ponder
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2005
- Messages
- 92,823
They were Muslim Indians so I'm not even sure if caste applies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_among_Muslims#Castes_in_India
They were Muslim Indians so I'm not even sure if caste applies
The crude answer to that is that you can't simply say everyone born after 95 be excluded from equity requirements. The reason for that being that the legacy of our past doesn't care if you were born after 95 in its enduring effects.
The flip side of course is that there are those who benefitted from equity and have amassed wealth and influence and their offspring the same and should be excluded from equity. So what is needed is a system that distinguishes on need among the previously disadvantaged not simply check designation and reward.
Yeah, look it might be there in some areas. All I know is my grandparents never talked about it or mentioned it as an issue.
My family is Indian. My grandparents arrived from India with nothing but the clothes on their back. They were treated like dirt by the government. I recall a stories like when they went to buy coke at a shop they were given warm cokes from the shelf while the white guy in a separate line got given one from from the fridge. That's just one small example.
They started up a small corner shop.
Still struggled. Got kicked out of their home due to the group areas act. My dad is still bitter about that.
However, they then plowed every single cent they had into their kids education.
Now my dad had a surveying diploma and started his own business that employs over 40 people. My uncle is a mechanical engineer. My 1 aunt has a PhD in biology the other is a maths tutor and the other a masters in HR.
My grandparents are still poor though. The family looks after them.
My moms side of the family is a similar story. 3 doctors 1 engineer and a surveyor.
It can be done even if you are disadvantaged by the system.
No one said it cannot done. There are many black people with similar stories but they are the exceptions and not the norm. Their path is made to be unduly difficult simply because they are of a different race and why should that be acceptable. Why do you keep making excuses for an non level playing field? it makes no sense to me. Is it an absurd notion to ask that a baby that is born black have the same opportunities in life as a baby born white? What is unreasonable about that?
My point is there are other races in SA as well. Indians got screwed over by the apartheid government as well, but now Indian males are the second worst category in BEE.
I think not only the government of the time, in SA would have done that, any government when you pitch up in their country would do the same. Why should they care about foreigners. Thinking I should now go to India and be given homes, and everything easy. I never understand this way of thinking. What comes to mind for me is, like the Australian PM said "You do't like me or my rules or my style, then go back to where you came from" As they say, charity starts at home. Birds of a feather flock together.
That's not the point of my post. I was Pointing out that even if you came with nothing and got treated like dirt you can still make a success out of yourself.
So why base it on racist skin color and not standards of living and income? A fair deal for everyone and not the inherently racist system adopted by the ANC and their supporters?
It was a long post. It can have multiple pointsIn other words you have no ideas what point you want to make. You seem to shift you stance depending on who is challenging your posts.
It was a long post. It can have multiple points
How are they conflicting?Which are conflicting with each other![]()
Noted. Will stop shortlyMod note: This thread is to discuss news articles, not your personal lives.
So why base it on racist skin color and not standards of living and income? A fair deal for everyone and not the inherently racist system adopted by the ANC and their supporters?
Because the past that needs redress was not based on standards of living and income, it was based on racist skin colour.
The implications of your post:
1. Redress is deserved by colour groups who had it hard way back when. Is the implication that whiteys must cough up more to fund this?
2. Because historical "disadvantage" was based on discrimination, future "redress" must be also based on discrimination? And stuff the poor whites.
Who is the bigot now?
I think what he's saying is pretty clear really. If you've been disadvantaged, waiting for handouts to make it better is the wrong way to go about helping yourself.In other words you have no ideas what point you want to make. You seem to shift you stance depending on who is challenging your posts.
You're leaping. I'm simply explaining how it logically that a race based disenfranchisement caused race based based harm and it follows logically that you can only redress it by ensuring that racial equality and redress is needed.
I can only lol at your absurd suggestion that I'm a racial bigot for offering a simply explanation
So what is needed is a system that distinguishes on need among the previously disadvantaged not simply check designation and reward.
I think what he's saying is pretty clear really. If you've been disadvantaged, waiting for handouts to make it better is the wrong way to go about helping yourself.
Well you go lolling away then.
Let me refer you to this post:
Why only those supposedly "previously disadvantaged"? What about all those who are currently disadvantaged, of all races? Looks like racial prejudice to me.
And what is this "system" of yours? How would it work in a practical way? Who pays? And what about all that the "previously advantaged" have already shelled out in RDP levies, inflated property rates, handing over huge shareholdings gratis to BEE deals, partially funding one third of the population on welfare?
No, you want people selected on the basis of skin colour rather than merit. You keep pointing to the past and saying that because a group of people suffered according to a general characteristic that all having that characteristic count as disadvantaged. Even when you yourself have managed to overcome whatever adversity your background may have presented to you.And who says we are waiting for handouts? We are working even harder to recover lost ground.
Lol you mean peanuts? We also want to own a fair share of the economy.If you're referring to the poor in general then there's welfare which is available to any down trodden.
Who are the currently disadvantaged in this context? If you're referring to the poor in general then there's welfare which is available to any down trodden.
Did metric count when we were discriminated against? It is funny that people that benefited from skin colour alone suddenly want merit to count and for skin colour not to be a factor. Skin colour is a factor because your forefathers made it a factor.No, you want people selected on the basis of skin colour rather than merit.