New SA president plans to take land from whites without compensation

a reply to: JoshuaCox

So if someone comes into your home kills you and takes your family. It's OK, because you know..."right by conquest".

a reply to: NOprah

In this case. White people are to blame.

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: CulturalResilience

Are you forgetting slavery? And how violent it was?
The fact that you result to name calling speaks volumes.

Oh right the slavery defence where Blacks captured other Blacks and sold them to slavers who were Black, Arab, and White. Your asinine boilerplate doesn't fly here.

If you don't like it pointed out that what you say portrays you as foolish and ignorant, inform yourself of the actual facts of the subject before you comment, and then it won't happen.

a reply to: trollz

Meh, maybe this will give the whites the incentive necessary for them to face the reality of their situation and get the h out of Dodge before they meet the "final solution" which is, actually, already under way.

a reply to: Ursushorribilis

Right.

If you are so righteous why are you not in Africa fighting for black slaves held by black owners currently?

Does your high horse not travel that far?

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: NOprah

In this case. White people are to blame.

What is it in this case that White people are to blame for? For settling and cultivating the unoccupied land before the Blacks migrated down from the North?

a reply to: CulturalResilience

In this instance. White people forcibly colonized South Africa and africans want back their land. Rightfully so.

originally posted by: trollz
lands owned by white farmers since the 1600s
Previous president Robert Mugabe tried the same thing - taking land from whites and giving it to blacks. The result was that food production crashed and the economy took a massive hit.

Not exactly. Food production plummeted before, as the white farmers switched to growing tobacco which was more profitable for them, and had stopped growing food.

Detroit, coming to a country near you.

South Africa will be just like Detroit in about a decade.

a reply to: CulturalResilience

There is zero evidence the land was unnoccupied.
Just propaganda from Europeans.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: SaturnFX

Did you really just say we should only take in white refugees lol???

The fact you said “I will stand with the liberals on this” would lead me to believe that you oppose refugee immigration in the other , far browner cases..

If I’m wrong I apologize..


(I think I’m farther right than everyone on immigration, because I could care less about the rest of the worlds problems.. we need those houses, jobs and other resources .. )

Wait waiting for the reaction to come in.
Well, lets consider qualifiers. they know the language, they are actual hard working people with a trade. They aren't gonna be leaving their women and children behind. They are being targetted specifically for their skintone alone.

Lets talk about other refugees then....mostly men, mostly without skill, mostly cannot speak the language.

I would be all for the entire nation of say, North Korea to migrate over to the west, because koreans are notoriously great at being industrious and well mannered as a demographic. Japan in a heartbeat. they are brown(ish).
India also

What I don't like is religious fanatics wanting to spread their "culture" (read: religion) by any means necessary.

If you see this as a skintone thing, thats on you. My stance...hey, if Africa wants to be a black only country, well, I guess they can do that (and we seen the effects it results in btw in Zimbabwe and such). I am always in favor of taking in hard working talent regardless of what skintone they have...so long as they don't come with a s=-t ton of baggage (aka: religion)

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: CulturalResilience

There is zero evidence the land was unnoccupied.
Just propaganda from Europeans.

You got anything to counter the "propaganda" or just your feel...

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: CulturalResilience

In this instance. White people forcibly colonized South Africa and africans want back their land. Rightfully so.

Those people didn't do any such thing.

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: CulturalResilience

There is zero evidence the land was unnoccupied.
Just propaganda from Europeans.

By zero evidence. Do you mean that the land had no permanent human settlement, because that is what unoccupied means. Does archaeology not constitute evidence to You?

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: trollz

Meh, maybe this will give the whites the incentive necessary for them to face the reality of their situation and get the h out of Dodge before they meet the "final solution" which is, actually, already under way.

When you've been on a plot of land for 9 generations, its not just a quick decision to pack up and go. Plenty will fight and die for their land. If native americans knocked on your door and told you to leave, would you just accept it and get a uhaul?

Yeah, check out Rekd on 4chan if you want to puke.

The brutal tribal crap going on over there, I can't even speak of.

We should probably invade and regulate.

a reply to: CulturalResilience

You mean, there were no European settlements there yet. They fixed that issue in a jiffy. There were people there. The people were not white enough I guess.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: trollz
To be fair the original colonists didn’t “compensate” the Africans who they took that land from in the first place..

It’s a super interesting question that doesn’t have a great answer..

I think a better solution to this problem would be to take the land away from the whites, and give them an equivalent parcel of land somewhere else.

The claim is that the whites took the "best land" away from the blacks when they came, so all the other land around is worthless, and only the land occupied by whites has value.

So, ok, exchange the worthless land for the valuable land. I'm sure the whites will figure out a way to make the worthless land profitable.

So, maybe 1 acre of valuable land, can be exchanged for 10 acres of worthless land, or something like that.

Then, nobody would feel too bad.

Just make sure, when you give the whites the new land, they also get the rights to any mineral deposits below the ground, so that they have a chance to turn things around for themselves too.

To just take property away from people without compensation isn't right.

Both whites and blacks of the modern world, "just happen" to be born into their circumstances, and it's neither of them's fault that things are the way they are today.

Hence, don't punish either side.

a reply to: trollz

I'm sure their will be Somers liberating coming soon by the good ol USA if this gets to out of control .

US mega corps such as MS,IBM,Oracle ,Google and other tech companies have quite a bit invested to make Africa the next slave labor tech hub of the world.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: trollz
To be fair the original colonists didn’t “compensate” the Africans who they took that land from in the first place..

Too true. And they were bastards about it after. Which wasnt too long ago.