# What's to be done with Zimbabwe? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 8, 2008, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257 "2008-06-08T19:48:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Darryl\_Lict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7cd45c/32.png) [@Darryl\_Lict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darryl_Lict)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2008, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/81 "2008-06-13T21:04:02Z")
[QUOTE= ralph124c] Take a Look at Angola or Mozambique [/QUOTE] I was under the impression that the outlook for Mozambique is actually pretty good, and should give hope for other African nations. After having decades of military dictatorship, they were able to have somewhat successful electoral and economic reforms. The elections have been considered democratic and the government is progressive, at least by African standards. I was there in 2002 and the sense of optimism was palpable. Economic growth has been strong and Mozambique was the new hotspot for tourism when I was there. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/82 "2008-06-14T03:32:30Z")
[QUOTE=Xema] Perhaps when you’ve tired of bleating about the source, you might put yourself to the trouble of saying what you find wrong about the linked article. Is your refusal to do so not the antithesis of debate? [/QUOTE] Some sources are _ipso facto_ not worth debating. [The _argumentum ad hominem_ is not always wrong,](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=405245) and this is one of the times when it ain’t. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/83 "2008-06-14T04:36:29Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Some sources are _ipso facto_ not worth debating. [/QUOTE] I’m suggesting you not debate the source, but instead attend to the facts. The notion that a link on a site you don’t care for renders an article ineligible for discussion is stunningly lame - approximately the equivalent of the 4th grader with his hands over his ears saying “Blah blah I can’t hear you.” ---
**Author:** ![Aquila\_Be](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a698b9/32.png) [@Aquila\_Be](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aquila_Be)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/84 "2008-06-14T08:38:46Z")
On a brighter note, it’s good to see that the Trustees of the University of Massachusetts have a strong moral compass and have decided to hit Mugabe hard for his crimes: [UMass Trustees Unanimously Rescind Robert Mugabe Degree](http://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/newsreleases/articles/76038.php) > [@](#): > > LOWELL – The University of Massachusetts Board of Trustees took an unprecedented step today, rescinding an honorary degree awarded to Robert Mugabe in 1986. The vote was unanimous. > > “Rescinding an honorary degree is a step to be taken in only the rarest and most grievous of circumstances,” said Robert J. Manning, chairman of the UMass Board of Trustees. “After studying this issue for more than a year, the University of Massachusetts Trustees have decided that Robert Mugabe’s performance and policies in Zimbabwe are so egregious as to warrant this ultimate expression of disapproval.” > > “We have decided to break the link between Robert Mugabe’s name and this University’s own good name,” Manning added. No lame pulling of punches there. ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/85 "2008-06-14T08:56:07Z")
[QUOTE=MrDibble] That’s my point - you really can’t tell until someone’s actually doing the job. [/QUOTE] Actually, I think it proves _my_ point. Bush had some bad warning signs, and turned out to be a terrible president. Zuma has some even worse warning signs, and though things could still go either way, could turn out to be a _catastrophic_ president. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/86 "2008-06-14T09:32:56Z")
I guess it must be a different David Horowitz than the one who made that “Fight Back” show back in the 1980s. [QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Some sources are _ipso facto_ not worth debating. [The _argumentum ad hominem_ is not always wrong,](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=405245) and this is one of the times when it ain’t. [/QUOTE] That’s ridiculous. I’m not exactly sure what David Horowitz is arguing here, but whatever it is must be a damn good argument, because you apparently can’t come up with any response on the merits. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/87 "2008-06-14T13:14:23Z")
By the way, **Brainglutton** , I would really like to know exactly why this David Horowitz person is on your sh\*t list. Let me put it another way: What is the **Brainglutton** standard for determining whether a person’s arguments can be summarily dismissed as you have apparently done with David Horowitz? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/88 "2008-06-14T14:26:39Z")
[QUOTE=brazil84] By the way, **Brainglutton** , I would really like to know exactly why this David Horowitz person is on your sh\*t list. [/QUOTE] See [here.](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20000703/sherman/6) Dude’s a crank. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/89 "2008-06-14T14:46:08Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Dude’s a crank. [/QUOTE] And this calls for rational people to reject discussion of anything he approves of? What exactly would be wrong with evaluating the linked article on its own merits? ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/90 "2008-06-14T15:00:34Z")
[QUOTE=Xema] And this calls for rational people to reject discussion of anything he approves of? What exactly would be wrong with evaluating the linked article on its own merits? [/QUOTE] Without commenting on the specific case, if a person has a pattern of using flawed or falsified information, I do think it can get to the point where you just reject anything they say instead of doing the research to show that this crop of facts and stats and such is also untrue or misrepresented. At that point you just figure that if what they are saying is actually true, someone more reliable will pick it up. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/91 "2008-06-14T15:28:38Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] See [here.](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20000703/sherman/6) Dude’s a crank. [/QUOTE] I don’t understand what your criteria are. What exactly is the problem here? That David Horowitz was criticized in _The Nation_? That he criticized certain prominent blacks? That he pointed out that the white on black rate of rape is very different from the black on white rate? That he (allegedly) spins things to support his viewpoint? Sorry, but I don’t have the time to go through that long article and guess what the standard is. But on the surface, it looks to me like he is he a pundit who is about on the same level as any of a dozen other pundits in 21st century america. I suspect that you just don’t agree with him on a lot of issues and conclude that he must therefore be a “crank.” > [@](#): > > Without commenting on the specific case, if a person has a pattern of using flawed or falsified information, I do think it can get to the point where you just reject anything they say instead of doing the research to show that this crop of facts and stats and such is also untrue or misrepresented. I agree. If David Horowitz had such a history; and if he was making an argument based on this sort of information, then **Brainglutton** would have a point. But I haven’t seen any evidence that this is the case. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/92 "2008-06-14T18:52:58Z")
[QUOTE=Manda JO] if a person has a pattern of using flawed or falsified information, I do think it can get to the point where you just reject anything they say instead of doing the research to show that this crop of facts and stats and such is also untrue or misrepresented. [/QUOTE] Well, there’s an old saying that the greatest fool in the world can say it’s raining, but that doesn’t mean the sun is shining. Humans routinely make mistakes. The standard for switching from “This guy has been unreliable in the past - better check his stuff carefully” to “This guy is beyond the pale - never read anything he approves of, and condemn those who do” ought to be very stringent indeed. If it isn’t trivially easy to show the falseness of any chosen example, it argues that the condemnation was uncalled for. And to defend this on the basis that someone is a “crank” seems to fly in the face of the concept of rational debate. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2008, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257/93 "2008-06-14T18:57:22Z")
[QUOTE=Aquila Be] On a brighter note, it’s good to see that the Trustees of the University of Massachusetts have a strong moral compass and have decided to hit Mugabe hard for his crimes [/QUOTE] While I don’t fault them for doing what little they could, I do have to wonder what took them so long. Mugabe was pretty obviously a monsterous tyrant years ago. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-to-be-done-with-zimbabwe/452257.md?page=4)