Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, not at all, though she/he will be born into a certain privileged class simply because he or she is not an African. No white South African born today has to contend with the same legacy of apartheid that many, most black South Africans have to contend with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by africanboy
Absolutely not, racism is taught and it would obviously depend on what kind of parents the child had growing up (that goes for both black and white South Africans). The sensationalist way that the media reports news these days would have you thinking that the country is on the brink of civil war which couldn't be farther away from the truth. It's always so easy to say that a child shouldn't be punished for the sins of his forefathers,but with SA, the inherited privilege is contrastively evident from a young age which is why it is easy to build resentment against the beneficiaries. Whether it is justified or not is irrelevant, it's life...
All good points. And there is absolutely no doubt that being born white in Africa automatically infers priviledge. But....that does not mean that a child of any color born in Africa will not feel African, or have the priveldge of referring to themselves as African. What else are they?
All good points. And there is absolutely no doubt that being born white in Africa automatically infers priviledge. But....that does not mean that a child of any color born in Africa will not feel African, or have the priveldge of referring to themselves as African. What else are they?
As a non-African African I see these people as part of Africa, as African national citizens (as in South Africans, Zimbabweans, Kenyans, etc.), but as actual Africans, no, I don't. They are descendants of settlers from Europe and, no matter how you slice it, the settlers didn't move to Africa to be part of the continent. They moved there to exploit, and to give their descendants the benefit of that exploitation. Whether the whites of Africa today continue that mindset or not, that is what has happened.
As a non-African African I see these people as part of Africa, as African national citizens (as in South Africans, Zimbabweans, Kenyans, etc.), but as actual Africans, no, I don't. They are descendants of settlers from Europe and, no matter how you slice it, the settlers didn't move to Africa to be part of the continent. They moved there to exploit, and to give their descendants the benefit of that exploitation. Whether the whites of Africa today continue that mindset or not, that is what has happened.
I understand what you are saying, but inversely it would be the same as saying that African Americans were brought here as slaves, and therefore should always think of themselves as slaves, and thus inferior, no? Do you not have to judge the present generation on their own merits or demerits?
I understand what you are saying, but inversely it would be the same as saying that African Americans were brought here as slaves, and therefore should always think of themselves as slaves, and thus inferior, no? Do you not have to judge the present generation on their own merits or demerits?
While I don't see the connection - one population voluntarily migrated, the other did not - I can only say that while I do not see AA people or anyone, for that matter, as superior or inferior, society in general does, still, in these times, in 2011, make such distinctions. Just look at some of the inane responses on this forum for evidence of this.
Just for the record, even though my African American and Caribbean ancestors came here as slaves they have never, ever been inferior to anyone.
While I don't see the connection - one population voluntarily migrated, the other did not - I can only say that while I do not see AA people or anyone, for that matter, as superior or inferior, society in general does, still, in these times, in 2011, make such distinctions. Just look at some of the inane responses on this forum for evidence of this.
Just for the record, even though my African American and Caribbean ancestors came here as slaves they have never, ever been inferior to anyone.
Sorry, I obviously did not make myself very clear. I'm not saying anyone is or is not inferior, I'm saying that is the perception amongst some. We are lucky enough to live in an age to know that we are all equal, separated only by physical appearance, and the geography of our birth, both of those being beyond our control, and both of those being inconsequential. Yes one group of people migrated voluntarily and one did not, but in 2011, why does that make an entire group of people less worthy of claiming their birthright because of what their ancestors may or may not have done?
I don't think you are grasping what I was implying.
Please help me understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see these people as part of Africa, as African national citizens (as in South Africans, Zimbabweans, Kenyans, etc.), but as actual Africans, no, I don't. They are descendants of settlers from Europe and, no matter how you slice it, the settlers didn't move to Africa to be part of the continent. They moved there to exploit, and to give their descendants the benefit of that exploitation. Whether the whites of Africa today continue that mindset or not, that is what has happened.
