Looks like it was intentional that my post at the ToxiNews blog was not posted as the editor has censored / removed a previous post I submitted that was up for a period of time. No doubt the editor is not interested in debating the issue, but to resort to censoring the entire post reflects badly on both of us. On himself for being afraid of a little truth or at the very least a disagreement - & on myself as readers could be left with the impression that I strayed from the topic of infringed against common blog rules or etiquette. The following is the short post that was censored at Survival of the White South African Part 2 . I could have written a larger response, but I responded to just a few basic points - which was deemed too much for the author.
The following is the post.
Quote: [ Talking about "so called Boers" is part of the problem because the Boers still exist even if too many were conditioned to see themselves as part of an artificial macro grouping under the Afrikaner designation. Just because the Boer Republics were "signed away" [ which were supposed to regain full independence as part of Article 7 of the Vereenigning Peace Treaty but were denied ] does not mean that they can not be reinstated or restored.
All peoples want their independence. This has always been especially true of the Boer people. You talk about the Republic of South Africa as some crowning achievement when it was simply an Afrikaans version of the old [ British ] order. You talk about the "Republican flag" of South Africa as though it was an authentic flag of the Republic of South Africa while forgetting that it was in fact the flag of the UNION of South Africa [ the flag in question was adopted in 1927 ] because the Republic of South Africa simply inherited the old flag of the old dispensation. The National party wanted to adopt a new flag & Verwoerd even signed off on a new design shorty before being assassinated.
The added irony is that you document quite well how the various components within the White population could not live together [ as they were different people with different traditions & outlooks ] yet attack them for not wanting to be united for the sake of the nominal republic.
The notion that the Vierkleur is "stupid" rather says a lot about the author than it does the Boers as the Boers lost 50% of their child population in the concentration camps defending the freedom they had under that flag. No. The VOC brought the Indians to the Cape. Not the Boers. The Boers were ruled by the VOC but the VOC was not run by Boers lest you want to corrupt the term as many folks do to mean all White people in South Africa & even the world. ] End of censored post.
I spotted this censoring after not long after finding his: What is a Boer? post.
Obviously the author was not interested in having his erroneous assertions countered.
I could have gone on longer - but this little bit was too much.
It looks like he redacted the word "stupid" within his article after reading my response.
Thank goodness I try to save just about everything I post.