South Africa going full Mugabe

[WISD0MTREE]

15 hours ago, Caecus said:

a man with 130 guns who spends 3 hours a day going to the range to fire a CB shot out of each of his guns only to go back home and meticulously lube his barrels (on his gun and on his fun-fun) while listening to Kenny Loggin's Danger Zone

It was 5 hours until recently I had problems bore-sighting my Ruger Precision Rifle and can't figure out why it just won't align without using 7 strips cut out from beer cans to angle it down. 

[Ogaden]

Justice would be white south Africans being placed under apartheid for 60 years.  They're getting off easy

[WISD0MTREE]

1 hour ago, Ogaden said:

Justice would be white south Africans being placed under apartheid for 60 years.  They're getting off easy

Let me add my two cents for What It's Worth. 

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking' their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

[Thalmor]

1 hour ago, Ogaden said:

Justice would be white south Africans being placed under apartheid for 60 years.  They're getting off easy

If you consider mass murder and land seized without compensation as 'getting off easy', I'd hate to see what you consider a harsh punishment.

[Rozalia]

On 15/03/2018 at 11:36 PM, Ogaden said:

Justice would be white south Africans being placed under apartheid for 60 years.  They're getting off easy

That is not justice. That is vengeance.

[Ogaden]

Whenever it's the !@#$ who's fricked everyone for decades, centuries or even millennia finally gets their comeuppance the whining always starts, what did we ever do to deserve this?  Someone compiles list as long as your arm, oh well that's all in the past!

Meanwhile someone tries to make a mosque or some shit in midtown Manhattan and "it's all in the past" suddenly goes out the window and the same people whining about white genocide and "ancient history" start bringing up the Ummayads or some shit with "Victory Mosques".

I too would love to live in a world of tolerance where ancient grudges aren't brought up when it's convenient, but we don't live in that world.  We live in a shitty world full of shitty people who enjoy the suffering of others, and the only discrimination they don't like is when it's against them.  So no, frick white colonial settlers, they can go frick themselves.  They made this bed now they can sleep in it.

[Rozalia]

1 minute ago, Ogaden said:

Whenever it's the !@#$ who's fricked everyone for decades, centuries or even millennia finally gets their comeuppance the whining always starts, what did we ever do to deserve this?  Someone compiles list as long as your arm, oh well that's all in the past!

Meanwhile someone tries to make a mosque or some shit in midtown Manhattan and "it's all in the past" suddenly goes out the window and the same people whining about white genocide and "ancient history" start bringing up the Ummayads or some shit with "Victory Mosques".

I too would love to live in a world of tolerance where ancient grudges aren't brought up when it's convenient, but we don't live in that world.  We live in a shitty world full of shitty people who enjoy the suffering of others, and the only discrimination they don't like is when it's against them.  So no, frick white colonial settlers, they can go frick themselves.  They made this bed now they can sleep in it.

You can say that if you wish but it will eventually be turned on you and people you actually care about. No good comes from this behaviour especially when the world is watching. The message in South Africa for example is quite a clear one for people in America and Europe. If you let your group lose control of the country then those that take over will exact bloody vengeance on you. The message of the far-right is proven completely accurate.

[Ogaden]

10 minutes ago, Rozalia said:

You can say that if you wish but it will eventually be turned on you and people you actually care about. No good comes from this behaviour especially when the world is watching. The message in South Africa for example is quite a clear one for people in America and Europe. If you let your group lose control of the country then those that take over will exact bloody vengeance on you. The message of the far-right is proven completely accurate.

Ironically South Africa and Zimbabwe are being criticized for essentially following an ethnic nationalist agenda with a special hatred for minorities and immigrants.  You just don't like it because the minorities and immigrants are white.

Trump isn't the antithesis of Mugabe, Trump IS Mugabe.  The lesson to be learned from Zimbabwe and South Africa is that a tiny minority ruling over a majority where the majority are given no rights or any slice of the economic pie is unsustainable and dangerous, and also that ethnic nationalist politics inevitably leads to violence.

I don't agree with Mugabe and the South Africans looking to emulate him, I don't think they should kill people, but at the same time I understand how they got like that, the same way how I understand why rural angry hillbillies in Trump country are also stockpiling guns and talking about a final solution to the darkie problem.  If you blame your problems on a minority and stoke populist politics where everything is the fault of "Group X" then this is what happens, in every country, in every time in history.

You can ironically see how this is bad in South Africa and Zimbabwe, but support these policies in your own country.  I wonder why, what's the subtle difference?

Edited March 20, 2018 by Ogaden

[Rozalia]

Just now, Ogaden said:

Ironically South Africa and Zimbabwe are being criticized for essentially following an ethnic nationalist agenda with a special hatred for minorities and immigrants.  You just don't like it because the minorities and immigrants are white.

Trump isn't the antithesis of Mugabe, Trump IS Mugabe.  The lesson to be learned from Zimbabwe and South Africa is that a tiny minority ruling over a majority where the majority are given no rights or any slice of the economic pie is unsustainable and dangerous, and also that ethnic nationalist politics inevitably leads to violence.

Yes, I only hate suffering when they are white. Quite the claim. I know full well how the world works and have said the best course of action from them now is to in fact flee. I merely like to point out how a certain sort will get up in arms about the smallest thing regarding minorities being oppressed, yet when they're white they have no care at all. They "deserve it" in fact as you put it. 

You're naive if you think that things would have gone different if the whites had simply treated them better previously. Racial groups are powerful things with only nationalism able to break the tie in most cases, and even then it's not a huge number especially with how under attack Nationalism has been for decades. You need ethnic Nationalism to the point that the main group remains primarily of that ethnicity, as otherwise things will start falling apart and getting ugly. That does not mean of course you shouldn't have non ethnic citizens, however integration into the main group is required so they don't become divorced from the main group. 

In addition you're completely wrong from a start. Ethnic states have far less trouble of such a nature in them than non-Ethnic ones. 

[Ogaden]

6 minutes ago, Rozalia said:

Yes, I only hate suffering when they are white. Quite the claim. I know full well how the world works and have said the best course of action from them now is to in fact flee. I merely like to point out how a certain sort will get up in arms about the smallest thing regarding minorities being oppressed, yet when they're white they have no care at all. They "deserve it" in fact as you put it. 

You're naive if you think that things would have gone different if the whites had simply treated them better previously. Racial groups are powerful things with only nationalism able to break the tie in most cases, and even then it's not a huge number especially with how under attack Nationalism has been for decades. You need ethnic Nationalism to the point that the main group remains primarily of that ethnicity, as otherwise things will start falling apart and getting ugly. That does not mean of course you shouldn't have non ethnic citizens, however integration into the main group is required so they don't become divorced from the main group. 

In addition you're completely wrong from a start. Ethnic states have far less trouble of such a nature in them than non-Ethnic ones. 

You make this claim but there's nothing supporting it, you do only care about people getting killed or deported or oppressed when they're white and christian.  In every other instance you have explained in detail how you believe that oppression, deaths and deportations are not just ok but good, because apparently that's the only way to ensure white and christian lives are saved.

I mean you have the first paragraph here claiming you think minorities (important point here, white and christian minorities) shouldn't be deported in ALL circumstances.  If they're white and christian they should be protected at all cost for instance.

Then in your second paragraph you say how you need to ethnically homogenize your country.  If that's the case then why on earth are you critical of Mugabe, who's agenda is literally to create a Shona ethnic nation state and kick out all the Zulus and white people?  If ethnic homogeneity is the goal of a stable nation state, where is your Mugabe love?  He was doing this before it was cool

Edited March 20, 2018 by Ogaden

[Rozalia]

Just now, Ogaden said:

You make this claim but there's nothing supporting it, you do only care about people getting killed or deported or oppressed when they're white and christian.  In every other instance you have explained in detail how you believe that oppression, deaths and deportations are not just ok but good.

