Zimbabwe's Mugabe Is Out, But the Policies That Destroyed Zimbabwe Are Still In
Bad policies make bad men more dangerous.

Robert Mugabe finally resigned as president of Zimbabwe this week, leading to celebrations in the streets. But those celebrations are likely to be short-lived: Mugabe may be gone, but his authoritarian system of government remains firmly in place.
Zimbabwe's military did not force the 93-year-old dictator from office because of the human rights abuses and disastrous economic policies that marked his 37 years of rule. It acted because Mugabe replaced his longtime vice president and presumptive successor, Emmanuel Mnangagwa, with his 52-year-old wife, Grace Mugabe.
Mnangagwa is on his way back to Zimbabwe and is expected to be sworn in as president Friday.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson claims that Zimbabwe now has an "extraordinary opportunity to set itself on a new path." But Mnangagwa, whose aides call him Comrade and whose nickname is The Crocodile, is unlikely to offer a substantially different sort of rule. As Todd Moss of the Centre for Global Development pointed out to Australia's ABC News, "Zimbabweans know Mnangagwa is the architect of the Matabeland massacres and that he abetted Mugabe's looting of the country."
Mugabe's signature move was seizing land from white farmers and claiming to redistribute it to poor blacks. (In fact he used the land to reward his allies and supporters.) He crippled the economy with hyperinflation, imposed tariffs that dried up trade, and increased government spending from 32.5 percent of GDP in 1979 to more than 44 percent in 1989. Meanwhile he capped interest rates and borrowed liberally to cover his spending, fueling more inflation and making capital hard to access for those not favored by the regime. His labor rules made it virtually impossible to fire workers, which hurt independent businesses but didn't keep the official unemployment rate from reaching 60 percent. Indeed, his party went out of its way to suppress the creation of independent African businesses, fearing that they would threaten its political power. With the economy devastated, Zimbabweans have had to rely on black markets to stay afloat.
Back in 2002, Reason's Ronald Bailey laid out how a government could centrally plan itself into poverty. A couple of years ago he noted that Mugabe had seemingly taken it as a playbook, bringing millions of people to the brink of starvation.
Sadly, ruinous policies like Mugabe's remain popular. Earlier this year, South Africa's Jacob Zuma expressed interest in accelerating "land reforms" that redistribute farmland to his allies. Even in the West, the kind of policies that ruined Zimbabwe—nationalization, redistribution, protectionism—persist.
Mugabe was a bad man, but his policies were even worse.
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 know who else was a bad man?
Shaft?
Those policies are not only still in - they are spreading to South Africa.
Zuma is just hanging on by a thread because of his commie tendencies.
As parodied on Zimbabwe's favorite sitcom, Emmanuwill and Grace.
But did Mugabe give Zimbabwe free health care?
Free nothing is better than paid nothing, but it's worse than paid something.
Your biased account ignores the fact that Britain and the US reneged on their obligations to pay compensation to the white farmers in the land reform programme signed between Zimbabwe and the colonialists at the Lancaster House Agreement in the 1970s, leaving Mugabe with no choice but to allow forced seizures. What is it really? DO YOU THINK that Africans will just sit there snd let you steal and own their land indefinitely while they subsist as tenanted peasants? Won't happen in a million years. Freedom or death. If you don't like it, leave Zimbabwe. Why did you even leave Europe in the first place to go there and massacre them to steal their land a century ago? You are the cause of all their problems, because you're thieves and mass murderers.
Who the fuck are you talking to?
TL;DR:
"Look, the Romanovs were really bad people, okay?"
Andy1 is an ardent Mugabe man who can't understand how an economy works.
I say we send Krugman over there to sort it out.