Skip to main content

There is a topic in one of the other Black forums about "Zimbabwe: White Farmers' Last Stand"... It concerns the White farmers having to give up the land that they live and farm on ect... ect...

Over the past few months there have been many topics on forums concerning White's in Africa giving up and turning over the land that they farm to Native Africans... You all know what Mugabe is doing to White ranchers and farmers...

I can understand the reasoning behind the demand of "GIVE US OUR LAND BACK"... The Native Africans want THEIR land back!!!...

Also...

Noticeably here in the U.S. calls and screams for White's in Africa to give the land back has been loud and louder... The bad White man must go away and give back what he took and uses!!!... And many of those screams and demands have been posted on Black forums... 99.9% of the posters on Black forums believe that the "African" White's must give up the land that they do not truly own...

In fact one forum poster made the remark: " What goes around comes around, im sure most of the rest of the whites can still run away if they leave fast enough, not their land."

BUT...

I find this perplexing...

If a Native American... aka an Indian... knocked on the door of a Black man who owns a home here in the U. S. and demanded that he give his property back to the Native American tribe that it was originally stolen from... Would you, as a Black man, do what is right and demand that they give it back???... Would you give your property, or at least part of it, back to the Indian???...

The "White Man" may have stolen it to begin with... But aren't you now living on stolen property???... Haven't you agreed to receive "stolen goods"???... You do know that it originally belonged to the Indian!!!... Is it yours???...

What is the difference between the White ownership of land in Zimbabwe and the Black (or White) man who owns a home and property in Anycity, USA???... Land is land!?!... Property is property?!?... The original owner is the true owner!?!... Right!!!...

What is there a difference between the two scenarios???... What's good for the goose is...

Any opinions???...

I am now putting on two (2) flack jackets!!!... and ducking low...

.

------------------------------
The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"

[This message was edited by Whoopie on June 27, 2002 at 08:49 PM.]
------------------------------ The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I have to admit I thought about this topic at first in that those white Africans should give the land back, but after reading through your whole post I have changed my mind. You make an excellent point with the Native Americans trying to take back what we as African Americans have.And to tell you the truth I had no idea this was even going on.Thanks for sharing that with me, I try to have some knowledge of current affairs of the world, but seem to fall short! wink


(p.s.-I left u a response over on the pledge of alledgence question.)

------------------------------
To know me is to love me!

Don't hate me b/c of the things I say, hate me b/c I have the nerve to say them.
African Americans don't owe Native Americans. The Federal Government, on the other hand, certainly does. All of us live on land that was expropriated by the U.S. of A. We did not commit the theft. Our government did.

I believe that Native Americans are owed reparations - above and beyond whatever tax breaks they currently receive on their reservations. Perhaps they deserve the benefit of not having to pay taxes, wherever they may be, ever. I don't know.

The analogy with the white farmers in Zimbabwe isn't parallel. Whites went to Southern Africa with the sole intention of confiscating land, and in so doing, depriving the rightful owners of their property. The current farmers are the direct beneficiaries of that policy. They are being asked to give back something that they took. If you think this is wrong - how does it differ from the situation of the man who was recently convicted of blowing up the church and little black girls in Alabama back in the sixties. He lived the majority of his life a free man and is just now being made to pay for his crime of 35 - 40 years ago. Despite the time, his guilt remained, Of course it was proper to exact justice.

To be clear, Africans certainly did not come to America with the imperialist intentions of stealing North America for herself. Remember, we didn't land on Plymouth Rock. It landed on us! smile

Onward and Upward!

[This message was edited by MBM on June 29, 2002 at 04:35 PM.]
MBM: "African Americans don't owe Native Americans. The Federal Government, on the other hand, certainly does... We did not commit the theft. Our government did."

MBM, unless you live on a cloud up above in the sky you sir are living on Native American land...

MBM: "The analogy with the white farmers in Zimbabwe isn't parallel. Whites went to Southern Africa with the sole intention of confiscating land, and in so doing, depriving the rightful owners of their property. The current farmers are the direct beneficiaries of that policy. They are being asked to give back something that they took..."

The decedents of Zimbabwe are living on land that truly belongs to the original inhabitants - Native Africans...

The decedents of Black (and White) people in the U.S. are living on land that truly belongs to the original inhabitants - Native Americans - Indians...

Now the intentions of theft have no bearing on the guilt of the party that stole the land... You, MBM, as well as I, are living on stolen lands...

MBM: "To be clear, Africans certainly did not come to America with the imperialist intentions of stealing North America for herself.

Irrelevant... Black people are living on Indian land... True or false???... And more Black folks have immigrated to the U.S. and settled on Indian lands in the past 100 years out of their own free will... True or false???... Did the Indian give "you" your land???...

.

------------------------------
The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"
quote:
Originally posted by Whoopie:
MBM, unless you live on a cloud up above in the sky _you sir_ are living on Native American land...


Whoopie - I have agreed with this point. My point is that African Americans did not steal the land.


quote:
The decedents of Black (and White) people in the U.S. are living on land that truly belongs to the original inhabitants - Native Americans - Indians...


Agree.

quote:
Now the intentions of theft have no bearing on the guilt of the party that stole the land... You, MBM, as well as I, are living on stolen lands...


AGREE. Do you see that you are stating two independent and unconnected facts though?
  • The US government stole land.
  • You and I are now living on it.

    quote:
    MBM: "To be clear, Africans certainly did not come to America with the imperialist intentions of stealing North America for herself._

    Irrelevant... Black people are living on Indian land... True or false???


    As I've said: true. The context is entirely relevant, however, in assigning culpability.

    quote:
    Did the Indian _give_ "you" your land???...


    Whoopie - whatever land I have lived on was stolen hundreds of years ago. It was stolen by the US government.

    The US government annexed Native American land. That was the "original sin". The purpose of the annexation was to provide land for the growth of the country. The responsibility lies with the party that initiated the crime. That would not be you and I.

    Onward and Upward!
The land is God's Earth. No one OWNS the land; it's just that people have become so ADEPT at making money on it. Humans FIGHT over land, spill blood over it, die over it, become part of it, that's the bottom line. I don't know about you ms.prettygirl, but a Native American has never harrassed, called any names, tried to take anything from me nor caused any disrespect. On the other hand......enough said!!!
According to you MBM, the land that you and I live on was stolen by the British/French/Spanish/U.S. governments and settled by settlers... I agree...

The land stolen in Zimbabwe was also stolen by a government, Great Britain (aka British), and settled by settlers...

Now please explain to me why it's OK for you to NOT have to forfeit your land/home back to the Indian, but it's necessary for the Whites to forfeit the land in Zimbabwe!!!...

I see no difference!!!...

.

------------------------------
The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"
quote:
Originally posted by Whoopie:
According to you MBM, the land that you and I live on was stolen by the British/French/Spanish/U.S. governments and settled by settlers... I agree...

The land stolen in Zimbabwe was also stolen by a government, Great Britain (aka British), and settled by settlers...

Now please explain to me why it's OK for _you_ to NOT have to forfeit your land/home back to the Indian, but it's necessary for the Whites to forfeit the land in Zimbabwe!!!...

I see no difference!!!...



Here's a quote from the CIA website about Zimbabwe:

quote:
The UK annexed Southern Rhodesia from the South Africa Company in 1923. A 1961 constitution was formulated to keep whites in power. In 1965 the government unilaterally declared its independence, but the UK did not recognize the act and demanded voting rights for the black African majority in the country (then called Rhodesia). UN sanctions and a guerrilla uprising finally led to free elections in 1979 and independence (as Zimbabwe) in 1980. Robert MUGABE, the nation's first prime minister, has been the country's only ruler (as president since 1987) and has dominated the country's political system since independence.


Because of the timing, most of the settlers being "ejected" now are the first generation of people who went to Southern Africa. They didn't go there randomly just to move to another part of the world. They moved there for economic gain. This gain occurred at the expense of the indigenous people. What's happening now would be as if the Native Americans rose up and pushed those that came over on the Mayflower out of America.

IMO - these white Zimbabweans might be owed reparations/recompense by the UK government. Perhaps they were political tools (just like the Israeli families now being moved into new settlements in Palestinian lands are). On the other hand, if they went there to cash in on the "gravy train", then maybe it's time for them to return to wherever they came from. Period.

The timing, circumstances, and directness of the situation makes a big difference to me.

Onward and Upward!

[This message was edited by MBM on June 29, 2002 at 10:30 PM.]
Perhaps if I had come here, like most other immigrants, to take advantage of America's bounty and opportunity - I might feel a bit differently. I was dragged here, stolen from my land, raped of all identity - as a slave - worked to death for someone else.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Black people, Whoopie, were (are) pawns in America's "Manifest Destiny". There is no resemblance of a connection between our existence here and white Zimbabweans who went there to cash in on their government's imperialism.

Onward and Upward!
MBM: "Perhaps if I had come here, like most other immigrants, to take advantage of America's bounty and opportunity - I might feel a bit differently. I was dragged here, stolen from my land, raped of all identity - as a slave - worked to death for someone else."

No you weren't!!!...

Your ancestors were... but NOT YOU!!!...

That is why you are just as guilty as me of owning stolen property!!!...

We will just have to agree to disagree...

.

------------------------------
The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"
quote:
Originally posted by Whoopie:
_Your ancestors were... but NOT YOU!!!...




Whoopie I could right a tome in response to your last post. Suffice it to say that I am my parents' child. As are you yours.

I'm not exactly sure where you're coming from with your comments, but I'm going to take a guess. There is a direct connection between generations of people. Do you think the next Bush or Kennedy will have more or less advantage than the average person? Don't you believe that there was any lasting impact on a nation of people who were completely stripped of their identity, whose families were cavalierly broken apart, who were legally prevented from reading and writing, who after emancipation were just thrown out to fend for themselves, who were prevented from buying land and their own home by institutionalized redlining, who were considered 3/5 of a person and were prevented from voting or accessing public accommodations until only the last 30 years or so, who have lived under scathing discrimination and racism ever since they set foot on this continent?

In addition, the word "ancestors" has connotations of ancient history that does not apply here. Take a look at my "editorial" about slavery. I talk about how close for my family slavery really was - the fact that the last person to be a slave only died less than three years before I was born, that my grandmother - the first generation in my family tree to be born free - just passed away within the last five or six years. My "ancestors" are still quite warm in their graves.

This is completely aside from the point about Zimbabwe, but you opened a humungous can of worms.

Onward and Upward!
Who was here first is an interesting conversation piece. I have a more important question; while the whites are being evicted off their land, who is providing the agricultural products? Since the whites are leaving they are not planting and harvesting crops so ........ Who is planting and harvesting crops? We know it is not the whites, is it the natives????
Inquiring minds want to know smile

Anubis98
The plains of hesitation are bleached by the bones of those who hesitated and in hesitating died.
Anubis,

No one is!! That is why 1/4 of the country is starving now, and it is predicted that over 1/2 will be starving in the next few years! It's a horrible situation over there, because a lot of those "natives" that are receiving the confiscated land are not farmers by trade and have no idea what to do or how to get started, nor have the resources to do it even once they find out!!

A lot of people are not expecting bloodshed, because some white farmers are going to refuse to leave on their eviction date, because all they know is farming and have nowhere to go to do it! Meanwhile, children are starving to death, because Mugabe is too full of himself to do anything about it!
Anubis and ER...

