Care to explain how an ethno-nationalist government implemented socialism?

> I take it you don't consider the country to have veen ruined under apartheid

Wether or not I consider the country to have been ruined under apartheid is irrelevant to the fact that the ANC is dragging it back to the stone age.

The ANC was handed a functioning economy, solid infrastructure, and hope for a better future - there are now rolling blackouts across the country, soaring unemployment, and a birth rate higher than the GDP growth rate. And that hope for a better future? All but gone - There are more race based laws _today_ than there were under apartheid.

I'm glad apartheid ended 30 years ago, I'm not glad with the direction we're going now. These are not the same thing - you trying to portray it as such says more about your views than it does mine.

Your responses are filled with non-specific references to online memes that suggest that you don't actually understand the problem in any deep sense (i.e you just have a gripe). I'm not going to defend ANCs policy decisions, but you can just point to specific decisions they made and the resulting outcome. You can't just handwave and repeat socialism/capitalism/Trotskyites like some mantra and expect everyone to take you seriously.

Not sure exactly which part of my response repeated socialism/capitalism/Trotskyites? And I gave 4 specific outcomes which are easily tied to ANC policy decisions given they've ruled the country for the last 30 years (blackouts, unemployment, birthrate > GDP growth, number of race based laws).

I'll grant you "dragging us back to the stone age" is an obvious meme.

Did you even read my comment?

> Care to explain how an ethno-nationalist government implemented socialism?

By using the state treasury to provide disproportionate infrastructure and services to the ruling ethic minority, while leaving the bantustans - with no say in national politics or budget - to largely fend for themselves. This incidentally has similarities to the US/Puerto Rico dynamic.

All the things you complain about can be explained by regression to mean[1], which the not even the apartheid government would have been able to prevent had they decided to adopt an egalitarian governance model.

edit: I didn't even get into how the "ethno-nationalist government" seized the means of production for the express benefit of a specific ethno.

1. I fully expect that the per-capita X (for any X you're claiming is worse) has actually improved for South Africans - all South Africans - between 1990 and now.

> State capacity has collapsed across many government functions that are essential for a functioning economy. Critical network industries, including electricity, transport infrastructure and services, security, and water and sanitation have experienced major deteriorations over the last 15 years [1]

> While the racial composition of wealth at the top has changed, wealth concentration in South Africa has not and remains very high. [1]

> while the standard of living has increased for a minority of formerly disadvantaged South Africans and a small black middle class has emerged, there are still huge disparities in both material and subjective well-being [2]

> In 2010, the majority of citizens still hoped for basic necessities, income and employment, to enhance their quality of life. [2]

So no, there is no mean reversion caused by a broader sharing of (the same set of) resources - in fact the policies leading to worsening infrastructure and economic disproportionally negatively impact the poor, black population [3]

The examples I've given (blackouts, unemployment, etc.) are governance and capacity failures above and beyond any "regression to the mean" effect.

[1] https://conversableeconomist.com/2023/11/20/south-africas-ec... [2] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-012-0120-y [3] https://qz.com/africa/1435910/blackouts-in-africa-affect-the...