Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Apartheid: The Truth

The last white president of the Republic of South Africa, FW De Klerk explains some of the many misconceptions about the Apartheid policy of South Africa.

"In 1980, White South Africa was acknowledged -- even by her enemies -- as the most powerful country on the African continent.

Now, 25 years later, this White giant has collapsed and is in the hands of the ANC. The Afrikaners, once masters of the country, are today a subject nation, ruled by people who only 120 years ago, did not have the wheel.
How did this happen?

The only way that Afrikaners, or "Boers" as some prefer to be called, can be spared the fate of all First World minorities in Africa, is for them to abandon their dependence on non-White labour, accept that their salvation lies in a smaller territory, and finally pack their bags and congregate in that smaller territory where they will form an outright demographic majority.


The Afrikaners never understood the relationship between demographics and power:
THOSE WHO OCCUPY A TERRITORY, DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THAT TERRITORY.

Only once a majority of Afrikaners understand this truth, can there even begin to be talk of a practical plan for saving them from ultimate long term extermination at the hands of the Third World.


Theoretically, if a majority of Afrikaners should come to this understanding, then it would be possible for Afrikaners to save themselves --
AS NO ONE ELSE IS GOING TO SAVE THEM.

Let us be positive and say that theoretically, Afrikaners did come to an understanding of the relationship between demographics and power politics.
Then they would stop wasting time blaming crackpot conspiracies for their downfall, stop dancing around wasting time playing party politics in a majority rule system, in which they are just as doomed to failure as they were under Apartheid, and start practically working towards creating a territory or region in which they become the demographic majority.

This would, ipso facto as a result of their small numbers, be a much smaller territory than the current area of South Africa. Where it would be, could be decided when and if that time ever comes: the only preconditions must be that it must be majority occupied by Afrikaners, and that those who settle there MUST BE PREPARED TO DO THEIR OWN LABOUR.
(There are immense problems in this, and this writer would be pleasantly surprised if the majority of Afrikaner farmers could in fact be persuaded to dispense with their hundreds of farm labourers, and mechanize like their Western counterparts; or if the majority of White South African households could be persuaded to make their own beds and wash their own dishes, instead of using the plentiful 'maids'.)

There is no other way: all else is chaff in the wind. History will tell if the Afrikaners have it within them to undertake this second Great Trek, or if they are doomed to go the way of all White settlements in Africa: be ploughed under as the Third World destroys them bit by bit."
- Arthur Kemp





In a hot tin-roofed workshop, four young men, stripped to the waist, build coffins. With well practised efficiency they produce 100 caskets a month, participants in a program to create work for unemployed Afrikaners. Most are sold to bury AIDS victims in the black communities surrounding the all-white private town of Orania.

This town of 600, situated close to the geographic center of South Africa, was established in 1991, as a place where the soon-to-be outvoted Afrikaners, could rebuild a homeland or Boer volkstaat. Thirteen years on, despite bad press and the brunt of endless editorial cartoons (now framed on the wall of the local B&B), this town is thriving.

To UNDERSTAND THE BOER, three issues must be considered: The wounds of the ANGLO-BOER WAR still bleed (proportionally more Boer, mostly women and children, died in British concentration camps than Jews died in the Holocaust); the Boer is deeply, CONSERVATIVELY RELIGIOUS; and to survive, the Boer believe they need SELF-DETERMINATION ON LAND THEY CAN CALL THEIR OWN. In a country of 45 million, the Boer, with a total population of under 3 million, is politically insignificant.

They gambled on apartheid to retain self-determination and lost. Now they live, a distinct nation, within a country not their own.

Source: MasakhaneSA

64 Opinion(s):

Ron. said...

The Boer people are not 3 million. The very article the video author lifted his information from even lists that the Boers are at 1.5 million which is a number I arrived at as well based on calculations I did about four years ago. The total White Afrikaans population is at 3.5 million but only about 1.5 million of those folks are Boers as the vast majority of Afrikaners are descended from the erstwhile named Cape Dutch population group.

[ In a country of 45 million, the Boer, with a total population of fewer than 1.5 million, are politically insignificant. They gambled on apartheid and lost. Now they live, a distinct nation, within a country not their own. Many Boer are again circling the wagon. The slogan for the Boer-run Radio Pretoria is “The radio with borders.” ]

The full article can be found at: New Coffins, Old Flags, Microorganisms And The Future of the Boer.

The above is a direct quite / excerpt from the article in question the video author must have gotten his information from because I can spot the EXACT same phrases used in both but then he OMITTED the relevant fact that the Boers are 1.5 million. Not 3 million. There would have been a lot more Boers were it not for the deaths in the concentration camps but let's not make the unacademic & tragic mistake of attributing the total number of Afrikaners to the smaller Boers because this just insults the long history of struggle the Boers have had to endure in the name of being Boers while the Afrikaners did not engage in such struggles. This would be tantamount to conflating the number of Quebecois with the Acadians & thus claiming that the Acadians are 5 million plus strong when in fact the Acadians are only about 300 000. This would insult the memory of the Acadians who have had a MUCH harsher history under British rule & displacement just as the Boers have had a much harsher history under British rule & displacement.

Doberman said...

Thank you Ron, that's why we must defer to you for clarification on matters of this nature. It's still a worthwhile video to post.

Vanilla Ice said...

