Rhodesian autism

Apartheid south africa was more successful tbqh

Since when did Rhodesia become Egypt?

Attached: 1520804828608.jpg (640x640, 68K)

You can’t be racist to “white” people, especially in this context
>the benefit of a small white upper crust at the expense of millions of black men and women quantifies “success”
I guess the Congo Free State was successful too

The failure of black majority rule in the former lands of Rhodesia is self-evident. So yes, in the case of Rhodesia their racism was fully justified. White rule built the country and made it prosperous as it could be while being under heavy sanction. Black rule destroyed it.

/pol/'s worshipping of rhodesia/apartheid SA is cuck tier faggotry that said both were models for Africa at the time. Africa's future today is so uncertain precisely because sources of stability, like rhodesia and apartheid SA, no longer exist.

>>You can’t be racist to “white” people, especially in this context
lol fuck off back to tumblr bitch tits.

>the benefit of a small white upper crust at the expense of millions of black men and women quantifies “success”
Left to their own devices the blacks promptly destroyed themselves.

>Source?
Pic related

>I actually think it's the other way around
The issue is that the government did not care about the origins of the ruins at all except that under no circumstances could it be reported they were created by black people. They effectively told archeologists what they were "allowed" to discover.

>I was the archaeologist stationed at Great Zimbabwe. I was told by the then-director of the Museums and Monuments organisation to be extremely careful about talking to the press about the origins of the [Great] Zimbabwe state. I was told that the museum service was in a difficult situation, that the government was pressurising them to withhold the correct information. Censorship of guidebooks, museum displays, school textbooks, radio programmes, newspapers and films was a daily occurrence. Once a member of the Museum Board of Trustees threatened me with losing my job if I said publicly that blacks had built Zimbabwe. He said it was okay to say the yellow people had built it, but I wasn't allowed to mention radio carbon dates... It was the first time since Germany in the thirties that archaeology has been so directly censored.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Zimbabwe#Political_implications

Attached: better source.png (550x834, 250K)

>fetishising
i know where you come from

Source regarding the petty apartheid and education separation.

Attached: petty aparthied fun.png (1604x768, 408K)

See
as well as pic related

Attached: consti.jpg (636x535, 178K)

No point in using facts and logic against these fascist zombies, I find bullets work best.

Attached: 2A7BF8A9-823F-46E4-A721-90DFB737D85D.jpg (640x636, 358K)

>gets culture and language obliterated by Arabs
>successful
Lol yeah having to send their now Arabized people to die by the thousands against Israel just because they’re brainwashed into thinking they are Arabs is the definition of success.

In what way were they fascist?

>yfw the UN considers unilateral independence illegal unless it’s performed by Kosovo

Attached: F43A9E63-49B2-4F0E-9699-03CC65593811.jpg (292x255, 27K)

Rhodesians simply reaped what the sowed. You can't expect to treat a population that outunmbers you 10 to 1 as second class citizens at best, and as slaves at worst for decades and for those people not to chimp out on you in the worst manner once they're free.
>BUT THEY SHOULD BE GRATEFUL
>WE WUZ CIVILIZATION AND SHIT
Nigger, humans care first and foremost about what has been done to them and their immediate ancestors. By your logic /pol/cucks should be grateful to Jews for giving them Christianity and a fuckton of scientific discoveries.

>You can't expect to treat a population that outunmbers you 10 to 1 as second class citizens at best, and as slaves at worst for decades and for those people not to chimp out on you in the worst manner once they're free.
I thought you people consider the Holocaust to be unjustified?

yeehaw

>UN considers unilateral independence illegal
Source?

No no no shut up someone ban him

Based. As Arthur Kemp writes in his essay "the lie of apartheid"; those people who occupy a territory determine the nature of society in that region".

Hinton Rowan Helper saw this as well and was villified by greedy short-sighted planters

It's just the catch-all phrase for people he, and people like him, disagree with.

Your analogy is bullshit and we're all dumber for having read it. But still, I'll bite. Even if what you said were true, then my statement still stands correct, backed by the evidence of your glorious Führer's actions.

Literally makes that accusation in the first line of this doc

You arent an user from
or
Are you?

>Your analogy is bullshit and we're all dumber for having read it
Well I'm glad that you had that ad-hom ready to back up your argument
> backed by the evidence of your glorious Führer's actions.
Could say the same to you about your noble Bantu freedom fighter Robert Mugabe

>the virgin /pol/: fetishizes rhodesia for being an ethnostate
>the chad /k/: fetishizes rhodesians for being true /k/ommandos

Attached: fuck you no crop.png (1920x1080, 406K)

Unironically this. I see so many threads complaining about the end of apartheid and how blacks had it better under apartheid.

From growing up in in SA as a white dude let me tell you that I would under no circumstances want to be a black guy under apartheid rule. The sheer amount of restrictions and infringements on them was crazy. It wasn't as pleasant as simply not being able to go to certain beaches. They had restrictions on where they could live, could be evicted from their homes at will and couldn't move about the country without proper authorization.

Most modern figures estimate that millions of blacks were forced out of their homes over the decades of apartheid rule.

Mugabe was an incompetent cunt and I have no sympathy for him.

Are you really so dimwitted you equate being critical of Rhodesia's short-sighted policies and blunders with support for everyone that has ever as much as slapped a white person in the face?

There was an account of one soldier who just stopped firing, because he just plain got sick of the abject slaughter.

>Rhodesia lives on in our hearts. They were pinoeers who conquered through iron and blood, but left behind a more advanced state. True heros! If only they had stayed more united and been more powerful..
>Israel, reeeeeeeeee!!! How dare Jews settle uncultivated lands. How dare they have a national culture. Why do they keep winning wars!? Reeeeeeeeee.

The irony is when you realize Veeky Forums worships Rhodesia but hates Israel despite it being literally everything they wish they could be and btfoing enemies far more numerous and better armed invasions than anything Rhodesia faced.

Also, not suprising, Rhodesia, South Africa, and Israel were close allies back then but /pol/ forgets this.

Attached: body (1).jpg (800x600, 229K)

There's more than one side to the coin, user. You wouldn't want to be a white farmer either who has interacted with his Khoesaan neighbors helping them, and then a bunch of Bantu kaffirs decide that your farm is theirs and then take it over, or the ones that took residence in urban office buildings during operations and decide to use the elevator shaft as an open cesspit.

The history of collaboration between Israel and SA is pretty damn interesting.
theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons

Didn't the white famers take the land from them first

If anything, dealing in completely retarded generalizations that you're bringing forward, they introduced agriculture to the area to begin with.

The solution would have been for either a state to be created that accommodates blacks and whites, which Rhodesia clearly wasn't, or to offer the whites free housing and a return to their country of origin, Britain.

Instead we got some guy LARPing as a colonial governor forgetting time had passed him by and ignoring the options for establishing a better state, or to negotiate for the return of his people back to his homeland.

Yep. And even if you dont consider the fate if the black population, history has proven that two races cannot live together in such a state, neither as unequals or equals. Sooner or later it falls apart. Be it colonial haiti, slaveholding south, apartheid SA, Rhodesia, indian-european treaties in america,...

Nature, white prejudice and black grudges make it impossible. Even Jefferson knew this

Apparently because the Bantu arrived in 1700 that means the Voortrek of the 1830's makes all of South Africa white land, there's an argument to be made about the Cape Colony but once you have places like Natal and Oranje in the mix it's very different

You're correct, I'm not denying that what you described doesn't happen. I'm merely tired of this extremely one sided narrative this site pushes about SA.

These states were. never equal

I'd argue that South America is a good counter argument to this. True, they're not as prosperous as they could be but they're an incredibly mixed society that manages to not engage in massive racial discrimination or genocide (at least in recent history).

However, they did not only arrive in the 1600s as often stated; that was apartheid myth-making. The Bantu peoples began arriving in Southern Africa at least 1 800 to 2 000 years ago and newer research keeps pushing that

m.thoughtleader.co.za/michaelfrancis/2009/10/26/from-whence-the-zulus-came-and-where-the-bushmen-went/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

If fact actual murder rates have been going down

>restrict basic human rights from indigenous Africans
Voting? Because every other basic human right they had access too and they were faring much better in that regard that most subsaharan countries. And they could vote if they gathered certain conditions like land ownership and literacy, what they were trying to avoid was a black populist promising the world and shit and driving the economy to the ground which happened all around the world and ended up happening in Zim. Say what you want, rhodies did nothing wrong.

>Killing communists and terrorists is a service to humanity at large, not a crime.

Attached: 25e.jpg (640x640, 37K)

I know. But I meant to say that for example South Africa will not endure in peaceful coexistence between tje races.

Imagine if Toussaint Louverture would not have massacred th french, but merely proclaimed equality. It would be impossible, regardless of what Toussaint, the law or whatever said, for the white former masters and tje black former slaves to live together and regard each other as fellow citizens.

Zimbabwe proves this as well. Regardless of good intentions, constitution, white were pushed out. And who can blame the blacks for holding grudges and wanting to settle scores?

Same goes for Zanzibar. All tje former arab upper class and slave masters were massacred by black former slaves and proles the minute the british authorities granted independence.

Black rule didn't destroy the country. Dictatorship and mismanagement did.

I bet you're a fucking Anglo. Forget the kaffers, the Apartheid government should've rounded you traitors up and exterminated you.

Read Arthur Kemp "the lie of apartheid" my boer friend.

Ik hou van de boeren, maar apartheid was onhoudbaar op de lange termijn.

>formed white supremacist state that restricted basic human rights from indigenous Africans

I'd say the indigenous peoples had it pretty good under white rule. Is there another Sub-Saharan nation that could have provided better? In fact, is there a black majority nation that would have treated them better?

Also, why is it that the nations that were most thoroughly colonized have more wealth than those that don't?

Some things to consider.

>I bet you're a fucking Anglo.

Actually, you're completely right. I don't think I had a single drop of Afrikaner blood in me.

>muh paternalism

"If ye love wealth better than liberty etc."

Why is it always the Anglos who fuck everything up?

Unironically this!

Attached: 9726E3C1-3769-4F07-9C35-3909B42634D4.png (501x585, 19K)

Do you think all the "liberated" post-colonial African states had that? In many of them the end of colonialism actually heralded the worst period of ethnic violence they had ever experienced, which in some cases continues until today.

>Requests sources on Rhodeisa being a white supremacist state.
>Sources provided
>Disappear

Im starting to notice a common pattern here.

Blacks are incapable of enacting any form of government then either a dictatorship or something that inevitably turns into one. Mismanagement is the only type of management that blacks can perform.

I don't understand what you're trying to say. And the whole framing of black v white when it comes to Africa is completely retarded in the first place. Like trying to talk about a unified Europe, Africa has a very tribalistic history that entirely negates this.

>posting propaganda by the UN is a source

What about Botswana? They didn't kill whitey or have a civil war and have continued democratically since its independence

Yea Obviously. Same as in Yugoslavia or kasjmir. Are you somehow surprised tribalism, ethnic conflict, sectarianism,... exist? Turns out having a superior state administration and military keeping you in line halts plans of genocide.

Regardless of its merits, paternalistic government of foreigners seeing you as second rate, children that need authority and civilization will never be seen as a positive thing. A cage, even if golden, is still a cage, and a point will be reached where its restrictions become intolerable.

Treating any Bantu as human is a big mistake. They have obliterated and utterly absorbed dozens of cultures on their expansion southwards, and exterminated outright many of the ancestors of the pygmies.

Like most sub Saharan countries Botswana didn’t have a sizable white minority calling the shots. Plus they’re still a shithole, just a shithole that has received a lot of foreign capital.

Attached: F6E9A873-5A9B-4880-BEA9-6E6F20E756DA.gif (433x366, 8K)

>paternalistic government of foreigners seeing you as second rate, children that need authority and civilization will never be seen as a positive thing
Why? It worked out very well for the Arabs, to the point where it enabled them to obliterate the cultures of nearly everyone from Antioch to the Nile to the western coast of North Africa and replace it with their own.

>And the whole framing of black v white when it comes to Africa is completely retarded in the first place.
Im not talking about Africa only the government policies of one country.

>posting propaganda by the UN is a source
None of those sources were produced by the UN. Indeed they literally cite the Rhodesian Constitution and the Report of the Delimitation Commission which was carried out by the Rhodesian Government.

What more could you want? And what evidence can you yourself provide that isnt a screenshot of Veeky Forums posts?

Cont. Your argument can also be used to give absolute power to employers, as ws done in the 19 th century, or to promote feudalism. You get fed, shelter, income, and sometimes yo are forced to do things against your will, bit it is for your own good.

Even if this leads to a nett positive in material prosperity, after a while people cant handle being obedient serfs anymore. That's why law, religion,... in history where such systems have been the norm have always promoted social class, obedience, hierarchy, importance of authority,...

After the level of prosperity reaches such a high level, eeucation, spare time,... makes people challenge this system, feeling they can govern themselves.

Or they are in a gruesome manner suppressed, that their opression ks unbearable, and thus revolt against the system

Do you mean they were the suppressors? If so, all the more reason for tje subjugated to revolt.

If you mean that arabs were the supressed but succeeded in subverting, supplanting and outbreeding their rulers, Yea congrats, That's Exactly why such systems are doomed to fail in the long term. As happened in haiti, Zimbabwe, and why apartheid failed.

Those who occupy a space sooner or later will determine the nature of society in that space, regardless of former owners.

bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13433790
Ghana

Europeans shouldn't be treated like humans the massacred many destroying countless culture and nearly eradicated natives Americans ancestors

>Do you mean they were the suppressors? If so, all the more reason for tje subjugated to revolt.
Yes, and what I'm saying is that it demonstrates that your claim that a paternalistic government of foreigners is always removed by rebellion is just wrong. The Arab ruling class eventually succeeded in turning the natives into themselves rather than getting removed.

They aren't though, everyone on Earth who isn't white or Christian hates Europeans and would exterminate them if they could.

>bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13433790
>>a state that can only support itself by extracting resources from the ground and selling them
This is the best of black africa, ladies and gents and another example of why the end of white rule was a disaster for the continent. The best of the place in question is equivalent to a somewhat dysfunctional south american nation.

>a state that can only support itself by extracting resources from the ground and selling them
So, Russia?

Average income projected to be higher than Russia by 2025 and right where China was 14 years ago.

>HAHAHAHA NO FUCK YOU IT'S NOT FAIR IF THEY START FROM THE GROUND UP, THOSE DUMB NIGGERS THEY HAVE TO JUMP FROM AN UNDEVELOPED JUNGLE INTO A SUPERPOWER IN 5 YEARS FUCKING NIGGERS STOP STEADILY IMPROVING
You're dumb, senpai.

And Norway drilling it out of the sea (something Ghana is starting to do) is somehow superior?

would love to see if Rhodesia didn't treat darkies as 2nd class citizen

>>>a state that can only support itself by extracting resources from the ground and selling them
>selling natural resources is now somehow a bad thing

nigger you what

i bet he's one of those dirty pinko commies

Probably like Botswana

So a shithole.

Epic post, fellow pede.

>you're a Trump supporter if you think Botswana is a total shithole
lol

They weren't calling all UDIs illegal, they were calling Rhodesia's UDI illegal.

Uh Nippon jumped from feudal society to regional power that could go toe to toe with Russia in only 40 years

Attached: 1508896336238.jpg (655x453, 45K)

Yes, like Russia. Funny thing is that Ghana was not so far as I'm aware ever ruled by a vicious band of bolsheviks that slaughtered people for trivial reasons.
Norway was well-off before the oil trade.
Buh buh how dis possibul japaneses aint white? :(

Its alright for Africa, very peaceful, stable and having the 35th least corrupt government on earth which is kind of special. Once they tackle the AIDs issues things will get much better.

Its pretty dam hard to the kind of prosperity white Rhodesians had without a particularly large underclass.

See

Doesn't disprove the fact it's shittier than the shittiest nation of Europe, not a good country by any stretch of imagination

Interesting that's still above basically all of Africa and countries like Vietnam and Indonesia. Also having been to Paraguay myself, I'm even more surpried they beat it. Of course, you'd have a better life in the US or Japan but that's besides the point. Botswana seems to be doing alright all things considered.