Zimpapers Logo

Indian national and former Miss New York Nina Davuluri who was crowned 2014 Miss America at the weekend.

Tendai Manzvanzvike
RACISM is a disease so cancerous that it can eat away the victim and the perpetrator. Victims of this sickening act know it. It demeans and destroys the best that a person has. As a black Zimbabwean, I know what institutional racism and racism perpetrated at personal levels are like, be it here in Zimbabwe and/or abroad.

I have had to learn some coping mechanisms to fight this evil, but never stopped wondering why someone should believe that they are a better creation than me, and why they should also believe that their skin colour gives them an advantage.

Why should skin pigmentation also be used as a benchmark to determine capability in executing tasks?  And, what scientific method has been used to arrive at the conclusion that certain races think, act and behave better than others?

Italy’s first black cabinet minister Dr Cecile Kyenge continues to be subjected to racial abuse.

However, the biggest problem with racists is that as they display their bigotry, they would also want to socialise their “subjects” so that they act like them. Through their pride and arrogance, they have placed themselves at a moral high ground where they believe that they have the right to tell people different from them to act like them.

Some even believe that they have a God-given right to tell the people of colour how they should go about their business.
The net effect of racism whether covert or overt is that it subdues, instils fear and makes victims feel inferior.

It is also destroys self-confidence and self-esteem. When a person loses his or her self-confidence, they become subjects that can easily be manipulated.

Thus racism is not only a vice, but an evil. How else can it be explained when whites from Western countries continue to think that people of colour are subjects of abuse?

Black soccer players and other athletes whose immense contribution to their sporting businesses continue to be racially taunted and traumatised, but apart from promises to address the problem, we have not seen any meaningful policy measures put in place to end racism in Europe, the United States of America and other countries.

They are keen to meaningfully address other forms of human rights abuse in developing nations, but not racism.
Italy’s first black cabinet minister, Dr Cecile Kyenge, continues to be an object of racial abuse. She was recently told that she has orangutan features.

Dr Kyenge is an eye specialist, and there is no way she could have risen in Italy’s political system as a former migrant if she did not have the requisite skills, qualifications and capacity to do the job.

If the racism she continually has to deal with had been perpetrated against white people in Africa, the United Nations would have been forced to deal with the issue, I presume.

Before I briefly look at racism against Zimbabwe, let me point out the worst case scenario of racism in the past week.
Indian national and former Miss New York Nina Davuluri was crowned 2014 Miss America at the weekend. This is how AFP broke the news on Monday: “For the first time America’s top beauty queen is a woman of Indian origin, a first partly clouded by a spate of hateful tweets branding her an Arab terrorist”.

As if the introduction was not damning enough, the racial taunts in the tweets were even more deplorable:

•  “It’s called Miss America. Get outta here New York you look like a terrorist. #bye #americanforamerica.”

•  “Are you serious??!!! The Arab wins??!!! This is miss AMERICA!!! Not miss Arabia!!! Miss Kansas is in the army and is a country girl!!! C’mon.” (Courtesy, AFP)

So, why claim to be civilised if people can stoop so low? The million-dollar question also is why racism seems to be on the rise, especially in Western countries. Is migration partly to blame? But, one would have thought that the paragons of human rights would admit that racism is a breach of the Bill of Rights and take stern measures to address the problem.

Turning to Zimbabwe, I have noted that the Anglo-Saxon world’s treatment of Zimbabweans since the land reform programme is not only propelled by a superiority complex, but it is a complex where race plays a divisive role.

They think that Zimbabweans need to be told what to do and who should govern them.  You begin to understanding that a nation like the US where everything is seen through colour lines considers it normal and acceptable to use racial undertones when dealing with Zimbabwean authorities.

What yardstick are they using to have sub-committee hearings where they not only misinform the international community about issues in Zimbabwe, but would want everyone to believe that they have the answers to Zimbabwe’s problems?

On September 12, the US House Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organisations held a hearing on Zimbabwe under the banner, “The troubling path ahead of US-Zimbabwe relations”.

Watching the two-hour-long hearing on YouTube, you realise that there was nothing new they were talking about, but that it was another racist ploy to use the Zimbabwe elections case to denigrate not only the Zimbabwean leadership, but also Africa’s institutions: Sadc and the African Union.

The committee chairperson, US Representative Edward Royce’s background remarks give this startling racist element.
Royce says, “We have another Zimbabwe election, another Mugabe victory through cheating, strong arming, intimidation and harassment. What we are talking about is more consequential.

“The unity Government has collapsed, the opposition party has been sidelined indefinitely and Zanu hardliners are in control . . . Unfortunately, the regional bodies aren’t (of) any help. The performance of Sadc has really been a disappointment here. Heralded by the administration at the start of summer as a force for change, Sadc in my opinion is still adding to the problem as they failed in the past to speak out, and this time, the parliamentary group report for the July elections terribly missed the mark.

“Miraculously, they concluded that the elections were ‘a credible reflection of the will of the people’. Free and fair is what they said, while civil society organisations who were on the ground and actually saw the elections and other domestic observers found rampant voters’ roll tampering, political harassment, political intimidation.

“This is so disturbing, when you consider that Sadc financially backed the group’s election observer mission . . .
“The US funded basically a flawed assessment that Mugabe has used to legitimate his continued despotic rule . . . Adding salt to injury,

Sadc just elected Mugabe deputy chair of the regional body for this year and chair for next year… Mugabe swore in his 62-member cabinet: a recycling of old Zanu hardliners, the old guard, some of the most militant of the old guard, and the new information minister who was the architect of the sweeping law on the clampdown on the media and the clampdown on press freedom.

And, finance minister, who was formerly justice minister, responsible for judicial crackdowns, and frankly, he is on our sanctions list . . .”
With this kind of attitude people could not agree more with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s op-ed on the Syrian crisis published in The New York Times on September 11 (electronic version) and September 12 (print).

President Putin’s parting shot summed up what many cannot articulate and be listened to: “I carefully studied his (President Barack Obama’s) address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is ‘what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.’”

He added, “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”

For more than a decade, Zimbabwe has experienced America’s “exceptionalism.” A small but rich country, Zimbabwe is still trying to develop its democratic systems. Its policies are very different from those of the United States, but the latter has taken it upon itself to meddle in Zimbabwe’s affairs.

Why, because they think that they have the right to do that, and that right is steered by their “exceptionalism”.
Is it really called for that a country that considers itself a beacon of freedom and champion of democratic rights should treat other nations as minions?

The United Nations will soon hold its 68th General Assembly. What hope for stemming this evil where the powerful use their exceptionalism — race, economic and military might — to trample on small and poor nations?