How many of those that have left after 1994 have been arrested upon their return to the country ?... None...it remains a choice to stay abroad...
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
Expats are trashing SA
- Thread starter Skeptik
- Start date
How many of those that have left after 1994 have been arrested upon their return to the country ?... None...it remains a choice to stay abroad...
People trashing South Africa are easily silenced. Simply disproof their points! Although this is a big challenge for our government, it could be done with a lot of work. Oh wait... work had never been a priority or popular. Expats must be racists then (see, didn't even have to work to disproof them. Just label them, and stand back).
McSack
Executive Member
I agree with you absolutely.
But why should these people be excluded from commenting on the situation in SA or criticizing the ineffectual chops who are supposed to be running the show?
UnoPanelvan
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 1,702
- Reaction score
- 0
It has to start from the top to bottom. We can do nothing until the government play the supporting role to achieve such improvements. Then if/because no one is complaining (Like with the power issue) the government will still do nothing and maintain status quo.
Remember.. the Justice scale... one persons freedom can be another persons persecution. You have freedoms, doesnt mean others do. By definition, the expats might as well have been exiled. The NATs brainwashed the whites in to believing in their idealism, and its a common practice of any political party. Just 'cos the current ruling party tell you 'All is well' , doesnt mean anything.
Apple:
Kingdom: Plantae
Division: Magnoliophyta
Class: Magnoliopsida
Order: Rosales
Family: Rosaceae
Subfamily: Maloideae
Genus: Malus
Species: M. domestica
Orange:
Kingdom: Plantae
Division: Magnoliophyta
Class: Magnoliopsida
Subclass: Rosidae
Order: Sapindales
Family: Rutaceae
Genus: Citrus
Species: C. sinensis
LoneGunman
Expert Member
remember, 'freedom' doesnt anything, when its not accompanied by the creation of a secure country, with opportunities.
'freedom' by itself means nothing, 'dignity' doesnt put food on a table.
and suggesting that people are 'trashing' SA - implies that SA is inherently fine to begin with.
Its clear that it is not 'fine', for a wide range of life-threatening reasons, often referred to here in this forum.
Therefore, the position of mediasluts like Moerdyk, to begin with, is based on an incorrect assumption of the current state, and potential future of SA.
Ultimately, the power to effect change - in the SA context - has to come whole heartedly from the State. The problems (in 94 - and doubly so now) are of such a magnitude, that no single individual cannot do anything to stop the disorder, lawlessness, refugees, diseases, poverty, xenophobia, racial bitterness, inequality.
Its fantasy to say to people, who have been reduced to living behind fortified fences, that merely 'being nice to each other' is somehow going to change anything, least of all the state of their own informal imprisonment.
The trashing of SA has clearly been done by the State itself, who do not seem interested in having a well functioning, safe and secure society for all. Their behaviour shows quite the opposite - they have done their best to cause racial divides, increase bitterness, remove their brief moment of being moral leaders in the continent - by their absence of action on Zimbabwe, and now we're into almost the end game - when they're starting to blame 'outside agitators' for their own mess.
Exactly like the apartheid government did.
'freedom' by itself means nothing, 'dignity' doesnt put food on a table.
and suggesting that people are 'trashing' SA - implies that SA is inherently fine to begin with.
Its clear that it is not 'fine', for a wide range of life-threatening reasons, often referred to here in this forum.
Therefore, the position of mediasluts like Moerdyk, to begin with, is based on an incorrect assumption of the current state, and potential future of SA.
Ultimately, the power to effect change - in the SA context - has to come whole heartedly from the State. The problems (in 94 - and doubly so now) are of such a magnitude, that no single individual cannot do anything to stop the disorder, lawlessness, refugees, diseases, poverty, xenophobia, racial bitterness, inequality.
Its fantasy to say to people, who have been reduced to living behind fortified fences, that merely 'being nice to each other' is somehow going to change anything, least of all the state of their own informal imprisonment.
The trashing of SA has clearly been done by the State itself, who do not seem interested in having a well functioning, safe and secure society for all. Their behaviour shows quite the opposite - they have done their best to cause racial divides, increase bitterness, remove their brief moment of being moral leaders in the continent - by their absence of action on Zimbabwe, and now we're into almost the end game - when they're starting to blame 'outside agitators' for their own mess.
Exactly like the apartheid government did.
What is your point?
I thought it was quite obvious. An orange and an apple are far more different than human races.
lion_fish
Expert Member
Actually, break the human speicies down to DNA level and the differences become quite apparent...
The world may have some problems but it's problems can't even be compared to the amount of problems South Africa and Africa in general has.
No it's not a short sighted choice. It's doing what is best for yourself. If South Africa ever recovers it will take 20 years at least for this to happen and that's with competent leadership. Why would you give up your entire youth by trying to cope in a much more difficult environment when you can go and have a much easier life over seas?
If you compare the countries logically I am sorry to say but SA currently doesn't even come close to those countries to which people are going to.
LoneGunman
Expert Member
All of this reminds me of a scene from the classic novel 'Catch 22' - a young soldier and an old man are talking..
I'm paraphrasing a bit but..
The old man's saying "Its better to live on your knees, than to die on your feet" - and the young soldier's saying, "No!, its better to die on your feet".
The old man says "Trust me, I know".
The soldier says "How do you know?"
The old man says "I know, because I am 102 years old..how old are you?"
The soldier thinks, and says "I'll be 22 next year"
The old man says "Yes... if you live."
I'm paraphrasing a bit but..
The old man's saying "Its better to live on your knees, than to die on your feet" - and the young soldier's saying, "No!, its better to die on your feet".
The old man says "Trust me, I know".
The soldier says "How do you know?"
The old man says "I know, because I am 102 years old..how old are you?"
The soldier thinks, and says "I'll be 22 next year"
The old man says "Yes... if you live."
I would agree if you said the expats have been "self exiled". I also believe that when people leave this country it is in search of a better life. If they couldn't find it they would be welcomed with open arms.
Last edited:
No silly
golden delicious = apple, Granny smith = apple
A golden delicious and a granny smith are both apples albeit of differnt kinds...applekind
The Cosmos
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,724
- Reaction score
- 3
I don't respect people who leave the country, unless they have been heavily affected by crime.
But i love it how the people who votes YES, in '92 have left the country in droves. What a bunch of *******s.
McSack
Executive Member
??? so one should hang around and wait to be heavily affected first??? take the reactive approach in other words ??
that's like saying you don't respect people who install an antivirus on their computers until they have been heavily affected by viruses
I am sure they are devastated to hear that.
LoneGunman
Expert Member
a) what does your 'respect' have to do with any of the reality of modern SA, or making a good and reasonable decision?
b) So what if people who voted 'yes' in '92, have decided to leave, based on the increasing grim violence of SA.
Would you rather
1) people werent allowed to change their minds
2) people who made what you see as a bad decision, stayed and wallowed in their bad decision, and let themselves be hurt or killed?
And ultimately - show us the stats that demonstrate that a majority of the people who voted yes in '92, are the ones who are leaving.
I think your argument is more about trying to deal with your own inner justifications for staying.
There seems to be more good reasons for leaving South Africa, than for staying.
It seems rather unreasonable, in fact, if not almost masochistic, to choose to stay in a prison-like living environment,
with a high probability of violence erupting at you or your family, at any time.
That's not 'living' or even, by any stretch of the imagination 'a good life' - that's something else entirely.
b) So what if people who voted 'yes' in '92, have decided to leave, based on the increasing grim violence of SA.
Would you rather
1) people werent allowed to change their minds
2) people who made what you see as a bad decision, stayed and wallowed in their bad decision, and let themselves be hurt or killed?
And ultimately - show us the stats that demonstrate that a majority of the people who voted yes in '92, are the ones who are leaving.
I think your argument is more about trying to deal with your own inner justifications for staying.
There seems to be more good reasons for leaving South Africa, than for staying.
It seems rather unreasonable, in fact, if not almost masochistic, to choose to stay in a prison-like living environment,
with a high probability of violence erupting at you or your family, at any time.
That's not 'living' or even, by any stretch of the imagination 'a good life' - that's something else entirely.
Last edited:
