|
Back to Index
Moyo's sickening sycophancy
Psychology Maziwisa
June 04, 2010
If there is
one individual in Zimbabwean politics who will say anything and
everything at the click of a finger simply in order to win his master's
accolades, it is, unsurprisingly, that charlatan Jonathan Moyo.
Apparently
the duty Moyo owes to his dictatorial master is one that he is prepared
to fulfil even if it only serves to cheapen himself in the eyes
of the people of Zimbabwe.
Surely, our
hearts have to go out to the unfortunate and poor people of Tsholotsho
who must certainly by now hate themselves for having elected such
a weak sycophant as their parliamentary representative.
Throughout
his career Moyo has developed and embraced such a sickening propensity
to abruptly switch from an entirely sensible point of view to one
that is totally outrageous.
He has only
to be convinced that it is politically expedient. Everything else
can be flagrantly ignored. There is not a single person familiar
with Zimbabwean politics who would honestly profess ignorance of
the fact that each time Moyo has fallen out of Mugabe's favour he
has criticised him.
Indeed, they
would equally confirm that whenever the opportunity to put a smile
on the old man-s face has presented itself, Moyo has profusely
sung the dictator-s praises.
In his piece,
The cancer of politics of personalities, published in The Herald
on 27 May 2010, Moyo, in typically desperate fashion, took pains
to pay homage to the controversial and controversially appointed
Judge President George Chiweshe - apparently in an attempt to appeal
to the latter's ear ahead of his day in court for allegedly defaming
Roy Bennett.
The truth of
the matter is that Moyo has every reason to be terrified because,
if brought before an impartial Judge, the case against him is a
compelling one. No doubt he takes consolation from ZANU PF's intrinsic
conviction that anything that is associated with Mugabe is beyond
the reach of the law.
However, what
really prompted this writer to comment on a piece otherwise deserving
of no comment at all was Moyo's ridiculous and patently untrue description
of Mugabe as 'an iconic African leader with a towering global stature'.
Such toadyism is simply sickening.
If that is
what it means to be a politician then, rather than becoming one,
I would much rather stick to being a commentator committed to 'keeping
the bastards honest'!
A few examples
will serve to illustrate Moyo's alarming inconsistency.
Just before
the 2008 harmonised elections Moyo went on about how 'Mugabe should
go now' because it was in his own best interest and in the national
interest as well.
He argued that
Mugabe's standing had plummeted both 'in and outside the country'
and that his continued presence in office had become 'such an excessive
burden to the welfare of the state and such a fatal danger to the
public interest of Zimbabweans'.
Moyo correctly
further argued that Mugabe lacked 'the vision, stature and energy
to effectively run the country, let alone his party'.
Of Operation
Murambatsvina he wrote that that evil exercise attested to the
fact that Mugabe is 'without compassion'.
One wonders
what really has changed between then and now for Moyo to now consider
it a 'privilege' for anyone to serve in a Mugabe-led government.
In his recent
unsuccessful attempt to sell Mugabe's presidency as one that promotes
and protects the rule of law, Moyo unashamedly referred to Tsvangirai-s
justified calls for an end to Bennett-s continued persecution as
'the most blatant and most outrageous attack on the rule of law
since 1980'.
If Moyo wants
clear examples of what really amounts to grave attacks on the rule
of law he needs only to look at his master's monstrous political
record.
It was Moyo-s
master and not Tsvangirai who arbitrarily detained, cruelly assaulted
and devilishly tortured thousands of innocent Zimbabweans in Matabeleland
during the years 1985 and 1986.
It was his
master and not Tsvangirai who, in a 1982 speech to Parliament, said
of Gukurahundi: 'An eye for an eye and an ear for an ear may not
be adequate in our circumstances. We might very well demand two
ears for one ear and two eyes for one eye'.
Indeed it was
the dictator and not Tsvangirai who, in perhaps the clearest expression
of his contempt for the rule of law, said: 'The government cannot
allow the technicalities of the law to fetter its hands. We shall,
therefore, proceed as government in a manner we feel as fitting;
and some of the measures we shall take are measures which will be
extra-legal.'
More recently,
several Zimbabweans have either been prosecuted or threatened with
prosecution for 'insulting the person of the President' simply for
exercising what is recognised elsewhere as their inalienable right
to free speech.
Rule of law in its purest form envisages that no one is above the
law and everyone is subject to it. It is Mugabe and his cronies
who have set themselves above the law.
Accordingly,
no one can take seriously anything that charlatan Moyo ever says
without causing their beloved ones a great deal of anxiety about
the soundness of their mind.
Mugabe has
not only wrought great evil on the people of Zimbabwe but his evil
has infected those around him as is evidenced when we see the keenness
with which Moyo licks his master's boots.
Psychology
Maziwisa is Interim President of the Union for Sustainable Democracy
(USD) and can be contacted at leader@usd.org.zw
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|