Should the Whites be totally removed from Zimbabwe... or ... should they be absorbed and included in the countries politics and economics???...

Is Mugabe wrong and making a huge mistake by forcing the Whites off of the land???...

While the Zimbabwe people are starving... WHO will get the blame.... Mugabe or the Whites???...

Do either of you have a solution for Zimbabwe's plight???...

As an aside:
The current cry of many "Nationalistic" Africans/Blacks here in the U.S. and around the World is: "Africa for Africans... Whites must go"... as well as the demand of "White intrusion and involvement in Africa must end!!!"... Most all of these "radicals" are claiming that "Africa" can survive and thrive without the help of the "Western White Man" influence....

My question is: Can Africa become a successful, advancing Continent without the help of the "Western White Man"???... Or will Africa need to hold out its hand for $$$ while at the same time demanding non-interference from the West...

.

------------------------------
The Liberal/Progressive mantra: "We are the champions of diversity and opinions... We tolerate all beliefs, all religions, and all customs.......... Unless they disagree with ours!"
MBM: "most of the settlers being "ejected" now are the first generation of people who went to Southern Africa."
===================================
MBM way of thinking is completely delusional! Where is your source on this Mr. ILoveMugabe?

Dude, you don't have a clue. Zimbabwe was designed to become the breadbasket of southern Africa. President Mugabe is insuring that not only can Zimbabwe support the nations around her; she cannot support herself. And you commend this man on his efforts. You are insane.

However, in the end, I also agree with MBM. Land is not free. Just because you lived on it and did not protect it doesn't mean it is still yours. You want it; you protect it with all of your available energies. I don't mind the white people being driven from their homes. However, I don't like it how its being done that it is destroying the productivity of the land. You call that progress, Mr. MBM?
quote:
Zimbabwe was designed to become the breadbasket of southern Africa. President Mugabe is insuring that not only can Zimbabwe support the nations around her; she cannot support herself.


Are you suggesting that Mugabe's Land Re-distribution Plan is the sole, or even a significant factor in Zimbabwe's failing agricultural production?

What about the 10 year drought that has inflicted the land? What about the nearly 20 years of failed "free-market" experiments that resulted in Zimbabwe's selling of its resources? Or, the nearly 30 years of IMF/World Bank debt-load strangulation?

Only the unaware would argue that.
Hmmm ... let's try this one ...

The "land" belongs to God.

More than likely, it was created for the benefit of His creation .. man.

Native Americans never "claimed" the land for their own. They always felt that it belonged to no one/everyone and should be shared and cultivated and used to sustain life for all.

I can't imagine a Native American demanding "their" land back. But even if so, the land is one thing, and the house that sits on it is another. I'm sure they would have no use for my house ... so, if I could take that with me somewhere, I'd be glad to "give them" back their land, if so requested.

However, I believe that fruitful use of the land is more what Native Americans have in mind. All the bloodshed that has been caused over "land" started with white settlers and was not part of the Indian way of life.

The situation in Zimbabwe is a whole other can of beans. We have seen the deterioration of the country due to colonial ways of handling "land" first by colonists and now by Mugabe. While I still stand by the premise of giving back the land to Native Africans, I still believe Mugabe did it the wrong way.
Kwil Er Rabit: "Are you suggesting that Mugabe's Land Re-distribution Plan is the sole, or even a significant factor in Zimbabwe's failing agricultural production?"
==================================
Significant factor, yes. Are you suggesting that the land resettlement Program isn't a factor in Zimbabwe's failing agricultural production? You steer yourself in the face of fact and logic presented in the last 15 years.

And while drought is a natural phenomenon, humans continue to contribute to the negative effects by mismanaging policies such as this. Seriously, take the land from the white man. Nobody cares. But give it to people who KNOW how to make the land productive.

Zimbabwe has experience several droughts in the last 15 years. The most severe was in 1994. The other two were '92 and recently 01/02. The slight drought they had last year ol' Muggie claimed the United Kingdom and the United States created to put pressure on him. Yep, he's your hero.


Kwil Er Rabit: "Or, the nearly 30 years of IMF/World Bank debt-load strangulation?"
===================================
Zimbabwe's four-year participation in the war in the Congo drained its economy. When the IMF was suspended because of Zimbabwe's loan default... somehow that is the World Bank's fault?

Kwil Er Rabit: "What about the nearly 20 years of failed "free-market" experiments that resulted in Zimbabwe's selling of its resources?"
================================
Don't give me your Pro-Communist propaganda. Free-Market trade do not turn a 'breadbasket' nation into a food importer.


Don't give my your crap. Nations can recover droughts.
quote:
Originally posted by The_Congo:
================================
Don't give me your Pro-Communist propaganda. Free-Market trade do not turn a 'breadbasket' nation into a food importer.


GTFO with that McCarthyite crap!

I didn't see where Kweli said anything communistic. And even if he is, so what? Better a Black communist than a Black corporate globalist.
Empty Purina: "Black communist than a Black corporate globalist."
=================================

LOL, that is like saying; better a child molester than a rapist.

Any way, if that is your only argument in this segment. GTFO of MY way. Me and Kwe are Chilling. Me and Kwe are relaxing. Me and Kwe are Chil-laxing.

Go read a comic book.
quote:
Originally posted by The_Congo:
LOL, that is like saying; better a child molester than a rapist.


I see. So were W.E.B. DuBois, Langston Hughes, Angela Davis and Paul Robeson child molestors?

quote:
Any way, if that is your only argument in this segment. GTFO of MY way. Me and Kwe are Chilling. Me and Kwe are relaxing. Me and Kwe are Chil-laxing.

Go read a comic book.


You aren't chillin, you got nothing but red-baiting when you can't win an argument or when someone says something you don't like.

I'll take Black Socialists like MLK and Malcolm X over inarticulate garbles like you anyday.
quote:
Significant factor, yes. Are you suggesting that the land resettlement Program isn't a factor in Zimbabwe's failing agricultural production? You steer yourself in the face of fact and logic presented in the last 15 years ... Zimbabwe has experience several droughts in the last 15 years. The most severe was in 1994. The other two were '92 and recently 01/02. The slight drought they had last year ol' Muggie claimed the United Kingdom and the United States created to put pressure on him. Yep, he's your hero.


What almanac it you referring to that even suggests that Zimbabwe has been in any other state than drought conditions in the last 20 years?

quote:
1981-82 Most of southern Africa experienced drought.

1982 Most of sub-tropical Africa experienced drought.

1983 This was a particularly bad drought year for the entire African
continent.

1985 Conditions improved.

1986-87 Drought conditions returned.

1991-92 Southern Africa, excluding Namibia, experienced the worst drought in
living memory.

Source, State of the environment in Southern Africa, SADC, 1994


Facts, Congo. Facts.

And, that non sense about the UK and America causing the drought ... now is a link to the [BBC's reporting of] article ... Notice anything missing? Well, how about anything resembling a quote from Mugabe saying the above. There are merely "insider/informed sources" quotes suggesting that Mugabe said this. Something like the fact deficient quotes popular with news-lite organizations like FoxNews.

quote:
And while drought is a natural phenomenon, humans continue to contribute to the negative effects by mismanaging policies such as this. Seriously, take the land from the white man. Nobody cares. But give it to people who KNOW how to make the land productive.


It is not a matter of "knowing how to make the land productive", who do you think was actually DOING the farming? The estate owners? Please.

How about re-distributing the land, and continuing to provide the same level of support and infrastructure, e.g., purchase agreements, access to farming equipment, and capital, as the UK and US provided before, when the white "farmers" had the land. Then, you can compare the relative productivity of the industry.

