Home  News International News Post-colonial Economic Genocide
|
Post-colonial Economic Genocide |
|
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Cornel Simms
|
|
Friday, 11 July 2008 |
There are many factors that have contributed to Zimbabwe’s economic dilemma since its independence from Britain. One is President Robert Mugabe’s attempt to redistribute wealth to native Zimbabweans in the 1990s, which many see as a chief contributor to the collapse of a once booming economy.
In this redistribution scheme, Mugabe encouraged Blacks to take over White-owned farms, which are now no longer operative and were significant to the survival of Zimbabwe’s once vital agricultural industry. Experts point out that Zimbabwe now has the highest inflation rate in the world.
Another factor is Mugabe’s firm grip on power. His recent controversial victory in the June 27 election for his 6th term as president is de-legitimized by many Western and some African leaders, as he is accused of authorizing state sponsored beatings and killings of opposition supporters, as well as unscrupulous electoral practices.
As a result, rival, Morgan Tsvangirai, 55, backed out of the presidential race days before the run off, leaving Mugabe as the sole candidate on the ballot. Mugabe, now 84, has been in power for 28 years since Zimbabwe’s independence and though many locals saw Mugabe as a hero and champion of Zimbabwe’s liberation, his long standing grip on power diminishes the ideals of real democracy and as the adage says, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
A third factor has to do with legislations Mugabe enacted that angered owners of large foreign owned corporations by passing bills that favored native Zimbabweans, such as the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Bill, which gave local owners majority control and membership shares in foreign-owned corporations. These efforts to empower local Zimbabweans, makes Mugabe appear as someone who was fighting for them.
But, while it may seem politically expedient to utterly blame Mugabe for Zimbabwe’s state, one cannot help looking at the role of post colonial power, Britain, in Zimbabwe’s struggle that goes beyond the past two decades. Should not Britain be held responsible, at least in part, for some of Zimbabwe’s ongoing economic struggle? Why did Britain not work out some economic package with Mugabe to compensate for colonial rule and oppression of native Zimbabweans? What power do the native Zimbabweans really have when the wealth of their country is controlled by an elite few that were once favored by colonialism? It appears that Mugabe and the democratic majority have been leading with little control over or retention of the nation’s wealth.
Was the county really flourishing in the 1980s, as many reported, when the majority of the people were still living in poverty? There seems to be a pattern with the natives of many post-colonial countries receiving political reign but not economic empowerment, because the wealth of those countries is often controlled by an elite minority.
Dr. Alex Magaisa of newzimbabwe.com argues that Zimbabwe and other post colonial African nations have been given democracy without wealth. This argument implies that democracy or majority-rule does not necessarily translate into wealth. Therefore, the minority elite class still controls the wealth of Africa. Consequently, this dynamic generates a tension between the politically powerful and economically weak majority and the politically weak and economically powerful minority. The key here would be for the democratically elected government to bring both powers together, which Mugabe and many leaders of once colonial ruled countries often fail to do.
The problem with this is that the economically powerful do not necessarily share their wealth with the poor and if their wealth is forcefully taken by the government, they often rebel in sophisticated ways that cripple a country’s economy. According to Mutumwa Mawere’s of newzimbabwe.com, the longstanding effect of institutionalized apartheid blights Africa’s economic development. He said the people who most benefit from post-colonial Africa are not the anti-apartheid majority but the minority that colonialism once served because the economic structure still serves them.
Therefore, it is incumbent upon the leader of Zimbabwe and other post colonial nations in similar crisis to work out a viable political and economic solution with clearly defined strategies that ultimately unite around a common good. Issues such as social and economic justice, health care, education, religious freedom, and equality should be a priority for these nations. The mission trips and charitable donations for Africa’s poor are good and should be applauded, but the continent needs to be empowered beyond these initial steps.
Powerful Western leaders are now pressuring the United Nations (UN) to impose sanctions on Mugabe and his inner circle, but they are not articulating an economically viable solution for Zimbabwe’s post colonial economic genocide. If sanctions is a starting point to addressing Zimbabwe’s economic crisis, fine, but these powerful leaders should also show the world their plans to address the broader economic problem that so long ravished Zimbabwe. Therefore, former colonial powers and powerful nations should expedite a plan to empower the overwhelming majority, the disenfranchised and marginalized people of Zimbabwe and Africa in general, to harness and be the true benefactors of their deep reservoir of resources that others, besides them, have long enjoyed.
Cornel Simms is an Adjunct Professor, Author, Pastor, & Entrepreneur. You can email comments to:
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
|
|
|
