Which objective do you prefer to shoot for, that the unsuccessful neighbors take over the succesful state and take it "back to the bush", or that someone work on improving the neighbor's economic development so that they have better things to think about than killing the competition?
In Zimbabwe, I would have liked it best if the 270K whites who called it home could have remained, in safety, and become accepted, as well as being great contributors to the country. However, I'm realistic enough to note that their landholdings most likely would have gone down, perhaps drastically.
What interests me is trying to figure out ways to obtain the best overall solution for everyone. What I've observed in British africa, is that the regions where whites resisted longer, the race relations are poorer today. Oddly enough, ex-Rhodesian white farmers now are found in Botswana, Namibia,Zambia, and even places like Nigeria.
Israelis of Ashkenazi descent are in the minority.
You know what the ratio is? Also, how does the political structure reflect this? |
