BS: OBIT: Ian Smith

Subject: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,clockwatcher
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 07:38 AM

Former Rhodesian leader, no doubt much hated by the liberal/left consensus on here. But he fought with the Italian partisans against the fascists in WW2, and can anyone really say he was worse than Mugabe ????

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:03 AM

"worse" is relative. Smith kept S. Africa stagnant for many years & aided & abetted repression of the country's majority.

"The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones"

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Crystal
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:07 AM

No worse, but certianly no better if the Zimbos I've met are anything to go by.
Roll on the day when Zimbabwe has a leader elected by the majority of its people, who dosn't resort to 'helping' the election when s/he looks like loosing!

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:13 AM

Ihave never been to ZIMBABWE,So my views are coloured by what Ihave read,and by meeting people from Zimbabwe,white and black.
NO he is not as bad,because he didnt bring the country to ruin,that doesnt mean ,he was good either,although fighting against the Fascists in WW2,is a plus.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:54 AM

The BBC ran this: A Zimbabwean assesses his life.

Yes life is tough nowadays here. But when I say that I am comparing it to life during the 1990s. Not to the those during Smith's time because about that, there is nothing to talk about - it was oppression.
Robert Mugabe is not the best leader that we can have. I want the president to leave - he has had his go, he has had his time. But never will Mugabe be worse than Smith.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Rhodie
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 09:29 AM

"But never will Mugabe be worse than Smith." - you have GOT to be joking.

ps what did we use for lighting in Zim before candles?
Electricity.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: number 6
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 11:32 AM

Under the Smith regime the country was a piece of sh&t and repressive for the black majority. A direct result of the old colonial ways. It had to end.

Currently, the country is a piece of sh&t and repressive to all it's citizens ... a direct result of the Mugabe regime. It has to end.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Rhodie
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 04:24 PM

"it", in the possessive, does not take an apostrophe

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Rhodie
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 04:28 PM

Bill,
"Currently, the country is a piece of sh&t and repressive to all it's citizens ... a direct result of the Mugabe regime. It has to end."
What I meant to say was "I agree: long overdue, but it won't be long".

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 04:29 PM

Smith was interviewed on radio some years back. I have no reason to doubt him when he said he had no objection at all to handing Rhodesia over to majority rule. What he did object to was handing it over to Mugabe.

Has time proved him right? I think so.

D.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 05:08 PM

Since the whole thing is a direct result of British Colonialism and good ol' Cecil Rhodes ("Oh, look. Who else has an entire country named after them?" he is reported to have disingenuously exclaimed)...let's be sure to give credit where it is due.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Hattrender
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:27 PM

Say what you want about Smith but I always admired him.
That country is in a mess today much like other parts of Africa. Yes give them all the independence they ask for, but explain not to coming knocking on our door for handouts. You want Independence ? well take what comes with it.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: The Badger
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 08:40 PM

Ian Smith was right in most of what he said. Zimbabwe made its own bed - let it lie in it.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 22 Nov 07 - 10:34 PM

No, years of British colonialism and Ian Smith set up the conditions that gave rise to Mugabe and his misrule. Neighboring Tanzania still has economic problems but it never had the civil unrest engendered by a white minority take-over of the government. It's all too easy to be pessimistic about the new African republics, especially those who have squandered resources and people to continuous civil war. But occasionally African leaders do arise from this strife who practice as well as preach reconcilliation.

Unfortunately, Zimbabwe is now a basket case, not easily dealt with by any indigenous mortal or outside agency.

I do not mourne the passing of Ian Smith, or Mugabe who awaits his own special place in hell.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 03:47 AM

"Since the whole thing is a direct result of British Colonialism"

Is that, like, illegally invading someone else's country so that you can grab whatever land, or vegetable or mineral wealth they have, and thereby enrich your own leaders, your leader's mates, big businesses and big-business-people, all the time claiming that you're bringing democracy and civilisation whilst at the same time subjugating and terrorising the indigenous population?

Rings a bell - which nation does that currently sound like?

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 04:22 AM

No Backwoodsman- British colonialism never claimed to be bringing democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 05:52 AM

Disagree Charlie,

Yomo Kenyata took over Kenya after independence following the Mau Mau uprising. He understood what his country needed and fostered a multi-cultural society in order that the nation could thrive.

