Bullying, sadistic politicians
Posted by Boertjie - 14/01/10 at 09:01 pm under General DiscussionsRugby and cricket work, and because they work they get acclaim and publicity. But this then makes them an easy vehicle for bullying politicians to ride on in their quest for publicity and power.
rugby365’s oracle, Paul Dobson, tries to make sense of government’s obsession with interfering in succesful sporting codes and ignoring those who fail dismally.
What is it with these people? Are they sadists? Are they iconoclasts? Does it give them some devilish sense of power to destroy what is good and strong? Do they delight in sticking spokes into wheels?
Rugby football is South Africa’s most successful sport at international level. Cricket, too, is internationally competitive at the top level. But those two come in for governmental big sticks in a way that seems to pass soccer, hockey, netball, and athletics, all of which are not competitive at the top level and growing less so. So now we try to spite rugby and cricket, and again politicians want to pick sporting teams.
There are massive issues to engage politicians – poverty, joblessness, housing, lawlessness, corruption and greed even within their own ranks, the malfunctioning of departments and even provinces. Lots of things do not work.
Democracy is more than voting once in a while for a government. It is not a tool for dictators of any stature. It is about allowing people the freedom to do what is naturally lawful for them to do. It is lawful to play rugby, an international game which has its own laws and regulations which apply internationally to those who wish to play internationally. Normal governments let rugby football get on with its own lawful business. They allow their countries to choose their own teams in their own way, and many countries have had and have “foreign” nationals playing for them – England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Samoa, Canada and the USA amongst them.
Tendai Mtawarira is rugby player. He is one of the most recognisable rugby players in the world – a man at the top of his profession, a skilled man, an important man in the great success of the Springbok team in 2009. By all rugby laws and regulations he is entitled to play where he is playing and in the way that he is playing. The laws and regulations of rugby football say he is entitled to play for the Springboks and those in charge of South African rugby choose him to play for the Springboks because he plays so well.
That Mtawarira is a black rugby player is incidental to his ability and fame. He is a rugby player and the world judges him as a great rugby player and one of the most popular throughout the world.
That he is a black rugby player should be a boon to South Africa if it is serious about moving to a non-racial society for he is black but essentially a rugby player, his blackness of no consequence. But it seems there are a people with a vested interest in keeping racial distinctions alive. (The Latin word for distinction is discrimen – discrimination.)
That he is a black African – government-speak – should also be a boon for they have a role model, the black man whose success and ability make it clear that rugby is not an “elitist, white sport”, as demagogues would have it, the black man encouraging people to play at a time when there are campaigns to get people to engage in the wholesomeness of sport.
Mtawarira is such a hard-working, good living man who earns an honest living and makes a positive contribution to the good of the country. He is not a gangster or a fraudster or a drug addict. He is not taking what is not his and he is not doing what is illegal. The same can not be said for many, many immigrants from many parts of the world or even for many who are citizens in South Africa.
Mtawarira has not just dropped out of the sky. He has come through years of development through good schooling. That is what needs to be attended to. It is silly to try to build a pyramid from the apex down.
Deport Mtawarira or stop him playing for South Africa and then put the next black African to play the role that he is playing in South Africa. Deport Mtawarira and condemn him to obscurity.
Oh, the whole business is sick. It sends a message to South Africans and the world that we are not mature enough to try to be normal, to try to do what other people do in the way that they do it. We are an abnormal, immature society who live in a playpen that politicians must supervise/police – politicians who have never been the role model that Mtawarira is, “sport politicians” who have never made the contribution to sport in South Africa that Mtawarira makes.
Beast Mtawarira is good for rugby football, good for sport in South Africa, good for South Africa.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:25 pm
There are so many things that could be said on this thread.
There are so many reasons why this thread can go sour or South very quickly.
But there is a message in here in which I believe anyone that reads this blog subscribes to.
One which is so obvious I won’t even care to mention.
I have decided not to get fucked off with politicians in 2010, because essentially sport, its supporters and those who play it and support it and love it, outlive stupid fucks the likes of Khompela.
I love rugby, and I am finished apologising because of it.
As I am sure most fellow rugby lovers are sick of justifying, explaining, and feeling sorry for, or trying to find something that they can identify with, in something which is essentially, a means of association.
No-one owns rugby, or cricket or any other sport, and thank f@#k for that.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
I am done for the night.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Thought-provoking article by Paul Dobson.
Boertjie, you could have added another adjective to the banner “bullying and sadistic politicians” and that is “racist”.
Politicians dabbling with the Springbok emblem, racial composition of the national cricket and rugby teams and all the other stuff that is so less important than safety and security, jobs and characteristics of a normal society are normally nobodies that nobody has heard of before. Sadly, they seem to gain instant recognition from some sectors of the SA population if they play the race game themselves and attack sports like cricket and rugby that are not only successful but also favoured by a race group they do not belong to. Sadly, unlike Madiba, the little men of SA politics cannot forgive and forget and instead want retribution. Therefore the dabbling in things that work and attempts at instant fame and fortune by doing so.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
Reply to out wide @ 11:28 pm:
I just had to respond to this…
I watched Invictus the other evening, and by all accounts it was factually very correct.
Now not having read either Madiba or Francois Pienaars biographies I am going on what I am told (from those who did) and what I saw in the movie…
My feeling is (watching the movie) and how Madiba ’saved’ the Bok from being thrown away in 1994 or 1993 was not due to his belief in the Bok (the game and what the Bok meant to rugby and its followers), but rather how chucking it would set him and his party (the ANC of course) back in a major way if they did.
So although we love Madiba for what he did from a rugby perspective in fighting very hard for keeping the Bok and the Green and Gold, I was left wondering whether he did it for the game of rugby, or to score political points…
Now either way, some might say who cares…
But for me, it is about the game first, as I do not give a flying f@#k about politics, and from where I sit, what Madiba did going on what I have seen in the movie – it had very little to do with the game of rugby, and all to do with politics, in which rugby, yet again, was used as a political vehicle.
Did it benefit rugby?
Perhaps it did, and I do think to some extent it did benefit rugby, and even nation building…
But was it done for the right reasons???
I do not think so.
If anything, I think Madiba recongised the power of sport and what it can do in society, only for his fellow coherts to go and fuck it up once he left.
But in all that, even with Madiba and what happened in 1995, I think the essence of the game of rugby was lost.
Or maybe Clint Eastwood is just a kak director and I need to go read the biographies…
January 14th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
And now I am really calling it a night…
Ciao
January 15th, 2010 at 5:19 am
Reply to Morné @ 11:41 pm:
Very valid points. I haven’t seen the movie, but your comments are pretty much in line with what people has been saying for a while.
Remember one thing: Politicians, whether it is Mandiba or JFK, are politicians first and will rarely do anything that will not promote their own political standing.
January 15th, 2010 at 6:50 am
Reply to Deon @ 5:19 am:
I can post you a copy of the movie if you want mate…
January 15th, 2010 at 8:06 am
What makes me sick… is that these same monkeys like Khompela… continue their vitriol towards the sport… yet are more than happy to take their families on a first class, expenses paid trip to France for the rugby world cup… only to spend the entire time gorging their faces in the VIP bar during the games (including the finals) where Mbeki was seen seated alone next to empty prime seats for most the game!
January 15th, 2010 at 8:40 am
Well I will be more confrontational on this one (if you will indulge me) and say:
fuck democracy.
Its a system with very little or no relevance in the world today and if you analise it to the core, and then compare it with the notion of freedom and equality to pursued by the philosophes’, the concept of democracy is IRRATIONAL.
and as fuct up today in SA as it was since 1910.
Meddling in sport is but one of the gazillions of examples of how democracy, and the entire political system we use today, is merely a tool in the hands of those in power to try and control those who are not.
January 15th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Reply to newbokshields @ 8:40 am:
People often ask me why I do not vote.
And you just answered them.
January 15th, 2010 at 9:22 am
Reply to Morné @ 11:44 pm: I thought different about the movie and Madiba,
I thought he knew the only way to sell the idee to keep the Boks is to tell his party it is for political gain.
A nice part in the movie is where he tell his VIP bodyguard that they need to forget about the pass and work towards the future and that transformation and forgiveness start here(his his office).
The other part is were he told the sports commission off when they voted against the team.
I think we can read into it as everyone experience the movie, If we had more people and leaders in the ANC like Madiba, nobody would touch our sports.
But I am now also fed up with these uneducated, stupid politicians that like you said is using rugby and cricket to piss off our white people in this country.
They should rather put all their stupid ideas into poofball which is so kak that the people of South Africa do not even wanna pay money to see them in the world cup. It was laughable this week when I saw that the SA games are the once which are not getting bought.
The other laughable comment was when the commentators of Supersport made the statement that the African Cup is better soccer than the Euro Cup because on average the African’s score 8 goals a match to the 3 of the Europeans. The reason the score more gaols is because the soccer is so kak that the defenses is up to shit.
But then after you laugh your arsh off you realize that these idiots are all the same, they think that as long as they can piss white people off and speak good about poofball and how great they are everything is ok.
To all politicians and people that want to run down Rugby(the greatest game on the planet) and Cricket, I have one thing to say to you
January 15th, 2010 at 9:29 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 9:22 am:
You should put a big SPOILER ALERT at the front of the post for those that haven’t seen it…
January 15th, 2010 at 9:34 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 9:29 am:
January 15th, 2010 at 9:34 am
Bunny I do not agree entirely.
I think African soccer will dominate world soccer in the next 15 years.
Yes there is still no discipline and no resources and all that but Africans seem to have the super gene, as can be seen in Europe where every year more and more Africans run the show.
Yet by theis I mean West Africa because the genes seem to breed here and nowhere else.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:06 am
Yet by theis I mean West Africa because the genes seem to breed here and nowhere else.
————————————–
Maybe one or two of them, but the problem with african poofball is that they do not have the development in youngsters like a Arsenal and a Man-U, they will bring one or two and then that’s that, never a force they will be.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:10 am
Reply to newbokshields @ 9:34 am: if you say dominate you surely do not mean they African teams will dominate rather one or two players in Europe.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:42 am
Reply to newbokshields @ 8:40 am: Amen to that
Finally someone wakes up
The sacred cow of standing in line to elect new crooks who have brainwashed you into leading them for five years is NOT DEMOCRACY
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 10:06 am:
And peoople say race is a social construct whilst happily accepting that West Africans are genetically better sprint athletes than everyone else.
Africa won’t dominate anything but headlines for genocide, poverty and starvation for the next 200 years…
After all
Haiti became independent when they massacred ALL the whites in 1804 and look where they are now…. 200 years on and same old same old…
January 15th, 2010 at 11:11 am
No Bunny I mean dominate European teams. If every team in every European league suddenly starts with 7 or 8 African players (who they buy and develop on the cheap) then obviosuly local players will see less and less quality football which means the national team suffers.
Yet the African players get the best exposure and this strengthens their national teams, as has happened in the last 10 years. There has never been more Africans in Euro leagues and if you look at the Arsenal development model it makes sense because they pay nothign for a 18 year old player from Africa yet the player has superior genes and in no time becomes a giant of the game.
You kind of dont even need development in Africa for this process to occur. The Europeans develop our player for us because it makes financial sense for them to do so.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:18 am
DavidS you agree and then contradict yourself (and me!)
Progress only comes about as a result of merit. Thats true for evolution as it is for social progress and cohesion.
Black players are better at Basketball and athletics and in fact most sports, so they prosper and dominate. Nothing wrong with that.
Soccer is simply put the next game in line to be concured by Africans (black people?) and that has nothign to do with the socioeconomic conditions of the continent. It has everything to do with genes and is helped by economic factors in the Sport in Europe.
Yes African teams will take longer to dominate but todays Ivory Coast is much closer to beating Germany than what he was 10 years ago and all this because Europe has started developing our players.
If the trend continues Germaany will kak to beat most West Arican teams (also coached by Europeans these day) in a few years to come.
European kids also getting lazier and fatter by the day whcih does not help their cause on the sports field.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:33 am
Didn’t watch the AFCON did we
No African team will do well at FIFA 2010
And your last two lines are sheer bullshit…
January 15th, 2010 at 11:39 am
Reply to DavidS @ 10:42 am: And then you do not even talk about Zim, Zambia and Angola, without the Europeans investments and people working in their mines they will be nothing. They all tried to stay in depended and saw they can not.
I will never say we are better than any other race in the world but fuck we do know how to work and we do know how to do things right.
My time in Zambia showed that without the South Africans and the Aussies their that Country will be screwed. Zambia told Anglo Gold to piss off and they tried to run everything through government, and messed the whole country up, the Indians and the Aussies came to their rescue with the South African work force and they are not to bad off anymore.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:40 am
Reply to newbokshields @ 11:18 am:
So it’s the European structures
that is developing the African
talent.
Easy to guess why.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:43 am
Reply to DavidS @ 11:33 am: I agree they are utter kak. The problem with them is the kind of poofball they play. Skilled players come much future these days in poofball than brutal strength.
Again I say their are one or two proper players in Africa in some teams, but they play kak as a team. The Afco cup is showing how far they behind the euro dudes.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:46 am
What will happen also more and more is that the good African player will be find by the big clubs in Europe at a young age and the money they will get will let them stay in Europe and they will be lost for Africa.
They will then later qualify to play for their native country and that will be all the fat lady sings.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:47 am
Man, I am often these days amazed at just HOW MUCH, I myself have changed.
What do I mean?
I compare my own reactions now – with my reactions in the past – to what is happening arround me.
This ‘intervering’ in rugby reported here would have had me steaming and stomping in the past.
Regarding Invictus-movie, it was all politics.
I enjoyed the movie alot – regarding re-living my own WC95 experiences through it.
Rare very rare today, and for that matter in the past, do you find a politician that “lives” the true ideal of Democracy = representing the people at governmental level – also those that did not vote for him/her.
Politicians – mostly, I know some who did not, – STAY IN POWER for as long as they can. I have personally been around “career-politicians” – IT’S A JOB !!!
And afterwards they work their gains for having been ‘in power’ – hterefore the deludge of re-treaded politicians in NGO’s.
Morne it was NEVER about rugby – it was always about Politics – THAT was clear for al who could see even in ‘95.
Mandela will in time be recognised as one of the most shrewed politicians of the 20th century – he and those that adviced him were absolutely geniuses!!!
In future “political Sciences” courses at Universities – Mandela will be studied !!!
January 15th, 2010 at 11:51 am
Reply to The Brand @ 11:47 am:
Nicely put, maybe I like the thought that Mandela was different than these idiots we have now.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:52 am
thought…..think Ahh you know what this afrikaans boy means
January 15th, 2010 at 12:03 pm
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 11:51 am:
You are definitely not alone – in liking the IDEA that Mandela was different – hell some even view him as a Saviour.
Am I glad he “saved” the Bok?
YES yes yes !!!
Why?
History !!!
Comparing the Proteas, they are still suffering from the ‘identity’ change at the hands of another seudo politician.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Ok I am off to have a lekker weekend by the see :db: and drink some
Sorry to all in PTA and JHB
Ps Will look out for the sharks, not the team but the real one cause the team have no bite
January 15th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 11:47 am:
Brand, rugby or any other social vehicle should influence politics, not the other way around.
And for that to happen, decision made must be made for rugby first.
Otherwise you will eventually lose that vehicle altogether.
Politicians are not the sharpest tools in the shed.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:09 pm:
Politicians are not the sharpest tools in the shed.
—————————————————
Ja and they will blame that also against apartheid
January 15th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Reply to newbokshields @ 8:40 am:
I will repeat this over and over:
Democracy: The system devised by dictators to screw over the people with their permission.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
Democracy will never be successful if the winning party has more than 45% of the vote. It is as simple as that. If not then it is just the abuse of power in disguise.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Just a few small comments, Democracy has become the USA’s form of Imperialism.
‘Reforming’ whom so ever they see fit using ‘democracy’ as a foil.
I no longer vote either, I find it pointless.
I was having a discussion with a Physiotherapist friend of mine and we were discussing the eventual domination of sport by black people, at least all athletic sports. We eventually decided that due to genes, white people will most likely dominate sports where size, strength and toughness are paramount.
So sports like Rugby (tight 5), power-lifting, Strongman etc.
As to the interference in successful sport on the part of the politicians?
It’s insecurity, as black people they were oppressed for so long that now to see a white dominated sport being successful hurts them and reminds of the ‘bad old days’ when they were constantly told they were inferior.
Unfortunately it would appear to be their nature to destroy instead of build, i.e. fuck with rugby instead of building football up.
heh, my dead racist grandfather used to say “If you want it built properly get an Afrikaaner, If you want it broken get a black man and if you want it run properly get an Englishman, but watch your back with the Englishman.”
Have a good weekend guys.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Reply to Deon @ 12:29 pm: Reply to asteroth @ 12:30 pm:
What I find funny with politics and religion in a lot of cases is how these guys can only control through instilling fear in people.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:09 pm:
I think that is where you are wrong
They are the ultimate con artists…
They are basically dictators who need good PR to satiate their need for power… so they brainwash us all and do a superb PR job of selling THEMSELVES to morons…
And they get the power trip…
No hey are inelligent… but not about the right things…
No doubt Komphela is doing his bit because he has some need to impress someone…
January 15th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:09 pm:
Politicians hardly ever look tooooo far forward.
Mandela was very clever – hell a genius – in the way he has used sport – not only rugby.
Pity what he started at the apex did not filter down effectively.
You are spot on – unfortuanately it is the other way round is most places.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 12:35 pm:
Yup, the most common mistakes we make is believing criminals are stupid.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:34 pm:
The problem is that people do not realise that with the right to vote comes responsibility.
People vote with their emotions instead of their brains. And that is why the liberals and the greenies targets people’s emotions.
Unfrotunately for them they know little of economics and when they start hitting the people’s wallets to pay for their incompetence, they are screwed at the next election.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
Reply to Morné @ 12:34 pm:
Just wait that the UN gets their way with the climate change scaremongering. If you think the individual governments are trampling their people, wait for the one world government that the UN is trying to put in place.
And the competition for the places in that government between the countries are heating up big time.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 12:37 pm:
Maybe I should ‘edit’ this – “Politicians hardly ever look tooooo far forward.”
I meant at the consequences and benefits of their actions to sport / society / earth – other than their own personal interests.
Reply to DavidS @ 12:35 pm:
Spot-on Dawie
As long as we stomp and bitch about how “stupid” the politicians are – the smile all the way in the ‘victories’
Reply to Deon @ 12:29 pm:
What is then the “best” political system?
My vote goes to a – fair dictatorship !!!
January 15th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Morne,
Just one thing about fear. It is fear of prosecution that is the basis of law and order.
In the pre liberal days people did not murder for the fear of being executed. People did not steal for it would end up in jail for a long time.
Now murderers get a fine and tax evaders go to prison. The liberals don;t mind you murdering someone, but do not fuck around with their money trough
January 15th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 12:47 pm:
A democracy in which no party can have more than 45% of the votes.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
OK dinner time. Back in a few.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 12:47 pm:
An enlightened despot may even
be the best option.
As for politicians: Godzille
and the DA is doing well in
the Western Cape, especially
the metropole.
Started with a massive backlog
created by the ANC, and now the
Cape is the envy of the ANC -
trying their best to create all
kinds of strikes etc.
They don’t like things that wêk.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Reply to Deon @ 12:50 pm:
but do not fuck around with their money trough
======
Unless you’re a comrade.
Too many examples to name.
Schabir Schaik foremost in
my mind.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Reply to Deon @ 12:46 pm:
That is scary!!!!!
There was thing in the Copenhagen agreement which would have granted certain controls over national governments to the UN…
Reply to Boertjie @ 12:59 pm:
The don’t fuck around with the money is BECAUSE they need it for Sheiks and freinds…
My view on democracy
NO PARTIES
NONE
Every guy goes to paliament to represnt the territory he lives in
All the rest is done by experts… like economists and foreign relations experts and soldiers and the like
not politicians… so no allegiances..
January 15th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 1:07 pm:
Isnt that (your last part) more or less how America works?
January 15th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Reply to Morné @ 1:10 pm: No
Yo have to identify with either of the big parties GOP or Dems
Then they sponsor your campaign…
Independents just do not make it in the USA…. you saw when Ross Perot tried it… he was like a multi billionnaire and lost..
The trick is to talk well and control the media in the US
Fox & CNN = the vice of the Neo-conservatives
ABC % NBC = the voice of the Dems
Then the smaller stations and radio stations all have their own allegiances… basically if you’re not Dem or GOP the media does not cover you..
E.g. do you know a guy from the radical Libertarian Party called Ron Paul who ran for president against McCain and Obama?
Exactly… know why? because the media simply did not give him any coverage… as easy as that… and if you go look at his policies… the likelihood is America would NOT be in as bad shape as it is today if he’d won…
In America it isdTHE FIRST PART I WROTE which determines whether you win or not…
I quote an example
On ABC the day before the Presidential election between Obama (who was in the lead) and McCain ABC ran a piece where it told WHITE voters that not voting for Obama would be the result of “residual racism”… how is that for intimidation?
January 15th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 1:16 pm:
So pretty much what you are saying it is fucked up everywhere.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 1:07 pm:
I know. Here we were within a “balhaarbrete” of having ETS legislation put in place just before Copenhagen. Luckily the Climategate emails surfaced and the opposition had a change in leadership to someone with balls to stand up against it.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
Reply to Morné @ 1:31 pm:
The media in the developed world elect the next government. The short and the long of it. How do you get the media to support you? Money!!!!
I listen to a talk radio station here where one of the guys is an ex member of parliament. He is pro the opposition. It still amazes me how they can crit the government without fear of retribution. If someone did that in SA now they will be disappeared.
The problem with it is again that people listening to it can easily be influenced and again they can be cohorted to vote without realising the responsibility.
Like everything there are pro and cons.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
Morne
I am a cynic huh?
I think that probably benign dictatorships is the way to go…
Or maybe ultra decentralized democracy like Switzerland…
Everything goes to the vote
The Swiss recently voted in a referendum that they would no longer allow Muslim “minarets” to be built in Switzerland…
There was a worldwide outcry and lots of liberal squealing* and even the Swiss government didn’t like it…. but in Switzerland the people had spoken so NO MINARETS..
*I bet cab is just getting ready to have a o himself now. Some morons in America whined about Swiss having “too much democracy”**….
** Can you imagine something this moronic!!!!!
January 15th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Reply to Deon @ 1:41 pm:
They certainly won’t be getting airtime!
January 15th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 1:43 pm:
In SA? Definately not. Imagine someone on radio not scared to call Zuma stupid and out of touch with his electorate.
January 15th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 1:41 pm:
Bwhahahhahahahhaaa
I will not be surprised that the liberals will start calling certain things TOOOOO democratic. It doesn’t serve their purpose if people actually use their intelligence when voting.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Reply to Deon @ 1:54 pm:
Exactly!
I recently had someone I met via the net tell me that no matter what government gets into power in a European country it is the small vocal minority of political correct analysts and think tanks and scholars and newspaper journalists who make the decisions…
I tend to agree…
January 15th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Reply to DavidS @ 2:07 pm:
Same here and the majority is getting fedup with it. They want to kick this minority out on their arses.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Uhu… I think it’s slowly happening all over the world that the liberal political corectness freaks are being found out and shut up
1. France kicking out illegals
2. Germany tightening immigration
3. Denmark has journos making fun of Muslims
4. In SA we sommer killed them…
January 15th, 2010 at 9:22 pm
How about:
1
People living in democratic system tend to be richer than those who do not. Check the included list. Of the top 20 countries only 3 are not democratic and they are all small with oil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita
2
Democracies rarely go to war against each other.
3
Some leaders may be just as power hungry and corrupt as those in authoritarian countries but in democracies they can be and often are replaced without violence (unlike dictatorships).
4
Americans are aware of all the benefits they have gained from a free democratic system and naturally want to export that. When others reject it, you have to ask yourselves if the rejection came from the people or the dictators in charge. Does the Zimbabwean government speaks for the Zimbabwean people? The Chinese government? The Cuban government? The Iranian government?
Who knows? You need a democracy to find out, don’t you?
January 15th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
C’mon fyndraai 2) is just dumb. Of course the big swinging dicks in school never challenged one another?
Why fight if you need to maintain the status quo?
You need the input of the majority voice to find out many things, but democrasy only allows people this once every 4 or 5 years, and then only around 3 or 4 major issues.
Again you confuse democrasy with freedom of choice. Mistake.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Deon you are wrong. I have only listened to talk radio for the past 5 years. SAFM (owned by SABC) and 702 never ever scared to air the views of those vehemently apposed to government. Daily you can listen to people saying just how kak they think government is.
The problem is commercial stations like 5FM and 94.7 etc. They are scared they lose advertising revenue from people who are pro government.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
Reply to newbokshields @ 9:59 pm:
Many democracies are small countries but who cares why they don’t go to war against each other. No war, is a big positive for the citizens.
Democracy and freedom of choice often goes hand in hand – no confusion there.
Democracies vary. We have elections all the time (minimum once a year, often more). Local, State, Congress, Senate, Presidential, Referendums, Primaries….). California has dozens of ballot initiatives (referendums) every year. The Swiss have it more regular.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:12 pm
If the status quo is peace and prosperity, why would anybody want to change it?
January 15th, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Problem is the status quo is SA is peace and stability for the simple reason that the millions of unemployed wake up every morning thinking today will be better.
What if one morngin they all wake up and decide: fuck it?
I cannot think of any country inthe world right now where their peace and prosperity does not come as a result of the the opression of someone far away.
Belgium for example. Man a pillar of peace. Yet they go to bed every night with the Congo looming over their consiousness.
The difference between peace and conflict is DISTANCE.
Thats what makes white SA special (and why people like DavidS should be given a break) is that they live right smack bang in the middle of the kak they created,
France/Holland/Italy/Germany/England all fucked off.
Which , if yo boil it down to the source, is why the average afrikaans kid plays better rugby than his peer in any other country.
We suffer, but we are here.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:20 pm
So you can’t equate the
BRSA with a democracy -
not when the voting follows
the racial line 90%.
The piepols will burn tyres
and buildings and revolt
against no service delivery,
but come the next election
they vote ANC.
Blood is thicker than water.
That goes for all of Africa.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:24 pm
But boer look into the eyes of the black people you see daily ( who probably vote ANC).
They are not disloyal or full of hatred for you. They just vote the way they do because it makes them feel comfortable. They are not over apartheid and the ANC plays their fear to a tee.
Yet the c#$%^ (sorry but I could not find a worse word to call these people) during apartheid played 100% the same card to mind-fuck every white person into believeing that he/she needs to vote guided by fear (not reason or common sense).
January 15th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
Reply to newbokshields @ 10:19 pm:
smack bang in the middle of the kak they created,
=======
Just for one second try to imagine
what would have happened if
Verwoerd had tried to create a
unitary state in 1960.
You would have had a full-blown
civil war.
As it is, is was difficult enough
to push through the reforms of
the 1980’s.
Sommige dinge kan net nie ryp
gedruk word nie.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
Yes boer I understand that. What I meant was that afrikaners today live in the midst of the bad and good choices they made, whereas throughout history most groups who made a bit of kak left the scene of the crime.
Post colonial Africa for example.
Those countries raped this continent and its people in ways far worse than apartheid yet they fucked of within the space of months.
Years later when white SA got in the shit these countries claimed the moral high ground pretty much as a way to divert attention from the kak they created.
And no Africa is not the eternal victim but do not sit in Fucking France and crit a white South African, not matter how fuct up this person is.
January 15th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
oh well, love peace freedom of the undemocratic variety to yall.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:31 pm
In any pub or place
on the planet
i would lean over and give
you a plap.
who gives you the fkn right to yay or nay.
Cause you crawled about on the
fkn eastrand.
Wind your fkn neck in.
twat.
January 15th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
POST REMOVED.
Guys, keep it civil please.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:54 am
Hey who said what? why was the post removed? Did some monkley have a go at me?
January 16th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
I’m ambivilent about it
I am not sure democracy is a good thing…
The only reason why democracies don’t go to war with each other is that historically they all became part of NATO and therefore toe the party… I mean US line…
Not an argument at all.
And if one looks at the Americans they tend to want to export democracy to nations where there is not a tradition of democracy….
And nations that fr some cultural reason do niot want to be democratic… their moronic experiments in Afgahnistan as an example… did they not see that the Commies tried their system and failed as well…
Afghans just don’t do Western democracy…
If you look at their system it is actually democratic amngst the rulers… as in the clerics who make the decisions do so by consensus (like a parliament) and they use the Koran to make their decisions (somewhat like a constitution)
Shieldsie people apparently think that the best counter to a factually referenced argument is to play the man like De Wet Barry and Butch James used to.
As for Afrikaners living in the “shit” they created… dude there are 20-something Afrikaners who had no say… in fact you can’t blame anyone who was not 18 in 1990…. they had no say in what happened…. IMO that means anyone white and under 38 is being discriminated against because how the heck can you blame them for what went before…
It’s like the Israelis somehow still blaming the Germans for what happened in WW2… it is guilt tripping madness —- and I don’t care if that comes across as anti semitic… it is not… it is anti Israeli… I am pro Palestinian and as far I know they are semites too.
January 16th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
Nonsense. NATO is a military alliance and has had several non-democratic members over the years. Greece, Turkey, Portugal, for example.
Also a good number of European democracies have stayed outside NATO.
The reason democracies do not tend to go to war against each other is the culture of non-violent dispute resolution on the inside also gets applied to the outside.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
The list of countries that have adopted democracy fairly recently without any previous history of it is long. Starting with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia. Most of recently freed central Europe. South Africa. The list goes on.
Who’s to say not Afganistan?
Anyway we do not really care what form of government they adopt. We have and still do get along with some brutal dictators. The key is to simply stop exporting violence. Don’t be a threat to us or our allies and we can get along.
January 16th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
A Brakpan girl goes into a sex shop & asks for a vibrator.
The man says: “Choose one from our range on the wall.”
She says “I’ll take the red one.”
The man replies: “You can’t, that’s a fire extinguisher.”
January 16th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
A Brakpan girl walks into the local dry cleaners.
She places a garment on the counter. “I’ll be back tomorrow afternoon to pick up my dress.” she says.
“Come again?” says the half deaf worker.
“No” she replies. “This time it’s mayonnaise.”