The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 John Derbyshire ArchiveBlogview
Premature But True—My Prediction of South Africa’s Collapse
Let’s Admit Some White Refugees!
Donald-Trump-672x336
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

The big issue in Europe is the ongoing invasion from Africa and the Middle East. If G-20 protestors were going to take to the streets and throw Molotov cocktails last weekend, THAT should have been their target. THAT’S the existential threat, the threat to Europe’s future–the future these millennials will have to live in. But that’s not what the G-20 protestors were protesting. Their target: CAPITALISM? We’re coming up to the hundredth anniversary of Lenin overthrowing capitalism in Russia. How’d THAT work out?

Sometimes the world just doesn’t make sense.

Of all of Africa’s 54 nations, only one is a member of the G-20. That would be South Africa (although Guinea and Senegal were guest participants at this year’s summit).

South Africa’s an interesting study. For race realists, it’s also a disconcerting one.

When the blacks took over 23 years ago, we all assumed the country would quickly collapse into economic destitution and tribal warfare, with the white people of South Africa counted as one of the tribes.

The joke going around at the time was: Q—What’s the difference between South Africa and Zimbabwe? A—About five years.

That was 23 years ago. South Africa’s still up and running, under black-run government all this time. Some humility is called for here among race realists. Some.

Sure, South Africa has its problems, as all countries have. They have 27 percent unemployment, with widespread serious poverty, including a big poverty-stricken white underclass. [Tough times for white South African squatters, by Finbarr O’Reilly, Reuters, March 26, 2010]Levels of corruption are, well, African.

The crime rate is tremendous. South Africa’s homicide rate is in the low-to-middle thirties per hundred thousand. That puts South Africa in the world’s top ten, up there with Jamaica, Honduras, and Guatemala—although not in quite the same league as America’ own St. Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit, all of which have broken fifty per hundred thousand.

A lot of the problems are First World-ish, though. South Africa actually has the ultimate status symbol among First World national vexations: an immigration problem.

The country is doing so well–by African standards, that is–that it’s plagued by illegal aliens from other African countries. There are frequent black-on-black anti-immigration riots. There was a nasty one earlier this year:

The latest anti-immigrant sentiments were set off in a neighborhood south of Johannesburg called Rosettenville, where residents burned down a dozen houses that they said were being used by Nigerians as drug dens and brothels. [South Africa Anti-Immigrant Protests Turn Violent, By Norimitsu Onishi, NYT, February 24, 2017]

Reading South African news outlets, it’s surprising how many immigration stories there are. Random headline from this week: Crackdown Halves Number Of Foreigners With Temporary Residence Permits. [By Farren Collins, Timeslive.co.za, July 10, 2017].

For a further claim to First World status, South Africa also has declining fertility, now just above replacement level.

The country’s politics are quite sane by African standards. Given the current levels of hysteria in Washington, D.C., it’s even tempting to say, “by American standards”…but let’s not over-egg the pudding here.

True, it’s a de facto one-party state, with the ANC, the African National Congress, holding power all 23 of these years. The ANC has quite distinct right and left wings, though, economically speaking: a pro-business wing and a pro-labor wing, who bicker constantly. There are significant opposition parties that did well in last year’s municipal elections. One of them won control of Pretoria, one of South Africa’s three capital cities.

(South Africa has three capital cities, one for each constitutional branch: legislature, executive, judiciary. Pretoria’s the executive capital. This seems to me a very good idea, that could be usefully adopted by the U.S.A. Why do we have all three branches located in Washington, D.C.?)

So, hey, we could just as well be talking about Denmark here!

Well, not quite. South Africa adopted the crony-capitalist economic model. Well-paid do-nothing government jobs are dominated by blacks, while the white and Asian–mostly Indian–business classes are left alone to make money. It’s not a bad model–Malaysia’s made it work for coming up to fifty years.

South Africa has its own particular issues, though–the issues spelled out in Ilana Mercer’s 2011 book Into the Cannibal’s Pot.

Fertility may be down towards replacement level, but as any demography buff will tell you, that leaves a huge “bulge” from the previous higher rates to work its way through the age cohorts. Millions of young black South African adults are jobless. They are rallying to Julius Malema’s new Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party, which is Castro-ist in economics and fiercely anti-white.

The ruling ANC is becoming more anti-white to protect its left flank against the EFF. At an ANC party conference last week the most hotly debated issue was whether white assets should be expropriated with or without compensation. Nobody seemed to think that white assets should not be expropriated.

So while race realists should admit they were too pessimistic back in 1994, I for one am not about to eat crow. As a model of multiracial harmony, South Africa will likely soon lose the little luster it had.

Four years ago here at VDARE.com I quoted that quip about South Africa being five years ahead of Zimbabwe, and said it should be filed under the heading “true but premature,” like videophones.

I stand by that judgment.

White South Africans, get out of there.

Maybe President Trump can include them in next year’s refugee quota (which should otherwise be set at zero).

(Republished from VDare.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Immigration, South Africa, VDare Archives 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
    []
  1. Agree. It’s not always as fast as we think it would be. Actually, if it really was that fast, it would be easier for all to see and so we wouldn’t have the problems we have, either because even our stupid elites (or at least many of them) would see how stupid multiculturalism was, and even if they didn’t, it would have been harder for them to convince the lemmings to follow them. Maybe the hoi polloi would have risen up if it was so easy to see how much worse it made the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    //www.unz.com/jderbyshire/premature-but-true-my-prediction-of-south-africas-collapse/#comment-1934759
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The joke going around at the time was: Q—What’s the difference between South Africa and Zimbabwe? A—About five years. That was 23 years ago. South Africa’s still up and running, under black-run government all this time. Some humility is called for here among race realists. Some.

    Keep in mind that Zimbabwe didn’t implode overnight either.

    For awhile, Mugabugabe kept his promise and didn’t go after whites. Whites ran good farms, and Zimbabwe had a successful productive economy compared to rest of Africa. It was when Mugabugabe decided to confiscate white farmers that the economy began to go south.

    So, we need to ask, Which Zimbabwe? Before expropriation or after expropriation?

    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things. So, even with all the mess, it’s been rather like Zimbabwe before expropriation. But if South Africa takes white wealth, it will be like Zimbabwe after expropriation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Yes, there was more than a decade during which mocking racists who had predicted Zimbabwe would decline after the end of white rule was a thing.
    , @Fredrik
    Zimbabwe only imploded once Mugabe felt a severe threat to his throne. Then he initiated action.

    Similar in South Africa. ANC is losing voters to DA(the mostly white opposition) and EFF. What do you do...

    On the other hand I don't think ANC are skilled enough...

    , @athEIst
    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things.

    The well known racist, Mahatma Gandhi said(around 1910 when he lived there) the whites hate the blacks because they will not work, the whites hate us(Indians) because we work too much.
  3. I would like to see Linh Dinh doing some of his depressing stories from a real dystopia instead of America. Here he is doing some propaganda for the Russians:

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    I'm not going to watch Chris Hedges moan openly on TV, but calling RT "the Russians" is disingenious.

    Apart from that, they have accessible non-MSM info, and excellent commentary, you just have to pick and choose and bit.

    Kerry telling you to stay the hell away from it and liberal profs telling you "it's Putin" is a double-plus bonus.
  4. Mmmmm, which is going to happen first: Europe going Sharia, US dollar going downhill taking the US along with it, or South Africa collapsing due to world renowned black management capabilities.

    I don’t think South Africa will be first.

    Read More
  5. “South Africa adopted the crony-capitalist economic model.” It adopted capitalism at gunpoint: Mandela was told very firmly that, if he took the left lane, SA would be embargoed and cut off from all foreign funding sources.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    So, a thirty-years respite?
    , @Karl
    5 godfree Roberts > and cut off from all foreign funding sources.

    there is no Human Right to get money from abroad
  6. A lot of the problems are First World-ish, though. South Africa actually has the ultimate status symbol among First World national vexations: an immigration problem.

    Reminder of the Mr Sailer’s review of the 1999 Sci-Fi flick “District 9″:

    Update: Steve Sailer review

    Crazed Namibian gangs doing good old exploitin’ of the low-IQ invaders. Radical.

    Read More
  7. @godfree Roberts
    "South Africa adopted the crony-capitalist economic model." It adopted capitalism at gunpoint: Mandela was told very firmly that, if he took the left lane, SA would be embargoed and cut off from all foreign funding sources.

    So, a thirty-years respite?

    Read More
  8. @jim jones
    I would like to see Linh Dinh doing some of his depressing stories from a real dystopia instead of America. Here he is doing some propaganda for the Russians:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n1dnk7jMeo

    I’m not going to watch Chris Hedges moan openly on TV, but calling RT “the Russians” is disingenious.

    Apart from that, they have accessible non-MSM info, and excellent commentary, you just have to pick and choose and bit.

    Kerry telling you to stay the hell away from it and liberal profs telling you “it’s Putin” is a double-plus bonus.

    Read More
  9. I’m one of those Asian South Africans you mentioned. I’d rather live here than in the USA ( and I travel to the US often for business). Why ? Well, while we do have problems with crime and corruption , you do get the sense that democracy is working as we see the black population increasingly turning to opposition parties. Let’s see what happens at the next election. Now compared to the US , we have real food , we have a lower cost of living , we can actually afford education, we can afford property, our drugs are more affordable , etc etc , and most importantly , I can live my life in peace without a liberal in my face at every turn ( the general culture is mostly conservative). You should come experience a country if you’re gonna write about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fredrik
    From a couple of visits it would seem that many of the Asians and Coloured South Africans mostly side with White South Africans on political topics. Is that your opinion as well?

    I also have read RW Johnson's books about South Africa. Have you read them? If yes, how much do you agree with them? My belief after reading them is that ANC is more cronyism and incompetence than anything else.
    , @jimmyriddle
    "we see the black population increasingly turning to opposition parties."

    That's when things will get really dangerous. This is exactly what happened in Zimbabwe. It was when he lost the 2000 referendum that Mugabe started looting the farms, in earnest.
  10. @El Dato
    I'm not going to watch Chris Hedges moan openly on TV, but calling RT "the Russians" is disingenious.

    Apart from that, they have accessible non-MSM info, and excellent commentary, you just have to pick and choose and bit.

    Kerry telling you to stay the hell away from it and liberal profs telling you "it's Putin" is a double-plus bonus.

    RT stands for Russia Today

    Read More
  11. @Priss Factor
    The joke going around at the time was: Q—What’s the difference between South Africa and Zimbabwe? A—About five years. That was 23 years ago. South Africa’s still up and running, under black-run government all this time. Some humility is called for here among race realists. Some.

    Keep in mind that Zimbabwe didn't implode overnight either.

    For awhile, Mugabugabe kept his promise and didn't go after whites. Whites ran good farms, and Zimbabwe had a successful productive economy compared to rest of Africa. It was when Mugabugabe decided to confiscate white farmers that the economy began to go south.

    So, we need to ask, Which Zimbabwe? Before expropriation or after expropriation?

    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things. So, even with all the mess, it's been rather like Zimbabwe before expropriation. But if South Africa takes white wealth, it will be like Zimbabwe after expropriation.

    Yes, there was more than a decade during which mocking racists who had predicted Zimbabwe would decline after the end of white rule was a thing.

    Read More
  12. Premature But True—My Prediction of South Africa’s Collapse

    The title reeks of a bit too much schadenfreude but never mind, Trump’s quotes apply as well to the USA.

    He would do well to drain his own cesspool first, and so far, he’s not only done a piss poor job, but the prospects appear dim.

    Get on it, Donny Boy!

    Read More
  13. @Priss Factor
    The joke going around at the time was: Q—What’s the difference between South Africa and Zimbabwe? A—About five years. That was 23 years ago. South Africa’s still up and running, under black-run government all this time. Some humility is called for here among race realists. Some.

    Keep in mind that Zimbabwe didn't implode overnight either.

    For awhile, Mugabugabe kept his promise and didn't go after whites. Whites ran good farms, and Zimbabwe had a successful productive economy compared to rest of Africa. It was when Mugabugabe decided to confiscate white farmers that the economy began to go south.

    So, we need to ask, Which Zimbabwe? Before expropriation or after expropriation?

    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things. So, even with all the mess, it's been rather like Zimbabwe before expropriation. But if South Africa takes white wealth, it will be like Zimbabwe after expropriation.

    Zimbabwe only imploded once Mugabe felt a severe threat to his throne. Then he initiated action.

    Similar in South Africa. ANC is losing voters to DA(the mostly white opposition) and EFF. What do you do…

    On the other hand I don’t think ANC are skilled enough…

    Read More
  14. @Raj Gupta
    I'm one of those Asian South Africans you mentioned. I'd rather live here than in the USA ( and I travel to the US often for business). Why ? Well, while we do have problems with crime and corruption , you do get the sense that democracy is working as we see the black population increasingly turning to opposition parties. Let's see what happens at the next election. Now compared to the US , we have real food , we have a lower cost of living , we can actually afford education, we can afford property, our drugs are more affordable , etc etc , and most importantly , I can live my life in peace without a liberal in my face at every turn ( the general culture is mostly conservative). You should come experience a country if you're gonna write about it.

    From a couple of visits it would seem that many of the Asians and Coloured South Africans mostly side with White South Africans on political topics. Is that your opinion as well?

    I also have read RW Johnson’s books about South Africa. Have you read them? If yes, how much do you agree with them? My belief after reading them is that ANC is more cronyism and incompetence than anything else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Raj Gupta
    yes many Asians and coloureds do side with whites on some issues, especially regarding the current failings of the ANC and the unacceptable crime rate.

    Have not read the books , but my opinion is that the ANC of Mandela genuinely fought for the people, but the "leaders" immediatly after him were greedy self enriching oxygen thieves.

    However , my positivity stems from that fact that South Africa is not the ANC , there is hope

    , @PV van der Byl
    Fredrik,

    You are correct about the political opinions and social attitudes of (especially Cape) Coloureds and Asians. On average, they are closer to South African whites than to SA blacks.

    RW Johnson's predictions, like the ones mentioned by Derb above, have often been premature. But premature doesn't mean wrong.

    Johnson's analysis of the ANC is, on the whole, superb. More of a classical liberal than a left-liberal, he does grasp the economic Big Picture.

    He is old enough, and have had enough associations on the left from the 60s through the 80s to assess the individuals, cliques, and factions very accurately.
  15. South Africa’s white population peaked at 5.1 million in 1991, fell to 4.3 million by 2001, then rebounded to 4.6 million by 2013. It has since fallen to 4.5 million and the long term trend is, of course, down.

    Over the course of this the white population has become slightly more Afrikaans and less English, as more Anglos left and didn’t return. The Afrikaners are, for the most part, staying put.

    There are some strange alliances developing in South African politics. The DA, the white liberal party with black frontmen, rules Pretoria and Johannesburg with the active support of the black communist EFF. Julius Malema is said to be good friends with DA leader Mmusi Maimane.

    Part of this is personal hostility towards Jacob Zuma, but if the ANC replace Zuma in an internal coup they risk a Zulu revolt and a revival of the nationalist Inkatha party. So the myriad anti-ANC forces can’t all be bought off at once.

    A Zuma-led ANC will almost certainly lose Gauteng, the richest and most populous province, in the 2019 election, and possibly even the whole country to this bizarre DA-EFF alliance. But the ANC could recruit some unlikely allies as well.

    The white conservative Freedom Front Plus, like the ANC but unlike the DA and EFF, is stronger in rural areas than in the big metros. The FF+ wants a federal system and eventually an Afrikaner ethnostate, and would definitely support redrawing the provincial borders to further those goals.

    If the ANC wins the country in 2019, but loses Gauteng to a ragtag coalition of whites and other minorities, and urban blacks, then they might retaliate by drawing Gauteng right off the map. Pretoria would go to ANC-ruled Limpopo to the north, Joburg to ANC-ruled North-West province, and the East Rand to ANC-ruled Mpumalanga. Poof, no more anti-ANC power centre in the heart of the country.

    This could be done in the name of provincial equality and decentralization. Gauteng has 3 metro municipalities, the Eastern Cape 2, while 4 provinces have none. Since the 8 big metros are increasingly where all the money and jobs are, they should be apportioned equally, one per province.

    This would also entail splitting the Eastern Cape in two, and combining the Western Cape and Northern Cape into one big Cape Province. Thus the outline of a future white and coloured, Afrikaans-speaking creole nation would come into being in the Cape Town-Port Elizabeth-Kimberley triangle.

    The FF+ and the ANC both have an interest in redrawing the map of SA; the former to achieve eventual self-determination in the western third of the country, the latter to permanently dilute the power of its urban-based political enemies. Other parties like Inkatha would also support any move towards decentralization.

    South African politics could, temporarily at least, cross racial lines as a coalition of conservative whites, rural blacks and Zulus (FF+-ANC-Inkatha) faces off against an alliance of liberal whites, urban blacks and other minorities (DA-EFF). If and when the provincial borders are changed to benefit the ANC and FF+, that coalition will fall apart and be replaced by a DA-FF+ bloc that will push for Cape independence against ANC-EFF resistance.

    South African whites are not only still there, but they’re still fighting and may yet achieve at least partial self-determination. History’s not over till the white lady sings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    You have, Jeppo, presented an intriguing and not implausible set of scenarios.

    The situation is very bleak but you do refer to the one ray of hope:

    This would also entail splitting the Eastern Cape in two, and combining the Western Cape and Northern Cape into one big Cape Province. Thus the outline of a future white and coloured, Afrikaans-speaking creole nation would come into being in the Cape Town-Port Elizabeth-Kimberley triangle.
     
    I agree that any white/DA alliances with the EFF are highly unstable and unlikely to last more than one election. Inkatha may offer more possibilities but could just wind up being absorbed eventually by a regional, Zulu-based ANC spin-off party.
  16. @Fredrik
    From a couple of visits it would seem that many of the Asians and Coloured South Africans mostly side with White South Africans on political topics. Is that your opinion as well?

    I also have read RW Johnson's books about South Africa. Have you read them? If yes, how much do you agree with them? My belief after reading them is that ANC is more cronyism and incompetence than anything else.

    yes many Asians and coloureds do side with whites on some issues, especially regarding the current failings of the ANC and the unacceptable crime rate.

    Have not read the books , but my opinion is that the ANC of Mandela genuinely fought for the people, but the “leaders” immediatly after him were greedy self enriching oxygen thieves.

    However , my positivity stems from that fact that South Africa is not the ANC , there is hope

    Read More
  17. As usual the real elephant in the room has been left out of the story.

    Jewish Rule In South Africa – Conspiratology

    http://www.conspiratology.com/jewrule_sa.htm

    Nelson Mandela & the Jews

    https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/06/nelson-mandela-and-the-jews/

    NELSON MANDELA WAS A COMMUNIST TERRORIST BACKED BY ZIONISTS

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/Nelson_Mandela_Was_A_Communist_Terrorist_Backed_By_Zionists/30938/0/5/5/Y/M.html

    Perhaps the only real difference between the US and SA in the “divide and conquer” games of a small “elite” sect is in which of the groups (black/white) is the larger group in the respective country?

    Read More
    • Replies: @gT
    Damn, so I, a non-white South African, owe my ability to dip my toes into the ocean on any beach in South Africa all to Jews!!! And they only wanted us liberated, as with the Negros in the US, as the first step towards destabilizing existing countries sufficiently so that they could take over behind the scenes!!!

    The next step being, of course, to bring the Latinos and anyone else into the US and the Muslims onto Europe to destroy the nations' identity entirely so that the New World Order can arise with them in charge. I can only but admire the long term, multi-generational persistence of these "characters".

    Good links those, never saw something so obvious expressed so clearly as "Jewish Communism and Jewish capitalism — Communist expropriation and capitalist “privatization” — are essentially interchangeable in terms of their results and even their personnel. Both are simply ways that Jews appropriate the wealth and power of a nation and destroy the best of their rivals."

    So the objective is always the same, global dominance, but the strategy varies. First global communism with them in charge was attempted, but that never worked out too well, so now its the turn of global capitalism with them in charge, but the one government New World Order is not working out too well either. Tough.
  18. If any white South Africans would want to come here it would probably in their best interest to hide their history, change their name, maybe claim to be a Canadian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    No, their accents can't pass for Canadian, but to me they are indistinguishable from Australians, mate.
    , @EdwardM
    They could check the "African American" box on every form and obtain a lot of affirmative action.
  19. The whites created a pretty good infrastructure and governmental/law-and-order system that could last a generation of disrepair, but which is now (a generation later) falling apart.

    The comparison today is NYC: Bill De Blasio is doing his darndest to destroy the city, but the infrastructure/systems set up by Giuliani and (largely) continued by Bloomberg have prevented immediate destruction; the police resistance to De Blasio is a big block, and likely supported by the Alphabet Agencies. And the long push out of blacks to crappier cities outside NYC (such as Newark) means that they won’t have as much of a foothold for their chaos in NYC proper as in the 1950s-1960s, when blacks were a larger percentage.

    However, give De Blasio a similar lefty successor and two terms and we’ll see good cops retiring and new cops avoiding the job and the whole mess come back. 16-20 years and it’s NYC in the late 1970s.

    Look at what happened to NYC model post 1950s: a thriving city was slowly brought to its knees by crime and infrastructure break down by Lefty mayoral policies, and crime destroying the infrastructure (think how the subways were a mess from graffiti, use as toilets, etc.). It was a slow break: Midnight Cowboy was made in 1969, but it was supposed to demonstrate the squalor in Times Square, separate from the “good neighborhoods” , such as those in the outer-boroughs and the Mafia-protected ones in The Godfather (1972).

    Then the crime spread out to the good neighborhoods :Death Wish (1974) depicted crime hitting the “safe” neighborhoods of the city, so much so that desperate pacifists daydreamed of being bloodthirsty avengers. And Mean Streets (1973) showed that low-level crime was infecting even the mobbed-up places.

    In the late 1970s the Bronx was burning, and the jig was up. By the 1980s, NYC had a hard time convincing anyone that there were any safe neighborhoods left: John Lennon was shot on the street,and Hollywood now stereotyped it as as a crime-ridden, falling apart mess that was unsavable: Fort Apache, The Bronx (1981); Escape from New York (1981), and the humorous-sly take on the filth in Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989), humorous because an in-joke of the film is that Manhattan is so crime-ridden and the people so violent/weird/anti-social than murderous psychopath in a hockey mask is virtually unnoticed in New York.

    Then Giuliani came in and suddenly it all got better.

    So if the D’s take Mayor’s office in the next three-four elections, we get to live all that again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Only you morons who haven't left Sodom on Hudson.
    , @hyperbola
    More complicated than that. Failed urban development (tearing the center out of cities for the automobile) made major contributions.

    5 Things in NYC We Can Blame on Robert Moses
    http://untappedcities.com/2013/12/18/5-things-in-nyc-we-can-blame-on-robert-moses/

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
    https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-american-streetcar-scandal-1203808
  20. @Fredrik
    From a couple of visits it would seem that many of the Asians and Coloured South Africans mostly side with White South Africans on political topics. Is that your opinion as well?

    I also have read RW Johnson's books about South Africa. Have you read them? If yes, how much do you agree with them? My belief after reading them is that ANC is more cronyism and incompetence than anything else.

    Fredrik,

    You are correct about the political opinions and social attitudes of (especially Cape) Coloureds and Asians. On average, they are closer to South African whites than to SA blacks.

    RW Johnson’s predictions, like the ones mentioned by Derb above, have often been premature. But premature doesn’t mean wrong.

    Johnson’s analysis of the ANC is, on the whole, superb. More of a classical liberal than a left-liberal, he does grasp the economic Big Picture.

    He is old enough, and have had enough associations on the left from the 60s through the 80s to assess the individuals, cliques, and factions very accurately.

    Read More
  21. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    South African whites are not only still there, but they’re still fighting and may yet achieve at least partial self-determination. History’s not over till the white lady sings.

    According to the prophetic visions of Seener van Rensburg (1864-1926), the whites will eventually regain control of South Africa…. when the ice melts.

    A Denmark-size iceberg just broke off of Antarctica…..

    Read More
  22. @jeppo
    South Africa's white population peaked at 5.1 million in 1991, fell to 4.3 million by 2001, then rebounded to 4.6 million by 2013. It has since fallen to 4.5 million and the long term trend is, of course, down.

    Over the course of this the white population has become slightly more Afrikaans and less English, as more Anglos left and didn't return. The Afrikaners are, for the most part, staying put.

    There are some strange alliances developing in South African politics. The DA, the white liberal party with black frontmen, rules Pretoria and Johannesburg with the active support of the black communist EFF. Julius Malema is said to be good friends with DA leader Mmusi Maimane.

    Part of this is personal hostility towards Jacob Zuma, but if the ANC replace Zuma in an internal coup they risk a Zulu revolt and a revival of the nationalist Inkatha party. So the myriad anti-ANC forces can't all be bought off at once.

    A Zuma-led ANC will almost certainly lose Gauteng, the richest and most populous province, in the 2019 election, and possibly even the whole country to this bizarre DA-EFF alliance. But the ANC could recruit some unlikely allies as well.

    The white conservative Freedom Front Plus, like the ANC but unlike the DA and EFF, is stronger in rural areas than in the big metros. The FF+ wants a federal system and eventually an Afrikaner ethnostate, and would definitely support redrawing the provincial borders to further those goals.

    If the ANC wins the country in 2019, but loses Gauteng to a ragtag coalition of whites and other minorities, and urban blacks, then they might retaliate by drawing Gauteng right off the map. Pretoria would go to ANC-ruled Limpopo to the north, Joburg to ANC-ruled North-West province, and the East Rand to ANC-ruled Mpumalanga. Poof, no more anti-ANC power centre in the heart of the country.

    This could be done in the name of provincial equality and decentralization. Gauteng has 3 metro municipalities, the Eastern Cape 2, while 4 provinces have none. Since the 8 big metros are increasingly where all the money and jobs are, they should be apportioned equally, one per province.

    This would also entail splitting the Eastern Cape in two, and combining the Western Cape and Northern Cape into one big Cape Province. Thus the outline of a future white and coloured, Afrikaans-speaking creole nation would come into being in the Cape Town-Port Elizabeth-Kimberley triangle.

    The FF+ and the ANC both have an interest in redrawing the map of SA; the former to achieve eventual self-determination in the western third of the country, the latter to permanently dilute the power of its urban-based political enemies. Other parties like Inkatha would also support any move towards decentralization.

    South African politics could, temporarily at least, cross racial lines as a coalition of conservative whites, rural blacks and Zulus (FF+-ANC-Inkatha) faces off against an alliance of liberal whites, urban blacks and other minorities (DA-EFF). If and when the provincial borders are changed to benefit the ANC and FF+, that coalition will fall apart and be replaced by a DA-FF+ bloc that will push for Cape independence against ANC-EFF resistance.

    South African whites are not only still there, but they're still fighting and may yet achieve at least partial self-determination. History's not over till the white lady sings.

    You have, Jeppo, presented an intriguing and not implausible set of scenarios.

    The situation is very bleak but you do refer to the one ray of hope:

    This would also entail splitting the Eastern Cape in two, and combining the Western Cape and Northern Cape into one big Cape Province. Thus the outline of a future white and coloured, Afrikaans-speaking creole nation would come into being in the Cape Town-Port Elizabeth-Kimberley triangle.

    I agree that any white/DA alliances with the EFF are highly unstable and unlikely to last more than one election. Inkatha may offer more possibilities but could just wind up being absorbed eventually by a regional, Zulu-based ANC spin-off party.

    Read More
  23. It’s time to reverse the tide of anti-white racism. The Cape should secede and leave the ANC Marxists alone to self-destruct.

    Read More
  24. @whorefinder
    The whites created a pretty good infrastructure and governmental/law-and-order system that could last a generation of disrepair, but which is now (a generation later) falling apart.

    The comparison today is NYC: Bill De Blasio is doing his darndest to destroy the city, but the infrastructure/systems set up by Giuliani and (largely) continued by Bloomberg have prevented immediate destruction; the police resistance to De Blasio is a big block, and likely supported by the Alphabet Agencies. And the long push out of blacks to crappier cities outside NYC (such as Newark) means that they won't have as much of a foothold for their chaos in NYC proper as in the 1950s-1960s, when blacks were a larger percentage.

    However, give De Blasio a similar lefty successor and two terms and we'll see good cops retiring and new cops avoiding the job and the whole mess come back. 16-20 years and it's NYC in the late 1970s.

    Look at what happened to NYC model post 1950s: a thriving city was slowly brought to its knees by crime and infrastructure break down by Lefty mayoral policies, and crime destroying the infrastructure (think how the subways were a mess from graffiti, use as toilets, etc.). It was a slow break: Midnight Cowboy was made in 1969, but it was supposed to demonstrate the squalor in Times Square, separate from the "good neighborhoods" , such as those in the outer-boroughs and the Mafia-protected ones in The Godfather (1972).

    Then the crime spread out to the good neighborhoods :Death Wish (1974) depicted crime hitting the "safe" neighborhoods of the city, so much so that desperate pacifists daydreamed of being bloodthirsty avengers. And Mean Streets (1973) showed that low-level crime was infecting even the mobbed-up places.

    In the late 1970s the Bronx was burning, and the jig was up. By the 1980s, NYC had a hard time convincing anyone that there were any safe neighborhoods left: John Lennon was shot on the street,and Hollywood now stereotyped it as as a crime-ridden, falling apart mess that was unsavable: Fort Apache, The Bronx (1981); Escape from New York (1981), and the humorous-sly take on the filth in Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989), humorous because an in-joke of the film is that Manhattan is so crime-ridden and the people so violent/weird/anti-social than murderous psychopath in a hockey mask is virtually unnoticed in New York.

    Then Giuliani came in and suddenly it all got better.

    So if the D's take Mayor's office in the next three-four elections, we get to live all that again.

    Only you morons who haven’t left Sodom on Hudson.

    Read More
  25. We can’t keep running like a herd of nancy boys, Derb. Iceland can only hold so many people. At some stage we have to let the testicles drop and fight.

    Read More
  26. @Priss Factor
    The joke going around at the time was: Q—What’s the difference between South Africa and Zimbabwe? A—About five years. That was 23 years ago. South Africa’s still up and running, under black-run government all this time. Some humility is called for here among race realists. Some.

    Keep in mind that Zimbabwe didn't implode overnight either.

    For awhile, Mugabugabe kept his promise and didn't go after whites. Whites ran good farms, and Zimbabwe had a successful productive economy compared to rest of Africa. It was when Mugabugabe decided to confiscate white farmers that the economy began to go south.

    So, we need to ask, Which Zimbabwe? Before expropriation or after expropriation?

    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things. So, even with all the mess, it's been rather like Zimbabwe before expropriation. But if South Africa takes white wealth, it will be like Zimbabwe after expropriation.

    South Africa let its whites and Asians stay and run things.

    The well known racist, Mahatma Gandhi said(around 1910 when he lived there) the whites hate the blacks because they will not work, the whites hate us(Indians) because we work too much.

    Read More
  27. @Dave337
    If any white South Africans would want to come here it would probably in their best interest to hide their history, change their name, maybe claim to be a Canadian.

    No, their accents can’t pass for Canadian, but to me they are indistinguishable from Australians, mate.

    Read More
  28. @godfree Roberts
    "South Africa adopted the crony-capitalist economic model." It adopted capitalism at gunpoint: Mandela was told very firmly that, if he took the left lane, SA would be embargoed and cut off from all foreign funding sources.

    5 godfree Roberts > and cut off from all foreign funding sources.

    there is no Human Right to get money from abroad

    Read More
  29. When its payment from a hostile foreign power that seeks to destroy your country, no.

    Read More
  30. Interesting, but a few minor points.

    South Africa’s fertility rate is not really ‘declining – it’s always been low! It’s just that the elites – first white, then black – used massive immigration from the rest of Africa to cancel out the pro-high-wage effects of low fertility rates, driving wages down and profits up. A policy the new black elites are continuing. Because greed is color blind.

    The Ivory Coast used to be a pretty prosperous country too. The black elites allowed in massive numbers of muslim refugees to – you guessed it – make a lot of money off all of that cheap labor. This immigration policy ended up doubling the population, and the resulting poverty tore the country apart in a bloody civil war.

    Talk about race as you will, but some things are eternal. The rich want cheap labor, the workers, expensive labor. The easiest way to get cheap labor is to flood the market, either by encouraging high fertility rates (Syria, Iraq, China under Mao in the 1950′s, Mexico, etc.) or importing massive numbers of immigrants (South Africa, Hong Kong, Australia, the United States – even parts of India! – ancient Rome, etc.) But in the long run endemic poverty is destabilizing.

    Because nobody – black or white – likes being crushed into poverty and having no realistic options of making a decent living and supporting a family.

    Read More
  31. @whorefinder
    The whites created a pretty good infrastructure and governmental/law-and-order system that could last a generation of disrepair, but which is now (a generation later) falling apart.

    The comparison today is NYC: Bill De Blasio is doing his darndest to destroy the city, but the infrastructure/systems set up by Giuliani and (largely) continued by Bloomberg have prevented immediate destruction; the police resistance to De Blasio is a big block, and likely supported by the Alphabet Agencies. And the long push out of blacks to crappier cities outside NYC (such as Newark) means that they won't have as much of a foothold for their chaos in NYC proper as in the 1950s-1960s, when blacks were a larger percentage.

    However, give De Blasio a similar lefty successor and two terms and we'll see good cops retiring and new cops avoiding the job and the whole mess come back. 16-20 years and it's NYC in the late 1970s.

    Look at what happened to NYC model post 1950s: a thriving city was slowly brought to its knees by crime and infrastructure break down by Lefty mayoral policies, and crime destroying the infrastructure (think how the subways were a mess from graffiti, use as toilets, etc.). It was a slow break: Midnight Cowboy was made in 1969, but it was supposed to demonstrate the squalor in Times Square, separate from the "good neighborhoods" , such as those in the outer-boroughs and the Mafia-protected ones in The Godfather (1972).

    Then the crime spread out to the good neighborhoods :Death Wish (1974) depicted crime hitting the "safe" neighborhoods of the city, so much so that desperate pacifists daydreamed of being bloodthirsty avengers. And Mean Streets (1973) showed that low-level crime was infecting even the mobbed-up places.

    In the late 1970s the Bronx was burning, and the jig was up. By the 1980s, NYC had a hard time convincing anyone that there were any safe neighborhoods left: John Lennon was shot on the street,and Hollywood now stereotyped it as as a crime-ridden, falling apart mess that was unsavable: Fort Apache, The Bronx (1981); Escape from New York (1981), and the humorous-sly take on the filth in Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989), humorous because an in-joke of the film is that Manhattan is so crime-ridden and the people so violent/weird/anti-social than murderous psychopath in a hockey mask is virtually unnoticed in New York.

    Then Giuliani came in and suddenly it all got better.

    So if the D's take Mayor's office in the next three-four elections, we get to live all that again.

    More complicated than that. Failed urban development (tearing the center out of cities for the automobile) made major contributions.

    5 Things in NYC We Can Blame on Robert Moses

    http://untappedcities.com/2013/12/18/5-things-in-nyc-we-can-blame-on-robert-moses/

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars

    https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-american-streetcar-scandal-1203808

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    Streetcars are inflexible because they run on rails. They will never again be economically viable except in a few high density areas until energy prices skyrocket a lot more than they have. Blaming suburbanization on GM's buyout of streetcar lines, expressways, and FHA and VA loans ignores the fact that people like suburbs, exurbs, and quasi suburban neighborhoods in the city. I'm somewhat sympathetic to your, in my view, unrealistic, viewpoint because I like good walkable urban neighborhoods myself. The best strategy is to try to have urban transit agencies serve their riders more rather than their employees. Rationalize bus routes which have changed little in many years. Use hybrid (this is already being tried) and natural gas fueled buses. On high density lines use trolley buses which are less flexible than motor coaches but more flexible than streetcars. At such distant future time as streetcars are viable on these lines, the overhead wires will already be in place and only the installation of the tracks, a big job to be sure, will be required.
    , @whorefinder

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
     
    Streetcars have never come back for a reason. GM acted in its own interests, to be sure, but streetcars were not some wonderful thing, more akin to crappy buses of today, but more dangerous. The Brooklyn Dodgers, for example, were so named because of the people in Brooklyn who had to "dodge" the streetcars ("trolleys dodgers") that went whizzing around and often killed or injured folk who weren't looking.

    Both streetcars and buses were above-ground transportation and the lowest form of public transport. So exchanging buses for trolleys was an improvement: in buses you got a safer form of transport, one that was enclosed from the elements, one that allowed other vehicles on the streets instead of monopolizing tracks, and also allowed for a broken bus to be replaced for a working one without needed to tow a streetcar off the tracks and move it for another one.

    SF is about the only ciiy that could use a light rail today, but that's because of the high hills of SF. LA would be better served by buses, Speed notwithstanding; light rail just gums up the roads, and subways don't work in either thanks to earthquake conditions and the quirky layout of those cities.

  32. @hyperbola
    As usual the real elephant in the room has been left out of the story.

    Jewish Rule In South Africa - Conspiratology
    http://www.conspiratology.com/jewrule_sa.htm

    Nelson Mandela & the Jews
    https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/06/nelson-mandela-and-the-jews/

    NELSON MANDELA WAS A COMMUNIST TERRORIST BACKED BY ZIONISTS
    http://www.blacklistednews.com/Nelson_Mandela_Was_A_Communist_Terrorist_Backed_By_Zionists/30938/0/5/5/Y/M.html


    Perhaps the only real difference between the US and SA in the "divide and conquer" games of a small "elite" sect is in which of the groups (black/white) is the larger group in the respective country?

    Damn, so I, a non-white South African, owe my ability to dip my toes into the ocean on any beach in South Africa all to Jews!!! And they only wanted us liberated, as with the Negros in the US, as the first step towards destabilizing existing countries sufficiently so that they could take over behind the scenes!!!

    The next step being, of course, to bring the Latinos and anyone else into the US and the Muslims onto Europe to destroy the nations’ identity entirely so that the New World Order can arise with them in charge. I can only but admire the long term, multi-generational persistence of these “characters”.

