Why the local mbingas seem to not be useful to Zimbabwe

“Mbinga” in Zimbabwean slang refers to the ostentatiously rich — people who parade wealth, parties and luxury, and who dominate social media feeds. This article looks critically at a few contemporary examples (Wicknell Chivhayo, Mudiwa Hood, Passion Java, “Ginimbi”/Ginimbi-lite figures) and compares the social, economic and institutional contribution of those personalities with genuinely transformational business leaders such as Strive Masiyiwa. The goal is not to trash individuals, but to examine impact: who is creating durable value, and who is mainly performing wealth as a public spectacle?

I base the analysis on public reporting and profiles about these figures; where controversy exists I note it and cite reputable coverage. Key supporting sources: profiles of Strive Masiyiwa (Forbes/Wikipedia), reporting and profiles on Wicknell Chivhayo (press coverage/Wikipedia), Passion Java (profiles/Wikipedia), and Ginimbi (profiles/obituaries). Pindula+3Forbes+3Wikipedia+3

Summary judgment up front

• Some high-profile, flashy wealthy figures in Zimbabwe concentrate on personal branding, spectacle and politics; their measurable, systemic contributions to the economy (jobs, factories, infrastructure, technology, tax base, sustainable philanthropy) are limited or unclear.
• By contrast, established business builders — exemplified by Strive Masiyiwa — produce long-term economic value: significant employment, infrastructure (telecoms/fibre), cross-border investment, and structured philanthropy. Forbes
• The public spectacle of mbinga culture can have some positive side effects (consumption, trendsetting, informal job activity around events), but these are shallow compared with systemic investment and institution building.

Who are we talking about — quick profiles (public, headline view)

Wicknell Chivhayo — rose to national visibility for lavish lifestyle posts and for winning/competing for government tenders; his public profile has been clouded by allegations and investigations concerning unexplained wealth and questionable tender awards. He projects power and proximity to politicians, and that has translated into business opportunities — but reporting also highlights state probes and controversy. Wikipedia

Passion Java (Panganai Java) — a self-styled prophet, music promoter and socialite who mixes ministry with showmanship, high-visibility endorsements and media stunts. He is active in entertainment promotion and has political visibility through public ties and endorsements; critics frequently point to flamboyance and question the substance behind the lifestyle. Wikipedia

Mudiwa Hood (Ian Mtandwa) — known publicly as an artist and media personality who has diversified into brand ventures and claims to run several business lines; his public profile is more entertainment/entrepreneur hybrid than large-scale industry builder. Wikipedia+1

Ginimbi (Genius Kadungure) and “Ginimbi-lite” figures — Ginimbi was a high-profile socialite and entrepreneur who combined nightlife, consumer ventures and heavy personal branding before his 2020 death; successors and imitators carry on a socialite business template: clubs, events, high-margin consumption and brand licensing rather than capital-intensive industry. Pindula

Strive Masiyiwa — founder of Econet and Cassava Technologies. Built infrastructure, cross-border telecom businesses, major philanthropic programs, and durable institutions that employ thousands and generate foreign exchange. Masiyiwa’s business model created tangible, long-lived economic assets. Forbes+1

What “useful to Zimbabwe” actually means

When I say useful to the country, I mean measurable contribution to:

1. Job creation (sustained employment across sectors)
2. Productive investment (factories, infrastructure, networks that produce goods or services at scale)
3. Tax revenue and export earnings (broad economic benefits, not just private consumption)
4. Institution and skills building (training, R&D, systemic philanthropy)
5. Rule of law and governance (transparent business practices and respect for regulation)

If a wealthy person mostly spends money on consumption or social cachet, that is not the same as building industries or institutions that raise national productivity.

Where the mbinga model fails — concrete reasons

1) Spectacle > Substance

Many of the mbinga personalities monetize attention: social media virality, parties, endorsements. That generates short bursts of economic activity (event staff, designers, caterers) but rarely leads to long-term productive capacity. One Rolls-Royce or a viral party does not equal sustained job creation. Coverage of figures like Ginimbi, Passion Java and Wicknell illustrates a pattern of flashy consumption and brand theatrics. Pindula+1

2) Weak or opaque business models

Public records and reporting often show limited evidence of large-scale, regulated businesses behind the glitter. Where companies exist, they are sometimes small, service or branding businesses that don’t scale into major employers or exporters. In some cases (reported around certain tender winners), there have been credible allegations and probes about how contracts were obtained — a governance concern that undermines public trust and the rule of law. That matters more than Instagram photos. Wikipedia

3) Political proximity replaces entrepreneurship

Access to political power can accelerate wealth accumulation without the same scrutiny or market discipline. That pattern creates rent-seeking incentives: wealth through connections rather than by solving market problems at scale. When business success depends on closeness to power instead of competitive advantage, broader economic development loses out. Reporting on some high-profile Mbinga figures documents both the proximity and resulting controversies. Wikipedia+1

4) Brand-focused philanthropy versus structural investments

Some flashy wealthy people dabble in philanthropy or public giveaways (which build short-term popularity). But sustainable impact requires structured investments in education, health systems, or industrial capacity — the kind of multi-decade programs some established entrepreneurs and foundations run. Strive Masiyiwa’s philanthropy and scholarship programs are examples of scaled, system-level impact. Forbes

5) Perverse social signaling

A public culture that equates success with conspicuous consumption can distort incentives for younger Zimbabweans: short-term fame and image management look easier and more appealing than long, technical work to build factories, services or platforms. That cultural drift has long-term human capital costs.

But don’t throw the baby away — positive (and often ignored) effects of celebrity wealth

1. Demand stimulation — parties and lifestyle create jobs in entertainment, fashion and hospitality (small-business livelihoods).
2. Visibility — socialites and prophets can draw attention to causes, mobilize followers, and sometimes fund grassroots efforts.
3. Micro-investing and brand ventures — some entertainers diversify into clothing lines, events companies, or SMEs that do create jobs (albeit often at smaller scales). Mudiwa Hood and others have attempted brand extensions and media businesses. Wikipedia+1

These are real but uneven and usually insufficient to replace systematic industry building.

Case comparison: Wicknell / Passion Java / Ginimbi (type) vs Strive Masiyiwa (institution builder)

• Scale and durability: Masiyiwa built telecom and tech infrastructure across countries, created thousands of jobs and long-term revenue streams. The mbinga template centers on short-term visibility and private consumption. Forbes
• Transparency and governance: Major corporate leaders are held to investor and regulatory scrutiny; socialite wealth often operates in murkier spaces (allegations, rapid wealth accumulation through political ties). That undermines public confidence when tenders or privileges are involved. (See reporting on tender controversies and probes.) Wikipedia
• Social returns: Masiyiwa’s scholarship and foundation work has measurable beneficiaries; the social return from parties and social media fame is much less measurable and often ephemeral. Forbes

Practical recommendations — what would make mbingas more useful to Zimbabwe?

1. Transparency requirements for large contracts and business ownership
   • Strengthen public procurement transparency and beneficial ownership registries so winning tenders is about capability, not connections.
2. Incentivise reinvestment into productive sectors
   • Offer clear, unconditional tax incentives or co-investment schemes for high-net-worth individuals who commit capital to manufacturing, agribusiness, logistics or digital infrastructure (not just consumption).
3. Partnerships between celebrity brands and structured programs
   • Encourage socialites to anchor impact funds tied to measurable outcomes (scholarships, microloans for SMEs, vocational training) rather than one-off giveaways.
4. Civic/entrepreneurship education for youth
   • Use the cultural platform of celebrities to promote entrepreneurship education, apprenticeships and technical career paths.
5. Public accountability and civic debate
   • Journalists, civil society and business associations should keep spotlight on how wealth is generated and used. Naming and shaming without evidence is wrong, but good investigative standards are essential.

Culture matters, but so do institutions

Mbinga culture — the flashy, aspirational display of wealth — is not inherently bad. It becomes unhelpful when it crowds out investment in real capacity, encourages rent-seeking, or masks the absence of productive enterprise. Zimbabwe needs both culture and institutions: role models who visibly invest in businesses that create jobs, pay taxes, and build skills; and a transparent governance environment that rewards productivity rather than proximity.