Why Scratch the Bottom of the Barrel for Heroes?
August 15, 2015
Opinion & Analysis
There is a dangerously stupid story that was published by one online publication this week.
The website, newzimbabwe.com, published a piece titled,”Mugabe honours Nehanda, says not a word about Lobengula’s wars against settlers”.
You can tell from this heading the dangerous and stupidly dangerous drift of the piece for its tribalistic undertones – or is it overtones?
The story was based on remarks by President Mugabe at the National Heroes Acre castigating Britain for displaying the remains of First Chimurenga heroes in its museums.
President Mugabe mentioned Nehanda, Kaguvi, Chinengundu Mashayamombe, Makoni Chingaira, Mapondera, Mashonganyika and Mutekedza Chiwashaira who by most historical accounts are the most famous victims of British brutality and dehumanisation, which dehumanisation was worsened by their display of heads as trophies.
President Mugabe was stating a historical fact, and one which is validated by both documentary and oral recordings.
But you would be wrong to assume that President Mugabe’s narrative would be taken for the historical fact that it was supposed to be.
Suddenly, some anger was contrived against the President for his alleged failure to mention in the same line with this historical fact, some obscure tribal narratives ostensibly to balance off history.
Which is stupid, of course.
But here are some tidbits for your pleasure:
“Significantly, however, Mugabe made no mention of one Lobengula whose bones are also missing,” the website complained, adding that Lobengula was the last king of the Ndebele and died from small pox while fighting white settlers in 1894.
Then history is retold: “In fact, some historians argue that Lobengula’s Matebele War of 1893-94 in which he fought white forces that included Shonas in their ranks, was actually Zimbabwe’s first anti-colonial war, not the Nehanda-inspired ‘First Chimurenga’ of 1896-97. So, why does Mugabe privilege Nehanda’s heroics and yet makes no mention of Lobengula’s role in the country’s first struggles against colonialism?”
You can see the mischief, quite clear as day.
Don’t even call it mischief.
It’s malice – pure and undiluted.
We have a Mbuso Fuzwayo, who we are told is a director with Bulawayo-based Ibhetshu Likazulu, “who describes Mugabe as a tribalist who has never acknowledged any heroic exploits from people in Matabeleland”.
“It is well known that Mugabe is the chief tribalist,” Fuzwayo said.
“It is common to all right thinking people that Mugabe will not care about the Ndebele monarch; he is only concerned about people from Mashonaland.
“To him, anything that is to do with Matabeleland is not worth talking about let alone celebrating.”
A nameless “Zimbabwean academic based in the UK” says: “Lobengula is as much a hero as Ndabaningi Sithole; there is no reason not to bury those guys at Heroes Acre.
“What is happening speaks to a very narrow brand of nationalism which started in the early 1980s with what happened in the Matabeleland and the Midlands.
“This narrow brand of nationalism is almost Shona centred and, to a larger degree, really about Zanu-PF.
“You see this especially at the Heroes Acre where the history that Mugabe talks about is Zanu-PF history which starts from Nehanda and comes down to Zanu-PF.
“So it speaks to a very narrow and non-inclusive nationalism which leaves out a lot of people.”
“It stands to reason that Zimbabwe should be allowed to enjoy a multiplicity of histories,” said Brilliant Mhlanga, a Zimbabwean lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire.
“Mugabe should have acknowledged King Lobengula, Chief Magwegwe Fuyane and others whose remains are still yet to be found.”
Angry at history, angry in the present
It is clear that this kind of anger is premised on these various actors’, including those behind the shadowy website, anger at their poor political fortunes.
These fortunes are predicated on politics of the tribe – and this brand of politics has failed.
The practitioners of this narrow brand of politics would have wanted more heroism from forebears to inspire them in the present but this has not worked out.
In fact, when you try scratching the bottom of the barrel for heroes and heroism, there is something fundamentally wrong.
Heroes speak through their works.
It is for the precise reason that the names of Joshua Nkomo, Nikita Mangena, JZ Moyo, George Silundika, Herbert Chitepo, Nehanda, Kaguvi, Chaminuka and others, shine through.
They do not have to be validated by people seeking to rewrite history.
Real heroes do not have to have historians Pathisa Nyathi and Ngwabi Bhebhe or even Stan Mudenge scratching their heads.
Joshua Nkomo is called Father Zimbabwe because of his works.
His stature and works beat tribal and regional boundaries.
You cannot have a Magwegwe Fuyane, whoever he is, in this bracket.
Of course, we mean no disrespect.
However, there is greater national glory for national heroes and heroism.
In this context we also would want to point out that King Lobengula has received more than enough recognition in this country.
Perhaps more than he deserves for what we learn from history as his exploits.
This is not the same heroism of chiefs who died fighting for their land and were captured and beheaded.
There are others like Kadungure Mapondera, who died during a hunger strike in the white man’s prison.
Defiant to the very end, he is said to have refused to eat, even his wives’ food.
That is the kind of stuff heroes are made of.
That is why we have heroes and not-so-heroes, even if villains they may not be.
 |
| King Lobengula of Zimbabwe. |
Opinion & Analysis
There is a dangerously stupid story that was published by one online publication this week.
The website, newzimbabwe.com, published a piece titled,”Mugabe honours Nehanda, says not a word about Lobengula’s wars against settlers”.
You can tell from this heading the dangerous and stupidly dangerous drift of the piece for its tribalistic undertones – or is it overtones?
The story was based on remarks by President Mugabe at the National Heroes Acre castigating Britain for displaying the remains of First Chimurenga heroes in its museums.
President Mugabe mentioned Nehanda, Kaguvi, Chinengundu Mashayamombe, Makoni Chingaira, Mapondera, Mashonganyika and Mutekedza Chiwashaira who by most historical accounts are the most famous victims of British brutality and dehumanisation, which dehumanisation was worsened by their display of heads as trophies.
President Mugabe was stating a historical fact, and one which is validated by both documentary and oral recordings.
But you would be wrong to assume that President Mugabe’s narrative would be taken for the historical fact that it was supposed to be.
Suddenly, some anger was contrived against the President for his alleged failure to mention in the same line with this historical fact, some obscure tribal narratives ostensibly to balance off history.
Which is stupid, of course.
But here are some tidbits for your pleasure:
“Significantly, however, Mugabe made no mention of one Lobengula whose bones are also missing,” the website complained, adding that Lobengula was the last king of the Ndebele and died from small pox while fighting white settlers in 1894.
Then history is retold: “In fact, some historians argue that Lobengula’s Matebele War of 1893-94 in which he fought white forces that included Shonas in their ranks, was actually Zimbabwe’s first anti-colonial war, not the Nehanda-inspired ‘First Chimurenga’ of 1896-97. So, why does Mugabe privilege Nehanda’s heroics and yet makes no mention of Lobengula’s role in the country’s first struggles against colonialism?”
You can see the mischief, quite clear as day.
Don’t even call it mischief.
It’s malice – pure and undiluted.
We have a Mbuso Fuzwayo, who we are told is a director with Bulawayo-based Ibhetshu Likazulu, “who describes Mugabe as a tribalist who has never acknowledged any heroic exploits from people in Matabeleland”.
“It is well known that Mugabe is the chief tribalist,” Fuzwayo said.
“It is common to all right thinking people that Mugabe will not care about the Ndebele monarch; he is only concerned about people from Mashonaland.
“To him, anything that is to do with Matabeleland is not worth talking about let alone celebrating.”
A nameless “Zimbabwean academic based in the UK” says: “Lobengula is as much a hero as Ndabaningi Sithole; there is no reason not to bury those guys at Heroes Acre.
“What is happening speaks to a very narrow brand of nationalism which started in the early 1980s with what happened in the Matabeleland and the Midlands.
“This narrow brand of nationalism is almost Shona centred and, to a larger degree, really about Zanu-PF.
“You see this especially at the Heroes Acre where the history that Mugabe talks about is Zanu-PF history which starts from Nehanda and comes down to Zanu-PF.
“So it speaks to a very narrow and non-inclusive nationalism which leaves out a lot of people.”
“It stands to reason that Zimbabwe should be allowed to enjoy a multiplicity of histories,” said Brilliant Mhlanga, a Zimbabwean lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire.
“Mugabe should have acknowledged King Lobengula, Chief Magwegwe Fuyane and others whose remains are still yet to be found.”
Angry at history, angry in the present
It is clear that this kind of anger is premised on these various actors’, including those behind the shadowy website, anger at their poor political fortunes.
These fortunes are predicated on politics of the tribe – and this brand of politics has failed.
The practitioners of this narrow brand of politics would have wanted more heroism from forebears to inspire them in the present but this has not worked out.
In fact, when you try scratching the bottom of the barrel for heroes and heroism, there is something fundamentally wrong.
Heroes speak through their works.
It is for the precise reason that the names of Joshua Nkomo, Nikita Mangena, JZ Moyo, George Silundika, Herbert Chitepo, Nehanda, Kaguvi, Chaminuka and others, shine through.
They do not have to be validated by people seeking to rewrite history.
Real heroes do not have to have historians Pathisa Nyathi and Ngwabi Bhebhe or even Stan Mudenge scratching their heads.
Joshua Nkomo is called Father Zimbabwe because of his works.
His stature and works beat tribal and regional boundaries.
You cannot have a Magwegwe Fuyane, whoever he is, in this bracket.
Of course, we mean no disrespect.
However, there is greater national glory for national heroes and heroism.
In this context we also would want to point out that King Lobengula has received more than enough recognition in this country.
Perhaps more than he deserves for what we learn from history as his exploits.
This is not the same heroism of chiefs who died fighting for their land and were captured and beheaded.
There are others like Kadungure Mapondera, who died during a hunger strike in the white man’s prison.
Defiant to the very end, he is said to have refused to eat, even his wives’ food.
That is the kind of stuff heroes are made of.
That is why we have heroes and not-so-heroes, even if villains they may not be.
No comments:
Post a Comment