Source: Personality politics is preventing Zimbabweans from freedom
For far too long, I have urged ordinary Zimbabweans to stand up against a repressive system that has driven them into unimaginable suffering and poverty.
Today, this call is even more urgent as the ZANU-PF regime brazenly seeks to amend the Constitution, paving the way for President Emmerson Mnangagwa to extend his stay in power beyond the two five-year term limit.
This proposed constitutional amendment, however, is not born out of a genuine concern for Zimbabweans’ welfare.
Instead, it reflects a self-serving agenda to perpetuate one man’s reign and that of his inner circle.
Extending Mnangagwa’s presidency from 2028 to 2030 or beyond will not improve the lives of over 70% of Zimbabweans currently living below the poverty datum line.
To directly receive articles from Tendai Ruben Mbofana, please join his WhatsApp Channel on: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaqprWCIyPtRnKpkHe08
It will not bring desperately needed medication to our crumbling hospitals or stock them with cancer machines and ambulances, which have been absent for decades.
The notion that an additional two years in office would bring meaningful change is both absurd and insulting.
If Mnangagwa has failed to achieve these basic goals during his two five-year terms, what miracle could we expect him to perform with an extra two years?
His record speaks for itself—a legacy of unfulfilled promises, economic decline, and institutional decay.
The two-term limit for presidential office is not arbitrary.
Nations worldwide adopted this limit based on evidence that a decade is sufficient for any competent leader to implement their vision and deliver tangible results.
Leaders who fail within this timeframe reveal their incapacity, and extending their rule only risks entrenching authoritarianism and exacerbating suffering.
Zimbabweans must ask: if Mnangagwa cannot fix Zimbabwe in ten years, why would he succeed in twelve?
This quest for extended power is, in reality, about consolidating control and protecting the interests of a small elite who have enriched themselves through the systematic looting of national resources.
These are the same individuals who evade the consequences of Zimbabwe’s failing healthcare system by flying abroad for treatment, who sidestep the collapse of public education by sending their children to prestigious schools overseas, and who are shielded from the struggles of the majority by their ill-gotten wealth.
What this proposal reveals is not just Mnangagwa’s lust for power but a contempt for the ordinary Zimbabwean.
It signals that his priorities lie not in alleviating poverty, creating jobs, or restoring dignity to citizens but in preserving his grip on the reins of power at all costs.
Yet, this is not simply Mnangagwa’s failure.
It is also a failure of the broader political culture in Zimbabwe—a culture steeped in fear, apathy, and personality politics.
Yesterday, I wrote about the pervasive culture of fear that has paralyzed Zimbabweans for decades, from the colonial era to the post-independence regime.
I questioned why influential leaders in opposition parties, civil society, and the human rights movement appear unwilling to take decisive action, instead limiting themselves to online activism and media commentary.
Some argue that these leaders fear arrest or persecution, a reasonable concern given ZANU-PF’s brutal history of incarcerating, torturing, and even assassinating opponents.
However, this fear is not unique to our generation.
The liberation struggle against colonial rule was marked by immense sacrifices, with thousands imprisoned, tortured, or killed.
Freedom has never been handed over on a silver platter—it must be fought for.
This historical lesson seems to have been forgotten.
Today’s Zimbabweans expect change without sacrifice, freedom without resistance, and liberation without struggle.
Yet, if our forefathers and mothers were willing to risk everything for freedom, why should we expect our generation to be any different?
Are we not facing the same, if not greater, oppression and deprivation?
To be clear, the call is not for violence or insurrection.
It is for peaceful, lawful action grounded in the rights enshrined in Zimbabwe’s Constitution.
But even this requires courage and resolve, traits that appear to be in short supply among both the populace and their leaders.
One of the most troubling aspects of Zimbabwe’s political landscape is its reliance on personality politics.
Mnangagwa’s justification for extending his term—his supposed indispensability to the fulfillment of “Vision 2030”—is emblematic of this toxic culture.
The same logic can be found among opposition supporters who argue that Zimbabwe cannot afford to lose certain leaders if they are arrested or otherwise incapacitated.
This mindset is not only flawed but dangerous.
It breeds a form of idolatry where individuals are elevated above the cause, reducing entire movements to personality cults.
Such an approach undermines the principles of democracy and accountability.
A genuine people’s movement must transcend individuals; it must be resilient and adaptable, with a deep bench of capable leaders ready to step in when needed.
History is replete with examples of movements that thrived because they were not dependent on one leader.
The African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa endured decades of apartheid not because of Nelson Mandela alone but because it nurtured a collective leadership.
In fact, Mandela was behind bars for a quarter of a century, yet the freedom for the people of South Africa was won.
There was an inexhaustible supply of leaders, such as Govan Mbeki, Steve Biko, Oliver Tambo, and many others capable of leading the fight for democracy in the country even in the unfortunate event of one leader’s elimination.
The same can be said of the Indian independence movement, which saw leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Subhas Chandra Bose emerge at different stages.
In contrast, Zimbabwe’s opposition and civil society risk becoming mirror images of ZANU-PF if they continue to place individuals above the cause.
This dependency renders the struggle fragile and vulnerable, as the removal of one leader—whether through arrest, exile, or death—can bring the entire movement to a halt.
As Zimbabweans, we must reject this flawed logic.
No leader is indispensable.
The cause of freedom, democracy, and prosperity must always take precedence over the preservation of any individual.
If we fail to understand this, we will remain trapped in the cycle of authoritarianism and stagnation.
Moreover, we must recognize that the excuses for inaction are not only unconvincing but self-defeating.
Yes, there are risks in standing up to an oppressive regime, but the alternative is perpetual suffering and poverty.
We must ask ourselves: are we willing to trade our future and that of our children for the illusion of safety today?
The time has come for Zimbabweans to rise above fear, apathy, and personality politics.
It is time to demand better from our leaders and ourselves.
This is not just a call for action; it is a call for accountability, for the courage to confront our reality, and for the resolve to change it.
Each one of us has a role to play.
The struggle for freedom and justice is not the responsibility of a select few but a collective effort that requires sacrifice from all.
No one will fight for Zimbabwe’s liberation but Zimbabweans themselves.
The question is not whether we can afford to stand up but whether we can afford not to.
Our future depends on it.
- Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. Please feel free to WhatsApp or Call: +263715667700 | +263782283975, or email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com, or visit website: https://mbofanatendairuben.news.blog/
COMMENTS