Info on Rhodesia?

Hey Holla Forums, as we all know Rhodesia is a bit of a fantasy land for the far right in general as they seem to claim that it was utopian despite being embargoed and isolated from the world
I'm having a hard time believing this and was wondering if anyone can direct me to any unbiased books, documentaries, etc. on the history of Rhodesia as I plan to make a video debunking any myths on the country the right parrots

Other urls found in this thread: data in das kapital&source=bl&ots=rnniRtM3sJ&sig=MGkfzNoDoIt7wY5_j6L-eQXqb1A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijlKmNsJTYAhXl34MKHYaCDHkQ6AEIWDAH

Well it was an English Colony for a while
Then it became Independent because England told them to give black-Africans the vote and like you said it then got embargoed

From that point on its almost entirely export based economy based on agriculture began to fall
It eventually was forced to hold open elections are after its economy had all but collapsed on account of the embargo

So it started off quite good but got pretty shot overtime
The fact that Rhodesia was in general kinder to its black-African population then let's just say south Africa also kept it going longer

Smith refused to follow the UK’s protocols for independence, so he unilaterally declared an independent Rhodesia.
Smith’s government was bankrolled by Israel and South Africa, and used to steal jets from Europe to secure capital.
They were absolutely BTFO by ZANU and Mozambique in the Bush War, and in fact ZANU was ready to crush the Smithites until he threatened to bawww to Europe about muh crimes against humanity.
Knowing full-well that Mugabe was going to win, all the Smithites fled to Australia or South Africa during the 1980 election season. More fled later, even as Mugabe proved himself soft on land reform until 2000.
The biggest mistake Mugabe and Nkomo made was not finishing the job before 1980. I’m not even being an edgelord; the settler porkies wrecked the revolution.

Ok mate no need to jumpsuit
ZANU got BTFO almost every ducking time
ZANU won because the Rhodesian economy had collapsed and their ally south Africa abandoned them

Got to turn off this Auto-Correct…


¡Fuera Sionistas!

This. The kill ratio was like 30:1 in favour of the Rhodesians.

It’s also important to note OP that when it came to racism Rhodesia wasn’t as bad a South Africa, but it still wasn’t good. Black people werent officially banned from voting, instead voters were divided up into two rolls, A roll and B roll, according to tax brackets. The higher tax brackets were on the A role, which was guaranteed 90% of the seats in parliament. Most blacks were on the B role, but there was a noteworthy amount on the A role, so it was more de-facto rather than de-jure discrimination. There was also a higher degree of integration of society in general than in South Africa. It would have unironically been better off if they had simply reformed the government into majority rule instead of falling victim to Mugabe’s insanity.

Saved. Will post this whenever Nazis fetishize Rhodesia.

Holla Forumscucks never mention the close ties between rhodesia, south africa and israel

that wasn't until the 80's shortly before their end
most of their trade before the embargo was with West Germany and Japan
ZANU failed hard for most of the war even while receiving support from the USSR and China
most of the T-34's the Soviets gave ZANU ended up in the Rhodesian army
the Rhodesian army would just bury an IED in the road, ZANU would run over it like retards and have their tracks blown out
then the Rhodesian army would tell them over a megaphone to surrender or else they'll just wait for them to die in their immobilised steel coffin, popping your head out the top would get it shot off
then the Rhodesian army would capture the T-34, fix it up, repaint it with old British army paint and drive it into a ZANU compound and BTFO of ZANU again
if the Rhodesian economy hadnt collapsed they could have held ZANU off forever

Real war isn’t COD. It isn’t all about K/D.

Ian Smith>Thomas Sankara(No)

kill ratio doesn't mean much when whites were 8 percent of the population.

it really started coming to an end in 1978 when ZANU blew up the government's entire strategic oil reserve in a single rocket barrage.

the rhodesian regime infected 10,000 black zimbabweans with anthrax in a bio weapons experiment.

half of rhodesian whites in the 1970s immigrated to rhodesia after independence. they were settlers, not natives.

the rhodesian government knew this was a problem so it restricted emigration out of the country. you couldn't take cash over certain amounts out of rhodesia if you were white.

the rhodesian army placed thousands of blacks in "protected villages" and set up "free fire zones" where civilians were murdered with impunity. both tactics ended up swelling ZANU ranks. the rhodesian army would win battles but lose the war.

mugabe was not the original leader of ZANU. he was a more radical leader who emerged during the war. so, the rhodesian regime is ultimately responsible for mugabe coming to power as opposed to, say, nkomo or tekere.

what needs to be emphasized is how insane the rhodesian project was to begin with. a white minority ruling over a 90 percent black country was never going to work. "if only…" that white supremacists use fails to reckon with this basic fact.

also "don't let go to the dogs tonight" is a good memoir about growing up in a white settler family in rhodesia.

U fookin wot m8
You've got some explaining to do

He built a far more prosperous nation.

This is why we use it as a case for why we need an ethnostate. We can't coexist. competitive exclusion principle etc….

being in the majority of a white supremacist state would be an advantage to creating a white supremacist state, yes, this is kinda obvious.

as far as co-existence, trying to lord over a 90 percent black country, deny them their basic rights, and then fighting a doomed war to preserve it while creating generations of enmity was not the white race's finest hour, i have to say.

as for a counter-example, this guy was president of zambia in 2014-2015 and was a former VP:

one difference is that zambia decolonized peacefully under a multi-ethnic african socialist party.

no but ZANU wasn't winning in any other sense either
it did until outside forces conspired against them and destroyed them

what are basic rights? and why do you care?
I know for goddamn sure you wouldn't afford your enemies what you define as basic rights
I dont think the war was to preserve their grip on the reins of power, but to preserve the state of Rhodesia and its living standards
they knew for sure what would happen if the country fell to ZANU and their ilk and look at the absolute state of Zimbabwe today

In fact the only reason America has lasted as long as it has and managed to become an industrialized superpower is because the white settlers killed the natives instead of dicking them like the Spaniards did.

And how prosperous is Zamabia?

Rhodesia was got sold down the river by Britain, while the Soviet Union and China pumped billions of dollars worth of material support into ZANU

This board makes all those arguments about neuro-plasticity and racist I.Q tests, but it is here where it is the most convincing in arguing that whites are not the cleverest race.

the number of communist African movements that weren't/aren't just warlords pretending to believe in an ideology in order to get free kalashnikovs and rocket launchers from Daddy Russia is microscopic in number

of course ZANU was winning, because they won. they weren't fighting a conventional war. i thought you'd be smarter than this.

as far the soviets and chinese pumping billions of dollars worth of support, no amount of money can win an insurgent war without underlying support from the civilian population. the tools of insurgent warfare is political, with propaganda and economic tools, as well as military.

and the rhodesian regime's actions served to alienate those civilians.

politics and political support is also a tool of warfare. it can't be divorced from warfare. (warfare is politics by other means per clausewitz, who lenin was an admirer of btw.) not having political support was a failure of the rhodesian regime. no point in making excuses.

generations of whites in the west have been tricked by old soldier of fortune magazine covers of rhodesian soldiers being tougher and better skilled at warfare, and have never grappled with why and how they lost.

zambia? it has improved. life expectancy has gone from 45 at independence to 60 today, which puts it in the middle globally.

you think the 80% tribal africans gave a shit about politics?
ZANU promises them all the white mans stuff if they win, so ofc an illiterate Shoni tribal fuck is gonna go with that
traditionally you get an Africans support by giving them a crate of free rum and a gun and tell them to follow you and do as you say for more liquour

rhodesia is fetishized by white supremacists because they cannot accept whites losing a war to blacks. but it's what happened. or they try to come up with k/d ratios like that means anything when they were just flat-out beaten and outsmarted.

rhodesia had no military solution, and they lost the political war. so in comes the "lost cause" (which we've seen elsewhere) to try to explain away the defeat. "we didn't have allies," they say. no shit? maybe you should have thought of that before unilaterally declaring independence with white-minority rule.

believe me, free stuff is the selling point of military recruitment everywhere. *dangles car keys for a ford mustang at the U.S. marines recruiting station*

did you know, chad, that with uncle sam's signing bonus that this could be yours?

the military solution they always had at their disposal was to develop biological and chemical agents and then use them en masse to depopulate the tribes of blacks that were against them
they didnt do that because hey wiping out the blacks was never something they wanted to pursue

Outnumbered* If they had more material support the black could not have won. Black have never defeated non-blacks, or arabs without outside support. Whites managed to humiliate and brutalize the zulu despite being outnumbered

Also this. They weren't as genocidal as they should be. You can win a guerrilla war without propaganda as long as you eliminate the recruiting base of your enemy.

lmao what a fucking brainlet

And I know some brainlet will respond
No it won't. Genghis Khan brutalized civilians to stop insurrection and it worked well. They would just waltz into people's houses and murder their families in front of them and leave without saying a word Killing enemy children does not bolster rebels. It scares them shitless.

Biology is a material condition.

two immediate problems that stand out, though, is that rhodesia exploited black labor, so they'd kill their own labor force as well.

and risk driving more recruits into the hands of the rebels.

second is that the rebels were based in neighboring states.

still trying to come up with some scenario in which rhodesia could have won.

i'm telling you: there isn't one.

these guys are fucking morons. they will never learn. well, i'm fine with that, actually.

they're trying to come up wunderwaffens now. any moment the V-2 buzzbombs are gonna turn this doohickey around, i swear!

Source? Rhodesia was the breadbasket of Africa because of white farmers, not black labor.

Again increased cruelty drives down recruitment for the rebels. Look at the Mongols. Being gentle to enemy civilians let them think the can fight you.
That didn't Stop Selous scouts from attacking them

As someone else mentioned germ warfare could have done wonders.

Yeah surely it was the natives that were humiliated

especially in Africa
ebola only spreads like wildfire there because they dont understand what germs are and kiss the lips of the infected dead as a funerary practice

Gee whiz willy gee oh goodness who worked the fields and mines gee wilickers

White people. Unlike the American south circa 1860 they had machines and didn't need black laborers.

usually the guy who owns the farm
with a tractor

It's like a pro boxer vs an unending hoard of kids. He'll kill dozens but eventually get swamped


Got anything better

and heres my evidence the earth is flat and homosexuality is a sin
checkmate tbh

Do you even know what a farm is


It was alright as long as you were a member of the privileged white minority. If you happened to be part of the indigenous black majority, however, you were impoverished and oppressed.

I know enough to run one better than a Zimbabwean black who stole land from a farmer under his supreme leaders new land grab policy

the whites put blacks in things called "townships."

which were, y'know, near towns. because the whites needed the blacks … to work in the towns … doing the shit jobs the whites took for granted.

but they didn't want the blacks to live in the towns, you see, because they were reserved for whites. so they had curfews at night.


It sounds like you don't know how modern farming works? Have you ever seen a farm in a industrialized country? They don't hire any laborers. The family who owns it handles all of the work. Why do Marxists claim to be materialists when their ideology isn't grounded in reality?

they're more impoverished and more oppressed today than they ever were in Rhodesia

Good. Cycle it so the brainlet cunts get distracted and come in to defend "muh poor white colonisers"

all I hear is I can't argue and win tbh

I lived on one for eight years in Pennsylvania.
You’re either trolling with your asine assertion that farmers do everything by themselves, or projecting about Marxists being detached from material conditions.

retard. the few white-owned farms left in zim commonly employ local labourers. same in za. the farm killings you hear about are often committed by the employees
have you? i guess all those spics picking vegetables in california must be actors or something

Why are /leftypoc/ butthurt about white people?

Sure you did, bud. None of the farms in my area are hiring laborers.

Reactionary as fuck.

Sophistry. "They do the jobs you don't want to". Basically the same thing as nigger gladiator fights in the south.

Weird; all I see are laborers on dairy and soy farms in the northeast.

it gave them the opportunity to exponentially breed and grow in population
furthering their own species is the objective of all biological organisms isn't it?

Source? From what I've read farm attacks are carried out by urban blacks that venture out into the country side.


There's no use arguing with people who see blacks as less than human. Honestly worthless.

so many assumptions


Secondly, even if it were true, population isn't a measure of quality of life.

rhodesia's main export was also copper. management and ownership of the mines was white but the labor force was (largely) black. tobacco as well, with also black laborers.

OP here, I asked for books and documentaries
If I wanted to see meme arguments about how black people are degenerate I'd watch Black Pigeon Speaks

Migrant farmworkers harvest strawberries near Oxnard, California

migrant workers harvesting lettuce Salinas California

Migrant farm workers from Mexico harvest organic spinach while working at Grant Family Farms, Colorado

Yes. I like how you puled the elaborate security systems shit out of your ass to make it seem implausible.

They get riled up by Marxist politician and go into the countryside to kill white people. They often kill children too. Infants are prized targets. This is why I feel no empathy with blacks. I saw a black kid wipe out on his bike and break his wrist. I didn't even to help. I didn't care how loud he cried I just kept walking. You can't convince me they're people.

They're true though. Holla Forumstards are invariably racist.

you know i'm gonna need a source for that

When has marixst theory ever not gone up in flames when applied to the real world?

Really makes you think

Nice source which doesn’t even go along with your claim. Did all that Dutch muhdikking make you permanantly retarded? Should the British take American Revolutionary War reenactments as an existential threat? Or do you fear that the blacks might do to you a fraction of what you inbred yokels did to them?

…Aaaand confirmed brainlet

Not an argument buddy. Back up your claim or fuck off.


Here a bbc article on some guys research on Zimbabwe land reform.
Or you could just google this guy name: Ian Scoones
He has several books on the subject and reading his articles might lead you to more literature on the subject.

Well we don't shoot brits, but blacks till shoot whites. Completely different.


how many acres are we talking about here, brainlet?
breadbasket, my ass

Holla Forumsyps were a mistake

Thanks kindly ☭TANKIE☭



mostly population control and using a club to fix a problem instead of some subtle surgical methods

Which problem might I ask?

He wasn't talking of statistical data, you buffoon, but Marxist theory.

We don't want to live among baboon

Bye bye baboons

I'd like to hear you explain your understanding of said theory.

Tl;dr "Marxist land distribution sucks, but not as much as everyone says."

They're importing way more than before. They've lost productivity.

overpopulation caused by the introduction of modern agriculture

Weren't you favoring going full genghis on africa in this thread? Why contain it.

He was caught out and is trying to backpedal. Anyway, what was "falsified" in Capital?

Need some stats. And not that debunked calorie consumption graph that uses questionable data.

well personally im more in favour of just taking away all the food and leaving the counter-revolutionaries to starve to death until they're at more manageable numbers tbh

Good source!

I already addressed that. When has Marxist theory ever been applied without failing spectacularly?

Do you not consider turning a feudal backwater into a spacefaring civilization in a lifetime a success?

The claim was about falsified data in Capital you dolt. Again, back it up or fuck off.

With stolen nazi science.

at the cost of how much blood again?
Genghis built mountains of skulls and even he never reached Stalin's K/D ratio

Firstly, it's not debunked, the CIA acknowledged it in internal documents.


I think it was about 6 × 10^(200000000000) if I recall correctly



Marx was pseudoscientist charlatan data in das kapital&source=bl&ots=rnniRtM3sJ&sig=MGkfzNoDoIt7wY5_j6L-eQXqb1A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijlKmNsJTYAhXl34MKHYaCDHkQ6AEIWDAH

surely you havent redacted history again to include rocketry as a soviet invention

If Nazis can't defeat socialists that's a bad reflection on Nazis, not the socialists. Might makes right.

The CIA said the soviet union didn't publish enough data to draw a reliable conclusion on their calorie intake. Read the second fucking paragraph.

I hate to tell you this user, but you are a bad person…

wew lads I guess we got btfo'd hard this time eh?

Do people like you intentionally ignore historical context, or are you happy to read "muh black book of gommunism" (aka "every death under communism was communism's fault") and call it a day?

Were people executed in the USSR? Sure. Was there repression? Some. Does this invalidate the achievements of the system? By no means. Also worth noting Russia was hardly free from mass repression and murder prior to the Bolsheviks; in fact, state violence was far worse under the Tsar.

hasn't the west (and universities / media in particular) fallen under the sway of cultural marxism, according to your own worldview?

Where was caught using knowingly using false data? If you’d actually read Volume One or even Value, Price and Profit you’d know that Marx held that wages actually tend to rise during an economic boom that this improvement in their well-being in material terms was offset by the fact that labor productivity and profitability also tended to shoot upwards. The end result being that it was completely possible for the exploitation of the worker to increase while his lot improved materially.

As for that out-of-context quote I think it was a perfectly apt description of the condition of the lower segment of the British working class at the time Marx was writing. It’s been confirmed by historians that the going wage for an unskilled worker was not enough to save them from constant hunger and malnutrition until the mid-1870s. Some of the more pessimistic economic historians even argue that the British working class as a whole had not received a raise since medieval times and that the going wage rate for builders in medieval times and in the mid-19th century was largely the same.

As for the upper-segment of the working class to which much attention has been paid it’s not like Marx was unaware of this. He and Engels did popularize the term “Labour aristocracy” after all…

most of the great powers had rocket programs in the 20s and 30s and were learning from each other. valentin glushko was working on them in the late 20s and was the first to develop hypergolic propellants… which were later used in the german me-163.

none of this stuff happened in a vacuum.

t. Scoones
t. world bank

So the Agriculture colapse came with the 90s according to Scoones data and the blogpost you brought. Literal neoliberalism fucked Zimbabwe, what a shock.

It is a good source actually, it's from Ian Scoones, a british academician working on land reform and its impact on Zimbabwe and elsewhere.

mugabe sold out hard, yeah. the reagan administration thought his victory was preferable to the soviet-backed ZAPU.

This is pretty clearly propaganda.

Look up the youtuber Jennifer Armstrong. She's a Rhodie with some insightful first-person accounts of what growing up in the colonial Rhodesian society was like. She's also a left-winger so don't think she's an apologist.

I wrote a long post about it but I didn't save it. Mostly it was an excuse to post a video of the Japan song 'Rhodesia', but someone might have it saved or know of an archive copy.
Rhodesia genuinely maintained higher living standards than African countries despite embargo - this is basically generally recognized. In large part the utopian appearance of Rhodesia as a utopia arises because the unequal condition of blacks was ignored by the people with the tools to record Rhodesian history, you get a myopic view focusing only on the white culture and character of Rhodesia, so you have the 'fun' sort of wartime rationing outlook, the "whenwe's from Rhodesia" view, rather than considering the realities of maintaining a discriminatory society. (The defense that "Rhodesia wasn't racist, whites and blacks were held to the same requirements" excuse is risible, with the income requirements, etc, being a transparent mechanism of disempowering blacks. You might as well say "Whites and blacks are held to equal requirements - they just have to be lighter than wood")

To find something without bias would be very difficult. A British Documentary that's quite good (if limited) on the power handover election is although you should keep the political motivations of all involved in mind at the same time.

There's also the Whenwes' from Rhodesia which is a nice little comic strip as a historical artefact. (A "Whenwe" is a Rhodesian who's emigrated, and now can't shut up about "Whenwe were in Rhodesia…")

Also an Adam Curtis thing about how BP was complicit in Rhodesian sanctions busting:

I believe it paid for the jets legitimately, it just had to sneak them in due to international sanctions. (Though this obviously let the Rhodesian airline gain foreign capital by carrying tourists, etc, from SA.)

To be fair, a 30:1 kill ratio is nothing when there are 30 times more blacks than whites.
(This actually comes up in the Docu above I believe - a Rhodesian moving to SA thinks he has a chance with SA's 6:1 population ratio if the blacks revolt, but is fucked in Rhodesia.)

What's more fascinating is why the fuck Britain and the USA handed Rhodesia to a self-proclaimed communist when the Rhodesians made McCarthy look like a SocDem.
Possibly because they knew he was a chancing klepto, but still.


So that's it? The Holla Forumsyps jumped ship?

They probably got banned by Barrack HUSSEIN Obama AKA 'B.O.' like this guy in here

Also check'd

When the fuck did I say that

No I just have things outside of the internet that need to be done