Why didn’t South Africa become as successful as Australia or Canada?

Home Forums History Why didn’t South Africa become as successful as Australia or Canada?

Viewing 41 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #94910
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why didn’t South Africa become as successful as Australia or Canada?

    • #94911
      Anonymous
      Guest

      not as many whites

      • #94913
        Anonymous
        Guest

        That wasn’t an issue in other places

        […]

        Turns out freaking over the majority of your popualtion isn’ta smart idea. Especially when you are a state that needs to make the castration to a service economy before Asia and LatAm to maintain any real relevancy. they didn’t so South Africa’s economy afield to modernize.

        • #94929
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >That wasn’t an issue in other places
          lol

          • #94935
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Because we have non-white develop states. You have to realize that SA spent facades and decades to fuck over the majority of the populace which backfired in the long run. Tell me a country that did something similar and ended up developed?

            • #94941
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Because we have non-white develop states.
              Not black ones.

        • #95051
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >That wasn’t an issue in other places

          Sorry, I’ll correct myself, it was too many scrotes.

    • #94912
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Define "successful." Until the 1980s, despite the stigma of apartheid, South Africa was probably just about as significant economically and culturally and definitely punched above its weight militarily although they paid an obvious price for that. A UCT degree was about as prestigious or not as one from ANU or Toronto.

      The one thing, well okay, two things that bonked South Africa was not being in international sports, and the fact that South African companies were gimped from being able to fully participate in foreign markets by boycotts and sanctions (which is why we had to wait until 1994 to enjoy Nandos for example and why there weren’t any Sasol petrol stations or Pick ‘n’ Pay supermarkets in the border states until relatively recently).

      Really when you consider that most of the population practically jumped out of the bush a century ago and that the South African government spent the best part of 20 years busy playing solider with Cubans and Angolans and after that got embroiled in putting out riots all over the place, I don’t think South Africa on the whole did too bad, even if it is really starting to come apart just in the last few years.

      • #95000
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Economic embargo by potential trading partners, plus what said, you can’t become a superpower without bullshit resources as in the case of Arabia when the overwhelming majority of your population are barely out of the jungle mentally.

        • #95002
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >your population are barely out of the jungle mentally
          the education in SA wasn’t nonexistent anon. Especial when Blacks and coloreds were still able to generate skilled and educated people and SA was heavily urbanized later on

          • #95003
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Especial when Blacks and coloreds were still able to generate skilled and educated people
            Skilled and educated terrorists, perhaps, but that’s about it

    • #94914
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The Rhodesians and South Africans had the right idea. You cannot hand over the right to vote to an uneducated, tribalistic, and superstitious population, it just doesn’t work.
      As Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out, the reason the Latin American republics all failed where America had succeeded was because of two things:
      >Anglo-American self governing culture which was developed in New England Puritan colonies
      >A strong local but weak federal government.
      The south africans had neither after 1991 and their democracy was doomed thenceforth.

      But there were other reasons. You can’t not give your poor food aid, but when there are too many poor, you can’t build enough schools to educate them fast enough to stop them from reproducing and needing more food aid. So as soon as you hand over the right to vote to everyone, this population of dumbasses growing at an exponential rate will just keep electing populists who want to kill the educated well off class. They should have gradually extended citizenry to everyone via literacy tests, but das raycis.

      • #94918
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >You cannot hand over the right to vote to an uneducated, tribalistic, and superstitious population, it just doesn’t work.
        that doesn’t make sense when whites were also uneducated and superstitious when they were first able to vote. Denying people the right to vote woke af off that is rooted off paternalistic, racist historical assumptions.

        >A strong local but weak federal government.
        Out in the frontier. In the more populated and settled places that wasn’t the case.

        >The south africans had neither after 1991 and their democracy was doomed thenceforth.
        They have self-govenring cutler espcialyl since SA was in a similar form of governance to other anglo settler states. Also democracy in SA is actually stronger than it is in a lot of other countries so I’m not sure what you are bitching about. Especially since having a weak federal government is actually bad thing in nearly all scenarios.

        >You can’t not give your poor food aid, but when there are too many poor, you can’t build enough schools to educate them fast enough to stop them from reproducing and needing more food aid.
        SA’s Black and Colored fertility rates have been dropping for ages.

        >So as soon as you hand over the right to vote to everyone, this population of dumbasses growing at an exponential rate will just keep electing populists who want to kill the educated well off class
        But that never has happened you scrotebrain

        >They should have gradually extended citizenry to everyone via literacy tests, but das raycis.
        It’s a shitty policy that has failed in every instance it has been done./ dear God how scrotebrained are you? Do you just skim shitty blogs for your info?

        • #94921
          Anonymous
          Guest

          you type like a scrote

          • #94927
            Anonymous
            Guest

            So you got nothing then?

            • #94943
              Anonymous
              Guest

              i got a sneed and a feed for ya

              • #94946
                Anonymous
                Guest

                https://i.imgur.com/yVZUqjt.gif

                Okay you got me there.

                >Because we have non-white develop states.
                Not black ones.

                Trinidad, Grenada, Bahamas, Barbados, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Jamaica, Dominica, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent.

                • #94947
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >developed
                  Also Dominicans are mestizo.

                  • #94950
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    He said Dominica you scrotebrain, do you not know what that is?

                    • #94951
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      My mistake. Regardless, still not developed.

                      • #94953
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        0.742 HDI

                        They can’t just kill them. They’re South Africa’s tax payers. They are subject to state-sponsored discrimination though and they’re victims of violent crime (not just them by any means but still). Some section of people would probably like to actually kill them however judging by their rhetoric e.g. Malema.

                        >They are subject to state-sponsored discrimination though
                        The yaren’t really. Espcially since in many South African institutions whites often discriminate against non-whites because of their established position in them.

                        >they’re victims of violent crime (not just them by any means but still).
                        An extremely tiny nubmer of them are anon. The extreme cast majority of Saffer crimes are done by Blacks to Blacks or Coloreds to Coloreds on top of the static al reality that the most cases of murders are done by the people you know (Oscar Pistorius). whites actually don’t experience it much at all versus other groups.

                        >Some section of people would probably like to actually kill them however judging by their rhetoric e.g. Malema.
                        For Malema not exactly and on top of that SA actually cracksdown on all incitement speeches in the nation which people here always seem to forget.

                      • #94956
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Lower than Algeria
                        They’re developing, not developed.

                      • #94957
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >The yaren’t really
                        They are and it’s not just them. Indians too and they also are targeted with violence.
                        I’m not going to argue it, it’s just tiresome. I’m convinced the only reason someone would deny it is because it clashes with their ideological view of the world.

                      • #94959
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Indians too and they also are targeted with violence.
                        They aren’t thoguh. indians rarely are targets of crime at all and the riots were targeting all business regardless of colour which is why many Black business also got attacked as well.

                      • #94960
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        "rarely" is a vague term and the nature of at least some of those attacks on specifically Indians in the recent riots was racially motivated

                      • #94964
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >some of those attacks on specifically Indians in the recent riots was racially motivated
                        And that can be applied to any other crime anon.

                        >"rarely" is a vague term
                        It’s not. Indians in Saffer crime states are erratically drop in the pan. Especially since they aren’t that numerous and only exist in like 3-5 areas.

                      • #94967
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >And that can be applied to any other crime anon.
                        No? It either is or it isn’t a racially motivated attack.

                        >Indians in Saffer crime states are erratically drop in the pan. Especially since they aren’t that numerous and only exist in like 3-5 areas.
                        Of course the numbers won’t be comparable to murders or violent crime in general, because they’re a minority. They were still clearly targeted. Can you admit that SA is a poorly run, dangerous shithole, that the government sucks and should be replaced with something else?

                      • #94958
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Pretoria High School for Girls banned wide cornrows, braids and dreadlocks. for years until only recently in 2016 did that change and that was a formerly all white girls school before the mid 90’s.

                      • #94962
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        im sure you also complain about the HBCU’s in the USA

                  • #94952
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    DOMINICA not Dominican Republic . DOMINCA was colonized by France then Britain with vestiges of both linguistically in English, English pidgins+creole and Antilles Creole.

                    >their percentage never changed

                    I see where you’re coming from, but this is plainly not true. IIRC, the white population was as much as one fifth of the population as recently as the 1970s. They are roughly one tenth, and will be around one twentieth by the middle of this century.

                    >IIRC, the white population was as much as one fifth of the population as recently as the 1970s.
                    South African Apartheid era stat collection was notorious for leaving out vast amounts of data to fluff up the numbers alongside police not doing any real work in the slums patrol or statistic collections wise. They also had a cuckoo of Blacks that they did not considered "citizens" on paper.

                • #95028
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Trinidad, Grenada, Bahamas, Barbados, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Jamaica, Dominica, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent.
                  Many of those have decent amounts of european admixture, even so they are shitholes. Sadly leftists have to delude themselves like this otherwise their worldview falls apart

                  • #95032
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Many of those have decent amounts of european admixture, even so they are shitholes.
                    Vast majority of them are vastly Black by a landslide.

                    Are you implying that those countries are actually good?

                    They are pretty decent to live in actually. Just because the banker, judge and jailer are Black doesn’t make them a bad state contrary to your hysteria

                    • #95034
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >ast majority of them are vastly Black by a landslide.
                      many of them have sizeable mixed populations.
                      >They are pretty decent to live in actually. Just because the banker, judge and jailer are Black doesn’t make them a bad state contrary to your hysteria
                      No, what makes them bad states is the poverty and crime. Jamaica is literally number 10 when it comes to crime.

                      • #95041
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >many of them have sizeable mixed populations.
                        Most of them don’t anon.

                        >No, what makes them bad states is the poverty and crime
                        Yet they are still developed. Under your criteria the US would not be develops.

                      • #95045
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Most of them don’t anon
                        Aight lets take a look
                        >trinidad, 15% mixed and 35% east indian
                        >Grenada 13% mixed
                        >saint kitts 16% mixed
                        >Jamaica 15% mixed
                        >Saint lucia 10% mixed
                        >saint vincent, 23% mixed
                        hmmmm
                        >Yet they are still developed
                        some of them are great tourist spots, in every other metric they are not developed

                      • #95048
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        that’s still small. On top of that man of those mixed people are partially black and often culturally associate with them. under your autism America isn’t white

                      • #95050
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        https://i.imgur.com/0kdEMRE.gif

                        >under your autism America isn’t white

                • #95037
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Trinidad, Grenada, Bahamas, Barbados, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Jamaica, Dominica, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent.
                  Homocide rates
                  Trinidad, 30.88
                  Jamaica, 43.85
                  Saint lucia, 21.44
                  Saint kitts, 34.23
                  Saint vincent, 36.46
                  Bahamas, 30.90
                  are you actually this delusional or just ignorant

                  • #95046
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    If your metric is homicide rate

                    Modern rwanda has comparable rate as Hungary, if we’re taking an African country that has a sufficiently efficient bureaucracy to establish believable statistic

                    Kenya or Angola have the same rate as the USA

                    • #95049
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Obviously homicide rate isn’t the only factor, but if a country has a homicide rate of 30+ then it obviously ain’t that great a place to live. Another factor would just be wealth, for example in Kenya 26% live on less than 1.90 dollars a day, now thats a shithole

                • #95160
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  All of those states are shitholes outside of tourist locations dude

        • #94922
          Anonymous
          Guest

          This is how basing enfranchisement of usually end up in some manner.

          >The test makers will arbitrarily design questions that can be interpreted in many ways so they can easily fail the test takers
          >The group in power will usually set up a grandfather clause or some loophole that will prevent their kin from losing their rights even if they can’t read at all. Rampant in the southern parts of the US
          >Voting violence so even if you pass the test good luck getting to vote if your life is at risk.
          >Gutting the education system so that gaining the education to let you take the test becomes more expensive and is of lower quality. Shifting of the curriculum to further enable this will occur.
          >constant altering and changes of the criteria to be able to vote. usually they WILL add income requirements and/or land at some point. This is done in palces where land ownership restrictions and massive wage disparities are rampant such as one group getting 10x+ the wages the rest do for the exact same job on top of job discrimination.
          >Setting up voting boundaries so that yes even if you pass all the criteria to vote your votes impact will be explicitly less than others.

        • #94939
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >that doesn’t make sense when whites were also uneducated and superstitious when they were first able to vote.
          Lmao, I don’t think Boers ever went around killing bald people because a witch doctor said there was gold in their head or eating albino babies to cure their aids, but whatever.
          >They have self-govenring cutler espcialyl since SA was in a similar form of governance to other anglo settler states. Also democracy in SA is actually stronger than it is in a lot of countries
          Does more brown people = more democracy to you? The boers had a long tradition of living within their republics which was inherited by the Dutch republic and the brits were used to having a parliament. The blacks were living under kings and warlords and thereto had never cast a vote in their life.
          >Especially since having a weak federal government is actually bad thing in nearly all scenarios.
          If you’re a paradoxscrote maybe. A strong government is good for defense and that’s about it. Weak federal but strong local control is great if you are a large multicultural nation because each locality can determine how they want to live
          >SA’s Black and Colored fertility rates have been dropping for ages.
          Great! That doesn’t change how it being high in the past bonked them over. Hopefully that trend will continue and they can get their country well educated.
          >But that never has happened you scrotebrain
          See Zimbabwe and South Africa. I suppose when I said "kill" I meant "resent and wish to remove the privledge of." Any visible underclass will wish to bring everyone down to the bottom instead of try to bring everyone up to the top.
          >It’s a shitty policy that has failed in every instance it has been done
          Not to be that guy, but has it ever been tried? Are you implying that illiterate people should vote? Being a voter means you are responsible for being politically conscious enough to vote well. If you can’t read the news, how can you vote? They’ll just vote for the black person who promises them money.

          • #94945
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >The blacks were living under kings and warlords and thereto had never cast a vote in their life.
            You think British common folk could vote in the UK all of its history? On top of that you do know Black governing systems vastly varied by group?

            >Weak federal but strong local control is great if you are a large multicultural nation because each locality can determine how they want to live
            It’s shit because limited federal control means being more prone to potential dissent and uprisings on top of weak outreach in giving services.

            >Great! That doesn’t change how it being high in the past bonked them over. Hopefully that trend will continue and they can get their country well educated.
            It wasn’t even that high back ten. You can;t understand that whites were always a fuck minority in Southern Africa which is why their percentage never changed.

            >See Zimbabwe and South Africa. I suppose when I said "kill" I meant "resent and wish to remove the privledge of." Any visible underclass will wish to bring everyone down to the bottom instead of try to bring everyone up to the top.
            Yet that didn’t happen in SA on top of that Populist politics were rampant as fuck in SA. The only reason NP even got in to power was because of heavy gerrymanddering in the rural areas gave them wins. Why do you think Whites are immune to populist politics?

            >Not to be that guy, but has it ever been tried? Are you implying that illiterate people should vote?
            They are citizens too anon. also tied to my post many countries with literacy tests often skimped on their literacy education

            >Being a voter means you are responsible for being politically conscious enough to vote well. If you can’t read the news, how can you vote?
            People don’t even read the news in many alteration nations yet still vote the same people lol.
            >They’ll just vote for the black person who promises them money.
            Literally applies to the whole world. Again why are Blacks to exceptional to you?

            • #94948
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >their percentage never changed

              I see where you’re coming from, but this is plainly not true. IIRC, the white population was as much as one fifth of the population as recently as the 1970s. They are roughly one tenth, and will be around one twentieth by the middle of this century.

            • #94954
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >You think British common folk could vote in the UK all of its history? On top of that you do know Black governing systems varied?
              Yes. By the 1880’s half of British men could vote within the UK. In the colonies the right to vote was extended even earlier. I’m not entirely sure on how voting worked within the boer republics, but since you’re the one making the claim, can you name a single democratic society which existed within south africa that wasn’t established by whites?
              >It’s shit because limited federal control means being more prone to potential dissent and uprisings on top of weak outreach in giving services.
              But why would people be dissenting if they create their own laws? Also a weak federal government doesn’t imply a weak military, just look towards switzerland or pre civil war America for an example. Also, the weaker the federal government, the less prone a state is to oligarchy as there is no massive federal power in which the rich can control.
              >It wasn’t even that high back ten. You can;t understand that whites were always a fuck minority in Southern Africa
              You misunderstood my point. An exploding uneducated population is any governments nightmare. You have to help your people, but if they’re reproducing faster than you can educate them your state becomes a welfare black hole. That will destroy your economy, but if you stop giving them aid then you lose popular support. I don’t think I’m as racist as you think I am. I’m not whining about white replacement, I’m saying that high birthrate in uneducated populations is a national disaster. A similar situation once had Mao consider deporting 11 million Chinese women to the US in a semi-serious way.
              >Yet that didn’t happen in SA
              What about the farmland reappropriation anon? It is happening in SA, it’s just that it isn’t history yet because it happened a few years ago.
              >People don’t even…
              What?
              >why are Blacks to exceptional to you?
              Because we are talking about SA specifically

              • #94963
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >It is happening in SA, it’s just that it isn’t history yet because it happened a few years ago.
                In Zimbabwe it l almost 20 years ago and in the case of SA their laws explicitly prevent forced appropriation from happening. Let me remind you that many land that whites lived on own were appropriated by South Africa from Coloreds, Khoisan and Blacks for ages

                >An exploding uneducated population is any governments nightmare. You have to help your people, but if they’re reproducing faster than you can educate them your state becomes a welfare black hole. That will destroy your economy, but if you stop giving them aid then you lose popular support. I don’t think I’m as racist as you think I am. I’m not whining about white replacement, I’m saying that high birthrate in uneducated populations is a national disaster.

                SA birthrates have been declining for ages and even in your statement of SA It’s not really accurate. SA’s ltieracy rate in 1996 was 86% and for Zimbabwe 83% in 1992.

                >But why would people be dissenting if they create their own laws?
                Look at the USA lol constant dissent over laws in general. Texas just banned abortion and Florida is trying to do the same.

                >just look towards switzerland or pre civil war America for an example
                Switzerland is surrounded by a lot of mountain and it’s feerla pwoer flexes itself when needed as well as in other matters. The times people vote in cantons are for little things that the feds don’t care about unless they have to step in which they do.

                >Also, the weaker the federal government, the less prone a state is to oligarchy as there is no massive federal power in which the rich can control.
                There’s oligarchy in the regional and municipal scale anon

                • #94968
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >In Zimbabwe it l almost 20 years ago
                  What?
                  >SA their laws explicitly prevent forced appropriation from happening.
                  That doesn’t seem to be the case as of 2018
                  >Let me remind you that many land that whites lived on own were appropriated by South Africa from Coloreds, Khoisan and Blacks
                  Coloreds didn’t even exist until whites began farming. There were barely any blacks until the whites were already established and any land taken was taken through conquest, not government reappropriation.
                  SA birthrates have been declining for ages and even in your statement of SA It’s not really accurate. SA’s ltieracy rate in 1996 was 86% and for Zimbabwe 83% in 1992.
                  >Adult literacy rate is the percentage of people ages 15 and above who can both read and write with understanding a short simple statement about their everyday life. South Africa literacy rate for 2017 was 87.05% , a 7.32% decline from 2015.
                  https://lastfiascorun.com/africa/what-is-the-literacy-rate-in-south-africa.html
                  A "short simple statement about everyday life" isn’t enough to educate yourself to vote well. Sounds like SA’s no child left behind.
                  >Look at the USA lol constant dissent over laws in general. Texas just banned abortion and Florida is trying to do the same.
                  A people voted to ban abortion. What’s so bad about that? If that’s what they want then those who don’t like it can move, that’s why the US has freedom of movement. Not every state needs to have legal abortion, it sounds like you just want everyone to live how you want them to.
                  >feerla pwoer flexes itself
                  Switzerland works great and prior to 2000 there was no swiss federal gov’t, only federal militia.
                  >There’s oligarchy in the regional and municipal scale anon
                  Yes, but it depillarizes politics. Think about how much money it takes to run a federal election, only the rich can do that. Now think about how much money it takes to run a local one. Anyone can do that. If votes are all that matter, it makes politics a much more level playing field.

                  • #94971
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >>SA their laws explicitly prevent forced appropriation from happening.
                    >That doesn’t seem to be the case as of 2018
                    They plan to just change the constitution to say it’s okay as I understand. The next cope will be they apparently promise to only seize unused land (if you believe that lol). Can’t forget the discrimination when it comes to employment, getting loans, admission to university etc. All available evidence points to the fact these people are shit on by the state.

                    • #94989
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >The next cope will be they apparently promise to only seize unused land (if you believe that lol).
                      Namibia and SA a have massive problem of land being abandoned to waste away due to land speculation.

                  • #94992
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Think about how much money it takes to run a federal election, only the rich can do that.
                    then restrict election budgets scrotebrain. Literally every place outside of the USA does it.

                    • #95008
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Are you seriously implying that the average Joe can run an election campaign on a national level as easily as he could on a local one if campaign budgets are limited? It’s infinitely easier to convince people to get your town to vote for you off of your ideas alone than it is to get a nation to do so, and much cheaper too. Normal people can’t partake in federal campaigns anywhere, it’s always just for the rich

            • #94955
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >capitalizes black
              >wont capitalize white

              into the trash it goes

              • #95005
                Anonymous
                Guest

                he’s probably a phoneposter, sometimes the autocorrect capitalizes a word for some reason

            • #94961
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >It’s shit because limited federal control means being more prone to potential dissent and uprisings on top of weak outreach in giving services.
              God anon. Before you say another word about democratic government you really do need to read de tocqueville.
              Democracy is about every man working for himself and communities deciding their own moral codes which work for themselves, not some all powerful federalized state giving handouts to everyone.
              Strong, centralized federal power gives the ambitious and the corrupt a seat to vie for. Decentralized democracy ensures that no entity rules over anyone but the law and the people’s respect for it. That’s what a self-governing culture is.

              • #94965
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >you really do need to read de tocqueville.
                and that is his take on the situation. Especial since if you decentralize power several issues can come up in it such has having more obstacles in ones path to push key developmental plans or infrastructure (look at the USA and how it can’t build trains).

                • #94966
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  America was building trains left and right and up and down every which way for a hundred years, back in the day when the centralized federal government was basically absent in most of the country.

                • #94970
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >and that is his take on the situation. Especial since if you decentralize power several issues can come up in it such has having more obstacles in ones path to push key developmental plans or infrastructure (look at the USA and how it can’t build trains).
                  Lmao, you had that completely backwards. 1800’s decentralized America had the world’s largest train network and it was completely privatized and worked great. Then the government stepped in and built massive highways for cars to drive on. This was much cheaper to use for companies since tax dollars were used to maintain them instead of the railways which the companies had to maintain. Naturally this caused trucking to overpass freight train transportation and the rail lined were all steadily abandoned.
                  Now the highways have given us the horrible commuter culture and bedroom communities which hereto had been unknown. Amtrack, a federal government project, has been a miserable failure compared to what our country used to have with a privatized rail network. That is what massive government projects get you.

                  Well, at least having a strong federal government means infrastructure is built faster, right? OH wait, Flint Michigan STILL DOESNT HAVE freaking WATER.

                  • #94990
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >1800’s decentralized America had the world’s largest train network and it was completely privatized and worked great
                    The private monopoly was utter cancer on top of their death grip hold on the economy

                    >Then the government stepped in and built massive highways for cars to drive on
                    Heavily influenced by private companies.

                    • #94997
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      The growth of the American rail network was unparalleled, primarily because the government left it up to private companies to develop it as they chose (and occasionally provided massive incentives to doing so). That immense private growth was, in turn, directly responsible for the rapid industrialization of the country. Of course, the rail barons were tamed by the end of the century, and put to work keeping the economy running in a responsible manner. The point remains, though, that the federal government could not and would not have sparked that initial boom

                      • #95001
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >the rail barons were tamed by the end of the century, and put to work keeping the economy running in a responsible manner
                        By that point they already drained a ton from their monopoly advantage.

        • #95020
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Whites in America were just like tribal Africans
          Imagine actually believing this.
          This is your brain on Netflix.

          • #95025
            Anonymous
            Guest

            The frontier era for America was a total shitshow with rampant ethnic cleansing, violence, lack of order, poverty and other issues, where the American state wasn’t able to have full control over it’s borders, expansion and it’ rowdy settlers.

            • #95069
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Source: Netflix

            • #95103
              Anonymous
              Guest

              The Frontier Era was defined by civilized Europeans coming to America.
              African tribals didnt come from Wakanda to South Africa, they were marauding goobers genociding literal hobbits and berrypickers who lived under trees.

        • #95067
          Anonymous
          Guest

          " whites were also uneducated and superstitious"
          Sure they were, they were also running around throwing spears at animals and eating babi-
          Oh wait.

      • #95098
        Anonymous
        Guest
    • #94915
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I would unironically rather live in ZA than either police state Australia or woketopia Canada.

      you can do whatever the fuck you want in South Africa and its ludicrously cheap. the blacks aren’t like american blacks, they pull all the strings so there’s no room to bitch about "systemic racism" or whatever. EEF tries with that shit and gets crushed every election, they’re an irrelevant backwater party outside of Limpopo.

      scrotes, trannies, conspicuous consumption, karens, coof hysterics etc. are all basically absent. the tradeoff is somebody in joburg might kill you for your sunglasses, but fuck it whatever keep your wits about you and you’ll be fine.

      if you really want to live a mostly free existence under a benevolent or absent government you’re probably better off in NZ or the white parts of America though.

      • #94916
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >they pull all the strings
        Not really anon.

        >EEF tries with that shit and gets crushed every election, they’re an irrelevant backwater party outside of Limpopo.
        Yet they make whites worry a lot.

        >scrotes, trannies, conspicuous consumption, karens, coof hysterics etc. are all basically absent
        SA is rife with Karens and, gay marriage in SA is legal and SA among the rest of the Africa and the developing world is being starved of Covid vaccines by the developed world who is hording them all.

        • #94920
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >ayo whitey, gibs me dat vaccine

          • #94924
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Can’t buy vaccines when the first world ends up buying them all up.

      • #94933
        Anonymous
        Guest

        You’d rather live in AIDS infested South Africa where they genocide whites? Good luck to you scrote.

        • #94937
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Where they genocide whites

          I wish.

        • #94944
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >where they genocide whites?
          /poo/ has been saying this for a decade and it still hasn’t happened

          • #94949
            Anonymous
            Guest

            They can’t just kill them. They’re South Africa’s tax payers. They are subject to state-sponsored discrimination though and they’re victims of violent crime (not just them by any means but still). Some section of people would probably like to actually kill them however judging by their rhetoric e.g. Malema.

      • #95060
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >the blacks aren’t like american blacks, they pull all the strings so there’s no room to bitch about "systemic racism" or whatever.
        Idiot, they’re talking about taking farms from the Boers and sing about shooting them. And yes, they’re complaining about all the systemic racism shit. Remember that this video comes from the University of Cape Town
        >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14

        • #95061
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Idiot, they’re talking about taking farms from the Boers and sing about shooting them. And yes, they’re complaining about all the systemic racism shit.
          Whites would certainly do more than ‘talking’ and singing songs if Blacks ruled over them in the US in an Apartheid state which only ended in the early 1990’s.

          • #95063
            Anonymous
            Guest

            No, they wouldnt, you freaking coping monkey.
            We both know blacks are ungrateful no matter how far Whites break their backs trying to appease them.
            blacks wouldnt create an apartheid state, they would genocide their underclass, LIKE THEY ALREADY DID.
            Whites not only spared blacks the classical genocide conquering races enforce, but also genuinely tried to make blacks equal to Whites with good faith efforts.
            NEVER EVER Has it gone in the opposite direction.

            • #95064
              Anonymous
              Guest

              20% annual death rate in French Haitian plantations
              200,000 black deaths during the indepence war, France invented the gas chamber for haitian

              • #95087
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >haiti
                not south africa

                Whites didn’t keep blacks alive out of compassion or mercy. They needed their labor force.

                and 120,000 White men died to end slavery because….?
                right because Whites are moral.
                blacks have never tried to make their underclass equal to themselves, Whites have made and still make genuine good faith efforts to make lessers equals.
                also
                >you didnt keep us around out compassion and mercy so its fine if we rape 20,000 women a year and have a pogrom style murder rate wherever we take power
                youre saying blacks should have been genocided?

                >Whites not only spared blacks the classical genocide conquering races enforce, but also genuinely tried to make blacks equal to Whites with good faith efforts.
                Tell that to indigenous peoples of North and South America and Australia who were genocided to near extinction by whites. Including the enslavement of blacks in the Confederate States.
                White American were still lynching blacks in the southern US states in the 1960’s for no other reason other than being black. And you expect me to believe that whites would just forgive and forget if blacks subjected them to Apartheid? You’re already upset over blacks singing songs and talking about taking farms but somehow you will turn the other cheek when if blacks subjected you Apartheid?

                >tell that to the people who outnumber Whites in South America and who have special rights and privelegs in North America
                ok I will, how about you tell the pure Khoisan of Central Africa about how great blacks are, wait, they no longer exist.
                Khois only exist in Southern South Africa today because Whites prevented black genociders from wiping out indigenous non-blacks lmao.
                >enslavement of blacks in the Confederate states
                and then 120,000 White men died to free blacks.

                >some psycho chains you up in his basement
                >police officer saves you and dies in the event
                >you not only spit on his grave but you justify murdering and raping his children because the officer had the same skin color as the kidnapper
                Youre bonked in your sunbaked 85IQ head.
                >would you turn the other cheek if you were under apartheid
                but blacks arent under apartheid, it ended, and they did not end it themselves, Whites could still today genocide the entire black race.
                They should be thankful Whites did not and still do not murder every single one of them, which they could, because it seems like blacks are murdering or displacing every single White wherever they get a modicum of power.
                also
                blacks didnt end apartheid, they didnt conquer Whites, they didnt invade London and force their demands through to the commonwealths.
                They didnt even subjugate Cape Town.
                They have no right to the natural rights of the conqueror, they are simply murderous at heart and ungrateful.

                thanks for tacit admission its genocide.

                • #95105
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >ok I will, how about you tell the pure Khoisan of Central Africa about how great blacks are
                  Khoisan in Central Africa? Are you on drugs?

                  >Khois only exist in Southern South Africa today because Whites prevented black genociders from wiping out indigenous non-blacks
                  Yeah whites landed in the Cape in 1652 and the Khoisan went to war with them in 1657. By 1700 there hardly any left.

                  >”White prevented wiping out indigenous non-blacks
                  By issuing permits so that German settlers in Namibia could legally hunt Khoisan as late as 1937. Strange way of preventing ethnic cleansing.

                  >and then 120,000 White men died to free blacks.
                  The Civil War started because Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union not about ending slavery. He only adopted the policy of the emancipation of slaves because the war was going terribly and the South were winning. Lincoln was badly in need of new recruits to fill the depleted Union Army ranks and was pressured by anti-slavery Church groups to end slavery in exchange for African-Americans joining the Union Army.

                  >some psycho chains you up in his basement
                  >police officer saves you and dies in the event
                  >you not only spit on his grave but you justify murdering and raping his children because the officer had the same skin color as the kidnapper
                  Take you psych meds. You’re not making any sense.

                  >but blacks arent under apartheid, it ended, and they did not end it themselves, Whites could still today genocide the entire black race.
                  Try re-reading what I posted.

                  >blacks didnt end apartheid
                  Then why did the Apartheid government enter into secret talks with the ANC in exile in Zambia as early as 1983?

                  >They didnt even subjugate Cape Town.
                  >They have no right to the natural rights of the conqueror, they are simply murderous at heart and ungrateful.
                  Did you see any genocide of whites when Apartheid ended in 1994? Of course not.

                  >thanks for tacit admission its genocide
                  Lmao what?

                  • #95107
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >By issuing permits so that German settlers in Namibia could legally hunt Khoisan as late as 1937. Strange way of preventing ethnic cleansing.

                    Got some source/reading for this? This is horrifying

                  • #95109
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >>some psycho chains you up in his basement
                    >>police officer saves you and dies in the event
                    >>you not only spit on his grave but you justify murdering and raping his children because the officer had the same skin color as the kidnapper
                    >Take you psych meds. You’re not making any sense.
                    That’s exactly your argument you mouthbreathing scrotebrain

                    • #95112
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Whites were never kidnapped.

                      • #95116
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Blacks are enslaved by other Blacks
                        >Whites buy the Black slaves
                        >Eventually Whites not only free the Black slaves but make sure that Black slaves everywhere are freed, the only freaking race in history to do this
                        >Blacks hate Whites because slavery
                        And you go around saying this is justified. By your argument it’s also justified for African Americans to treat the descendants of Black slave traders (along the coast of West Africa) like shit

                  • #95171
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Khoisan in central Africa
                    yes, a Khoisan-like people once ranged all of the Southern parts of Africa which includes areas that are now politically considered in Central Africa.
                    >Whites and Khoisan went to war
                    and? Khoisan would have gone totally extinct had Whites not landed and BTFO the Bantoids.
                    >German settlers in namibia could legally hunt khoisan
                    does your scrotebrained monkey brain not realize that even if Whites globally said "we are going to murder all Khoisan we can get our hands on" and then years later decide to protect the last of the Khoisan, would still be BETTER than the alternative which is raped into extinction by ugly flat nosed mongoloid demi pygmies?
                    So yes, Whites still prevented the total holocaust of the khoisan, It doesnt matter if some German autists in Namibia wiped out the Khoisan in Namibia (they didnt even wipe them out), the arrival of Whites in South Africa prevented perfidious psychotic bantoids from wiping out Khois.
                    Kind of poetic considering heavily semitic admixed East Africans raped the shit out of black West Africans in warfare, which prevented the extinction of native A and B Y DNA carriers in the Southern reaches of East Africa lol.
                    >Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union not end slavery
                    nice lost cause myth.
                    After the Battle of Antietam, there was a special meeting where the Northern leadership and abolitionists gathered and officially announced the war from that point onward would be primarily to Free the Negro slaves.
                    >war was going terribly
                    emancipation proclamation was given directly after Antietam, the shift in the war which knocked out all foreign support for the South.
                    >in need of new recruits
                    lol, they had just decimated the army of Northern Virginia at Antietam and had a 30,000 man advantage on the only relevant front throughout the entire war LOL
                    also
                    colored regiments were barely 10% of the Union forces throughout the entire war.
                    Battle of the Crater shows the USA valued colored troops more than White troops

                  • #95172
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Take you psych meds. You’re not making any sense.

                    >someone enslaves you
                    >another group liberates you
                    >punish the liberators because you vaguely associate their skin color with the skin color of those who enslaved you
                    Sounds like a group of real poopyholes who would do that, race obsessed poopyholes.
                    I would see things only in light of race too if I descended from mongrelized slaves sold off by my own kinsmen because I was an illiterate tribal too weak to serve under some Mansa and too stupid to evade capture.
                    >Why was the Apartheid Government in touch with political factions
                    because they were a political entity and Anglos being shrewd diplomats tend to do that?
                    When did blacks subjugate Cape Town? When did they march on London or the USA and demand foreign support to end Apartheid?
                    >did you see any genocides of Whites
                    did you see any genocides of native americans?
                    It was just a few villages, just a couple of buffalo.
                    >yeah but it was like millions
                    but it didnt happen in 10 years, it didnt happen even in 100 years, it happened in over 200 years.
                    South Africa 200 years post Apartheid (if Whites dont fight back, and Pajeets magically lay down their guns) will be totally black and a failed state, and your scrotebrained mongrel progeny will cope about how its the specter of Whiteness keeping South Africa poor.
                    >lmao what
                    you are justifying the genocide of Whites by saying Whites would have done the same thing had the roles been reversed.
                    To take that another way, Whites would never be subjugated or conquered on a racial level.
                    the Iberians fought a thousand year long war of liberation, they didnt petition for rights or hide behind the skirts of women begging their overlords for concession.
                    They fought, and they fought armies, blacks are murdering little girls.
                    Balkan Whites under turkish rule had to be subjugated through a 200 year long war, then had multiple rebellions and decades of autonomy and partial independence throughout.

            • #95065
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Whites didn’t keep blacks alive out of compassion or mercy. They needed their labor force.

            • #95066
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Whites not only spared blacks the classical genocide conquering races enforce, but also genuinely tried to make blacks equal to Whites with good faith efforts.
              Tell that to indigenous peoples of North and South America and Australia who were genocided to near extinction by whites. Including the enslavement of blacks in the Confederate States.
              White American were still lynching blacks in the southern US states in the 1960’s for no other reason other than being black. And you expect me to believe that whites would just forgive and forget if blacks subjected them to Apartheid? You’re already upset over blacks singing songs and talking about taking farms but somehow you will turn the other cheek when if blacks subjected you Apartheid?

              • #95072
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Blacks enslaved blacks and sold them to the west. Meanwhile in America blacks owned and bread slaves
                White people bad!

                Whites lunched rapists and criminals who were both white and black. Stop lying. Muh just because black…and happened to rape someone.

                >If blacks subjugated whites
                You mean like the Persians did when they obliterated the Byzantines or the Muslims did in north Africa after the fall of Rome?

            • #95089
              Anonymous
              Guest

              don’t be a disingenuous scrote, anon
              >WOW how dare the scrotes to remember we treated them as subhumans in their own land, holy shit, freaking ungratefull scrotes

              • #95093
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >act like subhumans
                >get treated like subhumans
                also
                how is freeing them from slavery, breaking down healthy and necessary barriers prevent blacks from entering (subverting) White society, and making genuine good faith efforts to make them equals "treating them as subhumans"????

              • #95095
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Just say you support revenge, anon, and then sit back as the scrotes rape your family and then slice your own throat. It’s what you deserve

              • #95101
                Anonymous
                Guest

                By that logic I suppose you support Iceland treating Moroccans as subhumans, because of the Barbary raids?

          • #95082
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Blacks slaughtered thousands of Whites and Haiti and all they did in return was economic bloccade. Fuck nowadays blacks kill far more whites than reverse and whites do shit about it

            • #95094
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Blacks slaughtered thousands of Whites and Haiti and all they did in return was economic blockade.
              Which resulted in the failed state that’s present day history. Whites certainly have a long memory.

              • #95097
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >It’s because of the economic blockade
                Must explain why Ethiopia is such a thriving country, o wait scrotes are just shit at building good societies

                • #95104
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Ethiopia was thriving until 10 months ago
                  And it’ll be thriving when Abiy glasses tigray

                  • #95108
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Only in last decade the GDP per capita rises above $200 /year
                    >In 1984 600,000 people died of starvation
                    Sounds great

                    • #95111
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      thriving
                      /ˈθrʌJvJŋ/
                      adjective:

                      prosperous and growing; flourishing.

                      • #95114
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Yes anon Ethopia was flourishing until 10 months ago
                        >Except if you discount everything happening before 2009
                        >Also ignore that it’s still a freaking shithole

                      • #95149
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        what happened in 2005?

              • #95099
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Thanks for admitting blacks cant generate a good society on their own without outside help.
                meanwhile Whites, isolated and in a mixed race society, manage to build a place more functional than Haiti while being unknown to other Europeans and Polynesians for a time nearly 15x LONGER than the blockade on Haiti, also they had no prior infrastructure.

                If you want to test racial ability, compare Pitcairn to Haiti.
                Pitcairn is a shithole, but they werent found eating mud when European rediscovered them.

                • #95102
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Yes, but all but Whites had either been killed in infighting or poor health, and the one dude left was found more or less leading a coll cation indigenous women and the mixed children of himself and the other mutineers. I would hardly call the one white person left existing in a state of drifting in and out of a drunken stupor more impressive.

                  • #95110
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >all the Whites
                    no? The last to survive were Whites, also, so what? They still created a functional society which literal children could run.
                    >its not impressive criminals with nothing built a functional society better than Haiti, a former colonial holding CONNECTED TO A FUNCTIONAL SOCIETY, with no apparent enemies, shared revolutionary unity, and a place rich with natural resources.
                    not to mention, the blockade didnt last even.

                • #95118
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  blacks are not indigenous to South Africa, some Whites are more indigenous to South Africa than blacks.
                  You are NOT all "africans" anymore than Elon Musk and Zidane also are considered "african".
                  Bantu are blacks, and Bantu were murderous genociders, more so than Whites, at least Whites created reservations, at least Whites didnt drive any race to total extinction, Khoi are far worse off than native Americans, who arent even less numerous than Whites in the Americas.

                  >blacks are not indigenous to South Africa
                  This has got to be the dumbest thing I read on the internet.

                  >You are NOT all "africans" anymore than Elon Musk and Zidane also are considered "african".
                  I haven’t heard Elon Musk refer to himself as African. Zidane is French of Moroccan descent.

                  >Whites, at least Whites created reservations, at least Whites didnt drive any race to total extinction, Khoi are far worse off than native Americans,
                  Because whites drove them to near extinction and issuing permits for whites to legally hunt them until 1937 as previously pointed out.

                  >Must explain why Ethiopia is such a thriving country, o wait scrotes are just shit at building good societies
                  Ethiopian Airlines was ranked amongst the best in the world before the civil war recently.

                  >Thanks for admitting blacks cant generate a good society on their own without outside help.
                  Meanwhile Apartheid South Africa needed the help from the West to maintain their society. Apartheid fell as soon as a few sanctions hit. They couldn’t even take 5 years of sanctions from the US despite still being able to trade with Britain,Germany,France,Israel and Japan.

                  • #95119
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Ethopian airlines
                    Scraping the barrell already are we?

                    • #95120
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >Ethopian airlines
                      >Scraping the barrell already are we?
                      How so? When they’re ranked amongst the best run airlines globally?

                  • #95122
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >This has got to be the dumbest thing I read on the internet.
                    OMG…modern bantus got there AFTER the voortrekkers

                    • #95125
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >Still perpetuating this lie

                      "Bantus" have been there for thousands of years

                    • #95153
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >OMG…modern bantus got there AFTER the Voortrekkers
                      The Boers were in South Africa around 300AD?That’s impressive since neither the Netherlands or the VOC company which sent them there didn’t exist yet.

                  • #95123
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >ethiopian airlines

                    they lawndarted a plane in a way that was so reckless it borders on deliberate.

                    • #95152
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >they lawndarted a plane in a way that was so reckless it borders on deliberate.
                      Pretty sure Boeing was found to be at fault there.

                      • #95158
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        of course boeing jumped on grenade to protect their customers but basically they had no idea what they were doing in that cockpit. just like lionair.

                  • #95164
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >actually Bantunogs are native to South Africa
                    30% Eurasian 40% Pygmy 30% Khoi mongrel moment
                    bantus are native to Northern Central, and ultimately Western Africa and its surrounding areas. They are NOT indigenous to South Africa, as a matter of fact some White South Africans have been in parts of South Africa longer than some Bantu.
                    >Elon Musk hasnt referred to himself as African
                    ??
                    He is a native of South Africa.

                    >Zidane is French moroccan
                    nope he is fully African, he is 100% indigenous African.
                    He is not French in the slightest.

                    >Whites drove them to near extinction
                    and then Whites built them reservations, and gave them special rights and rules not afforded to White Americans.
                    No such kindness to a race so utterly beaten and defeated has EVER been shown by a non-White race.
                    Least of all the african ones.
                    >whites could legally hunt them
                    no it was never legal to murder Indian women and children as a standing policy.
                    Even if the Whites pursued systemic genocide, see above, they have ALREADY shown more clemency than any non-White race.
                    Show me a single reservation for a vanquished people who are then given special rights and privileges by a non-White race.
                    >ethiopian airlines
                    ?? ethiopia is shit.
                    >there was a civil war
                    Where are the civil wars in China or Japan? places POORER than Africa in very recent history and received LESS aid than Africa.
                    >Apartheid South Africa needed help from the West to maintain their society?
                    ?? no, they didnt, Boers survived concentration camps and went on to build another successful nation.
                    >couldnt even take these sanctions
                    yeah well haiti had decades of foreign aid, reconstruction, investment, and they’re still shit, in fact african people are just a money sink, while WHITE nations have to be BEATEN, african will beat themselves.
                    >couldnt even take
                    they actually could and they did, as they are yet to be a failed state, wait till blacks are in full power.
                    SA deconstructed their nukes too LOL

          • #95090
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Whites would certainly do more than ‘talking’ and singing songs if Blacks ruled over them in the US in an Apartheid state which only ended in the early 1990’s.
            [citation needed]
            blacks are replacing Whites and murdering their children, where’s the White chimpout?

            • #95115
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >blacks are replacing Whites and murdering their children, where’s the White chimp out
              If whites are already upset over the removal of Confederate Statues then why won’t they seek retribution if African-Americans were to subject them to Apartheid?

              • #95117
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Because whites are nice enough to live with a people who commit more crime, are a drain on the economy and when the scrotes don’t do better they think it’s their own fault

              • #95165
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Whites are doing literally nothing as their history is destroyed, their women are raped, their children are murdered
                >"you’ll get angry eventually and try to genocide us, which means we are in the right presently and this justifies continued chimping on our part"

                You know what I freaking hope so, I hope Whites chimp out and are every bit as ruthless and violent towards Your women your children and your people as you claim they will be 🙂
                maybe youll be reminded as to why all black Africans have Eurasian daddies from MENA and European Mesolithic BVLLs raping native black pygmies to produce modern blacks LMAO

        • #95062
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Remember that this video comes from the University of Cape Town
          Remember that not even the most pro-white President in Donald Trump wasn’t convinced about ethnic cleansing of whites happening in South Africa.

          • #95070
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Zognald lord of the boomers is "the most pro-White president"
            I mean you’re not wrong, but that doesnt disperse the simple facts, Whites are second class citizens and falling.

            • #95080
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Whites are second class citizens and falling.
              How are whites second class citizens are in South Africa?

              • #95088
                Anonymous
                Guest

                It is legally permissible to sing about murder and rape aimed at Whites.
                It is morally permissible among a non insignificant portion of the population to actually carry out such heinous acts.

                I guess its going to be funny when Whites are gone and so is their media black out and we will get to see the memes of pajeets murdering black kids lmao like theyre doing now, but since its in response to White genocide, we will never see it until Whitey goes.

                • #95113
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >It is legally permissible to sing about murder and rape aimed at Whites.
                  It’s actually illegal. Show me where it is legal.

                  >It is morally permissible among a non insignificant portion of the population to actually carry out such heinous acts.
                  Where do get that from?

                  >I guess its going to be funny when Whites are gone and so is their media black out and we will get to see the memes of pajeets murdering black kids lmao like theyre doing now,
                  Those Pajeets in that area are themselves poor as fuck and live amongst blacks. They aren’t the rich ,educated Pajeets who look down on them.

                  >but since its in response to White genocide, we will never see it until Whitey goes.
                  You’re genociding yourself. White women no longer want to have kids.

    • #94917
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Australia and Canada were settler colonies and had very small native populations compared to SA. SA’s whites just got overran.

      • #94919
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >SA’s whites just got overran.
        Can’t get overrun when the Coloureds, Khoisan and Blacks were always there and you import slaves on top of that.

        • #95013
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >The coloreds
          >The descendants of slaves brought from SEA.
          >Always there.
          So true.

        • #95021
          Anonymous
          Guest

          South Africa was barely populated when the settlers arrived. What you just states is a lie.

          • #95023
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >South Africa was barely populated when the settlers arrived. What you just states is a lie.
            Except for the Zulus,Xhosa,Khoisan,Venda and Swazi tribes who were already there before whites arrived.

            • #95026
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >Zulus, Swazi
              >Native to south Africa. This about the country–not the total land mass of africa.
              lie more kid

              • #95027
                Anonymous
                Guest

                They’ve always existed within South Africa. fucks sake the development of SA as state heavily involved interaction with both groups and their absorption of them into the state.

              • #95031
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Zulus, Swazi
                >Native to south Africa.
                Where else on African continent can we find Zulu and Swazi tribes if they’re not indigenous to South Africa?

                • #95033
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Technically speaking,the zulu kingdom we all love and know was only established in 1816, the dutch had been in south africa since the mid 1600s. your argument would be stronger if you said the Nguni people (the "latins" to the Zulu’s "Romans") were natives to south africa.

                  • #95036
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Technically speaking,the zulu kingdom we all love and know was only established in 1816, the dutch had been in south africa since the mid 1600s.
                    The Bantus are descendant from the Nguni people. The Zulus are a branch of the Bantu tree. The Zulu Kingdom was formed in 1816 but the Zulu language and customs existed long before that date.

                • #95042
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  You have no idea what you are talking about. The COUNTRY of southafrica is mostly barren and brown people hardly touched the ocean for fish and certainly never farmed until whites shows up.

                  Stop learning history from netflix.

                  • #95047
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    Holy shit you killed me

                  • #95052
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >The COUNTRY of southafrica is mostly barren
                    Some of the oldest cave paintings in the word are found in South Africa.

                    >brown people hardly touched the ocean for fish and certainly never farmed until whites shows up.
                    How did the Khoisan in the Cape, Xhosa tribe near the ocean in the Eastern Cape and Zulus on the shores KwaZulu-Natal feed themselves if they couldn’t fish?
                    The Cape was a well established trade route for ships from Europe making their way to Asia since the 14th Century long before whites showed up.

                    >certainly never farmed until whites shows up.
                    What did all those tribes live off for hundreds of years if they couldn’t farm?

                    >Stop learning history from netflix.
                    If you stopped learning early South African history from /pol memes then it wouldn’t come as such a shock that black people actually inhabited a Sub-Saharan African country. It’s strange that some folks only believe that South Africa was ‘uninhabited’ before whites showed up but never say the same about Nigeria or Cameroon.

                  • #95053
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >Claims Zulus and Swazi tribes aren’t indigenous to South Africa
                    >Proceeds to post a map of Central Africa because he doesn’t have an answer

                    • #95054
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      The Zulu were in that little notch on the right brainlet. Not part of southafrica. The bulk of the rest of those tribes were further north of the center of SA.

                      >The COUNTRY of southafrica is mostly barren
                      Some of the oldest cave paintings in the word are found in South Africa.

                      >brown people hardly touched the ocean for fish and certainly never farmed until whites shows up.
                      How did the Khoisan in the Cape, Xhosa tribe near the ocean in the Eastern Cape and Zulus on the shores KwaZulu-Natal feed themselves if they couldn’t fish?
                      The Cape was a well established trade route for ships from Europe making their way to Asia since the 14th Century long before whites showed up.

                      >certainly never farmed until whites shows up.
                      What did all those tribes live off for hundreds of years if they couldn’t farm?

                      >Stop learning history from netflix.
                      If you stopped learning early South African history from /pol memes then it wouldn’t come as such a shock that black people actually inhabited a Sub-Saharan African country. It’s strange that some folks only believe that South Africa was ‘uninhabited’ before whites showed up but never say the same about Nigeria or Cameroon.

                      The country of southafrica is mostly barren
                      >there were cave paintings
                      and?

                      >How did they feed themselfs if they barely fished?
                      Sure dude–they were totally known for their fishing fleets. lool

                      >What did they live off if they didn’t farm
                      So basically you have zero evidence supporting they ever farmed so engage in sophistry.

                      >blacks inhabited south africa
                      as I said before–barely inhabited, not uninhabited.

                      They showed up en-mass for gibs after whites started making the land usable.

                      so please, lets hear more sophistry devoid of actual connection to history because muh whites good and those poor blacks being kept down by the man.

                      • #95055
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Brah they lived in a pretty big part of it. The rest lived all over the east end east of the fish river.

                        >So basically you have zero evidence supporting they ever farmed so engage in sophistry.
                        The easy to spot farming culture, signs of previous inhabitants in an areas, areas altered by the presence and movement of animals, the food.

                        >as I said before–barely inhabited
                        South Africa was inhabited by many peoples east and west. they had some Swazi trading some really nice dagga to some San for land long long ago and marijuana isn’t even native to Africa.

                        >They showed up en-mass for gibs after whites started making the land usable.
                        The SA state stole all the land to give it to the whites through land seizure polices. the type of polices that guys like you ironically fear.

                      • #95057
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >they lived in a big part of it
                        yes, "sparsely populated" is the term for it

                        >they had significant agriculture prior to 1600s
                        prove it

                        >SA colonizers stole the land
                        EG showed up where there were almost no natives, traded with them and established modern culture in a barren land–evil evil whites how dare they.

                      • #95058
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >The Zulu were in that little notch on the right brainlet. Not part of South Africa
                        Lmao KwaZulu-Natal isn’t part of South Africa?

                        >The bulk of the rest of those tribes were further north of the center of SA.
                        And?Various tribes inhabited different parts of South Africa. What’s so controversial about that?

                        >there were cave paintings
                        and?
                        Meaning the country was most certainly inhabited for centuries.

                        >Sure dude–they were totally known for their fishing fleets.
                        Bantu tribes managed to discover and master iron smelting but somehow couldn’t catch fish?

                        >So basically you have zero evidence supporting they ever farmed so engage in sophistry.
                        See extract from attached article:
                        >”This intensive farming system was unique in South Africa and was the largest intensive farming system in southern and eastern Africa” Professor Delius told Past Horizons . “ It included massive investment in stone terracing, cattle kraals and which allowed for the cultivation of rich, volcanic soils on the hill sides of the escarpment . It is also connected to systems of long distance trade which span the interior that linked to the east coast and to the vast and ancient Indian Ocean trading system. So this was not an isolated society, an isolated world, it was part of a much bigger regional system.”
                        https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/research-bakoni-ruins-south-africa-debunks-colonial-perceptions-020418
                        >as I said before–barely inhabited, not uninhabited.
                        South Africa certainly has a lot of indigenous tribes for it to have been “barely inhabited”.

                        “They showed up en-mass for gibs after whites started making the land usable.”
                        From where did they supposedly show and when did this happen?

                        >so please, lets hear more sophistry devoid of actual connection to history
                        You can’t even answer where else in Africa one kind find Zulus or Swazi’s since they are apparently not indigenous to South Africa.

                      • #95068
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Bakoni get wiped out by warring tribes and immigration from other parts of Africa
                        >White people bad!

                        >Sparsely inhabited when whites showed up
                        Yes, cave paintings from a century ago my guy. Literally means nothing.

                        I never said they couldn’t, I said it wasn’t a priority kido. Post hoc ergo propter hoc = you.

                        Again, look at the map–the Zulu were concentrated in the not-sa chunk on the Eastern portion.

                        Swaziland is literally it’s own country.

                      • #95071
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Yes, cave paintings from a century ago my guy. Literally means nothing.
                        Try 200,000 years. So much for South Africa being “barely inhabited “ before whites showed up.
                        Also from article:
                        >”The Bakoni can be traced back to at least the early 16 th century but the culture is probably far, far older, given that the ruins themselves can be dated to an incredible 200,000 years by some people’s estimates.”

                      • #95076
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        And? They were almost all gone by the time white people arrived. Nothing in this history disproves low population density in SA when whites started to arrive.

                      • #95091
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >And? They were almost all gone by the time white people arrived.
                        South Africa had so many indigenous tribes that one can literally disappear and another one can take its place.

                        >Nothing in this history disproves low population density in SA when whites started to arrive.
                        First it was proof that blacks did farming now the goalpost is being shifted to “low population density”.
                        Have a look at the numerous indigenous black tribes in South Africa. If you did then you wouldn’t be pushing the low population density narrative. Everywhere white settlers moved in South Africa they encountered various black tribes.

                      • #95096
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        blacks are not indigenous to South Africa, some Whites are more indigenous to South Africa than blacks.
                        You are NOT all "africans" anymore than Elon Musk and Zidane also are considered "african".
                        Bantu are blacks, and Bantu were murderous genociders, more so than Whites, at least Whites created reservations, at least Whites didnt drive any race to total extinction, Khoi are far worse off than native Americans, who arent even less numerous than Whites in the Americas.

                      • #95124
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Blacks had farms that were all but a memory over a hundred years before whites showed up
                        >There were tribes all over–who were largely nomadic and had a low population density

                        You’re literally scrotebrained.

                      • #95151
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Still no source
                        >Opinion discarded

                      • #95154
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Gets btfo
                        >Cries
                        Many such cases

                      • #95155
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Thinks whites arrived first in an African country
                        >Probably thinks Mickey Mouse is real

                      • #95078
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Again, look at the map–the Zulu were concentrated in the not-sa chunk on the Eastern portion.
                        Try looking at an actual map not something constructed in someone’s basement. Then you will see that KwaZulu-Natal is definitely part of South Africa

                        >Swaziland is literally it’s own country.
                        It’s a landlocked country within the borders of South Africa. They can’t even fart without asking South Africa for permission.

                      • #95086
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Sophistry: the post

        • #95162
          Anonymous
          Guest

          the bantus werent in the western half of the country when the dutch landed.

          • #95163
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Xhosa were well established around great fish river by the 18th century, there was settlement and mixing with local namas around Port Elizabeth

            • #95166
              Anonymous
              Guest

              thats 500 miles from Cape Town

              • #95167
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Yes and?

                • #95168
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  uh, kind of proves the point of the bantu being foreign to the western cape?

                  • #95170
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    Yes? Nobody denies that, the majority of western cape bantus came in the past 50 years, particularly post apartheid, although there was an older colonial presence, both from slaves brought by the dutch or xhosa labourers brought by british settlers in the 19th century

    • #94923
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I’ll say it again, blacks.

    • #94925
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The Dutch

    • #94931
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The Afrikaner National party refusing to allow more and more European immigrants. With successful Bantustanization of the native populations, sectioning off a third of their numbers, Blacks could easily by around 35% of the population of the main body of The Union.
      The proliferation of Immigrants in Cape and Namibia, rather than investing in the Bantu east, would probably serve them well.

      • #94940
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >With successful Bantustanization of the native populations, sectioning off a third of their numbers
        Failed becuase SA needed Black workers to have functioning economy and often times the bantustans led to other issues for SA like managing control over it. A fuckton of blacks mostly weren’t in the Bantustans.

        >The proliferation of Immigrants in Cape and Namibia, rather than investing in the Bantu east, would probably serve them well.
        It wouldn’t especially since SA needed EDUCATED immigrants so getting some discount Europeans who don’t exactly help fufill SA’s urgent skilled labour deficiency wouldn’t work. Especially when they could end up sympathetic with the Blacks

        • #94981
          Anonymous
          Guest

          ANP wanted educated, and Dutch-speaking which thins out the migrant pool compared to the other colonies.

    • #94942
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The 1948 election resulting in a half-century of NP autism unironically caused nearly all of South Africa’s problems besides AIDS and the Angola conflict.

    • #94969
      Mrrandom
      Guest

      Seriously? Because there are too many scrotes. They are unproductive as hell and simply chaos wherever they go.

    • #94972
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Not to mention whites are routinely derided as the villains, blamed for social ills and so on. Which goes to show the "Rainbow Nation" is a transparent lie, they don’t want to move on from the past and be united– they want retribution.

      • #95018
        Anonymous
        Guest

        lol Mandela was merciful

        • #95019
          Anonymous
          Guest

          People really need to understand that Mandela saved South Africa through mediation, the Zulus, the Volksfront, the other factions of the ANC, they would have gone haywire without a figure like him. South Africa would likely survive but it would have to face widely unpopular government, years, over a decade of low level insurgencies and white flight tims larger than IRL

          • #95022
            Anonymous
            Guest

            That’s why South Africa transitioning from Apartheid to a democracy was called a miracle. Things could have gone sideways easily.

    • #94973
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >itt lefty brainlet who can’t type gets blown the fuck out

      • #94974
        Anonymous
        Guest

        der phoneposter

    • #94975
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Its racial issues. South Africa was very competent underneath apartheid, but it was always bound to eventually fail, especially with significant international pressure.

      Monoracial and monocultural states are nearly always more prosperous than diverse ones. Too many conflicts of interest in South Africa. Australian and Canadian demographic change is a large reason why they turned into police states.

      • #94976
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >South Africa was very competent underneath apartheid
        For the white population.

        >but it was always bound to eventually fail, especially with significant international pressure.
        The country was collapsing from within due to large scale street protests from the late 1970’s onwards. Most of West were still trading with Apartheid South Africa despite Apartheid.

      • #94977
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Not to mention whites are routinely derided as the villains, blamed for social ills and so on.
        Apartheid only ended in 1993 not 1893. And it’s white South Africans running around the world falsely claiming they’re the victims of genocide .

        >Which goes to show the "Rainbow Nation" is a transparent lie
        The US is still grappling with racial issues dating back from slavery , the Civil War and ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans but South Africans are supposed to magically solve its racial issues in just 28 years since Apartheid ended?

        >they don’t want to move on from the past and be united– they want retribution.
        If black South Africans wanted retribution then it would have happened in 1994 after they gained control of the government.

        • #94978
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >The US is still grappling with racial issues dating back from slavery ,
          Issues yes, but vastly overrated ones, a 30-25% income gap for 10-15% of a country’s population really isn’t huge

          • #94979
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Issues yes, but vastly overrated ones
            According to you. But not to the people protesting to highlight the racial issues.

          • #94987
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >a 30-25% income gap for 10-15% of a country’s population really isn’t huge
            that’s prey huge especially if it’s two people doing the same career. At low salaries/wages that means that the one with an income gap has to obtain a higher position than his peer to even earn the same income as well as being prone to more poverty. If you are rich it means that you cannot obtain the same financial luxuries and strength your peers would get with their income despite the same job.

            • #94991
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Of cours it"s huge on an individual level, of course racism there must suck if you’re black, but it’s only an average issue on a societal one absolutely not even top 10 issues with america… It’s just talked a lot because American culture sets western one, because many white american feel guilty, because dems are using it for electoral purpose and because America is so huge even 15% of it is an economy the size of south korea’s

              • #94993
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Of cours it"s huge on an individual level, of course racism there must suck if you’re black
                Or Hispanic or Asian.

                >but it’s only an average issue on a societal one absolutely not even top 10 issues with america… It
                Issues tie into and intersect a loy.

                • #94995
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Or Hispanic
                  Hispanics are absolutely going to get integrated among the average population, just give it some decades.

                  >Asian
                  LMAO, ok sucks to be a filipino I guess, the rest do well. American asians really need to understand how good they have it compared to literally every other western countries. East asians in Europe will absolutely GTFO in the next decades or realise 80% of the country’s population want them dead.

                  • #94999
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >realise 80% of the country’s population want them dead.
                    That isn’t even true. Holy shit do you go on shitty reddit boards or /poo/ with your shit takes?

      • #94988
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Monoracial and monocultural states are nearly always more prosperous than diverse ones.
        And there’s a load of counterexamples that says otherwise. Especial when many monoracial/cultural palces are in reality not mono at all!

        >Australian and Canadian demographic change is a large reason why they turned into police states.
        Dumb scrotebrain, Canada isn’t even a police state and Australia always had this history of trying to ramp up police control. You kids crying about demographic change need t stop jacking off to your doom and gloom fantasies.

    • #94980
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Probably because apartheid forever doomed it be a giga political shitshow, and when that happens its only a matter of time before everything else becomes even worse

    • #94982
      Anonymous
      Guest

      They imported massive amounts of Blacks to act as a labor force, which worked well until Western academia decided that treating Blacks differently from Whites was a big no-no.
      Oh, and because of their chosen source of labor they were never able to make the leap from semi- to fully-developed and were consequently stuck in the Brazil tier of nations

      • #94985
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >They imported massive amounts of Blacks to act as a labor force
        Blacks weren’t imported anon. The extreme majority of blacks in SA were indigenous and migrant labour outside of SA was always TEMPORARY.

      • #94986
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >They imported massive amounts of Blacks to act as a labor force
        From where did they import blacks?

        • #94996
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >They imported massive amounts of Blacks to act as a labor force
          Blacks weren’t imported anon. The extreme majority of blacks in SA were indigenous and migrant labour outside of SA was always TEMPORARY.

          >the extreme majority of blacks in SA were indigenous
          No. The extreme increase of the Black population in SA came from this: the promotion of migration of cheap labourers from more northerly British colonies beginning in the 1890s, so as to provide feedstock for the burgeoning mining industry. They’re about as native to SA as the French are to Hungary

          • #94998
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >No. The extreme increase of the Black population in SA came from this: the promotion of migration of cheap labourers from more northerly British colonies beginning in the 1890s, so as to provide feedstock for the burgeoning mining industry.
            And how is it possible that out of the 11 official languages in South Africa none except English are spoken elsewhere and in Africa?

            >They’re about as native to SA as the French are to Hungary
            Immigrants from those countries still speak French and Hungarian.

            • #95004
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >And how is it possible that out of the 11 official languages in South Africa none except English are spoken elsewhere and in Africa?
              let’s see other native african languages
              >Afrikaneer
              Went with the trek and griquas and coloures, present in namibia, historically Botswana
              >Zulu
              Speakers in southern mozambique, Zimbabwe if you consider Ndebele a dialect of it
              >Xhosa
              Fair
              >Tswana, Sotho, Northern Sotho
              Same language, just dialects, spoken in Botswana, Lesotho too
              >Tsonga
              Southern mozambique
              >Southern Ndebele
              Fair
              >Tshivenda
              Zimbabwe

              Also you have to take borders of african countries as they are, as product of colonialism, that’s the main takeaway of the panafricanism of the 60s, of the Biafra war.

              Otherwise what, You could just put the namibian border 100 km south and you’d remove 2/3 of the blacks…

              • #95006
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >let’s see other native african languages
                So, according to you the majority of blacks in South Africa were imported by the British in the 1890’s and bizarrely not only did the discard their own languages but invented new languages once in South Africa. That makes no sense.

                >Speakers in southern mozambique, Zimbabwe if you consider Ndebele a dialect of it
                Nobody speaks Zulu in southern Mozambique.

                >Same language, just dialects, spoken in Botswana, Lesotho too
                Yet people from Botswana can’t understand the black languages spoken in South Africa. Lesotho is landlocked within the borders of South Africa.

                >Southern mozambique
                >Zimbabwe
                Same with two countries. Migrant workers from those two have to learn the local languages spoken in South Africa.

                • #95014
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >So, according to you the majority of blacks in South Africa were imported by the British in the 1890
                  The Zulu kingdom didn’t even exist until the 1870’s you mong. The bantu migration into the region happened slowly and gradually.

                  • #95015
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >The Zulu kingdom didn’t even exist until the 1870’s you mong. The bantu migration into the region happened slowly and gradually.
                    I’m fully aware of that. Including that Bantus were in South Africa as early as 300AD. I was pointing out how ridiculous it is to claim that the British imported the blacks who are currently in South Africa from 1890 onwards.

                  • #95016
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    The south-Eastern coast – xhosaland and zululand was already overpopulated by the late 18th century, the mfecane could only happen to this scale because of land pressure, and then between mass death and emigration population If the eastern half of South Africa collapsed In the 19th century

                  • #95017
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    I understand your point, and am probably splitting hairs here, but the Zulu Kingdom was founded by Shaka in 1816.

    • #94983
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Nelson Mandela, I know he ‘freed’ SA from apartheid or whatever but it was far, far worse living under Mandela – for anyone.

      • #94984
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Nelson Mandela, I know he ‘freed’ SA from apartheid or whatever but it was far, far worse living under Mandela – for anyone.
        Where did you get get from?Life for most South Africans actually improved when Apartheid ended.

    • #94994
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It starts with an n and its followed by an i, you add 2 g, an e and an r and the answer is not that hard

    • #95007
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Their existence was politically inexpedient.

    • #95009
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Because it’s full or black people

    • #95010
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Anglo rule. Should’ve let Afrikaners run it.

      • #95011
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Anglo rule. Should’ve let Afrikaners run it.
        They did from 1910 onwards.

    • #95012
      Anonymous
      Guest

      black people

    • #95024
      Anonymous
      Guest

      scrotes

    • #95029
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >Many of those have decent amounts of european admixture, even so they are shitholes. Sadly leftists have to delude themselves like this otherwise their worldview falls apart

      • #95030
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Are you implying that those countries are actually good?

      • #95039
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Forced lefty meme
        check
        >Doesn’t refute the point
        check

        I see the problem–you’re scrotebrained.

    • #95035
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Because it’s full of Africans.

    • #95038
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #95043
        Anonymous
        Guest

        How exactly do these links contradict the horrible murder rates of these states?
        >safest caribbean islands
        maybe for wealthy tourists lol, at the end of the day poverty and crime rates show that these places are terrible to live in for the majority

    • #95040
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Too many locals remaining

    • #95044
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >>Forced lefty meme
      >check
      >>Doesn’t refute the point
      >check
      >I see the problem–you’re scrotebrained.

    • #95056
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I’m not sure I can type the word on the blue colored boards.

    • #95059
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >itt cope because the African version of Anglo diaspora sucks shit

    • #95084
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Cause it was a racist shithole where 70% of the population was repressed with limited opportunities.

    • #95092
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The answer is demographics, there are many other factors of course but atthe end of the day anglos create very different societies from sub saharan africans

    • #95100
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >the blackcels stopped replying
      yeah Im expecting jannys are receiving about 150
      "REPORTED FOR RACISM"
      HAHAHHAHAHHAAA

      >support ethnic cleansing against your benevolent superior
      >get made when someone points out the erroneous, misguided, and evil nature of the pursuit
      >flail about screeching because Whites in North America 5,000 Miles away gave special priveledges to Red Indians or something
      >get BTFO
      >JANNY JANNY JANNY HELP ITS THE RACISTS

      • #95106
        Anonymous
        Guest

        You wouldn’t happen to be ban evading, would you?

        • #95121
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Get banned by a janni for btfoing their scrotebraination
          >Move to a different device on a separate network
          Wouldn’t be the first time.

    • #95130
      Anonymous
      Guest

      https://i.4cdn.org/his/1632854885644.jpg

      >Bait thread about south africa
      >100 replies worth of scrote cope

      • #95147
        Anonymous
        Guest
    • #95131
      Anonymous
      Guest

      the "british imported blacks in south africa" reminds me of the "british imported rohingya from bengal into myanmar" cope.

    • #95157
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Too many whites. Boers are scrotebrained.

    • #95159
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Because the Dutch weren’t as good at Empire as the British.

    • #95161
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >canada
      >successful

    • #95169
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Colonization (also known as mass immigration) only works when you kill everyone else who lives there intentionally or by accident. Or if there’s just not many people there to begin with. Otherwise you have tension and clashes of ideas and everything gets to be a mess

    • #95173
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >WHATS THAT? ETHIOPIA IS AN UNDERVELOPED SHITHOLE? BUT YOU DIDN’T THINK OF ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES DID YA? DIDN’T THINK SO, CHECKMATE RACISTS
      the cope is reaching new levels

    • #95177
      Anonymous
      Guest

      We both know why

    • #95178
      Anonymous
      Guest

      They were successful until scrotes took over.

Viewing 41 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.