Basically the miners there are more likely to be coerced, through things like having been fined and the "pass" system, not trafficked.
In the case of the technician, he is almost certainly a free person. Working class whites normally earned at least 10x the wages in SA mines, even for the same job. But it is unclear whether he belongs to the Apartheid classification "white" or "coloured" (who had less rights and lower pay).
What people are shitting on is his participation in a system of oppression and segregation which devalued the lives of Black people. These mines had incredibly high tuberculosis rates too. He is also using medical technology in a reckless way that causes harm.
But I think you are right in pointing out that to some extent he is a victim of his situation /lack of education, even if he has more privileges and a better situation than the Black mine workers.
If you think physically being in a situation is a prerequisite for caring about it, I don't know where this conversation can go. You seem to be veering into personal attacks.
None of this is a valid criticism of my point. I think it might be time for us to stop, since we are clearly talking past one another.
@Tar_alcaran ... if the miners even lived long enough to get cancer.
Diamond miners during Apartheid were working in unsafe conditions for ridiculously low wages, often coerced into being there, and at relatively high risk of tuberculosis.
The new UCLA “Teens and Screens” study, conducted by the Center for Scholars & Storytellers, found that across 1,500 members of Gen Z, ages 10 to 24, young people wanted to see platonic relationships between onscreen characters, and many felt sex wasn’t necessary for story plot. (Only the respondents ages 13 to 24 were asked about sexual content.)
“While it’s true that teens want less sex on TV and in movies, what the survey is really saying is that teens want more and different kinds of relationships reflected in the media they watch,” said Yalda T. Uhls
@dumdum666 that's a hard disagree from me. I think you fundamentally misunderstand what ethics and morals are. Either you believe something or you don't.
If you come upon some people raping some kid in an alley that doesn't mean it's somehow okay for you stand there and just watch because "this is rape and quite frankly worse things were done in other rapes".
The argument "other people could have chosen to help and didn't, therefore it's fine for me to not help either" doesn't cut it.
If you, personally, think it's morally fine to starve civilians and children that's one thing - luckily many disagree which is why it's deemed a war crime.
But you should own your views on that. Don't try to argue that there's some special ☆magical place☆ where there's no such thing as right or wrong and ethics suddenly don't exist.
This is heartbreaking. If you've ever had an incubator baby in your family, you know how incredibly tiny and vulnerable they are and how it feels like a miracle or gift that this child you love is alive.
So let us send even more. I'd rather civillians no longer starved. Even if it means bad actors take some too.
We saw the flaws with the aid sanctions against Ethiopia earlier this year. Some corrupt officials were re-routing some of the aid intended for the famine in Tigray. But when the UN and US halted all food aid in response, starvation deaths in Ethiopia rose.
I understand that Israel don't mind starving the civilian population of Gaza as collatoral damage in their war with Hamas, but I do mind. The fact remains that starvation of civilians during war is illegal under international law. And I support that law.
Eh, this is the kind of thing people say to absolve themselves.
"Sure that neighbour kid's getting starved and abused by his parents but it's his parents' responsibility to feed him, not mine".
"Sure, the Rohingya are getting genocided by the Junta but after all the Junta is technically their government who are responsible for their safety, not us".
Last time anyone voted in Hamas was 17 years ago. Meanwhile literally half the Gazans are aged 18 or younger. Far too younger to have voted for Hamas let alone for this nightmare.
Yet with Gazans facing a humanitarian catastrophe, Hamas’s stockpiles raise questions about what responsibility, if any, it has to the civilian population.
I find statements like this pretty fatuous.
Ethically all humans have a responsibility to see that these civilians won't starve or lack medicine.
Hamas is hoarding it and won't share with civilians.
Israel is also refusing to share with the hapless civilians
it's trying to prevent the rest of the world from sharing either.
It's stupid to say I'm not allowed to give a homeless guy a hot meal because there's a rich guy nearby.