It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What do you call the black South African governement

page: 6
27
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

It is terrible to see *any* racism especially codified into government policy. Whether it is in SA against white farmers, the southern democrats during the American civil war period or otherwise....racism is wrong but even worse when it comes under "color of law." Discrimination is wrong. Arbitrarily taking any action based solely on the color of one's skin is wrong

The fact there are some on the left calling this a mere conspiracy theory (when it is factual reality) tells me a lot. Why on Earth are *SOME* US liberals defending SA?
edit on 8/27/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx


there are enough white racists in the banking and financial world


Agreed. And they are just as despicable as black racists. I will also denounce the white racists until the sun goes down, no problem. Only problem with SA is that this is action coming under "color of law" from a supposed-governing body

Racism of any kind does not belong in the modern world. We are supposed to be an "intelligent" and "technological" species yet we can't seem to work past what color someone's skin is, how petty!
edit on 8/27/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Greedy and Incompetent.
Unsure which they are better at.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Greedy and Incompetent.
Unsure which they are better at.

In this they are no better than their predecessors who governed the land where the majority lived in extreme poverty and humiliation without rights for about 80 yrs..while 10% lived high off the hog.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Good Lord man, the title!

I thought this was gonna be a really bad StormFront joke for a minute...


Wouldn't SA simply be a failed ethnostate at this point?



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: howtonhawky

It is terrible to see *any* racism especially codified into government policy. Whether it is in SA against white farmers, the southern democrats during the American civil war period or otherwise....racism is wrong but even worse when it comes under "color of law." Discrimination is wrong. Arbitrarily taking any action based solely on the color of one's skin is wrong

The fact there are some on the left calling this a mere conspiracy theory (when it is factual reality) tells me a lot. Why on Earth are *SOME* US liberals defending SA?


I say it is a conspiracy that the un will not step in.

I would not view this with the right/left usual partisan view.

Around 40 people in syria were accused of dying by means of a chemical attack and the right went in and bombed them so that pretty much tells us that there is more to this issue than what we are accounting for so far.

I guess the usual sanctions for oil routine is not in play here.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

It also ignores the fact the there were more than one white group in South Africa and some of them fought very bitterly against each other perpetrating horrific crimes against one another over that land. I think it's been referenced in other threads that the British treated the Boer farmers who are being ousted today terribly.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Greedy and Incompetent.
Unsure which they are better at.

In this they are no better than their predecessors who governed the land where the majority lived in extreme poverty and humiliation without rights for about 80 yrs..while 10% lived high off the hog.


And this will not change in any way.

So basically, you are determined that anything whites can fail at, blacks can do it just the same?



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
...
Who do you suggest would be in the right to go in and stop the land from being transferred in such a manner. The situation is bad and i have followed it for years but there is no one that can legally step in on a global level.


The fact that no-one intervened during the Zimbabwe affair (or at any stage afterwards) tells me that no-one is going to be bothered with what happens SA either. I don't see anyone with anything to gain, there's no oil in SA... As far as I know the USA doesn't even have an ambassador to South Africa (Patrick Gaspard 's mission ended in 2016), although there is an embassy...

They can impose sanctions all they want - the only ones that suffer are the people of the country, not the politicians. The politicians live in wealth and luxury while the people have only dirt and dust to eat. Again we can use Mugabe as poster child.

I don't know who/what the answer is... I think if someone is to stop the train from derailing he/she will have to come from within South Africa. Right now, I doubt such a person/s exist/s. Tribalism and xenophobia is actually even worse than the racism in South Africa, so good luck finding anyone that will satisfy all tastes...
edit on 28/8/2018 by Gemwolf because: Sp



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: pointessa

No they did not, they intermingled with them,that's why their languages are full of clks and their DNA also reflects this.
As for the Europeans some deals were made with or without the threat of extreme ,violence others were just land grabs and displacement, that continued right up till one man one vote, in this we have to look at the entire southern end of Africa, including Zimbabwe and Namibia.

I have said this before on other threads of this type, and will say it again the situation is complex and I'm not certain that just grabbing lands that belonged to ones ancestors whilst one is made in the statutes of a serf is the way to go, but the answer may not be pain free, .for the current occupiers of the land grabs..I mean bottom line that's what we are really talking about after all.


I think it needs to be said that the current situation in South Africa isn't about "land". The topic of land is just used as shield for the actual hate.

Proof?

Well, that's easy.

The state already owns 4 000+ farms (about 4 027 000 hectares/1 629 669 acres) - intended for "land reform". Just sitting there. Why would they want to amend the constitution to get their hands on even more land, if they have plenty to go round...?

A detailed report

Secondly, when a person that has been wronged in the past or have a valid claim to land, they are (currently) given the option of either getting the land back (the land is bought from the current owner) or they can have the monetary value of the land. The overwhelming majority opt to take the money instead of the actual land...


When the land restitution process began in 1994, some 79 700 valid land claims were submitted by December 1998. By 2013, as the then minister of rural development and land reform, Gugile Nkwinti, pointed out, roughly 76 000 successful claims had been disposed of. However, only about 5 800 of these successful claimants (roughly 8%) chose to have their land restored to them. The remaining 92% preferred to receive cash compensation instead.

Said Nkwinti: "We thought everybody when they got a chance to get land, they would jump for it. Now only 5 856 have opted for land restoration." People wanted money because of poverty and unemployment, but they had also become urbanised and 'de-culturised' in terms of tilling land. "We no longer have a peasantry; we have wage earners now," he said.
Source


And while we're looking at statistics - what became of the land that was given back? The vast majority fail...


