South Africa Continues Towards Genocide Unabated

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Paulus said:

Haha, I hope you stretch before performing those mental gymnastics.

 

 

 

Those aren't gymnastics.  Those are the words you used.  You literally argued reversion to a previous state that didn't exist.

[#34fan]

12 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

I’ll ask you the same question: does that justify ethnic cleansing?

 

First of all, -What ethnic cleansing?

 

They want the land, because they think it's theirs. -Pretty cut and dried.

[Paulus]

3 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

There is but one authority and it is violence. 

 

There is one law that supercedes all — the right of conquest. 

I agree with you. Look at all my comments, just being a little devils advocate here, since echo chambers are pointless.

 

The only thing here is that conquest is happening in SA. And, it seems the whites may lose. The fact that it isn't really getting any media attention is unbelievable, yet still not surprising. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, #34fan said:

 

First of all, -What ethnic cleansing?

 

They want the land, because they think it's theirs. -Pretty cut and dried.

 

And if they attempt to murder the whites farming it to take it?

 

Does that not justify the white farmers killing as many blacks as possible?

 

[DC Tom]

Just now, Paulus said:

I agree with you. Look at all my comments, just being a little devils advocate here, since echo chambers are pointless.

 

The only thing here is that conquest is happening in SA. And, it seems the whites may lose. The fact that it isn't really getting any media attention is unbelievable, yet still not surprising. 

 

The UN definition used in Yugoslavia:

 

… rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area

 

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, Paulus said:

 still not surprising. 

 

Of course it's not surprising. To the left, a black person CANNOT be a racist, no matter the context.

 

 

[#34fan]

1 minute ago, joesixpack said:

 

And if they attempt to murder the whites farming it to take it?

 

If authorities attempt to remove me from land that isn't mine, and I die, that isn't genocide. -It may not even be murder, actually.

 

I though that by "genocide"  you meant the Namibian genocide where German colonists murdered as much as 80,000 Herero-Nama people..

[The_Dude]

5 minutes ago, Paulus said:

I agree with you. Look at all my comments, just being a little devils advocate here, since echo chambers are pointless.

 

The only thing here is that conquest is happening in SA. And, it seems the whites may lose. The fact that it isn't really getting any media attention is unbelievable, yet still not surprising. 

 

Yeah, I’m unfamiliar with the situation. I’m unfamiliar with the assets. But, and history routinely proves this, a small army of westerners can destroy a much larger African army. Unless your Mussolini in which case he just brought shame to the West for his army’s pathetic display in Ethiopia.   

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

land that isn't mine

 

 

I'd call you a mentally handicapped, but that would be an affront to mentally handicapped people everywhere.

 

Edited August 19, 2018 by joesixpack

[Paulus]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

Those aren't gymnastics.  Those are the words you used.  You literally argued reversion to a previous state that didn't exist.

Because the concept of ownership did not exist, there could be no rightful owners. I get your logic. It is just completely flawed. The second the land was taken, the European concept was introduced, and injustice took place. The land was seen by those introducing the concept of land ownership as the indigenous people's land. And, theirs for the taking. Taking! 

 

Because they had a different concept of ownership, or no concept at all, the land is forfeit. False. 

7 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

The UN definition used in Yugoslavia:

 

… rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area

 

 

So, there was an earlier genocide against the blacks in SA, which is being corrected. I see no problem. 

[DC Tom]

5 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Because the concept of ownership did not exist, there could be no rightful owners. I get your logic. It is just completely flawed. The second the land was taken, the European concept was introduced, and injustice took place. The land was seen by those introducing the concept of land ownership as the indigenous people's land. And, theirs for the taking. Taking! 

 

Because they had a different concept of ownership, or no concept at all, the land is forfeit. False. 

 

It's not my logic - I'm deconstructing yours.  You're conflating concepts of "land rights" between two cultures who had vastly different views of such, and using them to justify ethnic cleansing under a strictly modern view.  Or to put it another way, you're projecting modern concepts on pre-modern cultures to justify the breaking of current international law.

 

This is getting tiresome, I'm going to just cut to the punch line: all you're really arguing is that South African blacks have the right to take back the land based on some racial connection to the ground.  That is, based on the principle of blut und boden.  To justify ethnic cleansing.  Go take your Nazi bull **** somewhere else.

[Koko78]

13 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Because the concept of ownership did not exist, there could be no rightful owners. I get your logic. It is just completely flawed. The second the land was taken, the European concept was introduced, and injustice took place. The land was seen by those introducing the concept of land ownership as the indigenous people's land. And, theirs for the taking. Taking! 

 

Because they had a different concept of ownership, or no concept at all, the land is forfeit. False. 

 

According to your logic, the moment the land was taken, and the European concept of land ownership was introduced, the white Europeans became the rightful owners.

 

The indigenous people cannot make an ownership claim prior to the concept of ownership.

[DC Tom]

Just now, Koko78 said:

 

According to your logic, the moment the land was taken, and the European concept of land ownership was introduced, the white Europeans became the rightful owners.

 

The indigenous people cannot make an ownership claim prior to the concept of ownership.

 

See Blut und Boden.  

 

We've gone beyond the law in this discussion, to the concept of racial rights.  That always goes well.  I'm sure, in an area that invented the concept of "concentration camp," that will work out for the best.

[boyst]

So if is Epona Indians who frequently travel my lands back three or four hundred years ago had to send it to come up on my land and begin taking my crops, taking my resources of land, and other such things they'll be well within their rights to do so?

 

That is the argument here being made by some?

 

The same saponi Indians migrated to New York to join with the Iroquois before being pushed out even further. As such, what happens if the sapona then start playing football in the bills parking lot? Do they on the bills at that point?

 

Would it reverse the course and we win a Superbowl? If so I will give up my land and all things worldly possession...

 

But many of you, including paulus are still greatly at a mental disadvantage of this whole concept

[Paulus]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's not my logic - I'm deconstructing yours.  You're conflating concepts of "land rights" between two cultures who had vastly different views of such, and using them to justify ethnic cleansing under a strictly modern view.  Or to put it another way, you're projecting modern concepts on pre-modern cultures to justify the breaking of current international law.

 

This is getting tiresome, I'm going to just cut to the punch line: all you're really arguing is that South African blacks have the right to take back the land based on some racial connection to the ground.  That is, based on the principle of blut und boden.  To justify ethnic cleansing.  Go take your Nazi bull **** somewhere else.

Because, when a child with no concept the euro-definition of murder is murdered, it is not a murder because the child was unaware of the concept... Go take your pleb logic and stretch some more. 

 

 

Further, just because a war is based upon racial identifiers does not make it any more distasteful than war based upon a physical border.

 

Furthermore, I want to make it clear I find what is happening in SA horrifying and am only playing devil's ad because the echo chamber accomplishes nothing. I live in one of the more liberal areas in the country and regularly have to deal with !@#$s who condone and support this. How is that "Nazi bull ****?" (Another fine example of pleb logic, or perhaps early onset Alzheimers.)

[boyst]

7 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Because, when a child with no concept the euro-definition of murder is murdered, it is not a murder because the child was unaware of the concept... Go take your pleb logic and stretch some more. 

 

 

Further, just because a war is based upon racial identifiers does not make it any more distasteful than war based upon a physical border.

 

Furthermore, I want to make it clear I find what is happening in SA horrifying and am only playing devil's ad because the echo chamber accomplishes nothing. I live in one of the more liberal areas in the country and regularly have to deal with !@#$s who condone and support this. How is that "Nazi bull ****?" (Another fine example of pleb logic, or perhaps early onset Alzheimers.)

Either you are as Progressive in your thoughts and understanding of all sorts of things to the point of likely being in a ******* relationship and having NO understandings of worldly possessions because you're also a hippie or... You're just drastically confused

 

Edit: your rhetoric Rivals Jaden Smith. That is nothing to be proud of

Edited August 19, 2018 by Boyst62

[#34fan]

41 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

I'd call you a mentally handicapped, but that would be an affront to mentally handicapped people everywhere.

 

 

Call me what you want, -you're argument is still worthless.... If the SA government decides to re-appropriate South African farmer's land, then they won't own it anymore.

 

Period.   -That's not the same as genocide, you idiot.

 

[DC Tom]

5 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Because, when a child with no concept the euro-definition of murder is murdered, it is not a murder because the child was unaware of the concept... Go take your pleb logic and stretch some more. 

 

 

Further, just because a war is based upon racial identifiers does not make it any more distasteful than war based upon a physical border.

 

Furthermore, I want to make it clear I find what is happening in SA horrifying and am only playing devil's ad because the echo chamber accomplishes nothing. I live in one of the more liberal areas in the country and regularly have to deal with !@#$s who condone and support this. How is that "Nazi bull ****?" (Another fine example of pleb logic, or perhaps early onset Alzheimers.)

 

You're not doing a very good job of playing devil's advocate.  Hell, I've even given you all the correct terms to use, and you breezed right by them.

 

And it's Nazi bull **** when you're advocating for a racial right to land and preaching genocide in pursuit of such.  Ironic that you're named after an Eastern Front general, too...

2 minutes ago, #34fan said:

 

Call me what you want, -you're argument is still worthless.... If the SA government decides to re-appropriate South African farmer's land, then they won't own it anymore.

 

Period.   -That's not the same as genocide, you idiot.

 

 

It was in the former Yugoslavia.

[3rdnlng]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You're not doing a very good job of playing devil's advocate.  Hell, I've even given you all the correct terms to use, and you breezed right by them.

 

And it's Nazi bull **** when you're advocating for a racial right to land and preaching genocide in pursuit of such.  Ironic that you're named after an Eastern Front general, too...

 

It was in the former Yugoslavia.

I thought he was just an Afrikaner that went native.

[KD in CA]

1 hour ago, Paulus said:

 

So, there was an earlier genocide against the blacks in SA, which is being corrected. I see no problem. 

 

Quality trolling right here.  Gotta level out those genocides!