Nelson Mandela ... a great legacy being tainted.

[Platton]

 

Communism, for all of its flaws, is not inherently evil in the same way that true race-based class separation is.

I can't remember who asked that hypotetical question once:

 

Would you rather be a slave on a privat plantage, or a state owned gulag?

 

Ofcourse there was no slavery in South Africa, and people don't understand even what apartheid is. I myself don't care about race, because i'am a capitalist, and money has no race or religion. Also, apartheid isn't class speration, because it was them free to build business themself. As i mentioned, the tribal areas were just populated by native africans.

Also, Communism is a way more strikt class system than the apartheid ever was. And even worse, communism hinders you to vote with your feet.

 

But whats the point in trying to explain things. Western education system is total leftwing dominated, and so every child knows that Mandela ended raceism and that bunnyrabbits die.

[TRoaches]

Would you rather be a slave on a privat plantage, or a state owned gulag?

Saying "at least its not slavery" or "at least its not communism" is hardly a solid defense of apartheid.

 

 

I myself don't care about race, because i'am a capitalist, and money has no race or religion.

Apartheid was about as far from true capitalism as you can get. If you are defending apartheid you are not a capitalist.

 

 

Also, apartheid isn't class speration, because it was them free to build business themself.

 

This is simply not true. It was the very definition of a race-based class system.

 

 

Also, Communism is a way more strikt class system than the apartheid ever was.

Communism's flaws do not excuse apartheid's immorality any more so than apartheid's immorality excuses communism's flaws. The Nazis came to power in part under an anti-communist platform, but it didn't make them good guys.

Edited July 13, 2013 by TRoaches

[rizon72]

The big question I see is, are they better off now, than what they were? I don't know, I don't live there.

[Platton]

@TRoaches

 

I'am not defending apartheid, i'am pointing out that the people are even worse off now. And still, for every government project which results in failure the whites getting blamed.

 

Its a question of their attitude, and their attitude is the ones of lazy thiefs.

[TRoaches]

@TRoaches

 

I'am not defending apartheid, i'am pointing out that the people are even worse off now.

This is equivalent to stating "they were better off under apartheid". That sounds like a defense of apartheid to me.

 

By most accounts the former colonial citizens in the US were worse off in many ways for some time following the American revolution. Does this make the American revolution an entirely bad thing? I don't think so, but it is a matter of opinion of course. I don't think anyone would claim that South Africa was transformed into a utopia following the end of apartheid, but I do believe that the good outweighed the bad.

[Harbringe]

Despite what some may say , he will be regarded as one of the greatest individuals to make a mark on society that the 20th century ever produced , in the company of the likes of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Detractors may detract , but unlike them he made a difference for the good and that's all that needs to be said in world where so few do.

[Platton]

 

This is equivalent to stating "they were better off under apartheid". That sounds like a defense of apartheid to me.

That is because people are looking always to the perfect status. Sometimes you need to ask "compared to what?". And in this case, they are far more worse off now. And it didn't even changed much for about the apartheid, because the whites still live in gated and guarded communities while the blacks sitting in their townships and waiting for free handouts and that someone would give them an affirmative action job.

 

I would be happy to see South Africa becomming a real republic with free market trade, but now they are even more less likely to achieve that.

 

 

 

Despite what some may say , he will be regarded as one of the greatest individuals to make a mark on society that the 20th century ever produced , in the company of the likes of Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

First off, Gandhi was in South Africa also and he hated blacks. Also, Martin Luther King was opposing communism and islam, he was a republican. But their names sound positive, and so this comparison gives Mandela a positive look.

Why don't name him with people who also made a great mark on society in the 20th century such as Lenin, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot and Jim Jones.

[TRoaches]

@Platton: Has any person ever lived who, in your opinion, deserves recognition and praise for their political or social achievements?

 

eta: King was at least sympathetic to communism, expressed admiration for several communists, and worked closely with members of the Communist Party so, by the standard of perfection that you are setting to qualify for historical admiration, he did not deserve it either. He also never expressed any support for Republicans in general, and in fact said "In the past I have always voted for Democrats" when he was considering voting for Eisenhower. He was highly critical of both parties and never endorsed anyone from either party for President. He did say that he voted for Kennedy, and that he would have endorsed Kennedy had he been able to run for reelection.

Edited July 13, 2013 by TRoaches

[rizon72]

The phrase, "the grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind in this conversation.

[Platton]

 

@Platton: Has any person ever lived who, in your opinion, deserves recognition and praise for their political or social achievements?

 

Rejecting the Figures Ghandi and Mandela doesn't mean there ain't people who did good things. I just don't like frauds, thiefs, murderers, looters, racists and demagoges. So Ghandi and Mandela can touch themselfs.