Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday February 28 2018, @01:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the Apartheid-2.0 dept.

As reported in news.com.au, South Africa's Parliament have voted to "expropriate" land from white farmers with no compensation.

From TFA:

The motion was brought by Julius Malema, leader of the radical Marxist opposition party the Economic Freedom Fighters, and passed overwhelmingly by 241 votes to 83 against. The only parties who did not support the motion were the Democratic Alliance, Freedom Front Plus, Cope and the African Christian Democratic Party
...
"The time for reconciliation is over. Now is the time for justice," Mr Malema was quoted by News24 as telling parliament. "We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land."
...
Mr Malema has been leading calls for land confiscation, forcing the ANC to follow suit out of fear of losing the support of poorer black voters. In 2016, he told supporters he was "not calling for the slaughter of white peopleā€š at least for now"

This policy has been tried in other African countries before, most recently Zimbabwe, with disastrous results. The farms appropriated usually fail rapidly, leading to food shortages and economic destruction. Will South Africa be able to avoid repeating history, or is it about to slide into 3rd World status?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @06:18PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @06:18PM (#645285)

    Mandela is made out to be some saint for two reasons. First, from a South African view, he's a country founder. (like Washington, Mao, and Kim) Second, from an American view, supporting him is a way to assuage our slavery guilt.

    The reality is that he tortured people to death.

    The hands would be bound or hacked off. The person would be made to kneel. An old tire would be placed around the neck and over the shoulders, like a necklace. Liquid fuel would be poured into the tire and then ignited. Once the fire was well underway, the person's family would be encouraged to try to save the person. At that point of course, the person was probably doomed, and if not doomed then they'd at least have no face anymore due to burns. The family members would likely burn themselves trying to save the person.

  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday February 28 2018, @06:53PM

    by Arik (4543) on Wednesday February 28 2018, @06:53PM (#645304) Journal
    There is actually a difference though. Certainly from Mao. Their early careers resemble each other but when Mao took power he imposed a long and bloody period and killed people in incomprehensible numbers. Mandela, to his credit, stepped back from the abyss and started preaching non-violence and reconciliation in his old age. And post-apartheid South Africa has managed to avoid the worst at least in comparison to e.g. Rhodesia. It's not perfect but it could have been a whole lot worse, a lot of people had justified fear that it would be a lot worse, and right or wrong Mandela's timely turn-around is given a lot of credit for the fact that SA has not become Zimbabwe.

    This article makes it sound like it's finally going to do just that, only the article seems to be a bad lip reading and the rest of the press has it only as a 'proposal' - and not one expected to get support. So, so far, so good, still not Zimbabwe.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @11:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 28 2018, @11:13PM (#645476)

    I thought that was his mad wife.

  • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday March 01 2018, @09:47AM

    by pTamok (3042) on Thursday March 01 2018, @09:47AM (#645696)

    If you have evidence that Nelson Mandela personally participated in 'necklacing' and other abuses of human rights, please provide it*.

    It is true that as leader of the ANC while it was classified as a terrorist organisation, he was regarded as a terrorist, and ANC members did many terrible things. He did regard violent struggle as justified**, and co-founded ,Umkhonto we Sizwe [wikipedia.org] ("The Spear of he Nation"), which was set up purposefully as a paramilitary organisation. There is an interesting overview of Nelson Mandela's attitude to violence in this Salon article: What Nelson Mandela can teach us all about violence [salon.com]

    This makes it even more striking that he did not support a campaign of retribution against whites after the ANC gained power, as he had a history of regarding violence as justifiable.

    I certainly do not regard him as a 'saint'. He was probably a pragmatist, recognising that expelling the whites would ruin the country. This pragmatism makes him unusual. He was also strongly influenced by communism, and may well have believed that people would have been satisfied once blacks had equal standing with whites - that is, the armed struggle was a struggle for equality, not supremacy.

    *His second wife, Winnie Mandela was convicted in 1991 of kidnapping and being an accessory to assault in connection with the murder of Stompie Moeketsi [wikipedia.org]. She also made a statement in 1986:"With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country" which was regarded as endorsing the practice of 'necklacing' [wikipedia.org]

    **He concluded from the Sharpeville massacre that the ANC could no longer limit itself to non-violent protest if it were to overthrow Apartheid.