- Nov 22, 2017 at 9:05 pm #3503552
No telling for sure, but I hope the rich economies of the world will join in giving Zimbabwe a helping hand. Not with dubious loans to buy weapons or just to hollow out their minerals and resources — but to help Zimbabwe produce jobs that can jump start and sustain their economy. Maybe open up our markets to them a bit more?
But I wonder if Trump – amid so much more important things — like how come the daddy of UCLA shoplifting basketball player still hasn’t thanked him — would care all that much about Zimbabwe??Nov 23, 2017 at 3:06 am #3503602
Might it make sense to wait and see if the guy who will succeed Mugabe is any better? Mnangagwa is reputed to be a dictatorial thug, little, if any, better than Mugabe. If true, it would be throwing money down a rat hole, a cruel joke on the long suffering people of Zimbabwe, and another waste of the American taxpayers’ money.Nov 23, 2017 at 6:55 am #3503627
Magnangagwa’s political pedigree is downright dubious, yes, but I was thinking more along the line of helping Zimbabwe’s people to build up their businesses/markets – rather than gov’t-to-gov’t aid.
Might it still make sense to wait? Who knows? Nothing’s guaranteed. On the other hand, if Carter and Reagan had waited back then for China’s government to first rid itself of its political leadership of thugs, then a billion people may still be as destitute (and xenophobic) today as they were 30-40 years ago.Nov 23, 2017 at 3:55 pm #3503661
“Carter and Reagan had waited back then for China’s government to first rid itself of its political leadership of thugs, then a billion people may still be as destitute (and xenophobic) today as they were 30-40 years ago.”
I’m unclear as to what exactly Carter and Reagan had to do with China’s rise, at least in a critical sense. My sense is that they would have risen with, or without, any actions on our part. Diplomatic recognition and a willingness to trade with them may have made it a bit easier, but rise they would have anyway, IMO. On a related note, why do you refer to their leaders as thugs?Nov 23, 2017 at 4:32 pm #3503664
I think your view of China and its leaders is consistently a more positive and more confident one than mine.
Given how much progress China has made since 1980’s, I wonder how much more prosperous China would have been if it weren’t for its thuggish leaders and their disastrous policies between 1950 and 1980!
China was desperately poor and xenophobic in 1980. Foreign (and overseas Chinese) trade and investments jump started their economy – and all those contacts actually helped remove the xenophobia planted by the communists. Overseas Chinese saw opportunities and were eager to be agents of change – unlike their Cuban counterparts who chose to block their own homeland, thinking destitution will bring positive change!
Wait for them foreigners to prove themselves first? Perhaps. No guarantee, but in the case of China, Vietnam, etc. – I think not waiting and just trade / invest anyway actually helped cement success for those countries.Nov 23, 2017 at 7:09 pm #3503699
“I think your view of China and its leaders is consistently a more positive and more confident one than mine.”
The more I read, listen to others who know more than I, and watch their strategies and progress unfold, the more impressed I become. They are presenting an alternative to the Western order that poses a serious challenge to us in many parts of the world. It will play out over the coming decades, and I hope to see at least the outlines of who shall prevail before I pass. Of one thing I am fairly certain: The Western “freedom” and unfettered capitalism would not have worked well for the vast majority of the Chinese people, nor will it work for people in many other areas of the world. That is where the chinese model may prove to be more attractive. We shall see, as the fence sitters drop to one side of the fence or the other over time.
I will not defend what occurred in China during the Mao period, except to say that he unified the country and kept it independent at a time when it was isolated by hostile Western powers, the same ones who had inflicted great damage and humiliation on China, beginning with the British back in the 18th Century and continuing through the early 20s at least, followed by a brutal civil war in which we backed the Kuomintang. And then there was MacArthur at the Yalu threatening nuclear war. His methods were not pretty, and in the end proved counterproductive, I’ll give you that. Let history be the judge as to whether he was, on balance, a positive leader or a malign force, a thug as you would have it. Personally, I think he was a great leader who stayed on past the time when his type of leadership was what was required. Those who followed were certainly not thugs, of that I am certain. That is a derogatory term I associate with the likes of Idi Amin, Mugabe, Saddam,etc.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.