Which claim? Me saying you're wrong? I highlight these things because they expose a certain group that you are part of. You're of the crowd that is holier than everyone else and yet so obviously act vile like this? People deserving what they get was said about the slaves too you know, the Jews, it goes on. How does it feel to be playing that game too? So yeah, sorry if I'm not all that moved on talk of morality by someone who has defended genociders and the like by saying they were justified (Haiti talk).

Also, not Christian so stop that garbage with me please. Lucifer will illuminate the world! As for South Africa, like with Israel, they should deport/kill all the people they want gone and be done with it. That clear enough for you? South Africa is now what it is and they can do in their country what they like. If only more countries had the courage to take stands for themselves. 

[Ogaden]

I actually view nationalism as a disease and excuse giant corporations use to arbitrage labor prices and state regulations against tariffs.  We live in a giant worldwide Apartheid South Africa, with manufacturing bantustans of cheap labor on one side of the planet, and gated community first world terrified of the world outside the gates on the other side.

All nations should be abolished and all states dissolved.  There should be one law and one government, global international socialism.

[Rozalia]

11 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

I actually view nationalism as a disease and excuse giant corporations use to arbitrage labor prices and state regulations against tariffs.  We live in a giant worldwide Apartheid South Africa, with manufacturing bantustans of cheap labor on one side of the planet, and gated community first world terrified of the world outside the gates on the other side.

All nations should be abolished and all states dissolved.  There should be one law and one government, global international socialism.

And who is to blame for that? The same globalism you're in favour of right there. 

Such a world will not manifest, but if it did, you'd quickly find just what it will mean. A lot of conflict and division. In addition the rich will prosper even more while the poor are moved about wherever they are needed like cattle. The fact your hatred of Nationalism goes so far that you'd support corporations like that is really telling. Explains why the genocide and Islam defenses too. Hate Nationalism so much that you will support and defend anyone, no matter how monstrous. 

[Ogaden]

The system you describe is the current system, created by nationalism and capitalism.  You can't defeat it with more nationalism and more capitalism, you can't fix something with what caused the problem in the first place.

Capitalism and finance and labor arbitrage has created this nightmare world, the only solution is something different, not more of the same.

[Rozalia]

6 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

The system you describe is the current system, created by nationalism and capitalism.  You can't defeat it with more nationalism and more capitalism, you can't fix something with what caused the problem in the first place.

Capitalism and finance and labor arbitrage has created this nightmare world, the only solution is something different, not more of the same.

Incorrect. Nationalism was put under attack since WW2 and even for a time became a dirty word (people such as yourself still try). Nationalism in no way promotes having slave workers on the other side of the world as the current system as it takes away a nation's independence and takes jobs and money that could go to ordinary people (and instead goes to corps). 

Globalism (why mention capitalism as something for Nationalism when Globalism is way more capitalist?) is guilty for the things you describe and you want more of it. Ridiculous. Same lunacy as the Communists/Socialists being for free movement when it'll completely ruin/make impossible what they want in place.

[Ogaden]

Yeah gee I wonder why nationalism looked bad in World War 2

[Ogaden]

"Look man, just ignore the times when nationalism has literally enslaved people, killed millions and destroyed entire cities nations and peoples, and nationalism looks great!"

[Rozalia]

15 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

Yeah gee I wonder why nationalism looked bad in World War 2

 

10 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

"Look man, just ignore the times when nationalism has literally enslaved people, killed millions and destroyed entire cities nations and peoples, and nationalism looks great!"

Because like after WW2 the world moved to shift the current order to something else. 

Who said everything has to be rainbows? History is history, get over it and deal. Nationalism today is by and large very open, integrating people regardless of their race into the collective. As it should be, though as said, if the main ethnic base is not maintained then it can collapse on itself and fail. Race hustlers will take advantage and set people against each other, those people being part of the group you run with. 

