I guess someone has to worry about the whites who owned everything and ran things so well before the ungrateful indigenous people wanted out of serfdom in their own land. You're really holding it down for the whites, Cord!

I was thinking the same thing Megs!

Zimbabwe's colonialist past has not disappeared. The ravaged country is no different than too many nation-states that inherited the inhuman exploitation of its lands and its people by whites. Before the Portugese invaded in the 16th century, Zimbabwe was prosperous and engaged in trade far beyond its region, peacefully. When the Portugese were finally defeated near the end of the 17th century, Zimbabwe was in near ruin. It regained stability and relative prosperity after two hundred years. Then the British came. Not long afterwards, whites chose to become a self-governing colony, which effectively denied the black people the vote. That was 1922. It took 70 years for whites to agree to share at least half the land with Zimbabweans.
If someone moved into your house, and made you the 'help', you would reasonably expect some dissension. Zimbabwe has been depicted in western press as a place that became 'civilized' by Europeans. Yet, they were doing just fine, before the theft of their land. If you were really against domestic terror there, you'd try to understand the whole equation. Good and bad policies tend to come more in shades of gray, and are typically framed in blood. NO one "likes" the situation in Zimbabwe. I resent the theft of the only arable land by whites, who have the rest of the world's whites in their corner, and with little awareness of how things became that way. I do not love Mugabe. I do not believe those whites who spent a few decades in the country are benign. I know they are hard-working, but it's more of the overseer type, than the back-breaking variety.