Turn on thread page Beta

White businessmen forced to give blacks 51% controlling interest in their firms watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Oh in Zimbabwe? The thread title fooled me.

    Just goes to show that Affirmative Action and other racial quotas are indeed, horribly racist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kickflip)
    Zimbabwe was a functioning state able to feed itself thanks to white farmers before they started ethnically cleansing it of white people. Now thanks to their brilliant black political ability a loaf of bread in Zimbabwe costs $10 million, inflation is at 236 million percent, after they thought that since they had a mint why not just print all the money they need.
    Do you know why so many think you're unbelievably stupid? Its the fact you cant even conduct research into the contreversial **** you come out with. I mean jesus christ, get off TSR and start reading some goddamn books.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bishamon)
    Do you know why so many think you're unbelievably stupid? Its the fact you cant even conduct research into the contreversial **** you come out with. I mean jesus christ, get off TSR and start reading some goddamn books.
    He's right, Rhodesia was the bread basket of Africa under white leadership and everybody (including blacks) had a good standard of living. Now it’s an utter **** tip, and South Africa is going the same way.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    [/B]

    Yet absolutely true and argued by many top economists like Jeffery Sachs.
    Doesn't make it any less inhumane and pathetic.

    What's the point in saving one child, when they give us 4 more to save? It's not sustainable in the long run and you know it. That's why Africa will never drag themselves out of their mess. Too many starving people having too many starving kids.
    It's true Africa is a sea of problems, start with corruption and go from there, you'll be there all day. However starving kids is wrong.

    It's so easy for you to say that, and all the leading economists who have probably let good lives and have never starved, never had to walk 5 miles one way just to get water, and who can barely get health care for minor issues that are treatable let alone big problems like AIDs.

    It is so easy for you to sit there like an armchair general spouting your nonsense, you want to let the kids starve to death then at least have the courage to go out there and face them and tell them that.


    We can give aid to places like Zimbabwe but its a drop in the ocean. Their Govt is too corrupt to care about its own people so until old Robert finally dies its pointless doing a thing.
    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Mugabe only has supporters because he's brainwashed them. Once someone put's a bullet into Mugabe's head Zimbabwe have the potential to go up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    I'm sorry, you ordinarily make really good posts, but this was absolutely nonsense. Zim is a mess because of the legacy of DECOLONISATION. I'm sure you know about UDI and 1965 and the embargo. Rhodesia was the strongest economy in Africa next to South Africa because of how it had to diversify under the embargo. Rhodesia diversified magnificently in its years of isolation from a state that could only export food to Africa into a diverse and reasonably modern economy. Of course, that's all gone to **** now.

    Rhodesia-Zimbabwe had free and fair elections (declared by the UN) in which a black minister, Abel Muzorewa was elected. ZANU and ZAPU were not allowed to take part. Rhodesian Front was defeated by black voters without Mugabe. Yet Britain wouldn't recognise the elections because Mugabe's AKM toting terrorists weren't allowed to stand.

    Come Zimbabwe and that has all turned to ruin because Britain installed their Communist buddy Robert Mugabe. We were warned back in '65 that letting people like him in to power in Africa would lead to misery for all. Should have listened, tbh.
    Hmm, I still call ******** on this. The lancaster house agreement of 1979 was meant to bring parity between disenfranchised blacks and white land owners. The british initially disagreed to the terms of such an agreement, introducing their willing buyer and seller clause, such land reformation could only take place 10 years after the agreement. It was the 92 land aquisition act which removed the wiling buyer and seller clause and initiated a fast track land redistribution method. However the failure on the part of Mugabe was allowing the land to end up in the hands of fellow parliamentary members and freedom fighters, who obviously lack the know how to maintain vast areas of arable land. Phase 2 of this policy sped up the compulsory land purchases though many were not resettled, a failure on the governments part one again.

    Sanctions against Mugabe were unleashed in waves, depending on the depth of radicalism. The IMF, under the instigation of Britain and the U.S, imposed unpublicized sanctions against Zimbabwe in November 1998. These sanctions were imposed despite an earlier commitment made by this institution to support land reforms at a Donor´s Conference on Land Reform and Rehabilitation Phase 11 (LRRP 11) in Harare, 1998. The IMF embarked on an anti-Mugabe propaganda, warned off potential investors, froze desperately needed loans to Zimbabwe and refused to negotiate Zimbabwe´s debt.

    The sanctions diplomacy took a higher gear in September 1999 when the IMF completely suspended its support for economic adjustment and reform in Zimbabwe. This move was followed by the International Development Association. The bank suspended all structural adjustment loans to Zimbabwe. In May 2000, it suspended all other forms of lending, leaving Zimbabwe desperate for badly needed funds. With these strings on Mugabe´s neck, the western press started predicting his imminent collapse. .

    When Mugabe refused to fall as soon as was predicted, America rushed to the forefront of sanctions. In March 2000, the U.S Senate passed the Zimbabwe Democracy Bill. This bill called for a travel ban and the freezing of assets belonging to President Mugabe, his family and other top government officials. The ZDB sought to deny Zimbabwe access to international loans and credits. It called on Zimbabwe to respect existing ownership titles to property. This bill further aimed to support opposition groups within Zimbabwe and to fund projects aimed at undermining ZANU-PF. It also called on Zimbabwe to withdraw its forces from the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    Since 2000 there has been a bitter political struggle between the states and zimbabwe, bush considered it one of the 6 axes of tyranny (however respectable you find any of his remarks) and in 2001 assets of 80 government officials were frozen, Mugabe included.

    American hatred for Zimbabwe is equal to, or rivaled only by that of Britain. Ancestral home to majority of Rhodesian settlers, Britain stands at the center of Zimbabwe´s crisis. Britain stopped funding land reforms in 1997 on grounds that the land went to Mugabe´s cronies. They then imposed vast and crippling sanctions to ensure the economy is brought to its knees.

    Australia was among the several European countries to heed to Anglo-American calls for sanctions against Mugabe. Like the U.S, Australia widened its sanctions list to include 127 names, adding to an initial list of people in the Zimbabwe government banned from doing business with Australian firms. Together with New Zealand, Australia lobbied the UN Security Council to indict Mugabe in the International Criminal Court. This European consensus on sanctions culminated in an EU sanction package carrying a travel ban on Mugabe, business and trade restrictions and an arms embargo.

    These sanctions as crippling as they are, have not succeeded in achieving the desired goal of regime change. With a thunderous media blitz on Zimbabwe, the West hoped to use the 2008 Parliamentary and Presidential elections to make a good case for what they call the "restoration of democracy" in Zimbabwe. Alluding to western conspiracy and support for the opposition, Mugabe resorted to outright violence and intimidation, forcing the opposition to back out of the run-off elections. This left Mugabe with a "landslide victory" in the one candidate poll. His information Minister, George Charamba baptized this victory with a message to the West to "go hang."

    Though unable to kick Mugabe out of power, western propaganda paid off in the form of a crack that it inflicted on African sympathy and solidarity for Mugabe. A handful of African leaders raised concerns about the conduct of the elections, the violence involved and the credibility of the polls. Former South African President Nelson Mandela, qualified the situation in Zimbabwe as a "tragic failure of leadership." With this limited diplomatic breakthrough, the U.S, with the support of Britain and France, drafted a sanctions resolution which it carried to the UN.

    The recent debate over Zimbabwe in the Security Council marks the height of the diplomatic row between the West and the East over Robert Mugabe´s Zimbabwe. Never before in the history of the UN has the internal affair of a sovereign country reached the Security Council. Events building up to this debate date back to Mugabe´s manipulated victory in the last presidential elections. The western powers raised the problem of Zimbabwe at the G8 Summit in Japan and blamed African leaders for not bringing enough pressure to bear on Mugabe. They joined the U.S in tabling a sanctions resolution at the Security Council which was vetoed by China and Russia.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renner)
    He's right, Rhodesia was the bread basket of Africa under white leadership and everybody (including blacks) had a good standard of living. Now it’s an utter **** tip, and South Africa is going the same way.
    I see you are also an idiotic moron, CONDUCT SOME ******* RESEARCH, I gave a 7+ *******. Paragraph. Post. South Africa is NOTHING like Zimbabwe and economic instability has been propped up by both sides. Individuals like yourselves irritate the **** out of me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    [/B]

    Yet absolutely true and argued by many top economists like Jeffery Sachs. What's the point in saving one child, when they give us 4 more to save? It's not sustainable in the long run and you know it. That's why Africa will never drag themselves out of their mess. Too many starving people having too many starving kids.

    We can give aid to places like Zimbabwe but its a drop in the ocean. Their Govt is too corrupt to care about its own people so until old Robert finally dies its pointless doing a thing.
    Just leave he thread, you have always been too stupid to provide any legitimate contribution.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bishamon)
    Just leave he thread, you have always been too stupid to provide any legitimate contribution.
    Didn't realise I was speaking to the master general of TSR....

    How about no?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    [
    (Original post by Bishamon)
    I see you are also an idiotic moron, CONDUCT SOME ******* RESEARCH, I gave a 7+ *******. Paragraph. Post. South Africa is NOTHING like Zimbabwe and economic instability has been propped up by both sides. Individuals like yourselves irritate the **** out of me.
    I fail to see you point, Rhodesia was a modern prosperous country under Smith despite the various embargos places upon it. Zimbabwe is a **** tip; this is due to the incompetence of Mugabe and his tribal orientated thugs. Yes the West has placed sanctions on him, but that’s his own fault.

    South Africa is getting worse; the black population religiously vote for the ANC despite there many failings.

    I maintain you cannot take the uneducated portion of society and simply catapult them into power; it’s a recipe for disaster.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renner)
    [
    I fail to see you point, Rhodesia was a modern prosperous country under Smith despite the various embargos places upon it. Zimbabwe is a **** tip; this is due to the incompetence of Mugabe and his tribal orientated thugs. Yes the West has placed sanctions on him, but that’s his own fault.

    South Africa is getting worse; the black population religiously vote for the ANC despite there many failings.

    I maintain you cannot take the uneducated portion of society and simply catapult them into power; it’s a recipe for disaster.
    You just ignored my long post, knew you would. All did not prosper under the leadership of Smith, only the minority whites did, even your own monarchy accepted this upon Mugabe's knighthood. It was never prosperous, only artificially propped up by Britain as it was one of the few remaining imperialist African strongholds it had. You can easily create profit if you can engineer a supply and demand. With each comment you only further cement your stupidity and inability to analyze and disseminate the topic you discuss, I also must that for many years under Mugabe even into the period of botched land reform and instability, Zimbabwe has maintained an incredibly high literacy rate even by western standards. Anyone who has actually looked into the nation, which you obviously haven't (because you are dumb), would be very well aware that the population are often well educated. Mugabe's tenure actually strived for diversification and for the most part Zimbabwe remained prosperous, the imposing of sanctions only crippled the economy and punished the people. The west backed out of its agreement, even two members of the goddamn security council acknowledged this. Sanctions did not have to occur, the issue could have been easily resolved via effective diplomatic talks, however Britain wont see this happen as they just want him out, rather unfair that a foreign power should wholly decide what is good for the indigenous people of a sovereign nation.

    South Africa is getting worse? Go on jackass, provide me one cited source which shows a considerable worsening of conditions for majority ethnic groups since the fall of Apartheid. Crime is still a problem, yes, but that happens when a large chunk of an entire generation have been left uneducated and subsequently jobless. The country actually now sits on the FTSEs advanced emerging market list. Oh you didnt know that did you, of course not, you have conducted no research and hence you believe the place is falling to ****. From someone who knows nationals, has traveled to and knows much about the country this couldn't be further from the truth. Its only been twenty years, only a clown expects the entire landscape of a country with 40m+ people to change overnight.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Aw, those racist ***** are jealous of the whites. Just like that white guy that was beaten up by blacks a while back for dating that black schoolgirl model.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prussianking666)
    Lol your not serious?
    Well if they are doing it then we should
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    I find the title of this thread racist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kickflip)
    Zimbabwe was a functioning state until it got rid of white people
    lol.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bishamon)
    You just ignored my long post, knew you would, because you're stupid. All did not prosper under the leadership of Smith, only the minority whites did, even your own monarchy accepted this upon Mugabe's knighthood. It was never prosperous, only artificially propped up by Britain as it was one of the few remaining imperialist African strongholds it had. You can easily create profit if you can engineer a supply and demand. With each comment you only further cement your stupidity and inability to analyze and disseminate the topic you discuss, I also must that for many years under Mugabe even into the period of botched land reform and instability, Zimbabwe has maintained an incredibly high literacy rate even by western standards. Anyone who has actually looked into the nation, which you obviously haven't (because you are dumb), would be very well aware that the population are often well educated. Mugabe's tenure actually strived for diversification and for the most part Zimbabwe remained prosperous, the imposing of sanctions only crippled the economy and punished the people. The west backed out of its agreement, even two members of the goddamn security council acknowledged this. Sanctions did not have to occur, the issue could have been easily resolved via effective diplomatic talks, however Britain wont see this happen as they just want him out, rather unfair that a foreign power should wholly decide what is good for the indigenous people of a sovereign nation.
    I know Zim has a high literacy rate, due to the educational infrastructure put in place by the Rhodesian administration. Britain (and the UN) went against Rhodesia in 1965 and imposed sanctions, hardly propping up the economy. You are truly bonkers if you think Zimbabwe is a better place than Rhodesia. Blacks had economic freedom in Rhodesia; a black doctor was paid the same as a white doctor. Everybody was well clothed and fed, white or black. Rhodesia could boast living standards which topped the western world; the black standard of living was the best in all of Africa. These quotes were taken from an article by Graham Davis, writing in the Australian in 2000.
    Later, I called on a senior veteran of the independence struggle, James Chikerema, to ask him why so many blacks I’d met agreed with Smith that their lives were better under his regime than under Mugabe.
    ‘To a certain extent, he’s right,’ said Chikerema, who fell out with the regime when Mugabe sooled his North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade on his political opponents in Matabeleland in the early 1980s. Perhaps 35,000 people were massacred.
    ‘During Smith’s time, the police did their work professionally but now they’re totally corrupt. It’s a terrible indictment of Mugabe that ordinary people felt safer under Smith than they do now,’ Chikerama ventured.
    As Mugabe’s regime became steeped in blood and violence, Africans of all persuasions flocked to Smith’s house to consult him. The (all black) student body of Zimbabwe University gave him a standing ovation for his ringing condemnation of “the gangsters”, as he always called Mugabe’s corrupt ruling mafia.
    Paul Themba Nyathi, a leader of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, who had fought Smith’s regime tooth and nail, told me that in retrospect Smith’s Rhodesia had been “a paradise”.
    In material terms that was certainly true: everything then was better for Africans than it is now – education, healthcare, standard of living, life expectancy and employment.
    The original article is gone now but here is a re-make, call it what you will, from 2007. *linky*

    South Africa is getting worse? Go on jackass, provide me one cited source which shows a considerable worsening of conditions for majority ethnic groups since the fall of Apartheid. Crime is still a problem, yes, but that happens when a large chunk of an entire generation have been left uneducated and subsequently jobless. The country actually now sits on the FTSEs advanced emerging market list. Oh you didnt know that did you, of course not, you have conducted no research and hence you believe the place is falling to ****. From someone who knows nationals, has traveled to and knows much about the country this couldn't be further from the truth. Its only been twenty years, only a clown expects the entire landscape of a country with 40m+ people to change overnight.
    The ANC is getting a reputation for corruption, crime has quadrupled since the end of apartheid, unemployment is hovering around the 50% mark, positive discrimination schemes are driving young educated whites out of country which the country cant afford to lose. Some blacks are moving up the ladder, the ‘black diamonds’ as they are known comprise of 6% of the population and hold a quarter of all buying power. For those in the townships not much has really changed, bar the opportunity to vote. There is a consensus amongst most economic and political analysts that approximately 40% of South Africans are living in poverty – with the poorest 15% in a desperate struggle to survive.

    I have spoken to South Africans and Rhodesians, while South Africans realise there country is starting to faultier they are optimistic while many Zimbabweans I have spoken to hate Mugabe and his thugs.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renner)
    I know Zim has a high literacy rate, due to the educational infrastructure put in place by the Rhodesian administration. Britain (and the UN) went against Rhodesia in 1965 and imposed sanctions, hardly propping up the economy. You are truly bonkers if you think Zimbabwe is a better place than Rhodesia. Blacks had economic freedom in Rhodesia; a black doctor was paid the same as a white doctor. Everybody was well clothed and fed, white or black. Rhodesia could boast living standards which topped the western world; the black standard of living was the best in all of Africa. These quotes were taken from an article by Graham Davis, writing in the Australian in 2000.



    The original article is gone now but here is a re-make, call it what you will, from 2007. *linky*

    The ANC is getting a reputation for corruption, crime has quadrupled since the end of apartheid, unemployment is hovering around the 50% mark, positive discrimination schemes are driving young educated whites out of country which the country cant afford to lose. Some blacks are moving up the ladder, the ‘black diamonds’ as they are known comprise of 6% of the population and hold a quarter of all buying power. For those in the townships not much has really changed, bar the opportunity to vote. There is a consensus amongst most economic and political analysts that approximately 40% of South Africans are living in poverty – with the poorest 15% in a desperate struggle to survive.

    I have spoken to South Africans and Rhodesians, while South Africans realise there country is starting to faultier they are optimistic while many Zimbabweans I have spoken to hate Mugabe and his thugs.
    Wow, this is too easy, you still didnt read my original post did you? Then you quote the Australian, which then legitimizes one of the most violent of the Anglo-European regimes. All were fed under Smith? Not even British noblemen would lie like that. Your fantastical ignorance is beginning to border upon outright fairy tale. Unemployment in South Africa hovers at about 25%, high, but dont give me that ********. Its no where near fifty percent.

    I feel like insulting you some more but then I would be banned, only a fool links an article which offers nothing other than the opinion from a former SBS Dateline correspondent in one of Australia most conservatively skewed newspapers (aka Murdoch laughing stock), as if his views have any merit :lol: How about investigating the Lancaster House Agreement, the dozen or more phases, the vetoed UN security council call for Mugabe to stand in the ICC, the various sanctions imposed by the IMF. I provide facts and you provide out of date opinions of former imperialist propagators unhappy that they have lost their free ticket to exploitation of an entire continent.

    How about taking a trip to South Africa and seeing it for yourself, do yourself a favor instead of basking in your ignorance. An educational gap and the ghettoisation of entire ethnic groups, something the Apartheid government created in the first place wont be wiped away over night. Even if the ANC was removed from power, what the flying **** would it be replaced with?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by caw123)
    Innocent Zimbabweans should suffer for the actions of their tyrannical government?
    Ww should give aid so the tyrannical government can build more palaces?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    I really approve this. White people think they can own and take advantage of Africa. Great news imo!!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No one deserves to have their business taken away where ever they are in the world for whatever past or current reasons. Mugabe or whatever his name is (I can't be bothered learning how to spell the names of third rate dictators) is an idiot if he thinks this will somehow fix his crappy countries problems. All this will do is keep foreign businesses away (if foreign firms are affected, I haven't had a good read on the matter) and reduce trade. If he's trying to reverse inequality or something then all he's doing really is creating new inequality and the reason he can't fix the problem is because he is the problem.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    they did this to white farmers, and look where that got them... noone to farm properly and the rest too lazy/stupid to do it. they will **** it up even further for themselves, let them do it.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.