Rhodesia thread

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
@The Name of Love The American Revolution was immoral when it happened, it was just that the Founding Fathers were granted enough wisdom to create a Republic which could give more than a century of prosperity and liberty out of the ashes of our old English liberties and traditions.

As for the point about Rhodesia -- while democracy is neither necessary nor desirable, you cannot, as 1% of the population, maintain rule over an alien people comprising 99% of the population, without falling into immorality. Ask the crusaders, the Normans in Sicily, the Qing in China. The whites in Rhodesia were just one more mirage of a ruling class separate and distinct from the people it rules and unaccountable to them by traditional custom, and they fell harder and faster than most, to be frank.
Would you say that such minorities are the exception or the rule throughout most societies? Because I was under the impression that it was the rule that foreign elites would come to rule over a people.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
It's really annoying when people try to blame Africa's problems on Colonialism. Yes, Colonialism caused problems, but it ended sixty years ago.

That's more than long enough to make some major progress, and some nations have. Tunisia, for example, has managed to have an at least moderately privatized economy, and has a per-capita GDP over 12k US$. Some of that's due to geography, but more is because they've fought the nationalization urge and impulse that places like Zimbabwe succumbed to.

One of the things that the media and a lot of modern history is very quiet about, is how socialism cropping up in various nations of Africa, is directly linked to famines and economic collapses.

Another thing that 'blame colonialism' people completely fail to acknowledge, is what condition was Africa in prior to colonialism?

The answer is very often 'stone age technology and civilization.' And no, you can't just say 'they would have advanced without European intervention!' That's BS, because we know what happens with people groups isolated from modern technology over the course of the Industrial Revolution, because we saw that with Papau New Guinea and the 'deep Amazon' tribes. They were still stone age tribes too.

European involvement absolutely has advanced and developed the technology and civilizational structures of the majority of Africa. That is not to say that a lot of what was done was horrible, and absolutely unjustifiable.

Another thing that 'blame colonialism' overlooks, is that there was war between the various tribes in Africa before the Europeans got involved. The resumption of inter-tribe conflicts, of Islamic groups making war with anyone who isn't Islamic, that's simply the course of history resuming. The only thing you can particularly blame on the Europeans in that regard, is the arrival of Socialism, because that is a European invention, but it's far from the only reason Africans fight with each other or anybody else.

So no, Colonialism is not the sole source of Africa's problems. It's not even the primary source of Africa's problems. It arguably was right after colonialism ended, but the various peoples of Africa have had plenty of time to clean things up and/or create their own problems in the time since, something they have very much accomplished.
 

Arch Dornan

Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
but the various peoples of Africa have had plenty of time to clean things up and/or create their own problems in the time since, something they have very much accomplished.
Know anything about the Congo? I heard it's involving African states willing to poke their nose in the civil war for reasons.

If you do can you reply in a new thread?
 

Scottty

Well-known member
Founder
You were only going to have a white-ruled Rhodesia if you didn't have democracy, and the democratic nations of the world would've never allowed that. Supporters of democracy are ideologues.

The basic problem with Democracy, is that all the stupid people get to vote.

But... all of this assumes something that isn't true - that Zimbabwe is a democracy. Nope. Rhodesia was arguably far more democratic, in that more of the population got an actual say in things.

Communists don't do real Democracy, they do "People's Democracy" where The Party dictates what the "correct" answers are.
The "supports of democracy" regarding Africa were either useful idiots, or on the side of the Communists.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Would you say that such minorities are the exception or the rule throughout most societies? Because I was under the impression that it was the rule that foreign elites would come to rule over a people.

It’s a question of enculturation. Genetically the Romanovs were usually more German than not, but monarchs like Elizaveta were beloved for an essential cultural Russianness. It is inevitable that foreign elites tend to dominate peoples, but it is just as inevitable that they are swept aside if they don’t enculturate. What that did was make Rhodesia doomed because the white minority had no value in enculturation. So they negotiated an endpoint for the handover of power—morally correct in the circumstances—and then the world intervened to end any hope of a peaceful and equitable outcome.
 

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
The basic problem with Democracy, is that all the stupid people get to vote.

But... all of this assumes something that isn't true - that Zimbabwe is a democracy. Nope. Rhodesia was arguably far more democratic, in that more of the population got an actual say in things.

Communists don't do real Democracy, they do "People's Democracy" where The Party dictates what the "correct" answers are.
The "supports of democracy" regarding Africa were either useful idiots, or on the side of the Communists.

Having read both Plato and modern neo-reactionaries like Mencius Moldbug, I'm inclined to believe that communist dictatorship is a logical end-point of democracy thanks to the iron law of oligarchy. Zimbabwe, like all socialist states, is democratic in its essence because it is Marxist. But it is also tyrannical (because that's what democracy leads to) and hypocritical (because that's what democracy is).

It’s a question of enculturation. Genetically the Romanovs were usually more German than not, but monarchs like Elizaveta were beloved for an essential cultural Russianness. It is inevitable that foreign elites tend to dominate peoples, but it is just as inevitable that they are swept aside if they don’t enculturate. What that did was make Rhodesia doomed because the white minority had no value in enculturation. So they negotiated an endpoint for the handover of power—morally correct in the circumstances—and then the world intervened to end any hope of a peaceful and equitable outcome.
How would the elites have been able to enculturate themselves?
 

Tryglaw

Well-known member
Communists don't do real Democracy, they do "People's Democracy" where The Party dictates what the "correct" answers are.
The "supports of democracy" regarding Africa were either useful idiots, or on the side of the Communists.

Oh, absolutely. Eastern Europe had elections, and "democratically"elected parliaments. Supreme Soviet in the USSR, Sejm in Poland (we've kept the name, Sejm literally means parliament).

It's just that seats in those were nothing but cushy sinecures for Party comrades, and the parliaments did nothing but rubberstamp decisions of the Central Committees.
 

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
Oh, absolutely. Eastern Europe had elections, and "democratically"elected parliaments. Supreme Soviet in the USSR, Sejm in Poland (we've kept the name, Sejm literally means parliament).

It's just that seats in those were nothing but cushy sinecures for Party comrades, and the parliaments did nothing but rubberstamp decisions of the Central Committees.

The evolution of "democratic" leftist thought.
democracy-and-the-intellectuals-iv.jpg
 

Arch Dornan

Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
15 to 20 years with proper farming education. Because you know there are Black African Farmers in other countries that have been farming crops for centuries. Anyone and I mean anyone can learn farming with the proper instruction.
They certainly can. Zimbabwe's a very special case when Mugabe gave it to his supporters or himself when they had no idea how to farm.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
It's really annoying when people try to blame Africa's problems on Colonialism. Yes, Colonialism caused problems, but it ended sixty years ago.

That's more than long enough to make some major progress, and some nations have. Tunisia, for example, has managed to have an at least moderately privatized economy, and has a per-capita GDP over 12k US$. Some of that's due to geography, but more is because they've fought the nationalization urge and impulse that places like Zimbabwe succumbed to.

One of the things that the media and a lot of modern history is very quiet about, is how socialism cropping up in various nations of Africa, is directly linked to famines and economic collapses.

Another thing that 'blame colonialism' people completely fail to acknowledge, is what condition was Africa in prior to colonialism?

The answer is very often 'stone age technology and civilization.' And no, you can't just say 'they would have advanced without European intervention!' That's BS, because we know what happens with people groups isolated from modern technology over the course of the Industrial Revolution, because we saw that with Papau New Guinea and the 'deep Amazon' tribes. They were still stone age tribes too.

European involvement absolutely has advanced and developed the technology and civilizational structures of the majority of Africa. That is not to say that a lot of what was done was horrible, and absolutely unjustifiable.

Another thing that 'blame colonialism' overlooks, is that there was war between the various tribes in Africa before the Europeans got involved. The resumption of inter-tribe conflicts, of Islamic groups making war with anyone who isn't Islamic, that's simply the course of history resuming. The only thing you can particularly blame on the Europeans in that regard, is the arrival of Socialism, because that is a European invention, but it's far from the only reason Africans fight with each other or anybody else.

So no, Colonialism is not the sole source of Africa's problems. It's not even the primary source of Africa's problems. It arguably was right after colonialism ended, but the various peoples of Africa have had plenty of time to clean things up and/or create their own problems in the time since, something they have very much accomplished.
Slowly raises hand. Colonialism fucked up not just Africa but the Middle East, Central America, The Indian Sub Continent and even Northern Ireland. So yeah it did fuck up a ton of shit. Advancing tech is all well and good but if you don't deal with the social issues between groups it does no good. Do I really need to point out the failed US efforts to try and get groups in the Middle East to get along after the various wars from the end of WWII to now.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Slowly raises hand. Colonialism fucked up not just Africa but the Middle East, Central America, The Indian Sub Continent and even Northern Ireland. So yeah it did fuck up a ton of shit. Advancing tech is all well and good but if you don't deal with the social issues between groups it does no good. Do I really need to point out the failed US efforts to try and get groups in the Middle East to get along after the various wars from the end of WWII to now.

Do I really need to point out that those groups were already in conflict with each other before the US or Europeans got involved?

Colonialism caused problems, yes. But it is neither the 'original problem' those areas had, nor the primary problem they have now. Acting like it is, just results in enabling the same kind of victim mentality that helps trap people in the poverty/welfare cycle within our own nation.
 

Arch Dornan

Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Do I really need to point out that those groups were already in conflict with each other before the US or Europeans got involved?
Now that I've seen some other news someone really loves to shit on them.

First they sanction it when it was still Rhodesia. Now they still sanction it after it was Zimbabwe.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
I don't think it was colonialsm that fucked over Africa that as has been stated ended 60 years ago.
I don't think it was the cold war that fucked over Africa most African countries played both sides against the middle and were able to get resources from both of them or they picked a side and got some kind of development money. After that there was 30 years where the worlds oceans were safe and all countries could trade with any one else with out restriction for the most part.

I think the thing that fucks over Africa is its Geography.

There is a lack of navigable rivers that makes trade difficult, much of the ground is desert, or poor soil or tropical and then you have parasites disease and preditors who evolved along side humanity. I think even if you have all your ducks in a row its difficult to have a thriving civilization in most of Africa because of its geography and that their doing as well as they are dispite the shit hand is worthy of some level of praise.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
I don't think it was colonialsm that fucked over Africa that as has been stated ended 60 years ago.
I don't think it was the cold war that fucked over Africa most African countries played both sides against the middle and were able to get resources from both of them or they picked a side and got some kind of development money. After that there was 30 years where the worlds oceans were safe and all countries could trade with any one else with out restriction for the most part.

I think the thing that fucks over Africa is its Geography.

There is a lack of navigable rivers that makes trade difficult, much of the ground is desert, or poor soil or tropical and then you have parasites disease and preditors who evolved along side humanity. I think even if you have all your ducks in a row its difficult to have a thriving civilization in most of Africa because of its geography and that their doing as well as they are dispite the shit hand is worthy of some level of praise.
Well Tyanna is convinced geography determines culture. Maybe she's on to something with her theory.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
Do I really need to point out that those groups were already in conflict with each other before the US or Europeans got involved?

Colonialism caused problems, yes. But it is neither the 'original problem' those areas had, nor the primary problem they have now. Acting like it is, just results in enabling the same kind of victim mentality that helps trap people in the poverty/welfare cycle within our own nation.
But it is a problem. And it is one for some reason Europeans don't want to admit to and downplay. As Gunny would say it is what it is. And the European pull out could have been HANDLED WAY BETTER. Than it was. Just look at how India was divided up. That could have been down way better. If it was we would not have two nuclear powers with a hate boner for each other. If someone starts campfire. And I come along an throw Gasoline on it causing it to grow out of control. I don't get to say later that the fire was burning before I got there.

I don't think it was colonialsm that fucked over Africa that as has been stated ended 60 years ago.
I don't think it was the cold war that fucked over Africa most African countries played both sides against the middle and were able to get resources from both of them or they picked a side and got some kind of development money. After that there was 30 years where the worlds oceans were safe and all countries could trade with any one else with out restriction for the most part.

I think the thing that fucks over Africa is its Geography.

There is a lack of navigable rivers that makes trade difficult, much of the ground is desert, or poor soil or tropical and then you have parasites disease and preditors who evolved along side humanity. I think even if you have all your ducks in a row its difficult to have a thriving civilization in most of Africa because of its geography and that their doing as well as they are dispite the shit hand is worthy of some level of praise.
I pointed out Africa's geography being a problem for making a continent wide advanced society back in the old PM days and a few people they know who they are called bullocks on it. Eventhough it is completely true. And has been talked about by scientists for decades.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top