The latest from Zimbabwe

[opsec]

http://www.newsmaxworld.com/global_talk/Zimbabwe_law_whites/2010/03/01/313319.html

Zimbabwe Law Forces White Firms to Blacks

Monday, March 1, 2010 10:13 AM

A law to force white-owned companies to surrender 51 per cent of their shareholdings to black Zimbabweans comes into effect today, amid panic in the country’s business sector and fears of a catastrophic slide back into economic chaos.

Six weeks from now all companies with a relatively modest asset value of at least US$500,000 (£325,000) will have to submit official forms detailing the race of each of their shareholders. If whites are in the majority they will have to submit their “indigenisation plans”, which have to be carried out within five years.

He said that only “indigenous people” could control the country’s resources. “We are saying no, no, no, the land is ours, the gold is ours, the uranium and the forests and the wildlife is ours.” Recently he declared that white Zimbabweans were “not indigenous, even though they were born here. They are the offspring of settlers.”

Wait a minute. I thought only white people could be racist.


 

[The Future]

While clearly these are misguided attempts at righting past wrongs, calling them racist would be like saying a rape victim was one who hated men because she celebrated the execution of the rapist.  This entirely distracts from the central issue.  Taking steps to secure what is yours has nothing to do with beleiving you are inherently superior.

[Eddie]

I think all the whites in Zimbabwe should be allowed to immigrate to Canada and start over. Thus starting a new label, "African Canadian".  

[opsec]

If forcing people to give you money because of the color of their skin isn't racist then what is?

[The Future]

try to be more objective about what is happening.  They are not being forced to do anything because they are white.  It is a matter of trying to redress the often ill-gotten gains and priviledges they enjoyed - which so happens to have occurred because they were white.  If there were no reason other than them being white than you might be on to something.  But as it is, this is another sad case of race baiting and ignoring the history and context of "Rhodesia".

[opsec]

The whites didn't take farms, money and businesses away from indeginous peoples. They couldn't. The locals didn't have those things to begin with. The offspring of the settlers built those things for themselves.

[Eddie]

Can we find at least one case where there is a foreign black person witha business or farm that is allowed to stay?

[Dame]

We do not currently approve of armed invasions for the purpose of genocide, pillage and looting.  This is how much wealth has been obtained in the past.  So, how do we approach restitution, when, for whom, how much and by whom. 

The current state of Israel is the outcome of restitution provided over a 2000 yr old property grab;and, it is acknowledged that the land had been forcibly obtained by the Israelite s prior to that.  The degree of value added and maintenance that had been provided by the Palestinians did not seem to be an issue. 

The proposed in Zimbabwe solution looks more equitable than that implemented in Palestine.

Nothing any of us do now is going to generate truly fair outcomes by current standards.  When the original take over was done by legally declaring blacks unable to own property, any restitution is going to also be along color lines.       

         

[The Future]

The whites didn't take farms, money and businesses away from indeginous peoples. They couldn't. The locals didn't have those things to begin with. The offspring of the settlers built those things for themselves.

Farmland was taken, massive amounts.  Blacks were systematically moved off prime farmland and left to rocky, unfertile areas.  Why this historical fact is lost on you I don't know.  Next you'll be saying no Jews died in their Holocaust...or perhaps your were protesting the $60,000,000,000 paid out by the German government to the survivors....

[opsec]

Next you'll be saying no Jews died in their Holocaust...or perhaps your were protesting the $60,000,000,000 paid out by the German government to the survivors....

You're really grasping at straws with this one.

Farmland was taken, massive amounts.  Blacks were systematically moved off prime farmland and left to rocky, unfertile areas.

Ok. So give them back the land, but compensate the current owners...after all, as you have so keenly pointed out, robbing people of their land is wrong.

[offdalip]

no matter how the whites originally got a hold of the land in Zimbawe, or whatever its name was B4 that (rhodesia?).
the fact remains that it used to be the most prosperous nation in africa. WHY? b/c the white farmholders knew how to
efficiently and properly work the farms so they made money. What happened? these farms were taken away from the whites
and given to the blacks who didn't know how to run them. Result? plummeting efficiency and less money revenue causing
the Zimbabwean dollar to go hyper. Moral? leave productive assets in capable hands

[Dame]

So, is anyone here prepared to forfeit their personal assets any time they do not meet someone else's minimum productivity standards.  Where would that leave most investors after the past year.  How about most homeowners, homes are not seen as productivity units.

[The Future]

How can it be their land if they never paid anyone for it or otherwise acquired it through legal means?  Why were both the US and the UK in negotiations to pay the white "owners" Zimbabwe for the loss of land such that it could be rightfully returned to the indigenous?  Could it be they knew such a wholesale theft was untenable and wanted to smooth things over with "their own"?

Dame, the arguments these guys are posting are the same ones the spur racist activity in attempts to justify the unjustifiable.  Talk about grasping at straws, you guys ought to be ashamed to have posted these inflammatory comments.  Who made these guys qualified to justify wholesale theft and the crushing of an entire people's dreams?  To you it is just another resource to be used for your benefit.  And by the way Rhodesia is the former colony formed by the great warmonger cecil rhodes who invaded the land (among several others) and crushed the indigenous for profit in about 1870.  he even had the gall to name the country after himself.  Looks like his thinking was similar to what we are seeing posted here. 

Racist.


As for the argument that blacks controlling the land caused hyperinflation, that is an extremely unsophisicated and incoherent argument.  I hope when someone invades the US and goes on to make it productive again, you guys are the ones cheering them on... 

Oh.  And as for compensating the thieves and their descendants who inherited the ill-gotten gains, this is not unprecendented.  In the Americas and the Caribbean, so called slave owners were compensated for the loss of income once the abolishment of enslavement was announced.  So millions of people are forced to work from "can't see morning' to "can't see night" for +300 years for no pay after being wholesale kidnapped...and the criminals get more financial benefits at the end?  The only conclusion one is left to reach is the same one written in the US Constitution Article I Section II - blacks are less than human and legally on the same level as chickens, cows and other animals...to be bought and sold at the will of a master.

[offdalip]

As for the argument that blacks controlling the land caused hyperinflation, that is an extremely unsophisicated and incoherent argument.  I hope when someone invades the US and goes on to make it productive again, you guys are the ones cheering them on...  rolleyes008

I really don't take offense at this at all, I know that if any XYZ invaded/conquered the U.S. then we would be MUCH LESS productive. guaranteed.

How can it be their land if they never paid anyone for it or otherwise acquired it through legal means?  Why were both the US and the UK in negotiations to pay the white "owners" Zimbabwe for the loss of land such that it could be rightfully returned to the indigenous?  Could it be they knew such a wholesale theft was untenable and wanted to smooth things over with "their own"?

tell that to the american indians who got shooed off of their "lands" in favor of "reservations"

[Dame]

Please, no labeling; it's how this got started in the first place.  Opinions about the applied theory(s) of justice often improve with respectful discussion.  Most people have a valid point, even when the other guys valid point is discounted.