While Zimbabwe has collapsed and is cholera country, South Africa is prospering. How is that the transfer of power to the 80% African majority has done nothing but good to the economy? May be the power transfer was apparent and the inner core of the South African State has remained in the hands of the Bruderband? If so, it is being done with much sophistication, because the liberal world suspects nothing and lets South Africa in peace.
Actual White emigration is far from massive, less than 10% of the population have left and many are coming back. The main complaint is criminal violence, but that is typical of all Africa and little can be done to ameliorate the situation.
How did South African Whites pull off this PR miracle?
8 comments:
SA is not "in peace". The criminal violence in SA is in fact somewhat worse than average for Africa. Although the tourist areas are relatively safe, life is not secure for ordinary people of any race, unless fairly stringent anti-crime measures are enacted. The govt needs to take this issue much more seriously and actually solve this problem. It will not happen without a radical re-think of policy and a real commitment of resources. They need to apprehend people, try them effectively in court, and enact real punishments that fit the crimes and where necessary, permanently remove perps from society. Otherwise, who can blame citizens for finding ways to look after themselves?
Anon.
Widespread violence always existed in Soweto and other townships, but apartheid isolated and protected Whites. It is only logical that now everybody is "enjoying" it. You cannot live in a society where 80% of the population is African and expect a crimefree Japan.
Regarding the palliative of jailing criminals, it is unfeasible. Half of California's young male Blacks are in jail, and still... Think about jailing 15 million South Africans... Apartheid, in a way, was like that. The solution is like Brasil: well policed middle class neighborhoods and to let the favelas fester. Maybe once a while a night razzia.
You raise here a very serious issue, essentially dealing with the "custodial state".
My point is that it is not physically possible to run a democracy for very long unless a certain threshold percentage of the community is committed to the rule of law-an altogether more subtle concept than simple majority rule.
South Africa finds itself on a tipping point, beyond which it might not be feasible to maintain the fundamentals of civilized society. Brazil is a bit better, but as you point out, they have evolved mechanisms to protect their upper and middle classes. I have been there and seen Brazil.
Like it or not (and I didn't, since it was itself a source of insoluble problems), apartheid was primarily and fundamentally a security strategy; the dissolution of apartheid has had many benefits but physical security is not one of them. And it is not only whites who suffer, but also other minority groups and indeed many blacks as well.
The country needs to find a replacement strategy to protect its most productive people, of whatever race, since these are most likely to become fairly wealthy. Ipso facto they become targets.
Time to get tough, and, yes, life is not fair but civilization requires a certain minimum level of law and order. This is not a fascist slogan, but a fact. No security, no productivity; no productivity, no tax base; no tax base, no civilization.
But in Israel, you understand all this.
Anon.
Yes, we do, but we (like South Africa) cannot stand international media pressure.
You have to gird your loins.
What is it about "international media pressure" that is so powerful anyway? The aura of sophistication? Most of these journalists have lost touch with reality, and their editors try to gain notoriety by being more holy than the Pope.
And some of the media outlets are owned by, shall we say, people with an agenda.
Anon.
Dear Anon, I appreciate your opinion, but international public opinion is very powerful and has destroyed more powerful entities than Israel. For start, the English are organizing an academic boycott of Israel, and without academic contacts our scientists will not stay here. Then there is the arms embargo thing, no one is truely autarchic anymore, we need commercial relations. And I dont want to go on to avoid giving ideas to our enemies. But no one can resist public opinion. We dont want to be a pariah nation but an accepted legitimate member of the fraternity of enlightened nations. That is the whole idea of Israel.
That is why we are having this internal strive agains building settlements in occupied territories. Our best people here do not want to be or be perceived as outcasts.
The world does not give a shit if Arabs kill each other, but we are forbidden to even talk hard to them. I am not optimistic at all.
We don't want to be a pariah nation but an accepted legitimate member of the fraternity of enlightened nations.
That's funny! how many "enlightened nations" are there in the world? One? Two? Three?
You will need the Orthodox, since they seem to care less about Israeli opinion, much less World opinion.
You are wrong...South Africa still sucks since the Blacks took over - http://www.zasucks.com/
Post a Comment