The AU appoints Robert Mugabe as its 2015 chairman

[BruceVC]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2015/01/mugabe-appointed-african-union-chairman-150130190208635.html

 

This utterly disappointing and disgraceful decision by the AU needs its own thread as it highlights why Africa doesnt achive it true potential

 

The AU is useless  and constantly makes terrible decisions. How can you appoint Mugabe who has effectively destroyed his country's economy and has been implicated in several cases of gross abuse of human rights 

 

He should be one of the last people to be even considered to represent the AU on this level 

[Meshugger]

Since there is no apropriate answer for this kind of idiocy, i will just laugh.

 

 

 

Hahahahahaha

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Since there is no apropriate answer for this kind of idiocy, i will just laugh.

 

 

 

Hahahahahaha

[Valsuelm]

So who would have been a better candidate Bruce?

[JadedWolf]

Well, that is very depressing.

[Valsuelm]

Well, that is very depressing.

 

Are you going to sit in jamas on the couch and eat lots of chocolate now?

[JadedWolf]

 

Well, that is very depressing.

 

Are you going to sit in jamas on the couch and eat lots of chocolate now?

 

 

I'm going to do what everyone does when they read these things. Shake my head wistfully, thank my lucky stars I don't live anywhere near, shrug, and move on.

[Gorgon]

Was it just his turn. I mean if it was, it's not like there was a political reason to not appoint him. The fact that he is a dictator is not a political reason to antagonize a neighbour.

 

Just sayin'

 

The rest of the world can isolate him at no cost to themselves. Not entirely true of the AU. 

[Zoraptor]

Sadly, Mugabe has better democratic credentials than many African leaders- you just don't tend to hear about most of them until they get overthrown because they tend to not rock the boat vis-a-vis western economic interests. That's why you only hear about Burkina Faso's French supported dictator when he runs away on a french helicopter just in front  of the mob he'd been oppressing for decades, or never hear much at all about dictators in places like Equatorial Guinea who have been fleecing their countries of oil wealth while their people live in poverty. Mugabe on the other hand has very much rocked the boat on western interests so you do hear about him.

 

Previous recent heads of the AU include Ghaddafi albeit when he was a nice pro west guy, said president of Equatorial Guinea, and the leader immediate previous to Mugabe was installed by military coup...

 

Don't get me wrong, Mugabe's no true democrat and has sacrificed being remembered as a genuine freedom fighter and father of his nation on the altar of cronyism, corruption and a desperate need to maintain control and power. It would just be nice if the Beeb etc applied those criteria evenly instead of only ever against people the west doesn't like for other reasons than their democratic credentials.

[Gorgon]

He reminds me of Mao, essentially a riding violent populist movement to weed out his competition while pulling the strings, unoficial like. 

[Orogun01]

So who would have been a better candidate Bruce?

Yes, despite his SJW leanings he would be a better candidate....ah, it's missing a colon. NVM

[Barothmuk]

So who would have been a better candidate Bruce?

Someone who's "effectively destroyed their country's economy and has been implicated in several cases of gross abuse of human rights" but supports America. 

 

B/c "Western values".

[BruceVC]

Was it just his turn. I mean if it was, it's not like there was a political reason to not appoint him. The fact that he is a dictator is not a political reason to antagonize a neighbour.

 

Just sayin'

 

The rest of the world can isolate him at no cost to themselves. Not entirely true of the AU. 

 

I'm glad there has been some interest in this thread because it allows me to now respond in more detail, firstly we all should care about economic transformation of the African  continent. We live in a global world and  and we are impacted on different levels by the success or failure of Africa, so the main reasons we should care about the state of Africa include

 

• The humanitarian aspect : The fact that millions of people still live and die in abject poverty, that people still suffer from diseases that are cured throughout the world and that there are still many people who just aren't educated due to the the failure of educational institutions  in various African  countries. All these problems would be vastly reduced if AU was actually doing its job which is  basically ensuring good governance and creating a framework for economic transformation. What people may not realize is that the AU has a real charter that countries are suppose to adhere to but many don't. This charter specifically mentions how countries must follow free and fair elections and respect human rights. Mugabe is in direct contravention of the AU charter due to his political decisions over the last decade or so 
• The economic aspect :  Africa has huge reserves of untapped mineral resources that could be accessed much more easily if there was a stable environment for investors. Being able to get to these resources would benefit the countries of Africa if the investment was done in a credible way. Also a stable continent would lead to more investment from global hedge funds and people  who would buy shares of African listed companies. But at the moment the risk factor keeps many people away 
• The security aspect :  We know impoverished countries are breeding ground for Islamic extremists. We already see Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab that exist primarily due to economic factors in their countries. If African countries were doing well economically there would be less support for these types of groups and these groups would be more effectively dealt by the AU. 

So even if you don't care about the first two reasons around why the stability and growth of the African continent matters you should be concerned about terrorist groups exporting their ideology to other parts of the world 

 

So now the AU decides to appoint Mugabe who has no credibility due to his management of his country. I can't stress this point enough, his economic policies have destroyed his country's economy. We have over 1 million Zimbabwean economic migrants living in South Africa alone. What possible value will Mugabe bring to the AU?

 

Zora is right, there are much worse current leaders than Mugabe in Africa . But that just highlight my major criticism of the AU, it fails to enforce its own charter. "If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything " 

 

And Baro is also correct, of course I believe Africa should be following Western values and political systems. This will indubitably lead to the  desperately needed economic transformation of the continent. Its always weird to have people on a forum in this day and age battle with the concept that Western ideology offer the best quality of lives to their citizens. I even made a post about this. Western values are not about colonialism and  the Iraq invasion, these were obviously wrong. Western values are about free and fair elections, free markets, free press, respecting the rule of law  and good governance of governmental institutions. That is exactly what is lacking in the African context in certain cases. So obviously Africa needs to implement these steps as the benefits should be clear and include considerations like a stable economic investment framework 

 

So yes Africa needs to follow the West in some ways 

[obyknven]

Bruce just must return to home in Europe. Africa is not best place for colonialists now.

[Barothmuk]

Its always weird to have people on a forum in this day and age battle with the concept that Western ideology offer the best quality of lives to their citizens.

The beneficiaries of centuries of slavery, genocide, colonialism and imperialism are able to placate their civilians with enough material incentive so they won't rebel.

 

Who'd have thunk it.

 

Western values are not about colonialism and the Iraq invasion, these were obviously wrong.

Why not? All these Western value nations both participated in, and still benefit from colonialism and on-going imperialism; as well as repeatedly invading foreign countries, toppling foreign regimes and installing puppet dictatorships.

 

Going off history this all seems very "Western".

 

Western values are about free and fair elections,

Where you choose between rich representative who serves the interests of the rich A and rich representative who serves the interests of the rich B.

 

free markets,

The system that was built on slavery, genocide and mass exploitation; the system that continually funnels wealth into the hands of the few directly at the expense of the many; the system whose exploitation has been becoming more and more concentrated for decades; the system that has the richest country in the world have half its population living in poverty or near poverty; the system that in times of economic turmoil continues to attack the poor and serve the rich

 

Bloomberg, "Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened"

Wall Street Journal, "The 1% Captures Most Growth From Recovery"

Think Progress, "The Richest 1 Percent Captured 93 Percent Of Income Gains In 2010"

Washington Post, "In 2010, 93 percent of income gains went to the top 1 percent"

Business Insider, "New Study Shows How The 1% Got 93% Of The Income Gains During The Great Recovery"

 

The system who’s top economic work of the year had today’s court charlatan astrologer desperately trying to reconcile the contradictions of capitalism and fearing even worse wealth inequality without severe (and completely unrealistic) worldwide intervention; the system whose own scientists (NASA) fear societal collapse due to the ever expanding wealth gap and the never ending pursuit of profit at the expense of our natural resources; the system that ****ing exists in Africa and has only served widen the wealth gap in the continent.

 

free press,

That is owned by the rich, controlled by the rich and serves the interests of the rich.

respecting the rule of law and good governance of governmental institutions.

Haha.

 

So yes Africa needs to follow the West in some ways

Even if I were to ignore literally every point I've already made this is simply not possible. The conditions that allowed "the West" to achieve its post-war prosperity were a result of very specific circumstances that we are unlikely to repeat and which have been waning for decades anyway. Edited February 1, 2015 by Barothmuk

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Considering the African Union is a false construct meant to consolidate power, I can't see why anyone cares. It's a good thing that it's a joke. Like the EU to Europe, it's just a gambit to federalize a continent. That is a bad thing.

[Meshugger]

 

Its always weird to have people on a forum in this day and age battle with the concept that Western ideology offer the best quality of lives to their citizens.

The beneficiaries of centuries of slavery, genocide, colonialism and imperialism are able to placate their civilians with enough material incentive so they won't rebel.

 

Who'd have thunk it.

 

Western values are not about colonialism and the Iraq invasion, these were obviously wrong.

Why not? All these Western value nations both participated in, and still benefit from colonialism and on-going imperialism; as well as repeatedly invading foreign countries, toppling foreign regimes and installing puppet dictatorships.

 

Going off history this all seems very "Western".

 

Western values are about free and fair elections,

Where you choose between rich representative who serves the interests of the rich A and rich representative who serves the interests of the rich B.

 

free markets,

The system that was built on slavery, genocide and mass exploitation; the system that continually funnels wealth into the hands of the few directly at the expense of the many; the system whose exploitation has been becoming more and more concentrated for decades; the system that has the richest country in the world have half its population living in poverty or near poverty; the system that in times of economic turmoil continues to attack the poor and serve the rich

 

Bloomberg, "Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened"

Wall Street Journal, "The 1% Captures Most Growth From Recovery"

Think Progress, "The Richest 1 Percent Captured 93 Percent Of Income Gains In 2010"

Washington Post, "In 2010, 93 percent of income gains went to the top 1 percent"

Business Insider, "New Study Shows How The 1% Got 93% Of The Income Gains During The Great Recovery"

 

The system who’s top economic work of the year had today’s court charlatan astrologer desperately trying to reconcile the contradictions of capitalism and fearing even worse wealth inequality without severe (and completely unrealistic) worldwide intervention; the system whose own scientists (NASA) fear societal collapse due to the ever expanding wealth gap and the never ending pursuit of profit at the expense of our natural resources; the system that ****ing exists in Africa and has only served widen the wealth gap in the continent.

 

free press,

That is owned by the rich, controlled by the rich and serves the interests of the rich.

respecting the rule of law and good governance of governmental institutions.

Haha.

 

So yes Africa needs to follow the West in some ways

Even if I were to ignore literally every point I've already made this is simply not possible. The conditions that allowed "the West" to achieve its post-war prosperity were a result of very specific circumstances that we are unlikely to repeat and which have been waning for decades anyway.

 

 

Please continue. What should be done? The Chinese are already having a fun time buying up the continent and they do not have the moral baggage of being children of slaverers, true or not. 

 

Humans will always compete for resources through different degrees of conflict in order to achieve power. Democratic institutions and the rule of law at least minimizes the chance of total regression to tribal and feudal states. What should Africa do? What should the citizens of the western world do? 

[Orogun01]

Bruce just must return to home in Europe. Africa is not best place for colonialists now.

Neither is Europe truth be told, unless they colonialist are PoC.

[Barothmuk]

Please continue. What should be done? The Chinese are already having a fun time buying up the continent and they do not have the moral baggage of being children of slaverers, true or not.

Are you under the impression I have any sympathy for the Chinese state? They too are an imperial power, who follow same market logic and too continue to slash their workers pitiful wages in the pursuit of cheaper labour and greater profit.

 

 

What should Africa do? What should the citizens of the western world do?

Well much like NASA, Mr. Piketty and the latest Oxfam report state churning through our natural resources with a continued system of unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution is simply not sustainable and is only going to continue to create greater poverty and greater wealth divide. Nothing short of a complete societal restructuring that abolishes the pursuit of profit, the funneling of wealth and the recklessly self-destructive exploitation and unequal distribution of our natural resources will fix this continued wealth gap and eventual societal decay.

 

Of course the cynic in me doesn’t expect such a thing to happen any time soon. Instead wealth inequality will exacerbate; wages will be cut via “austerity measures”, the far-right will gain greater societal influence; some scapegoat will be found to pin societal woes on (e.g. Muslims, Jews, what have you); the West will continue to recklessly gobble up eastern markets meanwhile the east (Russia) will fight tooth and nail to maintain economic hegemony over the former eastern bloc; Africa and the ME will continue to be a playground for the imperial powers; and I will continue mutter bitterly about the whole damn thing.

 

Or at least that's my crystal gazing prediction.

Edited February 2, 2015 by Barothmuk

[obyknven]

 

Bruce just must return to home in Europe. Africa is not best place for colonialists now.

Neither is Europe truth be told, unless they colonialist are PoC.

 

O'RLY?! Do you think Europeans invaded  Libya ( and kill leader who try  create pan-African unity and independent African financial system), Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Rwanda, Somalia and other countries around the world East Europe, Middle East, Central Asia, Latin America, Far East etc - not because of colonialism, but just for lulz?

 

Anyway Bruce can migrate in Israel where he can continue to be a old-school hardcore colonialist without these European hypocritical songs about multiculturalism and democracy.

[Meshugger]

 

Please continue. What should be done? The Chinese are already having a fun time buying up the continent and they do not have the moral baggage of being children of slaverers, true or not.

Are you under the impression I have any sympathy for the Chinese state? They too are an imperial power, who follow same market logic and too continue to slash their workers pitiful wages in the pursuit of cheaper labour and greater profit.

 

 

What should Africa do? What should the citizens of the western world do?

Well much like NASA, Mr. Piketty and the latest Oxfam report state churning through our natural resources with a continued system of unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution is simply not sustainable and is only going to continue to create greater poverty and greater wealth divide. Nothing short of a complete societal restructuring that abolishes the pursuit of profit, the funneling of wealth and the recklessly self-destructive exploitation and unequal distribution of our natural resources will fix this continued wealth gap and eventual societal decay.

 

Of course the cynic in me doesn’t expect such a thing to happen any time soon. Instead wealth inequality will exacerbate; wages will be cut via “austerity measures”, the far-right will gain greater societal influence; some scapegoat will be found to pin societal woes on (e.g. Muslims, Jews, what have you); the West will continue to recklessly gobble up eastern markets meanwhile the east (Russia) will fight tooth and nail to maintain economic hegemony over the former eastern bloc; Africa and the ME will continue to be a playground for the imperial powers; and I will continue mutter bitterly about the whole damn thing.

 

Or at least that's my crystal gazing prediction.

 

 

I happened to misread your point then, sorry. I have been struck by the same cynisism, however maybe not as much. I do believe in liberty and the self-realization of the ego that comes with, but i sadly i cannot see it implemented without a bloody revolution. Hopefully i am just too dumb to understand how that would be done peacefully.

[Shallow]

 

 

Please continue. What should be done? The Chinese are already having a fun time buying up the continent and they do not have the moral baggage of being children of slaverers, true or not.

Are you under the impression I have any sympathy for the Chinese state? They too are an imperial power, who follow same market logic and too continue to slash their workers pitiful wages in the pursuit of cheaper labour and greater profit.

 

 

What should Africa do? What should the citizens of the western world do?

Well much like NASA, Mr. Piketty and the latest Oxfam report state churning through our natural resources with a continued system of unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution is simply not sustainable and is only going to continue to create greater poverty and greater wealth divide. Nothing short of a complete societal restructuring that abolishes the pursuit of profit, the funneling of wealth and the recklessly self-destructive exploitation and unequal distribution of our natural resources will fix this continued wealth gap and eventual societal decay.

 

Of course the cynic in me doesn’t expect such a thing to happen any time soon. Instead wealth inequality will exacerbate; wages will be cut via “austerity measures”, the far-right will gain greater societal influence; some scapegoat will be found to pin societal woes on (e.g. Muslims, Jews, what have you); the West will continue to recklessly gobble up eastern markets meanwhile the east (Russia) will fight tooth and nail to maintain economic hegemony over the former eastern bloc; Africa and the ME will continue to be a playground for the imperial powers; and I will continue mutter bitterly about the whole damn thing.

 

Or at least that's my crystal gazing prediction.

 

 

I happened to misread your point then, sorry. I have been struck by the same cynisism, however maybe not as much. I do believe in liberty and the self-realization of the ego that comes with, but i sadly i cannot see it implemented without a bloody revolution. Hopefully i am just too dumb to understand how that would be done peacefully.

 

Any kind of major change requires bloody revolution, the vast supermajority of the elite as well as the lower classes believing in it, or someone high up forcing the other higher ups to stand down. There is a very slim chance you'll see what you view as necessary change without bodies to bury, but on the other hand what we got going now will either naturally lead to some form of revolution or a loose mixture between 1984 and Brave New World, though there's also the extremely unlikely option that spacetravel, and the medical innovations required to utilize it emerge before states start forcing brain monitoring technology on people. Bloody revolution seems like the best likely scenario, and while it includes a very decent chance some guy in power declares "If I can't rule, no one will!" before pushing a nuclear button, it still seems like our best bet.