Being Zimbabwean: From Bondage To Slavery

Freeman Chari:

I have stayed in foreign lands for some time now. I have seen Zimbabweans being killed, I have seen them being segregated and I have seen them living worse than dogs. Back home I have seen my people degenerating into thieves, fraudsters and murderers; our once righteous women turning into nocturnal body-sellers. Out of pain, I decided to undertake a dialectical journey to the core of our existence; to explore what it means to be Zimbabwean, what it should mean and why it means what it means right now to be a Zimbabwean. This could be the works of a troubled mind but my hope is that someone would find sense out of it.

Sometimes I sit wondering why some people behave the way they do. I wonder why Robert Mugabe is that arrogant, why General Zvinavashe agreed to pronounce that infamous statement on the eve of the 2002 Presidential elections, why Jonathan Moyo keeps vacillating like a pendulum and why Morgan Tsvangirai overruled a democratic consensus that later led to the split of MDC. Most of the times, I end up indifferently concluding that maybe that’s how human beings behave. This time I decided to interrogate the source of these behaviors even deeper without giving myself a chance to resign.
The first question that I asked myself was; “what makes a man a man?” Apart from the physical how can we differentiate between a man and a dog? This question came about because of some things that we have seen happening in Zimbabwe that we would normally say; they are not fit to be done by human beings but by dogs or savages. So what is it that makes a man a man and a dog a dog?
There are certain characteristics that are common between a man and a dog which compel us to conclude that a man is primarily an animal. They both desire food, water, shelter and other basic needs. They both have the five scientific senses. They are both calculative- a baboon may bury wild fruits in sand to facilitate ripening just like a human being. Most importantly, they both act instinctively in the face of danger to avoid death. But still a baboon is a baboon and a man is a man- why?
Somebody argued that a man is a man because he can differentiate between good and bad. Again we ask; is good universal to all men? Why is polygamy good in some societies but bad in some? Who defines good? If we can follow the dictates of society on good and bad can’t that be said of a dog that is conditioned to know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to its master?
However, even if good or bad is not universal to all men the concept of goodness and badness is common across all people. But even this concept derives from a deeper intrinsic awareness in man which is I prefer to call the consciousness of value. It is therefore arguable that apart from the physical and the genetic make-up, human beings also share a common characteristic- attaching value to nature.
Notwithstanding the fact that animals also attach value to things out of instinct, it is only man who has the ability to attach value and defend it on worthless material and on non-material things. For example, man fight to defend religion, they fight to defend their rights because they place value unto these things and they are willing to risk death for things that are intangible.

Man in as much as he places value on other things also places value upon himself. He believes that he is worth a certain value. This is what is called self-worth. The product of this self-evaluation is called dignity. Because man is naturally a social being, that is he desires to be desired by other man. He expects other man to evaluate his worth by other man, he expects other man to evaluate his worth to its real value. When they undervalue him, he gets angry and when the evaluate him to his real worth he feels pride. This desire to be recognized by other man, is the one that drives man to behave in ways that defy natural animal instinct.
Let us look at Zimbabwe. On one hand we have a ruling class that is unwilling to recognize other ordinary Zimbabweans as people amongst other people, on the other we have a people that is yearning for such recognition. This ruling class which is mainly ZANU PF , behaves in a manner that seeks to undo history.
I say ZANU PF is seeking to undo history because it is taking the human philosophical function back to the primitive state when man , although social beings, interacted with each other violently. A period in history when man’s worth was evaluated on how much one was willing to risk death for pure prestige. Remember Alexander or Chaka .
Unfortunately, other Zimbabweans are unwilling to engage ZANU PF in such a primitive manner which to some may appear as cowardice. In circumstances, where one part is willing to engage in violence and another is unwilling there is greater possibility that their relationship terminates in lordship and bondage in which as is in Zimbabwe, ZANU PF gains the recognition of being the master and everybody else looses the dignity of being a man and becomes a slave.
But is the unwillingness of Zimbabweans to engage in violence a symbol of cowardice? The answer could be both YES and NO.
YES in that, cowardice itself begins when a man fails to overcome the fear of death and let his animal instinct of self-preservation override the human characteristic of seeking recognition. So out of cowardice, Zimbabweans decided to forfeit their worth for a chance to live.
NO in that, a human being is also calculative and can temporarily forgo his human desires for a particular reason. For example a man may choose not to eat even if he is hungry because he is on hunger-strike. So there could be a reason why Zimbabweans chose to forfeit their worth. One of which could be that they know that most of the primitive members of ZANU PF are close to death due to aging. From their calculations, they can do without dignity for a few years until this generation is wiped out. They can derive hope from the fact that a number of younger ZANU PF members have been attracted to the idea of change like Simba Makoni, Daniel Shumba, Walter Mzembi and others.
What is certain in Zimbabwe however is that the ZANU PF regime is not evaluating its people’s worth justly. Zimbabweans are conscious of this, unfortunately; as in all dictatorships, two groups of slaves arise. One that feels unjustly evaluated and is willing to regain its dignity and another that knows and feels theindignation but is content to live like that as long as they are alive....more

CONTINUE TO THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE

Are The Sanctions Against Zimbabwe A Weapon Of War ?

James C. McIntosh, M.D.:

The great Prussian general, and before I get into trouble and anybody is asked to denounce me, for calling a Germanic leader great, let me cautiously say wickedly great. The wickedly great Prussian general Frederick the Great wrote in his instructions to his generals, that "The greatest secret of war and the masterpiece of a skillful general is to starve his enemy.

That's what sanctions do.

In Zimbabwe sanctions have created critical shortages of supplies of clean water, water purification equipment, agricultural equipment and medications. The health system of Zimbabwe that had once been described as the best in Africa is now described by some as in a shambles.

Even government opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, speaking to CNN described Zimbabwe as having a "deepening food insecurity" Put that under the category even a broken clock is right twice a day. At any rate that's an echo of what Wickedly Great military strategist, Frederick was talking about starvation as a tactic.

Thats what sanctions do

General Colin Powell,

the wickedly great General Colin Powell, said when asked about his strategy for handling the Iraqi military, these infamous words "First we cut it off; listen, First we cut it off -----then we kill it."

That's the plan of the American Government for Zimbabwe.

That's what sanctions do.

Even in a country with a highly developed, sophisticated and well functioning medical system like Cuba certain inevitable consequences have been suffered because of US imposed sanctions in the form of an Embargo.

The American Association for World Health Report in their summary findings of 1997 said that sanctions had the following 4 negative impacts on the health of the Cuban People

"1. Malnutrition: The outright ban on the sale of American foodstuffs has contributed to serious nutritional deficits, particularly among pregnant women, leading to an increase in low birth-weight babies. In addition, food shortages were linked to a devastating outbreak of neuropathy numbering in the tens of thousands. By one estimate, daily caloric intake dropped 33 percent between 1989 and 1993.

2. POOR Water Quality: The embargo is severely restricting Cuba's access to water treatment chemicals and spare-parts for the island's water supply system. This has led to serious cutbacks in supplies of safe drinking water, which in turn has become a factor in the rising incidence of morbidity and mortality rates from water-borne diseases.

3. SHORTAGES OF Medicines & Equipment: Of the 1,297 medications available in Cuba in 1991, physicians now have access to only 889 of these same medicines - and many of these are available only intermittently. Because most major new drugs are developed by U.S. pharmaceuticals, Cuban physicians have access to less than 50 percent of the new medicines available on the world market. Due to the direct or indirect effects of the embargo, the most routine medical supplies are in short supply or entirely absent from some Cuban clinics.

4. SHORTAGES AND DELAYS OF Medical Information: Though information materials have been exempt from the U.S. trade embargo since 1 988, the AAWH study concludes that in practice very little such information goes into Cuba or comes out of the island due to travel restrictions, currency regulations and shipping difficulties. Scientists and citizens of both countries suffer as a result. Paradoxically, the embargo harms some U.S. citizens by denying them access to the latest advances in Cuban medical research, including such products as Meningitis B vaccine, cheaply produced interferon and streptokinase, and an AIDS vaccine currently under-going clinical trials with human volunteers. "


Are sanctions a weapon of war ??

