Where would you rather live, in Zimbabwe or the Diaspora?
Are your values and ambitions fulfilled where you are?
By Trevor Ncube
I recently had spontaneous but organic conversations with two Zimbabweans living in the Diaspora. Both discussions reminded me of the human tendency to compare oneself to others. Yet comparisons are essentially maladroit because they ignore context, overlook differences and oversimplify individual nuances and complexities.
The first conversation was with a Johannesburg-based friend who has lived outside Zimbabwe for over 30 years. In welcoming me to Johannesburg he said something that got me thinking. He said he felt he was condescending whenever he pitied those like me who lived in Zimbabwe. He then suggested maybe it was he who should be pitied by those in Zimbabwe. My response was there was no point in pitying each other.
The second conversation was with the lady doing my hair in Stevenage, UK. She said she was convinced a relative with a fully paid-up three-bedroom home in Chitungwiza was better off than her in a foreign land. She has been in the UK for a long time but does not own a home. She has to work more than one job to make ends meet as opposed to her relative who thrives on just one job back home.
Such comparisons come short at so many levels. I lived in South Africa for over 17 years and I remember the temptation to feel superior because of all manner of creature comforts and fleeting material possessions. I was aware of the desire to compare myself with the next person so as to feel superior based on flimsy subjective standards. Indeed, comparisons may temporarily deal with ego and self-esteem inadequacies but they are unhealthy and vacuous.
The most useful comparison is perhaps with oneself today against what one was yesterday. It is a measure of one’s personal growth and achievement against the goals one set for him/herself. Comparing oneself with someone else, whatever the yardstick, is faulty and deeply unhealthy. There will always be someone who appears better or worse than you. Where does one start and end the comparison?
The only constant in your life is you. Your progress over a defined period towards your personal goals is the best yardstick.
Ask yourself, whether you are in the Diaspora or home in Zimbabwe, if you have grown as an individual? Essentially, who you are does not change because of where you are. It begs emphasising that the only baggage you carry, wherever you go, is yourself. Your biggest competition and indeed stumbling block is yourself. Focus on yourself all the time.
Yes, there might be differences in the quality of services and infrastructure where you are but these really have little impact on the person you are becoming. For instance, better infrastructure, health services and schools in the Diaspora might offer better lifestyles, comforts, conveniences and lifespan but might not make one a better person per se than the person back in Zimbabwe. These are ephemeral material things and circumstances that don’t necessarily touch the person you are.
It is very possible to be a miserable and horrible person amidst world-class facilities. It is equally possible to be happy and be a beautiful soul in the middle of toxicity and crushing poverty.
The fact that the people back home in Zimbabwe have family around them is precious but does not make them better humans than the people in the Diaspora. Often proximity to family comes with its own complications.
Are the exiles that send remittances to family back home better than the recipients? Absolutely not! Each is playing an important role. It’s always better to give than to receive, as the scriptures say. There is mutual satisfaction as each plays their role based on what they have and can do.
Ultimately what matters are what values and principles you live by and how faithful you are to these. A measure of your personal growth based on intrinsic goals is more meaningful than validation from geographical location and material possessions.
Are your values and ambitions fulfilled where you are?
Marking yourself and others up or down the ladder on the basis of geographical location is unhealthy; it can only deliver envy, short-lived superiority or inferiority, but guarantee unhappiness in the long term.
We are each running our own races. So, focus on the race set before you. Where you are might aid or hinder the race; in which case you move if you can. Does your purpose change because of where you are? I don’t think so, at least not always. But changing your geographical location is not always a factor in your personal growth and fulfilment.
Therefore, whether you are at home in Zimbabwe or in the Diaspora is a personal choice and says little about who you are. If where you are allows you to zero in on self-improvement and personal growth then you might be in the right place. Better still, if you are impactful and fruitful in the community you live in.
The fundamental question to ask is this: What are the most important things to you in life?
The answer will help you determine the best place for you to live a fulfilling life and the subsequent decision is unique to each individual.
Thus, comparisons are an exercise in futility.
Trevor Ncube is the Chairman of Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) and the Host of In Conversation With Trevor (ICWT). This is an excerpt from the ICWT weekly newsletter. Please subscribe for thought provoking and fresh insights.
Hi Trevor
Your article's focus on individual preferences regarding staying in Zimbabwe or living in the diaspora presents a limited perspective. While individual satisfaction is important, this approach overlooks the broader societal impact of migration. It's true that personal contentment is a factor, but reducing the decision to a purely individualistic choice ignores the complex interplay between personal circumstances and the environment one inhabits.
To illustrate this point, consider the rural-urban migration pattern. People don't simply move from rural areas to cities solely based on personal preference. Often, they are driven by limited opportunities, seeking better education, employment prospects, and access to resources. Similarly, the decision to leave Zimbabwe often stems from systemic issues like economic instability, political uncertainty, and limited opportunities for growth. we cannot simply limit it to the individual's preferences if we are looking at the Zimbabwean, if Zimbabwe was performing as SA or UK maybe we can but the reality is people are migrating because of circumstances back home.
Furthermore, individuals are inevitably shaped by their surroundings. While personal values and choices matter, the prevailing culture and environment significantly influence one's identity and opportunities. Zimbabweans in the diaspora, for instance, may face stereotypes and generalizations about their country, regardless of their individual characteristics. The actions of a few can, unfortunately, tarnish the reputation of an entire nation, impacting how individuals are perceived abroad.
Therefore, it's essential to acknowledge the influence of a "toxic environment" on individuals. Seeking a better environment can be a catalyst for personal growth and well-being. However, leaving one's country also comes with significant sacrifices.
Living abroad often means leaving behind family, cultural roots, and familiar support systems. The emotional toll of separation from loved ones, particularly aging parents, can be profound. The challenges of building new relationships in a foreign culture, including finding a life partner who understands one's background, add another layer of complexity. While the diaspora offers potential advantages in terms of quality of life and opportunities, it undeniably alters the fabric of family life and cultural connections.
In conclusion, the decision to stay in Zimbabwe or join the diaspora is a multifaceted one with both personal and societal implications. While individual choice is paramount, it's crucial to acknowledge the influence of the environment and the potential consequences for both individuals and the community.
I concur with a larger part of this article. Unfortunately, the decision to leave Zimbabwe for some may not exist and that environment stifles growth and general upward mobility for self-actualization for both young and old. So, individual preference may be a point of privilege, because a majority of young people prefer being abroad, where, beyond the demerits ingrain with every nation, opportunities are many there.
However, in the grand scheme of things, regardless of where you're, whether by choice or design, the decision for one to become the best version of themselves rests upon the individual beyond their environment. The environment we're born into matters only in understanding what's at stake for the rest of our lives. It alleviates a need for "toxic positivity", but whether or not we lived a fulfilling life is not based on the environment we're in but the decisions made in the very same environment.
Loved the post Trevor