Ghana were well composed, tactically disciplined, and well-drilled.....they played as a team and not as 11 disparate individuals....the coach brought in four of Ghana's players from the Under 20 team....There was never a doubt in my mind that Ghana would emerge victorious versus Serbia.
===========================================
On the other hand, Nigeria were tactless, often looked lethargic, and played not as a team, but as 11 different individuals....were it not for keeper Onyeama, the score would have been embarrassing....they let the whole of the Continent down, in their game against Argentina.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Churchill and The White African
There is a documentary called "Mugabe and The White African" that is being reviewed to death right now in the blogosphere and in the press. This documentary omits any background information, and then jumps right into the fray to discuss the travails of Zimbabwe's white farming community. Many people watching the documentary, and unfamiliar with colonial African history, will view the white farmers as victims of barbarism, if not outright savagery. Pity the white farmers! They would say.
Well, let me give you a historical analogy so as to show you that Zimbabwe is not what some documentary-makers make it out to be. What if a documentary-maker was to show a documentary on the (1945) Allied bombing of Dresden, Germany, to a group of Native-Americans. What if these Native-Americans had never been exposed to German or European history, and knew nothing of WW1 and WW2. What then would the Native-Americans make of President Truman, and Prime Minister Churchill? And what would they make of the Russian Red Army, fast advancing on Berlin? Well, they'd probably think that Russians were a warmongering race of barbaric brutes out to ruin the harmony of the peace-loving Germans. And they'd probably think that both President Truman & Prime Minister Churchill were cruel savages, intent on bombing the innocent Germans into oblivion.
Anyone who is even vaguely familiar with European/Western history will know that it was the Germans who were the aggressors and not the other way around. The Brits, Americans & Russians were fighting for dear life against a ruthless, German war-machine. A background study of this era would have begun with the Franco-Prussian war of 1870; followed by the horrors of WW1; and then moved onto The Treaty of Versailles and the rise of Hitler & The Nazis. Without this background info, any film, documentary, or book about WW2 is meaningless.
The same is true of the land situation in Zimbabwe. Any movie, documentary, book or magazine article that ignores the events of the previous 150 years, and just focuses on the present is especially meaningless to a public that has never been exposed to colonial African history. Any background info on the land issue in Zimbabwe will start with missionaries like David Livingstone; proceed to adventurers like Speke, Morton & Stanley; and then be followed by the biggest plunderer of them all, Cecil Rhodes. Then it would move to The Pioneer Column of 1890 (that planted the British flag on Zimbabwean soil); and then (most importantly) the hut and poll taxes that sucked the indigenous black Africans of Zimbabwe into the wage economy.
Following these hideous hut and poll taxes, were a series of Land Apportionment Acts that forced black Africans from the fertile highveld area of Zimbabwe. This area was (and still is) the area of greatest population density, and had been settled by a Bantu-speaking population since around 900AD. After the land Apportionment Act (of 1930) Africans were systematically shoved into overcrowded and barren "Native Reserves". It was the cruel land policy of the colonial Rhodesians that sparked the Chimurenga War for Independence from 1966-1979. The background information that I've just supplied is crucial to any understanding of the tumultuous land situation inn Zimbabwe. Any filmmaker, writer or thinker who omits such background information is really just waffling about nothing.
The so-called "land invasions" that are shown in the documentary, "Mugabe & The White African" are really the actions of a wronged people, taking back the land of their ancestors, which they (rightly) believe to be theirs, through historical precedence.
Well, let me give you a historical analogy so as to show you that Zimbabwe is not what some documentary-makers make it out to be. What if a documentary-maker was to show a documentary on the (1945) Allied bombing of Dresden, Germany, to a group of Native-Americans. What if these Native-Americans had never been exposed to German or European history, and knew nothing of WW1 and WW2. What then would the Native-Americans make of President Truman, and Prime Minister Churchill? And what would they make of the Russian Red Army, fast advancing on Berlin? Well, they'd probably think that Russians were a warmongering race of barbaric brutes out to ruin the harmony of the peace-loving Germans. And they'd probably think that both President Truman & Prime Minister Churchill were cruel savages, intent on bombing the innocent Germans into oblivion.
