hayabusaboston
Well-Known Member
Well you arent denying they're incapable of running a country. It seems you agree. YES apartheid gave them worse conditions, but now that its over WE SHOULD BE SEEING IMPROVEMENT, and we're not. and You CONTRADICTED YOURSELF, you're not making any sense. You claim "conditions were worse in apartheid and thus they're incapable of rnning the country". Well what are you fucking on about??? the past or the present? the apartheid is OVER and they're free to run their country under NO RESTRICTIONS, the "conditions" of the apartheid have no more effect, your arguments are baseless in this case. You're using an extinct ideology to present your case. A bit silly if you ask me.yes you did, you clearly implied that black people are incapable of running a country without apartheid or white rule. This is incorrect as circumstances were much worse for black people and South Africa's overall murder rate was much higher during apartheid.
Yes, i am implying that the white man made it worse for black people under apartheid because they openly treated them as inferior.
I googled the movie you described, here are some wikipedia quotes about it
"Film critic Roger Ebert, in a scathing 1967 review of the (unauthorised) American version of the film, calls it "racist" and claims that it "slanders a continent". He notes the opening narration and subtitles:
"Europe has abandoned her baby," the narrator mourns, "just when it needs her the most." Who has taken over, now that the colonialists have left? The advertising spells it out for us: "Raw, wild, brutal, modern-day savages!""
"There remains controversy over whether all the sequences in the film are real or whether some were staged or reenacted. Jacopetti has stated that all images in the film are real and that nothing was ever staged.[2] In the documentary "The Godfathers of Mondo", the co-directors stated that the only scenes they ever staged were in Mondo Cane 2."
lol thanks for your "evidence" doesn't seem reputable or even worth looking at
And did u think that maybe the critics and people calling it "racist" were trying to protect their own asses from persecution and to follow politically correct viewpoints in their analysis of the film?
lol clearly you dont THINK about the information is given to you, you immediately take it to be unfaltering and 100 percent true.
What you're saying is basically the same as me saying "Aboriginals cant get access to universities because early australian settlers destroyed aboriginal culture and heritage and took their land."
Well firstly its NOT their land, they admit so themselves, as they VERY CLEARLY describe in their elder stories that "we belong to the land, the land doesnt belong to us"/
And second, Yea and we invaded australia how many hundreds of years ago?? What happened in the past has nothing to do with a persons ability to do something in the present. Apartheid in 1994 has nothing to do with black's ability to run their own country in 2013.
Last edited: