There are, however, a couple of comedic sequences for to alleviate the grim nature of events. One such dalliance has a lion desperately attempting to mate with his lioness, each attempt to get the leg over thwarted by tourists driving their cars closer for to take better pictures.
The irony, of course, is that the filmmakers themselves are just as much to blame as anyone, a point which seems ever more potent during the aforementioned battle, when the camera glares in anticipation as Mercenaries toss grenades into houses, then rushes in to observe fetishise the mangled remains of the occupants.
The lion sequence is also another example of Africa Addio's attempts to make a statement without actually voicing it. It doesn't take much effort (nor, indeed, much screentime) to note the comparisons between the depiction of the lion, "once king", now forced to exist in such a pitiful and degraded manner, with the depiction of the ever-burdened colonialists.
I would not for a second attempt to convince anyone of the moral worth of the film, simply because, barring the admirable stance on game-hunting, it is at best woefully misguided, and at worst, gleefully and abhorrently delighting in its racism.
Visually, though, the film evokes the likes of Sergio Leone, or John Ford (especially in a sequence following the descendants of the Boers crossing the plains in cattle-drawn carriages), and is a work of unparalleled artistry.
The duo would attempt to silence the accusations of racism with their next film, Goodbye Uncle Tom, a film which concerned itself with pre-civil war slavery in America. Whilst it certainly condemned the actions of plantation owners and the intellectuals who sat idly by and watched the obscenities occur, it again treated the black characters as nothing more than uncivilised, ill-mannered, simple-minded animals.
I stand by my assertion that Africa Addio is a masterpiece, and among the greatest films ever made, but I also stand by my assertion that it is morally disgusting, despicably racist and consistently reprehensible.
Thanks folks.
The Duke resides at Mondo Irlando
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Sean Devenish
Africa Addio simply shows it like it is in Africa. Wherever and whenever white laws fall away, as was the case in New Orleans recently due to Hurricane Katrina, blacks show us what they really are. Destroyers.
2 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
Sean, thanks for the comment (the first this ever recieved, would you believe!) but you're full of shit. Or at least your worldview is. but thanks for chipping in, regardless. And what exactly were the black folks in new orleans doin that was different to what the whites were doin? maybe you wanna go ahead and clear that up first, then we'll get to how folks shouldn't be expected to be angry following X years of enforced rule whereby land and freedom was stolen from them.
3 - Danny James
Yeah, it was offensively over-sypathetic towards the colonialists, however they covered enough ground that anyone with half a brain could figure out what was what, especially towards the end with the blacks in the gold mines and the priviledged whites above in the stock market, a real life "Metropolis" situation. I also found their closing analogy particularly ludicrous, the dislocated Penguin colonies on the Southern tip of Africa fighting against increasingly warm and turbulent ocean tides vaguely alluding to the imperialists; as if the English, Belgians and French were marooned on the strange and dark continent of Africa by some dislodged piece of glacier that served as a raft. Ha!
4 - Indyscribe
Duke,
Great review. I completely agree that Africa Addio is overtly racist but visually stunning. It's certainly on my top ten.
Regarding your 7th graph and the unattributed "miracle" that saved Prosperi and Jacobetti from the firing squad:
In he English-dubbed American edit(hilariously titled "Africa:Blood and Guts") as the Mondo Bros. are being led to the wall, the narrator says a soldier examining their passports prevented their execution by announcing to his comrades that "they aren't white, they're Italians."
-I/S
5 - michael
Incredible film. I had read about many of the events, but never seen footage. Amazing, breathtaking, and...above all, disturbing.
I really appreciate your analysis Duke. Yes, the film is horribly slanted. What I do find interesting though is the colonial tendancies that surface when occidentals are in Africa. The same idiocies keep being relived because the gap is still, in many ways, as wide as it was 50 years ago. I am amazed by the balls of the journalists. I also wonder if journalists could even approach like situations today. For anyone inspired by the topic of this film, I advise reading Ryazard Kapuscinski - a Polish journalist who covered many of these events with much more subtlety than the Italos. In these days after the 06 World Cup, they do make me wonder sometimes...
6 - michael
To add. I looking at criticisms of the film around the internet, I see that the directors were quite castigated and accused of focusing on "bizarre" aspects of African life. I would argue that they were present for major journalistic events: the massacre in Zanzibar, the Bantu-Tutsi conflict, and the Congo situation with the mercenaries and the Simbas.
These stories still live on, as we saw in Rwanda, Sudan, and the DRC. While the coverage may be slanted, somebody with a decent grip of post-colonial African history should appreciate that Africa Addio offers rare glimpses into what Africa has and continues to suffer. Sure, it is painful, unflattering, and uncomfortable...but as is life for millions and millions of people.
7 - Jan from Africa
I am from Africa. I agree with Sean Devenish - Destroyers.
Forget about what is going on in Rwanda, Sudan and the DRC Michael and go South to Zimbabwe and South Africa. Zimbabwe is in chaos and a communist dictatorship and South Africa on the verge of a full scale genocide - UN report - under communist rule and when Mandela the god who fell from heaven dies it is going to be worse.
Two aircraft hit the twin towers and the world is at war - 5000 killed?
South Africa- 52 murders per day since January 1st, 2006 up to June 30th - calculate it - Babies and little girls gang raped (9 black men) because virgins can cure AIDS - after the first one she is not a virgin anymore - Farmers being murdered so that the land can be given to the blacks - no farmers no food - the minister of agriculture were asked in parliament where will the people get food if there is no farmers - his answer "there is corn and wheat products in the supermarkets" - Johannesburg is no 1 crime city in the world - hijackings,murders, crime in general.
The best of all - the worlds white populations creeps up in black asses, as if they will be destinct in the following few years - teach people to fish and feed themselves and stop the hand outs.Sudan and Ethiopia - Feeding them to keep them from dying from hunger - stop feeding them -they keep on breeding like rabbits.
Duke go and do your homework before you defend the blacks - they are going to rule the world and that includes America - wake up America -
Go and learn from Africa's mistakes - keep on feeding the blacks and wet backs - within a few years America will be destinct.
Shakespeare said that the world must contain the black population - the way they multiply, they will rule the world.
Jan from Africa
8 - Jan from Africa
GENEVA - The United States must better protect poor people and African-Americans in natural disasters to avoid problems like those after Hurricane Katrina, a U.N. human rights panel said Friday.
Just what I was talking about in my previous posting. What is the problem with the world - are there only black disadvantaged people on this dear earth?
The U.N. Human Rights Committee said poor and black Americans were “disadvantaged” after Katrina, and the U.S. should work harder to ensure that their rights “are fully taken into consideration in the reconstruction plans with regard to access to housing, education and health care.”
I did not hear of any white or other ethnic groups that shot at rescue helicopters etc. when they had to be rescued - or did'nt I see all the news on TV.
What about the poor whites - sorry, I appologize, there was no whites in New Orleans.
Jan from Africa
9 - davizote
I just saw the movie two days ago, and I am still freaking out. I don't see a racism in it, and yes, I see a sympathy towards the whites. I don't know why is that surprising. If you are french and your soccer team is playing, you are with the French team, and no one accuses you of being racist because you don't support Italy. We support who we feel more identified with. These guys identified themselves more with the whites than with the africans. Who do you feel more comfortable with, a japanese, an afhgan, a guy from your own country or an American? When travelling abroad, even though I may know more the locals, if I suddenly meet a Spaniard, I feel immediately more identified with him than with the locals. We share the same value system, language subtle implications, and othre things... even though ideologically we can be opposite. If any of you guys have lived abroad, and you are not German, it's more than likely than this will happen to you, and it's not racism.
I also found a lot of criticism towards the whites. There are these images of white uniformed military man marching in perfect military order, all these exaggerated ceremonies of blessing flags, the last british to rule over Kenya, and I personally find these images depict a ridiculous european rigidity and almost histerical obsession with order, cleanness and rules. The same happens with the fox hunting scenes... they are absolutely pathetic. The white rigidity, these rules, these ceremonies, are nothing, though, if we compare them with what we find in Japanese movies... compared to them, we whites are a bunch of barbarians, too.
I don't see racism. I don't see a white over black issue here. I don't think the mercenaries, most of them white, show any racial superiority. Brutality is shown from all the ways. Cruelty is shown, and when that mercenary at the end of the film decides to kill the desperate big guy that was struggling against them, I don't think it shows any white man supremacy. It shows a guy that has no interest in human life, maybe a psycopath, who knows. Two shots, one in the belly, one in the head, your life is gone, gone. Now, I invite you to imagine the same shot, but now it's a bunch of africans grabbing a big white man, desperate, crying because he knows he is going to be killed, and a black guy just shots him, pum, pum, done. Our reaction would be worse. Change the white big man for a woman. Now change it for a child. Worse and worse.
I don't see racism because what these directors are filming is a Disney movie compared to what the great Europeans have done. Remember, 50 million dead people in the 2nd world war. 25 years after we had already killed and destroyed another 20 million people. Talk about destroyers. Talk about cruelty. The directors lived the second world war. 15 million women between ages 10 to 80 yo raped by the russians. The Japanese weren't bad, either, 10 million rape actions in Korea. It happened 10 years ago, in the Balkans, they now used men and dog, the white men. The constructive white man.
Life is the way it is. Beautiful and cruel. Life is. The film captures scenes from life that have happened since we know it and that will keep happening, even though we think we are so civilized. Who tough that what happened in Sarajevo could ever happen there, after the Olympic games?
Life and death will keep happening. People will keep amputing hands, the same as hundreds of years ago thousands were impalled or taken the eyes out of their cavities. 2 Million people were killed by the red Khmers, using children. Buffalo Bill, a national hero, got his nickname because he slaughtered 4300 buffalos in just one year and a half... then we see 30 africans throwing spears at an elephant and we think "that's so cruel, so barbarian". But there they are the white people shooting at elephants, driving the jeeps that kill the zebras. We can show the white people doing bad things, but when we show africans doing bad things, we are being racist. (the shot of the proud white man stepping over the dead elepant, brought to him by an helicopter is not what we nigyt call a declaration of the superiority of white man, I think).
The film shows, in my opinion, the consequences of the huge unbalance created by colonialism. Demagogic leaders, uncultured population, the extreme and merciless rigidity of the laws concerning the reserves, and how the sudden abandonment of those countries by the former governors led to a logical struggle for power where the spiral of hatred and cruelty hasn't done but increase.
The question here is: how could you film this movie without being accused of being racist? When the filmmakers go down the mines in Johannesburg, they capture the dignity and hard life of the me workers, while the white men above keep all the gold...
I think it's a great movie, and it's easy to judge the directors from our comfortable coach. I think that one should spend 3 years in the middle of those conflicts, flying over armys shooting at you, being next to be executed, and watching the things they saw, and then judge them. I think that the people that accuse them of being racist are a bunch of moralistic cowards who would never dare to do what they did, and who think it's cool to take a position where it's clear that you are not racist... but you are, I'm sorry to tell you. You are a slug compared to these guys. They, at least, were there to tell. They know what they are talking about.
White, black, asian, australian, arab, mongolian, native american, indian, we are all the same shit and we all have prepretated the same massacres, rapes, and massacres. Yet white, black, asian, asutralian, arab, mongolian, atc, love their children, fall in love, build houses, cook good stuff, and love life.
The images of the movie will stay with me forever as a reality I have only seen in few occasions, but a reality that happens every day, now, for example, in Darfur, and in some parts of South America, and in Irak, and in Chechenia. My grandparents went through it in the Spanish Civil war, and then you understand when they tell you " I don't care about what government we have, I don't care about what we have to eat, but may God free us from war"
Love and peace, really
10 - f.walker
I am with Jan in Africa on this one. Apologizing for racism just because its cool has never been helpful. Excellent film. Thanks to our U.S. policy towards S.A. they have gone from the last hope of Africa to the place it is today. Long live the memory of Rhodesia and the foods that were surplused and exported. Long live the memories of those that were slaughtered because they were productive. [Personal contact info deleted]
11 - Jess
Duke, in the Marine Corps, I was stationed in Okanawa in 1968, I went to a movie house and saw a picture called "Africa Addio", prior to this main attraction, instead of showing a cartoon they showed a film on a mother birthing a child. Hey, at 19 years old, it convinced me. Anyway, The Africa Addio I saw was about an uprising, there were mercenaries in a running gunfight, an airplane circled above some people in white robes in the center of a rock lined circle. One of the people on the ground shot at the aircraft and they flew off. Coming back later, all the people in the circle were dead. Under some tree they showed a stump, there was a pile of hands that had been chopped off. There was a scene of a dead elephant with people coming in and out of its insides. A car drives into a village filming, there are dead people stacked like cordwood, waste high along the side of the road, then there was yelling and bricks or rocks thrown throught the car windows braking them, also the car was being shook by the people yelling at the passengers. The film was not narrated, but there were times you could here a forein language. Is this the same film you are talking about? If it is the same film, My assessment is; there is no human compassion in a lawless uprising and it is them with the biggest stick that survive. My advice, invest in a good BMG........................
12 - Goran D
I'd say Africa Addio truly presents the world as a dark place without a happy ending, or an ending at all, a world full of intolerance part of the human condition. Even worse, there is great indifference towards this intolerance, even displayed by the filmmakers themselves as they arguably exploit the rape of Africa, equally marvelled by the human tragedy and the cinematic scope of Africa in crisis. Yet, the images are genuine, if not presented in a genuine way, and the use of editing, music, and all the techniques of cinema masterfully create a tour de force that commands debate, thought, and maybe - someday- action.
Is this perhaps an example of what "art" really is, for better and for worse?
The fact that it took me over a year to really put into words why this film affected me so much, and yet was still villainous in many ways (a paradox to be sure), makes me think that it is.
13 - Richard Blacquenhard
I recently purchased the entire Mondo Cane Collection, mainly for the "Goodbye Uncle Tom" discs. I must say that the footage of the transfer of power from British colonialists to Africans was truly amazing in Africa Addio. I am what would have been called a "Black militant" at the time this movie was produced. I sensed that the filmmakers had an affinity for the colonialist at the beginning of the film. However, I viewed the film from a different vantage point. I think the film captured the chaotic transition of post-colonial Africa. We can see the historical origins of the many problems bedeviling Africa today. I value "Africa Addio" for its unmatched documentation of the African condition during the early and mid-1960s, a critical period in African and world history. Lastly, I wish there had been documentation of Arab/Islamic racist exploitation in Africa [Mauritania and Sudan]. The film could have delved more into the liberation movements in Rhodesia-Zimbabwe and South Africa. A documentation Nkrumah's Ghana [the first "Black African" country to gain independence, 1957] would have also added much needed perspective to Africa Addio. As for those who seek to promote a white supremacist spin from Africa Addio and the Katrina tragedy, I don't think you really want to go there...
Richard Blacquenhard,
USA
14 - Ronald
Africa Addio is not racist. It's simply called that because people don't want to see the truth, but instead, make excuses for it. The white colonialists are not treated any differently from the black native population. This may be not very clear in the scenes about the mau mau uprisings, but it is very clear in the parts about south africa. The scene with the lion is particularly different from what the duke claims, as it is white people that make his life difficult.
Duke, you missed the point of this movie by several thousand lightyears. The allegory about the penguins at the end isn't just about white south africans being stuck on a last stretch of africa, it's about the disappearance of the old africa, and a way of life, piece by piece.
O btw, for people who haven't noticed, absolutely zilch has changed in 40 years in africa.
15 - DukeDeMondo
Hi folks
thanks to everyone who has commented on here over the last couple years, and i must apologise for not sayin so at the time of each instance.
what curious and wonderful (and oft-times conflicting) worldviews and so on we find coiled about these lonesome paragraphs!
i don't know how better to sum up why i think Africa Addio is a morally disgusting piece of work than the reasons i gave in the review. i haven't seen it again since writing this, mainly on account of it's an incredibly tough watch a lot of the time. But my main problem is that the very notion of a couple white Europeans making a film that mourns the passing of colonialism is in itself a disgusting idea.
Davizote says about how there's nothing wrong with identifying with the whites here, since hey, i'm white. well, i'm sorry Davizote, that's a fairly worrying stance to take about anything. i think the thread of solidarity is the old "humanity" thing. i feel sickened at humans treating other humans like animals. my sympathy goes to the latter bunch, regardless of what colour they might be. It's true that the filmmakers were there whilst i'm sat at a word-proccesor comfortable judging them, having done nothing, but there's not a lot one can do about that. do we all stay quiet about anything we don't have first-hand experience of? to use that argument, i could say to you; "How can you comment on this review, when i was there, man, writing it, and you weren't."
Ronald, the white colonialists ARE treated differently by the film. watch it again and note the mood of the film when dealing with them, note the music used, the lines of association drawn. sometimes subtly, most times not, it consistentally asks us to sympathise with them, and to react with horror (or at the very least a slowly swelling anger) every time a black face appears onscreen.
there are many arguments one can make in defence of the films stance. that it only documents events is, i think, false, for it represents the events in very manipulative ways to nudge us in the direction they want us to go, as any film does. That it is a product of its time is not an excuse either. and assuming that me or anyone else is seeing racism in the film now becuase it's somehow hip to be doing so is a bit mind-boggling.
anyway, apologies, i'm sure i answered very little there, and thank you again for commenting.
16 - DukeDeMondo
also, please don't read any smugness or sarkiness in that. it's 04: 46, i may not be putting things across as best i could.
17 - Goran D
Yo Duke, I see what you're saying. I've only seen the Italian directors cut. However, I think there is a deep irony to some of the scenes with the whites (the buggies moving across a landscape with the sun setting, note how it immediately cuts to whites and blacks together with a long piece of rope running through the field with Zebras), or the scene where the old stuff of the whites is sold, yet it is new in the face of Africa, and a lot of the stuff. the music especially says that. i do think there is a mildly imperialistic view, they realize that colonizing Africa is a mistake but since it was done... hey... do they really need independence? but again with even that, it's more critical of the way that independence was gained. for example, if the US were to just pick up and leave Iraq today, absolutely chaos would descend into Iraq. yet, Iraq still faces tons of violence. somewhat life Africa. and the end allegory with the penguins I think is very important and probably the most "humane" moment in the entire film. if i remember the penguins used to live there but were now off balance or something. if that's so, I think that can be seen as showing that it's sad that Africans themselves have become strangers to their land, to their culture, to all of that. so yes, definitely some imperialistic parts, and I could personally never do what these filmmakers did (I always got the sense they went there to exploit the violent images and soon had their own souls sucked into it, which explains why they risked so much for this film.) and I'm not here to say they are heroes or anything ridiculous like that. but I do think there's a deep current of dark humor through Africa Addio which, in some parts, make it bearable when otherwise it is almost unwatchable, and I do think there are more layers to Africa Addio even if it's own message is sometimes twisted.
18 - Goran D
mm some typos there, like somewhat life africa (somewhat LIKE africa.) sorry bout that, it is also early - er late - for me.
19 - Bjorn Leif Brauteseth
Dear duke! I am a south african of Norwegian decent, What i truly loved about the film was that it gave me a window into a time that is failed to be approached by African today and is left to the misguded imagination of man. I love that it showed what really happend in africa. My great grandparents where almost exicuted for their mission work in Congo, much of myfamily is from congo the reat is from South Africa. To me it visually exposed the atrocities that happend, regardless of human life. BUT my family has always treated our countrymen of colour as equals and the fact that the film never appoached why Black and white africans behaved the way they did was horiffic! Black people on a large scale where not educated in a cultur of modern and independant leadership! This is on white africas' hands!Though there are no doubt grave sins on the "black" side of things, the film dose not put to light in any way the root of much of africas problems. European and white african distanian and ignorence of the beatuy of the black people of africa! The people of africa are truly beatiful, we and i say we, black and white are very misguided by the fear of what we do not understand, and so we attack the apparent root of that fear, shuch as the killing of thoughs horses, or in much worse ways, genocides and apartheids. This film is terrible, but exposed a peice of my "tribes" history i am discouraged to see today. I do beleive that this film can be interprited by a mature person as to say...we are all human and the glorification of one group over another is nonsensical rubbish. But as you say it is horrifically racist, but yest beautiful, its cinamtograph is amazing!!! One thing i can say today is we africans have taken many steps forward from that time, and when i feel that Africa is ost i will remeber this film and realize, we have come so far, and we can go futhur! AMADLA AFRIKA!!!!
20 - Bjorn Leif Brauteseth
Sorry for all the spelling mistakes, im usless at the job!
21 - Clare
Hi there
I'm a Northern Irish lass who just watched Africa Addio for the first time last night to review it for a website and I found it a totally traumatic experience. It really wrenched me - particularly the animal snuff bits - they were worse than the human slaughter bits! I had to do fast forward.
The colonials WERE presented in a very good light compared to the natives, but a little part of me thinks that a lot of slaughter could have been avoided with the maintenance of the status quo or a more gradual state of decolonisation. It seemed from the Kenya section that the country was really thrown in at the deep end and didn't know how to cope.
The Zanzibar Massacre was heart wrenching when they filmed all the people running to the sea to escape and then all the dead bodies on the beach the next day.
The part dealing with South Africa at the end was definitely racist and pro-Apartheid as it seemed to be saying that the black Zulu girls were more civilised and sophisticated having taken on western ideals of beauty etc.
I think this is an incredibly important film that has been done a grave injustice by being lumped in as a mere 'Mondo' movie. It is an important historical document. It may be biased and prejudiced but it captures a unique moment in time. I won't be watching it again however, it was a bit like staring hell in the face for 2 hours..
22 - Ed
Just saw this. It IS heavily biased, and the result IS racist. But it is also worth analysing.
The issue isn't that the filmmakers just shot what they saw - they didn't - the mise en scene, editing and sound make sure that their input is much more than just gathering footage.
The sound is particularly notable. Note the juxtaposition of the newly independent Kenya's marching band against the British marching band - their playing is wonky and off-key while the Brits supposedly play and march perfectly. While the marching is real, the playing is completely fabricated! Both bands just happen to play the same tune, in the same register, and it just happens to be one of the film's theme tunes!
There are many more instances of such manipulation. At times, it's almost as if the filmmakers want you to see the fabrication - like the mating lion sequence where the tourists are in the lions' faces, yet the film crew are even more conspicious on a crane. Or the 'zulu village' sequence, when a piano, sax and double bass materialise from nowhere to exude American jazz. The filmmakers want to push their input, and do little to hide this.
It's against this backdrop that one starts to question just how authentic some of the film's historical document is. While it covers genocide and unrest in Zanzibar and Congo, how can we trust that they didn't just want to get the scoop? What supposedly happened to the German crew in the small plane?
While Jacopetti and Prosperi tried to expiate the label of racist with Addio Zio Tom, some might say that the scenes of angry blacks in Africa Addio are shown with justification against the injustices inflicted on them. But the film equally appeals to racists who find fear in those same scenes. The narration is quick to quash any idea of liberation with a left-wing ideology, but ellicits sympathy for the ex-colonial mercenaries whom they 'got to know one by one'. Such editorialising helps gloss over hard questions like, did the village which they assault actually have any guns? Did they give anyone a chance to surrender?
As a document of a complex period in a complex continent, this film is poor despite having some exclusive footage. As an example of the power and artifice of film (and the ability for people to see diametrically different viewpoints from one film), this is almost without equal.
23 - Igor Alexander
Liberals are forever whinging about how we evil whites aren't doing enough to help the poor Africans, about how we need to send more aid to Africa, about how we need to intervene in the tribal wars that are forever taking place there, etc. Fifty years ago, liberals were whinging about the "evils of colonialism." Under colonialism, African blacks had food in their stomachs, had a higher overall standard of living than they could ever have achieved on their own, and were forced to behave. The decolonization of Africa came about largely as a result of liberal efforts.
So why are liberals still whinging? The Africa of today is almost entirely a product of their own making. They got what they wanted, didn't they? So why are they insisting that we once again start interfering in the affairs of Africans, just like in the "bad old days" of colonialism? African blacks were given their freedom and their independence, weren't they? So what's the problem? Are liberals perhaps now discovering that blacks really are inherently different from whites, and that they're incapable of creating or even sustaining a civilization to Western standards without outside help?
I believe colonialism is going to return to Africa (and already is), albeit under a disguised, dishonest form. It's going to take the form of transnational corporations setting up outposts and propping up "democratic" governments that they control under the table, all under a humanitarian smokescreen. I believe this form of crypto-colonialism is going to be far worse for blacks, far more exploitative, far more dehumanizing, than the old-fashioned colonialism ever was. And it will have been liberals, not conservative white male "racists," that enabled it.
24 - Igor Alexander
Aaron, Duke De Mondo wrote: "Sean, thanks for the comment (the first this ever recieved, would you believe!) but you're full of shit. Or at least your worldview is. but thanks for chipping in, regardless. And what exactly were the black folks in new orleans doin that was different to what the whites were doin?"
I believe what Sean was probably alluding to is that groups of blacks took advantage of the Katrina situation to start robbing, raping, looting, and murdering. While some of the incidents I heard about seem far-fetched, I have little reason to doubt that incidents of this nature really did take place in New Orleans. I lived next to a black neighbourhood for several years and I witnessed similar behavior first-hand after a hurricane took out the city's power for a week. If another week had gone by without power, I'm convinced a race riot would have erupted. You see, the blacks were convinced that whites were deliberately witholding power from their neigbourhood in an attempt to kill them, even though anyone who had bothered to walk around the city would've realized that the power outage was affecting all residential neighbourhoods the same.
Frankly, I think it's a tad hypocritical for a kid sitting in front of a computer in lily-white Ireland to be telling someone who may have had more first-hand experience with blacks that he's "full of shit." It's telling that the most fervent anti-racists are invariably the ones who have had the least amount of direct contact with other races.
Aaron, Duke De Mondo wrote: "maybe you wanna go ahead and clear that up first, then we'll get to how folks shouldn't be expected to be angry following X years of enforced rule whereby land and freedom was stolen from them."
Are you condoning violence against whites? Because that's what it sounds like to me. If so, you should look in the mirror sometime. Hint: you're not black. In fact, if you had had the misfortune of being in New Orleans at the time, you might have found yourself the target of an attack, simply because of your skin color, even though neither you nor any of your ancestors (I presume) have ever so much as raised a finger against any person of color. Think about that.
25 - Igor Alexander
davizote wrote: "If you are french and your soccer team is playing, you are with the French team, and no one accuses you of being racist because you don't support Italy. We support who we feel more identified with. These guys identified themselves more with the whites than with the africans. Who do you feel more comfortable with, a japanese, an afhgan, a guy from your own country or an American? When travelling abroad, even though I may know more the locals, if I suddenly meet a Spaniard, I feel immediately more identified with him than with the locals. We share the same value system, language subtle implications, and othre things... even though ideologically we can be opposite. If any of you guys have lived abroad, and you are not German, it's more than likely than this will happen to you, and it's not racism."
Very well said, and I agree. The thing to remember about political correctness is that the term "racist" only ever applies to white people. Blacks can sit around denigrating whites all day but they are never called "racist" for it. Blacks are never put on trial for "hate speech." Blacks can physically assault whites in the most cruel and sadistic ways imaginable but these assaults are never classified as "hate crimes." Blacks are allowed and even encouraged to take pride in their race, but if whites should do the same, they're instantly labelled "white supremacists." When a TV network like BET in the United States says it only wants to hire blacks, no one makes a big deal about it, but if, say, the Disney Channel declared that it was only going to hire whites, I'm sure you can imagine the uproar. Apparently, it was never just a question of letting blacks sit in the front of the bus with us; we are being asked to trade places with them! Everywhere in the white world, laws are passed and policies enacted that discriminate against the majority population, and we're all supposed to pretend that this is normal. How much longer are whites going to put up with this? I know I'm sick of it, and I'm not alone.