The Flip Side with Kuthula Matshazi
Eric Bloch’s article in The Zimbabwe Independent, 18 May 2007, headlined “Sanctions: lies and deception”, undermines his credibility and demonstrates that he is a beholden man. He is disregarding inquiry and pragmatism for political correctness to seemingly please certain quarters. He comes up with several questionable arguments and “vitriolic” language to legitimize his flawed ideas. The problem with these arguments is that they distort the proper understanding of issues related to economic sanctions. More dangerously, at face value they are appealing arguments and therefore susceptible to be easily believed and embraced by casual readers. More...
6 comments:
Seems that YOU are the guy with the “vitriolic” language problem!
Not really. If my language was vitriolic, I used it unintentionally. But I believe I did not use bad language but vigorously engaged Bloch. Could you suggest which of the words are vitriolic? I weigh my words very carefully and put them on paper based on compelling facts as opposed to mere malice or my bias. If you press me on any of the "vitriolic" language, I will be glad to justify why I said so.
I love engaging people in a civilised manner. Discussing are not about insults but building. It is not my intention whatsoever to insult people, but I can surely label people according to facts on the ground. If someone is a neoliberal, I will say so; if they are white supremacists I will not hesistate to say so; and equally if they are tribalists.
I find it ironic that you rail against the West (Canada included in that) and yet where have you gone crawling to when times were hard in your own country? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. I suppose you will claim that you are fighting your enemy from within.
Once again I find your arguments weak. In the context that Mr. Bloch used "international community" it was obvious to anyone save you and a 2 year old that he was not referring to Malawi, or East Timor. He may be guilty of an inexact choice of words but you are guilty of nit picking. In a similar way when I say the west I am not really referring to Norway or Scotland. When Mugabe says "Look East" I doubt he is referring to Mongolia. Do you get the point? (Probably not but anyway)
I am interested to know what blame if any you place on Zimbabweans for the current state of affairs in that country. Please go into detail, I am sure you can muster a line or 2.
I also find fault with your argument that the "West" seeks to re-colonize places like Zimbabwe. In this case you confuse corporate interests with the interests of a nation. I can assure you that the United States has little interest in colonizing Zimbabwe however I am sure there are many American mining firms that would love to exploit Zimbabwe's mineral wealth or utilize its cheap labor. Does the domination of a nation by a corporate interest constitute colonization by that foreign company’s country of origin? Let me put it to you in easier terms, Toyota, a Japanese firm, is the leader in selling cars in the American market (if not yet, it is very close), it has factories here and makes a tremendous amount of cash in this lucrative market. I have never heard calls by Americans that Japan is seeking to colonize the United States. The US is saturated with Japanese, Korean etc companies all doing good business and removing funds from the country. You must learn to separate corporate interest from that of its nation.
I have read a number of your posts and have yet to see you post anything that you believe Zimbabwe can change that would improve things. Its always neoliberal this, neo colonial that. I think I shall coin a new term for you:
Neozimbo: An individual from the small nation of Zimbabwe who takes extreme delight in spotting the hypocrisy and unfairness of western nations in order to avoid facing the prospect that the real problems are self inflicted. This individual almost always resides in one of the aforementioned "western" nations in order to take advantage of scholarships and a generally superior lifestyle available to him in his own country.
(In a sentence: Kuthula, a staunch neozimbo cringed at the thought of blaming Gideon Gono for the recent free fall in the Zim dollar.)
Before you cry foul yes the west through its various organizations often cause damage to the economies of the countries they are "trying to help" however often it is vast and widespread corruption that causes these initiatives to fail as locals with access to the newly created wealth quickly misappropriate funds set aside for development and instead visit the nearest Mercedes dealer. (See recent events in Zimbia if you require proof).
I will respond to your posting Friday Canadian Time Dave. But I realise you are trying to strangle and muzzle me. No way man. Let me criticise issues and don't be a dictator and usurper of freedom of expression. Just because I stay in the West does not mean that I should not point out things - there you are wrong. I hope you are not a benefactor of anyone because those people will really be in trouble should they not agree with your views!!!
Anyways I will respond in detail on Friday. Meanwhile remember to give us the definition of economic sanctions - if you have not yet given us. I will define the violent neoliberalism, that, even by the admission of people like Anthony Giddens, Will Hutton has dismally failed the majority of people except maybe people like you who have spectacularly benefitted from the violent economic system. I wonder what you say about Giddens who was born in the West and yet criticises neoliberalism? Perhaps he is wayward and ungrateful like me?
I would never seek to "Strangle and Muzzle" anyone, I am simply pointing out that you are a hypocrite. Let's be clear, abve nation and all else is the duty to oneself to live this one life that we can to the best of our ability. I applaud the fact that your have furthered your education and seek to educate others through your postings, however this does not preclude you from being a hypocrite. You are like a husband who critisizes his wife for cooking disgusting food and then prceeds to lick the plate clean after a second helping.
I am not familiar with this Giddens but being born in the west does not exclude you from being a disagreeing with specific policies. I am sure there are people in China who would critisize communism. He is one man and one opinion.
I look forward with mild interest to see how you will respond to my brilliant comments.
In your first paragraph I fail to see why you say I am a hypocrite. Sure, there is nothing that precludes me from being a hypocrite if I am one. But I could not get any one reason why you think I am a hypocrite.
To be honest, I did not get the gist of your comment. Giddens is the guy who conceptualised the “Third Way” political model, former director of the London School of Economics and Tony Blair’s advisor.
Yes, Giddens is one man and one opinion; so is Hutton (Director of Work Foundation and former Editor in Chief, The Observer, UK) I could quote more of the people who accept that neoliberalism is dead. Philip McMichael (Development and Social Change); Wolfgang Sachs (Planet Dialectics); Joseph Stiglitz (former Chief Economist, World Bank – Globalisation and its Discontents, Making Globalisation Work); Greg Buckman (Global Trade: Past Mistakes, Future Choices); John O’Neill (Capitalism: The State of Childhood); Vandana Shiva (Globalization's New Wars: Seed, Water and Life Forms); Naomi Klein (No Logo); EVEN GEORGE SOROS of all people (The New Global Financial Architecture); Jeff Faux and Larry Mishel (Inequality and Global Economy). UNDP (International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world, Human Development Report, 2005); Noam Chomsky (Failed States). I could go on.
Some of these people who criticise the West were born in the West and others not. Now why am I being targeted for criticism? And even termed a hypocrite. I am puzzled. Is it wrong that I decided to exercise my right of movement and using my own resources to come and study in Canada. I earned my scholarships and was not given on humanitarian grounds. What is wrong with that? Some people who criticise neoliberalism and policies of the same Canadian governments are not targeted for criticism. Why me. I still do not understand. I need to know what sets me apart from every ordinary Canadian and international citizen who have the right to express themselves.
Also, I need to be clearly shown how I am a hypocrite.
Post a Comment