South Africa begins seizing land from white farmers

This is making news in the States as Tucker Carlson on Fox slates the racism involved.

Land taken

Be3eno

I rarely read this section threads.   I m very worried about land expropriation without compensation.  The first step would be agricultural land - the next will be private homes of races other than Black.  

It is making me a very worried person about the future of SA.

One can only hope the Constitutional Court stand firm on discrimination against people based on  race.  

Be3eno

I rarely read this section threads.   I m very worried about land expropriation without compensation.  The first step would be agricultural land - the next will be private homes of races other than Black.  

It is making me a very worried person about the future of SA.

One can only hope the Constitutional Court stand firm on discrimination against people based on  race.  

That's fine, so long as we are clear on one thing: South Africa receives no aid. If they want to destroy the country, they alone must bare the burden of their actions. If that means starving, then so be it. Black South Africans should be refused refugee status when they try to flee South Africa. It will certainly be interesting, as further north, many black Africans who supported the struggle against apartheid feel betrayed. It would be a fantastic humbling. 

Let me explain something which is misinterpreted by many people and by the Government.   To expropriate land is very- very easy - I dealt with numerous cases in the period 1995 to 2000.   

*   The first step is to get a valuation report - which include the value of the land with due regard to present revenue from land usage and essentially also profitability.   In controversial cases you get more than one such report.

*   The second option is to start negotiations with the owner,   You would initially offer a price slightly below the lowest evaluation and up the price regularly to the minum price bvaluation contained in the report.

*   If the owner refuse the price offered - you inform him in writing that the expropriation ahs been approved and you pay the full price of the compensation over to the transferring attorney.

The whole process can be done within a period of less than three days from the receipt of the valuation report,   The chances that the matter will be taken up in court is near to zero, since the courts will not accept inflated prices for any property.  Even court appeals will not delay the transfer of property indefinitely and will deal with the price - not the decision to expropriate cannot be challenged in normal cases and is only be applicable if their were serious breaches of law or economic crime attached to the process.      

Once the money was paid to the transferring attorney - the Government can move onto the property the next day  

So what went wrote iro the present Government insofar as the process is concerned.   First of all the deployees do not know even the most basic principles in such negotiations.   Secondly they are hunting for kick-backs and would try to attain that by inflating offers,  What follow is often even worse.  They allocate farms to political cronies  and productivity goes down to near to zero.

The problem will never be  successfully solved and changes of the Constitution will only lead to further bribery and corruption and abuse of property rights of all race  groups other than Blacks. 

   .     

LOL \shark, and you called me brainwashed, yet you are the one repeating the same skewed BS the ANC is spewing. Start thinking for yourself.

Edit: It's a good start that you believe neither Afriforum, nor the ANC.

Shark, first of all, don't blame Apartheid on right wing Boers. All the white people in the country had a hand in it....and it was actually started by the Brits and not the Boers. It was ended by a vast majority of the white people with Boer leadership being instrumental. 

I'm not saying Apartheid was skewed. I'm saying land ownership statistics are deliberately twisted by the ANC to suit their populist agenda. What constitutes farmland? Does it actually have to be a commercial farm to be included in the stats. 

Vast regions of South Africa is semi desert area. No-one but white South Africans thought of settling in The Karoo where you need thousans of hectares just to keep a few sheep. What about the tribal lands in the old Transkei, Ciskei and Kwa Zulu....Venda ...Baputatswana? Was that included in the stats.

This issue has got nothing to do with left or right, but all to do with the inability of the ANC to govern properly and improvethe lives of most black people. It's a populist move to gain support ahead of next year's election .

BTW, the ANC is less Progressive than the DA...yes, they are to the right of the DA.

My understanding is that the Afrikaner led National Party government legalized Apartheid. 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Apartheid was immoral in that it degraded people of difference race and colour and was humiliating in it's pettiness but the land issue is a different issue altogether....it goes back to the cutoff date in June 1913. Apartheid took on it's ugly claws under the Malan and then Verwoed government.

When the Progressive Party was formed, Helen Suzman, Colin Eglin, Frederick Van Zyl-Slabbert and others they stood for the abolition of this cruel system and advocated Qualified Franchise.

This is imho the only way it would have worked...qualified by ability, education and intelligence...no person irrespective of race or colour has the right to vote if they don't know what they are voting for...they just become pawns in the hands of political manipulators.

Yes, issues could have been ironed out by now...majority rule is a disaster in Africa, has never worked and never will ...that's the sad thing but the hard,cold truth.

Members of the Afrikaner Broederbond were sent to Germany to study Nazism in Hitler's time.

