South Africa - A ticking time bomb

Last year i commented on the Terre'blanche murder case telling people to listen out for Julius Malema. Well he has just been re-elected ANC youth league president, in his acceptance speech he vowed that he would retake land without compensation, nationalise the mines and nationalise the banks into one state bank.

first of all, encouraging land grabs is what Mugabe did and look at the mess Zimbabwe is in now.

Nationalising the mines is madness, i live in SA as a contract worker, every government run municipality is indebted and crumbling over mismanagement and major corruption so if these clowns take over the mines they will effectively become disfunctional due to lack of maintenance just like the SA roads.

nationalising the banks to make a state bank, more madness. SA has a very good financial system that did not crumble like the Irish banks during the financial meltdown due to SA's excellent financial regulator.

Malema wins support by telling his supports that he will share the wealth, that he will take the white mans wealth and re-distribute. Very communist thinking. i have been here 2 and a half years and it is plane to see if the white and indian people leave in the morning, SA would effectively collapse. All these promises come from Malema, a guy on the equivalent of 2500 euro a month but owns a nice big house in Sandton ( richest square mile in africa), drives a flash car, have a strong security ( i think 6 bodyguards), has a 25000 euro watch, need i go on, i think you will get the picture.

The rest of the world need to voice concerns over this fool as the last decent democracy in Africa will become the next dictatorship failed state just like Zimbabwe ( which was the bread basket of Africa).

here is a few of his latest outbursts.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Malema-warns-ANC-leaders-20110619-2

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Safeguard-yourselves-farmers-told-20110619

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Malema-warns-ANC-leaders-20110619


also this is the same guy who refuses to stop singing shoot the boer. Now i know Irish people sing struggle songs but just imagine at a FF, FG or even SF public rally that there leaders started singing struggle songs, there would be uproar. what is more frightening about Malema singing this song is he is a person of major influence. South African Afrikaaners are calling is a genocide about the amount of farmers being murdered, by the way boer means farmer. Read this

http://afrikaner-genocide-achives.blogspot.com/

Einhard

Deleted User wrote: »

The rest of the world need to voice concerns over this fool as the last decent democracy in Africa will become the next dictatorship failed state just like Zimbabwe ( which was the bread basket of Africa).

Don't have time to respond fully to your post, but the notion that SA is the "the last decent democracy in Africa" is nonsense, and could be seen as indicative of a less enlightened agenda than concern for democracy on the continent.

Einhard

Einhard wrote: »

Don't have time to respond fully to your post, but the notion that SA is the "the last decent democracy in Africa" is nonsense, and could be seen as indicative of a less enlightened agenda than concern for democracy on the continent.

Name one that is not riddled with corruption, i am curious

Jelle1880

I fully know what the white people did in South Africa during the Apartheid, but what has been going on there for years now is nothing short of black people taking revenge, assaulting the Boer communities all the time.
It's bordering on a civil war.

FTA69

Deleted User wrote: »

Name one that is not riddled with corruption, i am curious

Botswana wouldn't be the worst, and is probably more stable than South Africa nowadays.

Einhard

Deleted User wrote: »

Name one that is not riddled with corruption, i am curious

Well, first of all, demoncracy and corruption are far from mutually exclusive. One only has to look at Ireland to see that, let alone the likes of Greece and Italy, both democratic states, and both historically mired in corruption.

But I'll take the bait anyway- Botswana is ranked 33rd in Transpareny International's Corruption Perception Index. Israel and Spain rank joint 30th, Portugal at 32nd. Mauritius ranks above Poland; both of those countries rank ahead of South Africa, that "last decent democracy" of yours. Italy is 67th, Greece 78th; Ghana and rwanda 67th and 68th respectively.

So, quite clearly, not only are there several examples of well-functioning democracies in Africa, those same democracies rank ahead of several European counterparts in their lack of corruption.

But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way or anything...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

Einhard

Einhard wrote: »

Well, first of all, demoncracy and corruption are far from mutually exclusive. One only has to look at Ireland to see that, let alone the likes of Greece and Italy, both democratic states, and both historically mired in corruption.

But I'll take the bait anyway- Botswana is ranked 33rd in Transpareny International's Corruption Perception Index. Israel and Spain rank joint 30th, Portugal at 32nd. Mauritius ranks above Poland; both of those countries rank ahead of South Africa, that "last decent democracy" of yours. Italy is 67th, Greece 78th; Ghana and rwanda 67th and 68th respectively.

So, quite clearly, not only are there several examples of well-functioning democracies in Africa, those same democracies rank ahead of several European counterparts in their lack of corruption.

But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way or anything...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

one just needs to look at what happens in these countries at election time, kenya was also a great democracy till the last election violence. Fact about corruption in these countries is that it is blatant. Try driving from one end of mozambique or botswana and see how many times you get pulled over and are not allowed leave until a bribe is payed.

back to the topic, read recent events in SA and then comment

Inverse to the power of one!

Well he has just been re-elected ANC youth league president

Any good reason to take this guy anymore seriously then the head of Eirigi?

When your climbing the ladder you can feed people any sh1te you want......when you get to the top and there's money on that line....it's a different story.

SA's only hope is it's economy and future generations....politics has been a successive failure there since the get go. I wish em all luck.

Benny_Cake

keeffo2005 wrote: »

Einhard wrote: »

Don't have time to respond fully to your post, but the notion that SA is the "the last decent democracy in Africa" is nonsense, and could be seen as indicative of a less enlightened agenda than concern for democracy on the continent.

Name one that is not riddled with corruption, i am curious

Botswana as mentioned,also Namibia. Ghana has come a long way in the last decade too.

Benny_Cake

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Botswana as mentioned,also Namibia. Ghana has come a long way in the last decade too.

Might have come along way but these countries are far from stable. look at ivory coast, how lots thought that was after a long way. Even in SA tribalism is still rife and can explode any time, Xhosa, Sotho and Zulus hate each other

Benny_Cake

keeffo2005 wrote: »

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Botswana as mentioned,also Namibia. Ghana has come a long way in the last decade too.

Might have come along way but these countries are far from stable. look at ivory coast, how lots thought that was after a long way. Even in SA tribalism is still rife and can explode any time, Xhosa, Sotho and Zulus hate each other

Botswana is as stable as they come. Look at what's happening in Greece, or what could happen here. Stability is a tenuous commodity anywhere in the world

Benny_Cake

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Botswana is as stable as they come. Look at what's happening in Greece, or what could happen here. Stability is a tenuous commodity anywhere in the world

fair enough, good point, but african countries have a higher tendency to drift the way of destruction.

Anyway this is about SA, i like the way people just focus on one part of the entire post. Are people not the slightest bit worried or concerned what is actually going on.

jmayo

Deleted User wrote: »

Last year i commented on the Terre'blanche murder case telling people to listen out for Julius Malema. Well he has just been re-elected ANC youth league president, in his acceptance speech he vowed that he would retake land without compensation, nationalise the mines and nationalise the banks into one state bank.

first of all, encouraging land grabs is what Mugabe did and look at the mess Zimbabwe is in now.

Nationalising the mines is madness, i live in SA as a contract worker, every government run municipality is indebted and crumbling over mismanagement and major corruption so if these clowns take over the mines they will effectively become disfunctional due to lack of maintenance just like the SA roads.

...

Having worked with a number of south africans (boers, English white descendents and black), a lot of them reckon that the Mandella influence will eventually be repalced by something closer to mugabe.

Einhard wrote: »

Well, first of all, demoncracy and corruption are far from mutually exclusive. One only has to look at Ireland to see that, let alone the likes of Greece and Italy, both democratic states, and both historically mired in corruption.

But I'll take the bait anyway- Botswana is ranked 33rd in Transpareny International's Corruption Perception Index. Israel and Spain rank joint 30th, Portugal at 32nd. Mauritius ranks above Poland; both of those countries rank ahead of South Africa, that "last decent democracy" of yours. Italy is 67th, Greece 78th; Ghana and rwanda 67th and 68th respectively.

So right your great examples are Botswana, Rwanda, Ghana and Mauritius out of the entire continent ?
I know Mauritius is tiny, both itself and Botswana have populations under 2 million.
Oh and piece of trivia for ya, Ghana was richer whne i tgained independence than South Korea in the mid 50s.
Interesting to compare the two today.
And we all know Rwanda's recent history.

Einhard wrote: »

So, quite clearly, not only are there several examples of well-functioning democracies in Africa, those same democracies rank ahead of several European counterparts in their lack of corruption.

But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way or anything...

You are very selective with the facts yourself.

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Botswana as mentioned,also Namibia. Ghana has come a long way in the last decade too.

Well some of them had to progress at some stage.

irishh_bob

jmayo wrote: »

Having worked with a number of south africans (boers, English white descendents and black), a lot of them reckon that the Mandella influence will eventually be repalced by something closer to mugabe.



So right your great examples are Botswana, Rwanda, Ghana and Mauritius out of the entire continent ?
I know Mauritius is tiny, both itself and Botswana have populations under 2 million.
Oh and piece of trivia for ya, Ghana was richer whne i tgained independence than South Korea in the mid 50s.
Interesting to compare the two today.
And we all know Rwanda's recent history.



You are very selective with the facts yourself.



Well some of them had to progress at some stage.

white south africans have a personality similar to northern irish unionists , they are arrogant , stuborn and very conservative but thier could be something in the view that when mandella dies , the peace train could completley derail

irishh_bob

irishh_bob wrote: »

white south africans have a personality similar to northern irish unionists , they are arrogant , stuborn and very conservative but thier could be something in the view that when mandella dies , the peace train could completley derail

only some of them are to be honest. i wouldn't exactly call post 94 a peace train, look at the nearing 4000 white farmers murdered and its not a simple bullet to the head murder, its being tied up and butchered. Black people think the whites still have all the money, its true but why? 17 years of ANC rule has done nothing but false promises. 10% of working south africans pay income tax. townships steal electricity and don't pay rates, so what i would love to know from Malema is who will pick up the bills when he hunts the whites out of SA

doolox

Not knowing much about the Boer situation in SA but having seen what happened to white commercial farmers in Zimbabwe would it not be better for them to clear out of Africa altogether and go somewhere more amenable to white people of their type?

I remember when Idi Amin banished the traders and shopkeepers from Uganda, mostly of Indian and Pakistani origin. The country collapsed economically because they lost a vital part of their distribution system too suddenly without proper back-up.

Similarly, while Northern Rhodesia was once styled " the Granary of Southern Africa", under Mugabe it had huge deficits of grain and food and famine because of the forced removal of commercial farmers and their replacement by ex-soldiers who did not know about farming and failed to grow any crops.

It is likely that unless a gradual redistribution of wealth takes place, keeping as much of the expertise and education reposited in the Boers, mineowners etc while making a steady move towards replacement over time with suitably educated and experienced people regardless of race or ethnicity then SA will collapse just as Uganda and Zimbabwe did and all people will suffer.

Because SA forms an enormously influential regional power in Subsaharan Africa this will have enormous repercussions for the entire Southern portion of that benighted continent.

Einhard

Deleted User wrote: »

one just needs to look at what happens in these countries at election time, kenya was also a great democracy till the last election violence.

If one actually bothered "looking at these countires at election time", one would see that their democratic institutions have held up pretty well over successive elections. Botswana for one, has had a longer, uninterrupted democratic tradition than many countries in Europe, and, on average, has had one of the highest annual GDP growth rates of any country in the world since the '60s.

Fact about corruption in these countries is that it is blatant. Try driving from one end of mozambique or botswana and see how many times you get pulled over and are not allowed leave until a bribe is payed.

Fact is your assertions have been proven wrong, using empirical evidence, rather than anecdotal imaginings, and yet you still persist. Have you ever driven through Botswana? If not, how can you possibly use an imaginary experience to contradict the findings of a reputable internation agency like Transparency International?

Deleted User wrote: »

Might have come along way but these countries are far from stable. look at ivory coast, how lots thought that was after a long way. Even in SA tribalism is still rife and can explode any time, Xhosa, Sotho and Zulus hate each other

I'm sorry, but the countries I mentioned are stable. I never mentioned the Ivory Coast or Mozambique, so they're not at all pertinent to my point. Would you claim that Germany is a basket case on the basis that Greece is one? So why do if for African nations? Hmmm...

Deleted User wrote: »

fair enough, good point, but african countries have a higher tendency to drift the way of destruction.

True enough, but I don't think we can use that tendency on the part of some countries, to dismiss the very real political and economic progress currently taking place in others. If we were to apply that standard, then we'd similarly dismiss the achievements of South American countries, and those of Asia. But you don't. Again, I can't help but wonder why...

Anyway this is about SA, i like the way people just focus on one part of the entire post. Are people not the slightest bit worried or concerned what is actually going on.

Yes, I am slightly concerned. But I'm quite heartened by the fact that, Trevor Manuel, one of the most respected ministers in South Africa, a man who has served under all ANC presidents is not black, and neither are many senior party notables. Hardly indicative of a party which wants to turn on whites and other minorities, is it?

I'm also cheered by the fact that, in the recent local and regional elections, the main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, made major gains, and now controls Cape Province. In 1994, the party had just over 1% of the vote; that now stands at 25%, and has won over an increasing number of black South Africans. So, rather than a nation increasingly divided on ethic and racial grounds, the opposite is happening.

So, while there is of course cause for some small concern, if one looks at the borader picture in SA, which you have spectacularly failed to do, that concern is increasingly diminished.

jmayo wrote: »

So right your great examples are Botswana, Rwanda, Ghana and Mauritius out of the entire continent ?
I know Mauritius is tiny, both itself and Botswana have populations under 2 million.

Oh and piece of trivia for ya, Ghana was richer whne i tgained independence than South Korea in the mid 50s.
Interesting to compare the two today.
And we all know Rwanda's recent history.



You are very selective with the facts yourself.

Not at all selective with the facts. I took issue with the notion that every nation on the continent was some form of economic and political basket case. I then showed that this was not the case. I used the facts to prove my point.

We also know Serbia's recent history...and Germany's...and Japan's...Why is it just African nations that are judged on their pasts in this way?

Benny_Cake

As Einhard said, why treat all African countries as if they are identical. Malema is quite obviously an idiot but the ANCYL has a tradition of being a little "out there" with quite an Africanist tradition, which doesn't necessarily match with mainstream ANC thinking. The PAC would be the party closest to this thinking traditionally, and they are now reduced to 1 seat in parliament.

Marcus_Crassus

Einhard, I see where you're coming from saying that the Democratic Alliance is gaining more votes; but I don't agree that things are getting better. The only people voting for the DA are the white people and, now, the more educated black population who've seen what the ANC are really like and are tired of voting for the same fools with false promises!

But that all means nothing! The overriding fact is that the poor masses of black South Africans will continue to cast votes for the ANC. Malema and Zuma continuously throw veiled threats at the poor uneducated black masses! Before the election Zuma told them, in a round about way, that the ancestors would come back for them if they didn't vote ANC. They also see the ANC as Mandela's party and it would take a miracle to get them to change their mind.

All the ANC have to do is continue appeasing the poor masses and portraying the whiteman as rich!

I can see everything seriously going tits up... especially if Malema gets into power.

Who's going to be left to vote for the DA? Sure, there's a constant stream of white South Africans leaving the place.

jank

Einhard wrote: »

We also know Serbia's recent history...and Germany's...and Japan's...Why is it just African nations that are judged on their pasts in this way?

I think the sentiment here is that it has been 50 years since most countries have gotten Independence from its European overseers.
Since world war 2 you just have to look at each continent and how they have progressed economically and politically. Asia one can argue is the one that has progressed the most. Africa would be way down the list, probably last. I think the problem with Africa is that is it too tribal. They should split up the countries to make smaller nation states but that will never happen as precious resources are not in every region.

amacachi

jank wrote: »

I think the sentiment here is that it has been 50 years since most countries have gotten Independence from its European overseers.
Since world war 2 you just have to look at each continent and how they have progressed economically and politically. Asia one can argue is the one that has progressed the most. Africa would be way down the list, probably last. I think the problem with Africa is that is it too tribal. They should split up the countries to make smaller nation states but that will never happen as precious resources are not in every region.

The root of the problem with Africa is that it was divided to suit Europeans, not Africans.

Benny_Cake

Marcus_Crassus wrote: »

Einhard, I see where you're coming from saying that the Democratic Alliance is gaining more votes; but I don't agree that things are getting better. The only people voting for the DA are the white people and, now, the more educated black population who've seen what the ANC are really like and are tired of voting for the same fools with false promises!

But that all means nothing! The overriding fact is that the poor masses of black South Africans will continue to cast votes for the ANC. Malema and Zuma continuously throw veiled threats at the poor uneducated black masses! Before the election Zuma told them, in a round about way, that the ancestors would come back for them if they didn't vote ANC. They also see the ANC as Mandela's party and it would take a miracle to get them to change their mind.

All the ANC have to do is continue appeasing the poor masses and portraying the whiteman as rich!

I can see everything seriously going tits up... especially if Malema gets into power.

Who's going to be left to vote for the DA? Sure, there's a constant stream of white South Africans leaving the place.

Just because black South Africans are largely continuing to support the ANC doesn't mean they are doing it from a position of ignorance. It is only 17 years since the most complete and total form of racial discrimination in history was overthrown. In practise, the ANC has shown restraint and moderation. White South Africans continue to do well. As for emigration, people travel for all manner of reasons, but higher wages abroad and the desire to see the world seem to be the 2 main reasons young South Africans leave.

Benny_Cake

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Just because black South Africans are largely continuing to support the ANC doesn't mean they are doing it from a position of ignorance. It is only 17 years since the most complete and total form of racial discrimination in history was overthrown. In practise, the ANC has shown restraint and moderation. White South Africans continue to do well. As for emigration, people travel for all manner of reasons, but higher wages abroad and the desire to see the world seem to be the 2 main reasons young South Africans leave.

don't agree entirely with this comment, main reason out and out South Africans leave is crime and not just ordinary crime, brutal and vicious crime. Since i have been here the amount of people i know who got burgled, hijacked and were victims of assault is incredible. Touch wood i don't know anyone who got raped but all i need to do is talk to people in work and the majority have relatives or friends who were burgled, assaulted and raped. this is the main reason people are getting out. Its a well known fact South Africa is suffering a major brain drain and its going to get worse. The qualified people i know here all plan to leave in the next couple of years, especially with Julius' thinking.

as for the ANC showing restraint, tell that the farming communities, the ANC are turning a bliind eye to farm murders, there is monuments in Bloemfontein for the murdered farmers, its being classified as genocide. In lots of these the houses are not even robbed, just the farmers butchered. Do you think the ANC has shown restraint???

people forget power was just not handed over, the whites had to vote to allow it, they could have rejected ending apartheid but they took a leap of faith as well.

what saddens me the most is the AWBs claims seem to be coming through

jmayo

irishh_bob wrote: »

white south africans have a personality similar to northern irish unionists , they are arrogant , stuborn and very conservative but thier could be something in the view that when mandella dies , the peace train could completley derail

So what if some of them are arrogant and conservative ?
The Boers would be generally more conservative than the English descendents.
Both of them would have an arrogance about them, but so do Aussies.
In fact I worked with one very interesting guy who had fought covertly in Angola and I never saw issue with him working side by side with black South Africans.
Even some black South Africans I have met reckon the place could go the way of Zimbabwe.

doolox wrote: »

Not knowing much about the Boer situation in SA but having seen what happened to white commercial farmers in Zimbabwe would it not be better for them to clear out of Africa altogether and go somewhere more amenable to white people of their type?

Very simplistic and the same argument can be used in Palestine/Israel.
In fact we could use the argument about Northern Ireland.

It is their home.
Should descendents of Irish people clear out of parts of America.
I have known a few white Zimbabweans and they would say it was their home.
They or their descendents went there and built something out of nothing.
Ok fair enough some of them may have robbed the land off the natives, but what about the ones that actually went out years later and bought the land off someone else ?

doolox wrote: »

Similarly, while Northern Rhodesia was once styled " the Granary of Southern Africa", under Mugabe it had huge deficits of grain and food and famine because of the forced removal of commercial farmers and their replacement by ex-soldiers who did not know about farming and failed to grow any crops.

You mean Southern Rhodesia.
Northern Rhodesia has been Zambia since 1960s.

True Rhodesia or Zimbabwe is one of the richest farming areas in African and until mugabe started his cr**.
Not alone did he kick out the white landowners and farmers, he also kicked out their workers who would have an idea how to run a farm.
And they would have more of a right to the land than his supporters who he let have the land.

Their is one interesting little snippet here.
There are a couple of whites who have also hugely benefitted from mugabe's land grab.
One was John Bredenkamp who is now out of favour but the other big players are the likes of Billy Rautenbach and Charles Davy who almost was prince harry's father in law.

doolox wrote: »

It is likely that unless a gradual redistribution of wealth takes place, keeping as much of the expertise and education reposited in the Boers, mineowners etc while making a steady move towards replacement over time with suitably educated and experienced people regardless of race or ethnicity then SA will collapse just as Uganda and Zimbabwe did and all people will suffer.

But will that happen ?

jank wrote: »

I think the sentiment here is that it has been 50 years since most countries have gotten Independence from its European overseers.
Since world war 2 you just have to look at each continent and how they have progressed economically and politically. Asia one can argue is the one that has progressed the most. Africa would be way down the list, probably last. I think the problem with Africa is that is it too tribal. They should split up the countries to make smaller nation states but that will never happen as precious resources are not in every region.

In Asia even though some of the countries were run by single party often single individuals they moved forward.
Look at likes of Sth Korea, Singapore, Malaysia.

I recently saw a comparison between Ghana and South Korea.
Ghana was richer than South Korea in late 50s, ok it was after Korean war and Ghana just got independence.
Sth Korea had US/Japanese money pour into it, but they developed and became an economic power house themselves.
Meanwhile Ghana went backwards until recently due to military coups and military rulers even though it is rich in natural resources, things the some of the above Asian countries lack.

amacachi wrote: »

The root of the problem with Africa is that it was divided to suit Europeans, not Africans.

Very true.
But so were some European countries and we have seen how that worked out in the Balkans.
Just look at India & Pakistan as another example of drawing borders often based on geography rather than people.

jank

amacachi wrote: »

The root of the problem with Africa is that it was divided to suit Europeans, not Africans.

No $hit sherlock. That is what I said, in a round about way!

jank

jmayo wrote: »

In Asia even though some of the countries were run by single party often single individuals they moved forward.
Look at likes of Sth Korea, Singapore, Malaysia.

I recently saw a comparison between Ghana and South Korea.
Ghana was richer than South Korea in late 50s, ok it was after Korean war and Ghana just got independence.
Sth Korea had US/Japanese money pour into it, but they developed and became an economic power house themselves.
Meanwhile Ghana went backwards until recently due to military coups and military rulers even though it is rich in natural resources, things the some of the above Asian countries lack.



.

Yes, but do you assume that your average African has the same cultural drive for economic and educational progression?
Asians by their nature are hard working and have a great respect for education, they MAKE their kids go to school, learn and do well in exams...
Cant really say the same for Africans. It is like saying the Greeks and Germans are the same... yea both european, both people and bleed red but very different cultures in lots of ways to social interaction, rules and law, to work ethic...

We cant compare South Korea and Ghana because its people are very different.

PS. Ironicly its the Chinesse now who are buying up huge amounts of resouces in Africa. What the Japanese failed to do in WW2 the Chinese are doing by the cheque book.

jmayo

jank wrote: »

Yes, but do you assume that your average African has the same cultural drive for economic and educational progression?
Asians by their nature are hard working and have a great respect for education, they MAKE their kids go to school, learn and do well in exams...
Cant really say the same for Africans. It is like saying the Greeks and Germans are the same... yea both european, both people and bleed red but very different cultures in lots of ways to social interaction, rules and law, to work ethic...

We cant compare South Korea and Ghana because its people are very different.

Ehh I didn't want to put it that way, since you leave yourself open to being labelled as racist by some people.
There is interesting comparison to be made at how well different nationalities or races succeed as immigrants to for instance the UK.

jank wrote: »

PS. Ironicly its the Chinesse now who are buying up huge amounts of resouces in Africa. What the Japanese failed to do in WW2 the Chinese are doing by the cheque book.

Well remember the Japanese tried to do it in the 80s.
They bought huge amount, especially trophy purchases, in the States, Australia, etc and then the ass fell out of their bubble.
And their property values haven't truly recovered yet.
Something some of us around here used to use as salutary example for our country.
Of course we were told we were ever so different. :rolleyes:

The Chinese are rich in resources themselves but to sustain their huge growth they need guaranteed resources from elsewhere.
China's huge growth has had huge knock on affects from Western Australian (mining), Africa (backing dody regimes like Sudan in return for mineral resources, oil) to Argentina (where agriculture is diverting from cattle ranching to to soya growing).

BTW from experience the Koreans have been buying little chunks of Canada.

Le_Dieux

Deleted User wrote: »

Might have come along way but these countries are far from stable. look at ivory coast, how lots thought that was after a long way. Even in SA tribalism is still rife and can explode any time, Xhosa, Sotho and Zulus hate each other

Keeffo, I think You are getting bogged down in 'stabe countries' too much. You raise VERY VALID points, why go and get distracted. Malema is a poes ( cnut) in english of the highest order. He is really stirring the **** there, and sadly the masses are taking the bait. I read recently that He totally ignored the Ruperts when at a function in Midrand recently. No matter what's the past..LET IT F**KING GO! People like the Ruperts You need, not discard like a sweet paper.

Malema is not one bit of good for SA ( for ALL denominations), and the sooner He is locked up the better.

Le_Dieux

When people want to make a statement, can they PLEASE get their facts right first - Nothern Rhodesia is now Zambia...NOT ZIM!!

I think Keeffo raises valid points, and I totally agree with His/Her highlighting the fact about the different tribes...especially between the Xhosa & the Zulu. I was there back in the 80's & 90's whentribal warfare was totally rife, one only has to look at the East Rand Townships to see what was happening. Malema is only trying to get rid of the blankes first, then watch out!! Mugabe won't be a patch compared to what can potentially can happen in South Africa. And the sad thing is that whatever the fallout can happens in SA, will have a catastrophic effect on ALL it's neighbours

As for the person who raised the Western Cape - please remember it has been governed by the DA for a long time now. I stand to correction, but I don't think the ANC has once governed there, and The Fairest Cape is the only shining light in an otherwise depressing corrupt country.

Which is so so sad. For me, SA has EVERYTHING to make it an economical powerhouse in the World...except oil.

Le_Dieux

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Just because black South Africans are largely continuing to support the ANC doesn't mean they are doing it from a position of ignorance. It is only 17 years since the most complete and total form of racial discrimination in history was overthrown. In practise, the ANC has shown restraint and moderation. White South Africans continue to do well. As for emigration, people travel for all manner of reasons, but higher wages abroad and the desire to see the world seem to be the 2 main reasons young South Africans leave.

Sadly, I have to totally disagree with the post enclosed. Largely the black South African IS supporting the ANC, though personally, I have nothing agaiinst them. The only sad part for me is that there isn't another Madiba in the ranks there.

You are right in condemning the apartheid regime in its entirety, but whats going on now is PAYBACK time - apartheid with a shoe on the other foot.

And as for the emigration? I am back here in Ireland. Why? Because I had to train a person of another colour to do my job, and then I was being retrenched with NO possibility of another job due to the colour of MY SKIN! Then I had to go down to my local unemployment office to claim my UIF (SA's version of the dole, which only lasts for 6 months), only to be told month after month - 'There is nothing here for You, come back next month'. Before my life savings were exhausted, I had to get out. I have 2 children still there and am busy organising Irish Passports for them to get out. Most of my Daughters friends are of other colour, but She realises that She has NO future there. So, please take Your head out of the sand in stating they want out to 'see the world', OR for higher wages. It's because of the corruption & violence, and NOTHING else.

Benny_Cake

Le_Dieux wrote: »

Sadly, I have to totally disagree with the post enclosed. Largely the black South African IS supporting the ANC, though personally, I have nothing agaiinst them. The only sad part for me is that there isn't another Madiba in the ranks there.

You are right in condemning the apartheid regime in its entirety, but whats going on now is PAYBACK time - apartheid with a shoe on the other foot.

And as for the emigration? I am back here in Ireland. Why? Because I had to train a person of another colour to do my job, and then I was being retrenched with NO possibility of another job due to the colour of MY SKIN! Then I had to go down to my local unemployment office to claim my UIF (SA's version of the dole, which only lasts for 6 months), only to be told month after month - 'There is nothing here for You, come back next month'. Before my life savings were exhausted, I had to get out. I have 2 children still there and am busy organising Irish Passports for them to get out. Most of my Daughters friends are of other colour, but She realises that She has NO future there. So, please take Your head out of the sand in stating they want out to 'see the world', OR for higher wages. It's because of the corruption & violence, and NOTHING else.

Look,I was only speaking of young South Africans I've spoken to - I would certainly not claim it would apply to all South African emigrants. Yours is obviously a different experience and I'm sorry to hear that. BEE is obviously a controversial issue, any form of affirmative action always is. In my opinion there is a case for such policies in certain societies but they should always come with a firm cut-off date,ie;be focused and short term. For what its worth I remember feeling very angry when Mary Coughlin told the international media that Irish young people heading abroad wanted to see the world - so I'd reiterate I am only speaking of the few South Africans I've spoken to!

Le_Dieux

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Look,I was only speaking of young South Africans I've spoken to - I would certainly not claim it would apply to all South African emigrants. Yours is obviously a different experience and I'm sorry to hear that. BEE is obviously a controversial issue, any form of affirmative action always is. In my opinion there is a case for such policies in certain societies but they should always come with a firm cut-off date,ie;be focused and short term. For what its worth I remember feeling very angry when Mary Coughlin told the international media that Irish young people heading abroad wanted to see the world - so I'd reiterate I am only speaking of the few South Africans I've spoken to!

South Africa was warned many times by experts from overseas, that AA needs time to ingrain itself in the economy there. But no, the powers that be decided to go hell for leather and more or less implement AA with immediate effect. This resulted with people of NO education being in executive positions, based PURELY on the colour of their skin. This has resulted in an economy that is based almost exclusively on whats under the ground: Gold, platinum, coal etc.

My Daughter is 23, is that young enough? She says She cannot get the hell out soon enough, and knows black & coloured friends who want out also.

As I said already, the saddest part for SA is the fact there is only one Madiba & no matter what the Mbeki's or Zuma's of this world think, they will NEVER be a match for Madiba.

I am not bitter towards SA. It just makes me sad that here we have a country with the makings of being a major player in world politics, but it's run by corrupt people, and as for what's coming through the ranks behind these people, God help us. This is from the www.iol.co.za site of June 5 2011. Malema has to decide if he will REMOVE the state president. http://newsletters.iol.co.za/servlet/link/11979/45357/14240287/537059

I can google all night long and come up with lots more **** like this. But I think the message is clear enough.

donkey balls

Le_Dieux wrote: »

South Africa was warned many times by experts from overseas, that AA needs time to ingrain itself in the economy there. But no, the powers that be decided to go hell for leather and more or less implement AA with immediate effect. This resulted with people of NO education being in executive positions, based PURELY on the colour of their skin. This has resulted in an economy that is based almost exclusively on whats under the ground: Gold, platinum, coal etc.

My Daughter is 23, is that young enough? She says She cannot get the hell out soon enough, and knows black & coloured friends who want out also.

As I said already, the saddest part for SA is the fact there is only one Madiba & no matter what the Mbeki's or Zuma's of this world think, they will NEVER be a match for Madiba.

I am not bitter towards SA. It just makes me sad that here we have a country with the makings of being a major player in world politics, but it's run by corrupt people, and as for what's coming through the ranks behind these people, God help us. This is from the www.iol.co.za site of June 5 2011. Malema has to decide if he will REMOVE the state president. http://newsletters.iol.co.za/servlet/link/11979/45357/14240287/537059

I can google all night long and come up with lots more **** like this. But I think the message is clear enough.

110% spot on I worked with aload of guys from ZA who told me about apartied going in reverse,While doing my medical for the commercial pilots licence there was a guy from ZA also doing his.
I asked him why not fly for South African Airlines he pointed towards his arm and said to me that he had the wrong skin colour, And also the appointment of people not qualified to boards of companies was wide spread within the country and that corruption was also wide spread jaysus it sounds a bit like Ireland.

Denerick

Malema is an irritating rat, he will never elevate beyond his position because he is merely a petulant child. Political power in South Africa is concentrated in the ANC party, and over the last decade black millionaires and businessmen have cemented their influence there. They won't condone Malema because he would be catastrophic for their interests. The trade union wing would similarily despise Malema because he is so incompetant and would be unable to keep the outgoings of the state in order and pay public sector wages. South Africans, black, white and Indian, do not want a Robert Mugabe, which Malema most definately is.

The ANC is beginning to lose some of its support, the Democratic Alliance as led by Helen Zille is slowly building a reputation for competance and is also slowly winning support from the black majority (Traditionally the party of whites, indians and coloureds)

Le_Dieux

Denerick wrote: »

The ANC is beginning to lose some of its support, the Democratic Alliance as led by Helen Zille is slowly building a reputation for competance and is also slowly winning support from the black majority (Traditionally the party of whites, indians and coloureds)

I wish You were totally correct Denerick. Where, besides the WC, is the DA getting the upper hand? I was in the EC, and no matter what crap happened from the beginning of a term to the end of a term, once the election was declared, only one party had the vote....and it ain't the DA, sadly!

Something else I am amazed as*hole malema hasn't commentated on yet - the WC in 2010. The BIGGEST disaster I think to befall SA. Let's take PE ( MY home town). They spend over ONE BILLION rand building a fantastic stadium. It was filled not once since the WC. The powers that be spent millions on building bus corridors, only to find out the fu**ing busses were TOO WIDE to be used. They have NEVER been used, and are beginning to be bleached under the EC sun. What do I think? I think malema, faku and all the other pr*cks, including septic bladder, were given backhanders on this - thats why malema has kept his trap shut.

Denerick

The reason the DA are growing in popularity is because the one region they do control (The Cape) is run competantly, almost to Northern European standards. This benefits the monied classes too as business always performs better when the overall municipal infrastructure is capable of providing boring but necessary services like waste disposal, water, electricity, broadband etc.

I'd wager that as the DA grows in strength over time (In the most recent election the ANC ran a dirty tricks race based campaign against the (White) leader Helen Zille, a sign of how far they've come that they need racial smears to keep them down) that their influence and outreach amongst the wealthy will only continue. The business classes, specifically the Black magnates who have done so well out of ANC one party rule, will quickly come onboard and then the potentiality for South Africa to become a real genuine multiparty democracy will be realised. The DA needs to shake off its image as the white party, which it has been doing by amalgamating with various small, mostly black parties.

I don't think the future of South Africa will be grim. It isn't run badly as compared to many other western countries. In fact when compared to places like Italy it is much more transparant with a better legal system. Its constitution is wonderfully liberal. Although it has a high murder rate, and some Afrikaans are being victimised, it still has advantages and niche areas (Plenty of white Europeans live and work there nowadays). All it needs is patience, and better governance. The best outcome for the many poverty stricken blacks is that the ANC disintegrates and gets consigned to the history books. Unfortunately they haven't realised this yet. But when they do, morons like Malema will be about as relevant as Nick Griffin is in the UK.

Le_Dieux

Denerick wrote: »

The reason the DA are growing in popularity is because the one region they do control (The Cape) is run competantly, almost to Northern European standards. This benefits the monied classes too as business always performs better when the overall municipal infrastructure is capable of providing boring but necessary services like waste disposal, water, electricity, broadband etc.

TOTALLY agree with the above. I would nearly go so far as to say the WC is run better than some European countries - Ireland included.

I'd wager that as the DA grows in strength over time (In the most recent election the ANC ran a dirty tricks race based campaign against the (White) leader Helen Zille, a sign of how far they've come that they need racial smears to keep them down) that their influence and outreach amongst the wealthy will only continue. The business classes, specifically the Black magnates who have done so well out of ANC one party rule, will quickly come onboard and then the potentiality for South Africa to become a real genuine multiparty democracy will be realised. The DA needs to shake off its image as the white party, which it has been doing by amalgamating with various small, mostly black parties.

Agree, but its the millions of poor that malema and his rabid followers are feeding off, and while they ( the millions) are living in appaling conditions, nothing will change, and the likes of malema will only grow in influence. As for coming onboard, aside from ( perhaps) Patricia DeLille, who, of note, has crossed the floor, expecially on a permanent basis. Bantu Holomisa broke from the ANC and started a new party, but ( as far as I am aware) its practically dormant now, or already gone into oblivion - maybe You can tell me that Denerick ( I am not sure if You are in SA, or are from SA but living overseas?)? I still am amazed at the silence since July last year about the WC? Where have the benefits been reflected since then? PE has a beautiful stadium, but cannot fill it. They had a 22k cricket stadium, which they struggled to fill, a 35k rugby stadium, which was NEVER filled ( aside from a test match), and they go and build a new stadium for 1.4 BILLION thats basically lying dormant now, and will ultimatly end up like other stadia in SA...a decrepid eyesore. For me, the money spent here should have been spent on housing the MILLIONS of people living in abject poverty. But no, to appease the international community, they go and throw the money on more 'important' things.

I don't think the future of South Africa will be grim. It isn't run badly as compared to many other western countries. In fact when compared to places like Italy it is much more transparant with a better legal system. Its constitution is wonderfully liberal. Although it has a high murder rate, and some Afrikaans are being victimised, it still has advantages and niche areas (Plenty of white Europeans live and work there nowadays). All it needs is patience, and better governance. The best outcome for the many poverty stricken blacks is that the ANC disintegrates and gets consigned to the history books. Unfortunately they haven't realised this yet. But when they do, morons like Malema will be about as relevant as Nick Griffin is in the UK.

I really hope You are right here. As I said before, South Africa POTENTIALLY has everything going for it - scenery, resources ( except for oil), people - but unless its managed correctly, SA will ( IMHO) go the same route as Zim - and if it does, then the whole of Southern Africa is in for a torrid time.

I apologise. I tried to answer each paragraph individually, but when I submitted, all came up in the one section, bar the last submission by me - hence the reason I have 'bolded' my response to the first 2 paragraphs.

Yahew

Einhard wrote: »

Well, first of all, demoncracy and corruption are far from mutually exclusive. One only has to look at Ireland to see that, let alone the likes of Greece and Italy, both democratic states, and both historically mired in corruption.

But I'll take the bait anyway- Botswana is ranked 33rd in Transpareny International's Corruption Perception Index. Israel and Spain rank joint 30th, Portugal at 32nd. Mauritius ranks above Poland; both of those countries rank ahead of South Africa, that "last decent democracy" of yours. Italy is 67th, Greece 78th; Ghana and rwanda 67th and 68th respectively.

So, quite clearly, not only are there several examples of well-functioning democracies in Africa, those same democracies rank ahead of several European counterparts in their lack of corruption.

But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way or anything...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

Ireland came 14th in the link you provided, but let's not let the facts get in the way or anything.

Yahew

But, back to Africa. It certainly isn't all a basket case. The richest sub-saharhan state is , as far as I can see, Gabon is $8000 GDP per capita, Botswana is $6K per capita. Expect them to catch up on poorer European States in a decade or two.

Einhard

Yahew wrote: »

Ireland came 14th in the link you provided, but let's not let the facts get in the way or anything.

Are you suggesting that there was no corruption in Ireland during the 80s??

Yahew

Einhard wrote: »

Are you suggesting that there was no corruption in Ireland during the 80s??

No I am suggesting that Ireland came 14th least corrupt in the world in a survey which you linked to, whilst also

1) Castigating another guy for claiming that Africa was more corrupt than anywhere else without the facts.
2) Mentioning Ireland as an example of a corrupt democracy.
3) Linking to the websites which refuted the very point you made about Ireland, making your refutation hypocritical.

I even boldified the hypocritical parts your quoted response to make it easier for you, for you are perpetually .

Einhard

Yahew wrote: »

No I am suggesting that Ireland came 14th least corrupt in the world in a survey which you linked to, whilst also

1) Castigating another guy for claiming that Africa was more corrupt than anywhere else without the facts.
2) Mentioning Ireland as an example of a corrupt democracy.
3) Linking to the websites which refuted the very point you made about Ireland, making your refutation hypocritical.

I even boldified the hypocritical parts your quoted response to make it easier for you, for you are perpetually .

Right. I stated that democracy and corruption are not mutually exclusive. In the 80s, Ireland was very corrupt relative to the present, and yet was still a democracy. Indeed, right now, there is no doubt corruption in Ireland, and probably in every country on that list. Hence, democracy and corruption are not mutually exclusive...

Nothing I've stated is factually incorrect, and yet you seem to think you've trumped me on something.

Cork boy 55

Yahew wrote: »

But, back to Africa. It certainly isn't all a basket case. The richest sub-saharhan state is , as far as I can see, Gabon is $8000 GDP per capita, Botswana is $6K per capita. Expect them to catch up on poorer European States in a decade or two.

We have to be careful using the GDP per captia(measure)
In any country any where there are major inequalties in house

Botswana has a small population of 2 million and huge resources if run well it could be like the gulf states.

Gabon also has a very small population(1.5m)
also Gabon's economy is dominated by oil. Oil revenues comprise roughly 46% of the government’s budget, 43% of gross domestic product (GDP), and 81% of exports. Oil production is now declining rapidly from its high point of 370,000 barrels per day in 1997. Some estimates suggest that Gabonese oil will be expended by 2025. In spite of the decreasing oil revenues, planning is only now beginning for an after-oil scenario.
Gabon's oil revenues have given it a strong per capita GDP of $8,600, extremely high for the region. On the other hand, a skewed income distribution and poor social indicators misrepresent the situation if only GDP is taken into account. The richest 20% of the population receive over 90% of the income while about a third of all Gabonese live in poverty
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2826.htm



As for South Africa, building a multi-ethic country is difficult at best of times but building one with such a history and where the descandents of oppresser and victim can be identifed by skin colour is going to be very difficult. If the survival of a European community is the goal then would
The south african whites not be better off having their own homeland within a federal south africa. Is that not the optimin solution
Is any other solution not just a slow death of the community and threat of genocide ever present in background.

Le_Dieux

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

As for South Africa, building a multi-ethic country is difficult at best of times but building one with such a history and where the descandents of oppresser and victim can be identifed by skin colour is going to be very difficult. If the survival of a European community is the goal then would
The south african whites not be better off having their own homeland within a federal south africa. Is that not the optimin solution
Is any other solution not just a slow death of the community and threat of genocide ever present in background.

While You raise a valid point Cork Boy, I doubt if this will ever come to fruition. What You are proposing is exactly what the whites did back in 1962 - Bophuthatswana, Ciskei, Transkei & Venda - and NOT ONE country in the international community recognised these so-called countries. They were also totally opposed by the majority of blacks living in these homelands. The Blacks also fought to gain total independence, and this was (rightly imho) granted on April 27 1994. To even contemplate the possibility of them ceding an inch back to the whies doesn't even bear thinking. I know one can point to Orania, but thats also not exclusivly white, nor has it been granted any status by the ANC.

What is the solution? I have no crystal ball to see what is for the future, all I do feel sure will happen is that when things get tight, then we'll see a repeat of Zimbabwe, but on a much larget scale, which doesn't bear thinking.

Oh if only Madiba was younger!

Well things have calmed a bit now but Zuma is not ruling out anything in my opinion.

Interesting times ahead i must say. They are hell bent on the mines.

Its such a pity things are going like this, South Africa is such a beautiful country. If a Zimbabwe type land grab is tried i think all hell will break loose. South Africa is not like Zim, there are lots more whites in SA and ones who would be willing to fight for their land. I hope this doesn't happen but Malema is polarising the white population here.

Also for those who say the DA is gaining support, it is true but the big test is when the ANC fall below 50%, will they cede power, sadly me and a lot of SA citizens don't think they will. Julius Malema at the last general election did say blood will flow on the streets for Jacob Zuma

Benny_Cake

There's an extensive and interesting piece about Malema and the ANCYL here.

Interestingly, Malema has recently described Thabo Mbeki as "the greatest leader the ANC has ever produced" - which is an absolutely incredible turn around from his previous position. It underlines Malema's greatest weakness, he seems to have a knack for causing unnecessary offence to people right across the political spectrum, both black and white. Crazy to compare him to Mugabe really, Mugabe is an educated man who was quite clever at masking his true intentions and as such was much more dangerous than Malema!