“Your time is up, white people”: South Africa Sets Date for “White Farmers Land-grab Law”

Article Source

“Your time is up, black people!” said the politician.

Actually, no, that would create a media stir. What really was said, by a South African parliamentarian, is “Your time is up, white people” as she referenced a plan to soon begin the seizure of white farmers’ land.

As the Express reports, “The South African National Assembly has agreed to the establishment of a committee that will draft an amendment to section 25 of the Constitution. This law will basically allow the government to force people out of their homes and refuse to pay them any form of compensation. The motion gives the committee a deadline of March 31, 2019 to complete its work.”

So South Africa’s white farmers, already targets for garden-variety murder and theft, now face imminent, officially sanctioned theft. IOL provides more detail:

The motion was adopted with 183 votes in favour and 77 against. There were no abstentions.

Opposition parties had objected vehemently, with the Freedom Front Plus’s Anton Alberts reiterating the party’s threat that land expropriation would lead to instability.

“When the blood flows it will be on your hands,” Alberts said in the direction of the ANC benches.

The Congress of the People’s Deirdre Carter urged voters to go to the polls to “stop the ANC, stop the EFF, the only way you can do it”.

Themba Godi, from the African People’s Convention, backed the ANC and Economic Freedom Fighters’ support for the motion and an amendment, saying those who opposed land reform were, in fact, supporting the oppression of African people.

“Land must be nationalised and socialised for the benefit of the people, especially the working class and women…. Those who oppose want the perpetuation of wrongs of past.”

Of course, this is a wrong of the present guaranteeing future destruction. Proving correct Georg Hegel’s lament, “We learn from history that we do not learn from history,” expropriation of white farmers’ land was already tried in neighboring nation Zimbabwe. The result? The “socialized” land was given to people who couldn’t, or wouldn’t, manage it, and mass starvation and economic decline ensued.

Moreover, there’s little hope of the land grab proceeding peacefully if what transpired in the South African assembly is any indication. As the Daily Star relates, there

were heated scenes in the House when politicians clashed over the plans.

According to local reports, Economic Freedom Fighters MP Hlengiwe Mkhaliphi argued land grabs must go ahead as she declared: “Your time is up, white people”.

This came as the IFP MP Mkhuleko Hlengwa said the plans undermine South Africa’s position as a democratic state.

According to the Daily Maverick, he said: “To achieve real and effective land reform is (possible) under the existing Constitution, not your (ANC) populist agenda.

“You should be ashamed of yourself.”

However, the ruling ANC’s Chief Whip Jackson Mthembu dismissed the controversy, saying land reforms are “the right thing to do”.

It is believed that when South Africa’s Constitution is amended, it could be done by inserting into Section 25 the phrase: “Zero compensation may be regarded as just and equitable”.

Of course, this is simply what radio giant Rush Limbaugh has called getevenwith’em-ism. But this has long been a driving force in South Africa — and it can be deadly. As theTribunePapers.com informed this summer, “According to a Genocide Watch report in July 2012, over 3,000 of 40,000 white farmers had been murdered since 1994.”

This suits some South African politicians just fine, too. Consider the demagogic Julius Malema (shown), who actually said in an interview with TRT World earlier this year, “We’ve not called for the killing of white people, at least for now. I can’t guarantee the future.” When the interviewer said some people would think this “sounds like a genocidal call,” Malema scoffed, “Ah-ah, cry babies, cry babies!” (video below).

Then there’s the video of Malema singing to supporters the song “Shoot the Boer” (a white South African of Dutch or Huguenot descent). Note that since it was declared hate speech, he changed the words to “kiss the Boer,” though he can also be clearly heard saying “shoot to kill.”

Of course, some say that whites don’t belong in Africa. Yet this only makes sense if one also believes that blacks don’t belong in Europe, Japanese don’t belong on the “Japanese” islands (the original inhabitants were the Ainus) and that all of us, save American Indians, don’t belong on our continent. Man’s story is partially one of migration.

Yet there’s another factor, one relating to “Apartheid” and which I addressed in 2013, writing:

Most people would never guess it, but the arrival of whites in SA [South Africa] dates back further than that of the ancestors of many of the nation’s blacks. The first Dutch settlers … landed on Africa’s shores in 1652, while many blacks in SA arrived later. After all, since life in “racist” SA was vastly preferable to that in surrounding nations, it had long been attractive to black migrants. In fact, due to this factor and blacks’ higher birthrates, SA’s black demographic has increased 920 percent since 1913; this is the main reason the nation’s population increased from 6 million a century ago to 52 million today, as the white demographic increased only 3.3 million during that period [and now is only 8.4 percent of the population].

The relevant point, however, is that the Dutch settlers found in southern Africa a vast and beautiful land with great wide-open spaces. They then did what Erik the Red did in Greenland, what countless groups have done throughout history: they set up shop — their own shop. Of course, there were Xhosa and Zulus about, but they did their own thing as the Europeans did theirs for the same reason why the Sioux and Cheyenne stayed separate in North America, the Lombards and Alans remained separate in barbarian Europe, or the Smith and Jones households live separately on their block: the default for different groups, with different values and cultures or even just different blood ties, is to live apart. They naturally, instinctively, reflexively maintain “apartness.”

This worked well and was unquestioned for a very long time. But then something happened.

Southern Africa started moving into modernity.

As the Afrikaners and British developed the region, a country known as “South Africa” emerged. And as the blacks were integrated into this European creation — being hired by whites, receiving at least some Western education and learning European languages — they, too, developed a sense of belonging to this “South Africa.”

[So] SA blacks moved into modernity and became part of South Africa, a democracy — and outnumbered the whites 10 to 1. What were the whites to do? Granting the blacks full citizenship rights would usher in the whites’ political, and perhaps physical, destruction. Given this, is it surprising that what always ensured cultural preservation and group safety, that naturally ordained “apartness,” was replaced with the government-ordained policy of “apartheid?”

Of course, this had to end. But I and many others have long said that a rational policy would have been to partition South Africa, thus providing a just separateness that yielded safety. Instead, a pie-in-the-sky utopian scheme was pursued and brought the country to where it is now, a situation outlined well in Lauren Southern’s 2018 documentary Farmlands (video below).

The bottom line is that the clock is ticking on South African whites. Don’t expect the refugee-crazy media to take up their cause, though. Refuge is only given to those who’ll later vote for socialists — avowed or masquerading under a major-party label.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.