Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Justice, Southern Africa Style
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Justice, Southern Africa Style (Read 1145 times)
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3106
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #40 - Mar 11th, 2018 at 8:21pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 11th, 2018 at 5:35pm:
I addressed the issue many times. No government has any legitimate power to redistribute wealth, and when governments usurp that power, they first make sure they will benefit, then they try to keep their cronies highly profitable so the cronies will support them.

In the specific instance of the Republic of South Africa, it wasn't so much that they redistributed wealth by taxing and giving subsidies as it was that they prohibited people with different colored skin from participating on an equal basis. Sure, there were crony deals, but they protected basic property rights for everyone, at least on paper.




You must be kidding about that:

After the Union of South Africa, 1910, land in South Africa was divided. In 1913 the government passed the Land Act. This Act decided how the land in South Africa was going to be divided between black and white people. At this time there was no apartheid policy in place, but the government did want to prevent black and white people from mixing together. The policy is known as the policy of segregation, and would later be replaced with the policy of apartheid in 1948.

The 1913 Land Act set aside 7.5% of the land in South Africa for black people. The Act also said that black people could not get more land outside of their tribal areas. The Act caused a problem for black people who worked on white land but had their own piece of ground. These people, known as share-croppers, had to decide between working for the white farm owners or moving to areas set aside for black people. The situation with the 1913 Land Act became only very slightly better in 1936 when the Native Trust and Land Act increased the amount of land to just over 10% of South Africa.


http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/land-labour-and-apartheid
  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6744
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #41 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 4:55am
Print Post  
Thank you Burnsy. Jeff will take you seriously. He'll just flame me.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30325
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #42 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 7:01am
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 11th, 2018 at 8:21pm:
You must be kidding about that:

After the Union of South Africa, 1910, land in South Africa was divided. In 1913 the government passed the Land Act. This Act decided how the land in South Africa was going to be divided between black and white people. At this time there was no apartheid policy in place, but the government did want to prevent black and white people from mixing together. The policy is known as the policy of segregation, and would later be replaced with the policy of apartheid in 1948.

The 1913 Land Act set aside 7.5% of the land in South Africa for black people. The Act also said that black people could not get more land outside of their tribal areas. The Act caused a problem for black people who worked on white land but had their own piece of ground. These people, known as share-croppers, had to decide between working for the white farm owners or moving to areas set aside for black people. The situation with the 1913 Land Act became only very slightly better in 1936 when the Native Trust and Land Act increased the amount of land to just over 10% of South Africa.


http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/land-labour-and-apartheid
I understood that it wasn't permitted to rob black workers of their money and personal property or to steal the land that was set aside for them by law.

What does the ANC have planned for the "coloreds"? And for the "whites" for that matter.

A one party racist state that believes in communal ownership of land (the ANC) will be worse in every way than a one party racist state that believes in property rights under a rule of (racially discriminatory) law (The Boers).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3106
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #43 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 10:06am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 7:01am:
I understood that it wasn't permitted to rob black workers of their money and personal property or to steal the land that was set aside for them by law.
Well, that was awful white of them.  Sounds like you would be happy if the government kicked you off your land but left you seven and a half percent of it. Especially if they later raised it to an even ten!

Quote:
What does the ANC have planned for the "coloreds"? And for the "whites" for that matter.


I have no idea.

Quote:
A one party racist state that believes in communal ownership of land (the ANC) will be worse in every way than a one party racist state that believes in property rights under a rule of (racially discriminatory) law (The Boers).


But one is no more legitimate than the other.  In fact, the current government was voted in after South Africa finally got "one man, one vote" that the Boers had refused to allow for so long, so it arguably has more "consent of the governed" than the previous government.


  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30325
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #44 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 10:18am
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 10:06am:
But one is no more legitimate than the other.  In fact, the current government was voted in after South Africa finally got "one man, one vote" that the Boers had refused to allow for so long, so it arguably has more "consent of the governed" than the previous government.
I already said that the current government of S. Africa is no more legitimate than the previous government. They were/are both one party racist governments.

You like it better because it's more "democratic", but what they intend to do is confiscate land based on skin color.

Because the ANC is a communist government "authorized" by majority vote, the Party will rule and the result will be something like Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Everyone, no matter what color, will lose.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3106
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #45 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 11:15am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 10:18am:
I already said that the current government of S. Africa is no more legitimate than the previous government. They were/are both one party racist governments.

You like it better because it's more "democratic", but what they intend to do is confiscate land based on skin color.

Because the ANC is a communist government "authorized" by majority vote, the Party will rule and the result will be something like Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Everyone, no matter what color, will lose.


I don't like one better than the other.  You're right in that South Africa is sure to be worse off if they take land away from productive people.  But deciding who can and cannot own land is one of the functions of government that you have always supported so your objection to this must be practical ant not ideological. 

  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30325
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #46 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 4:50pm
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 11:15am:
But deciding who can and cannot own land is one of the functions of government that you have always supported...
It is a useful function of government to record ownership of land. That makes it much simpler to protect individual property rights.

A government that decides who can and can't own land is a tyranny. I have never supported such injustice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3106
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #47 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 6:19pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 4:50pm:
It is a useful function of government to record ownership of land. That makes it much simpler to protect individual property rights.

A government that decides who can and can't own land is a tyranny. I have never supported such injustice.


They all do that.  As we speak in the great state of Texas, perhaps the "most libertarian" of all, the government is taking steps to forbid families who have owned their land for multiple generations from keeping it.  The justification?  ~Um, a railroad wants it.~  It's not even a railroad.  It has exactly zero feet of track, zero locomotives, and zero train cars.  "It's a railroad" because it wants to be a railroad and the government thinks it's a good idea for it to build a high-speed track from Houston to Dallas.  That wannabe railroad also claims the right to come onto private land to see whether it might want to take it.


  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Tom Palven
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1799
Location: North America
Joined: Sep 27th, 2011
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #48 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 7:04pm
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 11th, 2018 at 8:21pm:
You must be kidding about that:

After the Union of South Africa, 1910, land in South Africa was divided. In 1913 the government passed the Land Act. This Act decided how the land in South Africa was going to be divided between black and white people. At this time there was no apartheid policy in place, but the government did want to prevent black and white people from mixing together. The policy is known as the policy of segregation, and would later be replaced with the policy of apartheid in 1948.

The 1913 Land Act set aside 7.5% of the land in South Africa for black people. The Act also said that black people could not get more land outside of their tribal areas. The Act caused a problem for black people who worked on white land but had their own piece of ground. These people, known as share-croppers, had to decide between working for the white farm owners or moving to areas set aside for black people. The situation with the 1913 Land Act became only very slightly better in 1936 when the Native Trust and Land Act increased the amount of land to just over 10% of South Africa.


http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/land-labour-and-apartheid


This seems similar to the deal that the Cherokees and other Native Americans got, and to what has been happening to the native Palestinians the last few decades.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30325
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Justice, Southern Africa Style
Reply #49 - Mar 12th, 2018 at 7:25pm
Print Post  
Tom Palven wrote on Mar 12th, 2018 at 7:04pm:
This seems similar to the deal that the Cherokees and other Native Americans got, and to what has been happening to the native Palestinians the last few decades.
It's similar to the deal the Cherokees gave to other tribes when the Cherokees were forced West. They drove them off the good land and took it for themselves.

The Cherokees who stayed in the East integrated themselves well into the changed situation. They stopped making war and started using the courts to protect their property rights. Had they continued to make war in the face of an altered reality, they would have also lost their remaining land and been killed or driven West.

I take a "native Palestinian" to be anyone who was born in the geographical region of Palestine, which is the majority of Jews now living in Palestine as well as the Arabs.

Arabs born in refugee camps in Syria are native Syrians, except the government of Syria won't grant them birthright citizenship. Tsk tsk.

The Syrian government won't even let them be "Dreamers"... So they vow to annihilate all Jews.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Justice, Southern Africa Style
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy