Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

MEDIA REPORTS: Nelson Chamisa has announced his return to active politics, saying this time he's launching a movement and not a political party; after he suddenly without notice jumped ship on this day 24 January in 2024, and ran away from the CCC party he had formed and led,... claiming it had been inflitrated by ZanuPF. PUBLIC EYE: Social movements are not formed or launched by an individual, they are people driven and they emerge organically and spontaneously to address a specific, self-evident and broadly shared public grievance. Otherwise, a party that is launched by an individual and which masquerades as a movement is the easiest thing to inflitrate and overrun. Will Chamisa run away, again, if that happens as it sure would? That's the 64 million dollar question. Time will tell, but once bitten twice shy. Voter beware!show more

Prof Jonathan Moyo

1,020,195 subscribers

331,938 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & Politika Eğitim Bilim & Teknoloji

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

The clearest evidence that Nelson Chamisa learnt nothing and forgot everything during his two-year hiatus, after he unceremoniously ran away from the leadership of his party in January 2024, is that he says he’s back in active politics to form and lead yet another “new” movement which he "shockingly claims will be similar to the 'liberation movement, that had no president and no constitution': Journalist: "And is this an announcement of the coming in of a new political party, or it's going to be a general movement; exactly what is this?" Nelson Chamisa: "I think I must help you. I said it's not a political party. It's a movement. It is, and a movement is like the liberation movement. Who was the president of the liberation movement? What was the constitution of the liberation movement?" [full video:

The clearest evidence that Nelson Chamisa learnt nothing and forgot everything during his two-year hiatus, after he unceremoniously ran away from the leadership of his party in January 2024, is that he says he’s back in active politics to form and lead yet another “new” movement which he "shockingly claims will be similar to the 'liberation movement, that had no president and no constitution': Journalist: "And is this an announcement of the coming in of a new political party, or it's going to be a general movement; exactly what is this?" Nelson Chamisa: "I think I must help you. I said it's not a political party. It's a movement. It is, and a movement is like the liberation movement. Who was the president of the liberation movement? What was the constitution of the liberation movement?" [full video:

Prof Jonathan Moyo

61,095 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

'GO AND TELL CHAMISA THAT MANICALAND SAYS NO': OSTALLOS AND CHIBAYA TOLD Gift Ostallos Siziva and Amos Chibaya had a torrid time this afternoon in Manicaland when they were told off by a charged crowd; in their ill-fated push for Nelson Chamisa's latest solo campaign to form yet another structureless movement; after he ditched and ran away from his CCC in January. In the ill-tempered meeting, Ostallos and Chibaya were told in no uncertain terms that its them who caused divisions in the province; and that the contamination [infiltration of CCC] that Chamisa complained about when he abruptly quit his CCC without notice last month, is in fact at the top, and not among the grassroots; and that the touted, yet another 'new', movement Chamisa wants to hurriedly form with no structures and no positions will have the same contaminated top that has left CCC with Chamisa!

'GO AND TELL CHAMISA THAT MANICALAND SAYS NO': OSTALLOS AND CHIBAYA TOLD Gift Ostallos Siziva and Amos Chibaya had a torrid time this afternoon in Manicaland when they were told off by a charged crowd; in their ill-fated push for Nelson Chamisa's latest solo campaign to form yet another structureless movement; after he ditched and ran away from his CCC in January. In the ill-tempered meeting, Ostallos and Chibaya were told in no uncertain terms that its them who caused divisions in the province; and that the contamination [infiltration of CCC] that Chamisa complained about when he abruptly quit his CCC without notice last month, is in fact at the top, and not among the grassroots; and that the touted, yet another 'new', movement Chamisa wants to hurriedly form with no structures and no positions will have the same contaminated top that has left CCC with Chamisa!

Prof Jonathan Moyo

258,055 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

These are the remarks by Nelson Chamisa which have sparked a sharp conflict with his former opposition colleagues after he claimed that Zimbabwe has "no constitution to defend" because it has been "shredded" by the ruling Zanu PF. Chamisa dismissed the current national debate over President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s plan to to extend his rule to 2030 as a "sideshow", saying the constitutional order has already collapsed. Former opposition allies in the Defend the Constitution Platform (DCP), including Jameson Timba, Tendai Biti, Jacob Ngarivhume and Munyaradzi Gwisayi, have described this as misleading amd reckless. They argue it undermines their legal and political efforts to block constitutional amendments to extend Mnangagwa’s rule. Upon his return to active politics, Chamisa launched "Agenda 2026," a movement he claims requires "new wine skins" and will not include old structures or figures from his former party, CCC. Colleagues view this as a move to disrupt existing opposition unity and "gaslight" the public. Chamisa continues to defend his "strategic ambiguity" model —operating without defined leadership structures — which former colleagues blame for the "hijacking" of the CCC by rivals like Sengezo Tshabangu. Some critics within the opposition have accused Chamisa of having a "secret deal" with Mnangagwa and the government to divide the opposition in exchange for his own personal safety, material benefits and money, allegations that he has vehemently denied.

These are the remarks by Nelson Chamisa which have sparked a sharp conflict with his former opposition colleagues after he claimed that Zimbabwe has "no constitution to defend" because it has been "shredded" by the ruling Zanu PF. Chamisa dismissed the current national debate over President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s plan to to extend his rule to 2030 as a "sideshow", saying the constitutional order has already collapsed. Former opposition allies in the Defend the Constitution Platform (DCP), including Jameson Timba, Tendai Biti, Jacob Ngarivhume and Munyaradzi Gwisayi, have described this as misleading amd reckless. They argue it undermines their legal and political efforts to block constitutional amendments to extend Mnangagwa’s rule. Upon his return to active politics, Chamisa launched "Agenda 2026," a movement he claims requires "new wine skins" and will not include old structures or figures from his former party, CCC. Colleagues view this as a move to disrupt existing opposition unity and "gaslight" the public. Chamisa continues to defend his "strategic ambiguity" model —operating without defined leadership structures — which former colleagues blame for the "hijacking" of the CCC by rivals like Sengezo Tshabangu. Some critics within the opposition have accused Chamisa of having a "secret deal" with Mnangagwa and the government to divide the opposition in exchange for his own personal safety, material benefits and money, allegations that he has vehemently denied.

TheNewsHawks

31,863 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

The office of The ODM Party’s Secretary General is not a platform for personal opinion. It is an institutional role that demands discipline and loyalty to the party constitution. Edwin Sifuna has failed in this duty. If he wishes to pursue a different political path, that is his democratic right. But as long as he remains ODM’s Secretary General, he must respect the Party Leader and communicate the party’s official position, not his own. The Secretary General does not make policy. He articulates it. Personal views masquerading as party position are unacceptable. He was handpicked by the party, and the party can handpick another. ODM is bigger than any individual.

The office of The ODM Party’s Secretary General is not a platform for personal opinion. It is an institutional role that demands discipline and loyalty to the party constitution. Edwin Sifuna has failed in this duty. If he wishes to pursue a different political path, that is his democratic right. But as long as he remains ODM’s Secretary General, he must respect the Party Leader and communicate the party’s official position, not his own. The Secretary General does not make policy. He articulates it. Personal views masquerading as party position are unacceptable. He was handpicked by the party, and the party can handpick another. ODM is bigger than any individual.

Kasmuel McOure

74,206 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

#IronyWritLargeAndLies Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa's former adviser Trevor Ncube, a local media publisher who owns Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) with the President's son-in-law Gerald Mlotshwa, has raised new controversy with fresh attacks on main opposition CCC leader Nelson Chamisa whom he says does not listen to anybody. Ncube has been consistently lambasting Chamisa calling him all sorts of names, going as far as insinuating he is a tribalist and dictator, but the CCC leader typically does not reply. Ncube owns AMH, publishers of NewsDay, Zimbabwe Independent, The Standard and online broadcasting platform Heart & Soul. NewsDay and Heart & Soul are names of Ncube's media platforms derived from BBC programmes. Although he postures as a neutral political observer who only wants to fix Zimbabwe's problems, Ncube - who behaves as if he has a God-ordained mission to do that - is actually a partisan political player operating in the dark shadows and an opportunist who hops from one party to another. He has been all over the place politically - from Zapu to MDC, then Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn, Alliance for People's Agenda (APA) and most recently Zanu PF by association. He is also a longtime Mnangagwa ally. Ncube's politics is not based on discernible ideological and policy ideation, values and principles, but opportunism and self-interest. He is also not principled. For instance, Ncube just went AWOL (Absent Without Official Leave) in 2017 when he was APA chair only to emerge as Mnangagwa’s adviser after the November 2017 coup without even officially resigning from his party. Ncube joined Mnangagwa’s coup project and became its media mouthpiece in a bid to revive his faltering publishing business interests after losing control of the Mail & Guardin in South Africa. He wanted radio and television licences to expand his media interests, while repaying a US$2 million debt to the Media Development Investment Fund, an American fund which provides debt and equity finance for independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat. APA had been formed in June 2017, with prominent business executive and academic Nkosana Moyo as the leader. Ncube's jumping ship and joining the coup gravy train led to Moyo to reflect and tellingly say that he had sadly come to realise that some Zimbabweans are not fighting to change the system, but to be part of it. Ncube went on to become a vocal and enthusiastic member of Mnangagwa’s Presidential Advisory Council (PAC) in his ill-fated political adventure. Ironically, Ncube keeps on complaining about Chamisa not taking his advice when he was Mnangagwa’s adviser. Ncube says Chamisa does not listen and repeatedly keeps on referring to a photo he took with him seven years ago as evidence of their meetings to discuss local political issues, justifying his conclusion and attacks on the CCC leader on the basis of one interaction seven years ago. However, The NewsHawks has checked the facts and found out that Ncube is conveniently manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa in 2016 to make it appear as if they have been meeting when Chamisa was already a party political leader in the context of what is currently happening in Zimbabwe. A Chamisa adviser told The NewsHawks: "We have seen the video and remarks by Mr Trevor Ncube in which he attacks our leader Nelson Chamisa and says all sorts of things about him. We have no problem with Ncube or anyone for that matter legitimately criticising Chamisa as a leader, a hugely popular one at that. Ncube has a constitutional and legitimate right to criticise him and other political leaders. That's what should happen in a democracy. "However, Ncube must stop crudely misrepresenting and manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa seven years ago for cheap political capital, publicity and relevance. In fact, he must stop lying about it. We have kept quiet throughout his lies and drama for far too long. I think we now need to set the record straight in the public interest and stop this charade. "The facts are very clear on this issue. Ncube invited Chamisa to his office in Graniteside, Harare, where AMH operates from on 5 August 2016 to discuss local political issues, including the formation of APA. Ncube wanted Chamisa to be part of that process led by Nkosana Moyo. At that meeting Ncube told Chamisa that he had held many consultative meetings in Zimbabwe and South Africa on the APA project, which he claimed was supported by telecoms mogul Strive Masiyiwa and many other prominent business people, some of whom ended up with him as Mnangagwa's advisers. "At the time, Chamisa had just been appointed one of the three vice-presidents of the MDC-T by the late Morgan Tsvangirai the month before, that is in July 2016. So he was not the leader of the MDC-T at that time and didn't even know one day he will lead the party. In that meeting, Chamisa told Ncube upfront that while he appreciated the invitation to join APA he was not able to do so because he wanted to help Tsvangirai rejuvenate the MDC-T post the 2013 elections and prepare for the 2018 elections. So Chamisa politely declined Ncube's offer to join APA. The idea was to use Chamisa's growing social base to back Moyo as APA leader in his presidential election bid in 2018. "The meeting, which ran for close to two hours from around 9am to just before 11am (that photo was taken at that time), ended on a somewhat sour note with fake smiles because Chamisa had rejected the APA invitation, saying he is a loyal MDC-T member and one of the leaders. Interestingly, it ended with a prayer. "Ncube gave Chamisa a book by Harvard Business School professor Bill George with Peter Sims titled True North, which is about leadership. Since then, Ncube has not spoken to Chamisa, not even once, except on 14 July 2021 when he sent a condolence message to him after a family bereavement. So Ncube is lying that he has engaged Chamisa on political issues and he doesn't listen. There is no such thing; it's just a needless malicious campaign and posturing. Chamisa talks to many people and takes ideas and proposals from them. He implements what is strategic and practical for the CCC given political conditions and circumstances. The claim that Chamisa doesn't listen, does not have structures, works alone and is a dictator is nonsense. He is a democratic leader who believes change can only be secured through democratic elections. Some may not like his style, but that is normal in politics. There is a difference between style, strategy and substance. In any case, why should Chamisa listen to advice coming from his rival's advisers? Ncube is a known Mnangagwa ally and now he works with his son-in-law at his media business. So why on earth would Chamisa listen to advice from that sort of a dishonest person who even lies about a meeting held seven years ago in a totally different setting, time and space? That's ridiculous. Let's must learn to discuss ideas, not people and events; this noisy mediocrity which pervades our polity masquerading as insightful leading lights of our politics is now part of the problem rather than the solution. He has his own system and team that he works with. It's ridiculous to suggest that Chamisa won 44% of the vote going by official results, which we reject as a fraud, and all those seats in parliament alone. How is that possible really? Is he superhuman? He works with others, but it is also true that other people are not happy. That's what happens in politics. He is also fully aware of critical issues that he needs to address urgently, that is the limitations and weaknesses from a political, structural, organisational and strategic point of view. Chamisa welcomes ideas and criticism from well-meaning people, not some malicious malcontents and bullies. He is a bona fide opposition leader who genuinely wants a solution to the country's problems and he is open to working with other people who seriously want to resolve national issues, not noise-makers and impostors. It's time we challenge these false and negative narratives by people who are more opposed to the opposition than the ruling party. Chamisa is an opposition leader trying to help a find a solution to our country's problems, he is not the leader of the country and the problem. He is the alternative to a failed leadership and its policies that have ruined the country with devastation consequences for all, especially the poor and vulnerable. He may have his own weaknesses like all of us, but he is the best alternative at the moment. Anything else is just mere wishful thinking and drama."

#IronyWritLargeAndLies Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa's former adviser Trevor Ncube, a local media publisher who owns Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) with the President's son-in-law Gerald Mlotshwa, has raised new controversy with fresh attacks on main opposition CCC leader Nelson Chamisa whom he says does not listen to anybody. Ncube has been consistently lambasting Chamisa calling him all sorts of names, going as far as insinuating he is a tribalist and dictator, but the CCC leader typically does not reply. Ncube owns AMH, publishers of NewsDay, Zimbabwe Independent, The Standard and online broadcasting platform Heart & Soul. NewsDay and Heart & Soul are names of Ncube's media platforms derived from BBC programmes. Although he postures as a neutral political observer who only wants to fix Zimbabwe's problems, Ncube - who behaves as if he has a God-ordained mission to do that - is actually a partisan political player operating in the dark shadows and an opportunist who hops from one party to another. He has been all over the place politically - from Zapu to MDC, then Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn, Alliance for People's Agenda (APA) and most recently Zanu PF by association. He is also a longtime Mnangagwa ally. Ncube's politics is not based on discernible ideological and policy ideation, values and principles, but opportunism and self-interest. He is also not principled. For instance, Ncube just went AWOL (Absent Without Official Leave) in 2017 when he was APA chair only to emerge as Mnangagwa’s adviser after the November 2017 coup without even officially resigning from his party. Ncube joined Mnangagwa’s coup project and became its media mouthpiece in a bid to revive his faltering publishing business interests after losing control of the Mail & Guardin in South Africa. He wanted radio and television licences to expand his media interests, while repaying a US$2 million debt to the Media Development Investment Fund, an American fund which provides debt and equity finance for independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat. APA had been formed in June 2017, with prominent business executive and academic Nkosana Moyo as the leader. Ncube's jumping ship and joining the coup gravy train led to Moyo to reflect and tellingly say that he had sadly come to realise that some Zimbabweans are not fighting to change the system, but to be part of it. Ncube went on to become a vocal and enthusiastic member of Mnangagwa’s Presidential Advisory Council (PAC) in his ill-fated political adventure. Ironically, Ncube keeps on complaining about Chamisa not taking his advice when he was Mnangagwa’s adviser. Ncube says Chamisa does not listen and repeatedly keeps on referring to a photo he took with him seven years ago as evidence of their meetings to discuss local political issues, justifying his conclusion and attacks on the CCC leader on the basis of one interaction seven years ago. However, The NewsHawks has checked the facts and found out that Ncube is conveniently manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa in 2016 to make it appear as if they have been meeting when Chamisa was already a party political leader in the context of what is currently happening in Zimbabwe. A Chamisa adviser told The NewsHawks: "We have seen the video and remarks by Mr Trevor Ncube in which he attacks our leader Nelson Chamisa and says all sorts of things about him. We have no problem with Ncube or anyone for that matter legitimately criticising Chamisa as a leader, a hugely popular one at that. Ncube has a constitutional and legitimate right to criticise him and other political leaders. That's what should happen in a democracy. "However, Ncube must stop crudely misrepresenting and manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa seven years ago for cheap political capital, publicity and relevance. In fact, he must stop lying about it. We have kept quiet throughout his lies and drama for far too long. I think we now need to set the record straight in the public interest and stop this charade. "The facts are very clear on this issue. Ncube invited Chamisa to his office in Graniteside, Harare, where AMH operates from on 5 August 2016 to discuss local political issues, including the formation of APA. Ncube wanted Chamisa to be part of that process led by Nkosana Moyo. At that meeting Ncube told Chamisa that he had held many consultative meetings in Zimbabwe and South Africa on the APA project, which he claimed was supported by telecoms mogul Strive Masiyiwa and many other prominent business people, some of whom ended up with him as Mnangagwa's advisers. "At the time, Chamisa had just been appointed one of the three vice-presidents of the MDC-T by the late Morgan Tsvangirai the month before, that is in July 2016. So he was not the leader of the MDC-T at that time and didn't even know one day he will lead the party. In that meeting, Chamisa told Ncube upfront that while he appreciated the invitation to join APA he was not able to do so because he wanted to help Tsvangirai rejuvenate the MDC-T post the 2013 elections and prepare for the 2018 elections. So Chamisa politely declined Ncube's offer to join APA. The idea was to use Chamisa's growing social base to back Moyo as APA leader in his presidential election bid in 2018. "The meeting, which ran for close to two hours from around 9am to just before 11am (that photo was taken at that time), ended on a somewhat sour note with fake smiles because Chamisa had rejected the APA invitation, saying he is a loyal MDC-T member and one of the leaders. Interestingly, it ended with a prayer. "Ncube gave Chamisa a book by Harvard Business School professor Bill George with Peter Sims titled True North, which is about leadership. Since then, Ncube has not spoken to Chamisa, not even once, except on 14 July 2021 when he sent a condolence message to him after a family bereavement. So Ncube is lying that he has engaged Chamisa on political issues and he doesn't listen. There is no such thing; it's just a needless malicious campaign and posturing. Chamisa talks to many people and takes ideas and proposals from them. He implements what is strategic and practical for the CCC given political conditions and circumstances. The claim that Chamisa doesn't listen, does not have structures, works alone and is a dictator is nonsense. He is a democratic leader who believes change can only be secured through democratic elections. Some may not like his style, but that is normal in politics. There is a difference between style, strategy and substance. In any case, why should Chamisa listen to advice coming from his rival's advisers? Ncube is a known Mnangagwa ally and now he works with his son-in-law at his media business. So why on earth would Chamisa listen to advice from that sort of a dishonest person who even lies about a meeting held seven years ago in a totally different setting, time and space? That's ridiculous. Let's must learn to discuss ideas, not people and events; this noisy mediocrity which pervades our polity masquerading as insightful leading lights of our politics is now part of the problem rather than the solution. He has his own system and team that he works with. It's ridiculous to suggest that Chamisa won 44% of the vote going by official results, which we reject as a fraud, and all those seats in parliament alone. How is that possible really? Is he superhuman? He works with others, but it is also true that other people are not happy. That's what happens in politics. He is also fully aware of critical issues that he needs to address urgently, that is the limitations and weaknesses from a political, structural, organisational and strategic point of view. Chamisa welcomes ideas and criticism from well-meaning people, not some malicious malcontents and bullies. He is a bona fide opposition leader who genuinely wants a solution to the country's problems and he is open to working with other people who seriously want to resolve national issues, not noise-makers and impostors. It's time we challenge these false and negative narratives by people who are more opposed to the opposition than the ruling party. Chamisa is an opposition leader trying to help a find a solution to our country's problems, he is not the leader of the country and the problem. He is the alternative to a failed leadership and its policies that have ruined the country with devastation consequences for all, especially the poor and vulnerable. He may have his own weaknesses like all of us, but he is the best alternative at the moment. Anything else is just mere wishful thinking and drama."

TheNewsHawks

153,304 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Dear Chipo Dendere, When Prof Ibbo Mandaza Ibbo D Mandaza said “step aside,” that is exactly what he meant. You are a student of politics and should understand that goodwill is based on trust. If Chamisa said today that he is backing another player, that player would inherit that political goodwill. That is why General Josiah Tongogara was targeted when he suggested that Joshua Nkomo should lead the Patriotic Front ZANU/ZAPU upon their return home. Those who targeted him knew that ZANLA military goodwill that it got from the Povo would be transferred to Joshua Nkomo. Zimbabweans voted for a movement that had a candidate—if that candidate had been Joshua Nkomo, they would have voted for him. Mugabe benefited from ZANLA’s goodwill because ZANLA controlled the larger part of the country. ZANLA controlled large areas, and its influence helped secure Mugabe’s leadership within ZANU and later in Zimbabwe. Political goodwill is transferable within movements. If Chamisa were to endorse someone, that person would benefit from his current support base the same way he benefited from Morgan Tsvangirai’s social base. However, the extent to which goodwill transfers depends on various factors, including public perception and internal party dynamics etc. The ordinary person in the streets doesn’t always understand the elite movements, so they can boycott an election simply because “their guy” is not there. So, as long as Chamisa is there, a new candidate will struggle to get a mass that is enough to remove ZANUPF. This is basic political science that I know you will relate with as a scholar of African politics. These dynamics differ from country to country. In South Africa, the goodwill from the struggle against apartheid rested with the ANC, which is why people continued voting for it even when it became evident that it had gone astray from its core values. So at some point, goodwill begins to fade. Unless Chamisa does something spectacular between now and 2028, his share of the vote will decline. It is up to him to decide what matters more to Zimbabwe—his personal presidential ambitions or the national interest. If he wants to remain electorally relevant to the point of winning, he must unite and build a movement where he is not a dictator or a ruler, but a leader. If he does not do that, he will still run but lose, because the Chamisa who excited people in 2018 is no longer the Chamisa of today—even he knows that in his heart of hearts. Many people in ZANU did not want the struggle goodwill to be passed on to Joshua Nkomo, even though he was the more qualified of the two men, because they feared losing their positions. Similarly, some around Chamisa today do not want him to work with others, because bringing in Dr Nkosana Moyo or Noah Manyika could mean they might not get the positions they desire. In America it is called an endorsement, that is why Nelson Chamisa claimed that he was endorsed by Morgan Tsvangirai, he wanted his goodwill! That is my view Chipo Dendere. What is yours?

Dear Chipo Dendere, When Prof Ibbo Mandaza Ibbo D Mandaza said “step aside,” that is exactly what he meant. You are a student of politics and should understand that goodwill is based on trust. If Chamisa said today that he is backing another player, that player would inherit that political goodwill. That is why General Josiah Tongogara was targeted when he suggested that Joshua Nkomo should lead the Patriotic Front ZANU/ZAPU upon their return home. Those who targeted him knew that ZANLA military goodwill that it got from the Povo would be transferred to Joshua Nkomo. Zimbabweans voted for a movement that had a candidate—if that candidate had been Joshua Nkomo, they would have voted for him. Mugabe benefited from ZANLA’s goodwill because ZANLA controlled the larger part of the country. ZANLA controlled large areas, and its influence helped secure Mugabe’s leadership within ZANU and later in Zimbabwe. Political goodwill is transferable within movements. If Chamisa were to endorse someone, that person would benefit from his current support base the same way he benefited from Morgan Tsvangirai’s social base. However, the extent to which goodwill transfers depends on various factors, including public perception and internal party dynamics etc. The ordinary person in the streets doesn’t always understand the elite movements, so they can boycott an election simply because “their guy” is not there. So, as long as Chamisa is there, a new candidate will struggle to get a mass that is enough to remove ZANUPF. This is basic political science that I know you will relate with as a scholar of African politics. These dynamics differ from country to country. In South Africa, the goodwill from the struggle against apartheid rested with the ANC, which is why people continued voting for it even when it became evident that it had gone astray from its core values. So at some point, goodwill begins to fade. Unless Chamisa does something spectacular between now and 2028, his share of the vote will decline. It is up to him to decide what matters more to Zimbabwe—his personal presidential ambitions or the national interest. If he wants to remain electorally relevant to the point of winning, he must unite and build a movement where he is not a dictator or a ruler, but a leader. If he does not do that, he will still run but lose, because the Chamisa who excited people in 2018 is no longer the Chamisa of today—even he knows that in his heart of hearts. Many people in ZANU did not want the struggle goodwill to be passed on to Joshua Nkomo, even though he was the more qualified of the two men, because they feared losing their positions. Similarly, some around Chamisa today do not want him to work with others, because bringing in Dr Nkosana Moyo or Noah Manyika could mean they might not get the positions they desire. In America it is called an endorsement, that is why Nelson Chamisa claimed that he was endorsed by Morgan Tsvangirai, he wanted his goodwill! That is my view Chipo Dendere. What is yours?

Hopewell Chin’ono

136,094 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

HOW OTHERS SEE IT The narrative on this video is deadly serious. Its audience can ignore the content of the video, only to its own downfall. Because, truth be told, this is the best explanation that if you want to understand anyone, don't go by what they say about themselves since, more often than not, what they say is self-indulgent propaganda; therefore its best to go by the consequences of their decisions or actions. Actions speak louder than words. Indeed, a political leader cannot run a structureless political party with no constitution - as the only office bearer with sole powers to appoint everyone else by giving them tasks or assignments - only to suddenly turnaround to quit the leadership of the party abruptly and unprocedurally, claiming that the party has been infiltrated and contaminated by some enemy. Surely, if the claims of infiltration and contamination are true, then only the political leader who ran the structureless party with no constitution; but with sole appointing powers must take full and all responsibility for the alleged infiltration and contamination of the party. Also, that political leader must forget about getting any trust from any serious people to lead any serious political party or movement, ever again. Once bitten, twice shy!

HOW OTHERS SEE IT The narrative on this video is deadly serious. Its audience can ignore the content of the video, only to its own downfall. Because, truth be told, this is the best explanation that if you want to understand anyone, don't go by what they say about themselves since, more often than not, what they say is self-indulgent propaganda; therefore its best to go by the consequences of their decisions or actions. Actions speak louder than words. Indeed, a political leader cannot run a structureless political party with no constitution - as the only office bearer with sole powers to appoint everyone else by giving them tasks or assignments - only to suddenly turnaround to quit the leadership of the party abruptly and unprocedurally, claiming that the party has been infiltrated and contaminated by some enemy. Surely, if the claims of infiltration and contamination are true, then only the political leader who ran the structureless party with no constitution; but with sole appointing powers must take full and all responsibility for the alleged infiltration and contamination of the party. Also, that political leader must forget about getting any trust from any serious people to lead any serious political party or movement, ever again. Once bitten, twice shy!

Prof Jonathan Moyo

90,543 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Dravidianism is a Secularised version of Evangelical Mentality Deepak reframes "Dravidianism" as a secularized Christian movement, not an indigenous ideology. He traces its origins to the Justice Party (formed by Mudaliars, Chettiars, and Naickers around 1917), which emerged as an anti-Brahman movement backed by British colonial and missionary support against the Brahman-led Home Rule Movement. Over 20–25 years, external resources transformed it into a broader anti-Hindu agenda, culminating in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the self-respect movement by the 1930s. He argues that Dravidianism’s 90-year history has entrenched it as a "Trojan horse" within Hindu civilization, more insidious than overt secessionist movements like Kashmir or Khalistan because it operates within democratic institutions. Credit : Time Various Authority.

Dravidianism is a Secularised version of Evangelical Mentality Deepak reframes "Dravidianism" as a secularized Christian movement, not an indigenous ideology. He traces its origins to the Justice Party (formed by Mudaliars, Chettiars, and Naickers around 1917), which emerged as an anti-Brahman movement backed by British colonial and missionary support against the Brahman-led Home Rule Movement. Over 20–25 years, external resources transformed it into a broader anti-Hindu agenda, culminating in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the self-respect movement by the 1930s. He argues that Dravidianism’s 90-year history has entrenched it as a "Trojan horse" within Hindu civilization, more insidious than overt secessionist movements like Kashmir or Khalistan because it operates within democratic institutions. Credit : Time Various Authority.

Augadh

78,098 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

Chris Mutsvangwa threatens nelson chamisa saying whatever you do, if it is starting a new political party, remember you have enemies in the courts, among judges. He says: "We said it again over the CCC, Chamisa has fled his job. We tell Chamisa that you went and wrestled power in this party and said the party is called, Wapusa Wapusa and said you will listen to no one, except foreigner who send you. But now you've been bitten by your own animal. The organisation has chased you away now. Now that you are gone, you must know that those who wanted to investigate you now have opportunity to peep inside your organisation when you were leading. There are people with grievances, with w9unds inside. They want to know what happened to the movement of money. The courts in this country stand for everyone without partiality. No one stops the court from ruling. So I don't know if you are going to start a new party without knowledge to build, because you stole this party from others. But now the role is now yours to go build your beginning with the first brick. I want to see your wisdom; but don't forget that inside the courts you have enemies; there are people who have wounds, who have grievances with you... "

Chris Mutsvangwa threatens nelson chamisa saying whatever you do, if it is starting a new political party, remember you have enemies in the courts, among judges. He says: "We said it again over the CCC, Chamisa has fled his job. We tell Chamisa that you went and wrestled power in this party and said the party is called, Wapusa Wapusa and said you will listen to no one, except foreigner who send you. But now you've been bitten by your own animal. The organisation has chased you away now. Now that you are gone, you must know that those who wanted to investigate you now have opportunity to peep inside your organisation when you were leading. There are people with grievances, with w9unds inside. They want to know what happened to the movement of money. The courts in this country stand for everyone without partiality. No one stops the court from ruling. So I don't know if you are going to start a new party without knowledge to build, because you stole this party from others. But now the role is now yours to go build your beginning with the first brick. I want to see your wisdom; but don't forget that inside the courts you have enemies; there are people who have wounds, who have grievances with you... "

ZimEye

107,570 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

After decades of betrayal by the establishment, many British people turned to Reform UK in desperation, believing it would finally give them a voice. Reform’s voter base now realises they were sold a lie. They understand that Reform UK will simply attempt to reform the same rotten system — one that has put British people last at every turn and brought the Britain that we know and love to its knees. A Makerfield resident says what so many are thinking: “Reform don’t have it in them. Nigel Farage has backed off from everything he said he was going to do.” Britain’s survival depends not on managed decline, nor on trusting a party led by the same traitorous politicians that brought us here. It depends on a party prepared to do things differently — one that leads with courage, confronts hard truths, and acts without fear or favour. A party that will unite the nation, a party formed and shaped by ordinary Brits like you and me. That party is Restore Britain. Unapologetically, putting British people FIRST. 🇬🇧

After decades of betrayal by the establishment, many British people turned to Reform UK in desperation, believing it would finally give them a voice. Reform’s voter base now realises they were sold a lie. They understand that Reform UK will simply attempt to reform the same rotten system — one that has put British people last at every turn and brought the Britain that we know and love to its knees. A Makerfield resident says what so many are thinking: “Reform don’t have it in them. Nigel Farage has backed off from everything he said he was going to do.” Britain’s survival depends not on managed decline, nor on trusting a party led by the same traitorous politicians that brought us here. It depends on a party prepared to do things differently — one that leads with courage, confronts hard truths, and acts without fear or favour. A party that will unite the nation, a party formed and shaped by ordinary Brits like you and me. That party is Restore Britain. Unapologetically, putting British people FIRST. 🇬🇧

Lydia † 🇬🇧

12,039 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

#WATCH | Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu: MDMK Principal Secretary Durai Vaiko says, "We have received an invite from the INDIA Alliance, and on behalf of MDMK, our leader, Vaiko, will participate in the meeting in Delhi.... Both the DMK and Congress have a difference of opinion, and because of that, DMK has probably taken a decision not to participate in the alliance..." On Annamalai forming a new party after resigning from BJP, he says, "Annamalai has announced his decision to resign from the BJP, and he has launched a political movement. He has said that the agenda of his party would be secularism, and development politics... I wish him success..."

#WATCH | Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu: MDMK Principal Secretary Durai Vaiko says, "We have received an invite from the INDIA Alliance, and on behalf of MDMK, our leader, Vaiko, will participate in the meeting in Delhi.... Both the DMK and Congress have a difference of opinion, and because of that, DMK has probably taken a decision not to participate in the alliance..." On Annamalai forming a new party after resigning from BJP, he says, "Annamalai has announced his decision to resign from the BJP, and he has launched a political movement. He has said that the agenda of his party would be secularism, and development politics... I wish him success..."

ANI

37,259 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

"IT WAS PRESIDENT CHAMISA WHO ASKED ME TO TAKE UP THIS ROLE", CONFIRMS DAVID COLTART AFTER BECOMING BULAWAYO MAYOR " My first vote of thanks needs to go to President Nelson Chamisa, the leader of Triple C, and to the leadership of Triple C. As you may have heard, I didn't ask for this position. I thought at the age of 65 that I was nearing retirement. But it was President Chamisa who listened to the citizens of Bulawayo, not just within the Triple C, but from leadership from other political parties, civic leaders and church leaders. And it was President Nelson Chamisa who asked me to take up this role. And so, I need to thank him for the confidence that he has placed in me to perform this role; and to the leadership of my party". - David Coltart speaking after he was made Balawayo Mayor on 11 September 2023 COMMENT: There it is. Chamisa had pledged that he and his CCC would let communities choose their own representative for Parliament and for local authorities. David Coltart's confirmation that he was imposed by Chamisa is important as it exposes the Triple C leader in three ways: Firstly, Chamisa is contemptuous of local communities like Ward 4 residents in Bulawayo to whom he made a false commitment that they would be free to choose their council candidates only for him to ignore all their preferences, as he did after the Ward 4 CCC community caucus rejected Coltart. Secondly, Chamisa imposed Coltart as the winner of the CCC Ward 4 candidate-selection community caucus when Coltart had not only lost the community selection contest, but also when he had come number last in the contest. Thirdly, Chamisa's contempt for the right of the community in Ward 4 to choose its council candidate, and his imposition of Coltart who was rejected by the Ward 4 community, demonstrates that in fact Chamisa does not believe in free, fair and credible elections; instead, he believes in imposing his handpicked candidates; just like he imposed Coltart!

"IT WAS PRESIDENT CHAMISA WHO ASKED ME TO TAKE UP THIS ROLE", CONFIRMS DAVID COLTART AFTER BECOMING BULAWAYO MAYOR " My first vote of thanks needs to go to President Nelson Chamisa, the leader of Triple C, and to the leadership of Triple C. As you may have heard, I didn't ask for this position. I thought at the age of 65 that I was nearing retirement. But it was President Chamisa who listened to the citizens of Bulawayo, not just within the Triple C, but from leadership from other political parties, civic leaders and church leaders. And it was President Nelson Chamisa who asked me to take up this role. And so, I need to thank him for the confidence that he has placed in me to perform this role; and to the leadership of my party". - David Coltart speaking after he was made Balawayo Mayor on 11 September 2023 COMMENT: There it is. Chamisa had pledged that he and his CCC would let communities choose their own representative for Parliament and for local authorities. David Coltart's confirmation that he was imposed by Chamisa is important as it exposes the Triple C leader in three ways: Firstly, Chamisa is contemptuous of local communities like Ward 4 residents in Bulawayo to whom he made a false commitment that they would be free to choose their council candidates only for him to ignore all their preferences, as he did after the Ward 4 CCC community caucus rejected Coltart. Secondly, Chamisa imposed Coltart as the winner of the CCC Ward 4 candidate-selection community caucus when Coltart had not only lost the community selection contest, but also when he had come number last in the contest. Thirdly, Chamisa's contempt for the right of the community in Ward 4 to choose its council candidate, and his imposition of Coltart who was rejected by the Ward 4 community, demonstrates that in fact Chamisa does not believe in free, fair and credible elections; instead, he believes in imposing his handpicked candidates; just like he imposed Coltart!

Prof Jonathan Moyo

117,449 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

“Peter Obi has the responsibility, after the 2023 election, to have predicted that he has to run, and he has the responsibility, like I told him, to find a party, however small, and let us go and market that party to the people. The time it takes to make the symbol and logo of a political party easily identified by the grassroots is not a short sprint. As old as the PDP is, a party registered in 1998, we still get to the day of voting and some of our rural supporters still miss where to put the ink.” — Segun Sowunmi, PDP chieftain

TheCable

68,258 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

“Now comrades, we are going to form a political movement which will contest elections if all of us agree we should do so and it will be called iAfrica Mayibuye Movement which is going to contest elections” Africa Mayibuye National convenor Floyd Shivambu “The values and principles of that party will be shaped by the people of South Africa, we're not confused, but we do not want to form a political movement which we just sit in a round table and we think we are intellectuals and ideologues” Floyd Shivambu

“Now comrades, we are going to form a political movement which will contest elections if all of us agree we should do so and it will be called iAfrica Mayibuye Movement which is going to contest elections” Africa Mayibuye National convenor Floyd Shivambu “The values and principles of that party will be shaped by the people of South Africa, we're not confused, but we do not want to form a political movement which we just sit in a round table and we think we are intellectuals and ideologues” Floyd Shivambu

News Live SA

105,367 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Oh, My Goodness! Jeremy Corbyn comes out fighting against Zarah Sultana's (Zarah Sultana MP) statement that she is an anti-Zionist and that the Labour Party under Corbyn had been wrong to adopt the IHRA definition of "antisemitism", a definition cooked up by the Mossad and the Zionist regime. What an appalling response. He says that "it wasn't really necessary for her to bring all that up. But that's what she decided to do". Really unbelievable. He goes on to say that he was "personally" more in favour of the Jerusalem Declaration, a liberal Zionist alternative to the IHRA. What a catastrophic thing to say. I have been told repeatedly that Jeremy is not a Zionist. And here he is effectively confirming as much. He says that a "huge majority" of the NEC adopted the IHRA "including people very close to me" being in favour of it being adopted. These people, let us remember are the same people that Jeremy has re-appointed again and again as advisors: including Karie Murphy and James Schneider. They are traitors. They should be nowhere near a party which seeks to be anti-racist or to oppose the genocide in Palestine. And yet, as I revealed earlier today, they have a glacial grip on the executive committee of the new party. We see here an foretaste of what Jeremy will do when there are future pressures from the Zionist movement. He will collapse, just like before. And he will not say - even now - that he is an anti-Zionist. I am genuinely shocked by how poor this response is. #DismantleZionism

Oh, My Goodness! Jeremy Corbyn comes out fighting against Zarah Sultana's (Zarah Sultana MP) statement that she is an anti-Zionist and that the Labour Party under Corbyn had been wrong to adopt the IHRA definition of "antisemitism", a definition cooked up by the Mossad and the Zionist regime. What an appalling response. He says that "it wasn't really necessary for her to bring all that up. But that's what she decided to do". Really unbelievable. He goes on to say that he was "personally" more in favour of the Jerusalem Declaration, a liberal Zionist alternative to the IHRA. What a catastrophic thing to say. I have been told repeatedly that Jeremy is not a Zionist. And here he is effectively confirming as much. He says that a "huge majority" of the NEC adopted the IHRA "including people very close to me" being in favour of it being adopted. These people, let us remember are the same people that Jeremy has re-appointed again and again as advisors: including Karie Murphy and James Schneider. They are traitors. They should be nowhere near a party which seeks to be anti-racist or to oppose the genocide in Palestine. And yet, as I revealed earlier today, they have a glacial grip on the executive committee of the new party. We see here an foretaste of what Jeremy will do when there are future pressures from the Zionist movement. He will collapse, just like before. And he will not say - even now - that he is an anti-Zionist. I am genuinely shocked by how poor this response is. #DismantleZionism

David Miller

193,317 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

#OppositionDividedWeakParalysed While main opposition leader Nelson Chamisa has relatively been quiet - conspicuous by his absence from action and loud silence, except for his occasional political posturing and symbolic resistance with a religious-style approach under his Agenda 2026 in a bid to reboot his sluggish career, his former ally in the opposition trenches Tendai Biti has taken a more vocal, confrontational, high-profile legal and public-outreach role opposing the government on its constitutional amendments to facilitate President Emmerson Mnangagwa's term extension and a raft of reforms changing the political, electoral and governance systems. Upon his return to active politics in January after a controversial two-year hiatus following the capture by Zanu PF of his CCC opposition party, Chamisa focused on "Agenda 2026" as a movement intended to rebuild Zimbabwe through a citizen-driven dialogue rather than traditional party politics. While he has launched this initiative and occasionally commented on social media to oppose Zanu PF's "2050 agenda" - incomprehensibly referring to the 2030 agenda - his public engagement has been characterised more by statements of intent, use of symbols and preaching "change" rather than organising grassroots resistance given his huge popular support base. He has defended his strange "No to 2050" social media post and castigated violence against citizens opposing constitutional changes, maintaining a symbolic rather than confrontational role. In the process, Chamisa has now become the weak link within the opposition movement. By constrast, Biti, who has no popular social base, has been highly vocal, acting as the convener of the Constitution Defenders Forum. Others who have been vocal include Jameson Timba as Convenor of Constitutional Defence Forum, Job Sikhala who leads National Democratic Working Group, Lovemore Madhuku and his National Constitutional Assembly, and strong-willed opposition figure Jacob Ngarivhume, among others. Biti has launched a vigorous campaign against Constitution Amendment No. 3, which aims to extend presidential terms beyond 2028 and change the political system. He has referred to the proposed changes as "legal lunacy" and a "quiet constitutional coup". Furthermore, Biti has taken the fight directly to the people, conducting door-to-door mobilisation drives and street campaigns in areas like Chitungwiza and Mutare to educate citizens on the implications of the reforms. Alongside other activists, he has filed urgent court bids to stop police from disrupting their private meetings regarding the constitutional reforms. As a result, Biti was yesterday arrested while organising a rally against the amendments in Mutare. Biti has invited Chamisa to work with him and others in fighting the current constitutional changes. However, Chamisa, despite his massive support, has distanced himself from Biti, Timba and others. He has been pussyfooting and claiming there is no constitution to defend, alarming his opposition allies. Despite pressure to take a form a party and adopt more aggressive approach, Chamisa maintains a propositional posture, making his politics and pronouncements merely symbolic opposition, not serious resistance anymore. This comes as the opposition is divided, weak and paralysed. The absence of a strong opposition and check on power has allowed for the proposal of constitutional amendments that extend the presidential terms from five to seven years and Mnangagwa's term extension, accompanied by raft of contentious changes in the political system. As formal opposition parties have fragmented and weakened, civil society groups and grassroots movements have increasingly taken centre stage in protesting government policies, human rights issues and the current constitutional amendments.

TheNewsHawks

11,987 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Just debated a right winger on the new Left party led by Corbyn and Sultana. 230,000 people signed up in 24 hours. By the end, he admitted the obvious: Jeremy and Zarah are honest and principled leaders who speak for millions. Millions who want to tax the rich, end the wars, redistribute wealth, and build a country that serves people, not billionaires. They can smear, they can panic, but they can’t stop a movement whose time has come:

Just debated a right winger on the new Left party led by Corbyn and Sultana. 230,000 people signed up in 24 hours. By the end, he admitted the obvious: Jeremy and Zarah are honest and principled leaders who speak for millions. Millions who want to tax the rich, end the wars, redistribute wealth, and build a country that serves people, not billionaires. They can smear, they can panic, but they can’t stop a movement whose time has come:

Ashok Kumar | 🇵🇸

81,391 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐃𝐨𝐨𝐫𝐬: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐨 𝐒𝐚𝐠𝐚 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐚 𝐭𝐨 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐋𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐀𝐮𝐱𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚 𝐌𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐰𝐚 The audio saga linking Zimbabwe's main opposition leader Nelson Chamisa to First Lady Auxillia Mnangagwa through her aide Ben Muneri - which has been verified by The NewsHawks beyond reasonable doubt - has further shown that politics is not just what happens in the public sphere, but mostly importantly behind the scenes. While public theatre dominates politics, important decisions are made behind doors, away from the public domain. Supporters of political parties and their leaders are usually left in the dark, and when they discover what has been happening they react with shock, denial and some by being aggressively defensive even when indisputable facts have been placed before them. The backstage environment and manoeuvres allow for genuine negotiation, compromise, and building of trust between opposing sides, away from public scrutiny, which can be essential for making progress on complex issues, yet dangerous as it can lead to cutting personal deals for self-aggrandisement and selling out. Significant deals are often struck in confidential settings, reducing the impact of political theatre and media sensationalism. Lobbyists and mediators often operate in the shadows to influence policy and cut deals without public disclosure. Private meetings are used by politicians to negotiate without fear of backlash from voters or other constituents, allowing for compromises that would be politically fatal in public. Closed-door bargaining allows politicians to engage in dialogue without facing reputational damage if a deal falls through. When not performing for an audience, politicians are more open to practical solutions and concessions. Zimbabwe has had several such arrangements, including four important Governments of National Unity (GNU), including the 1978 Internal Settlement, the 1980 GNU, the 1987 Unity Accord and the 2009-2013 GNU. Relationships between leaders, crucial for long-term policy, are nurtured through confidential, amicable, and trust-building interactions. While democracy primarily aims for transparency, the practical, often messy, processes of negotiation and power-brokering create a strong incentive for politicians to keep key political activity hidden from the public view. The Zimbabwean political landscape, for instance, is often defined by a stark public dichotomy between ruling party Zanu PF and the main opposition, characterised by intense public rivalry and violent repression. However, the emergence of a secretly recorded audio involving Chamisa and Muneri shows a far more complex reality of backroom lines of communication and secret negotiations, bridging the divide after the disputed 2018 and 2023 presidential elections. This situation further explains the capture and deals after the 2023 elections. This saga, which surfaced with recordings of conversations following a social media tiff between political activists Jealousy Mawarire, who is highly critical of President Emmerson Mnangagwa and his 2030 Agenda, and Brighton Mutebuka, a Chamisa loyalist, highlighted backdoor attempts at political maneuvring that stood in contrast to the public rhetoric of a stolen elections. The Secret Negotiations Exposed The audio recordings, which began circulating after the secret talks in 2021 and 2022, featured a conversation between Chamisa, then leading the MDC Alliance, and Muneri, an aide tasked with handling politucal and business interests for First Lady. The context of these discussions was the intense post-2018 election period, marked by brutal violence and killings on August 1, as well as a failed court challenge of the result by Chamisa. The audio shows Chamisa was not merely engaging in public resistance but in secret moves to engage with Mnangagwa, seeking to negotiate a personal deal to become prime minister rather than a broad coalition.

𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐃𝐨𝐨𝐫𝐬: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐨 𝐒𝐚𝐠𝐚 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐚 𝐭𝐨 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐋𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐀𝐮𝐱𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚 𝐌𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐰𝐚 The audio saga linking Zimbabwe's main opposition leader Nelson Chamisa to First Lady Auxillia Mnangagwa through her aide Ben Muneri - which has been verified by The NewsHawks beyond reasonable doubt - has further shown that politics is not just what happens in the public sphere, but mostly importantly behind the scenes. While public theatre dominates politics, important decisions are made behind doors, away from the public domain. Supporters of political parties and their leaders are usually left in the dark, and when they discover what has been happening they react with shock, denial and some by being aggressively defensive even when indisputable facts have been placed before them. The backstage environment and manoeuvres allow for genuine negotiation, compromise, and building of trust between opposing sides, away from public scrutiny, which can be essential for making progress on complex issues, yet dangerous as it can lead to cutting personal deals for self-aggrandisement and selling out. Significant deals are often struck in confidential settings, reducing the impact of political theatre and media sensationalism. Lobbyists and mediators often operate in the shadows to influence policy and cut deals without public disclosure. Private meetings are used by politicians to negotiate without fear of backlash from voters or other constituents, allowing for compromises that would be politically fatal in public. Closed-door bargaining allows politicians to engage in dialogue without facing reputational damage if a deal falls through. When not performing for an audience, politicians are more open to practical solutions and concessions. Zimbabwe has had several such arrangements, including four important Governments of National Unity (GNU), including the 1978 Internal Settlement, the 1980 GNU, the 1987 Unity Accord and the 2009-2013 GNU. Relationships between leaders, crucial for long-term policy, are nurtured through confidential, amicable, and trust-building interactions. While democracy primarily aims for transparency, the practical, often messy, processes of negotiation and power-brokering create a strong incentive for politicians to keep key political activity hidden from the public view. The Zimbabwean political landscape, for instance, is often defined by a stark public dichotomy between ruling party Zanu PF and the main opposition, characterised by intense public rivalry and violent repression. However, the emergence of a secretly recorded audio involving Chamisa and Muneri shows a far more complex reality of backroom lines of communication and secret negotiations, bridging the divide after the disputed 2018 and 2023 presidential elections. This situation further explains the capture and deals after the 2023 elections. This saga, which surfaced with recordings of conversations following a social media tiff between political activists Jealousy Mawarire, who is highly critical of President Emmerson Mnangagwa and his 2030 Agenda, and Brighton Mutebuka, a Chamisa loyalist, highlighted backdoor attempts at political maneuvring that stood in contrast to the public rhetoric of a stolen elections. The Secret Negotiations Exposed The audio recordings, which began circulating after the secret talks in 2021 and 2022, featured a conversation between Chamisa, then leading the MDC Alliance, and Muneri, an aide tasked with handling politucal and business interests for First Lady. The context of these discussions was the intense post-2018 election period, marked by brutal violence and killings on August 1, as well as a failed court challenge of the result by Chamisa. The audio shows Chamisa was not merely engaging in public resistance but in secret moves to engage with Mnangagwa, seeking to negotiate a personal deal to become prime minister rather than a broad coalition.

TheNewsHawks

52,461 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

The former RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch warned people about #KeirStarmer before the election. Most of the media laughed it off. Many in Labour dismissed him. But he understood exactly what Starmer represented. Lynch said Starmer’s Labour was managerial, not political. A party run by lawyers, advisors, and communications professionals rather than people rooted in labour history, trade unions, industry, or working-class communities. A party that believed in management, not representation. Stability, not change. Administration, not politics. He warned that if Starmer won, Labour would not govern as a movement, but as a management team. If anything, Lynch understated it. What we have seen is not a political Prime Minister but an administrative one. Government by briefing note, by focus group, by legal framing rather than political vision. A Labour Party reshaped from a political movement into something closer to a corporate structure with MPs. Under Starmer, Labour has been changed more fundamentally than even under Blair. Blair at least had a political project. Starmer’s project has been control. Centralise the party. Remove internal opposition. Sideline unions. Purge members. Control candidate selection. Control messaging. Control policy. The result is a Labour Party that is now barely recognisable as a working-class party, and barely recognisable even as a democratic political party. It behaves more like an administrative arm of the state than a movement representing the people. Alongside this has come something else that should worry anyone who cares about civil liberties. Expanding surveillance powers. Restrictions on protest. Speech laws framed as safety. Increasing police powers. More powers for the state, fewer rights for the citizen. All passed in the language of responsibility and stability. This is managerial politics. Not leadership, not representation, not democracy in the traditional labour movement sense. Management of the population. Management of expectations. Management of decline. Mick Lynch saw a managerial Labour Party coming. What he didn’t see was a Labour Party rebuilt as a machine: centrally controlled, staffed with loyalists, a government with authoritarian instincts and no roots in the labour movement at all, parachuting in MPs with little to no experience outside political offices, hand-picked acolytes from outfits like Labour Together, selected not for independence or service to their communities, but for loyalty to the leadership. MPs whose first duty is not to their constituents, not to their country, but to the party machine and the people who control it. Labour didn’t win power for the people. Starmer won power for the global oligarchy and that little club he's been a member of since 2019... Paul Knaggs , Labour Heartlands

The former RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch warned people about #KeirStarmer before the election. Most of the media laughed it off. Many in Labour dismissed him. But he understood exactly what Starmer represented. Lynch said Starmer’s Labour was managerial, not political. A party run by lawyers, advisors, and communications professionals rather than people rooted in labour history, trade unions, industry, or working-class communities. A party that believed in management, not representation. Stability, not change. Administration, not politics. He warned that if Starmer won, Labour would not govern as a movement, but as a management team. If anything, Lynch understated it. What we have seen is not a political Prime Minister but an administrative one. Government by briefing note, by focus group, by legal framing rather than political vision. A Labour Party reshaped from a political movement into something closer to a corporate structure with MPs. Under Starmer, Labour has been changed more fundamentally than even under Blair. Blair at least had a political project. Starmer’s project has been control. Centralise the party. Remove internal opposition. Sideline unions. Purge members. Control candidate selection. Control messaging. Control policy. The result is a Labour Party that is now barely recognisable as a working-class party, and barely recognisable even as a democratic political party. It behaves more like an administrative arm of the state than a movement representing the people. Alongside this has come something else that should worry anyone who cares about civil liberties. Expanding surveillance powers. Restrictions on protest. Speech laws framed as safety. Increasing police powers. More powers for the state, fewer rights for the citizen. All passed in the language of responsibility and stability. This is managerial politics. Not leadership, not representation, not democracy in the traditional labour movement sense. Management of the population. Management of expectations. Management of decline. Mick Lynch saw a managerial Labour Party coming. What he didn’t see was a Labour Party rebuilt as a machine: centrally controlled, staffed with loyalists, a government with authoritarian instincts and no roots in the labour movement at all, parachuting in MPs with little to no experience outside political offices, hand-picked acolytes from outfits like Labour Together, selected not for independence or service to their communities, but for loyalty to the leadership. MPs whose first duty is not to their constituents, not to their country, but to the party machine and the people who control it. Labour didn’t win power for the people. Starmer won power for the global oligarchy and that little club he's been a member of since 2019... Paul Knaggs , Labour Heartlands

The Heartlands Tribune

105,399 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce