todd@SCIRTP.UUCP (Todd Jones) (07/25/85)
The situation in South Africa has deteriorated so much that even the Reagan Administration is starting to complain. What a shock! I guess it's safe to say that almost no one outside of South Africa is very happy with aparthied anymore. But... the big question remains: What will/should replace the present system of rule? How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice about revamping the status quo? Assuming blacks gain power in S.A., what can America do to establish relations (and still get all the mineral goodies)? C'mon fellow netters, be ye commies or Birchers, sound off!!! *********REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR OPINIONATED OPINIONS**********
bill@persci.UUCP (07/29/85)
In article <245@SCIRTP.UUCP> todd@SCIRTP.UUCP (Todd Jones) writes: >The situation in South Africa has deteriorated so much that >even the Reagan Administration is starting to complain. >What a shock! >[...] >C'mon fellow netters, be ye commies or Birchers, sound off!!! 'Tain't neither (even tho' certain out there don't think so..), but.. It wouldn't be a shock if you didn't let your prejudice blind you.. (it's called believing your own propaganda, a very dangerous thing.) -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!persci!bill
gene@batman.UUCP (Gene Mutschler) (08/01/85)
> The situation in South Africa... has just become part of the "America Bashing" message string. See my (lengthy) comments there. > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > about revamping the status quo? This one isn't covered there--the list of African states where a black person can go to bed at night without worrying that the henchmen of the local (Black) despot will make a midnight courtesy call is a short one indeed. Besides South Africa, I can think of maybe one place--Ivory Coast, and I'm not completely sure about that one. There is in fact a substantial net IN-migration of blacks INTO South Africa looking for a better life. Perhaps someone can tell us about other African Elyseums. -- Gene Mutschler {ihnp4 seismo ctvax}!ut-sally!batman!gene Burroughs Corp. Austin Research Center cmp.barc@utexas-20.ARPA (512) 258-2495
baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS) (08/03/85)
> > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > about revamping the status quo? > This one isn't covered there--the list of African states where > a black person can go to bed at night without worrying that the > henchmen of the local (Black) despot will make a midnight courtesy > call is a short one indeed. Besides South Africa, I can think of maybe > one place--Ivory Coast, and I'm not completely sure about that one. > There is in fact a substantial net IN-migration of blacks INTO South Africa > looking for a better life. > Perhaps someone can tell us about other African Elyseums. > -- > Gene Mutschler {ihnp4 seismo ctvax}!ut-sally!batman!gene But the issue in South Africa is not one of prosperity nor one of personal security. The issue is the unequal apportionment of prosperity and security (among other things), enforced by law on the basis of race. Baba
mom@sftri.UUCP (Mark Modig) (08/04/85)
> > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > about revamping the status quo? > This one isn't covered there--the list of African states where > a black person can go to bed at night without worrying that the > henchmen of the local (Black) despot will make a midnight courtesy > call is a short one indeed. Besides South Africa, I can think of maybe > one place--Ivory Coast, and I'm not completely sure about that one. > There is in fact a substantial net IN-migration of blacks INTO South Africa > looking for a better life. > Perhaps someone can tell us about other African Elyseums. The problem in South Africa is not one of economics-- blacks in South Africa appear to be better off economically than blacks in most of the rest of Africa. That still doesn't mean they shouldn't aspire to live in a country where the distribution of power depends upon race. If economic reasons were the only valid ones for seeking change, there probably would not have been an American Revolution, since many people in the colonies (particularly the Northern ones) were reasonably well off by the standards of the day and what life was like in Europe. Mark Modig ihnp4!sftri!mom
gene@batman.UUCP (Gene Mutschler) (08/05/85)
> > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > > about revamping the status quo? > > This one isn't covered there--the list of African states where > > a black person can go to bed at night without worrying that the > > henchmen of the local (Black) despot will make a midnight courtesy > > call is a short one indeed. Besides South Africa, I can think of maybe > > But the issue in South Africa is not one of prosperity nor one of > personal security. The issue is the unequal apportionment of prosperity > and security (among other things), enforced by law on the basis of race. > > Baba You will please note that 1) I was responding to the original question regarding living standards; you are just looking for an excuse to throw this year's trendy phrase: "racism". 2) Your evasion of the original question implicitly excuses a bunch of tinpot despots all over black Africa. Not holding black rulers to the same standards as their white counterparts is just as racist as the KKK. -- Gene Mutschler {ihnp4 seismo ctvax}!ut-sally!batman!gene Burroughs Corp. Austin Research Center cmp.barc@utexas-20.ARPA (512) 258-2495
baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS) (08/08/85)
> > > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > > > about revamping the status quo? > > > > This one isn't covered there--the list of African states where > > > a black person can go to bed at night without worrying that the > > > henchmen of the local (Black) despot will make a midnight courtesy > > > call is a short one indeed. Besides South Africa, I can think of maybe > > > > But the issue in South Africa is not one of prosperity nor one of > > personal security. The issue is the unequal apportionment of prosperity > > and security (among other things), enforced by law on the basis of race. > > > > Baba > You will please note that 1) I was responding to the original question > regarding living standards; you are just looking for an excuse to > throw this year's trendy phrase: "racism". 2) Your evasion of the > original question implicitly excuses a bunch of tinpot despots all > over black Africa. Not holding black rulers to the same standards > as their white counterparts is just as racist as the KKK. > -- > Gene Mutschler {ihnp4 seismo ctvax}!ut-sally!batman!gene You will please note that: 1a) Your response said nothing whatever about standards of living, only that most black regimes in Africa are despotic and attack citizens in their homes at random. This is only relevant if you believe that you can infer from it that blacks are unfit to govern South Africa. Is that what you were trying to say? 1b) I rather pointedly did not use the word "racism" in my article. 1c) Trendiness does not make oppsition to racism any less valid, unless you can demonstrate that said opposition is dictated by fashion rather than reason or conscience. Can you? 1d) Lack of trendiness does not make support of racism any more valid, though I suppose there is less of a question of sincerity. But it is not for me to judge how firmly you hold your beliefs (any more than it is for you to judge how firmly I hold mine), only how well you argue them. 2) I fail to see how the assertion that black South Africans are upset over systematic racial injustice, rather than poverty and police terror per se, in any way excuses anyone else anywhere of anything. Please explain. It will be a real shame if South Africa goes up in revolutionary flames and leaves everyone (except the revolutionary leadership) worse off than they are now. But it does look as if the Africaaners are so addicted to the benefits that apartheid confers (cheap housing, cheap labor, high pay for positions that can only be filled by whites), that it will take remarkable leadership for them to avoid precisely that. Baba
js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) (08/10/85)
> > > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > > > about revamping the status quo? This assertion implies that the difference in standard of living between SA blacks and blacks in other African nations is caused by the leadership of South Africa. Of course, all of the gold and precious metals under South Africa has nothing to do with this prosperity. ;-) Seriously, does anyone think that it's more likely that this relative prosperity is caused by the oppressive ruling class than by the country's natural mineral wealth? -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "My SO is red hot. Your SO aint doodely squat."
nrh@inmet.UUCP (08/14/85)
>/* Written 5:02 pm Aug 9, 1985 by mhuxt!js2j in inmet:net.politics */ >/* ---------- "Re: South African solutions anyone?" ---------- */ >> > > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are >> > > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice >> > > > about revamping the status quo? > > This assertion implies that the difference in standard of living between >SA blacks and blacks in other African nations is caused by the leadership of >South Africa. Of course, all of the gold and precious metals under South >Africa has nothing to do with this prosperity. ;-) > Seriously, does anyone think that it's more likely that this relative >prosperity is caused by the oppressive ruling class than by the country's >natural mineral wealth? An interesting question. I doubt the oppressive tendencies of the ruling class help at all. I suspect their technical expertise and that of foreign investors has a lot to do with it -- but SA doesn't have the only mineral wealth in Africa.