Quote: (08-30-2018 06:09 AM)Pride male Wrote:
^Yup. Same could be said of American slavery. I am sure whites rue the day their ancestors shipped blacks to pick cotton. Should of been like Australia. Same can be said of Rome, Egypt, sweat shops etc. The lust for cheap labour was their undoing.
Quote: (08-30-2018 07:54 AM)Hell_Is_Like_Newark Wrote:
Quote: (08-30-2018 06:09 AM)Pride male Wrote:
^Yup. Same could be said of American slavery. I am sure whites rue the day their ancestors shipped blacks to pick cotton. Should of been like Australia. Same can be said of Rome, Egypt, sweat shops etc. The lust for cheap labour was their undoing.
And the American lust for cheap labour (Mexico, HB1) will be its undoing
"BUT THEY DO JOBS AMERICANS WONT DO" ... yes Americans would do it, just not at that price point, plus automation and tech advances would come into play
Quote: (08-31-2018 12:49 PM)britchard Wrote:
If the British had been allowed to properly rule South Africa it would be in a much better state than it is now. There were probably more Aborigines in Australia than there were Blacks in South Africa at the time of first settling. The Dutch/Afrikaners basically had no experience in colonising, they sort of just wandered aimlessly. If I remember correctly, it was 200 or so years after first settling that they even bothered to venture in to the interior (modern day Vrystaat en Gauteng). Added to that the fact that the Boers were hostile towards English settlers, this greatly decreased the numbers of immigrants wanting to move there. South Africa is in fact much more habitable than Australia, the population growth could have been incredibly exponential.
This isn't an anti-Afrikaner rant, I can completely see why they wouldn't want to be ruled by us and probably (I'm guessing here) be forced to drop their language and culture, and compete with English, Scots and Irish workers. But that also led to the current state of South Africa.
Quote: (09-13-2018 06:48 AM)Pride male Wrote:
I am reading Ian Smiths bio. He writes that apartheid SouthAfrica could have brought in white immigrants especially after WW2, thus becoming a European majority in the country. But the Afrikaners didnt want to lose political power.
I pointed this out a few pages back, a lot of SA's problems today were due to some critical mistakes, cheap labour and restricted white immigration.
Great bio by Ian Smith, had he had control of Rhodesia+SA it would be in a much better state. Implement Rhodesia's White immigration policy in SA post WWII to watch demographics, in addition to strict border control with neighbouring black states/tribes to limit black immigration
Thirst for cheap labour can be traced back, the mining giants depended on a lot of expendable black labour.
SA was a country that had a robust culture of innovation, self centered industry with uniquely SA solutions to problems, when oil was getting restricted what did they do? Develop a way to turn coal (abundance) to usable liquid fuels. Foreign nations won't sell you shit like transportation vehicles and arms? Build your own, and develop and build nukes while you're at it.
Their universities produced medical professionals who preformed the first heart transplant.
SA is too far gone, but it should be a warning and learning lesson for western countries that demographics are everything and addiction to cheap labour will result in your downfall.
As stated in a prior post, SA is also the testing grounds for many cultural marxist tactics now seen in NA (Canada has their own truth and reconciliation committee, something first tried in post apartheid SA, The tearing down of CSA statues in the states? Seen frequently in SA with the teardown of Afrikaan and British white figures' statues.) Next up their new testing field is going to be renaming universities (Rhodes)
EDIT: Bit of a jumbled mess of a rant, enjoying a few drinks while admiring the aesthetics of former Rhodesia.