Analysis Articles
Bookmark and Share
Africa Speaks Forums Rasta Times US Crusade Trini View Books
Zimbabwe: Racist anti-Mugabe Assault

By Ayinde
March 18, 2007

There are some opposition forces in and out of Zimbabwe whose only response to any alternative view is to send racially denigrating attacks via email. Some also have the false assumption that because my email address is, it somehow means I must be as delusional as many Whites... some marijuana smoking hippie.

In response to the article, 'Lack of Support for Zimbabwe's Land Reform is Africa's Shame', not one email so far has substantively addressed any of the points I raised. Several have pointed out that the Africans in Zimbabwe cannot utilize the land (of course, not worded so nicely).

One responder's reaction was even to foolishly ask, "Why have Africans not been able to grow sufficient food for themselves although colonialism ended many years ago?" while implying that the reason is some characteristic that is lacking in Africans that makes them unable to be productive. He (the respondent) cannot see that the efforts for land reform in Zimbabwe, which he thoroughly opposes, is about addressing this very issue. The reason many Africans cannot grow sufficient food for themselves is because WHITE SETTLERS OCCUPY THE BEST LAND.

All of this is part of the racist, dishonest propaganda that clouds the minds of the gullible and ignorant about the real issue of reclaiming lands that were stolen from Africans in Zimbabwe. What is taking place with Zimbabwe is similar to what the Western powers have done with Haiti. They have continually punished Haiti for being the first Black republic after a successful slave revolt. The European powers would never allow Haiti to be a success story because Haiti could become a model and a motivation to Africans to resist White domination.

In a similar manner, these White, Western powers know fully well that if Zimbabwe is allowed to succeed with its land reform, then other African nations would follow suit resulting in Western powers having less of a remote control on Africans who may suddenly choose to utilize the land in ways that first serves their own interest.

The White dominance agenda depends on the fictional image that Africans in Zimbabwe are unable to utilize their own land productively. Even if that image were true, that is still absolutely no reason for Whites to continually hold on to land that was unjustly handed down to them. If these White farmers feel they should be compensated then they should look to their colonial powers for any compensation. But the argument of unproductive Africans is absolutely false, "as black small farm owners account for the majority of maize grown in Zimbabwe" (See: Zimbabwe Under Siege). This White superiority complex reigns in the minds of many and it is clearly evident in the majority of news reports and email responses from those trying to give the impression that they are concerned with the plight of Africans in Zimbabwe.

The West is not concerned with human rights in Africa: they support brutal dictators around the world as long as these dictators do their bidding.

How come this same westernized media did not put forth a concentrated campaign to restore Africans to the more productive agricultural lands that they were driven from during colonial rule? How come they were contented with 70% of the best agricultural lands in Zimbabwe being held by Whites and used for growing tobacco and other crops for Europe? Why were they not concerned about all the racist imbalances that remain in Africa as the legacy of slavery and colonialism?

The mainstream media, which is mostly White-owned, have defended the status quo of White domination to such an extent that many today actually believe that the Africans, who they see in poverty, are in such a state because of some inherent flaw in their Blackness.

Many of these commentators are either ignorant, dishonest or both.


Visit: Zimbabwe Watch

Homepage | U.S. Crusade | Analysis and Reasoning | Zimbabwe | Venezuela