South Africa president says persecution of whites a 'false narrative' as Musk repeats genocide claim
-
Read up on Orania. The South-African government doesn't harass those Afrikaners trying to have their own little closed community.
And honestly, I think that approach is the best. If right wing people want to self-segregate in gate communities without harming anyone, then I think that's the least bad option.
If right wing people want to self-segregate in gate communities without harming anyone, then I think that’s the least bad option.
We should take these groups from every major nation and ship them out to some island in the middle of the Pacific or some shit, and don't allow commerce in or out. Let them deal with it themselves.
Or you know what, allow commerce so they can't just blame that for their inevitable failure.
-
Read up on Orania. The South-African government doesn't harass those Afrikaners trying to have their own little closed community.
And honestly, I think that approach is the best. If right wing people want to self-segregate in gate communities without harming anyone, then I think that's the least bad option.
The problem is that they turn into echo chambers and hate incubators. They need to be integrated with the rest of society.
-
If right wing people want to self-segregate in gate communities without harming anyone, then I think that’s the least bad option.
We should take these groups from every major nation and ship them out to some island in the middle of the Pacific or some shit, and don't allow commerce in or out. Let them deal with it themselves.
Or you know what, allow commerce so they can't just blame that for their inevitable failure.
We should make sure the Pacific island we ship them to is tidal.
-
Summary
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa rejected claims by Trump and Elon Musk that whites face persecution or genocide in South Africa, calling it a "completely false narrative."
Musk reignited the controversy by citing a rally where a far-left party chanted “Kill the Boer,” which courts previously ruled as protected speech.
Trump issued an executive order cutting US funding to South Africa and offering Afrikaners refugee status.
Ramaphosa noted that violent crime affects all races equally and condemned misinformation surrounding white farmers' safety.
Never thought I'd see the day when a Zuid Afrikaans president is less racist.
-
Summary
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa rejected claims by Trump and Elon Musk that whites face persecution or genocide in South Africa, calling it a "completely false narrative."
Musk reignited the controversy by citing a rally where a far-left party chanted “Kill the Boer,” which courts previously ruled as protected speech.
Trump issued an executive order cutting US funding to South Africa and offering Afrikaners refugee status.
Ramaphosa noted that violent crime affects all races equally and condemned misinformation surrounding white farmers' safety.
Genocide, no, but the level of crime there is incredible.
-
Musk thinks white wealthy folks facing any sort of consequence for past wrongs they committed is persecution and genocide. Must be hard living in a K-hole.
So just for interest sake, I am 52, and those wrongs were commited when I was little more than a boy. Should I still pay for them?
-
Genocide, no, but the level of crime there is incredible.
Depends, really. But yes, some places are rough.
-
So just for interest sake, I am 52, and those wrongs were commited when I was little more than a boy. Should I still pay for them?
do you still benefit from those wrongs? if so, yes, you should pay for them
-
So just for interest sake, I am 52, and those wrongs were commited when I was little more than a boy. Should I still pay for them?
Hoping this question is in good faith.
I think that depends on what we mean by “pay.”
My take:
If our lives are better/easier/safer/happier than the lives of those who grew out of wrongs committed by those of our own heritage / lineage, then yes, I believe we should endeavour to make their lives better.
Whether that’s financial reparations, return of property / land, sharing of resources, etc. should be up to communities to work together to decide.
Put another way, if my good fortune rests on the misfortune of others - even in the past - my personal take is that I am compelled to help where I can.
Sometimes that’s a simple as voting for the thing that benefits me less than others or me not at all because it aids those who need it most.
So yeah, we should “pay” but “pay” can mean so many things.
That’s just me.
-
do you still benefit from those wrongs? if so, yes, you should pay for them
Fair enough, I would still rather stay here than in the US though. Racism there is much worse than here.
-
Musk thinks white wealthy folks facing any sort of consequence for past wrongs they committed is persecution and genocide. Must be hard living in a K-hole.
It’s not even that. Unused land has been taken by the government under eminent domain, and white supremacists have claimed that these actions have “stolen” land from white farmers. In reality, white landowners have been subject to eminent domain seizures at no higher a rate than black landowners.
-
Hoping this question is in good faith.
I think that depends on what we mean by “pay.”
My take:
If our lives are better/easier/safer/happier than the lives of those who grew out of wrongs committed by those of our own heritage / lineage, then yes, I believe we should endeavour to make their lives better.
Whether that’s financial reparations, return of property / land, sharing of resources, etc. should be up to communities to work together to decide.
Put another way, if my good fortune rests on the misfortune of others - even in the past - my personal take is that I am compelled to help where I can.
Sometimes that’s a simple as voting for the thing that benefits me less than others or me not at all because it aids those who need it most.
So yeah, we should “pay” but “pay” can mean so many things.
That’s just me.
Well said, I can totally get behind this. And I have been doing this for more than thirty years. However, taking away a productive farmers land, and giving it to someone who has no idea what to do with it, or worse to a wealthy politician, helps nobody. (Except the politician).
-
do you still benefit from those wrongs? if so, yes, you should pay for them
So you will be OK with your kids paying for wrongs you committed?
-
So you will be OK with your kids paying for wrongs you committed?
If I rob a bank and give it to my kids, it is suddenly OK to keep the money?
-
So just for interest sake, I am 52, and those wrongs were commited when I was little more than a boy. Should I still pay for them?
Lets say you live in a white neighbourhood in south africa. You are upper class. Your parents, and you as a child benefitted from a system which extracted the labour of black people and let the white upper class take the profits.
There is a counterpart to you. A poor black dude who grew up poor because their parents labour had it’s rewards extracted and given to parents like yours.
It does make sense in a system like that that some land previously owned by the white labour extractors should be redistributed to those whose poverty is a direct consequence of their parents oppression.
What doesn’t make sense is punishing poor white individuals for the way upper class whites oppressed non-whites.
-
If I rob a bank and give it to my kids, it is suddenly OK to keep the money?
Hmm, good point. But it is not exactly the same though.
-
Well said, I can totally get behind this. And I have been doing this for more than thirty years. However, taking away a productive farmers land, and giving it to someone who has no idea what to do with it, or worse to a wealthy politician, helps nobody. (Except the politician).
Agreed, redistribution is only part of the solution. Those people need training and education as well.
-
So just for interest sake, I am 52, and those wrongs were commited when I was little more than a boy. Should I still pay for them?
For me, the question is easy: What's your tax bracket?
-
Hmm, good point. But it is not exactly the same though.
You only think that because you're the kid with the bank bag
-
Lets say you live in a white neighbourhood in south africa. You are upper class. Your parents, and you as a child benefitted from a system which extracted the labour of black people and let the white upper class take the profits.
There is a counterpart to you. A poor black dude who grew up poor because their parents labour had it’s rewards extracted and given to parents like yours.
It does make sense in a system like that that some land previously owned by the white labour extractors should be redistributed to those whose poverty is a direct consequence of their parents oppression.
What doesn’t make sense is punishing poor white individuals for the way upper class whites oppressed non-whites.
that some land previously owned by the white labour extractors should be redistributed to those whose poverty is a direct consequence of their parents oppression.
Is that really going to fix anything though? As in: It's <currentyear>, while agriculture is still important having a small farm is going to pay worse than being an engineer or something. Land does not have the socio-economic value it once had.
The most important bit, the key fulcrum to work with, I think, is social mobility in education. Make sure that schools are good enough to ensure that kids from poor parents are no less likely to excel than those of parents who have the means (monetary or intellectual) to coach their kids themselves.