You didn't address the fact that globalism is literally to blame for what you attack. You can't have this socialism, communism, or whatever you want in globalism. Globalism ultimately if unchained becomes capitalism unbound... and that is what you want apparently. You think people suffer now? Let globalism run free and see what happens then. Nationalism is a bond, one that can protect the people from many things (one of which is now globalism). You hate it because Nazis and KKK or something, which is silly.

[Ogaden]

Let me tell you a story about globalism and nationalism.

Before World War 1 broke out, it was clear that war was brewing in Europe.  Ever since the Franco-Prussian war, nations were militarizing at an enormous pace, alliances were being formed for war and it looked inevitable.  The Second International of socialists met in Zurich in 1907 to discuss this crisis of militarism, the problem of colonialism and the oppression of Africans and Asians, and the liberation of women.  The Second International represented labor unions and millions of workers, and could have shut down the war machines of Europe if they so chose.  If they could act as one, World War 1, a pointless war where millions died for no reason and the collapse of Victorian civilization could have been prevented.

In 1907 the delegates adopted a resolution to oppose militarism and imperialist wars.  seven years later World War 1 broke out, and every single socialist party but one broke their pledge.  For nationalism.  They formed governments of national unity with the imperialists and redoubled their efforts to produce arms and ammunition and materiel for the war effort, for national pride and nationalism, the disease.

Only one party, out of all of the parties, had the courage to stick to their pledge and refused to support the imperialist aggression.  The Russian party, under Vladimir Lenin.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Ogaden

[Rozalia]

24 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

Let me tell you a story about globalism and nationalism.

Before World War 1 broke out, it was clear that war was brewing in Europe.  Ever since the Franco-Prussian war, nations were militarizing at an enormous pace, alliances were being formed for war and it looked inevitable.  The Second International of socialists met in Zurich in 1907 to discuss this crisis of militarism, the problem of colonialism and the oppression of Africans and Asians, and the liberation of women.  The Second International represented labor unions and millions of workers, and could have shut down the war machines of Europe if they so chose.  If they could act as one, World War 1, a pointless war where millions died for no reason and the collapse of Victorian civilization could have been prevented.

In 1907 the delegates adopted a resolution to oppose militarism and imperialist wars.  seven years later World War 1 broke out, and every single socialist party but one broke their pledge.  For nationalism.  They formed governments of national unity with the imperialists and redoubled their efforts to produce arms and ammunition and materiel for the war effort, for national pride and nationalism, the disease.

Only one party, out of all of the parties, had the courage to stick to their pledge and refused to support the imperialist aggression.  The Russian party, under Vladimir Lenin.

So... talking up Lenin and attacking those who came together for their nation's sake? Right. It might be hard to understand but you sometimes put aside your differences to tackle threats. 

Nationalism today is not the Nationalism of 1915 or 1945. Please get with the times please. 

[Ogaden]

Nationalism never changes, it's the same shit from the caveman era, where the tribe over the hill is bad because they talk funny

[Rozalia]

13 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

Nationalism never changes, it's the same shit from the caveman era, where the tribe over the hill is bad because they talk funny

Hogwash. You simply cannot compare Nationalism today to Nationalism of the past. Hardcore Ethnic Nationalists still exist of course, but they're a minority in the west (widespread as you go east though yes).

[Ogaden]

Nationalism is literally tribalism with a veneer of ideology.

World War 1 and Kenyans shooting each other over election results are morally and ideologically equivalent, one is just on a much larger scale

Edited March 20, 2018 by Ogaden

[Rozalia]

8 minutes ago, Ogaden said:

Nationalism is literally tribalism with a veneer of ideology.

World War 1 and Kenyans shooting each other over election results are morally and ideologically equivalent, one is just on a much larger scale

Again, going back to WW1. We're talking Nationalism today, current year and all that, not from way back when.

[Ogaden]

In percentage terms of human history, how long is the time span between 1918 and today, keeping in mind that people still have trouble adapting to the social changes brought about by the end of feudalism