SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : War
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: lorne who wrote (16183)8/12/2002 2:14:40 PM
From: Elmer Flugum  Read Replies (2) of 23908
 
They are citizens of Zimbabwe, but they did benefit from a racist (sic) society. I have not read the details of the agreements to distribute land to Blacks so that it is not only Whites who control the majority share of arable land. The Whites were to yet retain land, but not in the same proportion as before the distribution.

The British did indeed colonize what is now referred to as America (North, Central, and South) and the Europeans who were part of the colonial experience revolted and formed a "more perfect union" that excluded non-whites and females. (What year did women recieve the right to vote from the boys?) Not all land should be returned to those who are left from the ethnic-cleansing of the Native Americans, but to honor half of the Treaties would be a step in the right direction, (they called them Indian-givers?). Isn't hilarious that the Europeans "gave" the Indians land?

As I stated, the British dragged their feet on this issue, thus making the situation more grave then it had to be...

len
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News