Zimpapers Logo

Would Mr Chamisa blame anyone for concluding that his reference to Zimbabweans as “monkeys” could be a reflection of his handlers’ thinking that daily feed him with such narratives in their daily encounters or interactions?

Same statement would not have the same impact had it emanated from a Rhodie like Ian Smith or even from some known racist individuals down South Africa. We know the use of simianisation as a racist slur against black people is still prevalent that side where not so long ago a white woman called Penny Sparrow complaining about black New Year’s revellers saying:

“From now (on) I shall address the blacks of South Africa as monkeys as I see the cute little wild monkeys do the same, pick and drop litter.”

Sparrow’s statement was indicative of the deep entrenchment of racial prejudices and stereotypes still afflicting South Africa with a history of apartheid – a system that clearly discriminated against blacks as inferior beings.

While we also came from a similarly racialised colonial society under Rhodesia, one would not expect a young black politician to appropriate such dehumanising tropes to characterise his fellow compatriots.

Is Mr Chamisa or those who follow him aware that in the history of European cultures, the comparison of humans to apes and monkeys was disparaging from the beginning?

Are they aware that Cecil John Rhodes appropriated the same negative tropes to justify his violent occupation of Zimbabwe? Why would a normal black child in this day and age find it convenient to publicly refer to his fellow compatriots as monkeys or baboons?

Animalisation is one of the common elements of racist dehumanisation. It’s likening others with the language of contamination and disease – placing men on a level with rates that carry epidemic plagues.

Some Europeans find it convenient to characterise Africa as a contagious continent gestating pestilences of all kinds in hot muggy jungles, spread by careless and sexually uncontrolled individuals.

This is just the latest episode in an ugly line of typecasts aimed against different people like Africans. That is why it is still a racist act of provocation to throw a banana in front of black sportspersons.

But how did we come to be here? How did we end up this way with such a kind of a politician utterly unconscious of history and given to unrestrained embarrassing gaffes?

Why are our journalists so soft on issues that are clearly critical in as far as they give a glimmer of the character that some compatriots bestow so much trust on?

We must all resist the temptation of extending the borders of what is right and wrong. It is wrong for one to acquiesce to foreign interests by mimicking their dehumanising portrayal of us.

Nobody has automatic deference to ascending to power. Journalists need to interrogate the character and calibre of those aspiring to lead us. We need to discredit the prudence that too closely resembles lack of conviction.

The coming national elections are not a simple voting story. It is a story about our existence and the legacy we want to bequeath to future generations. Now is the time not to tiptoe historical references that show an affinity with outside forces daily working to undermine our sovereignty.

We must counter dehumanising references with facts and proclaim our equal humanity, decency and compassion. Any political movement that fashions itself as a citizens’ movement and yet flagrantly calls the same citizens monkeys is a danger to our country. As is often said, an ugly idea left unchallenged begins to turn the colour of normal.