Thread: Hypocrisy?

You be the judge. How does this video strike you?

Comments?

(Pay attention to the minister's words)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFj0HdW2iDs

Whoever is the richest rules the day. Black or white, white or black, it's the rich who are removed from poverty and don't really care about either group.

Human nature doesn't change. Power changes hands throughtout history and the richest win everytime.

Originally Posted by CCUSA

Whoever is the richest rules the day. Black or white, white or black, it's the rich who are removed from poverty and don't really care about either group.

Human nature doesn't change. Power changes hands throughtout history and the richest win everytime.

I totally agree.

Originally Posted by CCUSA

Whoever is the richest rules the day. Black or white, white or black, it's the rich who are removed from poverty and don't really care about either group.

Human nature doesn't change. Power changes hands throughout history and the richest win every time.

I don't think the argument is that abstract. This video is about a rich land that belonged to a people before invaders entered in and raped, pillaged and burned it. Now that the "tables have turned", the video approaches the subject as if these people who benefited from the national exploits are somehow innocent bystanders.

The Minister summed it up very nicely.

Originally Posted by TheFomorian

I don't think the argument is that abstract. This video is about a rich land that belonged to a people before invaders entered in and raped, pillaged and burned it. Now that the "tables have turned", the video approaches the subject as if these people who benefited from the national exploits are somehow innocent bystanders.
The Minister summed it up very nicely.

What you've said reminds me exactly of what the reconquistas are saying vis-a-vis the US except they omit the part of stealing the land from the Native Americans.

I don't think racism and bigotry are ever justifiable. It's hypocrisy to take the moral and ethical high ground if you practice racism and bigotry. I feel affirmative action is nothing but approved racism. I didn't really see any proof that the government of South Africa was oppressing the white minority. Hopefully ethnic cleansing won't be an aspect of S. Africa's future.

Behold your future if the invasion is not stopped. Most of the blacks now in South Africa were imported from other African countries as cheap labor. There were not that many blacks originally in South Africa. In the Cape Town area the natives had more brown colored skin, they were decimated pretty much the same way American Indians were.

Originally Posted by Sam-I-am

What you've said reminds me exactly of what the reconquistas are saying vis-a-vis the US except they omit the part of stealing the land from the Native Americans.

While there may be parallels, the intricate diverging points clearly outweigh addressing the two countries' history as congruent in the scope
of invading Europeans.

I don't think racism and bigotry are ever justifiable. It's hypocrisy to take the moral and ethical high ground if you practice racism and bigotry.

Agreed.

I feel affirmative action is nothing but approved racism.

This is a common point brought up by those that have lived "the good life" under either apartheid or Jim Crow. But I don't draw a link between
apartheid and affirmative action. In the video people were starting businesses and free from the strain of European domination. And naturally the workforce became more reflective of the population.

I didn't really see any proof that the government of South Africa was oppressing the white minority.

Neither did I but that didn't stop those people's charges of discrimination.

Hopefully ethnic cleansing won't be an aspect of S. Africa's future.

I hope not.

Originally Posted by Bowman

Behold your future if the invasion is not stopped. Most of the blacks now in South Africa were imported from other African countries as cheap labor. There were not that many blacks originally in South Africa. In the Cape Town area the natives had more brown colored skin, they were decimated pretty much the same way American Indians were.

Forgive me if I don't bow to your obvious superior knowledge of Africa, it's culture and her people.
But your baseless pontification on the subject is "amazing"!

On the other hand, I did ask for your "thoughts".

Originally Posted by TheFomorian

about a rich land that belonged to a people before invaders entered in and raped, pillaged and burned it. Now that the "tables have turned"

I thought at first you were describing Rhodesia/Zimbabwe. The tables have turned there as well. And what an African run communist paradise it has become.

Originally Posted by Owen_Bucks

I thought at first you were describing Rhodesia/Zimbabwe. The tables have turned there as well. And what an African run communist paradise it has become.

Three points:

#1. The name of the country is Zimbabwe. You have had since April 18, 1980 until now to get to learn the name. It has been over 27 years! Why the resistance to calling an African nation by it's name?

#2. Since you exposed your motivation in an almost Euro-textbook fashion, your credibility, with me at least, is worthless. Of course that declaration doesn't carry any weight, but I just thought I'd let you know before you waste your time trying to reply to me.

#3. Not one person mentioned Zimbabwe, either in the video or post comments. Why don't you stick to the subject of this thread?