| This is all the effects of Black Panther. They're gonna rename their country Wakanda next. |
 |
Nyu said: traed said: It's extremely deceptive how some sources are reporting this. No, it's not racist opression of white people trying to take all their land. It's about taking back land that was stolen during Apartheid from the Natives Land Act of 1913 and that's regardless of race. [yt]dmT9VIxrMIc[yt] EFF has white members among them and white supporters. People with White guilt supporting poor whites having their homes stolen from them, what a surprise. I'm sure it wasn't racist for Zimbabwe to kick whites outta their homes as well. Well if kicking Whites outta their homes isn't racist, you won't mind it when Whites retake Europe and America. Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it. White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid. There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well. Land =/= home. I have seen nothing to suggest South Africans are being kicked out of their homes. If you want to claim that you have to prove it. What is being done is large plots of land are divided into smaller plots of land so more people can have a fair share of land. As explained in another post this bears no real resemblence to what happened in Zimbabwe. I would be against this if it was. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| they dun goofed smh |
| hi,i like you. |
| When they starve to death I hope no one is stupid enough to send them even one cent of aid! |
Cbr_Star said: When they starve to death I hope no one is stupid enough to send them even one cent of aid! Because millions deserve to die of starvation (probably one of the worst ways to go) because of a decision made by some old "radical Marxist opposition party" fucks who are in charge. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you." - Tywin Lannister Wise words, don't you think? |
149597871 said: Cbr_Star said: When they starve to death I hope no one is stupid enough to send them even one cent of aid! Because millions deserve to die of starvation (probably one of the worst ways to go) because of a decision made by some old "radical Marxist opposition party" fucks who are in charge. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you." - Tywin Lannister Wise words, don't you think? Who do you think supports the confiscation of White land. traed said: Nyu said: People with White guilt supporting poor whites having their homes stolen from them, what a surprise. I'm sure it wasn't racist for Zimbabwe to kick whites outta their homes as well. Well if kicking Whites outta their homes isn't racist, you won't mind it when Whites retake Europe and America. Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it. White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid. There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well. Land =/= home. I have seen nothing to suggest South Africans are being kicked out of their homes. If you want to claim that you have to prove it. What is being done is large plots of land are divided into smaller plots of land so more people can have a fair share of land. As explained in another post this bears no real resemblence to what happened in Zimbabwe. I would be against this if it was. Your arguments on this thread have been utterly disgraceful. "Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it." That's not true, since White farmers are poor, and they are constantly attacked by Blacks. "White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid." Whites are better off than Blacks, because Whites have a higher average IQ, whether you like it or not, that is Scientific fact. And because Whites built South Africa. And if you look at America, Europe and Australia, Blacks are always poor, and that is not White people's fault, that Blacks are unsuccessful. "There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well." Schools don't even let poor Whites go to School. South Africa still has Apartheid, it's just against White people now. |
My candies:   |
traed said: Nyu said: People with White guilt supporting poor whites having their homes stolen from them, what a surprise. I'm sure it wasn't racist for Zimbabwe to kick whites outta their homes as well. Well if kicking Whites outta their homes isn't racist, you won't mind it when Whites retake Europe and America. Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it. White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid. There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well. Land =/= home. I have seen nothing to suggest South Africans are being kicked out of their homes. If you want to claim that you have to prove it. What is being done is large plots of land are divided into smaller plots of land so more people can have a fair share of land. As explained in another post this bears no real resemblence to what happened in Zimbabwe. I would be against this if it was. You can't go back infinitely and redress every historical grievance. You can try but it will just result in more abuse. That's also a vague description: "The effects of apartheid". The ruling party in SA is explicitly anti-white. The poor whites there will not benefit from this. Affirmative action in the US is nothing compared to what it is there. Ultimately though, this is due to the Afrikaners being unable to protect their land. You are only sovereign if you can defend your territory. |
Nyu said: 149597871 said: Because millions deserve to die of starvation (probably one of the worst ways to go) because of a decision made by some old "radical Marxist opposition party" fucks who are in charge. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you." - Tywin Lannister Wise words, don't you think? Who do you think supports the confiscation of White land. I wouldn't know, haven't watched PJW recently. How's that even related to what I've said? The example was flawless. |
149597871 said: I wouldn't know, haven't watched PJW recently. How's that even related to what I've said? The example was flawless. Blacks voted for the Party, that is stealing White people's land, and kicking White people out of their homes. |
| My candies: |
Nyu said: 149597871 said: I wouldn't know, haven't watched PJW recently. How's that even related to what I've said? The example was flawless. Blacks voted for the Party, that is stealing White people's land, and kicking White people out of their homes. Just like my grandfather was a communist shortly after WW2 ended, thinking that confiscating the land from rich people is a wise decision. Well.. he ended up pretty disappointed from the whole thing. That's not the point. Give people time to realize what shitty ideology this actually is, then as Tywin said: "help them back to their feet" and they'll most likely never try that again. What does their marxist opposition bla-bla party gave them? - Hunger. What did we gave them? - Hope. After realizing that I doubt many of them would support something like this ever again. But if you refuse to do it, they'll keep looking at you as someone who is even worse and blame you for everything thus making their views even more extreme. I'm not sure why you are quoting me to be honest. |
149597871 said: Nyu said: Blacks voted for the Party, that is stealing White people's land, and kicking White people out of their homes. Just like my grandfather was a communist shortly after WW2 ended, thinking that confiscating the land from rich people is a wise decision. Well.. he ended up pretty disappointed from the whole thing. That's not the point. Give people time to realize what shitty ideology this actually is, then as Tywin said: "help them back to their feet" and they'll most likely never try that again. What does their marxist opposition bla-bla party gave them? - Hunger. What did we gave them? - Hope. After realizing that I doubt many of them would support something like this ever again. But if you refuse to do it, they'll keep looking at you as someone who is even worse and blame you for everything thus making their views even more extreme. I'm not sure why you are quoting me to be honest. The First World (White Nations) should not give them any help, since they are discriminating against White People. |
| My candies: |
Nyu said: 149597871 said: Just like my grandfather was a communist shortly after WW2 ended, thinking that confiscating the land from rich people is a wise decision. Well.. he ended up pretty disappointed from the whole thing. That's not the point. Give people time to realize what shitty ideology this actually is, then as Tywin said: "help them back to their feet" and they'll most likely never try that again. What does their marxist opposition bla-bla party gave them? - Hunger. What did we gave them? - Hope. After realizing that I doubt many of them would support something like this ever again. But if you refuse to do it, they'll keep looking at you as someone who is even worse and blame you for everything thus making their views even more extreme. I'm not sure why you are quoting me to be honest. The First World (White Nations) should not give them any help, since they are discriminating against White People. they aren't discriminating againts white people tho, but spesific, feodalistic rich land owner white people... you know, land redistribution/reform, literaly like what europe do in 18 and 19 century, lOl.. |
 "If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
| Hello, hello. Nyu told me to post something here, so I did. I'm such a nice person for listening to his requests, aren't I? @Nyu It may be racist, it may be not. I know nothing about the topic, so 'I don't know' is the only thing I can say. Can you reply to my comment on your profile now? |
| I think one good way to solve this problem is: take the white people in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, etc, grant them refugee status in Europe, Canada, etc and replace the african 'refugees' and let them live in their motherland Africa, lets see what will happen next to both places. |
 |
razor39999 said: NthDegree said: It's actually a lot less racist than what the OP makes it out to be. Traed did a great analysis, read his posts on the first page. It's basically sticking it to the rich people, which may be harsh but not nearly as horrible.Hello, hello. Nyu told me to post something here, so I did. I'm such a nice person for listening to his requests, aren't I? @Nyu It may be racist, it may be not. I know nothing about the topic, so 'I don't know' is the only thing I can say. Can you reply to my comment on your profile now? *shrug* I posted only because I was told to, so I didn't even read the OP lol. Speaking of which, Nyu still hasn't fulfilled his end of the bargain ;_; |
149597871 said: Cbr_Star said: When they starve to death I hope no one is stupid enough to send them even one cent of aid! Because millions deserve to die of starvation (probably one of the worst ways to go) because of a decision made by some old "radical Marxist opposition party" fucks who are in charge. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you." - Tywin Lannister Wise words, don't you think? It was those millions of people who put those people into power so yes they do deserve it. Same thing happened Russia and China with communism. It takes the will of the people to support leaders and government and they are just as responsible for their decisions. And I think you are misquoting your quote. .. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire" So in other words the White people of South Africa should rise up and fight the black people? And after they defeat them then show them kindness? ...Pretty dumb quote if you ask me. |
isekai said: when your economy is going to shit then right wing politics like nationalism rises To be fair, SA has the best economy in all of Africa... |
Crext said: isekai said: when your economy is going to shit then right wing politics like nationalism rises To be fair, SA has the best economy in all of Africa... Egypt, Nigeria, Botswana, Mauritius, Morocco, Algeria... SA economy is facing crisis currently. |
konkeloMar 4, 2018 12:30 PM
 |
| And if Europe were to start confiscating all land owned by Africans... |
 |
ExecCute said: And if Europe were to start confiscating all land owned by Africans... they in fact do in 1913... they want their land back, that's it... |
"If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
Swagernator said: I'm getting Germany during WW2 era vibes here. They were also confiscating lands, and properties. More like Zimbabwe, SA is going to shit. |
traed said: It's extremely deceptive how some sources are reporting this. No, it's not racist opression of white people trying to take all their land. It's about taking back land that was stolen during Apartheid from the Natives Land Act of 1913 and that's regardless of race. EFF has white members among them and white supporters. hmm, Traed, does that mean that they're "taking back" lands that were "stolen" 100 years ago, meaning 5 generations earlier? If so, I'm sorry but taking them back is long overdue, and shouldn't happen. The fact that they were "stolen" in the past does not means you can take them back from their descendants of the 5th generations who, afaik, never stole anything themselves. Furthermore, i'm pretty sure that all those farms were actually bought by those peoples from the government, right? So the white government back then stole those lands, sold them, those white peoples bought them with their wealth, cultivated them for 5 generations, spent their lives there for 5 generations, and suddenly they're going to be expropriated without any compensation? If that's the case, then no matter how bad was the aparteid, it is NOT okay and certainly NOT anything close of "justice". And yes, this is bad, because it's reproaching white peoples from now for crimes that were committed 100 years ago by other white peoples. I'm afraid that with just those informations I cannot call that anything else than being racist towards white peoples (and a heavy form of it too) from the south africa government. The fact that some opportunist white skinned peoples are part of the political group doesn't really matter. Some peoples would ally with anyone if it meant enough power or money for them. Your take? |
ZefyrisMar 4, 2018 5:41 PM
 |
Cbr_Star said: 149597871 said: Because millions deserve to die of starvation (probably one of the worst ways to go) because of a decision made by some old "radical Marxist opposition party" fucks who are in charge. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you." - Tywin Lannister Wise words, don't you think? It was those millions of people who put those people into power so yes they do deserve it. Same thing happened Russia and China with communism. It takes the will of the people to support leaders and government and they are just as responsible for their decisions. And I think you are misquoting your quote. .. "...when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire" So in other words the White people of South Africa should rise up and fight the black people? And after they defeat them then show them kindness? ...Pretty dumb quote if you ask me. More like let them get rid of those in charge after they realize the flaws in their system, then help the people who are starving and desperate. I'm not misquoting anything, copy paste works flawlessly. Most people are being fooled by those ideologies, that doesn't mean they deserve death. And yes, if you "defeat" your enemies you have to show them kindness, what's the other option? Slay each and every one of them until there's no one left in the world to oppose you? Sounds like something a 12-year-old would say :D You heard of an event called WW1? The victors didn't listen to Tywin's advice and 20 years later even a bigger catastrophe known as WW2 occurred. |
149597871Mar 4, 2018 6:13 PM
| @Zefyris No, the natives land act didn't take effect until Apartheid not the date it was written. If you read the beginning of the wikipedia page you would know that. Apartheid didn't end untill the 90s. Obviously land was taken at varying times so I can't give a single point in time it was taken. fruits_punch95 said: Swagernator said: I'm getting Germany during WW2 era vibes here. They were also confiscating lands, and properties. More like Zimbabwe, SA is going to shit. Watch the second embeded video I posted. This has many differences to Zimbabwe. ExecCute said: And if Europe were to start confiscating all land owned by Africans... Read my earlier posts and watch the first embeded video. This isn't an attack on whites because they are white but reposession of land that was wrongfully taken. Nyu said: traed said: Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it. White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid. There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well. Land =/= home. I have seen nothing to suggest South Africans are being kicked out of their homes. If you want to claim that you have to prove it. What is being done is large plots of land are divided into smaller plots of land so more people can have a fair share of land. As explained in another post this bears no real resemblence to what happened in Zimbabwe. I would be against this if it was. Your arguments on this thread have been utterly disgraceful. "Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it." That's not true, since White farmers are poor, and they are constantly attacked by Blacks. "White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid." Whites are better off than Blacks, because Whites have a higher average IQ, whether you like it or not, that is Scientific fact. And because Whites built South Africa. And if you look at America, Europe and Australia, Blacks are always poor, and that is not White people's fault, that Blacks are unsuccessful. "There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well." Schools don't even let poor Whites go to School. South Africa still has Apartheid, it's just against White people now. No on average they aren't poor. Like I said not that there isn't poor white people. Basically with Apartheid gone some of the boosts up white people got went away so poverty slowly has becoming more equal. So white poverty won't go away till all poverty goes away. "Inequality in South Africa is highly correlated with race. The system of apartheid, instituted from 1948-1994, determined economic possibilities and expectations based on race, contributing deeply to the unequal society that exists today. However, as the book Race, Class, and Inequality in South Africa* shows, apartheid did not have only the effect of increasing general inequality. For example, during early apartheid, the government was able to successfully decrease intra-race disparities. Furthermore, the overall levels of inequality remained fairly consistent, even through apartheid." http://www.geocurrents.info/economic-geography/inequality-trends-in-south-africa No they aren't being constantly attacked. Stop getting your info from white supremasist sites. Only about 1% of murders in SA are black on white. Black people are more likely to be murdered. https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/White-Genocide-fact-or-fiction-20130520 It's not IQ. Apartheid involved a white supremacist government that took almost everything from the black people and gave it to whites. It didn't end untill the 90s so there are people alive today that prospered from apartheid policy and some of the people born after prospered from inheritance of that same stolen capital. If that's your claim for it to be valid you need to show a reliable statistic of public school enrollment being disproportionately less for whites than it is for blacks. Polarc said: You can't go back infinitely and redress every historical grievance. You can try but it will just result in more abuse. That's also a vague description: "The effects of apartheid". The ruling party in SA is explicitly anti-white. The poor whites there will not benefit from this. Affirmative action in the US is nothing compared to what it is there. Ultimately though, this is due to the Afrikaners being unable to protect their land. You are only sovereign if you can defend your territory. It's not vague. Racial socioeconomic inequality caused by Apartheid wouldn't just magically and immediately go away after Apartheid. You say it's anti-white but couldn't provide a single example where they specifically target against all white people just for being white. I know ANC did impliment some policy in the past that did effect poor white people negatively but that wasn't the intent. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
traed said: It's not vague. Racial socioeconomic inequality caused by Apartheid wouldn't just magically and immediately go away after Apartheid. You say it's anti-white but couldn't provide a single example where they specifically target against all white people just for being white. I know ANC did impliment some policy in the past that did effect poor white people negatively but that wasn't the intent. Were blacks in the region richer or poorer before whites colonized the region? I don't see inequality in and of itself as a problem. Look at affirmative action policies in South Africa. Whites are only allowed to be a small % of a given company. They are strangulating any sort of meritocracy. Their rhetoric about the land redistribution is explicitly racial. It's totally delusional to think they are approaching this from a purely class-based standpoint. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html I see 'white farmers' there, not 'rich farmers'. White farmers are also attacked constantly and not protected by the government. It's more dangerous to be a white farmer than a police officer in South Africa. |
Polarc said: traed said: It's not vague. Racial socioeconomic inequality caused by Apartheid wouldn't just magically and immediately go away after Apartheid. You say it's anti-white but couldn't provide a single example where they specifically target against all white people just for being white. I know ANC did impliment some policy in the past that did effect poor white people negatively but that wasn't the intent. Were blacks in the region richer or poorer before whites colonized the region? I don't see inequality in and of itself as a problem. Look at affirmative action policies in South Africa. Whites are only allowed to be a small % of a given company. They are strangulating any sort of meritocracy. Their rhetoric about the land redistribution is explicitly racial. It's totally delusional to think they are approaching this from a purely class-based standpoint. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farms-land-seizure-anc-race-relations-a8234461.html I see 'white farmers' there, not 'rich farmers'. White farmers are also attacked constantly and not protected by the government. It's more dangerous to be a white farmer than a police officer in South Africa. Then sounds like you would gladly live under a feudalist monarchy. Yeah that's what I was talking about. It was a mistake how that policy was made. EFF and ANC didn't say this is only for whites even though the richer land owners who benafited from Apartheid who happen to be white are the focus and western news spun this as going against whites. It's not going to be Zimbabwe 2.0 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-01/south-africa-won-t-have-smash-and-grab-of-land-president-says You're making the same claim Nyu did. I already showed black on white murder is exceptionally rare in South Africa. You like Nyu failed to give any data on this. |
traedMar 4, 2018 11:41 PM
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| @traed I might prefer feudalist monarchy to liberal democracy, but that doesn't necessarily follow from what I said. If you're fine with stripping people of their land without compensation, okay, but own it. Admit that you're fine with the state abusing people who you think own too much. The Independent is the site that hosted your buddy Zizek and his article about Peterson, and even they are admitting that it's about white farmers. I doubt you've shown that, and I doubt the official stats of the country keep track of black on white murder in particular. South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world though, and farm murders are a known phenomenon. |
Polarc said: @traed I might prefer feudalist monarchy to liberal democracy, but that doesn't necessarily follow from what I said. If you're fine with stripping people of their land without compensation, okay, but own it. Admit that you're fine with the state abusing people who you think own too much. The Independent is the site that hosted your buddy Zizek and his article about Peterson, and even they are admitting that it's about white farmers. I doubt you've shown that, and I doubt the official stats of the country keep track of black on white murder in particular. South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world though, and farm murders are a known phenomenon. Well not under all conditions am I for it. I just don't think it's automatically good or bad. It really depends on how it's done and it depends on the circumstances. I don't give a fuck. I already explained how some media sources are dumbing it down. Stop wasting my time with your made up bullshit. It's in the same post you replied to just above my quote to you directed at Nyu. Learn to read. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| @traed Okay so you're for it when... what, how many meters of land is too much? So even leftist media sources are propagating white supremacy (Zizek, they're coming for you next. No more white male communism). Do you read all of every thread you post in? This looks like a blog post and he links to some Facebook link that isn't taking me anywhere. I'm not even saying I know the black on white murder rate is super high. I'm saying I doubt there are reliable statistics. I think even you won't deny that it's clearly far higher than the white on black rate though. I was talking about farm murders in particular though. There aren't always hard stats on every phenomena. You could check out Lauren Southern's series on South Africa generally. It's good to step outside the echo chamber. I'm subscribed to ContraPoints and a couple other leftist Youtubers for this purpose. |
traed said: Stuff being said If I may ask, why do you have a communist symbol in your signature? I can understand some people want to play around with swastikas and the hammer & sickle, but these are genocidal symbols of which ideologies have killed millions based on wrong-think. You don't seem like an evil person from how you express yourself, so I am wondering why you chose to identify with the most deadly forms of rule that our civilizations has known. This is not meant as a backhanded rhetorical question btw, I'm genuinely wondering why you chose to do it when your goal don't seem to be trolling others. ExecCute said: And if Europe were to start confiscating all land owned by Africans... Well, the British empire did end slavery in Africa, and tried to implement freedoms and commerce to the best of the populations abilities back then. One can argue the success in Africa, but they did succeed almost everywhere else in the world in making those countries become wealthy. America is one example, though those where settlers, a better example is Hong Kong which was given back in 1999 and has 3 times the standard of living as rest of China. India is doing pretty well as well. Anyways, the colony power actually didn't take much from Africa, they mostly grew cotton or renewable resources back then, where Africa until this day is the continent with the most natural resources left intact only second to America. However, the Chinese are actually seizing control of many of these materials currently and exporting them back to China at increasing rates. The local lords in Africa do get payed, however I suspect the current trade deals benefit China much more in the long run and this will give lasting effects far greater than what any colonial rule ever did. traed said: Poor people don't own large plots of land that would need to be divided up. If someone was poor and owned a lot of land they would already have sold it. White people in South Africa are on average more well off than black people because of lasting effects of Apartheid. There are some poor white people but I can see this could benafit them as well if done right because they would be able to give them land as well. Actually, from what I've seen of videos from South Africa, there's plenty of land "not used" to grow on currently, however the skills of agriculture doesn't seem to be managed well by many. They keep destroying huge patches of land permanently through over-harvest and nutrition mismanagement (basically you kill the earth by not supplying the correct minerals back into the earth). It seems like "difficulties" (hunger) isn't far off if your current farmers (that seem uneducated about the trade) seem happily satisfied about just "keep on moving to new land". If that keeps up you'll reach an end of fertile land eventually. I kinda get the feeling that white people in South Africa are viewed much like Jews was in 30s Germany (immigrants that succeed because they trample on the honest hard working German and took from them their property and living (which of course was not true, they got there because they educated themselves and worked hard)). I am however not educated about the subject, but I know this has happened many times in Africa before, be it over-fishing, over-farming, over-hunting, over-draining of water, etc. because some people abuse newer technology without educating themselves about the consequences. Btw, I hope you guys manage to deal with these issues. It is in everyone's best interest that you manage to get out of this in the best possible shape. This is something which could be said about every country, where nobody benefits from a country collapsing, as the problems only spreads. I hope Africa as a whole also manage to build their countries and form unity, but where there's much infighting between the native populations currently, and even genocides still. If you manage to build good competence hierarchies that rewards clever solutions and smarts, then you'd be well on your way to dominating and contributing to the world stage. Btw, solar power alone might make you a global power in the near future (as you are on the equator and the technology is getting better), and there's plenty of people that'd want to trade that renewable and lasting resource for things that they can produce, etc. etc. Anyways, I'm babbling, my apologizes! |
CrextMar 6, 2018 12:00 PM
| RIP south africa. Are we taking bets on how long it takes for hyperinflation and starvation to set in? And LOL at liberal hypocrisy. |
Polarc said: @traed Okay so you're for it when... what, how many meters of land is too much? So even leftist media sources are propagating white supremacy (Zizek, they're coming for you next. No more white male communism). Do you read all of every thread you post in? This looks like a blog post and he links to some Facebook link that isn't taking me anywhere. I'm not even saying I know the black on white murder rate is super high. I'm saying I doubt there are reliable statistics. I think even you won't deny that it's clearly far higher than the white on black rate though. I was talking about farm murders in particular though. There aren't always hard stats on every phenomena. You could check out Lauren Southern's series on South Africa generally. It's good to step outside the echo chamber. I'm subscribed to ContraPoints and a couple other leftist Youtubers for this purpose. It's a matter of circumstances not land size alone. I already said that. What are you even talking about? Whatever I don't care. You can't have a proper discussion. If the link didn't work try this one. It still shows white people aren't being attacked in mass. https://africacheck.org/reports/are-white-afrikaners-really-being-killed-like-flies/ Crext said: If I may ask, why do you have a communist symbol in your signature? I can understand some people want to play around with swastikas and the hammer & sickle, but these are genocidal symbols of which ideologies have killed millions based on wrong-think. You don't seem like an evil person from how you express yourself, so I am wondering why you chose to identify with the most deadly forms of rule that our civilizations has known. This is not meant as a backhanded rhetorical question btw, I'm genuinely wondering why you chose to do it when your goal don't seem to be trolling others. Part serious part satire. I won't give a ideology and history lesson here. Too in depth and off topic. Actually, from what I've seen of videos from South Africa, there's plenty of land "not used" to grow on currently, however the skills of agriculture doesn't seem to be managed well by many. They keep destroying huge patches of land permanently through over-harvest and nutrition mismanagement (basically you kill the earth by not supplying the correct minerals back into the earth). It seems like "difficulties" (hunger) isn't far off if your current farmers (that seem uneducated about the trade) seem happily satisfied about just "keep on moving to new land". If that keeps up you'll reach an end of fertile land eventually. I kinda get the feeling that white people in South Africa are viewed much like Jews was in 30s Germany (immigrants that succeed because they trample on the honest hard working German and took from them their property and living (which of course was not true, they got there because they educated themselves and worked hard)). I am however not educated about the subject, but I know this has happened many times in Africa before, be it over-fishing, over-farming, over-hunting, over-draining of water, etc. because some people abuse newer technology without educating themselves about the consequences. Btw, I hope you guys manage to deal with these issues. It is in everyone's best interest that you manage to get out of this in the best possible shape. This is something which could be said about every country, where nobody benefits from a country collapsing, as the problems only spreads. I hope Africa as a whole also manage to build their countries and form unity, but where there's much infighting between the native populations currently, and even genocides still. If you manage to build good competence hierarchies that rewards clever solutions and smarts, then you'd be well on your way to dominating and contributing to the world stage. Btw, solar power alone might make you a global power in the near future (as you are on the equator and the technology is getting better), and there's plenty of people that'd want to trade that renewable and lasting resource for things that they can produce, etc. etc. Anyways, I'm babbling, my apologizes! Do you know anything about farming? My dad is a soil scientist. You can't farm just anything just anywhere. The soil has to be right as well as the climate. Plus you need places for people to live and other infrastructure as well as the wildlife habitats. |
traedMar 7, 2018 2:37 PM
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
traed said: Do you know anything about farming? My dad is a soil scientist. You can't farm just anything just anywhere. The soil has to be right as well as the climate. Plus you need places for people to live and other infrastructure as well as the wildlife habitats. While what you say is not wrong, it didn't reply to anything I said. What I pointed out is that you can destroy the soil permanently (or for decades) by treating it wrong, and that there's evidence that some farmers in SA does this because they are not competent on the field. The biggest manmade human catastrophe in regards to farmland was probably the execution of "rich farmers" in Ukraine in the Soviet union, which in returned caused hunger and the death of millions. All I'm saying is that competent farmers probably are able to make a lasting and well producing farmland for generations (which is why they become rich), while incompetent farmers who know little about the trait either fail to make it function or destroy the land for future generations. Edit: Another element is that I beg you guys to not cause such an incident even if you mean well. Take it slow if anything. SA is the economic anchor of the region and cause tons of good simply by giving people opportunities, and if it falls we'll get waves of hungry immigrants streaming north, which again hurts everybody and can trigger additional unpredictable incidents. |
CrextMar 7, 2018 3:34 PM
| Honestly it's Mandela's fault for playing the flower power pothead when the Apartheid ended. I don't know what stuff he smoked to think there'd be no griefs, but it was obviosu that the situation could only rot. |
Prophetess of the Golden Era  |
| What a racist and dumb rule, |
| 'America is a stolen country' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM8WZ0ztMuc Zapredon said: It doesn't matter if you like LoGH,Monster etc.If you are a jobless or college/school dropout living in your mom basement, you are still an unintelligent loser. Taste in anime does not make you a better person. Totally agree! |
Crext said: traed said: Do you know anything about farming? My dad is a soil scientist. You can't farm just anything just anywhere. The soil has to be right as well as the climate. Plus you need places for people to live and other infrastructure as well as the wildlife habitats. While what you say is not wrong, it didn't reply to anything I said. What I pointed out is that you can destroy the soil permanently (or for decades) by treating it wrong, and that there's evidence that some farmers in SA does this because they are not competent on the field. The biggest manmade human catastrophe in regards to farmland was probably the execution of "rich farmers" in Ukraine in the Soviet union, which in returned caused hunger and the death of millions. All I'm saying is that competent farmers probably are able to make a lasting and well producing farmland for generations (which is why they become rich), while incompetent farmers who know little about the trait either fail to make it function or destroy the land for future generations. Edit: Another element is that I beg you guys to not cause such an incident even if you mean well. Take it slow if anything. SA is the economic anchor of the region and cause tons of good simply by giving people opportunities, and if it falls we'll get waves of hungry immigrants streaming north, which again hurts everybody and can trigger additional unpredictable incidents. White agricultural land owners didn't get more land from competence in farming but from a white supremacist goverment and then after for some by inheritance of the same land. You haven't provided a single source to any claim of scale of crop failure from overworking the land. South Africa has had a growing GDP in agriculture even though since before this event land already was being redistributed in a buy and sell fashion by the government. South Africa has a drought going on though. https://tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/gdp-from-agriculture No, what happened in Ukraine also happened in Russia and Kazakhstan and was from weather conditions and the spread of crop disease and a shortage of farm workers. It started before not after the removal of "kulaks". Droughts in Russia and USSR have happened every 5-7 years and famines every 10–13 years. This pattern is still present today. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
traed said: Polarc said: @traed Okay so you're for it when... what, how many meters of land is too much? So even leftist media sources are propagating white supremacy (Zizek, they're coming for you next. No more white male communism). Do you read all of every thread you post in? This looks like a blog post and he links to some Facebook link that isn't taking me anywhere. I'm not even saying I know the black on white murder rate is super high. I'm saying I doubt there are reliable statistics. I think even you won't deny that it's clearly far higher than the white on black rate though. I was talking about farm murders in particular though. There aren't always hard stats on every phenomena. You could check out Lauren Southern's series on South Africa generally. It's good to step outside the echo chamber. I'm subscribed to ContraPoints and a couple other leftist Youtubers for this purpose. It's a matter of circumstances not land size alone. I already said that. What are you even talking about? Whatever I don't care. You can't have a proper discussion. If the link didn't work try this one. It still shows white people aren't being attacked in mass. https://africacheck.org/reports/are-white-afrikaners-really-being-killed-like-flies/ Okay, then what are the specific circumstances that make it okay for the government to take land from people? What about these land claims in particular make you decide that they are illegitimate? I'm saying it's funny that you're saying even The Independent (a very leftist outlet who hosted Zizek) is making this supposed error of saying this is about white farmers in particular. Not reading all of that. Learn to narrow down your sourcing for a particular claim. I don't think I claimed they were being killed "in mass" anyway. I would say they are racially targeted though (I'm hearing chants of "kill the Boer", not so much any other group), and are probably reducing in number for various reasons. |
Polarc said: traed said: It's a matter of circumstances not land size alone. I already said that. What are you even talking about? Whatever I don't care. You can't have a proper discussion. If the link didn't work try this one. It still shows white people aren't being attacked in mass. https://africacheck.org/reports/are-white-afrikaners-really-being-killed-like-flies/ Okay, then what are the specific circumstances that make it okay for the government to take land from people? What about these land claims in particular make you decide that they are illegitimate? I'm saying it's funny that you're saying even The Independent (a very leftist outlet who hosted Zizek) is making this supposed error of saying this is about white farmers in particular. Not reading all of that. Learn to narrow down your sourcing for a particular claim. I don't think I claimed they were being killed "in mass" anyway. I would say they are racially targeted though (I'm hearing chants of "kill the Boer", not so much any other group), and are probably reducing in number for various reasons. That they obtained the land through a corrupt unjust system. He also writes for and is a correspondent for RT btw which is right wing and a Russian gov mouth piece. Anyway that's besides the point. Independent isn't very left and that doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact it's misleading. I already showed you many times there is nothing to suggest it can only be used on white people and nothing to suggest it will be used on white people that don't even have much land. The part of the constitution they changed (not sure if it's written yet) is chapter 2 section 25. Their constitution is very detailed on land unlike most countries. It wasn't even that long. “Whites are far less likely to be murdered than their black or coloured counterparts,” Lizette Lancaster, who manages the Institute for Security Studies crime and justice hub, told Africa Check. This is supported by an analysis of a national sample of 1,378 murder dockets conducted by police in 2009. In 86.9% of the cases, the victims were Africans. Whites accounted for 1.8% of the cases (although whites make up 8.85% of the population). According to Lancaster official police statistics show that between April 1994 and March 2012 a total of 361 015 people were murdered in South Africa. Applying the 1.8% figure, it would mean that roughly 6,498 whites have been murdered since April 1994. Even if there were some variation on the 1.8% figure, the number of white murder victims would still fail to come anywhere close to filling a soccer stadium. The fact is that whites are less likely to be murdered than any other race in South Africa. The current murder rate of white South Africans is also equivalent to, or lower than, murder rates for whites recorded between 1979 and 1991. According to the 2011/12 SAPS annual report, Lancaster said,“only about 16% of murders occurred during the commission of another crime, mainly aggravated robbery. About 65% of murders started off as assaults due to interpersonal arguments and fuelled by alcohol and/or drugs, result[ing] in a murder”. The vast majority of murders are, she said,“social fabric crimes often perpetrated by friends or loved ones”. The 2012 Victims of Crime Survey confirmed this assertion, stating that 16.1% of victims were “murdered by unknown people from outside their residential area” with an additional 10.9% of “murders … committed by known perpetrators outside [the victims’] residential area”, and the balance of homicides committed by community members, spouses and friends or acquaintances. Even if the proportion of “outsider” crime was doubled for white homicide victims, this would still fall drastically short of the “77.3%” of white murders that Hofmeyr appears to claim are at the hands of black perpetrators. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
traed said: White agricultural land owners didn't get more land from competence in farming but from a white supremacist goverment and then after for some by inheritance of the same land. You haven't provided a single source to any claim of scale of crop failure from overworking the land. South Africa has had a growing GDP in agriculture even though since before this event land already was being redistributed in a buy and sell fashion by the government. South Africa has a drought going on though. https://tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/gdp-from-agriculture Well, it's not really about the land, but how said land is used? If you destroy land, but keep moving on, then the impact will not come before you run out of land. South Africa is blessed with a lot of unused land. If anyone wants to buy a piece of land and become a farmer then the system is set up so that shouldn't be difficult, as you even say yourself? Numbers I found state that 80% of your land is available for farming, but only 16% is used. However, if you continue to destroy fertile land, then you'll eventually run out of it, or has to work the established land even more for less, and it is then starvation hits. If you google "South-Africa crop failure/infertile" then you get plenty of examples of this going back 15 years. If you use fast or bing then you get even harsher stories. I can of course not comment on the credibility of these articles, as I myself is basically a neutral bystander that just happened upon the subject and discuss it out of fun more than anything else. GDP mean gross domestic product(ion). It has some weaknesses, where for example paying a "maid" to clean your farm up grows your GDP, while doing it yourself or having a machine do it will not impact it. Also if you pay your workers more the GDP rises also, especially if your own country end up consuming the product. In other words, if South-Africa starts to consume more of its own food and pay more for the end product, then "GDP from agriculture" simply shifts. I doubt South Africa is selling much of their food these days, so what you in actuality has pointed out is that food has gotten more expensive for everyone? If so, then that doesn't help your case. That said I know little of the current trade situation and the supply lines of SA agriculture, so I'll default this point as I might be too ignorant about this subject. It might be the case that SA also produce more food now than before, but I'd want to see that statistics specifically rather than GDP on it. The only numbers I found was that SA had dropped production from 2009 to 2015 measured in tons. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter what one feel about the subject though. If letting "thieves" handle a resource, unlike what happened in the Soviet Union where the competent farmers that "stole from the poor" were killed, (despite being poor themselves even just the generation before,) then those thieves steal coppers from the poor man but provide gold in return. It can be considered a trade if anything. Notice that those who want you harm is telling the whites to get out and don't argue with you. That should make you think. traed said: No, what happened in Ukraine also happened in Russia and Kazakhstan and was from weather conditions and the spread of crop disease and a shortage of farm workers. It started before not after the removal of "kulaks". Droughts in Russia and USSR have happened every 5-7 years and famines every 10–13 years. This pattern is still present today. Russia and Kazakhstan were part of the Soviet union. The Bolsheviks took all the food from the farmers when Lenin in 1920 ordered requisition of food with no return of resources to the farmers (it was civil-war, and they needed it), which combined with a flood nobody could deal with (cause of the civil-war) again lead to a horrible harvest the following years (which cause the 1921-22 famine). 5-10 millions died from this. The farmers were later accused of "hiding away their own food" (to survive) and "stealing from the collective". This was later used to justify the central leaderships actions (where the famine was blamed on evil "rich" farmers). The Kulaks were removed and/or executed between 1929-1932, and the famine that killed maybe another 4-6 millions hit 1932-33. If anything this is a pure statement of miss-management of agriculture and a circle or paranoid blaming of disasters on others than the incompetent perpetrators in the government. If you have competent farmers, and don't kill them, then you can combat "lack of farmers" (do I even have to point this out?), crop disease and droughts. As a matter of fact that is one of the primarily factors that defines a competent modern farmer. It's pretty weird that say Israel can put up productive farms in the desserts of the Middle East (while the neighbors who've been around forever fail to do this), just as an example of handling water. People are not dying in the tens of millions in old Soviet today. To blame long term weather in modern times speaks of mismanagement, especially if these are patterns that happens continually. You stock up necessary supplies, and you stock up on food/water. This is even something the Romans knew 2000 years ago, and should hardly be something a modern society struggle with today. You can even buy your way out of the problems on the international market if you've produced something of value during more fruitful times. Also, I recommend that you read "Gulags Archipelago" if you're interested in how things went in Soviet Russia from an insider's perspective. In your case I could argue that it's probably the most important book you'll read in your life (that is, if you indeed are attracted by communism and isn't just joking around). |
CrextMar 8, 2018 5:44 PM
traed said: Polarc said: Okay, then what are the specific circumstances that make it okay for the government to take land from people? What about these land claims in particular make you decide that they are illegitimate? I'm saying it's funny that you're saying even The Independent (a very leftist outlet who hosted Zizek) is making this supposed error of saying this is about white farmers in particular. Not reading all of that. Learn to narrow down your sourcing for a particular claim. I don't think I claimed they were being killed "in mass" anyway. I would say they are racially targeted though (I'm hearing chants of "kill the Boer", not so much any other group), and are probably reducing in number for various reasons. That they obtained the land through a corrupt unjust system. He also writes for and is a correspondent for RT btw which is right wing and a Russian gov mouth piece. Anyway that's besides the point. Independent isn't very left and that doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact it's misleading. I already showed you many times there is nothing to suggest it can only be used on white people and nothing to suggest it will be used on white people that don't even have much land. The part of the constitution they changed (not sure if it's written yet) is chapter 2 section 25. Their constitution is very detailed on land unlike most countries. It wasn't even that long. “Whites are far less likely to be murdered than their black or coloured counterparts,” Lizette Lancaster, who manages the Institute for Security Studies crime and justice hub, told Africa Check. This is supported by an analysis of a national sample of 1,378 murder dockets conducted by police in 2009. In 86.9% of the cases, the victims were Africans. Whites accounted for 1.8% of the cases (although whites make up 8.85% of the population). According to Lancaster official police statistics show that between April 1994 and March 2012 a total of 361 015 people were murdered in South Africa. Applying the 1.8% figure, it would mean that roughly 6,498 whites have been murdered since April 1994. Even if there were some variation on the 1.8% figure, the number of white murder victims would still fail to come anywhere close to filling a soccer stadium. The fact is that whites are less likely to be murdered than any other race in South Africa. The current murder rate of white South Africans is also equivalent to, or lower than, murder rates for whites recorded between 1979 and 1991. According to the 2011/12 SAPS annual report, Lancaster said,“only about 16% of murders occurred during the commission of another crime, mainly aggravated robbery. About 65% of murders started off as assaults due to interpersonal arguments and fuelled by alcohol and/or drugs, result[ing] in a murder”. The vast majority of murders are, she said,“social fabric crimes often perpetrated by friends or loved ones”. The 2012 Victims of Crime Survey confirmed this assertion, stating that 16.1% of victims were “murdered by unknown people from outside their residential area” with an additional 10.9% of “murders … committed by known perpetrators outside [the victims’] residential area”, and the balance of homicides committed by community members, spouses and friends or acquaintances. Even if the proportion of “outsider” crime was doubled for white homicide victims, this would still fall drastically short of the “77.3%” of white murders that Hofmeyr appears to claim are at the hands of black perpetrators. Why is the system they used unjust? I wouldn't call RT right wing necessarily. They just end up sort of pro-Trump due to them countering some of wacky stuff coming out of Western MSM. This is my impression anyway. I'm not surprised more blacks are murdered, given that the crime rate is higher in black areas (let's say it's poverty... I'm just taking note of the fact). If we could get some reliable stats on outsider crime by race, this would start to fill in the picture of what I'm talking about, in terms of whites being specifically targeted. |
Polarc said: traed said: That they obtained the land through a corrupt unjust system. He also writes for and is a correspondent for RT btw which is right wing and a Russian gov mouth piece. Anyway that's besides the point. Independent isn't very left and that doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact it's misleading. I already showed you many times there is nothing to suggest it can only be used on white people and nothing to suggest it will be used on white people that don't even have much land. The part of the constitution they changed (not sure if it's written yet) is chapter 2 section 25. Their constitution is very detailed on land unlike most countries. It wasn't even that long. Why is the system they used unjust? I wouldn't call RT right wing necessarily. They just end up sort of pro-Trump due to them countering some of wacky stuff coming out of Western MSM. This is my impression anyway. I'm not surprised more blacks are murdered, given that the crime rate is higher in black areas (let's say it's poverty... I'm just taking note of the fact). If we could get some reliable stats on outsider crime by race, this would start to fill in the picture of what I'm talking about, in terms of whites being specifically targeted. Do I really have to explain why Apartheid was bad? They just took the land and sometimes that involved killing. Or do you mean something else? It's pretty much a well established fact RT is right wing and that has nothing to do with anything Trump related. I never said that white farmers are never victims at any point in time. There just isn't enough data on "farm attacks" to suggest it's an unusually high amount when most farm land is owned by white people. You and Nyu make the claim you two have to give the data to back it up. Crext said: traed said: White agricultural land owners didn't get more land from competence in farming but from a white supremacist goverment and then after for some by inheritance of the same land. You haven't provided a single source to any claim of scale of crop failure from overworking the land. South Africa has had a growing GDP in agriculture even though since before this event land already was being redistributed in a buy and sell fashion by the government. South Africa has a drought going on though. https://tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/gdp-from-agriculture Well, it's not really about the land, but how said land is used? If you destroy land, but keep moving on, then the impact will not come before you run out of land. South Africa is blessed with a lot of unused land. If anyone wants to buy a piece of land and become a farmer then the system is set up so that shouldn't be difficult, as you even say yourself? Numbers I found state that 80% of your land is available for farming, but only 16% is used. However, if you continue to destroy fertile land, then you'll eventually run out of it, or has to work the established land even more for less, and it is then starvation hits. If you google "South-Africa crop failure/infertile" then you get plenty of examples of this going back 15 years. If you use fast or bing then you get even harsher stories. I can of course not comment on the credibility of these articles, as I myself is basically a neutral bystander that just happened upon the subject and discuss it out of fun more than anything else. GDP mean gross domestic product(ion). It has some weaknesses, where for example paying a "maid" to clean your farm up grows your GDP, while doing it yourself or having a machine do it will not impact it. Also if you pay your workers more the GDP rises also, especially if your own country end up consuming the product. In other words, if South-Africa starts to consume more of its own food and pay more for the end product, then "GDP from agriculture" simply shifts. I doubt South Africa is selling much of their food these days, so what you in actuality has pointed out is that food has gotten more expensive for everyone? If so, then that doesn't help your case. That said I know little of the current trade situation and the supply lines of SA agriculture, so I'll default this point as I might be too ignorant about this subject. It might be the case that SA also produce more food now than before, but I'd want to see that statistics specifically rather than GDP on it. The only numbers I found was that SA had dropped production from 2009 to 2015 measured in tons. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter what one feel about the subject though. If letting "thieves" handle a resource, unlike what happened in the Soviet Union where the competent farmers that "stole from the poor" were killed, (despite being poor themselves even just the generation before,) then those thieves steal coppers from the poor man but provide gold in return. It can be considered a trade if anything. Notice that those who want you harm is telling the whites to get out and don't argue with you. That should make you think. Data about land from sources you still don't cite. When I searched for it I got sources talking about maize crop failure from Monsanto that happened in South Africa. Same thing happened in the US. I haven't seen anything saying they don't know how to farm. I know GDP has flaws. I point that out to people all the time but it's still something to go by. I did find large corn and wine yelds from 2017 https://answersafrica.com/sas-maize-harvest-2017.html https://en.vinex.market/articles/2017/05/10/south_african_grape_harvest_produces_larger_than_expected_yield [off topic stuff] I already know that. Well except the flood. I'm just saying you can't solely people for famines started by natural causes. It was mismanaged some but while lives were lost lives also were saved. It wouldn't be easy to figure out the net value of lives. I'm not a communist and especially not a Stalinist. Lol |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
traed said: Polarc said: Why is the system they used unjust? I wouldn't call RT right wing necessarily. They just end up sort of pro-Trump due to them countering some of wacky stuff coming out of Western MSM. This is my impression anyway. I'm not surprised more blacks are murdered, given that the crime rate is higher in black areas (let's say it's poverty... I'm just taking note of the fact). If we could get some reliable stats on outsider crime by race, this would start to fill in the picture of what I'm talking about, in terms of whites being specifically targeted. Do I really have to explain why Apartheid was bad? They just took the land and sometimes that involved killing. Or do you mean something else? It's pretty much a well established fact RT is right wing and that has nothing to do with anything Trump related. I never said that white farmers are never victims at any point in time. There just isn't enough data on "farm attacks" to suggest it's an unusually high amount when most farm land is owned by white people. You and Nyu make the claim you two have to give the data to back it up. I'm talking about how they acquired the land in the first place. From what you're saying, I take it some of the land had people on it beforehand, and they were killed to make room? Which land in particular? Is there any record of this? I'm not that familiar with everything entailed in apartheid, but put it this way. If things continue to deteriorate there, then at some point yes, you will have to explain why ending apartheid (at least how and when it was ended) was a good idea. The general idea of being able to decide who enters your society is a basic tenet of sovereignty though. You can talk about a phenomenon without having hard data. Let's say a genocide happens because you ignored all of the anti-Boer rhetoric and stories coming out of there because welp, the South African government didn't give us any data. No, I think I'll keep the pressure on this subject like Lauren Southern and an increasing number of people are. If that happens, will you still say "at least they ended apartheid"? |
PolarcMar 8, 2018 11:41 PM
Polarc said: traed said: Do I really have to explain why Apartheid was bad? They just took the land and sometimes that involved killing. Or do you mean something else? It's pretty much a well established fact RT is right wing and that has nothing to do with anything Trump related. I never said that white farmers are never victims at any point in time. There just isn't enough data on "farm attacks" to suggest it's an unusually high amount when most farm land is owned by white people. You and Nyu make the claim you two have to give the data to back it up. I'm talking about how they acquired the land in the first place. From what you're saying, I take it some of the land had people on it beforehand, and they were killed to make room? Which land in particular? Is there any record of this? I'm not that familiar with everything entailed in apartheid, but put it this way. If things continue to deteriorate there, then at some point yes, you will have to explain why ending apartheid (at least how and when it was ended) was a good idea. The general idea of being able to decide who enters your society is a basic tenet of sovereignty though. You can talk about a phenomenon without having hard data. Let's say a genocide happens because you ignored all of the anti-Boer rhetoric and stories coming out of there because welp, the South African government didn't give us any data. No, I think I'll keep the pressure on this subject like Lauren Southern and an increasing number of people are. If that happens, will you still say "at least they ended apartheid"? If you don't know about Apartheid when I pointed out many times how this is related to it you should have just said so instead of doubling down. I don't think killing was what the gov did right away but they did kick black people out of their homes and take their land to hive exclusively to whites and of course no compensation. "From 1960 to 1983, 3.5 million nonwhite South Africans were removed from their homes and forced into segregated neighbourhoods, in one of the largest mass removals in modern history.[11] Most of these targeted removals were intended to restrict the black population to ten designated "tribal homelands", also known as bantustans, four of which became nominally independent states.[9] The government announced that relocated persons would lose their South African citizenship as they were absorbed into the bantustans.[2]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid "The land laws were made stricter in the apartheid period, although the amount of land allocated to the black people did increase slightly. Black people were not allowed to live in white areas, and could not own land in these areas. This meant that those staying in townships could not own their land. The apartheid government also removed black people from some areas and declared these areas white. The apartheid government had a policy called the homeland policy. According to this policy, black people would all become citizens of independent black homelands. The government said that black people should settle in their own homeland, own land there and have political freedom there. Many black people were born in these urban areas and had never been to the countryside that was suddenly declared their 'homeland' by the white government. These homelands were usually not on the most fertile soil or in the best area, making economic success impossible, especially with the overcrowding and poor facilities. It was planned that all black people would eventually live in the 'homelands', and some would commute to work in the white areas. Essentially the 'homelands' were desolate, depressed labour pools for white business to obtain cheap workers. The apartheid state invented the idea of separate homelands that emphasized division and difference between the different tribes in South Africa' Sotho, Zulu, Xhosa, Tswana, Pedi, etc. This was a 'divide and rule' strategy which made up myths about how the government thought black people were completely separate from each other. The reason for this was that it made apartheid seem more logical (no mixing between races) and also ensured that the different groups could not all join together against the government. The truth was somewhat different: e.g. some tribes had been intermarrying for years and separation caused great sadness and social turmoil (e.g. the Shangaan and Venda). Some homelands that were created were Transkei, Ciskei, Bophuthatswana and Lebowa to name a few." http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/land-labour-and-apartheid So far about 10% of the land was regained if I recall right. The goal was 30% back. I don't know if ANC plans to go further than that but reaching 30% seems to be their current goal still. I've also just found out ANC is targeting unused land that can be farmed on but isn't @Crext https://www.moneyweb.co.za/news/south-africa/unused-land-is-main-target-of-sas-expropriation-plan/ |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
Clebardman said: Honestly it's Mandela's fault for playing the flower power pothead when the Apartheid ended. I don't know what stuff he smoked to think there'd be no griefs, but it was obviosu that the situation could only rot. The land reform was planned way back. It was stupid to do it back then because the country would immediately destabilize, now that the economy is a lot more modernized for both white and black people it makes sense to do it now. Like Traed said it's only natural to redistribute farmland that was literally acquired in the expense of natives through colonization less than a century ago. The Irish did it towards English that owned the land, so did other European and North African states. It's kind of funny watching everyone thinking they're some sort of African Hitlers though, when their countries have all done the same and would do it again if they were in similar circumstances. Like seriously, as if Germany or France would be okay with Russians owning 80% of their farmland because they invaded you a few decades back. Fuck that. |
| @NudeBear oh, I'm not saying it's a bad thing to do and I'm not offended that dem savages dare take the White Man's land. It's just obvious that 25 years after the dust settled, it's gonna be harder and create more racial tensions, something the country definitely doesn't need. |
Prophetess of the Golden Era |
| @traed My impression was that it was basically segregation. I didn't know too many details. I'm against kicking people out of their homes, obviously, as I'm big on property rights. The act of simply not allowing another group into your society is not something I take issue with though. So this happened on the current farmland we're talking about? Regardless, I'm against the government just taking people's land. We're how many decades down the line? Who are they giving the land back to exactly? I get why they're doing it though, and ultimately the Afrikaners are not sovereign there, and so they cannot retain their territory. I've thought for a while now that whites should probably leave South Africa. |
Polarc said: @traed My impression was that it was basically segregation. I didn't know too many details. I'm against kicking people out of their homes, obviously, as I'm big on property rights. The act of simply not allowing another group into your society is not something I take issue with though. So this happened on the current farmland we're talking about? Regardless, I'm against the government just taking people's land. We're how many decades down the line? Who are they giving the land back to exactly? I get why they're doing it though, and ultimately the Afrikaners are not sovereign there, and so they cannot retain their territory. I've thought for a while now that whites should probably leave South Africa. Two and a half for latest. Many people that lived in Apartheid are still alive. They have been giving it to those who work on the land. "The Freedom Charter, which was adopted by the Congress of the People in 1955, remains the basic policy document of the ANC. The Freedom Charter declares that: The people shall govern All national groups shall have equal rights The people shall share in the country`s wealth The land shall be shared among those who work it All shall be equal before the law All shall enjoy equal human rights There shall be work and security The doors of learning and culture shall be opened There shall be houses, security and comfort There shall be peace and friendship" http://anc.org.za/content/what-anc |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
271 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |