It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White farmers asked to return

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
Anglos most of them. I know this situation quite well since my stepmother is a Boer. I was also wondering if Mugabe was offering small plots back to people or just having them buy it back at a lowered price.


I've seen several reports on what he's doing or what he's thinking about dong. Some of it was fairly stupid and rather typical for Mugabwe (a variety of "the state siezes all the land and we allow everyone to share it... for a suitable price and so on and so forth" was one of the propoals.)

It looks like he's just making promises to try and stay in power.




posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   
I don't doubt that Mugabe is despised. He's seems like a very unfriendly man, and nuts to boot (ghosts this and ghosts that, who ya gonna call?).

But does that change the fact that he was empowered by the people of his country? Aren't the people responsible for their leaders, to the same degree that the leaders are responsible for their people?



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 03:30 AM
link   
StellarX-
I don't mean this as rude, or as a personal attack...however, I found it impossible to finish reading this thread after reading several of your posts. They positively make me sick, how you again and again make excuses for the poor. When you are talking about Zimbabwe, it is tough there, for certain, but the citizens chose their circumstances, and should reap their harvest. That's justice, and that's life.
As for the poor of the US that you make excuses for, please. In the US, one can accomplish anything, if they choose to. I have been the poorest of poor, living in a shelter most would consider uninhabitable, eating through the charity of others, living through subzero winters with no heat. AND GUESS WHAT? I worked to change it. I educated myself, because i couldn't afford a college education. (there's this thing called the internet, that you can get on for free at most public libraries...education just seconds away!) I climbed that mountain, without asking other for help, without a penny of welfare even. I have my own business now, and intend to continue climbing upward. ANYONE can do the same....if they CHOOSE to. Even in countries like zimbabwe, where there is a will, there is a way. The problem is, will is lacking, and those who makes excuses for that lack of will are the ones who are truely keeping the poor in "their place."



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 04:03 AM
link   
Just let 'em starve.

Well, until they kick out that sadistic madman Mugabwe and his henchmen.
I have worked with a few Zimbabwean people over the years and the tales they give are harrowing. The sadness they feel in their heart at the loss of their country and that is not just the "whities".

Yes there were colonial evils but howfar back do you seek justification?
Do the British kick out any with Roman, Norman or Celtic blood (yes theCelts were invaders) decendants?

Do the indigenous native Americans kick out all caucasians?

No. The man and his regime are racist pure and simple. The whole colonial thing was a front to grab the riches of the "bread basket". He has managed to hoodwink the rest of that continents nations by playing the "anti colonial" card. This is almost as sinful as the deads this evil man has done

Whatever the evils of colonialism. The country was turned from a place of conflict with various peoples fighting one another over water rights even slavery, to a prosperous one (as indeed did most colonialisation). OK the unfairness of the prosperity being mostly in "white" hands should have been addressed but not by the madness and hatred of this man and his cronies. The more I see of people like him in this world, the more convinced I am that there is not a god. Wrongdoers like him feed the racists with comments like "See they cant look after themselves thats why the Etheopians are starving etc"

I hope that the great man Mugabwe, succumbs to the evils he has created many fold.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by karby
everything. i think what happening in Iraq sickening. i think what's happened in Zimbabwe is sickening too. in any country, every place you look, it's everywhere. some people call it 'human nature', but i don't think it's natural to cause so much hurt and pain and misery,


Well i would argue that comparing the two situations is entirely inaccurate considering the level of direct involvement foreign powers have in the Iraq situation. Zimbabe is obviously also suffering from very bad press in the west but Mugabe is doing a great deal of the damage himself by being so very predictable in his hatreds. I fully agree with you when you say this is not human nature at work.


and not feel a thing. it's the 'human's suck' syndrome, it's been around forever, and from the looks of it it's not going away any time soon...sometimes people can overcome it, however most of the time they don't.


The moment one set of people can get such control over set the pain and suffering starts for them and while those issues were thousands of years ago resolved with abit of tribal skirmishing we these days end up losing millions of lives when governments fool around with the wellbeing of their citizens. I would say the problem with average people( the one's who suffer most) is their general lack of ambition for wanting enough control to decide the fate of their fellow human beings. We however have these specimens that want control at all cost with normally predictable results and i believe that if we could keep them from true power we would have done away with most of the friction that is used to start wars and general discontent.


i thought the invitation back was a step in a positive direction, but like many people here at ATS alone have shown, revenge is the law of the day, and no one is ready or willing to forvige(the blacks weren't, and the white's aren't appearantly) no matter how much potential good the outcome shows. my mistake.


Well most the posters so far do not know anywhere near enough to warrent the opinions they have clearly formed and i suggest you do the research yourself to see what really took place. The word 'forgiveness' is very infrequently used in the right context and believe this is another case of people expecting too much too fast for all the wrong reasons. The general public in Zimbabwe had not the interest or the energy to hate the white farmer and it took a bunch of near lawless thugs to get the ball rolling towards the general theft ( for private use by people who where nowhere near poor and normally wearing some kind of uniform) of privately owned land. The white farmers have to go rebuild from almost nothing ( even if they get the land back for free) and the banks that could have normally financed them are at this time probably in no state to do so anymore so this is hardly a question of forgiveness as much as it is one of praticality and a general distrust of what Mugabe might let happen to keep his military backers happy.


i've been known to dream too much. i shouldn't think so positively.


There is no alternative so just keep hoping and educating yourself towards inspiring hope in others.


not truly. the black population weren't starving before the arrival of whites...and i mean waaaay before.


Neither were the Chinese, the Indians or for that matter anyone else on the planet. Starvation spreads at the tip of a sword/gun or these days at the hand of the 'imperial shock troops' ( Pilger's term of multinationals) moving ahead of national governments.


pre colonial black population obviously knew something about how to feed themselves, esle they'd have all truly died out from starvation. so where did that knowledge go? and yes, Mugabe is a very short sighted man, i think we all know.


The knowledge is still there but subsistence farming is very much frowned upon these days as it does not contribute towards the national economy and the produce so generated can not be sold on the local market for enough to generate the money people need these days to survive in their townships while they seek for work in the cities. Near the cities there is simply no space for these people to subsists on ( so they must sell themselves as cheap labour; which is obviously the aim of driving them to the cities) and their original land were long since taken to raise sheep or cattle or whatever else.

Dictaters are by nature short sigthed men, imo, as their stay is rather precarious and normally balenced on how many short term benefits they can provide their principle backers.


if your family (or members of your family) were severly maimed or murdered, and a mob of people chased you out of the only country you've ever truly known, would you not consider that a nightmare?


Yes i most certainly would but for the media to portray this as a 'nightmare' of large enough proportion , to the general suffering in the world, to warrent international media coverage is what i refuse to sanction.


i don't mean it to belittle any other suffering occuring across the globe, honestly.


And it seems you do not but i would argue that this is what the western media did by making the suffering of a few white farmers and the families apparently more terrible than that self same suffering happening daily to millions of families all over Africa/Indonesia/India/China/South America and even good parts of Eastern Europe.


but while it's true that no one human problem should have precidence over another simply because of what the press choses to cover, i can only help but think 'baby steps'.


Well the global press is in fact taking ever larger steps to saying one thing repeatedly and very loudly. The steps is in the wrong way and their not at all small!


try taking it all in at once and your head is guaranteed to explode...or at least a melt down.


You got that right but it's not gonne stop me from doing it at the fastest pace by brain can stand. If something happens i wont be around to clean it up anyways.


Stellar



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
because the people in new orleans DID NOT take it upon themselves to try to leave that area, instead they RELIED on someone else (government) to aid them in the relief and evacuation.


How can anyone leave what little they have especially when leaving will give others even less fortunate time to move in and take their niche? Why not instead feel sorry for people who are in such dire straits that they would rather face down a hurricane than move inland and brave other people?


They could of walked, swam, whatever was neccesary to leave. and dont give me that crap that they were to poor to drive, you COULDNT get out that way anyway!


Where would they get the energy to do all that when many of them were dependent on local networks/communities to provide them with their basic needs to start with? How can you expect people to leave the tiny part of the world they know they have survived in so far? The worse your situation is the more benefit a 'home ground' advantage holds for you.


They could have taken (instead of sneakers, plasma TV's, and clothes and beer) camping and survival gear and whatever fresh water they could carry and left.


Well do we know what most looters took or what order they took the articles in? Would the food not run out in the first day anyways with the rest hoping to exchange the looted goods for something edible? I think the press coverage focused on some aspects( as they always do) over others and we are all suckers for trying to make sense of such biased information.


Instead, being conditioned to rely on someone else (the government) they stood in the streets and waited for death.


Well if they were conditioned what else should we expect from them? Even the much talked about German education system still resulted in men going in their millions to a near certain death on the east front not so long ago so why should we expect rather uneducated folks to act any more independently when up against nothing but rather bad weather?


because if you remember, a few months ago, bill cosby was encouraging them to take it UPON THEMSELVES, to invest money in education instead of athletic wear.


Well if you look at the type of jobs even educated Americans are these days forced to do what hope is there for educated black people? People with elaborate support systems ( mostly white in America's case) can afford to invest 21 or more years to prepare themselves to compete in the American marketplace but how do we expect the poor and marginalised to manage the resources to do the same? Do you not see that the whole education and long term schooling ( masters degrees and the like) is just ever more conditioning rewarded with luxury where poverty and the resulting independence( at least from what the state considers constructive/legal) of action is rewarded with punishment of various kinds?


I dont understand why this is such a hard concept, and I never said they were lazy only conditioned.


Well whatever you said you do not seem to realise the link between 'success' ( what the state trough education made the culture to expect) and successful social conditioning. The 'middle class' in western societies are that not because they are especially good at something but because they are willing to submit and live in the way that the governments want them to. The very rich and the very poor are thus those who respectively understand the system very well( and thus get ahead by even more submission or just cheating it) and those who either do not ( understand) or refuse to submit to it.

That's what my reading has brought me to believe at least.

Stellat



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I dont see how any change can come about in such a country before a rule of LAW is established!!! All this banter about all they have to do is (this) and grow meat or (this) and have gardens seems to me unfounded reasoning. Because what will happen?? If you grow a garden or raise livestock someone will just come steal it or kill you and then steal it. It will make anyone that trys to do as many say and


make a way for themselves

a huge target for the others who are starving and see a easy way to eat. A rule of law needs to be established first!! A

feudal system
would encourage the rise of mini dictators and warlords who control small areas for their own gain. Anytime you have people scraping for a living you have thieves and killers who will take the easy road no mater of race. Look at the old west in the united states. White thief's and killers and were everwhere killing and taking from others. Many warlord style gang leaders sprang up and used force to control "their" areas and what stopped them were determined law officers who were ELECTED because of their proficiency at catching or killing criminals and an overlapping law enforcement system. With a powerful law enforcement system you are always going to have corrupt people in power. This is why there needs to be a multi layered law enforcement system established. In the US we have City police ran by a police chief whom is elected by the city he or she will be governing. Next is County police. (The US is divided into states and each state is divided into county's)The county police is led by a Sheriff who is elected by the county. Next is the State Police . And finally you have the Federal Government law enforcement agencies. Without a rule of law you have anarchy which will always cause mass starvation and violence. After law and the rule of law is established then people will prosper.



[edit on 23-4-2006 by Heckman]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Karby, StellarX, what are the white farmers being offered? Are they being given a discount, or are they just being permited to purchase the farms back? Or have the farms been re-organized into different allotments?


They will be given land back ( for votes one supposes) whatever their colour now that his restructured the country to ensure his own future. As i understand one of problems were so much land going unused due to white farmers keeping the land ' in house' meaning that they would rather leave it unused but in fellowship than selling it on open markets.

www.theperspective.org... is what they are going to try do apparently.


How has the Mugabe government tried to spin this as? Because it looks like something of a reversal on previous policy, are they admiting that or are they playing it down?


Well their policy has never been against whites( why else would they still be there after twenty years) as such AS LONG AS they support the government. This is a classic dictatorship where what you do(however badly; think Goering) is really unimportant as long as you do not interfere with government policy or actions.


This is all very interesting. That part of the world has had a tumultuous history, but I think that it can still pull itself together and really come through as something great.


Without hope were not going anywhere and i suppose it's why we are bombarded with so much negativity in our daily lives.


Also, as an aside, are the 'white' farmers anglos or boers mostly???
Just a little image from a news service to help people orient themselves:


Mostly British origin.

www.state.gov...

www.afrol.com...

www.electricscotland.com...

Not that i agree with all the views ( US state department link is actually pretty good) but it at least gives a idea on the origins.

Stellar



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Allah the moon god
Yes there were colonial evils but howfar back do you seek justification?

However, in this case, the colonialism existed within our lifetimes. It started centuries ago, but it held on firmly until it started to crumble in the 1970's. So.... we coud argue a case for justification.


Do the indigenous native Americans kick out all caucasians?

Don't you think they TRIED? Dear heavens, there's books worth of evidence on uprisings and struggles against the Caucasians and the iron heel of superior technology crushing them (along with stealing women and children and enslaving them and... and... (sorry... one of my more favorite rant subjects.)


I hope that the great man Mugabwe, succumbs to the evils he has created many fold.


I think we can ALL agree on this -- and the sooner the better! I'd like to see a peaceful turnover and a progression of the political process, though, rather than a bloodbath and another warlord.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
They will be given land back ( for votes one supposes) whatever their colour now that his restructured the country to ensure his own future.

I'm just wondering how it works. You go to some government agency, apply for the land, and now, if you are white, they consider giving it to you, whereas in the past, whites couldn't have any?

As mentioned before, seems really risky. Whats to stop the government from seizing the land again in the future? Also, from what I understand, agribusiness requires a lot of capital investment; you need sowing and reaping machines, transport trucks, insectides and devices to disperse them, irrigation systems, etc etc. Is the government giving that out? Presumably no, no?

How can a farmer make these capital investments in machinery, when, in all likelyhood, the government will consider it their property, and take and distribute it at will?


As i understand one of problems were so much land going unused due to white farmers keeping the land ' in house' meaning that they would rather leave it unused but in fellowship than selling it on open markets.

A risk when private property exists, yes.


www.theperspective.org...
In order to empower the poor farmers to have capacity to produce, the Zimbabwean government, through the ministry of local government, has developed a scheme in which the local government ministry will oversee the management of the 57 districts in Zimbabwe.


These sorts of plans have historically, as far as I am aware, failed, and miserably at that.


A District Development Fund will enable the distribution of tractor units to farmers.

This is not the same as what I allude to above, but it seems like the 're-distribution and equalization' logic is in place for land, and having hte government supply some farm equipment means that the government will allways be able to recall and re-distribute that equipment.


Technical expertise to farmers is provided through the ministry of agriculture under a programme known as the Agriculture, Technical and Extension services scheme (Agritex). These support services are expected to empower the newly resettled farmers with the necessary skills that would enable them to take off.

This is a good idea.


Part of government plans include harvesting the waters during floods through a well-organised irrigation system. Already dam construction was underway as part of efforts to improve the storage of water.

This is an example of why central planning of the economy and real estate can be a problem. The rain/drought cycle exists throughout the world, and, unless I am mistaken, existed in zimbabwe when white zimbabweans managed the farms.
The proper response to a decrease in producivity and yeild is not to have a massive long term government programme.


two years from now whether we have drought or not we project that Zimbabwe should be self-sufficient in food production

Ironically, this article is from 4 years ago.


The majority of white farmers have voluntarily given up their farms for no compensation at all, he added.

Why should anyone trust such blatant liars like this? Never, in the history of humanity, has a large group of people given up large personal and private storages of wealth voluntarily without compensation.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MadGreebo
I worked in Immigration detention for a few years - and one thing I can tell you is that the Black africans HATE each other with such a passion it is awe inspiring to behold.


Some do and i suppose the billion odd Indians have a huge love of each other no matter the caste in question. With extreme poverty and deprivation is the hatred inspired by intense competition ( mostly governments playing one faction against another) not at least sometimes understandable?
Do you really believe that working in immigration gives you a cross section of a continent if everyone you met have at least one rather obvious thing in common( they all wanted to leave after all)?


They love to hurt each other, its the only way i have to say it - They took great delight in really really trying to knock seven shades out of each other - and all because of a tribal / racial slant ... and the scary thing?


Some do ( Eastern Europe/Middle east/Spain/Turkey/Ireland/France/Portugal anyone?) but what sort of education and social conditioning or interplay of events inspires people to hate complete strangers?


When asked why they did it, they just shrugged and said because its always been that way - Congo / Nigeria was the best fights. wow is all i can say.


Well it has not always been that way but humans have surprising short memories when it comes to history and since history is written by those in control ( to keep themselves that way) it's no surprise they create entirely fictional accounts to divide and keep people fighting anyone but their rulers.


But heres the rub - stick white people in amongst it, and they join up, fight the whites, and when thats finished go back to fighting each other.


White people tend to stick out and their normally even more arrogant than the normal enemies considering they pitch up in small groups and stick flags into ground claiming it's 'theirs'. If you can avoid uniting people against you with such arrogantly stupid behaviour your probably skilled enough to go try take over the world.


No wonder the continents in such a mess.


When is the last time Africans dug trenches and proceeded to kill each other for zero personal gain? Africans are no stupider , or for that matter smarter, than anyone else and one can argue that considering it's proximity to Europe and white colonist it did surprisingly well.


Whites should leave Africa to it - come back to europe - we need farmers, and im sure they'll even subsidise you all


As if subsidies are not doing enough damage to people all over the world already.

Stellar



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Zimbabewes government is byond redemption, someone should overthrow it.

Mabey a collelition of afican countrys, save their neighbors. Or heck why not the world community?

Though one should have tolerence, you shouldn't be indifferent to something like a opressive dicatorship.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I'm just wondering how it works. You go to some government agency, apply for the land, and now, if you are white, they consider giving it to you, whereas in the past, whites couldn't have any?


Whites have had the land very a very long time so there was never a need to give them any more. They bring in valuable foreign currency with their cash crops and the government obviously never wanted it to go as far as it did as if they did they would have done all of this twenty years ago.


As mentioned before, seems really risky. Whats to stop the government from seizing the land again in the future?


They never wanted it to happen on this scale and they will do their best to try prevent it from happening again as they have for the twenty years up to the recent events.


Also, from what I understand, agribusiness requires a lot of capital investment; you need sowing and reaping machines, transport trucks, insectides and devices to disperse them, irrigation systems, etc etc. Is the government giving that out? Presumably no, no?


And this is the problem they are facing. Without the white farmers they will be very hard pressed to get direct foreign investment to restart all these capital intensive programs as such investment requires foreign trust in the expertise of those involved.


How can a farmer make these capital investments in machinery, when, in all likelyhood, the government will consider it their property, and take and distribute it at will?


As i said above i think you misunderstand the reasons for the scale of the land evictions that happened. Do you for instance think that Stalin wanted millions to die in the Ukraine or that Mao wanted millions to starve in China or any of the other cases? The aim is control but with bad management such central control can have unplanned and rather adverse effects.


A risk when private property exists, yes.


A risk that antagonizes very many people and that creates the exact situation they claim their trying to avoid. Whites simply thought the government could protect them ( and would have enough support to never have to resort to gaining votes this way) against the common man and they obviously, and arrogantly, thought it could on for many more decades. White people in Africa are most of the time their own worse enemies for assuming they have more control than they do.


These sorts of plans have historically, as far as I am aware, failed, and miserably at that.


I certainly do not back all the statements made in that report but it does serve as a document towards the general aims ( and lies required to sustain them) this dictatorship has chosen to invest itself in. As to the historical effectiveness one can only look at Western subsidies to understand that Western governments are just as involved in their own agri business even if their chosen method is to use tax funds instead of general reform to reach their goals.


This is not the same as what I allude to above, but it seems like the 're-distribution and equalization' logic is in place for land, and having hte government supply some farm equipment means that the government will allways be able to recall and re-distribute that equipment.


And is this not just another form of subsidy like all the others? Can western governments not affect redistribution by shifting funding to one sector or another? I would suggest this form of management is just inherent in the 'shorter leash' type government that is your garden variety dictatorships.


This is a good idea.


If people will listen and if the land gets to people who actually want to farm it probably could.


This is an example of why central planning of the economy and real estate can be a problem.


When central planning goes wrong it tends to go wrong badly, yes.


The rain/drought cycle exists throughout the world, and, unless I am mistaken, existed in zimbabwe when white zimbabweans managed the farms.


Zimbabwe


More than 5 million people are in desperate need of food aid in Zimbabwe, according to the WFP. The government declared a state of disaster in April. However, the government's policy of seizing productive white-owned farms has compounded the problem. Even the finance minister, Simba Makoni, has admitted that turning the farms into smaller units has damaged productivity.

Zimbabwe is enduring its longest drought in 20 years, which followed exceptionally high rainfall that undermined the 2001 harvest.

The WFP reports that there are "staggering shortages", including a 1.5m-tonne cereal gap, as well as the "near collapse of large-scale
commercial farming due to land reform activities".

www.guardian.co.uk...


It's really very bad and this situation could not have come at a more opportune time for the Western press as crop failure and land seizure conspires to make black people look the fools Western press loves portraying them as.


The proper response to a decrease in producivity and yeild is not to have a massive long term government programme.


Tell it to the Western agri business. :0


Ironically, this article is from 4 years ago.


Why is that Ironic?


Why should anyone trust such blatant liars like this?


You can never trust blatant liars but you can not often avoid working with at least some of them and when it comes to governments you may avoid dealing with the lies but not with the liars.


Never, in the history of humanity, has a large group of people given up large personal and private storages of wealth voluntarily without compensation.


If i had the time to research it i am 99% sure i could make you eat that word ' never'.
Since i do not i will only say that human history is rather odd, and lengthy, affair for one to make such specific and exclusive claims.


Stellar



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   


Actually millions( if not hundreds of millions) of women around the world suffer this type of life so i find nothing absurd about people risking life and limb to do what they love which is this case means farming with some violent gangs around.



StellarX - all I can say is
kudos to you my friend. You have mastered the art of excuse making and taken it to an all time level of idiotic greatness. And I apologize as well, you are RIGHT, who WOULDN'T want to return to work under such welcoming conditions!! Since they love farming so much, surely they wouldn't mind the roaming bands of "violent gangs" who rob them and terrorize them on a daily basis. After all they LOVE farming. They will certainly be happy to return. Heck, they are obligated to return, so these poor warlords won't starve!! Where is Sally Struthers when you need her?

Your opinions and posts throughout this thread have been so unbelievably biased, non sensical and flat out ridiculous that I won't even bother to address them individually. Instead I will assume that you are only interested in flaming this topic and those who read it.

Every time you babble on about the indignities and the injustices that excuse these criminals for the acts that they commit you lessen the resolve of the honest, hard working African people who are not out in hordes threatening innocent farmers, women and children with AK-47's. Instead of making excuses why don't you instead do something constructive for your people. Oh, that's right, it's easier to complain about inequality and injustice over an online chat board than it is to actually do something about it.

Blame away, blame your government, blame Americans, blame Europeans, blame the white Africans who remain there, blame injustice, inequality, favoritism, corruption, lack of financial capital, lack of know how, lack of resources, lack of rain, lack of manpower, lack of honest politicians, lack of leadership, lack of foreign aid, lack of international interest, lack of news coverage, lack of racial identity, lack of unity - whatever you choose - an excuse is an excuse, and these excuses that you spew out are the same ones that have been used for the last two hundred years. When is it going to be time to step up and do something on your own, something for yourselves? I find that if you try hard enough you can manufacture an excuse to justify almost ANYTHING. The only thing that I see missing is a severe lack of EFFORT.

Meanwhile Africa will remain the basin of prosperity and the bastion for human rights that it is so well known for today..(LOL) Best of luck !!




posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Since yall cant seem to play nice.....I am moving this thread to slugfest.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Should have posted this sooner but rather late than never as they say.

news.bbc.co.uk...

www.guardian.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

www.trinicenter.com...

www.state.gov...

www.raceandhistory.com... is really REALLY big source for information.

This is the first time any thread i have been involved in got moved to 'this' section of the forum and i am NOT taking the blame! Anyone who says as much is doomed to conflict with my Borg sensibilities, the results of which everyone should at this stage be able to predict.

Stellar

[edit on 23-4-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
And this is the problem they are facing. Without the white farmers they will be very hard pressed to get direct foreign investment to restart all these capital intensive programs as such investment requires foreign trust in the expertise of those involved.

It also requires that the investments be protected. If a country is going around redistributing wealth and real estate along social lines, then no one can reasonably be confident in any capital investments. People make capital investments for profit, the farmer buys the treshing machine because he expects that it will up his productivity. Thats how farms become more productive, via the profit motive.


The aim is control but with bad management such central control can have unplanned and rather adverse effects.

Which is an excellent argument for not having centralized governmental control of the markets and farms.


A risk that antagonizes very many people and that creates the exact situation they claim their trying to avoid.

Well, I can understand it being seen as a social injustice, since europeans came into the country with advanced technology and practices, and have maintained a monopoly on the farms in this case until the recent events.

But mugabe wasn't trying to correct some historical social injustice anyway. And as much of an injustice as it was for the farms to be mostly owned by whites, look at the situation now. For mugabe to just steal the land and hand it out however he saw fit and permitting the 'veterans' to steal it also, it doesn't help the situation.

And the whole thing will probably have to happen again. Some group of people is going to become better at farming than the rest, whether its 'whites' or just a random collection of new farmers. And with their being better farmers, they're going to be able to buy more farmland, and thus before long the farms will be operated and owned by a small fraction of the population. Which is very similar to the situation that was used to justify mugabe and the veterans stealing the land.





As to the historical effectiveness one can only look at Western subsidies to understand that Western governments are just as involved in their own agri business even if their chosen method is to use tax funds instead of general reform to reach their goals.

Its quite different though. The western nations allow those who are best able to operate the farms to own them, even if that means that a tiny fraction of the population owns the farms. Mugagbe seems to want to redistribute the land equally, prevent there from being a 'class' of farm owners motivated by profit.

That is why the western model has been so successful though, because the profit motive is so powerful. Its not central planning.


Can western governments not affect redistribution by shifting funding to one sector or another?

Government can influence industry, sure, but private property is still respected. Western governments can't possibly do the same sort of things that mugabe is going, they don't seize as a whole all these farms, they allow the market to dictate what the size of a 'good' farm is, what the high yeild will be, and how much monopolization there is.




If people will listen and if the land gets to people who actually want to farm it probably could.

I would say, the land shouldn't go to peopel that want to farm it, it should go to people who want to turn a profit from it, and who have an investment in it for the long term (such as happens when an individual invests capital). But the government agency that will try to educate people on good farming practices is definitly a good idea, yes.



It's really very bad and this situation could not have come at a more opportune time for the Western press as crop failure and land seizure conspires to make black people look the fools Western press loves portraying them as.

Wel, lets face it, the people that seized control of these farms, mugabe and the veterns are fools.

Actually, its probably the average citizen that is the real fool, because I suspect that mugabe and the armed veterans aren't the ones going hungry.


Why is that Ironic?

Becuase rather than it working within two years, it's four years down the road and things have gotten worse.


You can never trust blatant liars but you can not often avoid working with at least some of them

Good point!


Since i do not i will only say that human history is rather odd, and lengthy, affair for one to make such specific and exclusive claims.

History is odd, but people are greedy. To say the least, these anglo farmers didn't peacefully give up their farms or receive no compenstation for it.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackOps719
StellarX - all I can say is
kudos to you my friend. You have mastered the art of excuse making and taken it to an all time level of idiotic greatness.


And here i thought i was offering explanations to serve as medicine to cure you of the severe case of ignorance you were suffering in this area. I guess. Are you per chance the type of person who calls all explanations that does not serve your interest excuses?


And I apologize as well, you are RIGHT, who WOULDN'T want to return to work under such welcoming conditions!! Since they love farming so much, surely they wouldn't mind the roaming bands of "violent gangs" who rob them and terrorize them on a daily basis.


You do not seem to understand what people will risk to do what they love and that limited understanding of human nature serves to say far more about you than it does about me. Why do you believe these gangs will continue to 'roam' the country anyways?


After all they LOVE farming. They will certainly be happy to return. Heck, they are obligated to return, so these poor warlords won't starve!! Where is Sally Struthers when you need her?


So now we have WARLORDS; what are you watching on Tv these days?


Your opinions and posts throughout this thread have been so unbelievably biased, non sensical and flat out ridiculous that I won't even bother to address them individually.


As long as you lack the guts to defend your views in public ( when presented with such ample opportunity) you wont get much in way of respect from me.


Instead I will assume that you are only interested in flaming this topic and those who read it.


I flame people who are desperately ignorant and deserving of having their ignorance exposed in the public way they chose to make it known.


Every time you babble on about the indignities and the injustices that excuse these criminals for the acts that they commit you lessen the resolve of the honest, hard working African people who are not out in hordes threatening innocent farmers, women and children with AK-47's.


And being able to provide explanations/motivations for other people's actions is the basis of empathy and thus humanity and intelligence. I lesson the resolve of people by pointing out the motivations and logic employed my thugs and criminals? Does explaining criminal behaviour not make preventing and stopping it far easier? Your not making any sense.


Instead of making excuses why don't you instead do something constructive for your people.


I am not making excuses. What i am trying to do is enlighten the type of ignorance you are displaying here and thus serving Africans by making the supporters of Africa's exploiters aware of the actions taken by their various governments. If you can propose a way in which i can serve Africans better i am listening.


Oh, that's right, it's easier to complain about inequality and injustice over an online chat board than it is to actually do something about it.


I believe that i am doing something and at this stage of my life i think it is the most effective thing i can do while not compromising myself in any serious way. I am young and while i am learning i am only willing to take a certain certain risks while i am still making mistakes and finding my way . It's selfish but then that's human and so am I.


Blame away, blame your government,


Their plainly guilty of not doing enough even thought the means to do so clearly exists with this countries wealth. If you want to discuss this in depth say so.


blame Americans,


And Americans are very worthy of blame considering the actions of the American government in Africa over just the last 60 years. Once again we can do this in any depth you like if you want to suggest that America is blameless and do not need to take responsibility.


blame Europeans,


You can colonize and build wealth for EVERYONE and choosing not to do so proves the intent of the colonizer. Tell me why Europeans should not own up to their crimes and pay for them.


blame the white Africans who remain there,


If they serve only themselves and blatantly endanger the lives of others there is no reason to stay blameless because you happen to be rich or white or for that matter both.


blame injustice, inequality,


And why in Africa should we not seek out the people who make themselves guilty of such?


favoritism,corruption,


If one African leader is supported over another by foreign governments why should we not be disgusted and demand such practices stop? Why should we put up with foreign intervention that almost always results in suffering that was unknown before such started?


lack of financial capital,


Well when Africans control so little of all those great enterprises Europeans brought how can we ever do what we think is right when that depends on others agreeing?

Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.
Mayer Amschel Rothschild

" If the people only understood the rank injustice of our Money and Banking system, there would be a revolution before morning. " - Andrew Jackson

If you control industry ( what drives IMF, World bank demands for privatization) do you not control to a great extent what is produced and thus have value? Combine that with dictators and the like being backed by European powers and you have predictable results.


lack of know how,


When your occupiers choose to encourage ignorance you do not think this becomes a real issue?


lack of resources,


When the critical one's are controlled by people who do not much care about local communities or much other than their profit margin?


lack of rain,


If you lack foreign currency to buy food because you must in fact use as much of available water and land resources towards planting cash crops ( that wont be eaten by the locals cause they can not afford it) towards getting the foreign currency you MUST have to import oil and other vital industrial resources you tend to end up with a great deal of subsistence farming that simply do not work with no rain. This issue is , as all the others you raised, far more complex than you think.


lack of manpower,


If the budget is eaten up by foreign depth given to dictators that were installed by foreign powers your budget will reflect that by cutting non critical services such as education for short term gain. I can help you understand how easy it is to destroy a country using it's industrial base ( that you and your foreign partners own) against it.


lack of honest politicians,


They are in every country doing much the same but in some places ( like Africa) their crimes are just more readily visible due to small margin of mistakes between their criminal leaders profiting and surviving and the people they rule not being as able to survive it. Why do America have 30 million people who do not know where tonight's or next weeks meals will be coming from? If such horrible mismanagement of resources can happen in such a wealthy country why on earth are you surprised that in others people actually die due to the same mismanagement?


lack of leadership,


As above leadership is normally done for it's own reasons and in Africa with all it's deprivations we just do not have as much for them to steal before that theft kills people.


lack of foreign aid,


Actually foreign aid is not nearly as much a problem as the conditions it comes with that serves in most cases only to deplete the countries resources further. The west has been turning a massive profit from Africa for centuries now and it has not stopped in the last few decades either. Hundreds of billions of dollars of profit to the west is the blood money that was required of Africa not to be any worse off than it is today.


lack of international interest,


Oh there is plenty of interest and coverage but it's robbed of all perspective if not factual content itself. You should investigate the major media services of the world and i would not mind helping you learn how it all works.


lack of news coverage,


If it's almost all biased to form the picture you clearly have then what use is more coverage? Why it's no surprise people have such a negative view when it's based on such blatant falsehoods and deception only on TV to make the west feel the suffering has nothing to do with their crimes in poverty stricken continents.


lack of racial identity, lack of unity


When your race is portrayed in such a negative way wherever you look ( due to western media being almost everywhere) what do you think that does to people's identity? Is the way African Americans are portrayed in American TV really doing them any favours? It really is no different and while people lack identity they will lack unity and be easily divided into competing groups which his obviously the aim of those who seek to divide and conquer.


- whatever you choose - an excuse is an excuse, and these excuses


You say excuse and i say explanation. I will keep disagreeing till you prove that explanations are somehow excuses instead of contributions to our understanding and thus efforts towards solving the problems.


that you spew out are the same ones that have been used for the last two hundred years.


They hardly are but making entirely false claims seems to be what your going to insist on doing while here.


When is it going to be time to step up and do something on your own, something for yourselves?


Only someone as ignorant as you would imagine that people who are starving and suffering would not do everything they can to help themselves. It's the type of logic that shows how little thinking happened during the formulation phase of the rubbish you spew. While swallowing such vapid propaganda right from the text books might obviously not be entirely your fault it will still get you into situations where your excuses will be as good as my explanations are to you.


I find that if you try hard enough you can manufacture an excuse to justify almost ANYTHING.


It's the nature of the average human being to shift blame as shifting blame requires no change in perspective, thinking or action. I can not argue that it is not something people prefer to do but i will argue that it hardly change the reality that much of what is happening in Africa and elsewhere is in fact the work of people who are quite deserving of blame for their intentional crimes.


The only thing that I see missing is a severe lack of EFFORT.


Effort alone ( Americans work on average more hours per person than any other industrialized nation but they are certainly not the wealthiest by any measure) does not automatically lead to greater personal wealth and it's very obvious when you observe sweat ships all over the world. Effort alone might make you a good slave but it certainly does not logically lead to riches or even success at what your attempting to do even though it is normally a basic requirement.


Meanwhile Africa will remain the basin of prosperity and the bastion for human rights that it is so well known for today..(LOL) Best of luck !!


Sarcasm will get you absolutely nowhere with me but lets keep going and see where you want to take this. If nothing else you will never again be able to claim complete ignorance of the facts.

Stellar



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Hi StellarX there's a similar thread going on about South Africa.
I'm not sure if you want to join in on that discussion:

South African Situation



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Send in George Clooney or Brad Zit. Aren't they already over there patronizing black people anyhow?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join