Is Mugabe right to kick the Brits out?

Phil_321

I think he is, seeing as how the Brits originally came in and colonised Zimbabwe and exploited the natives like for as long as they could get away with it.


Edit: I want to clarify as I think people are picking up the wrong end of the stick. I'm not a supporter of Mugabe, I think his land reform methods have ruined the country. Although, if they hadn't been colonised in the first place they wouldn't be in this position now.
I think the British have no right to be there so I don't like reading in the papers about some white land owners looking for sympathy for loosing "their" land. It's only approx. 100 years since they took this land from the black natives, not long ago in the big scheme of things. What about all natives living as slaves to the settlers for that time? I have more sympathy them.

So in priniciple I do think the British should be removed from Zimbabwe, although gradually so the ecomony wouldn't suffer as much and there wouldn't be starvation, like there is now.

bus77

It's not good if large productive farms simply get taken over and spilt up willy nilly.

Sleipnir

And now Zimbabwe can't feed itself because they don't know how to manage farms.

leeroybrown

No. Not only is he kicking people out of thier homes but he is also running Zimbabwe into the ground while doing so.

The people of Zimbabwe were colonised by Britain many years ago, when it was actually the done thing. What Mugabe should be doing is attempting to arrange a slow and coordinated repatriation of land over a long period of time. As it is, all he has done is unleash violent mobs upon (mostly) decent hard working farmers who provide much of Zimbabwe's employment, food stocks and economic activity. He could have turned Zimbabwe into a black-owned black-run productive country in 10 years or so, but instead he's ostracising it from the international community and creating a poor, under-resourced, famine-ridden country rampant with uncontolled militia.

beer enigma

Not saying its perfect, but South Africa was a much better transition.....

leeroybrown

South Africa is still deep in transition. Most of the poor are still black. Most of the rich are still white. While it's still not a brilliant situation, it's democratically driven and moving in the right direction. The average South African is far better off since the transition.

Mugabe seems to have had the misguided notion that he could get rid of white colonists and that Zimbabwe would keep running as normal. The average Zimbabwean is far worse off now.

Sinner_Rez

And its not only the brits he's kicking out. Its all white people, that includes Irish people, south afrikaans, a few americans and some germans and Dutch I believe too.

ChipZilla

Hmm, were we right to kick the Brits out all those years ago when we were the ones getting colonised and exploited?

arcadegame2004

Mugabe is a dictator who is handing the farms to his ZANU-PF cronies. He rigs elections with violence and has literally made criticising him a crime. He has also brought his country to the edge of famine due to the catastrophic collapse in agricultural-production caused by his so-called "war-veterans" destruction of the farm-machinery on the occupied-lands. He is going about the land-reform in totally the wrong way, and I suspect his motives are largely to distract public attention from the economic-crisis he has caused and his repressive regime.

Meh

Originally posted by Sinner_Rez
And its not only the brits he's kicking out. Its all white people, that includes Irish people, south afrikaans, a few americans and some germans and Dutch I believe too.

Aren't most of the white people in Zimbabwe Zimbabwean?

sceptre

Originally posted by ChipZilla
Hmm, were we right to kick the Brits out all those years ago when we were the ones getting colonised and exploited?

I'm hoping that's some sort of attempt at humour but if it isn't you might want to look up exactly what Mugabe is doing. A google for Mugabe will do.

cleareyed

Mugabe should look to his own election if he wants to do the right thing.

Phil_321

I didn't mean I was agreeing with Mugabe's methods. They're obviously destroying his county. The sooner he's gone the better.
What I was trying to say is the is the Brits had no right to be in Zimbabwe, owning all the land and exploiting the people. That's part of the reason why they're sitting back and letting events unfold. They know they shouldn't have been there in the first place.
It's just a pity there isn't someone else in charge who could implement a sensible land reform policy.

Typedef

Originally posted by Phil_321
I didn't mean I was agreeing with Mugabe's methods. They're obviously destroying his county. The sooner he's gone the better.
What I was trying to say is the is the Brits had no right to be in Zimbabwe, owning all the land and exploiting the people. That's part of the reason why they're sitting back and letting events unfold. They know they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Ah, hahahahahahaha.


Imperialists with guilt?

Ahhahahahahahahahahaha.

Perhaps Britain a) can't, be an Imperialist power anymore because the US, won't allow it al-la the British/French invasion of suez, thwarted by the United States for just this reason b) don't care about some farm land in the back of Africa.

Guilt, hmm, I suppose England will be withdrawing it's forces from Iraq, now that it's clear to even the most right winged simpleton, that Iraq 'never' had any WMD?

cleareyed

It's just a pity there isn't someone else in charge

It's more than that, it's a fraud.

Victor

Originally posted by Meh
Aren't most of the white people in Zimbabwe Zimbabwean?

I concur and suggest that the simplicity of the original poster's argument is no better than Mugabe's own racism and opportunism. Yes, some of the farmers are modern immigrants, but the majority aren’t and even those that are immigrants have put much of their lives and money into running their farms.

Not necessarily a perfect comparison, but I used to know a guy from across the border in Zambia. Certainly in Zambia, apartheid still exists, not in name, but in social and economic status. "Private" clubs (social clubs, dinner clubs, country clubs, whatever, but they form the core of life for many white Zambians) are the norm where non-members can't gain entrance. My friend went for a family dinner in one such club, they brought everyone - family friends, aunts, uncles, the farm manager, some farm hands.... the maid. The maid wasn't allowed in because she was a non-member. When asked how the waiter could be so assertive in saying that she was a non-member, he readily admitted because it was because she was black. “It's easy to tell who's a member and a non-member, just look at their skin.” None of the white people were asked to leave, even though some weren’t members.

While the guy I knew admitted to and stated racist tendencies, if transferred to Dublin it we would not be unfamiliar to the kind of exclusion of "skangers" from certain premises. He was happy to train his dogs to chase off black people, not specifically because they were black, but because black = poor = trouble.

My friend was driving along the road into town one day. He sees one of the farm hands (IIRC) sitting by the side of the road in the middle of nowhere. He stops, says “hi” and asks him why he was sitting by the side of the road.

2. I am waiting for the bus to the next town.

1. When was the bus?

2. I don’t know.

1. What do you mean you don’t know? Why wait for the bus when you don’t know when it’s going to come.

2. But it will come.

Night follows day. Day follows night. Season follows season. The bus will come. Sometime, someday.

Many of the blacks are happy enough to lead a basic pastoral lifestyle, a small house, a bit of land to grow maize for their family and something left over to trade for necessities in town.

Now, in both Zambia and Zimbabwe, whites had control of the farms - the land, the capital and they managed the labour. The blacks had no land, no capital, they were the labour. Whites, while not directly to blame for colonialism, not having done the maiming and slaughtering, were the main beneficiaries. The blacks being, in the large part un- or under-educated couldn’t run the farms themselves. The blacks can use a tractor, they might be able to do some maintenance on a tractor, but they can’t overhaul one, never mind buy one.

One of the solutions in Zimbabwe would have been to take part of the land (through a land tax?) and give individual workers their own few acres and the ability to work on the large commercial farms to make some extra money.

But that’s too easy. It would give Mugabe no cause belli to rally the party supporters to maintain his power. No circuses to replace the bread.

Phil_321

Originally posted by Victor
Yes, some of the farmers are modern immigrants, but the majority aren’t and even those that are immigrants have put much of their lives and money into running their farms.

Yes, the majority of the farmers aren't modern immigrants, but they are all descended from immigrants. And these immigrants started arriving just over a hundred years ago so it's not like they've really been there too long.
And as regards putting alot of effort in to running their farms, I take it you mean sitting around in the sun while the maids cater to their every whim, while the blacks are working their bolloxes off on the land?

Many of the blacks are happy enough to lead a basic pastoral lifestyle, a small house, a bit of land to grow maize for their family and something left over to trade for necessities in town.

I wouldn't say they're happy about it, that's why started revolting against white majority rule. Mugabe may have fooked it up now, but in the beginning they were right to rebel against their oppressors.

The blacks being, in the large part un- or under-educated couldn’t run the farms themselves.

And why's that? Because there were no eduction opportunities for black people in an apartheidic system.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Phil_321
What I was trying to say is the is the Brits had no right to be in Zimbabwe, owning all the land and exploiting the people. That's part of the reason why they're sitting back and letting events unfold. They know they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Well, considering my surname is of Norman descent, I guess I'll head back to France then, cos apparently I've no right to be here.

Nuttzz

there will always be a difference between rich and poor, the situation you described Victor is no different here, its just that the skangers are not black, to the white farmers in Africa taking their land would be the same as the government taking a room in your family home and putting Anto and Jessica into it. You wouldnt stand for it, why should they. Taxing the farms moderately and allowing the blacks to rent land off the land owner at very low rent would be a better solution than a land grab. What was once the breadbasket of Africa is now facing famine, such a shame.

As for the original question Mugabe didnt take over yesterday, its hard to say the Brits are to blame for the current state of the country

The Corinthian

Originally posted by leeroybrown
South Africa is still deep in transition. Most of the poor are still black. Most of the rich are still white. While it's still not a brilliant situation, it's democratically driven and moving in the right direction. The average South African is far better off since the transition.

By the same vain, Zimbabwe was in transition for a long time also before getting to this point. People seem to forget that Zimbabwe was long held up as an example of where this transition had succeeded. This of course is the fear of White South Africans, that eventually a popularist black government could do the same there - and indeed the demographics are very similar - rich white minority and poor black majority. Democracy is tyranny by the majority, after all...

Originally posted by Victor
Yes, some of the farmers are modern immigrants, but the majority aren’t and even those that are immigrants have put much of their lives and money into running their farms.

I believe that one of the objections that Mugabe has with the Whites is that the vast majority retain dual nationality with Britain.

mike65

Is Mugabe Right to Kick the Brits Out?

This must be the dumbest thread starter ever!

"They" are not Brits they are Zimbabwean and most of them will tell you that. Many will never have set foot in Britain unles they were visiting y'know hollidays, family etc just like anyone else.

Mugaba is beggaring his ppl and should have been deposed by internation force if necc years ago, but that did'nt happen.

The main reason it did'nt is the one implicit in the idiot topic line of this thread - racism.

No black African leader is willing to go against Mugabe lest they be seen to be doing the white mans bidding.

Mugabe has played has "brothers" for fools and they know it too.

South Africa is especially cuplable in this respect. They could roll over the Harare regime in no time but won't dispite the fact they have a time-bomb on thier doorstep.

Mike.

ChipZilla

Originally posted by sceptre
I'm hoping that's some sort of attempt at humour but if it isn't you might want to look up exactly what Mugabe is doing. A google for Mugabe will do.

And I hope that wasn't an attempt at being patronising. You might want to Google for what the Black and Tans did in this country.

sceptre

Originally posted by ChipZilla
And I hope that wasn't an attempt at being patronising.

I reckon you probably know at this stage that unless I consider you a complete idiot (which I don't), it's never an attempt at being patronising. And even if I do, it's highly unlikely to be as I tend to favour the more direct approach.

You might want to Google for what the Black and Tans did in this country.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to suggest that I google for what the Whiteboys (or the Protestant equivalents, the Oakboys or Steelboys) did in this country rather than what na Dúchrónaigh or the Auxiliaries did? It'd at least have the connection with land ownership and scaring people off land.
(and no, I'm not being patronising there either:))

Phil_321

Originally posted by mike65

This must be the dumbest thread starter ever!

Thanks for sharing that. Prick.

"They" are not Brits they are Zimbabwean and most of them will tell you that. Many will never have set foot in Britain unles they were visiting y'know hollidays, family etc just like anyone else.

From the U.K. Parliament website:

---

The British Community in Zimbabwe

10. We have no precise figures for British nationals in Zimbabwe. They are not obliged to register with the High Commission. We believe there may be up to 20,000 UK nationals. Dual nationality is not permitted under Zimbabwe law. There may be others who opted for Zimbabwean citizenship at Independence but who might, nevertheless, regard themselves as British if their future was threatened by appropriation of their land or economic hardship such as non-payment of their pensions. Any non-British nationals who chose to come to the UK would be subject to immigration rules. We have a Consular Contingency Plan, as we do for most countries in the world, but have no plans to evacuate our nationals at present.


Zimbabwe banned dual nationality in 1984. Britain, however, allowed Zimbabweans of British descent to keep their British passports.

---

So, the whites in Zimbabwe are either British or would consider themselves to be British if "their future was threatened by appropriation of their land or economic hardship such as non-payment of their pensions."

Stick that up your arse.

Mugaba is beggaring his ppl and should have been deposed by internation force if necc years ago, but that did'nt happen.

The main reason it did'nt is the one implicit in the idiot topic line of this thread - racism.

What's racist about it? I'm not in the slight bit anti-British. I was up for England in Euro 2004 unlike most Irish people and I fully support Blair's stance on the war on terror. I'm not a fan of their policy of colonising every inch of the world in centuries gone by, but as it stands to today, England is a fine country.

No black African leader is willing to go against Mugabe lest they be seen to be doing the white mans bidding.

Mugabe has played has "brothers" for fools and they know it too.

I'm not supporting Mugabe methods, I'm just saying the British have no right to be in Zimbabwe.

Mike65s new tune is here!

Don't give up the day job.




Imagine England hadn't colonised Ireland 800 years ago...... How would you feel if just over a hundred years ago England colonised Ireland, forcing the Irish people to work the lands for a pittance and treating them like second-class citizens, and these colonisers were still in this position of power today?

PH01

If this hasn't been said before then forgive me.

Mugabe is using this anti-colonist banner as whipping stick to beat down anyone who is against him.
It's as simple as that.
Any outside force can't say anything less they are accused of being a supporter of colonisation.
When the British Government complain about the human rights abuses carried by Mugabe. He brands them as interferring colonists. This strikes a cord with all the people in that countries and all the nations in Africa.

The only people who can sort this situation out are the Africans themselves. The African Union is well placed to do this.

mike65

Originally posted by PH01
The only people who can sort this situation out are the Africans themselves. The African Union is well placed to do this.

I agree but they wont, RSA could do lot after all they have a couple of million dissposssed Zimbabweans on thier soil right now who the South African government wont allow to be classifed as political refugees.

What's racist about it? I'm not in the slight bit anti-British. I was up for England in Euro 2004 unlike most Irish people and I fully support Blair's stance on the war on terror. I'm not a fan of their policy of colonising every inch of the world in centuries gone by, but as it stands to today, England is a fine country

Well it sounded racist at the time, anyway why even mention the Brits at all? Zim has been independent since 1980. "The Brits" just fed the place thats all...nothing important. Felt like troll tbh.

Don't give up the day job.

Whatever...

Mike.

Phil_321

Originally posted by mike65

Whatever...

Mike.

Fair enough, I hadn't even listened to your stuff when I took that cheap shot. I was just pissed off at being called " the dumbest thread starter ever".

I've clarified my initial post to make it look less trollish.

sceptre

Originally posted by Phil_321
I'm not supporting Mugabe methods, I'm just saying the British have no right to be in Zimbabwe.

The Lancaster House agreement of 1979 says they do...

gandalf

Thread closed as its turning into crap.

Mike65 & Phil_321 anymore rubbish from the two of you and I will be banning your asses.