Review: Mugabe and the White African
Volume 3 | Issue 1 - Film
Article by Anon. Edited by Liz Goodwin.
(A note from the Editor-in-Chief: The author of this article has requested that their identity be withheld in case of any potential political repercussions on visiting/residing in Zimbabwe.)
The film is a narrative documentary of the life of Michael Campbell, who was born and raised in Southern Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, and thus sees himself as a Zimbabwean white African. In this documentary, the audience experience his moving personal battle to retain his farm Mount Carmel which he bought in 1980 after independence. This documentary is a touching portrayal of the sacrifices Michael Campbell and his family have had to make. This film accurately depicts the intense politics that surrounds land reform going back as far as 1930 when Zimbabwe was under colonial rule. It is clear that the film is steeped in the history that underpins the story. It makes several references to Zimbabwean history both pre and post colonial, and how imperialism is a part of the legacy in Zimbabwe today. Mike is not alone in his fight against the Zimbabwean government who have been appropriating the land of commercial farmers since 2000.
Like Mike many commercial farmers have faced and still face eviction from their farms, despite owning them legally. Mike and his family in this film don’t just face a legal battle in the face of an aggressive land resettlement program but a battle for their livelihood and lives. In particular, Campbell’s story the documentary shows the ongoing legal battle with trying to get their case heard at the SADC (Southern African Development Community) court. SADC has the power to legally state whether their deeds to the land of Mount Carmel are valid and determine who the farm will belong to. The Campbell’s case not only represents their interests but also the most of the white Zimbabwean farming community and beyond, because the judgement made by SADC has the potential to set an international precedent. This film accurately depicts the intense politics and that surrounds land reform controversy in the context of land reform acts that are taking place not only in Zimbabwe but across Africa; in South Africa, Namibia and Kenya.
The ownership of land in Zimbabwe is socially, politically and economically important because land symbolises wealth and status. Before colonialism the Shona in particular, one of the two tribes in contemporary Zimbabwe, (Shona and Ndebele) were an agricultural people, making land historically important. In post-independent Zimbabwe land is also the basis for the Zimbabwean economy which is based on mineral and agricultural exports. Zimbabwe was once the breadbasket of Africa exporting tobacco, corn and cotton as well as gold, copper, iron ore and coal all of which are dependent on land ownership. Thus land ownership is everything. The motivation for land reform by the government can be seen as two-fold. Firstly it goes back to the Land Apportionment Act passed in 1930 by the colonial government which divided up the most fertile land and gave it to white commercial farmers discriminating against Black farmers. This racist law has left a legacy in contemporary Zimbabwe that is portrayed in this documentary. Secondly many see the impatient nature of the land reform movement in Zimbabwe as a political tool used to secure the support of Black Zimbabwean landless peasants. Interestingly, in the film Mike and his Brother –in-law comment on the fact that this is a facade, as most of the land actually ends up in the hands of government officials and the Zimbabwean elite. Campbell and the farm workers were able to transcend race and work together on the land, so in a sense they cannot be seen totally as landless peasants. Nonetheless there is clearly also a classist dimension of land distribution in Zimbabwe.
In the documentary the idea that the land is intended for the people of Zimbabwe is mentioned on several occasions. However, the description of these people is racially defined and refers to the Black majority Zimbabwean population and in some ways diminishes the representation of white Zimbabweans and their ability to own land. The theme of racial discrimination comes up on several occasions and is still a highly contentious issue in modern-day Zimbabwe. The film portrays the Zimbabwean government as perceiving white Zimbabweans as foreigners whether or not they have grown up in and spent all their lives in what was Southern Rhodesian and is now Zimbabwe. The racial dimension evident in the film shows how historically race and land are intrinsically linked to the legacy of colonialism, so much so that the resentment of some Zimbabwean politicians impacts government policy.
The title of the movie Mugabe and the White African is telling in that it points to the complexity of race in Zimbabwean politics. Sadly the biggest contemporary impact so evident in the film is that racism has gone full circle. Just as Black Zimbabweans experienced racism, now white Zimbabweans experience similar prejudice; because being Caucasian is associated with British imperialism. Ironically as racial segregation was part of the Rhodesian government’s political and social policy, so now the coin has flipped and for the Campbells they face the other side of racism. There is a common perception that to be African you have to be Black, and so the terminology of a White African is paradoxical and an ideological view that expresses the resentment of colonialism, a reoccurring theme in Zimbabwean contemporary history.
There is no doubt that in the wake in independence land reform was necessary and is necessary for many former colonial states, however the issue raised in this documentary is how this land reform is taking place. Land reform in contemporary Zimbabwe is conveyed as aggressive and more politically motivated. The need for land reform is rampant and necessary, but needs to be done within the interests of the majority black population in mind. Many Zimbabweans dream of being able to live a self-sufficient life in a society that values meritocracy, where they have the opportunity to own land. Some dream of commercial farming but when race defines who gets what land, the principle behind the Land Apportionment Act of 1930 is essentially repeated.
An interesting point made by the movie, looking at how much the law can protect you, addresses whether or not the legal system serves the innocent. Mike Campbell and his family appear to have the law on their side; nonetheless they are under constant threat from war veterans who were seizing land. The sacrifice made by the Campbells is well depicted in the film and the documentary explores the paradox of the law in Zimbabwe. Generally in a democratic government the state upholds the law in order to protect its citizen; in this case Zimbabwean law serves the interests of politicians. Because the state backs the seizure of Mount Carmel, this begs the questions as to who fights for the rights of the citizens, and how much democracy can be instituted when a state appears to oppose justice. The irony of the law shown in this film is somewhat disturbing and makes the audience question the potential good and evil of humanity, making them rightly uncomfortable.
I would recommend this documentary to anyone who enjoys historically based film. It’s more a documentary with a personal narrative than a film per say but all the same it is the kind of film that moves you and makes you think about the nature of the world we live in. It’s for those who do and don’t know about Zimbabwean recent history, and is factually accurate depicting not just the struggle of one family but the paralleled fight that many Zimbabwean farmers still face today. This documentary cover explores a number of the contentious and relevant issues, notably how Zimbabwean history has impacted government policy, racism and the hypocrisy of the law. But this documentary explores these issues in an appealing and thought provoking way that challenges how we view Zimbabwean politics.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Mugabe was Prime Minister of Zimbabwe between 1980-1987 and President since 1987.
2002 census estimated there was 46, 743 whites remaining in Zimbabwe, compared with the estimated 240,000 in 1965.
By June 2008, it had been reported that only 280 white farmers remained in the country, and that all their farms had been invaded by Mugabe supporters.