H10

Ontario is 38% of the population but produces 41% of the economy http://www.pearsoned.ca/school/secondary/atlas/instructor/ON_Answers.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada#Provinces_and_territories And the leader in attracting FDI in north America. "Ontario was the leading state/province for attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) in North America in 2013, with $7.23bn. This accounted for more than one-tenth of all FDI in North America. It was also the 4th biggest state for outward FDI, recording $7.74bn" So we are building this nation. We should separate because I am sick and tired of paying for welfare queens in Alberta and Quebec.

I think you have your analogy reversed. toronto is the economic center of the country and so is Ontario, 60% of the nations GDP occurs in this region. If Ontario leaves, the rest of you are done.

You sound alot like a radical muslim sympathsizer right now, the killer muslims are always somehow, not a "Real muslim" "The problem is that the King James Bible is filled with readings which have been created by overly zealous scribes! Very few of the distinctive King James readings are demonstrably ancient." https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today Where in the bible is communism mentioned? Capitalism has and does confiscate property all the time, ask all the Africans, native indians, aborignes in australia etc. The only consistent in capitalism in the new world is that they steal property from non-whites and hand it over to whites. We will allow whites in South Africa to become followers of crist, we will lighten their load and take the land back so they can go follow christ and get land in his kingdom.

I wonder if he will step on his own d*** like the last guy?

I just watched on CNN how Christians carrying bibles went into the rhineland under the popes directions and murdered all the jews, then ran down to turkey to palestine and killed off all the muslims. The bible carrying guys were no different than the kuran ones, crazy and killing. Why would they not be hostile to INVADERS! Duh, were the French glad when the Germans marched in? O yes they were because they supported Hitler. The Europeans should have stayed in Europe and not invade other nations and regions. The fact south african natives were hostile to iinvaders alone justifies them booting them now. King James had requested the bible be translated in a way that helped him and his objectives. What about all those invader prophets? Hundreds of millions were killed from Africa to the Americas and Australias under capitalism. China is the largest economy and communist. The bible talks about justice, can you show me where the bible says it is wrong to retake your land, and why don't any jew, muslim or christian follow this as it relates to the holy land and israel and jerusalem. Rwanda was not a civil war, it was a war between France and the Tutsi's. France then used local hutus to try to murder their political enemies. This is the finding from the Rwandan report created by a Washington Law firm. I'm not christian, nor do I care of their beliefs. My God is a vengeful God, a God of war who helps men who help themselves. If I must face the wrath of God, to get what I want so be it. Most Westerners are going to hell, how many churches did you build last year?

Given that so much of the bad was done at the hands of christians waving bibles to native peoples, I do not think many people care about it. Injustice is not solved by doing nothing and praying for pie in the sky after you die. Justice comes from laws, legislation, acts, etc which undo the wrongs of the past. If a man steals my car I don't pray for a pie in the sky, I go to find justice. You cannot respond to a violent military like the ones of colonial days and apartheid days by just rolling over, that is how you get massacred. Those who live by the sword, will die by the sword, however, those who live by neither will certainly die regardless. I am not a followerer of Jesus, however, I believe he has a good message. after the land is taken, and banks nationalized, I think it will be time to call it a day.

If this is what the boers believe it will be only to their own detriment. There is a series of well documented wars, where the Africans literally tried to stop the Boers from entering the lands, the boers refused, shot and murdered their way in and basically won the battle. White people did not discover America or Africa, there were millions of people living there already. It is actually whites who live a good life because of Africa, because but for the Africans they kidnapped and enslaved to build their economy, these European states would never have grown beyond the dark ages they were in. It was Mali which was the richest country in the world during the middle ages while Europe was in a dark age. Africa would have retained its wealth and stability and be in a good position to move into the modern period but for white invasions. The Boers did not build SA. SA was built off of African labor, the Boers were largely rural illiterate farmers and when they came to SA they didn't even know how to farm, they were starving at first and engaging in cannibalism and relied on handouts from the African locals. Most of the large industry in SA is not even in Capetown but the one that is doesn't come from Boers but Africans like Ramaphosa who is a mining magnet or the British whites. Black south africans run most the cities in SA, they are the majority of the population, capetown has had several black mayors and ironically it has ran out of water on the watch of the white one. Angola is even more developed than SA and doesn't have Boers or any real white population. The native Indians will learn to fleece the next wave of immigrants like they did the last one, one things Indians are good at is guilt tripping other races into giving them free stuff.

