Teach me of Rhodesia, was it as good as people say?

Teach me of Rhodesia, was it as good as people say?

A country built by whites and destroyed by blacks and communist shits

It was a great country

Yes, africa was wasted on nogs.

Its a beautiful continent

Good for whites. Not so good for blacks.

Thanks for the explanation. What was good, what went bad?

Bread basket of Africa
Low crime in comparison to neighbouring nations
Fought in WW1 and 2
Was British culturally
High standards of living
Is proof that black ruin everything good, and whites need to keep a master/slave dynamic for all to benefit
Now it is shitbabuwe, and anti white hail it as some sort of paradise

From what I've read and seen it was basically a South Africanised version of Australia. A lot of similarities to contemporary Australia at the time. Whites had 1st world living and blacks were a few rungs below, getting better, but they were extremely lucky even compared to South Africa much less the Congo or Uganda. At any rate "liberation" made life worse for them

>try to cover up historical fact because they find it problematic
No, it was not good.

And here come the revisionist faggots

Actually blacks fought alongside the whites in Rhodesia against mass immigration and attempts to steal all they had.

In truth the African people didn't give one single runny shit about the territory until it was built up by whites.

Then they flocked to it and eventually ruined it with the popular cry of blacks anywhere whites have something they want. RACISM

Attitudes like yours are pleabeian

This is true only in so far as blacks didnt have it as good as whites, they sure as shit had it better than other africans in countries they ran themselves

That actually happened, even just google it.

>Asking a question about Africa on Veeky Forums.

Why do people do this?

...

Based Zulu

Wot mod?

Depends. Rhodesia wasn't like in South Africa where blacks were barred from voting because they were black, wealthier and middle class blacks living in the cities could also gain the vote. The fact that the vote was based around wealth and land ownership meant whites naturally made up the majority of voters.

wat

I've heard peole talk about it like it was fucking White Atlantis, and the nigger flood crushed it udner the waves like rayleigh.
it was 100% MUH GRAIN MUTHAFUCKA MUH DONT EVEN HAVE TO TILL THE SOIL
they literally lost god's favor so it was ghetto as fuck, just notice how much of the land is inhospitable jungle

treed

trob

Racism

They actively tried to shut historians up because they didn't want blacks to think their ancestors built anything ever.

For White Rhodesians it was pretty good, high standards of living and lots of cheap labor, but it was generally shit for Blacks.

Most Black Rhodesians were extremely poor, most tilled shitty sandy parts of land that no one else wanted, or didn't own land at all and got paid shit to work in mines, farms, or houses owned by Whites. The exceptions were the chiefs, and sometimes village headmen, who controlled farming in the designated 'tribal areas' and could become very wealthy farmers and ranchers.

Violence was a constant feature of life in Rhodesia, especially against Blacks. From the 1960s onwards, the police regularly used torture to extract confessions from suspected rebel sympathizers. Beatings or killing by police, the military, or White paramilitaries were not dealt with. If you lived in a 'tribal area', life was especially shitty because the chief could dispense justice as he wished, often through whippings.

So, no. Not at all good. If it existed today, it would be up there with Sudan or Myanmar as a particularly violent and shitty place to live.

I'm going to call you a communist because of this

Life in Africa is shit for blacks in general, the key question is whether it was more or less shit in comparison to other parts of Africa.

No, it collapsed into a civil war and has been a shithole ever since

>have a 90% black population
>whites shit on them 24/7
>hurr blacks ruined it

/pol/, go home, please.

>90% black population
Why don't you care about minority rights and representation in government shitlord?

talex

Because what Rhodesia had was not a fair system in any way with its elections with how it represented it's populace.

>wealthier and middle class blacks living in the cities could also gain the vote

And whites completely owned the system to be enfranchised and could shift the criteria at a whim. That's very similar to Sa in its late colony days where it just upped the criteria solidly just to bar Coloured and blacks from voting.

*Lazy Blacks

>I've heard peole talk about it like it was fucking White Atlantis, and the nigger flood crushed it udner the waves like rayleigh.
kek, this pretty much sums up all the discussion you'll ever see in "Rhodesia" threads.

Humbly requesting sauce op.

>Because what Rhodesia had was not a fair system in any way with its elections with how it represented it's populace.

Affirmative action seldom is.

It's not even Affirmative action Dumbass.

you'd be lazy too if you weren't rewarded for hard work
see: USSR

>Ignoring conscription
>Ignoring government incentives to fight were much preferable to the current treatment they were given if they didn't
>Ignoring that most blacks who fought were afraid that if Rhodesia won and they won't seen to pull their weight that the whites might change their policy towards them for the worse

You are the pleb.

The worst instance of decolonisation. In all of Africa.

A very interesting semi autarky that was suprisingly wealthy. Extremely racist towards blacks - rolling back British reforms and making it consituationally impossible for blacks to ever have majority rule. Also engaged in covering black history and a vastly more sophisticated form of apartheid.

Really impressive military

As opposed to now

Water is like black people
It erodes everything
Eventually

do you not get the parody

It was far better than it is now

Not if you consider education/ literacy and arguably life span