In Zimbabwe, Patrick Chinamasa of the ruling party, Zanu PF, has caused a stir once again. He has a habit of using historical heroes to support the party’s cause. This is not the first time he has done this. Back in 2020, he made a similar comparison between President Emmerson Mnangagwa and Mbuya Nehanda, a famous figure who fought against colonial rule.

Recently, Chinamasa made more statements that have caught people’s attention. He said that some political figures, like Tshabangu, are helping Zanu PF without meaning to. He compared this situation to the way Mbuya Nehanda resisted colonialism. He also said that people who criticize Mnangagwa and his family on social media are like the people who once attacked Nehanda and another anti-colonial fighter, Sekuru Kaguvi.

Chinamasa took it a step further by saying that the international sanctions placed on Zimbabwe are similar to the violence and oppression faced during colonial times. This kind of comparison has raised many questions. Critics think Chinamasa is twisting historical events for political reasons. They say it is wrong to compare the current government’s challenges to the heroic fight of Nehanda and other freedom fighters.

People are especially concerned because these historical figures played a big role in Zimbabwe’s history. To use their stories in this way seems like an attempt to justify the actions of the current government. Critics say that the struggles of Nehanda were real and deserve respect, and they should not be used as a tool for political gain.

This is not the first time Zanu PF has used history to strengthen its hold on power. Throughout Zimbabwe’s history, Zanu PF has used historical events and people to show that it is the legitimate ruling party. This is a common strategy in politics around the world, where governments use history to build support and weaken opposition. In Zimbabwe, this has been a very effective way for Zanu PF to maintain power.

But the problem is that this use of history can be harmful. By comparing today’s political problems to the real struggles of the past, people might start to believe that the current situation is just as serious or important. This could make it harder to criticize the government or challenge its authority. In reality, the current issues in Zimbabwe are very different from the struggles against colonial rule. Zimbabwe today is not under colonial rule, and the problems faced by the country today are unique to the current time.

This strategy by Zanu PF also raises another issue. How much should history be used in politics? History is important because it shapes how people see the present and the future. But when it is used to push political agendas, it can be twisted and lose its real meaning. Nehanda and other freedom fighters fought for something very different from what the government is dealing with today.

In conclusion, Chinamasa’s remarks show how Zanu PF continues to use history to support its political goals. By comparing Mnangagwa to heroes of the past, Zanu PF hopes to gain more support and make it harder for people to criticize the party. However, this kind of comparison can be dangerous. It risks oversimplifying history and using it for political purposes. As Zimbabwe moves forward, the role of history in politics will remain important. But it’s clear that using history to gain political advantage is a complicated and risky strategy. Many people believe that the government should not abuse the legacy of true heroes like Mbuya Nehanda just to push its current agenda.