Anchorage Daily News

DALE MCFEATTERS: The lost white tribe of Africa

Scripps Howard News Service

Published: August 26, 2005
Last Modified: August 26, 2005 at 07:44 AM

(SH)- Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe likes to blame his country's manifold
and mounting woes on a legacy of white colonialism and imperialism. And at
one time there might have been something to that, but no longer.

The former Rhodesia, and before that Southern Rhodesia, took its name from
arch-imperialist Cecil Rhodes, who invaded the country as a commercial
mining venture in 1888 and, after fighting off the outgunned local tribes,
ran it as a private business enterprise until it became a regular British
colony in 1920.

The colony's white population steadily grew with immigrants, mainly from
Britain, who were attracted by the farms, mines and scenery. It grew
especially fast after World War II, and by 1974 the white population had
reached 293,000. It was a pleasant life of clubs, sports and drinks on the
verandah of the Meikles Hotel in a social milieu that reminded some
observers of prewar England.

The tide of black African independence and nationalism was rising, but the
white minority was not about to give up its solid grip on power and its
privileged status in a majority black country. That position was not only
immoral; it was also untenable.

The minority government declared independence in 1965 and almost immediately
the United Nations imposed economic sanctions. There followed a guerrilla
war that the white government more or less kept under control until 1975,
when Mozambique became independent of Portugal and guerrillas then had safe
haven on Rhodesia's eastern border.

In 1980, after an ineffectual African interim government failed, elections
that included the two main guerrilla groups, ZANU and ZAPU, were held. The
ZANU leader, Mugabe, was elected president in what is now an extinct
institution in Zimbabwe - a free and fair election.

Mugabe inherited a thriving country. Because of the sanctions, the economy
was thrifty and self-reliant. Because of the white-owned commercial farms,
the country was a major food exporter. Its mining sector was still vibrant
and, had there been no sanctions in place, it had immense tourist potential.

As Mugabe's misrule grew, the white population dwindled. Its exodus was
accelerated by the confiscation of white-owned farms, a feat of political
grandstanding that has left the country starving. The last official report
said that there were about 46,700 whites left, although the Associated Press
cites sources that say the figure now is likely fewer than 30,000.

Zimbabwe is moribund: Its currency worthless, its population starving and
stricken by a 34 percent HIV/AIDS rate and its unemployment off the charts.
To add to Zimbabwe's woes, Mugabe's government is bulldozing the shanty
homes of tens of thousands of its poorest and most miserable citizens in the
chillingly named Operation Drive Out Trash.

What was once called with some accuracy one of the white tribes of Africa
has now been thoroughly dispersed. Whom will Mugabe blame now?

Many years ago one used to travel to Rhodesia to view the ruins of Zimbabwe. Now one would travel to Zimbabwe to view the ruins of Rhodesia.

If the white people and their rule were "immoral," as this article says, I wonder what buzz word is appropriate for the black people and rule there now?

Since "community" seems to be a favorite buzz word now, used to blur responsibility such that as long as it is within a localized "community" that somehow justifies any sort of corruption, crime, or immoral behavior. As long as it localized within a "community," anything goes.

On CNN, the former Rhodesia may someday be referred to, in justifing Mugabe's results, as ...

Zimbabwe, a Detroit-templated "community" that is thriving with unlimited foreign aid.

I dont' normally weigh into things like this but I think something is worth saying here. when it is a "white problem" people all over the world and in all forms of media and government are very fast to point out the "immoral" "unjust" "racist" "oppressive" "insert hot topic word of the moment here". Why when things are happening that are in essence a problem caused by a black leader are all these good doers and "watchdog" groups so reluctant to call them to the mat?

that's it.

Red