Anyone who is even vaguely familiar with European/Western history will know that it was the Germans who were the aggressors and not the other way around. The Brits, Americans & Russians were fighting for dear life against a ruthless, German war-machine. A background study of this era would have begun with the Franco-Prussian war of 1870; followed by the horrors of WW1; and then moved onto The Treaty of Versailles and the rise of Hitler & The Nazis. Without this background info, any film, documentary, or book about WW2 is meaningless.
The same is true of the land situation in Zimbabwe. Any movie, documentary, book or magazine article that ignores the events of the previous 150 years, and just focuses on the present is especially meaningless to a public that has never been exposed to colonial African history. Any background info on the land issue in Zimbabwe will start with missionaries like David Livingstone; proceed to adventurers like Speke, Morton & Stanley; and then be followed by the biggest plunderer of them all, Cecil Rhodes. Then it would move to The Pioneer Column of 1890 (that planted the British flag on Zimbabwean soil); and then (most importantly) the hut and poll taxes that sucked the indigenous black Africans of Zimbabwe into the wage economy.
Following these hideous hut and poll taxes, were a series of Land Apportionment Acts that forced black Africans from the fertile highveld area of Zimbabwe. This area was (and still is) the area of greatest population density, and had been settled by a Bantu-speaking population since around 900AD. After the land Apportionment Act (of 1930) Africans were systematically shoved into overcrowded and barren "Native Reserves". It was the cruel land policy of the colonial Rhodesians that sparked the Chimurenga War for Independence from 1966-1979. The background information that I've just supplied is crucial to any understanding of the tumultuous land situation inn Zimbabwe. Any filmmaker, writer or thinker who omits such background information is really just waffling about nothing.
The so-called "land invasions" that are shown in the documentary, "Mugabe & The White African" are really the actions of a wronged people, taking back the land of their ancestors, which they (rightly) believe to be theirs, through historical precedence.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Che Guevara and Regulated Free Markets
I finished watching the movie "Che" yesterday. It was about four and half hours long, and was worth every minute. Damien Bechir is superb as Fidel Castro, and I think Benicio Del Toro was well-cast in the leading role. I think that the 60s revolutionaries really missed a golden opportunity to reshape the world to be as humane as possible. If only they'd allowed regulated market forces to co-exist side-by-side with all the positive dictates of left-wing ideology.
Free schooling, free health-care, women's rights, WITH regulated free-markets and democracy, might have made the rest of the world look like a poorer version of Scandinavia, rather than a scarier version of Miami, as it is now with its Neo-Liberal dogma.
Free schooling, free health-care, women's rights, WITH regulated free-markets and democracy, might have made the rest of the world look like a poorer version of Scandinavia, rather than a scarier version of Miami, as it is now with its Neo-Liberal dogma.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Education, Education, Education
Any country that abandons its education system is doomed to failure. The coastal elites of Sierra Leone used to be known for their education. Now two thirds of Sierra Leonese are illiterate and Fourah Bay College is a total wreck. Makerere in Uganda is now a shadow of itself, and one third of Ugandans still cannot read and write, 48 years after independence.
The Univ of Zimbabwe used to produce outstanding graduates, but now most of the teaching staff have fled for greener pastures and Zimbabwe's formerly outstanding education system is literally falling to pieces. Zimbabwe's President Mugabe is now admitting that Zimbabwe's once-stellar educational system is now in tatters. Governments that kill the education system, also kill any hopes of future development.
The Univ of Zimbabwe used to produce outstanding graduates, but now most of the teaching staff have fled for greener pastures and Zimbabwe's formerly outstanding education system is literally falling to pieces. Zimbabwe's President Mugabe is now admitting that Zimbabwe's once-stellar educational system is now in tatters. Governments that kill the education system, also kill any hopes of future development.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Shona Zvidawo & Totems
The Shona-speaking peoples of Zimbabwe use several cultural markers to identify a person and to show their origin. The most important cultural marker is one's totem (usually in the form of an animal). My totem - mutupo in Shona - is Mhara/antelope. Male members of the Mhara totemic lineage go by the honorific name of *Chikonamombe* ( *mombe* means cow in Shona). The honorific name, *Chikonamombe* can also be rendered as *Chikonan'ombe* . In Shona, this honorific name is known as a *chidawo*.