What disease?

If this country was 90% native Indian like Bolivia, or even 66% mestito like Venezuela, we both know that anyone not native would be packing their bags. How many times did the native tribes try to drive out white settlers? Whites came into African nations as unwanted invaders who basically ram-roded and ran rough shod over already existing countries, stealing their land and resources, mass kidnapping out people and sinking their economies by paying and arming historic rivals to fight. Even after they had won the wars and the nations were destroyed they followed it up with a series of genocides, colonial apartheid type laws and kicking people out of their houses. They then tried to grab literally every resource and refused to share even a small amount with a majority population. As such you end up having a democracy where a government literally cannot even function because every inch of land, every mine, every rail, every road, every means of production is owned by white monopoly capitalist. As such revolution becomes the only way to even get on track to some kind of a functioning country in the long run. I don't even really think this is racial. Even Canada had to have land reform when the absentee British land owners in PEI and eastern Canada prevented the government from being functioning. It is basically like why the french revolution happened. Rich people took everything, left the majority with nothing to lose by insurrection and rising up and killing the elites. When you take everything from a people out of greed, it may be a good short term strategy for looting, but long term it is entirely unsustainable. Because when you have nothing to lose, you have literally everything to gain by fighting, you cannot fall any lower,it doesn't even matter if you die at that point, because you realize you probably are going to die anyways if you do nothing. Now had the Europeans tried paying for the land, not genociding, enslaving, raping, maiming, killing pillaging and destroying civilizations. Then I believe it would have been possible for a multi-racial African state like South Africa to survive. If South Africa had followed the USA, and Canada in the 1960s with civil rights, they'd probably not be having this issue now. The whites in the USA was more clever, by having affirmative action policies before they were fighting a domestic war, they were able to bring in the African American population to be more aligned with the whites long term goals. the country is not perfect, but by permitting some power sharing, they avoid a major crisis.

Is this like a fantasy? If the four western provinces separate, it would basically be dominated by the NDP who control the government of Alberta and BC, but mainly by the far left in BC. You'd never garner enough votes for a conservative government again because the swing districts are mostly in the maritimes, suburbs of Toronto and parts of Quebec. Alberta cannot even form a union with BC because BC's is radically liberal and they are the opposite. It would be like if California was adjoined to Texas or New York state adjoined to Georgia, and the voters in Georgia were going to secede because they were tired of left wing liberals. The territories tend to be liberal as well. Ontario doesn't need the West, it has the strongest, largest, biggest economy in the country and its money built the west, when the west was just a poor farming area. If the West separates, we want all the tax money we put into developing your oil sector when you had none back, because you guys were too poor to pay for it. Why would Ontario with several times the population of Alberta agree to have equal seats to it. What Ontario would do is invade you and raid your resources like we did to the indians. Don't like it, go back to your homeland.

What if the police refused to arrest the perpetrator. They knew where he was and who he was, they just refused to do anything. And the courts as well refused to do anything. I think you are trying to refer to the 1600s or 1700s. While it is true that Africans did not use every square inch of the continent, that didn't mean they did not own it. No one is using most the area in Canada today, I haven't been in my own back yard in months, no one is using it, no one lives in our national parks and most of our country is uninhabited land. I haven't been to my vacation home up north in 4 years, no one is using it. Should someone be allowed to steal my back yard and vacation home? Neither the Boers nor the Africans were living in houses like we did, in fact, most people in Canada in the 1700s were living in mud huts. Come to think of it, I've seen the kind of houses the Persian immigrants are building, some of them are far more big than any white person I seen live in, should they get to steal our land because they have bigger houses than we do because 5 families live in 1 house in their culture? Immigrants are driving high real estate prices along with foreign investors. We are talking about 1913-1991, we know because people were alive, it was well documented, there are photos and videos. Not being use doesn't permits white to come in and take it. Most people in my nice suburb are workaholics, they rarely use their property like their backyard or their grill. To any neutral observer or wanderer, it would appear to not being used, they don't have to use their backyard, doesn't make it right to steal. If there was enough room for all to live and play together then there wouldn't have been all those colonial era wars. Maybe the root of white people's problem is greed. Stealing others land, then stealing others labor, then being to lazy to work their own stolen lands so they get immigrants to do it, then they complain about a society being white minority.

Why would they gas a dead body?

