In a world filled with political turmoil and aspirations for true freedom, one name that stands out is Nehanda, a selfless individual who sacrificed her life for the liberation of her people. Her legacy is a testament to the unwavering fight against tyranny and oppression. However, the recent move by Zanu PF to immortalize this fearless icon has raised eyebrows and sparked controversy. Is it a genuine tribute, or is it a sacrilegious act that tarnishes Nehanda’s memory?
The answer lies in the intentions of Zanu PF, a party with a history of self-serving strategies aimed at establishing a one-party state. This article delves into the perplexing rationale behind Zanu PF’s decision to immortalize Nehanda, shedding light on the broader context of their actions.
If you’re a cotton farmer awaiting payment for your last year’s deliveries or a teacher struggling to make ends meet in a volatile economic environment, how does a Nehanda statue improve your life? When a venomous snake bites you in Dande, will the lack of ambulances and anti-venom be magically resolved by a statue? These questions serve to emphasize the importance of governance that prioritizes the welfare of its citizens, a value Nehanda would have cherished.
Zanu PF, however, falls short of legitimacy and consensus among the people. Its dubious path to power, tainted by a compromised judiciary, raises doubts about its right to immortalize Nehanda. What does Zanu PF stand to gain from this act, other than perpetuating the suffering of the Zimbabwean people?
The Nehanda statue is merely a pawn in Zanu PF’s futile strategy to cling to power. Instead of addressing the root causes of the nation’s problems, the party resorts to diversionary tactics. Nehanda’s struggle against tyranny was born out of the very aspirations for a one-party state that Zanu PF holds dear. Her prophecy of rising against oppression now finds resonance in modern heroes like Erica Ndewera and Joana Mamombe, who bravely confront Zanu PF’s injustices.
The statue serves as a diversion from pressing issues, such as the plight of cyclone Idai victims still living in tents months after the disaster. Rather than channeling resources to alleviate suffering, Zanu PF prioritizes a monument. This diversion reinforces the blinkers placed on an apathetic and misinformed population, preventing them from realizing their power to bring about change.
For Zanu PF, the existential threat lies in the opposition gaining power with the consent of the people. A legitimate transition of power would usher in constitutionalism, democracy, rule of law, devolution of power, accountability, transparency, and the demilitarization of state institutions. These are precisely the outcomes Zanu PF seeks to avoid through futile deterrents like the Nehanda statue.
In Zimbabwean culture, there’s a saying that “whatever flies will eventually land.” This rings true for Zanu PF, which may delay the inevitable but cannot escape it. Just as past regimes met their demise, Zanu PF’s reign of terror will eventually come to an end. The opposition, embodying the people’s will, will restore order to the chaos inflicted by Zanu PF, marking the dawn of a new era for Zimbabwe.
In the end, Nehanda’s legacy remains untarnished by the political maneuvers of the day. Her memory lives on in the hearts of those who continue the struggle for a Zimbabwe that embodies her selfless spirit and commitment to the welfare of its people.