Why was Zimbabwe Rhodesia never internationally recognized?

This was basically a way to give the blacks power without turning the country into a commie shithole so why the fuck did everyone reject it?

Not good enough, Africa needed to be in tatters

I very much doubt that this is what they had in mind when they rejected it

The latter half was tongue-in-cheek, though I suppose you're too dull to understand. But the first part was pretty much it; "not good enough". Western powers wanted to see full Marxist Native rule, oddly enough

Because it would have been an admittance of bowing down and failure by the British conservative party.

Smith telling them what to do, the UK gov humiliated by a bunch of old colonial farmers and miners. Considering the US and UK wanted regime change in South Africa bowing down to the Rhodesian government was not the way to do it.

But in the end the saffas cucked them the hardest when they pulled support thinking they could get on good terms with the americans and brits.

>The latter half was tongue-in-cheek
I know, thats why i gave a tongue-in-cheek response, though i suppose you're too dull to understand.
>But the first part was pretty much it; "not good enough". Western powers wanted to see full Marxist Native rule, oddly enough
But why? Why the fuck would they prioritize a stupid principle over common sense?

>though i suppose you're too dull to understand
Well meme'd
>But why?
Rhodies made a fool of the UK government with their UDI and the UK wanted to end South African apartheid, as to avoid Communist subversion. puts it well; decolonization was done in a pretty ass-backwards way and now Africa looks like "who did it and ran"

>putting a symbol of the natives on the flag of your white nation.

What for?

>He doesn't know what Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was

>why weren’t white-nationalists and black marxists able to find compromise and accept something they both hate

>Communist subversion.

That was an was something the governments used to justify their abuses (also the fact that their sheer refusal to even treat africans as people pushing people to pursue help from other entities)

>white-nationalists
Rhodies were no more racist than other Anglos at the time. They actually didn't want a huge amount of European immigration like the US had. They saw themselves as defenders of their homes from Marxist guerrillas

Obviously it was just a part of the larger US-USSR tug-of-war. With increasing modernization Black natives would have no doubt turned to Communism as the USSR would be more than willing to undermine French, British, Portuguese, and Belgian Africa

>They actually didn't want a huge amount of European immigration like the US had

You're thinking of the Afrikaners that were afraid with the continued anglo immigration resulting in them being outvoted at a general election. They halted British immigration after 45' iirc around the same time they introduced apartheid.

Rhodesia was desperate for more anglo immigrants. But they had a hard time attracting them when Australia was basically paying brits to move there instead, Smith wrote as much in his biography.

>Ah yes, I wish there was a Rhodesia-Hungary

You misunderstand; calling the Rhodies "White Nationalists" would imply they supported any and all "White" settlement in Rhodesia. You can call them ethno-nationalist but their invitation didn't extend to Greeks or Poles who wanted to immigrate to Rhodesia. Plus "white nationalist" has become a buzzword

Not just Anglo. Rhodesia accepted a shitload of non-Anglo white immigrants, mostly Boers, Czechs and Hungarians. No idea what the fuck are you two talking about.

>wanted regime change in South Africa
Why though? It obviously didnt end well looking at modern times.

I don't see the country is about to fall apart.

>Rhodies were no more racist than other Anglos at the time.

Lol they were notably racist though. You know how much they threw a shift if anyone even remotely thought about treating Africans decently?

>Rhodesia accepted a shitload of non-Anglo white immigrants

No they didn't

the white population itself was a measly 250-280k at its peak. It was a British colony bordering SA so obviously the overwhelming majority were Brits or Afrikaners. Even then Afrikaners were better off in SA where they got preferential treatment over even other Europeans employment wise.

Read into the "winds of change"

I have no idea, I've been studying sub saharan geopolitics in detail for a couple days. So far the congos, Uganda, rwanda, sudan, Nigeria, libera and gabon. I've also studied Latin America.bI can tell you with a fair amount of certainty it was probably because destabilized African states are good business. The free world can't legally own the real world anymore, so through intervention in international trade and politics, shady "foreign aid"(arms deals to kleptocrats), CIA backed coups, ect. The poor people of the world are kept in the dirt where they belong. The free market and military complex need there natural resources and strategic postion.
In short, they had diamonds, oil, timber, or something of value that the international community didn't want them to control. The other user was right, the west would have loved them to adopt marxism, then we could have them massacred with a good excuse to tell our citizens.
Those were the good days for Africa. Africans had a taste of autonomy after a long time of colonial rule and were full of hope, however naive. Things have changed for the worst in the neoliberal age.

Is this proof that pride truly is the deadliest sin?

It was more the fact that up until that point Blacks had been left out of Colonial society, whether it was right or not that's how it was. How could it then be expected that they would be able to run a Western Democracy? Do you think everyone inherently has Western values? Rhodesians wanted a slow transfer of power so they could integrate the majority. If they had been allowed there'd be majority rule by now, but instead of focusing on development they fought a decade-long civil war. Unfortunately for them, the Rhodies were right, look at the state of Zimbabwe today

>white nation
I will find you, and I will kill you

Are you dumb? There was a sizable Greek community in Rhodesia, along with all kinds of Europeans, including JEWS. They just couldn't compete with the US and Australia as an emigration destination.

Communist terrorists were excluded from the election roll. When they were allowed in, Mugabe and his thugs forced uneducated villagers at gun point to vote for him.
When he won he exterminated the Mtabale, then the rest was history.

This. Australia was literally paying Europeans to immigrate while the US was an economic powerhouse.

The election was illegitimate because the voting structure still favored whites disproportionately by a notable degree.

rhodesia was a white nation faggot. Only the most delusional thought blacks were of any use to the state or the European citizenry asides from a cheap poll of labour

>How could it then be expected that they would be able to run a Western Democracy?

Yet Botswana and a growing number of African nations are doing that.

>Rhodesians wanted a slow transfer of power so they could integrate the majority. If they had been allowed there'd be majority rule by now,

Kek, Rhodesian wanted to have power exclusively in their hands FOREVER and this was written in black and white allover the place in said society and government. If they couldn't have power in perpetuity they were gonna delay Black enfranchisement so fucking long that Black Rhodesian would have reached full quality in 2050 in which at that point they would have set up so much counter measures that Blacks would basically have no power.

> but instead of focusing on development they fought a decade-long civil war.

Yet before the war development wise blacks were extremely behind with a massive funding disparity between them and Europeans.

>Unfortunately for them, the Rhodies were right, look at the state of Zimbabwe today

Yet there's otether Arican antiosn that are doign quite well. Also Zimbabwe only falter because Mugabe got a Pyrrhic victory in the Congo wars for the government side they spent too much on the military to do so and lost to much of it's budget and the angry demands of the ZANU youth wing and Britain cutting off it's funding for the "willling seller, willign buyer" program. Basically the Iraq war but the U.S ending up bankrupting itself in an attempt to secure resources.

>oddly enough

>Yet Botswana and a growing number of African nations are doing that.
Botswana is the exception not the rule
>Black Rhodesian would have reached full quality in 2050 in which at that point they would have set up so much counter measures that Blacks would basically have no power
Given what had happened to South Africa by 94, I very highly doubt this
>Yet before the war development wise blacks were extremely behind with a massive funding disparity between them and Europeans.
Your point?
>Zimbabwe only falter because Mugabe got a Pyrrhic victory
Zimbabwe collapsed because Mugabe redistributed large swaths of land to his goons who didn't know what they were doing and let the farms rot, while driving out the people who actually knew what they were doing. Also
>Reddit spacing

>Yet Botswana and a growing number

AND OTHER NATIONS

>Given what had happened to South Africa by 94, I very highly doubt this

What, that they got elections? Fucking faggot People thought a racewar was gonna happen but it clearly didn't.

>Your point?

Black development was never really invested in or actually strived towards in Rhodesia's history.

>Zimbabwe collapsed because Mugabe redistributed large swaths of land to his goons who didn't know what they were doing and let the farms rot, while driving out the people who actually knew what they were doing. Also

See >the angry demands of the ZANU youth wing and Britain cutting off it's funding for the "willing seller, willing buyer" program. Also if actual Black farmers who knew what they were doing got the land it would be better off.

>Reddit spacing
Ya got nothing.

The race war was going to happen without Mandela. Hell it still might happen

>Hell it still might happen

Been more then 20 years user. You guys need to stop projecting your paranoia of "the darkies are gunna keell us!" on others because it's making shit worse for others. Just because People aren't forced to like you doesn't mean they hate you.

>AND OTHER NATIONS
Such as?
>Fucking faggot People thought a racewar was gonna happen but it clearly didn't.
It didn't happen because they handed over power to the ANC
>Black development was never really invested in or actually strived towards in Rhodesia's history.
Because no one had really cared before then, the whole reason UDI happened was because they saw other African nations descend into chaos and shit
> Britain cutting off it's funding for the "willing seller, willing buyer" program
Even if Britain had continued to dump money into Zim it wouldn't have yielded much
>if actual Black farmers who knew what they were doing got the land it would be better off.
Not denying this but that isn't what happened. Rhodies would have preferred to give their land to the Blacks who helped them farm it. Mugabe was a terrible leader, Nkomo should have been "elected"
>Still with the fucking Reddit spacing
Christ if you love it there so god damn much just go back

>rhodesia
But this thread is not about Rhodesia, it's about it's shortlived successor Zimbabwe-Rhodesia