“Time For Reconciliation Is Over” – South Africa Votes To Confiscate White-Owned Land

Donate

Originally appeared at Zero Hedge

Is South Africa on the verge of a race-based civil war?

"Time For Reconciliation Is Over" - South Africa Votes To Confiscate White-Owned Land

Just as we warned was likely a week ago, the Parliament of South Africa voted this week in favor of a motion allowing lawmakers to amend the constitution to allow for the confiscation of white-owned farmland without any form of monetary compensation.

"Time For Reconciliation Is Over" - South Africa Votes To Confiscate White-Owned Land

The motion, brought by the Economic Freedom Fighter (EFF) leader Julius Malema (radical Marxist), was overwhelming adopted in parliament with a vote of 241 in support, and 83 against.

According to News24.com, an English-language South African online news publication, there were only a few parties that were against the motion including the Democratic Alliance, Freedom Front Plus, Cope and the ACDP. The proposal will be sent to the Constitutional Review Committee which must report back to Parliament by late August.

Confiscation of white-owned farmland was a major topic in the new president Cyril Ramaphosa’s platform, after he became the fifth President of South Africa since the 1994 democratic transition, in mid-February.

“The time for reconciliation is over. Now is the time for justice,” Malema told the parliament.

“We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land.”

With over 50 million citizens in South Africa, Bloomberg indicates that a 2017 government report shows white people own 73 percent of farmland.

White farmers own almost three-quarters of South Africa’s agricultural land, even after 23 years of government efforts to redistribute land to the black majority, City Press reported, citing a land audit by farm lobbying group Agri SA.

Some 73.3 percent of agricultural land is owned by whites, down from 85.1 percent in 1994, the year South Africa first held democratic elections, the newspaper reported.

Black ownership has increased markedly in some of the country’s most fertile provinces. Black farmers own 74 percent of the land in KwaZulu-Natal and 52 percent in Limpopo, City Press reported, citing the report to be released this week.

Total acreage available for farming fell 4 percent over the 23 years reviewed, as mining and expanding municipalities took over agricultural land, according to economist Johann Bornman, who conducted the audit for the lobbying group.

Last week, South Africa’s new president, Cyril Ramaphosa, said that he would return the lands owned by the white farmers since the mid-1600s to the black citizens of the country. He added the country’s agriculture (see below) must be preserved.

"Time For Reconciliation Is Over" - South Africa Votes To Confiscate White-Owned Land

Gugile Nkwinti, the former minister of rural affairs and land reform until Monday (reassigned to the minister of water affairs) said, “The ANC unequivocally supports the principle of land expropriation without compensation.”

"Time For Reconciliation Is Over" - South Africa Votes To Confiscate White-Owned Land

“There is no doubt about it, land shall be expropriated without compensation,” he added.

On the other hand, the official opposition Democratic Alliance party (DA) has criticized the motion, saying white confiscation of farmland by the government will undermine property rights and possibly collapse the economy.

The DA’s Thandeka Mbabama told the parliament that the wrongs of the past must be addressed, but white confiscation of farmland without compensation “cannot be part of the solution.”

The Transvaal Agricultural Union of South Africa (TAU SA), a commercial farmers union in the region, warned the country is in danger of traveling the same path as Zimbabwe, which “plunged into famine after a government-sanctioned purge of white farmers in the 2000s,” said the Russian Times.

“Where in the world has expropriation without compensation coupled to the waste of agricultural land, resulted in foreign confidence, economic growth and increased food production?” Meintjes said, via Australia’s news.com.au.

“If Mr Ramaphosa is set on creating an untenable situation, he should actively create circumstances which will promote famine. His promise to expropriate land without compensation sows the seed for revolution. Expropriation without compensation is theft.”

Freedom Front Plus leader Pieter Groenewald warned,

“If you continue on this course, I can assure you there is going to be unforeseen consequences that is not in the interest of South Africa.”

The Coming Civil War in South Africa explained: 

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • François

    Unbelievable Blacks used democracy and reconciliation to spoil Whites efforts. I would “understand” expropriation, but with corresponding compensation. Not to be a racist, but South Africa is nowadays the richest country in Africa, thanks to Whites’ capital and efforts.

    • soso

      and who did the “whites” compensate to get hold of 72% of farmland while making a shrinking 8% of total population ? and don’t even talk about “white” to make it a racial issue ; it’s an socio-economic one ?

      • velociraptor

        the farmland belong to people, who are able to farm it.

        • dutchnational

          No, in fact, farmlands belong to its owners.

          I would add the restriction that misused farmlands should be expropiated by a government under due compensation.

          • velociraptor

            in many countries only farmers can be owners. so is normal.

      • Saffa

        The local tribes couldn’t develop any farmland. They were too busy killing each other with spears and arrows.

        The whole of Southern Africa is dependent on the white owned farms in SA to feed them.

        How many black owned farms have had to shut down because the thieves that stole them have no idea how to run and operate a commercial farm… 99.9%

        • Turbofan

          The usual excuse. Dubious statistics and the white man has to save all other races from themselves

          • Ronald

            Racism is ugly in any color, by white or black or yellow. Survival of the people that is the big tribe of which we are all apart of, requires clear thinking not just emotional reaction. Going back over four hundred years it is certain that both noble and dishonorable actions brought us, the big tribe to this moment.
            We should therefore proceed by just actions today. Compensation would be logical, an unemotional solution.

          • 1691

            Generally speaking – ok, by all means. Regarding SA your comment is not objective.
            “Compensation would be logical, an unemotional solution.”
            Do you know how many times they have been compencated? It is never enough. The moment they finish their last acquired “redestribution” they turn their eyes to the whites and ask for more. They are not able to create, just consume.

      • Bru

        These white farmers where the first in these areas which were not inhabited by the Zulus who resided in other areas.
        Most blacks in the RSA are immigrants from other parts of Africa so can no more have a just claim on the lands of these white farmers than African immigrants to Europe towards the lands of European farmers.

        • Turbofan

          “Most blacks in the RSA are immigrants from other parts of Africa”

          Most whites from Europe are from other parts of Europe.Not to mention America and Australia but I dont hear you b*tching about that..

          “claim on the lands of these white farmers than African immigrants to Europe towards the lands of European farmers.”

          In which European country do black own huge swathes of farming land?

          • Hrky75

            I suppose you don’t hear him b*tching because nobody in Europe is trying to disposes a significant number of Europeans of the farmland they owned for centuries under a pretext that the “other people” are natives – when the fact is that todays “natives” actually murdered the real natives long before first whites ever set foot to the place…

          • Bru

            Just wrong, we have always been here, where do you get these strange ideas from, are you from another planet?.

            Re. Australia it’s a red herring.

            you distracting from the the real point, that it is a lie to say that the RSA’s farmers stole their land from other people.

            Again you are incapable of reading what I said, never said that black immigrants to Europe are at the present time claiming the lands of Europeans, but finding right that what they are now doing in the RSA would justify for them to steal the land of farmers in Europe.

      • 1691

        I appreciate your non-racial attitude however how many times the “socio-economic ” group have been paying, sharing, redistributing? You never have enough don’t you? And you will never acknowledge your own failures? Get your stats right. africacheck.org/reports/do-40000-whites-own-80-of-sa-the-claim-is-incorrect/

    • Turbofan

      “South Africa is nowadays the richest country in Africa, thanks to Whites’ capital and efforts.”

      Isnt that Libya?.. Oh I forgot, white Europeans destroyed that country..

      • Ronald

        Hillary Clinton destroyed Libya, she with the guiding hand of bankers and her personal assistant Huma Abiden, of the Muslim Brotherhood ( Sisterhood ). Comparing thieves to hard working people, and saying they are “the same” is to be blinded by skin color. That too is racism, and like any blindness will not be helpful.

        • MichaH

          The tribes, and native groups, as well as foreign arab terrorists are doing well in continuing the devastating mistakes made by western air-campaign.

      • Alex

        This will either end in war or like it did end with the Dutch Antilles, they kicked the Dutch out cause they wanted independece but few months later they were on their knees begging them to come back, imho, my guess is that the Dutch have pulled a couple of economic strings.

      • François

        True, sadly. But justice applies for all…

      • Thuli

        I don’t know how we’re measuring wealth here,but for a number years now the country with the highest GDP in Africa has been Nigeria, followed by SA, then Egypt.

    • 1691

      In 1994 immediately after Mandela was elected there was a redestribution of land and wealth. Now, more than 20 years later the ANC has been failing on all fronts but still blames the whites for their ignorance and greed. Ramaphosa himself is rich because of this wealth redistribution. These greedy semi-humans will face hunger like never before and blame the whites again and again.

  • soso

    Wealth, growth and Living standards isn’t everything ! Wrongly acquired property should be returned to the rightful owners no matter how long it takes and no matter how powerful backing the thieves enjoy !
    Proof is no other than Mugabe, bashed in MSM, sparking an economic crisis in his once rich Zimbabwe, but still supported by the people (even in the event of a “peaceful coup”).

    Mandela and ANC shouldn’t have done the compromises it did to get access to power, see “Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein”

    And actually the SA government is operating now the last security valve they have before a bloody revolution and all out civil war burst in SA, and believe it or not, Malema’s EFF is just a tip of the iceberg.

    • Saffa

      When the whites arrived in the 1600’s there were small groups of blacks living in mud huts scattered around SA. The whites developed SA into Africa’s powerhouse and the current ANC government is hell bent on turning it into Zimbabwe 2.0

      Typical. Its why African countries are the mess they are.

      • Анрэс Суарэс

        Probably those were mud huts, really, but they were THEIR PROPERTY IN THEIR LAND. Do not try to make excuses for the whites’ crimes.

        • Thuli

          Thank you..

  • velociraptor

    the black apes will follow the fate of zimbabwe.

  • paul ( original )

    If you want to see an ethno-state then this is the sort of course of
    action that is needed. So the question is are the South Africans
    doing something wrong or are they doing what all nations should do?

    • 1691

      This has nothing to do with South Afticans but the crooks in power.

  • Hrky75

    Strictly speaking, there wasn’t one acre of “farmland” in South Africa before 1600s – it was wilderness inhabited by few 1000 San people and other small tribes, mainly hunter-gatherers and cattle owners. Whites – for better of for worst – developed it into farmland using European methods and technology. Also most of the farm owner’s ancestors bought the land from SA government, some even from old Dutch Republic in 1600s – who should they return it to and who would compensate them. Incidentally, right about time of white collonization of SA, you had Bantu tribes from the north invading the land and butchering original natives, culminating with Shaka murdering 1 – 2 million people. And now his descendants will claim the land of their victims as their own, claiming ownership. Wellcome to Zimbabwe 2.0, only this time with a civil war to spice things up…

    • Bru

      exactly

    • velociraptor

      zulu, not bantu

      • Hrky75

        Zulu are a Bantu ethnic group like Xhosa, Nguni, Swazi, Ndebele, all inhabiting southern Africa…

        • velociraptor

          you are right

    • Thuli

      Where did you study your history? Was it from the Univesity of Thumbsuck?

      • François

        I’m curious to know your own version of History…:)

        • dutchnational

          Zuma ANC party program.

          • Thuli

            Na,just Google..

        • Thuli

          Google..

          • François

            …..Oh seriously? Which website were you advised to visit?

          • Thuli

            countrystudies.us/south-africa/3.htm

          • François

            ….Just one site? WELL, in any case I can understand the Blacks resentment against social injustice in South Africa…But at the same time justice applies for all and violence, spoliation against Whites is unacceptable and is high criminality.

      • 1691

        May be you studied history at ANC HQ and they only taught you about their 100 years of surviving by stealing, lying, abuse, corruption, killing whites, killing white farmers.

        • Thuli

          Google..(I’m not a politician or a member of any party,just a regular joe who’s not to lazy to run a Google search)

      • Hrky75

        There are 2 white racist inventions i generally use when learning history – local library and the Internet. The latter has literally thousands of sources for you to pick from. Now I’d really like to hear some arguments from you – because I never said that my version of events is absolute truth. That’s what the grownups call a DISCUSSION. Or are you one of those people that, upon hearing facts that disagree with the current ideology they are on, just throw a temper tantrum and move on…

        • Thuli

          The Bantu people have been here for over 2000 years. We didn’t arrive here at the same time as white settlers 400 years ago. That’s rubbish. The people who were here before us were the San/Khoi and they were hunter gatherers. They roamed the land freely and had no sense of the land as they were nomadic. The Bantu were farmers herders and had a sense of ownership of the land as we were not nomadic. We had kings chiefs who ruled over territories. There were wars between certain BANTU tribes such as the Zulu and the Xhosa over territories and grazing land. The events of Shaka Zulu took place some 200 odd years ago. 200yrs after white settlers arrived. The Bantu generally lived in peace with the San/Khoi and even intermarried with them. The San/Khoi were basically located in the western and north-western part of the country. It is documented history that as the white settlers moved in this direction they wiped out the San/Khoi population,literally hunting them down almost to extinction as if they were animals and not people. This is like the situation in Australia where the aboriginal people were by law classified as non-human beings and it was legal to actually hunt them down. This law as far as I know was only changed in the 1970’s or 1980’s I kid you not. Please don’t try to tell me what my history is and what it isn’t.

          • Hrky75

            I’m Ok with debating history, but don’t try and slip me ideology – that I’m allergic to. Bantus came from the north assimilating pillaging and killing people and settled in NW part that is today Natal. The western most progress was Xhosa settling in East Cape. On the other hand the Dutch settled Table Bay and small area around it, actually preventing early Dutch settler going beyond colony border. Wast areas of today’s SA were wildernesses populated with wild animals only. Dutch did fight the San and Xhosa trying to secure more land in the Cape. In early 1800s when British took over the Cape and Dutch decided to move away from British control Zulus started butchering other people living in W i NW parts of the country killing up to 2 million people in the process. Slaughtering that many people – way more then the Dutch managed to kill fighting San and Xhosa btw – had a side effect of emptying the country. The Boers didn’t trek east because the land was full of hostile blacks itching for a fight – on the contrary, they benefited from Shaka’s rampage. Now in no way an I defending or attacking the concept of 17-19 century colonialism – it’s a historical fact characteristic for the period. Europeans were infinitely more successful in it, but other people too were trying to take over land before and after that era. Zulus were as much an aggressive and expansionist society as the Boers. They fought each other and in free time subdued lesser tribes around them. And now descendants of the Zulu will claim all the land because they have roughly similar shade of skin as the people they killed and enslaved. While the Boer descendants will have to give up because their skin color is too pale? And somehow that’s not racism and new Apartheid this time with black people being top dogs. To be clear this move has nothing to do with getting the land in the hands of the people that owned it 400 years ago for several reasons: those people were killed either by the Dutch or by the Bantus, the survivors have no way of proving they owned the land, majority of black people inhabiting today’s SA aren’t even descended from Zulus or other black natives, but immigrated from other parts of Africa in last 150 years. And last but not least, judging from recent Zimbabwean experience, land will be distributed to the ruling party loyalist that will ruin it in a few years. Crop yield will drop significantly, because most land will end up being unused or used only for subsistence farming and there won’t be enough food to feed 50 million hungry people. And the real problem will be that after getting rid of “white boogie men”, by the time SA runs out of food – ANC will run out their favorite scapegoats…

          • Thuli

            Natal is situated on the east coast of SA. If I say West and NW(I’m not talking about North West province) what I’m actually talking about is the northern part of the west coast of south africa, which is called the Northern Cape and by west I mean the Western Cape. By the time white settlers arrived,these areas were mostly occupied by the San/khoi. The eastern part of the country EC, KwaZulu Natal were occupied by Bantu tribes mainly the Xhosa’s and the Zulu’s. Your account of history is full of holes. The battle of blood river was fought between Zulu’s and dutch settlers so its so its incorrect to say that dutch settlers avoided the Bantu as if they went around them. I don’t know where you get this number 2million. The Bantu settled in what is now called South Africa over 2000 years ago. The people who were here before the Bantu are the San/khoi. They were wiped out by dutch and/or english settlers. They were not killed off by the Bantu. It occurs to me now after reading your remarks again that you don’t know or understand who the Bantu are. Bantu is a broad term which includes most of the black tribes in sub saharan africa. For example, Xhosa’s are Bantu,Zulu’s are Bantu,Sotho,Tshwana, Tsonga, Shona ,Swati all the tribes living southern africa today are all Bantu. The Bantu people moved from west africa thousands of years, migrating east and south.The black people living in Kenya and Tanzania today speaking Swahili,are Bantu.Thats why all our languages have similarties. Originally we are one people,The Bantu. I’ll say it again,we the Bantu arrived here in what is today called SA over 2000 years ago. The only other people who were around here that time were San/Khoi who are not Bantu. We the Bantu didn’t wipe these people out,that was done by english and dutch settlers. We mostly got along with these people and even intermarried with them. Especially the Xhosa(who are Bantu). Now you want to deny us our heritage and ancestry also by saying we are not descendants of Zulus and Xhosa’s and Sotho’s and the rest of the Bantu tribes who’ve been here for more than 2 millennia? You are trying to whitewash history to cover your sins. Shame,shame..

          • Hrky75

            When the early Portuguese sailors rounded the Cape of Good Hope in the 15th century very few Bantu speakers were found there. The predominant indigenous population around the Cape was made up of Khoisan peoples. Following the establishment of the Dutch Cape Colony, European settlers began arriving in Southern Africa in substantial numbers. Around 1770 Trekboers from the Cape encountered Bantu speakers around the Great Fish River and frictions arose between the two groups. – and late 1700s is the time when Zulus under Shaka started butchering other Bantus virtually emptying the land that was already sparsely populated helping the Boers occupy it.

            From the late 18th and early 19th centuries, there were two major areas of frictional contact between the white settlers and the Bantu speakers in Southern Africa. Firstly, as the Boers moved north inland from the Cape they encountered the Xhosa, the Basotho, and the Tswana. Secondly attempts at large coastal settlements were made by the British in Xhosa territory (now the Eastern Cape), and in Zululand (now KwaZulu-Natal).

            The San include the indigenous inhabitants of Southern Africa before the southward Bantu migrations from North and East Africa reached the region 700 years ago, which led to the Bantu populations displacing the Khoi and San to become the predominant inhabitants of Southern Africa. – so you predate the Dutch in SA for mere 300 years not a millennia.

            Nobody want’s to deny your heritage – kindly cut with the SJW BS – my point is that your heritage includes dispossession and colonization of people that were in SA before you – just like the Boer heritage. I belive Mandela had plenty of reasons why he decided to make a compromise on the land issue – and it wasn’t weakens, because he didn’t compromise on any other major issue. When promoting policy of forceful confiscation of land under the pretext of “returning it to the original owners” the question arises – Where do you draw the line? Will the Bantu return all the land to the original owners the San or will just taking the land from the whites – just because they’re white – will right all historical wrongs?

            In the end, it’s very interesting and rather expected, that you didn’t answer to the last part of my comment, about real reasons of this political decision and how thing will develop after…

            P.S. I honestly hope we can have a genuine and civil discussion. So pls. cut the “shame” shit – OK?

          • Thuli

            Below is an extract from the website with the URL: countrystudies.us/south-africa/
            Their source is the ‘The U.S. Library of Congress’. This will be my last comment on this topic. I suggest that anyone who wants the historical facts without “ideology” go and check out this site,they have everything there,the whole history of SA. I’ve just copied and pasted one of the sections. This way we don’t have to debate about recorded historical facts.
            The Arrival of Bantu-Speaking Africans
            South Africa Table of Contents
            Bantu-speaking Africans, whose descendants make up the overwhelming majority of the present-day inhabitants of South Africa, had moved south of the Limpopo River by about 1,500 years ago. Farmers who combined knowledge of cattle-keeping and slash-and-burn (swidden) cultivation with expertise in metal-working, the Bantu speakers came from West Central Africa north of the Congo River near present-day Cameroon. Historians and archaeologists now argue that this movement took place not in any single great migration but rather in a slow southward shift of people throughout sub-Saharan Africa that resulted from the gradual drying up of the Sahara beginning about 8,000 years ago. The southward movement involved not the conquering hordes previously imagined but rather a moving frontier of farmers seeking new fields and pastures who interacted with pastoralists and hunter-gatherers, sometimes trading, sometimes incorporating people in client relationships, sometimes fighting for access to the same crucial resources. The farmers settled throughout southern Africa east of the 400-millimeter rainfall line and as far as the southwestern limits of cropping along the Great Kei River.

            The Bantu-speaking farmers chose to minimize risks rather than to maximize production in their use of the environment. They kept large herds of cattle and invested these animals with great material and symbolic value. Cattle provided a means to acquire and to display considerable wealth, and they were used for significant social and political transactions, such as bridewealth compensation (lobola ) and tribute demands. Cattle were also valued for their milk and for their hides, but they were seldom killed for their meat except on ceremonial occasions. Hunting of game continued to provide a major source of protein, while additional supplies came from domesticated goats and sheep. Bantu speakers also cultivated a range of indigenous crops, including millet, sorghum, beans, and melons along with other grains and vegetables. Those close to the sea collected shellfish and fished. By utilizing such a great range of food sources, the farmers spread their risks in a difficult ecological system constantly subject to drought, disease, and crop failure.

            Still, the accumulation of large herds and the cultivation of extensive fields produced greater concentrations of population and considerably more stratification among Bantu speakers than among their San and Khoikhoi neighbors. Archaeologists have found evidence of settlements established more than 1,400 years ago comprising several thousand people each. Toutswe, in eastern Botswana, consisted of a series of communities built on large flat-topped hills with fields cultivated below and cattle pastured locally. The residents smelted iron and engaged in extensive trade with people as far east as the Indian Ocean. Similar large communities emerged at least 1,000 years ago just south of the Limpopo River where Bambandyanalo and then Mapungubwe arose as significant early states (both situated at the intersection of the present-day borders of Botswana, Zimbabwe, and South Africa). Cultivating extensive fields and holding large numbers of cattle, the residents of these states also produced finely worked gold and copper ornaments, hunted for ivory, and engaged in extensive long-distance trade. They were generally presided over by chiefs who held considerable–although never total–power; elders always had to be consulted about major decisions. Compared with the smaller-scale communities of San and Khoikhoi, the Bantu-speaking societies were marked by greater degrees of stratification: of old over young, men over women, rich over poor, and chiefs over commoners.

            There were, however, significant differences between the settlement patterns and the degree of political centralization established by Bantu speakers who settled inland and by those who lived closer to the coast. The inland Bantu speakers, termed Sotho-Tswana on the basis of their dialects, concentrated in greater numbers around water sources and trading towns. By the late sixteenth century, a series of powerful hereditary chiefs ruled over the society known as the Rolong, whose capital was Taung. The capital and several other towns, centers of cultivation and livestock raising as well as major trading communities, had populations of 15,000 to 20,000. By contrast, the Bantu-speakers termed Nguni, who settled on the coastal plains between the Highveld (see Glossary) and the Indian Ocean, lived in much smaller communities and had less hierarchical political structures. Moving their cattle often in search of fresh pastureland, they lived in small communities scattered across the countryside. In many cases, a community identified itself on the basis of descent from some ancestral founder, as did the Zulu and the Xhosa. Such communities could sometimes grow to a few thousand people, as did the Xhosa, the Mpondo, the Mthethwa, and others, but they were usually far smaller.

            By 1600 all of what is now South Africa had been settled: by Khoisan peoples in the west and the southwest, by Sotho-Tswana in the Highveld, and by Nguni along the coastal plains. Portuguese travelers and sailors shipwrecked along the coast in the seventeenth century reported seeing great concentrations of people living in apparent prosperity.

            Google
            Custom Search
            Source: U.S. Library of Congress

    • dutchnational

      You are correct of course on this.

      Some of the old wineries around Stellenbosch are over 300 year old and have never been in the hands of bantu people, like you said, there were no bantu people in the cape at the time.

      Furthermore, the majority of the people in the Cape states are either white or colored (mixed) people, afrikaander speaking and non tribal.

      A program for gradual expansion of black independent farmers seems reasonable, giving those expulsed white farmers due compensation. Also I tend to think the figures are giving the wrong indications as one should differentiate between prime lands and almost arid lands. I tend to think that on prime lands, the percentages of black farmers are higher and in large almost arid lands, the percentages of white farmers will be higher. When one calculates averages on those very different lands, the results will not be really relevant.

    • Анрэс Суарэс

      The tale of “we the whites came and did a favor to this savages by enslaving them” has been used by centuries. People like you should go to jail, to say the least.

      • Hrky75

        …and illiterate people – like yourself – should stay the hell off the keyboard until you learn to read – I never said that “white people did a favor to blacks by enslaving them”. I said that both whites and blacks did the enslaving in South Africa, roughly at the same time and that the ancestors of black people claiming to own the farmland took part in the Bantu colonization of SA that cost 2 million lives of real natives…People that claim black on black violence is OK, but whites oppressing blacks is ultimate crime that should be paid for by the white decedents – on account of their white skin alone – should be treated like wild racist dogs that they are…

      • Bob

        ‘People like you should go to jail, to say the least.’ Hyperbolic much?
        Is that what you picked up from your post-colonial and gender studies?

      • Feudalism Victory

        Nobody is enslaved anymore you racist genocide apologist

    • Johnpd

      This agrees with my memory of what I’ve read.
      Purely by accident of shipwreck the Dutch East India Company (Jan Koompani) established an unintended colony in South Africa on the Cape.
      There were no full-sized blacks, Bantu, in the area.
      There were only the short San, Hottentot, people. Hunter-gatherers & herders, I believe.

      A few independent-minded Dutch escaped the clutches of the incredibly control-freak (Nazi) Jan Koompanie & established independent republics, like Transvaal, etc…
      They were confident in the knowledge that they were the chosen people, entitled to the lands, animals & San servants around them by their Old Testament Calvinist Bibles.
      The Old Testament is big on servants & slaves.

      The Bantu people were drifting South at this time, but further North in Great Zimbabwe, & further back in history Bantu policy had been to capture & enslave the little San People & work them to death down their gold mines.

      The area passed to Brit Empire control, who gave free farms on the borders to act effectively as a picket line for Empire to warn of & fight against the Southward encroaching Bantu.

      If anyone has a historically justifiable claim to South Africa, IMHO, it’s the original inhabitants, the San people.

      John Doran.

      • Hrky75

        Exactly. But this political move has nothing to do with righting the historical wrong and everything to do with corrupt and criminally incompetent ANC political class not being able to run a country at all. I mean in the 1990s it was all about housing, schooling, jobs and health care. And 25 years of black majority government later, most of the poor blacks still live in corrugated iron huts with no running water. Most schools that are not just concrete huts with a black board and semi illiterate teachers – were built in the Apartheid era. As for health, ANC cure for AIDS epidemic is – denying it ever existed. And now when they run out of stupid explanations a guy born in 1980s that was 10 when Mandela and DeClerk reached a deal creating the modern SA will try to copy the Zimbabwean disaster hoping for a totally different outcome. Now that’s text book definition of – insane…

      • Vitex

        What country are you from, John? What are the historical claims on the land you stand on?

        • Johnpd

          I was born & brought up in London, England, 1953, Vitek.
          I know about invasions by Danes, Vikings, Picts, Scots, Angles & Saxons & the Romans. The Norman (Northmen, Vikings) French invaded 1066.
          These Norman French invaded my Irish parents homeland, 1177.

          I regard the invasion which put the Dutch captain-general on the English throne as the most important, c 1688. William gave the anonymous to this day European financiers who had funded The English Revolution the Charter for the Bank of England 1694, which put the Kings’ debts on his taxpayers’ shoulders, to be collected through general taxations, establishing the now unrepayable Nation Debt, & also the right to create money out of thin air as debt, through fractional reserve banking, effectively enslaving the population to debt via fiat (imaginary) money.
          This was the most insidious invasion of all.
          This is now 100% (zero) reserve banking. Complete & utter fraud. Enslavement.
          Book: Pawns in the Game, William Guy Carr.
          Hope this helps.
          John Doran.

      • ZP

        great insight John, thanks and please keep them coming…

  • Thuli

    “Not to be a racist ,but South Africa is nowadays the richest country in Africa,thanks to Whites’ capital and efforts.” Dear Francois,South Africa is the country that it is today because it was built on the backs of the indigenous black population. Their suffering,disenfranchisement and systematic “efforts by Whites” (as you put it) to prevent the majority black population from participating in the countries economy on an equal footing are the very foundation on which the countries economy was built. In our country,in our own land we have no dignity,we are looked down upon ,controlled and oppressed still, 24 years after so called democracy. While I respect your right to have an opinion and express,I find it to be grossly in-accurate and frankly unacceptable. SF please,if you’re going to cover this topic in depth,PLEASE do your research. The Youtube video which you put up for this article is very one sided and very misleading as to the true nature of what is happening in SA. It’s exactly the type of propaganda which you have been so diligently reporting about and countering in Syria.

    • Saffa

      Your claims of being “controlled and oppressed” ring hollow in the face of how the current ANC criminal enterprise has many laws discriminating against whites and has made it as difficult as possible for whites to find employment in their own country and to own a gun to protect themselves and families from 50 million blacks that want them dead.

      That’s why whites are fleeing SA in the masses to places like Australia, New Zealand, UK and the Netherlands (as real refugees fleeing political persecution in SA).

      The truth is the ANC has implemented a reverse racism policy and has promoted racial hatred against whites and whites today are hunted and killed by blacks in ultra violent crimes while the “government” (really just a group of criminals looting and pillaging SA) pretends like its not happening!

      Thuli, it sounds like your an EFF radical marxist supporter.

      • Turbofan

        I think white South African should be thankful as to how they were treated after apartheid ended(black repression). At least whites were not lynched in the streets.Blacks in the US did not even come to power, all they did was to gain freedom from slavery and check how they were and continue to be treated..

      • Thuli

        Hi Saffa..Let me address 3 points you’ve made..#1.Laws discriminating against white people: It’s called affirmative action the purpose of correcting huge inequality caused by over 400 years of colonialism and Apartheid. By the way,”affirmative action” was invented by “white people”(I don’t like using this term),first instituted in USA through Executive order 10925 by President John F Kennedy on 6 March 1961. This was to bridge the inequality caused by centuries of slavery and segregation against the black population in the USA.
        #2 Hatred against white people: Black people DON’T hate white people!! And we’re NOT hunting you down,please don’t play victim here. The fact is the majority of victims of violent crime in South Africa is black people,by a huge margin. As far as un-employment goes:39% of black people are unemployed compared to 8.3% of white people. White people are NOT a persecuted or oppressed people in South Africa.
        #3 “EFF radical Marxist supporter.” Labels like this are meaningless to black people. These are intellectual terms/labels for intellectual debates( which are equally meaningless). Being Black in South Africa is an everyday struggle no matter what what you’re background is(rich family/poor family).There’s not enough space to adequately express this. Our trials are based in reality not in the mind,they are real. What matters is outcomes,not labels. And what we want is to be able to take part in the economy of our country as producers and not as just consumers. To be able able to mobilize capital and resources without being systematically hindered by a system built to ensure we don’t own or control any resources or capital. The party I will support is the one that can create the conditions for these outcomes. I don’t care if that is the ANC or EFF or even the DA, if they can do this they will have my support. We will not be running to Australia, or USA or Europe just because the going is tough. We only have one home, and that’s SA,we’ll stay and fix.

        • 1691

          Any input on BBE? Or BBBEE?

        • dutchnational

          It is well known there is a large influx of poor africans from other countries into South Africa. As they are generally less educated and have no capital, they tend to be more often unemployed. That is the fault of neither white africans nor of the present SA government, numbers given are even some 2 million Zimbabweans and then those from other countries.

          • Thuli

            According to Wikipedia there are 56 million people in South Africa. The black African population is 76.4% . In terms of real numbers that is 42.78 million black people. Wikipedia doesn’t specify if this number includes black people from the rest of Africa, but it does say there could be as much as 5 million African migrants including 3 million Zimbabweans( it says the numbers are not confirmed). But lets assume That this number of 42.78 million includes African migrants. If we subtract that 5 mill from 42.78 mill we are left with 37.78 million black SA citizens. Multiply that number by 39%(unemployment rate among black people) and you get 14.73 million unemployed black south africans. The entire white population of South Africa is 9.1% which is about 5.1 million white people. The number of black people unemployed is almost 3 times the entire white population in the country,and that excludes African migrants!!
            To say that they are less educated is totally incorrect. Zimbabwes education system is rated far higher than South Africa’s. I’ve just read an article published in the Mail and Guardian Jan 2012. Their pupils score higher in Maths and Literacy than ours do. Apparently this is true for most African countries compared to us :-(
            In my personal experience,when I was young,going out to eat with my parents at the local mall,the waiters and waitresses were mostly South African black citizens.Today the majority of them are African black migrants mostly from Zimbabwe.( Lower wages) The other African migrants whom I’ve met either have good paying middle income jobs or are self employed. They come here and start their own businesses whether that is being hawkers or proper registered companies( plumbing,electricians or general handymen) and they hire their own countrymen( we can actually learn something here).This is my personal experience. I don’t know what point you were making but these are facts.

          • 1691

            It never crossed your mind that your government allowed those immigrants to take over the jobs. You will never acknowledge that South Africans are to greedy to work for the wages that some will gladly take. They would rather live on social grants, stealing from the whites or spending life in prison where food is provided. You also miss the point about employment: most whites are self employed. The rest of the nation relies on state jobs,social help or participate in the sharing of the first round of redestribution. South Africans believe that the whites owe them and must provide for them. South Africans have turned into arrogant parasits demanding from the whites. No one owes you anything. If you are so good then stand up for yourself and do something on your own. You can not. It is proven.

          • Thuli

            EVERYTHING YOU’VE JUST SAID IS NONSENSE.But for arguments sake, everything you’ve just said could just as well be applied to the UK and the indigenous population( English ,Scott’s,Irish,Welsh etc..) Didn’t they not so long ago vote to get out of the EU because of an influx of migrants and complaints that they were lowering wages and standards of living because they were willing work for less? Ever heard of Brexit? Is it because they are also useless and lazy and can’t do anything on their own? No because those racial stereotypes can only apply to Africans right..? I hope you can appreciate the irony in this, since it was the English who colonized South Africa.
            Anyway like I said,everything you just said is nonsense. The situation in SA is complicated,its not “black and white”,no pun intended. For us to really understand the situation and for you to know what my actual positions are,we would have to go back about 28 years to the time when negotiations took place about ending Apartheid. What was discussed? What was the actual agreement?( between black and white). Who were the parties negotiating and how or has that deal been implemented as agreed?This comment box is not the right space to get into it.

          • 1691

            “Nonsence ” is such a strong argument! Ha ha ha. Irrelevan comparison with UK. Answer my questions. Or, … on second thought, please, do not bother.

          • velociraptor

            we are left with 37.78 million black SA citizens. Multiply that number
            by 39%(unemployment rate among black people) and you get 14.73 million
            unemployed black south africans.

            wrong.

            you should use the population 18-60 years old

          • Thuli

            It’s beside the point. The point is,even using the population 18-60,black unemlpoyment is in the millions. If you take the population 18-60 of white people with an unemployment rate of 8.3%, you don’t even reach 100k (8.3% of the entire white population of 5.1M is just over 420k). The numbers are quite telling..

          • velociraptor

            btw., i agree with your both comments

    • 1691

      Nice try. If it was not for the white man you would be walking around in straw skirts and dying like flies.. You inherited from apartheid the best infrastructure and in 24 years successfully corrupted it and ruined a lot. You have no idea how many of your brothers and sisters have been telling me that apartheid was bad but they were not hungry like now. Did you learn from the jews to lie so convincingly???
      “South Africa is the country that it is today because it was built on the backs of the indigenous black population. Their suffering,disenfranchisement and systematic “efforts by Whites” (as you put it) to prevent the majority black population from participating in the country’s economy on an equal footing are the very foundation on which the countries economy was built. In our country,in our own land we have no dignity,we are looked down upon ,controlled and oppressed still, 24 years after so called democracy.”
      This is pure BULLSH*T! The last 24 years have been a reversed revenge- you did not know how to handle the power. You kicked out Thabo Mbeki because he was following in the footsteps of Mandela and appointed the Guinness record crook- president ( accused of 737 crimes) . It was ok with you cause you could just steal and lie like him. By the way Ramaphosa was the one who sent the policemen to shoot to kill the Marikana miners. You had a stealing president and now you have a murderer. Talk to me about propaganda about SA if you dare! Shame on you!

      • Thuli

        LOL, thIs actually funny.. I’ll assume that when you say “You”, you are talking about black people in general and not me personally. You (1691),can’t be talking about me personally because you don’t know me at all. You don’t know what my views are you don’t know what I feel about any of the presidents you’ve just mentioned. Your statements are based on assumptions and racial stereo-types. You hate Jews and you hate Africans. What did Jews do to you? What did Africans do to you? Your hate is based on ignorance and stereotypes as all racism is. But you know what,I don’t hate you( you or other people of European descent). I’m NOT even angry. Outcomes,that’s all that matters.

        • 1691

          You made your points so clear. As for hatred…. you are wrong. It is not hatred but contempt. Could you please give me one reason to respect the government of israhell? Or for the same matter the government of SA? I am waiting and ready to really see something positive. So far… nothing. Leave israhell aside. What good has the government of SA done for the last 24 years. Even your ex- financial minister said that it is embarassing to carry on blaming your failures to apartheid. Can you not see that ANC is good for nothing. I feel for the people of SA, they do not deserve such rulers. You are hiding your ignorence behind the mask of “I don’t hate you”. Of course you don’t hate me/ us. You just want us to provide for you. Isn’t this the outcome that matters?

    • You can call me Al

      Wrong.

  • FlorianGeyer

    I am sure an ancient document will be found somewhere that says ‘God Gave South Africa to he jews ‘ :)

    It will be another miracle.

  • Johan 54

    Probably not only in South-Africa. If you look at the situation between Myanmar and Bangladesh, Rohingya are flooding already densly populated area’s in Bangladesh. That will end in civil war. The Middle-East and Africa is flooding Europe, that wil end in civil war. There will be civil war everywhere on this planet without borders.

    • Ronald

      Rohingya are Muslim, originally from Bangladesh flooding into Myanmar, now returning to the vastly overpopulated nation they tried to escape. It is not a civil war, but a clash of cultures. Islamic and Buddhist. There are some who wish too see war in all the world, and there are many more who wish to live in peace with their neighbors

      • nshah

        Rohingya are Muslim, originally from Bangladesh..???

        lol.. sounds like Khazars are jews originally from east Europe and occupies Palestine..!
        Maybe you should get ur facts straight..!

        • Ronald

          My facts are straight, the Rohingya may be from India as that was not yet separated when they were brought in by the British. However more than half are recent migrants who crossed into Myanmar from Bangladesh, hence their difficulty in getting paperwork. Are you suggesting they are not Islamic, or that they have all been there for hundreds of years. What is your knowledge ?

          • nshah

            Hehehe.. You’re right.. lol..!

  • Mory

    and you wonder why no one cares when your countries burn?
    Typical Arab zealous arrogance based on nothing
    I found out the most racists people are actually the one at the 3rd or lower tier that wishes so much to be like the one at the top thus spits on the bottom
    Arab this Arab that while at any other opportunity discredit others
    you’ll never win anything with such a mentality you’ll be battered and battered again migrate and enslaved till you realize that the real problem is within yourselves…. or never either way it’s your problem
    God is the best of judge

    • Thuli

      Mory I don’t know where you are from but what you’ve said is so TRUE. I don’t have any experience with Arabs but certain racial groups in SA who have the same position as you described( 3rd or lower tier),even 2nd tier, really do spit on those at the bottom(sometimes literally).

    • Raptar Driver

      Not too many Arabs in South Africa.

  • Pareggiamoiconti

    black southafricans have the undisputable right to demonstrate they can starve to death by themselves

  • Raptar Driver

    Poor Blacks, of course all of your problems trace back to ‘Whitey’, on your own you would have built things like the pyramids of Egypt; oh wait you did do that, never mind.

  • SnowCatzor

    That “BLACK POWer FARM” sign really says it all doesn’t it. Lack of planning, lack of foresight, lack of ability. Hopefully people will stop pretending that South Africa is a wonderful ‘rainbow nation’ and that Mandela was a saint, and instead see it for the corrupt, incompetent, ignorant s**thole it is.

  • Vitex

    People can get as cross as they want. But without the boers, SA will starve, just like Zimbabwe. Also, you think you’ve seen civil war from the Kurds? Wait until the boere arm themselves. You IED seen nothing yet.

  • Vitex

    Let’s not forget that Cyril R made his money from being a mining oligarch. When he has expropriated the lands, he’ll probably sell them to the chinese. The poor in SA will not receive any redistributed wealth anytime soon

  • EoF

    This is fucking retarded