# Will South Africa go the way of Zimbabwe? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 9, 2011, 9:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248 "2011-05-09T09:08:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/181 "2011-05-13T23:23:58Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > I just heard a report that some Chinese firms wil be managing some of the expropriated (white owned farms) in Zimbabwe. > apparently, even a dolt like Mugabe realizes that he needs food. Sad…Red China extending its influence in an Anglosphere nation… ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2011, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/182 "2011-05-13T23:27:49Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Sad…Red China extending its influence in an Anglosphere nation… Hey, they’ve showed us that you don’t need democracy to be Baller$$. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Jacquelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Le\_Jacquelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Jacquelope)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/183 "2011-05-14T02:02:00Z")
> [@Saffer](#): > > If you had posted this earlier I would have thought it a joke. Not so sure now that I have read some of your other posts. > > Are you seriously suggesting more racial segregation?:smack: I’m talking about Africa for native Africans. Those Dutch people are not native. They’re invaders from another continent. ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/184 "2011-05-14T03:32:17Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > I’m talking about Africa for native Africans. Those Dutch people are not native. They’re invaders from another continent. oh good Christ ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/185 "2011-05-14T03:54:04Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > I’m talking about Africa for native Africans. Those Dutch people are not native. They’re invaders from another continent. I understand you’re American? So, unless you’re Native American, then exactly the same can be said of you. Although I am an English-speaking South African, I have some Afrikaner ancestry. I can trace back 10 generations to people who were already living at the Cape in the late 1700s. That is longer than many Americans’ families have been in America, or many Australians’ family have been in Australia, or… you get the picture. The remainder of my response to your comment would be suitable only for the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Jacquelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Le\_Jacquelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Jacquelope)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/186 "2011-05-14T06:04:15Z")
> [@ctnguy](#): > > I understand you’re American? So, unless you’re Native American, then exactly the same can be said of you. Half of my family immigrated here from Africa; why, God only knows. The other half was dragged here as slaves. I can say with absolute confidence that one side would never have come here had there been no European settlers, and I’m willing to bet that without the Europeans here, the other half would have been unlikely to come, either. And now we get to the Native Americans. The slave side of my family fought alongside them against European settlers in Florida and other places. I’m sure you know who the Seminoles were. My family has both Native American friends and blood, too. If by some miracle the Native Americans managed to take back North America my family probably would not be among the ones that they come for. Probably. Let me put this delicately for you - your family’s and ancestors’ immigration history in Africa is absolutely, positively not similar to mine. You do not have common ground. The same _cannot_ be said of me. Your people invaded Africa. At least half of my people were forced here against their will. > [@](#): > > Although I am an English-speaking South African, I have some Afrikaner ancestry. I can trace back 10 generations to people who were already living at the Cape in the late 1700s. And that’s supposed to be significant because…? > [@](#): > > The remainder of my response to your comment would be suitable only for the Pit. Oh I’m _really_ intimidated now. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Jacquelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Le\_Jacquelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Jacquelope)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/187 "2011-05-14T06:15:36Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > oh good Christ Kicking people out seems to only be a problem when the evil darkies do it. :rolleyes: I mean, really, Europe is on the verge of trying to kick out Muslims and France is ethnic cle-er, um, kicking out the Gypsies, and none of these groups have, in a hundred years, done to Europe what the Dutch did in 10 years upon their arrival in Africa. The whole resurgence of the Right Wing in Europe is entirely due to their _fear.of. **immigrants**._ But when Africa plays that game, against a people who have brutalized them for centuries? Oh no, now that’s wrong. Rules for thee but not for me! Yeah, good _Christ_. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/188 "2011-05-14T06:25:10Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > Half of my family immigrated here from Africa; why, God only knows. The other half was dragged here as slaves. > > \ Fair enough; my argument does not apply to you personally, then. It does, though, apply to the majority of the population of the US, Canada and Australia. Are you similarly in favour of getting rid of all the people of European ancestry in those countries? > [@](#): > > And that’s supposed to be significant because…? Because of the sentence which followed, in which I compared the length of time that white people have been in South Africa to the length of time they’ve been in America. It bolsters my comparison with the US situation. But it’s not terribly important. > [@](#): > > Oh I’m _really_ intimidated now. It wasn’t supposed to be intimidating; I was just venting a little anger. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Jacquelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Le\_Jacquelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Jacquelope)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/189 "2011-05-14T06:45:44Z")
> [@ctnguy](#): > > Fair enough; my argument does not apply to you personally, then. It does, though, apply to the majority of the population of the US, Canada and Australia. Are you similarly in favour of getting rid of all the people of European ancestry in those countries? No more in favor than Sarkozy is in favor of kicking out the gypsies and banning burkas; or more than Europe is in favor of kicking out the evil Muslims. See, it seems to be just fine in Europe to have this big fat panic over the evil brown people coming into their countries and committing heinous crimes and living off welfare (which isn’t even true). Everyone’s up in arms about the immigrant problem. And don’t tell me this movement isn’t significant, because it’s driving politics all over Europe! It’s not so much that I’m in favor of kicking them out; it’s that I sympathize with the natives who want their land back. You say it’s not fair to the Europeans… but what about all those brown people whose world was taken from them? When do they ever get theirs back? Or is this “conquerors keepers losers weepers”? ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/190 "2011-05-14T08:41:14Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > No more in favor than Sarkozy is in favor of kicking out the gypsies and banning burkas; or more than Europe is in favor of kicking out the evil Muslims. > > See, it seems to be just fine in Europe to have this big fat panic over the evil brown people coming into their countries and committing heinous crimes and living off welfare (which isn’t even true). Everyone’s up in arms about the immigrant problem. And don’t tell me this movement isn’t significant, because it’s driving politics all over Europe! I don’t know quite how to interpret the first sentence, since I don’t know how much you think Sarkozy and Europe are in favour of those things. I see the point you’re making, and (to the extent that I have thought about it; I’m not particularly well-informed about contemporary European politics) I agree that _Daily Mail_-style immigrant-phobia is a worrying trend in Europe. I’m not sure, though, how it’s relevant to the South African situation. I don’t think that there’s much overlap between people who have a serious opinion about European immigration politics, and people who have a serious opinion about South African land politics overlap very much (except on this board, of course ;)). > [@](#): > > It’s not so much that I’m in favor of kicking them out; it’s that I sympathize with the natives who want their land back. > > You say it’s not fair to the Europeans… but what about all those brown people whose world was taken from them? When do they ever get theirs back? Or is this “conquerors keepers losers weepers”? I think that one does have to draw a line at some point in history where it does become “conquerors keepers, losers weepers” - otherwise you could iterate indefinitely back into history trying to redress earlier and earlier injustices. At some point you have to accept for the sake of practicality that not every wrong can be righted; otherwise you end up trying to send the Angles and the Saxons back to Germany so that you can return Britain to the Celts. Obviously, where you draw that line is a very contentious question. You may say that I am only saying this because my ancestors were on the conquering side, and I don’t suppose there is any answer I can make to that. But absolutely, it is not fair to the people whose land was taken (in any such situation, not just South Africa). And that is why I am in favour of land reform and affirmative action policies, as long as they are carried out carefully and reasonably. Because “going the way of Zimbabwe” - which I do _not_ think will happen - is not going to help anyone. If, though, by “get[ting] theirs back” you mean having a country without any significant number of white citizens, well, I reject the idea that any group is entitled in the modern age to have an ethnically-homogenous country. ---
