The American Right Wing and South Africa

[Paul Essien]

Your inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others is a result of you being full of hate.

It's not inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others.

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you are their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. What's your problem ?"

During WW2 President Trueman nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. He killed two hundred thousand people just on the first day and many more after. That's seen as one the greatest truimphs in American history. Trueman didn't care that people who he blew were not responsible for the crimes of others.

But it's ok for white people to kill innocents but not black people....right ?

Trump and pentagon drops bombs on people pretty much every day (Non white people of course in places like Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen) and now he has nerve to demand peace in South Africa

The Natives Land Act of 1913 gave the majority black population just 7% of farmland.

As of 2018, white South Africans make up 8.4% of the population but own 72% of farmland.

The farmers today, being oppressed, and mass murdered are not the ones that stole the land from the natives.

Who is being oppressed ? This is how whites in S.Africa are living

ONE SETTLER-ONE BULLET That's what I agree with. That mantra

And there should be more stories like this EVERYDAY

The white supremacist farmers should be killed because it's not there land in the first place.

No white person is African. They are on stolen ground

And murdering farmers and driving them from their farms is a great way to make a famine, if you want your people, especially children to starve.

There is no peaceful solution dude.

Black people for 500 years have been trying to explain racism to whites but this is what happens.

Black people have tried to do it the calm way. But has not worked.

But all the backlash from white supremacist aganist S.Africa is nothing new.

Rosewood in the early part of the last century ?

A thriving black community living independent of whites was burned to the ground by white supremacists.

Not 2 mention Bruce’s Beach, Black Wall Street, Bronzeville in Chicago and Black Baltimore during the days of sailing ships all show a pattern of White officials making extraordinary efforts to cut black business development off at the knees.

Black degradation is essential 2 White supremacists.

Thriving Black business districts and countries and strong Black communities would expose the lie at the heart of White Supremacy ideology.

The Tulsa Riot in the early part of the last century.

Same again. Thriving black community. Blew up by white ppl with the aid of the US government.

Growth of ones own country can't happen in isolation. It has to be within an agreed shared global structure which includes everyone. While the ideology and controlling structure of white supremacy remains firmly in place, restrictions will ultimately always apply to black nations.

Its no different to slaves growing their own independent business on the plantation. Sooner or later if its successful the master will want a cut of any of the profits or control of it. Eventually either dominating it completely, eliminating it to avoid unfavorable competition or even having it challenge the plantation slave institution itself.

One only has to look at the likes of Colonel Gaddifi who was trying to create a central african bank and an african communication network in Africa. Africa is a massive source for mobile phone networks and internet. Africans make billions for the white supremacists. Gaddifi plan went against there wishes just as would have an African bank. So he had to be killed

Patrice Lumumba, one of the greatest black leaders to emerge in this century, was assinated by the Belgians with the aid of US, so that the white international community could get the puppet government that they wanted in the Congo.

When the black children of SOuth Africa are dying, do you think the US lib media will tell that story, or will they rather bury it, so as to avoid embarrassing themselves?

Now this is the type of talk I like. This is straight in you're face white supremacy.

So you repeat the worn out "but...but ...only white ppl can farm....you blacks don't know anything"

If that does happen (that people in S Africa starve) then that will be the fault of the white supremacist not because (as you like to think) black people are stupid to know how to eat and can't farm. They

As long as USAID, IMG and World Bank don't try and send in there economic hitmen. Black people will be all right. But they will come. That's to be expected. But Julies Malema and millions black people are prepared to die

They will poison the land. They spread disease. They will fund some Boko Harem group. The white supremacist will do some thing to black progress.

But according to you only white people know how to grow crops and mechanized agriculture is such a complicated science.

Bitch plz

Whites can still wrk for black farmers as field handsand laborers for minimum wage.

And the land in SA is not just for Agriculture only but other forms of development including Mining, Infrastructure development, building malls n modern houses etc

If the goal is to deal with white supremacy and the roots of white supremacy, if we aren’t talking about issues related to economic class and redistribution of wealth and power, then we aren’t actually dealing with the problem.

The goal for black SA's is to break the white supremacists in SA's spirit. Black SA's should have a heart of stone towards white supremacists in South Africa.

 

[MizMolly]

Ive noticed that hardly any of the threads on the Africa board get much response. Disir posts a lot of interesting stuff that doesnt get the reaction it deserves.
But there is one topic that seems to fire up a certain section of the board to full froth. That is the subject of land redistribution.
Ive scratched my head over this. Why is this the only African subject of interest to people on here ?

