MovieChat Forums > Zulu (1964) Discussion > Imperialist Racist Slaughter

Imperialist Racist Slaughter


Almost all of Southern Africa once belonged to the small yellow-skinned bushmen - who were slaughtered and driven out by the Zulus and other fiercely war-like and imperial African nations pushing southward.

reply

Damn those assegais wielding impaling devils!!

reply

I'm glad you realize I was being a little tongue-in-cheek, though historically accurate.

reply

Thanks...hence the asseigeis & impaling comments.

reply

The Zulus were no one to ***k with. They'd eat people they defeated in combat in many cases, I'm surprised any Europeans were left standing after the battles. Respect to both sides, these days it's all about Smart bombs, drones, & some idiot in a suicide vest. Those guys back then on both sides of the conflict weren't cowards, that's for damned sure!


________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/loveunderlaw

reply

The Zulus did NOT emphatically eat victims! Slain enemies were disembowelled.

reply

Yeah, he must have the Zulu's confused with the the tribes on the remote islands near New Zealand.

reply

No I'm not confusing them with the New Guinea cannibal tribes! Cannibalism is the sign of ultimate defeat of a feared enemy in Africa, it continues to this day only the Western MSM doesn't report on it. Take a look at this:

The Cannibal Generals of Liberia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMwI5unlK9M

Vice is Indymedia, so you're going to have access to un-sanitized news with their reports !
________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/loveunderlaw

reply

"I Was A Teenage Liberian Cannibal General". I think Roger Corman made this in the 50s didn't he?

reply

Very good!

My father and his two brothers were evacuated with my grandmother to Grahamstown in South Africa during the war, when Torbruk fell. My poor grandfather was left behind to fight on against Rommel.

She often told me of the times when the Zulu tribes would come marching down the main street and what a fearsome they appeared. They brought back some short spears and shields when they returned to England as souvenirs of their time there.

I doubt very much whether we could get them through an airport these days!

reply


As an interesting note, in the early days of South Africa having its first elections after Apartheid, the Zulus were upset because they said they had the right to carry around small spears as a tribute to their heritage, while others disagreed.

I'm not sure what happened with this, but it was certainly interesting at the time.

reply

That's kind of the history of human society. Meso and Native American tribes did the same thing to smaller tribes. Trace it back to prehistoric man, and you'll find the same thing again.

reply

Only white people have ever done anything 'bad' don't you know that? We will need to send you to a re-education camp for advanced 'sensitivity training'.

reply

"Only white people have ever done anything 'bad' don't you know that? We will need to send you to a re-education camp for advanced 'sensitivity training'."

Of course. Because only white people will keep on braying about how 'civilized' they are while simultaneously bombing countries like Afghanistan back to the stone age! I think the rest of the world is fed up with your B.S., sonny!

P.S. I don't see too many Zulus plonking out countless movies showing how brave they were during WWII! I also don't see to many Zulus dropping nukes on defeated countries, attacking countries for their oil or droning innocent grandmothers to death and then calling it 'collateral damage'! Get over yourselves....

reply

Not a chip on the shoulder as much as chips on both shoulders.
Oh dear, so sad.

reply

Still better than the plank up your backside ...

oh dear, justifying imperialistic excesses even though you keep on losing and the whole world hates your guts... pathetic? Look in the mirror. And STILL haven't learnt from your mistakes .. witness all the neo-Nazis in Kiev being hailed as 'liberators' even though the whole world sees through your B.S.!

reply

Japan had a "no surrender" ethos in the military heirarchy, and a martial tradition of the same.

Giving them a massive bloody nose via an atomic weapon was the wake up call they needed, forcing the Emperor to capitulate.

They let it go when we dropped the first one, thinking it was a fluke, and that we didn't have another. Then, when the second one hit, that's when the message was driven home that we could, if we pursued that line of weaponization, level their country and destroy Japan utterly as a concept if they did not surrender.

If you want to prevent the Hiroshimas and Nagasakis, then you need to prevent the Pearl Harbors.

We didn't start the war, and in fact we tried to get the Japanese to withdraw from China and Korea, and even imposed sanctions, but we finished it.

End of story.

reply

Good point.
I wish you would ram that message home to all the ultra-Left Wing Parties in UK right now who want nuclear weapons banished from our country!

reply

Búllshït.

The Japanese governmental leadership were singularly unimpressed by the atomic explosions. It wasn't much different than the firebombing campaign they had been experiencing.

The only reason they surrendered was they were terrified what would happen when the hoard of Soviet troops that were poised to invade southward reached the most populated Japanese homeland islands after they had utterly rolled over their troops in Manchuria and Sakhalin Island in only three weeks and after seeing what they did to the Germans.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/


Blueghost wrote:

Japan had a "no surrender" ethos in the military heirarchy, and a martial tradition of the same.

Giving them a massive bloody nose via an atomic weapon was the wake up call they needed, forcing the Emperor to capitulate.

They let it go when we dropped the first one, thinking it was a fluke, and that we didn't have another. Then, when the second one hit, that's when the message was driven home that we could, if we pursued that line of weaponization, level their country and destroy Japan utterly as a concept if they did not surrender.


reply

The Japanese governmental leadership were singularly unimpressed by the atomic explosions.

That's not what the records of the Supreme War Council say. They indicate the Japanese leadership was extremely concerned by the apparent fact that the Allies could utterly destroy Japan with impunity.

reply

Another important point often overlooked. The invasion of Japan would have taken place on the main island of Honshu. The Hiroshima bomb wiped out the ENTIRE Southern Honshu military command at one stroke. The Nagasaki bomb was neatly centered between the huge Mitsubishi works and another giant armaments factory that were the two largest remaining such factories in Japan. The Bushido warlords were probably overwhelmed by the huge military blows.

reply

'Not a chip on the shoulder as much as chips on both shoulders.'

That would make the poster evenly balanced!

It's that man again!!

reply

bombing countries like Afghanistan back to the stone!


Oh come on! Both you and I know that Afghanistan never really emerged from the stone age!


In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

reply

P.S. I don't see too many Zulus plonking out countless movies showing how brave they were during WWII! I also don't see to many Zulus dropping nukes on defeated countries, attacking countries for their oil or droning innocent grandmothers to death and then calling it 'collateral damage'!


Only because they don't have the power and the cash.

Seriously: if in some alternate universe the Zulus had held on to their own empire and were still governing it today, and were rich enough to have their own film industry, do you really think that the glorious feats of Shaka, Cetsewayo and the rest in overcoming the dastardly Brits and subduing the weaselly other tribes of southern Africa (purely for their own good of course) wouldn't be the staple of their output?

reply

The Brits did bad things to the Zulu. The Zulu did bad things to the Bushmen. The Japanese did bad things to the Ainu. The Turks did bad things to the Anatolian Greeks. The Americans did bad things to the Indians. Etc etc and so forth. But only white people are evil bla bla bla

reply

" The Zulu did bad things to the Bushmen."

LOL! The Zulus did bad things to 'everybody'!

reply

When you start to do serious studies of human history you learn no one has clean hands. Every society has some dirt under their fingernails. It is sad that it is continuing to this day.

Waffles Anyone
rstory-3
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731

reply

I think it's disgusting how many right-wingers and racists are on the board of this movie. But that's imdb for you. This is why I hesitate to come to the boards of movies like this, so I don't have to see how many butthurt right-wing white people are bitching and moaning about how whites are "singled out" for the history of white imperialism and other crimes of white supremacism (e.g slavery), implying that no one should be talking about it at all (never mind that it's still f-cking going on today, with American wars against countries like Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, etc, and French wars in Mali, Cote D'Ivoire and others), or even implying that white imperialism was and is somehow "justified" or at least doesn't deserve condemnation because someone else did it first. F-cking repugnant. Kill yourselves.

"The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
- Voltaire

reply

I'm not trying to justify Imperialism but you have to try to understand it from their perspective, not from a modern standpoint- the Victorians overwhelmingly thought of the British Empire as a good thing and that it brought civilisation to savage lands. They didn't see themselves as despots. Plus it has to be remembered the common British people wren't exactly treated that well either- being hanged for stealing bread, the workhouses, and working 14 hours a day 6 days a week wasn't unusual even for children. Harsh times. It was a dog eat dog world, survival of the fittest being the dogma of the times. But even the poorest was still proud to be British at the time.

The British Empire was largely about dominating trade and the vast wealth it could bring- admittedly only to a comparitively few people at the top end of society. It was in often violent competition with the other European empires and the Americas, particularly the USA.
The Victorians are a pretty rum lot, some being ruthless in many ways and often uncaring while some wealthy people were socially progressive and philopanthric, donating libraries and schools for the betterment of ordinary people.
But their excesses are also well known and unforgivable. I'm not quite sure myself what to think about them- they were great engineers, produced great literature and built great cities. But at the same time were concerned mostly with feathering their own nest often at terrible cost.

Trust me. I know what I'm doing.

reply

Kill yourself you damned dirty, lying, unwashed, ignorant, Marxist rat. Slavery existed throughout the world in all societies and on all continents from the very beginning of time. White people, whilst they did participate in the slave trade, did not invent it, but they did invent the abolition of the slavery. In the 19th century, the British Empire even paid the African chieftans to stop trading other blacks as slaves. Not that it did much good, as there is more Africans enslaved today by other Africans. Google William Wilberforce, you left-wing cretin!


In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

reply

Hey chairperson Mao, there are no racist right-wingers. That's a social construct of the Marxist cult. Blaming slavery on whites just shows how deluded the cult it.

Three More Years! Climate Apocalypse! $17½ trillion!

reply

Kawada your entire post reeks of complete ignorance of reality and for proof of the low level of your intelligence, this crap you had the temerity to write bears examination.

crimes of white supremacism (e.g slavery)


Do you know who captured and sold most African slaves?. Yep, it was their fellow Africans, not nasty ole whitey. Many tribes started wars simply to get slaves, both for personal use and for sale to others (and yes that includes white slave traders) and this was happening long before any European set foot on the continent.

Are you also going to slag Africans off for the Barbary slave raids that they launched on Europe, the wars of aggression by Muslims that at one time threatened to conquer the entire continent?. No, I doubt you do as your entire post exudes stupidity and xenophobia of a depth that is simply breath taking.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

reply