At some point it became clear that apartheid could not last. Costs from sanctions, terrorism, and conscience were just too high. What could be done? The easy path was to simply stop being the oppressors: democracy+equality under the law. That would appease the terrorists, right?
-
Show this thread
-
Nelson Mandela seemed to many to genuinely want peace between the races and vibrant rainbow nation multiculturalism (perhaps he believed it himself), so he was not too threatening to the whites in power.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
So the majority of white people thought: 1. Oppressing people makes us feel bad and takes a lot of effort 2. Lifting sanctions will increase our prosperity 3. The nonwhites will be peaceful and not vindictive 4. Democracy would make everything work out
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
What else could they have done? They could have kept going as they were, but that was costing a lot of money. A minority of whites of course realized that democracy would result in them being permanently out of power and subhect to a hostile majority.
1 reply 1 retweet 17 likesShow this thread -
If they were oppressing the 85% nonwhite population while they were in power, why wouldn't the nonwhite population end up oppressing them with the roles reversed under democracy? Was democracy that magical? Why not cut losses and partition the country?
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likesShow this thread -
Let's say it's 1980 and whites are 15% of the population but hold 80% or more of the wealth and land. How do you partition the country? Can you keep 1/2 of the country for yourselves even though you're only 15% of the population? Maybe 40% would go over internationally?
1 reply 2 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Hard to say exactly what might have worked, but whites who might have gone for that strategy would have been looking at losing potentially half their property. Better to just blend into a rainbow nation and keep it all, right? (Also, partition is hard!)
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
Well I think we know how this turned out. Some managed to sell their assets while the selling was good and escape rather than remain subject to the hostile majority. Others stayed and are currently in the process of losing everything.
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
Yes, they managed to retain their holdings for a time and even benefit from the lifting of sanctions, but the gains were fleeting. The majority would never be satisfied with a market dominant minority holding most of the wealth, and democracy would ensure the majority's will.
3 replies 3 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Are there any white progressives who are honest about this?
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread
Addendum: Maybe the whites thought the constitution would protect them? Perhaps it did for a number of years, but now the majority is amending the constitution.
-
-
Replying to @HbdNrx
I think that's a good insight, but it's interesting to think how the interests of rich and powerful whites determined the fate of the entire white population. Not unlike what is happening in the West now. For poor and low middle class whites, living in a homogeneous white country
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
is optimal, in fact their well-being depends on it. For rich whites the story is different because they have the resources to protect themselves and other resources to earn in the horror of mass migration and multiracialism.
0 replies 2 retweets 4 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.