What is going on in South Africa

originally posted by: 0racle
a reply to: crazyewok

Actually the idea that testosterone causes aggressive behavior has been debunked.

New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior. A study with more than 120 experimental subjects has shown that the sexual hormone with the poor reputation can encourage fair behaviors if this serves to ensure one's own status.

www.sciencedaily.com...


My argument remains that moral discipline is what determines how much and what impact you allow hormones to have.

Notice this point:

can encourage fair behaviors if this serves to ensure one's own status.

Also i do t think its the only factor.


Lets face it, Africa has been # on by most thw world.
They do kinda have some reason to complain.

Problem is most are for improvised backgrounds with incredible backwards cultures that encourage poor morality. This results in pretty terrible educated people.

Black or white masses of angry poor uneducated masses cause problems and disaster.
They are angry but have no clue or idea how to improve there lot, so they will just smash and destroy.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
So, right on cue?

The globalists have to lay the groundwork for their eventual exodus from China, you know, after they have pillaged those resources. On to Africa! They will be begging for it.

Thanks for the segue

the globalists are allowing the situation with blacks & compromised government fall into total Chaos--- so that a military intervention becomes necessary to restore the exploitation of natural resources that South Africa has been blessed with

it might be the combined force and power of the 'BRICS' in which SA is a member who comes to restore civil laws

++ the 'blood diamond' cottage industry will not escape retribution
++ the colossal Gold reserves in the Earth will stay put until a civilized exploiter steps in...
so that fact will contribute into the answer as to just when they (globalists) determine when 'enough-is-enough' of mayhem and loss of revenue starts to damage the pocketbooks of the global Elites with respect to restoring a civilized society by a recognized & domineering government in a Re-Established South Africa

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Then the further north we get say Norway Sweden we get very laid back people.

This is not true. African is home to some of the most laid back cultures on the planet!

Same with South America.

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Its strange that the conversation has taken this turn, as I was just talking to a friend about how odd it is, if you think about it sensibly, that the hotter the country the shorter the tempers. For example everyone knows the sayings about Latinos and their hot tempers. Then the further north we get say Norway Sweden we get very laid back people.

Far more wars and rebellions in the hot countries than the cold. Sommat to think about I suppose...guess being hot 24/7 does make you a bit crabby! lol

That is something to consider.

Though my latina girl freind has a bad temper whether she at home or cold in the UK

a reply to: 0racle

Hmm well I beg to differ....there's barely a country in African that hasn't had war revolt and rebellion. Not too sure on South America personally. Take the Middle East, hot and constantly warring. There's a difference between laid back and lazy by laid back I meant far less volatile. When was the last war in Norway?
Anyway was just an observation

a reply to: crazyewok

lol and my brazilian girlfriend is the most relaxed person I've ever met

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
South Africa has been in the business of slavery for a very long time(since colonial days) it started around the horn of africa near Niger(hence the derogatory term) when slurred. It has been tribally chased down to South Africa generation after generation.

I honestly doubt the name is intended to be derogatory The country is named after the Niger river.

Ok it wasn't at one time but then became so. Where used away from Country. You and everyone else misunderstood what he said. Its ok it a knee jerk thing.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

haha, i think you know how many wars there have been in Europe... even in Scandinavia.
Perhaps not recently... but there are many places in Africa where there has been peace for centuries too. Doesn't mean they are the most laid back people in the world lol...

Russia is well known for having an aggressive culture... and it's further north in some parts than Scandinavia...

I don't believe there is any evidence to prove what you are trying to suggest.

a reply to: crazyewok


Yeah but don't forget the MAIN point:

For animal species with relatively simple social systems, an increased awareness for status may express itself in aggressiveness. "In the socially complex human environment, pro-social behavior secures status, and not aggression," surmises study co-author Michael Naef from Royal Holloway London. "The interplay between testosterone and the socially differentiated environment of humans, and not testosterone itself, probably causes fair or aggressive behavior."

Black or white masses of angry poor uneducated masses cause problems and disaster. They are angry but have no clue or idea how to improve there lot, so they will just smash and destroy.

Where are you suggesting this anger comes from?
What about the native south african bushmen? They don't smash and destroy anything or anyone. They are peaceful. Yet they have very little material wealth. You're making it up as you go along. Pretty shameless.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Niger is nowhere near the horn of Africa and the N word comes from the word Negro in portuguese.

The portuguese started the slavery in Africa.

Funny thing is that negro and preto both mean black in portuguese but the word preto would be considered racist to use to describe someone of black colour. The word negro would be the respectful form to use.

Go figure.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Enjoyed reading your post. You are quite knowledgeable. My question is why is Africa, the entire continent, continuing as a 3rd world? So much has been given to them by the rest of the world. Granted, they have been taken advantage of but what country hasn't? Why can't they modernize? Surely there are distinct differences, not just race and color or history.

a reply to: Justso
just because they are not all materially advanced, doesn't mean Africans are all completely backwards.
They have a very rich and diverse history. And remember... it's a different continent (massively different climate, history, politics, religion etc)

a reply to: clodbuster

You can find examples of primitive low Iq people with tendencies to violence in any part of the world.
You can also find the opposite, often living side by side.

Characterizing the whole continent in that way is simply racist.

originally posted by: Teeky
Nobody wants immigrants in their country running it like it's theirs. A part of me feels bad for the White South Africans because they weren't the ones to cause the mess, but on the other hand people never forget when they've been wronged.
Guilty by association is a real thing especially if you benefit from said crime.
Hopefully a peacefully resolution can be reached.

Immigrants? 350 years ago the Dutch/German settlers (the Boers) arrived in SA. The only tribe inhabiting the land around Cape Town were the Koi-San or Bushmen. The Boers spread North and East and met only sparse tribes most of whom they were able to live near without conflict. The biggest trouble came with the Zulu but that was around the same time Britain decided to take South Africa after the discovery of gold. Long story short the vast majority of Blacks in South Africa were migrants themselves who came South in the 20th century to find jobs and enjoy a better standard of living.

Bottom line is the White population are as native as anyone save the Bushmen who were never settled agriculturalist but wandering bands. Whites and Blacks built South Africa in to a great country making it the richest nation on the Continent. Since the end of Apartheid the country has fallen apart, the economy is shot, there is massive crime and unemployment and they can't even keep electrical service going to many areas.

We saw the same thing in Rhodesia ( now Zimbabwe) where the Whites hand over power and the country falls to ruin.

The EFF fully intends to kill the Whites in South Africa and take everything from them. Malema and many others have stated as much.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

We saw the same thing in Rhodesia ( now Zimbabwe) where the Whites hand over power and the country falls to ruin.

Agriculture production is so far down in Zimbabwe that Mugabe is asking for the whites to come back as advisors. The blacks are lazy and non productive, they've now ruined their own lands.

a reply to: Justso

In answer to your question (which unfortunately I don't have all the answers to) one of the problems is that despite having some fairly advanced civilisations thousands of years ago, they have a tendency to destroy anything and everything left by conquerors, whereas the majority of conquered peoples build on what the conquerors leave behind. For example the Anglos and the Romans, the Romans came to Britain turned it upside down and instead of annihilating all evidence of them, we accepted their inventions and improvements such as irrigation aquaducts roads etc. We started trading further afield and eventually became a nation of explorers and merchants. The African mentality by and large is one of superstition tribalism and nepotism meaning that positions of power, jobs etc went to sons uncles brothers, members of their own clan regardless of experience expertise or qualifications.

They never changed their development path, nor adopted anyone elses' that had been there and as a result civilisation as we refer to it, lagged behind. Most other countries in Europe & Asia did change their path and as a result became economically successful and big players in world trade and other areas.

Another issue that could be attributed to Africa's lack of advancement in so many areas, is one of dependency. They became dependant on various other cultures providing for them such as jobs education etc. Then in later years, they became dependant on others for food, Aid and handouts. This dependency is still very prevalent today, with millions being on Welfare, and is also indicated by the huge crime figures in SA and surrounding areas, whereby they want and take what others have but won't physically work for it, this dependency has made them lazy and to be honest (although I will get flamed for this statement) the same could be said of the American Blacks. The corruption at the top prevents Aid money going where it should. Those in power in African countries are not interested in their people or their country, they want it for themselves, they want a good life lots of cash and power, and they dont' care about investing in infrastructure. This is one of the reasons so many foreign companies are able to go into Africa so easily. All it takes are a few bribes in the right places and China takes over Angola!

There are other issues such as disease and procreatiion whcih I won't go into as it will take too long but in a nutshell I believe the above are the main reasons for much of Africa's stagnation. Wherever there is an African country ruled by blacks there is poverty corruption and starvation. That's not to say they can't run a country efficiently, it just says that they won't

originally posted by: 0racle
a reply to: clodbuster

You can find examples of primitive low Iq people with tendencies to violence in any part of the world.
You can also find the opposite, often living side by side.

Characterizing the whole continent in that way is simply racist.

It's not racist when it's based upon peer reviewed research, do your own homework.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Correct entirely

They are so mistakenly riddled with hatred and revenge that even when every white is gone from Africa they will still blame someone, usually a different tribe.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

they have a tendency to destroy anything and everything left by conquerors,

NO. There is no racial tendency for people to behave like this. It comes from the ideology of despots who filled the post colonial power vacuum in Africa.

Wherever there is an African country ruled by blacks there is poverty corruption and starvation. That's not to say they can't run a country efficiently, it just says that they won't

Without an established education system like the West they don't have the unlimited pool of talent required to run a developing country. I feel you are making this too much about race. I cannot accept that.