The Sunday Mail
IN Bishop Lazi’s village, there once lived this very short, dark, wire-thin, gaunt, ugly and scruffy chap called Mabhanga.
He was known far and wide for his undying love for the “wise waters”.
Wherever and whenever there was beer in the village, it was always a sure bet that Mabhanga would be close by, or, put differently, wherever and whenever you located Mabhanga, you would definitely know that there was some beer around.
The two were as inseparable as gin and tonic, sugar and tea, salt and pepper, Temba Mliswa and the baby mama drama, or Dynamos and chaos.
He, however, had one handicap: A sober Mabhanga — a rare sighting — was a personable, affable and reserved chap, but once he took a swig of the devil’s brew, he would transform into an insufferably bellicose, cantankerous and foul-mouthed creature loathed by villagers.
The dude could not hold his liquor.
Whenever the community, which naturally did not suffer fools, gathered to either celebrate or mourn — on which occasions beer would invariably be readily available — they made it a point not to invite him.
But it never helped, as he would happily invite himself.
Most disconcertingly, he would always — always — stir up trouble by talking or shouting himself into needless altercations and stand-offs with other villagers, which, in turn, spoiled the otherwise enjoyable community gatherings.
His expletive-laden rants and penchant to share unfounded village gossip often left in its wake bitter recriminations and a community at odds with each other.
Of course, he always knew that some responsible and peace-loving members of the community would always save him from getting the hiding he deserved from incensed and aggrieved fellow villagers each time he got into trouble.
Villagers also feared that, being so frail and seemingly fragile, he would unlikely survive a thorough beating.
But this further emboldened and gave him the audacity and temerity to continue his wayward ways.
With time, the community grew weary of putting up with Mabhanga’s grating toxicity, which was slowly but progressively undermining the spirit of community-hood.
Matters eventually came to a head at one community gathering, when, true to his nature, he unsurprisingly launched into one of his usual unwarranted invectives, insulting anyone and everyone, including village elders.
Some tried to warn him that he was going too far, but the more he was cautioned, the more he raised his voice and the more rabid his insults became.
Suffice to say, there was nothing that could have saved him this time around, as some villagers took matters into their own hands to discipline the seemingly incorrigible miscreant.
Mabhanga was flogged into a bloodied pulp and lost a tooth or two.
After they were through with him, he looked more like an effigy or scarecrow.
Embarrassed, he slunk away, leaving behind villagers who were for once satisfied that he had received his just desserts.
Never the one to condone violence of any kind, the Bishop, however, noticed that from that fateful day, Mabhanga’s notoriety was successfully exorcised.
He went under the radar for some time, but when he eventually surfaced, obviously after the embarrassment had worn off, whenever he turned up for communal beer-drinking festivals, he knew how to behave and was often the first one to leave, fearing his demons might get the better of him and earn him another spanking.
So, Mabhanga was not incorrigible after all.
Loose lips sink ships
This is a cautionary tale of the nature and character of African communities.
Our people can be extraordinarily patient to the extent of being perceived to be docile and ineffectual, but, when the need arises, they can fiercely wield the rod to put delinquents on the straight and narrow.
Ask the Rhodesians.
It reminds Bishop Lazi of the recent timeless wise words from distinguished war veteran Onias Garikayi Gosha, who recounted how commanders always reminded guerrillas during the liberation struggle that “a weapon . . . was not a decisive factor in resolving disputes, but a determined person wielding that weapon, who is prepared to use it, would be decisive in settling any dispute”.
You see, exhorting for peace is not a sign of weakness or fear, but of strength.
And shunning violence is not a sign of weakness as well. Proverbs 21:23 says: “Those who guard their mouths and their tongues keep themselves from calamity.”
Titus 3:1-2 also counsels: “Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone.”
As Zimbabweans prepare to engage in the quinquennial ritual of electing representatives who will shape their lives in the next five years, they need to take these words and lessons to heart.
We owe it to ourselves to deliver a clean, peaceful and violence-free election that will give a solid mandate to the incoming administration to discharge its duties without any unnecessary encumbrances.
We have learnt invaluable lessons from the 2018 elections, which were quite a welcome departure from the bitter contestations of the recent past.
For the first time in 16 years, we had election observers from the European Union and America, the campaign period was peaceful (despite incendiary rhetoric from some political parties), voting was incident-free, with American Senator Jeff Flake famously remarking that “democracy doesn’t get better than this”.
But the post-electoral period was topsy-turvy, as the MDC-Alliance, which felt aggrieved by early results that showed signs of imminent defeat, unleashed violence on August to disrupt announcement of the results.
As a consequence, six people died and 35 were injured.
In more ways than one, it is the same script that later played out in the US’ tightly contested 2020 presidential elections.
It was all going well until January 6, 2021, when violent goons, unhappy with Joe Biden’s win and Donald Trump’s loss, invaded the Capitol on the day the election results were supposed to be certified and senselessly unleashed an orgy of violence that left five people dead and many others injured.
The Bishop still finds it difficult to understand why, despite these eerily similar circumstances, Zimbabwe’s elections were, and still are, characterised as “disputed” when America’s polls were, and still are, considered legitimate.
Never again
But in the aftermath of post-election violence, Zimbabwe and America chose different paths.
Here, we constituted a seven-member commission of inquiry chaired by former South African President Kgalema Motlanthe, which was made up of eminent men and women, most of whom were foreign nationals.
After an elaborate fact-finding mission, which involved sitting through various testimonies and combing through evidence adduced by various parties, the commission made key findings that helped explain events surrounding the violence that stained the country’s electoral process.
“The demonstrations which became riotous and caused extensive damage to property and injury,” it said, “had been incited, pre-planned and well-organised by the MDC.”
The pattern was clear — from the incendiary rhetoric, militant defiance to accept defeat and the well-choreographed violence.
Despite these findings, made by a body that is seemingly and arguably quasi-judicial, we chose peace.
If we were a vindictive lot, we could have easily frog-marched these suspected instigators to court, just as they did in America.
As recent as May 25, the leader of a racist far-right gang called Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, who is incidentally a lawyer, was caged for 18 years for the role he played in mobilising the January 6 attack.
All told, American prosecutors have secured more than 600 convictions from the 1 000 cases that have been brought before the courts after the January 6 post-election violence.
Although Rhodes did not take part in the attacks, he was convicted of “seditious conspiracy” — whatever it means — ostensibly because he was prepared to foment unrest “simply because he did not like the results of an election”.
This is reminiscent of what Tendai Biti — then-vice chairperson of the MDC — said at a campaign rally at Chemhanza Grounds in Mabvuku-Tafara on June 26, 2018, when he indicated that “the Alliance would not accept election results if ZANU PF was the winner”.
Again, this was captured by the commission of inquiry, including “overwhelming video evidence, as well as evidence from institutions which presented submissions to the commission that show that the MDC-Alliance leadership made inflammatory statements in its campaign rallies and also at several press conferences, inciting violence”.
As another electoral season, which is open season for politicians, begins, we hope that our brothers and sisters are taking notes and lessons from what is happening in America, a country they consider an emulable gold standard for democracy and the rule of law.
They should temper their tongues and assiduously work to ensure that the events of August 1, 2018 are never, ever, repeated in this teapot-shaped Republic.
Like Mabhanga, they have every reason to fear letting their demons get the better of them again.
We are a peaceful village that prides itself in making peace and being at peace.
But being a peaceful people does not mean we are weak.
Bishop out!
