AFRICA

ZIMBABWE

 

 

 

 

 

Zimbabwe

population: 12.084.304 people

 

On Zimbabwe

Statement of the Comintern (SH)

December 12, 2012

(excerpt of the third part of the

("Declaration of War against the Maoists")

 

During centuries, Zimbabwe (former Rhodesia) was part of the British colonialist empire and served only as a supplier of raw materials in benefit of the profits of British imperialist bourgeoisie. Rhodesian white leaders were ardent defends of social-Darwinist racist theories and considered Rhodesia’s black population as “subhuman” (these theories were used by them to justify the intense exploitation and repression which was exercised over Rhodesia’s black workers, who constituted the majority of the population). Consequently, after independence from Great Britain, a white supremacist plutocracy was installed in Rhodesia under the leadership of Ian Smith. As a consequence of the racist and genocidal exploitative policies of Smith’s regime, Zimbabweans quickly organized an armed liberation struggle. Unhappily, this struggle was never led by an authentic communist party, but by a bourgeois-nationalist organization – the Zimbabwe’s African National Union (ZANU). The ZANU claimed to follow “the principles of Marxism-Leninism” allegedly in order to “establish socialism in Zimbabwe”, but unfortunately, reality was something else. Indeed, in spite of its cheap “leftist” slogans, the ZANU was never truly Marxist-Leninist. In his speech to the 6th Pan-African Congress, H. Chitepo – the president of the ZANU – affirmed his organization’s adherence to Pan-Africanism and openly declared that:

Pan-Africanism rejects the narrow viewpoints related to (…) class.” (H. Chitepo, Speech of the national chairman of ZANU to the 6th Panafrican Congress, Zimbabwe News, Volume 8, Noº 6 - June 1974, translated from version in German language)

A genuine Marxist-Leninist would never defend something like this. In first place, Pan-Africanism is a non-communist notion which, although useful in the bourgeois-democratic stage of African peoples’ struggle (for purposes of anti-imperialist union, etc.), it ultimately turns out to be a counter-revolutionary concept in posterior socialist and communist stages. This because Pan-Africanism is mostly based on cultural and racial concepts and not on class materialist ones. We, Stalinists-Hoxhaists, know that class concepts determine everything. This constitutes one of the basic pillars of the whole communist ideology. Therefore, it is extremely reactionary to say that to see things from a class viewpoint is to be narrow-minded. Another serious mistake committed by ZANU is its refusal to make differentiations between white settlers. Throughout their historical documents, ZANU’s leaders homogenously refer to “the oppressive regime of the white racist settlers” and declare:

Our party unites everybody against their common enemy – the white settlers.” (Historical documents of ZANU, Political Program of ZANU, November 27, 1973, translated from version in German language)

As can be concluded, ZANU does not even make a firm distinction between the white landowners and capitalists (who go to Zimbabwe only to increase profits through workers’ exploitation), on one side, and the poor toilers of European descent who emigrated to Zimbabwe to improve their lives but who also ended up being exploited and who are in a situation equivalent to that of black workers, on the other side. ZANU should have encouraged union with these last ones, because both oppressed black and white Zimbabweans workers have the same class interests, purposes and enemies. Indeed, their union only increases their strength in the combat against racism, capitalism and imperialism. However, ZANU’s leaders preferred to declare:

There cannot be share of power between Africans and whites in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is an African country and therefore, Africans are its legitimate owners.” [Zimbabwe News (central organ of ZANU), ZANU 's Criticism on the ANC, Vol. 1, Nº 1; November 1973, translated from version in German language]

In first place, it is obvious that Zimbabwe’s legitimate owners are the native Africans. Nobody here is questioning it. However, this should not prevent the union between native proletarians and white proletarians against their common oppressors. Also in this, ZANU’s leaders rejected the principled positions of the former Comintern of comrades Lenin and Stalin about African nations: recognizance that Africa belonged primarily to native workers without neglecting the urgent necessity of union between black and white exploited masses. In its “Resolution about the South African Question”, the former Comintern correctly stated:

(…) South Africa belongs to the native population. (…) In its propaganda among the native masses the Communist Party of South Africa must emphasize the class differences between the white capitalists and the white workers, the latter also being exploited by the bourgeoisie as wage slaves (…) black and white workers are not only allies, but are the leaders of the revolutionary struggle (…) intensive propagation of the chief slogan of a native republic will result not in the alienation of the white workers from the Communist Party, not in segregation of the natives, but, on the contrary, in the building up of a solid united front of all toilers against capitalism and imperialism.” (Documents of the former Comintern, Resolution about the South African Question, adopted by the Executive Committee of the Communist International following the Sixth Comintern congress in 1928, version in English language)

These words were about South Africa, but they are also totally applicable to Zimbabwe’s situation.

Therefore, if white Zimbabweans toilers are also exploited and subjected to wage slavery just like black Zimbabwean workers, there is no reason why they should not unite and seize power all together. Contrary to what ZANU’s leaders declare, this is not a question of sharing of power between different races. In the context of the struggle for socialism and communism there are no races, but only classes. So, instead of being so worried about preventing the share of power with whites, ZANU’s leaders should have strived for preventing the share of power with the exploitative elements – independently of their skin color. They should have fought for the union between both white and black repressed workers. But they could have done this only if they were true communists, if they were true Marxist-Leninists – and this was not the case. Consequently, they played racists’ game and ultimately defended the further division between native and white Zimbabwean toilers.

ZANU tends to see everything from a race perspective instead of from a class perspective:

In Zimbabwe, (…) the exploiters (…) are exclusively white, while the exploited are all black Africans. The struggle in Zimbabwe is a racial war.” (H. Chitepo, Speech of the national chairman of ZANU to the 6th Panafrican Congress, Zimbabwe News, Volume 8, Noº 6 - June 1974, translated from version in German language)

If there were still doubts about ZANU’s anti-Marxist leanings, this statement dissipates all of them. In first place, even during Smith’s rule it was false that all exploiters were white. There were at least some black tribal chiefs who sided with the forces of white colonial rule and were also exploiting Zimbabwean workers.

In second place, it is also false that all exploited are black Africans. As we had referred many times, there were and still are many white Zimbabweans toilers who are as exploited and abused as their black colleagues. Relatively to this, ZANU’s leaders argue that white workers were better paid than black workers, but this does not mean that white workers were necessarily less exploited than blacks. In synthesis, what determines the degree and intensity of exploitation is the quantity of surplus-value that the capitalist can extract from the worker’s labor. It may happen that a better paid worker is in fact more exploited than a worse paid worker if the surplus-value that the capitalist master extracts from the first one is superior to that he extracts from the second one. Finally, the affirmation that the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe was a “racial war” is incredibly anti-socialist. The liberation struggle in Zimbabwe and in the rest of the world is always and without exception a class war between exploiters and exploited, between the owners of the means of production and the wage slaves.

Unsurprisingly, shortly after the phrases mentioned above, we can find in the cited Chitepo’s speech a quotation from Mao stated in a praiseful tone. So, wherever there are anti-Marxist affirmations, Maoist quotations are never too far… Indeed, Zimbabwe’s “liberation struggle” centered mainly in the countryside and ZANU’s “freedom fighters” were mainly peasants, intellectuals and bourgeois, in what represented a neglecting of the proletariat – the only truly revolutionary class. The truth is that ZANU’s leaders were very enthusiastic about Maoist anti-communist ideas:

Undeveloped areas provide the basis for the struggle of the oppressed peoples.” (H. Chitepo, Speech of the national chairman of ZANU to the 6th Panafrican Congress, Zimbabwe News, Volume 8, Noº 6 - June 1974, translated from version in German language)

This paragraph is frighteningly similar to Maoist ridiculous premises that “only the peoples of undeveloped nations are revolutionary”. This idea relates with Mao’s “three world theory” defending precisely that the so-called “third world” (which is still nowadays under the rule of some of the worst fascist, reactionary and pro-imperialist regimes) is destined to be “the main force of revolution”. The anti-Marxist and pro-capitalist meaning of this concept was already explained by comrade Enver Hoxha in his brilliant works “Imperialism and the Revolution”, “The Superpowers”, etc… and also in this and in many other documents of the Comintern (SH). Therefore, we will not give further explanations about it right now. We will only add that even the terms used by ZANU’s leaders denounce a deeply accentuated social-bourgeois and pro-Maoist tendency. In truth, they refer to the “oppressed peoples of the undeveloped countries”, but it would be much more accurate to refer to the “oppressed classes of the undeveloped countries”, because the word “people” can be very treacherous, as its meaning can include also exploiting elements. And given the fact that ZANU was heavily influenced by Maoism, we can certainly conclude that ZANU’s leaders perceived the members of the aspiring black Zimbabwean bourgeoisie as being part of the “oppressed people” – while simultaneously considering white exploited workers as being part of the “oppressive enemy”. Therefore, for ZANU’s Maoist-influenced leaders, it was infinitively more desirable to promote the interests of the wannabe black exploiters than to unite with white oppressed proletarians in the revolutionary combat for socialism and communism.

In face of all this, no wonder that the revisionist and anti-Marxist tendencies of ZANU gave birth to such a disgraceful thing as it is the totalitarian social-fascist oligarchy presently ruling Zimbabwe – and which is nothing more than a puppet regime of Chinese social-imperialism.

In fact, bourgeois-nationalist ZANU was deeply influenced by Maoism since the beginning – social-bourgeois China was inclusively one of the main providers of weaponry to ZANU’s fighters. This is entirely comprehensible in the context of Maoism’s purposes of turning China into the world dominant superpower. Chinese imperialists clearly understood that to conquer Zimbabwe to their sphere of influence, they had to support ZANU against the white regime backed by western imperialism. In this manner, they first promoted an ideological invasion of Zimbabwe through Maoism with the goal of depicting this wicked and counter-revolutionary ideology with “progressive” colors, with the aim of presenting it as the ideology which would supposedly “free black Zimbabweans from racist tyranny towards socialism.” And we have to admit that many Zimbabwean workers and peasants were totally misled by Maoist lies, they were blatantly manipulated and convinced that Mao’s social-fascism would show them the path to complete liberation. This explains why the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe never evolved from a bourgeois-nationalist stage into a veritable socialist stage. Moreover, the ZANU was also supported by monarcho-fascist North Korea. This reveals us the lack of coherence affecting ZANU’s leaders and members. On one side, they fought against Smith’s pro-western racist plutocracy, but on the other side, they had no problems about receiving support from one of the most reactionary regimes that exist in this planet. We have already stated our position relatively to the North Korean oligarchy which savagely represses North Korean workers. We will only add that if ZANU’s leaders were true Marxist-Leninists, they would have never accepted any kind of support from a social-fascist regime which bases its existence over the forced division of an entire country.

However, it is understandable that socialist Albania had to support ZANU due to strategical motives. Indeed, the armed struggle of ZANU was the only correct line to the liberation of Zimbabwean people. This is a fundamental principle of Marxism-Leninism.

As time passed, the ZANU transformed itself from a bourgeois-democratic movement into an openly fascist party. During Smith’s rule, the ZANU’s leaders screamed a lot against western imperialism, but they were not authentically anti-imperialists. They were just waiting for their opportunity to contribute to the replacement of western imperialism by Chinese imperialism and to benefit from capitalist class privileges. Even ZANU’s anti-racist character suffered total degeneration. Nowadays, Zimbabwe’s white minority is affected by discriminations and oppressions which are very similar to those suffered by black Zimbabweans during white colonial dominion. We can say that after the fall of white colonial rule, the white supremacist bourgeoisie was replaced by a black bourgeoisie which started to encourage racist attacks against the white minority. This situation worsened since Mugabe’s clique is governing Zimbabwe. True, there are still some white landowners which are linked to western imperialism and who would like to restore white rule in the country. However, there are also many propertyless workers of European descent who were never involved in white rule and who are systematically intimidated, displaced or even killed by Mugabe’s fascist forces. Black Zimbabwean journalist Kholwani Nyathi affirms in his articles:

Mugabe (…) has been on a crusade against whites (…). (Mugabe) thinks fellow citizens who are different from him are less human. (…) Although some may argue that there is nothing like black racism, what Mugabe and Zanu PF are doing is known as reverse racism. The term refers to racial prejudice or discrimination directed against the traditionally dominant racial group.” (www.newsday.co.zw, Kholwani Nyathi, Racism, tribalism: Elephant in the room, November 21, 2012, version in English language)

However, the problem of black racism in Zimbabwe reached the peak of attention when Zimbabwe’s only white minister, David Coltart, complained that racist insults against white people are commonplace during Mugabe’s cabinet meetings. Coltart is a bourgeois activist and a former opponent to Smith’s regime. He affirms that his ministerial colleagues seem to forget he is in the same room when they make “shocking remarks” about whites and he says that “if I directed similar insults towards black people, I would rightly be branded as a Nazi or an admirer of the Ku Klux Klan.” This gives us an idea about the seriousness of the racist offenses heard by Coltart. And we must bear in mind that he is talking about the highest-ranking officials of Zimbabwe’s government! Therefore, we can conclude that the most intimate servers of the Zimbabwean dominant classes are doing their utmost to spread racist venom in order to prevent Zimbabwean workers from acquiring a communist consciousness and from uniting against their common foe – Mugabe’s fascist tyranny and its Chinese social-imperialist bosses.

Furthermore, Mugabe publicly encourages the practice of black racism and has once said to his supporters: “Strike fear in the heart of the white man.” In sequence of this, many white Zimbabwean workers were assassinated with impunity.

The referred statements are so explicit that we won’t waste our time commenting them further. Zimbabwean toilers must annihilate their enemies through revolutionary force and violence under the guidance of a genuine Stalinist-Hoxhaist party leadership. But they must do this because of the exploitative and oppressive character of those enemies, and never because of their skin color. Furthermore, we had already mentioned that to perceive every white African as someone who is inevitably reactionary is a terrible mistake which has been committed by many African liberation movements – including by ZANU.

The purpose of this kind of attacks against white minority is to make Zimbabwe’s black proletarians forget that they are being as much exploited under Mugabe’s pro-Chinese tribal oligarchy as they were under Smith’s white supremacist order – while the last one was a lackey of Western imperialism, the first one is a lackey of Chinese social-imperialism. The only distinction between them are the different imperialist masters to whom they serve – in all the rest, Mugabe and Smith are ideological twins.

Here are some revealing facts about the absolute control Chinese social-imperialists exercise over Zimbabwe (all information was taken from the mentioned bourgeois and pro-capitalist sites):

Accordingly with recent news coming from China Development Bank, China has plans to invest around 10 $ billion in Zimbabwe in various key economic sectors like gold and platinum refining, oil and gas exploration, fuel procurement and distribution, housing development, etc. Mashakada, the minister of economic planning and investment promotion of Zimbabwe openly declared that:

China is looking into mining development, exploration and exploitation of agriculture, infrastructure development and communication technologies.” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/01/zimbabwe-china-10-billion-economy, China poised to pour $10bn into Zimbabwe's ailing economy, The Guardian, 1st November, 2011, version in English language)

However, the construction of Chinese hotels in Mutare, Harare and the defence college in Mazowe is of no benefit to the majority of Zimbabweans, but only to the country’s dominant classes and its Chinese social-imperialist masters.

And of course, the Chinese would never invest 10 $ billion if they were not sure that they would get zillions more in return. And this was not the only billionaire agreement signed between Chinese social-fascists and Zimbabwe’s cleptocrats. After all, we must not forget that Zimbabwe has the world's second biggest platinum reserves and huge deposits of alluvial diamonds:

Mining will be a major beneficiary of an US$8 billion accord the government of Zimbabwe and a Chinese joint venture have signed. Reporting from the Zimbabwe capital, The Herald newspaper said that the agreement would result in investment in the southern African country’s mining, energy and housing industries.” (http://www.miningreview.com/node/16779, US$8 billion Chinese investment in Zimbabwe, 20th November, 2009, version in English language)

Recently, a bourgeois book entitled Win-Win Partnership? China, Southern Africa and Extractive Industries” authored by pro-capitalist organization Southern Africa Resource Watch (SARW) concluded that most Chinese companies in Zimbabwe violate local regulations and abuse workers with impunity because they are being protected by the country’s leaders.

Moreover, several bourgeois articles significantly refer:

Chinese investors have snapped up commercial and residential properties in Zimbabwe's capital, Harare, over the past few years. The influx of cheap Chinese goods, known locally as "zhing-zhong", has caused widespread annoyance.” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/01/zimbabwe-china-10-billion-economy, China poised to pour $10bn into Zimbabwe's ailing economy, The Guardian, 1st November, 2011, version in English language)

The Asian giant, in return for its investments -- both in Zimbabwean infrastructure and in Mugabe's personal accounts -- has won near-exclusive dominance of everything from mineral rights to labor standards, as well as the apparent acquiescence of local politicians and police. (…) So far, the Zimbabweans who are most feeling China's influence in their country are the workers. As Chinese firms take over business and Chinese managers come to run everything from billion-dollar mining companies to the downtown restaurants in capital Harare, Zimbabwean workers and labor unions are complaining of mistreatment and exploitation. Earlier this month, construction workers went on strike over low pay -- $4 per day -- and they complained about regular beatings by their Chinese managers within the Anhui Foreign Economic Construction Company.

Reports of beatings by Chinese managers are so common that even a cook at Harare's popular China Garden restaurant complained of them, telling the Zimbabwe Mail & Guardian, "Working for these men from the East is hell on earth." "Workers continue to endure various forms of physical torture at the hands of these Chinese employers right under the noses of the authorities," a spokesperson for the Zimbabwe Construction and Allied Trade Workers' Union told the same newspaper. "One of the most disturbing developments is that most of the Chinese employers openly boast that they have government protection and so nothing can be done to them. (…) China has adeptly co-opted much of the country's political leadership, buying impunity for Chinese managers as well as control over much of Zimbabwe's economy. China recently paid $3 billion for exclusive access to Zimbabwe's extensive platinum rights, a contract estimated to be worth $40 billion.” (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/06/in-zimbabwe-chinese-investment-with-hints-of-colonialism/240978/, In Zimbabwe, Chinese Investment With Hints of Colonialism, The Atlantic, 24th June, 2011, version in English language)

So, the Chinese social-imperialists pay $3 billion for a contract worth $40 billion. Our previous assertions that Chinese greedy social-fascists only invest if they are able to regain maximum profits in return are confirmed. And it is obvious that corrupt Mugabe is willing to sell his own country to the Chinese imperialists if this assures him bourgeois luxury class privileges:

Zimbabwe-watchers suspect that the autocratic president benefits personally from these kinds of deals from China. It's not hard to find the payoff -- he keeps a large (and heavily guarded) mansion in Hong Kong, where he is often seen on shopping sprees under the guard of Chinese special police.” (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/06/in-zimbabwe-chinese-investment-with-hints-of-colonialism/240978/, In Zimbabwe, Chinese Investment With Hints of Colonialism, The Atlantic, 24th June, 2011, version in English language)

It is also known that the Chinese embassy in Harare (Zimbabwe’s main city) prepared an opulent birthday party for fascist Mugabe on occasion of his 86th anniversary (!). This testifies of how content the Chinese social-imperialists are towards their Zimbabweans servants. Indeed, this is the reason why Mugabe is still in power. From the moment Chinese social-fascist are not happy with him anymore, then he and his clique will be quickly ousted from power. In what respects to protecting and advancing their profitable class interests, Chinese social-fascists are anything but sentimentalists.

Today, the control exercised by the Chinese social-imperialists over Zimbabwe is so intense that the country can undoubtedly be considered as a veritable Chinese neo-colony ruled by a puppet regime which totally depends on China in political, economic and militar terms:

China's grasp on Zimbabwe extends beyond even the African country's economy and political system. A massive military compound is under construction in Harare, built by Chinese firms and with a Chinese loan of $98 million. The open-ended loan, which the already indebted Zimbabwean government has no obvious way of paying back, means that this component of the country's military will be effectively Chinese-owned. (…)This isn't the first time that Zimbabwe has relied on China for its security needs. During the 2008 political crisis, when Mugabe deployed violence to retain control of the country after declaring victory in a heavily disputed election, South African dock workers discovered that China was shipping in weapons for Mugabe's army. (…) the effect has been to deepen China's influence over what happens, and who rules, in Zimbabwe.” (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/06/in-zimbabwe-chinese-investment-with-hints-of-colonialism/240978/, In Zimbabwe, Chinese Investment With Hints of Colonialism, The Atlantic, 24th June, 2011, version in English language)

So, it is crystal clear that after the Maoist ideological invasion, Chinese social-imperialists are now occupying Zimbabwe with their bloody weapons, obnoxious “investments” and predatory capital penetration.

Mugabe and Hu Jintao (social-imperialist China’s “president”): two fascist dictators, two ruthless adversaries of the world proletarian dictatorship, two implacable enemies of world socialism and world communism

But the British Maoists of the “C”PGB couldn’t care less about all this. They are so deeply submerged in their nauseatingly anti-communist ideology that they don’t have any scruples about openly supporting Zimbabwe’s pro-Chinese cleptocracy. They try to justify this by qualifying Zimbabwe as a “black progressive regime” but they will never be able to deceive the world proletarians, who know very well that capitalist exploitation is always and invariably noxious, independently of the skin color of who exercises it. The same can be said about racism, because black racism is as counter-revolutionary and anti-socialist as white racism. Those who advocate the opposite (like happens with the British Maoists) are perilous enemies of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinist-Hoxhaism and of the world socialist revolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    fascist police - 2011


     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mugabe & Ahmadinedschad

 

Mugabe & Gaddafi

 

 

 

Mugabe & Zuma

 

 

 

 

 

"The fight against imperialism is a sham and a fraud unless it is inseparably bound up with the fight against opportunism."

(V. I. Lenin)

 

This is particularly true in regard of the history of the anti-imperialist struggle in Zimbabwe.

The proletariat of Zimbabwe will learn from bad experiences of the disastrous influence of opportunism. The proletariat of Zimbabwe will overthrow the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie through the socialist revolution and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat. Socialism in Zimbabwe can only be constructed under the guidance of the teachings of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism - thus as a part of the socialist world revolution.

 

In Zimbabwe the black bourgeoisie established capitalism because a genuine Marxist-Leninist party was missing which could lead the revolutionary transition of the anti-imperialist, democratic struggle towards the the socialist revolution.

ZANU did never follow the Hoxhaist line.

In spite of this, Socialist Albania supported the struggle of the revolutionary patriots of Zimbabwe against the racist and colonialist Smith-Regime of Rhodesia in the spirit of proletarian internationalism. The armed struggle of ZANU was the only correct line for the liberation of the people of Zimbabwe. This is a corner stone of the principles of Marxism-Leninism.

 

ZANU was mainly influenced by anti-Marxist-Leninist ideology of Maoism and also backed by social-fascist North Korea. Whereas ZAPU was backed by the Soviet social-imperialists. Today, everybody can see the disaster of this road of betrayal.

The strategy of Maoism was, at first, the ideological invasion and then, secondly, the social-imperialist invasion for the Chinese purpose of becoming the hegemonist ruler of the world.

 

Today, Zimbabwe is under the social-fascist rule of the bourgeois Mugabe's Regime. ZANU became a counter-revolutionary, reactionary, nationalist party.

Zimbabwe is a colony of social-imperialist China.

The overthrow of the Mugabe Regime by the socialist revolution is on the agenda !

During the decade-long war against the white-dominated government of Southern Rhodesia – as Zimbabwe used to be called – it was China that supplied Mugabe's ZANU liberation army with arms, training, logistics, and funding.

Then the weapons were needed to replace Western imperialists by the Chinese imperialists.

Today, the Chinese weapons are needed against the socialist revolution in Zimbabwe....

 

 

 

 

 

Protest against Chinese weapons to Zimbabwe

 

 

 

 

Don't arm Mugabe! Zimbabweans protested as a Chinese ship carried arms toward Zimbabwe.

 

 

 

 

Chinese weapons shipped back to China

 

 

 


 

 

Long live the liberation

struggle in ZIMBABWE !

 

 

ZIMBABWE is ripe for a

Socialist revolution !

 

 

Create a strong ZIMBAWEAN Section

of the Communist International

(Stalinist-Hoxhaists) !

Long live the Stalinist-Hoxhaist World Movement !

 

Long live the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism !