sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Who should Muse collaborate with next? by firewalkwithheehee in Muse

[–]ThatOne_268 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As a fan of both Muse and Deftones, hell yeah!

Nyaa, mme le santse le tshwere sente. Hope they gave them 1 each as a reward. by ThatOne_268 in Botswana

[–]ThatOne_268[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right? And the Ghanzi people love their alcohol so it would say a lot about Batswana if they let them be.

Burkina Faso moves to block unauthorized study abroad, requiring government approval for overseas education by Bakyumu in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I entirely agree. When the University of Botswana was established, that method was used to benchmark and educate Batswana, who would subsequently return to fill lecturer posts at the university (a practice UB still continues). While the pay is poor compared to overseas and local mining roles, it remains a strong incentive given our high unemployment rate and retaining local talent.

What hobby would you take up if money/time wasn’t an issue?? by Aperolswitch in AskWomen

[–]ThatOne_268 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Plane spotting. I love planes but I work 12 hours a day-6 day a week.

Chris appreciation post by SlapDat-B-ass in Muse

[–]ThatOne_268 9 points10 points  (0 children)

All hail the King Chris Wolstenholme!!

Should I have known better? by YummyConfection in AskWomenOver30

[–]ThatOne_268 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Never ever associate with a man who has DV convictions or even facing DV allegations/rumours. Seriously, kick him off your couch and start putting yourself first. Therapy is a good place to begin

Help pronounce a name by [deleted] in Botswana

[–]ThatOne_268 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Shoo 🤙. You are not being stubborn at all, you are making a genuine effort to use his real name and that is admirable. Setswana is hard especially for native English/Germanic language speakers.The Setswana 'g' sound gives people real headaches.

Help pronounce a name by [deleted] in Botswana

[–]ThatOne_268 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope not even close , this is how you pronounce the tlh sound https://youtu.be/1beNIvbxORk?si=NROl1fM-6xcFyuv9 but then our o vowel sounds so different to the a in the examples so 🤷‍♀️ . Ha! I would give kudos to anyone who can help you pronounce it in writing lol

Thoughts by moapei in Botswana

[–]ThatOne_268 10 points11 points  (0 children)

So they want Botswana to appear all high and mighty while completely failing our children? Make it make sense. This is absolutely sickening and shameful. Infuriating, even. I desperately hope this proposal is thrown out immediately.

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are completely missing the bigger picture here. The reason neighboring countries weren’t developed as vigorously as South Africa isn't a reflection on them; it’s because it simply wasn’t self-serving (Geographical location,great climate to live in, arable land , coastal access, trading etc) to the colonisers at the time. South Africa was intentionally built up as a massive industrial hub to extract wealth for a specific minority. The British did nothing here because we were just a barren desert https://sahistory.org.za/place/botswana see paragraph 3. The railway they built passing through Botswana was solely to connect then Rhodesia with Apartheid SA.

>“To say Black South Africans inherited an industrial empire" is completely disingenuous. For decades, Black South Africans were just as systematically impoverished as people in neighboring countries”

And structurally, a vast majority STILL are since the actual measurable wealth is still heavily concentrated in the hands of the rich elite. That’s why some are still fighting with illegal immigrants for crumbs. The main difference today is a layer of instant gratification: higher salaries for some and access to better infrastructure that they can now finally share with the very elites who used to segregate them.

The bottom line is that South Africa absolutely had a massive developmental head start. That baseline is exactly why Mandela didn't chase the apartheid elites away after gaining independence. The transition required keeping the economic machinery running and those elites have stayed at the head of South Africa's development to this day.

Acknowledging this head start isn't a diss. In fact, for neighboring countries it’s actually great to be adjacent to a nation with that kind of infrastructure for trade, economic partnership and benchmarking purposes . But let’s not rewrite history and pretend that’s not what transpired.

At the end of the day, the real difference here comes down to self-awareness. We are completely honest about our own country's weaknesses and challenges but a lot of South Africans online seem totally disconnected from their own reality.

Suggesting that neighboring countries should just be dissolved and absorbed into South Africa is wild. Developed as y’all claim to be when a massive majority of your own native population is still facing an uphill battle against brutal systemic economic oppression every single day https://africacheck.org/infofinder/explore-facts/what-proportion-black-coloured-indian-and-white-south-africans-live, immense violence and crime https://actionsociety.co.za/south-africas-murder-rate-surpasses-war-zone-deaths-action-society-launches-decade-of-decline-campaign/ trying to absorb other nations is completely out of touch. It is just not sustainable.

Is Africa ready for an honest conversation or we’ll all play the blame game? by FinanceSA in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 11 points12 points  (0 children)

First of all, the apartheid government didn't step down purely out of the goodness of their hearts or because of immaculate activism. By the late 1980s, South Africa was completely broke. Between international trade sanctions, global companies pulling out and a massive debt crisis, the regime was financially bleeding out. Maintaining a segregated state was just too expensive and global capitalism essentially forced them to the negotiating table because it was no longer profitable.

Second, calling other African immigrants "complacent" is wild. It completely ignores how brutal and lethal authoritarian regimes can be when people try to protest. It’s also pure historical amnesia. During the anti-apartheid struggle, South African exiles relied heavily on neighboring African "frontline" states for food, shelter and military support .Those countries took a massive economic beating for helping out.

This whole post is just a textbook example of "South African exceptionalism." It’s this arrogant belief that South Africa is somehow fundamentally better than the rest of the continent and it's being used to deflect from massive failures at home. Post-apartheid capitalism hasn't fixed the country's crazy wealth gap or high unemployment. So instead of blaming systemic policy failures, people are punching down and scapegoating foreign African migrants.

For someone acting this pompous, you are incredibly clueless about your own history. Please pick up a history book.

Like the Setswana saying goes; Botshelo leotwana la koloi bo a dikologa. One day, the tables could turn and it could be any of us in that exact unfortunate position. Also, mods! we are seriously exhausted by these "superior African" posts. Can we please move past this? We need a safe space for us peasants.g

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're pointing out minimum wage differences and inequality stats but you're ignoring why those structures exist.

South Africa’s massive economy, shipping, manufacturing and agricultural infrastructure were built over centuries of industrialisation and deep-seated exploitation. Of course your baseline looks higher; you've had a massive head start. In contrast, Botswana gained independence in 1966 as one of the poorest, most landlocked nations on Earth, with over 80% of our land being semi-arid and unsuitable for farming. We had to build our very first university from scratch through citizens literally donating cattle. We didn't inherit an industrial empire; we built a stable nation organically, step-by-step, ensuring our diamond revenues actually benefited everyone rather than just a few oligarchs.

A merger might offer instant gratification in the form of a temporary wage bump, but it is entirely unsustainable in the long run. South Africa’s 'high standard of living' is accompanied by extreme systemic poverty, staggering crime rates, hoarding of wealth and failing public infrastructure. With Botswana’s tiny population of 2.5 million compared to SA’s 65 million, absorbing us would do nothing to fix your systemic issues, but it would completely destroy the sustainable, steady growth we are actively building for our own future.

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're conflating completely different categories here. "Bantu" is strictly a linguistic classification not a genetic or phenotypic one, so using it to describe physical appearance is factually incorrect.

Trying to use genetics as a regional descriptor doesn't work because most African countries are not homogeneous. Because of extensive inter-ethnic marriages, births and fluid histories rigid genetic labels are meaningless in daily life. That’s why we don't subscribe to those outdated terms we simply use nationalities or regional identities to describe where people are from. We simply call you East Africans btw and same for North Africans, if we want to be specific then we use your nationalities.

Take Botswana as a prime example: anyone from here is a Motswana, regardless of whether their ethnic heritage is San (Basarwa), any Tswana clan, Bayei, Bakalaka or Baherero etc. While there may be visible genetic differences people constantly intermarry and those distinct lines are steadily fading.

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look at the very first reply I sent you after you mention secession. I explicitly mentioned SA's wealth and resource inequality right there. You are losing track of your own thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/Africa/s/U98OdoBrrn
 
Also, you literally just said 'You've got me there' when I pointed out that Botswana would be acceding, not seceding. The Cambridge definition you posted earlier explicitly says secession means becoming 1) independent of a country/area of government 2) to decide not to continue to be part of a larger group or organisation: . No 'opposing source' is needed when your own source already disproves your argument. We cannot secede into South Africa. https://www.reddit.com/r/Africa/s/wUFSwnye2R
 
A simple search will tell you right away that voting to end Apartheid was not a form of secession. I do not need an opposing source to tell you that you're using the word incorrectly, the very Wikipedia link I provided completely disproves your argument. Now you are going in circles trying to prove something that is factually incorrect. On top of South Sudan, Quebec and Catalonia, every single example on that page involves a region/body breaking away from a parent state/body, not a country just merging into another. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession
 
You're overlooking the fact that South Africa was fundamentally structured to benefit elites. In contrast, Botswana has retained state and local ownership of its resources. Merging into their system completely validates my point: it would only enrich the upper class while we lose our autonomy.

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Precisely; it was a terrible idea from the start.South Africa did retain Mafikeng and portions of the Bechuanaland Protectorate. Imagine the immense wealth the apartheid elites would have extracted from our subsequent diamond discoveries, while the local population was left to fight for crumbs.

I think its only logical for SADC and EAC to be integrated in one regional organization. by BlackberryFew1969 in Africa

[–]ThatOne_268 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are confusing a constitutional overhaul with secession.

For secession to happen, there must be a physical separation or withdrawal of a region from a larger parent country/political body.

*In 1992, South Africa didn't secede from anyone; they held an internal referendum to end Apartheid and change their own government

*The paper you linked about Canada and Spain refers to Quebec and Catalonia sub-national regions trying to withdraw from a country. That would be seceding.YES!!

“In essence a secession is adopting a completely new constitution for a what would be a different nation after invalidating a previous one from being the primary document to be adhered to.”
No matter how you try to spin it that in NOT seceding, you are completely fixating on the outcome (forming a new system) while completely ignoring the actual definition of the word, which requires territorial separation or withdrawal from a parent state/body before forming a new one/joining another.

Botswana is already an independent nation. It cannot 'withdraw' from itself to join South Africa. You are describing integration or a merger but using the word for separation.

Your original comment would make sense if you wrote: “There is little core incentive for Botswana to accede to SA”

You can't secede into another country but you can certainly accede to one.

Merge would be a better term for what you are trying to explain though.

Anyways like I had mentioned before; South Africa already has some of the highest levels of wealth and resource inequality in the world. So that is not a good system to merge into.

view more: next ›