I have just moved back to Johannesburg after spending about seven months in Cape Town. Even though I am very glad to be back in Johannesburg ,I am still stressed about the change, and to a small extent I have been sulking a little bit — finding a place to stay, new job, new friends, etc. Yes — this sounds horrible and so frickin’ self-absorbed!! So who gives a damn about a stupid move? I am just moving from one South African city to another I am not a foreigner in this country.
I have generally steered away from political commenting (for various reasons) and have preferred to write on environmental issues (which mind you, is not ‘not political’) but in light (or dark) of the xenophobic attacks happening in Gauteng, writing about climate change and biopiracy doesn’t make sense right now.
There is a war going on around us. There have been tons written about the xenophobic attacks, pointing blame, suggesting its origins, South Africa has lost the plot, etc. And to some extent I do agree that our leaders (from all political parties) have not shown adequate leadership — they have been politicking, thus allowing the situation to spiral out of control.
A fellow blogger questioned whether blogging can help the situation much — we do sit in our little castles and comment to our hearts and (some) minds content. It is comfortable to provide comment and not do anything, waiting for the government and police to bring the situation under control. Maybe there isn’t a whole lot we can do but what if we can make a small difference?
An anti-xenophobia march is being organised by a number of civil society groups/organisations on Saturday 24 May 2008 (ironically it is a day before Africa Day – 25 May 2008). The march is scheduled to start at 9am from the Pieter Roos Park, on the corner of Empire and Queens street. It may seem as if nothing can be gained from this march — but history has proven different — from Gandhi to Martin Luther King Jr to the women who marched on Union Buildings.
I hope to join the march against these racist attacks, rather something than sitting back and pointing fingers. If you can, please join the march and let your voice against xenophobia be heard!
@ Jason Whitehead
I was going to treat your posting seriously until I saw your link.
Free papers for all illegals, immediately, free housing for all, immediately, whether they worked for it or not etc. etc. Where will the money and the land come from to support all this? Oh, we are going to steal it from the whites of course because they are GUILTY and UNWORTHY, and maybe we get to kill a few in the process. Where else in the world have you seen this black Utopia, Jason?
You are ignoring the facts detailed in my post to spread your COMMUNIST DISINFORMATION. I am not going to waste my time responding to the rubbish you have posted.
@Natalie
the xenophobes are not making any speech; free or hate or any other kind of speech. They are acting. While you and I make speech and you march (not me) they are doing what the government should have done, and prevented in the first place by proper border control.
Why do SA taxpayers owe them service delivery and jobs, slow or otherwise? We cant even meet the needs of our own people, never mind those rom other disaterous african governments.
Our own government is already making more poor in SA due to the decling number of formal jobs. But they are certainly enriching themselves.
@Jason
Thank you but no thank you. I have no interest in living like them. I am tired of this government trying to take us all down to that level. I try my hardest to keep myself and my nation out of that situation.
I have a better idea. Why not take all of your own possessions and give them to illegals, then go live like them. There would be perspective for you. Then we are all happy. You give your things away like you want us to do, I keep what I worked for, and the illegals get scraps, and then are just as poor the next day. If you want to jump off the bridge why must I follow?
I have seen enough of refugee camps and have installed services in some in the Lakes region.
Sorry. I don’t buy into the guilts and bleeding heart story. Uplift myself, my family, my people, my race, my nation. The illegals dont qualify and the above groups already need more than i can spare.
Where is the african uBuntu now?
@ Eagle: Please provide one shred of proof that only 4 millon South Africans pay tax. You’re dreaming.
In this kind of debate, we need to stick to facts, not fabrications
Eagle
All the refugees are not Zimbabwean, and “these refugees” did NOT “vote for Mugabe” The elcetions in both 2002 and 2005 were both rigged.
Jason
Like Helen Susman said we are “not into self-flagellation” and she commented upon how convenient it was for the ANC to airbrush out of history all the whites who had helped in “the struggle”.
So what then is your solution to the way so many South Africans have to live, in poverty? Your postings are so over-emotional. Who’s asking you to give up anything, guilt, killing, bleeding heart. What are you talking about? Can’t you see the link in the situation the people in the townships have to endure and the violence and mayhem that has followed.
What do you think your outlook would be if you so happened to be born a black South African in Alex today? What is the consulting engineer doing to try and keep his nation out the situation? The people Abahlali represent are not foreigners (read illegal aliens). They are poor South Africans. Sorry you missed that.
Eagle, are you really trying to engage in a constructive debate to find solutions, or are you wasting everyone’s time here so you can vent. I’ll discuss one of your examples that borders on an urban legend: 50% of Zimbabweans voted for Zanu-PF, thus he must have some legitimate support. Well, it’s doubtful those are the Zimbos who have left the country for South Africa if they’re hanging on Bob’s every word, not so?
Inadvertently you have posed the very question I think this whole saga revolves around; how is South Africa going to lift the poor out of poverty. The statistics are too depressing to go into, we know them. And it’s also true that in every developed country so far there remains a gap between the rich and the poor. Perhaps wanton capitalism is not the answer. Perhaps our democratic system is incapable of delivering. It’s all in the air. What are suggestions though?
We’ve had a crisis, I’m not at all happy seeing anybody burned to death for any reason in our country. My suspicion is that both you (Eagle) and CE believe in your hearts that the problem is an inherent inability of black people to get it right. And that, my dear friend, is the biggest untruth that we white South Africans who have lived through apartheid have to work our way out of. It not true. In fact it’s ignorance; and for the benefit of the interests of others it’s actually a lie.
@ Jason Whitehead
Classic communist disinformation techniques. You ignore the gist of what I posted and take the argument down a more inflammatory path that suits you better based on implied accusations of something neither I nor CE actually said:
“My suspicion is that both you (Eagle) and CE believe in your hearts that the problem is an inherent inability of black people to get it right.”
Please cut and past my statement to the above effect otherwise do not speak for me. It is ludicrous to for you to tell me what is “in my heart”. Judging by your postings you have neither the insight nor the objectivity. My suspicion is that you have communist agenda and are not on here to debate the facts but you are on here to spread your communist propaganda.
@ Lyndall Beddy
“All the refugees are not Zimbabwean, and “these refugees” did NOT “vote for Mugabe”.
You are nitpicking the incidentals and ignoring the salient facts. You cannot know who voted and who did not vote for Mugabe but he is in power because of majority votes. The first vote after independence in Zimbabwe was reasonably well policed. Realistically in Africa, like in South Africa, voters get one chance and thereafter must take the consequences of their decisions, despite the “democratic voting process.” Every vote thereafter is likely to be sham.
As for “All the refugees are not Zimbabwean,”. We all know that but the same principle applies. They voted their own despots into power, why must we now take the consequences?
I can make it simpler for you if you want.
I, and most other South Africans did not vote for these dictators either. Why must I pay crippling taxes, work 16 hour days and have whatever I have worked for all my live, stolen under laws such as the “Expropriation Act” to support the result of outsiders’ emotional decisions and the criminal actions of their elected rulers. I would be quite happy if people like yourself, Jason Helen Suzzman etc. etc. give what you own to these refugees. You might even feel better if you take a few into your houses but don’t ask me to do it, my family comes first.
The same has happened in South Africa. People like Helen Suzman, Black Sash Helen Zille, Nadine Gordimer, Brink, the 70% who voted yes in the referendum, the Liberal West, etc. etc. are materially instrumental for putting our present government into power and for the ANC’s actions thereafter. Now everyone is complaining and slating the government but not one will stand up and blame themselves or take responsibility for the mess we all find ourselves in. Will you?
And while people are running out the country at an incredible rate and those left behind are complaining non-stop, the ANC again will get the majority vote as has been shown in Polokwane. Interesting to note though that, when white refugee run to other countries they do so through the full process of the immigration laws of those countries and they become a contributing force, not a burden. If the government wants to support refugees they why do they not spend the taxpayers’ money to get our own back into the country and support our own?
What you sow you will reap, it is a fact of life.
I do wish you would all realise that Ubuntu does not meaan people first, or nation first – there is NO such concept in African culture. It means family first or tribe first i.e cronyism NOT democracy.
Jason
Eagle is right that the proportion of our citizens that pay tax is very small (and alledgedly does not include Zuma). Which is why we should be careful with tax money and not waste it as the ANC has been doing, starting with the arms deal.
Eagle
Massive violence and intimidation proceeded the first vote in Zim in 1980. And they have NEVER had a free election since 2000.
What do you think would have happened if the referendum vote had not been “yes”? Do try to live in reality.
@ Dave
You say:
“@ Eagle: Please provide one shred of proof that only 4 millon South Africans pay tax. You’re dreaming. In this kind of debate, we need to stick to facts, not fabrications”
Eagle says:
In support of my statement, below is an extract from a recent SARS media release.
“Pretoria , 23 January 2008 – The South African Revenue Service (SARS) has received a record of more than 3 million income tax returns as part of the 2007 Filing Season.”
Note, they talk of a RECORD receipt of 3 million returns which means returns for the previous seasons were even less.
Are you awake booytjie? Maybe its you that should stick to the facts and stop your fabrications. Its people like you who do not know the facts and shoot of at the mouth without understanding the implications of a particular event that cause the sort of problems we have in this country.
@ Lyndall
You give me these meaningless one liners but you expect detailed responses from me. You are wasting my time.
Eagle,
It is not a one liner – it is a question.
Not surprised you can’t answer it.
@Eagle, you are wrong about business taxes in South Africa. It is amongst the lowest globally at 29%. 4 million tax returns in a country where 60% remain unemployed is a great record. It is much lower in other countries. I do agree that Zimabweans have voted Mugabe into office repeatedly but that was only because they had no choice, ie. his electoral processes were not fair. If some of the media reports are to be believed, Zimbaweans have been intimidated and beaten if they were not Mugabe supporters. The people from Zimbabwe have asked for our help and is our humanitarian obligation to assist them. Assistance to refugees and those in need is human rights norm that is well established. Just because we are having problems of our own does not give us the right to ignore an important obligation owed to the refugees in our country. Like I said before, the problems like poverty and unemployment should be resolved by government.
@Consulting Engineer you should realise that the world has become a global market place and we are all dependent on each other. Our own stability and growth is very much dependent on the stability and growth of the region and the continent as a whole.In my opinion South Africa can only benefit from the talent and diversity from other African countries because we lose too many educated people to other countries. The only thing I smell in all the angry mail I read so far is FEAR, fear of competition. South Africans are now forced to compete with all those hardworking and resourceful Somali business owners, intelligent Nigerians and highly educated Zimbabweans. Naturally we feel inferior to them because we are all competing for the same resources and most South Africans remain illiterate. Further, our government has failed to deliver jobs, services and affordable education to the people. All I am saying is that we should not attack refugees for problems we would have had anyway.
@ Natalie Sunker
“@Eagle, you are wrong about business taxes in South Africa. It is amongst the lowest globally at 29%.”
Here is the reality. Do a little exercise. Take your 29% business tax, apply it to your cc but also apply all the hidden forms of taxation and levies. To make it more interesting also consider that some of these taxes are based on turnover or expenditure, not profit, whereas in many small businesses, profit could be less than 10% off turnover.
Imagine you and your partner are the member of a Close Corporation. You operate from a property which you purchased for the business and you have bought some capital items on installment. Your business does a bit of property development and some training. Here is just some of your taxation:
Secondary tax, VAT, Capital Gains tax – applied to gains on all capital items, not just properties, COIDA levies, skills development levies, property rates and taxes, Fuel levies, increase in bond rates, Sin tax, UIF, provident fund, taxation of insurance, etc, personal tax i.e. PAYE for members, Retirement and Provident funds taxes for employees and employers, Transfer duty, Taxation on water & electricity. Air passenger Tax, Import Duty, Annual Licencing and COF of your vehicles, etc.
Add to that the severe penalties which try as you might, you will fall foul of some act or directive or the other, e.g. provisional tax, and the cost of compliance with the 60 new acts or amendment acts per year such as BEE and EE and you have not a hope in hell.
Now comes your tax classification. Because there are primarily two of you you will probably be classified as a personal services business in which case you cannot deduct any expenses and your taxation rate is at 40%. Generally you will be lucky if you get to keep 10% of your turnover. Taxation and expenses will eat up the other 90%.
Do you get the picture now?
And your taxes will then be used to fund corruption and greed, the court cases of the likes of Zuma and McBride, the partying and traveling for cabinet ministers, electricity for foreign countries, grants for the “poor” and illegal immigrants and foreigners, amongst other things.
@ Natalie Sunker
“4 million tax returns in a country where 60% remain unemployed is a great record. It is much lower in other countries.”
Please detail for me some of these countries where “it is much lower”. As for the rest:
Read my postings again. You miss my point.
My point is that a very small proportion of taxpayers have to bear the burden of 55 million people, a large percentage of which are unemployed but have any number of children. Many of the unemployed live on child and other grants which have to come out of the money gathered through taxes.
Even if you battle with the maths you must surely understand the basic liberal concept that our own comes before foreigners.
Here is an analogy for you. The cake has to be cut into so many small pieces to support our own that there is already not enough hence massive suffering amongst our own black and white population. If any piece of the cake is given to an outsider one of our own will have to go without and that is not fair.
In other words, any money spend on foreigners will deprive our own already impoverished population. We have a much larger obligation to our own population than we have to outsiders and we cannot steal from our own population to protect those that have made a living from taking jobs and housing from our population, not even to mention the high incidence of crime in the areas where there are foreigners. Is it starting to make sense?
Emotional statement such as “Assistance to refugees and those in need is human rights norm blah, blah.” will not chance the reality. THERE IS JUST NOT ENOUGH.
Tent settlements have been put up all over the place, one of them has suddenly mushroomed about 1 km from my farm with the result that there were already 6 foreigners on my farm today stealing firewood. Besides the fact that my own workers were immediately on their cell phones to their friends in Mamelodi, the dangers to my family and the fact that this violence is then likely to spill over into our neighbourhood, why are our own poor black and white not being housed in tent settlements?
I suppose when the locals come after foreigners being sheltered in other neighborhoods such as ours and this leads to violence against whites, pc liberals like yourself will just pretend it never happened and that you had no part in it?
Eagle
This time I agree – with both your last two posts.
Eagle
This time I agree – with your last two posts.
Thanks Lyndall
What is it with liberals? They seem to have some fighting spirit, in short bursts granted, but it’s charging at windmills all the time. And then the debate disintegrates into arguing about minor details like; did the bodyguard who worked for Winnie Mandela in 1968 have 5 toes or 6 toes on his left foot, whilst the gists of posting are ignored.
What would be interesting is if they could see the realities, not the smokescreens put in front of them, and one can join forces against common injustices?
Like the Expropriation Act. It is an ugly piece of communism, it gives the corrupt and the greedy unlimited powers, and it is the one we should join forces against. TL should run a blog on it.
Eagle
Being Liberal is being Just to ALL SIDES!
@ Lyndall Beddy
You say: “Being Liberal is being Just to ALL SIDES!”
I am afraid the reality is a bit less romantic.
Liberalism is really legitimization of the uglier side of the human psyche. Generally it allows the intellectually challenged attention-seekers in our white populations to play out well-camouflaged non-politically correct aspects of their personalities such as selfcenteredness, envy, hate, social prejudice, stupidity, bigotry and the overwhelming need for attention, amongst other things, without fear of criticism.
For the liberal, the payback is large, today you’re a social misfit shunned by people due to your general state of stupidly, tomorrow you are an international expert on any subject you choose and who can scream out your criticism of others simply because you can say words like xenophobia.
The following has been copied form the liberal toolkit:
• As a pc liberal your most important tool is, of course, political correctness. You do not actually have to know a single thing about the subject at hand, you simply adopt the internationally morphed politically correct points of view thereby taking the attention away from the real facts at hand and bringing it back to some time-honoured white-guilt demons such as morality, or rather the lack of it, “discrimination”, “the rich advantaged at the expense of the poor”, “unjust treatment of the disadvantaged”, “inferior education” etc. etc.
• Secondly, demonizing and labeling is absolutely necessary so the liberal can be seen to be fighting some cause or the other on behalf of the “underdog” hence labels such as “the apartheid regime”, “racists”, “supremacists”, “abuser of human rights”, etc.
Through labeling the person/situation etc. which is being targeted is immediately demonized, no matter the reality. Hence people at the ends of their patience after being political pawns for 14 years, demonstrating for their own human rights, are label “Xenophobics” no matter that the label is a complete misnomer and that those very same people were the darlings of liberal society when labeled “disadvantaged by Apartheid” not too long ago.
• Never argue facts. Generalize at all costs. Meet every challenge with more labels and outraged insults.
• Ignore all truth and above all, never engage in constructive debate because you will be shown up as a fraud. Therefore disappear when the situation gets too hot only to pop up somewhere else with the same delusional and misleading ravings.
@Eagle
Excellent post and almost fully covers liberal debating tactics, known in the military as E&E – escape and evasion.
You forgot a few tools:
Claim what the other person says in nonsense, junk, untrue, idiocy etc but never ever attempt to show how it is junk
Deride or discredit the source as racist/false etc. but never provide factual contradictions
Make legislation that states questioning the PC view is illegal
If you want classic examples of these tactics look at the David Irving trail. In other trials in Germany against Holocaust deniers even the lawyer defending the denier was put on trial, like was done to Ernst Zundel’s lawyer. It is illegal to defend a denier.
That is the ultimate PC. Ensure the PC version of ‘truth’ cannot be challenged by silencing any debate and labelling the oppostion.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=38848§ionid=351020604
Liberals are people who prefer collectivist societies to individualistic ones. They want to run societies under the control of human reason — their own, of course.
When liberals put their plans into action something always leaks through the cracks. Some individualist always finds an obscure road that wasn’t on the liberal map. And when he uses that road to circumvent the road blocks liberals have clamped on society, the system starts to break down.
Liberals respond by calling him an evil person.
The whole leftist movement’s been rattling along for more than a hundred years now. Its corrosiveness was developed by that tribe that has instilled itself in so many white nations, and ends up being expelled. After WWII liberalism instilled itself in the social domain, once they got control of the entertainment media. Initially, they were filled with hope of changing the world into a liberal wonderland through reform or revolution: the march, toyi-toyi, protest, etc. Emotional outbursts.
Recently they experience disillusionment when the gap between their ideal and the actual world refuses to be bridged, and get upset that mankind’s recalcitrance to accept their wisdom. They conclude that the world was wrong — not their basic ideas. I heard that one. It was not voting ANC that was wrong. This is not the ANC and post apartheid we voted for. Ja ja… Avoid responsibility.
This is romantic idealism at its worst. Logic is put to the service of pure emotion thus achieving the maximum of unreality.
So how will it turn out? Probably it’ll be pretty messy because disillusioned liberals are often bitter, vindictive people. By about middle age, most liberals have seen their Utopia fail to materialize time and again. This gives rise to one of the more saddening, but ironic, spectacles of romantic liberalism: the aging hard liberal. Bitter, angry, disillusioned.
The failures of liberal social engineering schemes like ‘equality’ ‘multiculturalism’ etc are obvious. Everywhere it has led to increased racialism, riots, while the ‘oppressed groups’ continue to fail despite all the giving.
How can us conservatives and right wingers stop the liberal in the short and the long term? Short term, we must start, support and endorse any project that will encourage people to help themselves. We must forget the favorite word of liberals: give. We must replace it with earn.
Giving things has very seldom encouraged self-reliance and it won’t in the future. If, when they have the opportunity, people won’t help themselves — society can’t help them. Liberals have created hordes of people who absolutely cannot help themselves.
In the long term we must start to do several things. One is to get as many of our youngsters as possible into non-liberal environments. That last sentence did not contain the word school because it’s probably impossible to get the job done in anything called a school in today’s vernacular. Certainly not anything called a government school.
We must also make a much stronger effort to assemble a body of intellectually coherent literature documenting and explaining our (white non-liberal) philosophy of life and living and elf relaince. The quantity of words written in support of leftist ideology is colossal. Leftists tend to talk and wish. Conservatives tend to do and fix.
This has been one of the major reasons why the left has gained such a tight grip on our culture; they talk a good game. Ideas do matter and leftists are just much more wordy than we are.
We must increase our presence in the media.
There is very little written about the things conservatives think are important. Liberal ideology is documented in thousands and thousands of publications. The media is full of liberal, romantic chic. Questioning the PC view is career killing.
Liberals control over the process whereby our culture is passed on to our children must be taken out of liberal hands. White guilt is imposed on our children rather than pride in their people.
Eagle
My Pocket Oxford Dictionary defines Liberal as:
“Open-handed, generous, not sparing of, abundant, open-minded,unprejudiced, free from pedantry, advocating democratic reforms’
AND best of all
“fit for a gentleman”
What dictionary does your definition come from?
@ Lyndall Breddy
“My Pocket Oxford Dictionary defines Liberal as: Open-handed, generous, blah, blah blah………………………… What dictionary does your definition come from?”
Your definition, obviously written by a liberal, is the ULTIMATE DELUSION.
My definition comes from more than half a century of life experience. Like my experience with “Apartheid”; I was there, I do not get my “experience and knowledge” from books or from liberal groupspeak and politically correct psychobabble.
@ Consulting Engineer
Brilliant posts, I could not have said it better. I am still waiting for just one of these liberals to accept responsibility for the mess and the 240 000 violent murders, amongst other things, that they have brought about in this country.
Of course, in true liberal tradition, the other “experts” who attacked me on this thread have now gone “poof”, after I posted the facts. What say, Dave and Natalie?
CE You are confusing liberalism with socialism, a common mistake of people who only think they are well read. The main tenant of liberalism is the focus on individual rights, as in individual liberty. Some of the main themes, to fill you in, are freedom of expression, limitation in government influence, the rule of law. You would have no reason to feel threatened and insecure, as you do, in a true liberal democracy. To your credit in your rant you at least didn’t imply the world is over run with communist propoganda.
@ Jason Whitehead
So you are then saying the posters on here who hurl insults of “racists” and “white supremacists” at us when we exercised our “freedom of expression” are then socialists, not pc liberals. Well, I’m sure that Lyndall Beddy, oldfox, oosthuizen, len vd Merwe, lazola, khaya, etc. would love being called socialists, or is it communist.
Now of course, I will get the lecture that socialism is not the same as communism. It might not be Jason, but they are equally as stupidly dangerous in a thirdworld country as ours.
How would you classify yourself then with all the little digs such as “feel threatened and insecure, as you do”, “people who only think they are well read”, etc. in your post to CE? Remember he was only exercising his “freedom of expression”. Obviously you feel then that you are a socialist, not a liberal.
All liberals don’t behave like liberals for the same reasons. Despite claims to motivation only by the highest ideals, different sub-groups support the liberal movement with vastly different aims in mind.
Regardless of the disastrous results of their actions, liberals claim always to be motivated only by good intentions. Most of them really believe what they declare. But are they really altruistic?
Most liberals are ‘soft’ liberals who got hooked early in their lives on liberal doctrine. They were propagandised by the schools they attended, by the media they watched and listened to and above all by the outpouring of folly that characterises the products of the entertainment industry. They merely take liberal dogma for granted. They assume that all “right-thinking” people agree with them. And, since they usually associate only with other soft liberals, most everyone they know does agree with them.
It never occurs to them that the source of society’s crisis is the dogma with which they have been indoctrinated. They are mostly middle class. They have enough money to buy what television tells them they need. They seldom have any personal contact with the social turmoil that liberalism has given rise to. They dont serve in the army or poice. Therefore, they have no reason to question their beliefs. They hold these beliefs because they have been taught from an early age that liberal ideas obviously inform mankind about the best — perhaps the only — way society should be run. They never analyze the dogma they’ve come to assume is self-evidently true. They never recognize what it leads to when it’s applied. In their own lives they seldom look beyond the immediate consequences of anything they do; we can’t expect them to do otherwise in their support of liberalism. Soft liberals are blind to the inverted nature of their beliefs about society.
They have a single, dominant goal in life: to be accepted and liked by other people. They became addicted to a need for peer acceptance. This need dominates their every decision and action.
They think all races and people are equal, hence good and bad are relative to the situation and don’t really exist. Hence criminals are predominantly black is explained by situation. Facts that poor whites have lower violent crime rates don’t fit into their world view. Its OK, other liberals also will deny this, so you must be right. Its value-relativism. All they care about is ‘feeling-good’ and being liked. Dont say a truth that may offend others.
This is a telling indicator of liberalism’s acceptance of “conning” as the fundamental tool for dealing with others. Avoid criticism and tell other groups they’re okay, then they are okay.
Such liberals are easily manipulated by sending them on guilt-trips. if you don’t acvcept PC you must be ‘racist’ etc. So, altruism is not the reason soft liberals support the liberal cause. Such people need constant re-affirmation of their self-worth.
Other liberals are liberals by submission. Examples are most public school teachers, welfare workers, government employees, and many of the elderly. They support the liberal movement for economic security. Their financial well-being is in the hands of a powerful liberal system that dominates the sources of their income. Altruism is a minor motivator of such liberals.
Other liberals are liberal as they are benficiaries. They are clients of the liberal welfare system. Recipients of government hand-outs, BEE beneficiaries, etc who score from liberal hand out policies. Though they may deny it, they are, virtually to a person, supporters of liberal programs and the government that gave them their hand-out. They have to be. If their pet liberal programs don’t continue or grow it hits them in the pocketbook. Most of them don’t worry much about the pocketbooks from which their goodies originate: the tax-payer. Again, altruism has little to do with support of liberalism among these liberals.
The real swindlers are the leftie hard liberals who set all these policies up. They aspire to top political positions, however, they just don’t seem to have the right stuff. Their own kind will never vote for them. So how about all those racial outsiders? lets love the Black man, the Indian, the Coloured, gays, well anyone that they can use to gain power. They can beef up their political muscle by harnessing the pent-up envy and discontent of other races and groups. Maybe they can even nudge anger up a notch or two with promises they can never keep. The threat of civil disorder is an effective convincer. “End Apartheid” says the white liberal while they toyi-toyis with the Black man only to enhance their own power within a new regime.
But how to persuade the other groups that, although you are white and middle class, you are not really white at heart? They need a way to get Blacks and others to think they are racial brothers. That their being born white is just a regrettable accident. They merely learn a new way to talk and behave. They learn the buzz-words that echo the wishes and fears of Blacks everywhere in times of real or artificially created strife. Do the things Blacks do. Be seen eating where and what Blacks eat. Dress like Blacks. Mix with blacks. Pretend to hold the same fears and anxieties blacks hold. Then be sure to promise fanciful non-racial Utopias just around the corner.
Don’t give any details but say a lot about love, equality, caring and fairness. It’s especially important to tell Big Lies about the way that the Black’s problems were really caused by that other white: the wealthy one with all that undeserved money. Of course, you must never mention your own wealth and how you got it came from that systme created by those ‘other’ whites.
It isn’t hard to imagine the liberal marching with Blacks. Maybe even stop for a snack at their homes. as they rant about what is wrong with society and how they’d fix it. They probably even give glowing speeches about rights without responsibility, reform at someone else’s expense, wealth without effort and all the other pie-in-the-sky promises today’s liberals still find so useful.
And it works like a charm! Hard liberals are opportunists who pretend to put on the mantle of freedom and social equality then cynically con you with the Big Lie. Their real purpose is to get and hold power. If you doubt this, take a close look at the living standards of these people, in or out of politics, who try to send you on guilt trips if you don’t support liberal projects. Check out the good life lived by influential liberals in the media or the entertainment business; those who claim to have a special responsibility to shape public opinion to fit liberal dogma. Scrutinize those who fill the top echelons in organizations which have popped up.
In any event, all hard liberals use the three standard liberal ploys: the Big Lie, guilt-tripping and pitting social groups against each other. If someone else is to blame for one’s woe, the sufferer becomes a victim — and who’s there as a saviour? The altruistic hard liberal assures you that some selfish so-and-so should be punished because he doesn’t deserve what he has. You deserve it more, he tells you and, “If you support me, I’ll take it away from him and give it to you.” You become the victim and that other oke is nailed as the scapegoat. Here’s where PC speak is so handy. Emotionally-loaded words like fairness, compassion and victims flow abundantly to conceal hard liberal duplicity. If you don’t support us, hard liberals tells us, you are against fairness, equality, freedom. You’re mean spirited, and racist.
Never doubt that hard liberals will say anything, promise anything, do anything, inflict any harm to achieve their own ends. The first thing hard liberals learn is how to push the buttons that make you jump. The second thing they learn is to smile as they push them.
@Jason whitehead
Do you not feel ashamed for the ‘white’ in your name?
You are pulling that old playing with words con about liberals.
Trying to confuse classical liberalism from modern liberalism. Classical liberalism is today’s right wing, pushinf for les government and more individual freeedom. Modern liberalism is left wing.
Most encyclopedias define liberalism as a philosophy advocating individual freedom and “social progress.” But what is “social progress”?
When you delve deeper into what liberals mean by progress, what you discover beneath their philosophy is a deeply rooted desire for social and economic equalization. In other words, the definition of liberal is essentially the advocacy of both freedom and equality. This is inherently contradictory, since freedom and equality are frequently at odds. We can either be free or equal, but we cannot be both.
Since liberalism is at the very center of the political spectrum, it is more deeply concerned with both freedom and equality than any other political philosophy, so much so that the two ideas are often entangled and confused with one another in liberals’ minds.
Liberalism has been at war within itself since the first liberal ideas began to emerge.
The only positive aspects of liberalism are freedom of speech or freedom of religion. However, modern liberals want something to be provided by the government or by others, such as a right to health care or to education. They believe that it is the responsibility of government to promote social and economic equality, which they often view as an extension of freedom. However, equality takes away from someone to give to others,so it is not freedom.
The classical liberal is rarely referred to as a liberal today, but as a conservative, or libertarian.
Modern liberals want the government to provide and regulate, they have faith in utopianism, a preference for equality over liberty, a belief in the benevolence of government and individuals, a belief in the perfectibility of human beings, a belief in the communal state.
While it is true that liberalism was founded upon the idea that “life, liberty, and property” as natural rights, liberals do not believe in natural rights either as fervently or as literally as conservatives. Liberals stress that it is ultimately government that grants and guarantees rights.
Tolerance is at the heart of the definition of liberal, hence they tolerate the most obnoxious behaviour and make excuses for it.
Their faith in utopianism causes them to disagree with one another on what is utopia. “We have it in our power to change the world,” John Kerry declared in his speech accepting the Democratic nomination for president. At the root of the definition of liberal is a desire to change the world, and to use government as a tool to better all humanity. What the conservative would preserve, the liberal would replace with economic and social experimentation.
In their preference for equality over liberty most liberals are willing to curtail certain freedoms, particularly economic freedoms, to enhance equalities.Conservatives prefer the word ‘earn’ to ‘give’.
“All men are created equal,” liberals say. So when do some suucced and not others? Why do races have different IQs? Why do white nations prosper while frica doesnt? Why does one race not prosper in america while others do? Why must wealth always be redistributed to the same people?
In their belief in the benevolence of government liberals believe if someone is corrupted it is usually the fault of some social or economic injustice. Hence they want to help the disadvantaged. Government, for the liberal, is a champion of the downtrodden and an instrument for the improvement of humankind. Maybe they are where they are because of their own behaviour and actions?
Liberals believe that with the proper education and upbringing, all individuals can achieve their full potential in life and play a meaningful role in society. In this sense, education is not merely a matter of providing children with the proper schools but the proper society. Then why are matric rates and pass rates have to be lowered to 30%? We are NOT all equal. Education cannot help does that either dont want to, or cannot be educated.
Finally, the liberal belief in a communal state, and a feeling that “we’re all in this together.” is expressed in views like TLs who say we are ALL repsonsible for things like the xenophobia. Not me. I dont want Mozambiquans etc here. but I dont go and kill them.
In their desire for equality and social harmony, the liberal wants an egalitarian society. They believe unity is achieved by equality. Even my kids know that someone who does nothing all day and expects a living is not equal to someone who works hard and studies to make someone of himself and succeed. So we will never be all equal and never be united.
Liberalism is a big con, a pipe dream, it has always been. Liberal societies collapse from within as they kill the natural human to achieve and be better than others.
I would really like to apologise for the tone of my last posting, don’t know why I went off sounding like I was on some moral high horse when I really can’t stand it when other people do it. Sorry!
Political correctness could be miscontrued as liberal philosophy for example in the focus on equal rights and how that is achieved – your language and actions should align with your policy etc. I think, though, that anybody that doesn’t support your right-wing view you are trying to portray as weak and soft – which is what you think liberalism is. Alot people think liberal means open to anything and just a nice guy. You might find it interesting that classical liberalism is closer to conservatism than socialism: free-market, individual rather than communal etc. Some of the most important liberal names are Thomas Paine, Adam Smith etc.
Anyway, what you and CE are really unhappy about I think is ineffective government, African nationalism (so unecessary), corruption and the sellout of the ANCs values. How a liberation movement supports the dictator next door is beyond belief. It really is time for a change of government. It is wrong and small-minded that white South Africans should feel they are not part of building the country, and worse and targeted, made unwelcome and so many leave. In the UK South Africans have a good name in business and are sort after.
I’m not sure why you have this thing against communism. It’s such a discredited system, even the Chinese have an increasingly free market economy etc. as I’m sure you know. The only thing that seems to survive is the necessary authoritatrianism; it almost seems nobody would be a communist by choice without it. In South Africa the SACP seems to stand for the rights of workers and the poor and has been the most vocal in opposition to the Mugabe regime, you must admit. Still, when it comes to a workable economic and political policy they still have alot of convincing to do. Either way they are not a threat. Could you still possibly be brainwashed about a rooi gevaar? That whole episode in our history has been discredited.
As far as your idea about socialism being dangerous in a 3rd world country, I’m not sure there could be developement without government intervention, how else could it be achieved. There has to be some measure of a “welfare state”. Even the classical liberals concede some measure of government intervention – although for infrastructure and economic policy for example rather than social engineering I would argue.
I would be the last person to challenge someone’s right to freedom of expression, just as I would fight to preserve my own.
Protection of rights and strengthening democracy is an ongoing thing even in the most developed democracies, governments interests just don’t always correspond to the rights of the citizens. For example UK’s Labour government forcing through the 42 day detention of terrorist suspects by co-opting the DUP this (what did they offer them?) needs to be challenged.
The one thing that makes me angry when I see repsonses from your self and CE is that you seem to be unable to put yourself in the position of the people writers opposed to you are defending – the immigrants and the way they have suffered. If you were a Zimbabwean, country destroyed, no life, little hope … how is turning anyone away a proper and good solution? It seems so easy to say this is not my problem. The reason why you open yourself to being accused of racism is because you start to sound like colonialists and Afrikaaner nationalists (and others) who start to demonise a people so that they don`t have to apply the same standards to them that apply to themselves.
You`ve come onto this public forum promoting a very brutal response to the suffering of others, you have questioned whether they deserve help, and used very questionable intellectual arguements to get yourself into a position where their concern is not yours. There has to be a level of dishonesty there. At the end of the day what I’m saying is imagine that was you, or your family.
@Jason
So we agree about classical liberals being todays conservatives. You are correct that the most despicable thing is the PC liberal.
Oh we can put ourselves in the others shoes. I can understand that the Black Zimbabwean has made a mess of his nation, now comes here. They chose Mugabe over Ian Smith, so let them live with the consequences. Why must we now support them?
The Zimbo is trying to do what is best for himself. But my first responsibility is to my family, my people, my race and my nation. There is not enough left over to feed the rest of Africa as well. I have no obligation to, nor am I inclined to.
Being accused of racism? Do I care? Is loving my family and race more than others racism? I dont want to harm other races, but prefer to stick to mine. I give charity to my own; helping poor white families. Whites are begging on the streets and unemployed sue to AA. If I must look after the rest of africa as well I will be bankrupt and achieve nothing. Sorry, people in SA are already suffering. So the rest looking to stick their spoon into the communal pot can turn around and go elsewhere. Why must we ask poor blacks in townships to share their resources with them?
If you want to help them, invite them into your own home and you support them. Dont tell poor south african blacks in townships to share with them. Bsides they have already spoken: Uitlander, voetsek!
CE; If you define the group that is equal to you then where do you draw the line? The people in your street, your church, your race, your class … there are people in my family I dislike and people of other races I look up to. I think the problem is in a lop-sided equality; if I regard you as equal in a one way – you deserve the same opportunities I do -but not in a more balanced way – you have the same responsibilities I have, then that’s not equality. We live in a society that is skewed in favour of black people because our government is elected to right the historical wrongs. They could ofcourse do this by instigating an absolutely equal society, in which the whites with all their skills contribute to building a strong economy thereby creating the possibility of opportunity for all, but well we have affirmative action instead. Playing with the ruthless need for a productive workforce for the sake of their politics. This is unfortunate. Let’s hope its only a phase (or let’s do something about it).
You are mistaken about different IQs. Here goes a discussion on the bell curve. It’s not true. I’m quite confident the differences are cultural, which can be changed through developement. If one black person succeeds at the standards of the most successful whites then your theory is wrong, and there are many successful back men and women, and gays and the disabled and arabs and … You cannot demand dignity and respect for yourself without being able to allow that to anyone else. In a far broader way, what is this western white superiority you are claiming for your race anyway? How well is western society doing. Are we happy? We’re destroying the planet. This is an open debate your are settling for as a fact without question.
I can’t see how you think equality and freedom are opposites, except that you think you need to take away from one in order to give to the other. If we live in a world of limited resources then defining ourselves as more deserving based on untrue facts we choose to believe in dishonest. In the UK for example the poorest are not necessarily the blacks. They are the northerners who are cut off from London and the south east. In a free society, and with a free market, they have every opportunity to build their own economies, school their own children and create their own societies. It’s too easy to disallow the blacks or the jews or the muslims or the gays or the women … if we can build a prosperous life for ourselves then we can extend the circle an do it for all. People of different creeds and colours have their own things to contribute. The problems are too big and the possibilities too great to discard anybody.
The people of Zimbabwe cannot be held responsible for the mess their country is in. I know you think that alot of Zimbos voted for Robert Mugabe and so own the problem. The thing is the Zanu-PF political elite control the country, they intimidate their own people. The elections, including 1980 by the way which was violently controlled by Mugabe, are pointless, insignificant. Zimbos have never freely elected their own government.
Lastly, have you read Thomas Pakenhams Scramble for Africa or anything like that? The history of colonialism is horrific. No people deserve the ruthless way in which their countries were stolen from them, and their societies shattered. Once again, if that were your past? We go on about a small period in our history when the British tried to pull the stunt on our Boer republics. Can you imagine if we were so technologically behind that a foreign force could come along with rifles and artillery and forcibly take what they wanted with no regard for us. How would a history like that affect us. To be honest I think I would hate the oppressor and never rest until my hate was quenched. I would be a terrorist.
That’s all history though, but to really try and fathom where the actions of the African nationalists threaten your property and prosperity you have to understand them. And then, if you want to try and solve the problem, move forward and into a good future, you will need to have to embrace them, see them on equal terms, and then together sit down and think of a way out of this as fellow South Africans.
CE send me your details to my email address below. I want you to read the Africa confidential website, see what you think. I need to give you my login though. jasonwhitehead@mac.com
@ Jason Whitehead
You said;
“I know you think that alot of Zimbos voted for Robert Mugabe and so own the problem. The thing is the Zanu-PF political elite control the country, they intimidate their own people. The elections, including 1980 by the way which was violently controlled by Mugabe, are pointless, insignificant. Zimbos have never freely elected their own government.”
Eagle says:
Typical communist, or is it socialist, dis-information again.
Below are extracts from a letter by George M. Houser, Executive Director of the American Committee on Africa (ACOA), on the 1980 independence election in Rhodesia.
“The Zimbabwe (ZANU-PF) headed by Robert Mugabe, has won an amazing and overwhelming victory in the unprecedented election in Rhodesia. I was part of an unofficial group of five American observers in collaboration with seven unofficial observers from Canada.
Now that the election results are known, the most obvious thing to say is that black people of Zimbabwe have registered their preference for a government headed by Robert Mugabe. This speaks authoritatively for the independent judgement of the people. A second observation is that the harassment and intimidation practiced by the security forces, the police and auxiliaries against ZANU-PF did not work as expected.
ZANU-PF has an absolute majority in the House of Assembly. The overall judgement of observers is that the election reflected the views of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe. The Commonwealth observers clearly stated this. The British said this. Both Mugabe and Nkomo said they would accept the results.
There is now hope that a government of true majority rule will be accepted by all parties and a new Zimbabwe can move onto the task of developing a free nation- peaceful, prosperous and secure.
George M. Houser”
http://richardknight.homestead.com/files/zimletmarch80.htm
The above and several other reports support the fact that the 1980 elections were a fair representation of the will of the people in Zimbabwe but Jason Whitehead who was not there, 28 years later on in another country dispute this.
Here is news for you; Zimbabweans are responsible for their own misery as those who voted ANC as well as the socialists, communists and liberals are responsible for the misery in South Africa.
Eagle
Words have definitions. You can’t just make up your own. That is what Plato meant when he said “when you speak with me define your terms”.
I have just come back from Cape Town. Spent the afternoon with Amused Reader who told me what you are going through. Sorry – but don’t take it out on me!
Eagle
You are a wealthy man. I am poor. Both my husband and I have been badly affected by AA and BEE – yet I am not bitter. You are.
You have not a clue what Liberal means. My grandfather was one of the founders of the Liberal Party with Alan Paton. He stood AGAINST the Communist Sam Khan.
You are a fool – Liberal and Communist are the same to you.
@ Lyndall Beddy
Classic liberal behaviour. Can’t argue the facts so you revert to insults.
AR has probably told you that much of my life’s work has been empowerment and upliftment of black people where I have been instrumental in getting grants exceeding R 40 million for some poor unfortunates in the past 5 years alone. Weird, as I am supposed to be a “racist” in line with your prior batch of insults.
I love my life, I have no hang-ups, but I have empathy for the less fortunate, thus my current work with people in white squatter camps.
“Wealthy man and bitter?” In terms of classic liberal thinking I suppose my money dropped from sky. Wrong again, my wife and I work 24/7 and have made most of our money in the past 10 years, DESPITE BEE or AA.
When we met we were both playing the pub circuit (music) for an income, and loving it. Just shows you what can be done if you don’t have a victim mentality and truly walk the talk in caring for the less fortunate.
Liberals like yourself are a danger to our whole society as events of the past 14 years have shown. Communists do what they do because they have an underlying agenda. Liberals like yourself are mostly social misfits who chase attention and recognition and are just too limited to see the big picture. Exactly like the behaviour you are now exhibiting and your assessment of me.
Try and play the ball, not the man, your inadequacies are showing.
Eagle
Thanks! Amused Leader told me all that – but it was not my story to tell and I could not break a confidence.
Forced you into the open. Over 1000 blacks you have tried to advantage?
So why do you WANT to sound like a retard?
@ Lyndall Beddy
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
The question is now; what are you and the other bleeding hearts going to do about the next step into our ZIM-like future i.e. the Expropriation Act, relative to the beautiful prosperous wine farms which they are now starting to expropriate and the massive sufferance due to food shortages and overseas investment which will result?
Our indigenous are currently increasing at the rate of 2 million per year.
Do you own property or a business in that marvelous corner of the world where you are?
Eagle
I am living off a small pension and a small amount of capital. I own no land. Do you think that means I don’t care? I have been writing for almost 3 years that land is about food not money.
In order to pass that expropriation bill they will have to change the constitution – which they have done about 11 times already.
So we have to make certain that the ANC loose their 2/3 majority. Why do you think I have been pushing and pushing for an opposition co-elition, which is beginning to happen?
So join Amused Reader and me and any others we can get together to make it work!
The Lyndall vs Eagle Feud: Cant you just feel the love?
My son has a pair of boxing gloves. Lyndall, want to try them? I promise there is no swastika on them.
@ Lyndall Beddy,
Thanks Lyndall. I am truly honoured. Amused, yourself and CE seems like some of the smarter posters on here if I consider some of the ranting one-shot wonders that promptly disappeared after being given the facts. But will it work?
Liberals have had their shot. More liberal thinking will just result in more of the same and acceleration of the downward spiral. Things have to be left now to the realists and those that can see the big picture clearly, although I think that liberals who have truly decanted their prior thinking could be useful.
This does not mean that I don’t think that you seem like a really good person and that I am not honoured to have swopped repartee with you.
Eagle
Thanks. However, I don’t think you know much about the Liberal Party at all. They were not communist and did not believe in one man one vote but a qualified franchise. They were against sanctions – and Alan Paton had a difficult time disagreeing with Tutu’s boycott policy while agreeing with equal rights.
They disagrred with violence, and with Mandela’s policy of violence – yet Alan Paton spoke in mitigation of sentence for Mandela and the others at the treason trial – because he knew they faced the death penalty.
Forget what you learned from the Nats about the Liberal Party – they hated them as much as the ANC did. The Nats hated them because they believed in equal opportunity and equal rightd; the ANC hated them because they did not believe in violence nor in one man one vote for a tribal society.
However I am not proposing a start up of the Liberal Party again; but a Liberal Co-elition of opposition parties, most of whom have a lot more in common with each other, than the different splinter groups of the ANC have with themselves.
@ Lyndall Beddy
Liberalism is probably one of the ugliest and most self-serving disciplines around where the Liberal cares only about his own image and ego and none for the consequences of his actions. Decisions are based purely on emotional idealism. Practical conducive thought or realism plays no part in it.
Interestingly there is never a peep out of any one liberal on here when I say that liberals are part and parcel of those that carry responsibility for the murders, crime, corruption and mayhem in this country today. Alan Paton was a good case in point. Not concerned at all that he supported terrorism and the murders and suffering of the innocents who were bombed, neck laced and killed by these terrorists through his actions in the Rivonia trial, as long as he was seen to support his own lofty and wholly impractical ideals. He probably also supports the actions of the 9/11 terrorists in the USA?
Lyndall Beddy: “In order to pass that expropriation bill they will have to change the constitution.”
Eagle: Anyone that thinks the politicians care about the Constitution is sadly mistaken. The Constitution is not worth the paper it is written on. E.g. here is one of the many paradoxes that would be amusing if it were not so sick and destructive. The Bill of Rights says:
Quote:
9. Equality
3. The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth
Unquote.
So, how, is it then possible to have laws such as Affirmative Action, Black Economic Empowerment, The Employment Equity Act, The Land Redistribution Act, etc.etc.etc., which clearly discrimination against whites and which are clearly anti-white racist? For clarity read the next pearl of wisdom:
Quote:
2. legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons, or categories of persons, disadvantaged by unfair discrimination, may be taken.
Unquote.
So now the law contradicts itself and says that the Bill of Rights only applies to Blacks as they were supposed to be “disadvantaged by unfair discrimination.”
The Constitution is full of these little gems giving the gov the right to thoroughly persecute the current generation of whites, who were still in diapers at the time, for the perceived wrongful actions of some politicians a long time ago ignoring their own criminality committed through their terrorist actions.
The only way to fight the Expropriation Act and its evil Brother, the Land Use Management Act, is to protest in any way and on any forum possible.
Eagle
Did you READ what I wrote? NO – you prefer your prejudices to facts.
The ONLY way to fight the NEO-RACISM of the ANC is to VOTE THEM OUT ! And it CAN be done. If Zimbawe can do it – so can we!