Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    28 Feb '18 21:382 edits
    Originally posted by @ashiitaka
    Looking at Zimbabwe, fears are legitimate. Zimbabwe went from being the most successful African country to total ruin.

    Inflation reached 80 000 000 000 percent at the peak of the hyperinflation crisis. You could leave home with enough money to buy bread but by the time you arrived the price has quadrupled. Millions lost their life savings.

    Once the ...[text shortened]... land reform, South Africa has had a black majority government for almost a quarter of a century.
    For a different perspective from someone not relying on anecdotes, I suggest this: http://theconversation.com/land-reform-is-a-zimbabwe-success-story-it-will-be-the-basis-for-economic-recovery-under-mnangagwa-88205

    While acknowledging problems in the past, it states:

    In his speech after being sworn in as Zimbabwe’s new president on November 24, Emmerson Mnangagwa, stressed the role of the country’s land reform farmers in boosting the country’s economic recovery. They have excelled recently.

    Zimbabwe produced more maize in 2017 than was ever grown by white farmers, who have repeatedly been praised for making the country into the bread basket of Africa. Maize production in 2017 was 2.2m tonnes, the highest in two decades.

    Good rains helped, but even the United States Department of Agriculture said the huge increase in maize production was “mainly due to favourable weather conditions and a special program for import substitution, commonly termed as "Command Agriculture”. That programme was implemented last year by Mnangagwa, when he was vice president.

    Under the programme, land reform farmers signed contracts for a certain number of hectares and agreed to sell at least five tonnes of maize per hectare to the Grain Marketing Board. The government provided seed, fertiliser, and, if needed, tractors and fuel for ploughing, and the cost was deducted from the sale price of the maize. Compared to 2011, another good rainfall year, maize production jumped 700,000 tonnes – more than half of which was due to the Command Agriculture programme.

    Of course, right wingers posters want to ignore the reality of how whites obtained the vast majority of their land in the country during the colonial and white supremacist government's tyrannical rule:

    because the white farmers received their land in the 1930s to 1950s only by expelling tens of thousands of Zimbabwean farmers already on the land.


    What is the sense of throwing off colonial oppression IF you leave complete control of the country's economy with the colonials who seized it by force and maintained it by racist laws limiting or banning the indigenous population from buying land as was the case in Rhodesia for decades?

    EDIT: An example of such racist laws:

    The Land Apportionment Act of 1930 was the first legislation to establish land segregation legally, designating half of the country’s land for whites – who made up only five percent of the population – and assigning them most of the better land. It also made provisions for evicting indigenous farmers to drier and less fertile regions.[1]

    https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/case-study/fast-track-land-reform-zimbabwe/

    Are the People never allowed to redress the injustice of such laws even after throwing off the colonial oppressor?
  2. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81736
    28 Feb '18 22:01
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    For a different perspective from someone not relying on anecdotes, I suggest this: http://theconversation.com/land-reform-is-a-zimbabwe-success-story-it-will-be-the-basis-for-economic-recovery-under-mnangagwa-88205

    While acknowledging problems in the past, it states:

    In his speech after being sworn in as Zimbabwe’s new president on November 24, Em ...[text shortened]... er allowed to redress the injustice of such laws even after throwing off the colonial oppressor?
    Begging the white farmers to come back,,,

    "Zimbabwe's maize production dropped by more than 60 per cent after the farm invasions and then fluctuated.
    In 2016, an estimated 4 million Zimbabweans required food aid.
    A bumper harvest last year helped to restore some confidence, but there is still a long way to go."

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-03/zimbabwes-exiled-farmers-urged-to-return/9392322
  3. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    28 Feb '18 22:201 edit
    Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
    Begging the white farmers to come back,,,

    "Zimbabwe's maize production dropped by more than 60 per cent after the farm invasions and then fluctuated.
    In 2016, an estimated 4 million Zimbabweans required food aid.
    A bumper harvest last year helped to restore some confidence, but there is still a long way to go."

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-03/zimbabwes-exiled-farmers-urged-to-return/9392322
    LMAO! Yes, I'm sure the want they want white farmers to take over all the good land plus bring in white politicians to run the country and tell them what to do just like in the good ole days.

    Racist thread number infinity on this board.
  4. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    28 Feb '18 22:22
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    Fanaticism and praiseworthiness are not opposed. Where did I praise anyone anyway?

    What is happening in South Africa IS racism by blacks with white victims.
    How is it "racism"? It is redress of unjust action to reverse changes done BECAUSE of racism.
  5. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    28 Feb '18 22:27
    Originally posted by @ashiitaka
    And America belongs exclusively to Native Americans. They were there first. It's time to expropriate New York City, it's in Iroquois lands. Actually, you might as well expropriate all of North and South America and give it to Native Americans. Don't forget about Australia too.

    Where do you draw the line with this? Why is America different? Because Ame ...[text shortened]... ake it how it was. Next we'll take back Turkey for Byzantium and rename Istanbul Constantinople.
    Why in God's name have a revolution, throw off the colonial oppressors and then just allow the same people to enjoy the fruits of the racist laws and practices they imposed on the People? Might as well "know your place", I suppose.
  6. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y3ngvdp2
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    01 Mar '18 01:39
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    How is it "racism"? It is redress of unjust action to reverse changes done BECAUSE of racism.
    It’s institutional discrimination by a racial majority against a racial minority.
  7. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    01 Mar '18 01:51
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    It’s institutional discrimination by a racial majority against a racial minority.
    Jesus H Christ.

    So let me get this straight: IF a racial minority holds the levers of power by force and because of racist beliefs of the inferiority of the majority seizes large areas of the best land, the majority can't do anything about it without being "racist" themselves?
  8. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    01 Mar '18 01:58
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    It’s institutional discrimination by a racial majority against a racial minority.
    Some background:

    The Natives Land Act (No. 27 of 1913) was passed to allocate only about 7% of arable land to Africans and leave the more fertile land for whites. This law incorporated territorial segregation into legislation for the first time since Union in 1910.

    The law created reserves for Blacks and prohibited the sale of territory in white areas to Blacks and vice versa. An annexure designated the territory initially allocated to Blacks, with a provision that a commission was to investigate the matter further for a more realistic delimitation. In effect, over 80% went to White people, who made up less than 20% of the population. The Act stipulated that Black people could live outside the reserves only if they could prove that they were in employment. Although the law was applicable to the whole of South Africa, in practice it applied only to the Transvaal and Natal. In the Free State, such legislation was already in force since 1876, while a law forbidding Blacks to own property in the Cape would have been in conflict with the constitution of the Union of South Africa, as Cape property-ownership was one of the qualifications for Black franchise. Sharecropping on farms in the Transvaal and the Orange Free State was forbidden.

    According to debates in Parliament, the Act was passed in order to limit friction between White and Black, but Blacks maintained that its aim was to meet demands from White farmers for more agricultural land and force Blacks to work as labourer

    http://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/native-land-act-passed

    So tell me: how do you correct this injustice without being guilty of "racism".
  9. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y3ngvdp2
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    01 Mar '18 02:19
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    Some background:

    The Natives Land Act (No. 27 of 1913) was passed to allocate only about 7% of arable land to Africans and leave the more fertile land for whites. This law incorporated territorial segregation into legislation for the first time since Union in 1910.

    The law created reserves for Blacks and prohibited the sale of territory in white a ...[text shortened]... nd-act-passed

    So tell me: how do you correct this injustice without being guilty of "racism".
    Tax the rich landowners and create jobs with the money.
  10. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y3ngvdp2
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    01 Mar '18 02:20
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    Jesus H Christ.

    So let me get this straight: IF a racial minority holds the levers of power by force and because of racist beliefs of the inferiority of the majority seizes large areas of the best land, the majority can't do anything about it without being "racist" themselves?
    See my last post.
  11. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    01 Mar '18 02:30
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    Tax the rich landowners and create jobs with the money.
    I think the South African solution is better; it directly remedies the rights violations.

    And since there is no belief in that solution that one race is superior or inferior to another, I find nothing "racist" in it.
  12. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    20313
    01 Mar '18 02:34
    Originally posted by @ashiitaka
    Some white racist in Mississippi being obsessed with the legacy of apartheid South Africa or white minority Zimbabwe is irrelevant to the facts surrounding the consequences of land reform. The two are totally different issues.
    This is totally true.

    The fact that we have liberals getting all excited because this becomes some sort of grounds for which to witch hunt the "racists" is really silly and immature.

    It is a reflection of how insane Western PC culture has become.

    It functions as a sort of ersatz religion.
  13. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    20313
    01 Mar '18 02:35
    Originally posted by @no1marauder
    I think the South African solution is better; it directly remedies the rights violations.

    And since there is no belief in that solution that one race is superior or inferior to another, I find nothing "racist" in it.
    Geez, so you really support this kind of action that involves literally confiscating the lands fo whites and redistributing it to blacks?

    LOL, you come off as this moderate guy and I thought Venezuela was maybe just this sort of quirk you had but...

    You really are far left, aren't you?
  14. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    01 Mar '18 02:52
    Originally posted by @philokalia
    Geez, so you really support this kind of action that involves literally confiscating the lands fo whites and redistributing it to blacks?

    LOL, you come off as this moderate guy and I thought Venezuela was maybe just this sort of quirk you had but...

    You really are far left, aren't you?
    I believe in justice, yes. If you read my post above on how those whites got that land from the blacks, you'd know they have no moral claim to it.

    The solution is obvious and disadvantages only those who directly benefited from the previous crimes. That meets all equitable requirements in my view. There might be other situations where such a solution is impracticable (as in the case of Native Americans who constitute only a small fraction of the population of the United States) and other remedies would be in order but really the rich white farmers in South Africa don't deserve much sympathy.
  15. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    20313
    01 Mar '18 02:56
    The blacks were not some absolute majority. Indeed, they came to South Africa after the Boers. Not only that, but they did not have the agricultural or otherwise technological knowledge to settle the land in any meaningful way -- they came literally attracted to the conditions which white farmers made.

    It was under Apartheid that the blck population increased 800% and basically began to displace the whites.

    Under black rule, not only has Zimbabwe gone to garbage but we have South AFrica also facing a much harsher existence.

    Pretty much on every level the white South Africans have every light to run and manage the land, and the results will be infinitely superior to black rule.

    I find it intriguing that after decades of failure we still have people like Marauder thinking they can try the same shenanigans and expect something different.
Back to Top