If Afrikaners never took power in 1948, declared a republic in 1961 and South Africa remained a "dominion" like Australia or Canada, what would be different?
Forgot to specify, no Apartheid obviously
>>18105140they'd get their revenge for the boer wars later, maybe in the 70s instead.
>>18105140>>18105143It'd be in a far healthier state, undoubtedly.The establishment of an Afrikaner-run republic led to Boerwashing of the nation's history (we wuz concentrated, etc), and of course the evil system of Apartheid.Now, the Afrikaners suffer the consequences of their own actions and choose to cope by blaming 'the Anglo' at every opportunity.It's a shame, because it'd could've been the jewel of Africa.
>>18105140The anglos would have imported more kikes in SA
>>18105207weird, how do you convince people their own parents and grandparents were a different ethnicity?
It be full of kaffirs still>If Afrikaners never took power in 1948In fairness all the three previous PMs of South Africa before union had been Afrikaners. There would still be the problem that although they're might not be "Apartheid" coloureds, blacks and Indians were still second and third class citizens before then with less rights than whites. So there would still be pressure from the outside world to end minority white rule, and that's assuming the Smuts United Party kept power even if they won in 48. Also unless there was a large immigration from the British Isles the majority of whites would still be Boers and therefore be less inclined to vote against a republic (assuming a referendum was still whites only). That being said after the National Party got power there did place strict limits on immigration precisely because they didn't want British immigrants.
>>18105207>the evil system of Apartheid.Apartheid was based off all the British South African polices and precedents as well as Cape Colony's. Almost EVERY Apartheid policy could be traced to a law or policy instated in the previous regime.>Now, the Afrikaners suffer the consequences of their own actions and choose to cope by blaming 'the Anglo' at every opportunity.Many Anglos in SA are part of the grist too though?>It's a shame, because it'd could've been the jewel of Africa.It wouldn't because it's shitty economy was pretty much has dated and basic as every other one in Africa.
>>18105236>Apartheid was based off all the British South African polices and precedents as well as Cape Colony's. Almost EVERY Apartheid policy could be traced to a law or policy instated in the previous regime.Not really, it went much further than that in separate development and dumping blacks in memes republics
>>18105294You really downplaying the BSA years? They already had spatial segregation and pass laws for years prior to Apartheid. Voting rights and franchisment was actually stripped back on several areas.The land grab policies were already ramped up by the time rhe NP stepped in
>>18105207>Just gib blagbeepo equal rights dood>Making fun of concentration camp victims>Apartheid was EVILHow do libfags not give a shit about Boer genocide and Brits infringing on their sovereignty but shed a tear at segregation and minority rule, the anti-white mind disease is unreal. Almost comical level of hypocrisy
>>18105140Afrikaners were already in power, did you think Jan Smuts and Louis Botha are Anglo names?But if the Afrikaners in the NP never took power it would have been a softer form of white minority rule, like Rhodesia, as it wasn't until the 80s that it started to become a white mainstream opinion to abolish it entirely.
>>18105346>How do libfags not give a shit about Boer genocideThe British Empire has done hardcore targetted crackdowns for some time. Same for other empires in Africa or the colonies in Asia. Boers being white or "white" doesn't matter.>Brits infringing on their sovereigntyThe Boer republics weren't exaxtly so clean on that front anon.
>>18105346You're deliberately misinterpreting my post though, aren't you. Like a woman. A seething woman.
>>18105349>Afrikaners were already in power, did you think Jan Smuts and Louis Botha are Anglo nameOP probably meant the National Party types. Botha and Smuts especially had no problem collaborating with the British.
>>18105657>Like a woman. A seething woman.If so much men do this it's not exactly a womenly thing anymore but rather a "humans being hysterical" thing.
>>18105680Look up the meaning of hysterical.
