3 ms·
Rhodesia is a powder-keg but I'll tread carefully and try to give my angle. I know ex-Rhodesians, they still call themselves that since they left up until Marc
by dingaling 9y ago
Rhodesia is a powder-keg but I'll tread carefully and try to give my angle.
I know ex-Rhodesians, they still call themselves that since they left up until March / April 1980 when it became Zimbabwe. Their passports say Rhodesia or, from 1978, the transitional Zimbabwe-Rhodesia. Why would they call it by any other name?
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/peek_01/15570965/39590/39590_640.jpg https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/peek_01/15570965/39590/39590...
I would be careful about invoking the term 'colonial' when speaking with them. Many Rhodesians felt stabbed in the back by the 'colonial' power, the UK.
Outside former residents, there is an apparent romanticism amongst some demographics about Rhodesia in much the same way as the Wild West; tough pioneers taming the environment and making a previously barren land wealthy. Like the Wild West, I haven't seen that being based on a notion of supremacism; certainly Rhodesians of whom I've heard that went to South Africa were shocked at the much greater degree of discrimination in that country.
- 0xcde4c3db 9y agoMy post isn't really about Rhodesia per se, and I don't intend to suggest that the whole concept of Rhodesian identity is illegitimate. The kind of people I'm talking about tend to be very keen on apartheid South Africa as well, usually without showing any signs of intimate familiarity with either country (many of them are also apparently too young to have direct experience). This is part of a larger pattern of appropriation. There are many, many examples of white supremacists latching on to iconography and terminology from other places and cultures and declaring themselves the "true" Christians/Pagans/Nordics/Celtics/Aryans/Israelites/etc..