Law South Africa to Forcefully Seize Land Ownership from White Minority

Rhodesia was a sh*thole for everybody who was not white the moment the British arrived. After throwing out the brutal corrupt white minority government, then it became Zimbabwe with a brutal corrupt black government and it continued being a sh*thole for black people.
Sad truth.
 
You have me when you complain about the unlawful seizures of white-owned land and property, but I'm getting fed up with you presenting this as an ethnic cleansing of whites.

We've looked at the data, in this thread, and that simply doesn't suss out. Violent home invasion against white farmers is obviously a serious crime problem in South Africa, but it's not an ethnic cleansing.
I wouldn't say it's ethnic cleansing either.. Its just what the boers knew would happen without apartheid.

Same with the squatting and steady fall of Johannesburg. The whites weren't ethically cleansed in those areas, the whites just don't function well in that environment, so they aren't there.
 
You mean it was a shithole before Europeans came and civilized the nation.
A sh*thole before Eouropeans brought civilization? Let's just look at what happens sometimes when Europeans bring civilization into Africa shall we? You being Shertards resident expert on European intervention in Africa are already aware of the stories I am about tell but some posters on this thread might not be as well versed on the subject of Europeans bringing civilization to Africa as yourself.

King Leopold II of Belgium decided being the loving, giving humanitarian that he was decided that like other European nations wanted to bring civilization to Africa. Well he got he chance in a Belgium colony called the Congo Free State. For price of the wonderful civilizing influence he was bringing to the Congo Free State. King Leopold II only wanted a little rubber in return. In an effort obtain this rubber he created a slave culture in Congo where native Congolese were forced by companies to harvest the rubber. In addition to being enslaved to harvest rubber they were given quotas to meet and if those quotas weren't met it would be punishable by death. TBF as you have stated these African savages were being given good old European civilization so a little death penalty for failing to meet your rubber quota was a very small price to pay. To prove that one of these African savages were killed for failing a Belgian was required to cut off one of their hands. Not always did they kill the individual who failed to meet their rubber quota in a lot of cases they just cut off one of their hands to fool their commanders that they actually killed one of those inhuman African beasts. Hundreds of thousands of native Congolese had their worthless lives saved by cutting off one of their hands.

In 1901 alone 500,000 native Congolese dies from imported diseases, again a very small price for those African savages to pay in return for the wonders of civilization. According to some estimates 20 million native Congolese died during King Leopold's reign over the Congo Free State. France also being great humanitarians also tried to bring civilization to to the French Congo in return for a little rubber, almost all exploitable land was divided among concession companies. Forced labor, hostages, slave chains, starving porters, burned villages, paramilitary company 'sentries' was the order of the day, about half of French Congo's native population dies as a result of the French trying to bring civilization to those dumb Africans.

"After losing much of their land to the Germans, the Hereros rebelled in 1904. In response, Germany sent in a heavily armed force under Lt-Gen Lothar von Trotha, who issued an extermination order (Vernichtungsbefehl):
'Within the German boundaries every Herero, whether found with or without a rifle, with or without cattle, shall be shot... Signed: The Great General of the Mighty Kaiser, von Trotha.'
"In case everything was not clear, an addendum specified: 'No male prisoners will be taken."
By the time von Trotha's murderous hordes had finished their job in 1906, fewer than 20,000 of the 80,000 Herreros who lived in Namibia in 1903 remained.
"The others [more than 60,000 of them]", writes Hochschild, "had been driven into the desert to die of thirst (the Germans poisoned the waterholes), were shot, or - to economize on bullets - bayoneted or clubbed to death with rifle stocks."

This is just a few examples of Europeans being kind enough to bring civilization to the Dark Continent. As a result those barbarians don't seem to be even the smallest bit grateful, those ungrateful Africans should be ashamed of themselves.
 
You only focus on the bad
What could possibly be bad about having one of your hands chopped off, if these humanitarians from Europe are bringing you civilization in return oh wise a expert on all things European involvement in Africa? I'm just flabbergasted that those black South Africans are upset about Apartheid, I mean honestly it was for their own good they were wholesale uprooted from their lands and forced into townships. I mean what else were those savages going to do? They should be thanking the Boers for being kind enough for giving the gift of civilization.
 
For Black South Africans, Land Seizure Is a Question of Justice
By Antony Sguazzin and Amogelang Mbatha | January 22, 2019

360x-1.jpg

As the land-seizure debate divides South Africa and threatens to spook investors, for many black citizens the issue isn’t about farming -- it’s about justice.

President Cyril Ramaphosa says his ruling party plans to amend the constitution to permit seizing land without compensation to address the inequities of laws during white-minority rule that at one time put 87 percent of South Africa’s land in the hands of whites. The goal is also to give more black citizens an opportunity to earn a livelihood. Yet, with more than three-fifths of the nation’s 57.7 million people living in cities, many have no desire to farm.

“Land expropriation is important because the land was taken from our forefathers by force,” said Nhlanhla Mahlangu, an unemployed 28-year-old in the Zandspruit slum on the northern outskirts of Johannesburg who plans to stay in the commercial capital. “Some people may prefer money and others, like myself, would prefer a piece of land on which to build our own houses rather than to be living in shacks.”

The governing African National Congress says now, 24 years after the end of apartheid, is the time to tackle the land issue. But critics say earlier reform programs it oversaw failed dismally and its renewed focus is a bid to counter the populist Economic Freedom Fighters party before elections scheduled for May. Instead, more should be done to provide adequate housing in rapidly expanding cities like Johannesburg and Cape Town, many South Africans say.

Financial Compensation
“People living in urban areas prefer to keep their lives and livelihoods” in cities, said Phumla Kunene, a 32-year-old who works in the freight industry in the southeastern port city of Durban. “Some of them don’t want anything to do with rural areas. Then the best option is financial compensation.”

While some previous attempts to restore land to descendants of its original owners have included the option of payments instead of land, the ANC hasn’t mentioned that possibility in its new drive.

The EFF, which advocates placing all land in state hands, has captured the imagination of many of South Africa’s young people with its demands that everything from land to banks be nationalized to help speed up the transfer of wealth to the black majority.

Rapper Cassper Nyovest had a hit last year with Ksazobalit, a song about black citizens getting back land seized by white colonialists. The music video ends with an initially skeptical Afrikaans-speaking farmer dancing and sharing a meal with fashionably dressed black youths.

One-liners such as “we’ve got the land back” are often used on social media as an expression of approval.

Yet research by the South African Institute of Race Relations showed that only 4 percent of the black South Africans it surveyed placed land reform among the top two issues that government should attend to.

“We are an urbanizing society, and we are a society where opportunities correlate very strongly with skills,” said Terence Corrigan, a researcher at the institute. “Most South Africans see their future secured by a job in a city and a good education for their children.”

Jobs, drug abuse and crime were the top ranking concerns in the survey, and to many observers, the ANC’s land drive presents a threat to the economy. Unemployment is near a record high at 27 percent.

Historical Injustices
“There certainly were historical injustices, but land reform in the agrarian sense is not going to be transformative in solving South Africa’s problems,” said Corrigan. “You need exceptional expertise, funds and goodwill. I see very little of any of that. It has very little to do with socioeconomic problems and far more to do with ideology and politics.”

There’s still little clarity on what most people would do if they were allocated land away from the cities.

“We do need the land, that’s what I know for sure, but we don’t know what we need it for,” said David Makgata, a 24-year-old satellite television technician who lives in Johannesburg’s Alexandra township. “Even if I do get the land, what am I going to do with it.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/...fricans-land-seizure-is-a-question-of-justice
 
Last edited:
South Africa Confronts a Legacy of Apartheid
Why land reform is a key issue in the upcoming election
CHRISTOPHER CLARK | MAY 3, 2019

lead_720_405.jpg

ZOLANI, South Africa—On the outskirts of this overcrowded township in South Africa’s Cape Winelands, Phumlani Zota, a 32-year-old pig farmer, sifted through piles of waste in a refuse dump beneath the Langeberg mountains, filling a burlap sack with scraps of food for his livestock. “There is not enough land here,” he told me.

Yet on all sides, the impoverished settlement was hemmed in by great tracts of white-owned farmland, neat rows of fruit trees and grapevines punctuated by ornate Cape Dutch architecture.

The disjuncture is jarring, but mirrored all over South Africa. During apartheid, Zolani was designated a “blacks only” area by the Group Areas Act, one of about two dozen federal policies that dramatically restricted black South Africans’ access to land and opportunity. Today, the township stands as contemporary evidence of the wholesale land dispossessions carried out by successive colonial regimes, from the 17th century until as recently as the 1980s.

According to a 2017 land audit by the South African government, 72 percent of the country’s arable land remains in the hands of whites, who account for fewer than 10 percent of the total population. Since the ruling African National Congress came to power in 1994, under the stewardship of Nelson Mandela, one of its central undertakings has been to relieve this disparity. But to date, the spotty efficacy of the ANC’s land-restitution efforts has seen barely a quarter of such land restored to black farmers, according to the farmers’ organization AgriSA.

Now, with general elections slated for May, the renewed promise of meaningful and long-overdue land reform is once again a key feature of the ANC’s political campaign. The country’s lack of progress on resolving the issue speaks not just to the varied issues facing South Africa—from poor economic growth to spiraling unemployment—but also to the broader difficulty of finding practical solutions to redress historical injustice. It is a challenge informed not only by domestic politics, but also by years of chaos in neighboring Zimbabwe, which has seen ill-fated attempts at land redistribution of its own.

2f10c6def.jpg

The issue of land reform—and more specifically, of taking land from white farmers—has become a cause célèbre in the United States, Canada, and Britain, largely among white right-wingers, and even reached the Oval Office last year, when Donald Trump tweeted about it. Here in South Africa, the issue of land redistribution is complex, and has a long history characterized by a series of ineffectual and ill-defined government programs and a lack of political will that spans successive cabinets.

In the debate’s most recent incarnation, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa proposed a constitutional amendment last year that would allow the government to seize “unused” private land without compensation, a process known as expropriation, and redistribute it to disadvantaged black farmers. The ANC has made repeated, albeit vague, promises that this change would have far-reaching economic benefits. In December, after months of emotive public hearings that showed strong support for the amendment, the National Assembly, the elected house of Parliament, voted overwhelmingly to draft it, and an ad hoc committee has been established to oversee that process. Ramaphosa also created an advisory panel on land reform, which is due to submit a final report of recommendations before elections.

Yet it’s unclear how the ANC ’s proposed policies would be implemented, with critics voicing concern around potentially slow, cumbersome, and costly legal processes and a lack of cohesion between national and local government structures. Draft legislation also gives no guidance for dealing with customary and communal forms of land ownership, such as where traditional authorities administer land on behalf of rural people.

The system in place now has its own pitfalls. It relies on the so-called willing-buyer, willing-seller approach, which effectively calls for volunteers, allowing white landowners to refuse to sell or to demand exorbitant fees. Deficient regulation has also resulted in nonarable land often being sold first.

The failure to fix the system has been compounded by rampant corruption, which has decimated provincial land-reform budgets and prioritized spurious land claims. Combined with a protracted drought and persistent concerns about state maladministration, the corruption and uncertainty are harming South Africa’s agricultural sector, driving investor confidence lower.

Even for those black South Africans who have managed to buy farmland, government assistance is minimal. Many of the farms that have been transferred to black farmers, including former farm laborers, through past ANC-supported restitution programs now lie fallow. New farmers installed on expropriated land have received scant financial, operational, or infrastructural support, despite promises from the state. Others are never installed: Because of woefully slow processing, as many as 4,000 farms bought by the government have yet to be distributed to new owners.

In the verdant northern province of Limpopo, Thato Moagi—a 28-year-old commercial farmer and a member of Ramaphosa’s advisory panel on land reform—is among the minority of black farmers who have attained the means to secure their own success. Her father, who was directly affected by forced removals in the 1960s, repeatedly applied for agricultural funding. But, in 2013, after more than a decade of appeals, he and his wife used their life savings to buy the Limpopo farm that Moagi, who graduated from the University of South Africa with a degree in agricultural science, now runs.

Despite the success of the farm, which has livestock, food crops, and an apiary, Moagi still believes that she could do much more with government investment. “The government is not addressing the issues that young or emerging or first-generation farmers are experiencing,” she told me, adding that access to start-up capital is often foremost among these issues.

Moagi is heading up a new social-development project in the Cape Winelands, working with a luxury residential estate and a golf course to establish a commercial farm that will also serve as an incubation platform for young prospective farmers. “Generations of people have been affected by past laws and actions, and we need to start addressing that with the next generation,” she told me.

f5e3c6752.jpg

For white farmers, however, the government’s moves have sparked trepidation. “Today I’ve got an asset. Tomorrow, maybe I’ve got no asset, no means of making any living as we know it,” Denys Hobson, a former national-team cricket player who owns a 500-hectare goat farm near the village of Greyton, told me.

Those I interviewed not only worry about their land, and thus their livelihood, being taken, but also noted that expropriation without compensation could have devastating economic implications for their predominantly black workforce. Jacques Beukes, a 37-year-old fourth-generation grape farmer whose family owns 100 hectares of land in the fertile Hex River Valley, about an hour’s drive from Zolani, also told me many farmers feared a repeat of the violent state-sanctioned land grabs that left the Zimbabwean economy in tatters in the early 2000s.

That fear of violence was a persistent topic brought up in conversations with white farmers. Research from AgriSA shows that farmland murders account for just 62 of the more than 20,000 murders recorded in South Africa from April 2017 to March 2018.* However, many I spoke with suggested a correlation between populist land-reform rhetoric adopted by the ANC and by the Economic Freedom Fighters, a far-left opposition party, and what the white farmers said was an upsurge in racially motivated farmland murders.

One advocate for white farmers—Ernst Roets, the deputy CEO of AfriForum, a right-wing Afrikaner-rights organization—told me that, should Ramaphosa’s constitutional amendment pass, there could be violence from the farm owners as well. But Beukes believes that such claims are unhelpful, and said there were “definitely scenarios where government and commercial farmers could work together.”

For some, the preelection political rhetoric has been too narrowly focused on the proposed constitutional amendment. Politicians within Ramaphosa’s own party, as well as prominent political opponents including the centrist Democratic Alliance, have said that the constitution is being scapegoated for the state’s failure to restore land.

“This does not help us resolve the really big debates about who should be getting land, where do we need to focus this program, and what do people want land for,” Ruth Hall, a land-reform expert at the University of the Western Cape, told me. But she expressed hope that the emergence of land reform as a key election issue had “not only focused attention on questions of historical redress, but also on making land available to meet people’s needs now.”

With around 14 percent of black South Africans living in squalid and ever-expanding informal settlements on the periphery of major cities, fast-tracking well-located urban land for housing is foremost among those needs. In his State of the Nation address in February, Ramaphosa said that his cabinet had identified state-owned land in urban areas for imminent redistribution. This land could also make a considerable contribution to addressing rural land reform. More than 11 percent of South Africa’s total land falls under public ownership.

Back in Zolani, Phumlani Zota, whose forebears labored on largely unproductive farmland in the former black homelands of the Eastern Cape during apartheid, said that he didn’t trust the ANC to deliver on its renewed promises.

On a scruffy patch of communal land at the edge of the settlement, he leaned his short, sinewy frame on the makeshift fence that wrapped around his small plot, as his 30 pigs noisily devoured the scraps that he’d lugged down the hill from the refuse dump. About a hundred meters away, a rusty barbed-wire fence marked the perimeter of an expansive white-owned farm. “Maybe things will change for the next generation,” he said.

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/586900/
 
Last edited:
we wasted half the plot of Lethal Weapon 2 for this....

FOR THIS!
 

Katie Hopkins is a lying lowlife pos, there is no white genocide in SA.

You don't have to believe PrinceOfPain believe the numbers.
Between April 2016 and March 2017, 74 people - of all races - were murdered on farms in South Africa, according to police figures, compared to more than 19,000 murders nationwide in the same period.

The BBC has found that there is no reliable data to suggest farmers are at greater risk of being murdered than the average South African.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-45336840
 
Last edited:
Looks like another Mugabe in the making, and one more failed state in the next few years.



http://www.thestar.com.my/news/worl...aws-to-expropriate-land-without-compensation/

now these would be true refugees

Between April 2016 and March 2017, 74 people - of all races - were murdered on farms in South Africa, according to police figures, compared to more than 19,000 murders nationwide in the same period.

Could you please provide the racial breakdown of the farmers murdered? TIA!
 
now these would be true refugees



Could you please provide the racial breakdown of the farmers murdered? TIA!
2017/218 were 62 farm murders and of that number 46 were white. For comparison between March 2017-March 2018 were about 20,000 murders in SA.
 
2017/218 were 62 farm murders and of that number 46 were white. For comparison between March 2017-March 2018 were about 20,000 murders in SA.

20,000 murders arent happening on farms. these arent urban gang wars these are murders specifically targetting boer holdings. also how many farm murders have taken place since apartheid has ended and not just between 2017/18. dont worry 62 white farm murders in a year isnt even worth mentioning, fuck me. the fact that the BBC twisted it in a way to make it seem unimportant does not detract from the obvious implication here. from what i have read these farms are actually quite well defended its just they are being hit by commandos who know how to avoid the rhodesian ridgebacks, farm hands and armed farmers. not all of these farm attacks are crimes of oppurtunity someone wants thr white farmers gone. now whether they are locals, mercenaries or commandos from another nation is anyones guess.
 
Last edited:
A sh*thole before Eouropeans brought civilization? Let's just look at what happens sometimes when Europeans bring civilization into Africa shall we? You being Shertards resident expert on European intervention in Africa are already aware of the stories I am about tell but some posters on this thread might not be as well versed on the subject of Europeans bringing civilization to Africa as yourself.

King Leopold II of Belgium decided being the loving, giving humanitarian that he was decided that like other European nations wanted to bring civilization to Africa. Well he got he chance in a Belgium colony called the Congo Free State. For price of the wonderful civilizing influence he was bringing to the Congo Free State. King Leopold II only wanted a little rubber in return. In an effort obtain this rubber he created a slave culture in Congo where native Congolese were forced by companies to harvest the rubber. In addition to being enslaved to harvest rubber they were given quotas to meet and if those quotas weren't met it would be punishable by death. TBF as you have stated these African savages were being given good old European civilization so a little death penalty for failing to meet your rubber quota was a very small price to pay. To prove that one of these African savages were killed for failing a Belgian was required to cut off one of their hands. Not always did they kill the individual who failed to meet their rubber quota in a lot of cases they just cut off one of their hands to fool their commanders that they actually killed one of those inhuman African beasts. Hundreds of thousands of native Congolese had their worthless lives saved by cutting off one of their hands.

In 1901 alone 500,000 native Congolese dies from imported diseases, again a very small price for those African savages to pay in return for the wonders of civilization. According to some estimates 20 million native Congolese died during King Leopold's reign over the Congo Free State. France also being great humanitarians also tried to bring civilization to to the French Congo in return for a little rubber, almost all exploitable land was divided among concession companies. Forced labor, hostages, slave chains, starving porters, burned villages, paramilitary company 'sentries' was the order of the day, about half of French Congo's native population dies as a result of the French trying to bring civilization to those dumb Africans.

"After losing much of their land to the Germans, the Hereros rebelled in 1904. In response, Germany sent in a heavily armed force under Lt-Gen Lothar von Trotha, who issued an extermination order (Vernichtungsbefehl):
'Within the German boundaries every Herero, whether found with or without a rifle, with or without cattle, shall be shot... Signed: The Great General of the Mighty Kaiser, von Trotha.'
"In case everything was not clear, an addendum specified: 'No male prisoners will be taken."
By the time von Trotha's murderous hordes had finished their job in 1906, fewer than 20,000 of the 80,000 Herreros who lived in Namibia in 1903 remained.
"The others [more than 60,000 of them]", writes Hochschild, "had been driven into the desert to die of thirst (the Germans poisoned the waterholes), were shot, or - to economize on bullets - bayoneted or clubbed to death with rifle stocks."

This is just a few examples of Europeans being kind enough to bring civilization to the Dark Continent. As a result those barbarians don't seem to be even the smallest bit grateful, those ungrateful Africans should be ashamed of themselves.

you are correct there is no point in trying to argue europe had africas best interests in mind at that time.
 
Last edited:
South African Cabinet Rejects Farm-Size Limits in Land Reforms
By Paul Vecchiatto | December 19, 2019

1000x-1.jpg

South Africa’s cabinet rejected proposals to limit the size of farms and to establish a dedicated fund in the nation’s land-reform process, Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development Minister Thoko Didiza said.

An advisory panel set up by President Cyril Ramaphosa in July submitted a report containing 73 recommendations on the land-reform process. Of those, the cabinet endorsed 60 and noted three others, according to the Department of Agriculture.

The proposal on farm sizes was rejected because “agricultural conditions vary across the country,” Didiza told reporters Thursday in Pretoria, the capital. “While in one place where rainfall is good and the land fertile, a far smaller farm would be needed than a farm in one of the more arid areas.”

A recommendation by the panel that a dedicated land-reform fund be established was also dismissed “because we believe that the optimum and judicial use of funds can be done through the current budgeting process,” she said.

The ruling African National Congress adopted expropriation of land without compensation as a policy in 2017 to address racially skewed ownership patterns dating back to colonialism and white-minority rule. It’s seen by Ramaphosa’s foes within the party as a test of his resolve to push through decisions unpopular with the business community.

The panel’s other proposals included considering a tax on land that exceeds the maximum threshold for one owner and levies on underutilized land. It also suggested dissolving the Ingonyama Trust under which the king of South Africa’s most populous ethnic group, the Zulus, holds 2.8 million hectares (6.92 million acres) of land on behalf of his subjects.

The ANC plans to change the constitution to make it easier to seize land without paying for it. Separate legislation has been drafted outlining the circumstances under which the state can do this.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...inet-rejects-farm-size-limits-in-land-reforms
 
Back
Top