Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pointless insults do not constitute a valid argument. It only proves you can't logically address what you don't like. Your opinion of me is irrelevant to this topic.
You have not convinced me that anything I said in my original response here was wrong. i.e. Let them have it. If there are any White people in Zimbabwe they should move on. The natives are running it now and the results do speak for themselves. Western civilization is quickly disappearing.
Ok. You are wrong, and I'm merely stating observations based on absurd comments you've made in this thread; those aren't insults, but are fair questions/points made after your insulting remarks that ridiculously glorify a period of racial, political and economic discrimination (you can't separate any of that in Rhodesia's history as they were all tied together) for the great majority of Rhodesia's population. I have nothing to prove . . . you're the one who made a bizarre statement without supplying proof of it (that's what I'm taking issue with). Its no insult to state that your logic here, which claims that the fact that white Zimbabweans were doing better under white minority rule in Rhodesia despite the fact that the black majority were living in abject poverty with greatly diminished political rights, implies you'd also hold the same view regarding the antebellum South. Please use better logic If you don't like the comparisons, don't make such ridiculous statements in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
But do explain how Rhodesia was this well run economic success story (again, whether Zimbabwe is doing any better is irrelevant to this issue). Tell me how Rhodesia, with the vast majority of its population living in abject poverty, and with the vast majority of its population subjected to racial and political disenfranchisement, was a well run economic success story. You've made a bold, albeit ridiculous, claim and haven't done anything to back it up but blame the "natives" who are "running" Zimbabwe now for the country's miseries. I don't think anyone would suggest that Zimbabwe is a well run economic success story (it's a disaster), but I'm still waiting on you to supply evidence to support your claim that Rhodesia was a well run economic success story.
I'm still waiting.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 02-11-2015 at 10:58 AM..
Ok. You are wrong, and I'm merely stating observations based on absurd comments you've made in this thread; those aren't insults, ....
Nope. You accused me of supporting the antebellum South. (which has nothing to do with this topic) i.e. You were accusing me, without saying it, of being racist and thus, my commentary about Zimbawbe is nothing but racist. This suggests that you don't care to discuss the fall of Rhodesia but rather, to try and discredit anyone who might say what's causing it.
In regards to the "proof" you demand. The country was a backwards jungle when the British showed up. The natives were barely at sustanance levels. They brought Western Civilization to the country and with that economic success described as more food, better housing, transportation, and the ability to grow. It's all falling apart now and there isn't even a currency. As I keep saying the results speak for themselves.
If you have a different definition of "economic success", which is all that I said, then give it. And I will be glad to address it. But I won't respond to posts with personal insults.
Waldo is very racist, but he won't admit it. He's extremely fixated on race and race issues. He's in the minority though thankfully.
Anyone who drops the word "racist" is the one fixated on race. LOL. No matter,
What is your definition of "racist". When I ask that question, of people who drop that word as easily as breathing air, they can never come up with an answer.
The sad story of Zimbabwe is simply an example of a pendulum swinging too far in both directions. When it was Rhodesia and the whites ran everything, the blacks were simply a permanent underclass of 6 million people controlled by 250,000 whites. There was no prospect for any real change. The country was economically better off, but most of the wealth flowed to the 250,000 white people. It was an untenable situation that couldn't have lasted. It was destined to collapse.The key mistake was when the white minority attempted to declare "independence" from the United Kingdom. If Britain had had enough time, it would have tried to negotiate a gradual transition of power from Smith's government to a black majority. That didn't happen and the rest is history. Bad history.
After, Mugabe became President of the new nation of Zimbabwe, the pendulum swung completely in the other direction. Its become clear over time that all Mugabe wants to do is punish the whites who still remain in the country and reward a few of his closest friends.
The moral of the story? Abuse leads to more abuse. Oppression leads to more oppression. It takes leaders like Nelson Mandela to break out of that kind of cycle of retribution and cruelty. Sadly, there are few Mandelas in any racial group.
Why does the onus always fall on the Black & Brown people to produce the world's Gandhis and Mandelas and Martin Luther Kings?
Also, the case of Zimbabwe has little to do with retribution and mostly has to do with the greedy ambitions of one man. Mugabe used Black resentment against White oppressors to enrich himself because
1. Whites were the only Zimbabweans who had anything to steal. Black Zimbabweans were utterly impoverished and remain so
2. In no way were White Rhodesians sympathetic victims, either in the domestic or international court of public opinion
3. Black's had the numbers necessary to utterly destroy him if he tried to steal what little resources they had left
He may hate whites, but he's seizing their lands because they have lands to seize, not out of retribution because had it been about justice he wouldn't be redistributing the property among his cronies.
When it was Rhodesia it was a well run economically successful example of Western Civilization. Now that the Black race is running it, it has devolved to a lawless place of economic ruin, currency collapse, corruption, dreadful human rights, fraud and is essentially a dictatorship now.
I can't imagine why any Whites would want to go there to own property.
Example of a modern day complete currency collapse.
These will buy you nothing now.
any hope for any african country is to go back to some type of colonial run,sorry but we have to accept the unpleasant fact that africans cannot run a country, show me one that isnt a complete failed state even though many sit on trillions of dollars of natural resources.throw haiti onto that pile too
Next he will be asking why no one invest in his country. Racism has no color really.
He already asked that, decades ago, and he knows the answer. The Brits were going to finance his original land redistribution plan, but they pulled out when he started giving land away to his cronies and to freedom fighters from Mozambique, instead of to the local indigenous population. He knows he's screwed everyone, and he doesn't care.
Waldo is very racist, but he won't admit it. He's extremely fixated on race and race issues. He's in the minority though thankfully.
Yes, thankfully his line of thinking appears to be in the minority. Still baffled how anyone can claim that Rhodesia, a society founded and run on racial/political disenfranchisement, was somehow a well-run economic success story. Seriously? I've given up debating him and have formally ignored him as its helpless. I can't change people with that kind of mindset as they aren't willing to change, and I'd rather not read ignorance.
Yes, thankfully his line of thinking appears to be in the minority. Still baffled how anyone can claim that Rhodesia, a society founded and run on racial/political disenfranchisement, was somehow a well-run economic success story. Seriously? I've given up debating him and have formally ignored him as its helpless. I can't change people with that kind of mindset as they aren't willing to change, and I'd rather not read ignorance.
If you are truly concerned about racism, then you should direct your ire at Robert Mugabe. I suspect however, that addressing the OP's topic was never your intent since your only posts here are about me.
Debate? I haven't ever seen any debate from you. But I will be glad to actually discuss the topic with you if you ever decide to do so.
As I said, the current results in Zimbabwe speak for themselves and the original point that I made. (which you did not address at all)
Last edited by WaldoKitty; 02-14-2015 at 03:40 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you don't like the comparisons, don't make such ridiculous statements in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 
