Trump: I have asked Secretary of State to closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures....

LOL, you just made an argument against it being racist....don't you realize that? If it was a racist it would target one race or ethnicity.....it doesn't. Try to work with me here, all you need is a handful of brain cells all working together to follow along. I'm not asking very much.

South Africa - Actual racism, no argument otherwise
Trump travel ban - in no way racism, no way to spin it as racism.

This conversation is like me talking about how a Honda Civic is a car and you chiming in talking about how a hammer is a car too.

 

Hypothetically, ANC or the more moderate factions of politicians who keep proposing this might be using it as a negotiating tactic for something else.

 

You are the guy claiming that you could drive around in an hammer.

By your logic, Nazis werent racist, after all they targeted Jews, gypsies, poles and blacks.

 

LOL, you can't be serious, you took the brain dead rhetoric too far so now it's obvious that you are joking. Thanks for the laugh though.

 

Ok, so Trump is tweeting false information that he got from White Supremacists and RL reposts that.

At what point does repeating false propaganda from a hate group make you a supporter of that hate group? At this point, both Trump and RL are supporting hate group's agenda.

 

Guess you ran out of bias defenses to put up

 

Not at all, I just caught on that you were trolling.

 

So to bobby if a racist person steals all your stuff and then you spend 20+ years trying to get back through non-forcible ways and said racists refuse to return them, by then taking it back through force, that now makes you racist? Is that right?

You must think those Jews had some nerve after WWII when they began to forcibly take back all those things the nazis stole from them while they were trying to eradicate their entire race.

Sound logic.

 

I think he has a much simpler view
- if it done by white and/or benefits whites, it is not racism
- if it is does not favor white, its definitely racism

 

Again, you are attempting to justify Alt-Right politics and Richard Spencer talking points. When you decide that you can take private property from people on the basis of their race, it's a racist policy, even if you plan to pay them 10% of the value of the property. When Richard Spencer talks about wanting to create a white ethnostate in America, he proposes exactly the same legislation as the South African government.....just a different target obviously.

If you support Richard Spencer type policy when it targets white people, you lack the credibility to speak on the subject.

 

If you used any logic whatsoever, you wouldn't be able to come up with that r****ded gibberish. I get that you are a troll, and I shouldn't take this kind of BS seriously, but I'll still call you out for it.

My view is that if something is racist, it's racist. If it's not racist, it's not racist. I'll understand if that's over your head.

 

The FACT is Donald Trump had no idea what the F he was Tweeting about when he Tweeted about South Africa and the fallout of Apartheid.

You cannot explain or come to any simple conclusions in a tweet or even an DD post to solve to the decades of fallout from SA’s complicated race issue.

It’s like nobody has ever heard of this man named Nelson Mandela before. Give it a rest Trump cult fans. You know not what you post about on the interwebs.

 

There are many parallels between the anti-white laws of South Africa and the main-stream anti-white sentiment in the United States (i.e. white privilege, diversity, etc).

It's worth putting some effort into studying the matter as many white-majority nations in North America and Europe are experiencing a demographic decline in their white population. In many cases, this means that the white populations will be a minority at some point in our (millennial) lifetime.

Since these demographic changes are many times associated with either a rise of anti-white sentiment (as in the US) or an influx of religious fascism (Islam in Europe), Western society and culture are under threat.

Being able to understand and identify why such animosity arises and how it grows, may be the key to averting a South African like situation elsewhere in the world. We can also draw upon past instances of government sanctioned racism, as in the pre-Civil Rights Era US, Latin America, or Nazi Germany, to seek understanding about what the future may behold.

After all, those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it.

 

It doesn’t take a genius to understand why the black majority hates the white minority in South Africa.

 

That is false given your subjective interpretation of things. But dont worry you are entitled to your own delusions and alternative facts

 

Understood. But you can see from Cohete's last post his concern that that sort of hatred may not be limited to South Africa. Native Americans may have plenty of reasons to feel as strongly against those who came later and took their lands. The Middle East is a hotbed of hatred stemming from disputes that originated way in the past.

Is there a time limit for justifying theft(or murder) as retaliation for prior bad conduct?

If not, and if you believe the threatened actions in SA are justified, why wouldn't they be justified here?

 

And I fully agree with the earlier post that SA is not comparable to here given: 1) demographics; and 2) the more recent nature of the conduct (although that could spawn some arguments as well).

But,I see why the idea that it is ok for government is SA to target white land owners to make up for past injustices is scary if you extrapolate it.

 

The government takes back stolen property all the time in the United States. It's not called retaliation but rather justice.

 

When did you become a white nationalist? What did it?

 

An example from Axios as to why one must must be wary of the mainstream media:

And then later on in the very same article, they completely contradict themselves.

Axios no doubt is one of many news media who participates in this self-contradicting journalism.