[kj] OT... World Destruction

B. Oliver Sheppard bigblackhair at sbcglobal.net
Mon Dec 4 18:14:10 EST 2006


Belgium and to a lesser extent France supported the codification of an
ethnic Rwandan caste system. When Belgian troops defended the one-party
Hutu government system in 1990 from a Tutsi uprising, an ethnic national
ID card system was in place that made folks have to choose one ethnicity
or another, Tutsi or Hutu, legally and formally, stamped onto their IDs,
branded officially.

When Germany lost World War I, Rwanda became a Belgian colony (spoils of
war) and initially used a Tutsi comprador govt. as their proxy to
administer the region. This government was an undemocratic monarchy led
by King Jean-Baptiste Kigeli V.

The Tutsi monarchy enacted forced-labor schemes and heavy taxation on
the ethnic majority of Rwanda, the Hutus. This polarized and created
animosity between the ethnic groups. (Also noteworthy: Hutus and Tutsis
were now part of the same nation-state, a state arbitrarily drawn onto
the map of Africa by European colonial powers whose roots are ultimately
in the Berlin Conference of 1884 wherein the European nations carved up
the continent into various regions on their drawing board. )

In 1961, the Belgian government switched sides (I'm not even sure why,
honestly), taking away support from the Tutsi monarchy to the majority
Hutus, logistically supporting a coup against the Tutsi king. This put
the Hutus in power over the Tutsi minority; the Hutu leader and national
president was now Dominique Mbonyumutwa. Belgium set the country free in
1962 under these new & chaotic circumstances. At this point, masses of
Tutsis fled into neighboring Uganda or Burundi, fearing reprisals. By
the 1970s the Hutu government put into place ethnic quotas controlling
the percentage of jobs Tutsis could hold, as well as the maximum amount
of income they could have; Tutsis could hold no more than 14% of any
jobs at any given time. When Tutsis rebelled against this in 1990,
French and Belgian forces arrived in the Rwandan capital to defend the
Hutu one-party regime, a regime that had outlawed Tutsi political
parties. Ceasefires between Tutsi rebels and the Hutu govt. were
negotiated in Belgium in 1991, harkening back to the old colonial days.
This failed when in 1994 the Hutu president was assassinated -- who did
it is unknown. The Hutus blamed the Tutsis, and went all-out for final,
genocidal revenge.

So, you can't say the Belgians directly caused the genocide. The people
who did the actual, on-the-ground killing should be held responsible,
obviously. But the situation has been fucked around with so much that
it's hard to say there's no blood on Belgium or even France's hands.
They militarily defended an autocratic regime that had outlawed rival
parties, especially Tutsi political representation, and that had enacted
legal quotas setting caps on the number of Tutsis that could have jobs,
giving Hutus employment preferences. ("Ghosts of Rwanda" is a great
documentary on the subject.)

-Oliver





Neil Perry wrote:

> I don't know the answers to your questions. But I didn't say the

> colonisation of other countries had nothing to do with capitalism. I said

> the Rwandan massacre had nothing to do with capitalism, as you had said.

>

> Sure, European countries with capitalist political systems had

> colonised that part of Africa a century earlier, but I refuse to see

> a direct link between that and why they started hacking each other

> to pieces, 30 years after they had become an independent nation,

> with no capitalist colonisers to be seen.

>

> N

>

>

> */"B. Oliver Sheppard" <bigblackhair at sbcglobal.net>/* wrote:

>

> Well, if capitalist countries can colonize other countries, and it

> has

> "nothing to do with capitalism," then why isn't that latitude

> granted to

> what Crack insists are communist countries, when they invade others?

>

> Why can't we say that Stalin's invasions had nothing to with

> communism,

> then? Kind of a double standard that conveniently works for the

> cheerleaders of free markets: all evil redounds to what's selectively

> defined as communism in Crack-world -- and all that's good and

> wholesome

> and nice and fuzzy redounds to capitalism. And when a capitalist

> country

> does bad, well it wasn't the capitalism in it that did it. It was an

> aberration.

>

> O-kay. Whatever.

>

> -Oliver

>

>

>

> Neil Perry wrote:

> > Not getting involved in this, but feel compelled to butt in

> regarding

> > Rwanda - the tragedy there had absolutely nothing to do with

> capitalism.

> > It may have had its roots in European colonialism, possibly, but not

> > capitalism. The deaths - approximately 800,000 - were caused by one

> > ethnic group, the Hutus, attempting to completely wipe out another

> > ethnic group, the Tutsis.

> >

> > N

> >

> > */GREG SLAWSON /* wrote:

> >

> > These figures are mostly made up. Even a look at census figures

> > disproves them. How many have capitalism killed? 500,000 in

> > Rowanda? 1.5 million in Iraq, JUST under Bill Clinton (not to

> > mention the ongoing killilngs by the CIA-installed Hussein)? 2 or

> > more million in Asia during the Vietnam War? 20 million in WWII?

> > etc. etc. Besides, how many lives did the capitalists' main enemy

> > of all time, the evil Stalin, save by stopping Hitler in his tracks?

> >

> >

> >

> >

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > Gathering mailing list

> > Gathering at misera.net

> > http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

> >

>

> _______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> _______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>




More information about the Gathering mailing list