will get a single threatening phone-call, and they will never do it again. Otherwise they will be indirectly 'disciplined' for doing their job.
Those are the people killing the economy.
I also wonder whether the government officials involved ever properly do their work when come up with some these regulations. Otherwise they would know that Zimbabwe has signed various trade agreements that they need to adhere. You cannot just ban goods from your trade partners ignoring agreements that you have signed. Last time I checked, Zimbabwe was a member of at least SADC and COMESA.
This kind of bumbling happened at the time Zimbabwe introduced road tolling as well. Officials forgot that they were part of agreements by which they tolled trucks by selling route based coupons at the border. Now all foreign trucks do not pay at toll gates because they would have already paid for using that route at the border. Zimbabwe had to back track on that.
Now it looks like they have forgotten that they are part of SADC and COMESA. If they wish to withdraw from those agreements they are very free to do that. But they should do what the British are being asked to do over Brexit - send the proper notifications.
Once you are out the other party does not have to honour the agreement as well. Like the British are finding out, what was a win-win situation may become a lose-lose one. They lose, you lose too.
Given the state of Zimbabwe's economy it much more likely to suffer from not adhering to past agreements than the countries surrounding it.
Wednesday, 29 June 2016
Brexit: Brinksmanship gone awry
Imagine you are by the cliff-side. Playing a game. In your game you rush at the cliff. At the very last minute you dig in your heels. Bringing yourself to a halt just in before you tumble over.
Then this one time pebbles called Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson get themselves under your heels. Before you know it, you are over the edge. That is what we call brinksmanship gone awry, or Brexit for short. That was the game david Cameron played.
And when he clutched at straws he grabbed Jeremy Corbyn's lapel! It remains to be seen whether the cloth will tear and leave Corbyn standing or if he is toppling over with Cameron.
Surely if Edward Heath is hearing what the Brits are going to get by getting out the EU he is spinning like a top in his grave. He worked so hard to get them in.
The question to be asked is exactly what is Britain going to get by leaving? The main pillars of Leave campaign were 1) stop contributing to EU budget 2) stop immigration especially from Eastern Europe 3) tell the EU to continue giving Britain access to the free market or simply trade under WTO rules.
As long as Britain wants to stay in the single market the Guardian quoted a European diplomat as stressing that "participating in the single market meant accepting EU rules, including the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, monitoring by the European commission and accepting the primacy of EU law over national law". That conditions include free movement of people so migration won't stop. It also means contributng to the EU budget.
To me that doesn't sound like leaving the EU. It sounds a lot like staying with less rights. If the British do drigger article 50, ultimately it would mean staying without the rights of a full member. If they don't, they have significantly weakened their negotiating power. They may even loose some of the concessions they had previously negotiated.
If you ask me Brexit is brinksmanship gone awry. The fact that nobody including the Leave campaigners had a plan on how to leave the EU suggests that even they didn't really want it. The first sign that Boris didn't want to handle the hot potato he personally cooked was when he wrote to David Cameron in the dead of night asking him not to leave.
In my view, British politicians, including Boris Johnson, are going to try and wriggle their way out of triggering article 50. So people, relax. Take your seats. Bring your pillows and take a nap. There is going to be no Brexit
Then this one time pebbles called Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson get themselves under your heels. Before you know it, you are over the edge. That is what we call brinksmanship gone awry, or Brexit for short. That was the game david Cameron played.
And when he clutched at straws he grabbed Jeremy Corbyn's lapel! It remains to be seen whether the cloth will tear and leave Corbyn standing or if he is toppling over with Cameron.
Surely if Edward Heath is hearing what the Brits are going to get by getting out the EU he is spinning like a top in his grave. He worked so hard to get them in.
The question to be asked is exactly what is Britain going to get by leaving? The main pillars of Leave campaign were 1) stop contributing to EU budget 2) stop immigration especially from Eastern Europe 3) tell the EU to continue giving Britain access to the free market or simply trade under WTO rules.
As long as Britain wants to stay in the single market the Guardian quoted a European diplomat as stressing that "participating in the single market meant accepting EU rules, including the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, monitoring by the European commission and accepting the primacy of EU law over national law". That conditions include free movement of people so migration won't stop. It also means contributng to the EU budget.
To me that doesn't sound like leaving the EU. It sounds a lot like staying with less rights. If the British do drigger article 50, ultimately it would mean staying without the rights of a full member. If they don't, they have significantly weakened their negotiating power. They may even loose some of the concessions they had previously negotiated.
