Zimbabwe Government Passes Law On 51% Black Ownership

A law that demands that any business in Zimbabwe with assets of a value over $500,000 dollars must be 51% black owned within 5 years.

www.businessweek.com...

This has happened without the knowledge of the Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC Party.

Apparently Mugabe and his cronies still dictate policy in Zimbabwe and are determined to completely ruin this beautiful country which was once known as 'The Bread Basket Of Africa'.

And still The West sit back, watch and let this happen.

reply to post by Freeborn


I suppose it is all a part of a post-colonial mindset that is unfortunately being twisted... and twisted...

I almost feel physically ill when I hear of the things Mugabe and his ZANU-PF "veterans" get away. They kill Tsvangirai's wife and get away with it. They starve their population while the elite there gets fat.

Lets face it... they are doing what they are doing because to them, power is more important than the people of Zimbabwe. Sick bastards.

Dave

It's a shame that Zimbabwe has gone from the Bread Basket to a Basket Case and I'm sure this law is only going to make it worse.

Personally, I find it amazing that anyone would want to invest money in the region to begin with. If I had a truck load of money to gamble, it would be the absolute last place I'd risk my $$$$.


[edit on 9-2-2010 by Flighty]

reply to post by Freeborn


So do you think we should spend our tax dollars on a military intervention?

Should we invade them?

Should we bomb their cities with b-52's and launch cruise missiles into their towns?

Or would you rather we infiltrate their government and cause a coup?

reply to post by Freeborn

I think Mugabe has a clever way of shrouding his plunder and that of his Zanu-PF cronies in Africanist rhetoric and sentiment. Doublessy here in South Africa a huge chunk of the pro-ANC electorate will support the move.
We have a similar Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policy for companies with an annual turnover of R5 million or above. It also demands ownership/management positions for blacks in any company that wants to do business or be lisenced by government.
It allows for more leeway (so far) with a score card system. International companies can work out their points by broad black employement and training, and do not have to be black owned (although BEE partnerships are adventageous).
"Black" incudes actual black Africans (not necessarily locals), coloureds, Indians and Chinese. They form the affirmative action candidates that underlie BEE, and this also includes white women and the disabled. This has led to a brain-drain of young white male professionals to other countries, and a significant loss of skill and expertise. Furthermore BEE benefits only a tiny black elite, usually those of the ANC persuation (which underlies the widespread financial corruption and incompetancy in the system).
Companies with older white management have been warned that new laws may follow, and the more radical factions in the ANC have called for the complete nationalization of the mines.
So sadly, the Robber Mugabe seems to be leading the way. I'm sure there are powerful Asian (specifically Chinese) and some European tycoons and cartels behind this all. The poor blacks certainly do not benefit as one elite is replaced with another elite. And to think, it all began with anti-gay hate speech in the 1990s, just like Uganda now.

Mugabe knows how to blow anti-colonialist smoke so far up the African "indiginous" butt, that even white liberals are called racists when criticizing him.
And this is the Shona guy who wiped out tens of thousands of Matabeles in the 1980s, without a word of protest from the West.
My advice? - let the "indiginous peoples" sort each other out and let the whites withdraw. Pity about the human tragedy of the Methodist Church in Johannesburg (Gauteng), where masses of Zimbo refugees find refuge. Generally Zimbabweans are intelligent hard-working people, and I find their presence in SA quite welcome, but many local blacks defend Mugabe and yet don't want his refugees. Go figure.



[edit on 9-2-2010 by halfoldman]

This has been done by other countries and the only thing that it caused is a major loss of foreign investment.

Companies are not going to invest unless they can not be froze out of there business investments.

Any company that does is going to have a list of equipment/or special equipment they can remove critical parts from to make the plant useless.

The oil industry has done this with equipment that is only built in the US.
The Algerians did this in the 1960s
Venezuela did it in the 1970s.
it took years before these countries got the refineries to work right.

1972 Chilean nationalization of copper mining industry by the government of Salvador Allende.
Copper imports to the US and other countries from this country were limited and a high import taxes applied till the Chilean government payed compensation to the companies.
plus critical plant parts made only by US companies were not available because US copper companies to the US companies that made these parts not to send replacement parts

In all cases governments that try to control businesses in there countries only wreck these companies or loose money in the long term.

reply to post by ANNED

Clearly there is a bad history of CIA/Western intervention in the affairs of countries that elected fairly benign socialist governments, often simply to protect Western/US commercial interests.
This should not be confused with Robber Mugabe. He's been there as a dictator since 1980. Sure he had a cover of democracy, as long as his party won, until his mismanagement and theft led to an opposition victory. Then it was rigged elections, unimaginable torture and intimidation, and the bull-dozed clearing of entire opposition areas. What has/is going on in Zimbabwe will only be known in hindsight, but it is likely to equal some of the greatest atrocities in humanity.
All the profit from these companies will go straight into the Zanu coffers and be squirreled away for the high-life. But Mugabe has Chinese backing, so Western sanctions mean little to him. Most of the professional and able-bodied people have left in any case.

reply to post by downtown436


I don't know, I don't have all the answers.

All I do know is that Robert Mugabe and his Zanu PF Party is destroying a once great nation and it will take years to rectify what he has done.

In addition the 'West' is standing idly by and letting it happen with little regard for the suffering of the Zimbabwean people.

This is probably due to the support China is giving Mugabe and for fear of accusations of Neo-Colonialism.

I don't know if military intervention, economic sanctions or even an Aid programme are required, that's for greater minds than mine, but one thing is certain; we should do something rather than just sit back and watch a country regress in such a manner.

A South African gentleman pops into my pub occassionally and he was telling me of a friend of his whose family has owned a farm in Zimbabwe for generations. He employed a number of people, predominantly black, and was very succesful and everyone was happy. Quite the idyllic set up.
Unfortunately then the oh so familiar happened and his farm was taken off him by Zanu PF Veterans.
The farm is now derelict and overgrown and produces nothing due to the inabity of the new 'owners' to farm efficiently.
All the former employees are now living a hand to mouth existence and the farmer moved first to South Africa and then to the UK.
I know this is hardly a unique or even worst case scenario in Zimbabwe where such stories are ten a penny.
But these very policies which has robbed Zimbabwe of it's ability to feed itself is now spreading into every form of business.
Zimbabwe is heading towards total meltdown....and we sit and watch and let it happen???

Incidentally, my friend reckons the same is happening in South Africa only they manage to gloss over it better.
He thinks that once the Football World Cup is out of the way then South Afica will go the same way.
Personnally I suspect Western banking and finacial institutes have far too much nvested their to let this happen, however, wtf do I know??

reply to post by Freeborn

No no, you sum up some of the facts and sentiments quite well.
The SA government's "quiet diplomacy" can also be interpreted as tacit applause. The MDC comes from a trade union past, so our unions refused to off-load arms headed by ship from China to Zim, and they even threatened to block the border at Beit Bridge. I think this really spurred on some of the superficial changes in Zim last year. It also showed the growing split between the socialists in the ANC and the Africanists - who believe in "liberation leaders" as a kind of royalty (and several are indeed from royal clans).
What really also affected the pushing of the law (I believe) was the Grace Mugabe/Nestle saga.
Grace Mugabe stole a huge dairy farm and ran it on virtual slave labor. The milk was sold to Nestle for export. Many South Africans then organized a boycott of Nestle products, which caused the company to stop buying milk from Grace. So while the sentiment was lingering, the bad timing of the law is another hysterical reaction to international companies that slighted Mugabe (of course all assets will also be siezed for the Zunu PF pie).
Nobody will invade Zim, since they do not constitute a threat to neighbouring countries (at least that's the rationale - nevermind the flood of refugees). Not only that, but Mugabe has a well kept army, while the ANC mismanagement has all but ruined the South African Defense Force.
Will the same happen in SA or Namibia (Botswana is not Mugabe friendly)?
To a quiet lingering degree it is (more white productive farmers have been murdered here than in Zim). I doubt we'll ever have the politcally organized mobs and the spectacle.
However, should the ANC really face electoral defeat in the long-term, one never knows what they'll do.
Foreseeably xenophobia and black-on-black violence will increase - we are running low on water, electricity, sewage and basic resources. We simply cannot afford all the refugees, and xenophobic violence still occurs daily.


[edit on 10-2-2010 by halfoldman]

reply to post by halfoldman


You portray a grim picture of southern Africa both at present and for the future.
And I would tend to agree; both the ANC and Zanu PF will do anything to cling onto power.
Corruption seems endemic througout the continent as a whole and black on black and tribal violence seems to be the norm.

I have heard it said that there is a growing sentiment for the return of the days of Empire, (probably more so in Zimbabwe than South Africa).
Whilst I feel this is not probable or morally correct I can certainly understand the sentiment.
A solution to the regions problems which puts the people's best interests first must be sought.
Unfortunately the regions problems comes way down on the 'West's' agenda despite the human suffering that is occurring.

Originally posted by Freeborn
A law that demands that any business in Zimbabwe with assets of a value over $500,000 dollars must be 51% black owned within 5 years.

www.businessweek.com...

This has happened without the knowledge of the Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC Party.

Apparently Mugabe and his cronies still dictate policy in Zimbabwe and are determined to completely ruin this beautiful country which was once known as 'The Bread Basket Of Africa'.

And still The West sit back, watch and let this happen.

The 51% rule is very common throughout 3rd world countries, so no big surprise here.

reply to post by Xtrozero


Maybe that's why they are still third world countries?

I can understand people wanting to control at least 51% of what is in their own country. The desire is legitimate. But the implementation, as is usual for socialist dictators like Mugabe, is pure stupidity. Disowning well-established Business-Owners and driving out skilled people for racial reasons will have the country descend into poverty - ooops, wait a minute - they have already descended there, how much further down does it go?

reply to post by Skyfloating


And imagine the reactions if we were to implement such a policy here in the UK?
And I am 100% certain that we are infinately more qualified to make such a law work!

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

Maybe that's why they are still third world countries?

That may be true. I would think they should pass a grandfather clause otherwise business will just leave. I looks to be somewhat of a socialized event as most surly the government will seize assets at some point since the vast majority of the black people living there cannot afford to buy into companies. In Asia it was more to keep Japan and other nations from buying up whole countries.

reply to post by Xtrozero

True observations. However, I don't want to paint a one-sided bleak picture of SA. It's a big place with a lot of satisfied returning tourists, and foreigners buying up property (especially, for example the Cape province is scenic and relatively functional). I also think the World Cup will be OK and massive resources will be pulled together for safety in the urban centres where the games are. It's not just squatter camps and poverty, where most of the violence occurs. Even Zimbabwe has a trickle of tourists, and apart from politics they have very little crime.
The behaviour and messages from government does send out a bleak prognosis. Tribal war in SA is not a big factor at present. Most of it is xenophobic violence against African immigrants - especially against Zimbos, Nigerians and Somalis in the townships. There are also service delivery protests (against the empty promises of the ANC) in the traditionally black areas, but I doubt they will spill into wider areas (at least not for the World Cup). Violent crime is a big problem, but some visitors do say it's no worse than other global inner cities.
Well, I have to live here, so I thought I'd say something positive too.
Hunting tourism has brought huge game farms and the a lot of scenic biodiversity, and the ordinary people are welcoming and friendly.
It's really very diverse and complex in SA, and it's one of the few places in Africa that has never been wholly third or first world.
The big issue in Africa at present is Chinese neo-colonialism. They ask no questions on human rights and are willing to do business on mineral resources. Last year the Dalai Lama was refused a visa to SA, which proves the growing influence (Taiwan no longer has an embassy). For a really big bleak picture, I wouldn't be surprised if Western intervention in Zim would be the final straw in East-West tensions exploding into World War III!



[edit on 10-2-2010 by halfoldman]

Originally posted by Freeborn
And still The West sit back, watch and let this happen.

What do you want us to do about it? Its thier country. If they want to ruin it then thats thier problem. Its up to the people for change it. Just like America. If they dont want thier country ruined then they need to do something about it.

How come its the wests problem? How about the rest of Africa, or the middle east, or the east. Why always the west?

reply to post by DaRAGE

The West hardly cared that Mugabe wiped out 40 000 Matabeles with his North Korean trained brigade in the 1980s, and even applauded him for being the great African hope. Few expect anything from the West.
Some say the West is already going the same way. It's handed over it's civilizations and recent liberal advances in gender rights to immigrants who make no secret of the fact that they want Europe for sharia law and Islam. The West is dominated by a cultural relativist discourse invented by insane ultra-liberals. People from certain parts of Africa and the East bring drugs and human slavery (our local black xenophobia is not unfounded). They are bringing criminal cartels, people who practise female circumcision, marital rape and honor killings. It's a generalization, but watch them take over an apartment block and next thing it looks like a nuclear bomb went off.
Yes, we want Europe and the West to speak out and to allow sincere refugees to do honest jobs. But your misguided liberalism has let in your downfall.
So the West - save yourself, this is only the beginning of your nightmare. That's the sentiment I get from the West, which won't be the West for long.

reply to post by DaRAGE


Some would say that the UK has a moral responsibility due to it's colonial past.
I'm not too sure I agree with that, you Ozzie's seem to have managed quite capably on your own, but.....?

Personally I dislike the hypocrisy and double standards.
Mugabe is blatantly racist in his dealings with the white minortiy in Zimbabwe.
Imagine the outcry if similar policies were enacted in Australia, UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand etc or any other country with a white minority.
I feel a genuine sympathy for the farmers who are seeing generations of hard and devoted work go to waste.

I also find it hypocritical that some Western governments use the abuse of human rights to intervene in the affairs of some countries yet wilfully ignore the plight of millions of Zimbabwans who are suffering as a result of Mugabe's policies.

There is a complete contrast in approaches in the 'West's' dealings with the Middle East and Africa.

But you are correct, the 'West' can not, and should not, take all the world's ill's on it's own shoulders, but it can and should do more for Zimbabwe.

On a different note, it is good to see you posting here, I haven't seen you around for quite some time.
I hope all is ok with you and your's.

Let the Africans have the businesses, the governments, the infrastructure. Give it all back to them. Everything. And sit back and watch it in 50 or so years revert back to the primordial, backwards world it was when Europeans arrived.

[edit on 2/10/10 by Zatiktoktal]

[edit on 2/10/10 by Zatiktoktal]