    Good links those, never saw something so obvious expressed so clearly as “Jewish Communism and Jewish capitalism — Communist expropriation and capitalist “privatization” — are essentially interchangeable in terms of their results and even their personnel. Both are simply ways that Jews appropriate the wealth and power of a nation and destroy the best of their rivals.”

    So the objective is always the same, global dominance, but the strategy varies. First global communism with them in charge was attempted, but that never worked out too well, so now its the turn of global capitalism with them in charge, but the one government New World Order is not working out too well either. Tough.

    Read More
  33. South Africa is a true democracy – the government may be corrupt. But, you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. There is a vibrant press.

    Trump should not be letting in white refugees – we should be helping South Africa as best we can to stay together. And they need the educated Whites.

    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people – Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds. Yes, I get there are many non-warm criminals, too.

    Clearly the ANC did not want to become a Zimabawe. They had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission rather than mass executions.

    They even kept street names named after apartheid leaders. I was surprised to find a major street in Johannesburg named after this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._M._Hertzog. And, this was not in a white part of town.

    We should do what we can to keep this place going.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    "you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. "

    There are plenty of knocks on the door by criminals who operate with impunity because of the attitudes of the government. Not so different from the 21st Century USA.
    , @whorefinder
    lol.


    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people – Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds.
     
    Note how, when confronted with the astronomical crime rates, degeneracy of the country, and genocide of whites, the Lefty goes into a "muh feelz" argument. Typical womanish lies: the facts don't matter, I haz feelz!

    Your troll is complicated, but ultimately fails.
    , @BenjaminL
    Looks like it's all going great over there.

    http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/bury-them-alive-white-south-africans-fear-for-their-future-as-horrific-farm-attacks-escalate/news-story/3a63389a1b0066b6b0b77522c06d6476
  34. ANON says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The text in the Donald’s quote where he signs off as US President is dated 2015. ?

    Read More
  35. @Raj Gupta
    I'm one of those Asian South Africans you mentioned. I'd rather live here than in the USA ( and I travel to the US often for business). Why ? Well, while we do have problems with crime and corruption , you do get the sense that democracy is working as we see the black population increasingly turning to opposition parties. Let's see what happens at the next election. Now compared to the US , we have real food , we have a lower cost of living , we can actually afford education, we can afford property, our drugs are more affordable , etc etc , and most importantly , I can live my life in peace without a liberal in my face at every turn ( the general culture is mostly conservative). You should come experience a country if you're gonna write about it.

    “we see the black population increasingly turning to opposition parties.”

    That’s when things will get really dangerous. This is exactly what happened in Zimbabwe. It was when he lost the 2000 referendum that Mugabe started looting the farms, in earnest.

    Read More
  36. @hyperbola
    More complicated than that. Failed urban development (tearing the center out of cities for the automobile) made major contributions.

    5 Things in NYC We Can Blame on Robert Moses
    http://untappedcities.com/2013/12/18/5-things-in-nyc-we-can-blame-on-robert-moses/

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
    https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-american-streetcar-scandal-1203808

    Streetcars are inflexible because they run on rails. They will never again be economically viable except in a few high density areas until energy prices skyrocket a lot more than they have. Blaming suburbanization on GM’s buyout of streetcar lines, expressways, and FHA and VA loans ignores the fact that people like suburbs, exurbs, and quasi suburban neighborhoods in the city. I’m somewhat sympathetic to your, in my view, unrealistic, viewpoint because I like good walkable urban neighborhoods myself. The best strategy is to try to have urban transit agencies serve their riders more rather than their employees. Rationalize bus routes which have changed little in many years. Use hybrid (this is already being tried) and natural gas fueled buses. On high density lines use trolley buses which are less flexible than motor coaches but more flexible than streetcars. At such distant future time as streetcars are viable on these lines, the overhead wires will already be in place and only the installation of the tracks, a big job to be sure, will be required.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hyperbola
    See my answer to whorefinder.

    I will just add here that because the solutions in the US were dictated by a single model, most Americans now have virtually no experience/knowledge of the alternatives. Personally, after experience in several European and Asian cities, now I cannot imagine anything more boring and stultifying that being forced to live in an American suburb and waste hours everyday driving. Where I live at the moment I have 3 butchers, 2 bakeries, 3 fruit/vegetable shops, 2 supermarkets, dozens of restaurants, numerous doctors/medical centers/dentists, ............ within WALKING distance (say 400 yards). To say nothing of 3 miles of beachfront, playing fields, bike paths, .....

    Remember also that a substantial percentage of Ämericans don't drive (old/young/handicapped) and are excluded from many aspects of life in the US. My father had to be put in a residence when it became impossible for him to drive to buy food. Americans lost a lot with the "suburb" lifestyle.

  37. @Left Lawyer
    South Africa is a true democracy - the government may be corrupt. But, you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. There is a vibrant press.

    Trump should not be letting in white refugees - we should be helping South Africa as best we can to stay together. And they need the educated Whites.

    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people - Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds. Yes, I get there are many non-warm criminals, too.

    Clearly the ANC did not want to become a Zimabawe. They had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission rather than mass executions.

    They even kept street names named after apartheid leaders. I was surprised to find a major street in Johannesburg named after this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._M._Hertzog. And, this was not in a white part of town.

    We should do what we can to keep this place going.

    “you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. ”

    There are plenty of knocks on the door by criminals who operate with impunity because of the attitudes of the government. Not so different from the 21st Century USA.

    Read More
  38. @hyperbola
    More complicated than that. Failed urban development (tearing the center out of cities for the automobile) made major contributions.

    5 Things in NYC We Can Blame on Robert Moses
    http://untappedcities.com/2013/12/18/5-things-in-nyc-we-can-blame-on-robert-moses/

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
    https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-american-streetcar-scandal-1203808

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars

    Streetcars have never come back for a reason. GM acted in its own interests, to be sure, but streetcars were not some wonderful thing, more akin to crappy buses of today, but more dangerous. The Brooklyn Dodgers, for example, were so named because of the people in Brooklyn who had to “dodge” the streetcars (“trolleys dodgers”) that went whizzing around and often killed or injured folk who weren’t looking.

    Both streetcars and buses were above-ground transportation and the lowest form of public transport. So exchanging buses for trolleys was an improvement: in buses you got a safer form of transport, one that was enclosed from the elements, one that allowed other vehicles on the streets instead of monopolizing tracks, and also allowed for a broken bus to be replaced for a working one without needed to tow a streetcar off the tracks and move it for another one.

    SF is about the only ciiy that could use a light rail today, but that’s because of the high hills of SF. LA would be better served by buses, Speed notwithstanding; light rail just gums up the roads, and subways don’t work in either thanks to earthquake conditions and the quirky layout of those cities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @benjaminl

    SF is about the only city that could use a light rail today, but that’s because of the high hills of SF.
     
    I guess for the same reason S.F. still has a running trolley i.e cable car, although just as a tourist attraction.

    Trolleys can work as a free tourist attraction if run through the densest and most upscale part of town: http://mata.org/
    , @Thirdeye
    San Jose, Portland, and LA are doing light rail. In an odd way, the decentralized low density of SJ and LA present opportunities for light rail to succeed. Right-of-way acquisition is simpler with low density, as is transit-centered development. Tokyo's decentralized aspect - essentially a very large collection of villages - facilitated development adapted to rail transport. It can be easier for a low-density city to adapt to rail transport than for rail transport to be fit into a high density city.
    , @hyperbola
    You show a serious lack of knowledge about public transport around the world. For example, one of the places where I lived for awhile (Zuerich) still makes widespread use of trams and has one of the best city public transport systems in the world. You can get anywhere in the city rapidly and comfortably. In fact, public transport in the city (and from there to the rest of the country) is SO good that 50% of the families choose not to own a car - an unnecessary complication of life.

    How did they manage that? I always thought there were several reasons.
    (1) Cities that existed for many centuries prior to the arrival of the automobile were less willing to destroy their city centers.
    (2) Urban planning had been rational for a LONG time, with clear segregation of "industrial" activities to defined areas alongside the train lines.
    (2) Real, direct democracy has many advantages - when the first oil boycott arrived (Carter administration), the citizens VOTED to give public transport priority in the city - and have repeated that ever since.

    I would go further and argue that undue emphasis on the automobile (and oil products) has been a tremendous ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE for the US. Henry Ford paid his workers enough to buy a car? Shortly thereafter, that car became a pre-requisite for a worker to have a job. And American workers got expensive compared to other places. In Zuerich, the public transport system is organized so that workers arrive at the factories along the train lines on public transport (the lack of parking lots is impressive!) So much more rational use of expensive land!

    Perhaps the lack of public transport has also been a tremendous SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE for the US compared to other countries. Remember that ultra-cheap home mortgages financed by the federal government were originally instituted in the US (in the 1940s, 1950s) to allow "white" familes to move out of our cities to the suburbs as blacks and asians moved in (latinos came later). This produced social segregation of types that is MUCH less common in other countries.

    In general, my experience in half-a-dozen foreign cities where I have worked is that decent public transport is a tremendous social and economic advantage.
  39. @Left Lawyer
    South Africa is a true democracy - the government may be corrupt. But, you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. There is a vibrant press.

    Trump should not be letting in white refugees - we should be helping South Africa as best we can to stay together. And they need the educated Whites.

    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people - Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds. Yes, I get there are many non-warm criminals, too.

    Clearly the ANC did not want to become a Zimabawe. They had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission rather than mass executions.

    They even kept street names named after apartheid leaders. I was surprised to find a major street in Johannesburg named after this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._M._Hertzog. And, this was not in a white part of town.

    We should do what we can to keep this place going.

    lol.

    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people – Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds.

    Note how, when confronted with the astronomical crime rates, degeneracy of the country, and genocide of whites, the Lefty goes into a “muh feelz” argument. Typical womanish lies: the facts don’t matter, I haz feelz!

    Your troll is complicated, but ultimately fails.

    Read More
  40. The ratio of South African per capita income to American per capita income bounced around a set point of 0.26 from 1910 to 1976, then declined to about 0.14 between 1976 and 2001, after which it stabilized. Angus Maddison compiled data which runs from 1910 to 2010 and World Bank date runs from 1980 to the present. The World Bank shows a divergence in these ratios between nominal per capita income (which has declined in the last 7 years) and purchasing-power-parity, which has remained stable. About 90% of the decline in South Africa’s relative position happened prior to Mandela’s inauguration in 1994, about 70% prior to his release from prison in 1990, and about 35% prior to the international campaigns contra South Africa launched in 1984. This decay is not attributable to the ANC.

    As for the crime situation, it’s dreadful, but the homicide rate is actually less than half of what it was in 1994 and no worse than it was ca. 1984. There’s been deterioration net over many decades, but South Africa has not been a society at peace with itself in a long time. See some of the fiction published by Alan Paton. (Paton took up writing for publication when past 40; his previous occupation had been employment in the juvenile detention system). Anxiety over street crime was considerable in the late pre-Aparthied era.

    South Africa is not a ‘de facto one party state’. Kenya ca. 1970 was a de facto one-party state. South Africa has a dominant party, but the opposition is considerable and controls certain regional and local governments. What’s of interest is whether and at what pace the ANC’s hegemony will erode (as the hegemony of the dominant party has eroded in other African countries, Kenya and Senegal notable examples).

    Read More
  41. @Left Lawyer
    South Africa is a true democracy - the government may be corrupt. But, you can write that in the newspaper and not get a knock on the door at 3 AM. There is a vibrant press.

    Trump should not be letting in white refugees - we should be helping South Africa as best we can to stay together. And they need the educated Whites.

    I have traveled there, and I got a genuine feeling of warmth from all of the people - Afrikaaners, Anglos, Jews, Blacks, Coloureds. Yes, I get there are many non-warm criminals, too.

    Clearly the ANC did not want to become a Zimabawe. They had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission rather than mass executions.

    They even kept street names named after apartheid leaders. I was surprised to find a major street in Johannesburg named after this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._M._Hertzog. And, this was not in a white part of town.

    We should do what we can to keep this place going.
    Read More
  42. @whorefinder

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
     
    Streetcars have never come back for a reason. GM acted in its own interests, to be sure, but streetcars were not some wonderful thing, more akin to crappy buses of today, but more dangerous. The Brooklyn Dodgers, for example, were so named because of the people in Brooklyn who had to "dodge" the streetcars ("trolleys dodgers") that went whizzing around and often killed or injured folk who weren't looking.

    Both streetcars and buses were above-ground transportation and the lowest form of public transport. So exchanging buses for trolleys was an improvement: in buses you got a safer form of transport, one that was enclosed from the elements, one that allowed other vehicles on the streets instead of monopolizing tracks, and also allowed for a broken bus to be replaced for a working one without needed to tow a streetcar off the tracks and move it for another one.

    SF is about the only ciiy that could use a light rail today, but that's because of the high hills of SF. LA would be better served by buses, Speed notwithstanding; light rail just gums up the roads, and subways don't work in either thanks to earthquake conditions and the quirky layout of those cities.

    SF is about the only city that could use a light rail today, but that’s because of the high hills of SF.

    I guess for the same reason S.F. still has a running trolley i.e cable car, although just as a tourist attraction.

    Trolleys can work as a free tourist attraction if run through the densest and most upscale part of town: http://mata.org/

    Read More
  43. John

    Since I live in eastern neck of the woods:future Hindu-Jamaican future POTUS…2020 to be exact…..Kamala Harris, was down the road raising money for her 2020 election run….Demographics is destiny…

    Maryam Mirzakhani’s Mathematics ancestry:Dennis Sullivan phd advisor to Fields Medalist Curtis McMullen phd advisor to Maryam Mirzakhani…..that’s two low IQ Irishman….

    Bigger question:Why are there over one million Iranian’s living in California?…..Accelerated right after the 1979 Iran hostage crisis and USA!!!….USA!!!…USA!!!-1980 US Hockey Team win over the Russkie Commies……

    The Cold War Anti-Commie Crusade=POTUS Kamala Harris 2020…Our first Hindu-Jamaican POTUS sending Working Class Native Born White American Christian Teenage Males and Females to their death in the Middle East for Greater Israel…

    Read More
  44. @whorefinder

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
     
    Streetcars have never come back for a reason. GM acted in its own interests, to be sure, but streetcars were not some wonderful thing, more akin to crappy buses of today, but more dangerous. The Brooklyn Dodgers, for example, were so named because of the people in Brooklyn who had to "dodge" the streetcars ("trolleys dodgers") that went whizzing around and often killed or injured folk who weren't looking.

    Both streetcars and buses were above-ground transportation and the lowest form of public transport. So exchanging buses for trolleys was an improvement: in buses you got a safer form of transport, one that was enclosed from the elements, one that allowed other vehicles on the streets instead of monopolizing tracks, and also allowed for a broken bus to be replaced for a working one without needed to tow a streetcar off the tracks and move it for another one.

    SF is about the only ciiy that could use a light rail today, but that's because of the high hills of SF. LA would be better served by buses, Speed notwithstanding; light rail just gums up the roads, and subways don't work in either thanks to earthquake conditions and the quirky layout of those cities.

    San Jose, Portland, and LA are doing light rail. In an odd way, the decentralized low density of SJ and LA present opportunities for light rail to succeed. Right-of-way acquisition is simpler with low density, as is transit-centered development. Tokyo’s decentralized aspect – essentially a very large collection of villages – facilitated development adapted to rail transport. It can be easier for a low-density city to adapt to rail transport than for rail transport to be fit into a high density city.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    I would argue that Portland does light rail for the same reason it has bike lanes and socialism---not that they work, but because the nice white people who run the places think that they'll work and like them, and ignore any negative consequences, until they just fall apart. As for San Jose, their police chief stood down and allowed Trump supporters to be violently attacked by communists. Both cities exhibit extreme lefty pathology, so their adoption of light rail boondoggles seem to be part of that. Buses would have been fine and dandy.

    Light rail worked when the middle class didn't have cars. So I can understand Tokyo getting light rail before their nation recovered to the point where the average joe or jane could drive.

    I just think light rail is a terrible idea in the 21st century. Buses are a far better option and cheaper for above-ground public transport. But they're not cool and vaguely European like light rail is. Maybe if we made all the buses double-decker, like in Londoninstan?
  45. @Thirdeye
    San Jose, Portland, and LA are doing light rail. In an odd way, the decentralized low density of SJ and LA present opportunities for light rail to succeed. Right-of-way acquisition is simpler with low density, as is transit-centered development. Tokyo's decentralized aspect - essentially a very large collection of villages - facilitated development adapted to rail transport. It can be easier for a low-density city to adapt to rail transport than for rail transport to be fit into a high density city.

    I would argue that Portland does light rail for the same reason it has bike lanes and socialism—not that they work, but because the nice white people who run the places think that they’ll work and like them, and ignore any negative consequences, until they just fall apart. As for San Jose, their police chief stood down and allowed Trump supporters to be violently attacked by communists. Both cities exhibit extreme lefty pathology, so their adoption of light rail boondoggles seem to be part of that. Buses would have been fine and dandy.

    Light rail worked when the middle class didn’t have cars. So I can understand Tokyo getting light rail before their nation recovered to the point where the average joe or jane could drive.

    I just think light rail is a terrible idea in the 21st century. Buses are a far better option and cheaper for above-ground public transport. But they’re not cool and vaguely European like light rail is. Maybe if we made all the buses double-decker, like in Londoninstan?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    People drive cars, (despite traffic jams at certain times), because they offer mobility that is unprecedented. No longer are people tied to bus or train schedules or the inability to transport themselves with their goods. The car has been one of the greatest uplifters of mankind, at least in first-world countries. One can travel anywhere in the country without being tied to a schedule.
    Instead of buses and trains, it would be more economical to provide those of limited means cars...
  46. @whorefinder
    I would argue that Portland does light rail for the same reason it has bike lanes and socialism---not that they work, but because the nice white people who run the places think that they'll work and like them, and ignore any negative consequences, until they just fall apart. As for San Jose, their police chief stood down and allowed Trump supporters to be violently attacked by communists. Both cities exhibit extreme lefty pathology, so their adoption of light rail boondoggles seem to be part of that. Buses would have been fine and dandy.

    Light rail worked when the middle class didn't have cars. So I can understand Tokyo getting light rail before their nation recovered to the point where the average joe or jane could drive.

    I just think light rail is a terrible idea in the 21st century. Buses are a far better option and cheaper for above-ground public transport. But they're not cool and vaguely European like light rail is. Maybe if we made all the buses double-decker, like in Londoninstan?

    People drive cars, (despite traffic jams at certain times), because they offer mobility that is unprecedented. No longer are people tied to bus or train schedules or the inability to transport themselves with their goods. The car has been one of the greatest uplifters of mankind, at least in first-world countries. One can travel anywhere in the country without being tied to a schedule.
    Instead of buses and trains, it would be more economical to provide those of limited means cars…

    Read More
    • Replies: @hyperbola
    See my answers to whorefinder and hibernian.

