Can’t be my fault, must be yours:

Dec 13, 2008 09:23


Zimbabwe is a complex subject, and the complexities have gotten a whole lot rougher on the inhabitants as time passes by.   Europeans under Cecil Rhodes marched in in the ned of the 1800s and took control of the land from the local chiefs, and passed out all sorts of claims to white settlers, who set up solid and profitable ranches and farms all ( Read more... )

racism, zimbabwe, terrorism, africa, famine, deaths, food, greed, agriculture, government, history, plague, politics, business, uk_colonies, sep_reality, uk, sad, military, delusions, corruption_govt, inflation, propaganda, finance, disease, dictators, communism, security, health

Leave a comment

Comments 20

(The comment has been removed)

(The comment has been removed)

jrittenhouse December 14 2008, 16:12:49 UTC
Of course, but that's true in a number of countries in that area.

Reply

jrittenhouse December 13 2008, 15:37:04 UTC
Problem is ( ... )

Reply


samwinolj December 13 2008, 15:45:12 UTC
Blaming Snowball the Brits for all of Zimbawe's troubles is old hat for Mugabe. George Orwell would have had a field day with him

Denying the reality of epidemics is something of a habit for him, too--he used to be an HIV "truther".

Reply

jrittenhouse December 13 2008, 16:09:11 UTC
Well, it's easier and cheaper than doing something about it, especially when it may involve getting people to stop having unsafe sex. Most poobahs figure that fooling with the people's wine and women and song is a bad idea, especially when they want to Rule Unopposed.

Reply


barondave December 13 2008, 16:23:22 UTC
The sad part is that Zimbabwe had promise. As you say, the transition to black majority rule went (comparatively) well. Mugabe turned out to be a bigger crook, and more arrogant power-monger, than was useful for the country.

According to a friend of mine from there, the diverse black tribes actually got together, circa the 60s, and made the decision to put aside differences for the country. Internecine warfare wasn't the problem in quite the way it was in other places, according to her.

Still, the clash of cultures between European and the several black tribes was never resolved. To the extent that one culture took over, it wasn't one that helped: Males not believing they can get AIDS, Mugabe still popular despite everyone knowing how bad he is because they support nationalism over rationality, and so on.

Reply

jrittenhouse December 13 2008, 16:36:34 UTC
The real crash didn't come till the Mugabe became MuGrabby in the 2000s. I understand the idea of land reform, but the way that the Mugabe government handled it was criminal.

Zimbabwe also isn't quite as many-tribe diverse as some places. There's only two big tribes (Shona and Ndebele) in the country, and that's - oh, over 90% of the country. The latter are basically Zulus mixed with some other locals. If you don't speak English, you almost certainly speak Shona. Mugabe is Shona; I forget from which clan.

Reply

inuitmonster December 13 2008, 17:17:21 UTC
I wish to challenge your use of the word "tribe". People do not typically talk of tribes when discussing ethnic tensions in Belgium of Bosnia, and I think the word's use in discussing African ethnic groups is a bit problematic. I don't think it really makes sense to use the term "tribe" when taking about an ethnic group of several million people.

Reply

barondave December 13 2008, 18:55:11 UTC
"Tribes" is how they refer to themselves, according to my Zimbawean friend. I don't think "Celts" or "Serbs" as a tribe in the same way as African ethic divisions, partly because of self-description, partly because for historical reasons.

And for the record: I'm a Cohan, part of Levi, one of the two non-lost Tribes of Israel. "Tribe" is a fairly value-neutral descriptor, not (as you imply) some left-over imperialistic jargon.

Reply


kalimac December 13 2008, 16:50:07 UTC
White politics in the federation in colonial days was volatile, but after Ian Smith declared unilateral independence in 1965, he remained in power for the entire 15-year life of the regime. Perhaps his constituents regarded him in the same way Mugabe's do him: under attack, they hunker down in support of whatever they have. Something similar happened in South Africa after apartheid started to come under criticism in the 1950s.

Reply

jrittenhouse December 15 2008, 19:39:49 UTC
Basically correct. I note that the ANC types took the same approach after they got in power in SA.

Reply


jcw_da_dmg December 13 2008, 17:56:04 UTC
It must be horrible to have a leader who is in denial about the problems being faced in his realm, and who is so power-mad he will do anything to cling to power . . .

Wait a minute . . . I live in Illinois . . . never mind.

Reply

jrittenhouse December 14 2008, 16:19:52 UTC
By the way, I still need your mail address, or Santa will not being you anything for Christmas.

Reply

jcw_da_dmg December 15 2008, 19:04:57 UTC
That would be six one four zero north mozart, number one, chicago, illinois, six zero six five nine.

Reply

jrittenhouse December 15 2008, 19:36:38 UTC
U Just svd yr bkn, Mnky by. Thnks Much. I had gvn up.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up