Social South African Destruction Now Almost Assured

[Steve-French]

You can all go live in the midwest, until the Ogalaga dries up, then back to the coasts.

California is the one with the water issues right now plus 21% of the worlds fresh Surface water lies in the Midwest in the Great Lakes. Not to mention the 10's of thousands of inland lakes around that region.

 

[Rod1]

California is the one with the water issues right now plus 21% of the worlds fresh Surface water lies in the Midwest in the Great Lakes. Not to mention the 10's of thousands of inland lakes around that region.

Yeah, my bad, i always assumed that the midwest was the region west of Minnesota to Lousiana

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

At least they don't have Trump as their president

 

[panamaican]

So even his own party thought this was a bad idea?

 

[STEVEN SEAGOLD]

Just more right wing hysteria. 99% of the posters in this thread have never actually been to South Africa. White people are not endangered. Race relations are perfectly fine, just like every other developed nation.

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

Just more right wing hysteria. 99% of the posters in this thread have never actually been to South Africa. White people are not endangered. Race relations are perfectly fine, just like every other developed nation.

I've never been myself. Reading in the WR, I assumed there was massive white flight. I looked up the statistics today and learned that the white population is slightly trending downward, but near the all time high.

 

[Rod1]

Just more right wing hysteria. 99% of the posters in this thread have never actually been to South Africa. White people are not endangered. Race relations are perfectly fine, just like every other developed nation.

Well the Rand plummet tells another story.

 

[STEVEN SEAGOLD]

I've never been myself. Reading in the WR, I assumed there was massive white flight. I looked up the statistics today and learned that the white population is slightly trending downward, but near the all time high.

Which is completely normal given the demographics and sociopolitical historical circumstances of post-apartheid era South Africa. Less natives are impoverished and positioned to do better. Given how small a % the Afrikaneers make up SA, none of this surprises me.

 

[STEVEN SEAGOLD]

The whole "White Flight" spin is just a conservative twisting of the truth to demean actual humanitarian, race struggles/issues, historical discrimination. It's similar to the whole "Irish were slaves too so suck it up" angle that has circulated recently in Conservative circles.

 

[BassAckwards]

its a matter of time before the entire continent turns into district 9

 

[greedopl]

Wait...... Africa is corrupt?


Lol, jk. No one cares about africa.

Why should anyone care? Do the africans care about us?

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

lol, move to Brazil, it will be an easy transition with the violence, corruption, gated communities, and enriched population.

Tbh though, Brazil seems like an infinitely more stable SA

It is, less than 1% of the population has AIDS compared to 20% in SA.
We fight AIDS with condoms and ART while South African president takes showers to prevent HIV.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

@Wadtucket takes African refugees in his sleepy little village in Cape Cod, where the oysters flow like wine, but usually he only goes with Ethiopids. I'm sure he could make an exception for a Boer with a strong back, though.

 

[Undying Poster]

It is, less than 1% of the population has AIDS compared to 20% in SA.
We fight AIDS with condoms and ART while South African president takes showers to prevent HIV.

Makes sense to me. You take a shower to fight off the germs.

 

[Rod1]

It is, less than 1% of the population has AIDS compared to 20% in SA.
We fight AIDS with condoms and ART while South African president takes showers to prevent HIV.

The main difference i would think is that whites are still in control in Brazil, plus there is far more room than in South Africa.

What i dont know though, is how Brazil managed to be such a violent country, its not like its a major drug trade hub, it seems violence is more organic than elsewhere.

That being said i respect Brazil for staying as a single country, while hispanics broke into tens of them Brazil remained whole and its huge.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

The main difference i would think is that whites are still in control in Brazil, plus there is far more room than in South Africa.

What i dont know though, is how Brazil managed to be such a violent country, its not like its a major drug trade hub, it seems violence is more organic than elsewhere.

That being said i respect Brazil for staying as a single country, while hispanics broke into tens of them Brazil remained whole and its huge.

I think one of the reasons it stayed together is that the natives were culturally weak. Unlike places like Mexico or Peru with strong native cultures that didn't want to share the same country.
Also the whites were able to mix with the natives and blacks, unlike South Africa. According to genetic studies most of Brazilian DNA is European, not African or Native. So it's not like there are a bunch of black tribals bloc voting for their shaman or whatever happens in SA. I remember OP posted a topic where some blacks rioted because they were zulus and their mayor was xhosa or something.

I think Latin America is intrinsically violent, look at Venezuela. Also not a drug hub and it's even worse. Some of these central american countries are also terrible. It's also different from Mexico because the drug dealers here are not very organized, people just love killing each other it seems.

 

[Undying Poster]

The main difference i would think is that whites are still in control in Brazil, plus there is far more room than in South Africa.

What i dont know though, is how Brazil managed to be such a violent country, its not like its a major drug trade hub, it seems violence is more organic than elsewhere.

That being said i respect Brazil for staying as a single country, while hispanics broke into tens of them Brazil remained whole and its huge.

Lack of rule of law. Central America is the same way. They don't have drug wars like you guys. They're just backwards as fuck with nothing to correct it. That's also why Central America & Brazil have tons of LiveLeak videos of lynchings. Only way to deal with criminals.

 

[Rod1]

I think one of the reasons it stayed together is that the natives were culturally weak. Unlike places like Mexico or Peru with strong native cultures that didn't want to share the same country.
Also the whites were able to mix with the natives and blacks, unlike South Africa. According to genetic studies most of Brazilian DNA is European, not African or Native. So it's not like there are a bunch of black tribals bloc voting for their shaman or whatever happens in SA. I remember OP posted a topic where some blacks rioted because they were zulus and their mayor was xhosa or something.

I think Latin America is intrinsically violent, look at Venezuela. Also not a drug hub and it's even worse. Some of these central american countries are also terrible. It's also different from Mexico because the drug dealers here are not very organized, people just love killing each other it seems.

Mexican and Peruvian native cultures were obliterated, the nobles were baptized, converted and given nobility and the rest were worked to near death most of the time, couple with diseases and some good old book burning by the inquisition.

That being said, Spanish-American holdings were divided into three viceroyalties.

Viceroyalty of New Spain, New Granada and Peru.

So it would make sense if there were 3 Hispanic nations, but alas, infighting and more infighting. Everyone wanted to be king of their own turf and pay taxes to nobody.

Every single Hispanic country is the result of a lot (or won depending on the side) civil war or sedition war.

Brazil managed to stay whole in a time where i would presume every Portuguese upstart would vie for their own kingdom.

My guess is that Brazil knew how to govern itself more as a nation since at a point Brazil was the seat of the Portuguese crown.

Meanwhile Mexico was filled with Creoles (american born europeans), who were always ruled by a Spanish born individual, so when they rebelled after France invaded Spain and saw the Spanish rule as illegitimate, they just didnt know how to fucking govern as a single country.

Its weird because in the case of Mexico, it was european vs europeans fighting for power without a clear cause and it took an educated indian to beat everyone and actually found the Mexican republic.

 

[Rod1]

Lack of rule of law. Central America is the same way. They don't have drug wars like you guys. They're just backwards as fuck with nothing to correct it. That's also why Central America & Brazil have tons of LiveLeak videos of lynchings. Only way to deal with criminals.

Central American nations cant even be called that, they were all banana republics and then suffered tons of civil wars as Americans and Soviets meddled in their business add major drug trade routes and well, its a fuckery.

 

[Jimmy Jazz]

How are you going to do that? through e-help? or through a million sherdog war room posts a day? how do you even survive in america with a 40% non white population which is only growing?

the latinos want to be white anyway.