Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1330
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by Milo » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:30 pm

neverfail wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:09 pm
cassowary wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:02 am

I always regarded Socialism as theft. Socialists seek to take from those who have more to give to those who have less. It preys on people's envy - one of the 7 deadly sins. Stalin and Mao did the same. The ANC always have had a Communist element that wanted the wealth of the more successful who happened to be White in this case. Had they been black, the same thing would have happened. Being white simply gave them an excuse to steal.
No comparison!

In this case the proposal is not to take land from the peasants and turn them into state owned collective farms (that was quite reprehensible of Stalin) but to take from someone in order to give to someone else in private ownership. If only they were going to pay the current owners just compensation then it would be valid agrarian reform, not socialism as you routinely misdefine it.

We had agrarian reform in 19th century Australia when grazing land often illegally appropriated by our "squatters" (graziers, sheep ranchers) was taken from them by our colonial government and subdivided into smaller landholdings and sold off to aspiring family farmers. The result was no drop in fine wool production but the blossinging of new farming industries including (significantly) wheat production; which by the end of the 19th century had put this country on the map as a globally important wheat exporter.

The trouble was that the squatters had a fixed idea about what the land could be used for. The new generation of settler-farmers who superseded them had more open minds about land usage and new innovative ideas about what the land could produce.

Sometimes reform is worth the risk.
Even the most brilliant of leaders would be hard pressed to make something of this mess.

The thing to do is bring on forced expropriation WITH compensation but where's the money going to come from after Zuma looting the place for so long?

Also, is this going to be a crony rewards system or will some test of competence be considered? OTOH, can Ramaphosa stay in power if he doesn't just fling pork around?

I know a number of South African (whites) who have already bolted. One in particular left a senior management career to drive a bus here; he's quite happy with the choice!

This is not pretty and it won't be for some time.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by Mr. Perfect » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:40 pm

Government taking property by force is sorta kind socialism.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by Mr. Perfect » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:42 pm

It's important that White South Africans stand their ground and they are backed up globally, by everyone, because if they are forced out by any means it will create a precedent that will be used by nearly 100 countries. Unless you like the sound of 100 countries forcibly ejecting native born residents.

neverfail
Posts: 2363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by neverfail » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:17 pm

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:42 pm
It's important that White South Africans stand their ground and they are backed up globally, by everyone, because if they are forced out by any means it will create a precedent that will be used by nearly 100 countries. Unless you like the sound of 100 countries forcibly ejecting native born residents.
Unproven! You are catastrophizing.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by Mr. Perfect » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:26 pm

I never thought I would see the day when a guy on the street with a phone would be put in jail for 10 months either. Things are happening every day I never thought I would see.

Including forcibly ejecting white South Africans.

neverfail
Posts: 2363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by neverfail » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:29 pm

Milo wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:30 pm

Even the most brilliant of leaders would be hard pressed to make something of this mess.

The thing to do is bring on forced expropriation WITH compensation but where's the money going to come from after Zuma looting the place for so long?

Also, is this going to be a crony rewards system or will some test of competence be considered? OTOH, can Ramaphosa stay in power if he doesn't just fling pork around?

I know a number of South African (whites) who have already bolted. One in particular left a senior management career to drive a bus here; he's quite happy with the choice!

This is not pretty and it won't be for some time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_South_Africans
Since 1994, there has been significant emigration of white people from South Africa. There are thus currently large Afrikaner and English-speaking South African communities in the United Kingdom and other developed countries. Between 1995 and 2005, more than one million South Africans emigrated, citing violent and racially motivated black on white crime as the main reason, as well as the lack of employment opportunities for whites.
The above link features the photo of an Afrikaner farmer cultivating his crop in Georgia. That's Georgia in the Caucasus, not Georgia in the USA. If even the Caucasus region of the former USSR offers such people a better deal, then what does that say about current conditions in South Africa for such people?

...and still the exodus of whites from South Africa continues unabated.

Milo, I have met such people here in Australia. Indeed, my country is a prime targeted destination for South African expats. Our climate, beaches and lifestyle are so much like theirs.

neverfail
Posts: 2363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by neverfail » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:30 pm

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:42 pm
It's important that White South Africans stand their ground and they are backed up globally, by everyone, because if they are forced out by any means it will create a precedent that will be used by nearly 100 countries. Unless you like the sound of 100 countries forcibly ejecting native born residents.
Too late! The fate of the white South Africans is already a lost cause.

Mr. Perfect
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:24 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by Mr. Perfect » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:43 pm

Be ready for the consequences. By these standards White Australians have no right to be on that land. You are occupying invaders.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2191
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by cassowary » Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:20 pm

neverfail wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:09 pm
cassowary wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:02 am

I always regarded Socialism as theft. Socialists seek to take from those who have more to give to those who have less. It preys on people's envy - one of the 7 deadly sins. Stalin and Mao did the same. The ANC always have had a Communist element that wanted the wealth of the more successful who happened to be White in this case. Had they been black, the same thing would have happened. Being white simply gave them an excuse to steal.
No comparison!

In this case the proposal is not to take land from the peasants and turn them into state owned collective farms (that was quite reprehensible of Stalin) but to take from someone in order to give to someone else in private ownership. If only they were going to pay the current owners just compensation then it would be valid agrarian reform, not socialism as you routinely misdefine it.

We had agrarian reform in 19th century Australia when grazing land often illegally appropriated by our "squatters" (graziers, sheep ranchers) was taken from them by our colonial government and subdivided into smaller landholdings and sold off to aspiring family farmers. The result was no drop in fine wool production but the blossinging of new farming industries including (significantly) wheat production; which by the end of the 19th century had put this country on the map as a globally important wheat exporter.

The trouble was that the squatters had a fixed idea about what the land could be used for. The new generation of settler-farmers who superseded them had more open minds about land usage and new innovative ideas about what the land could produce.

Sometimes reform is worth the risk.
You are right, Neverail. Stalin and Mao transferred ownership of land from private hands into collective farms. The state was supposed to own the land on behalf of the proletariat (ie the working class). Ramphosa wants to transfer the land to private hands of his supporters.

Both are still redistribution of wealth. Nowadays, modern Socialists no longer preach state ownership of the means of production (such as farms and factories). Instead, they seek to transfer wealth using the coercive power of the state from the relatively wealthy (in this case the Whites) to the poor (mostly blacks in this case). The core belief of Socialism can be summed up in Marx's dictum:

"To each according to his needs. From each according to his ability."

In this case, the poor blacks have a need for land to do farming. So give it to them. The richer whites have land. So they have the ability to help the landless by giving away their land or be made to do so. The problem is that the rich (in this case the whites) are rich for a reason. They are more able people. That was how they acquired property in the first place. Those who do not have the ability to gain property through hard work, skills and so forth, will lose it even if you give it to them.

The proof is the large number of stories of people who won the lottery and lost it all. From rags to riches to rags again. Those blacks who used their vote to coerce Ramphosa to give them the property of the whites are like these lottery winners. The wil become poor again.

One of Singapore's richest men was Tan Kah Kee. He refused to give his children any money in his will. He argued that if they have the ability to make the money themselves, they have no need for his money. If they can't make the money for themselves, they will surely lose all that he gave them. So he gave the money to charitable causes instead.



Ramphosa just wants power. So he is doing something that failed in neighbouring Zimbabwe. He must surely know it will fail too. His supporters who elected him are too dumb to understand he is another charlatan who wants power, money and girls. Must be their low IQ. In the end, his supporters will be poorer than they are now, but he will be rich.

I hope Robert Mugabe will put in a good word into Ramphosa's ear for Singapore. Our banks will love to have him as a client.

neverfail
Posts: 2363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Socialism is about to be tried in S Africa and no doubt will again fail.

Post by neverfail » Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:03 pm

cassowary wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:20 pm

Ramphosa just wants power. So he is doing something that failed in neighbouring Zimbabwe.
Thanks for reply, cassowary.

I did not mention that there was this difference between Stalin's collectivization of farming and Mao's. The China that Mao took over had I believe been one where most arable land has been owned by big landlords, often by absentee ones. Where independent peasant landowners were few in number and hard to find. These land barons, unlike the innovative "gentlemen farmers" of old England but like the boyers and barons of Tsarist Russia (who were for all intents and purposes a class of parasites living off then sweat of others' brows) were often warlords and well as land barons. But Lenin, before his death in 1923, had abolished the landed estates of the Tsarist aristocracy and parcelled out the land into owner-occupied family farms for the formerly landless peasants. That land reform was so successful that during those handful of years between the end of the Russian Civil war and the beginning of Stalin's forced collectivization beginning of the 1930's; Russian farm output had recovered so well that not only was the USSR feeding itself adequately but it was producing a small surplus of grain for export.

What I am suggesting is that the Soviet collectivization hurt a lot more than the Chinese one because in the case of the former the land was taken from tens of millions of small time owner-proprietors whereas the latter was taken from but a relatively small number of mainly absentee landlords:and China had not been able to feed all of its peoplem for decades previously. Work for a landlord or work for the state? For a typical Chinese peasant farmer it would not have made any real difference; in either case he still did not own the land he worked for a livelihood so what the heck? Perhaps your handed-on family immigrant mythology about "the old country" did not mention that the China that Chiang Kai Shek presided over was the sham of a country in which real power was in the hands of the landlords/regional warlords. That Kuomintang one-party state relied upon those regional power brokers for support even in the war against the Japanese invaders: which is why by 1945 most of rural China was so willing to support the Communists during the ensuing civil war that brought them to power. As a government holding China's destiny in its hands the disgraced Kuomintang had fallen into utter disrepute.
....................................................................................................................

Years ago I was in touch via the internet to a black Zimbabwean living in exile in London. What he told me changed my view of Robert Mugabe and has a bearing on the situation in South Africa now.

From the time he first came to power in 1989 until the occupations of white owned farmland began in 2004 Mugabe had made no attempt to expropriate white farmers. Instead (I have since found out from other authoritative sources) a government agency tried to buy land off white farmers for resettlement of former freedom fighters who had put their lives at risk fighting for Mugabe against Iam Smith's Rhodesian army. The white farmers did not play fair but raised the sale prices on their land to the point where it became uneconomic for the agency to buy the land with the limited funds at its disposal. So very little land ownership was transferred to resettled blacks.By the early 2000's those former ZANU insurgent fighters having waited patiently form a decade and a half threatened to return to the Bush and wage guerilla-insurgency war this time against Mugabe himself if he did not deliver.

(The white farmers by their stonewalling tactic had in effect brought the forced expropriations down upon themselves.)

Hence those disorderly occupations of white-owned farms by mobs of Mugabe "supporters". Cassowary, where you are repeatedly wrong (you are not the only one on this website to make this mistake) is in your apparent supposition that a person who holds political power can do whatever he wants. That his choice of policy is entirely due to his personal ideological orientation. No Cassowary! I am now inclined to argue that the leader is only as good as his support base. The ousting of the white farmers in Zimbabwe was not a free choice by Mugabe but due to a revolt within Mugabe's own ZANU party which threatened to plunge Zimbabwe into civil war. Letting his supporters have their way with the white farmers was the price that had to be paid to avert something that would have been far, far worse for Zimbabwe.

I suggest that in South Africa Cyril Ramaphosa may likewise presently find himself caught between a rock and a hard place with the emergence of this new hardline faction within his own parliamentary party.

Post Reply