Can democracy reign in the middle east and africa? An African View

Bosun

Member
Jan 22, 2011
380
38
16
Underground Bunker Mojave Desert
Excerpt of an article by Charl van Wyk in World Nut Daily (there I said it before our progressive friends do :lol: ) :

Like any great debate, it begins with defining the language – which, while familiar to Western ears, is foreign in practice to most Africans (and nearly all Middle-Easterners). Congo calls itself a democratic republic, but don't let the words fool you; they're little more than clever marketing. In fact, words like "freedom" and "democracy" don't have the same meaning in Africa as they do in the United States. "Freedom" usually means access to resources or government jobs. "Democracy" often means supporting one man, with one vote (under severe pressure), once and never again as he retains power as permanently and ruthlessly as possible.

This firmly rooted mentality is ripe for Islam's all-encompassing level of influence. That's why I assert unflinchingly that Western-style democracy cannot develop in an Islamic society, and the evidence testifies to such. Islam – and the Shariah law that serves as its ideal of justice – is intolerant of anything resembling representative government and human rights.

Islam is incompatible with anything recognizing those self-evident truths your founders so eloquently summarized "that all men are created equal" and "endowed by their Creator" with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Read more: An African view of Islamic uprisings An African view of Islamic uprisings

Now what say you? Only intelligent conversation allowed... :lol:
 
Last edited:
Perhaps they should focus less on building Democracies and more on building real Republics.
 
Lol...an African perspective? That part's a joke, right?

only if you think it is... go back an read the link, reflect on what charl is saying, study history and nation building and get back with me next year after the election..... :lol:


Well, it's either a joke or a lie. Charl Van Wyk is a white European missionary who happens to base his missionary work out of South Africa.
 
Lol...an African perspective? That part's a joke, right?

only if you think it is... go back an read the link, reflect on what charl is saying, study history and nation building and get back with me next year after the election..... :lol:


Well, it's either a joke or a lie. Charl Van Wyk is a white European missionary who happens to base his missionary work out of South Africa.
I am glad to know you are an african living in africa speaking with great authority... :lol:

we will have to wait and see how bad our boy blunder ****s up the world in the remainder of his term in office...
obama-weed.jpg
 
only if you think it is... go back an read the link, reflect on what charl is saying, study history and nation building and get back with me next year after the election..... :lol:


Well, it's either a joke or a lie. Charl Van Wyk is a white European missionary who happens to base his missionary work out of South Africa.
I am glad to know you are an african living in africa speaking with great authority... :lol:

No, I'm an American with enough Google-fu to realize that WND led you down a path of lies. Van Wyk does not have an "African Perspective".
 
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.
 
Well, it's either a joke or a lie. Charl Van Wyk is a white European missionary who happens to base his missionary work out of South Africa.
I am glad to know you are an african living in africa speaking with great authority... :lol:

No, I'm an American with enough Google-fu to realize that WND led you down a path of lies. Van Wyk does not have an "African Perspective".

:lol: you have exposed yourself again, bro.... :lol:
 
Last edited:
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.

good comment, perhaps you should talk with the brother, 8537, who would like to stone the messenger, charl...... we could have a deep conversation about the republic we live in rather than bury heads in sand if charl can speak about africa or not...
 
Last edited:
I am glad to know you are an african living in africa speaking with great authority... :lol:

No, I'm an American with enough Google-fu to realize that WND led you down a path of lies. Van Wyk does not have an "African Perspective".

:lol: you have exposed yourself again, bro.... :lol:

Yes indeed! I have exposed myself as a person able to read past WND bullshit enough to realize that that author is not offering an "African view".
 
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.

good comment, perhaps you should talk with the brother, 8537, who would like to stone the messenger, charl......

I'm not stoning the messenger - I'm simply pointing out that he does not offer an "African view". He offers the view of a white, reactionary European missionary.
 
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.

good comment, perhaps you should talk with the brother, 8537, who would like to stone the messenger, charl......

I'm not stoning the messenger - I'm simply pointing out that he does not offer an "African view". He offers the view of a white, reactionary European missionary.

Personally, it doesn't matter what point of view he represents. I think it's a great opportnity to have a discussion about the problems that a republican form of government suffers from.
 
good comment, perhaps you should talk with the brother, 8537, who would like to stone the messenger, charl......

I'm not stoning the messenger - I'm simply pointing out that he does not offer an "African view". He offers the view of a white, reactionary European missionary.

Personally, it doesn't matter what point of view he represents. I think it's a great opportnity to have a discussion about the problems that a republican form of government suffers from.

Personally, I find it troubling that WND feels the need to lie in the headline of an article, and never mention that Mr Van Wyk's perspective is not African - it's Reactionary European Missionary.

in the light, his views change from that of a legitimately different and African view of the situation to that of just another reactionary missionary with an agenda.
 
I'm not stoning the messenger - I'm simply pointing out that he does not offer an "African view". He offers the view of a white, reactionary European missionary.

Personally, it doesn't matter what point of view he represents. I think it's a great opportnity to have a discussion about the problems that a republican form of government suffers from.

Personally, I find it troubling that WND feels the need to lie in the headline of an article, and never mention that Mr Van Wyk's perspective is not African - it's Reactionary European Missionary.

in the light, his views change from that of a legitimately different and African view of the situation to that of just another reactionary missionary with an agenda.

I've never understood why WND does half the stuff it does. All I do know is that Id rather talk about the subject than the media source.
 
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.

YOur right there Avy.

The average life for any republic is around 200 years. Once its been around a while things start to decline. As they are now.

This was supposedly written by an unknown someone around 250 years ago. Its attributed to an Alexander Tytler, Lord Woodleehouse. Don't know if he wrote it or not but it rings pretty true.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.

Wonder if I'll be around to see if it holds true?? Hope not.
 
Personally, it doesn't matter what point of view he represents. I think it's a great opportnity to have a discussion about the problems that a republican form of government suffers from.

Personally, I find it troubling that WND feels the need to lie in the headline of an article, and never mention that Mr Van Wyk's perspective is not African - it's Reactionary European Missionary.

in the light, his views change from that of a legitimately different and African view of the situation to that of just another reactionary missionary with an agenda.

I've never understood why WND does half the stuff it does. All I do know is that Id rather talk about the subject than the media source.

bravo... some want to talk around the elephant in the room.... thanks bro... some think it is better to discuss safe subjects that they want to control, like christians, whites, missionaries.... the missionary position gets used a lot... :lol:
 
To be fair, Im not convinced we can maintain a Republic much longer. Our people just aren't prepared to take the responsibility needed to maintain it. Unless we make some significant changes in our lives and teach our children correct principles of Self-goverment, I don't think our Republic will last another generation.

YOur right there Avy.

The average life for any republic is around 200 years. Once its been around a while things start to decline. As they are now.

This was supposedly written by an unknown someone around 250 years ago. Its attributed to an Alexander Tytler, Lord Woodleehouse. Don't know if he wrote it or not but it rings pretty true.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.

Wonder if I'll be around to see if it holds true?? Hope not.
it is coming at an excellerated rate... more than likely you will be around to catch some flak.....
143786.jpg
 
No, I'm an American with enough Google-fu to realize that WND led you down a path of lies. Van Wyk does not have an "African Perspective".

:lol: you have exposed yourself again, bro.... :lol:

Yes indeed! I have exposed myself as a person able to read past WND bullshit enough to realize that that author is not offering an "African view".

:lol: pull up your pants. that is embarrassing. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top