But I don't expect you to understand the concept of level comparisons.

quote:
Zimbabwe's four-year participation in the war in the Congo drained its economy. When the IMF was suspended because of Zimbabwe's loan default... somehow that is the World Bank's fault?


Show me [us] where Zimbabwe's participation in the war in the Congo was relevant to Zimbabwe's default and I'll show you that:

quote:
The drought in southern Africa, perhaps the worst in a century, affected Zimbabwe so severely that a national disaster was declared in 1992. The drought compounded the country's debt crisis. The ensuing IMF-backed economic adjustment and austerity program caused further widespread hardship.


And, I would suppose that it is mere coincidence that the IMF adjustment and austerity programs were first discussed when Mugabe introduced the re-distribution plans in 1980, and fully implemented once the re-distribution plan was activated.

[And, BTW, I hope by now you realize that IMF, the World Bank and the USAID loans are all designed to break the back of developing nations [by saddling them with debt] to ensure their compliance with UK and US interests.]

quote:
Don't give me your Pro-Communist propaganda. Free-Market trade do not turn a 'breadbasket' nation into a food importer.


"Free-market trade" as practiced at the blessing of the IMF, World Bank and USAID, has been a failed experiment everywhere it has gone. Read up on Chile, Pamana and pre-Chavez Venzuela all of which became solvent only when they turned their back on these money lenders; while other African and Indonesian nations are holding fire-sales of their nations resources to manage their IMF debt.
Last edited {1}
Kwil Er Rabit: "What almanac it you referring to that even suggests that Zimbabwe has been in any other state than drought conditions in the last 20 years?"
=======================================
LOL

cabbage

LOL

You have me ROFL. Just a minute... .. . O.K. Yes. I am telling you that Zimbabwe has been in another environmental state other than drought. There have been numerous floods throughout the years (which are caused by heavy rainfall). thanks

P.S. That is the 2nd question I answered of yours. To remind you, I answered, yes to the effects of drought on the nation of Zimbabwe. Answer my first question:
quote:
Are you suggesting that the land resettlement Program isn't a factor in Zimbabwe's failing agricultural production?


LOL The information you have provided me is only suggestive that Zimbabwe was able to sustain its ability to be as food exporter. Zimbabme and the six other nations involved have suffered numerous droughts since we have been keeping track (we have sources dating as far as 1896). Mind you these were severe ones.

Why now? Is she struggling?



Kwil Er Rabit: "Well, how about anything resembling a quote from Mugabe saying the above."
==================================
LOL! The source is the state-run newspaper. I would rather have the idiots at Fox News give me their 'Fair and Balanced' news than any state run newspaper!!!
laugh



Kwil Er Rabit: "merely "insider/informed sources" quotes suggesting that Mugabe said this."
==================================
laugh
laugh
Empty Purina: "So were W.E.B. DuBois, Langston Hughes, Angela Davis and Paul Robeson child molestors?"
==========================================
You know what. I am off-base. You're right. I shouldn't have said the molester/rapist thing.


Other than that, I would like to know exactly how a free market caused a nation to become submissively an importer of one of its own specialties? If you don't have a clue, bugger off, Purina.



Kwil Er Rabit: "How about re-distributing the land, and continuing to provide the same level of support and infrastructure, e.g., purchase agreements, access to farming equipment, and capital, as the UK and US provided before, when the white "farmers" had the land. Then, you can compare the relative productivity of the industry."
===========================================
Sounds logical. But it isn't happening like that at all. It certainly isn't the fault of Western nations as you or Muggie wants the world to believe.



Kwil Er Rabit: "And, BTW, I hope by now you realize that IMF, the World Bank and the USAID loans are all designed to break the back of developing nations [by saddling them with debt] to ensure their compliance with UK and US interests."
==================================
What the fuck ever. Why would a bank loan money in the attempt to bankrupt the nation? Of course, they want to 'saddle them with debt'. That's the nature of banking. Your hysteria is just plan funny.

It reminds me of a child who blames everyone and everything it hates.
A quick google search reveals this:

"Zimbabwean Finance Minister Simba Makoni has admitted that his country cannot sustain the cost of its military intervention in the Democratic Republic of Congo for very much longer." - 2000

Note the date. 2000. Zimbabwe was in it for 2 more years. I have more sources I can pull up, but it became obvious with just a google search.


[u]SOURCE[/u]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/904534.stm



I'll show you that:
"The drought in southern Africa, perhaps the worst in a century, affected Zimbabwe so severely that a national disaster was declared in 1992. The drought compounded the country's debt crisis. The ensuing IMF-backed economic adjustment and austerity program caused further widespread hardship."

Kwil Er Rabit: "And, I would suppose that it is mere coincidence that the IMF adjustment and austerity programs were first discussed when Mugabe introduced the re-distribution plans in 1980, and fully implemented once the re-distribution plan was activated."
==============================
You didn't show a source. However, I have argued enough with you to know you don't lie. Your statement about the reason for the programs is just speculation.

*****Just like we haven't landed on the moon.

*****Or that the U.S. government brought down the World Trade Center.

It is your opinion; that is all.
quote:
A quick google search reveals this:

"Zimbabwean Finance Minister Simba Makoni has admitted that his country cannot sustain the cost of its military intervention in the Democratic Republic of Congo for very much longer." - 2000

Note the date. 2000. Zimbabwe was in it for 2 more years. I have more sources I can pull up, but it became obvious with just a google search.



And, that answers what? The question was: "Show me [us] where Zimbabwe's participation in the war in the Congo was relevant to Zimbabwe's default ..."


quote:
O.K. Yes. I am telling you that Zimbabwe has been in another environmental state other than drought. There have been numerous floods throughout the years (which are caused by heavy rainfall).


Okay Mr. Meterologist/Geologist Man care to speak to how Tucson, Arizona can experience 3-4 weeks of monsoonal rains every year and remain in the midst of a severe drought? If you knew anything about what you are taking about, you would know that flooding does not resolve drought. By definition, flooding is run-off water, i.e., the [rain] water does not soak in, therefore it does not recharge the water-table.



quote:
LOL! The source is the state-run newspaper. I would rather have the idiots at Fox News give me their 'Fair and Balanced' news than any state run newspaper!!!


No, actually what we have is the BBC reporting what "A state-Run newspaper in Zimbabwe has suggested." Fine sourcing ... Fine sourcing in deed.

And, I believe we have seen that FoxNews is operating as a partisan "news" organization.

quote:
Kwil Er Rabit: "How about re-distributing the land, and continuing to provide the same level of support and infrastructure, e.g., purchase agreements, access to farming equipment, and capital, as the UK and US provided before, when the white "farmers" had the land. Then, you can compare the relative productivity of the industry."
===========================================
Sounds logical. But it isn't happening like that at all. It certainly isn't the fault of Western nations as you or Muggie wants the world to believe.


Facts please.

quote:
Why would a bank loan money in the attempt to bankrupt the nation? Of course, they want to 'saddle them with debt'. That's the nature of banking.


Okay, real world economics time ... If I am saddled with debt I am controled, If I am bankrupt, I am owned.

And, BTW, why do you insist on calling me out of my name? Could it be that you're attempting to distract from the pure bs of your non-supported arguments?

