Zuma, Zanu-PF and the simple truth

The struggle of Zimbabwe was once a struggle for freedom. It is now, among many other things, a battle between the simple truth and the aggressive lie.

In many ways,  this is typical of failed states.  The human devastation caused by the failure of the state sannot be endured or explaine without an increasingly  shril dictator who is able to develop a form of national false consciousness. The result is a population which has, at least partly, seemingly  succumbed to a state of  something akin to  mental  collapse

But to maintain this state of mental collapse, the remnants of the failed state must keep delivering its potion in increasingly powerful jolts. It must have horrible bogeymen to "pedestalise" and degrade; it must have righteous anger to vigorously cast about, preferably with a heavily underlined subtext; and it must have someone to blame for the state it is in other than, naturally, itself.

To everybody else, the simple truth is obvious. As Hannah Arendt noted in The Origins of Totalitarianism: "One of the greatest advantages of the totalitarian elites ... (is) to turn any statement of fact into a question of motive."

Consequently, it's immensely depressing that President Jacob Zuma found it necessary to upbraid a member of not only his own delegation but also that of the SA region for stating the simple truth.

In doing so, he has become yet another victim of the overweening disaster that is modern Zimbabwe. The simple truth is that Zimbabwe has been devastated by economic policies so brainless any informed person could easily see their folly. Even if the destruction of the economy were not enough to demonstrate this simple truth, the fact that Zimbabwe's economy improved immediately when the country was forced to depart from these policies ought to demonstrate the point.

This was obvious enough for Zuma himself on entering office. He distinguished himself from his predecessor by suggesting a "tougher line" with originators of the disaster on SA's border. At the time, ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe said Zuma would be "more vocal in terms of what we see as deviant behaviour by our neighbours".

Compare and contrast that statement to the one released at the weekend in which Zuma expressed regret about "unauthorised statements" by an unnamed member of the facilitation team. There are only three people on the team: Charles Nqakula, SA's high commissioner to Mozambique; Zuma's spokesman Mac Maharaj; and Lindiwe Zulu, his own foreign affairs adviser.

The sin committed by Zulu was, of course, to state the simple truth. In this case it was that there appeared to be problems with the early voting process. The response, of course, was virulent. Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's 89-year-old quasi-dictator who has ruled the country for 33 years, called Zulu a "street woman" from SA who he said had tried to block the holding of polls by the end of July.

More ominously, he actually threatened the Southern African Development Community (SADC). "Let it be known that we are in SADC voluntarily. If SADC decides to do stupid things, we can pull out."

As it happens, the real issue is transparent. Because their own country has been made uninhabitable, a large number of Zimbabweans now live outside Zimbabwe. They are, not surprisingly, generally not Zanu-PF supporters. Having been forced to allow these economic exiles the right to vote, Mugabe's strategy has been to try to force the elections to happen as fast as possible to make it difficult for them to cast their ballots. The strategy would be cunning if it weren't so transparent. But it's entirely consistent with Mugabe's modus operandi, which has been the chief reason he has been able to cling onto power.

That is depressing enough. But for Zuma to choose to support Mugabe over his own adviser is doubly depressing. He was once an independent voice. But now he is just another Zanu-PF plaything. That, sadly, is the simple truth.