Unbelievable Zimbabwe

[busdriver]

Any government rules by the consent of the governed. Period Dot. That is what makes a government sovereign. The fact that the old has been kicked out proves the point that is was not a sovereign government. That the new government is inept is irrelevant. The standard of living may have been better under the old, but that's the past.

 

[eddie]

Any government rules by the consent of the governed. Period Dot. That is what makes a government sovereign. The fact that the old has been kicked out proves the point that is was not a sovereign government. That the new government is inept is irrelevant. The standard of living may have been better under the old, but that's the past.

I think that's what I was trying to say...

 

[nanofighter]

I feel like I'm arriving a little late in the argument to start throwing around my own opinions and observations, but I'm with you Flash. I worked in South Africa for several months, while also spending time in Swaziland and Mozambique, and most of your points seem to be spot on from my experiences.

I could talk about the "African situation" for hours on end and never come to a conclusion for HIV/AIDS, malaria, famine, tribal warfare, attempted democracy and the struggle to modernize. However, I could just as easily discuss the great potential that lies just beneath the surface, in places all over the continent, from mud huts to skyscrapers.

The biggest frustration I have is that there are so many intelligent, rational, well-meaning people within these countries we speak of, who can, and should be running their country, and are not. Why is this? I can't answer as simply as this forum would encourage, but I can say that they deserve a little patience. Mandela was just the beginning.

And with respect to those claiming that former Rhodesia and other white or western owned lands were "better" under their rule, you are severely mistaken. Economic success, or non-existent crime rates are not necessarily a sign of better living. I have a hard time believing that many of you on here would defend China or Saudi Arabia's human rights abuses simply because your standard of living would be higher there and that you wouldn't have to worry about being mugged in an alley.

 

[exhelodrvr]

The settlers came in and created unnatural borders and destabilized what government they had. Ofcourse they were not ready to step in; the colonial government was not their idea. Unless we plan to re-structure Africa today, the past 50 -60years has done little to bring the warring tribes together. It is going to take many more years to make them homogenous. That is why you have to give them time to work out those issues.
I mean, you have tribes that are enclosed in the same country who have no business being together. But like I said, they will need to fight things out. Eventually the tribes will see the benefit of coming to a consensus and if they don’t then things will remain the way they are. For most of these countries, it is an average of 60 years post colonialism.

No, what will happen is that there will be ethnic/religious cleansing in the various "nations", combined with some minor realignment of borders.

 

[MasterBates]

In some places, there isn't democracy, yet relative freedom.

Democracy oftentimes becomes mob rule at the ballot box without checks and balances.

Bahrain, Qatar, UAE aren't exactly democracies, but rate pretty high on the freddometer but for their part of the world.

 

[FlyinRock]

In a country where white foreigners could be officers in the military and almost 95% of the population couldn't, except in a handful of units. Where the only people who could vote were white. The only people in charge were white. Every advantage was given to the whites, a tiny minority. Yes, in this case, that would be correct.



They didn't even have the right to vote. They were almost 95% of the population and they had no say in government. It is a simple fact. They weren't even good enough to vote or participate in government. How is that not racist? How is that right? Why the hell would I have to be black to see it was wrong?

And a helicopter pilot in a region and a time there were few, FlyinRock certainly had advantages and rights that many in that region of the world did not. The black citizens of Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa did not have the opportunity to do what he did. How is that right? How can is that justified?

*****************
Flash
Right to vote? They didn't have a clue what a vote was until they were exposed to a white point of view. Prior to that it was tribal and still is. All you have to do is look at recent events in Africa and see the ethnic cleansing that has been going on for thousands of years.
You are trying desperately to impose your views of democracy or right and wrong on people who have no fucking concept of what you are talking about.
May I ask how much time you have lived in Africa, or anyplace outside the USA?

 

[Flash]

*****************
Flash
Right to vote? They didn't have a clue what a vote was until they were exposed to a white point of view. Prior to that it was tribal and still is. All you have to do is look at recent events in Africa and see the ethnic cleansing that has been going on for thousands of years.
You are trying desperately to impose your views of democracy or right and wrong on people who have no fucking concept of what you are talking about.
May I ask how much time you have lived in Africa, or anyplace outside the USA?

That may be so but that still does not make the white-ruled government of Rhodesia right by any stretch of the imagination. Right to vote or not, the vast majority of Rhodesians had absolutely no say in government just because they were the wrong color. There is no justification for that.

I have not lived in Africa, only visited, about a total of a year and a half living overseas so far. But I don't need to have lived there to know what is right and what is wrong, just a modicum of common sense.

Who did you fly for in southern Africa?

 

[FlyinRock]

That may be so but that still does not make the white-ruled government of Rhodesia right by any stretch of the imagination. Right to vote or not, the vast majority of Rhodesians had absolutely no say in government just because they were the wrong color. There is no justification for that.

I have not lived in Africa, only visited, about a total of a year and a half living overseas so far. But I don't need to have lived there to know what is right and what is wrong, just a modicum of common sense.

Who did you fly for in southern Africa?

************************
Flash, "that may be so but still does not make it right?...." Is that your personal opinion and based on what? You seem to be caught up in a warp of color and racisim. And, I dare say a lack of real education beyond what you read or were taught by some college teacher?
If you go live in several countries in Africa as I did, you're better poised to make prouncements and judgements. Our way of life bears little sembalance to what many parts of the world live with and have for thousands of years. It would be the height of arrogance to say you have the answer to all the worlds problems simply based on limited experience or education.
Geeezzz that sounds kind of like our current president ....

 

[Flash]

************************
Flash, "that may be so but still does not make it right?...." Is that your personal opinion and based on what? You seem to be caught up in a warp of color and racisim. And, I dare say a lack of real education beyond what you read or were taught by some college teacher?
If you go live in several countries in Africa as I did, you're better poised to make prouncements and judgements. Our way of life bears little sembalance to what many parts of the world live with and have for thousands of years. It would be the height of arrogance to say you have the answer to all the worlds problems simply based on limited experience or education.
Geeezzz that sounds kind of like our current president ....

I can't say it much better than this:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

While it might be in our Declaration of Independence, it holds true for all men and women. The basic premise of the Rhodesian state was that only whites could rule. How is that not flawed? How is that right? Especially given the relative success of its neighbor to the south that just a mere 15 years later transitioned to a full democracy?

To assume that someone does not have an ability because of the color of their skin, their upbringing or their nationality is arrogant and narrow-minded. So is your assumption that my knowledge and experience is limited to what I learned in a college classroom. I guess my Citadel education really imbued me with nothing but liberal thoughts of global utopia, and since graduating have sat in a windowless room learning nothing than what I read in books and from a computer.

You still haven't answered my question, who did you fly for in southern Africa?

 

[HueyCobra8151]

Eh, I am done with this argument as it's not really going anywhere I want to be.

But isn't it the height of arrogance to tell someone that his opinion doesn't count because he is of a "privileged" class (of which you are the same - but somehow this doesn't apply to your opinion), meanwhile you are basing your entire argument on things you have read on the internet?

Am I missing the mark here?

 

[Flash]

Eh, I am done with this argument as it's not really going anywhere I want to be.

But isn't it the height of arrogance to tell someone that his opinion doesn't count because he is of a "privileged" class (of which you are the same - but somehow this doesn't apply to your opinion), meanwhile you are basing your entire argument on things you have read on the internet?

Am I missing the mark here?

I think you are way off mark. We have one persons word that white rule in Rhodesia was 'good', someone who may have been a direct beneficiary or even defender of that system. When held up against some of the most basic rights afforded to free people, how is it even defensible? Why not go back to the days of the Raj for that matter? You don't always need to experience something first-hand to know it is wrong, to think so is just plain stupid.

And give me a little credit, I have lived life a little, not everything I know comes from the internet.

 

[FlyinRock]

I can't say it much better than this:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

While it might be in our Declaration of Independence, it holds true for all men and women. The basic premise of the Rhodesian state was that only whites could rule. How is that not flawed? How is that right? Especially given the relative success of its neighbor to the south that just a mere 15 years later transitioned to a full democracy?

To assume that someone does not have an ability because of the color of their skin, their upbringing or their nationality is arrogant and narrow-minded. So is your assumption that my knowledge and experience is limited to what I learned in a college classroom. I guess my Citadel education really imbued me with nothing but liberal thoughts of global utopia, and since graduating have sat in a windowless room learning nothing than what I read in books and from a computer.
**********************
The fact that you are stuck with thinking our declaration of independence applies worldwide speaks volumes of your ignorance of how the real world works.
Your statements regarding the "white" government of Rhodesia amplifies your lack of knowledge of what was going on there probably about the time you were born.
I flew for several agencies in Africa

 

[A4sForever]

Roger that.

HEY !!! This was "fun", wasn't it?? Let's do it again, sometime ... you know, sometime in the future when anyone's mind is going to be changed on the subjects broached.

Mebbe we could reopen it around the same time we again bring out our quarterly topics of homosexuals in the military or women in combat units ... ???



Locked.