...Land reform minister Gugile Nkwinti said the focus would now shift to helping the black farmers make their land productive.

"The farms - which were active accruing revenue for the state - were handed over to people, and more than 90% of those are not functional," he said.

"They are not productive, and therefore the state loses the revenue. We cannot afford to go on like that... No country can afford that." ...
Source


None of the statistics make sense when held next to the excuses used by the government (and "far left") to implement "land expropriation without compensation".

So, we're left with the question what is it about, if it's not about the land?



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf



The fact that no-one intervened during the Zimbabwe affair (or at any stage afterwards) tells me that no-one is going to be bothered with what happens SA either.


Two reasons why 'no-one intervened' in Zimbabwe;
A genuine fear of accusations of neo-colonialism.
No oil.


Tribalism and xenophobia is actually even worse than the racism in South Africa,.....


A fact that so few people are willing to acknowledge.

Brutal honesty is required if problems are to be addressed, far too many people want to blame some convenient scapegoat rather than accepting both personal and collective responsibility.



So, we're left with the question what is it about, if it's not about the land?


Retribution, power and control would be my guess.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf



Excellent response!

It is a very complicated situation with no clear solution that would please everyone but while the world waits the whites are slowly suffering.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

By most metrics including education, life expectancy and income Blacks were better off during Apartheid. The government actually did a fair job of building and staffing schools and hospitals for everyone. Ditto for infrastructure. In the meantime they fought off Communist insurgents, did the first human heart transplant, had a robust economy and maintained a first rate armed forces which all White men were required to serve in at age 18. They even carried on for over decade despite embargoes from many countries and sanctions from the UN.

Robbery, rape (including of children), assault and murder are all much higher than ever. Electric service is inconsistent, roads and public services are breaking down, AIDs is epidemic - is life somehow better under the Rainbow nation? It isn't.

There was a growing Black middle class during Apartheid, which lasted for 54 years. Anything before that was on Britain during colonial rule. Not saying it was right but when you have 9 major tribes competing against each other in addition to the White/colored/Indian populations I don't know how else you could keep the country from in-fighting and fragmenting. A major reason Blacks remained poor in South Africa is unlimited population growth - 800% in the last century.
edit on 27-8-2018 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-8-2018 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ATSAlex
What do you call the black government and it’s followers in South Africa?

Reverse racists...!!!


That has always bothered me, the term "reverse racist".

Racism is treating someone different because of the color of their skin.

Now racism can be positive to a skin color, such as America's Affirmative Action program, or the treatment of any other skin color but white by the Democratic party.

Racism can also be negative, such as what is going on right now in Africa.

There is no such thing as reverse racism, unless you believe that racism is inherent in white people.

Which would make you a racist, since you are treating someone different based on the color of their skin.

Just a barefoot Cherokee here pointing out the obvious...



No.

Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

And a racist is one who believes that their race is superior to another.

That's why anyone of any race can be racist.

Barefoot Cherokee?....nice....LOL

Just a Muscogee here.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Would you care if it wasn't white people getting shafted (which really isn't happening anyway)?


Really isnt happening anyway? You are blissfully ignorant and ignorance kills.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Just goes to show,racists all cry they are targets because of their race,and try to portray the victim,when put in power they do the same but justify it because of their cause,why I hate liberals all about them



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

You make a good point.

Skyped with my buddy in Durban yesterday and he said the same thing. Only thing that could be done is for the U.S. to put sanctions on and all that would do is make it worse for him.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2


why I hate liberals all about them

Ok !¿ leaving that statement stand by itself..


Alrighty then to the rest of you guys and gals remember when I said there is still a problem regardless of how it got there?? well I went in search of other voices on the issue, and I found one , who until recently was ANC deep,

Former defense minister, you South Africans should know of him, his name is Mr Terror Lekota, yes that's his real name lol, caught an interview in which he seems to have some commonsense approach to the issue, without mucking about with the constitution, or making things painful for white farmers, according to him S.A do not have a land shortage problem, and the govt, have control over it, that they should use that and bring landless black farmers into the fold, updating them with better farming techniques/ mgt..now This seem to me a win win than the other alternative which may mean a possible lose lose..
Find the interview on YouTube
land expropriation without compensation.

that's the tile to put in your YouTube search engine.

The interviewer is Mr Jonas Nielson.
On my android can't send a direct link.

edit on 28-8-2018 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Patrick Lekota is one of the most level-headed and intelligent politicians I've ever seen. It's really a pity his party doesn't do well. Perhaps because he doesn't have extreme views or isn't controversial enough? (I'm actually considering voting for him/COPE in the next election, would it not be a wasted vote against the ANC.)

There is an awesome "open letter to the president" by a white farmer that makes some excellent suggestions as well. He is actually involved in helping black farmers obtain farms legally (with financial support) and also with the training of black farmers... He has turned 660 of his workers and members of the community into productive self-sufficient farmers.

His Letter is in Afrikaans - I don't know how well it will translate using an online translator.

The point is, there are MANY excellent solutions and suggestions voiced such as Mr Lekota's. Poor mister Lekota was booed to silence during a recent debate on the matter of land expropriation, just because he wasn't for amending the constitution. Unfortunately, and as I suggested earlier, it's not actually about the land. Logic, practicality, facts and common sense have no place in the land debate. ...

edit on 28/8/2018 by Gemwolf because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 06:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

Well someone get busy and reprint his letters in the various languages, and disseminate it through out, also have folks educated about this man Patrick Lekota it's all in the presentation, yeah folks can shout in a crowd but catch them on a one to one with commonsense and they are likely to switch.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join