DICKSON Mungazi, in his book The Fall of the Mantle describes how Rhodesia’s education system contributed to the fall of the mantle of colonialism which purported that colonialism is a civilising force, a progressive force contributing to the emancipation of mankind, particularly the barbaric race of Africans.
Ironically it is the barbarism of colonialism, enshrined in its education system which betrayed the true nature of colonialism, contributing immensely to ‘the fall of the mantle.’
The barbarism of a racially segregated system; condemning the owners of the country to an education for serfdom and giving the offspring of the foreign occupying force, an education for rulership; the barbarism of condemning the owners of the country to an education that skilled them for the purpose of serving the foreigner who had robbed them of their land and wealth at gun point; the barbarism that heirs of Zimbabwe should be so demeaned to learn of their people and history as backward and belonging to the dark ages and that, by those who had robbed them of everything without compunction; posed contradictions that escalated hostilities that led to the armed struggle.
In ensconcing with colonial education therefore, the people of Zimbabwe were assaulted severely from all angles and something could not work in them.
To be reduced from being owners of the country to labourers of the white robbers who had stolen their land and wealth was assault enough, but to be accosted to adopt the mental framework of colonialism as the correct was the ultimate assault.
It was a process that systematically and consistently assaulted the indigenous person such that they should internalise the state of being dispossessed, exploited and oppressed as not only correct, but desirable, it was meant to transport them to a point of no return, to annihilate them.
It was a process designed to make the Africans internalise the psyche of the white man’s mantle that they are a lost race, there to be rescued by colonialism, by ceding land, wealth and sovereignty to the white foreigner from England.
Such as this could not continue for too long, because it meant systematic annihilation of a people, their sense of self, their dignity, their culture, their values, their very personhood.
It would mean the ultimate success of colonialism, a point of no return for the indigenous people.
This is why our armed struggle had to be very vigorous intellectually, to clear the debris from colonialism and its education that would otherwise cloud judgment and perception.
Said the founding fathers of our struggle:
“To set the mind free, to make observation and analysis accurate, to make judgment informed, objective and fair, and to make the imagination creative are as important a cause of struggle for political and economic emancipation.
“Mental emancipation is both the instrument and modality of political and economic emancipation.” (Mugabe: 1983)
Thus to counter the colonial mentality championed and justified by the colonial school system was of paramount importance.
The first fundamental premise which the armed struggle clarified and underlined was that Zimbabwe and all its wealth belonged to the Africans.
“Tinoda Zimbabwe neupfumi hwayo hwose!”
This fundamental truth was nowhere to be found in the colonial school books.
In fact, what was taught denied this.
The history books talked of a Pioneer Column; pioneers are brave daring people who bring a good thing where no man has trod.
They talked of a Rudd Concession as an honourable agreement between King Lobengula and the colonialists in which the King ceded the land, wealth and sovereignty to the colonialists.
The colonial textbooks successfully protected and masked the colonial mantle, the learners would never perceive that the Pioneer Column was a band of armed robbers, and that the so called Rudd Concession was a mega fraud.
But for the armed struggle, this would still be the story.
The reconceptualisation of situation, our history was therefore a critical component of the armed struggle, indeed an indispensable one.
The colonial regime was cognizant of this, and therefore relentlessly attacked the schools in the struggle, seeking to annihilate the children because these schools were the centres for this reconceptualisation, the nucleus for the theory and practice of this new mentality.
Of course this was in addition to their fear that these children were our insurance for a protracted war.
Although without the gun, these schools were a deadly weapon against the armed banditry of colonialism, they spelt doom for the mentality that colonialism was the mantle of civilistion.
After independence, efforts to spread this reconceptualisation through curricula transformation and the establishment of the Zimbabwe Foundation for Education with Production (ZIMFEP) schools survived for a number of years, but no more today.
In earlier articles, we have described how efforts at curriculum transformation were sabotaged, as well, we have looked at the problems that have dogged ZIMFEP.
Now that we have stalled, it is instructive to revisit Mungazi’s perceptions about colonial education for Africans:
“From its very beginning the education of the Africans acquired powerful socio-economic and political dimensions which were determined by those who were conscious of its implications for the racial and institutional relationships of the future.” (Mungazi:1993)
Thus it is pertinent to ask:
“Who shall carry the mantle of Zimbabwe, the mantle that dismantled colonialism?”
Dr Mahamba is a war veteran and holds a PhD from Havard University. She is currently doing consultancy work.