Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

An educated liberal. Pretty standard.

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

Poverty rate among blacks was actualy on the decline until the War on Poverty. Also, they had two parent households until the War on Poverty.

They had a LOWER rate of single parents than even whites at one point.....

From 1865 until the 60's they had been on the upswing, but Democrats needed them back on the plantation.

No Spin Ag said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

---

How were they treated after Jim Crow laws went away?

The crackdown on crime, specifically organized crime, drove the organized criminal actions into the black community.

bobbranco said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

---

How were they treated after Jim Crow laws went away?

The crackdown on crime, specifically organized crime, drove the organized criminal actions into the black community.

---

You didn't answer my question.

Was Jim Crow, and everyone that loved it back then, in the wrong?

No Spin Ag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

---

How were they treated after Jim Crow laws went away?

The crackdown on crime, specifically organized crime, drove the organized criminal actions into the black community.

---

You didn't answer my question.

Was Jim Crow, and everyone that loved it back then, in the wrong?

---

If you took the time to read you would have found my 848a 'answer'. And nice bit of trolling with the "love" comment.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:
So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

Jim Crow laws were wrong. LBJ's plan destroyed the black community.

The black community and their overlords* selected the wrong representatives who promoted racial strife. Riots, criminal acts, and mayhem were considered to be the best path forward instead of hard work and family. White Democrats(*) subjugated their black constituents and the country to lives of misery. And Obama ramped the hate up to eleven.

---

bobbranco said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

---

How were they treated after Jim Crow laws went away?

The crackdown on crime, specifically organized crime, drove the organized criminal actions into the black community.

---

You didn't answer my question.

Was Jim Crow, and everyone that loved it back then, in the wrong?

---

If you took the time to read you would have found my 848a 'answer'. And nice bit of trolling with the "love" comment.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:
So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

Jim Crow laws were wrong. LBJ's plan destroyed the black community.

The black community and their overlords* selected the wrong representatives who promoted racial strife. Riots, criminal acts, and mayhem were considered to be the best path forward instead of hard work and family. White Democrats(*) subjugated their black constituents and the country to lives of misery. And Obama ramped the hate up to eleven.

---

---

My bad. That's on me.

And, you're not wrong. The left saw an opportunity and went all in. And in typical fashion, no one benefited more from it than they (the Democrats) did.

They feed too many other countries in Africa for this not to spiral into a bigger event.

— Paul (@WomanDefiner) May 17, 2025

It's going to get really bad in SA soon.

Don't shoot, let'em burn.

Tom Fox said:

---

Don't shoot, let'em burn.

---

This. Let them collapse. No more propping up failure with aid from the West.

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Don't shoot, let'em burn.

---

This. Let them collapse. No more propping up failure with aid from the West.

---

Agreed, get all of the Boers out and then let it fail.

Stone Choir said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Don't shoot, let'em burn.

---

This. Let them collapse. No more propping up failure with aid from the West.

---

Agreed, get all of the Boers out and then let it fail.

---

4.5 million White people in South Africa. It would probably take a year or two to resettle them all, but it will be interesting to see what SA does without its evil colonizers. I expect it to end up like, well, the rest of southern Africa.

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Stone Choir said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Don't shoot, let'em burn.

---

This. Let them collapse. No more propping up failure with aid from the West.

---

Agreed, get all of the Boers out and then let it fail.

---

4.5 million White people in South Africa. It would probably take a year or two to resettle them all, but it will be interesting to see what SA does without its evil colonizers. I expect it to end up like, well, the rest of southern Africa.

---

History is a good indicator since it's happened before in Africa. Famine

I haven't been following this thread recently but I saw where Ramaphosa called them cowards for leaving.

Lol

If they all left, SA would immediately return to the stone age.

samurai_science said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

Poverty rate among blacks was actualy on the decline until the War on Poverty. Also, they had two parent households until the War on Poverty.

They had a LOWER rate of single parents than even whites at one point.....

From 1865 until the 60's they had been on the upswing, but Democrats needed them back on the plantation.

---

You keep up bringing up facts. Your facts, although true, will be completely ignored by the leftist lunatics and their sympathizers.

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

I guess you aren’t a refugee if you are white. According to the Episcopal Church Jesus doesn’t love white people. https://t.co/83tHnY0MyY

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 12, 2025

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to match this....



SIAP

---

Screw the Episcopal Church and all it's fake-ass highbrow, selectively-anointed social climbing alcoholics, too. So they join the Salvation Army in hating white people? Glad to know it. Of course, only we "little people" care.

TexAgs91 said:

---

Churches that are actually political organizations need to lose their tax exempt status.

---

Stand by . . .

Logos Stick said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

With Charlie Kirk and Matt Walsh, they have to realize it cuts both ways. Do white Afrikaners qualify to be here as refugees? Sure. But so do plenty of dark skinned Venezuelans.

If you're against neither, I get it. If you're against both, I get it. But what I don't get is anyone picking one group and not the other.

---

There it is folks!

The patented Leftist equivocating!

"I'm poor and want to be less poor" is the same as "I am actively being persecuted by my government for my race" and both make you a refugee

---

Venezuelans are just poor. They're escaping violence (including threat of death), the same as South Africans.

---

It's not violence from their government directed at them because of their race and religion

The UN has held time and again that "I'm poor and there's violent crime here the government doesn't do anything to stop!" does not make you a refugee. If it did Chicagoan's could flee to Canada

---

I thought we wanted people from **** hole countries to stay there and fix their problems. Why is this different?

---

We want people from crap hole countries to stay and fix the economic problems in their country. They don't qualify for asylum simply because they live in a poor country.

If they are 7% of the population and the government is systematically killing them because of the color of their skin, they qualify for asylum. That's not an economic issue.

But I don't expect liberals to understand the difference.

---

They understand but don't allow themselves to recognize it. Truth exists only so far as it supports predetermined leftist rigidities; insofar as desirable toward furtherance of that requirement inconvenient truths, as a matter of course and not requiring conscious thought, are replaced by imagined or manufactured "truth". To some people reality is the work bench upon which human action must be hammered out. To others reality exists only to the extent it serves their fantasies.

No Spin Ag said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

richardag said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So I'm assuming you would have been all for the black residents of South Africa being able to immigrate to this country during the Apartheid Era?

---

If they were being slaughtered like the white people are today and their land was being illegally seized by white people.

---

What about if their basic human rights were being taken away? Surely you would welcome them with open arms because there is no way you would tolerate that for yourself or your children.

---

We will never know but keep trying to make an issue out of something hypothetical.

---

Why shouldn't the Afrikaners go back to their original lands?

---

They're in their original lands. South Africa

---

I guess the black population is as well.

---

And we should have left their country alone in the 1990s to handle their internal politics as they saw fit and let the SAs handle their business. This goes for Rhodesia as well.

---

Nah, apartheid was a **** idea.

---

Not when the other 90% will literally destroy the country if allowed to vote. And 30 years later ... boom.

Sometime you have to realize that some people cannot be allowed to ever run things if you want to have something nice.

It is a bitter lesson to learn but part of growing up. The reality is that all men were not created equal. We never were. We spend so much effort trying to balance the destructiveness of that simple truth.

It applies here too. You cannot let the leeches vote. Universal suffrage is pure folly.

---

Yeah, I've come to realize the one-sided narrative of the Civil Rights movement we were taught in school.

Perhaps back in the 1960's, it was reasonable to assume that Black people could succeed if given the chance. I wasn't there, so I can't fairly judge how people thought then.

Well, we gave them what they wanted. Desegregation. Voting rights. Even preferential treatment in college admissions and job hiring. They got one of their own elected President in 2008. And what have they accomplished with it? They're still poor. They're still over-represented in crime rates, single motherhood, and the wrong side of damn near every social statistic.

So, maybe Jim Crow wasn't the problem after all.

---

But Jim Crow was still wrong for how it allowed whites to treat black, right?

---

Yes. On several levels. They have created or contributed to (unintended) problems for whites, too.