The UCT - Cecil John Rhodes Statue Thread

sox63 said:
I would not. As descendant of people butchered by him in war, he was a particular tribe's King after all and I'm not bothered about it. Had it been in Mangaung or somewhere where I lived, I would have problems with it
Click to expand...

Double standard much?
 
sox63 said:
I would not. As descendant of people butchered by him in war, he was a particular tribe's King after all and I'm not bothered about it. Had it been in Mangaung or somewhere where I lived, I would have problems with it
Click to expand...

What? :confused:

So it's okay because he was a particular tribe's king? Regardless of the fact that he was brutal tyrant that oppressed and butchered people?

And you have a very strange kind of morality, where only injustice that touches you specifically is worthy of condemnation. Sounds to me like you're cut from the same cloth as Rhodes. ;)
 
Sinbad said:
His statue and name are all over an international airport. You should have problems with it.
Click to expand...

Like I said, he was significant to a particular tribe of South Africans. And outside of his tactics in war, he was not responsible for legislation that would seek to stunt the development of an entire race, like the subject of this thread IMO.

You'll notice when Gary asked me what bothered me about the man, I did not refer to his antics in war or conflict, just his views and legislation put forward to ensure an entire race is nothing more than menial labour...
 
OrbitalDawn said:
What? :confused:

So it's okay because he was a particular tribe's king? Regardless of the fact that he was brutal tyrant that oppressed and butchered people?

And you have a very strange kind of morality, where only injustice that touches you specifically is worthy of condemnation. Sounds to me like you're cut from the same cloth as Rhodes. ;)
Click to expand...

See my last reply to Sinbad...
 
sox63 said:
I'm not going to engage on the history of the armed struggle, its well documented, go read up on it...
Click to expand...

So because it's well documented, it's allowed to break international treaties protecting noncombatants? OK then.
 
@sox63 and @ngwe23

The only reason that I’m in disagreement with Shaka Zulu being commemorated in the essence with this whole colonial statue debacle is that Shaka Zulu did exactly what the white man did, to build a civilization. They shared a common interest…

Shaka Zulu didn’t hate white people, people knowing their history will know how Natal was brokered between the Zulu Kingdom and white traders, and how Shaka Zulu invited white men into the Zulu’s territory. This ultimately changed with Dingane Zulu, whereon all relationships between white colonies (and trek/grens boers) and black tribes was doomed. This also reinitiated clashes with the natives as they were conscripted into the white and black militaries.
 
sox63 said:
Like I said, he was significant to a particular tribe of South Africans. And outside of his tactics in war, he was not responsible for legislation that would seek to stunt the development of an entire race, like the subject of this thread IMO.

You'll notice when Gary asked me what bothered me about the man, I did not refer to his antics in war or conflict, just his views and legislation put forward to ensure an entire race is nothing more than menial labour...
Click to expand...

Yes, them war tactics...
When Shaka's mother Nandi died for example, the monarch ordered a massive outpouring of grief including mass executions, forbidding the planting of crops or the use of milk, and the killing of all pregnant women and their husbands.
Click to expand...
 
Fulcrum29 said:
@sox63 and @ngwe23

The only reason that I’m in disagreement with Shaka Zulu being commemorated in the essence with this whole colonial statue debacle is that Shaka Zulu did exactly what the white man did, to build a civilization. They shared a common interest…

Shaka Zulu didn’t hate white people, people knowing their history will know how Natal was brokered between the Zulu Kingdom and white traders, and how Shaka Zulu invited white men into the Zulu’s territory. This ultimately changed with Dingane Zulu, whereon all relationships between white colonies (and trek/grens boers) and black tribes was doomed. This also reinitiated clashes with the natives as they were conscripted into the white and black militaries.
Click to expand...

I think you missed the part where I said they are cut from the same cloth...
 
sox63 said:
Like I said, he was significant to a particular tribe of South Africans. And outside of his tactics in war, he was not responsible for legislation that would seek to stunt the development of an entire race, like the subject of this thread IMO.

You'll notice when Gary asked me what bothered me about the man, I did not refer to his antics in war or conflict, just his views and legislation put forward to ensure an entire race is nothing more than menial labour...
Click to expand...

I think having an assegai stuck in me would stunt any growth.

However, Shaka most certainly did introduce 'legislation' that continues to have impact on Zulus today.
 
OrbitalDawn said:
My point stands. You think it's okay to honour a tyrant that butchered countless people, including everyone that disagreed with his empire-building. But it's not okay when the white guy did it and he's evil because of it.
Click to expand...

Sorry to break it to you, but that is how empires were built, there are many "great" leaders littered through history that did that. But still you missed the key part of my post as to why CJR bothers ME...
 
sox63 said:
Like I said, he was significant to a particular tribe of South Africans. And outside of his tactics in war, he was not responsible for legislation that would seek to stunt the development of an entire race, like the subject of this thread IMO.

You'll notice when Gary asked me what bothered me about the man, I did not refer to his antics in war or conflict, just his views and legislation put forward to ensure an entire race is nothing more than menial labour...
Click to expand...

But he exterminated many other tribes or at least most of them and raped the woman to have Zulu babies for future soldiers. That makes him a war criminal in my eyes. Yet you want his statue to stay and worshipped. I have now filed you with the Malema group in my mind! ;)
 
EtienneK said:
You define a soldier as someone who blows up innocents and kills children? :wtf:
Click to expand...

As a beneficiary of those actions I remind you "one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter". Maybe start the umpteenth thread to discuss tactics used in the armed struggle in response to the Apartheid government?
 
sox63 said:
As a beneficiary of those actions I remind you "one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter". Maybe start the umpteenth thread to discuss tactics used in the armed struggle in response to the Apartheid government?
Click to expand...

Thanks, you've just contradicted yourself, and thereby proven our points.
 
sox63 said:
As a beneficiary of those actions I remind you "one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter". Maybe start the umpteenth thread to discuss tactics used in the armed struggle in response to the Apartheid government?
Click to expand...

The ideals of the armed struggle where to target state apparatus, security and defence forces. Even McBride's bombing of Magoo's bar was supposed be a target where SAP members gathered. Zondo's target was entirely civilian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X