Whites fear land grab as black heirs win claim to family farm

Times Online ^ | September 28, 2005 | Jonathan Clayton in Johannesburg

[winodog]

I certainly agree.

[OKIEDOC]

Excellent observation.

It seems to me that the world was all in a tither years ago about White South Africa.

Communists and liberals everywhere couldn't wait to see that country returned to black leadership.

It is a shame but it looks as though South Africa in a few years will return to it's aboriginal ways.

Along with Zimbabwe to be a drain on the world and to regain third world status.

One need only to look at these African countries to see what the future holds for America if the likes of Jessie Jackson, Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, NAACP and Congressional Black Congress prevail in their give away views.

[finnigan2]

" It is a shame but it looks as though South Africa in a few years will return to it's aboriginal ways."

- I once spent a few weeks at the World Health Organization HQ and had a long conversation there with an official with extensive experience in Africa. He said that we Westerners don't understand the native viewpoint when it came to political corruption and cronyism. In their minds, their first loyalty is to their family, then the tribe and finally (if at all) to their country. A native African would never dream of holding an open competition for a key government post if he had a nephew or uncle who was out of work - regardless of their lack of education, experience or qualifications.
Furthermore, once you get beyond the welfare of citizens outside their particular tribe, they could care less. This helps to explain the lack of concern on the part of even a Western educated native like Kofi Annan to the massacre in Rawanda. He didn't lift a finger to help, even when he became aware of what was going on there. You can take a native out of the tribe, but you can't take the tribe out of the native.

[OKIEDOC]

Good point.

It seems to me that some of that argument can be expended on the disaster in New Orleans.

You hear a lot of leaders constantly screaming about racism and spewing anti-white rhetoric all across the biased MSM.

You can probably name many of these race baiting con artists such as Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Charlie Rangel, Calypso Louie Farahkan, John Conyers and others with out much thought.

I would however have problems naming many of the wealthy blacks who are truly trying to help the poorest of their race.

I know there are some but they just do not get the notoriety as the radical Democrat extremists.

Why? Because they usually are conservative in nature or belong to the hated Republican party.

It's all about victimization and entitlement to spreading the wealth.

[facedown]

Other white farmers fear that it could mark the start of a far more aggressive land redistribution programme.

Ya think?

[dfwgator]

A native African would never dream of holding an open competition for a key government post if he had a nephew or uncle who was out of work - regardless of their lack of education, experience or qualifications.

Sounds a lot like Louisiana.

[Smokin' Joe]

I'd agree if the land were currently held by people who had taken it, but I thought they bought it.

It would be like a Nanticoke or Powhatan Indian surfacing to claim land my ancestors bought from both the Nanticoke and the Powhatan (same land, two different claimants--which meant I found a lot of arrowheads as a kid).

[zimdog]

i've heard it called "ethno-fascism" because it had the appearance of free-market capitalism on the ground level, but most corportations were controlled by the government and the government's resposibilities to the people were determined by people's official racial and ethnic classifications.

[zimdog]

I agree

[Riverman94610]

I hear ya,cyborg.I can't believe how so many people on this board criticize-and often rightfully so-the abuses going on currently in Zimbabwe and SA under black rule but then completely destroy their argument by waxing nostalgically about Apartheid or the old Ian Smith regime in Rhodesia.
To me it would be the same as a Cuban condemning the tyranny of Castro's dictatorship but then blowing their logic by wanting to bring back a scoundrel and theif like Bautista!

[agarrett]

If you can't understand why it was wrong for the apartheid gov ernment to shove people off their land then I'm not going to bother to explain.

  I'm actually glad to see some one post this. If the land was stoled originally, then it seems they should have a claim of action. And they certainly were not better off under an apartheid government.

  That said, there are 2 very important issues that appear to be lacking here. First, what is the standard of proof that the land was originally stolen? You would have to show, first, that it was legitimitely owned, and secondly, that the transfer was involuntary. The article glosses over those points - for all I know, they were properly shown - but I somehow doubt it. If anyone knows more, I'd be interested in hearing it.

  The second point, though, is one that we're seeing increasingly in this country too, a lack or disregard for any statute of limitations. At some point, we should take ownership as a given, and void old claims, simply to keep basic order. We see this a lot in any dealings in antiquities (witness the current brouhaha about the Getty Museum, or the American Indian claims in upstate New York.) Is 60-70 years long enough? It's even more complex, of course, as the previous owners would have been prohibited from advancing a claim under the old South African government.

  Suffice to say, not a simple situation. From the (admittedly) little I know of the situation, I'm inclined to think the current South African government is wrong in this situation, for the reasons given earlier. Any other links, though?

Drew Garrett

[zimdog]

The Oneida claims in the Syracuse area are different than the case in SA and most other cases in America because it's not a civil case or criminal case, but rather an international case rooted in the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua.

[zimdog]

also, interesting post.

[zimdog]

welcome abord riverman. you're with a unbelieveable small group in the debates over apartheid.

[Dustbunny]

The land will be returned but the end will probably be the same as it has been in other areas. Sad, they just don't seem to realize they are destroying themselves.

[pepsionice]

My guess is that alot of SA "white" capital is flowing out of the country as we speak. Everyone can guess the timeline here...by 2015...this will be in full swing and most of the SA agriculture will be subdivided amongst the locals. The downward trend of the economy there will start around the same timeperiod. And by 2020....alot of folks will be asking why the economy has suffered so much, with no answer from the leadership of the country. Most whites will have left by 2020. It will be a very different place...with civil war very likely.