# South Africa, better or worse? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2006, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968 "2006-03-19T03:58:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/1 "2006-03-19T03:58:33Z")
Obviously [influenced by this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=363292). There was once a country with oppressive quasi-fascistic regime, an international pariah, subjected to sanctions by most countries; the country that was considered a blemish upon the world, where regime change was absolutely imperative and no compromises were possible. That country, of course, was the [South African Republic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Republic). After apartheid regime gradually relinquished power, the virtual civil war ensued, primarily [between Zulus and Xhosas](http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/data/safzulu.htm), replete with horific atrocities and mass slaughter. > [@](#): > > Violence occurred mainly between Zulu/IFP and Xhosa/ANC. In four years of violence leading up to the dismantling of apartheid, 4000 people died in the violence. Between 1990-1994, up to 20,000 had died, and between the elections of April 1994 and June 1995, an additional 1100 perished in violence. The new Republic of South Africa was [taken over by crime and violence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_africa). > [@](#): > > According to a survey for the period 1998 - 2000 compiled by the United Nations, South Africa was ranked first for murder by firearm (both absolute and per capita) and rape per capita. It was also number two for assault and murder (by all means) per capita. Things are still pretty bad, as far as security situation is concerned. Considering all this, was it worth to dismantle apartheid? If yes, why to have second thoughts about removal of Saddam in Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/2 "2006-03-19T04:30:08Z")
Firstly in the second part of your post comparing two totally different things the kind of sectarian slaughter going in Iraq cannot be compared to the rise in conventional crime in South Africa (primarily of course because there has also been a huge rise in conventional crime in Iraq, as well, its just lost in the general slaughter) Actually the comparison is very good one. Before the collapse of the Aparteit regime the considered opinion was civil war was inevitable, because of the kind of inter-tribal violence you describe (which was encoraged by factions within the white security forces, who wanted to prevoke a civil war). But because the regime was brought down from within (the regime of sanctions certainly helped of course), and the actions of politicains like Mandela it was able peacfully transition to democracy. The rival factions were brought into the political process and violence died down as after of the election(5000 a year before the election, 1000 year afterwards) , as your quote points out (unlike in Iraq where sectarian slaugher has INCREASED after the various elections). This WOULD never have happened if an outside power had invaded South Africa and deposed the regime by force. Just as in Iraq people in the White establishment would have viewed those who cooperated with the occupiers as collaborators (just as Sunni extremists view Sunnis who take part in the political process as collaborators). And the polical process would be doomed from start. In the future when pro-war types start saying “its not our fault Iraq is such a mess, it was a power keg just waiting to blow-up, etc…”. I will be sure to point out South Africa as to why “yes it is our fault”. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/3 "2006-03-19T05:44:21Z")
Great post **griffin1977** , if no one has done so: welcome to the SDMB. While the problems are serious, SA is not in the level of Iraq, like \*\*griffin1977 \*\* mentions, there was no need to invade to get a regime change: > **[AEGIS - Experts in Security, Investigations, Training And Consulting](https://aegis.com/)** > > AEGIS Private Security & Investigations is a full-service security, investigative, training & consulting solution. Our approach is focused on our clients' unique needs. > [@](#): > > The country is still saddled with deep-seated problems, from persistent poverty to runaway AIDS, crime and joblessness. But it is a peaceful and democratic place, the rule of law is respected, the economy is stable and growing, and its people just held fair national elections–all remarkable achievements, particularly in troubled Africa. > > Even more important, South Africans of all skin colors are optimistic about the country’s future. In polls taken to mark the 10-year anniversary of the country’s multiracial democracy, more than two-thirds of South Africans say they are encouraged about the future. > > “The country has improved, slowly, not too fast, but it has improved. And it will improve more,” said Joyce Mulemba, 35, a student nurse living in a shack in Diepsloot. > > In 1994, as South Africa prepared for its first multiracial elections, optimism was scarce. Rival political factions were battling in the country’s townships, leaving scores dead. Whites, many preparing to flee the country, worried about a race war and black retribution; the country’s black soon-to-be rulers feared that white security forces might come out of their barracks to stage a coup. > > Instead, power changed hands peacefully. > > White security police saluted Mandela, the country’s new president. Mandela donned the green jersey of the Afrikaner-dominated Springbok rugby team, sending a powerful symbol of reconciliation. > > The country’s international isolation under apartheid-era sanctions came to an end, and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission was set up to delve into the country’s brutal apartheid past and start the healing process. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/4 "2006-03-19T09:42:21Z")
Related threads: > **[Why are white people being oppressed in Zimbabwe, but not in South Africa?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=176914)** > > Ever since Rhodesia’s all-white government was overthrown, and the country became Zimbabwe, we’ve been hearing accounts of the Mugabe government oppressing and dispossessing white landowners. But we haven’t heard any such stories out of South Africa... > **[Why have things gone so differently in Zimbabwe and South Africa?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=310741)** > > I heard a news story on the radio this morning about two British journalists who are on trial for the crime of reporting on last week’s elections in Zimbabwe without first registering with the government. ... And there was one more I remember starting but the search engine doesn’t turn it up . . . lost in the “Winter of Our Missed Content”? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/5 "2006-03-19T09:49:38Z")
Found it! [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184292](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184292) ---
**Author:** ![FWorld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FWorld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FWorld)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/6 "2006-03-19T11:49:15Z")
I would say that people would continue to have second thoughts about Iraq for several reasons: First, the initital case presented by Bush and Blair for the war, the WMD. That allegation proved to be false, and resulted in great loss of credibility for both leaders. As the search for the WMD continued and failed, it provided much fodder for discussion. Second, the actual level of involvement of the countries in question. No one sent troops to fight the white SA security forces. But Iraq was invaded, at a great cost to Iraq and the invaders. Nations that sent troops will contiue to question that decision so long as the suffering of those troops, or in many cases their misdeeds, fill the news. Third, can the newbie make an Old Doper Joke and say Hi, Opal? Fourth, American and Iraqi mismanagement of the country will continue to fuel debate, more so since America is do deeply involved in it and since it continues to make such promises of a rosy post invasion Iraq. Fifth, the Iraqi case came in the context of the war on terror and unprecedented (un)Islamic terrorism. As these two continue, the impact of the invasion of Iraq will remain an issue. Sixth, George Bush has become such a polarising figure in America that the sinlge most significant decision of his adminstration has to be a subject of debate. ---
**Author:** ![FWorld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@FWorld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FWorld)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/7 "2006-03-19T12:10:31Z")
[QUOTE=me] Fourth, American and Iraqi mismanagement of the country will continue to fuel debate, more so since America is do deeply involved in it and since it continues to make such promises of a rosy post invasion Iraq. [/QUOTE] Maybe that should be since America **was** so deeply involved and **had made** such rosy promises etc… ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/8 "2006-03-19T13:51:51Z")
[QUOTE=New Iskander] Considering all this, was it worth to dismantle apartheid? If yes, why to have second thoughts about removal of Saddam in Iraq? [/QUOTE] Could you spell out exactly what parallels you see? Because I’m not really seeing them. After all, if you’re just founding the comparison on civil war, why not analogize with the US Civil War? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/9 "2006-03-19T18:58:13Z")
The rest of the post has been dealt with quite nicely by others, but to answer your questions: [QUOTE=New Iskander] was it worth to dismantle apartheid? [/QUOTE] Hell, yes! [QUOTE=New Iskander] If yes, why to have second thoughts about removal of Saddam in Iraq? [/QUOTE] What’s going on in Iraq is a lot more than just the “removal of Saddam”. South Africa was never occupied by an brutalising outside force the way current Iraq is. Makes a lot of difference. In fact, it’s the continued occupation of the country that makes it _not_ South Africa. Leave, let them have their civil war, maybe they’ll turn out like us at the end. We’re doing OK. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/10 "2006-03-19T19:13:57Z")
[QUOTE=GIGObuster] …there was no need to invade (the South Africa) to get a regime change… [/QUOTE] Exactly right, however it only serves to reinforce my point. It was possible to force SA National Party to relinquish power without invasion, just as it was possible Sandinistas and Milosevic to relinquish power without invasion. It was not possible to remove Saddam without invasion. In South Africa, Nicaragua and Serbia, the movement was slowly toward free elections, that eventually resulted in regime changes. The last elections under Saddam resulted in 99% approval (or was it 98%?). Saddam was determined to stay no matter what. [QUOTE=FWorld] No one sent troops to fight the white SA security forces. But Iraq was invaded, at a great cost to Iraq and the invaders. Nations that sent troops will contiue to question that decision so long as the suffering of those troops, or in many cases their misdeeds, fill the news. [/QUOTE] Fair enough. Iraq must serve as a reminder of our own shortcomings. We are not perfect. We do have brutal and sadistic prison wardens, as reinforced by Abu Ghraib. We do have an abundance of egotistic bumbling fools at all walks of business, as reinforced by multiple Iraq reconstruction fiascos. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/11 "2006-03-19T19:52:08Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Found it! [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184292](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184292) [/QUOTE] Must say, this thread of yours is a real gem, everyone should read it. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/12 "2006-03-19T20:02:42Z")
[QUOTE=New Iskander] Exactly right, however it only serves to reinforce my point. It was possible to force SA National Party to relinquish power without invasion, just as it was possible Sandinistas and Milosevic to relinquish power without invasion. It was not possible to remove Saddam without invasion. [/quote] Of course your reinforced point here makes sense after the goal posts were moved. Remember that your point was that having second thoughts about the removal of Saddam in Iraq meant that we should also have second thoughts about SA, as it turns out your analogy was silly. > [@](#): > > In South Africa, Nicaragua and Serbia, the movement was slowly toward free elections, that eventually resulted in regime changes. The last elections under Saddam resulted in 99% approval (or was it 98%?). Saddam was determined to stay no matter what. And yet there was a big chance to pull a Haiti maneuver in Iraq: [http://www.usembassy.it/file2003\_03/alia/a3031607.htm](http://www.usembassy.it/file2003_03/alia/a3031607.htm) Powell had experience with that, as Haiti showed, there was an opportunity to get Sadamm out as soon it was clear the invasion was coming. (IIRC maintaining contact with the Haitian dictators paid off when Powell showed them, almost in real time, the amount of troops and firepower coming in, they accepted exile then) [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9864433/](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9864433/) I’m convinced if a leader was not hell bent on invading, a “Haiti solution” would have occurred, but I’m now more convinced that other factors entered into the decision to invade, most of them criminal IMHO. > [@](#): > > Fair enough. > > Iraq must serve as a reminder of our own shortcomings. We are not perfect. We do have brutal and sadistic prison wardens, as reinforced by Abu Ghraib. We do have an abundance of egotistic bumbling fools at all walks of business, as reinforced by multiple Iraq reconstruction fiascos. Indeed, keep that in mind before you post misleading OP’s like the one in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/13 "2006-03-19T21:07:20Z")
[QUOTE=MrDibble] Leave, let them have their civil war, maybe they’ll turn out like us at the end. We’re doing OK. [/QUOTE] But SA **avoided** civil war. What would the country be like now if it had taken a civil war (or foreign invasion) to end apartheid? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/14 "2006-03-19T21:33:50Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] But SA **avoided** civil war. What would the country be like now if it had taken a civil war (or foreign invasion) to end apartheid? [/QUOTE] Civil wars in Africa tend to last a long time and they virtually destroy any economical progress. [http://www.ecunews.org/articles/display.shtml?04-0249](http://www.ecunews.org/articles/display.shtml?04-0249) > [@](#): > > Once one of the world’s most bitterly divided countries, it narrowly avoided civil war, dismantled the officially-sanctioned racist policy of apartheid, it launched a non-racial democracy and now lays claim to Africa’s most robust economy. I do think the white folks in SA did foresee what civil war could get them. _“Then we could send our ambassador over there and he could pull President Botha aside and say, 'P.W.–let me talk to you for a minute. You know you’ve got 2 million white people and 8 million black people in this country? Right? Does the name Custer mean anything to you, son?”_ - Robin Williams ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/15 "2006-03-19T21:37:09Z")
[QUOTE=New Iskander] In South Africa, \*\*Nicaragua \*\* and Serbia, the movement was slowly toward free elections, that eventually resulted in regime changes. [/QUOTE] I wouldn’t exactly quote Nicaragua as a successful international intervention. The US opposition to the Sandanistas resulted in a savage civil war, in which the US supported some of the most increbily brutal terrorist insurgents in the region’s history (Selling arms to terrorists sponsors in Iran, and funding the drug trade, in the process). And the downfall of Milosovich was not the result of free elections, it was a popular uprising. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2006, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/16 "2006-03-19T21:52:02Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] But SA **avoided** civil war. What would the country be like now if it had taken a civil war (or foreign invasion) to end apartheid? [/QUOTE] Not a nice place. Sorry. I was incompletely quoting the OP. Make that “_virtual_ civil war”. My emphasis. Or think of it as a sarcastic way of saying that any sectarian conflict pre-elections in South Africa was about as close to a civil war as a Bloods vs. Cripps gunfight. What’s happening _now_ in Iraq does not compare, it’s so much worse.. Hell, most days I can walk to the corner store without getting murdered or raped more than once, maybe twice. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/17 "2006-03-20T02:30:26Z")
[QUOTE=griffin1977] I wouldn’t exactly quote Nicaragua as a successful international intervention. The US opposition to the Sandanistas resulted in a savage civil war, in which the US supported some of the most increbily brutal terrorist insurgents in the region’s history (Selling arms to terrorists sponsors in Iran, and funding the drug trade, in the process). [/QUOTE] All true, but they have democracy **now.** So, in the long run . . . ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/18 "2006-03-20T02:38:45Z")
[QUOTE=GIGObuster] Remember that your point was that having second thoughts about the removal of Saddam in Iraq meant that we should also have second thoughts about SA, as it turns out your analogy was silly … keep that in mind before you post misleading OP’s like the one in this thread. [/QUOTE] I see I didn’t make my position crystal clear. Change of regime in South Africa was a right thing to do. Change of regime in Iraq was a right thing to do. Clear now? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/19 "2006-03-20T02:49:33Z")
[QUOTE=New Iskander] I see I didn’t make my position crystal clear. Change of regime in South Africa was a right thing to do. Change of regime in Iraq was a right thing to do. Clear now? [/QUOTE] As the evidence has demonstrated, **Iraq was not the right thing to do** , Clear now? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2006, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968/20 "2006-03-20T02:55:03Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] All true, but they have democracy **now.** So, in the long run . . . [/QUOTE] They had democracy THEN, or at least were trying their damndest, in spite of U.S. interference. Daniel Ortega was elected twice, and lost power in the third election he contested. The election he lost wasn’t anything new in Nicaragua; it was the regularly scheduled vote. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/south-africa-better-or-worse/348968.md?page=2)