Is it because most of the tales are made up genocide stories ?
Is it because the supposed victims are white and bad things cant happen to white folks ?
Is there a long suppressed desire to return to the evil age of apartheid ?
Is apartheid worship some kind of comfort to alt righters in a post Jim Crow US ?

It might be all of those things.

But I think the answer may be more complex than that.

It is more about the US than it is about South Africa.

If you question the legitimacy of white ownership of African land then it raises other questions closer to home.
If the Boer cant sieze land at gunpoint then why should anyone else have that right ?

The only good injun is a dead injun ?

The white right wing sub conscious is an interesting study. but its actually the white subconscious at play here. The concept of "manifest destiny" is something that many whites believe in to the point I think its become part of their DNA. I've heard people actually claim that the land stolen from Africans is actually legally owned by whites. I dont know what kind of fucked up logic that is but it appears to make sense to a lot of whites. They think its unfair for that land to be returned to Blacks without compensating whites. To me thats like paying a bank robbers son after you take back the millions his dad stole.

With that same thought, how about the American blacks who feel this way give their land back to NA?

 

[Correll]

Your inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others is a result of you being full of hate.

It's not inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others.

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you are their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. What's your problem ?"
.....

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

And how long ago does it have to be to make it right ?

First of all, I like that you were not dishonest enough to deny my points about how marxist like to punish farmers and engineer famines.

And as to "how long to make it right", I would say that if the current owner did not have anything to do with the initial theft, holding them responsible is not morally right.


I know as a marxist, that holding individuals responsible for the actions of other people, if they are in the same "group", is near and dear to your heart,

but it is morally wrong. Evil even.


As we can see by the way that Ascelips is willing to see black children starve, if it means hurting whitey.



That's evil right there. If you can't see it, that is something very wrong with you.


Are you comfortable with the idea of black children starving? Is that an acceptable price to pay for social jsutice?

You keep waving these notional starving kids in my face as some sort of justification for the crimes of white south africans.

Here is the thing.

South Africa will reverse the Boer policy of stealing land owned by black folk..

And then in a few years time it wont matter because the next generation cannot be held responsible for the actions of this one. (your position)

And we can all move forward in harmony.
.

No, I hold forth the strong possibility of famine, and starving children, as a reason to not drive farmers from their farms.

Since the fact that the white farmers who are being mass murdered, raped and driven from their farms, NOW, not having committed any of the crimes you cite, seems to not matter to you.


And yes, once the whites are all dead, or fled, and a generation passes, I would not hold the next generation responsible for the crimes of their fathers. What part of this is confusing to you?

None of it is confusing.I just find it amusing that you feel that a white land grab is ok but a reversal of that is a big problem.

I don't think your position is teneble.

If whitey had any sense he would sit down and work out a deal. I think Cyril would be up for that.

1. Your conclusion that I support Imperialism is a self serving assumption on your part, that is not supported by anything I have ever said.

2. Mass murder, rape and oppression is a big problem to civilized people. You, however are a marxist, and thus support it. As long as the right people are being mass murdered, raped and oppressed.

3. YOu want those being mass murdered, raped and oppressed to sit down with their oppressors and work out a deal? And would any such deal be honored? And when it was not honored would you hold the government responsible? All those questions are rhetorical. Don't bother answering them. We all know you answers.

Where are these "mass murders" taking place ? Where are the graves and who has been murdered. ?
Its a load of right wing bollox.

This is what Cyril told the FT>

EXCLUSIVE: 'This is no land grab', writes Cyril Ramaphosa


The “land question” goes back more than a century to the 1913 Natives Land Act, which provided legislative form to a process of dispossession that had been under way since colonial times. It confined the country’s African population to slightly more than 10 per cent of the land, reserving the rest for the white minority. These laws alienated the majority of our citizens from their places of birth and burial, stripped them of their assets and deprived them of their livelihoods.

Even now, the dispossession of land continues to determine the prospects of millions of South Africans, and it holds back the country’s economic development. By restricting the ownership of land to a small minority, the apartheid regime ensured that one of the country’s most valuable economic resources would be severely underutilised.

