[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

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

Really, your emotionally hysterical shrilling only shows your complete inability to debate facts.

In 1991, whites controlled about 85% of the arable land.
It's now down to 74%, because the Constitution said the farms had to be bought at market value.
So it's just easier to change the Constitution, right ?

I see you are convinced blacks are only capable of farming.
So they are not able to set up new businesses, restaurants, taxi services,
computer sales, house construction.
Because if they are, there is no need to steal White property.

$1:

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.

Senior levels.

[martin14]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Wow you really have a hate on for SA.

Better to say he has a real hatred of White People.

$1:

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.

Umm, no.

The first Africans the Dutch encountered were the Khoikhoi, who were not farmers.
So the Dutch had to import their own farmers for supplying ships at Capetown.
This started in 1650.

So,

ShepherdsDog 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.

is true.

Khoikhoi were only 10-15,000 people, so pushing them off the land they weren't farming
was easy. The land was empty until explorers found the Xhosa, another small tribe on the Indian Ocean side of SA. Zulus didnt show up in SA until 1800 or so.

Anyone who says the land was stolen from blacks is lying.

[Prof_Chomsky]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

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

That didn't really help explain anything. Really the answer he gave in 3 different ways was "the locals screw themselves over, repeatedly, and always by making stupid, stupid decisions".

[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

And I say again for the record 1991 was not that long ago

For someone who still blames Bush for everything, sure 30 years is nothing.

$1:

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

Here we go again.

martin14 martin14:

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.

Let's just take mass imprisonment.

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/prisoninde ... frica.html
Section IV: Global Comparisons
Crime and incarceration around the world:
U.S. vs. South Africa

Incarceration rate per 100,000 population in South Africa under apartheid (1993) 609: 368
Incarceration rate per 100,000 Black males in South Africa under apartheid (1993) 610: 851
Incarceration rate per 100,000 African-American males in the United States under George W. Bush (2001) 611: 4,848

outright lies, or pure ignorance ?

$1:

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

Wrong. lies and more lies.
They were using an American reactor with full American knowledge and permission.

[BeaverFever]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Wow you really have a hate on for SA.

I don't have a hate on for SA but the apartheid regime that lasted until 1991 is almost universally considered one of the villains of the 20th century. Remember Lethal Weapon 2? So it's always shocking when you go on the internet and someone is pretending they were just like Canada or Australia with some unavoidable indigenous relations issues. Seriously, read up on that shit. Ronald Reagan. Brian Mulroney and Margaret Thatcher, all Conservatives, worked to see them kicked out of the commonwealth and placed under international embargo....they're no bleeding heart liberal humanitarians.

$1:

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.

One generation is nothing. Are you telling me that I killed your parents an you were orphaned and forced to live in the streets and endure a childhood of violence and depredation you wouldn't hold it against me because "it happened a generation ago". Of I someone killed your family when you were 10 you'll forgive them when you're 40? Under the best, and I mean the BEST circumstances for reconciliations that aren't even realistically achievable most of the time these kinds of grievances and grudges takes 4-5 generations to pass...once all of the people who experienced the violence first-hand have passed away and a new generation is born not knowing anyone who experienced it directly. And that's under the BEST circumstances....usually there are enough shit disturbers and provocateurs and incidents to keep people nursing their grudges much longer.

$1:

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.

1991 was the year they stepped down and handed the government over to the blacks. You better believe they wanted/were made to destroy all the nukes first!

$1:

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).

Omg The "natives" are 90% of the population! That IS the country, not the ruling 10%!

"It's a thriving economy if you don't count the 90% of the population forced to live in squalor by law!"

$1:

Let the natives live how they always lived,

Urban squalor in a viscous capitalist ethnocentric police state where they were officially declared to have no legal rights was not how they always lived.

$1:

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...You segment the people from your country you don’t have a use for and let the educated masses form an economy.

They weren't outside the bubble or the border, they were inside the border, providing the cheap labour that allowed the bubble to exist. Last time I checked Mexicans didn't have to live their lives under US law. And blacks under apartheid were by law limited in what education they were allowed to obtain and what kind of economy they were allowed to have. The Apartheid regime needed the blacks for all the back-breaking labour in their diamond mines and plantations and wanted them living poor in tin-can shanty towns so that the white 10% could afford first-world living standards and the latest consumer luxuries. The entire Apartheid South African economy was based on intentionally enslaving 90% of the population in order to provide wealth to the ruling 10% and they used the full brutality of the state to make it happen.

$1:

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.

You're right, I don't. And I don't expect them to give up assets without compensation. The government should compensate them fairly for any expropriation but when what is now 8% of the population owns something like 75% of the farmland, that's also unreasonable. We're not talking about small family plots here. The government should be pay them for any land expropriated.

[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Remember Lethal Weapon 2?

So you are basing your South Africa knowledge on........... a movie......

$1:

worked to see them kicked out of the commonwealth

More utter and complete lies.
SA withdrew after becoming a Republic in 1961.

Every post you have made in this thread is a complete lie.

$1:

$1:

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.

1991 was the year they stepped down and handed the government over to the blacks. You better believe they wanted/were made to destroy all the nukes first!

Which has nothing to do with their legality... another lie.


The rest of your post is just too much virtue signaling nonsense to even bother with.

[BeaverFever]

martin14 martin14:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

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

Really, your emotionally hysterical shrilling only shows your complete inability to debate facts.

In 1991, whites controlled about 85% of the arable land.
It's now down to 74%, because the Constitution said the farms had to be bought at market value.
So it's just easier to change the Constitution, right ?

I see you are convinced blacks are only capable of farming.
So they are not able to set up new businesses, restaurants, taxi services,
computer sales, house construction.
Because if they are, there is no need to steal White property.

Considering you do nothing but factless emotional shrilling its pretty fucking rich hearing a troll like you try to complain about the quality of debate.

And how many times do I have to tell you that I think they should be compensated? Do you have a learning disability?

Even setting race aside it’s unreasonable that a tiny minority that’s only 8% of the population should monopolize 75% of the farmland and therefore contol the country’s entire agricultural sector These are not small family farms here these are big farms that will likely just have to get rid of a few acres each because they are still a golden goose for tax revenue.

Saying it again for the learning disabled: They should be compensated for any expropriation

$1:

Senior levels.

Senior job levels, I bet that’s something you’ll never be familiar with.

[BeaverFever]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

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

That didn't really help explain anything. Really the answer he gave in 3 different ways was "the locals screw themselves over, repeatedly, and always by making stupid, stupid decisions".

He explains how and why they screw themselves over.

[N_Fiddledog]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Omg The "natives" are 90% of the population! That IS the country, not the ruling 10%

As I've learned in the past one wants to be really careful about accepting Beave's stats, graphs and in particular Math as fact.

$1:

As of the calculations of 2004, there are 34,216,164 Black Africans and 8,625,050 Black African households residing in South Africa. The Black South African population density is 29/km². The density of Black households is 7/km². Black South Africans make up 79.0% of the total population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_gr ... uth_Africa

[N_Fiddledog]

Speaking of graphs though.

Somebody was talking about "Ethnic Cleansing" Earlier. Would you like to see some ethnic cleansing?

[N_Fiddledog]

Ok, that's not fair. That's more just demographic change.

But if you want to do 'fun with graphs' Beave just remember you're not the only one who can do it.

[BeaverFever]

martin14 martin14:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Remember Lethal Weapon 2?

So you are basing your South Africa knowledge on........... a movie......

$1:

worked to see them kicked out of the commonwealth

More utter and complete lies.
SA withdrew after becoming a Republic in 1961.

Every post you have made in this thread is a complete lie.

$1:

$1:

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.

1991 was the year they stepped down and handed the government over to the blacks. You better believe they wanted/were made to destroy all the nukes first!

Which has nothing to do with their legality... another lie.


The rest of your post is just too much virtue signaling nonsense to even bother with.

The Commonwealth was the lead behind the IS-backec sanctions in the 80s, but SA was actually forced out of the Commonwealth in the 60s :

$1:

August 1986: Commonwealth puts pressure on white minority rule government

Commonwealth leaders agreed a programme of economic sanctions against apartheid-era South Africa in 1986, helping to galvanise international action against the apartheid regime.

Sanctions included a ban on both air travel and investments in South Africa, as well as a bar on agricultural imports and the promotion of South African tourism.

Bank loans to South African companies were banned as well as imports of coal, iron, steel and uranium from the country. Consular facilities were also withdrawn under the agreement.

In their communiqué, the heads of government called for “the dismantling of apartheid and the establishment of a non-racial and representative government in South Africa as a matter of compelling urgency.”

“The Commonwealth cannot stand by and allow the cycle of violence to spiral, but must take effective concerted action,” the leaders said. “We trust that the authorities in Pretoria will recognise the seriousness of our resolve.”

‘Not adequate concrete progress’

The leaders of seven Commonwealth member countries were present at the mini-summit in London between 3 and 5 August 1986.

Those attending were President Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, Prime Ministers Robert Hawke of Australia, Lynden Pindling of The Bahamas, Brian Mulroney of Canada, Rajiv Gandhi of India and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, as well as British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Billed as a ‘review meeting’, the mini-summit was convened following the previous year’s Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in The Bahamas, at which the Commonwealth had demanded South Africa dismantle its system of white minority rule.

A taskforce of Commonwealth observers known as the Eminent Persons Group was formed by then Secretary-General Shridath Ramphal following the meeting in Nassau to meet with the government and opposition groups in South Africa.

The Eminent Persons Group was aborted in May 1986 however after an upsurge in violence, after concluding that “at present there is no genuine intention on the part of the South African government to dismantle apartheid.”

Piling on international pressure

Meeting in London, six of the seven leaders present signed up to the sanctions, concluding: “There has not been the adequate concrete progress that we looked for.” The United Kingdom, led by Mrs Thatcher, declined to sign up in full to the agreement and instead offered a “voluntary ban” on investment in South Africa and tourism promotion.

Besides adopting the sanctions, the six heads of government agreed to recommend them to other governments with significant economic links with South Africa. The Commonwealth leaders then appealed directly to the USA, Japan and the European Community to follow their lead.

Not punitive – but corrective

Secretary-General Ramphal, speaking at a conference a few weeks later, insisted that the sanctions were intended as “not punitive but as corrective”.

“[It is] a programme to impress on Pretoria, and those in South Africa who support the regime,” he said, “that apartheid must be dismantled and a future for all South Africans that is truly non-racial and democratic within a united and non-fragmented country.”

The white minority rule government of South Africa had first withdrawn from the Commonwealth in 1961, after being pressured by member states over its apartheid policies.

South Africa rejoined the Commonwealth in 1994 following the end of apartheid and the election of Nelson Mandela as President.

The rest of your post is just too much high school dropout ignorant trolling to address

[BeaverFever]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Omg The "natives" are 90% of the population! That IS the country, not the ruling 10%

As I've learned in the past one wants to be really careful about accepting Beave's stats, graphs and in particular Math as fact.

$1:

As of the calculations of 2004, there are 34,216,164 Black Africans and 8,625,050 Black African households residing in South Africa. The Black South African population density is 29/km². The density of Black households is 7/km². Black South Africans make up 79.0% of the total population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_gr ... uth_Africa

The difference is your stats break down “Coloureds” (mixed race Blacks) and Blacks separately.

[BeaverFever]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Ok, that's not fair. That's more just demographic change.

But if you want to do 'fun with graphs' Beave just remember you're not the only one who can do it.

= “an argument I just invented is false therefore all arguments are false”

[N_Fiddledog]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The difference is your stats break down “Coloureds” (mixed race Blacks) and Blacks separately.

Do some more math then Beave. I could use a chuckle.

In any case, why would mixed race be black and not white or Asian?

As long as you're collecting stats though here's an interesting one. Black, Coloured, and Indian Asian demographics are consistently growing lately in South Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_gr ... uth_Africa

However: