Zimbabwe signs billion-dollar deal to repay white farmers

submitted by yesofcoursenaturally from (apnews.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Your argument partially works for zimbabwe but The boer are more native to south Africa than the bantu.

[–]Salos10000 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

And what?It's the bantus land now.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They are conquerors on boer land and the only reason they were able to do it is with international pressure on the boer. By your own logic they should go back to their lands.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Just yesterday you talked about how whites don't belong in Zimbabwe because they took it from the native Bantus, but now you suddenly turn around to argue that the Bantus are legitimate in taking over land they aren't native to from the whites who first settled it. Double standards much?

[–]Salos10000 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No Double standard, my point is basically that that the situation Southern Africa is hopeless for whites and any chance of a 'victory' in that region is hopeless. Whites were at their peak only about 20 percent of the south African population and 8 percent of the Rhodesian population. Black workers contributed as much as whites to the building up of those regions. We need to get our brothers and sisters in that region back home to Europe, Africa is not our place, if they stay they will eventually be massacred there is no question especially with Julius Malema's parties gains in the 2019 election there. We need to get them back, there is zero point of them being there.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Do you make that argument about native lands in the US?

[–]Salos10000 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So you only support non white conquerors?

[–]Salos10000 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't support any conquerors,our people won North America,Australia and New Zealand by right of conquest,the Bantus won Southern Africa by right of conquest.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Whites are the natives in the US

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Not to cultural marxists. Whites can't be natives anywhere under the lens of critical theory.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Yes but there is no need to use their language

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

100% agree. That's what I'm trying to explain to salos.

He made the argument that it's 'bantu land now'. Which is a dissident position (conquerors own their territory if they hold it long enough). Salos is basically switching around between philosophies to support black people and dump on whites. If he keeps doing it I'm going to ban him for misrepresenting his position (rule 3).

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Salos is salos. His arguments never made sense but I liked him on reddit because he made stupid posts which forced others to argue and I learned a lot that way.

[–]Salos10000 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What stupid arguments?

[–]Salos10000 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Ban me for what? I am consistent in my position, the situation in Southern Africa is unwinnable for our people, the Bantus won by right of conquest as did we in North America and Oceania. Right of conquest is how the world has always worked, whites have a right and a duty to hold onto and maintain what we have just like Europe done against Islam.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Your words:

I don't support any conquerors,our people won North America,Australia and New Zealand by right of conquest,the Bantus won Southern Africa by right of conquest.

You just said, 'it's bantu land now' and 'whites should leave'. That's at least tacit support of bantu conquors over south african boer natives who have lived on the land for 400 years. If that's your position state it clearly so people can debate with you and hold you accountable for your position.

Which one is it? Your position is constantly changing. The only consistent position you hold is that white people need to retreat and that whites can never be natives. This is the exact same position a critical theorist that goes around academia warping the historical record to make whites the eternal aggressors.

[–]Salos10000 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think the situation in Southern Africa is unwinnable and it is best to get our people back home to Europe before mass bloodshed ensues, that's my position.