Mugabe was a murderer, not Pan-Africanist

0Shares

By Hopewell Chin’ono

It was Robert Mugabe’s birthday on Friday, and many celebrated what they called their hero, some in Africa called him a Pan-Africanist. Was he really a Pan-Africanist?

The African fascination with Robert Mugabe is bewildering and embarrassing at the same time.
Calling Mugabe a Pan-Africanist means you either do not know what Pan-Africanism means or you simply support murderous dictators.

A man who authored a genocide in his own country, killing his kith and kin, cannot be a Pan-Africanist.
Calling Mugabe a Pan-Africanist mocks genuine Pan-Africanists and makes those who are truly Pan-Africanist reluctant to associate with the term.

Pan-Africanism is the love of African people. Mugabe continued to kill his own African people until he was overthrown in a military coup in 2017.
How, then, can any sane person call such a man a Pan-Africanist?

Africans are gullible, they love rhetoric and empty speeches that hold no meaning.
Do not embarrass the continent and real Pan-Africanists by calling brutal dictators Pan-Africanists, unless Pan-Africanism now has a new meaning!

Pan-Africanism, at its core, is a movement focused on unity, solidarity, and the well-being of African people.
Attributing this label to a leader who was responsible for widespread violence and human rights violations within his own country not only distorts the meaning of Pan-Africanism but also diminishes the efforts of genuine Pan-Africanists who fought for the rights and dignity of African people.

The contradiction between Mugabe’s actions and the principles of Pan-Africanism is stark and undeniable.
By holding up Mugabe as a Pan-Africanist figure, you inadvertently glorify authoritarianism and undermining the values of justice, equality, and human rights that are central to the Pan-African movement.

That is why many South Africans on this app reject the “Pan-African” label because it is associated with people who have done the most horrible things to their own people.

The tragedy is that these dictators were never Pan-Africanists. To them, the term is a fashion label.
Until we stop the nonsense of calling anyone who bashes whites a Pan-Africanist merely based on rhetoric, many young progressive Africans will shun the term.

Pan-Africanism is about the well-being of African people. Look at Zimbabwe today, is that what Pan-Africanism is about?
Its people die because hospitals have collapsed due to Mugabe and ZANUPF rule.
2500 women die every year giving birth in Zimbabwe due to lack of proper maternity facilities. Had it not been for South Africa, many more Zimbabweans would have died.

When the Pan-African label is applied indiscriminately to leaders who have done horrible things like commit genocides, it not only cheapens the term but also makes it difficult for genuine Pan-Africanists to promote their progressive ideas and vision.

The focus on anti-Western rhetoric as the sole criterion for determining Pan-Africanism is crazy.
It ignores the fundamental principle of Pan-Africanism, which is the unity, dignity, and well being of African people.
Did Mugabe leave Zimbabweans living in dignity, how can a man who gives 22 farms to his daughter to the detriment of many landless blacks be a Pan-Africanist. He used foreign hospitals while his people were left ti die from easily treatable diseases.

If a leader like Mugabe, whose actions have led to significant suffering for Zimbabweans, is hailed as a Pan-Africanist, then the term loses its meaning and integrity.
This is why the rest of the world looks at Africa as a joke, it is because we idolise people that have taken the continent backwards.

To preserve the essence of Pan-Africanism and attract younger, progressive Africans to the movement and its ideas, it is important to shift the focus back to the core values of unity, human rights, and development.
This requires a more nuanced understanding of the term and a commitment to holding leaders accountable for their actions, regardless of their rhetoric.

I recommend reading literature by William Edward Burghardt Du Bois for those genuinely interested in understanding Pan-Africanism not this propaganda of elevating a man who killed his own citizens to stay in power including a genocide.
It is shameful that we have people who can’t understand this simple issue!

The argument that Mugabe had his flaws is weird because calling a genocide a flaw is an insult to the memory of those killed.

What a Pan-Africanist he was living in luxury at the cost of his people who continue to live in penury!