The National Party also developed a poor white policy to eradicate poverty amongst the Afrikaner.

Government corporates were formed run by members of the Broederbond, they were the Citrus Board, Egg Board etc

Job Reservation was one of the cornerstones of Apartheid, it secured better jobs and better pay for whites. The Group Areas act was another cornerstone of Apartheid, amongst many things it meant that the oppressed were denied living or setting up a business in allocated white areas.

My wife, a radiographer, earned half the salary of a white radiographer......she was not allowed to x ray a white patient.

The holocaust and apartheid : similarities and differences : a comparative study

In recent years it has become fairly commonplace to make comparisons between the Holocaust and Apartheid. This dissertation explores similarities and differences. It acknowledges that both systems were rooted in ideas of race, but while the tools used by the Nazis in Germany and the apartheid government in South Africa are superficially similar, their very different objectives brought about radically different outcomes once their policies were enforced. The dissertation opens with a discussion of the methods used by each of the different systems to define the victim races, and justify their inferior status. In Germany the reasons given were the desire to preserve the pure Aryan volk and protect the volkisch culture. In South Africa the stated premise was that each 'ethnic' group would best realise its full potential if it was encouraged to preserve its integrity and promote its own culture. In both countries separation was followed by deprivation of citizenship. Under German rule Jews were rendered stateless and expelled as far as possible from the Reich. In South Africa 'blacks' were made citizens of 'ethnic homelands'. Unlike the German Jews, South African 'blacks' had at least some kind of nominal right to equality in their designated 'homelands'. Freedom of movement was restricted and residential segregation enforced in both countries. Jews, previously prominent in the cultural, academic and economic life of Germany, were impoverished and dehumanized. 'Blacks' in South Africa were locked into their role of unskilled, manual labourers, a position that they had occupied since the beginning of 'white' settlement in the Cape. Initially Jews were confined to ghettos, eventually to labour and death camps. In South Africa people of colour were forcibly removed to rural 'homelands'. However the demand for cheap labour eventually necessitated their admission to the urban industrial areas, and although they were restricted to living in 'townships' their exclusion was never total and their physical destruction was never contemplated. In both countries government controlled local authorities kept tight rein on the administration of the residential areas that were demarcated for the disadvantaged. In Nazi Germany the SS appointed Judenrate (Jewish Councils) to administer the ghettos. These councils were used to secure the peaceful acquiescence of Jews en route to the death camps. Eventually the councillors were killed together with the people they were supposed to govern. In South Africa town councils were established for local government in the townships, but these councils were unsuccessful because they were government controlled and illegitimate. Their purpose was to administer the separate development areas, not to pave the way for eventual extermination of their inhabitants. In neither Germany nor South Africa did churches play an active role in preventing discrimination and injustice. In Germany this was simply a continuation of the traditional attitude of anti-Judaism nurtured by the refusal of Jews to convert to Christianity. In South Africa missionaries worked hard to convert 'blacks' to Christianity, but Dutch Reformed Church ministers believed that it was God's will that 'black' and 'white' should be kept separate, church services were strictly segregated, and this was in keeping with the apartheid ideal. With regard to the media, both Nazi Germany and the apartheid regime backed those sectors of the media that promoted negative images of Jews and 'blacks', while censoring those that were more liberally inclined. The fundamental differences between the Holocaust and apartheid became most apparent in their terminal stages. Whereas Nazism led to genocide, the leitmotif of apartheid was cheap labour, not planned extermination. The Nazis created death camps and designed advanced technology especially for the purpose of speeding up mass murder and body disposal. Apartheid killings in South Africa were carried out by traditional means on an individual basis and not by large-scale extermination techniques. The killings in South Africa were directed only at opponents of the regime and not for the purpose of exterminating a specific ethnic group. This dissertation presents two case studies of racist ideology which promoted discrimination and the elevation of a 'superior' race at the expense of the disadvantaged. In Germany this resulted in a programme of genocide whereas the apartheid system in South Africa, though intended to service the material interests of the ruling group, nevertheless proved dysfunctional and sowed the seeds of its own demise.

The Nats came into power in 1948 and they gave it a name and expanded it, but it's been with us since long before 1948. The Black people were suppressed in SA long before 1948. Cecil John Rhodes was probably the inventor of Apartheid in SA, but the same thing happened in the USA and AUS too, just a bit differently and it was ended a bit sooner than over here. It was probably a global mindset at the time. The world was different back then.

IMO, Apartheid was more than the "Home Lands" and "Dompass" system. That was cruel and unfair and can be blamed solely on the Nats.

"Before world war two- English speaking South Africans ran the government in South Africa. 

Denny, that comparison is actually a good peace. I do however think that the main purpose of Apartheid was control. The old Nats went to extreme lengths not to lose control of the country and a one man one vote system was always gonna give control to the black man. No coincidence at all that the ANC was legalised and Mandela released at more or less the same time as the Berlin wall went down.

Yes Shark, you did not word that well...is kinda a way to say you got it wrong....completely wrong...and don't give me the Boers were always the majority horse shyte. The Nats won by way larger margins than Eng/Afr demographics would allow.

Do you know who Clive Derby-Lewis is? Does he sound Afrikaans to you?

What about Frederik van Zyl Slabbert? Sounds English? What about Beyers Naudè, Breyten Breytenbach, Sampie Terblanche? Take off your blinkers. It's easy to blame everything on the Afrikaner or the Boer, but it's either dishonest or ignorant in whatever way you word it. I agree that the majority of right wingers are Afrikaans, but lots of English people enabled Apartheid and lots of Afrikaans people opposed it. Your generalizations is plain wrong on so many levels.

Horse sh!t ( with a Russian accent ).

You are the one that's got a lot of BS in your head about what's going on in the world...  and then gets caught out time and again when facts are pointed out. You've been wrong so much, it looks like you are deliberately being an arse. Either that or you've been brainwashed beyond hope 

Spot on Vlag. Like I said, the Nats named it...1894, weren't the Cape a British colony back then? I wonder who was prime minister of the Cape Colony back then?

Might it have been a certain Mr Cecil John Rhodes? No, it can't be, those pesky right wing Boers are to blame for everything! The English are far too civilized to do any wrong.

Woosh!

Oh I see, it's the English who are to be blamed for starting Apartheid, they had racial segregation in place long before the Afrikaners.

Oh well it's all the English fault then is it?

Really?

I ask again, was it the Afrikaner led National Party who legalized Apartheid when they came to power in 1948?

Denny, of coarse the Nats played the largest role in the end. I'm not trying to exempt them or the Afrikaner. Go and read all my post on this thread. I'm just reacting to everyone else trying to exempt themselves and there forefathers.  I'm saying all white people should cop some responsibility. Shark seems to think the English speaking Saffas are superior to the Afrikaners and would not have something like Apartheid happen.

Exactly right in that all whites with the exception of a handful were in favour of Apartheid...….why wouldn't they, the National Party had created a paradise for them at the expense of the oppressed. Hell I know of white trash who migrated to South Africa and suddenly they had a servant or two. Apart from Helen Suzman and Bernie Wrankmore I don't remember any other English speaking people speaking out against Apartheid. The ballot box told a story in that the Nats were in power for what almost 50 years? It's not hard to work out where their votes cam e from.

My point exactly Denny.  Funny how everyone and their was opposed to Apartheid, yet the Nats won by larger margins than Afrikaner demographics would predict, especially if one keep in mind that for most of the 80's, the KP/CP was the official opposition...and they were even further right than the Nats. Apartheid is a blight on all white South Africans, but it's not an excuse for turning the tables. The country will benefit from empowering all her citizens. If you start excluding or impeding sertain sectors of the population,  you are looking to repeat the mistakes of the past. Regardless of good intentions. 

Draad I can tell you some stories, things that I suffered yet it's chicken shit compared to how others suffered and while we're talking about English speaking saffas here's a couple.

Met a young whitey through table tennis, I was up at his place one sunday, didn't invite me in, anyway, next time we met was at the club, he said his father had told him that I was never to set foot on his property again.

I worked at the East London Daily Despatch, befriended a really nice English speaking whitey, he was decent to the bone, had his 21st birthday party coming up, pulled me aside and apologized that his parents would not hear about him inviting me.

At that same company there were only showers for the whites so illegally I used their showers, guess what, to spite me an English speaking white guy stole my clothes and hid it. Because it was pay night I kept my jeans with me and hung it over the shower door but that was mainly because I had my pay packet on me. 

The above was mild in comparison to other things I experienced living with Apartheid, I can't be bothered listing other far more nastier experiences.

So much for the "softer" English racist behavior.

but it's not an excuse for turning the tables.

Totally agree, I'm opposed to any form of racism, it's about giving everyone a fair chance regardless of colour or religion. The way things are panning out I  never want to live in SA again.

The four damning factors stopping Africa's advancement is tribalism, corruption, over population and a lack of a middle class.

European civilization is steeped in infrastructure and the rule of law. European civilization will invest in health care, education and respect for the rule of law. At best some African countries like South Africa dangle in the middle but they never get on the front foot because of the abovementioned inherent handicaps.