@Ron. Firstly, thanks for enlightening me some time back. This is now a permanent part of my debating arsenal, as it should be.

I was wondering if you would correct this obvious flaw; thankfully you did.

Ron. said...

Just glad I was able to spot it. There is a bit of confusion over this issue simply because the Boers were so prominent in the history of Southern Africa therefore a lot of people around the world erroneously presume that the all Afrikaners are descended from the Boers but there were always a lot more non-Boer descended White Afrikaans speakers who lived mainly in the south western region of the Cape & were often called Cape Dutch [ if anything at all ] then later started calling themselves Afrikaners in a more political & assertive sense [ circa 1875 ] as the term Afrikaner was used prior in a loose sense referring to anyone White or mixed race lineage born in Africa. I realize that a number of Boers also referred to themselves as Afrikaners too [ as the term meant what it meant ie: African ] but historians do note that the Boers were & saw themselves as a distinct entity from the group in the south Western Cape. The Cape Dutch as such [ despite their larger numbers over the Boers ] are not as prominent in the history of the region due to the fact that they exhibited little dissatisfaction with the various Colonial rulers while the Boers did & history tends to record those who have the greatest friction or problem with the ruling powers. The book: Cecil Rhodes and the Cape Afrikaner by Mordechai Tamarkin goes into great & informative detail about the pro British & pro Colonial outlook of the Cape Dutch which explains their less visible - though not completely absent - nature within the pre 19th century history of the region.

Doberman said...

@ anon who just commented. It got rejected because whoever you are and whatever your beef with Ron, it won't be played out here.

Anonymous said...

@ Dobes: So much for freedom of expression. I worked near Orania, and live near a Verwoerd. Boer is a tired concoction resurrected for fairy devotees. Your censoring is laughable, your satirical vein clogged, infarction imminent. Ron's a Fool to your raging Lear, stating amusing old platitudes, and post apartheid nonsense, while "the rain it raineth every day."

Doberman said...

Slightly better. I won't allow ad hominem attacks for the sake of it. Explain yourself and make a point. Don't just band around the same old canards you accuse him of. If you differ with his opinion, state which and clarify knowing he has the right to disagree. Simply to attack the man for having an opinion is bullshit.

Vanilla Ice said...

@Anon 2:04. Ha ha, I like the way you explained it. Yes, an infarction may be imminent, and the term Boer may have been resurrected. It may well be an obsolete term, but it is still nonetheless true that the Afrikaners are heterogenous, which may go some way to explaining why there is so much infighting.

Doberman said...

I'm beginning to understand more and more why Afrikaners /boers /whites cannot unite.

Ron. said...

Not this Anon again. I wish he would once & for all tell us why he has such a problem with the facts I noted because it is an historical & documented fact that the Boers are a specific BRANCH of the White Afrikaans speaking population. Furthermore the Boer people have every right to self determination.

Anonymous said...

What Boer people Ron? Where? Specify please, instead of thumb sucking. Although English (ek praat Afrikaans), I worked closely with many Afrikaners, in the Vrystaat, northern and eastern Cape for a decade during the troubled 1980s and 1990s amongst many Afrikaners, some even farmers in the Cape and Vrystaat, and no Afrikaners I encountered called themselves Boers.

Islandshark said...

@ Anon 4:47pm - No respectable Boer will refer to himself as Afrikaner.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 4:47, Ron and IslandShark...

Ron... Is it as much as that?

I am a Boer, and until recently also a boer (farmer). I was always under the impression that I was an Afrikaner, until I went and did some research into my family history. Arrived in 1600's. Trekked to EC frontier almost at once. Kept trekking as the brits moved in to steal. In the laager at Ncome. Trekked again and again. Settled in Free State. Fought in both British wars. Fought in rebellion of 1914. Recent family broke these ties to history due to "treasonous" acts and the remaking of themselves to stay out of the noose. The inclusion of the Boer people as Afrikaners is a recent development and was politically expedient.

Most Boers know who they are... However there are a lot of Afrikaners who do not know they are Boers and so call themselves Afrikaner and not Boer.

The Boer people only have a claim based on treaty and occupation of parts of the interior of SA, while I would say the Afrikaner ONLY can lay claim to the Western Cape.

I believer our only hope as whites is to lay our differences aside and achieve that hegemony we need to be able to hold the land or we will be destroyed... And as a Boer, I believe we will probably be the last to be destroyed as we understand the enemy, thanks to 300 years of dealing with them, and have a higher inclination for fighting than our Afrikaner or English brothers.

However, as brothers, we need to put the differences of souties, dutchies and boertjies aside; kick some ass; get what we want -a homeland free of infestations; then, we can resume our infighting, bickering etc. Unless we can stand united in purpose (not on every issue) we will be lost, but we cannot look past the bumf to see where we actually already have accord. I feel the time is running out for the whites of Africa (no matter what they call themselves) and we had better get our shit together regarding the important issues of survival and fuck the Currie Cup.

Anonymous said...

Sorry but I don't see the FW DeKlerk connection! He would (could) never say what Kemp wrote!

Anonymous said...

Ron, you are quite correct, save to add that Boers have never been solely "afrikaans-speaking"! Remember, almost 25% of the Voortrekkers who trekked over the interior and down into Natal were of British 1820 Settler stock, who had quickly turned against Britain when witnessing how they treated the people of the Eastern Cape!

Anonymous said...

Of course the economy grew in the 1960s. Why wouldn't it when apartheid enslaved 87% of the population and created an entire workforce to feed the minority whites. Black people built South Africa. Fact. And they still don't benefit from the wealth of their own country with the likes of Anglo American raping the natural resources of the country.

Viking said...

@Anonymous 7:55

"raping" is a strong word isn't it?

Maybe, given the context, it isn't. There has been much in the news this year about South Africans who have tried to have a go at mining - it didn't end well:

http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=9290

Without the technology and investment from companies like Anglo - who bravely continue to invest despite calls for nationalisation - South African mining under government control might look something like this:

http://www.wolverhamptonhistory.org.uk/assets/userfiles/wolverhampton_history/industry/001505.jpg

Ron. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ron. said...

Well Anon 4:47 is either ignorant / uninformed or is playing an old semantic game [ which was perfected by the Afrikaner Nationalists ] aimed at denying the existence of the Boer people. First of all: a lot of Afrikaans speaking farmers in the old Boer Republics region are not Boers [ Theuns Cloete mentioned this specifically during an interview with the Right Perspective ] as numerous Cape Dutch have moved there. Next: Most Boers were conditioned into viewing themselves as Afrikaners so your claim of not meeting anyone who referred to themselves as Boers is plausible & simply in line with the manner in which people were indoctrinated since childhood. Third: The term Boer was rarely mentioned by National Party ministers [ as noted by journalist Adriana Stuijt ] & was purposely marginalized & degraded - as Theuns Cloete mentioned as well - to the point where few wanted to be called Boers because of the successful propaganda by the Afrikaner & Broederbond establishment & politicians. Fourth: a great number of farming Boers became urban dwellers quite fast after the Anglo-Boer Boer were they became the proto urban poor & encountered folks who referred to themselves as Afrikaners but they still held onto their Boer identity until the 1930s before Afrikaner Nationalism rose & usurped & co-opted the Boers & tethered them to an Afrikaner agenda. Fifth: In point of fact it is almost irrelevant what the actual Boer people call themselves because no matter what they are called one things is clear: they are a distinct people from the bulk of the Afrikaners as they have their own unique history / struggles / culture & flags. The Boer people have been called Trekoers / Grensboere / Veeboere / Voortrekkers etc therefore your cynical comment that you have never encountered anyone calling themselves Boers is irrelevant to the fact that a PEOPLE or folk often called the Boer people / Boerevolk & unfortunately even Afrikaners [ though that designation makes them a minority within the actual Afrikaners ] exist as plain as the sky is blue regardless of the fact that they are often confused about what to call themselves [ as noted by H Labuschagne ]. Therefore please spare us the petulant tactics of ethnic denial.

Doberman said...

I think there can be no doubt that Boers and Afrikaners are not one and the same. Many coloureds in the Cape indeed some blacks classify themselves as Afrikaners and are not Boers by any stretch of the imagination.

Ron. said...

Addendum to Anon 4:47. I would suggest that instead of parroting the ignorant & one dimensional rhetoric of the establishment line that you actually research the topic yourself then you would discover & know that the Boers were propagandized [ though not everyone was ] out of their identity in the name of a teleocratic agenda not of their own & that those Boers with long memories like the late Robert van Tonder & others are committing no crime when referring to themselves as Boers distinguishing from the Afrikaners who often oppose them [ like the Afrikaans money / media power ] & attempting to find self determination for the Boer Nation.

Ron. said...

Anon 6:12. I agree with much of what you said as a lot of people who thought they were Afrikaners have been waking up to discover that they are Boers. Theuns Cloete was one of them & he first started becoming aware during his young adulthood [ circa early 1970s ] when he visited Cape Town for the first time [ as he noted in the first TRP interview ] then fully woke up during the early 1980s & left the AWB [ after just one year ] to found with his brother the Transvaal Separatists. I agree about putting differences aside but one must try to be cognizant of the fact that due to the nature of some of those differences [ or rather how the Afrikaner establishment uses their power ] that the Boers in particular will be scuppered in their aims as has happened in the past. Perhaps one way to look at it is like this: if independence minded Afrikaners & English speakers join the Boers in their struggle for freedom then that it not so bad but if the Boers are expected to put aside their centuries long struggle for self determination in the name of standing with the suicidal Cape Dutch descended Afrikaners in the name of some illusory unity [ as per the political party & organization model wherein the leaders claim "don't worry about how bad things are we're 'looking out' for your interests - just keep paying those dues & keep voting for us"! "Never mind about self determination - we're going to force the regime to tackle crime"! ] under the South African state paradigm then that could be the end of both the Boers & Afrikaners & everyone else for that matter.

Ron. said...

Anon 11:42. I am actually quite aware of those English speaking Voortrekkers who accompanied the Boers during [ what was later called ] the Great Trek. This is no doubt where those English surnames among some Boers come from. Though they were generally absorbed into the Boer people & adopted Afrikaans [ Boeretaal: the dialect classified as Eastern Border Afrikaans ] as a home / first language. For the record I am also aware of numerous Portuguese folks who were absorbed into the Boers because my quasi stalking contrarian Boer denialist poster antagonist [ or Anon 4:47 here ] has accused the Boers of not existing [ in another discussion forum ] due to the presence of numerous Portuguese names. This guy is as bad as author Peter Stiff who made SIMILAR allegations on the Right Perspective as they both seem to think that the absorption of other ethnicities somehow rendered moot the Boers as a distinct people. A people can survive absorbing limited numbers of other peoples into the folk but what they often can not survive is tyranny / subjugation & domination.

