First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply South Africa votes to confiscate white-owned land without compensation
245 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
108 / O
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:

@zefur
@mxdan
I'm not that familiar with the on goings in the forums here, but it seems pretty hypocritical for you two to be saying that "he's missing some context", and then the only rebuttal of his post was a statement without any context beyond "whites stole the land." Clearly there was a lot of missing context there, if I was able to elaborate on that line as much as I did in my response.


The context was provided by Tigers post. As you can see that is before I posted and before you posted. I dont feel the need to repost something twice.
25236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / In
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:


uncletim wrote:

and those lands were forcibly taken at gun point and then said make believe people were treated as second class people in there own land to included being enslaved.

Then yes they would have that right. But that has not happen has it?



Not with this current situation no, but that doesn't mean "white lands" have never been forcibly taken, and aren't still under non-white control. This, and you do actually have people who've fled parts of some western nations because their hometowns became too unsafe for them to inhabit. That, and if you wish to put it in those terms, you're simply stating that whites in South Africa are more immoral for taking lands by force, because they were more effective at said action. That would be like saying "this rapist is more moral than that rapist because he got caught by the police."

You, also have to consider the fact that you're punishing people by taking lands that most of them either bought, or received from their ancestors. You're not talking about anyone who actually committed those crimes you're alleging. Now, if you wish to go down that road, then let's just look at that area before whites entered. Chances are whatever people the whites took that land from, was given to them by ancestors who, also took that land by force from some other people. That's just commonplace in tribal societies.

Now then. On the slavery issue.
You're more, or less stating that the whites are evil in that area because they have relatives who owned slaves in the past. Well according to modern stats, someone of African decent in that area is actually much more likely to have had ties with a slave owner, and even a current slave owner, as blacks in that region still routinely practice slavery.

This of course is, also ignoring the fact that the lands aren't being seized, and given to prior owners. It's just Africans in general, even if their ancestors never set foot in the south African region.

Modern slave citation:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/11/18/map-the-worlds-36-million-slaves/?utm_term=.c6e6df0e2441

White on Black slavery ended (source for date)
http://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/slavery-abolished-cape

Citation showing migration from other African regions.
https://africacheck.org/factsheets/geography-migration/



Passing down an stolen item through a family still does not make it a stolen item and buying it from a rigged system so you are the only one who can buy said item does not make it not a stolen item.

855 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / US
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

mxdan wrote:


Powder710 wrote:

@zefur
@mxdan
I'm not that familiar with the on goings in the forums here, but it seems pretty hypocritical for you two to be saying that "he's missing some context", and then the only rebuttal of his post was a statement without any context beyond "whites stole the land." Clearly there was a lot of missing context there, if I was able to elaborate on that line as much as I did in my response.


It's not hypocritical at all actually. If it were hypocritical we would be submitting responses in which we pick pieces out of his statements and use them to exemplify his entire point.

To that point though every single person who isn't a Trump supporter has been engaging Ruji's points for years and rarely does he bring about points that aren't riddled with fallacy and propaganda. I suggest you do a search if you can of his post history here to see that point. It's pretty cut and dry.


"fallacy and propaganda"
Like saying whites in South Africa need to be punished for crimes they weren't even alive for?
"them to exemplify his entire point."
The only rebuttal I saw was clearly implying that such actions were justified purely because "white people's ancestors did bad things."
mxdan 
12368 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:


mxdan wrote:


Powder710 wrote:

@zefur
@mxdan
I'm not that familiar with the on goings in the forums here, but it seems pretty hypocritical for you two to be saying that "he's missing some context", and then the only rebuttal of his post was a statement without any context beyond "whites stole the land." Clearly there was a lot of missing context there, if I was able to elaborate on that line as much as I did in my response.


It's not hypocritical at all actually. If it were hypocritical we would be submitting responses in which we pick pieces out of his statements and use them to exemplify his entire point.

To that point though every single person who isn't a Trump supporter has been engaging Ruji's points for years and rarely does he bring about points that aren't riddled with fallacy and propaganda. I suggest you do a search if you can of his post history here to see that point. It's pretty cut and dry.


"fallacy and propaganda"
Like saying whites in South Africa need to be punished for crimes they weren't even alive for?
"them to exemplify his entire point."
The only rebuttal I saw was clearly implying that such actions were justified purely because "white people's ancestors did bad things."


Did I ever write that? I think you're making an assumption about me.

I never clarified a stance here or even put forth one. I merely stated that Ruji's character is in question due to his actions, one of which being, lack of engagement on the flawed arguments he submits here.
855 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / US
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
@uncletim
Stolen from whom? All black people, and by all white people? Oh, and now returned to some random black person, who's likely not even related to the person whom it was stolen from; whom likely stole said item from some other person. (this is of course assuming that they're even going to try to make sure they're only taking items that they can verify as stolen.)

Best way to solve the problem? Steal said item again, and then give said item to someone purely based off of race... Wow this doesn't sound the least bit familiar. The "rigged system" line really sounds familiar...
855 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / US
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
@mxdan
"Did I ever write that? I think you're making an assumption about me."
Awesome. Glad you think that's a horrible argument too.
"lack of engagement"
I would like to say something about OPs, but I doubt the forums here tolerate the word.
25236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / In
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:

@uncletim
Stolen from whom? All black people, and by all white people? Oh, and now returned to some random black person, who's likely not even related to the person whom it was stolen from; whom likely stole said item from some other person. (this is of course assuming that they're even going to try to make sure they're only taking items that they can verify as stolen.)

Best way to solve the problem? Steal said item again, and then give said item to someone purely based off of race... Wow this doesn't sound the least bit familiar. The "rigged system" line really sounds familiar...


and your solution is let the thieves keep their loot and rigged the system to keep the thieves safe from any kind of punishment by keeping the victims second class citizen?
855 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / US
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
@uncletim
"and your solution"
Lol, and your solution is the final solution.

"the thieves"
The thieves have been worm chow for a long time now, so no. You seem to hate them so much, so I guess I'll buy you a shovel, and let you have at your "punishment."

"the victims second class citizens"
Once again worm chow. Though if you're talking Apartheid which is already over, and a fair chunk of the Africans there now, weren't even in the country during it. (which just... wow, this sounds so much more humane than that)

As far as what I would do? If it's historically significant land, then yes, have it seized, but with fair compensation. If not, then they can verify who lost lands, and then give them monetary compensation, balancing the budget with increased taxes on the farmers whom can't provide proof that they legitimately purchased the land.

Now on the rampant violence that's currently being committed by blacks, against whites? That needs to be harshly punished. If the government there isn't able/willing to protect its citizens, then it's not a legitimate government.
25236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / In
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:

@uncletim
"and your solution"
Lol, and your solution is the final solution.

"the thieves"
The thieves have been worm chow for a long time now, so no. You seem to hate them so much, so I guess I'll buy you a shovel, and let you have at your "punishment."

"the victims second class citizens"
Once again worm chow. Though if you're talking Apartheid which is already over, and a fair chunk of the Africans there now, weren't even in the country during it. (which just... wow, this sounds so much more humane than that)

As far as what I would do? If it's historically significant land, then yes, have it seized, but with fair compensation. If not, then they can verify who lost lands, and then give them monetary compensation, balancing the budget with increased taxes on the farmers whom can't provide proof that they legitimately purchased the land.

Now on the rampant violence that's currently being committed by blacks, against whites? That needs to be harshly punished. If the government there isn't able/willing to protect its citizens, then it's not a legitimate government.


and your solution is

Fuck justice because hey the wrong doers are dead

Nice
855 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / US
Offline
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
@uncletim
Fuck justice because hey the wrong doers are dead

I'll just get right to ringing up my BFF Lucifer. Should I say something along the lines of "Hey bro, you've got some bad dudes down there?"
25236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / In
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18

Powder710 wrote:

@uncletim
Fuck justice because hey the wrong doers are dead

I'll just get right to ringing up my BFF Lucifer. Should I say something along the lines of "Hey bro, you've got some bad dudes down there?"


that only works if you believe in hell
qwueri 
25810 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
So refreshing to see Rujikin lay out a well-thought out and level-headed OP to address a complex and difficult problem...


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-land-exproriation/vote-in-south-africas-parliament-moves-land-reform-closer-idUSKCN1GB22I
http://www.businessinsider.com/south-africa-cyril-ramaphosa-wants-to-confiscate-white-farmers-land-2018-2
Fear-mongering aside, this looks like a difficult problem of ethno-nationalism complied with the ramifications of institutionalized racial disadvantages that were abolished only ~2.5 decades ago. You've got a minority party pushing a larger majority party to take a hard line on the racial identity of the country to empower an impoverished majority by redistributing the lands owned by an economically advantaged ethnic minority who owns a majority of the farming land.

Seems part of what really hurt Zimbabwe in a similar move was ousting experienced and established farmers without replacing them with similarly experienced and capable farmers, resulting in the food shortages. Without a plan for maintaining current agricultural levels, South Africa could easily be up the same shit creek without a paddle. And that's before even getting into the prospects of disenfranchising a minority group.

Even if their current wealth was built upon their ancestors' land grabs, South Africa treating the Boer population as second-class citizens is not going to heal divisions between whites and blacks in the country. And yes, at worst it could incite violence (from both sides).

I'm at a loss for a clear solution to the issue, but the current path seems to be yet another wave of populism tinged with ethno-centrist ideologies.

*Edit:
Seems like the remarks Steve Bannon made in France could easily apply to this move by South Africa.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/03/13/in-europe-steve-bannon-can-still-play-the-hero/?utm_term=.53def3f2d823

In France, Bannon also urged his allies to cling to their nationalist guns and not worry about the censure of their liberal opponents. “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists,” he said, perhaps remembering how a host of Trump supporters embraced their status as “deplorables,” as Hillary Clinton called them on the campaign trail. He told the French far right to “wear” such accusations “as a badge of honor.”
10302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Enemy Territory
Online
Posted 3/13/18 , edited 3/13/18
So, if I’m understanding this correctly, most of the land in question is vacant, unused or underused. Things suddenly don’t look so apocalyptic now.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.