Will South Africa Be The Next Zimbabwe?

[British and Proud]

Will South Africa Be The Next Zimbabwe?

The following passages are extract's from an article written by Peter Hitchens, back in April, about South Africa's new President, Jacob Zuma. It is both illuminating and frightening. He describes how he opens and closes his rallies with a song called Bring Me My Machine Gun and has been investigated for serious crimes such as fraud, racketeering and rape!

Imagine how you would react if Gordon Brown opened and closed his election rallies by bursting into a song called Bring Me My Machine Gun, swaying and jigging to the hypnotic chorus of this menacing ditty.

And how would you feel if the Prime Minister were alleged to be taking campaign money from Colonel Gaddafi; faced 783 counts of fraud, racketeering, tax evasion and corruption which somehow never came to court; and had been acquitted of rape while his fearsome supporters mobbed the courthouse?
.
.
.
All the soppy admirers of Nelson Mandela - especially the BBC - gave the new South Africa a free pass when apartheid ended 15 years ago.

They wanted to believe this complicated and important nation had become a sort of heaven on Earth where all tears were dried and all problems solved.

Mr Mandela himself, personally decent but politically ineffectual and naive, served as both figurehead and figleaf for the new order. The world ignored or forgave his continuing friendships with the world's worst despots, and the fraudulent bungling that surrounded him.

Now, looking frail, bemused and ancient, he recently had to be helped on to the stage by his suspect would-be successor, to endorse the grotesque rabble who seek to succeed him.

Once, South Africa dominated the nightly news for weeks on end. Now the liberal media barely mention it. Why not? Because post-apartheid South Africa is a failure.

You don't hear about the terrifying crime. You don't hear about the pestilence of corruption, or the absurd purchase of needless submarines and aircraft for a country with no serious enemies except its own elite.

There is a little about AIDS, but nothing like as much as there should be, given the acres of graves that commemorate the government's moronic policies, of denial and folk remedies (including beetroot).

Violent xenophobic rage against uncontrolled mass immigration was played down both in South Africa and abroad because it did not fit the smiley picture beloved by the Mandela worshippers. And little is said about the unstoppable spread of shanty towns, far outstripping state attempts to build proper houses for the poor.

Electricity blackouts - the invariable sign of a country on the slide - are now frequent. The ill-run nuclear power station inherited from the apartheid regime's atom bomb programme is beginning to judder and fail, raising fears of an African Chernobyl.

Then there are the overstretched water supply, the railway system fraying at the edges and the unguarded borders open to migrants and refugees from every destitute nation in Africa.
.
.
.
Zuma is wholly African. He has at least four wives and 18 children. He has for years avoided standing trial on fraud and corruption charges. Nobody seriously believes he ever will: his approaching election is already spreading fear in South Africa's legal establishment.

Mr Zuma joined the Communist Party in 1962 (he only left a few years ago), and has a dark and inadequately examined past as a much-feared intelligence chief in the ANC's ruthless armed wing, Spear of the Nation. He underwent 'military training' in the old Soviet Union in 1978, when the KGB was very much in charge of such things.

On April 22 he will become President of one of the world's most important countries.

Comrade Zuma, as his supporters know him, certainly is not dull. And South Africa will not be dull either when he takes over.

Many fear it will rapidly become a lawless kleptocracy when he comes to power, which he will do after a hopelessly one-sided and rather crooked election.

Zimbabwe was once known as the breadbasket of Africa, now it is a basket case run by a despot who likes to sport a Hitler 'tache.

Under Ian Smith, Rhodesia, as it was then known, was a prosperous country that exported food, today Zimbabwe relies upon food aid. The standard of living enjoyed by the average Zimbabwean was far higher than other African countries, and despite an embargo (or perhaps because of it), Rhodesia had a thriving manufacturing sector.

However, because of Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence, the UN "declared an international embargo on 90% of Rhodesia's exports, forbade the U.N.'s 122-member nations to sell oil, arms, motor vehicles or airplanes to the rebel territory or to provide it with any form of ‘financial or other economic aid.’” (source: Time magazine; Sanctions Against Rhodesia; 23/11/1966).

Ian Smith didn't believe that black majority rule would work and that, like so many other African nations, it would degenerate into a failed state. He was proved correct. The following is an extract from The Telegraph:

Until his last days, Smith was brimming with opinions on current affairs and obsessed with criticising Mr Mugabe, who he branded a "mentally unstable gangster running a one-party Communist dictatorship".

Smith accused Mr Mugabe of "ruining a wonderful country" and forcing "ordinary black children" to "go to bed hungry".

Under his rule, by contrast, Smith claimed that Rhodesia had displayed the "happiest black faces in the world".

I think these are the words of a man who genuinely cared for the people he once led, a colonial ideologue who has been villified for his paternalistic attitude towards the native Rhodesians - people he thought were incapable of running their country satisfactorily. For that he was portrayed in the West as a wicked, evil racist. Conversely, Mugabe was seen as a hero and had prestigious honours bestowed upon him including a knighthood and an honourary degree from Edinburgh University!


Mugabe was championed by the left, and it is they who succeeded in toppling Ian Smith's regime. Their legacy is one of massacres, starvation and hyper-inflation.

Further Reading:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...opkeepers.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-per-cent.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7509715.stm

http://sarahmaidofalbion.blogspot.co...rmer-shot.html

http://sarahmaidofalbion.blogspot.co...r-tied-up.html

http://www.zasucks.com/?p=2464

[Germanicus]

Really, does anyone really care what happens to South Africa, the country was lost as soon as Aparthied was abolished?

[British and Proud]

Really, does anyone really care what happens to South Africa, the country was lost as soon as Aparthied was abolished?

Maybe it was. Arthur Kemp believes it was lost even before that - he attributes it to a dependence on black labour, of the Afrikans it was said "They'd rather die in their beds than make them".

However, contrary to what many people believe the Boers settled lands that were uninhabited. They established a culture (including the Afrikans language) and it is very sad that they're now seemingly doomed. They should have negotiated for themselves a homeland.

[Brännvin]

Check it, he is wearing a trendy sport shoe, how this is part of the tribal ritual?