Zimbabwe is a country being torn into pieces over racial issues at this current point in time, and the suffering that these people must endure is horrific. Every day hundreds are fleeing their native land to simply find means by which to survive. Why does this happen in countries around the world? In Zimbabwe it is over racial tension, but the fight to end it is only proving to produce more suffering amongst the citizens. Is what the government doing right? Can they take this land from the white-minority that owns it? In this paper below one will view both side of the argument, that of the functionalist perspective and that of the conflict theorist perspective, ultimately deciding which side they believe to have the stronger argument.
"A Bleak Ride Home for Zimbabwe Deportees" is a disturbing article, telling of the horrors of the governmental and economic problems happening in Zimbabwe. The New York Times released this story on September 23, 2003, in light of the increasing problem of Natives fleeing the country, due to the suppression of the government. Throughout this article one is captured by the suffering that Zimbabweans are enduring as their leader, President Robert Mugabe, tries to "free" his people from "oppressive white-minority rule". This act has left the country in turmoil, with over 70 percent unemployment and much of the citizens starving to death or fleeing into neighboring South Africa as the only resort to safe themselves. Each month at least 2,500 people flee into Johannesburg and every two weeks about 1,000 of those refugees are dragged back into the shambles of their homeland, many only to attempt migration again. In Johannesburg they by no means found themselves a life of luxury, but they were able to make between 30-45 dollars a week - enough to send back to his relatives to help buy food. The current situation has reached such extreme levels, that many Zimbabweans kill themselves on the train ride back to their country, because "they would rather die, than go home.
