-
thanks for posting it.
I have friends there...it is very sad.
They got what they wanted - a country ethnically cleansed of all non blacks and run by a socialist - let them starve...
They probably should have done in Zimbabwe what LBJ did in the USA with his Great Society. Tax the Be-Jesus out of the producing population to support the non-producing population.
Poor liberals one of their dream boys goes bad and reality takes over. What suprises me is that there are "conservatives" who still look upon their leftist counterparts as slightly out of touch "idealists", and not the nihilistic monsters of the self-hatred seminar known as Liberalism. I for one would like to see George Will and Boy George sent to Zimbabwe where Boy George can apologize for his Comrade gone bad Mugabe while Mr. Will can be sent out to hunt mice.
Meanwhile, I wonder how things are in Rhodesia?
The problem is far more than one disgusting old man, it is the method that is the problem, the practice of a class-based ideology that is modern socialism, that enables a political party to affix itself to a society like a leech and suck it dry.
It is a political disaster of the first order that this became so fixed into the post-colonial movement within the European academy that the latter is now virtually indistinguishable from early-stage Marxism. But that is where the current generation of African leaders was nurtured and educated, and they were, once they returned to their native countries, an educated elite within relatively uneducated societies, which is Marx's dream come true. It is one of his base premises that the perquisite of power is plunder and that it has always been that way - if these new elites tended to act on that premise who could blame them?
But were that really the case the societies built around it would resemble their predecessors instead of becoming uniform economic basket cases. It is, in fact, a deeply flawed premise kept in place by two of the basest human emotions, envy and greed, papered over by a promise of a better world that never arrives.
And as the victim society's surplus diminishes so does the circle of its parasitical beneficiaries. The fellow convinced that Zimbabwe can support 6 million people has calculated it on the basis of the existing plunder to be had. He does not expect that to be six million subsistence farmers in a peaceful agrarian paradise. This paradise has limousines for the lucky and rifle butts for the rest. If the six million cannot be sustained by the surplus of others then it will become three million, then one, and then like all parasites the ruling class will drop off and look for another, richer host.
Do not look to the UN for help - it is peopled by precisely the sort of post-colonial educated elite that has attached itself to the groaning people of Africa. Failure is their norm and they hate the successful for their very existence even as they look to them as hosts.
Another fine example why Marxists on ever continent should be smoked out and beaten to death like the vermin they are.
That's one Iraq quagmire every week. Where's the outrage?
But the UN is not really concerned. Or maybe they are, in some factions -- but they're also utterly corrupt and weak.
The only difference is in carryng out the intent. Here Nagin has the federal government to rob the productive citizens to support his electorate of parasites. In Zimbabwe, the thieves have to steal directly. Here we have a second amendment that gives the citizens a chance to fight back (althogh nagin's jackbooted goons did go door to door violating citizens' right during the emergency - ever notice the police never have a problem in violating peoples' fundamental rights)
When liberals look at Zimbabwe they don't see a holocaust, they see their ideal state where government bureaucrats have everything and private citizens have nothing. Hillary's and Rudy's wet dream of America.