Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxt.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j From: js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: South African solutions anyone? Message-ID: <1048@mhuxt.UUCP> Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 17:02:29 EDT Article-I.D.: mhuxt.1048 Posted: Fri Aug 9 17:02:29 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 13-Aug-85 00:38:32 EDT References: <245@SCIRTP.UUCP> <151@batman.UUCP> <442@spar.UUCP> <154@batman.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 16 > > > > How valid are assertions that because South African blacks are > > > > better off (Standard-of-living-wise) they should think twice > > > > about revamping the status quo? This assertion implies that the difference in standard of living between SA blacks and blacks in other African nations is caused by the leadership of South Africa. Of course, all of the gold and precious metals under South Africa has nothing to do with this prosperity. ;-) Seriously, does anyone think that it's more likely that this relative prosperity is caused by the oppressive ruling class than by the country's natural mineral wealth? -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "My SO is red hot. Your SO aint doodely squat."