tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36841665.post6469756359819321392..comments2023-12-31T13:47:05.758+00:00Comments on Fat Man on a Keyboard: IrritationThe Plumphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09244528534476387323noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36841665.post-22363569326234302122008-08-06T20:50:00.000+01:002008-08-06T20:50:00.000+01:00"...from tolerating Ian Smith's declaration of ind..."...from tolerating Ian Smith's declaration of independence..." <BR/><BR/>So it shouldn't have been tolerated. The British should have intervened. Which I thought was wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36841665.post-80464768057769099482008-08-02T09:15:00.000+01:002008-08-02T09:15:00.000+01:00Growing older has definite advantages. Here it is ...Growing older has definite advantages. Here it is in chiefly having been alive when Ian Smith declared independence from the United Kingdom. Mr Jacques is wrong about the level of British opposition, headed by Harold Wilson, which was swift. Only the Liberals, then led by Jeremy Thorpe, wished to make military moves against white settler rule however. This was unrealistic at a time Wilson was stoutly resisting being drawn into Washington's Vietnam War. But clearly it suits Jacques argument that Britain is responsible for the present state of affairs in Zimbabwe to pretend otherwise. This is the current leftist interpretation of Africa's woes writ small: It is all the fault of the old colonialist powers.<BR/><BR/>Actually, this is true. What the old colonialist powers did was take a generation of Africans and turn them in to intellectuals at European universities and infuse in them the themes and ideas of the Enlightenment – and more. These same Africans subsequently returned to take control of the newly independent colonies with catastrophic results. Failure was certain and one by one they have been elbowed aside by corporate crooks.<BR/><BR/>It was not meant to be like this. Some of us have learnt a bitter lesson. From what you say it appears Mr Jacques, for complex reasons to do with the uncomfortable outcomes of history, needs to explain this and chooses wilfulness over facts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36841665.post-77848059360270515902008-08-01T11:32:00.000+01:002008-08-01T11:32:00.000+01:00Is it possible that Mr Jacques' line derives from ...Is it possible that Mr Jacques' line derives from the relationship between the regime in Zimbabwe and that in China, which he seems to be "understanding"/boosting in the press these days? This is an interesting question for historians in that the two movements active against minority rule in Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) in the 70s were aligned with different regimes - the ZAPU with Moscow and ZANU with Peking. I'll leave you to join up the dots....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com