By Womberaiishe Nhende
As an opposition youth leader, I have made it clear that Blessed Geza is no saint, and I believe it’s time for us to critically assess his true political motives.
His actions have raised questions, and I am not alone in thinking that he might be playing a political game for personal gain, rather than working for the collective good of the people.
The real question that must be asked is whether Geza truly wants change for everyone, or if his agenda is driven by personal ambitions—simply to secure a place in the corridors of power. I believe the people need to clearly understand this distinction.
Are we witnessing a genuine desire for change, or just a power play for one man’s inclusion in the political elite?
In my view, Geza’s behavior mirrors that of certain political figures from the past, figures like Matemadanda and Mahiya, who once sought to be the voice of the people but later exposed their personal motivations. I believe that Geza is just another version of these individuals, using the opposition to gain support and sympathy. However, we, the people, cannot afford to be gullible. We must see through this manipulation and recognize it for what it is.
A statement I made, which has garnered much attention, is: “Hanzi Hakuna muWar Vet akambopinda muState house” (There is no war veteran who has ever entered the State House). This remark points to a broader dissatisfaction with individuals from the war veterans’ community. Despite their historical role in the struggle, some now seem to be positioning themselves for high political office, without ever having truly participated in the fight for power. This is something I cannot simply overlook.
I also recall the actions of Matemadanda and Mahiya, who at one point openly supported the opposition, only to later flip and embrace the ruling party when they saw an opportunity for personal advancement. It’s not a new story. These kinds of political switches have been happening for years, and I believe we must remain cautious and vigilant, because the true nature of these figures often becomes clear only after they’ve gained enough support.
A key moment in this saga, one that I will never forget, was a rally at Africa Unity Square. The event ended in frustration, marking the moment when many opposition figures, who had once strongly opposed the ruling party, began shifting their allegiance. When Emmerson Mnangagwa (ED) came to power, these same individuals, who had been vocal in their opposition, suddenly started claiming that the “State House is a straightjacket.” In other words, they suggested that no one can enter the highest office without compromising their values and principles.
In closing, I urge the public to question the true intentions of figures like Geza. If they are not committed to the cause of the people, we must not tolerate their political maneuvering. Our opposition must stay united, focused on delivering meaningful change. We cannot afford to allow individuals to manipulate the system for their own personal gain.
As the political landscape continues to evolve, I remain unconvinced that Geza’s actions will truly reflect a commitment to the people. I can only hope that the public remains discerning, as the real test will be whether Geza addresses these accusations or if his actions only serve to deepen the skepticism about his loyalty to the people’s cause.