South Africa 'draws up a list of almost 200 farms it will seize from white farmers' as ANC head says - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14940996
Beren wrote:Sorry Ter, but we don't let foreign farmers have that much of our land. Hungarian land is for Hungarians!


I wouldn't be surprised if Hungary and Poland don't actually follow Russia's lead on this. I think they would take Afrikaner refugees just to piss off Merkel and the EU.
#14941002
Victoribus Spolia wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Hungary and Poland don't actually follow Russia's lead on this. I think they would take Afrikaner refugees just to piss off Merkel and the EU.

Maybe they could settle down if they bought "settlement bonds" for some hundreds of thousands of euros. I wonder if the programme is still alive, though. :lol:
#14941008
Victoribus Spolia wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Hungary and Poland don't actually follow Russia's lead on this. I think they would take Afrikaner refugees just to piss off Merkel and the EU.


The silly part about this is that Afrikaners are blamed for living on African land but at the same time they are blamed if they choose emigration from South Africa. No matter what they do they are criticised for it.
#14941021
Beren wrote:What if you posted something else than bullshit for once? :lol:
I'm sorry Beren, perhaps mention of Serbs might had been too offensive for you. Will Czech or Slovens be a better option, they are Catholics themselves after all?

We can start with couple of farms at first.
#14941023
Albert wrote:I'm sorry Beren, perhaps mention of Serbs might had been too offensive for you. Will Czech or Slovens be a better option, they are Catholics themselves after all?

We can start with couple of farms at first.

Sorry Albert, but most Hungarians don't freak out if Serbs are being mentioned, it's rather the other way around I guess. :lol:

However, none of that peoples ever lived here. I never ever heard anyone making such claims, you're literally the first one, so it must be utter bullshit, like your analogy between Hungary and South Africa is utter bullshit too. You clearly don't know anything about Hungarian history, not to mention pre-feudal history that happened more than 1,000 years ago, so you invented and spread your own bullshit version to troll me off-topic. Maybe that could be offensive, but it's rather pathetic I think.
#14941029
Drlee wrote:We just have to remember that it is revenge, not justice.

Right. The black government values revenge over justice, the white landowners value privilege over justice -- and the black government will simply transfer landowner privilege from whites to blacks. There is no chance of justice, and SA will go the way of Zimbabwe. Take it to the bank.
#14941031
@Sivad

You clearly don’t know what it means to be colonized or what colonization. Having citizenship doesn’t mean that you are no longer colonized. Indians in British India were considered to be British citizens yet you would have to be retarded to argue that the relationship between Indian British citizens and native British citizens wasn’t unequal.

There is no such thing as a fair share if no one has any right to land. It’s like saying that no one has a right to the sun except their fair share. It is impossible to own the sun in the first place so it would be contradictory to state that you can only have your fair share of it which assumes that you are capable of ownership.
#14941034
@Albert

You don’t need to be colonized to know what colonialism fucking is. If you read the definition you would know that having citizenship has jackshit to do with colonialism.

Also I lived under a western puppet which isn’t colonialism but it’s still imperialism.

@Suntzu

So you’re implying that no one can truly own land? Wow Suntzu, I never knew you were against land property rights!

Also the government has right to all land within a nation. People own nothing. If Native Americans want their land back, they need to fight for it.
#14941055
Oxymandias wrote:@Sivad

You clearly don’t know what it means to be colonized or what colonization. Having citizenship doesn’t mean that you are no longer colonized. Indians in British India were considered to be British citizens yet you would have to be retarded to argue that the relationship between Indian British citizens and native British citizens wasn’t unequal.


Obviously nominal citizenship or unequal citizenship isn't actual full citizenship. Native Americans have full citizenship in the US.

There is no such thing as a fair share if no one has any right to land.


I never said there was no right, just that there is no right beyond what's fair. I don't think there is any absolute right to any specific land, just a general right to what's fair and reasonable. The Natives had no right to exclude the rest of the world from settling the Americas just like the Europeans would of had no right to exclude Native Americans from settling Europe if history had gone differently. The Western Hemisphere did not belong to any one people and still doesn't.
#14941189
Beren wrote:Sorry Ter, but we don't let foreign farmers have that much of our land. Hungarian land is for Hungarians!


'Hungarian' land that was conquered by some Hussars coming from the East. Damned conquerors, squatting on SLAVIC land.

The Western Hemisphere did not belong to any one people and still doesn't.


No, it's SLAVIC land because they were in closer proximity. It's Slavic by mere virtue.

I'm just a bit confused about ownership here. It seems that there is no one reason of who own's the land but... who you think should own it?
#14941192
@anasawad @Pants-of-dog

I don’t think they his this is true. Pretty much everyone is South Africa is descended from settlers. Settlers from Dutch, British, Dutch slaves from India, Indonesia,. Migrants from the Congo and inner Africa.

https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa ... -sa-366860

There were contests and displaced people @anasawad bur those people are gone just like countless others. I mean I am just native Persians displaced some tribe at some point. Everyone did.

@Pants-of-dog lumping all blacks into one group is strange as you are always at pains to point out native Americans are not. Also, your core argument for those is that there are continuous First Nations that have a case to answer. There is no such case in sa at the group or individual level.

Since you two literally always take the side of the non European, i suspect the position is a little neejerk. As I said, I get the concept of fixing inequality but this is ethnic nationalism and probably racism. Plenty of black individuals and sub ethnic black groups enriched themselves under zuma. Why not target them?
#14941194
layman wrote:@Pants-of-dog lumping all blacks into one group is strange as you are always at pains to point out native Americans are not. Also, your core argument for those is that there are continuous First Nations that have a case to answer. There is no such case in sa at the group or individual level.


It's because he's racist? "All blacks are the same".

It really seems like this has become a race for who is the most oppressed race and how that grants rights by virtue of skin color.
#14941202
layman wrote:Well, much of the land in Scotland is uninhabited as in no one lives there and it is wilderness.

The real question is when a border. Becomes valid and sovereign surely ?

What did Africa’s borders actually look like when the white man arrived? Was any of it free for grabs?

When is any land free for grabs? Many uninhabited islands were taken by far of maritime powers, only for more local countries to demand them by reason of geography. The Falkland is a case in point as it isn’t really that close to Argentina either. The argument often comes down to who inhabited it first and whether it was a settlement or just a lame outpost.


After all the battle of justice, it seems like it boils down to "might makes right" and "I make the rights of what is right". This is why I feel that the world is becoming more nationalistic because institutions that were built for world unity are breaking down because the world is divided, and always was.

After WW2, the West was hung over from Nazism and fear of nationalism. Turns out that other countries never had such a big problem with it and are taking advantage of this guilt, and I think "the white world" has had enough.
#14941214
@layman

I don’t think they his this is true. Pretty much everyone is South Africa is descended from settlers. Settlers from Dutch, British, Dutch slaves from India, Indonesia,. Migrants from the Congo and inner Africa.

I know, I believe I quoted or stated this in my post in the first half.

There were contests and displaced people @anasawad bur those people are gone just like countless others. I mean I am just native Persians displaced some tribe at some point. Everyone did.

Yup. We call those modern day Pakistanis and Afghanis. :D :p
And true, there were contests over lands in South Africa, which I did put in my post, and as stated earlier, most of the contesting factions no longer exist either by being wiped out or by being assimilated into bigger groups throughout history, the only ones who still didn't are the Boers.

lumping all blacks into one group is strange as you are always at pains to point out native Americans are not. Also, your core argument for those is that there are continuous First Nations that have a case to answer. There is no such case in sa at the group or individual level.

This is probably not meant for me. but either way, I didn't lump all black people together as obvious by my statements.

Since you two literally always take the side of the non European, i suspect the position is a little neejerk. As I said, I get the concept of fixing inequality but this is ethnic nationalism and probably racism. Plenty of black individuals and sub ethnic black groups enriched themselves under zuma. Why not target them?

This is where you're wrong. I don't always take the side of non-Europeans, infact quite a good number of my positions are pro-European, (though to be fair usually not the Brits but more so either Slavs or even the Dutch in Netherlands or Greeks and Italians :p ). But, when it comes to things regarding colonialism and imperialism, I will take the position not of whom ever the non-Europeans are in the issue but in accordance to what I believe we would have or did in face of similar circumstances. By we I mean both Iranians and Lebanese people.

So in the case of South Africa as it is the example in the thread;
First point, land.
Lebanese people never gave up their land, for thousands of years and on going the various Lebanese tribes and factions have constantly fought to maintain their lands as theirs, the Ottomans tried to take over Lebanese ports and lands and they fought for centuries against a perpetual asymmetric war the Lebanese factions fought against the empire until it could no longer keep going and stopped trying. The Syrians tried to take over Lebanon and annex the lands and they also faced constant war and when they withdrew, Lebanese tribes funneled tons of weapons to ignite a civil war in Syria to insure they don't try again. The Israelis the same but were kicked and Israel maintains a military occupation on the Sheba farms whom belongs to Lebanese people, as long as it stays occupied your grandchildren will hear about wars between Lebanon and Israel and wont stop until its back.
The same for Iranians, Iranian land will only belong to Iranians and we're welling to do whatever it takes to insure that. Heck the whole conflict between the US and Iran started because Iranians refuse to relinquish sovereignty over their lands and resources.
The only way you could take land and keep it from either Lebanon or Iran is if you integrated so well into society that you become one of us.
And it did happen before BTW;
For Lebanon, many of the crusaders integrated so well into society that they were allowed to stay and now effectively as Lebanese as everyone else irregardless of their origin and how they came to the country. And For Iran, the various Turkic tribes that moved into the region and even conquered much of it in many occasions integrated so well into Persian societies that they're just as Persian as everyone else in Iran and still hold the lands they took.
So its not a theoretical framework 'm talking about, its generally how both Iranians and Lebanese people viewed their rights to sovereignty over their lands for thousands of years and ongoing.
We're going to apply that same standard to south Africa. If the Dutch boers don't integrate into society in south Africa and become on and the same with the rest, then they shouldn't keep any of the land they took, irregardless of how many generations have gone.
Does this mean there should be crimes done to them ? No, not necessarily; nontheless the nations in South Africa should never relinquish their sovereignty over the lands as it'll make a dangerous precedent and so they have to do what it takes to keep it. If the Boers integrated into their societies and stopped isolating themselves and effectively maintaining the status of foreign settlers then 'll call it racism and agree its bad, If they didn't, then they shouldn't keep the lands.

For Zuma, thats corruption and its an entirely different topic. But yes If you followed my posts regarding that type of actions, I do believe those guys should be punished (killed off mainly) and the wealth they unjustly took from the people returned to the people.
#14941233
We're going to apply that same standard to south Africa. If the Dutch boers don't integrate into society in south Africa and become on and the same with the rest, then they shouldn't keep any of the land they took, irregardless of how many generations have gone.


Hopefully they don't apply that same standard. Like Lebanese culture, I don't think this South African culture must be anything special to be integrated with because it might've happened already. I mean, looking at your junk heap now, why would the Boers want to do that to themselves? :?: :excited:
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 16

Doesn't he have billions in Truth social (you pos[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]

Based on what? On simple economics. and in t[…]