By Son of ZimbabweOn the surface it might be thought that there could be no similarities between Gordon Brown’s politics and Robert Mugabe’s. But is that so?
Gordon Brown is doing exactly what Mugabe does; the only difference is the degree and speed of the affliction which they impose upon their populations.
While it might be unfair to attribute all these errors to Brown personally, as he is an end-point of the misdemeanours of successive politicians, he failed to see the dangers or never acknowledge them. Instead he mindlessly persisted in perpetuating this inherited political cult.
Both Brown and Mugabe have a questionable mandate to be in office.
Both are essentially concerned with their own image and hanging on to power when it is clear that their leadership capacity is extinct.
Both Brown and Mugabe are presiding over declining nations, neither man able to provide the leadership spirit to resuscitate their nations.
In the face of failure, contributed to by their own weaknesses, both threaten that unless they are retained in office the population will face worse to come.
To remain in office both attempt to increase their voter support by appeasing the least economically productive sector of the population, whilst threatening the most productive sector of the population.
Both head governments which have contrived criminal charges against opposition politicians, in Mugabe’s case Morgan Tsvangerai, Nick Griffin by Brown.
Both have bullied their populations by oppressive legislature. In this way both their populations have been slowly intimidated into passivity and inertia, and both Brown and Mugabe have succeeded in destroying their respective population’s will to resist.
Both are suppressing freedom of speech, Brown by prohibiting “anti-immigrants” speech, .Mugabe by prohibiting “anti- government” speech
Neither has appeared to be concerned about the true purpose of government which is to refrain from continuous legislative engineering and instead to reduce legislative manipulation in order to offer the population a predictable stability. Without this the sense of security, and a belief that there is full protection of person and possession, is impossible.
Mugabe abdicated the control of Zimbabwe to a cabal of corruption which effectively operates Zimbabwe to its own benefit. The financial foundation of Zimbabwe’s economy exited abroad.
Brown abdicated the control of Britain to a cabal in Europe, the traditional enemies of Britain, to the benefit of that new power. The industrial foundation of Britain’s economy exited abroad.
Brown and Mugabe have both damaged their nation’s economic power by racial engineering. As a result both populations are degrading into impoverishment. Both have diluted the white creators, their most productive work force. Mugabe did this by a forced exiling of the white creators of industry. Brown did this by a forced invasion of black immigrants diluting the previously superbly successful creators of industry, the white work-force.
Both have filled the government coffers (and the pockets of their politicians) by printing money to an unprecedented degree, in order to both hide their foundation economic errors and as a short term placation of their populations.
Mugabe’s ruthlessly printing of money caused a devaluation which will leave most of the present generation of Zimbabweans destitute.
Brown first ruthlessly taxed the population and later ruthlessly printed money (to cover an unconscionable deficit) which will leave most of the next generation of Britons destitute.
Zimbabwe is a small, land-locked country with finite resources. However each citizen’s share-holding of their country has been progressively reduced by population increase, following Mugabe’s government’s encouragement of unrestrained breeding, to further his political cause.
Britain is a small, water-locked country with finite resources. However each citizen’s share-holding of their country has been progressively reduced by population increase following Brown’s government’s encouragement of unrestrained immigration, to further his political cause.
Son of Zimbabwe
Gordon Brown is doing exactly what Mugabe does; the only difference is the degree and speed of the affliction which they impose upon their populations.
While it might be unfair to attribute all these errors to Brown personally, as he is an end-point of the misdemeanours of successive politicians, he failed to see the dangers or never acknowledge them. Instead he mindlessly persisted in perpetuating this inherited political cult.
Both Brown and Mugabe have a questionable mandate to be in office.
Both are essentially concerned with their own image and hanging on to power when it is clear that their leadership capacity is extinct.
Both Brown and Mugabe are presiding over declining nations, neither man able to provide the leadership spirit to resuscitate their nations.
In the face of failure, contributed to by their own weaknesses, both threaten that unless they are retained in office the population will face worse to come.
To remain in office both attempt to increase their voter support by appeasing the least economically productive sector of the population, whilst threatening the most productive sector of the population.
Both head governments which have contrived criminal charges against opposition politicians, in Mugabe’s case Morgan Tsvangerai, Nick Griffin by Brown.
Both have bullied their populations by oppressive legislature. In this way both their populations have been slowly intimidated into passivity and inertia, and both Brown and Mugabe have succeeded in destroying their respective population’s will to resist.
Both are suppressing freedom of speech, Brown by prohibiting “anti-immigrants” speech, .Mugabe by prohibiting “anti- government” speech
Neither has appeared to be concerned about the true purpose of government which is to refrain from continuous legislative engineering and instead to reduce legislative manipulation in order to offer the population a predictable stability. Without this the sense of security, and a belief that there is full protection of person and possession, is impossible.
Mugabe abdicated the control of Zimbabwe to a cabal of corruption which effectively operates Zimbabwe to its own benefit. The financial foundation of Zimbabwe’s economy exited abroad.
Brown abdicated the control of Britain to a cabal in Europe, the traditional enemies of Britain, to the benefit of that new power. The industrial foundation of Britain’s economy exited abroad.
Brown and Mugabe have both damaged their nation’s economic power by racial engineering. As a result both populations are degrading into impoverishment. Both have diluted the white creators, their most productive work force. Mugabe did this by a forced exiling of the white creators of industry. Brown did this by a forced invasion of black immigrants diluting the previously superbly successful creators of industry, the white work-force.
Both have filled the government coffers (and the pockets of their politicians) by printing money to an unprecedented degree, in order to both hide their foundation economic errors and as a short term placation of their populations.
Mugabe’s ruthlessly printing of money caused a devaluation which will leave most of the present generation of Zimbabweans destitute.
Brown first ruthlessly taxed the population and later ruthlessly printed money (to cover an unconscionable deficit) which will leave most of the next generation of Britons destitute.
Zimbabwe is a small, land-locked country with finite resources. However each citizen’s share-holding of their country has been progressively reduced by population increase, following Mugabe’s government’s encouragement of unrestrained breeding, to further his political cause.
Britain is a small, water-locked country with finite resources. However each citizen’s share-holding of their country has been progressively reduced by population increase following Brown’s government’s encouragement of unrestrained immigration, to further his political cause.
Son of Zimbabwe
