Mugabe's Water Terrorism
Via The Australian, more grim news from Zimbabwe:
Robert Mugabe is using water as a tool of repression in Bulawayo, the largest urban area in Zimbabwe controlled by a council of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, the President's critics say.
…The water crisis is a dangerous extra strain on Bulawayo, which is already reeling from the country's hyperinflation, critical shortages of basic food and electricity supplies, and the political repression witnessed in the rest of the country. Church and political leaders believe Mr Mugabe is determined to let Bulawayo wither without water. The Government has ignored repeated appeals for help.
"The problem is political," said the Reverend Kevin Thomson, a leading figure in Churches In Bulawayo, an alliance of the city's churches which has begun an emergency water supply operation in the townships. "They don't want to fix the problem. Just as they control the supply of food for political purposes, water has become another area for controlling people."
…"We wrote to the minister responsible for water for two months about the looming disaster," said an official of Churches In Bulawayo. "There was neither acknowledgement of, nor any reply to, our letters."
Instead, the minister, Munacho Mutezo, declared that the Government would not intervene in the water crisis until the city council allowed his ministry to take over water management.
Writing in the Financial Times a few years back, my friend and former colleague Fredrik Segerfeldt, author of Water for Sale: How Businesses and the Market Can Resolve the World's Water Crisis (Cato), argued that the privatization of water distribution in poor countries could save millions of lives.
Ron Bailey reviewed Segerfeldt here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
You're not going to see any reform there. The water companies run the government. I mean, that stuff doesn't grow on trees, you know.
Yes, yes. Just providing a link to Fredrik's excellent book. I am fully aware that there won't be any privatization in Harare any time soon.
I'm not trying to be facetious here, but isn't the libertarian argument to do nothing? To not get involved? To not (heaven-forbid) engage in active regime change, however evil the regime?Seriously, why even post this story? Privatization doesn't apply to dictatorships.
Desmond Tutu has called for South Africa to toughen its stance against Zimbabwe.
which is already reeling from the country's hyperinflation
Considering how high it is, I don't think hyper really covers it. More like Supermegaultrainflation.
Or maybe double-secret inflation?
"isn't the libertarian argument to do nothing?"
There's no argument made in the article. So while you argue that the libertarian stance is to do nothing, the article one-ups you and actually does nothing. You can't outsmart these people, ed. That said, why do you peruse media sources if you're not interested in news?
ed, Episiarch - Hey guys, Zimbabwe's inflation is now under 7000%! So can your smart-aleck remarks about the effectiveness of price controls, since it's obvious they're working swimmingly.
why do you peruse media sources if you're not interested in news?
I can get my news anywhere. My point was, why post a story of this nature on a site that's supposed to be about ideas, when it's the editorial policy to do nothing about it? It's fine to point out Mugabe's latest horror, but if you're not prepared to act, you're just pissing in the wind.
...but if you're not prepared to act, you're just pissing in the wind.
Hell, I'm prepared to act. I'm boycotting all Zimbabwe products as of this date until Mugabe is removed from office. That always works so well.
It's fine to point out Mugabe's latest horror, but if you're not prepared to act, you're just pissing in the wind.
Part of being free is the freedom to piss in the wind...
why post a story of this nature on a site that's supposed to be about ideas, when it's the editorial policy to do nothing about it?
Continuing to spread information about a cruel kleptocracy is doing something about it. In this age of information, it's more powerful than you might guess.
Look at Radley Balko's neverending exposure of pig cops and their illegal tactics. I'm telling you, the tide is turning.
I'm not trying to be facetious here, but isn't the libertarian argument to do nothing? To not get involved? To not (heaven-forbid) engage in active regime change, however evil the regime?Seriously, why even post this story? Privatization doesn't apply to dictatorships.
Right, the problem is not private vs. public but rather the nature of dicatatorships.
Heck, one could argue that the water in Zimbabwe is privitized. It's owned by Robert Mugabe.
Heck, one could argue that the water in Zimbabwe is privitized. It's owned by Robert Mugabe.
What?
Dan T. -
You were making a funny, right?
Heck, one could argue that the water in Zimbabwe is privitized. It's owned by Robert Mugabe.
That's proof right there that privatization will never work.
I don't see the point of adding the privatization angle to this story.
Mugabe is attempting to use control of water to oppress people.
Whether the water supply should or should not be privatized is a separate issue. Does anyone seriously think that Mugabe would respect the property of the hypothetical private water suppliers and therefore abstain from his present actions?
Whether the water supply should or should not be privatized is a separate issue. Does anyone seriously think that Mugabe would respect the property of the hypothetical private water suppliers and therefore abstain from his present actions?
No, and thats part of the problem. Lack of secure property rights. That, not TEH CORPORASHUNZ or "imperialism" are the real problems preventing many developing countries from industrializing.
I'm not trying to be facetious here, but isn't the libertarian argument to do nothing? To not get involved? To not (heaven-forbid) engage in active regime change, however evil the regime?
Not quite. The libertarian argument is that each individual should have a choice whether to get involved. An individual might choose not to get involved because he is too busy dealing with problems in his own life or his own society. Or he chooses not to because he is busy pursuing his own happiness. Or he might choose not to because the risks are too high. Or he might choose not to because he doesn't care. No matter, it's not the business of the rest of us to judge another's reasons for not rushing in to solve every problem in the world.
However, there's nothing in the libertarian argument that says one can't help out in a situation like this if one wants to. It is coercive, however, to make everybody else get involved, too.
Cesar, wouldn't you first need to determine who owns that property. Government can pretty much do what it wants on property it owns. I'm not saying I disagree, I'm just do want to put the cart before the horse.
"""Robert Mugabe is using water as a tool of repression in Bulawayo, the largest urban area in Zimbabwe controlled by a council of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change,"""
Is that council a home owner's association?
I keed, I keed
Hey speaking of water, government and arrests.
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_6928168?source=rss
I do not want to put the cart in front of the horse.
Cesar, wouldn't you first need to determine who owns that property. Government can pretty much do what it wants on property it owns. I'm not saying I disagree, I'm just do want to put the cart before the horse.
Thats understandable.
Proof again that blacks can't govern.
Wow. Skip.
That's just ignorant. Wow.
(psst - they prefer "African-African")
terrible. sad. such ignorance. You know, you should probably sit out the next few plays. What with the "not being funny" thing and all...
Pissin' In The Wind Lyrics
Pissin' in the wind, bettin' on a losing friend
Makin' the same mistakes, we swear we'll never make again
Pissin' in the wind, but it's blowing on all our friends
We're gonna sit and grin and tell our grandchildren
About the time I called this Guy it was four in the morning
Teach me the words to the song I was humming
(hum along)
He just laughed and he said that the ole grey cat is sneakin' down
the hall
But all he wants to know is who in the hell is paying for this call
Oh Pissin' in the wind, bettin' on a losing friend
Makin' the same mistakes, we swear we'll never make again
And we're pissin' in the wind, but it's blowing on all our friends
We're gonna sit and grin and tell our grandchildren
Now this Nunn called me up, it was eight in the morning
Wanted to know how in the world am I doin'
Ohhhh ohh, mmmm mmmm
He just laughed and he said get it together boy, and fall on by the house
Some Gonzo buddies would like to play anything your picking now
Oh pissin' in the wind, bettin' on a losing friend
Makin' the same mistakes, we swear we'll never make again
And we're pissin' in the wind, but it's blowing on all our friends
We're gonna sit and grin and tell our grandchildren
Now we worked and we suffered and struggled
Makin' our record till we got it right
Now we're waiting on the check to come sneaking down the hall
Like that old time feeling
That we never should have ever put the record out at all
Yes pissin' in the wind, bettin' on a losing friend
Makin' the same mistakes, we swear we'll never make again
And we're pissin' in the wind, and it's blowing on all our friends
We're gonna sit and grin and tell our grandchildren
That the answer my friend is just pissin' in the wind
Oh the answer is pissin' in the sink
(psst - they prefer "African-African")
Unless they are from the Carribean. Never, ever make the mistake of calling a Hatian an "African American". They seemed to get very pissed off by it.
Cesar -
indeed! I did have the pleasure of hearing someone refer to a Zulu who lived in Capetown (IIRC) as an "African American" South African...
it was the conversational equivalent of an out-of-body experience.
"(psst - they prefer "African-African")"
Not in Africa, my friend.
I stand by my original post.
indeed! I did have the pleasure of hearing someone refer to a Zulu who lived in Capetown (IIRC) as an "African American" South African...
Its even funnier when a real "African American" is a white South African immigrant.
I stand by my original post.
We sure this isn't joe? The probable support of Jim Crow laws, the implacableness of his ideas...
(keed, keed)
looks like Skippy has completely missed the boat. Or wagon. Or whatever mode of transportation is out there and available. Which isn't surprising, given that he's named after a peanut butter. I'm going to call you "Tinkerbell" now, riffing off the peanut butter and those associated with peanut butter names. If there were any humor in your post, I might dub thee "Captain Hook", since it's "talk like a pirate day", but that might make your cross dressing alter ego, "Mrs. Haberdasher" jealous.
