simple poll- please consider standard of living, job opportunities, health care, education- if you choose to comment, please indicate if you have actually been there or live there.

Question:
is the AVERAGE black Zimbabwean better or worse of now than 35 years ago- yes or no

Choices:
yes
no

 

Is this like the "you have finally stopped beating your wife, yes or no" question? How do you answer a "are they better or worse" with a yes or no answer?

yes, they are better off or no, they are not better off. sorry for any confusion but it seems pretty straightfoward to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Is this like the "you have finally stopped beating your wife, yes or no" question? How do you answer a "are they better or worse" with a yes or no answer?

It's a joke ... and a very stupid one.

i doubt it is a joke to the average Zimbabwean trying to feed his family with no job( 50plus% unemployment)

No, I was not joking Steve. I was simply pointing out that this is not a "yes" or "no" question the way it is worded. If you are seeking "Better" or "Worse", I would vote "Worse". Much "Worse".

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
yes, they are better off or no, they are not better off. sorry for any confusion but it seems pretty straightfoward to me.

Or it could be No, they are better off, or Yes, they are worse off. Not straightforward at all!

From the current poll results it would seem everyone is of the opinion that they are better off

jdollar - Ya man, you gotta re-word the question completely.

But to your point, there's no doubt they are MUCH WORSE OFF than they were years ago. Even 10 yrs ago when the illegal land grab started stripping many legal landowners of rightfully obtained property - leaving thousands of blacks & whites, jobless!

I can't vote. Was there for the first time in early August. The country and people are extremely poor and the infrastructure is collapsing.
I suspect they have not yet hit the bottom, but they will.

Jerry,
Why don't you reset your poll to choices of 1) better off and 2) worse off instead of yes or no.

But...no doubt about it...black Rhodesians under Ian Smith had a future and life was decent...they were far better off then.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
yes, they are better off or no, they are not better off. sorry for any confusion but it seems pretty straightfoward to me.

Or it could be No, they are better off, or Yes, they are worse off. Not straightforward at all!

Actually, Todd, if you want to read it literally, a "No" answer means that they are neither better-off nor worse-off; or in other words, nothing has changed for the average black Zimbabwean over the past 35 years. A "Yes" answer means they are either better-off or worse-off, but doesn't distinguish between the two.

Everyone knows what he's getting at - and everyone knows what the answer is: the average black Zimbabwean is worse-off than he/she was prior to independence. But everyone already knows that so it's a stupid waste of time to even ask the question. But that's not what this is all about.

What this is all about is just another simplistic and transparent attempt to assert that whites are superior to blacks by every measure (which is patently absurd). It's much more complex than that.

Different peoples have all sorts of different abilities, qualities and character traits. That's one of the things which makes this world so interesting: the extraordinary variety of peoples, places and things.

Now I'm not defending Uncle Bob (I'd shoot him personally in a heartbeat if given the opportunity); nor am I attempting to justify the documented failure of so many African nations to achieve stability after 50 years of independence movements.

But imagine what a boring world it would be if everyone was white - even worse, if everyone was a cookie-cutter copy of jdollar, singing the same tired tune over-and-over again. Yikes! I'd shoot myself!

Nothing personal there, j; I just like variety.

... ... ...

PS: In order that I'm not brought up on charges for threatening the (dis)honorable Mr. Mugabe over the internet, I must add that my reference to him was purely rhetorical.

Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

Was there in 1989, 1994 and then 2012 I'd bet if you asked them they would vote worse off. It's a sad thing to see. The City is not as bad as what we see in the rural area's but both are just as heartbreaking.

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

I beg to differ with you over Ian Smith. He had a plan to slowly integrate the government of Rhodesia.

Lol Lane you and I have not shared a view since I started posting on this forum

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

No doubt there's more than an element of truth in that statement but the difference between the two is that Smith was an honest, fair & principled man who had the interests of the country at heart, whereas Mugabe is a completely mad, genocidal, dishonest, unfair, unprincipled, murderous, lunatic who has proved himself more than willing to rape & entirely destroy his country to keep himself in power & enrich himself & his henchmen.

There's also no doubt that the country was FAR better off under the Smith Govt than it is now.

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

that!

Is now a good to point that Smithy got labelled as a racist largely because he was against black rule because he thought they'd stuff the country up.

He wasn't exactly wrong in that opinion was he?

sorry for the poor syntax/wording but hopefully folks understand the gist of the question. and i think the answer is painfully obvious- blacks are worse off now than 35 years ago.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

No doubt there's more than an element of truth in that statement but the difference between the two is that Smith was an honest, fair & principled man who had the interests of the country at heart, whereas Mugabe is a completely mad, genocidal, dishonest, unfair, unprincipled, murderous, lunatic who has proved himself more than willing to rape & entirely destroy his country to keep himself in power & enrich himself & his henchmen.

There's also no doubt that the country was FAR better off under the Smith Govt than it is now.

Well said! Nice job Steve.

All colors much worse off now than then. All children were educated in Rhodesia - Mugabe et al couldn't give a rat's behind about education (or anything else that's not related to raw power). It's a slow descent into hell for a lot of good, innocent people, both black and white.

Yes I've been there; '99, '05, '07, '10, '11.

Funny poll...

jdollar-

What's the point?

Things a little slow over in the valley, are they? Musta been 100F+ there today; maybe that explains it?

quote:

Mugabe et al couldn't give a rat's behind about education

That makes a lot of sense really - it makes it easier for a regime such as his to manipulate the ignorant, especially at voting time!

Ding Ding we have a winner


BTW the poll is worded really poorly

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Is now a good to point that Smithy got labelled as a racist largely because he was against black rule because he thought they'd stuff the country up.

He wasn't exactly wrong in that opinion was he?

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
sorry for the poor syntax/wording but hopefully folks understand the gist of the question. and i think the answer is painfully obvious- blacks are worse off now than 35 years ago.

I agree with you JD. They are much worse off today.

They are much worst off today and the black Zimbabweans will tell you so in private. Older men and women tell me they prefer the pre-Mugabe days. Younger folks have nothing to compare the modern state to.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Lol Lane you and I have not shared a view since I started posting on this forum

You really should research Ian Smith and his philosophies more closely Anton. I am not saying that he was not biased towards the whites...but...he DID have an integration plan and that is a fact. And as Steve has already pointed out...he was a good person. No comparison between he and Bob.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

No doubt there's more than an element of truth in that statement but the difference between the two is that Smith was an honest, fair & principled man who had the interests of the country at heart, whereas Mugabe is a completely mad, genocidal, dishonest, unfair, unprincipled, murderous, lunatic who has proved himself more than willing to rape & entirely destroy his country to keep himself in power & enrich himself & his henchmen.

There's also no doubt that the country was FAR better off under the Smith Govt than it is now.

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Fellow Hunters

Unfortunately we in South Africa are heading the same way.It amazes me that who ever is in power the other groups will suffer.I am not only referring to color groups, I am also referring to other black tribes within the larger picture.

Kinda like what is going on here in the USA, now that it's election time again. Been to Zim three times, was worse each time I went there.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Mugabe et al couldn't give a rat's behind about education

That makes a lot of sense really - it makes it easier for a regime such as his to manipulate the ignorant, especially at voting time!

quote:

Originally posted by LionHunter:
jdollar-

What's the point?

Things a little slow over in the valley, are they? Musta been 100F+ there today; maybe that explains it?

the point is that some people here seem to be in a state of denial about what is happening in Zimbabwe and the current situation compared to the general state of that country 35 years ago.... the "rule of law" train left that station years ago and it ain't coming back. Zim is circling the drain and Mugabe has already pulled the stopper. extremely sad for everyone there- black and white.

Smith was the cause and Mugabe is the reason for today's chaos.

Terrorism & despotism breeds worse terrorists and despots.

The fact that Smith rebelled against the British governement would make him guilty of treason. He was not really concerned about the majority of the population but only about a very small minority. He did not treat all Rhodesians as equals and did not offer equal rights or opportunities to all people.

If only Smith had done a decent job of caring for all people in terms of education, employment, civil rights and equality under law, Mugabe would never been elected to power in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by A.Dahlgren:
Smith and Mugabe are nothing more then two racists.. Nothing to golrify at all..

No doubt there's more than an element of truth in that statement but the difference between the two is that Smith was an honest, fair & principled man who had the interests of the country at heart, whereas Mugabe is a completely mad, genocidal, dishonest, unfair, unprincipled, murderous, lunatic who has proved himself more than willing to rape & entirely destroy his country to keep himself in power & enrich himself & his henchmen.

There's also no doubt that the country was FAR better off under the Smith Govt than it is now.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Smith was the cause and Mugabe is the reason for today's chaos.

Terrorism & despotism breeds worse terrorists and despots.

The fact that Smith rebelled against the British governement would make him guilty of treason. He was not really concerned about the majority of the population but only about a very small minority. He did not treat all Rhodesians as equals and did not offer equal rights or opportunities to all people.

If only Smith had done a decent job of caring for all people in terms of education, employment, civil rights and equality under law, Mugabe would never been elected to power in the first place.

is est tantum probus quisnam puto sus lies


scientiam tuam de Africa et eius rei politicae sunt nisl

quote:

Originally posted by Scriptus:
is est tantum probus quisnam puto sus lies

scientiam tuam de Africa et eius rei politicae sunt nisl

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Smith was the cause and Mugabe is the reason for today's chaos.

Terrorism & despotism breeds worse terrorists and despots.

The fact that Smith rebelled against the British governement would make him guilty of treason. He was not really concerned about the majority of the population but only about a very small minority. He did not treat all Rhodesians as equals and did not offer equal rights or opportunities to all people.

If only Smith had done a decent job of caring for all people in terms of education, employment, civil rights and equality under law, Mugabe would never been elected to power in the first place.

Are you suggesting that Mugabe treats all Zimbabweans as equals & offers equal rights or opportunities to all?

Only a fool would think anything is better for anyone under Mugabe.

Talking of which....... has anyone else noticed how we're not hearing much, if anything at all from our friends inside Zimbabwe?

That to me should perhaps give cause for concern.......

Steve

If you read my post carefully you will see clearly that I have not said that Mugabe is any good. I have clearly stated that he is a terrorist and a despot. I have said that terrorism and despotism breed more terrorism and despotism. Is it so hard to understand?

The point I am making is that some people try to idolise Smith and make him out into some kind of hero when he was the root cause of todays problems. If Smith had done a good job no one would have even heard of Mugabe. If Smith had cared for the long term future of Zim, you would not have today's problems. When one regime is looting in the short term, you will get a succession of such short term looters. That is the truth - right through history.

Some people are quick to forget the fact that Smith started the misrule and Mugabe has made it worse. Some people still have a colonial mindset and want to romanticise Smith's regime.

Of course Mugabe is evil and his regime is terrible. That does not make Smith some saint or hero.

Look at the situation of China taking control of the natural resources in Africa! How did it happen? For over 150 years China had no chance & now people moan & complain. The opportunity was squandered by misrule and now people complain about Mugabe & China.

It is right to blame Mugabe. But it is also right to hold the right people responsible for allowing Mugabe and the current situation to develop.

"AVERAGE black Zimbabwe..."

i would have think that all black Zimbabweans are worse of...

(Granddad a farm in Plumtree area in the 90's)

quote:

Some people are quick to forget the fact that Smith started the misrule

Nakihunter:

Pray expand on this misquote - are you suggesting that under the Smith regime life for the indigenous Zimbabwean was a disaster?

Had Mugabe accepted a proper transition it might well have been possible to have seen a different Zimbabwe today?.....or was it a case of "haste makes waste"?