EULOGIZING A COLOSSUS; NELSON ROLIHLAHLA MANDELA (JULY 18, 1918 ~ DECEMBER 5, 2013) –PART I

My first 'encounter' with Nelson Mandela must have been around 1994. It was from the musical Sarafina which is set in Apartheid South Africa. I must have been around 8 then and can safely say that I was already precociously politically aware. He sounded too good to be true this Mandela guy. Almost a mythical character. However, a few years later, as I dug deeper on him and other heroes that I had discovered along the way, the likes of Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jr., my affection and admiration for the man grew. Before December 5, 2013, if I had been granted just one wish in the world, I am more than sure that it would have been to meet this man. Let’s keep it simple. I admired the man because not simply because he spent 27 years in prison; there are many people who have spent even longer periods of time in incarceration on politically motivated grounds. Rather, it was the raw and unapologetic commitment to principle that the 27 years represented that earned him my eternal respect. It was the way in which he went about building a nation after he became President that etched his name onto my heart. The boldness to reconcile with the enemy, to embrace his tormentors and the magnanimity and grace to move on from a painful past without forgetting its useful lessons. Let’s face it. Madiba is stuff of legends. President Obama was right when he said that we are unlikely to see anyone of his ilk again. Not that human decency has perished from the face of the face. But rather because the peculiar political circumstances that conspired to birth the Mandelas of this world won’t probably repeat themselves. True there remains a lot to be done in this world. A lot of evil to be confronted. There is war on poverty, hunger, disease and illiteracy to be won. But surely this will not require those waging these wars to be locked up on a lonely and wretched island for close to 2 decades. [There is a popular misconception that Mandela spent 27 years on Robben Island. In fact he only spent some 18 years or so on the Island. The remainder of his prison term was served at Pollsmoor and Victor Verster prisons.] It’s further true that there still remains political settlements to be secured in the Palestine and that there are still many peoples of this world who are denied the basic rights and freedoms that some of us take for granted. Countries like Burma, Saud Arabia, Swaziland come to mind. Maybe these still need gallant sons and daughters to lead them to the Promised Land. But so different are the variables that they are unlikely to attain even half the stature of Mandela.

There are those who in light of his passing on December 5, 2013 have sought to cast aspersions on his legacy. They have called him names. From an opportunist who had greatness thrust upon him to a western puppet and everything in between.  It’s a free world. The kind that Mandela was ready to lay down his life in order to see realized. So people can blurt out what they fancy. However, it is in that same freedom that we add our own voice to the ‘debate’ about the Madiba legacy.

Greatness thrust upon him…

There is no gainsaying that Mandela was a product of peculiar historical circumstances. He became of age in a country in which a brutal system of racial discrimination condemned him and others of his race to “a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity.” They were to be excluded from the political process simply because they were black. Faced with such kind of stark social reality, one must make a decision. For good or bad such calls alter history. Madiba, dutifully, made the right call when he got recruited by Walter Sisulu into the ANC in 1942/43. Any person who has even fleetingly glanced at the history of the ANC will know that before his incarceration in 1962, Madiba had been a leader in the ANC. It was him and others who pushed for a more ‘militant’ liberation organisation. In fact his views to revolutionize the ANC [through formation of a Youth League for instance] were considered so radical by Dr. Xuma, the leader of the ANC at the time that him and his comrades [Sisulu, Lembede] were dismissed as being “naïve firebrands.” In fact, by the time that Mandela was being incarcerated he had been the movement’s leader for the Transvaal, secretary of the Youth League on top of being a member of the party’s national executive committee. This clearly shows that Mandela was a leader in his own right even before he was thrown into prison.

Even a cursory examination of the role he played during the Rivonia trial [his 3 hour court address] and at Robben Island clearly shows that his colleagues recognised him as the first among equals. It’s accurate indeed that the ANC had rivals within South Africa. Long Walk to Freedom, Madiba’s autobiography details how Robert Sobukwe, the leader of the Pan Africanist’ Congress, the ANC’s chief rival organisation, made it a point to antagonise Mandela and to challenge his ‘leadership’ of political prisoners on the Island. But for those within the ANC on the Island, they accepted Mandela as their leader.