Well they are certainly a weapon of economic war. And economic war is just that war. There would be no need to debate the point that economic war is war were it not for the fact that we are living in a period when US government officials are known to argue with straight faces that coerced hypothermia that is freezing a person to a state of ill health, sleep deprivation and drowning a person until he gives up information, are not torture but technically just harsh interrogation. HARSH INTERROGATION -They make it sound as though they are just cussing somebody out while they question him- You better tell me where those weapons of Mass distruction are you Son of a Bush- but it is nothing so benign. We are living in a time when there are politicians who still maintain that the events in Korea, involving mainly U.S. Troops was not war but technically just a U.N. police action. We are told that what occurred between Bill and Monica was not sex. What was it torture, harsh interrogation? 4 years f medical school and if it wasn't sex I don't know but seriously. We are told that if you take a person out of a U.S. prison and send him to an Uzbekistani prison prison for the purpose of having him beaten, shocked and boiled, that's not torture its an extraordinary rendition- They make it sound like Beyonce had changed the inaugural program and instead of singing At last had sung Mirriam Makeba's song, Piece of ground--- and sounded just like Etta James or as if if Sachmo got up out the grave and showed up at the Obama inauguration and played the national anthem- ----- you know, of Zimbabwe- and mixed it in with The Creator Has A Master Plan, now that would be an extraordinary rendition. But this Cheyney Bush crap is torture and sanctions are nothing but weapons of war.

1. Like weaons of war, sanctions kill people

2. Like weapons of war, sanctions are usually used in excess against and among poor and black nations

3.Like weapons of war. sanctions are killing the poorest and most vulnerable people on the planet the children

Case in point Iraq: The 88 thousand tons of ordinance the US dropped on Iraq in the first Gulf War, killed by most estimates maybe 37,000 Iraqi's., the economic sanctions imposed on iraq after the war are blamed for killing 5,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 per week

Thats over 500, 000 or a half a million children IN UNDER 10 YEARS


That's what sanctions do.

In Zimbabwe during the last few weeks 67 thousand people have been infected from a totally preventable form of diarrhea. Over 3 thousand of them have died This deadly watery form of diarrhea called Cholera is TOTALLY PREVENTABLE.

All you have to do to prevent Cholera is have clean water. All you have to do to treat Cholera is to replace the persons fluids so they don't become dehydrated from the diarrhea which in severe cases can cause the loss of several quarts of fluid per hour.

IV fluids are THE best and most rapid way to replace these fluids However there is a cheap oral solution that can be used pretty effectively if you have clean water and utensils to serve it in. The cure can also be speeded up if the antibiotic tetracycline is used.

But under Sanctions shipments of chlorine gas necessary for water purification are blocked that keeps the water supply from being purified in the first place, Under Sanctions the government has credit problems that don't permit the purchase of the antibiotics, or water purification equipment or IV fluids, or even enough of the cheap oral solution that is curative. Under sanctions aircraft parts necessary to repair crop dusters to grow the grain necessary to stop malnutrition are blocked. Malnutrition makes the children die of diarrhea and respiratory infections from germs that would only cause a sore throat an ear ache or cold in a well nourished child.

So because of Sanctions In Zimbabwe, children die for lack of clean water, IV solution, common place antibiotics or an asthma pump.

That's what Sanctions Do

Please recognize that the imposition of Economic

sanctions on a developing nation like Zimbabwe is not an alternative to war but such imposition is war itself.

Sanctions like wars are used for economic motives to foster political change, specifically regime change.

Sanctions like wars have historically been used to attempt regime change. We have the examples of sanctions for attempted regime change in Chile, Cuba, and Iraq. Zimbabwe is no different

In Zimbabwe the first sanctions were of the unofficial variety where various lenders and banks began to refuse credit to Zimbabwe in the context of a call by the western powers for regime change. These unofficial sanctions were followed by official declaration of sanctions in 2001 under Zidera the so called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery ACT. The ACT authorized the US to officially use its veto power to make the multilateral lending agencies, IMF, World Bank and African Development Bank stifle Mugabe's efforts to get credit. This meant that not only were efforts to borrow new money necessary for development stifled but efforts to restructure existing loans were nipped in the bud. All of this was sparked by Mugabe's having responded in 1999 to the peoples demand to the reclaim their stolen land. Was'nt it Malcolm X who said that land is the basis of all revolution. Should the Zimbabwe revolution be any different. Of course not, Land reclamation is in fact the real revolution. And The reaction of imperialism to revolution is always war.

That's what Sanctions are one a the weapon of Imperialist Economic War.

And the purpose of the war is the same purpose as in war in chile, cuba, grenada, Iraq etc etc economic gain and political change specifically regime change in the interest of the US government.

Sanctions Like weapons of war are proliferated mainly by the US government and imposed all over the the Black and Brown world

The National Association of manufacturers reported in 1997 that at that time 42 percent of the world's population from over 190 countries were being. sanctioned by the United States for alleged offenses ranging from terrorism to failure to protect the Sea Turtles of Costa Rica. So to save the sea turtles you starve the children, make them drink dirty water, catch cholera, malaria and pneumonia and call it an alternative to war.

That's what sanctions do That's what the United States does.

The same study by National Association of manufacturers also concluded that sanctions are costing the United States $15 billion to $19 billion annually in potential exports. And in only 13 percent of the cases in which they have been employed do they achieve the foreign policy goal for which they have been employed.

They are not even working and yet they are used to cause suffering for more than 41 percent of the earths population.

These kind of facts about sanctions do not make sense to a rational mind. The rational mind says why would you kill babies when the strategy only works 13 percent of the time. But the capitalist mind is not a rational mind. 13 perecent yield is an excellent yield for a Capitalist during Imperialism's last gasping breaths. No only would they kill our babies for a 13 percent yield, they would kill their own. In Vietnam they watched their babies step on punji sticks. In Somalia they watched their babies get dragged through the streets, and in Iraq they are sending their own and our own 18 and 19 year old babies toff to war only to bury them by the caseload as they return or to hospitalize them for traumatic brain injury or post traumatic Stress Disorder after they return. But for a pipeline , for a 13 percent yield they will do this.

And they will say it is worth it.

I am not speaking figuratively.

When former Secretary of State Madeline Albright was told by Leslie Stahl that these sanctions had caused the death of a half a million children more dead children than in Hiroshima, Albrights response was

"-we think the price is worth it."—

She said

The world is a beautiful place

to be born into

if you don't mind some people dying

all the time

or maybe only starving

some of the time

which isn't half bad

if it isn't you

Nah, She didn't say that last part that was the poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti

but that's what she meant !

She meant the price is worth it. So long as its not me and Bill and Hillary and George and Condy. Its worth it!

For the American Government not only is it worth it for the most innocent and vulnerable to die. In the case of Sanctions as with all siege warfare,

The innocent and the vulnerable are the intended targets.

Military Strategists have know since the time of wickedly great Frederick and beyond that The lord of a feudal castle eats well until the last of the provisions are gone. The children and the sick hunger and die first. That's the whole point of siege warfare and sanctions to make the populace suffer to the point that they scream for the ruler to open the gates.

This was never better expressed than when Richard Nixon instructed the CIA, in the case of Chile to

"make their economy scream." MAKE THEIR ECONOMY SCREAM The barbarism of the sentiment comes forth even THRU the euphemism economy . Economies don't scream people scream.

And what better way to make people scream than to negatively impact on their health, food, drinking water, education, shelter and safety'

Writer Joy Gordon points out in her two papers Sanctions as Siege Warfare and Sanctions as weapons of mass destruction that it is perhaps contradictory and immoral for the UN to be involved in sanctions given the madate of the, Universal Declaration of Human Rights to insure that every person has a right to "to health, food, drinking water, education, shelter and safety'

For my last point I would like to suggest that it is immoral for the US and any of the western powers to engage in Sanctions against any country in the so called developing world

To make this point I refer to General Tecumsah Sherman, whom the white folks of Georgia still refer to as wickedly great. Sherman said War is Hell

Why should Hell be imposed on anybody, but if it is to be imposed on someone why the innocent children. George Bush and the Crusaders say they are fighting the axis of evil. Well you all know that the axis of evil runs in the line right between that dunce's ears. In runs right up Condelizza's -------nose through the sphenoid bone through her brain-

Sanctions bring hell to the children of Zimbabwe.

I ask you to close your eyes and think of a little boy or girl in Zimbabwe with a face just like your child or grandchild. I ask you to imagine your child or grandchild shivering, on soiled bedding, sweaty, thirsty, malnourished, vomiting, afraid, innocent, screaming and in hell. Then I ask you to hold that image and support D12 as they gather supplies and money to bring relief to our people.

Call December 12th Movement if you want to help

(718) 398-1766

Africa for the Africans and Long Live The Zimbabwe Revolution!

Pan Africans, enemy of the people

Pan Africans, enemy of the people.

By Kwasi Akyeampong
http://theblacklistpub.ning.com/?xgi=YJzq0g
4/26/8

The first thing that is obvious about Pan African is Pan. Pan a Greek word whose cardinal meaning is all.

So then we Pan Africans could be called All Africanist - we espouse a philosophy that embraces all Africans – seek the union of all of Africa and all its people.

Now lets look at All. ALL - 1: the whole of 2: greatest possible 3: every one of
Does our All and Pan Africans embrace the whole of Africa, every one of Africa’s children or at least the greatest possible number of Africans?

Does this philosophy that warmly embrace Mugabe has a slight embrace for Morgan Tsvangiria? Just one example. The one I’ll use in this discourse.

But of course Pan Africans are Pan Africans.

What else do I know about Pan? Pan, "a broad shallow open vessel or container."
Of course I am for a philosophy that is broad in scope. But the shallowness of the practice and application does contradict its potential as a vessel open to input of creativity and inspiration. (A dogma. Not unlike a religion)

Being true to its application, we use this vessel to Pan - for “gold” - a Moses that will deliver us. We wash away tons of perceived irrelevance - dirt, ideas and potentials' - to find our bright and shining prince.

What will become of the dirt we discard?

When we turn our back on Morgan Tsvangiria; for example, who will he turn to for council, fellowship, and support when others elevate him to the Presidency of Zimbabwe; if not soon, but eventually? Who will hold him to account?

The king is dead. Long will he be dead. No hope for continuity here.

Again, using Zimbabwe as an example, we invest everything in Mugabe, and, when our 85 year old mentor reaches the end there is not room for us to make a difference with the likely successor who may obviously be garnered by the likely interests and thus fulfilling our narrow Pan African delusion.

I am of the opinion that we must reinvent and re-forge the Pan into a bucket; being inclusive of our brothers and sisters, celebrating and acknowledging, and seeking out the arrays that unites us rather than clink to and heighten perceived differences.

As that Pan African I am a conciliator and a reconciler for All Africans regardless of our temperate parochial opinions.

I could never have dreamt that in Jamaica there would be a JLP
Government that would be more socialist than the socialist PNP - a JLP whose platform party that is enacting the very programs (free education) the socialist PNP did not enact over all their years in office - even when they (PNP) had ultimate power. There are no saints nor demons out there. There is just us - each as himself. I am all that I perceive - you are your perceptions.
All the ideas and opinions among us is from us, and when we condemned any of us we condemn the all of us - all of who we are.

When I turn my back on any of us I turn my back on the very part of me I will not embrace. For me to love me I am required to love all of me. There is no conditionality to love. I must get to embrace me as I am and as I am not to truly embrace the vision of Africa that's is worthy of our father Marcus Garvey.

My mother is not less honored as my mother because I disagree with her on some essential points. When will we likewise honor Clarence Thomas and Morgan Tsvangiria for they and we share in common? Do we know what we share in common? Do we dare look?

To the extent I/you/we can look ourselves in the mirror and be in love with everything I/you/we see; to that extent I/you/we are able to be a peace and ease with I/you/we and anyone.

M.arcus Garvey's harsh criticism of His Imperial Majesty did not excommunicate either from the race. Being frank with our selves and our friends is a core value required for being a friend.

How will we ever speak with those with whom we disagree when we dare tell our beloved Emperor what we know too well? He is naked. Sir, you have no close on.
Who among us has the moral authority to speak with both, for example, Mr. Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangiria?

Until being a Pan African is reinvent as being an instrument for what's possible, Pan Africans are enemy of the people.

Time to end the dialect-ic civil war and take responsibility for the juggernauting genocide and once again stand in position at the fore of the dreams and aspirations or the people.

:KWASI Akyeampong