Cesar: nice!
The trouble is monopolies, especially monopolies enforced by violence.
If someone has a monopoly on water, they can use that monopoly to intimidate and control people. It doesn't matter if that monopoly is "private" or "public", those are just words and don't describe any real physical or systematic difference between the two.
The trouble with socialists, is that they think that a state monopoly is somehow different or less oppressive than a private monopoly. And even worse yet, they think that a state-monopoly is better than a private non-monopoly.
"looks like Skippy has completely missed the boat. Or wagon. Or whatever mode of transportation is out there and available. Which isn't surprising, given that he's named after a peanut butter. I'm going to call you "Tinkerbell" now, riffing off the peanut butter and those associated with peanut butter names. If there were any humor in your post, I might dub thee "Captain Hook", since it's "talk like a pirate day", but that might make your cross dressing alter ego, "Mrs. Haberdasher" jealous."
Dissing me with impunity may get you hard, but it won't change the facts on the ground.
It was so much better off as Rhodesia, a British Colony. Turn it back over to the British, then if it works out reasonably well, try the same thing here. Maybe better than Hillary, especially if the consrvatives get back in power in the U.K.
Its even funnier when a real "African American" is a white South African immigrant.
Similarly, I once met a Jewish girl in college whose family was from Morocco. I thought the same thing at the time - should she be called African-American?
My sister-in-law is from Ghana, but she only became hyphenated recently, having lived most of her life in Britain. Skip will be pleased that she is governing nothing either here or in Ghana. Well, except for my brother, who can probably use it.
oh hay hai Skippy!
Not quite there, old bean!
Lubing up the Noam Chomsky Blow Up doll makes me hard.
Dissing you with impunity makes me smile.
And then chortle. Followed by a giggle and a belly laugh.
Douglas Gray -
Sad thing is, given a choice today, I bet a lot of folks there might go that route, given the chance.
In Zimbabwe, that is.
When people say African countries can't govern themselves, its useful reminding them that it was once said majority Catholic countries could never be democracies. And that east Asians could never develop capitalism because of their culture.
Skippy is a nerd.
(that wasn't dissing with impunity. That was gratuitous dissing)
And you're a twaddlenock
(that was also gratuitous)
And your hair smells vaguely like toast.
(that made no sense)
I think Skip just needs a list of the African countries being led in a liberally democratic fashion by black leaders.
I think Skip just needs a list of the African countries being led in a liberally democratic fashion by black leaders.
He could look at Zimbabwe's very successful neighbor, Botswana.
Ghana?
Its also worth noting Botswana has a very free market economy which actively welcomes foreign investment. Its been one of the few African countries that has been spared dictatorship, civil war, or massive corruption since independence. Coincidence? I think not.
I agree with Botswana, certainly.
" since it's "talk like a pirate day", "
I heard that at work today, are they the ones that end everything with, "....bitch".
Mugabe is attempting to use control of water to oppress people.
Anyone else think this is just a spoof of a crappy Sci-Fi Channel show (not that all Sci-Fi Channel stuff is crap)?
Kenya seems to be decent as well.
Skippy is right: black people can't govern.
And neither can anybody else. Evidence for this is not lacking either.
(Just bein' an anarchist when I have the chance.)
John-David - Ghana is getting there, but it still has a little ways to go.
Kenya has similar issues, but neither country is a basket case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_despotism
I declare that events in Zimbabwe demonstrate the superiority of Democratic Party-style liberalism over all other political and economic systems.
After all, the political system in Zimbabwe is not Democratic Party-style liberalism, and look what's it's gotten them. They would be so much better off under a system of governance more in line with the Democratic Party platform. Can you doubt it?
Just look at this water terrorism. Democrats would never do that. That is a very non-Democratic thing to do.
Ergo, Democratic Party-style liberalism is superior to political philosophies, such as Mugabe's, which are not Democratic Party-style liberalism.
After all, the political system in Zimbabwe is not Democratic Party-style liberalism, and look what's it's gotten them. They would be so much better off under a system of governance more in line with the Democratic Party platform. Can you doubt it?
Joe, I'm not sure what you are going on about but I'll give you that John Kerry would make a much better President than Robert Mugabwe.
joe, it's Talk Like A Pirate Day, not Talk Like An Idiot Day. I think your calendar might be on the wrong month.
On Hit and Run every day is Talk Like and Idiot Day
I agree, crimethink. That type of thinking is idiotic.
Regardless of who employs it, or which ideology they employ it for.
Let's keep this exchange in mind.