During this year the department of rural development and land reform released results of a land audit to establish land ownership patterns. Among other insights forthcoming from the land audit, it emerged that:

• Individuals, companies and trusts own 90 per cent of land in SA, and the state 10 per cent
• Of this 90%, individuals own 39%, trusts 31%, companies 25% and community-based organisations 4%, with co-ownership at 1%.
• In terms of farms and agricultural holdings, 97% of the total agricultural holdings are owned by 7% of landowners
• Agricultural land ownership by race: 72% of farms and agricultural holdings are owned by whites, 15% by coloured citizens, 5% by Indians, and 4% by Africans

For decades, the country’s assets — its land, its minerals, its human resources, its enterprises — have been owned, controlled and managed in a way that has prevented the extraction of their full value. Our intention is to unlock the economic potential of land. Without the recognition of the property rights of all our people, we will not overcome inequality, and without giving the poor the means to productively farm the land, we will not defeat poverty.

In promoting accelerated land reform, the ruling ANC, recently resolved to propose a constitutional amendment that would make explicit the conditions under which land could justifiably be expropriated without compensation. While the current clause in the constitution dealing with property rights does not necessarily prohibit such a measure, the ANC’s view is that an amendment would provide certainty and clarity.

The proposed amendment would need to reinforce the fundamental principles of the property clause, which, among other things, prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of property and holds that expropriation is possible in the public interest subject to just and equitable compensation. It also says that no provision can impede the process of land reform to redress the results of past racial discrimination.

While a parliamentary committee is at present wrapping up public hearings on this issue and still needs to give consideration to any possible constitutional amendment, there have been several suggestions on when expropriation without compensation may be justified. These include, for instance, unused land, derelict buildings, purely speculative land holdings, or circumstances where occupiers have strong historical rights and title holders do not occupy or use their land, such as labour tenancy, informal settlements and abandoned inner-city buildings.

This is no land grab; nor is it an assault on the private ownership of property. The ANC has been clear that its land reform programme should not undermine future investment in the economy or damage agricultural production and food security. The proposals will not erode property rights, but will instead ensure that the rights of all South Africans, and not just those who currently own land, are strengthened. SA has learnt from the experiences of other countries, both from what has worked and what has not, and will not make the same mistakes that others have made.

The proposal on expropriation without compensation is one element of a broader programme of land reform that seeks to ensure that all citizens can have their land rights recognised, whether they live in communal areas, informal settlements or on commercial farms. It includes the release of well-located urban land for low-cost housing so that the poor can own property and live close to economic opportunities.

For land reform to succeed, it is essential that support is given to beneficiaries of land redistribution through financing, training, market access, irrigation and the provision of seeds, fertiliser and equipment, all of which contribute to the sustainability of emerging agricultural enterprises.

Land reform in SA is a moral, social and economic imperative. By bringing more land into productive use, by giving more South Africans assets and opportunities for sustainable livelihoods, the country is creating conditions for greater, more inclusive and more meaningful growth.

Thats right, they intend to compensate the people who stole their land !!

And it is wider ranging than farmland. It will address inner city land use in an effort to improve housing. This is an absolute necessity for social cohesion in a country where inequality destabilises any kind of progress.

Of course, as a racist, you can only see that black folks will benefit out of this and that cant be right in your world.

They will be wanting the vote next.

 

[Paul Essien]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

 

[Godboy]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

A black guy robbed my house 50 years ago. I guess i should go rape and murder his family now, right?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

He did almost say that a few pages back. Of course it didnt cost him anything to say it.
I think he is still pining because his families slaves were set free.

 

[Liberty777]

I will laugh at you, when their racists actions lead to famine and black children are starving.

Such is life if that actually happens. I'd rather people starve and have their land than have it in the thieving hands of whites

You would rather see children, even black children starve if it means you get to see whites suffer?

My God, you are full of hate.


You are pathetic.

Yes, but thats not whats happening. I'd rather see Black children starve to death knowing they own the land instead of whites. Whites arent suffering. They are being forced to give up stolen land.

White are certainly suffering.


It is pathetic that you support oppressing them, but are too cowardly to be honest about it.


You are so full of hate, that you are willing to see black children starve rather than see a white person own land and farm it, in Africa.


I want the ANC government to stop being marxist genocidal maniacs and make policy to keep their people fed, not to feed their blood lust.


I want to see black children NOT starve and you want to see them starve.

Well if whites are suffering from having their stolen land taken away from them then thats just a bonus. Fuckem.

Theres plenty of Black people and they will eventually stabilize their population and resources. No white boy should ever be allowed to own Black land. Thats the motherland.

Do you relate more to your mother or father?

 

[Liberty777]

Your inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others is a result of you being full of hate.

It's not inability to understand that individuals are not responsible for the crimes of others.

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you are their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. What's your problem ?"

During WW2 President Trueman nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. He killed two hundred thousand people just on the first day and many more after. That's seen as one the greatest truimphs in American history. Trueman didn't care that people who he blew were not responsible for the crimes of others.

But it's ok for white people to kill innocents but not black people....right ?

Trump and pentagon drops bombs on people pretty much every day (Non white people of course in places like Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen) and now he has nerve to demand peace in South Africa

The Natives Land Act of 1913 gave the majority black population just 7% of farmland.

As of 2018, white South Africans make up 8.4% of the population but own 72% of farmland.

The farmers today, being oppressed, and mass murdered are not the ones that stole the land from the natives.

Who is being oppressed ? This is how whites in S.Africa are living

ONE SETTLER-ONE BULLET That's what I agree with. That mantra

And there should be more stories like this EVERYDAY

The white supremacist farmers should be killed because it's not there land in the first place.

No white person is African. They are on stolen ground

And murdering farmers and driving them from their farms is a great way to make a famine, if you want your people, especially children to starve.

There is no peaceful solution dude.

Black people for 500 years have been trying to explain racism to whites but this is what happens.

Black people have tried to do it the calm way. But has not worked.

But all the backlash from white supremacist aganist S.Africa is nothing new.

Rosewood in the early part of the last century ?

A thriving black community living independent of whites was burned to the ground by white supremacists.

Not 2 mention Bruce’s Beach, Black Wall Street, Bronzeville in Chicago and Black Baltimore during the days of sailing ships all show a pattern of White officials making extraordinary efforts to cut black business development off at the knees.

Black degradation is essential 2 White supremacists.

Thriving Black business districts and countries and strong Black communities would expose the lie at the heart of White Supremacy ideology.

The Tulsa Riot in the early part of the last century.

Same again. Thriving black community. Blew up by white ppl with the aid of the US government.

Growth of ones own country can't happen in isolation. It has to be within an agreed shared global structure which includes everyone. While the ideology and controlling structure of white supremacy remains firmly in place, restrictions will ultimately always apply to black nations.

Its no different to slaves growing their own independent business on the plantation. Sooner or later if its successful the master will want a cut of any of the profits or control of it. Eventually either dominating it completely, eliminating it to avoid unfavorable competition or even having it challenge the plantation slave institution itself.

One only has to look at the likes of Colonel Gaddifi who was trying to create a central african bank and an african communication network in Africa. Africa is a massive source for mobile phone networks and internet. Africans make billions for the white supremacists. Gaddifi plan went against there wishes just as would have an African bank. So he had to be killed

Patrice Lumumba, one of the greatest black leaders to emerge in this century, was assinated by the Belgians with the aid of US, so that the white international community could get the puppet government that they wanted in the Congo.

When the black children of SOuth Africa are dying, do you think the US lib media will tell that story, or will they rather bury it, so as to avoid embarrassing themselves?

Now this is the type of talk I like. This is straight in you're face white supremacy.

So you repeat the worn out "but...but ...only white ppl can farm....you blacks don't know anything"

If that does happen (that people in S Africa starve) then that will be the fault of the white supremacist not because (as you like to think) black people are stupid to know how to eat and can't farm. They

As long as USAID, IMG and World Bank don't try and send in there economic hitmen. Black people will be all right. But they will come. That's to be expected. But Julies Malema and millions black people are prepared to die

They will poison the land. They spread disease. They will fund some Boko Harem group. The white supremacist will do some thing to black progress.

But according to you only white people know how to grow crops and mechanized agriculture is such a complicated science.

Bitch plz

Whites can still wrk for black farmers as field handsand laborers for minimum wage.

And the land in SA is not just for Agriculture only but other forms of development including Mining, Infrastructure development, building malls n modern houses etc

If the goal is to deal with white supremacy and the roots of white supremacy, if we aren’t talking about issues related to economic class and redistribution of wealth and power, then we aren’t actually dealing with the problem.

The goal for black SA's is to break the white supremacists in SA's spirit. Black SA's should have a heart of stone towards white supremacists in South Africa.

Do you love white people?

 

[Tilly]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

He did almost say that a few pages back. Of course it didnt cost him anything to say it.
I think he is still pining because his families slaves were set free.

You are cosying up to someone (Paul) who said if he could he would order the gang rape and murder of white South African children, force their parents to watch, and then do the same to them.

Ask him and he’ll tell you with pride that this is what he’d like to do.

Although, from what you are posting here, it seems as though you’d be fine with this. Not that I’m surprised, you continually support violence against women and men you disapprove of. SMH.

 

[MizMolly]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

Thats exactly right. Anyones great grandchild is not to blame. Get on with your life

 

[Paul Essien]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

A black guy robbed my house 50 years ago. I guess i should go rape and murder his family now, right?

And that black man went to Jail for a very long time. He did not get build and grow from robbing your house and you did not have any long term effects of him robbing your house. Unlike the white house robbers in S.Africa.

 

[Godboy]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

A black guy robbed my house 50 years ago. I guess i should go rape and murder his family now, right?

And that black man went to Jail for a very long time. He did not get build and grow from robbing your house and you did not have any long term effects of him robbing your house. Unlike the white house robbers in S.Africa.

No, he didnt go to jail. Most robbers dont. He took many thousands of dollars from me, and now his kid inherited it. I should go rape and kill his familiy now?

 

[Correll]

First of all, I like that you were not dishonest enough to deny my points about how marxist like to punish farmers and engineer famines.

And as to "how long to make it right", I would say that if the current owner did not have anything to do with the initial theft, holding them responsible is not morally right.


I know as a marxist, that holding individuals responsible for the actions of other people, if they are in the same "group", is near and dear to your heart,

but it is morally wrong. Evil even.


As we can see by the way that Ascelips is willing to see black children starve, if it means hurting whitey.



That's evil right there. If you can't see it, that is something very wrong with you.


Are you comfortable with the idea of black children starving? Is that an acceptable price to pay for social jsutice?

You keep waving these notional starving kids in my face as some sort of justification for the crimes of white south africans.

Here is the thing.

South Africa will reverse the Boer policy of stealing land owned by black folk..

And then in a few years time it wont matter because the next generation cannot be held responsible for the actions of this one. (your position)

And we can all move forward in harmony.
.

No, I hold forth the strong possibility of famine, and starving children, as a reason to not drive farmers from their farms.

Since the fact that the white farmers who are being mass murdered, raped and driven from their farms, NOW, not having committed any of the crimes you cite, seems to not matter to you.


And yes, once the whites are all dead, or fled, and a generation passes, I would not hold the next generation responsible for the crimes of their fathers. What part of this is confusing to you?

None of it is confusing.I just find it amusing that you feel that a white land grab is ok but a reversal of that is a big problem.

I don't think your position is teneble.

If whitey had any sense he would sit down and work out a deal. I think Cyril would be up for that.

1. Your conclusion that I support Imperialism is a self serving assumption on your part, that is not supported by anything I have ever said.

2. Mass murder, rape and oppression is a big problem to civilized people. You, however are a marxist, and thus support it. As long as the right people are being mass murdered, raped and oppressed.

3. YOu want those being mass murdered, raped and oppressed to sit down with their oppressors and work out a deal? And would any such deal be honored? And when it was not honored would you hold the government responsible? All those questions are rhetorical. Don't bother answering them. We all know you answers.

Where are these "mass murders" taking place ? Where are the graves and who has been murdered. ?
Its a load of right wing bollox.

This is what Cyril told the FT>

EXCLUSIVE: 'This is no land grab', writes Cyril Ramaphosa


The “land question” goes back more than a century to the 1913 Natives Land Act, which provided legislative form to a process of dispossession that had been under way since colonial times. It confined the country’s African population to slightly more than 10 per cent of the land, reserving the rest for the white minority. These laws alienated the majority of our citizens from their places of birth and burial, stripped them of their assets and deprived them of their livelihoods.

Even now, the dispossession of land continues to determine the prospects of millions of South Africans, and it holds back the country’s economic development. By restricting the ownership of land to a small minority, the apartheid regime ensured that one of the country’s most valuable economic resources would be severely underutilised.

During this year the department of rural development and land reform released results of a land audit to establish land ownership patterns. Among other insights forthcoming from the land audit, it emerged that:

• Individuals, companies and trusts own 90 per cent of land in SA, and the state 10 per cent
• Of this 90%, individuals own 39%, trusts 31%, companies 25% and community-based organisations 4%, with co-ownership at 1%.
• In terms of farms and agricultural holdings, 97% of the total agricultural holdings are owned by 7% of landowners
• Agricultural land ownership by race: 72% of farms and agricultural holdings are owned by whites, 15% by coloured citizens, 5% by Indians, and 4% by Africans

For decades, the country’s assets — its land, its minerals, its human resources, its enterprises — have been owned, controlled and managed in a way that has prevented the extraction of their full value. Our intention is to unlock the economic potential of land. Without the recognition of the property rights of all our people, we will not overcome inequality, and without giving the poor the means to productively farm the land, we will not defeat poverty.

In promoting accelerated land reform, the ruling ANC, recently resolved to propose a constitutional amendment that would make explicit the conditions under which land could justifiably be expropriated without compensation. While the current clause in the constitution dealing with property rights does not necessarily prohibit such a measure, the ANC’s view is that an amendment would provide certainty and clarity.

The proposed amendment would need to reinforce the fundamental principles of the property clause, which, among other things, prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of property and holds that expropriation is possible in the public interest subject to just and equitable compensation. It also says that no provision can impede the process of land reform to redress the results of past racial discrimination.

While a parliamentary committee is at present wrapping up public hearings on this issue and still needs to give consideration to any possible constitutional amendment, there have been several suggestions on when expropriation without compensation may be justified. These include, for instance, unused land, derelict buildings, purely speculative land holdings, or circumstances where occupiers have strong historical rights and title holders do not occupy or use their land, such as labour tenancy, informal settlements and abandoned inner-city buildings.

This is no land grab; nor is it an assault on the private ownership of property. The ANC has been clear that its land reform programme should not undermine future investment in the economy or damage agricultural production and food security. The proposals will not erode property rights, but will instead ensure that the rights of all South Africans, and not just those who currently own land, are strengthened. SA has learnt from the experiences of other countries, both from what has worked and what has not, and will not make the same mistakes that others have made.

The proposal on expropriation without compensation is one element of a broader programme of land reform that seeks to ensure that all citizens can have their land rights recognised, whether they live in communal areas, informal settlements or on commercial farms. It includes the release of well-located urban land for low-cost housing so that the poor can own property and live close to economic opportunities.

For land reform to succeed, it is essential that support is given to beneficiaries of land redistribution through financing, training, market access, irrigation and the provision of seeds, fertiliser and equipment, all of which contribute to the sustainability of emerging agricultural enterprises.

Land reform in SA is a moral, social and economic imperative. By bringing more land into productive use, by giving more South Africans assets and opportunities for sustainable livelihoods, the country is creating conditions for greater, more inclusive and more meaningful growth.

Thats right, they intend to compensate the people who stole their land !!

And it is wider ranging than farmland. It will address inner city land use in an effort to improve housing. This is an absolute necessity for social cohesion in a country where inequality destabilises any kind of progress.

Of course, as a racist, you can only see that black folks will benefit out of this and that cant be right in your world.

They will be wanting the vote next.

Interesting. YOu deny any murders are taking place, and start talking about events over a century ago, and finish with a government promise of payments for land to be confiscated.


You do realize that that is not a very convincing argument that murders are not taking place, do you?

Indeed, it is more an justification of said murders, than any attempt to show that they are not taking place.

 

[Correll]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

My answer is the same. I am against mass murder and rape. I would not do that, nor support other people doing it.


You do support it. You are supporting it right now. That is a basic difference between us.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Ive noticed that hardly any of the threads on the Africa board get much response. Disir posts a lot of interesting stuff that doesnt get the reaction it deserves.
But there is one topic that seems to fire up a certain section of the board to full froth. That is the subject of land redistribution.
Ive scratched my head over this. Why is this the only African subject of interest to people on here ?

Is it because most of the tales are made up genocide stories ?
Is it because the supposed victims are white and bad things cant happen to white folks ?
Is there a long suppressed desire to return to the evil age of apartheid ?
Is apartheid worship some kind of comfort to alt righters in a post Jim Crow US ?

It might be all of those things.

But I think the answer may be more complex than that.

It is more about the US than it is about South Africa.

If you question the legitimacy of white ownership of African land then it raises other questions closer to home.
If the Boer cant sieze land at gunpoint then why should anyone else have that right ?

The only good injun is a dead injun ?

When are you giving Northern Ireland back? How many Scots and Welsh did you slaughter when you forced them to be part of the UK? How many American did you murder when they wanted independence from your despotic regime? How many people did you kill and abuse in India?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Ive noticed that hardly any of the threads on the Africa board get much response. Disir posts a lot of interesting stuff that doesnt get the reaction it deserves.
But there is one topic that seems to fire up a certain section of the board to full froth. That is the subject of land redistribution.
Ive scratched my head over this. Why is this the only African subject of interest to people on here ?

Is it because most of the tales are made up genocide stories ?
Is it because the supposed victims are white and bad things cant happen to white folks ?
Is there a long suppressed desire to return to the evil age of apartheid ?
Is apartheid worship some kind of comfort to alt righters in a post Jim Crow US ?

It might be all of those things.

But I think the answer may be more complex than that.

It is more about the US than it is about South Africa.

If you question the legitimacy of white ownership of African land then it raises other questions closer to home.
If the Boer cant sieze land at gunpoint then why should anyone else have that right ?

The only good injun is a dead injun ?

When are you giving Northern Ireland back? How many Scots and Welsh did you slaughter when you forced them to be part of the UK? How many American did you murder when they wanted independence from your despotic regime? How many people did you kill and abuse in India?

I am Welsh and I would give Northern Ireland back tomorrow. And Scotland and Wales, the Falklands and any other place blighted by English Imperialism. My country is still a victim of English imperialism. I hope that helps you.

 

[Correll]

What I would not do, is rape and murder you and your family.

That is the behavior, you are supporting.

So I'll the same question again

If my great grandparents come into your great grandparents home and rob and rape their home and use the contents of their home to build an empire and they say they are doing this because black people are superior to white people.

The legacy of that means that now you as their great grandchild is living in the mud and you ain't got a biscuit.

So according to you're logic you would find it OK for me to say to you "That was long time ago. I did not do all that stuff. Nothing should change .What's your problem ?"

He did almost say that a few pages back. Of course it didnt cost him anything to say it.
I think he is still pining because his families slaves were set free.

My family fought on the side of the North. YOu are a fucking asshole.

 

[Yarddog]

Ive noticed that hardly any of the threads on the Africa board get much response. Disir posts a lot of interesting stuff that doesnt get the reaction it deserves.
But there is one topic that seems to fire up a certain section of the board to full froth. That is the subject of land redistribution.
Ive scratched my head over this. Why is this the only African subject of interest to people on here ?

Is it because most of the tales are made up genocide stories ?
Is it because the supposed victims are white and bad things cant happen to white folks ?
Is there a long suppressed desire to return to the evil age of apartheid ?
Is apartheid worship some kind of comfort to alt righters in a post Jim Crow US ?

It might be all of those things.

But I think the answer may be more complex than that.

It is more about the US than it is about South Africa.

If you question the legitimacy of white ownership of African land then it raises other questions closer to home.
If the Boer cant sieze land at gunpoint then why should anyone else have that right ?

The only good injun is a dead injun ?

It probably gets a lot of notice because of that little thing that happened over in Zimbabwe. Remember that country? It completely collapsed. Do remember they used to export a lot of food to other African nations?

Probably when the whole Land redistribution thing comes up and you can draw a line of comparison between the two countries of South Africa and Zimbabwe.... It might catch the attention of people who are able to think. You think??

 

[Tommy Tainant]

You keep waving these notional starving kids in my face as some sort of justification for the crimes of white south africans.

Here is the thing.

South Africa will reverse the Boer policy of stealing land owned by black folk..

And then in a few years time it wont matter because the next generation cannot be held responsible for the actions of this one. (your position)

And we can all move forward in harmony.
.

No, I hold forth the strong possibility of famine, and starving children, as a reason to not drive farmers from their farms.

Since the fact that the white farmers who are being mass murdered, raped and driven from their farms, NOW, not having committed any of the crimes you cite, seems to not matter to you.


And yes, once the whites are all dead, or fled, and a generation passes, I would not hold the next generation responsible for the crimes of their fathers. What part of this is confusing to you?

None of it is confusing.I just find it amusing that you feel that a white land grab is ok but a reversal of that is a big problem.

I don't think your position is teneble.

If whitey had any sense he would sit down and work out a deal. I think Cyril would be up for that.

1. Your conclusion that I support Imperialism is a self serving assumption on your part, that is not supported by anything I have ever said.

2. Mass murder, rape and oppression is a big problem to civilized people. You, however are a marxist, and thus support it. As long as the right people are being mass murdered, raped and oppressed.

3. YOu want those being mass murdered, raped and oppressed to sit down with their oppressors and work out a deal? And would any such deal be honored? And when it was not honored would you hold the government responsible? All those questions are rhetorical. Don't bother answering them. We all know you answers.

Where are these "mass murders" taking place ? Where are the graves and who has been murdered. ?
Its a load of right wing bollox.

This is what Cyril told the FT>

EXCLUSIVE: 'This is no land grab', writes Cyril Ramaphosa


The “land question” goes back more than a century to the 1913 Natives Land Act, which provided legislative form to a process of dispossession that had been under way since colonial times. It confined the country’s African population to slightly more than 10 per cent of the land, reserving the rest for the white minority. These laws alienated the majority of our citizens from their places of birth and burial, stripped them of their assets and deprived them of their livelihoods.

Even now, the dispossession of land continues to determine the prospects of millions of South Africans, and it holds back the country’s economic development. By restricting the ownership of land to a small minority, the apartheid regime ensured that one of the country’s most valuable economic resources would be severely underutilised.

During this year the department of rural development and land reform released results of a land audit to establish land ownership patterns. Among other insights forthcoming from the land audit, it emerged that:

• Individuals, companies and trusts own 90 per cent of land in SA, and the state 10 per cent
• Of this 90%, individuals own 39%, trusts 31%, companies 25% and community-based organisations 4%, with co-ownership at 1%.
• In terms of farms and agricultural holdings, 97% of the total agricultural holdings are owned by 7% of landowners
• Agricultural land ownership by race: 72% of farms and agricultural holdings are owned by whites, 15% by coloured citizens, 5% by Indians, and 4% by Africans

For decades, the country’s assets — its land, its minerals, its human resources, its enterprises — have been owned, controlled and managed in a way that has prevented the extraction of their full value. Our intention is to unlock the economic potential of land. Without the recognition of the property rights of all our people, we will not overcome inequality, and without giving the poor the means to productively farm the land, we will not defeat poverty.

In promoting accelerated land reform, the ruling ANC, recently resolved to propose a constitutional amendment that would make explicit the conditions under which land could justifiably be expropriated without compensation. While the current clause in the constitution dealing with property rights does not necessarily prohibit such a measure, the ANC’s view is that an amendment would provide certainty and clarity.

The proposed amendment would need to reinforce the fundamental principles of the property clause, which, among other things, prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of property and holds that expropriation is possible in the public interest subject to just and equitable compensation. It also says that no provision can impede the process of land reform to redress the results of past racial discrimination.

While a parliamentary committee is at present wrapping up public hearings on this issue and still needs to give consideration to any possible constitutional amendment, there have been several suggestions on when expropriation without compensation may be justified. These include, for instance, unused land, derelict buildings, purely speculative land holdings, or circumstances where occupiers have strong historical rights and title holders do not occupy or use their land, such as labour tenancy, informal settlements and abandoned inner-city buildings.

This is no land grab; nor is it an assault on the private ownership of property. The ANC has been clear that its land reform programme should not undermine future investment in the economy or damage agricultural production and food security. The proposals will not erode property rights, but will instead ensure that the rights of all South Africans, and not just those who currently own land, are strengthened. SA has learnt from the experiences of other countries, both from what has worked and what has not, and will not make the same mistakes that others have made.

The proposal on expropriation without compensation is one element of a broader programme of land reform that seeks to ensure that all citizens can have their land rights recognised, whether they live in communal areas, informal settlements or on commercial farms. It includes the release of well-located urban land for low-cost housing so that the poor can own property and live close to economic opportunities.

For land reform to succeed, it is essential that support is given to beneficiaries of land redistribution through financing, training, market access, irrigation and the provision of seeds, fertiliser and equipment, all of which contribute to the sustainability of emerging agricultural enterprises.

Land reform in SA is a moral, social and economic imperative. By bringing more land into productive use, by giving more South Africans assets and opportunities for sustainable livelihoods, the country is creating conditions for greater, more inclusive and more meaningful growth.

Thats right, they intend to compensate the people who stole their land !!

And it is wider ranging than farmland. It will address inner city land use in an effort to improve housing. This is an absolute necessity for social cohesion in a country where inequality destabilises any kind of progress.

Of course, as a racist, you can only see that black folks will benefit out of this and that cant be right in your world.

They will be wanting the vote next.

Interesting. YOu deny any murders are taking place, and start talking about events over a century ago, and finish with a government promise of payments for land to be confiscated.


You do realize that that is not a very convincing argument that murders are not taking place, do you?

Indeed, it is more an justification of said murders, than any attempt to show that they are not taking place.

The South African farmers themselves statethat murders are at a 20 year low. The whole thing is a made up scare story by right wing loons.