How have the politics been serving you Zimbabwe?

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