News24

The historical amnesia of Pieter Mulder

2012-02-21 14:15

Pierre De Vos

Dr Pieter Mulder, Freedom Front Plus Leader and deputy minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, last week provided South Africans with a textbook example of the kind of historical amnesia that has befallen some of my fellow white South Africans. Almost every day one has to listen to some or other fellow on the radio complaining about how black South Africans are obsessed with the past.

This complaint is usually followed by a demand that we should all stop harping on about the past (in other words, that we should pretend that apartheid never happened and that its effects do not linger on in our society) and that we should look towards the future – as if the past has absolutely nothing to do with the problems faced by our country today.

The problem is that this yearning (expressed by some white South Africans) to forget the past is not only illusory, it is also deeply dishonest and self-serving. This is because those who argue in favour of a kind of moral amnesia often have very little knowledge or understanding of the very past which they now claim we need to forget. How, I wonder, can we be asked to forget the past if we do not even know (or pretend not to know) about the injustices committed by our forefathers against black South Africans and if we have no understanding of its lingering effects?

An exhortation to forget the past is really an exhortation to rewrite the past and to invent a completely new past in which white people never oppressed black South Africans, never exploited black South Africans economically and never actually dispossessed black South Africans of land and of opportunities – including educational opportunities. This Stalinist yearning to whitewash the past and to try and make us forget about the role white people played in the exploitation and dispossession which occurred during the periods of colonialism and apartheid is dangerous and infuses some white South Africans with an undeserved (and, quite frankly, bizarre) sense of moral self-righteousness and superiority which is at the heart of the continued racisms in our country.

Mulder is only one of a long line of white settlers who wishes to rewrite the past in order to enforce and perpetuate their own sense of moral superiority and their sense of supposed victimhood. Speaking in President Zuma’s State of the Nation debate with a chutzpa that is breath-taking, Mulder ignored the past 300 years of colonialism and apartheid to try and make a point about land ownership and dispossession in South Africa, stating that:

    "Sir, Africans in particular never in the past lived in the whole of South Africa. The Bantoe- speaking people moved from the equator down while the white people moved from the Cape up to meet each other at the Kei River. There is sufficient proof that there were no Bantoe-speaking people in the Western Cape and North-western Cape. These parts form 40% of South Africa’s land surface."

He “forgot” to mention, amongst others, the long process of colonialism and concomitant land dispossession, which culminated in the Glen Grey Act of 1894 and the Natives Land Act of 1913.

The Glen Grey Act, as Davenport pointed out, “was designed to set a pattern of African land-holding throughout the Cape African reserves”. It imposed a labour tax on Africans which was aimed at forcing Xhosa men off their land and into employment on commercial farms or in industry. It further “excluded property ownership altogether as a voting qualification for blacks who held under Glen Grey title”.

Even worse was the Natives Land Act which was passed in 1913 by the Union Parliament as part of its first efforts to formalise land dispossession of Africans and to lay the groundwork for full racial segregation which culminated in the adoption of apartheid policies. The Natives Land Act included a “Schedule of Native Areas,” incorporating all the African reserves that had been established in the various provinces prior to 1913. The Act carefully delineated the boundaries of these reserved areas. The schedule brought under the coverage of the Act about 22 million acres of land (just over 7 per cent of South African territory) within the four provinces of the Union.

As Feinberg has pointed out, the creation of a schedule, defining the boundaries of the African reserves by national law, was a very important part of the Act. The most important provision of the Act stated that Africans could no longer buy, lease, or in any other manner acquire land outside a scheduled area, except by acquiring that land from another African, and Europeans were prohibited from buying or leasing land from an African. Only Africans could buy land within the scheduled areas. Although the territory covered by these schedules were increased in 1936, the effects of this Act on landownership by Africans was devastating.

From 1913 to 1991 black South Africans, were therefore denied the right to acquire land in most parts of South Africa. Feinberg sums up the effects of this Act as follows:

    "The long term results were worse than anyone anticipated. Rapid population growth among Africans and soil erosion in the reserves (partly due to over-grazing) seriously undermined African agriculture. And, after 1948, the reserves became the cornerstone of a key part of the apartheid system, the homelands."

Of course, by the time the Land Act was passed, the dispossession of land had almost been complete. Feinberg again:

    "Before 1910 just under two million Africans lived in reserves, some of which were overcrowded. They lived in these reserves because, during the last third of the nineteenth century, Africans were conquered by Europeans who took control of a large proportion of African land, leaving only remnants for the survivors. Over half (1,149,438) of the Africans living in reserves were in the Cape Province. Africans could purchase land in the Cape, Natal, and, after 1905, the Transvaal (as a result of a court decision). The number of Africans buying land in the Transvaal was very slowly increasing after 1905. However, Africans owned a mere 2,104,300 acres in the Union, and this land was occupied by fewer than 124,000 people. Africans could not buy land in the Orange River Colony or in the Orange Free State, and the holdings of a few dated back to special circumstances from the nineteenth century."

It is exactly because (unlike Mulder and his cronies) the drafters of our Constitution did not suffer from historical amnesia that section 25 of the Constitution explicitly recognises the need for land reform in our country. This section allows for an expropriation of land in the public interest, and section 25(4) explicitly states that “the public interest includes the nation’s commitment to land reform, and to reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa’s natural resources”.

This section also places a positive duty on the state to take “reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis”, while section 25(8) could not have made this general point any clearer when it stated that:

    "No provision of this section may impede the state from taking legislative and other measures to achieve land, water and related reform, in order to redress the results of past racial discrimination, provided that any departure from the provisions of this section is in accordance with the provisions of section 36(1)."

As I have written before, to this end the property clause therefore does not require expropriation of land in accordance with the “willing-buyer willing-seller” principle. Nor does it require the payment of market value for that land in all circumstances.

These provisions can be viewed as responding directly to the history of land dispossession of black South Africans which went hand in hand with the process of colonial conquest. Mulder’s argument, which (even if it was historically correct) hinges on a requirement to completely forget the past 300 years of land dispossession that went hand in hand with colonial conquest, is thus completely at odds with the provisions of the Constitution itself.

It is strange that a Deputy Minister in the Cabinet would make statements that so utterly disregard the provisions of the Constitution, given that it is this very same Constitution which he invokes in other contexts to try and argue for special rights for white farm owners or for what he would term “Afrikaners” (but what in reality amounts to right wing whites).

This column originally appeared on Pierre de Vos' blog ConstitutionallySpeaking.co.za and has been republished on News24 with his permission. Pierre de Vos is the Claude Leon Foundation Chair in Constitutional Governance at the University of Cape Town.

Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.

Comments
  • francois.visagie1 - 2012-02-21 15:19

    so..two paragraphs from the end you admit that Mulder's statements may be historically correct and yes..he is at pains to explain that his statement was thereafter used out of context to fuel the press garbage and the Blacks who must now at all possible times be reminded how much they should hate whites.. The problem is that we need to decide how far back we need to go in history to draw the line.. is it 1913 or if earlier then why don,t we all also march for the white AND BLACK Americans to give the land back to the Red Indians and while that takes place the lines drawn in Europe during the Roman Empire's reign should also be reviewed and do not forget the sweetened history of how "peacefully" Shaka's dispossed lesser Black tribes from their land and posessions...and around the same time that the writer goes on about... Bottom line ..how do you explai to a 19 year old white that he must stand back in the line for ever ...no end in sight for BEE etc.

      Marconism - 2012-02-21 16:02

      what is your POINT, exactly?

      Chris - 2012-02-21 16:10

      @marconism, his point is that white youth in this country should not be punished for the sins of their fathers. Rather focus on raising up the majority than dragging down the minority.

      Chris - 2012-02-21 19:22

      You're a fine example of the Afrikaner male, aren't you Spyker?

      Spyker - 2012-02-21 19:43

      @Chris, And your contribution to the debate is... ..?

      Malans - 2012-02-21 21:01

      Francois has a point: How far do you want to go back in history? That way you can claim anything you like. However, this debate is to a large extent irrelevant. The white population has already declined by more than one million since 1994 and this decline will continue since Pierre de Vos and the ANC sees whites as wicked by nature and only fit for punishment. White numbers will become totally insignificant and they will then have to find another culprit for all their problems. Maybe climate change caused by the bad whites of the USA and Europe. While on the USA: I agree that they must also give that country back to the first nations. Its only fair since they did not just perpetrate apartheid on them, they actively exterminated them, which has to be worse than apartheid. Australia did the same, so they can be next in line. Then the English can get out of Ireland, Wales and Scotland. Then ...

      Gungets - 2012-02-21 21:09

      Spyker - if you had taken the time to read some of de Vos's other writing you would realise how wrong you are. Why not go and read his criticisms of things like the Secrecy Act, and many others before you vent in such a personal way. ProAfrikaans - that counts for you too. http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/how-to-fix-the-secrecy-bill-and-make-it-constitutionally-compliant/

      Spyker - 2012-02-21 23:07

      @Gungets.., I am aware of his position on the 'Protection of Information Act' and other matters where I may agree with him. I do grasp the verity that life is not a binary regime - i.o.w. people are not necessarily only 100% correct or 100% incorrect, 100% left or 100% right... If you have noted my previous responses to PdV, you would have been aware of the fact that my opinion about him is- and has remained steadfast – viz he is a HYPOCRITE of the highest order. PdV camps out in his sterile cocoon, preaching sacrifice (eg as with the additional tax for white people in SA) that would not even make the remotest dent in his expense account. Why does the pilot of a passenger plane not have a parachute..? Because he suffers exactly the same consequences of his actions as everybody else - it is the perfect example, of perfect justice. PdV is a prime example, of the spineless kind who are only too keen to exact the kind of sacrifice, they themselves will never suffer. NO other opinion PdV holds, on any other topic, will ever change this verity - so even if I agree with every other one of his opinions, he remains the worst kind of spineless hypocrite...

      Harald - 2012-02-22 07:36

      I'm just impressed you actually got to the second last paragraph... Goodness, this letter is boring, repetitive and most of all, inacurate!! But, as they say, history is writen by the victors...

      Smell - 2012-02-22 07:47

      This is perhaps the most eloquent article that I have ever read about land possession in South Africa, written by a very smart Afrikaner - take that all you stereotypists! The first four paragraphs are ethical and moral poetry. However, after that, Mr. de Vos seems to meander a little. First, one can spin it all you want, but the original population of the Southern and Western part of what is now South Africa, was the KhoiSan. Pale settlers came from overseas in 1652; darker settlers came from the North at some point - history and palaentology. Both of these groups intermingled with the KhoiSan. Today the genome of the Xhosa apparently contain up to a 40% genetic contribution form the KhoiSan, and the genome of the Afrikaner apparently contains a 6% contribution from the KhoiSan. That does not take away from the fact that both the Xhosa and the Afrikaner originally were "settlers" in the land of the KhoiSan. Nomadic visits do not make one an "original". So to only refer to Whites as "settlers" in the land of the Khoisan is a bit of a stretch. Also, not sure why he juxtaposes the African population explosion and soil erosion with homelands/reserves. Those two issues are certainly not limited to the African countries that were colonized, and continue to this day. Orania, a small Afrikaner "enclave" certainly does not seem to be plagued by those issues. Anyway, an illuminating article, that drifts a bit in the latter part and certainly sucks up to the bias of the majority.

      Paul - 2012-02-22 08:46

      The Jews are still being compensated for the holocaust. The injustice to the Jews stretched over 10-12years max depending on the european country. You try and tell the Jews to give up Israel and see what happens. You tell the Jews that there will be no reparations paid, you will see the uproar. Why should it be any different for blacks in South Africa who had suffered a lot longer and lost a lot more.

      Luvo - 2012-02-22 19:29

      @ Francois - Perhaps it would serve all of us greatly if for one moment you could pull your head off your butthole and try and think clearly. Never in his column did Pierre de Vos agree with Mulder's statements, quite the contrary, might not be late to go back to school...troll !!

      Smell - 2012-02-22 19:58

      Just wanted to add a few other thoughts. Being overly politically correct is also a form of historical amnesia, even if well intended. And it seems absolutely hypocritical to place the burden of redressing the injustices of Colonialism/Apartheid on the shoulders of our farmers. Virtually all Whites benefited from Apartheid, whether they voted for the Nats or not, and I have to presume that would include you and your parents, Mr. De Vos. The fair expectation would be that all Whites contribute to the same extent and it would be enlightening to hear how much you and "your cronies" would be prepared to give as a percentage of your total worth and income potential.

      Searcher - 2012-02-23 18:43

      Pierre de Vos doe very little but apologize for the fact that he is a living example of a white man. Mr de Vos, congratulations you have swallowed and internalized the memes sociability would want you to carry and perpetuate.. You comfortably forgot that without the white man most of the black population would have been dead of deceases their limb chopping sangomas simply were not equipped to cure, Perhaps it would be good to leaver them to their own devices for a while!

      chesterright - 2012-02-23 22:19

      No matter how far you go back to try and right the wrongs the fact still remains that this is Africa and the land belongs to those who identify themselves as Africans (physically, culturally and psychologically). We are still the majority but do not enjoy the rich benefits of our land. Let America with their historical unfairness, we will continue to strive for what is rightfully ours but still respect all that is truely proud to be South African (not those who wave the flag in adopted countries when our sports teams play abroad but then criticize the country whose flag they so enthusiastically wave). I am sure the white 19 year old will benefit from his forefathers' legacy that enabled them to own majority of the economy. Whites are still being employed more frequently than any other race in the private sector.

      thabo.mophiring - 2012-02-24 02:06

      You do not seem to read very well - he said even if but hey white privilege gives you the right to read wrongly to support your argument

      Bongani - 2012-03-01 08:18

      huh???? red indians, romans and black americans, what do they have to do with south african history again? elaborate so we can find a south african solution to a south african problem.........

  • lhfick - 2012-02-21 15:37

    Just give them the land, that is the only answer they want to hear. Debate after debate has left us with no answers or solutions for this land issue. Neither does De Vos have any positive solutions, but to say that a white farmer is part of a right wing group, because his white and farms borders on the verge of hate speech or statement.

      Marconism - 2012-02-21 16:04

      come on, you can think and reason better than this!

      Spyker - 2012-02-21 17:25

      Just a pity you cannot Marconism...

      Malans - 2012-02-21 21:12

      In the end they will just take the land, as well as the crops and machinery (It was all there when the whites stole it in the first place, was it not Mr de Vos?). That great freedom fighter and mass murderer Robert Mugabe has shown them the way and they will follow. They do not in the least intend to do it in an "equitable" manner.

      chris.faurie - 2012-02-22 07:24

      Yes, stop farming altogether. Then, as an encore, get rid of all the domestic servants, garden assistants etc. PdV & JZ are both empty headed fools.

  • jacques.kies - 2012-02-21 15:51

    De Vos you are stupid.

      Dirk - 2012-02-21 19:06

      If that is his photo, I am not surprised that he talks so much rubbish. He suffers from political amnesia- for personal career advancement.

      Herman - 2012-02-21 19:07

      Hi jacques.kies, Why do you say that De Vos are stupid?

      sizwe - 2012-02-23 15:53

      Guys, its a bitter pill to swallow I get it but you cant act like Pierre does not have a point... Now why do you guys want to act like the land issue is something that should not be addressed? Jacques I'm sorry to say this but I don't even think you finished reading this article

  • Scebberish - 2012-02-21 15:58

    So how come the Germans and the Jews put the past behind them and became amongst the strongest and most successful countries in the world? Do you think they could have moved forward if they continued to live in the past?

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 17:21

      @ Scebberish The Germans had to give back what they stole to the Jews. The Germans also had to and continue to pay monetary compensation in respect of various claims. Furthermore, even today the Jews continue to reclaim their assets from other European states where they may have been stashed. Sooo... The lesson is the same: those that steal and dispossess others must give back and repay. The Jews (and Germans) grasp this simple fact which many white South Africans (like Mulder and co) seem so ignorant of.

      Spyker - 2012-02-21 17:33

      Excuse me Psalm - WHAT A LOAD OF TRASH..! The only 'debt' that Germany paid after WW2 was was according to the London Debt Agreement, The LDA covered a number of different types of debt from before and after the second World War - IT HAD LITTLE TO DO WITH THE TRASH YOU ARE CLAIMING.

      Celtis - 2012-02-21 18:13

      Or perhaps it is the fact that Germany and Israel are not located in Africa and have no ANC.

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 18:52

      @ Scebberish Fine, then I guess I can expect you to disprove my claims. Perhaps you wish to disprove the list of compensation schemes/funds provided by the Jewish website (whose link I have provided). Maybe you wish to astound those Jews with your superior knowledge and promptly inform them that there are no such schemes/funds. The list is fiction, I presume. The schemes/funds are all fictional. Perhaps you wish to proclaim here and now that there was no agreement between West Germany and Israel and that West Germany never paid compensation for about 14 years to Israel. Pray tell, astound us all with your "version" of this historical event. OR Perhaps you just love to call people names and provide little or no substance.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 19:01

      Psalm, so you are telling me that Germany and Israel did NOT put the past behind move forward and build successful countries then? They still killing each other right? I worked in Germany for 3 years. I have worked in most countries in the world, even PNG and Pakistan, and they still safer than South Africa. Of course your reply will be the typical one about "leave the country" if I'm not happy. Why didnt all your "black" people leave then when they were not happy? I am born here same as them and I want change for the better, so its the ones who want worse, like you, not better, that should leave, NO MATTER WHAT COLOUR THEY ARE!!

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 19:05

      Psalm, anyway I also see you dont read to good, perhaps you should read my original comment again, or you just to stupid to discern my comments from other comments? I am trying to find where I said there was no mutual agreements.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 19:21

      Craig, I think you need to think more about what you are saying, you seem to have the wrong perception. Major Pshycopathic War Criminals are being hunted, NOT every German soldier or Nazi who fought in the war as you tend to infer. BIG difference. and once again you dont read to good either.

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 19:43

      @ Scebberish It is your reading skills that are in question. I did not state that you denied that there are mutual agreements. As you claimed that I am "ill informed", I pointed out the aburdity of your comment- if I dare call it a comment. Hence the use of the word "perhaps".

      Hugo - 2012-02-21 19:51

      Scebberish German jews/those affected by the holocaust are still being compensated to this date(last was in 2007 where a 93 year old Jewish Gogo was paid in cash after hitler's goons had failed to recognise her for breaking a record in high jump simply because she was Jewish.)Round about 2008/2009 a German right winger was jailed for three years for having a hitler'speech as a ring tone as well as the nazi swastika as a screen saver.Also dont forget that that SA never had the Nuuremberg style trials,maybe that was needed.Lastly the entire German nation acted switfly to compensate ALL those affected by the holocaust and never said Jews' must stop being so hung up about the past'like we always hear in RSA.

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 19:51

      @ Spyker May I note that you addressed some dog's breakfast to me. A posting presented so stupidly cannot be worth reading and does not deserve any respectable attention (probably like its author). I therefore did not read further than "Psalm".

      Diana - 2012-02-21 22:53

      Hi Guys and Gals, Why are the jews being dragged into this foray, it is a South African problem to be sorted out by South Africans not the Jews per se.!!!!!!

      Blip - 2012-02-22 03:53

      The Jews are STILL hunting any remaining Nazi, all over the world -- even though their prey are by now well into their nineties.

      louisdiemasjien - 2012-02-22 04:32

      Sweet comment! Well done.

      Paul - 2012-02-22 08:59

      Scebberish you are a ignorant idiot. How can you say there was nothing in South Africa when the Europeans arrived? Southern Africa is the cradle of civilization, the cradle on mankind. There were cities in Southern African before Europeans knew how to walk upright. The point you are missing is that land was taken away from blacks without any compensation. They just wrote a law and dispossessed blacks. I agree with Zuma. Don't open a can of worms on something that could end up having the blacks dispossess you from land with just one law. Shut up and be thankful the people is still patient

      goyougoodthing - 2012-02-22 17:26

      The Jews got a free parcel of land stolen from the Palestinians and are backed by the USA. Hardly their own hard work has lead to their rise.

      Mano-Lee - 2012-02-23 14:49

      @PAul - Not to be dragged into this hot topic, but, there was nothing in africa before the europeans came. There were no cities in southern africa. African didnt even have ships to sail the seas. As for believing that southern africa was the cradle of civilisation, that my friend, you are wrong. No cicvilisations, or at least, modern civilisations came from africa. Egypt was an exception, but if my history serves me well, the original builders of those civilisations originally moved down from macedonia. Southern african was the cradle of the evolution theorists. Not the cradle of human kind! If you believe you came from an ape, than by all means punt that bit of misleading half truth.

      sizwe - 2012-02-23 16:01

      Psalm you have proper NUKED the idotic Spyker and Scebberish. Its amusing watching them try to profess they are right... I always appreciate when a level headed person blows an idotic comment to bit... Thanks guy, I enjoyed laughing at Spyker May... You deserve a Bells @Psalm

      Antebellum - 2012-02-24 06:38

      Psalm, you argument is extremely biased, why do you only expect white people to compensate? Can you explain to me why the Zulus should not pay reparations to almost all the other tribes in South Africa? Since Shaka Zulu and Mzilikazi killed more than 2 milion people in the Defecane. They wiped out entire tribes, stole the cattle, killed all the men and then took the women and children as slaves. Stronger tribes have conquered weaker tribes and annexed their territories for millenia. This has been the natural order of things since the dawn of mankind. The question is how far do you want to go back? None of the South African tribes claim compensation for being conquered, massacred and displaced by the other. It seems that the only time compensation is an issue is if the conquering tribe was white And Why are you comparing jews with south african blacks? Did the apartheid government kill 6 milion black people? Definitely not, in fact the black pupulation increased from 3 milion in 1910 to more than 35 milion today. South African whites must have been the worst Nazis ever... Instead of exterminating their "enemies" they let the population increase 10 fold. Can you please explain to me the relation between the Jews and South African blacks or the Apartheid government and the Nazis? (Since you use that as a basis for compensasion.)

      Psalm - 2012-02-24 08:59

      @ Antebellum There is no bias in stating facts about German (or European) compensation to Jews. You wrote:"Can you explain to me why the Zulus should not pay reparations to almost all the other tribes in South Africa?" COMMENT: for the same reason that Europeans are not paying compensation to each for their ancient tribal wars. You do know that European tribes fought, don't you? For the same reason that the inhabitants of the divided kingdoms of ancient Korean are not paying reparation to each other for their wars before the unification of Korea (prior to its division into North and South). And please drop colonialist propaganda. King Shaka and Mzilizaki did not wipe out any tribes. Difaqane refers to a period of chaotic warfare and scaterring. You cannot scater people who are allegedly "wiped out". Furthermore, your obsession with body counts is irrelevant in this case. Apartheid, like the Holocaust, is defined as a crime against humanity - for both these crimes, inter alia, seek to dehumanise groups of people by various means, including racial oppression and murder. You wrote:"Can you please explain to me the relation between the Jews and South African blacks or the Apartheid government and the Nazis?" COMMENT: I will repeat what I have already written above, if you had even bothered to read and comprehend it: "there is international precedent for wholesale reparation for crimes against humanity (e.g. the holocaust) and Apartheid was a crime against humanity."

      Antebellum - 2012-02-24 14:05

      Your pseudo intellectual ramblings are just that...ramblings. The Mfecane wasn't an ancient tribal war, it happened 170-195 years ago. You make the Zulus exempt from reparations, yet you want white people to compensate for something that supposedly happened 300-350 years ago. Do you see how biased you are? Mfecane means the crushing or the scattering. Do you really think the Zulu impis(most feared and brutal warriors) strolled into these villages with feather dusters and politely asked the people to scatter? No, they attacked without warning ,slaughtered whoever they could find, took the cattle and left the few survivors scattered in all directions. The fact that the oral traditions of the Zulus themselves confirm the "colonialists'" recorded versions of events makes this verifiable. What evidence do you have to the contrary? Please enlighten me. If it was a crime against humanity why hasn't there been a single person convicted of this crime or of being complicit in it? "In regard to apartheid in particular, the UN General Assembly has not made any findings, nor have apartheid-related trials for crimes against humanity been conducted." Comparing Apartheid to the holocaust is rediculous to say the least. The Nazis murdered 6 milion Jews. How many blacks did apartheid kill? According to the HRC 21,000 people died in political violence(1948 to 1994) 14,000 of which died during the six-year transition process from 1990 to 1994 (black on black violence)

      Antebellum - 2012-02-24 14:32

      So that is 7000 black people killed by the Apartheid government in 46 years(which also includes SA Defence Force actions in Angola) Compare that to the new South Africa's average of 30 000 + murders a YEAR. How many of their own people did the ANC's alies kill? Idi Amin's Uganda (100 000 - 500 000) China (65 milion) Soviet Union(20 milion) North Korea (2 milion) And these were the countries that were at the forefront of getting apartheid declared a crime against humanity. So without dodging the question this time. Can you please explain to me the similarities between the Jews and South African blacks or the Apartheid government and the Nazis?

      Psalm - 2012-02-24 18:48

      @ Antebellum This is amusing! A non-African has the audicity and arrogance to imagine that he/she can teach me, an African, my history. Well, well, it seems colonialist tendencies are alive and well, isn't Antebellum? Let me educate you: 1. I did not state in my comment that Difaqane was an "ancient tribal war". Are you really this simple-minded that you cannot comprehend a message that is diplomatically conveyed to you? I will be blunt: 1.1 Koreans are not claiming compensation from each other. 1.2 Native Americans are not claiming compensation from each other. 1.3 Africans are not claiming compensation from each other. Are you catching now? 2. Difaqane resulted in, inter alia, (and this is for your education) the consolidation of some African tribes and the scattering of others. No African is sitting here, crying and claiming that "atrocities" were committed by X group against Y group and we, as Africans, do not care for your incorrect claims. 3. Also, the VICTIM (who has been dispossessed) has the discretion to decide which compensation claim to persue - you don't get to dictate that. The Jews sought compensation from the Germans for the Holocaust, yet they never sought compensation from the Russians for the pogroms and dispossessions. That doesn't make German compensation unfair for they stole and are liable. A car thief can't claim "unfairness" if the owner decides to reclaim his car, but decides not reclaim his cellphone from the cellphone thief.

      Psalm - 2012-02-24 18:59

      @ Antebellum (Part 2) You keep harping on body counts. The UN does not define crimes against humanity on the basis of body count. So, your approach is pointless and irrelevant. Apartheid is defined as a crime against humanity on the basis of the nature of the crime. You can keep posting the irrelevant body counts - no one cares, for the crime is defined. Furthermore, I have already explained the similaries between Nazis, white South African oppressors, etc. They committed CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY - this is the international criminal law finding. I really cannot help you if you are incapable of grasping this most obvious fact, a fact that anyone with a decent level of intelligence can look up in any respected international criminal law journal on the topic. Now, do you actually have anything of substance to say or is it your intention to merely parrot irrelevant body counts and repeat pointless questions when you cannot grasp clear answers?

      Antebellum - 2012-02-25 05:23

      You are rambling again. All that you have proven is that you are incapable of logical thought and that you are inconsistent with your reasoning. You have one set of rules for South African white people and another set for black people. Your answer to my question on compensation from the Zulus: "...for the same reason that Europeans are not paying compensation to each for their ANCIENT tribal wars" <- this was your answer idiot So your argument was that the Zulus should't pay reparations because it was an ancient tribal war(like that of the europeans) and thus making it irrelevent. But you want to lay claim to the western and nothern cape based on events that happned even BEFORE the Mfecane? You don't have to be diplomatic or vague, I could allready infer your racist viewpoint from you first posts. The common thread running througout your compensations rants is that you can only claim reparations from another race or ethnic group especially if they are not "indiginous" according to you. So lets lay the groundwork before we move along any further. Can please answer this without being vague, a simple yes or no would do. 1.Do you think that people from Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Botswana and Namibia have more of right to live in South Africa than me "the colonialist"? 2. Do you think that Zulus, Sothos and Vendas have the right to claim the western and nothern cape which supercedes that of the whites living there?

  • Truthis - 2012-02-21 16:05

    The point is that they were never on more than 60% of the land in the first place and therefore could not have been dispossessed of it. He is saying that they are only entitled therefore to claim the land they were on when whites arrived. The rest was free to take by anyone.

      Bertus - 2012-02-21 16:43

      I think the point De Vos is trying to make is that black people did acquire more land between the time Jan van Riebeeck arrived in the Cape and 1913 or 1948 and was removed from that land. I will agree with that, as well as that we can not afford to forget our past. However, I don't think that means ALL land should be up for redistribution. Two things are true: (1)There are too many people and not enough land and that (2)without successful commercial farmers we will all starve to death. How to solve the issue I don't know, but since De Vos is so smart maybe he can come up with a solution. How De Vos came up with white people wants everyone to forget the past I don't get. Saying we must look and work towards a better future does not automatically mean we should forget the past. That's just stupid.

      sizwe - 2012-02-23 16:02

      Since when was the land here free for anyone to take Truthis? What drivel...

      Susan - 2012-02-23 18:56

      @Craig - "Afrikaners are 6% Khoi" I just want to say - I demand my 6% compensation!..... Craig, just an interesting point on languages (this is not to be taken as my "side" to any part of the argument, just interesting information). History tought us that the language of the "more civilized" nation, that is the nation who could function better administratively, was always learned by the "lesser civilized". For instance, Greek was the language spoken in Byzantian times, and one could say that it was the language of the victor; however, when the Germanic tribes took over Roman provinces, they started to speak Latin, the language of the opressed at the time. This is probably what happened in SA as well. No need to see evil in everything. It is only how life works.

  • Kirsten - 2012-02-21 16:10

    once again- I say that the issue of black or white land is irrelevant until the Khoi San demands have been met. Until such time, I believe such arguments and articles to be a complete waste of time and a sort of political procrastination.

      Hugo - 2012-02-21 19:55

      Craig uyabetha my leader

      Dumbile - 2012-02-22 09:13

      @Craig Hayi uyingqwela grootman, hats off to you!! The knowledge you have is amazing. I wish you can point me to the right direction so that ndiyozifundela nam. People like you are a gem in this country. Thank you for teaching these so called South Africans their true history, myself included! Aah Tholeleduna!!!

      Kirsten - 2012-02-22 12:19

      while I hear what you're saying Craig- how do you suppose they are going to award 40% land to the 60% part of the Xhosa and Tswana peoples physical person- do you suggest cutting each individual into three parts and sending 2 thirds of their bodies to families with a new land deal? obviously there is cultural assimilation; Historically largely by bantu conquest of the san- not peaceful inter-breeding. If you want to get that technical then OMW! Leave the land as it is and save us a country full of dismembered bodies. I'm talking about a little community who have been pushed into the desert in order to preserve there culture and avoid 6-60% assimilation. I'm talking about a people who deserve an individual voice in parliament not 60% through the mouthpiece of a bantu with Khoi San blood. yes "let's look at it this way, 100% Khoikhoi people were deemed ineligible to own their own land... with 6%, well you go figure!" so let's rectify that part of history before we go onto the 60% khoi san in other races in SA- is your argument that because the bantus or ngunis or whoever have more Khoi San blood they are more elligible for land? I see you have a troup of admirers but have only inforced my original point...

      sizwe - 2012-02-23 16:03

      It is funny that the white people who comment here don't seem to think what black people have to say in this regard is at all relevant... Pittyful really

  • Italy.FYI.L - 2012-02-21 16:13

    Pierre De Vos what in the hell is wrong with you. The problem with the world is not race it is guys like you. Hanging on to every screw up your country has ever made and never progressing forward. So to you Mr De Vos I ask this question. How do you sleep at night knowing you are aiding the downfall of our country under the notion that you are doing good for the greater good. I do wish you a speedy exit from public appearance for you and all your kind. And I say your kind meaning the pillager of peoples lives homes and will. Good day Douche

      Kirsten - 2012-02-22 12:25

      I believe it is our country to begin with- i was born here craig which other country thus is mine? You are now being racist;"one of the few sensible Caucasians " Also- how old are u? I'm not entirely sure you experienced these so called cruelties first hand... and luckily the new dispensation you voted in is apparently rectifying this so you can stop harping on. You seem to want confrontation.... vengeance etc. why dont u focus on pulling yourself out of the hole... since legislature now allows you to do so-

      Malcolm - 2012-02-23 15:18

      Hear hear, De Vos is the worst kind of rodent. I hope we don't have to tolerate his vomit much longer.

      Kirsten - 2012-02-24 10:14

      luckily you don't call the shots so your summary that i am "disqualified" is an opinion which i dont share. hahaha shame man i suggest you see a shrink for your bitter heart- it will only eat you up

  • Mpho - 2012-02-21 16:14

    To most whites, apartheid and it's after-effects ended on 27 April 1994. This is reflected in opposition to any form of redress. This is probably the kind of amnesia that got Zimbabwe to where it is today.

      Trevor - 2012-02-21 17:21

      Wrong there, Zim is where it is because old BOB took back ZIM and with out fore-thought, did what Julius wants to do, land GRABBED at any cost,his "soldiers" MURDERED farmers because they were white,he spread race hate to incite the people...the result, productive farming which was the backbone of the Zim economy collapsed, those whites left scattered into Africa to start new farms given to them by other African States who capitalised on BOBS mudering spree now, those States are smiling all the way to the bank while ZIM's people die from disease and malnutrition AND they coming into SA creating a problem for us....crime, welfare...but mind you, SA is following a similar trend, murdering of our farmers who, put the food on the shelves that you buy,taking of productive land and giving it to the people who NO thought of how they are to manage it but hell, they have the land that is all the ANC cares for...I don't blame the small farmers, I blame the ANC being STUPID in implementing a process that will in the end only destroy the Agricutural sector in SA, why do you think we import so much wheat from Canada and other foods from China....there is ALOT more to this tan simple take and give land!

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 17:45

      @ Mpho Interesting point indeed. I am inclined to agree that Mugabe would not have had any political amunition had the Brits and the whites in Zim sought to resolve the land issue properly and satisfactorily- and speedily. Regarding SA....The simple-mindedness of some white South Africans is rather...well, appalling. They celebrate Malema's alleged downfall - under the bizarre idea that he is a threat and false belief that the issues he raises will be buried. Malema may go, but the prevailing anger at past injustices and dispossession won't. Another man will rise - and he may be far more impatient and less inclined to sit through TV interviews and smile at Ms Deborah Patta. He may quickly harness the rising and palpable anger and frustration of those who keep hearing about land reform, transformation, jobs, etc and yet never see them. They may also applaud Mulder and some may share his amnesia. But, in the future, they may be forced to look back on such applause as the height of their own stupidity. I wish more white South Africans were of a better calibre...not the Mulder-types.

      Paul - 2012-02-22 09:03

      Actually Trevor, the Zimbabweans just got impatient. UK refused to pay Zimbabwe the reparations they were promised. Bob is a politician. He needed to remain relevant by giving the people what they wanted.

      Malcolm - 2012-02-23 15:20

      The constant notion of entitlement and land grabs is what got Zimbabwe where it is today, and if the same sentiment that people have a right to take the land for nothing is continually reinforced by scum like De Vos it will be the downfall of this country as well.

      Mano-Lee - 2012-02-23 15:23

      Maybe those who support this 'apartheid and its effects' should stop referring to all whites. I am a white South African, my parents imigrated here in 1969, not because the whites were in power but because out of all the visas that my parents were waiting for, SA offered first. And quite honestly, i'm kinda gatvol of this entitlement that every one is harping on about. I dont care about the past. Dont care about who was here first, dont care whether a black runs this country. However, i do care when the majority paint me with the same brush. Cause the way i understand it, it was a minority of a minority that instigated this apartheid. The rest were duped into believing about the swart gevar the peddled in their propoganda against the blacks. Similar to what this anc is doing now. I recall 83% voted yes for democracy, something blacks dont acknowledge. I voted Mandela in '94 when i heard about aprtheid 2 years earlier. It was the fair thing to do. But my future is very limited here, fair enough to a degree, but what about my childrens children. Will they be paying for the NP's mistakes? Thats why most whites want the past behind bacuse, they were involved indirectly in a war between the then NP and the now masses. I just want to live a nice normal life and guarantee my grand children the same.

  • Theresa - 2012-02-21 16:16

    A Nation which is built on a foundation on Truth will always succeed ...but if it is built on lies there is no foundation to secure its future .....? it shall always erupt because of lies,people will always be crying out for Justice and justice can only be "Met" when there is Truth .....Rev Theresa Wiid..

      Theresa - 2012-02-21 16:18

      Therefore Truth Must prevail no matter how painful it is .....

      Herman - 2012-02-21 18:27

      Theresa, please explain yourself? What truth are you talking about?

  • Scebberish - 2012-02-21 16:20

    There is no such people as "BLACK" people!!! There are however Zulus, Xhosas, Vendas, Sotho and Pedi(South Sotho), Ndebele, Lemba, Tsonga(masacred by Shaka and became Shangaan), Nguni, Swazi, Tswana, then there is the Bushman and the Hottentot, and more. Incidentally, they all hate each other. So which one does the land belong to Mr. Chickenrun De Vos? You always choose the "winning" team? bet you were a Nazi during the war, and will be all Chinese next, finding some excuse why they are the rightful landowners when the day finally comes.

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 18:03

      @ Scebberish "Bushman" is a derogatory term. They are Khoi-San. But, you are right: Africans are Zulus, Xhosas, Swazis, Northern Sotho, Khoi-San, Vendas etc. You will also find that there is often plenty of inter-marriage- even between, for example, Xhosas and Khoi-San. And no, it is incorrect (and sheer propaganda) to claim the groups "hate each other". These African nations have continued to intermarry. Ask a couple of Africans about their family and ancestral background and you may end up going through a majority of those African nations. Africans have their own narrative on land entitlement. Africans have their own history. Each and every one of the indigenous African nations can comfortably lay claim to their portion of land without confusion. They do not need to be baby-sat by Pieter Mulder on this. I doubt very much that Africans are going to start killing each over this issue. I doubt the Vendas (who have generally been based the North of the country) are going to start running to the Southern tip of the Cape to claim part of Khoi-San land or contest Zulu claims elsewhere. Africans know their own history.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 18:50

      @Psalm, So I guess you believe the many incidents of Xenophobic attacks in South Africa were just a white plot to turn blacks against each other? or are you in the same type of denial here as you are about the sucess of Germany and Israel? You are the type of person who will manipulate the truth to suite your thinking, rather than your thinking to suite the truth!

      Psalm - 2012-02-21 19:09

      @ Scebberish As you have already proven that you are uncouth, I would not expect you to be concerned about these things. The San people decided that the term was derogatory and it is. I must assume you are alien to South Africa, for if you paid attention to stuff, you would have noted that the SA government rejects the use of the word "bushmen" as derogatory, in line with San understanding.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 19:39

      Psalm > What San people, the ones exterminated by the "Bantu"? The new South African government is now speaking for a group of people they all but exterminated? The same government that has gone bankrupt in most provinces and most departments, the same one that is stealing from its people around every corner and is rotten and corrupt from the top down? Am I alien to South Africa? I guess you mean as in White South African? Yes that I am, Born and Bred in South Africa. French Heugenot and Dutch Voortrekker decent with a long history of pioneering and also lot of British blood for good measure, go figure! Have a Lovely Day!!!

      Hugo - 2012-02-21 20:07

      Scobberish you have just displayed your ignorance.You count Ndebele and Swazi as separate from the Nguni,well you are wrong.Ngunis are made up of Zulu,Xhosa,Ndebele and Swazi.If you cared,you would have noticed that the languages from these groups are effectively the same,with Swazi inheriting about 90% of its vocab from Zulu,which in turn has many words including the clicks inherited from Xhosa.Same applies to IsiNdebele.As for these groups hating each other, I think those are just the wishes of a right winger.My own family is made up largely of siSwati and Zulu speakers,we are yet to meet to finalise the rules the hating contest.

      Anders - 2012-02-22 00:39

      @Craig - You display common ignorance about the term "Bushmen". The original people occupying Southern Africa were two distinct groups: The "Khoi-Khoi" (meaning "Men of Men") were farmers and the "San" (meaning "The Others") were nomadic hunter-gatherers. "Bushmen" refers solely to the San. The name "San" was a derogatory name used by the Khoi-Khoi to describe the people who frequently raided their livestock. As far as I am concerned, the word "Bushman" has never been used as a derogatory term, but rather as a descriptive one: "men with knowledge of the bush", and that is the sum of it. The word "San", on the other hand, was created as a deliberate derogatory term. Before you shoot your knowledgable mouth off, why don't you firstly try to discuss this with a proper Bushman someday?

      Kirsten - 2012-02-22 12:30

      Can someone please employ craig- he seems full of ideas on how to run the country but has enough time to sit and comment on peoples posts all day- anyone can copy and paste from "history" sites all day and pretend to care...

      Psalm - 2012-02-22 15:59

      @ Anders, you wrote "s far as I am concerned, the word "Bushman" has never been used as a derogatory term". Well, we are not interested in YOUR opinion on this matter. The South African San Council (being the representative of the San people), decided in 1993 that the correct and appropriate term for their people is SAN, not "bushmen". That settles it.

  • Andre - 2012-02-21 16:26

    Two wrongs don't make a right. Whites are sick of the reverse discrimination continueing after 18 years. My innocent children, borne 1996 and 1998 have to carry the brunt everyday because they are white. How on this earth is anyone going to stop racism if this discrimination is entrenched in affirmative action - whatever it is supposed to mean. Pierre is blind to the realities of SA and his comments are very selective to protect his position and image. Dr Mulder represents a small klompie verkrapte whites, listen carefully, a very small group. Most whites I know do not associate with his/their thinking. What we want is EQUAL treatment as citizens of this country and an EQUAL opportunity and freedom to be part of it. White brain-power has build this country which is now destroyed on all fronts. No normal thinking person can accept this state of affairs. So, don't get stuck with a small minority so called afrikaners or boere and generalise that all whites think like that. Most of us, the majority want to feel welcome in our country and we are ready to contribute and build, but we are blatantly faced with racist practices every day and made unwelcomed by the JZ's, Mbeki's and Malema's alike. The rest is dead quiet. Give all SAfricans equal treatment and opportunity!

      Dumbile - 2012-02-22 09:31

      You, Andre, are the worst kind of the lot! You talk about your kids suffering and yet it does not bother you that generations of blacks have been suffering at a scale beyond your imagination. Ofcourse, I don't expect you to care about them becuase they are not your immediate family, right? You go on to talk about equal treatment when we see black people everyday treated like the scum of the earth everywhere. We see their babies being murdered with no one batting an eyelid. Aargh, why do we bother with you people mara hey??

      Mano-Lee - 2012-02-23 15:49

      Aaaah Craig, get over it! He spoke certain truths. Just accept it. Just like we have to accept the anc's version of the truth and the cr@p that is malema and his ilk. A spade is a spade is a spade.... finish and claar.

      Mano-Lee - 2012-02-23 15:52

      @dumbile... you're right. But thats their own doing for the most part. Poverty begets poverty.... and the poor and breeding rapidly But i will not held responsible for their lot! I was never part of your apartheid nor will i ever be. As far as i'm concerned it was all a myth.

      Kirsten - 2012-02-24 10:19

      I must add Craig- I quite enjoy arguing with you- see we can get along :P

  • Howard Butcher - 2012-02-21 16:30

    De Vos, Mulder made a statement to the effect that there is no evidence that blacks settled, before whites, in the present day Western and Northern Cape Provinces. That is historically and factually correct. The first nations people of the area are Bushmen, Koi Koi etc. the Nguni (Bantu) are, like whites, settlers. They emanated from the equatorial regions of Africa around 350 AD, pushed south by the pressures of an expanding Sahara, amongst others. If we are ever to settle the issue of empowerment comprehensively then there has to be honest discussions and brokering. How can that transpire if inconvenient truths are ignored. Take a breath man, your diatribe is not balanced. No one is saying we don't have work to do but solutions must take cognizance of history. The delusionary perspectives of Malema are not a way forward, neither is the president's denialism. Where did that get Mbeki? Pieter Mulder may have opened a can of worms but his statement concerning who preceded who in the Cape will prove to be factually correct. Blacks will eventually have to accept that.

      bfvillet - 2012-02-21 17:39

      the issue is not who were first or not we know that, but land dispossesion and its return and how we are going to go about it.At this stage it seems as if legislation will probably be used to return land as it was used to disposses people from the land.It seems as if next mulder will be telling us that apartheid never existed like many anti semites today try and deny the holocaust.Today white people still live many of the privledges that apartheid and colonialism have given them while many black people still suffer that same legacy.It is disengenious of whites to expect black people to suddenly work together in the post colonial apartheid south Africa without adressing the imbalances caused by colonialism and apartheid.Is collective denial of colonialism and apartheids effects not just another attempt by the white right to entrench their position of privledge

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 18:26

      @bvfillet, so what is your solution? I have already donated four new vehicles(stolen), and a house(burned down by burglars), a whole electronics lab three times(stolen in the 32 breakins I had in less than a year), 3 family members (murdered beaten to death by house burglars),7 good friends (murdered including the 10 year old son bioled alive in a bath), 2 friends raped. one was 8 months pregnant. So tell me how much more would you feel should be given in repayment?

      Wim - 2012-02-21 23:05

      bfvillet. Inform yourself before you spout off. The 1913 Act did not dispossess anyone. It prohibited the buying of land outside demarcated areas. What is never mentioned is that the Lagden commission also reserved the crown colonies that was not include in the Union for exclusive black occupation. In fact 51% of British territory in southern Africa was set aside for exclusive black occupation.

      bfvillet - 2012-02-22 06:54

      the solution is to share the resourses we cannot after 24 years continue with a situation where the majority of the wealth is held by a minority.I reiterate again what Pierre de vos is saying whites in SA will have to acknowledge the sin of colonialism and apartheid and not make as if it did not exist the victims here continue to be treated with disrespect and disdain.The TRC was an attempt at reconciliation which we can now see has clearly failed because there was no real reperation.It is now time to adress this if not we will reap the whirlwind.Pierre de vos is a voice that needs to be listened to.As the economy continues to suffer the call for more equitable wealth distribution will become louder

      Paul - 2012-02-22 09:07

      Bushmen, Khoi Khoi, etc were all classified as black by the apartheid government. Point being, when Jan van Riebeeck arrived in SA, there were people there already. They traded with the locals to survive.

      Wim - 2012-02-22 11:02

      No Paul, Khoi/San and their descendants were never classified as black. However, the current regime do classify them as black for propaganda purposes, but when it comes to jobs etc. they stand at the end of the row, just in front of white males.

  • Stefan Van Der Merwe - 2012-02-21 16:31

    i'm white and i'm not saying forget the past, but if we keep focusing on it it will keep us from moving forward. It will prolong the healing of this land. I also think its unfair to put the sins of the older generations on my shoulder. I was born white, i didn't ask to be. I'm 22 and i'm only trying to make a living for myself, trying to survive but i should pay for what other old fart whites did. And no i'm not saying that black should either. But im sick of hearing how 'we' whites wronged them. I an not and was not apart od tha. Can we movd on already and try to live along

      Stefan Van Der Merwe - 2012-02-22 00:38

      i didn't say anybody hates me. I know the past and the truth, i'm not ignorant. I do get angry at people who cling on the past, thrusting the hatred into the hearts of the youth instead of teaching us tolerance and ways of overcoming our bloodied past. I know how more privelaged i am than some others. Thats why i get involved in community programs. Not ou of guilt but because i want a better SA for everyone. I do what i can. Its just a shame that they go vote for the idiots who dont live up to there promises but are doing more damage than good.

      Stefan Van Der Merwe - 2012-02-24 02:58

      i know they are not only doing bad but remember gov has a whole lot more responsibilities than just improving townships and the lives of people living there. Etoling for ex. By ading 7c to the petrol price the etol4ng system can be scraped. Did u know its gonna cost more to retreive the money ppl wil pay than money paid. A fuel shortage is upcoming because the the refineries havem't been upgraded since 1960s. The list goes on. And i have spoken to many non white ppl who are sick of the anc's empty promises. All i want is for s.a. to move fwd and be a beter nation. Stop playing the blame game, pointing fingers etc. We are here NOW. Life is to short to bicker. Lets fix the probkems we are left with and move on to be the sunshine nation we should be

      Kirsten - 2012-02-24 10:17

      Craig you remind me of a newly expelled ancyl member- shame u WISH you were born in the struggle... it's over now- now it's an individual one up to each SAfrican to better their lot in an unhappy global economic state.... you could always play dress up with your "comrades" in the back yard....

  • Ebon - 2012-02-21 16:33

    The sooner we stop arguing about the past with ulterior motives, the sooner South Africa can start making positive strides. Trying to create a national sense of white guilt is stupid and counter productive. It illicits defensive reactions and results in debates that go nowhere with one group blaming the other, and each expecting, totally ridiculously, that if they can prove their side of the argument, they will magically have all their problems solved. Bollocks. Our situation is what it is. Arguing about the past won't change that. We can talk about the past, and as long as our agenda remains one of learning to avoid repeating the mistakes, there is value in it. But when I hear someone talking about wanting reparations because of yada yada yada, I switch off and want to smack that person. Maybe there are some individuals who need to pay reparations. That is what the TRC was about. For the rest of us, we are stuck here trying to make the best of our situations. While people argue about who is to blame, our country's problems continue. It is nice to blame the past because then people don't have to be accountable for their actions. The reality though is that kids being born today are going to land up with problems that have very little to do with the distant past, but with what we are doing here, today.

  • Martin - 2012-02-21 16:45

    Thanks Pierre you are helping us. A pity almost no one wants to listen. Most Afrikaner whites have no ears, sorry to say! And their grand children unfortunately will pay the price, when they hopefully rest in peace.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 17:14

      @Martin ou call that help?! You Cannot continue to paint people into a corner and trap them with no way to turn and expect no reaction or fightback! After all isnt that exactly what the result of Apatheid was, so why should it now be any different when the positions are reversed? Perhaps we should follow the example or precedence set and start to destabilise the country until someone hears us too. What it would lead to is a never ending circle, or more accurately, fatal downward spiral for the country, so better to rather learn from the past, leave it where it belongs, IN THE PAST, and move on with the future. and I am NOT Afrikaans.

      Wim - 2012-02-21 23:09

      So why aren't you here? Hand to the plow, so to speak.

      MPHO.MUTHUBI - 2012-02-27 12:54

      DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF MAPUNGUBWE? IF YOU DO, THEN YOU HAVE SEE THE IRRELEVENCE OF MULDER'S ASSERTION.DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORD AFRICAN OR WHAT YOUR ANCESTORS CALLED 'DARK CONTINENT'? WHAT DOES IT MEAN, WHITE OR BLACK? IF YOU OWN A PROPERTY, DO YOU NEED TO ACTUALLY OCCUPY THE PLACE OR YOU COULD POSSESS IT AND STILL BE CALLED THE OWNER? IF YOU OCCUPY A PART OF YOUR YARD OR PLOT, WOULD ANYONE WHO COMES AND BUILD IN ONE CORNER OF THAT YARD BE ALLOW TO OWN IT SINCE YOU HAVE NOT ACTUALLY OCCUPIED IT? AFRICA IS NOT EUROPE AND EUROPE CANNOT BE AFRICA. I KNOW IT IS CONVENIENT FOR MOST WHITES LIKE MULDER TO CALL AND CLAIM AFRICA AS THEIRS ONLY WHEN IT IS BENEFICIAL TO THEM AND IF IT DOES BENEFIT OTHERS ALSO, SUDDENLY IT IS A DIABOLICAL PLACE. AND YOU GUYS CALL YOURSELVES CHRISTIANS AND YOU LIE SO MUCH IT HURTS!NO WONDER IT IS DIFFICULT FOR BLACKS TO EVER TRUST THE LIKES OF YOU. GOD HELP US ALL.

  • Wim - 2012-02-21 17:17

    Did this silly fellow read Dr. Mulders entire speech, or is he just preforming his pre-programmed knee-jerk?

  • Jan - 2012-02-21 17:21

    About 25000 white active commercial farmers now remain on the land. The rest of the white population was removed via economic considerations over the past 100 years and now work in cities. They sold their farms and invested in non farm investments. Must the remaining 25000 now pay for all the wrongs of the past by having their land expropriated below market price? They are the ones that own the skills to produces our food - under dangerous conditions.

  • Scebberish - 2012-02-21 17:24

    When the white man and the asian is finally eradicated from Africa, what comes then? Peace and Prosperity? Like all the rest of the shining African examples?

      Heiku - 2012-02-23 17:12

      Ethiopia is a pretty good example. It has never been colonised. I've been there and its a beautiful country with lovely people but its still a mess.

  • Pierre - 2012-02-21 17:34

    How depressing. So few people engage with the article but rather hurl invective at the author. A question: how should one respond to the fact that - regardless of who owned what land in 1652 - by 1913 black South Africans were prohibited from acquiring land in most parts of South Africa? So, for almost 80 years white people could acquire land in 80% of the country and black people could not. White people could use acquired land in this 80% to build up their wealth and black South Africans could not. Was this fair? If it was not fair, what duty do we have to change the effects of this (at the very least) deeply unfair system of effective land disposession? If you say that there is no duty to address the effects of this effective land dispossession, well, then you are probably not the kind of person that I would allow into my house or would ever want to engage in a civil conversation.

      Wim - 2012-02-21 18:05

      Pierre, (assuming it is De Vos)You are quite wrong. You latch onto the Glen Grey Act but fail to take other issues such as the Lagden Commission into account. Furthermore, blacks could acquire land by permit system between 1913&36 and did so extensively. Apparently blacks were also quite active in the land market since 1990, and that is what Dr. Mulder pointed out in his speech. His departure point was that a land audit should be undertaken to establish the state of the governments program. Instead of responding to this reasonable position you proceeded to heap slanderous invective upon everyone, and particular Afrikaners, who does not accept a slanted version of history. How do you expect to engage in reasonable debate with that attitude?

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 18:12

      What makes you think anyone wants to come into your house anyway! As for civil conversation, your idea of that is anyone who agrees with you is civil, anyone who has their own opinion is not! Wow, nice life your family must have living with you.

      Celtis - 2012-02-21 18:33

      Pierre, “…then you are probably not the kind of person that I would allow into my house….” Is it your house? How did you get it and do you feel guilty about it?

      Mike - 2012-02-21 22:10

      Pierre, do not mind them they sometimes struggle to use the grey matter. Ad hominem attacks are easier than actually using the brain to debate. In any case thanks for a good read.

      Celtis - 2012-02-22 17:45

      How depressing. Where are you Pierre when you need to answer a simple question? You ask if it was fair or not en I ask what do you feel and how do you explain your right to have a home and what do you suggest we do to fix the errors from the past. It is easy to criticize others but no guts in fixing the problem starting with yourself. Typical ….

      Winston - 2012-02-25 11:03

      Pierre, just look at what the anc(Black representation and not white) have accomplished during their rule. Imagine if they had had 80 years of land in their hands how much more they could have accomplished. wake up and smell the roses this is africa not europe give them another 3000years and they will still be planting mielies

  • Trevor - 2012-02-21 17:39

    Rather than post an article that does NOTHING but aggrivate people even further, why not provide a solution. I find people that write this garbage are the same who have no solution and feel the need to get attention by pushin the race card.I agree 100% with the ANC's land reform,but not at all how it is implemented. They want a radical change to win votes so they just give land away with the media in tow,but that does not help SA in the long term, in fact it will kill our agricultural sector and we'll end up importing the majority of our food stocks and THAT for any country is the start of the end of our economy.I say, you have so many WILLING WHITE AFRIKAANER farmers out there wanting to put back into the economy by passing on their knowledge but the ANC won't use it because why, it's the White Afrikaaner. ANYTHING white is rubbish, add AFRIKAANER & all hell breaks lose in their eyes and their actions speak VOLUMES so no need to assume this. Just giving land away WITHOUT providing a PROPER infrastrucure if doomed to fail and it is why it IS FAILING IN SA. If the ANC is REALLY serious then talk to AgriSA,work with them and we will ALL benefit because we have some of the most experienced farmers in the WORLD in SA,the fact they are almost ALL WHITE AFRIKAANERS should not be the reason they are killed and sidelined so people,shelve the race hate and look forward, don't forget but also don't hang onto the past!

      Vernon - 2012-02-22 18:00

      I agree 100%

      Wim - 2012-02-23 17:42

      Afrikaner is spelled AFRIKANER, rooinek!

  • Tc - 2012-02-21 17:49

    Dear Author, You are precisely an example of what you are accusing mr Sell-Out Mulder of. You are in a convenient denial. I will assume you wrote this column to please your political masters.

      Pierre - 2012-02-21 17:58

      Such a well argued and considered response. Thank you for your intelligent, well thought through and coherent contribution which demonstrates a rare intelligence and a serious grappling with the issues in a nuanced yet lucid manner.

      Scebberish - 2012-02-21 18:15

      Pierre, you are a delusional, self ingratiating half-wit.

      Wim - 2012-02-21 19:40

      Pierre, Presumably you caught the news item that the parliamentary committee heard today that Land Affairs can't account for land claims and that the department is in chaos. Seems to me Dr. Mulder sounded the early warning, and got no recognition. Show some emotional intelligence now and support him in his call for a land audit. Why don't you urge Zuma publicly to task Dr Mulder with the cleaning up of that department?

      Wim - 2012-02-21 19:47

      Pierre, Another thought. Why don't you volunteer your senior students to assist in that malfunctioning department? Now that a practical idea, isn't it?

      Vernon - 2012-02-22 18:02

      @Scebberish You seem to be very angry. Calm down.

  • Herman - 2012-02-21 18:13

    Mr de Vos, you do have some valid points that need to be considered. As white afrikaners, we need also to help our fellow black afrikaners to grow, and not to try and make life miserable for each other. We need to find practical ways to make it properous to them as well, instead of reverting back to hate and distrust, as we have been taught. If we always bite each other, at the end we will devour each other, and some way somebody must give way. We need to acknowledge the injustices, and reach out to them, in an honoust and caring way. I can see not other way that we can live together in this land. What has the past to do with us, whether it be in the 1600's or the 1900's. Let us create something better, that is meaningfull and sustainable for everyone.

      Vernon - 2012-02-22 18:03

      I'll drink to that.

  • Werner van der Westhuizen - 2012-02-21 19:23

    Great ideas are often violently opposed by mediocre minds. If you cannot appreciate and understand the objective nature of this article as a white South African, I can fathom how you cannot understand that you are beneficiary of Apartheid. This article does not attempt to polarise the debate, it attempts to explicate the objective facts that Mr Mulder so expediently left out. Reading some of these comments, as a 21 year old law student who is not naïve as to the detrimental effects of Apartheid, as well as the need to actively work on affecting a new generation that illuminates the principles of our Constitution, I feel discouraged. Do we actually want to work on a new future? The subsequent comments only seem to perpetuate some of the basic principles of apartheid I.e. discouraging objective reasoning. We don't have to agree on every single issue, but sometimes the way in which we disagree begets a post apartheid, apartheid. And as a South African that is too young to have actively participated in the draconian system but too old to claim immunity, I am perplexed by our need to perpetuate antagonistic rhetoric.

      Wim - 2012-02-21 20:32

      How can you judge the objectivity if you are not familiar with the entire story? Did you read Mulders speech? Poor judge you'll make, jumping to conclusions without studying all the facts.

      Juann Strauss - 2012-02-22 15:45

      It is quite possible to arive at a logical and rational conclusion that is patently false if you begin from a faulty premise.

      Grant Olivier - 2012-02-26 11:25

      I think treating this issue in a rational dispassionate debate is naive. Or rather, if in 10 years you as a father and husband are denied work because you do not fit in with the notion of a transformed judiciary, and you are unable to afford a good home for your family, if you are then neither disillusioned nor embittered, we can continue this discussion. The existential nature of the issue makes it emotive on all sides.

  • Cracker - 2012-02-21 19:36

    Pieter Mulder knows as well as anybody else what the land laws were and the consequences thereof. That however was not the issue he was addressing. He was dealing with the accusations that only blacks have rights to land, based on a certain interpretation historical developments used against whites and their actual RIGHT TO EVEN BE IN THIS COUNTRY. Unfortunately he did not during his speech sufficiently and periodically emphasize the context of why he was making his statements. The debate is in any event sterile and unwinnable. As for the conclusions from the legislative provisions Pierre De Vos tries to push down the throats of whites, rubbish. He, so typical of the soul self-purifying brigade at the expense of others, does not properly think through what he preaches. The news we saw on SABC2 tonight will hit the printed news media tomorrow. Pierre, think it through what you preach and relate it to the mess that has been going on that government department responsible for land reform. That is exactly what Pieter Mulder and some others have been trying to point out. And Pierre, identify the individual recipients of the land according to your version of what the Constitution says. And while you are at it, explain if the Constitution is not also supposed to ensure that the country does not die of famine and the fatal destruction of the economy of what you seem to propagandize for. Guilt trips will not save us. We are way beyond such childishness.

      Cracker - 2012-02-21 19:51

      If you do away with willing buyer/seller principle you have to explain how the alternative will work in practice. How do you qualify as the buyer if other potential buyers are also interested in buying the farm? How is the successful buyer determined? Can't it be sensed how the floodgates for corruption will be opened? Surely the Constitution and common sense must feature somewhere to prevent corruption and abuse of the system. But let's see what the reaction will be to the news that the land reform process has been one huge (corruption) mess.

      Herman - 2012-02-21 20:36

      A POISON TREE by: William Blake (1757-1827) WAS angry with my friend: I told my wrath, my wrath did end. I was angry with my foe: I told it not, my wrath did grow. And I watered it in fears, Night and morning with my tears; And I sunnèd it with smiles, And with soft deceitful wiles. And it grew both day and night, Till it bore an apple bright; And my foe beheld it shine, And he knew that it was mine, And into my garden stole, When the night had veiled the pole: In the morning glad I see My foe outstretched beneath the tree.

  • Chris - 2012-02-21 20:20

    Tell you what Pierre. This country's problems will start resolving themselves once and individual is judged by merit, NOT by race. It is quite frankly moronic to apply a system based on race and a form of reverse discrimination to fix the discrimination we had in the past. It's like pouring oil on a fire to put it out. We need even-headed and unbiased leaders to facilitate proper reform, and I am ashamed to say that this poor country has a strong deficit in those regards. Bickering about the past and who is right and wrong distracts from the present and prevents ANYTHING from being solved. It is PAST time for these politicians to GROW UP.

      Herman - 2012-02-21 21:03

      Tell you what i think, the country's problem will start resolving once people will start respect and honor each other, regardless of race and colour. When we lean about love, being true to our word, and to care for another. When we forget about our pedigree or our social standing, and start to think of others that are in need.

  • Kobus - 2012-02-21 21:26

    It is quite ironic that we as the majority white tax payers of South Africa is actually paying for this redistribution of land of which we do not see any beneficial return on investment for any body, that includes the blacks who get to own the land because they lack the skill to establish their own economic freedom with the land that they have been given. This is a very sensitive issue and if not handled correctly by the state can cause serious problems for SA. IF land grabs were to take place South Africa will surely become a failed state which means poverty for even more black and white except for the whites with enough money and intellectual ability to be able to make a living elsewhere. But it is important to know that the majority of the people who will suffer will be black. Thus, the outings of Pieter Mulder, who is a warning government that land redistribution done wrongly (not paying for land, corrupt redistribution, failing to ensure food productivity) will be catastrophic and that there is very little logic behind their plan. So I agree with the message he tried to convey to government, it is just unfortunate that it is blown out of proportion and deliberately fuel to enhance racial tension. But what really gets me is that a person who works at a university can be so short sighted.

      Mike - 2012-02-21 22:02

      just to correct you there, for now there are already more middle class tax payers in SA than whites.

      Kobus - 2012-02-21 22:19

      Thank you Mike. That good news. We need a strong black middle class. I think its one of the few things that will increase SA chances for success. Nobody wants to see there hard earned money wasted.

  • Hermann - 2012-02-21 21:41

    The same old trash ignoring that a lot of it also applies to non-whites especially when comes to living in the past like most non-whites and in particular a certain professor in constitutional law who happens to be non-white. Can't you guys learn from the past instead of whinge and start living for the future?

  • Koos - 2012-02-22 05:28

    Grow some spine Pierre de Vos. You've become a sorry excuse for a white Afrikaner. The past is the past, but I'm sure as hell not going to allow anyone to trample all over me over what someone in my bloodline did three hundred years ago. At least I know where I came from.(and where I headed) That's a good start in any colour.

  • brieuse - 2012-02-22 06:38

    We haven't forgotten the past. Many of us were not there. Our parents maybe. Perhaps it's time to move on and make a country work?

      Hugo - 2012-02-22 07:11

      how do the victims of the past think,dont you think their word should count more than yours(atleast)this once?

      Malcolm - 2012-02-23 15:38

      We are all victims of the past Hugo, every last one of us. It's how we choose to deal with that which matters, its time to stop crying and focus on the present.

      Malcolm - 2012-02-23 20:06

      @Craig - Why do some enjoy their victim-hood? Because they can make a living off it instead of getting of their lazy backsides and doing something about it. Mulder trying to re-establish victim-hood? I think not, Mulder is trying to prevent new victimization in the present. Nothing can ever be solved by looking backwards. Where would you have it end? Should the Australians be making demands of the British for deporting them (Many of the prisoners sent there were political opposition)? Should the English be demanding reparations of the Nordic countries for what the vikings did? Should Italy be demanding money from the hungarians for the sacking of Rome? Do the Egyptians still owe the slaves who built the pyramids for them? Please tell me where does it all end? One can literally trace suffering and injustice back to the beginning of civilization, but what good will it do anyone. None of it can ever be undone without causing new unjustice, it has been tried before it doesn't work. It just creates a new group of wronged people who will then also demand reparation, you cannot undo injustice with more injustice... Why should 4 million white South Africans (And 46 million non white South Africans) be damned to an eternity of suffering because of the vote of only 400000 South Africans most if not all of whom are long dead and gone. I might add that almost 600000 white south africans voted against in those elections, what about their ancestors do they deserve this as well?

      Malcolm - 2012-02-23 20:08

      How about instead we work together and build a new great South Africa for all of us. We can only do this by focusing on preventing future injustice not by constantly trying to seek continuous reparations for the actions of ghosts from the past. It will take time and it will be hard but in the end it would benefit everyone more then the current situation: black, white and everything in between. Rome wasn't built in a day and it certainly wasn't built by whining about the past and demanding handouts either...

  • Louise - 2012-02-22 07:12

    Sir, you seem to only involve yourself with the late 1800 & 1900's. Look at history since 1652 to 1820........ Like one would read the bible from front to back and not only the last chapter and fix your beliefs only on that contents of what you want to hear or try to understand.

  • Carel - 2012-02-22 07:43

    Your whole comment does not even make sense! You state that Mulder has forgotten the past 300 years - NO HE HAS NOT - actually he got it spot on. You on the other hand start off in 1894 (Only +/-120 years ago) so in actual fact, YOU (Pierre De Vos) are forgetting the past 300 years. You look like a fool and an idiot!

  • Angela - 2012-02-22 07:49

    Very well put and I see by the comments that those who do not agree resort to insults and personal attacks. A sure sign you are speaking an unpalatable truth. Sadly it seems most believe the Boer mythology that was taught as history until very recently.

      Juann Strauss - 2012-02-22 15:42

      Who is to say the current history is any more accurate?

      Angela - 2012-02-23 14:14

      It's certainly more balanced and I have the academic credentials to make that statement.

      Wim - 2012-02-23 17:59

      Academic credentials from Wits? Is that a non-sequitur?

  • henrycharlesmuller - 2012-02-22 08:27

    You need some cheese for that wine

  • Ryan - 2012-02-22 08:53

    Let's give Pieter some trinkets for his property and then he can tell his grand children to forget the past and move forward...Deny deny deny, this is the reason the country is struggling to move forward.

  • allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-02-22 08:54

    JuJu makes very controversial calls to land reform and we are all asked to debate the issue , to talk about together . Pieter Mulder makes a statement on the 'sensitive' topic in the appropriate place (parliment) which has historical backing and he is crucified , labelled a racist and ring-wing lunatic(who was appointed as deputy minister?). If you can't debate and bring points out into the open and get pigeon-holed in the black and white thinking which is so prevalent then there is no hope of finding a solution of redress which has never been argued but rather the extent and cost to our current social ,economic and ecological environment.

      Vernon - 2012-02-22 18:25

      My question to you is why do you care what JuJu has to say as he is not a member of parliament and has no power to do anything.

  • Carl - 2012-02-22 09:04

    Mulder was correcting zuma's earlier statement, which as usual was stupid and provocative, perhaps look at the whole picture?

  • Mirasie - 2012-02-22 10:11

    Wat presies probeer de vos hier se?

  • Craig - 2012-02-22 12:15

    so you agree... " These provisions can be viewed as responding directly to the history of land dispossession of black South Africans which went hand in hand with the process of colonial conquest. Mulder’s argument, which (even if it was historically correct) hinges on a requirement to completely forget the past 300 years of land dispossession that went hand in hand with colonial conquest, is thus completely at odds with the provisions of the Constitution itself." What was the point of the rest of your reply? Mulder was not questioning the badness of Apartheid, rather sating a fact.

  • Dewald - 2012-02-22 13:49

    And the writer is a Professor? Glad I did not study at Stellenbosch....

      Wim - 2012-02-22 15:00

      No Dewald, At Cape Town. "Pierre de Vos is the Claude Leon Foundation Chair in Constitutional Governance at the University of Cape Town." Right at the bottom of the article.

  • Vernon - 2012-02-22 18:15

    I think a short-term solution would be give a percentage of all profits made farmers to 'blacks that can prove the they were removed from that land. Also a percentage ownership of that land. That's my contribution. Everbody else seems to be focused on the problem.

  • bruning.vankriekenbeek - 2012-02-22 19:21

    How does the denial of an opportunity to purchase additional land, equate to an entitlement (for free), by the denied, to land which was legitimately bought and paid for at the then applicable market rate?

  • rvandenheever - 2012-02-23 05:11

    An interesting article but I think its irrelevant as the majority of people including whites agree land reform must take place. Where South Africa run into a problem is on a lack of a common vision and on how we are going to reach our vision. The goal was set to transfer 30% of the commercial agricultural land to previously disadvantaged by 2010. Unfortunately no one knows how much land has been transfered.That a side, the goal that was set was the incorrect goal as it stopped at the point of transfer and did not include the successful management of the land after transfer. The goal should have been one of establishing successful farmers that contribute to the SA economy. If we set a common vision the results of land reform can satisfy everyone, but as its now it is creating dissatisfied beneficiaries a disgruntled farming community and could in the end threaten food security. The next question that needs to be addressed is how we will achieve the vision of many successful black farmers. At present its a willing buyer willing seller system. Many people want to move away from this to a land grab. Lets first look at the effect a land grab will have. It will damage investor confidence in our country. Most farmers have production loans and mortgages. If the land is grabbed then we could trigger a banking crisis as well as bankrupt co-ops. Somewhere between the present system and a land grab we must find the answer. We cant correct the ill's of 350y in 20y be realistic.

  • rvandenheever - 2012-02-23 05:38

    Please read this with the previous comment. We should be realistic in our targets as it takes many years to train a person to become a farmer. Farming has become a business like any other and needs skilled management to succeed. We will need to use existing structures and maybe some new ones to train and support these new farmers. Without such training and support these farmers will be doomed and WILL fail. The end result will be more of the same as what we have now. According to me we need the following:1. Acknowledgement that the present system has failed. 2. Set a common vision of successful African farmers and not hectares transfered.3. Negotiate with all parties concerned how the vision will be reached.4. Draw up a policy and implement it.5. Appoint people that have the knowledge and skills to make this work.6. Create realistic expectations within the African society on land reform. The alternative to a successful land reform system is Zim and nobody wants that. So lets work together to solve this issue, lets take the emotion out of it and think with clear heads, lets put the good of our country before our own gains, lets break the chain of injustice that threats through our history but not create new injustices, lets act as one nation and not as colour defined groups, let each one become a statesman of note and treasured leader in our everyday life and we will receive in return the country we long for a country of peace, prosperity and justice for all.

  • Lebogang - 2012-02-23 09:27

    why dont we just kill each other and who ever wins take all, casue it is sickening to hear people trying to justify stealing african land. In europe you wont find blacks owning a large portion of the land.

      bruning.vankriekenbeek - 2012-02-23 09:54

      Of course they don't. You have to pay for what you own. Here as in Europe. Unless you can prove ownership by title deed. Which is exactly why such documents exist.

      Russel - 2012-02-23 14:28

      You are the biggest racist of them all! oh no, in RSA only whites can be racist!

      Mano-Lee - 2012-02-23 21:15

      Thats because they cant afford it

      bruning.vankriekenbeek - 2012-02-24 14:09

      Craig please do. And highlight who is living on the land you refer to, that did not pay for his land. (or did Rhodes leave the land to his "offspring". Lol) Then tell us something about the Transkei, Ciskei and Western Cape too.

      bruning.vankriekenbeek - 2012-02-25 15:29

      Craig I asked you to show which land was occupied by owners who did not pay for it. You clearly are not able to. Transkei and Ciskei, and most of Natal which is probably the best agricultural land in SA, was consolidated. Unwilling (white) owners were forced off land and highly productive farms, consolidated and merged into the above, before being handed over for black ownership and occupation. Those farms/lands which were prime producers have produced nothing since. The occupiers have even gobbled up everything intended to produce and reduced the land to waste. Comparing prime land to semi desert is truly disingenuous and false. Or are you professing to trade diamonds and sandstone on an equal value/weight basis? As far as the Westen Cape is concerned you have "cleared" absolutely nothing "earlier". The fact that a few scattered migrants meandered around an area does not imply it "belongs" to them. And your claim to having Khoi and San blood in your veins? Sure. All it proves is that the black invaders murdered, raped and enslaved them where ever they came into contact with them. I guess you will have to "carry on for days and days" more to resolve what the real truth is.

  • Lebogang - 2012-02-23 10:02

    @ kobus it is sad that there are people as ignorant as who think that only whites pay tax, let me tell u Kobus I probably pay more tax more than u.your superiority mentality clouds your thinking hence you assume that because you white you pay tax and black people dont.black people are majority it make sense that most of the VAT coes from this group of the population, even the PAYE if we were to do proper audit I'm sure you will find that blacks account for most. however to argue with someone who was brought up with a baas mentality is a waist of breath.

  • Lebogang - 2012-02-23 12:20

    @ WIM just google my friend then you will know what the land act of 1913 was about, u so used to having blacks working for you unfortunately for you I'm a liberated black person, I dont work 4 whites and in my entire life I will not, infact I will employ whites.

      looneylani - 2012-02-23 12:24

      here here... at least someone is creating jobs!! =)

      Wim - 2012-02-23 13:43

      So you don't really know anything about the act? Much easier just spouting hot air. And you are being presumptuous: I don't befriend intellectually challenged AA appointees.

  • looneylani - 2012-02-23 12:27

    If everyone can just come back to the present moment and stop living in the past. I think alot will change :) Stop pointing fingers and start making a difference!

  • Brett - 2012-02-23 12:48

    The bottom line is that there is plenty of vacant land available. But they dont want that. They want the white farmers farm that he developed, they want his farmhouse, his crops, his cattle etc etc. Its not about land its more about developed farmland and the bakkie, tractor, the cheese in the fridge.....

  • Lebogang - 2012-02-23 13:05

    @looneylani, so far u are the only person who makes sense, the rest is about race including myself. the truth no race deserves less but a lot of whites in this forum seem to think that as blacks we must accept anything even if its rubbish, by virtue of being black u know nothing except the jungle.till i get respect i will continue to show zero tolerance to white supremists.

      looneylani - 2012-02-23 13:15

      Lebs... I don't think demanding respect from people is going to work... I mean this with respect - because of the way people are brought up, it's deep rooted unfortunately. So there must be another way to address this. Because - we keep getting the same results, but doing the same things over and over again. As individuals and a country.

  • looneylani - 2012-02-23 13:15

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Love-South-Africa/328912590493182