At the core of the struggle for independence was a realization that the principle of individual rights was an indispensable foundational construct of any viable and sustainable nation state.

The post-colonial experience was expected to bring to life the universality of the principle of man's individual rights as an extension of morality into the social system by limiting the power of the state and in so doing act as a protection of man against the brute force of the collective.

Regrettably, the experience has not produced a moral, cohesive and inclusive Africa.

The only power that people who do not have power is the power to organise and yet human civilisation has taught us otherwise.

Faith is the biggest business not least because its practitioners are driven by greed, but its customers realise the limitations and opportunities of human life.

When human beings think and act as one they possess a power that is indivisible and solid.
Human progress is necessarily located in the ability of actors to pursue individual interests, but in a societal or community framework.

The box that we have to think and act in has to be seen in a bigger context.

Nation states exist only because human beings thinking and acting in the personal, family, clan, village, provincial and national settings define and shape its character.

The human mind is a powerful instrument capable of conceptualising, reasoning and making choices that not only advance the cause of human progress, but that could undermine the validity of the well-established fact that human beings have some superiority over God's other creations in the animal kingdom.

Indeed the law of the jungle applies to the rest of the animal kingdom where might is right. We generally expect better from human beings.

When the basic foundational principles expected in the human kingdom are absent, then one must know that the difference, if any, between the animal and human mind is the same.

Having read Manheru's article entitled "Who governs, who rules?" published by the Herald newspaper on 13 January 2012, it occurred to me that the shrinking conversation space on what matters in shaping and defining the character of not only Zimbabwe but Africa may very well explain the post-colonial African quagmire.

Manheru correctly observes that no real assessment of the Right Honourable Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai's book ("MT") has been done by a Zimbabwean and concludes by saying that this is partly a self-sought ruin, partly a tragedy of contemporary Zimbabwe.

The human mind is an incredible, innovative and creative asset that is capable of doing both good and bad.

Building national democratic societies is never an easy task, but what we do know is it is fundamental that such societies are founded and underpinned by a political and economic morality that respects the rule of law and in which the rights of persons and to their property are also respected.

So when Justice minister Patrick Chinamasa invoked Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) by promulgating Statutory Instrument 187 of 2004 published as a supplement to the Zimbabwean Government Gazette dated September 3 2004, it stands to reason the minds that saw it fit to use emergency powers to deal with the affairs of SMM Holdings Private Limited (SMM) were of the view there was no other instrument to use than to borrow State powers to create a law that did not exist.

As we journey through 2012 and the promise and challenges it offers, I could find no better theme for this year than "When Minds Meet" to highlight the urgent need to improve our conversations on what matters.

My own experiences have assisted me in sharpening my understanding about the human mind and the need to create a vibrant space in which minds can meet and engage in meaningful conversations based on the premise that every mind counts and ideas, facts and perspectives can advance the human cause when they are voluntarily generated and freely shared.

The fact that the birth of the Arab Spring Uprising was on the African continent is significant not only because the cry for a better life has regrettably not produced the desired outcomes in the post-colonial era but because it exposed a fundamental fault line in the construction and performance of the post-colonial dispensation.

It, is therefore, fitting that I add my voice on this last article for 2011 to the extraordinary events that started unfolding from 17 December 2010 when a young vendor named Mohammed Bouazizi in Tunisia came to the conclusion that his life was less important than the change that needed to take place in his country so that the dignity of citizens could be restored.

The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert is a book about climate change and the claimed thoroughness of the reports issued by the IPCC.

"95% of world scientists agree;" "the science is settled;" "the time for discussion is over." Such expressions dominate debate on climate change. The font of wisdom from which these assertions emanate is the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change whose job it is to survey the scientific literature and to issue a series of reports for the guidance of governments in formulating climate change policy. Journalists are among the IPCC's most ardent admirers: "The greatest feat of global scientific co-operation ever seen ... utterly unique and authoritive." (UK Guardian). According to its chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC's reports are the "crème de la crème." And "its writers are chosen from people at the top of their professions ... the best scientific experts from around the world."