[beebeepka]

Critical thinking? Try to look at this from a their point of view and it will make a ton of sense. They were royally fucked but all we heard was the corporate (white farmers) side. Just try to imagine if the sides were reversed

What is more likely:

1. stupid Africans just can't get things done

2. they tried to get some control of their production and their white friends abroad didn't like it one bit

It was so obvious.

[notahacker]

hmmm...What is more likely:

1. Dictator redistributes land to his cronies and gangs of armed men (crucially not the people who worked on the farms who might actually have been able to run them efficiently). This has the same effect as when tried everywhere else regardless of the colours of people involved: production drops. When Zimbabwe goes from being a net exporter of food to a net importer, people lose confidence in a currency which was already extremely prone to inflation.

2. Actually the halving of agricultural production was a sign of how successful the "land reforms" were, and everything else that happened was all the white people's fault

[ur-whale]

All critical thinking will ever yield is theories.

To have value, theories must be met with reality.

This is why providing actual sources is useful.

[beebeepka]

That is certainly true. Though providing sources, let alone "credible" ones, would be hard. Personally, I am not that interested in the details and technicalities as this is where the deception is more likely to lurk. Who has more control over the flow of information: Zimbabwe, or the poor multi billion dollar farmers they banished?

[hn_throwaway_99]

To be honest, I think this type of thinking is everything that is wrong with public discourse today.

Gtex555 made a very specific claim: "In truth the whites were stealing minerals and precious metals from the country on the cheap and laundering that money as farming proceeds giving the impression of this bread basket cause it was all funded by illicit funds. When they were kicked out they continued to steal these minerals through bribing the top officials but the only difference was there was no-longer an incentive to send the money back into Zimbabwe and hence the farming was no-longer supported by illicit funds and it collapsed."

It should not be particularly difficult to find at least some evidence for that claim. There are voluminous reports and investigations of government corruption all over the world.

And yet, your response is basically "I'm not really concerned with the details, I'm just going to believe what I choose to believe because that fits more closely with the narrative that I identify with".

Some of us still believe that evidence matters.

[beebeepka]

That is fair and while I firmly believe evidence matters a great deal, I am not that great at gathering it.

Please excuse my short form scepticism. And it has to be said: you made some good points.