2018 South Africa

"Don't post anything racist/misogynistic/pornographic, loli images, or any animated GIFs and you should be fine, haha!" The Raytownian

Moderator: xome


User avatar
Dyecap
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:59 pm

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by Dyecap » Thu Jul 26, 2018 1:37 am

Interesting...


User avatar
Dyecap
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:59 pm

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by Dyecap » Thu Jul 26, 2018 1:50 am

Another view that will be uncomfortable for some...


User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by WhiteWarlock » Thu Jul 26, 2018 9:47 am

Image
Last edited by WhiteWarlock on Thu Jul 26, 2018 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.





User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by WhiteWarlock » Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:58 am

South Africa Withdraws Anti-White Land Confiscation Bill
A bill allowing the South African government to seize private land without compensation has been withdrawn by the Portfolio Committee on Public Works pending further study, according to the ruling African National Congress.

In 2015, the ANC proposed a constitutional amendment allowing the government to seize and redistribute land without any compensation to its owners. The draft, which has not been adopted so far, evoked widespread international outrage and multiple media reports of alleged violence against white South African farmers, including murders.

The committee’s chairperson, Humphrey Mmemezi, said the bill was referred to parliament on procedural grounds, but they couldn’t duplicate a separate parliamentary process.

“If we, as Parliament, resolve to hear the people of South Africa on that important clause, it then goes without question that we must send the bill back to Parliament,” he said, adding the committee had no choice but to withdraw it.

However, the ANC reiterated its commitment to pursue the country’s controversial land reform program. The ruling party wants to redistribute the land confiscated from white farmers to the black citizens of the country. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, the ANC has followed a “willing-seller, willing-buyer” model. Under the plan, the government buys land from white landowners and redistributes it among black citizens of the country. However, the land reform program has not brought the results the ANC wanted.

Just to be clear here: this is a temporary reprieve, and there is a serious chance this only came about thanks to America’s GOP leadership stressing the need for “constitutionality” in these matters.

What is good about this, however, is the fact that this gives us time to continue pushing the issue – White Americans are seemingly receptive to the message of people like Tucker Carlson when it comes to White Genocide, the breathing space allows the Boers and other South African whites to continue to organize and radicalize (mistakes and weakness in a race war will be brutally paid for), and the Russian Bear continues to notice the developments more and more as time progresses.

Our part should be most of all to push the concept that under a non-White majority, constitutions and other legalisms mean nothing.

It’s a bit of a red pill, but if we can get others to see South Africa as an image of the future, then our task here at home will be all the more easier.
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2018/0 ... tion-bill/


User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by WhiteWarlock » Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:11 am

Image
South Africa Calls for 300,000 Gun Owners to Turn Over Their Weapons
South Africa is opening the door for tyranny.

The Constitutional Court of South Africa recently ruled that 300,000 gun owners must turn in their firearms.

This judgement came in response to the North Gauteng High Court’s ruling in 2017 which said Section 24 and Section 28 of the Firearm’s Control Act were unconstitutional.

A report from The Citizen explains what Section 24 and Section 28 entail:

“Section 24 of the Act requires that any person who seeks to renew a licence must do so 90 days before its expiry date Section 28 stipulates that if a firearm licence has been cancelled‚ the firearm must be disposed of or forfeited to the state. A 60-day time frame was placed on its disposal, which was to be done through a dealer.”

Now that the High Court’s initial ruling has been overturned, gun owners who failed to renew their firearms licenses must hand in their firearms to the nearest police station, where authorities will then proceed to destroy them.

Many naïve political observers will paint this event as a casual gun control scheme, but any astute student of politics will recognize that the floodgates are now open for further encroachments – not only on the gun rights of South Africans, but also on others facets of theirs lives.

A look at South Africa’s current political climate will give us an idea of the potential ramifications of this gun control scheme.

Political Trouble Brewing in South Africa?
Though South Africa witnessed rising levels of economic freedom shortly after Apartheid ended in 1994, the country has taken a more interventionist path to economic development in recent years.

This situation is becoming more pronounced with the South African National Assembly recently voting 241-83 to amend the South African constitution to allow for land expropriation without compensation.

The socialist-leaning African National Congress (ANC) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) parties are leading the charge for expropriation under the banner of fixing racial disparities that have supposedly remained intact since Apartheid’s conclusion.

While land confiscation has not been officially finalized, South Africans should worry about the direction their country is going.

And how does gun control fit into this equation?

Gun Control: A Tool for Tyranny
No matter how socialist apologists rationalize it, the redistributionist agenda the South African government is pursuing will not be implemented passively. Ultimately, it must be carried out by force.

The kind of force socialists seek is a monopolized kind, which extreme forms of gun control like gun confiscation help facilitate.

The history of gun confiscation is one of repeated cases of tyranny.
https://www.gunpowdermagazine.com/south ... r-weapons/

killing raven sun
Posts: 991
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by killing raven sun » Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:24 am

South Africa withdraws white farmland redistribution bill six days after Trump warned he was closely studying the situation

The ruling African National Congress (ANC) said the bill passed by parliament in 2016 enabling the state to make compulsory purchases of land to redress racial disparities in land ownership needed further consideration.

It comes after Trump criticised the country's land reform plans in a tweet that touched on the overwhelmingly white ownership of farmland in South Africa - one of the most sensitive issues in the country's post-apartheid history.

User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by WhiteWarlock » Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:34 am

Image
Image
Theresa May Endorses South Africa Land Seizures
'The UK has supported land reform that’s legal and transparent. It’s an issue I’ve discussed with Cyril Ramaphosa'


British Prime Minister Theresa May has endorsed SA’s approach to land reform, but emphasises that the process must be legal and transparent.

May, who is visiting SA as part of the UK’s efforts to boost relations ahead of that country’s exit from the EU in 2019, said the UK supported land reform "that is legal, transparent and follows democratic process".

"It’s an issue I raised with President [Cyril] Ramaphosa when he was in London earlier this year … I will be talking about it with him later today," said May in response to questions at a business forum in Cape Town on Tuesday.

"I welcome the comments that he has already made about approaching land reform bearing in mind economic and social consequences ... and that land reform will be no smash and grab," May said.

Her views on the contentious land issue stand in stark contrast to US President Donald Trump’s assessment last week.

In a tweet that rattled local markets, Trump said he had asked US secretary of state Mike Pompeo "to closely study the SA land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers", and falsely accused the South African government of "seizing land from white farmers".

May announced that the UK planned to invest heavily in SA and the continent.

"By 2022, I want the UK to be the G-7’s number one investor in Africa, with Britain’s private sector companies taking the lead," May said. The G-7 comprises some of the world’s major industrialised nations, but does not include China, which is a key investor in Africa.

The UK, a major investor in SA, is the world’s sixth-biggest economy, with a GDP nearly nine times the size of SA’s. The country was SA’s sixth largest global trading partner in 2017, with total trade at R79.5bn.

May, who is also visiting Nigeria and Kenya this week, said SA and the broader African continent offered significant opportunities for investors.

"I think there are real opportunities for the future…. I brought a significant business delegation with me across a wide range of business activities from financial services to agriculture … they are looking to invest … they want to ensure that countries have that stable aspect that investors are always looking for," she said.

The UK’s development aid would look at how "we can assist to bring stability to those states that are fragile," she said.

"As prime minister of a trading nation whose success depends on global markets, I want to see strong African economies that British companies can do business with."

Britain aimed to retain the EU’s current partnership with six southern African countries — Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, SA, Swaziland and Mozambique, May said.

Speaking at a business roundtable, Ramaphosa reiterated that land reform would not "be a smash and grab", and that government was prepared to engage with investors to discuss their concerns on the issue.

"We will deal with the issue in a way that ensures that the economy is not harmed, agriculture production increases, and we will focus on food security … we can reassure you that we are as responsible as we were when we solved the apartheid nightmare," Ramaphosa said.




https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/natio ... and-grabs/
Last edited by WhiteWarlock on Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.


User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: 2018 South Africa

Post by WhiteWarlock » Wed Aug 29, 2018 3:48 pm

historical reference written by John Atkinson Hobson (1858 - 1940) British economist
Image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Hobson

The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Effects (1900)
Image



In 1900 he published The War In South Africa, the following is the chapter entitled For Whom Are We
Fighting?
FOR WHOM ARE WE FIGHTING?

It is difficult to state the truth about our doings in South Africa without seeming to appeal to the ignominious passion of Judenhetze (Jew-baiting). Nevertheless a plain account of the personal and economic forces operative in the Transvaal is essential to an understanding of the issue, and must not be shirked. A few of the financial pioneers in South Africa have been Englishmen, like Messrs. Rhodes and Rudd ; but recent developments of Transvaal gold-mining have thrown the economic resources of the country more and more into the hands of a small group of international financiers, chiefly German in origin and Jewish in race. By superior ability, enterprise, and organisation these men, out-competing the slower-witted Briton, have attained a practical supremacy which no one who has visited Johannesburg is likely to question.

It should be distinctly understood that the stress which my analysis lays upon the Jew has reference to the class of financial capitalists of which the foreign Jew must be taken as the leading type. Before I went there, the names of Beit, Eckstein, Bamato, &c., were of course not unknown to me; the very ship in which I crossed bore many scores of Jewish women and children. But until I came to examine closely the structure of industry and society upon the Rand I had no conception of their number or their power. I thus discovered that not Hamburg, not Vienna, not Frankfort, but Johannesburg is the New Jerusalem.

Although their strength does not really consist in numbers, the size of the Hebrew population is very considerable. Public statistics are most deceptive in this matter ; many of these persons rank as British subjects by virtue of a brief temporary sojourn in some English-speaking land, and as for names. Smith, Newman, Phillips, Gordon, Bruce are just as good as Marks or Cohen, and are often preferred. So the census of Johannesburg, taken in July 1896, only recognises 6253 Jews. But while the total population of Johannesburg has probably not increased since that date, it is generally agreed that the Jewish population is very much larger. A well-informed Jew, drawing his conclusion from synagogic and other private sources, told me there must be at least 15,000 Jews in Johannesburg and the district. The evidence of the directory, borne out by the casual testimony of the streets, would lead me to believe this an under, rather than an over, estimate. The great majority are undoubtedly Russian, Polish, and German Jews (commonly classed under the generic title of "Peruvian "), who ply the business of small shopkeepers, market salesmen, pedlars, liquor dealers, and a few rude handicrafts. These are everywhere to be seen, actively occupied in small dealings, a rude and ignorant people, mostly fled from despotic European rule, and contrasting sharply with their highly intelligent, showy, prosperous brethren, who form the upper crust of Johannesburg society. It is with the latter we are directly concerned if we would understand the economic and political import of the present movements.

It is not too much to say that this little ring of international financiers already controls the most valuable economic resources of the Transvaal.

The first and incomparably the most important industry, the gold-mines of the Rand, are almost entirely in their hands. The following brief enumeration of the leading companies, which represent the recent consolidation of many mining interests, will serve to show the extent of their power. First comes Wemher, Beit & Co., more commonly known by the name of the managing director as the "Eckstein Group." This comprises twenty-nine mines and three other financial businesses. The nominal capital is £18,384,567, but the market value at the beginning of August 1899 was over £76,000,000. This Eckstein Group is the leading member of a larger, effective combination, which includes, for most practical purposes, the Consolidated Goldfields, S. Neumann & Co., G. Farrar and A. Bailey. Of these, the largest is the Goldfields (virtually Beit, Rudd, and Rhodes), with nineteen mines, and a nominal capital of £18,120,000. Next in size comes Neumann, with a capital of £8,806,500. In more separate working, but virtually under the same ulti- mate control, are two other important groups of mines, largely repositories of German capital, Goetz & Co. and Albu & Co. The financial connection, according to my information, consists in the fact that Brassey, representing Rothschild, has a controlling interest in Goetz & Co., while Albu & Co. have behind them the Dresdener Bank. Now Rothschild stands for the Exploration Company, which is in effect Wemher, Beit, and Rothschild, while Wemher and Beit are believed to be large owner of the Dresdener Bank. These statements are made to me on evidence which I am naturally unable to check, but I believe them to be correct, and even if only approximately true, they indicate a close consolidation of the greater part of the Rand mining industry. Outside of them, the chief businesses are J. B. Robinson, with nineteen mines, and other estates at a nominal capital of £14,317,500 and the less important Bamato firm. It is also well to bear in mind that Wemher, Beit, Rudd, and Rhodes, Bamato, and Rothschild are associated as chief owners and life governors of De Beers.

The last few years have seen large steps towards a consolidation of the entire industry under the supremacy of Eckstein, the chief instrument of which is the Chamber of Mines. The primary object of the Chamber, started by Eckstein in 1889, was to secure returns of output, wages, &c., from the various companies, and soon most of the leading companies, with the exception of Robinson, joined it. Robinson, followed by the now rising French and German companies, formed in 1895 the Association of Mines, which was in effect a rival combination. Hostilities were maintained until 1898, when Goetz and Albu were forced back into the Chamber, which has since attained a paramountcy that extends not only to the mining industry, but widely controls the industrial and indirectly the political life of Johannesburg, forming the nucleus of a monopoly which may become to the Rand what De Beers has been for some years to Eimberley. This, however, is not the place to discuss the present and probable future of the power possessed by the Chamber, and Messrs. Eckstein, who actually wield it. This brief sketch is only designed to indicate the dominance of international finance over the vast industry whose capital had recently a normal value of some £150,000,000, and which is and will remain the great source of wealth in the Transvaal. It is, I think, correct to say that the destiny of almost all these leading companies is controlled by foreign financiers. There is, moreover, no reason to believe that the capital thus wielded is chiefly owned by English shareholders. Though no means of close calculation exists, there is good reason to suppose that the French and German holdings, taken together, largely outweigh the English interest in Rand mines.

But while the power of this capitalism is based on gold, it is by no means confined to it. Whatever large or profitable interest we approach, we find the same control. The interests are often entirely severed from, and even hostile to, the mining industry, but they are in the hands of the same class. This is the case with the dynamite monopoly. Every name connected with the present and past of this scandalous economic episode is significant: Lippert, Lewis and Marks, Vorstmann, Phillip, Nobel. The rich and powerful liquor trade, licit and illicit, is entirely in the hands of Jews, from the supreme control of the liquor kings, Messrs. Lewis and Marks, down to the nmning of the meanest Elaffir bar. That greatest of gambling instruments, the in Stock Exchange, is, needless to say, mostly Jewish. The large commercial businesses are in the same hands, in particular the important trade in horses, and other highly speculative businesses. The press of Johannesburg is chiefly their property: they control the organs of Outlander agitation on the one hand, the Star and the Leader, while the Government organ, the Standard and Diggers News, is under similar control. Nor has the Jew been backward in developing those forms of loan and mortgage business which have made his fame the world over. A rich and ably organised syndicate exists which operates through branches in all the little towns, lending sums of money or furnishing credit through retail shops, which they control, to the neigh- bouring Boers, and thus obtaining mortgages upon their farms. I am informed that a very large proportion of the Transvaal farmers are as entirely in the hands of Jewish money-lenders as is the Russian moujik or the Austrian peasant. No one who knows the fluctuating and precarious character of Transvaal agriculture will feel surprised that the Boer should succumb to thia common temptation set so carefully in his path.

It thus appears that the industrial and agricultural future of the Transvaal is already hypothecated to this small ring of financial foreigners, who not merely own or control the present values, but have, by buying up mining properties and claims of a contingent future value, secured an even more complete supremacy over the economic future.

The Transvaal is a country especially adapted to the money-lender and the stock-jobber, a land of hazards and surprises, booms and slumps, where the keen-sighted speculator and the planner of bold complex combinations has unrivalled opportunities.

Dull and depressed as was Johannesburg when I visited it, the savour of gambling was in the air. Though talk of stocks and shares was in abeyance, not so the gambling side of sport. One final testimony to the supreme genius of the European speculator stood plastered upon every wall. Sweepstakes upon races are in Johannesburg not a casual caprice of a sporting few, but an important, well-organised, and enduring trade, supported apparently by a very large proportion of the men, and even the women, of the place. A "sweep" upon a single race meeting often amounts to ;£120,000 or £150,000, a sufficient evidence of the popularity of the demand, which extends to every class of the community. This novel industry owes its local origin to a Jew known by the name of Phillips, who kept a bar in Johannesburg. Phillips runs four big "sweeps " every year and a score of little "sweeps," which are advertised on every wall and by copious handbills. The business basis of the "sweep" is that prizes shall cover 90 per cent, of the money subscribed, the other 10 per cent, going to cover expenses of management and profits. The "industry," I am told, is a most remunerative one. Phillips has now a good handful of competitors: the names of Moss, Legate, Hess, and Herff stare upon you from the back of every newspaper. It is needless to dwell on the demoralising influence of this great and growing gambling trade. Its success is alike indicative of the place and of the people that control it.

The practical paramountcy exercised by financiers, the recognised leaders of whom are foreign Jews, over the economic interests of the Transvaal, extends also to the social and the recreative side of Johannesburg life. Many of the recognised leaders of society are Jewish. The newspapers of September 13th contained the announcement: "There will be no performance at the Empire (music-hall) to-day by reason of the Jewish Day of Atonement." The Stock Exchange was also closed upon that day.

When the British arms have established firm order, this foreign host will return with enhanced nimibers and increased power. During the distress of last autumn they bought up, often for a song, most of the property and businesses that were worth buying, and as soon as & settlement takes place, they will start upon a greatly strengthened basis of possession.

It may be said, granting this story of a Jewish monopoly of the economic power is true, it does not justify the suggestion that the political power will pass into their hands, and that there will be established an oligarchy of German Jews at Pretoria.

But a little reflection shows that while this class of financiers has commonly abstained in other countries from active participation in politics, they will use politics in the Transvaal. They have found the need for controlling politics and legislation by bribery and other persuasive arts hitherto: the same need and use will exist in the future. Politics to them will not merely mean free trade and good administration of just laws. Transvaal industry, particularly the mining industry, requires the constant and important aid of the State. The control of a large, cheap, regular, submissive supply of labour, the chief comer-stone of profitable business, will be a constant incentive to acquire political control : railway rates, customs' laws, and the all-important issues relating to mineral rights, will force them into politics, and they will apply to these the same qualities which have made them so successful in speculative industry. In a word, they will simply and inevitably add to their other businesses the business of politics. The particular form of government which may be adopted will not matter very much. Government from Downing Street may perhaps hamper them a little more than the forms of popular representative government; but the judicious control of the press and the assistance of financial friends in high places will enable them to establish and maintain a tolerably complete form of boss-rule in South Africa.

A consideration of these points throws a clear light upon the nature of the conflict in South Africa. We are fighting in order to place a small international oligarchy of mine-owners and speculators in power at Pretoria. Englishmen will surely do well to recognise that the economic and political destinies of South Africa are, and seem likely to remain, in the hands of men most of whom are foreigners by origin, whose trade is finance, and whose trade interests are not chiefly British. If all I say be true, it gives no ground for any final judgment on the merits of the war. This international oligarchy may be better for the country and for the world than the present or any other rule ; and England may be performing a meritorious world-service, in establishing it. But it is right for us to understand quite clearly what we are doing.

It is with complete despotic arrogance that the UK would even make any statement on South Africa & land seizures...
they Stole Gold & Diamond mines(that they still own)
using bloody scorched earth policy & the first "concentration camps"
killing at least 1/6th of the Boer population
26,000 to 30,000+ Boer women & children
yet suppose the "Globalists" figure you are just too fucking dumb for ever realizing what they did
you are just stupid serfs/slaves anyway
"What difference does it make?!"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests