What is the answer for Zimbabwe?

[RSS News]

Can regional powers settle differences between the two sides in Zimbabwe's political crisis?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm))

[Followthewhiterabbit]

Zimbabwe is rife with fascism and is ruled by dictatorship. I think that the people will have to stand up for their cause although this will be difficult. Mugabe has organized squads of intimidating gangs to harass people and keep them in place. He spreads propaganda that the economy was caused by anyone but him and he rigs elections.

I feel that it may be a long time before Zimbabwe is peaceful and secure. Maybe Nelson Mandela could help, he achieved so much in SA.:)

[Revy]

Socialists in Zimbabwe should organize for a real land reform that benefits the black Zimbabwean people, not Mugabe's cronies. This does not mean that the MDC is the solution. They are capitalist as well. Socialists should organize a new party for revolutionary socialism.

[fmlnleft]

Im sorry for asking but i am not informed about whats going on in Zimbabwe can someone explain for me?? thanks!

[AnthArmo]

Im sorry for asking but i am not informed about whats going on in Zimbabwe can someone explain for me?? thanks!


Umm, speaking purely off the top of my head...

Previously, Zimbabwe was a British colony ruled by a small white minority. The Black Zimbabweans were brutally exploited and repressed by the imperialist British.

Mugabe and Tvsangirai led the ZANU-PF party and created a revolution that was marxist in nature (Mugabe's a marxist).

Immediately after taking over, Mugabe set in place a one party dictatorship and started printing epic amounts of money, this, sadly enough, triggered hyperinflation which is still soaring upwards today. go on any currency converter and giggle cruelly at how 1$US = 1,000,000,000,000,000 Zimbabwean dollars. they're unemployment and poverty rate is about 80% last time I checked.

Mugabe, ironically enough, is more or less blaming this entirely on "western imperialism". As such he concludes that none of this is his fault at all whatsoever and believes it is justifiable to kill political dissidents, rig elections, harshly torture political opponents and, ironically enough, exploit those farmers that ARE employed. Mugabe and his cronies are essentially just as bad as the white British before them.

At the moment a historic power-sharing agreement has been reinstated between Tsvangiari and Mugabe that basically means that they have equal powers. Tvangirari is the leader of the party for democratic change.

I think that Mugabe is essentially a massive Stalinist, The people should revolt again and instate a proper socialist regime.

Do keep in mind, this is entirely off the top of my head so I've probably made some critical mistakes there.

[peaccenicked]

Mugabe is more a victim than a villan. The West is at war with Zimbabwe. They want to control its resources. Imperialism does this to other countries that is its function.

"Leaders who have committed offenses against democracy, human rights and international law on a level far graver than the offenses Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe has been accused of committing, are rarely, if ever, vilified by Western government officials, the media and left intellectuals. By contrast, Robert Mugabe has been subjected to a sustained barrage of criticism, often bordering on the hysterical, for crimes that, laying aide whether they’ve been committed or not, are minor in comparison. I’ll show that an inconsistency in the treatment of Mugabe does indeed exist, and explore the reasons why. I’ll also show that there are compelling reasons to be skeptical of the case against Mugabe." More (http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/08/15/negative-image-robert-mugabe-through-the-lens-of-western-propaganda/)

The reports of election rigging are strange considering the result have produced opposition candidates. Reports of torture have been deliberately fabricated by the BBC.
The west has also sought to stir up violence (http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/07/05/is-zimbabwe-violence-a-british-operation/) in Zimbabwe.

Inflation in Zimbabwe has brought on dollarization and most shops only accept hard currency. In other words, imperialism is getting a bigger grip on Zimbabwe but things are complicated Magabe has option of nationalizing the British and and US firms there, and seeking more help from China.

While we can recognize that socialism in one country is impossible. Mugabe at best is guilty of defending Zimbabwe's national sovereignty.

It is our socialist duty not to believe the crap from the BBC, and westernised media.
These conditions demand that criticisms of mugabe are put in a framework of what is actually happening, not in the Brit counter narrative.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

"Leaders who have committed offenses against democracy, human rights and international law on a level far graver than the offenses Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe has been accused of committing, are rarely, if ever, vilified by Western government officials, the media and left intellectuals. By contrast, Robert Mugabe has been subjected to a sustained barrage of criticism, often bordering on the hysterical, for crimes that, laying aide whether they’ve been committed or not, are minor in comparison. I’ll show that an inconsistency in the treatment of Mugabe does indeed exist, and explore the reasons why. I’ll also show that there are compelling reasons to be skeptical of the case against Mugabe." More (http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/08/15/negative-image-robert-mugabe-through-the-lens-of-western-propaganda/)

Yes, the West is hypocritical in who it condemns and who it doesn't. In other news, the sky is blue.


