[BeaverFever]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

That only just means the {new} oppressors are still in control.

FTFY

If you perpetuate the wealth power of the former oppressors it means the new oppressors are in control?

I guess maybe I could have worded that sentence better; take 2:

If you allow the former oppressors to maintain their wealth and power, then they remain in control.

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

That only just means the {new} oppressors are still in control.

FTFY

If you perpetuate the wealth power of the former oppressors it means the new oppressors are in control?

I guess maybe I could have worded that sentence better; take 2:

If you allow the former oppressors to maintain their wealth and power, then they remain in control.

If you do the same thing as your former oppressors, you become the oppressor.

[BeaverFever]

That’s also true

And again I don’t support expropriation without compensation

But that alone is not equivalent to the crimes of the former oppressors.

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

But that alone is not equivalent to the crimes of the former oppressors.

The point I'm trying to make, the same as I was in the Boushee/Stanley thread and in any US Political thread or any thread that is 'us vs them'; if 'getting even' is the goal, then 'peace' will never be achieved. Not with First Nations, not with Democrats/Republicans nor White and Black South Africans.

Starting new and fresh is the only way to successfully go forward. There are no 'equivalences'. Blacks can't act 'less oppressive' than Whites used to be, and expect anything to seem 'fair'.

[martin14]

$1:

$1:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

A new kind of ethnic cleansing where the people being supposedly cleansed have all the land, all the private sector jobs, own all the businesses and control all the money and continue to enjoy almost all of the privileges of a ruling elite, except hiring preference when applying for government jobs.

Jews in Germany.
The perception. Correct or not doesn't matter, that was the perception.

First this is not comparable to the holocaust

Yep.
Not yet.

$1:

'We are not calling for the slaughter of white people - at least for now': South African parliament votes to SEIZE white-owned land as experts warn of violent repercussions

White South African farmers to be removed from their land after parliament vote
The motion for 'expropriation without compensation' passed by a landslide
It was brought about by Julius Malema who said white farmers are 'criminals'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -land.html

[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

One major difference though is South African colonization follows the pattern of most tropical and subtropical European colonies, where the climate and tropical diseases prevent or discourage mass settlement of Europeans. In temperate regions like North America, European settlers along with their their livestock and crops flourished while their germs and communicable diseases quickly decimated the indigenous populatio and whites quickly became the majority. In tropical colonies, the opposite was true. European crops,livestock and farming methods were not well adapted to the climate and along with various waterborne and mosquito-borne diseases limited the success and attractiveness of European settlement. So in these tropical places, the Europeans remained a permanent minority. These colonies had to continuously rely on more brutal and oppressive means to maintain control. Many parts of conqured Africa were never settled by Europeans at all, and were simply garrisoned by European troops and private armies who pressed the locals into slave labor. South Africa was perhaps among the most successful of these tropical colonies as the climate is actually quite moderate compared to other tropical locations yet the white population there was never more than 11% at its peak. How is a country that is 11% wealthy and 89% slave any different from any other African “shithole” country? You would not be singing it’s praises if the privileged 11% were non-whites would you?

That's some nice copy/paste, but two things.

$1:

We can easily say that everything you post in the next 5 years about South Africa
will be either an outright lie, or borne of pure ignorance.

South Africa was never a slave holding country. Slavery in the Colony ended in 1820.

The White population of South Africa in 1911 was 22% of the total.


Lies, or ignorance ?

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

That’s also true

And again I don’t support expropriation without compensation

But that alone is not equivalent to the crimes of the former oppressors.

Oh, don't worry, the crimes are well underway, and more will come.

[BeaverFever]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

But that alone is not equivalent to the crimes of the former oppressors.

The point I'm trying to make, the same as I was in the Boushee/Stanley thread and in any US Political thread or any thread that is 'us vs them'; if 'getting even' is the goal, then 'peace' will never be achieved. Not with First Nations, not with Democrats/Republicans nor White and Black South Africans.

