Imperialist rhetoric against Zimbabwe intensifies

[turquino]

Mugabe must be toppled now - Archbishop of York

• Put Zimbabwe's leader on trial, urges Sentamu
• Time to use force, MPs say

In an extraordinary and passionate outburst, the Archbishop of York is calling for President Robert Mugabe to be toppled from power and face trial for crimes against humanity, Dr John Sentamu, writing in The Observer, said the world must recognise that the time for talks was over and Mugabe should be forced out. 'The time has come for Robert Mugabe to answer for his crimes against humanity, against his countrymen and women and for justice to be done. The winds of change that once brought hope to Zimbabwe (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/zimbabwe) and its neighbours have become a hurricane of destruction, with the outbreak of cholera, destitution, starvation and systemic abuse of power by the state,' he says.
'As a country cries out for justice, we can no longer be inactive to their call. Robert Mugabe and his henchmen must now take their rightful place in The Hague and answer for their actions. The time to remove them from power has come.'
He said the power-sharing deal signed by Mugabe and the Zimbabwean opposition in September was 'now dead'.
This time last year Sentamu, one of the Anglican church's most senior clerics, ripped up his dog collar on television in protest at Mugabe's regime and refused to wear one again until the tyrant had been toppled. He then asked Christmas shoppers to give £1 to Zimbabwe's suffering people, but now he wants more far-reaching action.
The Archbishop's attack came as Gordon Brown also stepped up the rhetoric yesterday, calling the Zimbabwean government a 'blood-stained regime' and urging the international community to tell Mugabe 'enough is enough'. The Prime Minister said food shortages and the cholera epidemic had become an 'international rather than a national emergency' that demanded a co-ordinated response.
'We must stand together to defend human rights (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/humanrights) and democracy, to say firmly to Mugabe that enough is enough,' he said. 'The whole world is angry because they see avoidable deaths - of children, mothers, and families affected by a disease that could have been avoided. This is a humanitarian catastrophe. This is a breakdown in civil society.' Brown said he hoped the UN Security Council would meet 'urgently'. But Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg went further, saying the UN should now declare the use of military force was justified: 'The world has sat idly by while Mugabe has brutalised his own people for too long. Economic recession in the West has led the world to avert its gaze from the suffering in Zimbabwe. Further international inaction would be inexcusable.'
South African Nobel Peace Prize laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu said on Dutch TV that Mugabe must stand down or be removed 'by force'. But while Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga has said it was time for African governments to 'take decisive action to push him out of power', there has been little sign that Zimbabwe's neighbours were prepared to move against him. The growing international fury came as cholera ravaged the people - 575 have died and 13,000 are infected - and the economy is worse than anything the world has seen.
The Zimbabwe central bank sacked executives at four banks accused of illegal foreign currency trading. The managers were sacked for diverting Zimbabwean dollars to the black market before the notes were introduced, central bank Governor Gideon Gono told the state-run Herald newspaper. Referring to reports that the central bank itself bought black market currency, Gono said: 'We are sick and tired of being labelled crooks.'
Inflation is at 231,000,000 per cent and the Reserve Bank has been unable to print money fast enough to keep up with prices, which double every 24 hours.

*

Zimbabwe's crisis is the fault of britain and america. At the conclusion of the second Chimurenga and the Lancaster House Agreement, Britain promised to pay for the land of white settlers. In 1998 tony bLiar's government declared it would not pay the money, so ZANU-PF moved to expropriate the white settlers. The 'Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001' co-sponsored by notorious (now dead) racist Jesse Helms was the imperialists' response to the expropriation of white settlers and the country's aid to the Kabila's government in the Congo. The result was that the US would block credit to Zimbabwe in any organization in which it controlled a stake. The effect on the country was devastating because Zimbabwe is poor and needs credit to purchase things like fertilizers and farming machinery.

Despite the huge suffering the imperialists are inflicting on Zimbabwe's people, the western left has been silent for some reason. Some trotskyists are even lining up to support the imperialist-backed and bankrolled MDC who encourages the West to blackmail their country. While ZANU-PF is not socialist, the people of Zimbabwe are suffering from imperialist oppression and need our support.

[Dimentio]

Why is Mugabe worse than Nkunda, Kabila, the Etiopian dictator, the Rwandan dictator, or the Nigerian potentates?

[Kukulofori]

Because people in Zimbabwe are pretty much without exception rioting, in jail for rioting, or dying of chlorea.

[Andropov]

Mugabe and his generals should be taken out and shot.

[Hessian Peel]

Mugabe and his generals should be taken out and shot.

But why is the misery in Zimbabwe getting such widespread coverage when far worse things are happening throughout Africa and Asia?

[Dimentio]

Exactly. There are a lot of pro-western regimes in the region which are even worse than Mugabe's.

[Wanted Man]

True. Of course, it's terrible what's happening in Zimbabwe. But many blatantly pro-imperialist and pro-capitalist regimes in Africa are also ridden with disease, hunger and repression. Yet you never see MPs or clerics claiming that there is a need to "use force" and that the government "has to be toppled".

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Because Mugabe doesn't bow to the dictates of Britain and the U.S., obviously.

There's always an agenda.

It's the same with the situation in Sudan, which gets all sorts of coverage, while a bloodier civil war waged in nearby Congo for years with little said. Not to mention that more people starve in Sudan than die from bullets...

[Revy]

Mugabe sucks, but this is sheer hypocrisy since Saudi Arabia is about the worse regime on the entire planet yet nobody cares since it's an ally, of US imperialism. US imperialism has already killed so many people as well.

The people of Zimbabwe should overthrow him, not anyone on the outside.

[Dimentio]

Saudi Arabia ain't that bad. I mean, everyone gets work and a full-time salary without having to actually do anything. The Saudis don't really starve. Then that they have an insane theocratic regime is another thing.

[fabiansocialist]

Exactly. There are a lot of pro-western regimes in the region which are even worse than Mugabe's.

Which states are in even worse shape than Zimbabwe? Haiti maybe? Somalia -- which isn't really a state? Not trying to defend scum like the USA and UK, but Zimbabwe is a failed state on a monumental scale. Shooting Mugabe is too good for Mugabe: he should be hanged and quartered.

[Wanted Man]

Which states are in even worse shape than Zimbabwe? Haiti maybe? Somalia -- which isn't really a state? Not trying to defend scum like the USA and UK, but Zimbabwe is a failed state on a monumental scale. Shooting Mugabe is too good for Mugabe: he should be hanged and quartered.
Are you kidding? Zimbabwe is just scratching the surface when it comes to human misery in Africa. Yet whenever something goes wrong in Zimbabwe, many "leftists" line up behind their own governments to demand imperialist intervention. "Failed state" is a disgusting imperialist euphemism for "a country fucked over by us", transferring the blame to the "stupid Africans who can't govern themselves".

Some interesting articles on Zimbabwe and imperialism:

BBC should not lie about Zimbabwe (http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/06/218651.php)

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

How come Zimbabwe and Tibet get all the attention?
If a government wants to abuse human rights and rig elections, it needs to have the support of - or be - the western powers (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/17/zimbabwe.tibet)

The truth of the last article is especially plain to see. Just look at the examples below, which are still only the tip of the ice berg. Where is the outrage? Where are the mass media and public figures calling for American or British troops? Nowhere, because many other African countries do accept imperialist influence over politics, IMF and World Bank plans to privatise the economy, brutal exploitation by foreign oil companies, etc.

Serious violations of core labour standards in Benin, Burkina Faso and Mali (http://www.icftu.org/displaydocument.asp?Index=991220267&Language=EN)

Burundi: An ethnic-based war that lasted for over a decade resulted in more than 200,000 deaths, forced more than 48,000 refugees into Tanzania, and displaced 140,000 others internally. Only one in two children go to school, and approximately one in 15 adults has HIV/AIDS. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/by.html)

Central African Republic: Food shortages increase as fighting intensifies in the northwest (http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=58581), Thousands flee from CAR violence, children killed (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4844664.stm).