The struggle to liberate South Africa has never been a one man show. No honest man can produce evidence that Mandela ever made any claim that he singlehandedly dismantled apartheid. Such evidence is not available because Mandela never made such an outlandish assertion. In fact quite the contrary. Mandela has always been insistent that the liberation struggle was a collective effort. It is even recorded that he resisted any attempt to call for his lone release minus that of his comrades. The slander that he stole other struggle stalwarts’ glory is, therefore, baseless and is indeed just that; malicious slander. But it is indeed true that there was a decision made by the movement in exile in Zambia and London [the likes of Tambo and Mbeki] that they would make Mandela the ‘poster boy’ of the liberation struggle. I guess ‘Free Mandela’ sells well than Free Mandela, Govan Mbeki, Walter Sisulu, Kathrada, Mac Maharaj….[yo! The list is endless isn’t it?] Can you imagine such kind of a media campaign? Wouldn’t it be a such a damp squib that no traction would in fact be gained? By highlighting the plight of Mandela, the struggle movement was ‘dramatizing [his] shameful condition’ and indeed that of all those prisoners of conscience who were being held on the Island. It was indicting the apartheid regime and everything else that it stood for.

But again History will record that it was Madiba who had wisdom to tell that the pivotal moment to start talking to the racist regime had come. This he did at a great risk to his personal standing within the organisation as others were suspicious of his motives. After his release from prison in 1990, Mandela continued to provide steady leadership to the ANC through the CODESA process. It was him who probably pulled South Africa from the precipice of a bloody civil war when he appeared on national television to calm the nation down after the racially motivated slaying of Chris Hani.  

Surely all this should begin to answer the skeptics unbelievable assertion that Madiba had greatness thrust upon him, no?

To be continued... 

A Note on cash-gate: Can we all calm down, please?

According to published reports [Nation Online and Nyasa Times of November 17, 2013], the civil society in Malawi wants all cash-gate cases to be investigated and prosecuted by the end November [2013]. A petition to that effect will be presented to President Banda in due course. This is the second most outlandish thing I have heard from these guys in as many months; the first one being a threat to boycott the payment of taxes. For starters, it should be obvious to any clear minded individual that the sheer monstrosity of the cash-gate scandal is such that investigations may actually take many months to complete. One would have thought that our civil society would be pushing for more thorough and painstaking investigations for the consequences of a shoddy job should be self-evident. Acquittals and subsequent nauseating settlements in millions of kwachas for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment claims. But this gung-ho attitude is troubling for even more serious reasons. The petition which the Civil Society has prepared will be addressed to the President. It stands to reason, therefore, that in effect what the President will be asked to do is to ensure that the cash-gate investigations and prosecutions are fast-tracked to meet the ominous November [2013] deadline. The only problem with this call is that it assumes that the President has the power to direct how both the Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions investigates and conducts prosecutions in respect of the cashgate scandal. Well, she does not. These 2 institutions are under our law required to operate independently, free from any influence be it presidential or otherwise.  [And I have always thought that this was a good thing. Well apparently not.] The fact that there has been interference in the operations of these institutions by the Presidents in the past does not colour such interference with any legality. Independence of these 2 institutions at the most basic level entails that they should not be at the receiving end of orders from any office on how to do their job. If the President tells the Police and the DPP to finalize investigations and  prosecutions by November [2013], even if the same was feasible which it clearly is not, what will stop her from telling them who to and not to investigate and prosecute? It’s quite ironic, isn't it, that it is now the civil society which is foaming and frothing, championing the anarchy and illegality. Very ironic indeed. It’s a crazy world this one.  

In any event, prosecutions do not just involve the police and prosecutors. It also involves courts which, as is or should be elementary knowledge, do not answer to the President. How legitimate is it to demand that a President deliver on a timetable she has no control over whatsoever? Am not Mrs. Banda fan, naturally, but this is a no-brainer really.

Can we all calm down and be sensible about all this, please? Look, we are all seething with rage that some miscreants helped themselves to our money as our brothers and sisters lay dying in our drugless public hospitals. [How bizarre, by the way! Hospitals without drugs. How about changing their names to ‘Departure Lounges’? Because in all fairness that’s what they have become.] But I digress. We are all mad that cashgate happened. But the last thing we need is a mob mentality. We are a country of laws and processes and we must exercise restraint as these take their course. There are hardworking public servants in this country who are putting themselves in harm’s way [we all saw what these guys are capable of didn't we?] working 20 hour days, on measly pay, so that those who did us this great wrong are brought to book. Let us be patient and let them do their job. Professionally and efficiently. Save the hysteria for another day. We are dealing with a serious issue here. It does not admit of melodrama. 

"Looting" at capital hill…a case of corporate complicity?

Caveat: We do not have the full facts on the so-called Capital hill cash-gate. It is a fast moving story and one would be well advised to withhold their judgment at this point. If there is anything that the Chasowa tragicomedy and the Mphwiyo-still-unraveling saga teaches us, then it’s that in Malawi, there is always more than meets the eye. However, there is still something that can be said about the unfolding drama even at this nascent stage.

Are we really surprised?

We shouldn't really be surprised with what is allegedly going on at Capital hill. Folks in Malawi have been shamelessly thieving for so long. Didn't the former Chief Public Prosecutor once go on record that close to a third of public resources are lost to graft in this country? We all know of people who are living in upscale suburbs in our cities and who have their children at expensive private schools; stuff they naturally can’t afford on their paper civil service salaries. It is common knowledge, isn't it, that the majority of people stick around the civil service, despite the ludicrously low wages, because of allowances and other freebies. No one has bothered to do anything about it. We all know of politicians who couldn't even afford a decent pair of pata pata just a few months before their ministerial appointment. These days, however, they send their mistresses to opulent capitals of the west for their vacation and shopping. So a culture of thieving is something which is entrenched in the public service.

Is it not something we accept?

Since we have had public looting for so long and have done so little to address it, wouldn't it be a fair charge that we have all been corporately complicit in the larceny of our own resources? Surely we have. If not by active encouragement then certainly by our muteness and passive acquiescence. Walk to the gates of Sanjika Palace whenever President Banda is in residence. You will see scores and scores of people waiting by the entrance for alms from the President. How much do we pay our President to expect her to engage in such kind of largesse? You see in Malawi, the President is also supposed to be the nation’s supreme benefactor. She is expected to have all the money to meet everyone’s insatiable demand. And it’s not just the President who bears this burden of expectation, really. Ministers and members of parliament too. They are somehow expected to provide coffins for every dead constituent and to pay school fees for every orphan in their areas. Never mind their job description and importantly, never mind how much they draw from the public kitty as their paper emoluments. By putting these unreasonable, unrealistic and immoral financial demands on our leaders, we unwittingly push them into unorthodox means of raising money.  We must get rid of this parasitism. Habitual begging, especially where it is accompanied by the imposition of a burden of obligation on the benefactor, is no less objectionable than the benefactor resorting to criminal behavior to meet the obligation.

Fighting corruption is a bloody duel…  

As I write this, am told that the MDF has deployed its personnel to look for ‘looted funds’ in our capital city’s markets! Of course, there may be a bit of exaggeration here. But with respect, a lot of what am seeing in response to the so called capital hill cash-gate is knee jerk. It’s not methodical enough. [Am actually surprised that some were ‘caught’ with huge sums of money in their car-boots. Well, it’s either they are not thieves at all or they are so green at the game it’s embarrassing!]

The starting point here is that we already have institutions that are supposed to be fighting graft in the country. These include the National Audit Office, the Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Malawi Police Service [which has a specialized department dealing with “fiscal crime”] and of course the top prosecutor. If there has been larceny on a scale suggested by reports on social media, and that’s still an “If” at this point, then it would mean that these sleuths have been caught napping on the job. Any investigation into the looting of public funds should of necessity also extend to why these bodies weren’t able to pick up these malpractices earlier and do something about it. All of us will of course have to wait for the results of this investigation. But there are some things which we already know and which we can confidently say something about.

Firstly, the underworld of white collar crime is sophisticated and possesses a potent ability to repel the forces of good; criminal investigators, prosecutors and courts. The fight against corruption is a bloody duel. No one should attempt it unless they are convinced that they are up to the task. Our avowed commitment to tackling corruption and theft of public resources should be matched with action. The ACB and Fiscal Police should be funded in such a way that paucity of resources does not stand in the way of their success. They should have the most reliable cars, the fastest computers and the best brains on the market if they are to succeed. Look, criminals have moved on. Gone are the days when people had to forge cheques to steal. These days, a computer nerd only has to sit in his bedroom with a laptop that has a decent Wi-fi connectivity to steal without a trace, millions of kwachas of public funds funds. These kinds of crooks cannot be fought with colonial-era issued riffles and baton sticks. This new threat cannot be met with brawns but brains. Of course, these are brains that are highly sought after. It would be naïve for anyone to expect them to work for the police or the audit office or the ACB if they are paid a pittance. If we are serious about fighting graft, we need to put money where our mouths are.

To be continued…

Conversations with Moses

Fumbo: who benefits from societal order?

Interesting thoughts…on the male control of the female body. Maybe to simply reduce the argument to ‘men controlling the woman’s body’ is to pay scanty attention to the other rather pervasive and equally important power players in society. Because when you think about it, our bodies, yes both male and female, are subject to some sort of societal strictures. It might as well be that the inhibitions placed on the female body are indeed more pronounced but it doesn’t change the fact that Society would ‘flog’ me if I paraded in my village square naked. So maybe we need to interrogate the basis of societal order. Who stands to benefit more from a well ordered society with conventions on even mundane matters like dressing? Where do we place political and religious interests in all this? Do I hear someone say that it is even patriarchy which stands behind these systems? But what of systems where females have traditionally been very important power brokers? Can we not say that they are also in that regard beneficiaries of a well ordered society of which the ‘control of the body’ is but an aspect? I would love to hear your thoughts on where the ‘man’ stands in a matrilineal set-up…My point is, at the end of the day, we might as well find ourselves concluding that in some instances it is the woman who controls the male body! Quite outlandish, huh?

Of “us” and “others”…

On this I fully concur with you and I have nothing useful to add. I posted on my FB wall a couple of weeks ago that the “‘There is no chewa, tumbuka, sena but Malawian’ is a refrain of dubious accuracy.” There is nothing objectionable with racial/ethnic [and whatever] diversity. Heck! There is nothing we can do about being born Tumbuka, Chewa,, black, brown etc is there? The problem arises when we use these differences to disentitle others and to favour our own. I have always told ‘northerners’ who agitate for cessation on the basis of discrimination that “ah just dare do that and you will soon see what will happen. After the cessation Tumbukas will start discriminating against ngondes and Tongas against lambyas and so on and so forth. Before we know it, every village will be its own country if the solution to ethnic discrimination will be cessation.” I would love to see how much this othering has set us backwards as a people. We compromise on putting the right people in the right places because they do not belong. We would rather an inept homeboy occupied the office. Poor us…

“At what precise pace should a black man walk to avoid suspicion?”

I was watching Andersoon Cooper’s Townhall Meeting Special on Race & Justice in the US yesterday July 18, 2013. This whole Trayvon Martin travesty feels me with a great sense of frustration and anger. Let me start by acknowledging that it might as well be the case that the case, merely looked at from its “merits” was correctly decided. I believe it is the law in the US that if a jury entertains any doubt about the culpability of the accused, then it must resolve the same in his favour. In this case, we do have evidence that Zimmerman did in fact sustain some injuries on the material day. We also know that there was someone between the 2 of them who shouted for help. In other words there was some compelling evidence to suggest that in the minutes leading up to his fatality, Trayvon was in fact the aggressor. Now throw in Florida’s stand your ground law into the mix and you really have a hopeless case as a prosecution. After all, we must not allow ourselves to be blinded by our momentary anger to the fact that it is for the State to prove the guilt of an accused. The bar to clear is rather high in this regard. The evidence must be such as eliminates any reasonable doubt from the jury/court’s mind. That can hardly be said to have been the case in this case. Sadly, however, that’s not all that there is to the Trayvon travesty. The criminal justice system is not simply an assemblage of rules, procedures and system for enforcing a state’s penal laws. It also encompasses the unwritten attitudes of the people who run it, from the penal lawmaker through the cop who stops and frisks to a sentencing judge. It is informed by the policy objectives of any given polity. And it is not value free. And because we entrust it to human beings, they bring to it their prejudices and biases, both acknowledged and subconscious. Now it is a notorious fact that a young black man has got more chances of ending up in a penitentiary than he has of say a community college. If you are black, you are more likely to be stopped by the Police. You are more likely to be arrested. You are more likely to be shot by the Police and you are more likely to be at the receiving end of a long custodial sentence than would be the case if you were a white Defendant. Am saying nothing new here. These are well researched observations. Now this is the system that ‘processed’ Trayvon. You are right when you say that paper justice was served here. Zimmerman had his day in court and he carried it. But we all know better, don’t we? If Trayvon had been white and Zimmerman black….How I wish this was a Stephen Lawrence moment for the US. But somehow, I just have a depressing feeling it won’t be. Racism in the US is too institutionalized. It is a centuries-old machine that may never be fully dismantled. But that of course, is no excuse for failing to ask the tough questions.  Again I must agree with you that paper justice was served here. But we all know that the young man was screwed by the system…

FACING THE ENEMY...

Apparently there has been a ‘spike’ in crime since Mrs Joyce Banda took over as President of this tiny country. I have put the word spike  in quotes because in all fairness, in the absence of empirical evidence to validate the assertion, there is simply no way of knowing the accuracy of the claim. It might as well be that there has indeed been a spike. It’s difficult to tell. What is evident, however, if the media (including social media) coverage of criminal activities is anything to go by is that there is a popular view out there that since President Banda took over there has been an increase in criminal activity. Attempts have been made to link the ‘spike’ to the current administration’s stand on use of lethal force by the police or what is commonly referred to as the shoot-to-kill policy.  Common wisdom here is that since the current administration decided to abandon the policy, criminals have been emboldened while law enforcers have in the same breath been demoralized. Blame for the ‘spike’ has, therefore, been squarely laid at the doorstep of Amayi and her man at the National Police Headquarters Lot Dzonzi.

Like I have said, I form no opinion on whether or not there has been a spike in criminal activity in the country since Mrs. Banda became the State House’s tenant. Fact of the matter is that we had criminals yesterday, we have today and we will have for as long as human civilization last. I do not even need to be a Man of God to say that. It’s that obvious. That does not mean, however, that we should take a defeatist attitude towards crime. However, fighting crime should not be on the basis of knee-jerk policies. The task is so serious that it requires society to engage itself in some soul searching and in the asking of oft uncomfortable questions.

Tackling crime comprehensively…

It must firstly be recognized that criminal behavior is behavior that is so deviant from the acceptable norms that it is accepted that it is appropriate to attach penal sanction to such. It is quite legitimate to focus on the penalties themselves. However, I dare say it is equally important to expend some energies on why some people deviate from the acceptable norms. Attempting to fight crime without even bothering to find out why some folks feel compelled to go and violently rob and rape others in the still of the night is to some extent akin to prescribing drugs without diagnosing the ailment. It can hardly be helpful.

Let me hasten to say that I am not a trained criminologist. But were you to ask one, he or she would tell you that there are many theories that seek to explain criminal behavior. Some factors are environmental. Could it be that our young men (I am generously assuming that the majority of criminals are male) are being pushed to crime because the economic environment is so harsh that they feel like they have no option than to steal from someone? Is it because they have been jobless for so long and the pressure of society for them to stand up and counted as men has gotten to them to the point of pushing them into criminality?  Could some government policies such as the decision to stop touting or street vending be to blame? Could it be because folks feel that no matter how hard they try, they can never break free from the shackles of poverty? It surprises me that we complain of crime and yet we are yet to find a solution to the problem of street-children. Where do we think those disappear to as they grow older? To villages and townships to become responsible citizens or to terrorize others? Why do we have so many street kids anyway? Is it not a sign that the family as an institution is failing? What has happened to the institution of the extended-family that used to take in all orphans and nurture them to responsible maturity? We also know,  that some causes of criminal behavior are due to psychological problems. Do we have systems in place to diagnose and attempt to treat personality disorders for instance? When are we going to wrestle with these issues and deliberately try to take them into account in policy formulation? Let us be clear here. Criminal behavior is to a large extent inexcusable. But we cannot ignore context in fighting crime. Those who do so, proceed in great peril.

Policing

It goes without saying that a robust police service is indispensable in the fight against crime. Policing is not just about tactics, however. It’s also about structures and resources. Perhaps it is time we asked ourselves whether or not we have properly equipped our crime busters before burdening them with impossible and unrealistic demands. Our Police Service is as old as our modern state itself but to date it does not have a forensic laboratory. And from the look of things, if our successive national budgets are anything to go by, this situation will not change any time soon. The world of technology is steaming ahead at a neck-breaking speed and yet our police’s record keeping system is still manual. Do you know how tragic that is? A police station goes up in flames when a few miscreants decide to riot and that’s that. No back up system. Nothing. We want the police to be gentle with stone-throwing protesters and yet an overwhelming majority of them go into such situations without protective gear. Not that they find the attire unfashionable, but because it simply isn’t in stock. Should we really be surprised then when such officers, overwhelmed by the occasion perhaps, recklessly use their firearms? It’s all really attractive and pretty when we preach human rights to police officers but if we really are serious about the decent handling of suspects in cell, we must empower the Police to do its job without having to resort to barbarian tactics. A detective who is able to lift a suspect’s DNA and fingerprints from a crime scene will surely have no reason for wanting to sear the suspects bare back with a hot pressing iron, will he?

There has also been some debate on the legality of the President’s claim to being the Commander-In-Chief of the Police Service. Maybe she is, maybe she is not; that’s for another day. But surely we all agree that as the country’s number 1 citizen, the President has an obligation, be it moral or otherwise, to motivate her troops, No? Our police officers are among the least paid in the region, well let us just say the least paid. And yet, on my own nocturnal sojourns, I sometimes chance into them. Often times it will be a trio. Faithfully patrolling the streets so that say my mother and everyone else all can sleep soundly. And yet, and I hope my perception is wrong here, the Police has never been under a more sustained attack from the public than it has been for the last couple of months. And curiously, to a very ostensible extent, the charge has been led by the President herself. To be honest with you, there is nothing complimentary that I have heard her say about the Police for the past 4 months. She has found time within her relatively short stint at the state house to visit two, not one but two, correctional facilities. She is yet to make her way to any Police formation. Maybe I am just being petty but such gestures are so wrong for a politician to whom public perception must be everything. We must never allow the Police to feel like they are the enemy. Law enforcers can never be our enemies. The miscreants who go about terrorizing innocent people in their houses are the ones who on the wrong side of society and not the brave men and women who dare to go where all flee. It’s the Police we must side with and pamper. Not petty criminals and consummate crooks. To say this is not to celebrate police monstrosity, though. Like any big institution, it will have its bad apples. We must avoid labeling the whole institution however.

The victim’s voice…

Retribution is a legitimate aim of society. To advocate for a more comprehensive approach towards crime busting is not to say that crime should not be punished. Appropriate sentences must be meted out by our courts to people guilty of offences. Much as it is said that a crime is a wrong against the whole society and not just the particular individual, it cannot be denied that long after the offender has served his sentence, the victim of the crime will still be dealing with the scars that crime leaves on its victims. This is especially so with violent crimes such as burglary, defilement and rape. This is why it is important for our courts to deliberately take into consideration the express sentiments of victims of crime for purposes of sentencing. It is rather odd, isn’t it, that despite the law providing for the reception of evidence for sentencing purposes, courts rarely follow that course. It’s high that started happening. Not to overemphasize the retributive aim of criminal law, but to give recognition to the fact that it remains one of its aims.

Conclusion…

It has been said that “History shows that whenever a grievance presses hardly on the greater part of the population, it is not long before a remedy is discovered.”For this true in our case, however, we must not be content with firefighting. We must accept that crime is a complex problem requiring an equally complex solution. I am not claiming to propose a complete panacea for our crime problem. I am hoping, however, that we can start having the conversations that really matter. Am hoping that we can begin to face our real enemy.

Confusedly tribal…

You see I am not as enthusiastic about these tribal things. I would hardly muster enough excitement within myself, for instance, to travel all the way to Hora Mzimba to attend some cultural function such as Umtheto. Not that I blame or judge those who are deep into these things, No. It’s just that I have decided that they really aint for me. And I have my reasons.  

If I heard my paternal grandfather well, his ancestors were Karangas from Zimbabwe. They were uprooted from there by their Nguni conquerors and forced to trek to Tanganyika before finally finding themselves in northern Malawi. The Ngunis, so the story is told, had a policy of assimilation so that those that they took under fold, mostly be conquest, became ngunis by association, it at all there is such a thing. Am not sure about the ethnicity of the women that my paternal great-grandfathers married, though am sure they were from diverse ethnic backgrounds. What am sure of, however, is that my paternal grandfather, a polygamous man, married two women from different ethnic backgrounds. Am not sure whether my grandfather’s first wife, fondly called Ago Tembo was a tumbuka or ngoni by ethnicity but what am sure of is that my Mdala’s second wife, Ago Phiri, was a daughter of a yao man and a chewa woman.  My father was Ago Phiri’s eldest son from her marriage to the M’dala. Ago Phiri being from a matrilineal background could easily have pointed her children to Lilongwe, from where her mother came from as being their home. As it were, however, my father was raised to call Ekwendeni Mzimba, where his father had settled, as his home. I similarly call it home as well. My mother on the other hand is from Mzimba. Her father’s ancestors are said to have trekked from the area along the northern shores of Lake Malawi. For all I know, these ancestors could have been tongas. They later found themselves at Embangweni in Mzimba and settled there. Am not sure though about the ancestry of her mother. She could be Ngoni. She could be something else. Alright this is a little bit confusing, isn’t  it? Exactly my point. What am I by ethnicity?

Like I have said, if what I was told is correct, my father could only have laid claim to have been a ngoni by association save perhaps to the extent that some of his maternal ancestors could have been ngonis? What however is the ethnicity of a progeny of an inter-ethnic marriage?

Take the Umtheto festival, for instance. Didn’t you find it curious that a ngoni function was celebrated in tumbuka language? Wasn’t it even stranger that the chairperson for the Mzimba Heritage Association asked for tumbuka and not Ngoni, or Zulu as DD Phiri would rather we call it, to be included in the country’s school syllabus? This may sound rather petty but let’s face it; a language is central to any ethnic identity. Not that you can claim to be English simply because you speak the language, No. But a proud Englishman who wasn’t able to speak English would be an oddity. The same can be said about the Maseko Ngonis who call Chichewa their mother tongue.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that there is a cultural homogeny in this country. Far from it. There are distinct practices, attitudes, values etc that we can all identity with particular ethnic groups. It’s just that the heterogeneousness of our ethnicity and culture is disproportionately highlighted in Malawi.

Historically, what we call Malawi has been a melting pot of diverse peoples. Some came from central Africa while others trekked from the southern tip of the continent to settle in diverse places that were later to be called Malawi. History also tells us that inter-marriages and cultural assimilation was rampant during these mass migratory periods. That is why the Ngunis who settled in the plains of central Malawi soon forgot their language and adopted Chichiwa as their lingua. The same can be said about most other ethnic groups. So really, we don’t have pure ethnic groups in Malawi. And certainly no untainted cultures. What we have are alloyed cultures. Alloyed ethnic groups. Alloyed languages. Why then do we find it so necessary to exaggerate our ethnic distinctiveness when we are anything but such in reality?...Stay with me…my thoughts are still evolving. 

The world as i see it...

I have, i must admit, been resisting the temptation to create a blog for a very long time now. Some of us are natural loudmouths. This mouth of ours, on more than one occasion as a matter of fact, has gotten us in trouble before. One can be forgiven, therefore, for wanting to be cautious. After all, the older we grow, the greater the stakes become. In a way, therefore, this is a risk that am taking. A risk that i will offend others. A risk that my views, yes MY VIEWS, will cause discomfort for others and that others may actually be victimized for my expressing them. You probably think I am exaggerating my importance. But there is as we all know, something known as "guilt by association." We all have been labelled, rightly or wrongly, haven't we, for merely associating with others even if the association is purely accidental. Say consanguinity for instance. We don't choose our families or do we? This association is purely accidental, therefore. But this does not stop the world from labeling us on the basis of this association. All am saying is that there is a possibility that others who associate with me "accidentally" may suffer some disadvantage as a result of the views expressed here. That is why it took some time for me to do this...


But now i reckon i will do it after all....I promise to articulate my reasons later. 


This will be my viewpoint. The world as i see it. Many of you will disagree with me. Well that's alright. I disagree with people all the time. Some quietly, others loudly. It's not a crime to disagree provided we are not disagreeable about it. So keep those comments coming and those debates raging. I am mighty lucky if you ask me. I keep the company of men (should I have used the word people perhaps?) with strong opinions. Folks who have an opinion on everything from whether it's appropriate to have sex during daytime to whether  animals have rights at all. So I know i will not be short of company here. 


So let's roll...