If you ask me Brexit is brinksmanship gone awry. The fact that nobody including the Leave campaigners had a plan on how to leave the EU suggests that even they didn't really want it. The first sign that Boris didn't want to handle the hot potato he personally cooked was when he wrote to David Cameron in the dead of night asking him not to leave.
In my view, British politicians, including Boris Johnson, are going to try and wriggle their way out of triggering article 50. So people, relax. Take your seats. Bring your pillows and take a nap. There is going to be no Brexit
Monday, 27 June 2016
The Government and Politicians Need to Spend Money Locally
Desperate for revenue, and desperate to revive the local economy, the Zimbabwe government has taken the ridiculous step of banning importation of basic items by travellers. They hope this will stimulate local buying.
It is not going to work. The simple reason being that the foreign buying that takes huge sums of money out of the economy, is not done by travellers on buses and cars.
Rather it is very high worth individuals and politicians who make the purchases and spending decisions that take huge sums of money out the country. The bottom line is these high worth individuals, including all levels of political leadership, are not economically patriotic. I would go as far as calling them economic traitors (vatengesi).
They are the ones who take their considerable spending power out of the country, starving the local economy of cash.
For example, recently five ZIMRA managers are said to have imported luxury cars worth US$120'000 each. On top of taking spending power out of the country they also smuggled the cars into the country denying government sorely needed revenue.
This week ZIMRA tried to 'stimulate' the local economy by banning wheel barrows. A wheelbarrow costs R350, or about $20 dollars. Even if ZIMRA were to stop the importation of six thousand wheelbarrows, that is about ten magonyet of wheelbarrows, the value will not match one of the single luxury cars imported by the managers.
Mind you we are talking about just five junior ZIMRA managers. What about senior management. What about other parastatals, government departments and the management of those.
Recently the ZBC was reported to have flouted tender regulations to buy imported cars worth 1.7million dollars. What difference does importing a wheelbarrow costing 20 dollars make when such a large amount has already been taken out of the country?
Even those high worth individuals who regularly globe-trot are doing considerable damage to the Zimbabweans economy. If you sleep in a hotel, it means that hotel can employ people like cleaners. If it were a Zimbabwean hotel, that would mean jobs for Zimbabweans. If it's a hotel in Singapore, it means jobs for Singaporeans.
I hope, therefore, people will understand my logic when I say banning individual travellers from importing items for personal use is meaningless. It is a useless measure in terms of reviving the local economy. As long as politicians and rich individuals who control large sums of money are not patriotic. As long as they continue to spend millions on luxury vehicles, other junkets and foreign holidays, they will continue to draw huge sums out of the economy.
Banning small traveller imports is like trying to get a fallen man to get up by taking a small stone out of their hand while leaving a huge boulder resting on their back.
Economy yeZimbabwe yakagarwa matunduru ne mashefu. Haisimuki.
It is not going to work. The simple reason being that the foreign buying that takes huge sums of money out of the economy, is not done by travellers on buses and cars.
Rather it is very high worth individuals and politicians who make the purchases and spending decisions that take huge sums of money out the country. The bottom line is these high worth individuals, including all levels of political leadership, are not economically patriotic. I would go as far as calling them economic traitors (vatengesi).
They are the ones who take their considerable spending power out of the country, starving the local economy of cash.
For example, recently five ZIMRA managers are said to have imported luxury cars worth US$120'000 each. On top of taking spending power out of the country they also smuggled the cars into the country denying government sorely needed revenue.
This week ZIMRA tried to 'stimulate' the local economy by banning wheel barrows. A wheelbarrow costs R350, or about $20 dollars. Even if ZIMRA were to stop the importation of six thousand wheelbarrows, that is about ten magonyet of wheelbarrows, the value will not match one of the single luxury cars imported by the managers.
Mind you we are talking about just five junior ZIMRA managers. What about senior management. What about other parastatals, government departments and the management of those.
Recently the ZBC was reported to have flouted tender regulations to buy imported cars worth 1.7million dollars. What difference does importing a wheelbarrow costing 20 dollars make when such a large amount has already been taken out of the country?
Even those high worth individuals who regularly globe-trot are doing considerable damage to the Zimbabweans economy. If you sleep in a hotel, it means that hotel can employ people like cleaners. If it were a Zimbabwean hotel, that would mean jobs for Zimbabweans. If it's a hotel in Singapore, it means jobs for Singaporeans.
I hope, therefore, people will understand my logic when I say banning individual travellers from importing items for personal use is meaningless. It is a useless measure in terms of reviving the local economy. As long as politicians and rich individuals who control large sums of money are not patriotic. As long as they continue to spend millions on luxury vehicles, other junkets and foreign holidays, they will continue to draw huge sums out of the economy.
Banning small traveller imports is like trying to get a fallen man to get up by taking a small stone out of their hand while leaving a huge boulder resting on their back.
Economy yeZimbabwe yakagarwa matunduru ne mashefu. Haisimuki.
Tuesday, 24 May 2016
Zambia's maize output. Who is responsible?
Recently an article in the media claimed that Zambia was expecting a harvest of 3.3 million tonnes. The tonne of the article was as if this achievement was solely or mainly done by ex-Zimbabwean white farmers.
According to the Zambian ministry of agriculture about 350 new commercial farmers have settled in Zambia in the past decade. Of these about 150 are are Zimbabwean and about 200 are South African. Therefore if Zambia's success with maize was solely attributable to commercial farmers less than half are from Zimbabwe.
As to how much commercial farmers contribute to Zambia's maize output the WFP says only 10%, or only 330 thousand tonnes. According to the WFP small-holder black farmers are responsible for 90% of Zambia's maize output. It supports these farmers through its P4P (Purchase for Progress) programme that is partly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The P4P programme guarantees that small-holder farmers have a market for their produce.
Before Mugabe messed up agricultural marketing policies, small holder farmers were responsible for 70 to 80 percent of Zimbabwe's maize output.
The main reason for Zambia's success is that smallholder farmers are guaranteed an income from their produce through purchasing support of output.
In contrast Zimbabwe's government run Grain Marketing Board has been systematically failing to pay for deliveries on time. Some farmers have gone for years without being paid. The government itself has been wrongly focusing on funding inputs rather than output. The net effect of providing free inputs while failing to ensure output is paid for, is that people have resorted to simply selling the inputs to get at least some money.
Output support is nothing new. Most Western countries subsidize agriculture heavily. In February this year farmers in France (http://www.france24.com/en/20160215-france-angry-farmers-blockade-vannes-protest-falling-prices) protested low prices, demanding that the EU help France subsidise their output through a 'European Storage Plan'
In short Zambia's agricultural success is testimony of the benefits of getting more land into the hands of small holder farmers. It makes a very strong case for land reform rather than against it.
Zimbabwe's failure is not on land redistribution but interference in the market through price controls, restricted marketing options for farmers (you can only sell to state bodies which don't pay). Those crops that are not subject to excessive marketing restrictions are enjoying some success in production.
According to the Zambian ministry of agriculture about 350 new commercial farmers have settled in Zambia in the past decade. Of these about 150 are are Zimbabwean and about 200 are South African. Therefore if Zambia's success with maize was solely attributable to commercial farmers less than half are from Zimbabwe.
As to how much commercial farmers contribute to Zambia's maize output the WFP says only 10%, or only 330 thousand tonnes. According to the WFP small-holder black farmers are responsible for 90% of Zambia's maize output. It supports these farmers through its P4P (Purchase for Progress) programme that is partly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The P4P programme guarantees that small-holder farmers have a market for their produce.
Before Mugabe messed up agricultural marketing policies, small holder farmers were responsible for 70 to 80 percent of Zimbabwe's maize output.
The main reason for Zambia's success is that smallholder farmers are guaranteed an income from their produce through purchasing support of output.
In contrast Zimbabwe's government run Grain Marketing Board has been systematically failing to pay for deliveries on time. Some farmers have gone for years without being paid. The government itself has been wrongly focusing on funding inputs rather than output. The net effect of providing free inputs while failing to ensure output is paid for, is that people have resorted to simply selling the inputs to get at least some money.
Output support is nothing new. Most Western countries subsidize agriculture heavily. In February this year farmers in France (http://www.france24.com/en/20160215-france-angry-farmers-blockade-vannes-protest-falling-prices) protested low prices, demanding that the EU help France subsidise their output through a 'European Storage Plan'
In short Zambia's agricultural success is testimony of the benefits of getting more land into the hands of small holder farmers. It makes a very strong case for land reform rather than against it.
Zimbabwe's failure is not on land redistribution but interference in the market through price controls, restricted marketing options for farmers (you can only sell to state bodies which don't pay). Those crops that are not subject to excessive marketing restrictions are enjoying some success in production.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)