Discussion
  • Read More
    MikemanAngela Helm
    11/18/17 11:08am

    This has former colonial power Britian written all over it. This man overthrew and fought off colonial powers for almost 40 years. He was always considered a “bad guy” because he would not submit to white supremacy. But now that he is in old age they are seizing the opportunity to create a coup in the country so they can regain control of the land and natural resources.

    Reply
    • Read More
      TownaceNoahMikeman
      11/18/17 11:25am

      Have you spoken to any Zimbabweans about this? Every Zimbabwean I have communicated with since this started (none of them white, by the way) is elated.

      It seems to me that if the U.K. wanted to overthrow Mugabe, the time to do it would have been around 2001, when the majority of white landowners were still in place. The fact is, the Brits give very few fucks about Rhodesians, and haven’t since Margaret Thatcher left power (and possibly not even then).

      Also, how would the U.K. have gotten the co-operation of Emerson Mnangagwa, has is every bit as much liberation war cred as Mugabe?

      And speaking of resources, Mugabe pretty much already sold them all to the Chinese.

      Reply
    • Read More
      IMadeANewBurnerToStarThisPoopJokeMikeman
      11/18/17 11:39am

      Nah.

      Reply
  • Read More
    IMadeANewBurnerToStarThisPoopJokeAngela Helm
    11/18/17 10:55am

    Man, if you ever want to get insanely depressed, study southern African political history.

    Reply
    • Read More
      TownaceNoahIMadeANewBurnerToStarThisPoopJoke
      11/18/17 11:27am

      The chapter about Botswana isn’t so bad.

      Reply
    • Read More
      IMadeANewBurnerToStarThisPoopJokeTownaceNoah
      11/18/17 12:04pm

      Relatively, yes. God knows how.

      Reply
  • Read More
    TownaceNoahAngela Helm
    11/18/17 11:11am

    Though all of Zimbabwe is united in its desire for Mugabe’s departure, there is less unanimity about the way forward. It is most accurate, I think, to see this as a realignment of power within Zanu PF toward the remaining liberation war vets and away from Grace Mugabe.

    The opposition parties (and I) may hope for a transitional government which leads to a more democratic system, but Mnangagwa threatened a similar coup against the MDC (or anyone who was not a liberation war vet) when it looked like they might win the elections of 2008, then launched a campaign of terror against them to force them out of the race.

    More likely, at least in the medium term, is the establishment of a defacto one-party state, with some room for a token opposition presence. The political contests then will mostly take place within that party. If Zimbabwe is lucky, whoever ends up in power will institute better economic policies. If they are very lucky, they will forgo enriching themselves.

    We can hope Mnangawa will have a change of heart. But we can’t expect it.

    Reply
    • Read More
      BadOmbreTownaceNoah
      11/19/17 1:29am

      Yeah, no one is under any illusions, here. This isn’t going to be plural democracy overnight. It’s basically going to be Mugabe-lite; Mugabe with better economic policies...and given how poorly the economy was managed, that’s something that’s worth the coup as far as I’m concerned.

      The extent to which Mugabe single-handedly destroyed the economy is if anything underplayed in all of this.

      Reply
  • Read More
    BadOmbreAngela Helm
    11/19/17 1:15am

    BTW, coups are not be definition necessarily bloody. The reason they aren’t calling this a coup is because of the optics of it. But it’s most definitely a military coup in everything but the formal name by the military. Mugabe for all intents and purposes is now a figurehead, and how long that lasts depends on how he acts toward the military and/or how long they want to keep him in place.

    Martha O’Donovan, a central New Jersey native, was freed on bail Nov. 10.

    Girl, you betta run whilst nobody’s watching.

    Reply
  • Read More
    Tim WernerAngela Helm
    11/18/17 10:49am

    Unfortunately, Mugabe’s VP, longtime henchman and likely successor, is just the same kind of brutal ruler, only 20 years younger. Nothing will change for Zimbabweans.

    Reply
    • Read More
      PooJavelinIsSickOfLosingBurnerPasswordsTim Werner
      11/18/17 11:22am

      One major difference; he inherits the job knowing the military can (and will, if necessary) take it away…

      Reply
  • Read More
    OnAHalifaxPierAngela Helm
    11/18/17 3:06pm

    Point of order: Ian Smith’s Rhodesia had illegally declared independence and the UK government at the time actually insisted on desegregation before granting independence.

    Reply
  • Read More
    Uncle RemusAngela Helm
    11/18/17 6:04pm

    Intents and purposes used correctly. Thank you.

    I’ve seen both intensive purposes and intents of purposes. They both make my teeth itch.

    Reply
  • Read More
    BadOmbreAngela Helm
    11/19/17 1:09am
    Illustration for article titled

    This is such an incredibly polite sign given the circumstances. lol You don’t see that kind of stuff over here. It’d have way more profanities.

    Anyway, when one man or one party is able to co-opt a revolution...it ain’t a revolution, anymore. Mugabe undeniably outlived his usefulness as a president to the people of Zimbabwe years ago. To take the hopes of a nation like that and nakely manipulate and continually dash them for your own personal gain for decades, his ass was lucky the people didn’t Mussolini him.

    Reply