South Africa Votes to Confiscate White Minority's Land Without Compensation

[The ScorpioN]

its a matter of context. a race committing crimes against its own is not the same as a different race comming in and doing the same.

Sherfront at its finest.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

@PrinceOfPain Would you be interested in/care to give a brief overview of the South African political parties? Even for a parliamentary system, the fractionalization seems pretty extensive, particularly on the left. I know the political left is internationally more known for in-fighting and squabbling over very particular political and theoretical nuance, while the right tends to just coagulate into a reactionary uniformity....but still, it seems extreme.

I recalled reading something long ago about the Workers and Socialist Party (WASP) there and being mildly impressed. But, after consulting Wikipedia, I saw that they don't even have a seat in your current parliament. Meanwhile, the African People's Convention, Economic Freedom Fighters, National Freedom Party, United Democratic Movement all have seats.

Shew. A brief overview?
Things'll get murky here, because (shamefully) I am not as versed on all of the parties as I maybe should be.

First off, we don't really have a right-leaning political party. Sure, we have our version of Front National - but they're loons, who get no attention, have little influence and no power. Effectively, we have a center, a left and a far left. The ANC and the DA both sort of dance around on the line between left and right.

The top three parties, as you've probably gathered, are the ANC, the DA and the EFF. That third slot used to be occupied by the IFP (Inkatha Freedom Party), but the EFF's aggressive populist approach catapulted them into the limelight about five years ago (their leader, Julius Malema, used to be a member of the ANC Youth League, but was given the boot a while back, for sowing dissent within the ANC and for being kinda racist).

Trying to understand the dynamics between and within the parties can be a bit of a struggle, due to loyalties often being divided between tribe, party, nation and race. That's an oversimplification, but it'll do the job.

Originally, the ANC could have been considered the Xhosa party, the IFP the Zulu party (they actually threatened to boycott the 1994 elections, rather than have a Xhosa party run the country and become the face of the successful revolution) and the DA was the white party (considered by many black people to be the ideological successors of the National Party - the Apartheid party, essentially).
Almost all of the 'black' parties have communist backgrounds, even if that isn't entirely apparent in their modern permutations, and the DA's roots are in the Capitalism that has a long history in white South Africa.

Nowadays, these tribe/race divisions between parties are far less stark, which has caused fissures to form. For example, Zuma is a Zulu nationalist - his rise to the top of the traditionally ANC leadership, and his ousting of Thabo Mbeki before the end of his term back in 2008 was the first obvious and overt sign of a sort of civil war within the ANC (for the record, I by far prefer the Xhosa people and Xhosa leadership. They're a more thoughtful people in general, whereas the Zulu can be very aggressive, and their temperament still shows signs of their warlike and genocidal history. Also, their allegiance to the Zulu king is, I think, very misplaced).
Cyril Ramaphosa, the new ANC president whose ascension I was sort of celebrating the other day, is a Venda - there is some hope that his relative tribal neutrality will allow him to bridge the divide between Xhosa and Zulu. I am skeptical.

Rather than Left, Right and Center, it is easier to think of the political parties in terms of the economic demographics they appeal to. The DA is the party of the suburban middle-to-upper classes while the ANC tends to aim its efforts at the lower class urban dwellers, with an occasional bone thrown to rural communities.
As a representative of the people, the ANC has done a horrible job - Mbeki was considered too aloof and intellectual, and overly concerned with international relations. Zuma was meant to be a man of the people, but he robbed us blind and sold the country out to criminals and Russians.
That all made room for the EFF, led by Malema. With their populist rhetoric and militant image, the EFF is the party of rural black South Africa. Malema, despite his party's relative weakness, is responsible for this Land Expropriation matter. He's been a cunning political tactician - making alliances with the DA during 2016's municipal elections, in order to allow major municipalities to be snatched away from ANC rule.

In essence, that is how the minor political parties maintain some semblance of influence. The ANC has dominated SA politics (though a little less with every election since the first) and the DA is the perennial runner-up (though, gaining a greater share of votes in every election since the first).
The ANC lost their two-thirds majority during the last general elections - a loss of influence and power that has sped up the infighting within the ANC - and, as I say, they lost their major municipalities to an alliance between the DA and the EFF.

As is common in parliamentary politics, the smaller parties tend to rally behind one of the two lead parties in order to push or block motions. For the past few years, most (but, alas, not all) have been as vocal in their criticism of the ANC as has the DA - unfortunately, it's not been quite enough to pass the constant motions of no confidence leveled against Zuma.

While the EFF lacks the votes to make any changes themselves, they are in the position of kingmaker - having enough of a share of the votes to be the deciding factor on most issues. I am pretty sure that this land expropriation thing is a good example of them using that position to push their personal pet policies to endear themselves to the rural and poor voter.
A year ago, the same motion failed by as overwhelming a majority as it was just passed with. It is hard not to see the EFF's fingerprints on that.

Okay.... that's not brief.
In terms of the specifics of the parties:

IFP: They still exist, they're still zulu but they've largely been usurped by the EFF. Their most notable stance is the desire to integrate traditional leaders into the system of government.
National Freedom Party: Another Zulu party, the NFP is concerned governing KwZulu-Natal, and their focus is on service delivery (or the lack thereof in rural/poor urban areas.
United Democratic Movement: I know nothing about them.
Freedom Front Plus: I suppose you could call this our right wing. Formed by Afrikaners, they take care of "the white man". Their biggest concern, realistically, is the maintenance of the afrikaans culture.
Congress Of The People: Cope is one of my favourite parties. Their primary thrust is a belief in the primacy of the constitution. They've allied with the DA and the ANC on alternate occasions, coming down on the side that most closely aligns with their principles, rather than the side that that is more politically expedient.
Pan Africanist Congress: Pretty self explanatory. Unfortunately, there are not many Pan African sympathies in the country - though Zimbabwean nationals are bringing the sentiment with them, so maybe in time these guys will have a bit more sway.

There's about 6 or 7 other 'major' parties, and a host of even smaller ones, but that's as much of an overview as I think I can manage without delving into areas I'm not even a little bit comfortable with.
Hope it's helpful.


Edit: God damn. That's a lot of waffle.

 

[AtomicPanther]

Planet Of The Apes: South Africa

 

[Hollywood Jack]

Do you really believe that Northern Europe wouldve been succesful if they didn't steal ideas/technology from Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Asia, Greece(Not really white like northern europeans), and Rome(Not really white like norther europeans)?

Face it.....Northern Europe peaked at the right time...before all of this, they were complete shithole civilizations.

You're delusional. And following your logic, the successful Asian countries are "stealing" ideas/technology from Western/European countries. They didn't invent any of the consumer goods that they sell worldwide, including in the countries that invented these products, they just figured out how to produce and distribute them efficiently.

Production is not theft, and colonized African countries were just as advanced, if not more advanced than many Asian countries at the time when they gained independence. The difference is that the African countries regressed while the Asian countries progressed. The African countries would be better off to study what the Asian countries did right and try to emulate it as best they can, rather than to be bitter and play the blame game and never get anywhere.

 

[DC23]

Lmfao absolutely unreal. Imagine being proud of stemming from that continent though. Legit.

 

[Karasu-Hanta]

I doubt many of the lets help the Syrian people brigade are frothing at the bit to help white Afrikaners hey.

 

[mon]

Someone doesn’t understand the brutality of pre European African society. It wasn’t some utopia.

Nailed it.

In fantasy its a rugged, noble savage with an intricate combination of strength, understanding and primal wisdom.

In reality its a brutal, unforgiving trial of strength, speed, trickery and cunning. Compassion and understanding outside your tribe are at best a weakness to be exploited and at worst a killer.

 

[faustian]

Predictably. I do occasionally try for SA threads with a positive tone, but they're never as popular as this one.
Know your audience and all that...

And let's be honest, race in South Africa's been on the American political agenda since Reagan. But neither left nor right cares all that much, except when we can be used to push a domestic agenda.



This is going to be a bit of a meandering ramble, but if you're patient enough to get through it, it should answer your question. I haven't provided sources, 'cos it's time consuming. But if you're actually interested, I think I've given enough info to inform further research. Just be careful, given the circumstances, there is a great deal of misleading information polluting the net.

Anyway, from what I can see, the arguments taking place about land expropriation here are largely based on an inaccurate premise.
The situation is a little more complicated than either side might prefer.
The taking of the land is not being discussed as restitution for "theft" of land when the settlers arrived in the country in the 1700s.

Spoiler: Slightly off-topic background info

You are right in saying that the original settlers did not run into African peoples, aside from the Khoisan (whose surviving members, I'd like to tangentially add, possess possibly the oldest culture in the world, having lived in basically the same way for close on 100,000 years - their's is an egalitarian culture, supported by an economy of gifting; a pretty utopian approach that all of the progress in the world seems only to move us further away from).
The Western half of the country is of legitimately European descent (in part because the Khoisan lack the interest or influence to contest the historical claim). The Eastern half of the country is of legitimately Bantu descent (in part because the Khoisan lack the interest or influence to contest the historical claim).

On topic, this land expropriation is a response to the 1913 Natives Land act, which formalised segregation, confiscated land and forbade transactions of land between race groups. It was a major abuse of power, and it was legalised theft.
The soon-to-be apartheid government took land away from blacks. They redrew borders for the tribes and for the (I think three) independent Boer states of South Africa. They then sold the confiscated land to white, Afrikaans farmers.

Spoiler: Sidebar of context

One of the main reasons that the black population was more or less at the mercy of an Afrikaans government that did not really want them, was due to the fact that the Brits had broken the back of the Boer resistance during the Anglo-Boer wars, and they'd shattered the Zulu kingdom during the Anglo-Zulu War (a war that a British general whose name eludes me, forced the Zulu into despite the fact that no one, not the British Government at the time, not the Boers and not even the Zulu themselves were really looking for the conflict).

The British wanted a unified South Africa, because it better served their ambitions of a Pan-African conquest. The Boers wanted their own sovereign states and independence from the British, and the Zulu wanted much the same. Not a whole lot of focus was really given to other tribes, in part because the Zulu had already broken every non-White power in the country (it could be easily be argued, for instance, that the Xhosa were saved from genocide by running into the Boers as they unknowingly fled to Bantu lands to escape the British). Blacks had the option of living outside of white land, and risk dealing with the Zulu, or remaining within white lands as a labour underclass.

So, anyway, the land whose... repossession is now being discussed is land that was fairly paid for by the ancestors of the current owners. The complicating matter is that the ones who bought the land in the first place, bought it from a government that was illegitimately in possession of it.
The people speaking about theft are not wrong, except that attributing theft to the wrong historical figures/period.
The people saying that the land was not stolen are also right, except they're attributing rightful claims to the wrong historical figures/period.

At the end of the day, land was stolen by the 1913 government and blacks were forced off of it. It was then sold to 1913 Afrikaans South African citizens, who promptly turned to farming it.
Bear in mind that this was undertaken with the full support of the African tribal chiefs - who were more than happy to sell out their people for the tribal lands that the white government was offering.
The present-day South African government is now talking about confiscating those lands and putting them to use for the betterment of the country.

The questions I think people need to be considering are:

• The ANC government has had 24 years to put assets to use for the betterment of the country. They've largely failed - why would this be any different?
• Does anyone really believe that once the government has confiscated the land, it will be returned to the descendants of its original black owners? If not, where is the justice in its confiscation?
• How far back in time do you really want to go, to decide who is lawfully entitled to something?

Tremendous post. Should be edited into OP as required reading for the thread. I think most people with even the slightest gift of logic and objectivity are likely to deduce that what's going on in SA today is little more than a primitive beginner's level exercise in how easy it for stupid people to manipulate even stupider people when an environment of absolute ignorance is embraced and allowed to thrive

 

[Hard To Tell]

Nailed it.

In fantasy its a rugged, noble savage with an intricate combination of strength, understanding and primal wisdom.

In reality its a brutal, unforgiving trial of strength, speed, trickery and cunning. Compassion and understanding outside your tribe are at best a weakness to be exploited and at worst a killer.

Before outside contact, Sub-Saharan Africans had not even developed written language or invented the wheel. I know a lot of people hate it when you bring this up and try and dismiss at some far-right propaganda but it's the truth.

 

[mon]

Before outside contact, Sub-Saharan Africans had not even developed written language or invented the wheel. I know a lot of people hate it when you bring this up and try and dismiss at some far-right propaganda but it's the truth.

Being honest that's irrelevant to me, what's relevant is the use of the oldest form of communication.... Force and violence vs a more mature communication... understanding, acceptance and peaceful intergratation.

Its not the level of tech or achievements that matters here(to me) its the ability to peacefully co exist with a seemingly alien viewpoint and let go of differences, nothing from the take it all crowd show me anything but might is right and if that's the case Apartheid wasn't the travesty it seemed but a just consequence of might is right and if that's the case all the people in power who pushed, helped and made the ending of Apartheid happen could be justified in reversing that decision. And that would be absolute amoral stupidity.

 

[Broke Lester]

Before outside contact, Sub-Saharan Africans had not even developed written language or invented the wheel. I know a lot of people hate it when you bring this up and try and dismiss at some far-right propaganda but it's the truth.

Nobody wants the truth, they just want to scream that they are victims

 

[ScarHead]

Maybe you should look into instead of just saying you doubt white people did much work. By the way, you didn't tell me what great cities and nations were built by black people.

Wakanda ......

 

[oldshadow]

As said before any whites that stay are crazy.

White should get political refugee status and be help to move to different countries.

That would make the taking of the land easer and prevent mass muder.m

Then let the country fail or survive on its own by their rules and devices.

Other then that the only thing left is for the whites to band together and make a last long bloody stand and ride the country into a true shithole.

 

[faustian]

Other then that the only thing left is for the whites to band together and make a last long bloody stand and ride the country into a true shithole.

Would buy the PPV

 

[KantoTerror]

In the near future...South Africa will be renamed to Wakanda...

 

[Denter]

You're delusional. And following your logic, the successful Asian countries are "stealing" ideas/technology from Western/European countries. They didn't invent any of the consumer goods that they sell worldwide, including in the countries that invented these products, they just figured out how to produce and distribute them efficiently.

Production is not theft, and colonized African countries were just as advanced, if not more advanced than many Asian countries at the time when they gained independence. The difference is that the African countries regressed while the Asian countries progressed. The African countries would be better off to study what the Asian countries did right and try to emulate it as best they can, rather than to be bitter and play the blame game and never get anywhere.

I never understood how one could "steal" an idea. They don't snatch it out of your head and make you forget it.

 

[Hard To Tell]

But guys. ....Apartheid which only ended in the 90's.

And colonialism in Hong Hong only ended in 1997.

I guess they must have achieved this by waving the same magic wand that allows Asians in America and The West to outperform whites despite the dreaded white privilege that is apparently holding other minorities back.

 

[Mark Cutting]

And colonialism in Hong Hong only ended in 1997.

I guess they must have achieved this by waving the same magic wand that allows Asians in America and The West to outperform whites despite the dreaded white privilege that is apparently holding other minorities back.

Bet there's some world class trout fishing in that stream on the left though

 

[Victor Maitland]

The task of farming in South Africa is not really as simple as the government seems to think. The land is arid, not as fertile as in other parts of Africa, and experiences occasional droughts (like in 2015).

If the South African leadership had any brains, instead of randomly seizing land from one group of people, to give to another group of people, they'd have experienced farmers teaching farming methods to coming generations, black and white. Wealth re-distribution is much less important than knowledge distribution. In the case of the latter, the results are much more permanent.

Otherwise they're doomed to realize that South Africa didn't grow to be what it was because it was such a great piece of land. It was a mostly abandoned piece of land that was built into what it was through a capable, well-organized infrastructure and skillful farming methods. There is much better land elsewhere in Africa, the only reason why people are concentrated in South Africa, is because it had better governing.

Something that it can probably no longer boast about.

Scan forward 2 or 3 years , this government will be begging for food aid and donations.
Just look what happened when cape town ran out of water. That is just a taster of the chaos they are bringing on themselves.
Maybe Bob Geldoff can do a concert for them when they start starving.

 

[BassAckwards]

give it back to the blacks and watch it all crumble. they think it'll turn into wakanda but it will turn into somolia

'merica will gladly take in south african refugees