[Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people

Tom O'Lincoln suarsos at alphalink.com.au
Tue Jul 1 16:14:16 MDT 2008


I hope I'm not repeating things already said somewhere else in the thread, 
but briefly in reply to this:

>Shouldn't this depend on *what* the proposed actions are? If the
>actions consist of such things as diplomatic de-recognition, freezing
>foreign bank accounts, etc, that will hurt the Mugabe-associated elite
>but not the common people. Why shouldn't that be supported?<

Because diplomatic de-recognition will help legitimise sanctions, without 
affecting Mugabe & co in practice because informal diplomatic relations 
would undoubtedly continue. Likewise, freezing bank acounts is itself a kind 
of sanction and would legitimise other sanctions.

>it all depends on the concrete actions that are proposed

It also depends on the politics, since one thing leads to another.

And also in reply to this:

>Artesian's incredible suggestion that the UN shouldn't be permitted to
>do anything in Zim just because the UN doesn't do anything about US or
>Israeli crimes, seems to me to be a classic case of cutting off the
>nose to spite the face. It also bespeaks a horrible disdain about the
>value of Zimbabwean lives, and about the benefit of saving at least a
>few of these needless deaths. No wonder third-word common people often
>don't trust Western leftists.

I suspect  that the "international community" (imperialists and their 
subordinates) are waiting till Mugabe smashes up the opposition completely, 
then when the damage is done they might decide to waltz as saviours, and 
cement their own control. That's essentially what happened in East Timor.

Orwell wrote somewhere that no situation is so bad it can't be made worse by 
the arrival of a policeman. Ditto for imperialist "humanitarian 
intervention". 






More information about the Marxism mailing list