SA Politics Thread Part 10 : The GNU Has Crashed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Read this. Unbiased, easy-to-read history of the Afrikaners.

Yes, Afrikaners started to build financial institutions, etc, pre-Apartheid when the Brits still tightly controlled everything, incl. the economy.
If you read the book, you'd get what Gogo is saying and ask how come the Afrikaners could manage to gather and get building, but...

While since 1994, we've yet to see such successful initiatives by the Black community, except maybe African Bank (is the first that comes to mind, ready for more examples)?
 
If you read the book, you'd get what Gogo is saying and ask how come the Afrikaners could manage to gather and get building, but...

While since 1994, we've yet to see such successful initiatives by the Black community, except maybe African Bank (is the first that comes to mind, ready for more examples)?
So let's go with that for a minute, if they were that good why did the need apartheid?
 
So let's go with that for a minute, if they were that good why did the need apartheid?
Good question. The way I see it, fear of others and good ol' racism and prejudice won the day. Hence, the creation of apartheid.

If you read the book I linked you to, it also mentions that Apartheid as a policy had its beginnings in the NG Kerk in the early 1900s (this was when they became a vassal for the NP)
 
Good question. The way I see it, fear of others and good ol' racism and prejudice won the day. Hence, the creation of apartheid.

If you read the book I linked you to, it also mentions that Apartheid as a policy had its beginnings in the NG Kerk in the early 1900s (this was when they became a vassal for the NP)
It's like having a football match and taking all your opportunities, while the opposing team is safely locked away in the dressing room, a very odd definition of taking your opportunities.
 
It's like having a football match and taking all your opportunities, while the opposing team is safely locked away in the dressing room, a very odd definition of taking your opportunities.
Naspers, Sanlam, Volkskas (now part of ABSA) and Santam were created and were successful way before Apartheid started.

Remgro, you could make the argument that it was helped by the regime. The same with Anglo-American.
 
No, it's just they they did not loot their own banks, nor stripped their companies of assets!
Meh, degrees.

The apartheid regime built the thing first with 95% of the funds, then stole the 5% left over.

The current lot steals 95% of the funds first, then use the remaining 5% to build two zink sh*thouses, Rama comes to open them with a ribbon-cutting ceremony, and the only community remains with a confused look on their faces.
 
It's like having a football match and taking all your opportunities, while the opposing team is safely locked away in the dressing room, a very odd definition of taking your opportunities.

And now?

The tables have turned. The ANC has been in power for 30 years. What have they done?

While other countries like Singapore turned themselves into shining examples of what hard work and common sense can achieve, the ANC has done the complete opposite and destroyed nearly every sector in the country from health to education.
 

Thoughts?

Also, the DA is having to do this because Macpherson is a complete twit saying that 'nil compensation is a form of compensation'.
Failed to come out in clear support...

Um...
Acknowledging that secure private property rights under the rule of law are essential to fixed investment, economic growth, job creation, and better living standards for the people of South Africa, the Democratic Alliance (DA):


(1) Supports section 25 of The Constitution of South Africa.
(2) Asserts our support that compensation must be just and equitable, as adjudicated by a court of law, in cases of expropriation in terms of the Constitution;


(3) Rejects the notion of ‘nil compensation’ as established by the Expropriation Act, 2024 as well as the limitations placed by the Act on rights of private property owners in contesting the terms of expropriation in court; and


(4) Supports the existing efforts of the DA to take the Expropriation Act, 2024 on judicial review and explore every other opportunity to render the Act less of a risk to private property rights.



The DA continues in our court case challenging the constitutionality of the Expropriation Act in the High Court.

What is there to disagree with here? Where is it unclear? Or is Politicsweb flailing because the DA isn't? I don't get it.

Edit: seems like they're flailing about the use of "just and equitable" that appears once in the whole article and is in the Constitution...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X