Rhodesia won the war, was able to maintain its independence and the sanction stopped

>Rhodesia won the war, was able to maintain its independence and the sanction stopped
How would it have looked today?

Attached: d7rpmjjg02p51.jpg (1062x1955, 155.2K)

yts lost (as always), just like in 1865, just like in 1945, just like in 2021. cope.

A shitty state because it heavily relied on agriculture (lol) for employment with no real plan to every shift from that?

Attached: rhodesia4359084.png (1864x789, 200.3K)

i mean they lost their war and mugabe took power for 30 years, there was no opportunity to make that societal shift
with south africa as an industry-focused ally they could have remained a heavily militarized bread basket economy

I think we all know the answer to this

Agricultural states can be prosperous as long as population stays low and high value crops that can pay for farming automation can be grown.

See also: Denmark pre-1970

lol you can just tell that he is trying to avoid saying anything about the jim crow-tier laws and borderline slavery that they subjected their actual workers to on a daily basis (thus why the revolution succeeded.)

Back in 2013 the Zimbabwe government said that after paying for salaries they had $217 left to spend in the budget

Attached: africa before and after whites censored because mutts kept reporting it triggered leftist faggots 1.png (1492x1578, 1.69M)

Africa is not a country and Zimbabwe is obviously not in the picture. The west is still involved and invest the most money into Africa

Highly segregated, and mostly poor except for the gentrified neighborhoods propped up by the government.
Also constantly under siege by the native pop.

segregated and therefore bad despite evidence suggesting otherwise

>Highly segregated, and mostly poor except for the gentrified neighborhoods propped up by the government.
So basically nothing would have changed?

well
the only difference is mugabe's cronies are in those neighborhoods instead of whites and also that those cronies are incompetent

>i mean they lost their war and mugabe took power for 30 years
They had several decades to make the shift user. Southern Rhodesia was a colony for decades under white rule.

>with south africa as an industry-focused ally they could have remained a heavily militarized bread basket economy
With Saffers dominating their asses? Even growing wheat was bad thing for them because cash crops made way more money.

>How would it have looked today?

Attached: 1641914602144.jpg (1242x1536, 355.27K)

And they are still pretty shit. Rhodesia hinged on having a racial underclass with jackshit labour rights and status to do all their farming labour. You really can't call a country that basically hinged on third class citizens prosperous in any stretch of the word.

>also that those cronies are incompetent
So just like the prior regime?

rhodesia became autonomous after ww2, before that they were a fully managed british colony without independence or any decision making capacity
so until 1965 when they had their universal declaration of independence they had little to no capacity to make economic choices and it was all run by crown policy
are you in highschool?

>so until 1965 when they had their universal declaration of independence they had little to no capacity to make economic choices and it was all run by crown policy
You do know the people in southern Rhodesia had big say in it. Just like they did in other colonies. In fact Southenr Rhodesia was going to merge with another colony until they realized that they'd become an even smaller minority and ditched the plan.

Its neighbor Botswana has one of the highest HDI and strongest economy in Africa. They're majority Christian and embraced a capitalist economy. Zimbabwe shows you how much of a failure communism is every single time.

>had big say in it
in economic policy?
no they did not
that was in control of the british empire

Southern Rhodesia was under BSAC rule user. then the empire later but white settlers were able to have a say in both governments.

>Zimbabwe shows you how much of a failure communism is every single time.
It wasn't commie at all. A lot of it's polices were never socialistic or communistic.

I think Botswana has surpassed SA at this point, despite their head-start

Attached: Mar-29-18-Bot-v-SA-v-Zim.jpg (561x351, 39.79K)

It hasn't. It lags behind SA in a lot of things.

yeah
it was run the same way imperial india was, by using a company as a third party to employ mercenaries and manage properties while the crown makes policy choices at the governmental level

Yeah just like every communist shit hole. Communism is filled with nothing but corrupt looters.

Yes it has, I just looked it up and as of 2020 Botswana is wealthier than SA

Settlers were able to vote in the BSAC government and more elected seats were given over time. After that they had the Legislative Assembly of Rhodesia in 1923 where settlers could vote after passing a few requirements.

>eliminate corrupt and rich bourgeoise
>corrupt government bureaucrats steal their property and take their place as new overlords
marx never saw it coming

and yet no one really wants to invest in Botswana. GDP per capita is nota good measure for wealth. Equatorial Guinea is a bit richer yet they live in dense poverty.

that's before rhodesia was given autonomy after ww2, they were still following crown rule in the 20s and you know it
close your wikipedia tab btw faggot

But it never was communistic government. Hell what he did was no different then what other
"capitalistic" states did in Africa.