For
those born after 1980 (Millennials, that is), Rhodesia was an African country
led by a white anti-communist militant regime (1965-1980), in a region
dominated by black Marxist administrations and military factions self-titled
“liberation armies.” Its unique case -- during a short-lived existence and
especially after -- shows us what happens when a social construction led by
competent elites is sacrificed on the altar of political and racial
correctness, in the name of some utopian ideals shared by the majority of the
local population.
The
"Rhodesia Syndrome" is a term that I coin in order to describe the
degeneration of a society, partially anomic, whose administration camouflages
its perverse socialized communist-type policies through its ethnic narrative
overtones about the so-called “racial injustice.”
The
phenomenon is vividly present here, in America, from the Great Lakes to the
Mississippi Delta, and from one coast to another. The same expired theories and
bankrupt economic solutions, consistent with the left-wing party activist lines
and doubled by racial components, have made today part of communities from Detroit
to Atlanta and New Orleans, and from San Francisco to Chicago and Baltimore, to
look more like Zimbabwean microcosms……
(Full text at link below)
There are some factors that explain why
the white rule in Rhodesia lasted for so long (1895 to 1980). First, Rhodesia
was long considered the Africa’s breadbasket.
White farmers were skilled, and after the 1980s the black farmers’ low skills
or lack of incentives have led to a disastrous farming policy. Second, the
country’s two main ethnic groups, the Shona and the Ndebele, were more in
conflict than in partnership relations. It was said that, in a way, Rhodesia’s
white administration was the black majority’s chance for a balanced approach,
toward prosperity and the creation of a solid middle class.
There
are also some lessons to be learned from Rhodesia’s case: domestically
(nationally and locally), going along racial lines and political convenience
against the expertise of the few can be the sure recipe for economic disaster;
regionally, your neighbors can be both good and bad, but in the end they
can all turn up being even worse; internationally, your allies’ diplomacies of
duplicity, followed by treachery, will be pursued for their own pure
self-interest, and later justified by “principles and requirements” of Realpolitik.
But
in the end, even if you remain alone with your pride, standards, and values,
you can rest assured that your place in history has been secured. Or
to put it in Ian Smith’s own prophetic words: “I told you so!”.
TIBERIU
DIANU is a scholar in East European studies and author of several books and
articles in law and post-communist legal reform. He currently lives in
Washington, DC and works for various government and private agencies.
