Concerns entries in the Journal, that is all
February 24
Feeling much better after a week of illness, thanks to Shantiee and my roommate, Muma, both of whom have been taking care of me. They swear, however, that I am a difficult patient – often argumentative or simply ‘impossible’. He reveals that whenever his patience gave out my girlfriend would take over and eventually have her way with me through gradual approaches and firmness. ‘For all her efforts to have you take a bath, medication or food, you repaid her with indifference, resentment, insolence and sometimes even aggressive behaviour, resisting her all the way. I told her that the moment you felt well again she deserved a present of some kind from you.’
February 26
Lunched with Shantiee at her favourite restaurant in town. She’s a remarkable woman. I slipped into a Jewelry shop and bought her a beautiful engagement ring I presented in the evening at her place, and fled from her room: didn’t want to witness her reaction the minute she unwrapped her parcel.
‘Where are you off to, my dear sir?’ her voice called at my back, a glint of mockery in her eyes. She glanced at the ring already glistening on her second finger and smiled. ‘You’ll have to excuse me just this once, mister Ferio. Please cancel all your appointments for this evening because you and I will have a little chat. I want to know what this is all about.’
In her room we embraced for a long time, and I didn’t have to explain much because we understood that we would always live for each other…even as man and wife.
March 4
There are basically two sorts of students. Those who are syllabus or examination oriented (or those who will do anything to earn good grades) and those for whom assignments, tests and exams are not as important as the acquisition of knowledge for its own sake. The former are merely concerned with passing and consequently restrict their studies to what they suppose may appear in the examinations. The latter, on the contrary, being more adventurous and curious, desire to explore the landscapes of knowledge. They are exemplars of Goethe’s verse: ‘I declare myself to be of those, who from the darkness to the light aspire.’
March 5
This contrast in intellectual attitude as to the ends of formal education defines us forever (and reminds one of the reasons for existence in general), since it leads to the types of lives people choose. On the other hand, does it really matter whether someone embraced opinion and conjecture (or lived like prisoners in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave?) or chose to live a life in which the contemplation of metaphysical realities of existence (like every philosopher does) becomes the reason for living? Does it matter (ultimately, that is), whether one lived this life or the other?
March 6
I think it does. I agree with Aristotle in Virtue and Rationality, though the principle of the golden mean is contentious.
March 9
After learning that I come from Luapula and therefore qualify to be labelled ‘Bemba’, a lecturer in African History – a Lozi by tribe
– asked me privately what I thought of the Barotse Question. Do I oppose the idea that the Lozi people in Zambia have a right to self-determination?
‘No, sir,’ replied I. ‘Everyone has a right to determine his or her own destiny. If all the Lozi people wish to separate from the rest of the country in order to create an independent state, that’s their business. Personally I wouldn’t mind.’
This unsettled him somewhat. A Bemba who oppresses the Lozi must feel hostile, as is commonly believed. We control everything and we have economically undermined them. We are a thorn in their flesh.
I checked some facts about the Lozi in the Special Collections of the Library. I consulted Gerald L. Caplan, L.H Gann, Richard Hall,
A.D Jalla, Mutumba Mainga, David C Mulford, The Bledisloe Report of 1939, Barotseland Agreement 1964, and The Constitution of Zambia.
Theories of Lozi origin
a) Formerly known as Luyi, another Bantu people who migrated from the Congo Basin or the Luba-Lunda of Mwata Yamvo. They moved south down the Kabombo River in the 18th Century, and found other Bantu such as the Sotho, Shona and Nguni already living there. The new inhabitants conquered them. The Twa or Kwengo were driven south. By the 1800 AD the migrants had founded the Barotse nation. Their greatest chief was Mulambwa, who ruled from 1812–1830. The early Bantu had settled in the Zambezi by 1300AD, and these existing inhabitants called the Lozi, Luyana or Luyi – which means, foreigners. Barotseland was formerly known as Ngulu.
(b) Mythology. The Great God, Nyambe, founded the kingdom. Therefore all members of the royal family have divine ancestry which cannot be challenged.
Background to the Barotse Question
Secessionists claim that the Lewanika Treaty of 1900 AD with the British South Africa Chartered Company grants the Lozi a more privileged position than any other tribe in Zambia. It puts them in direct relationship with the British Crown from whom the Paramount Chief, Lewanika, had been seeking protection. Thus begun a policy of deference. The boundaries of Barotseland were equated to territories extending as far as the Pedicle in Congo and down the Lwangwa River, which included the entire Copperbelt mining area. The 1936 Barotse Native Authority Ordinance and Barotse Native Courts Ordinance and the Barotse Native Government, for the first time received official recognition and legal status under the Northern Rhodesia Law. The Bledisloe Report of 1939 and the Federal Constitution in 1953 recognised the terms of the 1900 Treaty. Between 1945–1950 the British Government had reiterated that ‘no constitutional changes affecting Barotseland would be made without full consultation with, and the prior consent of, the Paramount Chief.’ Her Majesty’s Government would continue to honour and safeguard all obligations to the Barotse nation.
Demands for secession were repeated several times between 1960 and 1964, and yet the colonial government always waved such demands aside. A year before the independence of Zambia in 1964, the Barotse ‘government’presented a memorandum which proposed a new question of reinstatement other than secession from Northern Rhodesia, and this meant recognition of boundaries and other rights of the Barotseland, or an opposition to the transfer of British rights and obligation in Barotseland to Northern Rhodesia. In April 1964 an agreement was reached and ratified in London (The Barotseland Agreement 1964). Under this Agreement all responsibilities, obligations, between the British government and Barotseland were terminated. The new government of Zambia promised to treat Barotseland in the same way as other parts of the Republic.
Arguments advocating secession
The Barotseland Agreement of 18th May, 1964 was reached on the understanding that the Government of Northern Rhodesia (later Zambia) and the Paramount Chief, Lewanika of the Lozi people desired that Northern Rhodesia should proceed to independence as one nation. Although The Agreement was not included in the new Republican Constitution, some provisions of the Republican Constitution were included in The Barotseland Agreement 1964. These related to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the individual, the judiciary and the public service. On the other hand the Litunga was authorised and empowered to make laws for Barotseland in relation to the following:
Barotse Native Government;
Barotse Native Authorities;
Barotse Native Courts;
The status of members of the Litunga’s Council;
Matters relating to local government;
Land, forests, traditional and customary matters, fishing, control of hunting, game preservation, control of bush fires, supply of beer, local taxation, reservation of trees for canoes, Barotse Native Treasury and festivals.
The Lozi Royal Establishment has since 1964 made calls for the reinstatement of The Barotseland Agreement 1964 which has been ‘breached’ or abrogated by the Government of the Republic of Zambia. The calls are for ‘a state within a state.’ The following factors have undermined The Agreement:
The Local Government Act of 1965
This instrument empowered the Central Government to create local government administration structures; Part XI of the Act made special provision with respect to Bulozi. The Local Authorities created were directly under the control of Central Government, through the Ministry of Local Government. District Councils in Bulozi such as Mongu, Senanga, Kalabo, Sesheke, and so on, were set up. Funds held in the Barotseland Native Treasury were transferred to the Barotse Local Government Fund. On November 1, 1965 the new Government abolished the Barotse Native Council, which had resisted new changes. The impact was the reduction in the powers of the Litunga and his administrative structures; the Barotse Native Courts, for example, was incorporated into the Central government’s Ministry of Justice, making Lozi personnel answerable to the Minister and not the Litunga. In the same year the Government announced that capital projects in Bulozi would be done through its offices and not Barotse Native Government. With regard to the Civil Service and Public sector, respectively, the Central Government also held the responsibility to appoint and control civil servants and public officers who worked freely in Bulozi on conditions similar to what obtained elsewhere in the country.
The Chiefs Act, October 1965
This instrument empowered the Republican President to recognise or withdraw recognition from any chief in Zambia in the interest of peace, order and good governance. The Litunga was explicitly mentioned. The Government would determine the subsidies to be paid to any chief and family and household. This made all chiefs in the country dependent on the government.
The Matero Economic Reforms of 11th August 1969
The President announced that mining companies operating in Zambia were to offer the State the right to buy 51% of their shares, while all rights of ownership or partial ownership of minerals in Zambia reverted to the State. All mining concessions obtained through traditional chiefs and other institutions before independence were cancelled. By implication, therefore, the Litunga lost all the rights to determine the conditions for prospecting licences, mining and also the right to claim royalties on minerals. It was determined that the rights that applied to the Litunga should not be different from any that obtained anywhere in the Republic.
Recall that in 1964 the Northern Rhodesian nationalist government successfully challenged the British South Africa Company’s claims to mineral royalties in Northern Rhodesia. The Government demonstrated that Lewanika’s territory in 1890 and after did not include the Copperbelt area, and therefore the Company could not lay claims to mineral royalties in that area on the basis of the Lochner Concession of 1890 and later agreements with the Lozi Paramount Chief, Lewanika, who had lost sovereignty as King to the Queen and Her Majesty’s Government, by virtue of the 1899 Order in Council. The boundaries of the Barotse kingdom as, for example, reported in François Coillard’s work, The Frontiers of the Barotse Kingdom, ‘On the south, the Zambezi and the Chobe Rivers, on the west the 20th degree longitude east, on the north, the watershed of the Congo and the Zambezi rivers, on the east the Kafue river’ including, later on, claims to areas as far as Lake Nyasa and the Tanganyika plateau, were criticised for their distortion and exaggeration of the extent and influence of the Lozi kingdom. Some of the tribes listed as subjects of the Litunga such as the Lunda and Luvale respectively disputed such claims.
The Constitutional Amendment Act of October 1969 terminated The Barotseland Agreement 1964.
In general, therefore, the ‘Lozi’ feel that as compared to other parts of the country, Barotseland has gained little in terms of economic development. They feel that their people have been excluded from the running of the government. Since Barotseland existed as a ‘nation’ even before independence, she reserves the right to secede as the present Constitution does not bind the Lozi people in their desire to be free.
Arguments against secession
The breakaway may lead to the disintegration of Zambia and possibly a civil war as other chiefs would also want to secede. The impact may spread to other countries such as Angola and Namibia, respectively, whose small, minority populations may perhaps want to annex their traditional territories to Barotseland. Ultimately, this would lead to the redefinition of boundaries.
Granting Barotseland complete autonomy has enormous economic consequences for Zambia, as territorial claims by the Paramount Chief, Lewanika can cause conflict. The claims extend as far as the Lamba country or the
Copperbelt and parts of North-western Provinces, respectively, which have large deposits of mineral resources. However, as far as 1904 such territorial claims were surrounded in controversy. For example, the Administrator of North-Eastern Rhodesia, Cadrington, seems to agree in an answer to Wilson Fox, Secretary of the British South Africa Chartered Company in March 1904, that such a claim was ridiculous. Note that the concessions signed in the name of Her Majesty the Queen and Her Government with African Chiefs were often deceptive and later repudiated. Lobengula says of the Rudd Concession that ‘[it] contained neither my words nor the words of those who got it.’And the missionary, Coillard writes of the Ratifying Treaty with Lewanika in 1900 that, ‘the poor natives [Lozis] do not understand the situation...It makes me tremble...’An address to the Northern Rhodesian Parliament by Roy Welensky of March 22, 1948, echoes the same sentiments. The authenticity and authority of treaties between African chiefs and mineral hunters and companies are vulnerable to doubt.
Demands for secession are not supported by the majority of ordinary Lozi but by the Royal Establishment of the Litunga and some power hungry politicians who have failed to influence events at the national level. Like their ancestors who were used by the Lozi royal family to provide labour for an extensive agricultural system and other public works, the descendants or ordinary people have little to gain from the reinstatement of The Agreement. They have a lot to fear from the absolute powers of the Chief.
Seceding from Zambia is treasonable.
March 11
Concession treaties and the ‘Queen’s protection’ were some of the tactics used in obtaining access to the natural resources of Africans including commercial and industrial rights to the continent. The phenomenon of deceit and plunder, which has been imposed on our people since time immemorial, is every African’s problem. It should be challenged and stopped forever.
March 12
Apparently, this phenomenon which denies Africans the right to development has reached alarming proportions. Globalisation ravages peoples and their environment everywhere; it calls for the oppressed peoples of the world to assert their right to exist through the abolition of institutions such as the World Bank, World Trade Organisation, International Monetary Fund and other such transnational firms reputed for their economic policies which destroy indigenous economies and reduce billions of people to pauperism. The poor must stand up or, in John Chilembwe’s words, ‘fight a blow and die.’
March 14
The Lozi lecturer (what does he want from me?) spoke of the ‘persecution’ of his people as though the country has committed genocide against an entire tribe. This was shocking to me. I have read the Amnesty International Reports on Zambia for the last four years but found nothing to suggest that there’s a deliberate Government policy aimed at persecuting Lozis because they are Lozi. I was very disappointed in him, and I said so to Shantiee.
‘This doesn’t surprise me in the least,’she told me. ‘I know some Lozis who are exactly like that. They’ve got this negative attitude towards other tribes and they generally feel everyone is out to undermine them, particularly the Bemba.’
‘Why the Bemba?’
‘I don’t know, but they think Bembas stand in the way of everything. Bembas are involved everywhere and they feel squeezed out.’
‘I am sorry about that,’ I said. ‘But who’s to blame? From the little I know of Zambian history, the influence that people from Luapula and Northern Provinces have exerted on the country should be understood in the context of the development of the Copperbelt mines from the late 1920s to the present. Studies in colonial wage-labour in the Copperbelt mines by Ohadike, Henderson, Deane, Perrings, Berger, Parpart and others, suggest that as far as the indigenous sources of labour were concerned, people from Luapula and Northern provinces provided a higher overall average contribution of all local labour supply to the copper mines. The people of Barotseland or Western province provided the least figures – followed by Southern province. The Lozi went to Southern Rhodesia and South Africa, respectively, and were hardly represented in the Copperbelt. But we must not underestimate the significance of wage employment. Apart from providing new skills and a living for the workers, it has also been a very powerful force in the evolution of trade unions and shaping a new African consciousness and an identity that transcended the tribe, thus shaping the course of Zambian politics. As a people who were probably most detribalised, the “Bembas” became, perhaps, more aggressive in addressing issues of wages, political rights and freedoms.
‘Because of the social welfare programmes of most mining companies for the benefit of their workers, the largest benefits went to those who were most represented in the Copperbelt mines. These are the Bemba. They have gained from sports, clubs, schools, hospitals and other social amenities. As a result, iciBemba is the most widely spoken language in Zambia today. But things are changing, and I hope for a time when all Zambian shall feel equal before the law.’
We then discussed ethnicity as a handicap towards African integration, and decided that the future of the continent lay in broader perceptions that took essentials into account: economic development and the promotion of African values and way of life based on equality, mutual respect and freedom.
‘If such is the case,’ Shantiee remarked, ‘then Zambia should resolve the Barotse problem permanently or let go of the Lozi people.’
I remained quiet for some time, and then pointed out a few obstacles to the independence of Barotseland as indicated above (March 9).
‘Another difficulty, perhaps, may be the question of the constitutional status of Barotseland. How far in history must you go to fix your claims? The Lozi suppose Barotseland to be theirs by right but too quickly forget that what they call ‘ours’ has not always been theirs historically, nor can they justify the rational basis of this claim to the territorial ownership of Barotseland on agreements with the British South Africa Company, or the British Government. My question is, if the Lozi were called foreigners, why should they claim that land? On the other hand, assuming that ownership through the use of force legitimises Lozi claims, then why shouldn’t the Republic of Zambia use force or whatever means to legitimise its claim over Western province? What should be the standard criteria of land ownership and why?’
Shantiee shook her head. ‘It’s difficult.’
‘Exactly. And this leaves the Lozi people on the same level as everyone else. We are foreigners to this country and we cannot establish ownership of land on any rational foundation except on tribal wars and conquests. The best we can do is accepting the existing political structure and seek development within it; otherwise the whole thing becomes a murky business.’
Shantiee then wondered whether my overall opinion of the Barotseland Question was in agreement with positions sustained in my essay on student politics and rights, and I replied that Government had a responsibility of providing economic, social and cultural development to all. Without this the institution of governance becomes irrelevant to the expectations and aspirations of the people.
March 15
I presented my paper at The Youth Forum Workshop. Afterwards, one of my lecturers said, ‘While we may blame the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and other donors for our misery, we should also question ourselves as to what extent we are responsible for our situation. I don’t think African leaders are serious with development. It’s time we stopped presenting history as the history of Westerners that shape African history. We should centre Africans at the core of historical change and make them responsible for everything that happens to them. If Africans are underdeveloped, it is because they allowed it. It is not circumstances that determined life: it is the attitude people have of circumstances that determine their life. This is what K. P. Vickery is saying in Black and White in Southern Zambia: The Tonga Plateau 1884–1924. Despite a number of measures passed by the British South Africa Company to protect White farmers and undermine Tonga peasant farmers, the latter managed to overcome external problems and increase their production. In his work, The Rise and Fall of the South African Peasantry, Collin Bundy demonstrates the impact of land legislation on the African social economic systems. Apart from several Anti-Squatting Acts or legislations passed between 1876 and 1900 to uproot Africans from their lands and turn them into a cheap pool of labour for white farmers and mines, there were the Glen Grey Act of 1894, the Native Land Act of 1913 and the Native Land and Trust Act of 1936. Although whites finally destroyed much of the African production and self-reliance, Africans nonetheless put up some resistance and were not always passive victims of western capital.’
In the evening Shantiee congratulated me by putting her arms around me. ‘I am very proud of you, Mr Ferio,’ she said. ‘May I be allowed to kiss you on the lips?’
‘No, not here.’
‘Any place is good enough to kiss my man.’And she planted her lips on mine, unembarrassed by onlookers.
March 18
Perhaps it has something to do with being a woman: supervising the boy friend’s life, pointing to a missing button, a torn shirt, a dirty collar, and suggesting changes to be made to his dwelling place. I welcome these new developments in my life but sometimes feel as if my identity was threatened. I enjoy living in an environment in which things are not placed in fixed positions: some experience of disorder is necessary in order to be creative. I also enjoy being alone and doing things at my own pace, and despise constant attention, association with parties, crowds or being regular in one’s habits. I hate just what most women love: being an object of public interest. I prefer a quiet, simple life. Being a non-entity, sinking into the remote centres of nebula, forgotten, non-existent, like two parallel lines shrinking into nothing from the point of view of an observer, or like a stone fading away as it moves at the speed of light.
March 19
‘I know what we’ll do,’ Shantiee observed this morning as she gave my room another check. ‘We’ll buy you some paintings at an art shop in town. I know a good one.’
I didn’t see the point. My room was okay as it was. Why bother?
‘This place really ought to look beautiful. Don’t you admire rooms with art works hanging on the walls?’
‘No.’
‘You’re crazy. Everyone wants their rooms to look nice, why don’t you?’
‘Everyone? Did you carry out a census?’ I asked. ‘Anyway, my reasons for my actions do not depend on the opinion of the majority. I think things out by myself.’
‘I am sure you do. I wasn’t disputing your having to use your mind. I just wanted your room to look nice. It’s terrible the way it is, can’t you see?’
‘Depending on your understanding of beauty. Look, I appreciate your suggestions but would rather my room remain the way it is. Shall we leave it at that?’
She started to sob. I lost my cool and called her childish, and we ended up quarrelling. She accused me of being deaf to her feelings, and I attacked her disregard for my preferences.
‘I don’t know how to please you but I try so hard. Please do help me a little. I don’t want to mess up our relationship. You are the most important person in my life. I don’t want to be with anyone else.’
At such an exquisite declaration of love, my heart was overcome. I went over to her and wrapped my arms around her. ‘You’re right, Shantiee, you try so hard to please me, and I will help you in our life together. But you should also learn to give me some space to be by myself and enjoy arranging my life the way I want to. Individual freedom is very important and mustn’t be sacrificed for the relationship. At the same time, though, I want you to know that no matter how unkind I might be to you, you are all I have. I trust you and I will always love you.’
March 20
S is undoubtedly an intellectual. Apart from her maths, chemistry, physics and biology, she also reads research methodologies of great scientists. Just yesterday I found her reading a pamphlet on John Dalton, Gregor Mendel, Johannes Kepler, John Sturt Mill and the existentialist, Biswanger. Asked why she had interest in the scientific method and research design, she said, ‘I pick up anything as long as the material can provide data on how people organise their thoughts.’
‘Why do you want to know?’
‘Need you ask me that?’ she eyed me quizzically. ‘Anyway my answer is, an unexamined life is not worth living.’
That was the Socratic answer. I was quite impressed, for a nineteen-year-old girl who reads through Plato’s Phaedo, Euthyphro and The Republic with some ease, or one who sincerely wishes to understand why Rutherfold, Einstein or Max Planck thought the way they did is quite something. She is a rare flower.
March 23
We were officially engaged at a small ceremony held at my lecturer’s home. Shantiee’s parents were there: they specifically wanted to see me face to face. It was very nice. Some people who were present included Washaama’s uncle, Mr Bwalya, who represented my family. Mr Bwalya works for Zesco as an engineer. Others who attended the function were Muma, Jane, Washaama, Sichone, Nalumino, Miya, The Young Lady, Professor Feldmann (Shantiee’s lecturer in physics), her friends and three of my lecturers, Dr Krishna, Dr Chabatama and Dr Kalusa. We also invited our special and very wonderful friend, Sarah Sinkaala, who was Shantiee’s former classmate at Lechwe.
In the evening Shantiee, her parents, and I dined at Holiday Inn. Mr Perronni asked me a number of questions and seemed satisfied about me. Then he drew me aside and said: ‘If you engage my daughter, you be a man and take care of her. No fighting, no beating. You understand?’
‘Yes, sir.’
‘Good. When you have your holiday I want you to come and live with us in Mufulira. I’ll give you a job to do to keep busy.’
We had a number of presents from friends, lecturers and Shantiee’s family. The best present I had was the mountain bike from Mr Perronni. I asked Shantiee how her father knew I liked cycling and she said:
‘I told him, though he wanted to get you something bigger – like a car. But I advised against because I thought you wouldn’t accept it.’
‘He was going to buy me a car?’ I asked in horror.
‘Yes, why not?’ she laughed. ‘He likes you and believes you are a good young man. He’s happy there are now two men in the family – you and him.’
‘He asked me to spend the next vacation with your family.’
‘You’ll love it. I know you will.’
March 27
Shantiee feels that it won’t do any good sulking over the banning of our newsletter, the Vanguard, by Government authorities. She is also worried about me being actively involved in plans to demonstrate against yesterday’s issuance of a Statutory Instrument that classifies the newsletter and Unza Bulletin as ‘prohibited publications and offences against public order.’ The situation is becoming dangerous, she contends, so it was about time I withdrew from publishing any of my writing and quit student politics. What did I have against this suggestion?
‘Nothing,’ said I, ‘except that it’s too late to back out. Everything is about ready and the guys are prepared to fight. We can’t let the situation be the way it is at the moment. We’ve got to do something.’
She’s been distant, reflective and pensive since morning, and her criticism has ended in tears and pessimism. ‘I have a premonition something terrible will happen.’
‘What will?’
‘I don’t know exactly but I have this nagging feeling that something will. I believe in what you do, Ferio, and I shall always stand by you, but I am also scared for you. I love you so much that I couldn’t bear to see anything happen to you. It could be the end for both of us, and we’ve just got engaged. Please don’t get involved in this demonstration.’
I nodded understandingly. I stroked her shoulders and remembered Jose Ortega’s doctrine of perspectivism, Leibnitz’s concept of the monad, and the venerable Socrates who preferred death to living uncritically, and related this to my situation.
‘You’re not them,’ Shantiee objected. ‘You’re different.’
‘Yes I am different; but in accepting the Statutory Instrument and doing nothing to change it, I would have forsaken the most elemental principles of my life: opposing evil wherever it manifests itself. Like Ortega I believe that every person has a mission of truth; like Leibnitz I hold that each individual must express their own content through self reflection from where they are, and like Socrates I refuse to choose silence.’
‘What about me? What am I supposed to feel while you’re demonstrating and risking your life for the truth?’
‘Sweetheart, Zambia is our own country. Therefore, we must be prepared to die for her.’
‘Don’t you love me? Don’t you care about me?’
‘I do but our newsletter comes first...I am sorry.’
March 28
My self-centredness or egoistic nature (as she calls my recent behaviour) is still a subject of our private debate. As we argue or stand our grounds a new reality dawns on us, that in spite of our declaration of love and friendship we are (so to speak) paradoxically different from each other. The estimates we have for the value of things and the way we conceive the basic meaning of existence has bared who we really are, and it seems as if the glamour of our romance has shrivelled forever.
April 3
‘Darling,’ Shantiee writes me after I’d told her again that I would not change my mind about the impending demonstration, ‘I am very sorry to bring you some disturbing news about our relationship, but I really have no choice. I think that at the moment we need time away from each other to see where we stand. We keep arguing all the time and I can’t see why the newsletter is more important than our relationship. I am engaged to you and I should mean more than your friends. Suppose you were imprisoned how would that make me feel? How would I live? Sometimes I feel that maybe our priorities are different, but I will not accept to let my man do things that will hurt him. You mean everything to me but maybe we need to be apart for some time.’
April 4
Met her at the Mingling Bar. There I fumbled an apology, an inane thing to do considering the circumstances. She claimed to be too busy to discuss anything: what she had communicated to me had to be accepted. Didn’t want to be pushed. She wanted to be free from me for some time. The relationship was confusing her.
I watched my girl (or someone who had been my girl) retreating from my sight without saying goodbye. Like Akigbo’s30 watermaid she was – ‘sinking ungathered’.
April 7
I tried to speak to her again but she wouldn’t let me. ‘Besides, if you really loved me you wouldn’t be doing this to me.’
‘I love you, Shantiee,’ said I, ‘let’s discuss this and see what could be done about it.’
‘What is there to discuss when you are not prepared to change your mind? Right now I just want to be left alone. And I don’t want you to bother me or come to my room.’
She slipped off the ring and said: ‘Perhaps someone will have more luck wearing this. Mine has run out.’
‘Do what you want with it. I don’t want it back.’
‘Why?’
‘It’s yours forever. I bought the ring for you. I still love you.’
‘I don’t believe you do.’
‘Don’t you love me any more?’
‘I don’t know. I don’t wanna think about it.’
I thanked her for everything she has been to me before leaving her room, disquieted and perplexed as sorrow and grief very nearly turned my thoughts to suicide.
April 10
Soren Kierkegaard, despairing and anguished by the dialectical moments of living, raises his soul in faith and abandons himself to the grace of God – but, according to Karl Barth, such an attempt is bound to fail. Therefore, to whom shall we turn for help? To whom shall we cry?
Evening
After discovering the other (writes Van der Kerken in Love and Loneliness), true love is born when ‘love really believes in the absolute value of the beloved, who in love is always held to be greater and incomparably more valuable than the loving subject, because real love of its essence aims at the absolute...They see only the absolute value of the person they love, who is for both their all in all at which their love is aimed...’
Question:
Have I wholly lived for her whom I claim to love, or have I loved her less because she’s unworthy of my love?
Answer:
My love, or that which in my eyes has passed for love, has failed to transcend the self so that my beloved might become for me the concrete reality around which whatever I call ‘I’ could revolve. The self is the limitation, a self-event in which my body, bounded and the same as itself, is nurtured by itself through self-exclusion and self-existence, for I am for myself and not always extended. Love is merely a possibility by means of which I may strive to be for others what I am always for myself. In every act of love, then, I imply myself, but I exist sorely for myself. I cannot desert my self.
April 11
A kind of ‘solipsism’ denying real contact between self and what lies around? Should explore above thought further. I am much confused.
April 12
As I sense in myself an extended, unspeakable pain, it seems as if I should be detached from the moments I loved and I was loved. And then I must, as Ovid writes, yield to the fate by virtue of which material reality is conditioned: ‘Every shape that is born bears in its womb the seeds of change,’ while I am yet shackled, or in thrall of she whom my heart naturally seeks.
April 13
At a meeting held today in respect of the banning of the Vanguard and Unza Bulletin by the Government of the Republic of Zambia, editorial members of the said student publications:
1. ARE AGREED that The Statutory Order which deems the aforementioned publications subversive, seditious, and prohibited, IS A VIOLATION OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. Under the present ACT 31 and the context hereto referred (Articles 13, 21, 22 and 23, respectively) the Law provides for the enjoyment, exercise and preservation of fundamental human rights and freedoms, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly and association. Under the present Code 32 and the context hereto referred (Section 60), the Law deems that a publication IS NOT seditious if such a publication is an intention:
(i)
to show that the Government have been misled or mistaken in any of their measure; or
(ii)
to point out errors or defects in the Government or Constitution as by law established or in legislation or in the administration of justice, with a view to the reformation of such errors or defects; or
(iii) to persuade the people of Zambia to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Zambia as by law established…
ARE AGREED that our publications and contents of such publications are not generally seditious and subversive, nor are they calculated to effect any of the matter which defines ‘seditious intention’ in Section 60 of the Code…Instead, our publications merely discuss various themes affecting millions of people in Zambia, in furtherance of their freedoms, social justice and development. WE ARE SHOCKED to learn that fair discussions of such matters are viewed by the State to be contrary to public interest…
ARE RESOLVED TO TAKE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE State in order to repeal the aforesaid Statutory Order or, failing this, procure other necessary, lawful means to repeal the said Order. WE BELIEVE that we have a constitutional right and responsibility to defend and sustain our freedoms and interests, and to hold or express opinions about our country, or to extend such opinions to others as we wish.
ARE RESOLVED to seek legal council, protection, or whatever kind of help – if necessary – from organisations or individuals anywhere, in our pursuance of our right to self-expression. We believe that academic freedom (which includes the freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of research, freedom to publish, travel and to have international contacts, freedom of thought and freedom of
opinion) may not be subject to arbitrary restriction by the State. Academic freedom is closely connected with the right to education since effective learning can only take place in an atmosphere of academic freedom. Articles 9, 10, 12, 17 and 20 of the African Charter guarantee the rights and freedoms of individuals and groups in the University to generate, receive and express information and opinions within the law (or in the context of international human rights standards!). Bared of academic freedom education becomes useless. The French Constitutional Court (1984) said this about academic freedom and the academics: ‘Pursuant to their very nature, education and research not only allow but also require, in the interest of the service, the freedom of expression and the independence of their staff be guaranteed through provisions which are applicable to them.’ We are therefore shocked that the Zambian Government has violated internationally accepted standards of behaviour for academicians and students .
April 16
I attended a talk in NELT on the following subjects; ü Constitutional review: a focus on developments in the
political repression in Zambia; ü Functions and status of the university in a dictatorship; ü Evaluation of current student representation and Student
Union; ü What is a Student? An analysis of public opinion; ü Student Discontent: its roots and solutions; ü The student: past, present and future.
The talk was organised by the Crisis Committee, the Vanguard, Unza Bulletin, Unza Watch and the Dean of Students Office. Speakers and facilitators included senior students, Professor Gehlen (Senior Lecturer in Law) and Doctor Harlan, S.J (Lecturer in Philosophy and Political Science). The presentation of themes was lively and informative, and the general attendance was very encouraging.
April 18
Prof. Gehlen and Dr Harlan have been detained, and the University Administration is panicky over the safety of other teachers and students (including myself!) who have not yet been arrested but have received Police-call outs. Under the dreaded Preservation of Public Security Regulations33, the President may authorise detention without trial of real or suspected ‘opponents’ of the Government outside the jurisdiction of the courts. We are all very worried, indeed!
April 19
Feeling very scared. Don’t know what will happen to the sixteen of us… May face expulsion, detention, deportation, and torture or just about anything. Hopefully our lawyers Unzasu has contracted will do the best for us! Should inform Shantiee about this, just in case.
April 19, evening: TV Items
A Government Spokesperson has made a statement over the ‘timely arrest of two foreign spies who worked under cover of lecturers’ at the University of Zambia. The named persons had been working in collaboration with other foreign agents to destabilise the university and the nation as a whole, and would therefore be deported. He urged all Zambians (students in particular), not to fall prey to ‘imperialist elements who are bent on destroying the fruits of [the] revolution.’ He requested students to co-operate in helping police ferret out other foreign nationals engaged in this terrible crime. ‘The evidence we have clearly shows that there are yet others who are lurking out there…so we must be vigilant!’ concluded the spokesperson.
Commenting on the same, the minister of Local Affairs has claimed that students at the University of Zambia could not possibly ‘start anything by themselves…some lecturers and foreign informers responsible for instigating unruly behaviour at [this] institution. How can one explain the disturbances that rock the university every day? We have information that some irresponsible lecturers use the university to propagate their political opinions. The recent seminar organised by two foreign lectures illustrates how innocent students can be used. Fortunately, however, the bad eggs have been arrested, and a possible unrest has been averted. I hope and pray that students will assist the police in further investigations… We don’t want trouble, we want peace and prosperity.’
The President has denied foreign media reports that there was a wide spread dissatisfaction with the Government in Zambia, and that the Party was using the recent arrest of two harmless lecturers at the University to shift blame and international attention onto the ‘imperialist elements’. ‘The people of this country fully support the Party and its Government. Students are also in support of our policies. The problem we have is with the false reporting of events by some foreign media. The only thing they report about Africa is something negative. We pray to God that they will see the truth.’
Bedtime Note:
Hitler and Mussolini used the media to manipulate public opinion. What is most painful in our circumstances, however, is not the level of indoctrination but the level to which public institutions such as Television Zambia, Zambia Radio Services, Times of Zambia and Daily Mail, respectively, are used to oppress the very people who pay tax! Zambians must be some of the most docile people in the world. It is stupidity to let a Party and one man ruin an entire nation. Sometimes individuals ought to want to take up a gun and fight! Sometimes it is necessary to go to war and die for what you think is right! But Zambians desire ‘peace, tranquillity and prosperity’, and support Government without thinking. But how can there be peace and tranquillity when the majority of people are facing abject poverty? How can there be peace when The Public Order Act is used against the very people from whom a government draws its powers? Yet Zambians will allow a dog to oppress them and pretend that all is well in their country. They drink beer to forget. Like Germans who allowed the Nazi to annihilate Jews and led the country into a catastrophic war, Zambians have permitted a mad man to rule them. By the time they wake up because they prefer to be herded like sheep, this nation would have been destroyed! Foolishly some believe that God will come from heaven and help the country. Fat chance! God does not intervene in human events unless some people are prepared to shed their blood for their country. This is the law that governs every resistance and revolution.
April 21
Lecturers are demanding the immediate release of all the detained. If Government does not act, they will all resign!
April 22
It is evening. I am anxious and cannot sleep. I keep asking myself, ‘What if I don’t come back?’ I think of my parents and their reaction, especially that of my mother. She would be devastated if someone told her: ‘Your son is in prison. He’s a troublemaker.’ She would roll on the ground in deep mourning, she would refuse to be consoled, but father would be all right. What about the rest of the family? Maliya, Mwape, Chizindo…and my relatives. Would they ever be able to understand?
April 23, 8.00 hrs
This might be my last entry in this Journal. I’ll leave it in my bag for anyone to read in case I don’t return. I have no time, I have to go to the Central Police Station with fifteen other students. I love you, mother, and father. I love you, too, Shantiee: I love you very much! Please forgive me for the trouble I might cause you, but I choose to live a life that I must, and I am leaving with a quiet mind.