Chad: Half a million people in danger (http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/SHES-7BLMXD?OpenDocument).

D.R. of Congo: Prevalence of rape described as worst in the world (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/08/AR2007090801194.html).

Congo: Congo's pygmies live as slaves (http://www.newsobserver.com/110/story/552528.html).

Equatorial Guinea: Riggs Bank, Exxon and Bush administration fund kleptocrat dictator (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/08/sb-obiangs-banking-again-1155053056) (we already know Riggs from their ties to the Saudis, Pinochet and the CIA)

Gambia: President silences the media (http://www.mg.co.za/article/2005-03-11-president-tightens-media-laws-in-the-gambia)

Ghana: CIA supported overthrow of Nkrumah (http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/history/cia_nkrumah.php)

Senegal: Major cocaine trade hub (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6260708.stm)

Mauritania: Military coup in August (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/mauritania/2509991/Mauritania-president-under-house-arrest-as-army-stages-coup.html) (where is the outrage about anti-democratic military coups???

Nigeria: Foreign oil companies exploit the people (http://www.essentialaction.org/shell/report/intro.html). Rivers and Blood: Guns, Oil and Power in Nigeria’s Rivers State (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/africa/nigeria0205/index.htm).

[Sasha]

Why is Mugabe worse than Nkunda, Kabila, the Etiopian dictator, the Rwandan dictator, or the Nigerian potentates?

because his impact has have been far greater, zimbabwe is sommething else than central africa, zimbabwe was for years the most prosperous country in the whole of africa with very high levels of education and health care. its only rival in living standards was south-africa and they didn even came close. And now its completely run in to the ground.
most countrys in central africa have been a mess since colonial times, zibabwe was not.
comparing zimbabwe with central african country's is like comparing japan with cambodja or burma.
if polpot or the birmese junta would have taken over japan and run it completly bust and decimated its population there would have also been more outrage in the western media and calls for intervention.

its double standards and its discusting but screaming "imperialist rhetoric" is knee-jerk simplism.

[Wanted Man]

Yeah, Zimbabwe was run into the ground. And why? "Because white land was given to blacks, who are too stupid to run land." "Because they went from private property to state property." These two claims are always implicit in biased imperialist media reporting on Zimbabwe. Yet the article "Zimbabwe under siege" that I posted earlier says differently:



When Zimbabwe had a Model Economy

There was a time when the management of the economy in Zimbabwe was highly regarded in Western circles. Throughout its first decade of independence, Zimbabwe's economy grew at an average of 4 percent per year, and substantial gains were made in education and health. Zimbabwe was handling its finances well, and between 1985 and 1989 had cut its debt-service ratio in half. (6) However, the demise of socialism in Europe resulted in an inhospitable environment for nations charting an independent course, and Zimbabwe felt compelled by Western demands to liberalize its economy. In January 1991, Zimbabwe adopted its Economic Structural Adjustment Program (ESAP), designed primarily by the World Bank. The program called for the usual prescription of actions advocated by Western financial institutions, including privatization, deregulation, a reduction of government expenditures on social needs, and deficit cutting. User fees were instituted for health and education, and food subsidies were eliminated. Measures protecting local industry from foreign competition were also withdrawn.

The impact was immediate. While pleasing for Western investors, the result was a disaster for the people of Zimbabwe. According to one study, the poorest households in Harare saw their income drop over 12 percent in the year from 1991 to 1992 alone, while real wages in the country plunged by a third over the life of the program. Falling income levels forced people to spend a greater percentage of their income on food, and second-hand clothes were imported to compensate for the inability of most of Zimbabwe's citizens to purchase new clothing. A 1994 survey in Harare found that 90 percent of those interviewed felt that ESAP had adversely affected their lives. The rise in food prices was seen as a major problem by 64 percent of respondents, while many indicated that they were forced to reduce their food intake. ESAP resulted in mass layoffs and crippled the job market so that many were unable to find any employment at all. In the communal areas, the rise in fertilizer prices meant that subsistence farmers were no longer able to fertilize their land, resulting in lower yields. ESAP also mandated the elimination of price controls, allowing those shop owners in communal area who were free of competition to mark prices up dramatically. In 1995, the IMF cut funding to the program when it felt that Zimbabwe wasn't cutting its budget and laying off civil service employees fast enough. Furthermore, the IMF complained, the pace of privatization wasn't rapid enough. But implementation of ESAP was quite fast enough for the people of Zimbabwe. By 1995, over one third of Zimbabwe's citizens could not afford a basic food basket, shelter and clothing. From 1991 to 1995, Zimbabwe experienced a sharp deindustrialization, as manufacturing output fell 40 percent. (7) According to an economic writer from the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), "There is a general consensus among the people of Zimbabwe that ESAP has driven many families into poverty. The program only benefited a privileged minority at the expense of the underprivileged majority." (8) As intended by Western financial institutions, one could argue.The rest is well worth reading, too. http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html

Oh, wait, nobody here will read it. Real leftists only read BBC articles about how Zimbabwe is a "failed state" because of the original sin of turning away from imperialism. :rolleyes: Governments, intel services, the IMF and World Bank, NGOs, celebrities, former UN politicians... all of them are used as regime change tools. It was successful in Yugoslavia, and they also tried it with Venezuela, Iraq, Zimbabwe, etc. Yet for some reason, so-called lefts fall for it every single time.

[Sasha]

no, real leftist dont fall for the simplistic thinking of a lot of anti-imps that any dictator using anti-imperialist rhetoric is automaticly a comrade that should be supported unconditionaly.
the enemy of our enemy is not our friend, as an mater of fact he could be an even bigger enemy of ours.

[Wanted Man]

If you can point me to a post where I said: "Mugabe is a comrade who should be supported unconditionally, because the enemy of our enemy is our friend", link it. And how can a petty corrupt dictator be "an even bigger enemy" than the global system of imperialism?

[Killfacer]

I really hope that nobody here is actually supporting Mugabe. Media coverage will always be focused on certain issues/countries, but this does not take away from the fact that he brutally puts down any opposition and tortures dissidents.

[Revy]

no, real leftist dont fall for the simplistic thinking of a lot of anti-imps that any dictator using anti-imperialist rhetoric is automaticly a comrade that should be supported unconditionaly.
the enemy of our enemy is not our friend, as an mater of fact he could be an even bigger enemy of ours.
this is just ridiculous. Nobody said they were supporting Mugabe. Opposing an intervention doesn't mean you support him. By that logic an opponent of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would both be a supporter of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. c'mon now......

[Wanted Man]

I really hope that nobody here is actually supporting Mugabe. Media coverage will always be focused on certain issues/countries, but this does not take away from the fact that he brutally puts down any opposition and tortures dissidents.
And you never stopped to think of the "why" question? See, this is the problem of left-wing political tendencies that refuse to analyse imperialism as anything more than "one country invades the other for land and resources, and that's bad" (or even use "anti-imp" as a pejorative...). It leads to a refusal to see what's going on (in an earlier thread on Mugabe, one person bizarrely asked: "What have the British done wrong, exactly?") and to positions that condone imperialism in practice by regarding anti-imperialist dictators like Mugabe as "just as bad" or "worse".

[Hessian Peel]

And you never stopped to think of the "why" question? See, this is the problem of left-wing political tendencies that refuse to analyse imperialism as anything more than "one country invades the other for land and resources, and that's bad" (or even use "anti-imp" as a pejorative...). It leads to a refusal to see what's going on (in an earlier thread on Mugabe, one person bizarrely asked: "What have the British done wrong, exactly?") and to positions that condone imperialism in practice by regarding anti-imperialist dictators like Mugabe as "just as bad" or "worse".

Firstly - a great series of posts comrade - keep up the good work.

As you have already pointed out the problem with ultra-leftists and liberals is their failure to identify the primary contradiction of a particular conflict (in this case Zimbabwe vs Western imperialism). The fact that ZANU-PF may have degenerated to a point where they are no longer worthy of the support of Communists is irrelevant. Supporting the people of Korea against US-led UN aggression doesn't equate to support for Juche and the Dear Leader. The issue at hand is the right of nations to self-determination and independence in all spheres of life.

[Sasha]

anti-impies is an established term in the dutch autonomus movement originating in the split of the 80 of the squat movement in to diffrent groups.
its an negative word for people so obsessed on anti-impirialism that they turn an blind eye towards the regimes in 3 world countrys. its in no way ment to be critical of anti-imperialists in general
sorry if other people dont use the term like that.

[fabiansocialist]

anti-impies is an established term in the dutch autonomus movement originating in the split of the 80 of the squat movement in to diffrent groups.
its an negative word for people so obsessed on anti-impirialism that they turn an blind eye towards the regimes in 3 world countrys. its in no way ment to be critical of anti-imperialists in general
sorry if other people dont use the term like that.

I agree. The Western imperialistic establishment uses media, finance, and armed force to fashion the world the way it wants it. Everyone on a forum like this probably knows this. But that doesn't get an incompetent murderous crook like Mugabe off the hook.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I think we're all in agreement that Mugabe should be pushed from a very high height, preferably into water. And I think we're also in agreement that intervention into Zimbabwe would be a bad thing.

This seems to be degenerating into a DPRK-esque argument between the "you're-giving-such-and-such-dictator-a-free-pass" crowd and the "sure-such-and-such-dictator-is-bad-but-imperialism-is-worse" crowd.

[turquino]

I’m very disturbed by some leftists here talking about lynching Mugabe. I think we should all condemn that in the strongest terms. That sort of thing is never called for, especially not in the present situation when the nation of Zimbabwe is being threatened by imperialism.
Some questions:


Which is more responsible for the state of affairs in Zimbabwe: Western imperialism or Mugabe?
Do those opposed to ZANU-PF think the land reform is worth defending?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Which is more responsible for the state of affairs in Zimbabwe: Western imperialism or Mugabe?


Imperialism, but some of Mugabe's decisions play a significant role.

I think that some people are presenting a false dilemma here: Mugabe, or imperialism. I prefer the third option: the people of Zimbabwe take back their country from the thug who is currently ruling it, and preferably seperate his head from his shoulders in the processes. Leaders like him are parasites.

[Sasha]

on your first question:what he (^) said

on your second question:

Do those opposed to ZANU-PF think the land reform is worth defending?

a land reform, absolutly.
this land reform, no

yes, land should be taken from the big ex-colonial landowners (but what kind of other reply would you expect from members of an revolutionary leftist website?) but it should hapen with the intrest of feeding the population in mind, not buying votes/loyality, whipping the veterans in a frenzy or cronyism and coruption.

[fabiansocialist]

Imperialism, but some of Mugabe's decisions play a significant role.

I think that some people are presenting a false dilemma here: Mugabe, or imperialism. I prefer the third option: the people of Zimbabwe take back their country from the thug who is currently ruling it, and preferably separate his head from his shoulders in the process. Leaders like him are parasites.

Agreed. Incidentally, and not related to this particular case, imperialists usually work through corrupt local puppets and corrupt local elites. Being against the local thugs automatically means being against the imperial system.

[Revy]

I think that a land reform is absolutely needed, to give the land back to the black working class. It is truly disgusting how whites took up all the land.

However, Mugabe isn't doing that. He's just been giving that land to his cronies who have mismanaged it. So he doesn't really care about black people just his own power.

Mugabe certainly isn't a special case and it's hard to think that he's somehow different than someone like Yoweri Museveni. The rhetoric against him from these UK leaders looks imperialist.

[fabiansocialist]

The rhetoric against him from these UK leaders looks imperialist.

Of course it's imperialist: they are imperialists. But it's silly to use this as a red herring to deflect attention and criticism from Mugabe.

[Robespierre2.0]

This seems to be degenerating into a DPRK-esque argument between the "you're-giving-such-and-such-dictator-a-free-pass" crowd and the "sure-such-and-such-dictator-is-bad-but-imperialism-is-worse" crowd.

Ahem... Please don't compare the DPRK to Zimbabwe. One is a socialist state, the other is just another bankrupt foreign-dominated despotate.

Mugabe is a son of a *****, but the reason he gets so much media attention is because he's in the pockets of the Chinese. All Bush, Brown, and co. really want is a regime that is loyal to them.

Besides, look at the shit going on in the DR Congo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io8c81xHLmw
There's actual slavery going on there, for chrissake, but the U.S. daren't touch it, lest we lose the source of our precious electronics.

[Revy]

"The DRPK.....is a socialist state".

:rolleyes:

[Eros]

ZANU-PF are quite reactionary when it comes to certain social issues. Homosexuality, for example, is still very much illegal in Zimbabwe and 'practicing it' carries heavy penalties such as imprisonment. Clearly (well in my view at least) these aren't the sort of people that merit our support as socialists and they don't even rise to the level of 'progressive nationalism', if there even is such a thing. However, I do acknowledge that the problem is in the main the result of various competing imperialist agendas (USA/UK/EU vs PRC) which will always encourage internal corruption and all forms of despotism in a country either directly or indirectly.

So hands off the PEOPLE of Zimbabwe!

[PeaderO'Donnell]

I’m very disturbed by some leftists here talking about lynching Mugabe. I think we should all condemn that in the strongest terms. That sort of thing is never called for, especially not in the present situation when the nation of Zimbabwe is being threatened by imperialism.
Some questions:


Which is more responsible for the state of affairs in Zimbabwe: Western imperialism or Mugabe?
Do those opposed to ZANU-PF think the land reform is worth defending?



Look of course the land of Zimbabwe should be in the hands of the Zimbabwian people. I dont have any sympathy at all with the settlers...But why is the Mugabe doing this?

Mugabe is the Zimbabwian Gerry Adams...Where is the Zimbabwian James Connolly?

A forum like this filled with its share of Imperialist chauvanism its easy to fall into cheer leading third world centrists and social democrats.

[El Rojo]

"The issue at hand is the right of nations to self-determination and independence in all spheres of life."
entirely true, but the citizens of Zimbabwe have lost independence in most spheres of life. and also they should have have the power put in their hands. but how is that going to happen in an empovished Totalitarian state with the new guy suffering constant suspicious accidents?
In cases like these I really don't see the problem with the Imperialists rolling in, toppling Mugabe's administration in a weekend military excersize, restoring democracy, "law" and order and getting out as soon as possible. Hopefully we will have learnt how not to screw up from Iraq (NI, Vietnam ect ect). Surely a capitalist democracy is much closer to Communism than a tinpot Dictatorship?

[STJ]

Mugabe is a brutal dictator and no comrade of mine.

[PeaderO'Donnell]

Surely a capitalist democracy is much closer to Communism than a tinpot Dictatorship?

Zimbabwe is now a capitalist democracy.

It was not so under the huns....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJbT5Bg_pJE&feature=related

[El Rojo]

I think democracy is stretching the term for Zimbabwe...

[PeaderO'Donnell]

I think democracy is stretching the term for Zimbabwe...

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Organisation: none
Posts: 6

Well you would say that now...wouldnt you?

Homage To A Government

Philip Larkin (http://plagiarist.com/poetry/poets/21/)





Next year we are to bring all the soldiers home
For lack of money, and it is all right.
Places they guarded, or kept orderly,
We want the money for ourselves at home
Instead of working. And this is all right.

It's hard to say who wanted it to happen,
But now it's been decided nobody minds.
The places are a long way off, not here,
Which is all right, and from what we hear
The soldiers there only made trouble happen.
Next year we shall be easier in our minds.

Next year we shall be living in a country
That brought its soldiers home for lack of money.
The statues will be standing in the same
Tree-muffled squares, and look nearly the same.
Our children will not know it's a different country.
All we can hope to leave them now is money.