Mugabe to white farmers: "Oops, my bad"

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Pax
I don't think the idea you're proposing is going to work kuciwalker.

Should I have explicitly added [/sarcasm] tags?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Pax

Caligastia,
I definitely am not condoning stealing the land from innocent people. What I said was that the whites are/were benefitting from lands that were stolen from the African people that were already there prior to colonialism. I think it's unrealistic to emancipate/desegregate/deapartheid/grant independence or whatever and still leave the people in the same state as they were before gaining that so-called freedom. It was that way in the USA when they slaves were freed but continued to work on the same fields as there ancestors for the same white master. Black were not really free until over a hundred years later. The same can be said for almost every African country that was subjected to colonialism. They were greated independence but the Europeans still controlled the resources that were ill-gotten gains. It's not fair for the Blacks Africans to take this stolen property back but it's also not fair for the whites to continue to benefit from what was stolen. So what do we have? A ****ed up situation that needs to be resolved. I propose a program that will allow the whites to keep most of the land at the same time giving up a share to the blacks and also promoting programs to educate and provide economic stability to the blacks so that everyone in the country can I have equal opportunities and the country will be stronger as a whole.

What does it matter which racial group the farmers belong to? And for the land to be "stolen" it has to be owned by someone first. Was the land in question actually being used for anything before nasty ole whitey came along and turned it into farmland? I doubt it. Chances are it was a barren wasteland. Who owned the land before it was supposedly "stolen"? Can anyone produce title deeds to prove their ancestors owned the land or are all claims based on some concept of racial ownership?

[Spiffor]

So, Cali, you think there were no sendentary societies on these lands, the lived off them before the colonization? You think that no traditional village ever had a right on these lands?

Mugabe is a racist, and the land-redistribution may well be based on race instead of on ancient claims. However, race is definitely not the only possible criterion when redistributing lands to the native population.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Caligastia
What does it matter which racial group the farmers belong to?

If they had been blacks, you'd have never created the thread. I think it matters quite a bit to you.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Spiffor
So, Cali, you think there were no sendentary societies on these lands, the lived off them before the colonization? You think that no traditional village ever had a right on these lands?

I don't know. Do you?

If they had been blacks, you'd have never created the thread. I think it matters quite a bit to you.

It matters to me whenever someone of my racial group is persecuted because of their race, but if the farmers had been black, and driven off by whites who then let the land go to waste, I wouldn't support that either.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Caligastia


... but if the farmers had been black, and driven off by whites who then let the land go to waste, I wouldn't support that either.

Right. So where the did the original white farmers get THEIR title deeds from ?


Terra nullius is a joke.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I don't know. Do you?

I don't know either. I'm just saying that race is definitely not the only possible reason to claim land.

It matters to me whenever someone of my racial group is persecuted because of their race, but if the farmers had been black, and driven off by whites who then let the land go to waste, I wouldn't support that either.

I believe you on that. However, if it had been blacks being displaced by other blacks, you'd have never cared one notch, because you only care about race conflicts.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Right. So where the did the original white farmers get THEIR title deeds from ?

Where are the original white farmers? Oh wait, they're all DEAD AND GONE. I suppose Italy should pay Tunisia reparations for what Rome did to Carthage...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Where are the original white farmers? Oh wait, they're all DEAD AND GONE. I suppose Italy should pay Tunisia reparations for what Rome did to Carthage...

Wow, like, is there a slight difference in time frames and situations, Wesley Crusher ?



" Land has been one of the most controversial issues in Zimbabwe for the past 100 years. The war to end white-ruled Rhodesia was fought largely over land. Robert Mugabe's guerrilla fighters, and the peasants who supported them, battled to regain the land seized from them by British colonists.
The Rhodesian regime systematically stripped the African population of the country's best land without paying any compensation. The Africans were confined to arid, marginal land, where the majority of Zimbabwe's people remain today. "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0,2763,181162,00.html

" But the Land Apportionment Act of 1930 barred African land ownership outside the reserves, except in a special freehold purchase area. Africans not needed for labour on white farms were removed to the reserves, which became increasingly congested. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/africa/2000/zimbabwe_crisis/slideshow/colonisation.stm

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I believe you on that. However, if it had been blacks being displaced by other blacks, you'd have never cared one notch, because you only care about race conflicts.

What makes you think race conflicts are the only thing I care about? Certainly, they are the conflicts I find most interesting, and therefore pay more attention to, but that doesn't mean I don't care "one notch" about any other kind of conflict.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by Pax
I don't think that socialism is the root of the problem. I agree that good governance is the one key to solving this problem. I also think that the problem is how the countries were set up. I believe that the colonial powers set these countries up to be weak and the colonial powers also did not make enough effort to give these countries enough of there resources back to stand on their own 2 feet.
It's just like in the play by George Bernard Shaw. "In order for Britain to be #1 the status quo must be maintained." Another good book to read about post colonialism in africa is a grain of wheat by Ngugi wa Thiongo.

Well, explain Ethiopia then. Its border weren't arbitrarily set up, it was only "colonised" for 5 years, it was free to handle their domestic en economic matters as they pleased, and yet it is still limping on.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Caligastia
What makes you think race conflicts are the only thing I care about?

The fact that you only create race threads and rugby threads?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Spiffor

The fact that you only create race threads and rugby threads?

See! I care about rugby conflicts!

[Worthingtons]

Mugabe is what many can confidenty call scum, however I don't disagree with what he is currently doing.

Zimbabwe experienced a brain drain in the agriculture industry because of it's former policies. It has realised it's errors and seeks now to redress the balance by bringing back more capable farmers.

The decisions, which were obviously ridiculas, that were taken in the first place were awful but best not to get hung up on sunk costs.

[Pax]

Originally posted by atomant


Instead of reading a book, try living there. I did for six years.

I prefer primary source material, rather than rely on someone elses interpretation.

Everytime I find myself interested in a place I can't just get up and move there to see what's going on. I'm sure that you would find it acceptable to take the word of a person who lived there his whole life just as you find your 6 years of experience qualify you as an authority on the subject. In other words, the book trumps 6 years.