| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa Subsaharan |
| Why Zimbabweans do not rebel: Part 2 |
| 2006-10-01 |
| In Part 1 of my contribution to the mystery of why Zimbabweans do not rebel, I anchored my argument in the proposition that Zimbabweans do not rebel largely (but not solely) because the Zimbabwean masses are a risk-averse people ruled by a risk-taking political elite. How this situation arose is the subject of this installment. Since Ian Smith captured power from the rather risk-averse Winston Field in 1964, Zimbabwe has been ruled by a risk-taking elite. It was not until a critical mass of a risk-taking Black Nationalist elite emerged to counter the White risk-taking elite and to mobilise the masses that mass action took place in the manner of the liberation struggle in its variegated forms. After independence, Zimbabweans recoiled into their shells like tortoises and have by and large remained in this situation since then, only occasionally and hesitatingly popping out their heads. The risk-taking behaviour displayed by Zimbabweans during the liberation war was a transient phenomenon and this transitory character serves to prove the fundamental and underlying political character of the average Zimbabwean; his/her subject orientation to authority, any authority. Moreover, this attitude is deeply embedded in the Zimbabwean psyche and it will take a painfully long time to unwind. And it is a product of more than a century of uninterrupted authoritarianism. |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #4 This is a standard Marxist analysis and like most Marxist analyses it is ahistorical (despite the references to historical events). this attitude is deeply embedded in the Zimbabwean psyche and it will take a painfully long time to unwind. Probably. And it is a product of more than a century of uninterrupted authoritarianism. Nope. Wrong. Risk-aversion is built into nearly all pre-industrial / barely agricultural societies. Tradition, what the elders (who might have lived to the ripe old age of 35 and thereby accumulated wisdom) say, these guide choices in most such peoples. One does not have to be a Marxist to agree with Karl Marx’s acute observation that “the tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living.” Only if you are an idiot academic / ideologue. The most critical agents in the transmission of this risk-evading behaviour among Zimbabweans and over decades have been the churches, schools and, for adults, the media. Ah, yes. and if they are to have their Glorious Revolution, they first need to destroy any semblance of tradition and order in the society. Destroy the society so they can build it just they way they want it. Dictatorship by the leaders of the proletariat will be necessary, of course. |
| Posted by: prof 2006-10-01 09:22 |
| #3 that concept is waaaay to hard for a university educator, gorb. |
| Posted by: anon 2006-10-01 08:08 |
| #2 Who has the guns? |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-10-01 04:45 |
| #1 "!! Hey - free land and farms - who knew?!" |
| Posted by: newc 2006-10-01 00:53 |