Thursday, March 1, 2018

Zimbabwe redux

"South Africa Votes To Seize White-Owned Land Without Compensation".

7 comments:

RebeccaH said...

Let's see how many countries are willing to take in large numbers of white South African refugees.

Zardoz said...

Haven't we seen this movie before? As I remember it didn't end well.

bruce said...

We have lots of Seth Effricans in Australia.

rinardman said...

Trump should tweet that the white S. Africans are welcome to immigrate to the the USA, as long as they promise to vote Republican!

That might be enough to finish the job of driving the progs totally insane.

bruce said...

The difference with Zimbabwe is here we are talking about cantankerous Afrikaners. They don't want anyone's sympathy, they think they can handle this, and we British know we can't trust them. Similar to Germans or even Scots. They are just as likely to change sides if it benefits them. We fought against them in the 1890s Boer War, still arguing the relative merits of that, except they earned our respect as fighters, as did the Turks later.

Jonah said...

Thing is Bruce, we've learned, I think, that 1890s people aren't the same people as today's people.

bruce said...

Good point Jonah. But as I think the ANC is mainly talking about the land owned by Afrikaners in the Transvaal I think they are using the term 'white' very loosely:
https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/Afrikaners-are-black-20130225

That's what I mean about changing sides. There is some discussion of the issue there by the Afrikaners themselves:
https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/land-expropriation-we-need-to-train-more-black-farmers-20180301

'White South Africans' have mostly already set up in Australia and elsewhere. It's the people who won't leave Africa under any circumstances that the ANC is negotiating with.