patrick.net

Strategist says

The world is full of crazy wack jobs. We need to change our laws to prevent them from spreading their filth.

What american laws would you suggest changing to prevent politicians in south africa from speaking?

bob2356 says

Strategist says

The world is full of crazy wack jobs. We need to change our laws to prevent them from spreading their filth.

What american laws would you suggest changing to prevent politicians in south africa from speaking?

I was talking about the world at large. I am willing to give up some of my privacy in exchange for your safety.

The ancient Phoenicians settled first in South Africa after Rome burnt them out of Carthage (Libya). They sailed South and found a fat land with lots of resources, with some troublesome black tribes scattered here and there. So they sailed up a river and set down roots for a new Phoenician civilization. Unfortunately they became complacent to the threat the tribes could be, and lacking the human resources to fight the horde, were wiped out and their budding civilization erased from history.

Now it’s happening again in slow motion to the Bo’ers. They really fucked up when they did away with apartheid.

Strategist says

The world is full of crazy wack jobs. We need to change our laws to prevent them from spreading their filth.

Don't get all free-speechey on me now Strategist. Next you will be asking for religious freedom, free unregulated internet, and separation of powers. (smh)

Quigley says

Now it’s happening again in slow motion to the Bo’ers. They really fucked up when they did away with apartheid.

A fascinating history lesson on European colonialism. Yes, with the brief statement I think you have captured the whole of Africa's troubles.

Thanks Quigley. I learned so much.

Quigley says

The ancient Phoenicians settled first in South Africa after Rome burnt them out of Carthage (Libya). They sailed South and found a fat land with lots of resources, with some troublesome black tribes scattered here and there. So they sailed up a river and set down roots for a new Phoenician civilization. Unfortunately they became complacent to the threat the tribes could be, and lacking the human resources to fight the horde, were wiped out and their budding civilization erased from history.

Want to quote a source for this information? The only reference in all of history about this is a single paragraph in Herodotus' Histories that says the Phoenicians circumnavigated Africa, but nothing at all about them settling there.

If people of different ethnicity are equal in intellectual capacity, but widespread social inequalities endure, it must be the case that whites have some deviate, structural and hidden ways to ensure their superior wealth.
In this context, it makes sense that they should donate most of what they have as a way to right a wrong and atone for their past crimes.
Any attempt for them to resist this is tantamount to white nationalism. It can only be justified by the deliberate racism and willingness to oppress people of color, and, yes, at some point in the future it may justify a slaughter.

anon_4ca64 says

... it must be the case that whites have some deviate, structural and hidden ways to ensure their superior wealth.

Do you need a basic colonialism in Africa history book?

See any worthy anarcho-primitivism critique of why human genetics or racial differences are bogus with regards to cultural dominance of a race.

anon_4ca64 says

willingness to oppress people of color, and, yes, at some point in the future it may justify a slaughter.

Thanks for justifying my point.
People have the right to self defense and I expect the whites in SA will exercise it When threatened.

this is what BLM looks like when they are winning.

Wait, didn't Mandela and Tutu tell us when Apartheid ended and there was a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, everybody would then hold hands and sing Kumbaya?

That corruption wouldn't explode all over the country, along with violence, armed robbery, and gated communities with 24-7 armed guards?

I didn't hear that from Anti-Apartheid peeps in the 80s... they promised love, peace, rose gardens.

Turns out reality is more complicated. Bantu vs. White, Zulu vs. Bantu, etc.

Seems like Minorities get angrier the more time passes since their second class status, and the more they're not only given the same rights, but additional privileges and preferences.

Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.
The tribes were split into a two part caste system. Zulus were the warrior caste, and they lived separate from the Bantu class which were not allowed to have much in the way of warriors and certainly no fortified defenses. The Zulu chief or king of the area they claimed for their own would set his warriors to prey upon neighboring Bantu tribes, raiding them for grain, cattle, and women. These raids were always bloody, as they had a dual nature: to pillage and also control Bantu population.

The Zulu caste controlled its own population with a rigid code. The chief decided who would marry and when. If you pleased the chief with your exploits as a warrior, you would be allowed to take one or more wives. If not, you were prohibited from impregnating any woman on pain of death for you both!

So the Zulus existed as pirate kings of the Serengeti, and the Bantu were their cattle to be farmed and slaughtered as the chief saw fit. This went on for probably thousands of years, man emulating nature. Disney’s The Lion King contains more truth about tribalism than it lacks. The lions control the herbivore population and also control their own population with infanticide. Much as the Zulus performed that role.

Perhaps if you dream of living a green and natural life in perfect tune with ecology, this would seem ideal. But consider the life of a lowly Bantu, working to scrape out a living and raise children when both could be taken and slaughtered by the Zulus at any moment.

Africans under colonialism fared objectively much better. They had more more to eat, better order, and the whites killed enough Zulus to keep them in line.

Communism broke the system before the blacks were educated and acculturated enough to become equal partners with the colonialists. Blacks were encouraged to rise up and attack the whites and drive them from the land. Some of the first places this happened were Mozambique and Rhodesia, which the latter is now known as the failed state of Zimbabwe.
SA resisted this for much longer, but couldn’t keep it up in the face of world condemnation.
As soon as the blacks were given the vote, the government changed entirely, with the whites now on the outside looking in.
Whatever happens now, it will be at the orders of black leaders, not white.

#fuckinganimals

Quigley says

Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.

You have a long way to go on representing all African societies, pre 1800s. That fills many many books worth.

Quigley says

Africans under colonialism fared objectively much better. They had more more to eat, better order, and the whites killed enough Zulus to keep them in line.

Slaves fared better under their masters as well right? Next you will tell me the newly formed S.A. really was under threat from the Zulu's and needed to go wipe them out, al-la justification or the Zulu wars?

Quigley says

which the latter is now known as the failed state of Zimbabwe.

You cannot insert yourself into a country, destroy the progression and society of the people, take their right of self determination, and when you leave suddenly expect things not to revert back to where they were or typically a lot lot worse. Countless historical examples.

As to European triableness: What did Germany look like pre-Roman Empire? Post? Before unification into the german state? A class system present at any time? Slaves?

The point is, historically, human nations and civs. all have horrible points in their histories. A European 'superiority', or kindness in its colonialism of Africa, was anything but. Laughable to think they were "better off". The entire continent would have been better if Europeans never set a foot on the soil. Europe and America are however overwhelmingly rich today due to our continued exploitation of the region. Hold up your smart phone.

anon_4ca64 says

If people of different ethnicity are equal in intellectual capacity, but widespread social inequalities endure, it must be the case that whites have some deviate, structural and hidden ways to ensure their superior wealth.
In this context, it makes sense that they should donate most of what they have as a way to right a wrong and atone for their past crimes.
Any attempt for them to resist this is tantamount to white nationalism. It can only be justified by the deliberate racism and willingness to oppress people of color, and, yes, at some point in the future it may justify a slaughter.

And once their own white compatriots have been slaughtered they will rely on outside whites to constantly bail them out of various shitty situation they find themselves in. Case in point - Haiti.

Quigley says

The Zulu caste controlled its own population with a rigid code. The chief decided who would marry and when. If you pleased the chief with your exploits as a warrior, you would be allowed to take one or more wives. If not, you were prohibited from impregnating any woman on pain of death for you both!

Sounds like the Zulus discovered 'natural selection' before Darwin did.

KimJongUn says

And once their own white compatriots have been slaughtered they will rely on outside whites to constantly bail them out of various shitty situation they find themselves in. Case in point - Haiti.

Another fine case of colonialism and occupations by rival European tribes. Hey, America even got in on the action for fear that Germany might lay claim first!

Whether it is justified or not, resentment of people of color against whites seems to be on the rise.
After 2 Obama mandates, they throw out King's 'dream' , and cultivate that resentment.

The worst that could happen in the US would be for the Democrats to become THE party representing people of color, and the republicans representing whites only.

Rew says

See any worthy anarcho-primitivism critique of why human genetics or racial differences are bogus with regards to cultural dominance of a race.

I don't see any worthy "anarcho" anything.

Rew says

The entire continent would have been better if Europeans never set a foot on the soil.

Better off perhaps in the same way that an untouched nature preserve is better off for being untouched. Africans in subsaharan Africa were going nowhere as far as civilization is concerned and hadn’t in millennia. You can argue differently about Ethiopia and other northern nations which had been in contact with other civs for millennia and grown in sophistication as a result.

Strategist says

The world is full of crazy wack jobs. We need to change our laws to prevent them from spreading their filth

great timing. This was followed by:

Tenpoundbass says

I'm all for a Global "Put that thing back where you found it" day.

Quigley says

Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.
The tribes were split into a two part caste system. Zulus

Nice, except the part where the Zulu kingdom didn't exist in pre colonial Africa. The colonization of Africa stared with Antonio de Noli mid 1400's. The Zulu kingdom arose in the late 1700's. The Zulu kingdom was centered around Bulawayo stretching roughly from Port Natal to Richards Bay. That would be about .001% of africa.

Looks like South Africa has a tough road ahead.

Quigley says

... were going nowhere as far as civilization is concerned and hadn’t in millennia.

Which is actually the standard state of human existence. Alien invaders, essentially, robbed them of ever being able to rise to anything else, and still do to this day. The only defense of that is (shrug), it's tribal human nature.

Europeans are not some gift to humanity or the world. We got lucky.

anon_4ca64 says

The worst that could happen in the US would be for the Democrats to become THE party representing people of color, and the republicans representing whites only.

Almost there and making quite a lot of steps toward that with Trump in office.
- 8% of the black vote, and just over 1/4 of the Hispanic and Asian-american vote to Trump.
- He is barley carrying 20% of non-white voters now. Women and minorities well over 60% strongly disapprove. (according to FOX's last poll)

Rew says

Alien invaders, essentially, robbed them of ever being able to rise to anything else, and still do to this day. The only defense of that is (shrug), it's tribal human nature.

Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.

Teaching people to be lifelong vicitms-leftie mantra-neevr helps them. Fight, get back on your feet and sometimes you can't accept -but stop with this colonial nonsense. India and China were huge powers for long, they fell and now are rising again.
Japan was bombed -look at the difference between N and S Korea. Leftis ideology always keeps people down-becaus eit teache syou nothing is every your fault.

lostand confused says

Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.

When your culture is made to fail by external oppression, it takes a little bit of time to "get back on your feet" once that oppression is removed. The longer the oppression lasted, and the more brutal it was, the harder it is to recover.

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.

lostand confused says

India and China were huge powers for long, they fell and now are rising again.

90% of the African continent was under European control by the beginning of WWI. India and China had kicked out the Brits over 50 years prior. African nations are some of the youngest on the planet.

Have you read any single African history book, or literature, at all? If so, please provide the title.

Have you ever been to any African country? Which country(ies)?

Do you understand the advantages and disadvantages to the development of human civilizations with regards to low bio-diversity regions of the planet and how that compares to high bio-diversity regions? Do you know what it means for farming and ranching?

lostand confused says

teaches you nothing is every your fault.

Republican leanings these days seem to be quite hypocritical on the point of personal responsibility (Trump, O'Reilly, etc.).

I cannot make any logical leap which says the invaded and colonized are at personal fault for what befalls them. Would you care to extend blame to those people who have genocide and war crimes committed against them? What about those that get assassinated, murdered, or just robbed?

If we follow that to its logical conclusion, no law or order is needed, since victims are always at fault. If a person doesn't want something bad to happen to them, just don't let it happen, right?

I find your thinking here simplistic and ignorant. Sorry.

lostand confused says

Japan was bombed

Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?

If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.

Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.

Anyone have a clear title back to Adam & Eve?

Rew says

When your culture is made to fail by external oppression, it takes a little bit of time to "get back on your feet" once that oppression is removed. The longer the oppression lasted, and the more brutal it was, the harder it is to recover.

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.

As usual you ignore evidence. Spain was ruled over by Arabs, they came out of it and kicked ass. india was ruled by the British, they are kicking ass. You are not helping these people. Rwanda was not being ruled by colonial powers when they had the genocide.

As a non white, I hate these patronizing. I believe everyone is equal-hold them accountable. Kumbayah, kumbayah, whit privileged blah, blah.

Rew says

Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?

If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.

You are so racist/whatever. You actually believe our little help is what helped them. Nobody helped India or China or Singapore or Malaysia-look at them now. As usual evidence, facts never help. Who helped Spain who got out of four centuries of Arab rule-they got out and kicked ass. It is asinine to keep countries in chains and blaming what someone did decades or even centuries ago-you are not treating them s equals-you are being racist and saying they are beneath others and incapable of doing things and being successful on their own even after decades. All because it makes you feel good and superior.

Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??

Rew says

Europeans are not some gift to humanity or the world. We got lucky.

Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America that allowed for sustained growth for 2 millennium. Only China is the only place that even began to approach Europe’s natural resources.

lostand confused says

Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.

Muslims were run out of Spain in the 12th and 13th century. Spanish conquest started in the 16th century. Shall we wait another 350 years and see how Africa does?

lostand confused says

Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??

I've been to Cape Town, 4 yeas ago. It is NOT a big city and it is not very black. What is your point?

Rew says

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.

Without the foreign influence, they’d still be chucking spears and sacrificing newborns to Kali while living in mud huts and putting bones in their noses.
If that’s progress, it’s too slow. They didn’t have the Luxury of being able to be tribals for another three thousand years. Throughout history, more competitive organisms displaced less competitive organisms. It’s Darwinian and harsh, but it’s Nature.

I’d argue that culture is the best predictor of progress. Theirs was adapted to their environment, but that very adaptive trait made it perfectly stagnant. No change means no progress means eventually the culture must die. The Europeans had a kick ass culture developed over hundreds of years that was the reason they overcame every other civilization they encountered. Advanced technology was a product of the culture, not an innate trait of Europeans themselves.

Culture is still the most defining trait of any civilization or ethnic group. It determines how successful its members will be. Not successful? Probably not because of oppressive Europeans. It’s because your culture SUCKS and can’t compete with a better one.

Multiculturalism is a naked attempt to say that all cultures are equal, but historical evidence CLEARLY shows that they are anything but equal.

anon_2d50f says

Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America

And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!

Quigley says

And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!

What civilization didn't they have? There were quite a number of advanced civilizations in the Americas in the pre columbian era. Europe wasn't all that advanced in the 15th century either. European culture is 35,000 years old. The Americas is only 13,000 years old. How advanced was Europe 22,000 years ago despite having ridiculous amounts of resources?

bob2356 says

European culture is 35,000 years old.

Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.

Quigley says

bob2356 says

European culture is 35,000 years old.

Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.

Europe isn't a race. There were many races in europe dating back to Palaeolithic times. Races like nordic, alpine, dinaric, hither asiatic, east baltic were all part of middle Palaeolithic and subsequent cultures.

Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_table_of_the_principal_old_world_prehistoric_cultures

They sound like the left wing these days, aka Democratic party.

bob2356 says

Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?

Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens. These are subject to change, and change occurs every generation to some extent. Religion usually plays a HUGE part in shaping culture, and European culture was greatly shaped by religion. Religion acts as a force for cultural stagnation, keeping culture from changing radically from generation to generation. Each time a new religion is adopted, it transforms a culture drastically. Clearly, the change of religion (to Christianity) in Europe shaped the various cultures of the region and served as the common denominator between the nations of Europe. So probably the traditions of that religion contain the elements of cultural transformation. It’s really the only thing they all had in common.

Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.” Sheesh!