Is Mugabe overall a good guy or bad guy?

[ButterflyBlood]

Poll question: Is Mugabe overall a good guy or bad guy?

yes, it's binary, but intentionally

[Aidoneus]

1. a more or less bad guy doing a good thing (and some other things)

[ButterflyBlood]

2. But I'd find it tough to argue that the good thing outweighs the "other"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1242959

[NoPasaran]

3. I think he was a good guy who became bad

by hanging on to power way too long, unfortunately a common occurance.

[Aidoneus]

4. Interesting line to take

He was the very same guy since he won his first election, just served a different boss.. when he stopped governing the country for the benefit of Western businesses, he suddenly became "bad"--funny how that works out, sad how that bait is so often swallowed..

[noiretextatique]

8. and "human rights" is always the bait

i wonder :wtf: "human rights" were like when zimbabwe was rhodesia...and how many americans were calling the white minority government "thugs?" too bad we didn't have the internet back then.
it is sad...how easily some of our allies take the bait. from abortion to affirmative action to...well, you name it. divided and conquered we stand!

[NoPasaran]

10. Just a damn minute here

I don't know how many Americans were calling the Smith regime thugs but I can assure you that I was among them. I was part of the anti-apartheid movement in the 1970s and 80s. Believe me, I was quite pleased when Rhodesia became Zimbabwe.

Unfortunately, Mugabe is one of those leaders who, having seen their struggle triumph, cannot conceive of the revolution existing without them at its vanguard. I count another man I once admired, Fidel Castro, in that group as well. By perpetuating their personal power decade after decade they do a great disservice both to their own people and to others fighting for liberation around the world.

None of this should be taken as implying that the United States or any other foreign power has any right to "take out" Mugabe.

[AP]

31. Moral absolutism is essentially reactionary.

To get the job done, nobody is going to do everything perfectly. To argue for moral absolutes is to argue that whomever is in power should be out of power.

You have to play the narrative out, which requries a little historicizing as well.

Anyone who thinks the alternative to Mugabe (the MDC) is going to better morally, or in any other respect, is either lying or doesn't understand politics and economics in the slightest.

Look at Haiti or Argentina or Chile, or any other of dozens of countries for evidence of the sort of oppression required to perpetuate neoliberalism.

[arewethereyet]

17. hes been a nightmare from day one

[dpibel]

18. Quite simply, not true

Even the standard received wisdom is that Mugabe was a perfectly OK chap, running one of the better functioning economies in Africa, until he decided to boot the IMF and their economic restructuring plan. That put him on the bad guy list. Then he started dispossessing plantation owners, and he became a monster.

But I'm sure you know better.

Edited to add: Feel free to direct me to a source supporting your statement. I'm sure you wouldn't make a statment like that without some basis in fact.

[arewethereyet]

21. my Zimbabwean friends do know better

he started wrecking the economy immediately with cronyism and killed it with his ill timed (lost an entire crop to suit his timetable) and foolish land seizures.

if you rely on the papers you'll never know the whole story.

[dpibel]

25. Purely out of curiosity

What is/was the occupation of these friends of yours down Zimbabwe way? Did they live there when it was Rhodesia? If they did, what did they do to earn their keep then?

What you're saying here is that everything was just jackaloo when the place was Rhodesia, and immediately thereafter went right on to hell (never mind that it took 20 years for Mugabe to administer the coup de grace with his horrible land reform). Well, jackaloo for who? You might find one or two people for whom the Rhodesian economy wasn't doing all that well before Mugabe. Think?

But then again, cronyism is way, way, way worse than some petty de jure racism, isn't it?

Just out of curiosity: Assuming, arguendo, that Mugabe has given perks and favors to his pals, what is it that makes that cronyism and very, very, very bad -- to the point of advocating a coup or death, depending on who's advocating -- as opposed to, say, the second-in-command of a country shuffling multibillion dollars contracts to his former company. Or, for that matter, the Fierce Warrior Chieftain of that same country pushing business in the direction of his dad's operation? Is that cronyism, or is it something else? If it's cronyism, should those people be deposed forthwith?

I mean, I know that you would want to be intellectually consistent here, so I assume you are contemptuous of cronyism wherever it occurs, and whether is called cronyism or the good-old-boy network. Right?

Y'know, Bunky, if I got all my news out of the newspaper, I'd know that Mugabe was the fiercest monster going, now wouldn't I? I'd know that you were dead-bang right.

[AP]

32. This post kicks ass.

[AP]

33. This is so true. Zimbabwe was like Argentina in the eyes of the west

(even when, just like with Argentina, rational people could see that it was just a bubble that was inflated by injustice and postcolonial economic irrationalities).

And it's so true that when Mugabe addressed the ONE THING that could make the irrational economy rational, that's when, VERY SUDDENLY he became a monster in the eyes of the west.

Arguably, he was MORE of a monster before, in terms of not doing much to solve the real problem, allowing Ian Smith to live on a big farm in Zimbabwe, and engaging in wars which killed thousands of people and that furthered the west efforts at neoliberalism. But all that was hunkey dorey, so long as the corporate farms could grow a bushel of tobacco for 10 cents and sell it for 100 bucks in Europe.

[beanball]

23. Mugabe

stoped serving the white guys and they turned on him.The media of the world is controlled by w----g---,and most of them are racist.So I say to those that don't like whats going on in Mugabe's country,go piss up a rope.

[arcos]

5. 4 people who don't give a damn about human rights... sad... n/t

[tom_paine]

6. Bad guy

n/t

[Walt Starr]

7. PAt Robem$ome cozies up to this dictator

Oust the fucker.

[dpibel]

19. Monster mixing

That would be Charles Taylor, of Liberia, you're thinking of. They're different countries -- Zimbabwe and Liberia.

But they all kinda run together, don't they? Know what I mean?

[AP]

34. Very funny.

Why don't people care enough to know the facts before they post?

[noiretextatique]

9. a question

:wtf: does mugabe being a "good" guy or a "bad" guy have to do with anything? and how on earth can anyone on DU know whether he is "good" or bad?"

[RichardRay]

11. An answer

Because if I'm not willing to take what I know, synthesize questions and find the answers as best I can, then form an opinion and state it then I might as well just give up now and sink into paralysis.

In my opinion, he's bad. If you believe otherwise, why?

[dpibel]

22. My answer to your question

Because I've read the material at Swans.com, which is one of the more thoughtful and intelligent sources of reading around, on or off the web (no, I have no connection with them).

I find it interesting that you seem to give yourself permission simply to have an opinion, but ask that anyone disagreeing offer an explanation.

What's the basis for your opinion that he's bad?

[AP]

35. Who are you?

This is some of the smartest commentary I'm reading anywhere.

Thank you.

[noiretextatique]

my opinion: "good vs. bad" simplicity

shreds ZERO light on the character of mugabe or the situation in zimbabwe. it's perfect for most americans though...it's the shorthand used in our national political discourse.

[noiretextatique]

my opinion: "good vs. bad" simplicity

shreds ZERO light on the character of mugabe or the situation in zimbabwe. it's perfect for most americans though...it's the shorthand used in our national political discourse.

[noiretextatique]

29. my opinion: "good vs. bad" simplicity

shreds ZERO light on the character of mugabe or the situation in zimbabwe. it's perfect for most americans though...it's the shorthand used in our national political discourse.

[Zynx]

12. He is a horrible thug. I would not mind to see him couped so long as real

democracy takes place. For the love of God, Africa deserves better.

[eridani]

13. Used to be a good guy

Been in power waaaay too long. End of story.

[Minstrel Boy]

14. Bad guy. I can't say he was ever a "good guy", but he once had a

good cause. But no more.

[AP]

36. He was good when he didn't push to hard, and when he cooperated,

even if it meant perpetuating the status quo, and now he's bad because he's doing what they should have done right away?

[fujiyama]

15. He's scum. EOM

[Trajan]

16. Yuckey Poo ....

Mugabe is a facist dictator ....

Someone that the GOP would love ..

[LoneStarLiberal]

20. Whether It's The Syphilis or the Senility...

Whether it's the syphilis or the senility (or both), Barking Bob hasn't been running on a full tank in a number of years.

He should always be remembered for his leadership during the civil war and at Zimbabwe's independent dawn, but he should also be remembered for this use of state murder, repression, and outright goofiness later on in life.

[Zinfandel]

24. I can't answer...don't know...have to research...

[ermoore]

26. Mmmm . . . dictators . . .

Yeah, one problem here is that there is a tendency for dictators, assholes, fascists, etc. to be defended simply b/c they're not American, Republican, capitalist, etc.

[Matilda]

27. Maybe was a good freedom fighter once,

but should never have been given/taken executive power, because
clearly not up to the job. But having got the power, there's no
way he'll surrender it, and that means he has to do a lot of BAD
things. So is now a very bad guy.

[rman]

28. Where do we get our information about this guy?

From the same media who portrait Aristide and Chavez as anti-democratic authoritarians?

[AP]

30. The only kind of guy who could remove a racist colonial gov't from power:

he's a guy with liberation in his heart but with an extremely nasty streak.

What other kind of guy do you think wouild take a country from colonialism to postcolonialism to, hopefully, postneoliberalism?

This isn't a job for a priest.