God’s Silence: Why Nelson Chamisa’s Faith-Based Politics is Out of Step with Reality

Nelson Chamisa's political journey is undeniably challenging, especially under the repressive ZANU-PF regime in Zimbabwe. Since 1980, opposition leaders like Joshua Nkomo, Abel Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole, Edgar Tekere, and Morgan Tsvangirai have all faced extreme measures such as assassination attempts, abductions, poisonings, and relentless intimidation by security forces. Zimbabwe is a difficult environment for any citizen, let alone someone in opposition.

However, while acknowledging these external challenges, it's also essential to critically examine the personal and ideological decisions that may be hindering Chamisa’s political success. His reliance on the #GodIsInIt mantra, for instance, raises significant concerns. While personal faith can be powerful, when it becomes the foundation of a political strategy, it demands scrutiny—especially when many supporters rally behind it without evidence-based justification. Faith is valid, but in the public sphere, actions must be accountable.

Consider the hypothetical CEO of a major corporation. If the company were on the brink of collapse, tweeting #GodIsInIt wouldn’t save it; it would likely result in the CEO being fired. In the same vein, while faith might offer personal solace, it is not a substitute for the practical, data-driven strategies required in governance. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for instance, is in the middle of a war and leads by addressing issues head-on, not by invoking his beliefs on social media.

Chamisa’s approach has been problematic in areas like party structures, appointments, election litigation, and a general lack of strategic direction. During the 2018 Presidential campaign, he chose to visit Israel—a Zionist state—rather than heed Prof. Mandaza’s warning to avoid participating in a flawed election. This move not only distracted from critical campaign issues but also highlighted a concerning ambiguity in his religious and political stance.

Theocracy, or governance based on religious rule, often fails to deliver the just and moral society it promises. Instead, history shows it leads to division, oppression, and stagnation—outcomes Zimbabwe has seen with Mnangagwa’s regime, which is deeply entangled with so-called ‘prophets’ and religious movements like the Vapositori.

Throughout history, theocracies have often persecuted dissent, stifling intellectual and cultural diversity. During the European Middle Ages, for example, the Catholic Church’s dominance led to the persecution of those who challenged its authority, such as scientists like Galileo, who was condemned for advocating heliocentrism. In contrast, secular governance separates religion from state, ensuring equality and protecting individual rights in a diverse society.

When political leaders blend faith with politics, decision-making can become clouded by dogma rather than driven by reason. For Chamisa, allowing religious beliefs to override practical considerations in areas like election strategy and the safety of supporter’s risks leading to ineffective or harmful policies. Decisions in governance should be based on data, expert advice, and a clear understanding of societal needs, not religious conviction.

Moreover, religious fanaticism in politics often justifies authoritarianism and intolerance. Leaders who claim divine authority for their actions may suppress dissent and erode democratic principles like freedom of speech, religion, and the right to political opposition. We’ve already seen instances on social media where Chamisa has shown intolerance toward views that do not align with his religious perspective. This rigidity is becoming part of his personal brand, reflected in his use of religious titles and qualifications.

There is also the risk of manipulation by religious figures. If Chamisa places undue trust in such leaders, his decisions could be swayed by their agendas, much like what we see with Mnangagwa’s associations with figures like Angel, Java, and Magaya. Mnangagwa’s appointment of a ‘prophet’ as an Ambassador-at-Large, later exposed for facilitating gold smuggling, is a glaring example of the dangers of such influences.

Chamisa’s reliance on Christian rhetoric also raises concerns about perpetuating colonial mentalities. By relying on Western religious constructs rather than developing culturally relevant strategies, he risks alienating those who value indigenous beliefs and practices. This disconnect could undermine his appeal to a broader segment of the Zimbabwean population.

The persistent failure of divine intervention in Chamisa’s political journey—evident in lost elections and unaddressed injustices—highlights the limitations of the #GodIsInIt mantra. This reliance on faith over strategy has played into the hands of ZANU-PF, which has exploited his inability to prioritize effective action over religious dogma.

In conclusion, while Chamisa operates in an incredibly hostile environment, his overreliance on religious rhetoric may be limiting his political potential. Success in governance requires more than faith; it demands evidence-based strategies, accountability, and a clear separation between personal beliefs and public duties. Only by addressing these ideological shortcomings can Chamisa hope to achieve the political and personal success he seeks.