Mugabe took over Zimbabwe which had an extremely healthy economy and excellent prospects after a guerilla war. He first turned on his formed allies and carried out an extensive campaign of ethnic cleansing in Matabeleland, then resorted to cronyism to maintain power and succeeded in driving a potentially rich country to hell in high gear.

Nothing whatsoever to do with British Colonialism, but a hell of a lot to do with the unfettered actions of a powercrazy, corrupt, meglomaniac.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 11:50 AM

Teribus-

I don't suppose that the British colonial administrators ever took advantage of tribal rivalries, to solidify their control? I believe that was a general policy throughout the Empire.

I do agree with what you have to say about Mugabe's record after he came to power.

It is all too rare that a revolutionary leader is an effective leader with regard to national reconcilliation. South Africa may, or may not, be the exception.

Backwoodsman-

One could certainly make a case for neocolonialism with regard to what the Bush Administration and its British ally are trying to achieve in Iraq. You are perceptive.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,Perspective
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 12:07 PM

Kenya and Rhodesia exported food, had great schools established and a medical program that was progressive and modern. Today Kenya cannot feed itself never mind export food; and Zimbabwe is totally fucked up.

Thank God for the UN and modern thinking, I'm sure if truth be known the residents would prefer what they had before independence.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Nov 07 - 05:38 PM

So true, Perspective, and some folks were quite pleased to give up their personal freedom in Fascist Italy in the 1930's because the trains were said to run on time. Do you assume that Black Kenyans and Rhodesians had equal access to the school systems and the medical services compared with the Whites?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 07 - 06:14 AM

Do you assume that Black Kenyans and Rhodesians had equal access to the school systems and the medical services compared with the Whites?

And do you, Mr Noble, assume that the poor and starving peasantry of Africa have the same level of care as the friends of rich and corrupt government officials? Do you also assume that the 'enemies' of Mr Mugabe are extended the same rights as his cronies? Do you think for one minute that things would be worse if these countries were governed by todays first world governments?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Nov 07 - 04:40 PM

Dave-

Yes, in general.

I'm less optimistic of what would be worse than Mugabe's regime. But I have read a great deal of what the British colonial system did for the indigenous Black population and it was not a pretty picture.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 07 - 07:03 AM

Well let's see, all things are relative, when did Blacks in the USA actually get their "civil rights" Charley, when did they become fully equal?

The Spaniards, Portuguese and Belgians tended to kill the indigenous people off wholesale in the establishment of their colonies. The Dutch weren't so far behind them and all employed slave labour.

The French, incorporated their overseas possessions as part of metropolitan France.

Britain on the other hand, in the 1700's granted the indigenous natives in Cape Colony, which was ceded to Britain as part of a peace treaty, equal rights under law, thereby causing the First Boer "Great Trek". Actively campaigned for the abolition of slavery then enforced it (The only country to do so).

Charley, I don't know if you have ever read any of the histories of the African tribes? If not then you should as it has a direct bearing on something you asked further up the thread:

"I don't suppose that the British colonial administrators ever took advantage of tribal rivalries, to solidify their control? I believe that was a general policy throughout the Empire."

Not a case of ever taking advantage of Charley, the script actually ran more like this, we'll take the Zulu as an example:

Each year the Zulu King stood outside his Kraal with a spear in his hand. On whatever whim took his fancy he threw the spear and the direction indicated the war path the Impi were to follow. The Zulu preyed upon subservient tribes, killing or enslaving the men women and children and taking all their cattle, leaving nothing behind. Then along come the Brits, they defeat the Zulus, difference now is that there is no annual spear throwing with it's ensuing death and destruction. In fact the new kids on the block are really quite benign in comparison to the old order. Too few of them of course to run everything so they have to take on locals. Now the pride of the Zulu will not permit them to co-operate with their conquerors, but for the other tribes, who for years had been the oppressed and the conquered, they saw no shame in working for the "white man". Along comes "Independence", who is best equipped and trained to run this newly independent country? Not the Zulu. But once independence came the old pecking order re-emerges as people do not forget their history. Now tell me Charley do you remember the tensions between Incata and the ANC down in South Africa at the end of the apartheid era? If you don't, I most certainly do.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 25 Nov 07 - 05:50 PM

Charley, if I were you I would retire gracefully from the discussion now.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 25 Nov 07 - 07:23 PM

Murray-

You may be right but I prefer to mull over what Teribus has to say.

South Africa at the end of the Apartheid Era was an interesting place. It seems to me, and maybe a few others, the Nelson Mendela and the ANC did a fairly decent job of defusing the more militant ambitions of the Inkatha Freedom Party, and initiating reconcillation with members of the National Party. Evidently the leaders of the National Party refused to appear before Desmond Tutu's Truth and Reconcilliation Commission but many lower level members confessed their brutal crimes and were exonorated. The widely anticipated "bloodbath" did not happen. I really haven't seen any recent reports that the Zulas within Inkatha are still threatening direct action to achieve supremency over other tribes. Today, South Africa still has major problems but they seem to be tackling them politically.

I do find it a stretch for anyone in this day of age to suggest that things were better for the indigneous people under British colonial rule than they are now under imperfect independence. In either event, I doubt if all the Queen's horses and all the Queen's men and women can reassemble the Empire again. However, if C. Fox Smith were still alive, she would have urged the Queen to give it a try!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Nov 07 - 05:28 AM

They didn't have 15,000% p.a. inflation back then.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 26 Nov 07 - 08:23 AM

Charley.... quoi? Inkatha wasn't "more militant", but the (probably apartheid state sponsored) Zulu nationalist movement fighting for, amongst other things, the transormation of the KwaZulu Bantustan into a Zulu kingdom. They also hoped for more favourable treatment by the apartheid regime compared to other ethnic groups.

South Africa has many problems yet to face- Mbeki is an African chauvinist and believer in quack AIDS remedies, and is almost certainly only waiting until Mandela dies to launch a Mugabe style landgrab. He needs to do this to maintain his support base, as the poor economy (SA has effectively two separate economies, the nicer one being for the rich) has declined badly.

But even so, I doubt if you'd find many non-White South Africans willing to return to the old system.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Nov 07 - 05:24 PM

Ihave read [Whether it is true or not ,I do not know,that Smith was incorruptible]that he offered to help Mugabe for the first couple of years,And that they worked together,until Mugabe proposed nationalisation,which Smith opposed,Smith subsequently resigned,and slowly Zimbabwe declined.
Smith was as African as Mugabe,he was wrong in believing that black people could not govern Rhodesia /Zimbabwe,but now Zimbabweans are worse off than they were before,because the country is being led by a bad leader[Colour is irrelevant].
Mugabes mistake was not to have kept Smith on board for longer and not to have listened to his advice about nationalisation,he Mugabe Needed a much longer transition period,It takes time and a long training period to pass on expertise.Mugabe handed out farms to his cronies[according to the western press]and these people, have not the expertise to farm properly.
The war by African nationalists[according to the western press],was started in 1962 ,two years before Smith came to power.
I think Mugabe should take the blame for the present situation,It takes time to train people to farm properly,and under UDI and white rule, Black people did not have that oppurtunity,however Mugabe should have instituted proper training programmes using white expertise,to make sure this was done, instead of which he seized land, and handed it over to his political supporters who have proved incompetent.
It could be argued that the present situation, is a result of white rule[when blacks had lack of opportunity]but later when the opportunity was there,Mugabe spurned it,so Mugabe must take the blame.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Nov 07 - 05:52 PM

I do find it a stretch for anyone in this day of age to suggest that things were better for the indigneous people under British colonial rule than they are now under imperfect independence.

British colonial rule. Alive, well fed, reasonably educated, deprived of equal opportunities.

Mugabe rule. Dead, starving, uneducated, deprived of equal opportunities.

Spot the similarities.

Beside which we will not, and never will, talk of going back to British Imperialism. It is impossible and I doubt anyone would want it. We are talking of what has happened since.

During the industrial revolution the indegenous peoples of Britain were subjected to horrendous hardships. In my home town of Salford children as young as 6 were forced into working in incredibly dangerous jobs in the cotton mills. We had the first workhouse. Look up how bad that was on the internet. The people were not in forced slavery, but they may as well have been. Those times changed. The changes went from the centre out, as did the imperialism.

When Kenya and Zimbabwe and all the others decided that they no longer wanted the interference of 'The Empire' they pulled out too early. If they had stayed they would now have been enjoying the benefits that the working class British now enjoy. Instead they are lumbered with despots and dictators who just want to stay in power and get rich to the detriment of the indigenous peoples.

Much as you hate the 'British', Charley, there is no doubt in my mind that any 'colony' under current 'British rule' (Eg. England) is faring far better than those who are not. The Brits have changed, Charley. I don't know if it will last. I don't know if it is genuine, but, for now, they are doing a bloody site better than your third world heroes. Live with it.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Charley Noble
Date: 26 Nov 07 - 10:31 PM

Dave-

Probably with several more go-arounds we would achive general agreement. When I think of "British Imperialism" I tend to think of what was happening in the early 1900's.

When I try to come up with new african nation success stories, I find very few. There have been usually enough factions within each country to squander scarce resources without external intervention, although there has been an abundance of that as well.

And I agree that going back to Empire (or neo-colonial) control is not an option.

Tanzania is still one of my favorite survival stories, still poor but they've never had a coup or invaded their neighbors (well, they did help oust Idi Amin from Uganda).

I did spend 3 years working in Ethiopia but its more of a unique case of internal and external strife than other newer African nations.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Nov 07 - 03:25 PM

Thanks, Charley.

Just remember that the first victims of British Colonialism were all English and you won't go far wrong. The British Empire was indeed mighty but it was built on the bones of the working class, whatever nationality. It is now a toothless ghost of it's former self but, I genuinely believe, a sensible one. We all know that the former glories can not and should not ever be recovered. But we can learn from it's mistakes. Something that the likes of Mugabe will never accept.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: fumblefingers
Date: 27 Nov 07 - 11:25 PM

One thing I'll give the British. Wherever they went, they built an infrastructure. They left schools and a civil service to take care of the locals. That's more than can be said of many other imperialist countries.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Nov 07 - 04:53 AM

Yes,That is true even in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 28 Nov 07 - 05:55 AM

I think you've got a bit of a rosy view of British colonialism. At its best, it was as you describe. Much of the rest of the time, it was largely invisible. But when it felt threatened, it could be very vicious indeed- viz Amritsar, Mau Mau, and the many punitive expeditions against recalcitrant tribes and nations. And it was pervaded by racism as well as benevolent paternalism. In the article I cited above, the interviewee describes being tantalised by the smell of bread as a child- Africans weren't allowed into the whites-only bakers, and couldn't afford it if they had been. It's little things like that that eventually lead people to rejection, and rightly too. If British imperialism had been able to treat all its subjects as full human beings, we would have had the Empire yet.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Nov 07 - 10:45 AM

"In the article I cited..." - Guest PMB, is that the one from the BBC, by any chance?

Now if you swallowed that, then I do not believe for one second that you ever lived in Rhodesia, or for that matter in Zimbabwe.

Pure propaganda, rather than take as gospel the words of party hack why doesn't the BBC ask one of the 4 million refugees who have fled the country for their tales of comparison.

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Nov 07 - 05:16 PM

The British Empire was built at a time when people knew their place, and rarely aspired to rise above it - unlike the hideous state of affairs today. Ian Smeeeeeeeth - I liked the way he talked, I've often wondered how on earth that strange accent came about!!!

Subject: RE: BS: OBIT: Ian Smith
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Nov 07 - 04:10 AM

In another thread on this forum we are asked the question whether or not we should care about Africans.

To those who have posted on this thread castigating the days of colonial rule, I would like to ask the question what they thought Africa was like before the advent of colonisation.

I can give you a hint. Take a good look at Africa today and imagine it ten times as bad, with the unrepressed evils of continual war, famine, disease and slavery. Now as Charley seems to have focused on the evils of "The British Empire", probably because in this thread we are discussing Zimbabwe, or Southern Rhodesia as it was known under British rule, please note that under British rule three of those evils were eliminated and the fourth (disease) was brought under control.

To those who knew and know Africa, through childhood and a lifetime of working there, the downwards slide since "Independence" in many places came as no surprise and to them was as obvious and inevitable as night following day.