Posted on 05/07/2007 10:39:46 PM PDT by B-Chan
Ian Smith, the Grand Old Man of Africa, Speaks
"What we believed in was responsible majority rule, as opposed to irresponsible majority rule and I stand by that," Mr. Smith tells the interviewer. "I think it is important that before you give a person the vote you ensure that his roots go down, that he's part of the whole structure of the country."
"Smith is an African," Ernest Mtunzi says. "He understands the African mentality. [...] Smith was being realistic. If you give people something before they're ready, they're going to mess it up. And that has happened."
Why did he and Muzorewa finally give in to British and Soviet demands for universal suffrage? The Lancaster House accord which was agreed by the various Zimbabwe-Rhodesian factions guaranteed a certain number of white Members of Parliament, and Smith was convinced that these, along with the Matabele people, would never give in to Mugabe.
"We were satisfied," Smith explains, "that what we were doing was absolutely in keeping with the traditions and the culture and what was expected of us."
Of course Mugabe eliminated the Matabele threat by sending in his "5th Brigade" which committed brutal widespread massacres in Matabeleland, relayed to us in this clip by Kathy Olds.
"Africa is a continent which is subject to a great deal of friction and argument and change," Smith concludes. "That's part of the world generally but more so Africa than anywhere else. So because of that we live in hope. We think that the people they in the end will say we've had enough."
"In the interest of our people and of other people this part of the world, let's work together. [...] Let's just accept that we are all part of Africa, all part of the world. Let's all work together and the more we can get people to accept that philosophy I think the greater the hope for the whole world."
There is a video link on the site as well.
Had the British not come in a made a political entity of multiple peoples in the first place, and have those of European descent take ownership of the fertile land, Zimbabwe might not be in the situation it is in today. Much of the turmoil is directly related to normalizing things after European/European descended rule, and the mismanagement by Mugabe.
And it was Rhodesians of declared Rhodesia independent from the British Empire, not Rhodesians of ancestral African descent.
A timeline of the history of Zimbabwe, courtesy of the BBC.
Perhaps an African kingship should have been instituted, eh? (Given your belief in Monarchy). Certainly it would be hard to find a better poster child for the failure of democracy than Zimbabwe.
I think a case can be made that, while ALL deserve Constitutional protection, not All need to be given the power to choose leaders at all levels.
Senators originally were elected by state legeslators, to represent the state.
There were original tests for voting, unfortunately often including race, not only literacy.
I am quite happy with the so-called low levels of participation in voting in this country, as there is a certain amount of self-selection in those making the effort to vote.
One of the differences in the success of democracy in the former colonies was the development of a native bureacratic and governing class. This is one reason why India has been a reasonably successful democracy. The British were there for some 250 years before giving the reins to the locals.
It is unfortunate that an indigenous governing class was not nurtured throughout the African colonies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.