http://desicritics.org/ Superior South Asian bloggers on Culture, Media, Politics, Sport, Business, and Technology. en Copyright 2006 by the authors Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:45:10 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss BC custom software http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-169104 Sridhar How about this formulation? History may say that he was an anti-imperialist fighter (according to you) who turned into a gangster, thief and incompetent goon? :) cheers bd 169104@desicritics.org Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:45:10 EDT http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-168186 Bd, Thank you for your comments. 1. The white settlers were enjoying the benefits of the land illegally misappropriated from the blacks even 20 years after Zimbabwe gained her independence. The freedom struggle was about returning the stolen property to its people. Even though there are allegations of cronyism and corruption, many of the people who benefited from the land reforms were the war veterans who fought the white settlers. How would England react if 70% of her land were to be occupied by black settlers constituting one per cent of her population? 2. It is significant to note that Mugabe has the support of the majority of African nations with the exception of Zambia. The African Statesman Kenneth Kaunda has also supported Mugabe. The reason could be that Africa is sensitive to issues of white imperialism and domination. Africa has witnessed one of most ferocious plunder of her resources by the whites. She would not like the return of the whites, as the 'efficient management of her economy' does not benefit Africans. 3. The western propaganda about Mugabe rests on deception and half-truths. While BBC waxes lyrical about African corruption it side steps issues relating to human rights violation during the white rule and the plunder of Africa. Britain, we must not forget, had a cosy relationship with the dreadful Apartheid regime of South Africa. 4. Therefore it would be simplistic to describe Mugabe as thug in chief. History would perhaps give its final summing up on Mugabe as a person who is neither a sinner nor a saint but as a person lying somewhere in between. Sridhar. . 168186@desicritics.org Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:11:53 EDT http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-167873 Sridhar I am afraid I have to disagree. 1. He didnt have a problem with the settlers for years and years. 2. Then suddenly he wakes up to land reform. Ok, good. So what does he do? 3. He gives most of the land to his goons and kicks off the white settlers. So just how was land reforms good? 4. Ok, even considering being stupid and incompetent in land reform execution can be explained away. How can we explain that Zimbabwe's agricultural and economic mismanagement has been screwed up? I wonder how he will blame the western powers for that? 5. Oh! the fact that he was locked up for 10 years fighting for independence is very credible. Very good reason. How about locking him up again for commiting genocide against his own people in matabeleland using his north korean trained 5th brigade? At end of the day, he is nothing better than a thief and kleptocract. I wish we could say sod him but unfortunately the people of zimbabwe deserved better and they got a thief in turn. Oh!, add an incompetent idiot to the list, lol Anyway, I dont hold out much hope, we have seen this behaviour so many times in Africa. cheers bd 167873@desicritics.org Wed, 18 Apr 2007 05:15:11 EDT http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-167782 Dr Dasgupta, Another "factoid" your readers may be interested to know about Zimbabwe is that white settlers who formed one per cent of the population owned 70% of the best land in that country. When Mugabe initiated land reforms to ensure the equitable distribution of land among his own people there was concerted campaign to destabilise his government one of which was economic sanctions and another was a PR media blitz about his human rights violations. It is indeed ironic that BBC should shed crocodile tears about the Mugabe Regime while the British media was largely silent about Pinochet atrocities.Maybe BBC was incensed by Mugabe's human rights violations of white settlers interests than the rights of the blacks living there. A more balanced view would be that Zimbabwe is in the throes of a struggle with imperialism where the land reforms have ejected the minority white settlers but produced a crisis of talent with indigenous talent to manage agriculture missing. While Mugabe could be blamed for the timing of the land reforms, he cannot be faulted for the land reforms itself,atleast,in principle. The trouble is Mugabe who spent 10 years in jail fighting white minority rule cannot be easily dismissed as a tin pot dictator.There are shades of gray in the opinion about Mugabe. 167782@desicritics.org Wed, 18 Apr 2007 01:38:22 EDT http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-166753 Luke thank you for your comment. Well, you are right in your understanding of the meaning of the word factoid. There is another meaning, namely, a small insignificant piece of information. I was using it from the other perspective :) Lexicographically speaking, I realise I am using a newer definition but hey, that's what makes English fun, lol. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factoid http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0120.html http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/factoid Cheers bd :) 166753@desicritics.org Tue, 17 Apr 2007 01:41:47 EDT http://desicritics.org/2007/04/16/041825.php#comment-166714 "Another factoid to know is that in Switzerland interest rates turned negative once. So if you wanted to invest in Switzerland, you had to PAY! Go figure!" I enjoyed reading your article, however 5 must bring your attention to the usage of the word "factoid". Factoid implies that the information is coined and salted to make it sound interesting, real and unbelievable. It means that the information is not true. 166714@desicritics.org Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:32:53 EDT