• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nelson Mandela admitted to hospital in 'serious condition' [W:47:W:117]

a777pilot said:
Their economy is terrible. The standard of living goes down. The crime rate is appalling. The un-employment rate is at record levels. Public health is almost non existent after years of denying there was an AIDS problem.

That's enough to get started.
Click to expand...

All goes back to the point how does this make Mandella a racist? Because the country he fought for is not perfect yet?
 
apdst said:
I'lk never excuse comnunism.
Click to expand...

Mandela was not a communist? Did he stand aside the South African Communist Party? Yes for political reasons, because they both wish to end apartheid. Does that make him a communist? No! Mandela was a social-democrat and a brave gentleman and a great hero and a great man.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Mandela was not a communist? Did he stand aside the South African Communist Party? Yes for political reasons, because they both wish to end apartheid. Does that make him a communist? No! Mandela was a social-democrat and a brave gentleman and a great hero and a great man.
Click to expand...

The USA fought alongside the Soviets against the Nazis during WW2. That doesn't make us Communists.
 
Kanstantine said:
The USA fought alongside the Soviets against the Nazis during WW2. That doesn't make us Communists.
Click to expand...

If we go along the lines of APDST's knowledge then of course!
 
0bserver92 said:
If the government legally buys the land form whites I'm okay with it and they must do everything to stop the violence against farmers.
Click to expand...

There shouldn't be any violence against farmers.

Meanwhile the white farmers need to realize that their vast tracts of land were given to them under a racist, oppressive, and unjust system. They will be lucky if they get market value for their land from the government.

But in all honesty there is no reason why undoing centuries old persecution requires paying fair market value to white farmers who profited from injustice.

If you are a co-conspirator in a massive crime you don't have the right to demand fair treatment. The farmers should be able to keep enough land so as to maintain a nice middle class lifestyle for their families. Anything more would be to continue the injustice done upon the native South Africans.
 
Takes a lot of hate to to wish for the death of a man who helped fight against centuries of racial injustice and colonialist oppression.
 
Its ironic that right wing patriotic Americans would hate a man who rose up against colonial oppression just so his people could be free to vote and be represented in gov.
 
Kanstantine said:
There shouldn't be any violence against farmers.

Meanwhile the white farmers need to realize that their vast tracts of land were given to them under a racist, oppressive, and unjust system. They will be lucky if they get market value for their land from the government.

But in all honesty there is no reason why undoing centuries old persecution requires paying fair market value to white farmers who profited from injustice.

If you are a co-conspirator in a massive crime you don't have the right to demand fair treatment. The farmers should be able to keep enough land so as to maintain a nice middle class lifestyle for their families. Anything more would be to continue the injustice done upon the native South Africans.
Click to expand...

Non it isn't it is their land, if the government wants it they have to buy it.
 
Higgins86 said:
Its ironic that right wing patriotic Americans would hate a man who rose up against colonial oppression just so his people could be free to vote and be represented in gov.
Click to expand...

If the USA had freed South Africa from the Apartheid regime the end result wouldn't have been that different as it is today. It takes decades to undo centuries of colonialist oppression.
 
0bserver92 said:
Non it isn't it is their land, if the government wants it they have to buy it.
Click to expand...

Its called eminent domain. The government can compensate the owner if it chooses to but it doesn't have to, as the confiscation is for the betterment of society and for the common good.

Plus you don't have to pay a man to take back land that he received as part of a racist and oppresive regime. Its very nice if you do, but its not morally required.
 
At the time Martin Luther King was assassinated the racists claimed he was a communist, murderer, and racist. The same has been done with Obama. History repeats itself and the racists on this forum are no exception.
 
Kanstantine said:
Its called eminent domain. The government can compensate the owner if it chooses to but it doesn't have to, as the confiscation is for the betterment of society and for the common good.

Plus you don't have to pay a man to take back land that he received as part of a racist and oppresive regime. Its very nice if you do, but its not morally required.
Click to expand...

Having a farm owned by blacks instead of whites do not benefit society, the land is being farmed and producing either cash crops or food something that can benefit anyone. We shouldn't take away land from people who know what they are doing and that is what they know how to do. White farmers know how to grow crops on plenty of land whereas the blacks will not. In the end it benefits society more to have the white farmers keep their land but if a black wants to farm and has the money to do so let hem have it.
 
Kanstantine said:
Justice takes time to work things out.

The Afrikaners and British set up a horrible system of land theft and oppression against the vast majority black population.

Power had to be given back to the majority. You support representative democracy don't you? Would you prefer the majority black people still be oppressed by the minority white people?
Click to expand...

I would prefer that when someone is seen as a great human rights champion they don't simply flip everything in the opposite direction. The majority oppressing the minority is NOT any better than the minority oppressing the majority.
 
a777pilot said:
LOL!

How many successful countries are there in all of Africa?

(Hint: South Africa is not one of them.)
Click to expand...

Well there are many growing countries that stand out, South Africa as one of the largest economies in the world and is half of Africa's GDP, Nigeria, Kenya are all getting better. Africa also has a very complicated history.
 
a777pilot said:
LOL!

How many successful countries are there in all of Africa?

(Hint: South Africa is not one of them.)
Click to expand...

If Europe had been colonized by racists for hundreds of years, they too would be having serious economic and social issues.

How is India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, Phillipines doing these days?

Not exceptionally better than the average African nation.

Racist oppression and colonialization leaves a long lasting mark.
 
Kanstantine said:
Its called eminent domain. The government can compensate the owner if it chooses to but it doesn't have to, as the confiscation is for the betterment of society and for the common good.
Click to expand...

:doh That is such a dangerous view. Eminent domain is only ever legitimate when the owner of such property is dead and there is no heir to take over the property. In those cases, it still only legitimate that the property is resold to the private sector. Otherwise, the government can simply buy whatever it wants with little to no say from anyone.

Of course, even in the US they take whatever the hell they want. Eminent Domain really needs further attention in the constitution and everywhere else in the world that uses it.
 
Kanstantine said:
If Europe had been colonized by racists for hundreds of years, they too would be having serious economic and social issues.

How is India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, Phillipines doing these days?

Not exceptionally better than the average African nation.

Racist oppression and colonialization leaves a long lasting mark.
Click to expand...

As I thought. All the African countries are basket cases.
 
0bserver92 said:
Having a farm owned by blacks instead of whites do not benefit society, the land is being farmed and producing either cash crops or food something that can benefit anyone. We shouldn't take away land from people who know what they are doing and that is what they know how to do. White farmers know how to grow crops on plenty of land whereas the blacks will not. In the end it benefits society more to have the white farmers keep their land but if a black wants to farm and has the money to do so let hem have it.
Click to expand...

His scheme is very similar to what was done in Russia back when I believe Stalin was in charge. Though I might be mistaken on the leader. It's funny how all these really messed up ideas are all found in really ****ed up leaderships throughout history.
 
Henrin said:
His scheme very similar to what was done in Russia back when I believe Stalin was in charge. Though I might be mistaken on the leader. It's funny how all these really messed up ideas are all found in really ****ed up leaderships throughout history.
Click to expand...

Between land "reform" in Russia and China, tens of millions of lives were lost.
 
apdst said:
Hitler defeated Jewish oppression. I guess that was a good thing, too.
Click to expand...

Leave to adpst, the supposedly black man on this forum, to make such a spacious comparison that is devoid of any connection to historical facts.

South Africa:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.

Germany:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.

-------------

Yet SOMEHOW, apdst decided it was zee Joos who did the oppressing or there was no white oppression in South Africa.

Un-****ing-believable.
 
Hatuey said:
South Africa:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.

Germany:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.

-------------
Click to expand...


South Africa, today:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.
 
a777pilot said:
South Africa, today:

Race based economic oppression: Check.
Race based cultural oppression: Check.
Race based social oppression: Check.
Click to expand...

Utter nonsense. Most land in South Africa is owned by whites, whites are still able to engage in their culture as they see fit, they're not banned from any events or social positions. You claiming it so, doesn't make it true. But hey, here are the facts:

Promised Land . Q&A: Land Reform in South Africa | POV | PBS

Less than 7 percent of land has been redistributed to date, and if current performance continues there is no likelihood that the target of one third will be achieved even by 2025.
Click to expand...

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2011/11/30/south-africas-wealth-still-resting-in-hands-of-a-few/

as one ascends, the houses get progressively bigger and more expensive, and the demographic increasingly white and wealthy.
Click to expand...

No wonder the therapy industry is booming in wealthy South African neighbourhoods. Rich white people in places like Pretoria East have to bear the impossible burden of ignoring the searing contradictions of their existence, pretending that their wealth is somehow legitimate now that apartheid is over, reminding themselves that they pay “market” wages to the workers who labour for the betterment of their pampered lawns and babies.
Click to expand...

https://globaledge.msu.edu/countries/south-africa/economy

The Government of South Africa demonstrated its commitment to open markets, privatization, and a favorable investment climate with its release of the crucial Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy--the neoliberal economic strategy to cover 1996-2000. The strategy had mixed success. It brought greater financial discipline and macroeconomic stability but failed to deliver in key areas. Formal employment continued to decline, and despite the ongoing efforts of black empowerment and signs of a fledgling black middle class and social mobility, the country's wealth remains very unequally distributed along racial lines.
Click to expand...

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1665276.htm

ZOE DANIEL: There's still a form of economic apartheid in South Africa, where as a rule, black people are poorer than whites.

Moshe Langa from Soweto is one of the lucky ones.

His father's worked hard to give his child the best possible education and he also fought in the struggle.

MOSHE LANGA: He told me that he went to prison and then also went to exile working for us, for me to be here.

ZOE DANIEL: Thirty years ago, kids like Moshe Langa would also have been fighting. These days it's a battle to get a job with 40 per cent unemployment. That's why access to education is critical.
Click to expand...

No matter how much you repeat the same nonsense, it doesn't do away from the facts. The only thing which has changed in South Africa are the basic legal infrastructure. Now, it's no longer legal to beat up blacks on the street. For the most part, the country is still divided with whites being mostly on top economically, politically, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom