ANCYL taught a lesson...

[PostmanPot]

and the evil colonial amenities?

bricks, mortor, corrigated iron?

I think that Europeans could have brought those to Africa in a more peaceful way.

There were wooden huts too.

 

[PostmanPot]

Oh, this is like talking to a Linux fanboy about Windows. FFS, show me the slums in Finland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Greenland, Iceland, Germany, Holland, Spain, Italy....you're probably talking about ****holes like India and Bangladesh, etc. SA is not Europe. White people shouldn't have come here, and leave the natives living in caves and bushes. Would you think that is better off?

Yeah sure, those countries have been practising the European way and developing like that for a long time. It will take much longer than 14 years for SA/blacks to come any where near where European countries are. I believe the potential is there.

 

[PostmanPot]

The population also grows. Ethiopia disproves your theory

Not if there is less poverty, more education etc. Think long-term.

 

[PostmanPot]

But why did some make it, and some not, I am talking about blacks here?. I am just trying to understand the logic of blaming apartheid, but then some blacks still managed to be successful.

Yes, but they are still discriminating, whatever the difference.

B

I would say because many of them were crippled by Apartheid and didn't have the vision of making or being able to make it.

Unfortunately the ANC has to give its people a little head start as they have tough competition, and I suppose they see the type of discrimination that AA/BEE is as as the quickest way to help blacks catch up.

I'm sure it has been discussed before, but what other ways would you guys use to help blacks catch up?

 

[PostmanPot]

Haha, you really do make up the wildest strawmen. You quote me saying they didn't have opportunities and somehow manage to claim the opposite! And then feel siff about the imaginary point, nice touch.

You used the phrase "I'm not arguing with the reality that blacks did not have many opportunities in the old South Africa" - which I interpret as meaning that there were some blacks (lucky) who had opportunities in your opinion. I agree with this, that some blacks (extremely few) were able to become something as per Bismuth's story.

Let me try and simplify this so that we're perfectly clear.

You're saying: All whites should pay for the material advantage that they received by oppressing blacks.

I'm saying: Oppressing blacks was not directly profitable to the vast majority of whites who lived out their ordinary lives in a manner almost identical to their European counterparts, despite your claims to the contrary. Their European counterparts didn't have any local blacks to oppress so presumably they can act as the "control" to the experiment. Yes, it meant some whites could have a maid and a gardener but that doesn't provide a long-term benefit to whites. The people who made the real money from oppressing blacks were the mines and their HUGE labour force. If you want to talk compensation, then they definitely were built on the backs of the people.

That is not entirely what I'm saying. I am saying that "whites should pay" for putting measures in place (Apartheid, Bantu Education ) which meant blacks were denied similar opportunities than what whites were.

I am not claiming that Apartheid was directly profitable to all whites. Us and our European counterparts did lived in similar fashion, but they did not have measures in place to oppress a certain race, as we did.

BEE is a system whereby all whites pay, whereas the ones who truly milked the black labour force (mining houses etc) walk away smiling.

Siff, isn't it.

 

[boramk]

Not if there is less poverty, more education etc. Think long-term.

And who is guaranteeing this?

 

[PostmanPot]

And who is guaranteeing this?

Evolution?

 

[dlk001]

Even an idiot can see that.

Says a lot about the condition of some people.

 

[Slooth]

Evolution?

It has to be Evolution because it sure as hell won't be the ANC.

 

[High/eenah]

Says a lot about the condition of some people.

Yes I'm an idiot and even I can see it.

 

[km2]

That is not entirely what I'm saying. I am saying that "whites should pay" for putting measures in place (Apartheid, Bantu Education ) which meant blacks were denied similar opportunities than what whites were.

Yeah, but since when can one start holding individual voters responsible for the acts of a government? If there's a R30 billion arms deal that's fraudulent, are you then entitled to go "oh blacks voted for the ANC, lets go collect the money from every black person"?

You can't do that. Not all black people voted for the ANC, just like not all white people voted for apartheid. There is no Homogenous White Group to punish for the acts of apartheid, all you do is hurt individual people and generally it's the people who were too young to even have had any say in voting who get it most in the shorts from BEE.

 

[gpe]

Julius threatening to kill people live on national television is no admirable quality. He is making himself a target for right wing extremists, or other enemies of the state.

He earns more coverage than Zuma and I sometimes wonder who the real future President is? The ANCYL President? or ANC President(Zuma)?

Zuma barely ever speaks partly because he barely ever thinks. The camera people have to point somewhere(its nice to hear whats happening in our country) and Jacob just isn't there -- We'll be seeing a lot more of Julius I suspect in the next 8yrs along with his rantings.

 

[alloytoo]

That is not entirely what I'm saying. I am saying that "whites should pay" for putting measures in place (Apartheid, Bantu Education ) which meant blacks were denied similar opportunities than what whites were.

By this reasoning the ANC should pay for conciously denying their followers what little education opportunities there were.

 

[PostmanPot]

Yeah, but since when can one start holding individual voters responsible for the acts of a government? If there's a R30 billion arms deal that's fraudulent, are you then entitled to go "oh blacks voted for the ANC, lets go collect the money from every black person"?

I think "holding individual voters responsible for the acts of a government" is an extreme way of looking at it. If whites in old SA did not agree with the National Party and Apartheid then they should have been voted out. I think a large amount of white people were apathetic because they enjoyed the the privileges Apartheid provided even though, morally, they may not have agreed with what the Nats were doing. Unfortunately having the Nats in power longer meant blacks were denied the opportunities to develop for longer. I don't agree with the way AA/BEE discriminates, but something has to be put in place to allow for blacks to develop, because it was denied in the past (how else will we curb racism and white superiority? ). On paper, I think AA/BEE would be the quickest way for blacks to advance, but of course what's happening in reality is another story.

You can't do that. Not all black people voted for the ANC, just like not all white people voted for apartheid.

One of the cons of democracy.

 

[PostmanPot]

By this reasoning the ANC should pay for conciously denying their followers what little education opportunities their were.

I agree, the ANC should pay.

 

[km2]

If whites in old SA did not agree with the National Party and Apartheid then they should have been voted out. I think a large amount of white people were apathetic because they enjoyed the the privileges Apartheid provided even though, morally, they may not have agreed with what the Nats were doing. Unfortunately having the Nats in power longer meant blacks were denied the opportunities to develop for longer.

Ah, Collective Responsibility. As the old examples go:
"Those Americans citizens who died in 9/11 deserved it. If they had just voted in someone who stopped meddling in Middle Eastern affairs it would never have happened."
"It's ok to blame the Jews now, because they killed Jesus!"

You can't do reconciliation when you're going to hold the citizenry directly responsible for actions of the past. If one stuck to these principles, there would never be any reconciliation between groups ever. If you know they're going to hold it against anyone who shares your race/ethnic group/faith, and use it to justify any number of byzantine restrictions against you, why would anyone agree to it?

In fact your line of thought is so dangerous it leads to nonsense like WW2:
1. Make the Germans pay for the damage suffered by everyone in WW1
2. Take away some of their land to teach a lesson
3. Massive resentment builds leading to the people supporting an utter nutjob
4. People remember what happened at end of last war, know that the only option is to try and conquer everyone otherwise it could happen again

Seriously, it changes the whole relationship of negotiations. If every Zanu-PF member knew that if the MDC got into power they'd divide up their possessions with MDC members, do you think there'd ever be any chance of peace? No, there'd be a massive civil war until only one group survived!