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."