The aftermath of Sanctions

My country (South Africa) was forced by sanctions to change because we were doing it wrong according to the main players. But looking at the history of main players against us, it shows an even worse scenario in their development as a nation. I remember the lies in the European and American newspapers and always wondered what the real agenda was to force these changes. We can speculate from gold to the nuclear capabilities this little country had till we blue in the face, it won’t change a thing. But that is not what this thread is about.
So the world must be happy with us now because there is no oppression, less corruption and an effective workforce. Now I need to ask this: How long should a new government be in control to become effective? We didn’t even had a war forced on us.
I just experienced a mistake made in a government department that is now in day 5 to correct. I am trying to help the person involved because my signature is needed on some documents. He already used 5 days of his leave, traveled up and down over 2000km and have spend over R3000.00 to try and solved the mistake made by this department. We are getting send up and down between the different 30+ customer windows, but no joy. The Supervisors and Managers are unwilling or unable to help and the person able to fix it, is always on leave or not in (most probably at a golf day for executives with our tax money). How is it possible for a country to move forward with all this high-ranking bosses without the authority or knowledge to get the job done?
And then apartheid still get blamed after 20 years and most probably after 50 years as well.

a reply to: ICycle2
Sorry I am sure this is not your intention but your post does read like justifying apartheid because you now have inefficient government departments?

a reply to: ScepticScot

Uh, yea here is the issue with sa as I see it. You have and had a huge poverty stricken black community, then a small but powerful white community. The whites due to sanctions gave up power and established a true democracy. Which in theory sounds great, but the reality is, it turned sa into a full blown 3rd world country overnight. As a result you had politicians with no experience or knowledge being elected to positions that they aight not should have gotten, and put those they could control in charge underneath them, which again, had nothing to do with knowledge and everything to do with control. As a result, the infrastructure is crumbling, the society is degenerating, and the country is slowly dying. Did apartheid serve a purpose absolutely, should it have been abolished, yes, eventually, but not via the way it was. By outright eliminating it, there was nothing ready to successfully replace it.

Cheers

Camain

a reply to: camain
Not sure if you meant to reply to icycle rather than me, however my immediate question would be how long do you deny people the vote and other basic human rights in the name of efficient government?

a reply to: ScepticScot

That's a true logical question, and I don't have an answer. I guess the question is, for how long should the whites in sa been educating and building infrastructure not only for themselves but for the large African black population. I guess the point I'm making is that when you have a large uneducated nearly feral society, you just don't give them democracy and wish them the best. Democracy only works when you have a large educated social state, not when your just starting out as a country. They have the same issues in the Middle East too. There is no easy answer, but to assume democracy or republic is the best form of government and should be implemented everyone just isn't the case. In South Africa, I think if they would have spent 30 years transitioning over, it would have been a way better country today. Not saying though they should have started in the 90's. It should have started during colonial times.

a reply to: ScepticScot;camain

I’m never was against the abolishment of apartheid. I’m white and the person I’m helping is black. I’m helping him because of the excellent student and person he was and not on race.
I’m just frustrated to see this beautiful country going down this road of decline. Then I sometimes wonder what would have happened if the forces allowed us to follow the homeland route we were busy establishing. But who knows? However I will always question the so called world leaders with their agendas forcing their will on other nations. The lies I understand is to win the public over? But that’s a trademark of most politicians.
I just received news after an e-mail I send yesterday. The head of different departments worked together and the problem was solved today. The student will also get a refund for his losses.

As said before, I was for the abandoning of apartheid and a lot was done wrong against the blacks. But even with the previous bad pictures painted to the world the blacks in South Africa was better of than in any other African country controlled by their own people I know of. What the people seem to forget is that the British implemented apartheid and the “Afrikaner” only inherited the mess and blame after becoming a republic in the 1960’s

a reply to: ICycle2
Apartheid was introduced just after the second world war. SA was already an independent country by this time so nothing to do with the UK.
Apartheid era SA was a very wealthy country however I doubt many blacks who lived in that era would think they were better off then.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Ok, I see you think you know the real history. You must be a politician because I see you never posted a thread. Stop drinking because your stars are reflecting intelligence. Good night.