Starting new and fresh is the only way to successfully go forward. There are no 'equivalences'. Blacks can't act 'less oppressive' than Whites used to be, and expect anything to seem 'fair'.

Well I agree that sentiment.

But in this context “starting fresh” necessarily means that some wealth and power, previously held exclusively by whites, must be redistributed to others. SOMEHOW.

It should be done respectfully and reasonably (expropriation without compensation is neither IMO) but with the understanding that it is the right thing to do and has to be done, and accepting you’re never going to get 100% support from anyone, especially from the group that has everything and has to do the giving up.

[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Well I agree that sentiment.

But in this context “starting fresh” necessarily means that some wealth and power, previously held exclusively by whites,.....................

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I am now going to justify the seizure of White property in South Africa without compensation as a good thing.

$1:

........................must be redistributed to others. SOMEHOW.

It should be done respectfully and reasonably (expropriation without compensation is neither IMO) but with the understanding that it is the right thing to do and has to be done,

Really.
Why ?
Are you saying that the blacks in South Africa are only able to create wealth
by taking it from whites, that they are unable to create it by themselves, now that
they have political emancipation and control of the government ?

Btw, your 'government only' is also patently false.
Every larger company in SA has minimum quotas to hire blacks. Mandatory minimums.

[Sunnyways]

Land redistribution is a symbolic issue for most South Africans. Ramaphosa can head this very bad idea off if he improves the lot of urban blacks living in the vast 'informal settlements' around major cities.

[Prof_Chomsky]

2 wrongs don't make a right.
And honestly, you can go back another hundred years to when the Zulu's were fighting the Dutch, then English. Then 100 years before that when the Zulu's were slaughtering neighbouring tribes, or selling them as slaves.

The point is, wrong is wrong. During Apartheid the world isolated South Africa and stopped trading with them. Added them to the list of human rights abusers etc. So, the same had better happen now in SA.

I would love to know why African's can't get their shit together though. They blame Europeans, and we are to blame somewhat. But in places with no Europeans they are literally living like they did 500 years ago and starving, dying of disease etc. In places with some Europeans they complain racism screws them over. And in once rich nations run by Europeans that are now confiscated by the locals, they drive their thriving economy into the ground, and people start starving and civil wars ensue.

I know it's not cause their skin happens to be darker, so what the hell is it? Culture? Education?

[BeaverFever]

martin14 martin14:

I aam now going to justify the seizure of White property in South Africa without compensation as a good thing.

The only thing worse than your complete dishonesty is stunning ignorance and stupidity Actually quoting a line where I directly say I don’t support something to say that I support it. Reading comprehension has never been your thing has it?

$1:

Really.
Why ?
Are you saying that the blacks in South Africa are only able to create wealth
by taking it from whites, that they are unable to create it by themselves, now that
they have political emancipation and control of the government ?

How do you create new land Einstein? Really you are an epic failure of a human.

$1:

Btw, your 'government only' is also patently false.
Every larger company in SA has minimum quotas to hire blacks. Mandatory minimums.

And yet the charts I posted on page 1 of this thread show that outside of government it’s still white majority especially in senior levels.

[BeaverFever]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

2 wrongs don't make a right.
And honestly, you can go back another hundred years to when the Zulu's were fighting the Dutch, then English. Then 100 years before that when the Zulu's were slaughtering neighbouring tribes, or selling them as slaves.

The point is, wrong is wrong. During Apartheid the world isolated South Africa and stopped trading with them. Added them to the list of human rights abusers etc. So, the same had better happen now in SA.

I would love to know why African's can't get their shit together though. They blame Europeans, and we are to blame somewhat. But in places with no Europeans they are literally living like they did 500 years ago and starving, dying of disease etc. In places with some Europeans they complain racism screws them over. And in once rich nations run by Europeans that are now confiscated by the locals, they drive their thriving economy into the ground, and people start starving and civil wars ensue.

I know it's not cause their skin happens to be darker, so what the hell is it? Culture? Education?

I don’t think that the real Prof Chomsky would agree with anything you’ve posted here.

And I say again for the record 1991 was not that long ago and the abuses that got the apartheid government blacklisted globally were mass murder, mass torture, mass imprisonment, public floggings, and a long list of horrific crimes far beyond a propsal to expropriate some farms

Oh yeah and they were illegally trying to produce nuclear weapons which probably had more to do with the international sanctions than humanitarian concerns.

And there has never been a “thriving economy” run by Europeans in Africa. Period. They were always shitholes for the black people who lived there under European rule and only thrived for the white ruling elite at the top, which is not much different than any other African country except the ruling elites in those countries aren’t white but otherwise not much different.

[Prof_Chomsky]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

2 wrongs don't make a right.
And honestly, you can go back another hundred years to when the Zulu's were fighting the Dutch, then English. Then 100 years before that when the Zulu's were slaughtering neighbouring tribes, or selling them as slaves.

The point is, wrong is wrong. During Apartheid the world isolated South Africa and stopped trading with them. Added them to the list of human rights abusers etc. So, the same had better happen now in SA.

I would love to know why African's can't get their shit together though. They blame Europeans, and we are to blame somewhat. But in places with no Europeans they are literally living like they did 500 years ago and starving, dying of disease etc. In places with some Europeans they complain racism screws them over. And in once rich nations run by Europeans that are now confiscated by the locals, they drive their thriving economy into the ground, and people start starving and civil wars ensue.

I know it's not cause their skin happens to be darker, so what the hell is it? Culture? Education?

I don’t think Chomsky would agree with anything you’ve posted here.

And I say again for the record 1991 was not that long ago and the abuses that got the apartheid government blacklisted globally were mass murder, mass torture, mass imprisonment, public floggings, and a long list of horrific crimes far beyond a propsal to expropriate some farms

Oh yeah and they were illegally trying to produce nuclear weapons which probably had more to do with the international sanctions than humanitarian concerns.

And there has never been a “thriving economy” run by Europeans in Africa. Period. They were always shitholes for the black people who lived there under European rule and only thrived for the white ruling elite at the top, which is not much different than any other African country except the ruling elites in those countries aren’t white but otherwise not much different.

Wow you really have a hate on for SA.

I’m not really sure where to start. 30 years is a generation. And regardless it doesn’t excuse doing something wrong anymore than if you were to say someone killed your dad in Vietnam so you have the right to kill a Vietnamese today.

They weren’t illegally producing nuclear arms. They didn’t sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty until 1991 when they then dismantled their entire arsenal. Funny too it was Russia that was SA’s key enemy during Apartheid, not the west.

As for my “thriving economy” comment. It was a THRIVING economy. For everyone involved in it. They left the natives largely out of it because they felt they weren’t educated enough or willing enough to participate, too costly to educate, and if allowed full participating would overwhelm the country and send it into a tailspin (which is what happened after Apartheid). Also they were incredibly racist. Like incredibly racist.

Now, remove the racist overtones, and it was good business. Let the natives live how they always lived, and disclude them from the bubble you built for fear they could pop it. Allow them to fill cheap labour jobs no one else wants. It’s no different than having a border between the USA and Mexico (or Israel disallowing the right of return) if it wasn’t also horribly racist at the same time. You segment the people from your country you don’t have a use for and let the educated masses form an economy. For the record I’m not defending Apartheid. I think if the white minority wanted to form their own bubble in SA at a minimum they could have created a new smaller country called WhiteyVille and given the rest of the country to the natives to do with as they pleased. But whatever, history is complicated. Zulus were there sorta first. But you also can’t blame 3rd, 4th and 5th generation English and Dutch for wanting to stay where they were born and live as good a life as possible.

[BeaverFever]

To answer your question on why Africa, you’re right colonialism isn’t completely to blame but is part of it

[ShepherdsDog]

Actually, the Europeans(Dutch and French Huguenots) started settling in the Cape around the mid 1600s, so they've been there longer than just 3, 4 or 5 generations.