The streets can be very one dimensional and too static at
analysing the political and economic dynamics in Zimbabwe. It appears to some, only one part has made “undesired”
moves whilst all others remained static at sincere and progressive positions. On
Zimbabwe, we must understand we are no longer in November 2017! Entities and
people have had a characteristic of constant and volatile kinetics in search of
optimal political and ideological positioning for power.
THE OVERKILL OF GAME THEORY
It is unfortunate in that, patriotically, game theory should not be
applicable in a political force field beyond an election day, especially to
current magnitudes! The biggest political strategic questions within the public,
I proffer, are how much and who is positioning themselves for positive enablement
of what the nation can deliver under the current circumstances. The same
question applies on identifying those who have moved in ways of “positive
disablement” of progressive drivers. This last bit is described as so because
no one is saying they have made moves of negatively disabling progress under
the circumstances and drivers. However, the attribution of lack of progress to
other forces in the field is abundant.
REMEMBER THE BIG FALLACY
One big fallacy being perpetuated is that the political
system must be a compromise of shared power amongst political contestants. Fewer
people win or lose the elections! Even fewer participate in exercising or
shaping the mandates that are gained or lost. All the country’s people however exist
under the undue extension of power games persisting beyond plebiscites; to
pollute and degrade the avenues to national aspirations.
THE TASK OF DECENT POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION
The task then becomes all players maintaining a minimum
threshold to which they should not descend beneath, just for the sake of
political gain. Zimbabwe must move on from matters of some winning and some
losing! There is a task now where everyone Zimbabwean needs to look for the
nation’s key success factors. Accepting the realities one cannot change!
Following the ideas on things that can really be changed! Above all, checking
that progress for the whole nation is maintained, and buttressing our actions
in either. We cannot continue promoting the Destroy the Zimbabwe Image Brigade!
Instead, we can think better on getting to urgent technical solutions.
WHY THINK DEEPER ON ZIMBABWE
I started putting my thoughts down having wondered how much
Zimbabwe is capacitated in minds to arrive at a Radner Equilibrium. I wondered
further how much the calculations of our trajectory and retrospective analysis
of the preceding times’ curve are inclusive of the kinetics of each
stakeholder. When an equation goes in the wrong magnitude direction, a constant
factor is never the problem - the transiency of our political force field. The
answer is to the questions; WHO HAS MOVED AND WHO IS MOVING GOAL POSTS? WHO IS
PLAYING BADLY IN THE SYSTEM? WHAT IS THE BEST OUTCOME EACH INVOLVED FORCE WANTS?
A FEW QUESTIONS THEN ON:
International community:
What do they want from Zimbabwe? Do they want it from anyone
or from a specific internal partner who provides it more cheaply (good deal)?
Are they fair on Zimbabwe, are they going to give us a good deal? Have they got
any preferences on players in Zimbabwe? Are they or have they moved in
facilitating their preference or they ignore their preferences? Do they have
major historical issues as contestations? Do they still pursue them to maintain
gains, to fair conclusions or to benefit Zimbabwe more? Do they want for us what
we really want? Do they want for themselves what we really want for ourselves? Do
they really care if we are not progressing? Do they not like it that we are
occupied with power contestation at this stage? Who amongst us will be in a
desperate position against their ally when deals are negotiated? Who amongst them is on which
side? East, West, North, SADC and their representatives we host…
MDC:
Does the MDC want or even need current government to achieve
progress? Does it want progress to happen without its involvement? What would such a trajectory mean for it? Does it prefer progress first, or it is transfer and gains in
power first? Does it want to be in power at the next election or it has been
working to be in power since the last election? Is it accessing and utilising all
pillars of government to progress national business, or to clearly show its
party’s agenda on power, and power ploys alone? What is its priority under the current
administration; progress or power now? What does this mean for the government’s
environment with MDC taking a position as a type of influence market? Are they
allowing the government space to achieve progress or only to relinquish power?
ZANU-PF:
Is it in power or it has still to be fighting for power? Is
it prioritising the Game Theory application or is it more inclined to the progressive
output from its power tenure? Who then is it engaging on that basis and who is
it not? On what matters is it engaging the world; party affairs or national
affairs? Is the government engaging other world capitals with MDC being the
agenda or national business? Is it accessing and utilising all pillars of
government to progress national business or to clearly show its party’s agenda
on power, and power ploys alone?
Citizens:
Are they looking for power transfer, or instead, immediate
progressive use of power? Do they expect and prefer the stagnancy, or a
progressive continuum from their expectation? Are they seeing everyone as
aligning to their preference? Who is not doing the progressive work? How are
they reacting to the one concentrating on a task of not bringing food to their
tables today? How are they reacting to the one just concentrating on the gains,
losses or preservation of power(s)? What do they want now and what are they
willing to trade off for that?
UNDERSTANDING OUR RESOURCE BASE AND POTENTIAL TO PROGRESS
Radner Equilibrium would inform us the requirement to factor
in all resource aspects and how they are deployed to provide options for optimum
progress even under some uncertainty. Has one of the above become an uncertain
factor in our environment? Which amongst them is clearly a deliberate negative
disablement of resources that if worked up provide us with progress?
Zimbabwe as a boundary of deliberate internalised actions has
since moved from November 2017. Whoever is carrying out tasks for its people's best yield from its resources, needs
our support in further differentiating and decoupling themselves; all away and above those dividing
and stagnating progress of and within the motherland.
#iChooseProgress