**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:** [May 14, 2011, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/191 "2011-05-14T11:18:14Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > Infractions against citizens happen everywhere. In some countries, they are handled. I don’t care what the ANC _claims_. I don’t care what the Constitution _says_. (You know how many countries have a constitution they don’t respect? The government (under the ANC) doesn’t just pay lip service to the Constitution. Case in point: gay marriage. We have it. We have it because of a Constitutional challenge. How is that \*not \*a working Constitutional democracy? ---
**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:** [May 14, 2011, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/192 "2011-05-14T11:42:04Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > I don’t even know what your question _is_. “How, exactly, is South Africa not a democracy.” I think I’ve made that pretty plain. Not “The ANC is in charge, and they’re not nice,” because that’s not relevant. America is no less a democracy when the Reps are in charge than it is when the Dems are. South Africa is [not a one-party state](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:South_Africa_national_election_2009_ANC_vote_by_ward.svg). Absolutely, unquestionably not. > [@](#): > > You don’t take into account anything I say and then you twist my words and go off a cliff. Quoting you =/= “twisting” your words. > [@](#): > > It is. But precedent and standards show in the U.S. that when it is in the government’s interests, the property will be compensated above retail value. It’s part of a good faith effort. 😉 The SA Government doesn’t need to bend over backwards to accommodate people who _themselves_ are not bargaining in good faith. The farmers started it by demanding inflated compensation or refusing negotiation at all. Now they’ll suffer for their arrogance. Tough. Look, it’s fairly simple. **96% of commercial arable land is in the hands of White farmers**. That is wrong, however you slice it. So any reasonable steps taken to redress that? I’m OK with. Even if it means land is taken at a rate below market value (but not _too_ far), I’d be OK with it. I’d prefer the willing seller model, but if farmers aren’t going to co-operate, they’ll have to be made to. One way that I quite like is a moratorium on inheritance of White-owned farms - that on death, a white-owned farm is automatically bought by the State, which pays the estate. That breaks the chain of White ownership nicely, without depriving a current living owner of their property. ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/193 "2011-05-14T14:22:42Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > “How, exactly, is South Africa not a democracy.” I said it wasn’t a successful one. I’ve been going on for two pages. Go and read, grasshopper. > [@](#): > > America is no less a democracy when the Reps are in charge than it is when the Dems are. Yeah, because we can change things and our system makes it hard for government to squash the wee wuns. > [@](#): > > The SA Government doesn’t need to bend over backwards to accommodate people who _themselves_ are not bargaining in good faith. The farmers started it by demanding inflated compensation or refusing negotiation at all. Now they’ll suffer for their arrogance. Tough. What about all the farmers in the past that never got paid?! Tough? That’s your attitude? Blame it on whitey? :p:p:p Blame it on whites that most of the country is in poverty? That the poorest and most desperate are the ones who have not seen ANY change? Blame that on farmers? Who is running the show now, eh? Some people in South Africa are racist self serving dicks. Zuma is one of them. Botha another. But come on. Your F U rhetoric is weak. You don’t even have sources. At this point, I’m feeling so anti ANC right now that I’d do anything to get the weasels out of office. If they want to terrorize people, send them to Zimbabwe. > [@](#): > > Look, it’s fairly simple. **96% of commercial arable land is in the hands of White farmers**. That is wrong, however you slice it. So any reasonable steps taken to redress that? I’m OK with. Even if it means land is taken at a rate below market value (but not _too_ far), I’d be OK with it. Democracy at its finest. :dubious: Links? > [@](#): > > I’d prefer the willing seller model, but if farmers aren’t going to co-operate, they’ll have to be made to. How is that democracy? _Forcing_ someone to ‘sell’ you land is _not_ libertie ! > [@](#): > > One way that I quite like is a moratorium on inheritance of White-owned farms - that on death, a white-owned farm is automatically bought by the State, which pays the estate. That breaks the chain of White ownership nicely, without depriving a current living owner of their property. This Just In: The ANC, our democratic jewel of South Africa, is spewing violent anti-white rhetoric and racist policy while filling its own coffers with international aid $$. Vote for ANC if you like a good stick up your ass cause you know we do! Up Next: Angelina Jolie adopts yet ANOTHER baby! But first: _We will return after these messages brought to you by the govment._ ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/194 "2011-05-14T14:24:09Z")
> [@ctnguy](#): > > If, though, by “get[ting] theirs back” you mean having a country without any significant number of white citizens, well, I reject the idea that any group is entitled in the modern age to have an ethnically-homogenous country. A+ ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/195 "2011-05-14T14:29:09Z")
I’m curious. What happens when Whitey gets all successful in the city? Will the ANC take that, too? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/196 "2011-05-14T15:45:04Z")
What we have here is a failure to communicate. **CitizenPained** you seem to be addressing points that are not made (like in posts [153](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13793100&postcount=153), [154](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13793159&postcount=154), [168](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13796152&postcount=168)). This is a bit confusing. > [@CitizenPained](#): > > We may have differing opinions on what ‘failure’ means or what ‘legitimate’ means, but can we even agree that the direction the country is headed could be a dangerous one? **CitizenPained** , you simply don’t understand the words that you are using; it’s not coherent to force people into the role of [Alice to your Humpty Dumpty](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_Looking-Glass). Upon careful examination you will find that you are not using these words and concepts correctly: [QUOTE=CitizenPained] My objective measure is simple: Government sets out to do ABC using 123 method. 123 method was not as effective as hoped and ABC was not implemented. If I fail an exam, I fail an exam. It does not mean I won’t pass the class eventually. It just means I failed. [/QUOTE] [ [QUOTE=dictionary.com] failed state — n a weak state where social and political structures have collapsed to the point where the government has little or no control [/QUOTE] ](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/failed+state) > [@CitizenPained](#): > > I hope so. It’s a _one party system_ in the idea that it’s federally controlled by one party and it’s also a parliamentary(ish) system. The major ruling party (the ANC) gets to hand-pick the President. I understand the rationale for the major levels of government (it’s an extremely diverse nation) but I’m not sure how it will play out. Arguments of non-ANC controlled areas are that the ANC dismisses the rights and needs of the areas it does not have power…when it claims to be the people’s party. :dubious: > [@CitizenPained](#): > > Well, your entire post was your m/o. 🙂 But that’s fine. We can disagree. It’s just that history (and obvious case studies next door) mean little when a people get desperate. We won’t know if South Africa will be a one-state party until the next election or so. It’s kind of up in the air - but the current proposal of bills and rhetoric is _not_ in any way how the country should move if it wants to maintain its democratic status. [ [QUOTE=wikipedia] A single-party state, one-party system or single-party system is a type of party system government in which a single political party forms the government and no other parties are permitted to run candidates for election. [/QUOTE] ](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-party_state) > [@CitizenPained](#): > > As far as the legitimacy factor goes: South Africa’s government (and current Constitution), their ruling party (with majority vote…and power), and their leaders have not shown the rest of the world that they are to be recognized as capable, competent governing leaders of a nation that will exist (as we know it) in the far future. Or even in ten years. Let’s see. The ANC has had a stronghold. A little less than half of South Africans voted in the last election, right? Do you think the ANC will knowingly give up its power? Will we have corrupt elections in five years? [ [QUOTE=wikipedia] In political science, legitimacy is the popular acceptance of a governing law or régime as an authority. Whereas “authority” denotes a specific position in an established government, [/QUOTE] ](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)) > [@CitizenPained](#): > > What about proposals to the judiciary? Centralization of government? How is that fighting for a democratic South Africa? > [@CitizenPained](#): > > Sigh. What we you have is a party that has always been in control of the federal government. There’s no time to see democracy. The factions were united under one party and they’ve split since, but the ANC is pretty much in control. Concerning economics, education, health, etc., the ANC has had control. Get it? [ [[QUOTE=dictionary.com](http://QUOTE=dictionary.com)] de·moc·ra·cy –noun, plural -cies. 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. [/QUOTE] ]([http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/democracy](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/democracy)) > [@CitizenPained](#): > > The ANC has put a foot down (or tried to) on potential changes in the government. That’s not democracy in action. That’s tyranny. [ [[QUOTE=dictionary.com](http://QUOTE=dictionary.com)] tyr·an·ny –noun, plural -nies. 1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. 2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler. 3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler [/QUOTE] ]([http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny)) ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/197 "2011-05-14T16:06:39Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > What we have here is a failure to communicate. Thank you for this. **CitizenPained** is using lots of terms in completely non-standard and IMO nonsensical ways. Every term she used for the ANC could be applied to either major party in the US at various times over the past 50 years. And they still wouldn’t be correct. The ANC isn’t perfect, but then democracy rarely is. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Jacquelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Le\_Jacquelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Jacquelope)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/198 "2011-05-14T19:27:52Z")
> [@ctnguy](#): > > I don’t know quite how to interpret the first sentence, since I don’t know how much you think Sarkozy and Europe are in favour of those things. Sarkozy is the very man responsible for the policy of evicting Gypsies from France. [http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gccPLaJDk9QtPpgtwMKLyI51Abmw](http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gccPLaJDk9QtPpgtwMKLyI51Abmw) There’s like a billion links about Europe and the anti-immigration rage going on there. > **[Europe shuts doors to illegal immigration](https://sputnikglobe.com/20110513/164011243.html)** > > Denmark has shocked the European Commission by closing its borders without waiting for recommendations from the EU interior ministers who met on May 12, the foreign ministers who met today, or the EU leaders who will meet on June 24. [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2010/09/14/uk-europe-immigrants-analysis-idUKTRE68D1Z520100914](http://uk.reuters.com/article/2010/09/14/uk-europe-immigrants-analysis-idUKTRE68D1Z520100914) Anti-Muslim sentiments are rampant there, too: > **[Europe's Identity Crisis: A Growing anti-Muslim Sentiment throughout Europe -...](https://www.globalresearch.ca/europe-s-identity-crisis-a-growing-anti-muslim-sentiment-throughout-europe/16655)** > > It seems that the targeting of Muslims and Islam has become a kind of national theater in France. Unlike theater, however, the disturbing trend can, and will turn ugly – in fact to a degree it already has – if the French government doesn’t get a grip... If these links are considered to be biased then I can find you others. > [@](#): > > I see the point you’re making, and (to the extent that I have thought about it; I’m not particularly well-informed about contemporary European politics) I agree that _Daily Mail_-style immigrant-phobia is a worrying trend in Europe. I’m not sure, though, how it’s relevant to the South African situation. South Africa is trying to get rid of foreigners. Although not to the extent that Europe is. And the foreigners in Africa have done _far greater damage_. > [@](#): > > I think that one does have to draw a line at some point in history where it does become “conquerors keepers, losers weepers” - otherwise you could iterate indefinitely back into history trying to redress earlier and earlier injustices. At some point you have to accept for the sake of practicality that not every wrong can be righted; otherwise you end up trying to send the Angles and the Saxons back to Germany so that you can return Britain to the Celts. Obviously, where you draw that line is a very contentious question. You may say that I am only saying this because my ancestors were on the conquering side, and I don’t suppose there is any answer I can make to that. Yeah, that’s the point. Your ancestors were on the conquering side. See, here’s the problem. 1. North & South America were hit with a European settler problem. This brought disease, which killed millions; and genocides, ethnic cleansing, and mass subjugations, and now European settlers are the majority at least up North, while holding a disproportionate amount of power per capita down South. 2. The aborigines of Australia also encountered a European settler problem. Their numbers were greatly reduced by disease, the Black War genocide, etc. Now Europeans are the majority there and the aborigines are basically begging to be treated as equals on their native turf. 3. China and India both encountered a European settler problem. This wound up with India under British control and China being divvied up. Fortunately both of them threw the Europeans off their backs and regained autonomy. 4. Africa encountered a European settler problem. Even a short summary of the problems? Rape, genocide, slavery, Apartheid, the list goes on and on and on. So when the children of European settlers say “otherwise you could iterate indefinitely back into history trying to redress earlier and earlier injustices” this absolutely _reeks_ of “we conquered the world but we don’t want to give anything back”. But now let’s look at this another way, shall we? The other, less openly stated but equally popular sentiment among European settlers and their children is “if you can’t defend your land then you don’t deserve it”. Social Darwinism, the strong vs the weak, that kinda thing. Well, guess what… Africa has decided to play the strongarm card. If the Afrikaaners down there can’t defend their ill-gotten holdings in Africa, then they, too, are subject to Social Darwinism. You might know that as “Conquerors, keepers”. > [@](#): > > But absolutely, it is not fair to the people whose land was taken (in any such situation, not just South Africa). And that is why I am in favour of land reform and affirmative action policies, as long as they are carried out carefully and reasonably. Because “going the way of Zimbabwe” - which I do _not_ think will happen - is not going to help anyone. Mugabe deserves a BILLION painful deaths for his epic mismanagement of Zimbabwe. > [@](#): > > If, though, by “get[ting] theirs back” you mean having a country without any significant number of white citizens, well, I reject the idea that any group is entitled in the modern age to have an ethnically-homogenous country. No, that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking more about what China and India did. On a side note: Africa should get more control of its resources and leverage this to keep the next round of invaders at bay - China. Africa is in for yet another massive round of exploitation, this time by China, and few see it coming. ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/199 "2011-05-14T20:00:32Z")
**Orcenio** , if you want to play that game, will you at least do it right? Don’t take two quotes sand put them next to each other as though they have a relation. 1. In response to how I quantified a policy as being a failure: > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by **CitizenPained** > My objective measure is simple: > > Government sets out to do ABC using 123 method. 123 method was not as effective as hoped and ABC was not implemented. > > If I fail an exam, I fail an exam. It does not mean I won’t pass the class eventually. It just means I failed. > [@](#): > > fail·ure >    [feyl-yer] Show IPA > –noun > 1. > an act or instance of failing or proving unsuccessful; lack of success: His effort ended in failure. the campaign was a failure. > 2. > nonperformance of something due, required, or expected: a failure to do what one has promised; a failure to appear. > 3. > a subnormal quantity or quality; an insufficiency: the failure of crops. 1. But if you _want_ to talk about where I addressed the possibility of South Africa becoming a failed state, well, since you favor[Wik](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state), here’s a few things for you to chew on: > [@](#): > > [ul] > [li]loss of physical control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein,[/li][li] erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions,[/li][li] an inability to provide reasonable public services, and[/li][li] an inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.[/li][/ul] If that entry was suitable, there’s also a “Failed States Index” where South Africa is at “Warning”. Is that better for you? 😕 1. On party monopoly of government: > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by CitizenPained > I hope so. It’s a one party system **in the idea that…** But will it become a literal one party state? What did I say? I expressed concern about the ANC’s legislative agenda. I said _in the idea that_, as in, ‘when you look at it this way’. I could’ve just called it an oligarchy. Sorry. But I did clarify my statement. More than a few times. Want to put democracy to the test? Let’s see if the ANC will cede any power. 😉 > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by CitizenPained > We won’t know if South Africa will be a one-state party until the next election or so. It’s kind of up in the air - but the current proposal of bills and rhetoric is not in any way how the country should move if it wants to maintain its democratic status. Clearly we have a [dominate-party system](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant-party_system) right now. Here’s a list of other African states with [dominant party systems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant-party_system#Africa). Some of them are in not so good shape. The United States Constitution provides so many check and balances in government that is situations are nearly impossible. **IF** , say, the Democratic party rose up like a Phoenix and united the country with a 65% majority, took back the Congress, and ran the country for the next 17 years, there would still be so much political avenue for discourse (party platform, nominations, party elections, media, web, print, access to government, etc. etc.) that citizens wouldn’t be removed from the process. 1. On legitimacy and how it relates to tyranny of majority: > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by CitizenPained View Post > As far as the legitimacy factor goes: South Africa’s government (and current Constitution), their ruling party (with majority vote…and power), and their leaders have not shown the rest of the world that they are to be recognized as capable, competent governing leaders of a nation that will exist (as we know it) in the far future. Or even in ten years. Let’s see. The ANC has had a stronghold. A little less than half of South Africans voted in the last election, right? Do you think the ANC will knowingly give up its power? Will we have corrupt elections in five years? What’s your problem with this statement? I outlined my positions on _legitimacy_ a few times, because I said the world had a hard time of viewing the ANC as legitimate. Legitimate and illegitimate are technical opposites, but there’s a grey area. I gave so many reasons why…it’s been nearly every post. 😕 People in the U.S. have argued (rightfully so) that certain precedents or laws in the United States set up a case for legitimacy of government. When they are violated, it weakens the checks and balances system - our greatest democratic asset. Bush v. Gore, Guantanamo Bay, Nixon, and the 9/11 Commission are all examples of _actions_ by a government (or branch thereof) that threatened the legitimacy of the United States government. But those things have all been addressed (and still are being addressed and figured out) by citizens and government because this is a country in which citizens, should they choose to exercise it, have a strong hold on government power. They _are_ the government. When citizens and their government overreach themselves and inflict danger on the liberties of others, it is expected that SCOTUS will intervene when they have breached our social contract. Sometimes it takes awhile (e.g., Civil Rights movement), but there’s a method for rejecting tyranny of government. omg, did i JUST SAY TYRANNY? Wtf does [tyranny of government](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority) mean?! It’s a criticism of what can happen in a democracy (you know, like when it becomes and oligarchy). > [@](#): > > The phrase “tyranny of the majority” (or “tyranny of the masses”), used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule, is a criticism of the scenario in which decisions made by a majority under that system would place that majority’s interests so far above a dissenting individual’s interest that the individual would be actively oppressed, just like the oppression by tyrants and despots.[1] I think I’ve mentioned social contract theory enough that it’s obvious that people like [J.S. Mill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._10) are the kind of political philosophers that influenced me. Government must be separate from party. 1. On democracy: Democracy is a tricky topic. The definition is wide enough that one democracy is another country’s illegitimate power. So when we talk about _democracy_ in a country, a good way to measure that is by viewing _democracy in action_, or when the citizens can change the status quo without violence. (A very odd example of how a state can be democracy and still have _the rejection of democratic principles by the majority_ is Puerto Rico not wanting to be a U.S. state.) We’ve had this convo here before. Is the U.S. a democracy? Well, literally, it’s a democratic Constitutional republic. :eek: Okay. But does it have the principles of democracy? Yes. Does Iran have the principles of democracy? Well, technically. But the only way to measure it is to look at[governmental processes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy). Clearly, _my_ view of democracy is of a system that protects natural rights. > [@](#): > > Many people use the term “democracy” as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include elements such as political pluralism; equality before the law; the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances; due process; civil liberties; human rights; and elements of civil society outside the government. In the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute, but in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the dominant principle is that of parliamentary sovereignty (though in practice judicial independence is generally maintained). In other cases, “democracy” is used to mean direct democracy. Though the term “democracy” is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles are applicable to private organizations and other groups as well. > > Majority rule is often listed as a characteristic of democracy. However, it is also possible for a minority to be oppressed by a “tyranny of the majority” in the absence of governmental or constitutional protections of individual and/or group rights. An essential part of an “ideal” representative democracy is competitive elections that are fair both substantively[15] and procedurally.[16] Furthermore, freedom of political expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are considered to be essential, so that citizens are adequately informed and able to vote according to their own best interests as they see them.[17][18] It has also been suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of individuals to participate freely and fully in the life of their society.[19] Now, South Africa’s government is a far cry from direct democracy. Okay, we don’t have one either, but we also don’t have a system in which a party runs on its platform and\* then\* places people in power with no oversight. Many parliamentary systems have placed rules in place to ensure that their head of state is known by the people. :eek: \*\* Is South Africa’s [government](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_South_Africa) democratic? Yes in some ways and no in others. But it is it a _stable_ democracy? I argue **no** , for two main reasons:\*\* 1.) The power of the government to take away the liberties of its citizens (tyranny of majority) 2.) Its 17 year history of being a system in which one party has majority power and rule that has yet to find a way to get itself out of the mess it was in when it started. ^^ Youngest democracies are the most unstable ones. South Africa is noooo exception. It the only parliamentary system in the world (that I know of - I welcome corrections so we can do some comparative analysis here) where the head of government and the head of state are combined. :eek: These are political science ideas. They do change a little over time and some applications cannot always be set in stone. However, the phrases I used were completely in line with any political science classroom in the United States that values itself to be above Mickey Mouse University. Now that you have had some fun playing Webster, do you want to actually discuss _political science_ or not? ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2011, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248/200 "2011-05-14T20:04:46Z")
> [@Le\_Jacquelope](#): > > South Africa is trying to get rid of foreigners. I know I’ve been told not to engage with you, but define “foreigner”. You are still a foreigner in the U.S. since you’re not purely native. (Newsflash: Do you know how many people in the U.S. have **zero** black, native, or South American history? 😕😕) The Ute in Southwest Colorado are foreigners because they occupy a land that wasn’t always theirs…is that correct? So what do you propose we do with our population? Give ‘land back’ to any ‘pure’ ethnic group that had an original claim? :smack: And the rest of the population? Do they go live in an ocean? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-south-africa-go-the-way-of-zimbabwe/581248.md?page=11)