    The automobile has been a curse for large parts of populations. Substantial proportions of the populations cannot drive (old/young/handicapped) and are excluded from many aspects of life because of the forced atrophy of public systems. For other parts of the population, the automobile has brought enormous time wastage in a very boring activity (driving) and contributed to massive contamination. That, plus economic efficiency, contributes to why most of the first-world countries maintain much more sophisticated public transport systems than the US.

    As for uplifting (!), there is nothing more boring and stultifying than living in American suburbs. Perhaps that is a contributor to Americans accepting mass media propaganda - socially isolated and easily manipulated?
  47. @whorefinder

    The Great American Streetcar Scandal
    How General Motors Derailed Public Transportation to Sell More Cars
     
    Streetcars have never come back for a reason. GM acted in its own interests, to be sure, but streetcars were not some wonderful thing, more akin to crappy buses of today, but more dangerous. The Brooklyn Dodgers, for example, were so named because of the people in Brooklyn who had to "dodge" the streetcars ("trolleys dodgers") that went whizzing around and often killed or injured folk who weren't looking.

    Both streetcars and buses were above-ground transportation and the lowest form of public transport. So exchanging buses for trolleys was an improvement: in buses you got a safer form of transport, one that was enclosed from the elements, one that allowed other vehicles on the streets instead of monopolizing tracks, and also allowed for a broken bus to be replaced for a working one without needed to tow a streetcar off the tracks and move it for another one.

    SF is about the only ciiy that could use a light rail today, but that's because of the high hills of SF. LA would be better served by buses, Speed notwithstanding; light rail just gums up the roads, and subways don't work in either thanks to earthquake conditions and the quirky layout of those cities.

    You show a serious lack of knowledge about public transport around the world. For example, one of the places where I lived for awhile (Zuerich) still makes widespread use of trams and has one of the best city public transport systems in the world. You can get anywhere in the city rapidly and comfortably. In fact, public transport in the city (and from there to the rest of the country) is SO good that 50% of the families choose not to own a car – an unnecessary complication of life.

    How did they manage that? I always thought there were several reasons.
    (1) Cities that existed for many centuries prior to the arrival of the automobile were less willing to destroy their city centers.
    (2) Urban planning had been rational for a LONG time, with clear segregation of “industrial” activities to defined areas alongside the train lines.
    (2) Real, direct democracy has many advantages – when the first oil boycott arrived (Carter administration), the citizens VOTED to give public transport priority in the city – and have repeated that ever since.

    I would go further and argue that undue emphasis on the automobile (and oil products) has been a tremendous ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE for the US. Henry Ford paid his workers enough to buy a car? Shortly thereafter, that car became a pre-requisite for a worker to have a job. And American workers got expensive compared to other places. In Zuerich, the public transport system is organized so that workers arrive at the factories along the train lines on public transport (the lack of parking lots is impressive!) So much more rational use of expensive land!

    Perhaps the lack of public transport has also been a tremendous SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE for the US compared to other countries. Remember that ultra-cheap home mortgages financed by the federal government were originally instituted in the US (in the 1940s, 1950s) to allow “white” familes to move out of our cities to the suburbs as blacks and asians moved in (latinos came later). This produced social segregation of types that is MUCH less common in other countries.

    In general, my experience in half-a-dozen foreign cities where I have worked is that decent public transport is a tremendous social and economic advantage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    Henry Ford paid his people $5.00 per day, when the average wage was about $1.50 per day. This was done in order to stabilize his workforce, but was also done as Ford believed that his workers should be able to afford his products.

    Henry Ford realized that paying people a decent wage would come back to reward him immensely. Of course, the wall street banksters howled in protest, stating that Ford's high wages would "destroy capitalism" as they knew it...Henry Ford mistrusted banks and knew of their destructive potential. His writings have stated as such.

    Henry Ford had a great part in establishing a "middle class" and was instrumental in helping quell the "class warfare" that was evident in other parts of the world.

    Henry Ford did MORE to create a middle class than any of the other capitalists of the day.

    Mobility made it possible for one to live wherever they want...not stuck in cities with their soviet-style apartments...
    , @whorefinder
    oh dear you are deluded. get with the times, gramps.

    In the pre-automobile days light rail/trams/trolleys worked. Just like in pre-automobile days horses worked.

    But when the car was invented, and more importantly became something the middle class could use, light rail/trams/trolleys became outmoded.

    Older cities outside the U.S. installed light rails pre-automobile. The U.S. did too, but we also had a lot fewer centuries of development to deal with when cars were invented. So it was a lot easier for us to build highways and get with the new technology. Euros don;t build highways because of their centuries old infrastructure, not some desire for "preservation" or whatever other cover story they use.

    You can have your fantasies about light rail, but that's all they are: fantasies.
    You can hate on cars all you want, but it's a bit like hating on gasoline: both are extremely efficient ways for the modern age, and far outpace older systems. Our highway system allows us to drive 3000 miles in two days time. That's remarkable.

    You can have your cute European central-hub cities, but you can't get around them without big daddy gov shipping you. You could have a cheaper version with buses, but that's not "cute" enough for you. And you certainly can't spread out without gov's permission.

  48. @Hibernian
    Streetcars are inflexible because they run on rails. They will never again be economically viable except in a few high density areas until energy prices skyrocket a lot more than they have. Blaming suburbanization on GM's buyout of streetcar lines, expressways, and FHA and VA loans ignores the fact that people like suburbs, exurbs, and quasi suburban neighborhoods in the city. I'm somewhat sympathetic to your, in my view, unrealistic, viewpoint because I like good walkable urban neighborhoods myself. The best strategy is to try to have urban transit agencies serve their riders more rather than their employees. Rationalize bus routes which have changed little in many years. Use hybrid (this is already being tried) and natural gas fueled buses. On high density lines use trolley buses which are less flexible than motor coaches but more flexible than streetcars. At such distant future time as streetcars are viable on these lines, the overhead wires will already be in place and only the installation of the tracks, a big job to be sure, will be required.

    See my answer to whorefinder.

    I will just add here that because the solutions in the US were dictated by a single model, most Americans now have virtually no experience/knowledge of the alternatives. Personally, after experience in several European and Asian cities, now I cannot imagine anything more boring and stultifying that being forced to live in an American suburb and waste hours everyday driving. Where I live at the moment I have 3 butchers, 2 bakeries, 3 fruit/vegetable shops, 2 supermarkets, dozens of restaurants, numerous doctors/medical centers/dentists, ………… within WALKING distance (say 400 yards). To say nothing of 3 miles of beachfront, playing fields, bike paths, …..

    Remember also that a substantial percentage of Ämericans don’t drive (old/young/handicapped) and are excluded from many aspects of life in the US. My father had to be put in a residence when it became impossible for him to drive to buy food. Americans lost a lot with the “suburb” lifestyle.

    Read More
  49. @anarchyst
    People drive cars, (despite traffic jams at certain times), because they offer mobility that is unprecedented. No longer are people tied to bus or train schedules or the inability to transport themselves with their goods. The car has been one of the greatest uplifters of mankind, at least in first-world countries. One can travel anywhere in the country without being tied to a schedule.
    Instead of buses and trains, it would be more economical to provide those of limited means cars...

    See my answers to whorefinder and hibernian.

    The automobile has been a curse for large parts of populations. Substantial proportions of the populations cannot drive (old/young/handicapped) and are excluded from many aspects of life because of the forced atrophy of public systems. For other parts of the population, the automobile has brought enormous time wastage in a very boring activity (driving) and contributed to massive contamination. That, plus economic efficiency, contributes to why most of the first-world countries maintain much more sophisticated public transport systems than the US.

    As for uplifting (!), there is nothing more boring and stultifying than living in American suburbs. Perhaps that is a contributor to Americans accepting mass media propaganda – socially isolated and easily manipulated?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    For one, I do not consider driving to be "boring". I appreciate the instant mobility that the automobile provides.
    By your "reasoning", us able-bodied automobile enthusiasts who enjoy driving and the open road should give up our mobility because not everyone can drive.
    There was a movie a while back that was based on the premise of enforced equality--those who had perfect vision were required to wear glasses that distorted their vision, the able-bodied were forced to be splinted to "equal" those with deformities and disabilities. All this to make everyone "equal"...Is that what you want?
    I ENJOY driving. True, there are traffic jams, but so what?
    Forcing people on buses and trains is all about CONTROL--nothing more.
    Just because you hate driving is no excuse to ban it for everyone else.
    Regards,
  50. @hyperbola
    See my answers to whorefinder and hibernian.

    The automobile has been a curse for large parts of populations. Substantial proportions of the populations cannot drive (old/young/handicapped) and are excluded from many aspects of life because of the forced atrophy of public systems. For other parts of the population, the automobile has brought enormous time wastage in a very boring activity (driving) and contributed to massive contamination. That, plus economic efficiency, contributes to why most of the first-world countries maintain much more sophisticated public transport systems than the US.

    As for uplifting (!), there is nothing more boring and stultifying than living in American suburbs. Perhaps that is a contributor to Americans accepting mass media propaganda - socially isolated and easily manipulated?

    For one, I do not consider driving to be “boring”. I appreciate the instant mobility that the automobile provides.
    By your “reasoning”, us able-bodied automobile enthusiasts who enjoy driving and the open road should give up our mobility because not everyone can drive.
    There was a movie a while back that was based on the premise of enforced equality–those who had perfect vision were required to wear glasses that distorted their vision, the able-bodied were forced to be splinted to “equal” those with deformities and disabilities. All this to make everyone “equal”…Is that what you want?
    I ENJOY driving. True, there are traffic jams, but so what?
    Forcing people on buses and trains is all about CONTROL–nothing more.
    Just because you hate driving is no excuse to ban it for everyone else.
    Regards,

    Read More
  51. @hyperbola
    You show a serious lack of knowledge about public transport around the world. For example, one of the places where I lived for awhile (Zuerich) still makes widespread use of trams and has one of the best city public transport systems in the world. You can get anywhere in the city rapidly and comfortably. In fact, public transport in the city (and from there to the rest of the country) is SO good that 50% of the families choose not to own a car - an unnecessary complication of life.

    How did they manage that? I always thought there were several reasons.
    (1) Cities that existed for many centuries prior to the arrival of the automobile were less willing to destroy their city centers.
    (2) Urban planning had been rational for a LONG time, with clear segregation of "industrial" activities to defined areas alongside the train lines.
    (2) Real, direct democracy has many advantages - when the first oil boycott arrived (Carter administration), the citizens VOTED to give public transport priority in the city - and have repeated that ever since.

    I would go further and argue that undue emphasis on the automobile (and oil products) has been a tremendous ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE for the US. Henry Ford paid his workers enough to buy a car? Shortly thereafter, that car became a pre-requisite for a worker to have a job. And American workers got expensive compared to other places. In Zuerich, the public transport system is organized so that workers arrive at the factories along the train lines on public transport (the lack of parking lots is impressive!) So much more rational use of expensive land!

    Perhaps the lack of public transport has also been a tremendous SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE for the US compared to other countries. Remember that ultra-cheap home mortgages financed by the federal government were originally instituted in the US (in the 1940s, 1950s) to allow "white" familes to move out of our cities to the suburbs as blacks and asians moved in (latinos came later). This produced social segregation of types that is MUCH less common in other countries.

    In general, my experience in half-a-dozen foreign cities where I have worked is that decent public transport is a tremendous social and economic advantage.

    Henry Ford paid his people $5.00 per day, when the average wage was about $1.50 per day. This was done in order to stabilize his workforce, but was also done as Ford believed that his workers should be able to afford his products.

    Henry Ford realized that paying people a decent wage would come back to reward him immensely. Of course, the wall street banksters howled in protest, stating that Ford’s high wages would “destroy capitalism” as they knew it…Henry Ford mistrusted banks and knew of their destructive potential. His writings have stated as such.

    Henry Ford had a great part in establishing a “middle class” and was instrumental in helping quell the “class warfare” that was evident in other parts of the world.

    Henry Ford did MORE to create a middle class than any of the other capitalists of the day.

    Mobility made it possible for one to live wherever they want…not stuck in cities with their soviet-style apartments…

    Read More
    • Replies: @gT
    Henry Ford was notoriously anti-Semitic, that's why he paid his workers well and looked after their wellbeing, and that's why the wall street types hated him.
  52. @hyperbola
    You show a serious lack of knowledge about public transport around the world. For example, one of the places where I lived for awhile (Zuerich) still makes widespread use of trams and has one of the best city public transport systems in the world. You can get anywhere in the city rapidly and comfortably. In fact, public transport in the city (and from there to the rest of the country) is SO good that 50% of the families choose not to own a car - an unnecessary complication of life.

    How did they manage that? I always thought there were several reasons.
    (1) Cities that existed for many centuries prior to the arrival of the automobile were less willing to destroy their city centers.
    (2) Urban planning had been rational for a LONG time, with clear segregation of "industrial" activities to defined areas alongside the train lines.
    (2) Real, direct democracy has many advantages - when the first oil boycott arrived (Carter administration), the citizens VOTED to give public transport priority in the city - and have repeated that ever since.

    I would go further and argue that undue emphasis on the automobile (and oil products) has been a tremendous ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE for the US. Henry Ford paid his workers enough to buy a car? Shortly thereafter, that car became a pre-requisite for a worker to have a job. And American workers got expensive compared to other places. In Zuerich, the public transport system is organized so that workers arrive at the factories along the train lines on public transport (the lack of parking lots is impressive!) So much more rational use of expensive land!

    Perhaps the lack of public transport has also been a tremendous SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE for the US compared to other countries. Remember that ultra-cheap home mortgages financed by the federal government were originally instituted in the US (in the 1940s, 1950s) to allow "white" familes to move out of our cities to the suburbs as blacks and asians moved in (latinos came later). This produced social segregation of types that is MUCH less common in other countries.

    In general, my experience in half-a-dozen foreign cities where I have worked is that decent public transport is a tremendous social and economic advantage.

    oh dear you are deluded. get with the times, gramps.

    In the pre-automobile days light rail/trams/trolleys worked. Just like in pre-automobile days horses worked.

    But when the car was invented, and more importantly became something the middle class could use, light rail/trams/trolleys became outmoded.

    Older cities outside the U.S. installed light rails pre-automobile. The U.S. did too, but we also had a lot fewer centuries of development to deal with when cars were invented. So it was a lot easier for us to build highways and get with the new technology. Euros don;t build highways because of their centuries old infrastructure, not some desire for “preservation” or whatever other cover story they use.

    You can have your fantasies about light rail, but that’s all they are: fantasies.
    You can hate on cars all you want, but it’s a bit like hating on gasoline: both are extremely efficient ways for the modern age, and far outpace older systems. Our highway system allows us to drive 3000 miles in two days time. That’s remarkable.

    You can have your cute European central-hub cities, but you can’t get around them without big daddy gov shipping you. You could have a cheaper version with buses, but that’s not “cute” enough for you. And you certainly can’t spread out without gov’s permission.

    Read More
    • Replies: @E
    Ever traveled in Europe, or Japan? Give it a shot, maybe. You very quickly learn that a car isn't necessary. It's possible to travel by train from the most remote hiking places to the centres of the biggest cities (the railways and metros use the same gauge), not to mention the numerous river and bus routes as well. If your experience is limited to the US, of course, which has terrible public transit by first-world standards (it's good in some spots, but there are large "dead zones"), there is absolutely no way for you to understand that, nor are you able to see the disadvantages that come with such widespread car use (and some of them are far from obvious).

    Others have already mentioned one big disadvantage: it ruins the quality of life for the most vulnerable members of society, such as seniors or disabled, who cannot drive. Even those who CAN tend to be far more isolated in the US than in those other places, with fewer social contacts, fewer things to do, fewer places to go. That's why they're packed off into nursing homes which are isolated from the wider community where they spend the rest of their days slowly rotting away, and where their paths no longer cross with young children, unfortunately for both of them.
  53. @anarchyst
    Henry Ford paid his people $5.00 per day, when the average wage was about $1.50 per day. This was done in order to stabilize his workforce, but was also done as Ford believed that his workers should be able to afford his products.

    Henry Ford realized that paying people a decent wage would come back to reward him immensely. Of course, the wall street banksters howled in protest, stating that Ford's high wages would "destroy capitalism" as they knew it...Henry Ford mistrusted banks and knew of their destructive potential. His writings have stated as such.

    Henry Ford had a great part in establishing a "middle class" and was instrumental in helping quell the "class warfare" that was evident in other parts of the world.

    Henry Ford did MORE to create a middle class than any of the other capitalists of the day.

    Mobility made it possible for one to live wherever they want...not stuck in cities with their soviet-style apartments...

    Henry Ford was notoriously anti-Semitic, that’s why he paid his workers well and looked after their wellbeing, and that’s why the wall street types hated him.

    Read More
  54. I agree with everything you say. I also applaud your your comments regarding St Louis, Baltimore and Detroit. I spent 30 plus years in Baltimore and can attest to the truth in that example.

    Read More
  55. @Dave337
    If any white South Africans would want to come here it would probably in their best interest to hide their history, change their name, maybe claim to be a Canadian.

    They could check the “African American” box on every form and obtain a lot of affirmative action.

    Read More
  56. @whorefinder
    oh dear you are deluded. get with the times, gramps.

    In the pre-automobile days light rail/trams/trolleys worked. Just like in pre-automobile days horses worked.

    But when the car was invented, and more importantly became something the middle class could use, light rail/trams/trolleys became outmoded.

    Older cities outside the U.S. installed light rails pre-automobile. The U.S. did too, but we also had a lot fewer centuries of development to deal with when cars were invented. So it was a lot easier for us to build highways and get with the new technology. Euros don;t build highways because of their centuries old infrastructure, not some desire for "preservation" or whatever other cover story they use.

    You can have your fantasies about light rail, but that's all they are: fantasies.
    You can hate on cars all you want, but it's a bit like hating on gasoline: both are extremely efficient ways for the modern age, and far outpace older systems. Our highway system allows us to drive 3000 miles in two days time. That's remarkable.

    You can have your cute European central-hub cities, but you can't get around them without big daddy gov shipping you. You could have a cheaper version with buses, but that's not "cute" enough for you. And you certainly can't spread out without gov's permission.

    Ever traveled in Europe, or Japan? Give it a shot, maybe. You very quickly learn that a car isn’t necessary. It’s possible to travel by train from the most remote hiking places to the centres of the biggest cities (the railways and metros use the same gauge), not to mention the numerous river and bus routes as well. If your experience is limited to the US, of course, which has terrible public transit by first-world standards (it’s good in some spots, but there are large “dead zones”), there is absolutely no way for you to understand that, nor are you able to see the disadvantages that come with such widespread car use (and some of them are far from obvious).

    Others have already mentioned one big disadvantage: it ruins the quality of life for the most vulnerable members of society, such as seniors or disabled, who cannot drive. Even those who CAN tend to be far more isolated in the US than in those other places, with fewer social contacts, fewer things to do, fewer places to go. That’s why they’re packed off into nursing homes which are isolated from the wider community where they spend the rest of their days slowly rotting away, and where their paths no longer cross with young children, unfortunately for both of them.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Limbaugh and company certainly entertain. But a steady diet of ideological comfort food is no substitute for hearty intellectual fare.
Once as a colonial project, now as a moral playground, the ancient continent remains the object of Great Power maneuvering