Had a chat with my older ‘brother’ the other day. We are now involved in the same project, and know where the other stands politically because when I was elected in 2002, on an MDC ticket, to City Council, he was not elected, on the Zanu PF ticket. Since then, I have left the MDC, and not been elected as an Independent, and he was not been elected as Zanu PF. This time, I am not standing, independently, and he is not standing, as Zanu PF (although he is still a member).
The bit that got me going – he says, “these papers, they tell lies.”
I agree. Papers, journalists, they all tell lies. Almost as many as politicians.
“These other papers, they should be banned.”
But, I argue, I know the Herald tells lies. I have been a part of events, and read about it in the Herald the next day, and what they wrote did not happen. All lies. So if you want to ban one, you have to ban them all.
“No, the Herald does not lie.”
But I was there, I was central to events, and what the Herald reported did not happen. They told lies. If you ban one, you ban them all.
“But the Herald is a government paper.”
As if this makes any difference! And now I am just thinking. What hold does the government (which is only partly made up of his former ruling party) have on his mind. When he believes this. Which basically means that he is calling me, standing right here in front of him, a liar. Because my story demonstrates (proves) that which he is not able to hear. That the Herald writes lies. That half of the government (his party) is only half of the government, and being made up of politicians, they are liars.
It will take quite some time to unravel some alternate realities.