Mahoso’s resurfacing in another role is typical of a gerontocracy in which a select few individuals dominate in which they are appointed and re-appointed. Gerontocracy carefully and deliberately chooses lackeys among academics, business and religious leaders. Ageism is as bad as the racism which Mahoso rabidly espouses every week in the State media. It follows that gerontocracy is different from ageism. There is nothing gerontocratic in the Queen reigning until she is 100 years or 200 years old as her position is hereditary, not elective, thus her age would not in any way endanger or destabilise the nation because it’s not a factor.Įven if we were to accept Mahoso’s line that the Queen rules, there is still a clear path of succession unlike in a gerontocracy. So one can’t talk of gerontocracy in the same breath as the monarchy.

So what’s his locus standi in posturing as the voice of the majority of Zimbabweans? How can one back a form of political governance that has proved to be so manifestly at variance with the interests of the majority? The last survey of viewers’ tastes established that Mahoso’s so-called National Agenda programme with Claude Mararike, Vimbai Chivaura and Sheunesu Mperereki was by a stretch the least watched on TV. It’s the same way Mahoso was reminded by the then Daily News editor Geoff Nyarota in 2001 that instead of teaching Harare Polytech students about the basics of journalism, he was most of the time indoctrinating them with his “whacky” politics such that they had to be retrained in the newsrooms after graduating. Instead of informing the nation about the ceremonial role of the British monarchy, Mahoso twists facts. The Queen does not resort to ugly, raucous political language. People no longer view royalty as having a divine right to rule, unlike here where the Mbare Chimurenga Choir sings about Robert Mugabe as eternal.įurthermore, parliamentary systems have seen the wisdom of having the Head of State as ceremonial instead of an active politician, which has proved highly divisive and destabilising as in the case of Zimbabwe. She is a figurehead, she has no absolute authority in a democratic society.

Furthermore, she does not write her speeches, but they are written for her.

All her speeches on State visits abroad are vetted by and agreed by the Foreign Office.

Spacious acres