3 ms·

I hate how you americans kicked South Africa for the same things they stopped to do, like, just fifteen years earlier. That's like punching other people instea

I hate how you americans kicked South Africa for the same things they stopped to do, like, just fifteen years earlier. That's like punching other people instead of saying "sorry, I did bad things". Bonus thing, you ruin a country in process.

guard-of-terra 14y ago
Example: "This system broke down the structure of the African family, as the workers were prohibited from living with their families" Didn't that also happen to american black family due to reasons entirely economic? Some people prefer to kill with money not guns, doesn't make the murder less bad.
kylebrown 14y ago
At risk of speaking for others, I don't think most Americans feel a cohesive group identity as an 'American' or as a white American. Does it make much sense to generalize "you South Africans" including both Afrikaners and Bantus?
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  The article-about-South-Africa-writing kind of Americans.
xaa 14y ago
This article is more about casting shame on IBM, not South Africa.
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  Don't think I want corporations to judge my morality before selling me goods. They might e.g. stop selling me stuff the other day because I torrent. Do I want that? I guess I do not!
EliRivers 14y ago
So if you ever did something bad, you can't stop other people doing it? An ex-thief gone straight should watch and do nothing as someone is robbed in front of him? A reformed killer must turn away as someone is murdered in front of her? A nation that manages to start on the road away from its prejudices must turn a blind eye to the suffering of other peoples?
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  There is this thing where former alchoholics fight alchohol, former addicts fight drugs and former racists fight racism. They would do that overzealously, theyr involvement may cast a shadow over the whole fight, and they would hurt innocent, or not so much guilty, people by trying to make others pay for their own sins. This happens. If an ex-thief becomes a sheriff, I say I'd be cynical and worried.
guelo 14y ago
That would be our American leaders, not us. Our democracy functions by having irrelevant arguments about gays or drilling in Alaska every 4 years and then the leaders do whatever they want while nobody pays attention.
- alan_cx 14y ago
  Living in a democracy means you cannot divorce yourselves from the actions of your leaders, unlike people who do not have the luxury of the vote.
_delirium 14y ago
The initial leaders of the disinvestment-from-South-Africa campaign were some of the same people who were involved in the American Civil Rights Movement (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Sullivan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Sullivan), so it seems pretty consistent to me. They opposed white segregationists in the U.S. first, then once they'd won significant victories there, took the fight to white segregationists elsewhere. The US establishment was definitely not on board with that until years later. When the disinvestment campaigns were launched in the mid-1970s, and sanctions efforts had some initial success in the UN General Assembly, the US and UK opposed any Security Council involvement (i.e. anything with teeth). It was only in 1986, following a significant escalation in violence and repression in South Africa, that the anti-apartheid activists in the US Congress (led by another Civil Rights Movement veteran, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Dellums http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Dellums) finally got a bill passed--- and Ronald Reagan vetoed that bill. It was eventually passed again over his veto.
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  Still I don't understand why South Africa. Most of world's countries are in sad state, especially africa. South Africa was unique because it was both successful and messed up at the same time. It could go either up and down. I have the feeling they went down: more messed up than successful today. I don't exactly know what happens there, tho. The question is: why "nuke" (economically and politically) this particular country and not any other?
  - scarmig 14y ago
    Because their ruling class was a brutish sibling to the Anglosphere's, and we were giving them massive amounts of economic and military support to dominate and terrorize 90% of their country's population in what was effectively a set of really large concentration camps?
    - guard-of-terra 14y ago
      Well, just stop doing that without going bully on them? You made it bad by supporting them and then made it even worse by cutting support really fast and isolating them. It's amazing how you got the worst outcome possible. Glad they more or less survived it anyway. It could me much worse.

guard-of-terra 14y ago

Example: "This system broke down the structure of the African family, as the workers were prohibited from living with their families" Didn't that also happen to american black family due to reasons entirely economic? Some people prefer to kill with money not guns, doesn't make the murder less bad.

kylebrown 14y ago

At risk of speaking for others, I don't think most Americans feel a cohesive group identity as an 'American' or as a white American. Does it make much sense to generalize "you South Africans" including both Afrikaners and Bantus?

guard-of-terra 14y ago
The article-about-South-Africa-writing kind of Americans.

xaa 14y ago

This article is more about casting shame on IBM, not South Africa.

guard-of-terra 14y ago
Don't think I want corporations to judge my morality before selling me goods. They might e.g. stop selling me stuff the other day because I torrent. Do I want that? I guess I do not!

EliRivers 14y ago

So if you ever did something bad, you can't stop other people doing it? An ex-thief gone straight should watch and do nothing as someone is robbed in front of him? A reformed killer must turn away as someone is murdered in front of her? A nation that manages to start on the road away from its prejudices must turn a blind eye to the suffering of other peoples?

guard-of-terra 14y ago
There is this thing where former alchoholics fight alchohol, former addicts fight drugs and former racists fight racism. They would do that overzealously, theyr involvement may cast a shadow over the whole fight, and they would hurt innocent, or not so much guilty, people by trying to make others pay for their own sins. This happens. If an ex-thief becomes a sheriff, I say I'd be cynical and worried.

guelo 14y ago

That would be our American leaders, not us. Our democracy functions by having irrelevant arguments about gays or drilling in Alaska every 4 years and then the leaders do whatever they want while nobody pays attention.

alan_cx 14y ago
Living in a democracy means you cannot divorce yourselves from the actions of your leaders, unlike people who do not have the luxury of the vote.

_delirium 14y ago

The initial leaders of the disinvestment-from-South-Africa campaign were some of the same people who were involved in the American Civil Rights Movement (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Sullivan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Sullivan), so it seems pretty consistent to me. They opposed white segregationists in the U.S. first, then once they'd won significant victories there, took the fight to white segregationists elsewhere. The US establishment was definitely not on board with that until years later. When the disinvestment campaigns were launched in the mid-1970s, and sanctions efforts had some initial success in the UN General Assembly, the US and UK opposed any Security Council involvement (i.e. anything with teeth). It was only in 1986, following a significant escalation in violence and repression in South Africa, that the anti-apartheid activists in the US Congress (led by another Civil Rights Movement veteran, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Dellums http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Dellums) finally got a bill passed--- and Ronald Reagan vetoed that bill. It was eventually passed again over his veto.

guard-of-terra 14y ago
Still I don't understand why South Africa. Most of world's countries are in sad state, especially africa. South Africa was unique because it was both successful and messed up at the same time. It could go either up and down. I have the feeling they went down: more messed up than successful today. I don't exactly know what happens there, tho. The question is: why "nuke" (economically and politically) this particular country and not any other?
- scarmig 14y ago
  Because their ruling class was a brutish sibling to the Anglosphere's, and we were giving them massive amounts of economic and military support to dominate and terrorize 90% of their country's population in what was effectively a set of really large concentration camps?
  - guard-of-terra 14y ago
    Well, just stop doing that without going bully on them? You made it bad by supporting them and then made it even worse by cutting support really fast and isolating them. It's amazing how you got the worst outcome possible. Glad they more or less survived it anyway. It could me much worse.