South Africa

What is your opinion about South Africa?

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/books/first/w/welsh-africa.html
archive.org/details/riebeecksjourna00archgoog
news24.com/Columnists/MaxduPreez/Are-we-all-coloured-20110309
britannica.com/topic/click-languages
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xhosa_language
san.org.za/history.php
web.archive.org/web/20090228160138/http://newsobserver.com/110/story/552528.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_Areas_Act
citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/1295289/khoisan-says-sa-is-theirs-all-of-it/
ibtimes.com/south-africas-khoisan-demand-constitutional-recognition-first-indigenous-people-2062401
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

...

it's a shame, too many mistakes made up to this point and we in the US should evacuate the lot of them

Kek, they will go after schlomo next.

They actually can, so what's that dumb negro's point? Oh wait, he's just a dumb nigger not capable of critical thinking.

...

>evacuate
they can just take a plane

They will collapse very fast, such a lost potential.

So... why don't the white south africans just leave then?

am i wrong or does this show just how much blacks don't know
most farmland doesn't magically exist. its usually created through years and years of hard work to turn land productive and keep it productive.

The whites are just as native as the Bantu...

I personally can’t wait to watch south africa completely fucking crumble. Hilarious as it was the only decent place left in africe lmaoooo

South Africa is already worse off than a lot of the rest of Africa.

So... why don't the Bantu go back to Angola?

wait my bad, "why don't the Bantu go back to Nigeria"

>Hilarious as it was the only decent place left in africe lmaoooo
this just shows how little you know of the world

UNPOPULAR OPINION:

Build a giant dome around the whole continent of Africa and NUKE IT TO BITS!!!

So... why don't Portuguese go back to Morrocco?

>Portuguese arrived before Dutch
>Portuguese traded and didn't colonise
>made paintings of them meeting thousands of Koisan and Xhosa
>traded with Koisan and Xhosa for hundreds of years before the Dutch arrived
nytimes.com/books/first/w/welsh-africa.html

>Dutch made paintings depicting the people they met when they landed
>Dutch wrote diaries about the people that fed them when they arrived
>Dutch has sex and babies with women who already there and recorded it in their diaries
>they suddenly don't exist according to Sup Forums

Proof: Van riebeek's diaries archive.org/details/riebeecksjourna00archgoog

I wish some country would just fucking colonise the place and wipe them out the whole world would be a better place overnight.

>What is your opinion about South Africa?
I think the media hysteria is completely over-blown, but the idea of confiscating land is pants-on-head retarded. Up until now, South Africa has been running voluntary purchase scheme where they buy land off whites and give it out to Blacks. They've managed to transfer fuck all, and most of the land they give away ends up unused or sold back, because they aren't giving it to people who know or care about farming. On the other hand, private sales from whites to blacks have managed to transfer more land, which actually ends up being used by black people who actually want to farm. If they just leave people alone there'll probably be some move towards equity without all of this bullshit.

i can't deal with that level of retardation it was a fucking open nuclear power
and bantu people literally only came in the 1600s the same time it was colonised

>and bantu people literally only came in the 1600s the same time it was colonised
sorry but as much as i hate niggers i can not accept this argument : they are the same fucking colour

take this hypothetical scenario :
>year 2050
>europe falls to the niggers
>russia declares war on europe too
>russians win and become the majority

>and then all the niggers start being like "nuh uh you damn russians don't belong here, you came here the same time we did in the 2050s, you are foreigners too here !"
well yeah no fuck off in this case i'd support the russians since they are white
it means they have much more legitimacy to european land obviously

so with this same logic i can see how bantus are more legitimate to rule south africa than dutch people
they are niggers and it is the continent of niggers that's very simple

they're completely different
anyway projecting pan africanism on history is retarded

thats because most farmers are white. only like 2% of a modern country's population needs to farm

>apartheid south africa
>170 murders annually
doubt

meh they are exactly like niggers but with slightly slanted eyes
actually it means my example is perfect since russians are also exactly like white people but with slightly slanted eyes

go back you retarded nigger

is this about russia ? you know, i can make the same example again, but with white americans instead of russians, if it makes you less butthurt

BULLSHIT

>Portuguese arrived before Dutch
>made paintings of them meeting thousands of koisan and xhosa
>traded with koisan and xhosa for hundreds of years before the Dutch arrived
nytimes.com/books/first/w/welsh-africa.html

>Dutch made paintings depicting the people they met when they landed
>Dutch wrote diaries about the people that fed them when they arrived
>Dutch has sex and babies with women who already there and recorded it in their diaries
>they suddenly don't exist according to Sup Forums

Proof: Van riebeek's diaries archive.org/details/riebeecksjourna00archgoog

There is no doubt that people existed in South Africa before colonization. They were just an entirely different race (brown-yellow skin, slant eyes, small frame, neolithic hunter-gatherers) than the Bantu immigrants (dark skin, round eyes, large frame, early Iron-age farmers) that migrated into the area hundreds of years later, and who are now claiming their people have always owned the land and that this entitles them to genocide.

it's about your retarded idea that skin color makes less of an invader,there's no fucking scale or rating for that.

Proof that white people are violent savages:

I thought French posters were supposed to be smart.

Cherry picking

Kek the South African government only said that shit to JUSTIFY the forced land evictions of Colorued and Black lands you moron.

If it said "well you weren't here first so therefore all claims to land as your own are null because you aren't 'indigenous'".

China: "Hold my beverage"

Also the thing about land seizure without compensation is that they still have to fork money over it due to the nature of land.

Farmer debts (massive since farming involves a lot of debt), Land improvements, debt so on and so forth means that even with seized land only 10% of the cost of land is the land itself the other 90% in and improvement still needs to be paid and debts honored to the bank so people with failing farms can with a good lawyer reduce losses in a way if they play their cards. Also lands held by kings and chiefs are also up for land compensation claims.

of course it does

it's precisely because i am the smartest that i am persecuted by everyone itt, it often is something that happen to misunderstood genius such as me

another country that will look like haiti/zimbabwe in the coming years.

so if france is taken over by africans and they end up owning all the land, can my australian great grandchildren migrate there and confiscate your great childrens land because their skin colour is the same as the native french?

Haiti is a completely different case.

yes obviously ?
i'd definitely much rather australians rule france than the fucking niggers who destroyed france

i'm pretty sure the last natives of south africa must also have been like "rather the land goes to those northerners than to fucking white people" as well

M'bogo, by your very own example the non-whites dont have a right to europe so whats your point?

based

its not

>i'm pretty sure the last natives of south africa must also have been like "rather the land goes to those northerners than to fucking white people" as well

No because they got decimated and enslaved by said Northerners.

Haiti got fucked over by politics, hurricanes and trade bullshit.

americans aren't white

Haiti got fucked over because it got taken over by a violent mob

False. Xhosa existed in South Africa for a thousand years before Europeans arrived. Xhosa are mixed Bantu and Koisan. Nelson Mandela is supposed to be Xhosa but DNA tests showed he's pure Koisan.

>Nelson Mandela’s mitochondrial DNA was found to be pure Khoisan.

news24.com/Columnists/MaxduPreez/Are-we-all-coloured-20110309

Xhosa language is a dialect of Koisan click languages.

britannica.com/topic/click-languages

Mutt brother pls stop, you are of great shame of us

well then, russians genocided the polish too, and regardless, imo it would be less disgraceful if russia owned poland than if niggers owned poland

Is it better to get robbed by a russian than a jap?

completely different scenario, japs are not black
i would actually rather get robbed by a jap since if it comes to hands he isn't as strong as the russian, and he would hit me less hard

Bitching about the revolution or something else?

I don’t get why people are triggered by this argument

The Khoisan aren't Bantus, you fucking retard.

Fun fact : The white south Africans were in SA before the currently ruling Blacks (the indigenous SA don't rule shit)

As i understand your argument is that it's better to be wronged by your race.

There's no justice in a government seizing the land of it's citizens based on their race and economically it's devastating.

>white man kill nigguh
>nigguh report it
>white police tells him to fuck off
>OH LOOK HOW FEW MURDERS WE HAD

kek
And north korea says its the mightiest country on earth and everyone is happy there

>It's okay to seize all white south africans' land because they own too much
>it's not okay to put all black americans in jail because they commit too much crime

oh yeah no absolutely i don't support the SA government at all, i was only talking about this one point

>Xhosa language is a dialect of Koisan click languages.
Are you insane?
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xhosa_language

>It's okay to seize all white south africans' land because they own too much
>It's not okay to seize all jewish people's money because they own too much

>The white south Africans were in SA before the currently ruling Blacks (the indigenous SA don't rule shit)

completely wrong.

The argument originally back then was

>SA was empty
Then
>SA had a few Khoi's
Then
>Khoi's existed before us whites
Then
>Khoi's are a super special category so they don't count.

It says it right there

>The Bantu ancestor of Xhosa did not have clicks, which attest to a strong historical contact with a San language that did. An estimated 15% of Xhosa vocabulary is of San origin

Because they don't. Compare them to your average bantu nigger, they are different. Plus, khois are grateful with the boers because they saved them from being slaughtered by bantu niggers

I never claimed that. I said the Xhosa are mixed Bantu and Koi San and they have been in South Africa over 1000 years. This is a fact.

>The first Bantu-speaking agriculturalists moved into South Africa about 1 800 years ago, with the major migration of agro-pastoralists happening about 800 years ago. The term Bantu developed negative connotations during apartheid. The term is used here to identify a sub branch of the Niger-Congo language family. Over the following centuries, there was extensive interaction between the San and the various Khoe and Bantu-speaking immigrants. South Africa’s dominant cultures and languages are all shaped by this contact. Genetically many South Africans have DNA that demonstrates intermarriage with aboriginal peoples. Culturally, some Coloured, Griqua, Zulu, Swati and Xhosa South Africans still identify with their aboriginal Khoe-San roots.

san.org.za/history.php

Who gives a shit what the argument was? The truth is that the Khoisan are essentially a separate race, with the greatest genetic similarity to early humans, and who populated most of Africa before genocidal Bantu expansion.

That's 100% false.

If they are going to take the land they are using the completely wrong arguments. Skin colour should not be the determining factor, wealth should be. It is valid to take land from the rich to redistribute to the poor, because the rich are already stealing the land from the poor. There is no justification for taking the land based on skin colour.
And while there may be some racism behind why white people own more land, the by far biggest reason is the classist system set up to prevent poor people from gaining wealth and to make the rich richer. This is the real problem, and what should be addressed.

The first Bantu moved into South Africa about 1800 years ago and mixed with the Koi and San

They're not using that, they're going by records of people who's land was forcefully taken by the Apartheid government to give to whites for free.

How you canacuck?

Racism and classism go hand in hand just as in Latin America. There can be no wealth creation when whites have an advantage over blacks.

>It is valid to take land from the rich
Die you commie bastard

Fuck the world outside of Finland

So? In what way does that exclude posterior hostile migration and ethnic displacement?

Bantus are hardly unfamiliar with enslaving and exterminating other ethnic groups
web.archive.org/web/20090228160138/http://newsobserver.com/110/story/552528.html

That makes the situation slightly different, although I don't feel this is fair either. They should first offer the people whose land was taken a good middle class lifestyle in the cities, and if they reject that, the whites should get the same offer in exchange of giving up their land to the original owners. If the original owners don't agree to be middle class, and the whites don't agree to give up the land, then too bad for the blacks, there's nothing to do about it. Maybe give the same offer to both parties at the beginning, and if both the blacks and the whites agree, then the land can be given away to other blacks where the whites rejected the offer.
This is ignoring the problematicness of ownership of course, but assuming the current economical model is kept, this may be a good way to do it.

The facts I provided prove that the claim that there were no Blacks in South Africa when whites arrived is a total lie.

Bantus are the wh*Tes of Africa?

basically desu

Most of those people are now living in townships outside cities. They used to live in the prime real estate in the most expensive parts of the cities.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_Areas_Act

>the acts assigned racial groups to different residential and business sections in urban areas in a system of urban apartheid. An effect of the law was to exclude non-Whites from living in the most developed areas, which were restricted to Whites (e.g., Sea Point, Lansdowne, Cape Town, Claremont, Cape Town). It caused many non-Whites to have to commute large distances from their homes in order to be able to work. The law led to non-Whites being forcibly removed for living in the "wrong" areas. The non-white majority were given much smaller areas (e.g., Tongaat, Grassy Park) to live in than the white minority who owned most of the country. Pass Laws required that non-Whites carry pass books, and later 'reference books'[1] (similar to passports) to enter the 'white' parts of the country.

>some Bantus mixed with South African Khoisan 1800 years ago
>this justifies the massive migratory waves over a thousand years later

>fun fact
>it was rumored

>They should first offer the people whose land was taken a good middle class lifestyle in the cities,

Ooooo, so they can just create middle class jobs out of nowhere (SA has a big unemployment problem) with mass housing and the sheer pools of money to do this plan?

>f they reject that, the whites should get the same offer in exchange of giving up their land to the original owners.

Considering the cost of the land with improvements it's gonna be a big amount.

> If the original owners don't agree to be middle class, and the whites don't agree to give up the land, then too bad for the blacks, there's nothing to do about it.

So people just have to accept that an asshole government just took their land and they got no compensation for it and they had to migrate to cities (then even then they were forced to relocate again because of the government because they lived in good real estate to further out slums) to find shitty jobs with ass pay?

You can't just have away problems like it never happened.

Your was that SA had no "blacks" beforea certain period and got proven wrong. Now you are spazzing about something else and moving the goalposts.

You're making no sense. I've proven to you that South Africa has tribes like the Xhosa who were already there before Europeans arrived as Sup Forums types like to claim and I've provided evidence.

Nothing you say can change that fact.

>Your was that SA had no "blacks" beforea certain period and got proven wrong. Now you are spazzing about something else and moving the goalposts.
I never said that at all, friendo, I entered this discussion halfway through which you would have been quick to notice had you been paying attention at all.

What the fuck are you talking about? I never once referred to fucking Boers or whites at any point. What's I'm saying is that the Bantu claim to being the original inhabitants of South Africa is largely farcical and that the Khoisan, the actual natives, have been abused and progressively reduced to a small pocket of their original lands.

In the Netherlands the farmers are 0.005% of the population and they own more than half the country.

>What's I'm saying is that the Bantu claim to being the original inhabitants of South Africa is largely farcical and that the Khoisan, the actual natives, have been abused and progressively reduced to a small pocket of their original lands.

But whites did that though. In the western part they used to cover all of it then got fucked by the Dutch. Fucks sake the Post-Apartheid SA government gave land to them after the previous government seized it form them.

55% of the Dutch clay is used for agriculture.

That's not what a dialect is

There's a reason Hammurabi wasn't known for economic policy.

Although you can nuance it a bit by saying 3% of the population works in the sector.

Blacks (especially in South Africa) have the strange belief that white farmers generally live in vast luxury. They think owning land = money. They probably don't understand that you need to grow tons of stuff on vast stretches of land to even earn a modest living.

South Africa to this day doesn't recognize the Khoisan as the native ethnic group of the country, and the land claims are a promise that was never realized.

citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/1295289/khoisan-says-sa-is-theirs-all-of-it/
ibtimes.com/south-africas-khoisan-demand-constitutional-recognition-first-indigenous-people-2062401

Furthermore, idiot, I'm not talking about just SA. Khoisan existed outside of South African territory, having populated most of Austral and Eastern Africa before Bantu migrations.

Farmer is a shit job
Most farmers are poor, work a fuck ton for shit money
unless you own a really huge amount of land

You think they don't know that?

Land is money. So when you compensate people for their land nobody actually gets richer or poorer. It's just an exchange of two things of equal value. And the lands can then be used as an asset to produce more wealth.

If there was more fertile land, then you would not need to disown people. If this is all fertile land, then you benefit from buying it and compensating people for it. So I don't really understand why you wouldn't compensate someone for it.

>white farmers get shit done
>niggers steal their land
>niggers ruin it because they ruin everything
>niggers give it back to the whites
>land already too ruined whites can't do anything
>both starve in the end
SHEEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTT