Post

Independent Zimbabwe wrote:

I firmly support the causes of national liberation and anti imperialism in the contexts of both Zimbabwean and South African history. The material conditions and historical development of the former are the result of influences stemming from the latter albeit at a much slower pace.

Though racial statecraft, legislation, and political repression was marginally more mild than that of South Africa its not very difficult to empathise with the plight of the majority and their rationale for endorsing armed struggle in order to end the domination of the minority in national life and correct the state sanctioned inbalances of wealth and power perpetuated under the rule of the company (1888-1923), responsible self government (1923-1965), and UDI (1965-1979).

Mugabe and generation were the product of this, there decision to take arms was one of desperation after all plausible alternatives were rejected by the settler regime. I don't agree with everything him and Nkomo did in the fight for majority rule, but it was defiantly a worthy cause. His original policies of reconciliation and land redistribution along market lines is certainly commendable but his use of intimidation and political repression made a mockery of everything the liberation struggle stood for especially when it was directed at the Ndebeles, ZANU dissidents, and after two decades of independence with tragic result, the white minority.

My nation is an alternate timeline and so does not reflect what happened in real life per se.

Land redistribution had to happen but the use of violence was poor form.