Gibson Nyikadzino
A FEW days ago, footballer Lionel Messi was allowed by the European Court of Justice, EU’s top court, to register his name as a trademark. The Barcelona FC player first applied to trademark his surname as a sportswear brand in 2011. A sportswear company, Massi, argued the similarity between their “two logos would cause confusion."
The court noted that “the star player’s reputation” could be taken into account when “weighing up whether the public would be able to tell the difference between the two brands.”
This goes similarly with our politics. A name in politics is like an ideology. It helps extract identity. All politics is identity. Identity and politics are two phenomena joined together by contestation and the struggles that emerge from it are struggles of power, relevance and memory.
This explains the acrimony between the MDC-A led by Nelson Chamisa and the MDC-T of Thokozani Khupe. Of interest is the recent statement by Khupe that his party is set to go to the December by-elections as MDC-A, seizing Chamisa’s party/identity/values/ideals. The name MDC (despite splits) has a memory, it is leverage, it is a representation of values, norms, customs and ideals against Zanu-PF’s two score hegemony.
Today when one mentions EFF, DA and ANC, they are quickly understood to be talking of the political entities in neighbouring South Africa. The parties continue with their values and relevance. In December 2008, an ANC party veteran Mosiua ‘Terror’ Lekota formed his Congress of the People party (COPE). It was hope it would tear and divide the ANC. Today the party is diminishing and dwarfing.
Similarly, even revolutions that form part of the histories around the world were identified by name to meet their objectives. The 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia advertised its aim as replacing the exploitative economic system of tsarist Russia with more just and efficient one that would bring freedom and prosperity to millions in Russia.
Zimbabwe’s liberators turned oppressors, fought hard to oust the Ian Smith’s racist regime. The leaders, fighting for a democratic and just society, replaced Smith’s system with a much more complex extractive system that defies the constitutional freedoms as much as they were defied during colonialism.
In Russia and Zimbabwe the outcomes have been opposite. Repression has followed en masse. Even the experiences in Vietnam, China and Cuba were similar. The reason credited to the successes of the revolutions in Russia, Zimbabwe, China, Vietnam and Cuba, among others, is the ideological and organization of the freedom fighters against their oppressors. Radio and pamphlets were used as ideological tools to counter the narratives. The leaders of these revolutions from Russia’s Vladimir Lenin to China’s Mao Tse-tung, Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh to Cuba’s Fidel Castro had ideological clarity that drew them closer to the masses. They received collaborative support from the people hence in Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle the phrase “the people represent water and the fighters are the fish” grew loud then.
The name Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in Zimbabwe is synonymous with socio-democratic change. Of late the name has been compromised, contaminated and corrupted to meet political ends that have been judicially accepted as true, whether such relevance is true or imagined. The MDC-T vs MDC Alliance scenario is proof that Zanu-PF is living to fight another day. The splits that have taken place in the MDC have diminished the power of their leaders to force officeholders to hew the party line.
When a group of former ZANU and ZAPU officials who were fed up with the incessant squabbles between the two liberation movements formed the Front for the Liberation of Zimbabwe (FROLIZI) in October 1971, they were disparaged as a “Front for the Liaison of Zezuru Intellectuals.” This was done to maintain the ZANU-ZANU dominance in the fight against colonialism.
When Joice Mujuru was expelled from Zanu-PF, she and Didymus Mutasa, Rugare Gumbo and Dzikamai Mavhaire were thought to be key people who’d split Zanu-PF. Their departure was seen as an opportunity for a new phase in Zimbabwean politics without Zanu-PF. Even another outfit, Zimbabwe People First (ZPF), was threatened with legal action by using the initials PF (People First) which according to Zanu-PF was meant to confuse the electorate. However, up to today, that remains an unfulfilled dream, Gumbo and Mutasa already retraced their footsteps to the liberation party.
The name MDC matters. Chamisa and Khupe are both committing fatal errors that are not being addressed with immediacy. In today’s interconnected world, it is difficult to penetrate the consciousness of a busy and distracted electorate without a political name. As a result, winning in politics mainly comes down to a simple matter of name recognition.
On the other hand, the Zanu-PF of today is not the 1990s party. It is also rebranding and has become aware of technological and digital innovations that are reshaping society, politics and economies. This they are doing because of their party’s name and putting a new energy in the party.
For feedback: gnyikadzino@gmail.com