Interesting response, but you never answered what you would do if someone stole all your house or car? Most of the white did not live their for centuries, most of them came after the 1913 land act. This kicked African off their land to make space for whites coming in, this continued right up to 1991. I'm pretty sure blacks in 1913 lived in houses in SA, well they did until they were thrown out by the land act. Why did white people take land from people in such an immoral and indefensible manner and why do they continue to attempt to hang onto it? This is really the root of the problem.

An oppressed group of people who are a tiny minority owning the majority of the land who inherited all the benefits of a racisr cast system that put all the nations major resources in their hands which they never had to give up? That doesn't meet the criteria of an oppressed people's but rather a privileged people. Not all political power, but it probably has to do with their perspective that democratizing economy is them being doomed. If the elite in Canada, Norway, and most other successful countries viewed the country through that lens, we'd probably all be third world nations. If they viewed the creation of a middle class and sharing of the economy as being doomed.

So if someone stole your house or car you'd be fine with them keeping it?

I didn't watch the video, but to give someone with views of hatred a platform in Western media is very dangerous, we seen it with Trump and Hitler, and the bigger platform you give these lunatics is the more they spread their views to the gullible and naive. You want to see a wave of nationalist people elected across the world, you just go put that on every corner and you'll see laws like this replicated in areas that have no need for it at all.

South Africa is not the leading economy in Africa, it is Nigeria which is much faster growing and more than twice the size. South Africa will probably be surpassed by other nearby nations like Angola and Tanzania. Its not about "punishing whites". if they really wanted to "punish whites" they'd just put them all in prison for land theft and accessory to theft for being on stolen land. This is about justice for the land owners who are africans and were dispossessed of land from 1913-1991 via a serious of apartheid era laws. I'm not sure if whites are better aware of how to make profits from a land, and this law would not necessarily prevent whites from farming, simply return the land to the rightful African owners who could then lease the land back to the farmers of commercial firms. I do not believe that capitalism will work for South Africa in the way it does in Canada or USA. Our ideas of enslaving minorities and stealing land to enrich the majority only work because whites are a majority population here. In Bolivia and Cuba which are white minority we see people taking back what is theirs. This is not even about whiteness per se, it is about justice for native and indigenous peoples who had their land stolen in South Africa. Anyone who cannot see that should probably just leave SA because you are going to have a hard time in that nation.

I think there were many naive people on both sides. Many Africans had naively believed whites would share the resources in the country with them and that land ownership would be democratized with the end of apartheid along with the economy. I've long said, that if the average farm owner in SA just gave half of their farm to the farm workers, this never would have happened. Instead what happened was you got a democratic government and whites kept all the spoils from colonial invasions and apartheid and Africans who were thrown out their houses and onto the streets in the 1990s couldn't understand why they were not getting any justice. There was also effectively no economy for them to participate in, they were told they had to pay tuition to go to schools, but then when they went to the job market, there was 60% unemployment rate for those same people (As whites had controlled almost all the businesses at this point yet had a lower unemployment rate than Canada or USA in SA), and they couldn't start businesses because all the banks were white owned and refused to lend to an uneducated person with no assets or income, especially an African. So whether the whites new it or not, they basically created a powder keg for revolutionary type land reform. The ANC has tried for 24 years to put a lid on it, however they were likely to lose the 2019 electrion without this policy as all the rural farm vote would have shifted over to the EFF who'd form a coalition government most likely. I don't think the majority of South Africans want the whites to "go back to their country". They just want what is theirs back, then you have some people on both sides fanning the flames, and the reaction is well if you don't want me to have justice go back to your country. No problem will get solved by people yelling and fighting at each other. Sadly this has just degenerated into that.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/25/germany-moves-to-atone-for-forgotten-genocide-in-namibia The genocide did not occur successfully, but they definetly had plans for it. The apartheid government backed by the USA had lost American support and a series of wars from the Congo down to Namibia in the 1990s and there were armies of the ANC and MK and Chris Hani and Winnie Mendela basically sharpening the knives of war. They were fully prepared to genocide or try to the Africans had negotiations fallen through. https://academic.oup.com/jicj/article/13/5/933/2411996 ""Israel also assisted the apartheid regime of South Africa in developing nuclear, biological, and chemical wepons that clearly envisaged the mass extermination of African populations if white rule was pushed to the wall" https://books.google.ca/books?id=i3auDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT349&lpg=PT349&dq=bio+weapons+south+africa+genocide&source=bl&ots=DQLWn_Z_Rw&sig=lLNbHqs0oLvNYHgzZMB5SQ7eyeE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjsoaqu49bZAhVSXKwKHRN3DxoQ6AEIVTAF#v=onepage&q=bio weapons south africa genocide&f=false I will say Mandela was very clever to have the South African whites give up all their weapons before taking the land back.

The jews did not enter Germany as unwanted invaders who the German government fought a war to keep out. The jews did not as a rule of thumb steal land from Germans militarily and throw 40 million Germans onto the streets poor and homeless and penniless and genocide Germans and develop bio-weapons to exterminate Germans and then try to push Germans onto German homelands while controlling 87% of arable land while being just 2% of the population. Jews were not even that numerous in Germany. Hitler was an austrian and the major austrio-hungarian cities at that time had 30-45% jew and gypsy populations. I see nothing comparable with these populations, when did jews practice reverse apartheid over Germans and ban Germans from owning property through a series of race laws? If anything the apartheid government would be the nazis here and the africans would be like the jews. The germans were the fascist and hated "communist jews" and the apartheid fascist of today blame "communist anc". The headline is gutter journalism and sensationalism. Did the law say confiscate "White owned land". No. The journalist is playing the race card to get everyone hyped up over race to come read their article and make more ad money and get everyone fighting. Even if it were confiscating "White land". And its not in the law, most of the blacks in South Africa were dispossessed of land between 1913 lands act and 1991 until its repeal. In reality, whites do not even own these lands. The apartheid government illegally took it from blacks who owned over 90% of the land in 1913, gave it to banks who then sold it off to whites while holding a bond, so its really a lease because 98% of white south africans carry a bond and don't own the property outright. So at best they could argue, South Africa votes to confiscate bank owned land. However, that is not as sexy of a headline. These lands are stolen lands, in south africa it is a crime to possess stolen property or even make money off of stolen property (proceeds of crime and money laundering). The banks have essentially committed mass crimes (like they do everywhere) and its either arrest all the bank ceos and thrown them in prison or pass a law to take back the land.

They did during the colonial period, not only did they do it to the africans the brits even did it to the whites (boers), in fact they were planning another one in the late stages of apartheid according to Dr. Basson. They were trying to develop race specific bio-weapons to kill off all the Africans in South Africa, according to him and he was the head of the bio-weapons program in SA. https://www.africanglobe.net/africa/proof-south-africas-apartheid-government-developed-germs-kill-blacks/

Revenge and hatred or justice?

I would have left in 1995 or 1996. Once I saw the Truth and Reconciliation committee, knowing that millions of the majority population who had been throw out on to the streets from their houses from 1913-1991 would get no justice, I'd realize that you cannot mess with 40 million people, kick them out their house and expect no blowback. Most South African whites have dual passports if they are of means or they are otherwise underclass and dirt poor and cannot afford to get out. The other are ones with special needs kids and the cost of living in SA is much lower than most of europe and Canada, so they'll stay their for the kids.

Given that the largest economy in the world is communist china, it could be a step in the right direction, after all look at how democracy is ruining america and most of europe.

I think the expectations that the ANC government was going to waltz in and fix 500+ years of wrong was unrealistic. You also have to bear in mind the ANC is really a coalition rather than a single party. I believe human rights exists in South Africa, but I'm not sure what you are referring to when you claim they don't. Respect for minorities was already an issue before they entered, there was little they could do to fix the fact that the apartheid government made up of people had spent decades disrespecting people and fomenting divisions. The truth and reconciliation committee was probably the nail in the coffin for any real chance of reconciliation. As all those people who had seen their families murdered, robbed, looted, children shot dead in the streets by military police were left with no justice. So you have literally millions of people who have been given no justice from the government in place because the ANC government was basically pressured into not imprisoning all the apartheid era criminals. As such what you really have is a country build on the foundations of failure. I do not see any chance long term of South Africa not collapsing. How can there be respect for property rights when the majority of the population in the country had their property stolen? I am not talking about the way native indians talk about stolen land 200 years ago either, I mean apartheid jack boot thug para-military kicking down your door and dragging you out your house, which only stopped in 1991. South Africa never had law nor order since the 1500s. So the ANC is tasked with turning a lawless nation and an orderless nation where a culture exists among most whites and Africans, and yellows and brown to evade being orderly. Alot of the people who opposed apartheid were whites who were non-dutch because it was basically a pro-dutch government, so they had a practice of trying to evade taxes because they felt left out, etc. South Africa had the highest murder rate in the world in the 1970s and one of the highest unemployment rates when the ANC took over the economy was in taters and collapsing.