The UCT - Cecil John Rhodes Statue Thread

[sox63]

Soldiers are not allowed to engage noncombatants - Fourth geneva convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

He was a war criminal.

I'm not going to engage on the history of the armed struggle, its well documented, go read up on it...

 

[ellyally]

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

Double standard much?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

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

What?

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.

 

[sox63]

His statue and name are all over an international airport. You should have problems with it.

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...

 

[sox63]

What?

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.

See my last reply to Sinbad...

 

[Sinbad]

I'm not going to engage on the history of the armed struggle, its well documented, go read up on it...

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

 

[Fulcrum29]

@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.

 

[ellyally]

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...

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.

 

[sox63]

@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.

I think you missed the part where I said they are cut from the same cloth...

 

[Albereth]

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...

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]

See my last reply to Sinbad...

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.

 

[sox63]

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.

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...

 

[Seriously]

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...

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]

Fine by me. He was a soldier in war

You define a soldier as someone who blows up innocents and kills children? :wtf:

 

[sox63]

You define a soldier as someone who blows up innocents and kills children? :wtf:

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?

 

[Crowley]

You define a soldier as someone who blows up innocents and kills children? :wtf:

He wasn't white so all is forgiven...

 

[EtienneK]

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?

Thanks, you've just contradicted yourself, and thereby proven our points.

 

[Cray]

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?

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.

 

[sox63]

Thanks, you've just contradicted yourself, and thereby proven our points.

How have I proved your point exactly? Tactics in a conflict?

 

[EtienneK]

How have I proved your point exactly? Tactics in a conflict?

No - that point of view matters.