Peter Moyo
Bulawayo – A trending debate on X has Zimbabweans comparing the governance of former Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith to the current administration under President Emmerson Mnangagwa, igniting a broad spectrum of opinions on both historical and contemporary issues.
Discussions often highlight the economic and infrastructural developments from Smith’s era, juxtaposed with today’s socio-economic challenges.
A user going by the username @TaperaEmmanuel, for instance, noted, “Most of the roads in urban areas were tarred during Smith’s governance; most high-density locations were built by that Smith government.” This nostalgia is countered by criticism of the current ZANU-PF government, with @TaperaEmmanuel adding, “Zanu-PF government dumped citizens, stole.”
The comparison is met with sharp criticism due to Smith’s racist policies. Former Mount Pleasant legislator, Fadzayi Mahere critiqued the current government’s legislative approach, saying, “If you want to see how deeply @ZANUPF_Official worships Ian Smith, just look at how they copy and paste repressive, colonial legislation. Zimbabwe’s 2019 Maintenance of Peace and Order Act is a direct replica of Ian Smith’s 1960 Law and Order Maintenance Act.”
However, the debate also includes voices in support of the current government. @TendaiZim, defending the administration’s efforts, commented, “We are on the path to recovery. The sanctions are a significant hurdle, but reforms are happening. We must not forget the progress made in education and health sectors post-independence.”
Echoing this sentiment, @NyashaPatriot added, “The current government is making strides in land reform, which Smith never intended for the black majority. We need to focus on the progress, not just the setbacks.”
The current economic climate, characterized by hyperinflation and unemployment, fuels this debate. @MJairosi lamented, “Zimbabwe’s infrastructure that was left by Ian Smith is deteriorating & life in general has become unbearable for the majority of Zimbabweans.” Yet, @UphakamaM argued, “When we say Smith was better than Mugabe & ED, we’re told that he catered for whites. Why is ED making lives of blacks worse ke?”
Critics argue that the liberation struggle’s promise of freedom and prosperity has not been fully realized.Brighton Mutebuka stated, “ZANU PF long lost the moral authority to speak on behalf of genuine heroes of the liberation struggle. They can only purport to. It’s a betrayal of national aspirations on an industrial scale.”
Journalist, Hopewell Chin’ono reflected on Smith’s views, saying, “Ian Smith said that Black Zimbabweans were not yet capable of governing themselves when he spoke towards the end of his racist regime. Does it not embarrass ZANUPF leaders that they have done everything possible to prove him right?”
This debate highlights the complex relationship Zimbabweans have with their history and the present. While some long for the economic stability of Smith’s time, others stress the racial injustices.
The conversation reflects frustration with governance, economic policy, and the unfulfilled promises of independence, with many advocating for policy reevaluation to address pressing issues like unemployment, poverty, and corruption for a better future.
