The Delusion of Absolute Power
by
Adolf Hitler was in Warsaw to celebrate a military victory. On that day at Warsaw, his false feeling of importance reached a high pitch. He was ranting, "nobody in history ever achieved what I have achieved in such a short time. Nobody has the confidence of the people like I do. Nobody, be him military or civilian can replace me. I am indispensable. I will therefore tolerate no opposition. I will therefore spare no effort in liquidating any opposition". Less than six years later, the terror he unleashed on the world had boomeranged, and was closing in to devour him. Marooned in his Berlin bunker, he took his own life.
The Shah of Iran, Mohammed Pahlavi, surrounded by a retinue of sycophants, was
exalted as the King of Kings,the Light of the Aryans, the Shadow of God on
Earth, etc. In his swagger and arrogance, he tolerated no dissent. He
imprisoned, tortured and executed those who opposed his autocratic rule.
Conspicuously detached from the mood and sentiments of his people, he once
boasted "nobody can overthrow me. I have a 350,000 man army. I have the
support of the people. I have the power." Months later, in the heat of a
religious inspired revolt against him, the Shah, with his 350,000 man army and
their arsenal of modern weaponry still intact, scampered into exile. Dejected,
and looking for scapegoat, he blamed his fall on his advisers "who built a
wall between (him) and his people." He died ignominiously a short while
later.
The problem with tyrants is that they lack legitimacy. Their power does not
derive from a popular mandate. Therefore, they can only remain in power in
defiance of the popular will. So, to maintain themselves in power, they must
rely on brute power, or in the words of Kenneth Galbraith, "condign"
power. Unknown to them is that condign power is the most treacherous form of
power, and that it has always betrayed those who wielded it excessively.
Not too long ago, a diminutive general dispensing cold hearted power from Abuja,
believed that he could hold on to power indefinitely in defiance of the
collective will of the people. Africans thought that their worst nightmares were
made manifest in Idi Amin and Mobutu Sese Seko. That is, until the debut of Sani
Abacha. Abacha combined the worst of Amin and Mobutu: wanton brutality and
mindless kleptomania. It was this his crooked amalgam of butchery and thievery
that made Nigeria under him one of the most misruled country in the world. In
the deranging effect of power, he trampled on human dignity, freedom and lives.
He rode roughshod over Nigeria: squelched dissent and murdered political
opponents, ruined the economy and subverted every civil institution,
glamorized
greed and emptied the national coffers. Unknown to him, nemesis stalked him, and
in a swoop, nemesis struck him down. As he laid in chilled stillness - frozen by
the grip of death, Nigeria exhaled in relief.
Although the turn of the century has seen a decline in the fortune of tyranny
all over Africa, an anachronistic despot holds sway in Zimbabwe. He seems
mentally and psychologically trapped in the past. In invoking anti-colonial
rhetoric to justify his political criminality, and labeling his critic sellouts,
he sounds completely out of sync with the times. The era of colonialism in
Africa is over, and so is the time when anti-colonial rhetoric found resonance
amongst Africans, and anti-white tirade struck a chord in African minds. The
liberation that is relevant to African, and especially Zimbabwe is not
liberation from colonialism, but from poverty, anarchy and dictatorship. The
ideological divide between whites and blacks in Zimbabwe have narrowed, as their
interests have converged in a unified opposition against a common foe, Mugabe's
repressive, moribund and corrupt government. So, the battle is no longer between
blacks and whites, but between tyranny and democracy, lawlessness and the rule of law, societal squalor and social progress.
A hero of the war of independence, Robert Mugabe came to power tremendously
popular, and was to many Africans a symbol of African triumph over the forces of
colonialism. But right from time, his style has been peremptory. From his
guerrilla days, he stated his misgivings for multi-party democracy, and extolled
the virtues of a one party state. Following Zimbabwean independence, he smashed
all political opposition, especially in Matebeleland, forcing through his one
party state. However, with the economy, he remained a realist. He tapered his
guerrilla war days revolutionary bluster with pragmatic economic policy. As a
result, in the early days of Zimbabwe independence, the economy bloomed, and his
government, then almost incorruptible, made remarkable strides in education
(giving Zimbabwe the highest literacy rate in African), and health.
But, Mugabe overstayed in power, concentrated so much powers in his own hands,
and evidently, lost touch with reality. He became too despotic, and insensitive
to the corruption that has eaten deep into his government, and the economic
slide that is evident, even to the most casual observer. Imperious and oblivious
to the economic deprivations of the masses, he struts around in his custom
tailored suits, and flaunt his sybaritic lifestyle. The electorate handed him
their verdict when the opposition, Movement for Democratic Change, won nearly
half of the contested seats in the parliamentary election. That election
foreshadowed for him what was in stock for him in the then scheduled
presidential election, he will most likely loose the election to the opposition
candidate.
To prevent that, his usual bumptious style took a shameless bent. In his macabre
and tyrannical antics, he became in the words of Desmond Tutu, a "cartoon
figure of the archetypal African dictator". He restored to desperate
measures to cling onto power. For the presidential election, voters were
arbitrarily disqualified, election observers harassed, the political opposition
intimidated and murdered. Repressive laws banned opposition rallies, silenced
critical reporters and the elections were rigged. Finally, he won - a
pyrrhic
victory.
He started exploiting the emotive issue of land redistribution, allowing the
independent war veterans to occupy white farms. Thus, whipping up pro-government
sentiments among blacks, and punishing white farmers for their support for the
opposition. Undoubtedly, there has been a need for land redistribution in
Zimbabwe, but the Mugabe government avoided a radical land redistribution
program for more than 20 years. His recent fixation on land allocation is a
political vendetta, couched in ultraistic rhetoric. His lawless style of land
allocation is strife-driven, bloody and furthers the deterioration of a once
robust economy. As a result, Zimbabwe, once a regional breadbasket now reels
from starvation. Only food aid from international donors have saved millions
from starvation. The production of cash crops, the mainstay of the economy has
plummeted, as many white commercial farmers have fled in fear of their lives,
and the operation of those left is hampered by the government sponsored lawlessness. Other economic and social indicators reveal the extent of
the havoc Mugabe has wrecked on his country in his mindless bid to remain in
power. Inflation hovers at about 117 percent, and there is an acute shortage of
gasoline, medicine and other essentials. Unemployment is at about 70 percent.
Human right abuses, torture, rape, extra-judicial killing and a gross disregard
for the rule of law are prevalent in all sectors of the society.
Not a single ideal inspires Mugabe's continued stay in power. In his megalomania
and paranoia, he seems to be sinking deeper and deeper into his make believe
world. He has spurned voices of reason from world leaders, rebuffed entreaties
from friends and rejected dialogue with the opposition. Buoyed by his resource
of terror and flush with boundless powers, he is relying more and more on
ruthless tactics. Evidently, like Adolf Hitler, the Shah and Sani Abacha, he
must believe that he can maintain himself in power indefinitely with political
intrigues, guns and bayonets. Well, I suggest that he flips through the pages
of modern history for some instructive readings on the perilous ness of
autocratic power. And if, in some recess of his mind, there is still any element
of perspicacity, that is, yet un-confused by arrogance and greed, it will
crystallize to him that power predicated on brute force can at the very best be
tenuous, and will inescapably collapse like a foundationless edifice.
Jan 2004