Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 6 of 30 pages
His statement was ridiculous (though it should be noted that the white south africans in power deserve the credit for denuclearizing).
That being said, the distinctions are numerous. The Nazis, as noted above, commited genocide and had genocide as part of their ideology from long before they were loading the ovens at Auschwitz, and everything they did is viewed within that framework. Genocide was not part of apartheid.
Violence does not lead to order. In fact it is usually detrimental to it. That is your primary mistake and from that mistake you get your whole flawed analysis.
I don't know how this was unclear, but I wasn't criticizing Mandela in any way, shape, or form. Nor was I criticizing the well-placed celebration of his life. I was criticizing white modern liberals who, obviously, drafted South Africa as virtually their only cause celebre during the late apartheid era not because the oppression there was worse than in many other countries -- it wasn't -- but because the oppressors were white. We see much the same thing in the Middle East, wherein relentless intra-Arab oppression is overlooked, and Israeli/Jewish misdeeds toward Arabs obsessed upon.
No, you aren't reading it right. There was no "problem" with Mandela, and I've said over and over he was a great man.
Because you're claiming the decline in SA's white population is due to "job recruiting". But then we're not seeing such a decline in any of the other countries that have significant white, educated, english-speaking populations. So either such recruitment is a magically unique SA thing, or it's not a major factor in the population decline.
I'm just quoting Hobbes you know. Was he a comic book villain?
"Is the freedom to gang rape, or be gang raped really that important or valuable?"
I'm sure no rapes of black South Africans went unreported during apartheid.
Your idealized notion of order is nothing more than a large scale offensive by the status quo powered elite against the rest of humanity in the war of all against all. The only distinction is that you identify emotionally with the status quo and benefit from the order imposed by them.
political power stems from the barrel of a gun
Order stems from political power, and political power stems from the barrel of a gun.
government of the people, by the people, for the people
A society where 25% of the males ADMITTED to participating in at least one rape seems like a pretty crappy one. Even worse than what came before it.
Almost a quarter of men surveyed in a UN report looking at violence against women in parts of Asia have admitted to committing at least one rape. Link.
There's a difference between trading in some level of freedom for security in a society so long as that security has some equal basis.
The SA was stable and secure if you were white, but not if you were part of the majority, living in poverty with no ability to advance, without the ability to rule themselves, subjected to forced removals, subjected to imprisonment for drinking out of the wrong water fountains or using the wrong bathrooms... Hobbes is applicable, but not the way you mean. There was no social contract between the blacks and the afrikaners, no protection from violence, no opportunities for advancement or enrichment.
Without order, political freedom is worthless. Would you rather live in South Africa or Singapore?
This would be news to Hobbes.
There were black elites during the Apartheid years as well. There are more of them and they're much richer now than they were, but the vast majority of black South Africans were dirt poor then, and are dirt poor now. The difference is they get to vote and they get to victimize each other (and any whites dumb enough to stray from secured areas).
Really? The crime rate was just as bad during Apartheid, but it was covered up?
Norman Ernest Borlaug (March 25, 1914 – September 12, 2009) was an American biologist, humanitarian and Nobel laureate who has been called "the father of the Green Revolution", "agriculture's greatest spokesperson" and "The Man Who Saved A Billion Lives". He is one of seven people to have won the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal and was also awarded the Padma Vibhushan, India's second highest civilian honor.
Isn't this comparable to to the flight of many Jewish professionals (and others) from Hitler? We pitied them, didn't we, even if they were scientists, artists, literateurs, and doctors?
Germany between 1919 and and 1933 was a mess, too.... Perhaps Versailles made it an unavoidable mess.... but still, it was wracked by violence... it was filled with destitution and uncertainty.... and there is no argument that the Nazi regime brought stability. It brought order. It brought economic growth. Time magazine, Henry Ford, and Charles Lindbergh praised it -- and using the exact same criteria you and TGF are now using to condemn a post-Apartheid South Africa, they were right. Germany went from a failed state to a rising economic power, orderly, stable, and "safe" -- so long as you were the right sort of German.
You left out one key rationale that links the Lindberghs and the Joseph Kennedys of the 30's to the Reagans and the Thatchers of the 80's: They both saw the regimes they were defending as crucial bulwarks against Communism.
The latter I find to be "merely" ideologically backwards, even repugnant... the former, I find morally irredeemable.
There were black elites during the Apartheid years as well. There are more of them and they're much richer now than they were, but the vast majority of black South Africans were dirt poor then, and are dirt poor now. The difference is they get to vote and they get to victimize each other (and any whites dumb enough to stray from secured areas). Without order, political freedom is worthless. Would you rather live in South Africa or Singapore?
I think the relevant question is would you rather live in South Africa in 1970 or in 2013.
You hamstrung by an, ahem, limited perspective.
Few people in history, if any, take migration lightly.
Obama orders flags at half staff until Monday for Mandela.
If you're argument is that the primary mistake of Mandela and the CODESA accords didn't seize vast swaths of property that were accumulated under a fundamentally corrupt system, then redistribute those ill-gotten gains directly (via land grants, etc) and indirectly (via an absolutely massive investment in education) -- OK.... then I guess I can buy that as a potential failing.
But, then, how can it be otherwise with a mentality who thinks something like this, "Only a Kenyan Muslim Socialist would do such a thing", is serious and substantive.
Hobbes wrote of a world of absolutes. We live in the real world.
You don't count being subjected to forced poverty, forced removals, unlawful imprisonment, police beatings, and living under institutional oppression as victimization, so you're always going to win that argument in your own head.
White South Africans were recruited to good jobs in other countries and faced few or no barriers to their emigration and faced little or no hardship. And those that stayed behind, are still there and still have huge financial advantages (in aggregate). There was fear that they would be persecuted, but the reality was those who stayed behind were not.
This is tedious who/whom argumentation. If the black population in America dropped from 12.6% of the population to ~6% of the population over a 15 year period accompanied by a widespread epidemic of white-on-black murder and rape, you would rightfully call it ethnic cleansing.
Modern liberals are nutty about race, conservatives are nuttier.
To fit the facts however we would need to add the fact that several really nice countries (Australia, UK, Denmark - to pick three out of a hat) had been actively recruiting that same black population and that a huge percentage of the decrease came from blacks leaving to go to those countries.
Of yeah and mentioning the fact that the blacks remaining behind in the were still economically in charge of the country with a huge advantage in wealth and economic power.
So yeah I am going to suggest your analogy is a might bit flawed.
Out of curiosity do you have hard numbers for the changes in crime rates in South Africa, specifically for crime rates against whites there?
George Zimmerman. Terri Schiavo. Severus Snape.
It's still the Rapiest Place in the World though
No, it sounds pretty lousy. But it doesn't change the fact that they're still poor and brutally oppressed. Only the mechanisms have changed. And at least the old way created a stable, orderly society. Chaos and anarchy are not an improvement on anything.
You should stop lying about "targeted recruiting" being responsible for the ethnic cleansing of South Africa. At the very top of the Wikipedia page on Crime in South Africa, it states, "Most emigrants from South Africa state that crime was a big factor in their decision to leave." and includes a citation.
However, flight of human capital in South Africa should not be attributed solely to regional factors. For example the demand for skilled labourers in the UK, US, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia has led to active recruitment programs by those countries in South Africa. These countries accounted for 75% (by volume) of recent skilled emigration with the UK receiving approximately half of annual skilled South African emigration from 1990 to 1996. It has been suggested that the role of domestic socio-political variables may be negligible. The health sector has been hit particularly hard.
And as an aside you still have not addressed the bulk of my argument from #528, scalpel guy. The one where I clearly and unambiguously (and directly, like with a scalpel even) dissect the differences between the Jewish and South African emigration.
Which of course begs the question, who are the conservative heroes of the last 20 years?
Call it hysterical all you want, TGF....
Internationally, I'll go with Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel, just to name two.
That's an interesting definition of conservative.
Did you get where I said, and say again for the third time, that I appreciate those differences, but ...?
How does that particular accusation apply to those it was directed?
Call it hysterical all you want, TGF....
Internationally, I'll go with Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel, just to name two.
I really want to know what zop and Ray think of them. And yes what I know of both men impresses me, though I suspect both are also "complex heroes."
You posted confusion when someone (not me) mentioned the Lost Cause. I was just surprised you did not get the reference and was offering to help educate you. I did not make the original reference, and you should discuss it with them if you want.
"Most emigrants from South Africa state that crime was a big factor in their decision to leave."
It has been suggested that the role of domestic socio-political variables may be negligible.
For example the demand for skilled labourers in the UK, US, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia has led to active recruitment programs by those countries in South Africa. These countries accounted for 75% (by volume) of recent skilled emigration with the UK receiving approximately half of annual skilled South African emigration from 1990 to 1996
Both fled in fear, both felt they had to for their own good, both felt threats based not on what they did but what they were, which they could do nothing to change--now, one may have had reason for greater fear, for fear of more dire consequences
So again; stop lying. There is no evidence to suggest that the SA ethnic cleansing is the result of "targeted recruitment" on the part of Anglosphere nations.
It is now twice as dangerous to be a farmer as it is to be a police officer in South Africa, according to Johan Burger, a senior researcher with the Pretoria-based Institute for Security Studies' crime and justice programme. Last year the country had a murder rate of 31.9 per 100,000 people, almost 30 times higher than Britain, according to police statistics. For police officers, this rate rises to 51 – and among farmers, a staggering 99 people killed per 100,000.
Ethnic cleansing is a the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.
I think the flight from SA is bad for SA. I wish they had stayed behind, but they are free and get to make decisions on where they live and what they do. While I don't feel a great deal of sympathy (I do feel some) I also do not condemn their choice and am glad they had a choice.
That's not inconsequential difference, isn't it?
I am amused you think it a lie when I quote an article that gives both versions. That is an ... interesting spin on what a lie is.
I am still waiting for evidence of an ethnic cleansing in South Africa. And no raw demographic changes does not cut it.
And by the way I never wrote "It has been suggested that the role of domestic socio-political variables may be negligible." I quoted an article that stated that (with citations and everything) and also stated your crime theory (also with citations).
Rick Santorum compares the GOP fight against Obamacare to Mandela's fight against Apartheid...
I just don’t know what to say about that. I really don’t. Except that Santorum’s mind is simply unhinged, and that the reflexive need to describe anything that this president has done as pure evil has become a kind of sickness of the mind and soul on the right. It has abandoned any connection to the real world. It lives in a narcissistic, warped, ideological echo-chamber of victimhood and utter obliviousness to the real tragedies of human history.
When such demographic change occurs over a very short time and and is accompanied by violence, that's pretty much the definition of ethnic cleansing.
The lie is your claim that the ethnic cleansing of SA is, to any extent, the result of British and Australian executive recruiters, because there is not a shred of evidence supporting that claim.
Leading to this fantastic takedown from Andrew Sullivan:
I just don’t know what to say about that. I really don’t.
Again I have not made this claim. Please cite where you think I did make this claim. Where exactly am I lying?
I just don’t know what to say about that.
According to a 2003 police committee of inquiry into farm attacks, cited by Solidarity, 38.4% of farm attack victims were described as being black, coloured or Asian. TAUSA’s figures suggest that 208 (or 13.5%) of those murdered in farm attacks between 1990 and 2012 were black.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (0 members)
Page rendered in 3.9124 seconds, 50 querie(s) executed