Ya see, this stuff right here is why we'll never have a real-life Wakonda (country in Africa where Black Panther is from). . .

The folks that saw this coming and had the means to do so, have already left, the ones that didn't have the means, are stuck; then there are the ones that still think the water is not hot.

Pretty sad because the ones that stuck are usually unable to immigrate anywhere...maybe the U.S. should admit them as refugees.

If I owned the land I would salt it and burn whatever is left standing on my way out of town.

I'm curious about the property on the safari game reserves. I'd love to do another safari in South Africa, but I just don't see things going very well over there after nonsense like this.

quote:

In 2016 he told his supporters he was 'not calling for the slaughter of white people - at least for now'.

Well, that's comforting....

...like previously mentioned, most white SA's left back in the 80's and 90's, but the old diehards have been putting up with the attacks, robbing, burning, destruction, raping, assaults, maiming, murder and other bullshit that has been ongoing.

This will be another Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola, and another animal slaughter zone and civil war where only the poor folks starve and suffer...

Given Julius Malema’s communist ideology, and apparent influence, I expect that businesses, many of them white owned, will soon be commanded to reduce prices to negative-profit levels. When they can’t deliver products at those prices, the businesses will be confiscated. So Zimbabwe plus Venezuela effects on the way.

Maybe they can move them all into ghettos. Arbeit Macht Frei. Same mentality.

Let the greedy bastards starve.

A good example where having some universal currency to buy your way to a new country is a good thing.

A good article on the reality of the situation.

A British Legal Expert’s Opinion On Illegal “Expropriation Of Land Without Compensation”
Posted on 01/03/2018 0 Comments

Response written by Mark Philip Malcolm Horn – London Barrister. * No one does business with a thief, and no one extends credit to a thief.
“You can not have land expropriation without compensation. It is illegal in international law. It is contrary to a dozen treaties that South Africa has signed and ratified. As such, it is a principle that is also enshrined in South African domestic law. You can not change the Constitution, therefore, to make it legal – Treaty law is superior law, it always applies.

The proposal, if directed at land held by the white community, would also contravene half a dozen international treaties, notably those condemning apartheid, that South Africa since the ANC took power, has signed and ratified.

The same argument applies above, but now with the ironic twist that any such initiative would result in the ANC being condemned under international law for actions that the world would condemn as being racist.

So no, it can not be done. When Mugabe tried this, the point was litigated. These were the legal conclusions. Now, Mugabe pushed ahead, so what happened?

Well, the claims for illegal expropriation still are valid in law – at some point, the Zimbabwean Government will need to pay them.

The consequence of their illegal policy is not forgotten with time. If they ever want to be re-integrated into the global community, they will need to pay.

As to the consequences of such a policy – Zimbabwe is a good example. There is no sanction on Zimbabwe. That is a myth. The only sanctions are those targeted on Mugabe and a few of his associates, and they are in place because of human rights abuses.

The economy has crashed, there is a 90% unemployment rate, for the very simple fact that Zimbabwe has shown itself to be a thief. No one does business with a thief, and no one extends credit to a thief.

You can not run a modern economy without access to the international market, and for that you need credit. The Zimbabwean economy has declined by 70% from what it was at independence simply because no one does business with a thief.

So what would be the consequence of a policy of expropriation without compensation in South Africa? Well, as noted, such a policy would be illegal.

The international community will immediately take note that South Africa has become a rogue state. That is not too much to worry, about, its just political. There are plenty of rogue states around the world.

What would happen, however, in terms of South Africa’s access to the international markets is of far more concern. South Africa would have signaled that property rights are insecure. That will mean that international investment in South Africa would come to a screeching halt.

This has been happening for many years in any event – that is why South Africa is now ranked no. 7 in gold mining, when it used to be no. 1.

It is why South Africa has a 27% unemployment rate and a 50% youth unemployment rate. So the response could well be: “who cares, we do not need their investment”. That may well indeed be true.

But, that is not where the real crisis occurs. South Africa needs access to international financial markets because it has a trade and budget deficit. It needs access to international financial markets to pay for its bloated public sector and to pay social grants to all those unemployed people.

To raise that money, it needs the banks. Now, this is where the consequences of a policy of expropriation without compensation hits home.

Banks have, as is the nature of banking, highly leveraged Balance Sheets. They lend as multiples of the assets they actually have. They need to conform to the Basel ratios. If they have a rise in bad debt, they can easily wipe out their Balance Sheets – they then become bankrupt, and they collapse.

So what do you think will happen if the land is expropriated without compensation to the Banks? The answer is, they will see a rise in bad debt, and they will collapse.

That is not the end of the story. South Africa has seen its black population rise from approximately 2.5 million in the mid 19th century, to its current level of 50 million. The 2.5 m may be taken as the sustainable level of the black population without the benefits of colonialism, and of modern agriculture.

That 2.5 m number is important, because only 13% of South Africa is suited for agriculture, and only 3% is high-quality agricultural land. The vast majority of South African agricultural land requires the application of modern technology.

Farming in South Africa is highly capital intensive. Farmers depend on bank lending not only to buy their farms but also to provide essential working capital.

So, what happens if the land is expropriated without compensation if the banks then collapse? Well, it means no one is able to provide the essential working capital. If the farms then collapse, then up to 95% of the existing black population is at risk of starvation.

The banks can not access international markets, international lenders will not lend, South Africa then descends into chaos. At point, the international community would probably intervene military to restore order. As such, South Africa would have become yet another Failed State in the traditional African mold.”

https://sa-news.com/a-british-...ithout-compensation/

Never been there...but from what I've seen I had always thought it would be a pretty country to visit. Not so much now maybe.

Racism and Marxism, two destructive forces collide.

Sadly, maybe it is time to apply Rule 303

Making South Africa worse again..

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I'm curious about the property on the safari game reserves. I'd love to do another safari in South Africa, but I just don't see things going very well over there after nonsense like this.

Despite the fact that safaris are cash cows for African countries, I personally wouldn't want to risk it. Too many risks of violence within a few years (if not already, I haven't paid attention to SA in many years), no police aid for whites, and I doubt that the Guides will be able to help much, even if they're still doing business.

These fools would eat their own young to preserve power.

I believe SA's decent into chaos and ruin is almost irreversible at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I'm curious about the property on the safari game reserves. I'd love to do another safari in South Africa, but I just don't see things going very well over there after nonsense like this.

Despite the fact that safaris are cash cows for African countries, I personally wouldn't want to risk it. Too many risks of violence within a few years (if not already, I haven't paid attention to SA in many years), no police aid for whites, and I doubt that the Guides will be able to help much, even if they're still doing business.

The 2nd and 3rd order effects will be increased poaching and destruction of wild lands. Of course, there will cries of help and a need to spread awareness by the typical activists; swooping in on private jets, photographers in tow, personal assistants managing all social media channels.

quote:

Originally posted by Dusty78:
If I owned the land I would salt it and burn whatever is left standing on my way out of town.

Yep. Salt the land, poison the wells, burn everything down, punji stick every path

Not to worry in probably less than 100 years the region of Southern Africa will be fit to serve as new colonial lands; perhaps for the Chinese or Indians.

Silent

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:
Zimbabwe II, from breadbasket to national casket in one generation.

Bingo.

There economy will do a nosedive, poverty will be the norm (except for the ruling class, which are probably the ones who voted for this).

And whites will get the blame for the downfall.