South Africa seizing white owned farms

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peebo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
Imdaman:
Don’t hide behind whatever it is you are trying to say here. Tell us what does your family have to give back to the oppressed American Native. Please put your property where your mouth is and correct the injustices of the past. All of what you have is made on the backs of the oppressed.
Click to expand...
Please discuss the issues and not each other.
Click to expand...
This is the issue… giving back land to people the land was stolen from! You are all for it seems except when it comes to your land.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Yes it does. The white farmers acquired the land through an unjust system. It does not belong to them, according to the 1995 Act.
Click to expand...
What is the evidence for your claim that these White farmers acquired the land unjustly?

What act are you referring to?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Granted. But it is rightfully (according to the 1995 Act) the distributees’.
Click to expand...
Since claims under the 1995 act “sunsetted” after 1998, I don’t see how that could be true. In any event, it wouldn’t take a constitutional amendment to give effect to the 1995 act. What the S.A. government is now proposing to do seems like something entirely different from the 1995 act.
 
From what I understand even with the land it wasn’t really taken from people so much as unoccupied land that was settled. But if we are saying land that is conquered must be given back then this principle retroactively might lead to all sorts of problems. For example wouldn’t that make Hitler right in invading Poland and other countries to reclaim land?
 
I think we’re talking about different things here without acknowledging it. There was a land act of 1913 which, I understand, was discriminatory, favoring white over black ownership in some manner. How it affected the “Cape Colored” I don’t know. They were sort of in between folks.

Then there was a land act of 1995 that only related to land transactions taking place after 1913. Just skimming it a bit, it appears to have redressed grievances arising out of the land act of 1913.

This new thing is, I believe, entirely new, and provides for extrajudicial forfeiture of land if the government decides your ownership is somehow unjust.
 
exnihilo said:
No it isn’t. There are plenty of recent historical examples where redistribution in the name of justice led to starvation and death. Once those conditions take hold you aren’t going to find much justice.
Click to expand...
It worked well in Japan, Taiwan and Korea, but that was after major conflicts with outside control to mitigate corruption of the process. It was a disaster in the Philippines. As others noted, advances in technology and global farming make it very hard for small farmers to thrive.

 
Not saying anything one way or the other, but the article purports to capture the opinions of the majority of SA farmers, but only quotes two black farmers. Seems a bit incomplete.
 
First of all, it has nothing to do with race; it has to with experience. If I took over someone’s farm, I wouldn’t have the first clue how to run it, because I’ve never done it before. And I’m a pretty smart fellow.

You suggest that they’ll bring back the white farmers as consultants and sharecroppers; what makes you think the white farmers will be interested in coming back after they’ve had their farms stolen by the government, if they haven’t already been killed by that same government by then? The media may want to cover it up, but it’s already known that the SA government HAS been allowing their citizens to murder white farmers. One of their pols has been quoted as saying that he wants to grind up their children to use as fertilizer. And you think white farmers aren’t going to be leaving the country in droves? Or will they just be enslaved by the SA government and forced to work on the farms they used to own? Wouldn’t that be just dripping with irony?
 
Israel is a desert country and now uses technology to make themselves water surplus.


Is that going to happen in South Africa?

Based on Zimbabwe’s example … no.
 
Last edited:
Borealis2 said:
First of all, it has nothing to do with race; it has to with experience. If I took over someone’s farm, I wouldn’t have the first clue how to run it, because I’ve never done it before. And I’m a pretty smart fellow.
Click to expand...
It may be true that the native population will not be as efficient at running a farm as the whites who run them now. But they have a right to try. It was their land before it was unjustly acquired under apartheid laws that prevents blacks from buying property.
You suggest that they’ll bring back the white farmers as consultants and sharecroppers; what makes you think the white farmers will be interested in coming back after they’ve had their farms stolen by the government,…
Click to expand...
Restoring land that was unjustly acquired is not stealing.
if they haven’t already been killed by that same government by then? The media may want to cover it up, but it’s already known that the SA government HAS been allowing their citizens to murder white farmers.
Click to expand...
Owing to the long-suppressed anger, some of that did happen long ago. But the number of such murders has gone way down. It is a white supremacist spread rumor that such things are on the rise.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
. It was their land before it was unjustly acquired under apartheid laws that prevents blacks from buying property.
Click to expand...
So you are confirming that the land is being returned to the person it was taken from?

Care to show some documentation to back that?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Owing to the long-suppressed anger, some of that did happen long ago. But the number of such murders has gone way down. It is a white supremacist spread rumor that such things are on the rise.
Click to expand...
So it’s okay that they’re killing fewer farmers, then? Because it isn’t as many as before, that means there’s no problem, right? If the skin colors were reversed, every liberal on CF would be at the front of the line demanding that the entire world get involved in stopping this outrage. But because the victims are white, and even though they themselves had nothing to do with what happened a century ago, there’s nothing wrong with these hate crimes. Good to know.
 
vz71 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
. It was their land before it was unjustly acquired under apartheid laws that prevents blacks from buying property.
Click to expand...
So you are confirming that the land is being returned to the person it was taken from?
Click to expand...
Prior to colonization and apartheid, much of the land was held by the community. Now it is being returned to the community. The same community, although comprising 80% of the population, has been forced onto 13% of the land.
 
Borealis2 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Owing to the long-suppressed anger, some of that did happen long ago. But the number of such murders has gone way down. It is a white supremacist spread rumor that such things are on the rise.
Click to expand...
So it’s okay that they’re killing fewer farmers, then?
Click to expand...
No, it is wrong when anybody is murdered. But it is also wrong to say the government is complicit in these murders, or that it in any way discredits the effort at restoring native control of their land.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Prior to colonization and apartheid, much of the land was held by the community. Now it is being returned to the community. The same community, although comprising 80% of the population, has been forced onto 13% of the land.
Click to expand...
I assume the 80% you use is Black Africans. If so your analysis is wrong. The land may have been owned by certain tribes. But not every Black South African is a member of those tribes. So you are essentially advocating for a similarly racist system. You are advocating for the fact that if you are Black and not White then the land belongs to you regardless of your particular ancestry and membership in tribe who may have owned the land.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top