The Sunday Mail
Let’s say there are roughly 13 million people in Zimbabwe — accuracy not being relevant.
Add to that those living outside who still contribute to the economy through remittances and other economic intangibles; let’s just say two million.
Moreover, we can include the number of foreign investors with FDI or financial investment in our capital markets, say, 500 000.
All of us put together would make 15,5 million people with vested interests in Zimbabwe.
From a certain perspective, that also makes 15,5 million people culpable for our economic circumstance. I will revert to this perspective later.
In many African countries, there is an awareness of political patriotism, yet a very shallow understanding of economic patriotism.
Casually, it may seem an absurd notion to distinguish political and economic patriotism, but Zimbabwe shows that it is very easy to separate the two.
Incumbent or opposition, you will find a substantial proportion of people who pledge allegiance to political parties remain stubbornly misinformed on their respective party’s economic convictions or ideals.
For instance, many within the incumbent party will claim elevated loyalty, but when asked to explain the national blueprint, all things happen to find themselves in line with Zim-Asset.
Capitalism becomes a mechanism of antagonist Western imperialism, yet when practised at a much more efficient and competent level in the Far East, it becomes a benevolent economic system we should learn from.
Regrettably, I lack any suitable examples to fit the opposition.
I am not sure it has ever offered any economic agenda of which I can interrogate its members on.
In both situations, however, political patriotism reigns supreme with little interrogation of economic understanding — if relevant at all. How one can conclude that it is political patriotism and not simple political preference is that as it often plays out in our political environment.
Party preference is matched with a perception, which seemingly finds direct correlation of who is more “Zimbabwean” than the other. Anyhow, this complex maze of how we function as a country wanes my enthusiasm in politics.
We carry on with a vacuum of understanding economic patriotism.
At my most pessimistic, in fact, I suspect our politics mischievously sucks the air out of economic patriotism.
Patriotism is so retained in a political realm of understanding that we do not appreciate its necessity in an economic context. This creates a dark irony within our prevalent national discourse.
Without patriotism defined in an economic context, Zimbabwe will always deprive itself of the desirable nirvana where we can have differing political preferences, yet, still, willingly conform within economic nationalism without the fear of external influence compromising our objectives.
The fact that 35 years after independence, we cannot argue over our economic fate without concern of outward discretion is evidence of a nation immature in economic patriotism.
Likewise, the absence of economic patriotism is how Zimbabwe and many other African countries find ourselves struggling to chart long-term economic visions.
Political cycles are pretty short-term.
Economies that ride on political patriotism can never plan long-term economic visions for the simple reason that elections are disruptive inconveniences.
This explains what global investors mean when they say Africa’s political uncertainty compromises economic partnership. However, this is also how investors of ill-intent rob Africa so easily.
Sponsoring political contenders easily means changing, or abandoning, a nation’s long-term economic vision in return for political grip.
It follows then that politicians of the purest kind in Africa, and here in Zimbabwe, should comprehend the paramount importance of informing their nation on economic patriotism ahead of political patriotism.
Now to revert, the certain perspective that I opened with is one which is informed by economic patriotism.
As I have also explained that we are a country seriously deficient in economic patriotism, it should make sense why not all 15,5 million people with a vested interest in Zimbabwe feel culpable for our economic circumstance.
Perhaps this answers why a banker in our financial system, who holds no political allegiance, fails to cherish the role that is dependent on his integrity for Zimbabwe to develop economically.
He is not bonded by the duty of economic patriotism.
It could also be why the executive at a State enterprise easily mismanages resources and his only worry is from political structures — little concern over Zimbabwe’s economic dependence on that State enterprise.
He is only bonded by the duty of political patriotism.
My use of the words “perhaps” and “it could be” should not be seen as me having uncertainty in my suggestions, but rather as intentionally leaving room for politicians to respond, and defeat if they can, the notion that Zimbabwe cannot continue to function without economic patriotism.