The west has also sought to stir up violence (http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/07/05/is-zimbabwe-violence-a-british-operation/) in Zimbabwe.

LaRouchite nonsense. Lyndon LaRouche, for those of you who are unfamiliar, is a conspiracy theorist who believes the British Royal family intends to take over the world.

I find it absolutely laughable that you consider people's personal blogs and LaRouchite rantings to be more reliable than the BBC, which has little incentive paint Mugabe out to be worse than he already is.

If you think about it, if they are, they're doing a real botched job of it. I mean, entering into power-sharing talks? How tyrannical! :rolleyes:


Inflation in Zimbabwe has brought on dollarization and most shops only accept hard currency. In other words, imperialism is getting a bigger grip on Zimbabwe but things are complicated Magabe has option of nationalizing the British and and US firms there, and seeking more help from China.

They're accepting dollars because Zimbabwe's currency has become worth less than the paper it's printed on, literally. The Zimbabwe government could easily slow down this inflation by not printing more money, something the US learnt in the Depression.

I suppose their hands will be forced when they can no longer afford to run the printing presses, if they don't stop beforehand.


While we can recognize that socialism in one country is impossible. Mugabe at best is guilty of defending Zimbabwe's national sovereignty.

Yeah, from those evil British who have done... what precisely?

[peaccenicked]

Nixion it is impossible to be a communist and a defender of British Imperialism.
I trust anyone more than the BBC who have been consistently anti-working class since its inception.
Here is a source you might find acceptable, if you are calling the cultist LaRouche, a liar on Zimbabwe.
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/06/218651.php

The inflation is not see easy to controll once it has been let of the loose. Salaries are becoming worthless. It is a vicious circle

What haVe the British done? They have been holding Zimbabwe to ransom.

I thought a revolutionary leftist might know this.

http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html
(http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html)

[Wanted Man]

Also:

How come Zimbabwe and Tibet get all the attention? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/17/zimbabwe.tibet)

I guess The Guardian is also making propaganda against the innocent British imperialists. :rolleyes:

[peaccenicked]

Well look here, An example of the Guardians impartiality.
http://www.ligali.org/article.php?id=1861

We wont be fooled again. Shall We?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Nixion it is impossible to be a communist and a defender of British Imperialism.

I have not defended British imperialism, that is all in your mind. I am not calling for any sort of intervention with regards to Zimbabwe. They are not children, they can sort their own mess out.


I trust anyone more than the BBC who have been consistently anti-working class since its inception.

No more so than any other bourgeouis news agency.


Here is a source you might find acceptable, if you are calling the cultist LaRouche, a liar on Zimbabwe.
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/06/218651.php

Well, you can't blame me for lacking trust in the word of conspiracy kooks. And if that article lacked any more substance, it would fall over. It reeks of yellow journalism.


The inflation is not see easy to controll once it has been let of the loose. Salaries are becoming worthless. It is a vicious circle

What haVe the British done? They have been holding Zimbabwe to ransom.

How so? In case you haven't noticed, the whole world is experiencing financial difficulties. I hear Iceland is running out of food. Does that mean they're being held to ransom?


I thought a revolutionary leftist might know this.

http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html

Just because the imperialists disapprove of what Mugabe's government is doing, doesn't make it right.

I thought every leftist knew this.


Well look here, An example of the Guardians impartiality.
http://www.ligali.org/article.php?id=1861

We wont be fooled again. Shall We?

So two newspapers publish something that turned out to be false, with one publishing a letter from Morgan Tsvangirai and a retraction, the other an unreserved apology. Which is exactly what is to be expected.

What's your point? You assume bad faith on the part of the Gaurdian and the Times, but why?

[Wanted Man]

That's interesting, actually. Even a paper that gleefully takes part in the demonisation of Zimbabwe has once given space to a columnist who dares to criticise this very same colonialist mindset. It goes to show that these views are not 'fringe' opinions from LaRouchites or anything like that.

If the media discourse had even the slightest guise of impartiality, it would be much more widely accepted that British imperialism continues to play a negative part in the problems facing Zimbabwe. But I guess it's more comfortable to pretend that decades of white rule had no effect, and that the African people have brought all the trouble upon themselves, despite the stern, but fair hand of imperialism continuing to interfere, even after independence...

[DesertShark]

I saw in the news that Mugabe's opposition, Tsvangirai, is boycotting the summit in Swaziland because Mugabe did not allow him to attain a passport in order to travel to the summit.

-DesertShark