Anonymous said...

Get a jester's cap Ron. You're grudgingly jumbling me with others on "another discussion forum." After your apologia and "quasi stalking, contrarian..." claptrap purporting to be debate, your fevered gibberish doesn't give your so-called Boers a hope in hell for self determination.

I've met and worked with many first class Afrikaners in my life, In Natal, Vrystaat and Cape, including those in my immediate family, but I have yet to meet or be introduced to a Boer, of any description.

Ron. said...

Well whatever you say can only be taken with a huge grain of salt because A: you betray the fact that you have debated with me before by repeating specific discredited platitudes & B: you engage in semantic games & commit logical fallacies by erroneously asserting the Boers do not exist because you only ever met Afrikaners [ without ever considering that some of those Afrikaners might actually be Boers ] & C: you muddy the waters & engage in ad hominem attacks which betrays the fact that you have no argument of your own & can not refute the evidence demonstrating the existence of the Boer Nation.

Ron. said...

Furthermore: let's try to remember how this got started. The author of the video copied text directly from an article then deliberately inflated the figure by attributing the total number of Afrikaners to the Boer people! Whether you recognize the Boers as a distinct people or not is besides the point to the fact that the author improperly inflated the number of Boers when he redacted the 1.5 million figure & replaced it with a 3 million figure. Therefore even if you believe that all Boers are now Afrikaners there could still be no excuse for asserting that the Boers are now 3 million when the Boers are not supposed to "exist" any longer but if one recognizes that they do exist then they can certainly & logically can not be as numerous or more numerous than the Cape Dutch Afrikaners. This is just common sense. Either there are 3.5 million Afrikaners - a portion of whom were once Boers OR the Boers are 1.5 million. Regardless of what you might believe about the existence or non-existence of the Boers there sure as hell can not be 3 million of them. Get it? What you never admit is that at least some of your Afrikaners were probably [ & statistically ] in fact Boers ergo you are befitting of that jester's cap.

Ron. said...

Remember: the article in question whom the video author was copying & to which I posted a link to even recognizes the Boers as a distinct people [ even placing them at 1.5 million contrary to the video author's erroneous inflated assertion ] therefore your argument holds no water.

Anonymous said...

@Ron: Tiddlywinks with quotes & vids eh? Your perception re ad hominem attack is amusing. Dubbed a fool wearing a jester's cap is complimentary. Tiddlywink Shakespearean fools to click your sense of humour.

You're welcome to your Boer volkstaat fantasies, as they make you feel good. As for your repetition of "facts," so what?

I lived in SA for 44 years, and my Afrikaner family has white as well as many coloured family members, flesh and blood. My Afrikaner fam, white and coloured, lived in all four of the old SA provinces.

In your Boer volkstaat fantasies, please advise what your so-called Boers would do with all the Boer coloured offspring they produced over the years, especially coloureds you have in your own Boer family.

Ron. said...

Concerning ad hominem attacks Doberman prevented your first post due to them. Concerning the notion of an alleged Boer Volkstaat. I am one of those who has pointed out that the whole concept of a proposed Volkstaat is a government scam which was never intended to be created but was used to lure a lot of Boer Republicans & even pro independence Afrikaners away from their goal. The goal of the Boer Republicans is the restoration of some form of a Boer Republic or self determination. Not a government controlled ambiguous Volkstaat which has no direction. Then in your final paragraph you both reject then accept the existence of the Boers. As for your contention of Coloured relatives of Boers: this is a distraction because for one thing Afrikaners & Boers have absorbed limited numbers of Coloureds [ particularly during the formative era ] & I have conversed with some White Afrikaans folks who are accepting of some of them into their folk but most Coloureds do not see themselves as part of the Boer people as they have their own unique culture. [ Though the Griquas adopted an inverse version of the Vierkleur as the flag of the Griqua people ] Furthermore you erroneously presume that Boer self determination would mandate decisions concerning non-Boers when in fact those maters would sort themselves out particularly through the adoption of decentralized systems where no ethnic group would have authority over another. The sort of fossilized & static thinking & regurgitated cant from you is not a convincing argument against Boer self determination.

Ron. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ron. said...

What a joke to accuse myself of engaging in Tiddlywinks with quotes when that was what the video author was doing when he employed his selective editing & voodoo mathematics concerning the number of the Boer population.

Anonymous said...

@Ron: When are you going to start self determining your Boer republic?

Ron. said...

Not only are you making less sense but that line is just bad grammar. I think you are trying to ask when are the Boers going to obtain self determination within a republic. For once I do not have an answer because there are a lot of factors to take into consideration.

Anonymous said...

@ Ron: Grammar so what? (Shakespeare didn't worry about it). As a petty pedant, your paragraph length, parenthesis, bold & ampersands suck.

Your "facts" and put-downs are foolish tiddlywinks. Your Boer republic(s) is / are a mirage, where your development and Boers' development stopped somewhere in 1902, propped up by British post Boer War reparations of course.

As Shakespeare said: "...What a a thrice-double ass Was I to take this drunkard for a god, And worship this dull fool!" (Caliban)

Ron. said...

The official history of the Boers might have "ended" during the aftermath of the second Anglo-Boer War but their development as a people certainly did not. Robert van Tonder informed many Boers about their own post Anglo-Boer War history further countering your trite assertion. The official history of the Boers ended only because they were overshadowed & marginalized by the rise of the Afrikaners which worked to co-opt the Boer people in a political context in order to justify their ascent to power. I find it most interesting how you deride the facts I have presented as "foolish" while never explaining what is so "foolish" about them. Quite a telling comment. The alleged "mirage" Boer Republics is pure nonsense because after the collapse of the South African state [ which is propped up by foreign intelligence ] & at the first conceivable opportunity they could be restored.

Ron. said...

Just in case you or others are still confused about who the Boer people are & how they are in fact a distinct entity from the bulk of the Afrikaners: I refer to this detailed post which contains a rather large collection of relevant quotes from an eclectic range of personalities all of whom recognize & expound [ some in depth ] on the distinction.

Anonymous said...

Confusion? That's your condition Ron.

Ron. said...

Telling. So all you have is another ad hominem attack. You have never told us why you are so opposed to Boer self determination. Just why does it bother you so much that some of them continue to struggle for freedom & self determination. ? ...

Anonymous said...

Ad hominem? Your perception Ron. Didn't get the pun eh? Opposed? Your assumption. Bothered? Not me. You're bothered. Your quotes Struijt, Giliomee, Mostert... are elementary primary school stuff. Who's "us?"

Your Afrikaans speaking "Boers" were silent beneficiaries of apartheid with all its benefits for whites, and oppression of others. 15 year after apartheid
your "Boers," now at the bottom of the dung heap, are still bleating for an apartheid teat, whatever expedient definitions you use.

Ron. said...

The Boer people benefited no more than you & probably not as much due to the salient fact that they are the poorest segment of the White population & were generally part of the working class. No one is denying the fact that the Boers also benefited from Apartheid legislation due to being classified as part of the White population but what you conveniently forget is that they were also subjugated by the folks who ran the Apartheid system & that very few actual Boers crafted the Apartheid legislation. One can go down the list to find that the creators of the Apartheid legislation were mostly from the Cape Dutch group & that their Broederbond made sure the Boers never rose too far up the ranks [ save for those who were entirely conditioned to promote the Afrikaner Nationalist
( re: Afrikaans extension of British Imperialism ) agenda ] & made sure that their aspirations were thwarted or co-opted.

It is all rather rich to accuse the Boers of benefiting from Apartheid when A: The Boers never wanted the macro State [ Professor Tobias Louw noted this in an open letter to the ISS ] of South Africa in the fist place & in fact fought two wars of freedom against the implementation of such a macro State. Remember: Apartheid was the direct result of the macro State for various reasons. B: The Apartheid system subjugated the Boers as a people as well. C: The Boers have tried to restore their republics at various times & have often tried to get out from the control of the Apartheid managers. D: Apartheid type segregation was supported by liberal icons like Alfred Hornlé during the 1940s as a means to prevent the White economic domination of Black people. This point is important because the Boers have been historically & are still economically dominated by the White financial elite. E: The Boers have always been at the bottom of the economic & political ladder & Apartheid only MARGINALLY helped those who were most destitute but economic professors have noted that Apartheid actually HURT them in the long run as it prevented them from gaining skills to compete in the free market. F: Apartheid was promoted as a distraction to finding authentic ethnic self determination. Robert van Tonder realized this in 1961 & left the National Party that year to pursue the goal of restoring the Boer Republics. Note: Andries Treurnicht who crafted the disastrous Afrikaans educational policies in the townships [ which was used as a pretext for the 1976 Soweto uprising ] & who later became the leader of the Conservative Party was of Cape Dutch origin & rejected the concept of the Boer Nation.

Furthermore: the whole "silent beneficiaries" nonsense sounds like politically motivated claptrap aimed at scapegoating or blaming the Boers for a system which would have been imposed even if there were no Boers around. Since Apartheid was initiated by the British Colonial regimes then later expanded by the Cape Dutch run Afrikaner Nationalists. Gavan Tredoux noted in Apartheid Revisited that the Boers in fact were originally OPPOSED to Apartheid as they feared it would lead to hostile "uncivilized" independent neighbours. Furthermore Apartheid was a total scam as its promoters acted as though it was an authentic or viable measure in safeguarding a sort of White self determination without ever reforming or dealing with or even abandoning the macro State concept structure which inherently made Apartheid so untenable / oppressive & ultimately impossible to even enforce or propagate in the face of shifting demographics.

Ron. said...

Now as for lambasting the sources I quoted. What a joke! First of all you can not even spell Stuijt right. Next: Stuijt is not a fan of Giliomee. So lumping them together is hilarious. Which is even interesting that you would trash Hermann Giliomee because just like you & the Broederbond: he also denies the existence of the Boer Nation. Talk about classic agenda driven zealotry: you are so driven to lambaste the sources I used that you do not even realize that one of them is more anti-Boer than you! Mostert wrote a book on the history of the Xhosas wherein he noted the obvious distinction between Boer & Afrikaner. Whose "us"? Classic attempt at passive aggressive attitude in the vain hope that you have offended or insulted. Bothered? Whose bothered?

Ron. said...

Well I see you are also in the business of conflating Boer self determination with Apartheid. None other than the aforementioned Professor Tobias Louw has publicly stated that the Boers do not want a return of Apartheid as they are only interested in self determination. The Boers had a high degree of self determination LONG before the establishment of Apartheid when most of them were independent within their internationally recognized Boer Republics. Therefore you can not just rip those republics away from them & rescind their hard won independence & expect them to quietly acquiesce or accuse them of wanting a return of "Apartheid" for the temerity of wanting freedom or to regain their subverted self determination.

Anonymous said...

I crtitically read Giliomee's and Mostert's tomes years ago after publication. Stuijt (Sp so what?) is biased, as she did / does whites only records of white "farm" murders in SA and ignores many more non white murders in SA.

Your bombastic bluster avoided answering "Who's us?"

You comment much about Boers yet can't say when and where their new utopian, angelic Boer republic will be.

Ron. said...

Well you are now exposing deception on your part as Stuijt documents ALL of the farm murder victims regardless of race. The book by Mostert was published 17 years ago. Which would suggest that you have been following this topic longer than most of the folks here but is a concept negated by your constant distortions of the topic.

The "whose us" line is just a clever line you use to imply that no one is reading the posts on this blog.

Now I have never stated that the restoration of Boer self determination would be "utopian" [ but sure recognize that slur used to make erroneous implications ] nor that it would be an "angelic" dispensation as these are just straw men arguments you throw up in an attempt at distracting form the salient issue of Boer independence & self determination.

There is not one single country on Earth which is "utopian" or "angelic" but somehow according to you the Boers must pass this ridiculous litmus test in order to regain their freedom. This is nothing short of a double standard because a lot of folks who have struggled for freedom were sure as hell not angles capable of creating a Utopian dispensation.

Now no one is in a position to assert when the Boers will reclaim or reacquire their self determination but it is clear that it will be within the region where they obtained it in the past.

The Rooster said...

"In 1980, White South Africa was acknowledged -- even by her enemies -- as the most powerful country on the African continent.

Now, 25 years later, this White giant has collapsed and is in the hands of the ANC. The Afrikaners, once masters of the country, are today a subject nation, ruled by people who only 120 years ago, did not have the wheel. How did this happen?
#
____________________

I stopped reading after you lied in the second paragraph. In what way has South Africa collapsed ? Our economy has grown massively more than ever in our history the past decade and we're still by far the richest country in africa. Loser.

The Rooster said...

And regardign the boer/afrikaans debate...who gives a fuck ? You're all dutchmen at the end of the day.

The Rooster said...

Andf english autrocities against your ancestors ...get the Fuck over it. Those were shitty times when people did shitty things including you lot..walking around africa shooting stone age people people armed with weighted sticks. You lot came here as opportunists like everyone else.

Doberman said...

Hey Mr Chicken, you bored or what? Get back in your coop.

The Rooster said...

and old mad tannie stuijt was even berated by uhuruguru once for mis representiung and inflating her her "farm murder" stats in various ways. How do I know ? I have a copy of the email.

The Rooster said...

Hi doberman. Yup and hungover (hence the grumpiness). Zasucks has been pwned so I'm giving your site some attention. Don't worry , it will bring you a massive bump in traffic.

Doberman said...

Wait a minute, after all those years of saying Uhuru Guru spoke nonsense, suddenly what he has to say is fact? Who's cherrypicking now?

Doberman said...

Hey Roost, you do sound sloshed my son. Don't worry about zasucks, it's being re-started as we speak, not by me or anyone I know, or the former owners, but it is. One gets to hear these things.

The Rooster said...

Oh of course some of the stuff he says is true. Just nothing he posts on his site. He knowingly lied to readers over and over. When there's infighting certain zasucks readers and writers love to stab each other in the back by sending emails to people like me. I've never understood why ..point is I know everything.

Doberman said...

You're right about the infighting. Point taken.

The Rooster said...

Oh I know it will be re opened. Nothing else for the bitter expats to do. They can't afford to go out even if the weather wasn't awful so they sit at home writing crap about a country they are deeply homesick about. Of course they will re open it.

Ironic how in so called trying to "help the white race" they do nothing more than alert some people to the fact that "wow..white people are neurotic douchbags!".

Ron. said...

Well there's Rooster again. Promoting nonsense as usual. The debate is not Boer / Afrikaans but rather Boer / Afrikaner as both groups speaks dialects of the Afrikaans language but the Boers are a distinct entity from the Cape Dutch originated Afrikaners. Noting that you do not "give a fuck" is a total irrelevant matter outside of the academic study of the topic. A lot of folks do not "give a fuck" about the difference between a quirk & a quark but that indifference does not negate the fact that there exists a difference. Advancing ignorance is never a legitimate rebuttal.

The term Dutchmen is just a derogatory term that you British Imperialists promoted against the bulk of the Afrikaans speakers. The Anglo-Boer War was supposed to have ended but your well documented antagonism against the Boers has never ended. As was duly noted on your old Kill Whitey blog in the past. Furthermore the Boers have very few actual Dutch roots as they are the descendents of the German / Frisian / Danish servants the VOC forcefully brought out to the Cape as well as the numerous French Huguenot refugees escaping political & religious persecution.

Concerning your post at 5:11. This is just pathetic apologia because there is no excuse or rationalization for those brutal actions as your masters took the war to the average civilian & ended up killing off half of the Boer child population.

Then you try to make the Boers out to be loose canon conquerers when it was your British Empire which did that. Where are these "stone aged people" the Boers allegedly "shot at" & conquered. The Boers might have settled north of the Orange River as "opportunists" [ though in reality they were just trying to escape British Colonialism & Xhosa attacks / killings ] but they can not be held responsible for developing as a people in Africa as the Dutch VOC arbitrarily made the decision to import their ancestors to the Cape / Africa. What you forget is that the Boers are a homegrown / indigenous people who have no other home & identify with no other place on Earth other than the African continent.

Concerning your post at 5:15. That allegation made by U G was thoroughly debunked when Stuijt posted a complete list of the names of the farm murder victims. Furthermore it should be pointed out that he was making the allegation at a time when there was increased animosity between the two. Therefore taking his word concerning this would be foolish & tantamount to taking sides in petty dispute.

Concerning your post at 5:17. This is what makes you such a paradox because if you hate the truth exposing sites so much then why would you risk making them more notable by posting on them & continuously mentioning them [ & downright promoting them ] on you own blog? Either you have an uncontrollable obsession or you are a paid hack employed to counter the truth exposing blogs or maybe you just posing as an anti-truth bigot in order to remain under the radar of the various regimes while covertly promoting the truth blogs by feigning opposition to them.

Concerning you post at 5:24. In fact most of the contributors on that site / blog were in South Africa: not "expats" "homesick". All that infighting is indicative that they could not have been as serious as they maintained about exposing the truth. An astute observation for once Rooster in your final line which has always begged the question if that was not always the whole point to the site. IE: Post the truth but in a manner which made White folks out to be radicals. This way the various regimes & media outlets could "discredit" the larger truth by pointing to the radical manner in which it was delivered.

Doberman said...

Very eruditely put Ron.

Ron. said...

Presuming that Rooster is not Anon [ which he shouldn't be as Rooster does not seem anywhere near 44 as Anon alleged he was ]: YOU have not answered MY question concerning your opposition & aversion to Boer independence & self determination.

The Rooster said...

The term Dutchmen is just a derogatory term that you British Imperialists promoted against the bulk of the Afrikaans speakers. The Anglo-Boer War was supposed to have ended but your well documented antagonism against the Boers has never ended. As was duly noted on your old Kill Whitey blog in the past.
----------------------
Fuck them if they can't take a joke. You're missing most of the punchline...my mother is afrikaans and so are the gross majority of my family. Not a single one of them could give a fuck if they're "proper boers" or such nationalistic psycho babble.
----------------------
Furthermore the Boers have very few actual Dutch roots as they are the descendents of the German / Frisian / Danish servants the VOC forcefully brought out to the Cape as well as the numerous French Huguenot refugees escaping political & religious persecution.

-----------------

Interesting except I just don't give a fuck. Really dude we all have interesting watered down heritages. Go play your constatina's and sokkie sokkie to your hearts content for all I care. Just don't bore me with some argument that you have some unique shared heritage.


----------------

The Rooster said...

Concerning your post at 5:11. This is just pathetic apologia because there is no excuse or rationalization for those by your masters took the war to the average civilian & ended up killing off half of the Boer child population.
-----------------

Oh shut up. My great great grandmother was in a concentration camp but that aside I piss on the idea that the modern day South African English in any way shape or form owe any living afrikaans person any apologies for the boer war. You twats want the blacks to forget about apartheid in 5 minutes but a war over 100 years ago and you can't get the fuck over it.

---------------
Then you try to make the Boers out to be loose canon conquerers when it was your British Empire which did that. Where are these "stone aged people" the Boers allegedly "shot at" & conquered. The Boers might have settled north of the Orange River as "opportunists" [ though in reality they were just trying to escape British Colonialism & Xhosa attacks / killings ] but they can not be held responsible for developing as a people in Africa as the Dutch VOC arbitrarily made the decision to import their ancestors to the Cape / Africa.
---------------

yeah yeah...hapless victims. Ag shame. Shut up.

---------------

The Rooster said...

What you forget is that the Boers are a homegrown / indigenous people who have no other home & identify with no other place on Earth other than the African continent.
----------------------
Funny that they're so eager to bitch and moan about it all the time and shit talk it. Seems they indentified with it a lot better when they were abusing everyone.
----------------
Concerning your post at 5:15. That allegation made by U G was thoroughly debunked when Stuijt posted a complete list of the names of the farm murder victims. Furthermore it should be pointed out that he was making the allegation at a time when there was increased animosity between the two. Therefore taking his word concerning this would be foolish & tantamount to taking sides in petty dispute.
---------------

Nope. Wrong. F for fail. Stuijt posted people murdered in small towns and also called them "farmers". This and a lot of other liberties have been taken to try and perpetuate the absolute 100% myth of farm genocide.
------------------
Concerning your post at 5:17. This is what makes you such a paradox because if you hate the truth exposing sites so much then why would you risk making them more notable by posting on them & continuously mentioning them [ & downright promoting them ] on you own blog? Either you have an uncontrollable obsession or you are a paid hack employed to counter the truth exposing blogs or maybe you just posing as an anti-truth bigot in order to remain under the radar of the various regimes while covertly promoting the truth blogs by feigning opposition to them.
----------------------

Someone give the man some barbituates, he's going to have a panic attack.
----------
Concerning you post at 5:24. In fact most of the contributors on that site / blog were in South Africa: not "expats" "homesick". All that infighting is indicative that they could not have been as serious as they maintained about exposing the truth. An astute observation for once Rooster in your final line which has always begged the question if that was not always the whole point to the site. IE: Post the truth but in a manner which made White folks out to be radicals. This way the various regimes & media outlets could "discredit" the larger truth by pointing to the radical manner in which it was delivered.
------------------
Now this has occured to me from time to time. But I just put it down to stupidity and selfish agenda. Because there can be no worse way to promote the white cause that the way zasucks does it. For a short time I thought "nobody can be this dumb...surely they're lampooning right winged nut jobs" ..but then It hit me that nah, nothing so sophisticated. Just a bunch of bitter expats venting their spleens and just can't help themselves. You know...like all typical white trash.

Ron. said...

Rooster. It's not about being "proper Boers". [ ? ] Whatever that is supposed to mean. The point simply is that most of the Boers were propagandized into seeing themselves as Afrikaners which marginalized the Boers in the process due to the salient fact that the Cape Dutch Afrikaners OUTNUMBER the Boers. Getting the Boers to realize that they are Boers empowers them as it gets them out from the Afrikaner agenda which simply uses them to further a foreign agenda while throwing the actual Boers under the bus. This is not even about nationalism because even if you do not accept that the Boers are a nation: they still developed as a distinct entity on the Cape frontiers adopting their own dialect / customs & outlook. It is not a matter of "forgetting" about Apartheid [ of which the Boers were ALSO under ] but of moving past it. Furthermore the Anglo-Boer War had far more devastating repercussions on the region than Apartheid ever did for the very reason that the Anglo-Boer War resulted in the deaths of close to half of the Boer child population & the illegal removal of the Boers' self determination within their internationally recognized Boer Republics which led to the imposition of the macro State of South Africa & the subsequent implementation of its Apartheid policies. Therefore while Apartheid was a strong force with its own harsh consequences: it was nothing compared to the Anglo-Boer War which unleashed a genocide & was the launch pad for the apparatus which led to Apartheid.

I find it most interesting & odd that in light of your [ supposed ] heritage that you often slander the way you do against the Boer people. Do you not realize that your sort of rhetoric will lead to more concentration camps against the Boers again? Have you not noticed the folks even calling for the Boers to be "exterminated" just because of & as a result of the irresponsible anti-Boer hate-filled rhetoric. Where do you think the act of demonization leads to & ends with? Are you really that ignorant of history & where the demonization of whole ethnic groups leads? Well the Boers [ like all peoples ] of course do have a unique shared heritage. Actually its not that the English speakers owe the Boers an apology as the contention is that it is the British regimes who owe the Boers an apology. This matter got started when the British Royal family apologized to the Maoris & other groups but shunned the Boers which caused some to start a movement to ask for one. A lot of local English speakers are actually on the side of the Boers & some even were back during British Colonialism. So no the apology is not being sought from them but rather from the actual British regimes back in Britain. From those who are the current incarnation of British authority or power.

When the late Fritz Meyer wrote that open letter asking for an apology he was addressing it to the then British government of Tony Blair & Royal family. I do not think he was asking for an apology from the average South African English speaker as they were & are not culpable [ by & large ] for the actions of the British Empire. I am not saying that the Boers were "hapless" victims but you must try to keep things in perspective as they came about as a people on Africa soil due to the actions of the Dutch elites who brought their ancestors out there & that they tried to survive [ much to the chagrin of the Colonial elites who never wanted a permanent White settlement ] as best they could so accusing them of "shooting stone aged people" is a rather disingenuous / cynical & aloof analysis of the situation.

Ron. said...

Then once again you promote the notion that the Boers were "abusing everyone" thereby engaging in an act of conflation of them with the neo Colonial Apartheid regimes which worked to marginalize them as well as noted [ among other techniques used ] with the attempt at destroying the identity of the Boers & to merge them with the Afrikaners. Concerning Stuijt: you are nitpicking because whether those victims are farmers or not is irrelevant to the fact that folks are being killed off far out of proportion to their numbers within the general population. Furthermore your myth that there is no farm genocide is totally debunked by the fact that the President of Genocide Watch Gregory Stanton went to visit the region & after careful examination of the matter concluded that the killing of Boers farmers constitutes a genocide under the Genocide Convention.

Ron. said...

Well whether I have "a panic attack" or not: I bet one of those 3 descriptions fits the bill concerning your motives on attacking truth exposing blogs. That was the most startling thing about SAS because it did appear as if it was just folks lampooning [ to use your apt term ] & stereotyping those who criticize the current South African regimes. Most of them were not ex-pats but in fact lived [ & still live ] there. The very fact that they live there is the main reason the site was discontinued because the U G [ for one - after having his door broken down by the State ] could not continue the site any longer & further risk his family as they are now living in terror. The site would probably have remained up & running if they were all in fact ex-pats because it is generally much harder for the long arm of the State to impose itself against ex-pats living in OTHER sovereign States although the CIA & Mossad are notable exceptions to the rule though. Whether one agrees with them or not - being forced to close their site the way they were speaks volumes about the growing State control.