I'm done with [and have no more use for] you. You've entertained me in a childish sort of way. Please see yourself out.
Kwe Li Rabit: "...drought condition in the last 20 years?"
============================
So are you still convinced Zimbabwe has been experiencing a 20-year drought?
Wink


Kwe Li Rabit: "...There are merely "insider/informed sources" quotes suggesting that Mugabe said this."
============================
So are you still convinced the 'statement' was from an insider?...
kiss



[b]Kwe Li Rabit:
"It is not a matter of "knowing how to make the land productive", who do you think was actually DOING the farming? The estate owners? Please."
================================
Doing the farming? The estate owners RUN the FARM just like Bill Gates RUNS MicroSoft... Do you think a Helpdesk support technician would have a clue how to run MicroSoft without support? Of course not! Do you think Russell Simmons RUNNING his company then turning it over to the guy who opens his car door gonna be as successful the next year? No way. You city-boys think farming is like so simple, you try it for a year! You won't have a clue.
hug



Kwe Li Rabit: "Show me [us] where Zimbabwe's participation in the war in the Congo was relevant to Zimbabwe's default..."
====================================
I think I just did show you [them].
4 spank 2 9
8 13 16 5
congo is right...

at least on one point..

i think a little more thought should have gone into what would be done w/ the land when we kick the devils off of it...

i think a natural relationship could have been arrainged w/ all of the African-American farmers, that could have been used to keep zimbabwee productive..

but under no cirmcumstances should white people been or be allowed to stay on the land
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
K4R ...

Save your fonts, darlin'!! They are much more needed on discussions more fruitful than this one! Smile


Why? Oh, why do I get involved in this B.S?


#1 - you probably missed your true calling as an educator! Smile

#2 - you believe that every nut (even the toughest ones) can be cracked ... otherwise they're really no more useful than a rock! Big Grin

quote:
i think a little more thought should have gone into what would be done w/ the land when we kick the devils off of it...


blaqfist .. "a little more"?? Confused for something as dynamic than that, a entire comprehensive plan should have been put in place. Merely deciding to give it to his family and military cronies was just plain stupid!
quote:
i think a natural relationship could have been arrainged w/ all of the African-American farmers, that could have been used to keep zimbabwee productive.


I agree with this. But Blaqfist, you can't agree with Congo, because you two are saying to very different things. Congo's objection is regarding the disgorgement of the land from the white folk, period. He could care less what has happenned/is happening there absent that very narrowly described aspect.



E.R.,

[Question #2]

quote:
Just cut your balls off and run, you coward.


Why do white men always start talking about a Black man's ball when they run out of stuff to say? Roll Eyes Eek

quote:
Merely deciding to give it to his family and military cronies was just plain stupid!


No, He was mimicking the behavior of others ... G.W. Bush, comes to mind.
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
E.R.,

[Question #2]

Why do white men always start talking about a Black man's ball when they run out of stuff to say? Roll Eyes Eek


20

I think the correct term is ... closet envy?? Confused laugh


quote:
Merely deciding to give it to his family and military cronies was just plain stupid!

No, He was mimicking the behavior of others ... G.W. Bush, comes to mind.


That's what I said ... just plain stupid! I mean, unless you know of somebody stupider than GeeDubya?? Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by The_Congo:
You know what. I am off-base. You're right. I shouldn't have said the molester/rapist thing.


Other than that, I would like to know exactly how a free market caused a nation to become submissively an importer of one of its own specialties? If you don't have a clue, bugger off, Purina.


"Free market" = privitization of farming land, deregulation of industry, trust and protectorate-allowing laws, lack of enforcement of corporate responsibility (free entry and exit), union-busting, trade-union crashing, making all sectors of the economy dependent upon globalized trade, scale-down of social welfare policies, relaxing of labor laws, etc.

The "free market" means that private corporations are allowed by governments to take land away from community farmers and private owners have exclusive control over the land. The farmers who live on the land are forced to grow what the business forces them to grow, work on their terms, and often can't afford to leave. For all intents and purposes, they become corporate serfs. All because the government protected a rich business' claim to the land simply because they can buy it.

Farmers in Zimbabwe grow cash crops and food specifically demanded by the corporate farmowners. The food is then taken by the corporation and distributed on the market to the highest bidder (first world country consumers). The farmers don't grow food to feed themselves or their country since they are not economically independent. In a capitalist market system, poor countries become rentier states. That's just the way it is.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×