"White genocide"

[niikeb]

Scary place down there. 25% of South African men admit to having raped a woman. In South Africa, such primitive views on sex and power have lead to a devastating AIDS epidemic.

Still the current land issues are similar to the Polish/Russian/German issues of the previous century, just with an added racial component... no wait its the same.

Zimbabwe and South Africa, and most of the ex colonial sub Sahara region are really hotbeds of violence and tribalism. Look at Rwanda, where the racism had nothing do do with skin color.

[andrewza]

where do you see tribalism in south africa. Yes we have tribes but they not fighting each other. And if you bring up Kwazulu Natal and the IFP, that is political and it is contained to rural areas.

Has for violence. Again localized in certain areas. Yes there are problems but what do you know about it. Have you ever been in South Africa.


Has for our problems we know about them and make them public. Unlike most african counties who either have no data, the data is incomplete or is unavailable to the public. We have been improving unlike the majority of african countries. We have the best standard of living in Africa one of if not the highest life expediency in Africa even with Aids. We are the most industrial nation in Africa. We are nothing like zimbabwe they are like most african nations slipping in to darkness even Nigeria the giant of Africa all its wealth is based on crude oil(I saw a report that said around 80%) that it can not refine because all refineries are broken. So please if you want to compare us with a African country try Botswana or any other of the (to few) well run african countries.

[Pruitt]

Some tribes are well organized politically and some are not. One could argue that the Swazi and Sotho succeeded where the Zulu failed. Some ethnic groups in South Africa were never well organized (Bushmen, Hottentots) and the Xhosa immolated itself right after the Europeans moved in.

Do they still have that tribe that called itself the Bast@rds?

South Africa is like no other place in Africa. Do they still bring large groups of workers from Mozambique to work the gold mines?

Pruitt

[andrewza]

Well the zulus do have a tribal political party (IFP) but they must fight for second place with the DA (mainly whits) in there own province. Where the ANC is king (was a Khoza based party but now consists of all tribes. The current president is a Zulu.

Migrant work is still common in SA mainly from zimbabwe now. They aske for less money, will work longer hours and will not complain. But you can find all sorts here even met a iraq army deserter that got asylum in SA I wonder if he went back since Sadam got hung.


The bushman and Hottentots never stood a chance. They where the first to meet the Europeans and thus got in to fights over land they where all so bushed south by the other african tribes. They where caught in between a rock and a hard place. Sad since they where the first to inhabit South Africa.

[niikeb]

Originally Posted by andrewza

where do you see tribalism in south africa. Yes we have tribes but they not fighting each other. And if you bring up Kwazulu Natal and the IFP, that is political and it is contained to rural areas.

Oh from the English and the Boers, The Colored, and the Tribes, it's all modern tribalism.

The Apartheid government moved many of the "tribes" onto homeland territory, and the land went to (successful) white farmers much as in Rhodesia. After that government fell, (and in Zimbawe under Mugabe) the Land Reform acts attempted to "right that wrong". Pure tribalism, group A has more right to plot X than Group B, on both the previous government, and the current government.

Of course South Africa is miles more "fair and legal" in how it is doing land reform than anywhere else, and no one is getting "robbed". But still the theory both in the origional British land acts (Not to mention Amrican Homestead acts etc...) and the current Land Reform acts are tribal in nature.

As I stated, the Polish the Germans the Russians the Ukranians, the Jews, it's all modern tribalism, in 1940, and now.

Has for violence. Again localized in certain areas. Yes there are problems but what do you know about it. Have you ever been in South Africa.

The statistics are quite bad for a first world nation. The reason South Africa gets such a bad rep is because it IS a first world nation (BRICS), it has international power and finance, and it has the responsibility that comes with that.

Yes, South Africa is the only Sub Sahara nation that could have hosted a World Cup. But until the rape statistics drop (as an example), it is still a first world nation with 3rd world violence.

Has for our problems we know about them and make them public. Unlike most african counties who either have no data, the data is incomplete or is unavailable to the public. We have been improving unlike the majority of african countries. We have the best standard of living in Africa one of if not the highest life expediency in Africa even with Aids. We are the most industrial nation in Africa. We are nothing like zimbabwe they are like most african nations slipping in to darkness even Nigeria the giant of Africa all its wealth is based on crude oil(I saw a report that said around 80%) that it can not refine because all refineries are broken. So please if you want to compare us with a African country try Botswana or any other of the (to few) well run african countries.

See I don't think that is true, South Africa should not be compared to third world nations for it;s problems, but to first world nations with similar GDP per capita and industrilization. South Africa is emerging on the global scale, and there is no reason they should get a discount for "being in Africa" when it comes to human rights and sexual violence.

[Jonathanrex1]

Originally Posted by niikeb

The statistics are quite bad for a first world nation. The reason South Africa gets such a bad rep is because it IS a first world nation (BRICS), it has international power and finance, and it has the responsibility that comes with that.

Yes, South Africa is the only Sub Sahara nation that could have hosted a World Cup. But until the rape statistics drop (as an example), it is still a first world nation with 3rd world violence.

See I don't think that is true, South Africa should not be compared to third world nations for it;s problems, but to first world nations with similar GDP per capita and industrilization. South Africa is emerging on the global scale, and there is no reason they should get a discount for "being in Africa" when it comes to human rights and sexual violence.

In terms of statistics, the Human Development Index gives South Africa a rating of 0.619, classifying it under Medium Development. It's just right above Indonesia, and just below Honduras.

So I wouldn't call it a"first-world nation", nor a "third-world nation". It's more of a "second-world nation".

[andrewza]

Yep we no 1st world nation. We are more a second world in terms of standard of living economy extra. Of course we miles better than any other african country and I agree we are rated on a higher level.

[madmike]

Duke is taken with a grain of salt.Its all wrong.But why isnt it reported such as the Genocide in Rwanda.