Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watrose.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watrose!gdvsmit
From: gdvsmit@watrose.UUCP (Riel Smit)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory,net.politics,net.nlang.africa
Subject: Re: Yugo automobile and human rights
Message-ID: <7525@watrose.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Aug-85 11:12:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: watrose.7525
Posted: Tue Aug 27 11:12:34 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Aug-85 21:29:44 EDT
Reply-To: gdvsmit@watrose.UUCP (Riel Smit)
Followup-To: net.politics
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.politics.theory:988 net.politics:10680 net.nlang.africa:111

In article <220@cylixd.UUCP> charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips) writes:
>
>As far as Eastern Bloc countries go, Yugoslavia is bad, but not by
>any means the worst.  It allows more rights and liberties than, say,
>Romania or Czechoslovakia, but is more repressive than East Germany
>or Poland.  It is a one-party Marxist-Leninist regime, and consistently
>violates the Helsinki Accords, the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human
>Rights, and other agreements which it has signed.  It just doesn't
>violate them as often or as severely as some others.
>

In the light of the above (which is not new to me), and similar statements
that can be made about a large proportion of African (and other third
world) countries, can someone please explain why South Africa is singled
out for the kind of treatment it gets?  I'm not necessarily saying they
(SA) should not be getting the treatment, I just want to hear peolpe
explain why they do not become rabid over these other countries the way
they do over South Africa.  Why, sporting ties, investments, and what have
you go on with hardly a whisper (and definitely nothing more than a
whisper).