Government in Africa

"Pushing people forward simply because of their colour, irrespective of merit, would be most unfortunate and would of course lead to disaster. It would mean that Rhodesia would then develop into a kind of banana republic where the country would in no time be bankrupt." - Ian Smith

I put it to Veeky Forums, without racial prejudice nor /pol/centric stupidity, has Smith been vindicated by current events in Zimbabwe and, furthermore, in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) as a whole? Objectively speaking and not simply focusing on race but on the suitability of Westminster Parliament and/or Western Democratic systems in SSA?

Of course he has, Zimbabwe is a failure on every conceivable level.

>I put it to Veeky Forums, without racial prejudice nor /pol/centric stupidity, has Smith been vindicated by current events in Zimbabwe and, furthermore, in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) as a whole?
No, most Sub-Saharan African countries have approved immensely since colonialism ended and Zimbabwe in particular was actually pretty good during the first few years of Mugabe's rule. There was an unprecedented level of interracial social cohesion and education for both whites and blacks was massively improved.

Smith thought that simply putting a bunch of uneducated nignogs in charge would ruin the country, that it would just naturally fall apart. That isn't really what happened, Zimbabwe would probably be a great place to live today if it hadn't been for the embezzlement of the war veterans' fund, which set in motion a chain reaction where everything got fucked super fast.

Yes, 100%.

Lefties eternally BTFO

Improved how?
Saying it went well at first and then fell apart is still falling apart no?
Also what about the issue of governance and the failure of leaders in SSA?

Over 90% are literate

>discriminate against the native Africans
>wonder why they can't succeed in white society
>wonder even harder why they rebel

The situation in Zimbabwe is the final verdict on Ian Smith and the failed apartheid policies

>has Smith been vindicated by current events in Zimbabwe and, furthermore, in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) as a whole?
No. Zimbabwe is a shithole, but Zimbabwe was already a rogue state depending on a precarious policy of ethnic favoritism to cling to power, not exactly a recipe for success if there ever was one.

>Improved how?
Literacy, Urbanization, Infrastructure, Higher Education, Poverty Relief, Hunger Relief, take your pick.

>Saying it went well at first and then fell apart is still falling apart no?
Smith's idea was that as soon as blacks were running things for themselves things would just implode and get worse

This isn't what happened in Zimbabwe. Mugabe kept things together and even improved the country for a while. He turned into black Hitler later on, but things didn't immediately go to shit.

Cool, so they can shitpost on Veeky Forums while they hunt for rats to eat

he was vindicated in his lifetime and lived to see his beloved country collapse.
I respect him a lot for staying in Zimbabwe despite threats against his life.
I think he sort of grew on Mugabe a little.

idiot

>discriminate against native Africans by building all the infrastructure and creating massive agricultural centers on their own then not wanting to hand it over to the Africans just like that.

remember Rhodesia wasn't South Africa, the political situation was no where near the same or as exclusionary.

>Mugabe kept things together and even improved the country for a while
because at first it was a gradual shift where whites and blacks would be integrated, aka what Smith had already started doing.

then Mugabe decided things weren't moving fast enough and kicked out whitey leaving the entire nation without many of its specialists and then it collapsed.

so Smith was right, it did break down once the blacks were thrust into power rather than a gradual transition.

>another day another thread about the same white posters circlejerking about rhodesia/SA

How come no one circlejerks about, I dunno Milton Obote.

He's got a much better record of being 'proven right'.

This is a fact. However the betas who make these threads constantly, assume it's because of niggers nigging. IMO it's

>people who have no experience or skill running something
>surprised when they fuck up when they try to run it

So then they shouldn't have insisted on running it immediately

>then Mugabe decided things weren't moving fast enough and kicked out whitey
That's massively oversimplifying the situation. Land redistribution was moving as slowly as it could reasonably be expected to. Privately Mugabe might've wanted it to happen faster but he kept it on track. The Willing Seller, Willing Buyer clause was still in effect, and nobody was being forced off their land.

It wasn't until the war veterans' fund was stolen that Mugabe shifted into maximum overnig, got rid of the clause, and started forcing whites off of their land, mostly to use it to pay the veterans who could've threatened his power if they got discontent.

This might help.

>has Smith been vindicated by current events in Zimbabwe
Yes.

Zimbabwe was ok for a few years because it takes some time to ruin a nation. The improvment was ONLY because the end of international sanctions and end of the war. Ian Smith was completely right in everything.

But he was wrong about many places in Africa and his policies helped ferment many problems in Rhodesia. I'd say Ian was as much of a poison as a ruler of Rhodesia as Mugabe is to Zimbabwe.

Are you implying that there is an inherent genetic behavioral difference between the races and that parliamentary democracy cannot work within SSA populations? Because it works fine everywhere else in the world

>Because it works fine everywhere else in the world
Shit, it does? Last I checked it only works in Europe and North America.

and East Asia

>poison as a ruler of Rhodesia as Mugabe is to Zimbabwe
>Ian in charge
>no rat eating
>Mugabe in charge
>rat eating
What did he mean by this?

Of course he hasn't been vindicated, precisely because of Zimbabwe. Had real and genuine attempts been made to educate more blacks and give them representation long before the end then Western support may have been retained and society may have transitioned slowly to a new balance of power but where there was more stability and ultimately whites still had disproportionate power.

Anyone know any good resources to learn about what's been going on in Africa over the last few hundred years up until modern times? I want to know why life is so shitty for people there.

> Zimbabwe in particular was actually pretty good during the first few years of Mugabe's rule.
Wow! Removing sanctions improves a country! Guess I'm now a #DabfortheMugab

>largest democracy in the world is thriving
>their social indices are up since 1947
>they don't count because there are online photos of muh upper caste oppression.

Can't even farm, starving depsite the aid given to them

On what basis do you oppose an apartheid state?

Muh feels

>in Sub-Saharan Africa as a whole

Not really, many African colonies were run by people who wanted to keep the native population as uneducated as possible. When Belgium left the Congo, there were only 6 people with university degrees in the entire country. It's not surprising that things didn't work out.

Dude don't knock cane rat until you've eaten it. It's actually delicious, tastes a bit like venison.

>blacks are horribly discriminated against in Rhodesia and South Africa
>blacks immigrate there willingly from African countries with black governments

really makes you wonder

>Pushing people forward simply because of their colour, irrespective of merit, would be most unfortunate and would of course lead to disaster.

Ironically he was 100% correct. By pushing forward white people and holding back black people irrespective of merit he layed the foundations for the abomination of Mugabe

>That isn't really what happened
Liar or moron

All of those are wrong.