Red Nose Day

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Red Nose Day

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 7 of 11 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

imbored UK 15 Mar 15 10.27am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe. When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system. Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt). It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence..... Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it?
Alert a moderator to this post

imbored

UK 15 Mar 15 10.27am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am

You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe.

When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system.

Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt).

It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence.....

Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it?

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 15 Mar 15 10.33am
Skin colour has nothing to do with IQ or the ability to run things successfully.....Which is tantamount to the same thing. Probably the smartest student I teach at the moment is black and the school is mainly white.....Fine brain he has. I do agree that different cultures teach different priorities and from a human progression point of view are definitely not equal in worth. But it's nothing to do with skin colour. Edited by Stirlingsays (15 Mar 2015 10.34am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

15 Mar 15 10.33am

Skin colour has nothing to do with IQ or the ability to run things successfully.....Which is tantamount to the same thing.

Probably the smartest student I teach at the moment is black and the school is mainly white.....Fine brain he has.

I do agree that different cultures teach different priorities and from a human progression point of view are definitely not equal in worth.

But it's nothing to do with skin colour.

Edited by Stirlingsays (15 Mar 2015 10.34am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

imbored UK 15 Mar 15 10.37am
Quote Stirlingsays at 15 Mar 2015 10.33am Skin colour has nothing to do with IQ or the ability to run things successfully.....Which is tantamount to the same thing. Probably the smartest student I teach at the moment is black and the school is mainly white.....Fine brain he has. I do agree that different cultures teach different priorities and from a human progression point of view are definitely not equal in worth. But it's nothing to do with skin colour. Edited by Stirlingsays (15 Mar 2015 10.34am) Yes, that's it, these are cultural issues. I can't fathom how anyone can seriously believe that there's legitimacy in lumping all of this stuff on skin pigment.
Alert a moderator to this post

imbored

UK 15 Mar 15 10.37am

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 Mar 2015 10.33am

Skin colour has nothing to do with IQ or the ability to run things successfully.....Which is tantamount to the same thing.

Probably the smartest student I teach at the moment is black and the school is mainly white.....Fine brain he has.

I do agree that different cultures teach different priorities and from a human progression point of view are definitely not equal in worth.

But it's nothing to do with skin colour.

Edited by Stirlingsays (15 Mar 2015 10.34am)

Yes, that's it, these are cultural issues. I can't fathom how anyone can seriously believe that there's legitimacy in lumping all of this stuff on skin pigment.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 15 Mar 15 10.41am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 10.01pm Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 9.39pm Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 9.32pm Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 9.20pm Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 11.26am Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe. When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system. Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt). It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence..... Um Hoof,two points (only two because the proposition that black people screw up as a result of being black whereas white people don't since they are white,advanced on his thread,is too too insane to get further engaged with). 1.The copper was/is in the British colony of Northern Rhodesia now known as Zambia,as opposed to the British territory of Southern Rhodesia now known as Zimbabwe,so at least try to have a basic grasp of facts if you are going to advance an argument tending towards a proposition of inherent racial inferiority. 2.Take a look at places like Moldova,Uzbekistan. Note the health of the economies,their corruption etc,the extent to which their rulers f-up. and then take a look at the colour of the skin of the people that rule in those states.Poverty,corruption and repression do not stem from skin colour/race.The logic of your proposition is that we shouldn't vote for black politicians here due to inherent racial lesser ability to "govern" than those of a superior at governing white race.We are indeed headed back to the dark ages (no pun intended). Edited by legaleagle (14 Mar 2015 4.45pm) Zambia/Zimbabwe........ North/South Rhodesia.... Makes little difference - it was an example of a major fcuk up that wouldn't have occurred under colonial rule. I don't think all black people are inferior but in Africa there are a lot of greedy/corrupt/incompetent people (who just happen to be black) now running most countries and sadly running them into the ground. The worst of the lot is Mugabe. As for your last point I'd rather vote for that Chukka fella than Balls/Miliband or Prescott. But he's had the benefit of our education system. Yup,makes little difference.They all look the same anyway,don't they, so no need to actually know the difference between one country and another. You are right,"we" didn't f-up under colonial rule in Central and Southern Africa at all.Everything ran perfectly for the rulers and we did very nicely indeed out of it and made a mint and lived in the lap of luxury there.Don't you worry about the majority in Northern and Southern Rhodesia,whose lot was somewhat worse then than now. Read up about it sometime. Who needed corruption to obtain access to wealth and power when we just lauded it and banned any access to it for them full stop? Do you think they are better off now legal? There seems to be more poverty, more in-fighting, more famine etc to me. I don't disagree that GB benefitted immensely from the colonies, but there was order rather than chaos. Hoof,for what its worth my MA research was into the Central African Federation in the 1950's,which was comprised of Northern Rhodesia,Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland (now Malawi). The lot of the average person was sh1t. IMO they were somewhat worse off than now and there weren't tv crews then filming a lot reporting things or the internet so it was a pretty isolated part of the world.When push came to shove back in Whitehall the "interests"of the settler always trumped those of the locals,including economically. There was "order" for the rulers and an appearance of order overall looking from outside since it appeared that way to many here. On the ground,the locals were basically in general terms exploited and shafted something rotten,so "we" set a good example for people to follow...For a local on the ground,I suspect life was viewed as tending more towards the "chaos" end of the spectrum than the "order" end. I'm being simplistic I know,but life can seem very ordered when the Master and Mistress know their place,as do the cook,maids,houseboys and gardner, especially when there's an iron fist available to back up the velvet glove any time anyone steps out of place and built in legal discrimination to make sure the locals don't get too uppity.Bit like feudalism was here and the deep South in the USA. Lots of poverty in the Southern USA today,but would many say they were better off then... Edited by legaleagle (14 Mar 2015 10.19pm) Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL I still feel the way I do though. I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good. They slaughtered the dairy herd for a quick steak dinner, then didn't utilise the expertise shown to them for decades... animal husbandry, crop efficiency etc... most farms failed and then the famine started. The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials. I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation. Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly. Ace trumps were betterer than Top Trumps
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 15 Mar 15 10.41am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am

Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 10.01pm

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 9.39pm

Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 9.32pm

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 9.20pm

Quote legaleagle at 14 Mar 2015 11.26am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am

You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe.

When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system.

Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt).

It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence.....

Um Hoof,two points (only two because the proposition that black people screw up as a result of being black whereas white people don't since they are white,advanced on his thread,is too too insane to get further engaged with).

1.The copper was/is in the British colony of Northern Rhodesia now known as Zambia,as opposed to the British territory of Southern Rhodesia now known as Zimbabwe,so at least try to have a basic grasp of facts if you are going to advance an argument tending towards a proposition of inherent racial inferiority.

2.Take a look at places like Moldova,Uzbekistan. Note the health of the economies,their corruption etc,the extent to which their rulers f-up. and then take a look at the colour of the skin of the people that rule in those states.Poverty,corruption and repression do not stem from skin colour/race.The logic of your proposition is that we shouldn't vote for black politicians here due to inherent racial lesser ability to "govern" than those of a superior at governing white race.We are indeed headed back to the dark ages (no pun intended).

Edited by legaleagle (14 Mar 2015 4.45pm)

Zambia/Zimbabwe........ North/South Rhodesia....

Makes little difference - it was an example of a major fcuk up that wouldn't have occurred under colonial rule.

I don't think all black people are inferior but in Africa there are a lot of greedy/corrupt/incompetent people (who just happen to be black) now running most countries and sadly running them into the ground.

The worst of the lot is Mugabe.

As for your last point I'd rather vote for that Chukka fella than Balls/Miliband or Prescott.

But he's had the benefit of our education system.

Yup,makes little difference.They all look the same anyway,don't they, so no need to actually know the difference between one country and another.

You are right,"we" didn't f-up under colonial rule in Central and Southern Africa at all.Everything ran perfectly for the rulers and we did very nicely indeed out of it and made a mint and lived in the lap of luxury there.Don't you worry about the majority in Northern and Southern Rhodesia,whose lot was somewhat worse then than now. Read up about it sometime. Who needed corruption to obtain access to wealth and power when we just lauded it and banned any access to it for them full stop?

Do you think they are better off now legal?

There seems to be more poverty, more in-fighting, more famine etc to me.

I don't disagree that GB benefitted immensely from the colonies, but there was order rather than chaos.

Hoof,for what its worth my MA research was into the Central African Federation in the 1950's,which was comprised of Northern Rhodesia,Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland (now Malawi). The lot of the average person was sh1t. IMO they were somewhat worse off than now and there weren't tv crews then filming a lot reporting things or the internet so it was a pretty isolated part of the world.When push came to shove back in Whitehall the "interests"of the settler always trumped those of the locals,including economically.

There was "order" for the rulers and an appearance of order overall looking from outside since it appeared that way to many here. On the ground,the locals were basically in general terms exploited and shafted something rotten,so "we" set a good example for people to follow...For a local on the ground,I suspect life was viewed as tending more towards the "chaos" end of the spectrum than the "order" end.

I'm being simplistic I know,but life can seem very ordered when the Master and Mistress know their place,as do the cook,maids,houseboys and gardner, especially when there's an iron fist available to back up the velvet glove any time anyone steps out of place and built in legal discrimination to make sure the locals don't get too uppity.Bit like feudalism was here and the deep South in the USA. Lots of poverty in the Southern USA today,but would many say they were better off then...

Edited by legaleagle (14 Mar 2015 10.19pm)

Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL

I still feel the way I do though.

I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good.

They slaughtered the dairy herd for a quick steak dinner, then didn't utilise the expertise shown to them for decades... animal husbandry, crop efficiency etc... most farms failed and then the famine started.

The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials.

I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation.

Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly.

Ace trumps were betterer than Top Trumps

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 15 Mar 15 10.43am
Quote imbored at 15 Mar 2015 10.27am Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe. When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system. Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt). It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence..... Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it? I wonder about Diane Abbott obviously.... but no, it is about education, or lack of it. That wasn't my best post as I failed to distance myself from an assumption that all black people are those things, which clearly they are not and I apologise for that.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 15 Mar 15 10.43am

Quote imbored at 15 Mar 2015 10.27am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am

You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe.

When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system.

Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt).

It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence.....

Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it?

I wonder about Diane Abbott obviously.... but no, it is about education, or lack of it.

That wasn't my best post as I failed to distance myself from an assumption that all black people are those things, which clearly they are not and I apologise for that.

Alert a moderator to this post

imbored UK 15 Mar 15 10.48am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.43am Quote imbored at 15 Mar 2015 10.27am Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe. When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system. Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt). It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence..... Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it? I wonder about Diane Abbott obviously.... but no, it is about education, or lack of it. That wasn't my best post as I failed to distance myself from an assumption that all black people are those things, which clearly they are not and I apologise for that. That's fair enough . I think the guy posting the original comment is on some kind of wind up. I would hope he doesn't really believe what he's saying. Edited by imbored (15 Mar 2015 10.49am)
Alert a moderator to this post

imbored

UK 15 Mar 15 10.48am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.43am

Quote imbored at 15 Mar 2015 10.27am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Mar 2015 10.40am

You just have to look at places like Zimbabwe.

When it was colonial Rhodesia it prospered by exporting copper and had a great railway system.

Now the railway is fcuked both financially and physically and only survives on handouts from China (in return for the major slice of the copper no doubt).

It may have been un PC by the poster to suggest "blacks" always fcuk up... but the state of Africa kind of backs this statement up unfortunately... corruption, greed, incompetence.....

Do you view that your black friends in the UK are consumed by corruption, greed and incompetence too? if not, then it isn't an issue of skin colour is it?

I wonder about Diane Abbott obviously.... but no, it is about education, or lack of it.

That wasn't my best post as I failed to distance myself from an assumption that all black people are those things, which clearly they are not and I apologise for that.

That's fair enough .

I think the guy posting the original comment is on some kind of wind up. I would hope he doesn't really believe what he's saying.

Edited by imbored (15 Mar 2015 10.49am)

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 15 Mar 15 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL I still feel the way I do though. I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good. They slaughtered the dairy herd for a quick steak dinner, then didn't utilise the expertise shown to them for decades... animal husbandry, crop efficiency etc... most farms failed and then the famine started. The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials. I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation. Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly. Yes,I thought about whether I should mention the MA studies since it would just be seen as trying to trump you. But, what is a constant in your posts is your lack of knowledge of the situation of the locals under settler rule in Southern Rhodesia under our "benign" watch.. So, all you do is look at bad things happening now,and contrast them with your general view of "order" under British rule and conclude the locals must be worse off than they were. I can't and don't defend Mugabe or his henchpeople and support the struggle of the Movement for Democratic Change.But that is a struggle by a populace against repression,just like in Belarus,or Uzbekistan or in Poland pre-1990.What it is emphatically not is a struggle against "black rule" of the country, a consequence of blacks ruling rather than whites,or an example of innate white superiority. But,just to take the topic of land...how exactly did the white farmers get this land,Hoof? Did they visit the estate agent,make an offer and pay market rate in an "ordered" way?.No,the settlers simply threw the locals off all the best land whether they wanted to move or not,with no compensation,and introduced a legal system giving them "ownership" of it."We" set a great example...just like we did with our introduction of detention without trial because people called for democracy. As a result of this "stitch up",the land allocated to black people was not only the "worst"land in agriculturally but as of 1969 had a population density of 67 people per sq mile,whereas the white reserved land had a density of 3 people per square mile. It is hopeless to try to evaluate anything that happened about land post independence unless you are aware of what "we" created and the legacy left. It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off. As for the "aid" going to the elite,contrast this with almost all the "aid" going to the old elite,the settlers resulting in "limousines" and "flash palaces".;it was worse then in terms of "trickle down". If we just look at education as an example. 1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school. As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid. Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa. Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it. Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

15 Mar 15 11.19am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am

Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL

I still feel the way I do though.

I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good.

The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials.

I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation.

Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly.

Yes,I thought about whether I should mention the MA studies since it would just be seen as trying to trump you. But, what is a constant in your posts is your lack of knowledge of the situation of the locals under settler rule in Southern Rhodesia under our "benign" watch.. So, all you do is look at bad things happening now,and contrast them with your general view of "order" under British rule and conclude the locals must be worse off than they were.

I can't and don't defend Mugabe or his henchpeople and support the struggle of the Movement for Democratic Change.But that is a struggle by a populace against repression,just like in Belarus,or Uzbekistan or in Poland pre-1990.What it is emphatically not is a struggle against "black rule" of the country, a consequence of blacks ruling rather than whites,or an example of innate white superiority.

But,just to take the topic of land...how exactly did the white farmers get this land,Hoof? Did they visit the estate agent,make an offer and pay market rate in an "ordered" way?.No,the settlers simply threw the locals off all the best land whether they wanted to move or not,with no compensation,and introduced a legal system giving them "ownership" of it."We" set a great example...just like we did with our introduction of detention without trial because people called for democracy.

As a result of this "stitch up",the land allocated to black people was not only the "worst"land in agriculturally but as of 1969 had a population density of 67 people per sq mile,whereas the white reserved land had a density of 3 people per square mile. It is hopeless to try to evaluate anything that happened about land post independence unless you are aware of what "we" created and the legacy left.

It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off.

As for the "aid" going to the elite,contrast this with almost all the "aid" going to the old elite,the settlers resulting in "limousines" and "flash palaces".;it was worse then in terms of "trickle down".

If we just look at education as an example.

1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school.

As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid.

Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa.

Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it.

Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am)

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 15 Mar 15 5.07pm
Quote legaleagle at 15 Mar 2015 11.19am Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL I still feel the way I do though. I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good. They slaughtered the dairy herd for a quick steak dinner, then didn't utilise the expertise shown to them for decades... animal husbandry, crop efficiency etc... most farms failed and then the famine started. The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials. I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation. Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly. Yes,I thought about whether I should mention the MA studies since it would just be seen as trying to trump you. But, what is a constant in your posts is your lack of knowledge of the situation of the locals under settler rule in Southern Rhodesia under our "benign" watch.. So, all you do is look at bad things happening now,and contrast them with your general view of "order" under British rule and conclude the locals must be worse off than they were. I can't and don't defend Mugabe or his henchpeople and support the struggle of the Movement for Democratic Change.But that is a struggle by a populace against repression,just like in Belarus,or Uzbekistan or in Poland pre-1990.What it is emphatically not is a struggle against "black rule" of the country, a consequence of blacks ruling rather than whites,or an example of innate white superiority. But,just to take the topic of land...how exactly did the white farmers get this land,Hoof? Did they visit the estate agent,make an offer and pay market rate in an "ordered" way?.No,the settlers simply threw the locals off all the best land whether they wanted to move or not,with no compensation,and introduced a legal system giving them "ownership" of it."We" set a great example...just like we did with our introduction of detention without trial because people called for democracy. As a result of this "stitch up",the land allocated to black people was not only the "worst"land in agriculturally but as of 1969 had a population density of 67 people per sq mile,whereas the white reserved land had a density of 3 people per square mile. It is hopeless to try to evaluate anything that happened about land post independence unless you are aware of what "we" created and the legacy left. It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off. As for the "aid" going to the elite,contrast this with almost all the "aid" going to the old elite,the settlers resulting in "limousines" and "flash palaces".;it was worse then in terms of "trickle down". If we just look at education as an example. 1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school. As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid. Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa. Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it. Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am) May I play Devils Advocate and ask what is the point of having the best literacy rate in Africa if your country is one of te most corrupt places on Earth, where ownership of property is dictated by the whim of the ruling junta and where said activities have driven the economy and society into the ground? I don't support minority rule in any country. However, i support the concept of a meritocracy and blaming all the woes of a country or people on colonialism seems to be a kop out. Look at Singapore? They have been independent as long as many African States and have created wealth, employment and a system that rejects corruption. You seem to blame everything on whitey. Why do you do that when there are credible examples of former colonies throwing off the yoke of oppression and embracing change? Zimbabwe hasn't and won't until it faces some brutal, home truths. Edited by matt_himself (15 Mar 2015 5.08pm) "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 15 Mar 15 5.07pm

Quote legaleagle at 15 Mar 2015 11.19am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am

Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL

I still feel the way I do though.

I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good.

The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials.

I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation.

Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly.

It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off.

If we just look at education as an example.

1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school.

As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid.

Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa.

Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it.

Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am)

May I play Devils Advocate and ask what is the point of having the best literacy rate in Africa if your country is one of te most corrupt places on Earth, where ownership of property is dictated by the whim of the ruling junta and where said activities have driven the economy and society into the ground?

I don't support minority rule in any country. However, i support the concept of a meritocracy and blaming all the woes of a country or people on colonialism seems to be a kop out. Look at Singapore? They have been independent as long as many African States and have created wealth, employment and a system that rejects corruption. You seem to blame everything on whitey. Why do you do that when there are credible examples of former colonies throwing off the yoke of oppression and embracing change? Zimbabwe hasn't and won't until it faces some brutal, home truths.

Edited by matt_himself (15 Mar 2015 5.08pm)

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 15 Mar 15 5.17pm
Quote legaleagle at 15 Mar 2015 11.19am Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL I still feel the way I do though. I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good. They slaughtered the dairy herd for a quick steak dinner, then didn't utilise the expertise shown to them for decades... animal husbandry, crop efficiency etc... most farms failed and then the famine started. The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials. I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation. Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly. Yes,I thought about whether I should mention the MA studies since it would just be seen as trying to trump you. But, what is a constant in your posts is your lack of knowledge of the situation of the locals under settler rule in Southern Rhodesia under our "benign" watch.. So, all you do is look at bad things happening now,and contrast them with your general view of "order" under British rule and conclude the locals must be worse off than they were. I can't and don't defend Mugabe or his henchpeople and support the struggle of the Movement for Democratic Change.But that is a struggle by a populace against repression,just like in Belarus,or Uzbekistan or in Poland pre-1990.What it is emphatically not is a struggle against "black rule" of the country, a consequence of blacks ruling rather than whites,or an example of innate white superiority. But,just to take the topic of land...how exactly did the white farmers get this land,Hoof? Did they visit the estate agent,make an offer and pay market rate in an "ordered" way?.No,the settlers simply threw the locals off all the best land whether they wanted to move or not,with no compensation,and introduced a legal system giving them "ownership" of it."We" set a great example...just like we did with our introduction of detention without trial because people called for democracy. As a result of this "stitch up",the land allocated to black people was not only the "worst"land in agriculturally but as of 1969 had a population density of 67 people per sq mile,whereas the white reserved land had a density of 3 people per square mile. It is hopeless to try to evaluate anything that happened about land post independence unless you are aware of what "we" created and the legacy left. It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off. As for the "aid" going to the elite,contrast this with almost all the "aid" going to the old elite,the settlers resulting in "limousines" and "flash palaces".;it was worse then in terms of "trickle down". If we just look at education as an example. 1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school. As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid. Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa. Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it. Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am) Again I don't dispute how the white farmers came about their farms was probably illegal, but they were better farmers and produced more crops, dairy and beef than ever has been the case under the black tenure. That's incompetence dealt with. You've agreed with me about Mugabe's regime so that's corruption and greed dealt with. I think the locals in Zimbabwe keep pretty quiet these days and will do until Mugabe's tyranny is at an end.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 15 Mar 15 5.17pm

Quote legaleagle at 15 Mar 2015 11.19am

Quote Hoof Hearted at 15 Mar 2015 10.20am

Interesting... you've sort of tried to "top trump me" with your MA studies...LOL

I still feel the way I do though.

I remember the time when the white farmers were driven out of their homes/farms to be taken over by the black farm workers and that wasn't good.

The likes of Robert Mugabe were allowed to flourish backed by vicious gangs and corrupt officials.

I'm not buying that they were worse off before liberation.

Most of the aid we send ends up as Private Jets, Limousines and flash Palaces sadly.

It was overall certainly worse than what happened when some white farmers were thrown off.

If we just look at education as an example.

1930:compulsory education for whites.By 1975,education for blacks still not compulsory.In 1964,only 64% of blacks of the relevant age group went to primary school.

As of 1971 the average educational spend per black kid was £16.60 whereas it was £160.70 for each white kid.

Nowadays,Zimbabwe has one of the best adult literacy rates in Africa.

Would the locals think educational opportunity,for all the current economic woes, was better or worse now?Would the locals in Zimbabwe like to bring back the "good old days"? I doubt it.

Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 11.55am)

Again I don't dispute how the white farmers came about their farms was probably illegal, but they were better farmers and produced more crops, dairy and beef than ever has been the case under the black tenure. That's incompetence dealt with.

You've agreed with me about Mugabe's regime so that's corruption and greed dealt with.

I think the locals in Zimbabwe keep pretty quiet these days and will do until Mugabe's tyranny is at an end.

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 15 Mar 15 9.10pm
Hoof,we haven't agreed about anything unfortunately.You think black people are inherently less capable of running their own country than white people running it instead;I very strongly don't.Let's move on rather than banging heads against a brick wall. Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 9.14pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

15 Mar 15 9.10pm

Hoof,we haven't agreed about anything unfortunately.You think black people are inherently less capable of running their own country than white people running it instead;I very strongly don't.Let's move on rather than banging heads against a brick wall.

Edited by legaleagle (15 Mar 2015 9.14pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Boooo 15 Mar 15 9.41pm
Quote MileFan at 13 Mar 2015 7.47pm I hate this red nose day/comic relief crap - we give so much money/aid/support etc to africa and it never makes a blind bit of difference in the long term. total waste of time money and effort imo If someone has said it, apologies, i've not read the entire thread. £1b and 'they' are still drinking dirty water! Someone is making shed loads from this and it isn'tt he kids in the villages. I think it's almost run it's course now, we have food banks in this country ffs. We have our own 'foreign aid' needed on our doorstep. I refuse to believe there are that many people out there that can't spell. Too f**king lazy, that's what I think.
Alert a moderator to this post

Boooo

15 Mar 15 9.41pm

Quote MileFan at 13 Mar 2015 7.47pm

I hate this red nose day/comic relief crap - we give so much money/aid/support etc to africa and it never makes a blind bit of difference in the long term.

total waste of time money and effort imo

If someone has said it, apologies, i've not read the entire thread.
£1b and 'they' are still drinking dirty water! Someone is making shed loads from this and it isn'tt he kids in the villages.
I think it's almost run it's course now, we have food banks in this country ffs. We have our own 'foreign aid' needed on our doorstep.

I refuse to believe there are that many people out there that can't spell. Too f**king lazy, that's what I think.

Alert a moderator to this post

imbored UK 15 Mar 15 10.53pm
Quote Boooo at 15 Mar 2015 9.41pm Quote MileFan at 13 Mar 2015 7.47pm I hate this red nose day/comic relief crap - we give so much money/aid/support etc to africa and it never makes a blind bit of difference in the long term. total waste of time money and effort imo If someone has said it, apologies, i've not read the entire thread. £1b and 'they' are still drinking dirty water! Someone is making shed loads from this and it isn'tt he kids in the villages. I think it's almost run it's course now, we have food banks in this country ffs. We have our own 'foreign aid' needed on our doorstep. Huge numbers of people have gained access to clean water over the last 20 years - 2 billion in fact - due to global efforts. If you're one of those 2 billion people I'm guessing you're happy about it, and would be averse to the argument that "'they' are still drinking dirty water" as an argument to pull the plug. Granted not all of the money reaches the right places, but clearly some of it does and it makes a difference to a staggering number of lives. Specifically the 1 billion pounds you highlight is money donated by the public. If you don't want to directly contribute then don't. I donate to food banks too by the way. If you help one person up, you're not obliged to kick another down. Edited by imbored (15 Mar 2015 10.55pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

imbored

UK 15 Mar 15 10.53pm

Quote Boooo at 15 Mar 2015 9.41pm

Quote MileFan at 13 Mar 2015 7.47pm

I hate this red nose day/comic relief crap - we give so much money/aid/support etc to africa and it never makes a blind bit of difference in the long term.

total waste of time money and effort imo

Huge numbers of people have gained access to clean water over the last 20 years - 2 billion in fact - due to global efforts. If you're one of those 2 billion people I'm guessing you're happy about it, and would be averse to the argument that "'they' are still drinking dirty water" as an argument to pull the plug.

Granted not all of the money reaches the right places, but clearly some of it does and it makes a difference to a staggering number of lives. Specifically the 1 billion pounds you highlight is money donated by the public. If you don't want to directly contribute then don't. I donate to food banks too by the way. If you help one person up, you're not obliged to kick another down.

Edited by imbored (15 Mar 2015 10.55pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 7 of 11 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Red Nose Day

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors