Reading through the comments there seems to be some confusion as to the ultimate cause of Rhodesia's fall. In 1976 Kissinger forced South Africa to suspend oil and arms supplies to Rhodesia, by threatening South Africa that America would block South Africa's own oil supplies and also freeze its government accounts in Switzerland that paid for these and other critical imports. South Africa could not have survived an oil blockade and therefore forced Rhodesia to capitulate. Regarding the Royal family the article mentions: In 1994 Mugabe was appointed an honorary Knight Grand Cross in the Order of the Bath by the Queen, one of the most prestigious royal awards. This was after the Gukurahundi massacres (20-30,000 Black Ndebele slaughtered by Mugabe and the North Koreans soon after Mugabe came to power), showing that the West had no regard for the human rights they cynically champion. This raises the suspicion, more extreme than the article articulates, that the eradication of White Zimbabweans was always the plan. The White population peaked at 300,000 in 1975 and now numbers 10-15,000. Essentially they have been eradicated.
To add more context to my reference to the cause of Rhodesia's fall: In 1976 I attended a briefing at a brigade HQ by Rhodesian intelligence on the Kissinger proposals We were told of the extreme pressure that was being placed on South Africa by Kissinger. I've noticed that this pressure is now underplayed or not even acknowledged. Wikipedia merely states that in Pretoria (18 September 1976) Vorster "privately informed Smith that it was no longer viable for South Africa to support Rhodesia financially and militarily, and that Smith should make up his mind quickly and announce his acceptance (of the Kissinger proposals) that evening." Without acknowledging the intense economic pressure that Kissinger was threatening to unleash on South Africa, the sudden capitulation of the Rhodesians becomes unexplained, giving rise to the false notion that were defeated on the battlefield.
Yeah Ian Smith discussed the South African issue a great deal in his book, and Kissinger said he regrets his involvement. But it needs to be highlighted more, for sure
Kissinger's role in the 1976 State Department could be interpreted as epitomizing the 'deep state' since there was a continuance of policy between the Ford and Carter administrations, even if Carter was much more hostile to the White Rhodesians. Some of this deep state nexus could be explained by the interest the CIA (judging from several leaked notes) took in the Zambian copper mines. In 1966 Zambia was the world's second largest copper producer, after the US. Ironically China is now the dominant force in Zambia driven by its interest in the copper mines. Eradicating the White population from Rhodesia can, in historical terms, be seen to have facilitated the creation of the new Chinese empire that is emerging in Africa, with both Zimbabwe and Zambia under its influence.
Fundamentally , the idea of excellence and a ‘natural aristocracy’ is the best compromise between ‘equity’, where excellence and achievement are subjugated to subsidizing the incompetent and immoral, and ‘might makes right’ where the powerful can do whatever they please- including murder, rape, pillage, torture and enslave- much like the Roman conquest of Gaul. Excellence and natural hierarchy envision a society with rights and rule of law, with a functional and contributing role from both high capacity and low capacity people, and dignity within the roles of everyone, from judge to journalist to janitor.
Yes, they did, if by that you mean a just and non-tyrannical system. Their legal system was recognized by all in the country as fair, top-notch, and rooted in Anglo legal traditions
Yes, they did; human rights and the rule of law. The first adherence to this is the belief and follow through in legal rights and legal protections, which were followed in Rhodesia; the legal tradition was the last to succumb to one party rule.
Thank you. Isn't it possible this belief caused the white Rhodesian's downfall? Blacks felt their rights were abused by racism, or taken by colonizers. Rights being defined as privilege without obligation. One merely has to be born. And white Rhodesians had no moral or legal defense.
They largely didn’t feel that way and the Rhodesian retort is that they could simply better themselves through education or wealth and become voters
more importantly, their opinions were expressed through the chiefs, who were involved in the government and generally worked alongside Ian smith. All of them agreed with UDI before he embarked upon it, for example
Kinda. If you read or learn about the whole red aristocracy issue, they are very much less committed to meritocracy than many think. However, they do have a good bit going for them in that regard
The bigger issue with the Chinese spread around the world particular involvement in Africa is that they generally lack the sense of paternalism and civilization building the Europeans had when they colonized the similar areas century or so ago. In practice, but Chinese programs are far more extractive And cruel than the European ones were
Reading through the comments there seems to be some confusion as to the ultimate cause of Rhodesia's fall. In 1976 Kissinger forced South Africa to suspend oil and arms supplies to Rhodesia, by threatening South Africa that America would block South Africa's own oil supplies and also freeze its government accounts in Switzerland that paid for these and other critical imports. South Africa could not have survived an oil blockade and therefore forced Rhodesia to capitulate. Regarding the Royal family the article mentions: In 1994 Mugabe was appointed an honorary Knight Grand Cross in the Order of the Bath by the Queen, one of the most prestigious royal awards. This was after the Gukurahundi massacres (20-30,000 Black Ndebele slaughtered by Mugabe and the North Koreans soon after Mugabe came to power), showing that the West had no regard for the human rights they cynically champion. This raises the suspicion, more extreme than the article articulates, that the eradication of White Zimbabweans was always the plan. The White population peaked at 300,000 in 1975 and now numbers 10-15,000. Essentially they have been eradicated.
Thanks for this added context. Great points
To add more context to my reference to the cause of Rhodesia's fall: In 1976 I attended a briefing at a brigade HQ by Rhodesian intelligence on the Kissinger proposals We were told of the extreme pressure that was being placed on South Africa by Kissinger. I've noticed that this pressure is now underplayed or not even acknowledged. Wikipedia merely states that in Pretoria (18 September 1976) Vorster "privately informed Smith that it was no longer viable for South Africa to support Rhodesia financially and militarily, and that Smith should make up his mind quickly and announce his acceptance (of the Kissinger proposals) that evening." Without acknowledging the intense economic pressure that Kissinger was threatening to unleash on South Africa, the sudden capitulation of the Rhodesians becomes unexplained, giving rise to the false notion that were defeated on the battlefield.
Yeah Ian Smith discussed the South African issue a great deal in his book, and Kissinger said he regrets his involvement. But it needs to be highlighted more, for sure
Kissinger's role in the 1976 State Department could be interpreted as epitomizing the 'deep state' since there was a continuance of policy between the Ford and Carter administrations, even if Carter was much more hostile to the White Rhodesians. Some of this deep state nexus could be explained by the interest the CIA (judging from several leaked notes) took in the Zambian copper mines. In 1966 Zambia was the world's second largest copper producer, after the US. Ironically China is now the dominant force in Zambia driven by its interest in the copper mines. Eradicating the White population from Rhodesia can, in historical terms, be seen to have facilitated the creation of the new Chinese empire that is emerging in Africa, with both Zimbabwe and Zambia under its influence.
Fundamentally , the idea of excellence and a ‘natural aristocracy’ is the best compromise between ‘equity’, where excellence and achievement are subjugated to subsidizing the incompetent and immoral, and ‘might makes right’ where the powerful can do whatever they please- including murder, rape, pillage, torture and enslave- much like the Roman conquest of Gaul. Excellence and natural hierarchy envision a society with rights and rule of law, with a functional and contributing role from both high capacity and low capacity people, and dignity within the roles of everyone, from judge to journalist to janitor.
Very much agreed. Well said
I think it’s how you balance promotion of the best with keeping the best from being parasitic and oppressive
Just out of curiosity, did Rhodesions believe in human rights? Thanks.
Yes, they did, if by that you mean a just and non-tyrannical system. Their legal system was recognized by all in the country as fair, top-notch, and rooted in Anglo legal traditions
Yes, they did; human rights and the rule of law. The first adherence to this is the belief and follow through in legal rights and legal protections, which were followed in Rhodesia; the legal tradition was the last to succumb to one party rule.
Well put, thanks
Thank you. Isn't it possible this belief caused the white Rhodesian's downfall? Blacks felt their rights were abused by racism, or taken by colonizers. Rights being defined as privilege without obligation. One merely has to be born. And white Rhodesians had no moral or legal defense.
They largely didn’t feel that way and the Rhodesian retort is that they could simply better themselves through education or wealth and become voters
more importantly, their opinions were expressed through the chiefs, who were involved in the government and generally worked alongside Ian smith. All of them agreed with UDI before he embarked upon it, for example
Thanks. Don't the Chinese believe in Excellence? They seem to be doing a better job.
Kinda. If you read or learn about the whole red aristocracy issue, they are very much less committed to meritocracy than many think. However, they do have a good bit going for them in that regard
The bigger issue with the Chinese spread around the world particular involvement in Africa is that they generally lack the sense of paternalism and civilization building the Europeans had when they colonized the similar areas century or so ago. In practice, but Chinese programs are far more extractive And cruel than the European ones were
"Chinese programs are far more extractive And cruel than the European ones were"
So the Chinese don't care about the "rights" of others. Why should they?