Yes, I know about these cases, but segregation is, AFIK today condemned by all, so segregation in SA before 1948., what was the way to deny coloured their right to vote before 1948.? And could that system be continued after 1948. and be tolerated by West?
Sure.
Some people in the West thought that kind of thing was a great idea. A lot of South Africa's Nationalist program was clearly patterned on US Jim Crow. Heck, until the Supreme Court ruled against it in Loving v Virginia in the late 1960s, interracial marriage was against the law in a great many US states, by no means all of them in the South. My understanding is that the day before the court struck down anti-miscegenation laws, it would have been impossible for an interracial couple legally married in a less benighted state to cross the country by road or railroad without becoming felons along the way. No clear route anywhere. When the Nationalists began enacting their program I don't think they did anything that was not the de facto rule, if not strictly the letter of the law, in many states in the USA. It wasn't OK for an American state to simply state that no residents of African descent could vote, for instance, because the Radical Republicans had foreseen (or rather, observed, with the Black Codes of the newly reclaimed Southern states) that and provided against it with laws and Amendments. But a number of indirect methods (plus good old all-American mob terror, more or less judiciously applied) achieved the "desired" results de facto, and the Feds didn't say boo about it for nearly a century.
Stuff like this seemed like a good idea to Hitler and company too.
The thing is, do you want to associate with these particular Westerners?
Don't be surprised if people draw certain conclusions about your mindset from these questions of yours. If they are correct conclusions, then I guess that's all right then. If you don't
think of yourself as a white supremacist, though, I think you'd better figure out why people are getting that impression!
Ok sorry, Nambia at the Most has 12% to South Africas 11% Max, i think because there are less natives there it would be easier to obtain a majority
Um, I think the reason there are less natives is that Namibia is a desert. People, white or black or any color you like, want to live somewhere that is, you know, habitable.
The Germans got South West Africa because no prior colonial power wanted it. It turned out later there was a beach where you could pick diamonds out of a handful of random sand. Who knew? The diamonds make it possible for people to live there by buying everything they need. Actually it makes it possible for DeBeers, who now own the beach, to make huge profits and bring in food and water to dole out grudgingly to the workers on the beach. Who are watched very closely lest they sneak anything out in their pockets.
OK, I went to the Wikipedia and I am exaggerating a little. Over 2 million people do live in Namibia.
But not much. Namibia has the second lowest population density in the world, after Mongolia. On a planet that contains nations like Saudi Arabia, largely covered with what everyone knows is harsh desert, that is sort of a negative accomplishment.
Reading more there is even more depressing.
I don't mean to speak ill of the people who manage to make some sort of a living in this challenging environment. (Actually I was just thinking of Namibia on another thread, about a dry Mediterranean--I figure there would be a fog belt there and remembered there is this plant that lives on the coast in Namibia that gets all its moisture from fog. It isn't a very impressive plant--except that it manages to live at all there!) Just pointing out, this is the sort of extreme white supremacy leads one to--lording it over people too desperately close to the edge of survival to try and stop you, because everyone else in the world has had quite enough of it.
About that family in the picture--no way would I characterize them as "white." Some do look Latino or vaguely Asian (Filipino say) to me rather than African.
I would like to know them; they seem like fine people. But not white, by the American standards I was raised with. By those standards, they are definitely brown.
Funny thing; I believed growing up I was raised to be not racist, and was proud of that. Nowadays I recognize both that I was raised--not by my parents particularly, but by the whole society I lived in--to categorize people by "race" and to make judgements accordingly, and also not to realize I was doing this. Recognizing I have been taught to do this and not deny it makes it easier for me not to do the judgements, or at least to question them.