Zvidawo (plural of chidawo) can also be used as family names, hence *James Chikonamombe*. Every totemic lineage has a praise poem that is associated with that lineage. A single line of this praise-poem is called a *detembo*; several lines are called *madetembo*, and to be showered with praise using your lineage praise-poem is known as *kudetembedzwa* .
Here are some lines from my lineage praise-poem: Mbuya Chikonamombe, chigumbu chinounye... ....Gusho, vari Rare.....vari zihota...vemuto munyere....vakazadzwa mhezi neVaranda. The reciting of the praise-poem is often accompanied by the ritual clapping of hands (kuwombera maoko). If you ever see two Zimbabweans clasping and clapping their hands, as they exchange pleasantaries, don't be confused....you will actually be witnessing a ritual greeting.
Shona *madetembo* often include ritual attributes of that totemic lineage (sometimes in jest), and some geographic attributes. For example, in ours, there is reference to *vari Rare*. Here, *Rare* refers to an area in Chikomba (my home district) now known as *Range*. During colonial times it was known as *The Range*. In our poem, the line with *vemuto munyere* refers to our legendary love of meat. When Zvikonamombe (plural of Chikonamombe) are at the table then be forewarned: there are no vegetarians in the family, and baby-carrots and mushy peas just won't suffice!
Honorific names are how adult (male) Zimbabweans address one another, either in person or in correspondence (and not by their given family names). For example, PM Morgan Tsvangirai is addressed in person as *Save*, and not *Morgan* or *Morgan Tsvangirai*. You might have read of *Gushungo* in passages about Zimbabwe. The *Gushungo* they are referring to is President Robert Mugabe. The respectful and proper way to address President Mugabe in person is by his lineage honorific name of Gushungo, and not *Bob* or *Robert*.
Zvidawo (plural of chidawo) can also be used as family names, hence *James Chikonamombe*. Every totemic lineage has a praise poem that is associated with that lineage. A single line of this praise-poem is called a *detembo*; several lines are called *madetembo*, and to be showered with praise using your lineage praise-poem is known as *kudetembedzwa* .
Here are some lines from my lineage praise-poem: Mbuya Chikonamombe, chigumbu chinounye... ....Gusho, vari Rare.....vari zihota...vemuto munyere....vakazadzwa mhezi neVaranda. The reciting of the praise-poem is often accompanied by the ritual clapping of hands (kuwombera maoko). If you ever see two Zimbabweans clasping and clapping their hands, as they exchange pleasantaries, don't be confused....you will actually be witnessing a ritual greeting.
Shona *madetembo* often include ritual attributes of that totemic lineage (sometimes in jest), and some geographic attributes. For example, in ours, there is reference to *vari Rare*. Here, *Rare* refers to an area in Chikomba (my home district) now known as *Range*. During colonial times it was known as *The Range*. In our poem, the line with *vemuto munyere* refers to our legendary love of meat. When Zvikonamombe (plural of Chikonamombe) are at the table then be forewarned: there are no vegetarians in the family, and baby-carrots and mushy peas just won't suffice!
Honorific names are how adult (male) Zimbabweans address one another, either in person or in correspondence (and not by their given family names). For example, PM Morgan Tsvangirai is addressed in person as *Save*, and not *Morgan* or *Morgan Tsvangirai*. You might have read of *Gushungo* in passages about Zimbabwe. The *Gushungo* they are referring to is President Robert Mugabe. The respectful and proper way to address President Mugabe in person is by his lineage honorific name of Gushungo, and not *Bob* or *Robert*.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Robert Mugabe & The Breetish
As we all know, you can never travel back in time and there is no such thing as 20/20 hindsight. The Lancaster House talks that decided the fate of Zimbabwe took place in Dec of '79. I was too young at the time to have taken part; I was just a toddler. Nevertheless, I wish to point out some key mistakes that were made by all the parties involved, and which have led to the land-issue problems we face today .
First of all, the Patriotic Front conceded to clauses in the agreement that called for land to be transferred to the African majority on a willing buyer,willing seller basis. Furthermore, these land transfers were to be funded by the British govt -- That was a fatal error. Why bring the British into it? Any future British govt, that was to provide these funds, would obviously bring its concerns, worldview, biases, and economic interests to the table.
Britain is a democracy, and any British Govt has to answer to its electorate. This electorate is swayed by appearances, perceptions, and raw emotions. In no way could any British leader APPEAR to be abandoning the white Zimbabwean farmers to their fate. Nevermind, that your white farmer seen on TV is a Dutch Boer named Cloete, who hates the "English" and has never set foot in the British Isles. But, that's besides the point: it's PERCEPTIONS that count; these perceptions sway the British public; and any British govt cannot appear to be blind to the raw emotions of the British public (especially in an election year)
Back in Zimbabwe, our President never tires of lashing out at the "Breetiish" at every opportunity. Every occurrence, from drought to cholera, is blamed on the "Breetiish". This leads me back to the original sin, of asking the British Govt to fund land transfers as specified by the Lancaster House agreement. The parties involved should have been told,in very strong terms, that there was to be no third party guidance, funding or overseeing of any of the agreed-upon stipulations of these agreements. That would have forced all the parties involved, The Patriotic Front (Zanu,Zapu) and the Rhodesians to cobble together any future arrangements on their own.
James Chikonamombe
First of all, the Patriotic Front conceded to clauses in the agreement that called for land to be transferred to the African majority on a willing buyer,willing seller basis. Furthermore, these land transfers were to be funded by the British govt -- That was a fatal error. Why bring the British into it? Any future British govt, that was to provide these funds, would obviously bring its concerns, worldview, biases, and economic interests to the table.
Britain is a democracy, and any British Govt has to answer to its electorate. This electorate is swayed by appearances, perceptions, and raw emotions. In no way could any British leader APPEAR to be abandoning the white Zimbabwean farmers to their fate. Nevermind, that your white farmer seen on TV is a Dutch Boer named Cloete, who hates the "English" and has never set foot in the British Isles. But, that's besides the point: it's PERCEPTIONS that count; these perceptions sway the British public; and any British govt cannot appear to be blind to the raw emotions of the British public (especially in an election year)
Back in Zimbabwe, our President never tires of lashing out at the "Breetiish" at every opportunity. Every occurrence, from drought to cholera, is blamed on the "Breetiish". This leads me back to the original sin, of asking the British Govt to fund land transfers as specified by the Lancaster House agreement. The parties involved should have been told,in very strong terms, that there was to be no third party guidance, funding or overseeing of any of the agreed-upon stipulations of these agreements. That would have forced all the parties involved, The Patriotic Front (Zanu,Zapu) and the Rhodesians to cobble together any future arrangements on their own.
James Chikonamombe
Sunday, March 14, 2010
It's Our Turn To Eat
Just read the book by Michaela Wrong, "It's our turn to eat". What a great book. Michaela Wrong is a great wordsmith, and she knows her Africa. She doesn't spout useless cliches like some other "experts" on Africa. The main character in all of this, John Githongo, had the guts to take on the whole, corrupt, Kenyan establishment. I wish there were more Africans like him. The man has got b***s!
It's good to know that Ndugu Githongo is still alive-and-well, still in the fight against corruption. In the book, Michaela Wrong describes how some of Githongo's ex-workmates traveled to London to try to get him to drop his endeavours and return to the fold. At least the Kenyan establishment still has some decency; they don't kill all of their enemies, unlike their cousins in Zimbabwe.
It's good to know that Ndugu Githongo is still alive-and-well, still in the fight against corruption. In the book, Michaela Wrong describes how some of Githongo's ex-workmates traveled to London to try to get him to drop his endeavours and return to the fold. At least the Kenyan establishment still has some decency; they don't kill all of their enemies, unlike their cousins in Zimbabwe.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)