Waarom het niemand omgee vir die Afrikaner-volksmoord in Suid-Afrika?
(Translation from Afrikaans to English: Why doesn't anyone care about the Afrikaner genocide in South Africa ?)
***
When the Apartheid system in South Africa fell apart in 1994, the world rightfully cheered. Apartheid was a vile, racist system that robbed men of their God-given individual rights. Apartheid was a big government system created by leftists that kept black Africans, Asians, and those of mixed race in a state of perpetual misery and poverty. To say that Apartheid was one of mankind's ugliest inventions, would be an understatement at very least.
Hey, why are you looking at me like that ? Oh, I get it. This sentence is making you uneasy:
Apartheid was a big government system created by leftists that kept black Africans, Asians, and those of mixed race in a state of perpetual misery and poverty.
That's correct, dear reader. Apartheid, much like segregation in the South, was a grotesque creation of leftists. As economist Thomas Hazlett wrote:
***
"The now-defunct apartheid system of South Africa presented a fascinating instance of interest-group competition for political advantage. In light of the extreme human rights abuses stemming from apartheid, it is remarkable that so little attention has been paid to the economic foundations of that torturous social structure. The conventional view is that apartheid was devised by affluent whites to suppress poor blacks. In fact, the system sprang from class warfare and was largely the creation of white workers struggling against both the black majority and white capitalists. Apartheid was born in the political victory of radical white trade unions over both of their rivals. In short, this cruelly oppressive economic system was socialism with a racist face."
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Apartheid.html#abouttheauthor
***
Apartheid's origin comes from two places: Racism and the fears of tradesmen being replaced by black workers. (Kind of like the "American" unions of old, huh?) As professor Hazlett writes:
***
"The South African gold rush made the natural synergy between white-owned capital and abundant black labor overpowering. The gains from cooperation between eager British investors and thousands of African workers were sufficient to bridge gaping differences in language, customs, and geography. At first, however, the white capitalist could deal directly only with the few English and Afrikaner managers and foremen who shared his tongue and work habits. But the premium such workers commanded soon became an extravagance. Black workers were becoming capable of performing industrial leadership roles in far greater numbers and at far less cost. Driven by the profit motive, the substitution of black for white in skilled and semiskilled mining jobs rose high on the agenda of the mining companies.
White workers feared the large supply of African labor as the low-priced competition that it was. Hence, white tradesmen and government officials, including police, regularly harassed African workers to discourage them from traveling to the mines and competing for permanent positions. Beginning in the 1890s, the Chamber of Mines, a group of employers, complained regularly of this systematic discrimination and attempted to secure better treatment for black workers. Their gesture was neither altruistic nor founded on liberal beliefs. Indeed, the mine owners often resorted to racist measures themselves. But here they had a clear economic incentive: labor costs were minimized where rules were color-blind. This self-interest was so powerful that it led the chamber to finance the first lawsuits and political campaigns against segregationist legislation.
Nonetheless, the state instituted an array of legal impediments to the promotion of black workers. The notorious Pass Laws sought to sharply limit the supply of nonwhite workers in 'white' employment centers. Blacks were not allowed to become lawful citizens, to live permanently near their work, or to travel without government passports. This last restriction created a catch-22. If passports were issued only to those already possessing jobs, how was a nonwhite to get into the job area to procure a job so as to obtain a passport? Nonwhites also were prohibited from bringing their families while working in the mines (reinforcing the transient nature of employment).
Each restriction undercut the ability of blacks to fully establish themselves in the capitalist economy, and hence to compete with white workers on equal terms. Confined to temporary status, blacks were robbed of any realistic chance of building up the human capital to challenge their white bosses directly in the labor market.
Yet even on this decidedly unlevel playing field, the profit motive often found ways of matching white capitalists with black workers. Whites formed labor unions in the early 1900s to guard against this persistent tendency, and the South African Labour Party (SALP) was formed in 1908 to explicitly advance the interests of European workers. The SALP and the unions with which it allied, including the powerful Mine Workers’ Union, were all white and avowedly socialist; the British Labour Party formed the model for the SALP. These organizations opposed any degradation of 'European' or 'civilized' standards in the workplace, by which they meant the advancement of blacks willing to undercut white union pay scales."
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Apartheid.html#abouttheauthor
***
From there came the "Colour Bar", from the "Colour Bar" came Apartheid in 1948 with the election of the National Party, which had thrown its hat in with scumbag socialists chanting "Workers of the world unite, and fight for a white South Africa!"
Over the years, Apartheid became less and less popular with most Afrikaners and other whites. (Just as Segregation became less and less popular with whites in the South as the years went by.) The economic boom of the 1960's made the "protections" of Apartheid unnecessary. By the end of the 1980's, most of it was gone. Finally in 1991, President FW de Klerk signed legislation that effectively ended Apartheid. Anti-Apartheid activist Nelson Mandela was released from prison and in the following election, Mandela's African National Congress (ANC) booted the Socialist National Party out of office and Mandela succeeded de Klerk as president of South Africa.
Again, let me be clear on this matter so there's no misunderstanding whatsoever: The end of Apartheid was one of mankind's better moments. But sadly, tyanny in South Africa didn't die with Apartheid. It simply changed its moniker. Instead of the racist socialists in the National Party running the show, the racist Marxist-Leninists of the ANC were running the show. In no time at all, communist-inspired black on white violence had spread throughout South Africa.
From Genocidewatch.org:
***
"The African National Congress has been South Africa’s governing party since the Presidency of Nelson Mandela 17 years ago, following the end of white minority rule and apartheid. In the years under apartheid, hate speech was used by both supporters and opponents of the apartheid system to stir up their followers. When racial tensions in South Africa ran high, the song 'Kill the Farmer, Shoot the Boer' was a revolutionary song of the anti-apartheid movement. However, it is an illustration of the long-term impact that such de-humanizing language can have.
After many years when such songs were no longer sung, in 2010, prominent members of the ANC Youth League, in particular Julius Malema, President of the ANC Youth League, openly sang the 'Shoot the Boer' song at ANC Youth League rallies. Not only did revival of the song strike fear into the hearts of Boer farmers, but it has actually been sung during attacks on white farmers. It is an incitement to murder white Afrikaner farmers.
Over 3000 white farmers have been murdered since 1994. The South African police have not made investigation and prosecution of these farm murders a priority, dismissing them as crimes by common criminals. The government has disbanded the commando units of white farmers that once protected their farms, and has passed laws to confiscate the farmers’ weapons. Disarmament of a targeted group is one of the surest early warning signs of future genocidal killings.
A recent outbreak of violent farm invasions has led to casualties among white South Africans. The farm invasions are direct results of calls by Julius Malema and his Deputy, Ronald Lamola for whites to give up their land without compensation, or face violence by angry black youths 'flooding their farms.'
In response to Julius Malema, the Freedom Front (FF) cited Section 16.2c of the South African Constitution, which restricts freedom of speech rights by excluding as unprotected speech 'advocacy of hatred based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion and incitement to cause harm.' The FF contended that Malema’s singing of the 'Shoot the Boer' song was hate speech and therefore a human rights violation. Acting Judge of the South Gauteng High Court, Leon Halgryn declared that the song is hate speech, and it is unconstitutional to either utter or sing 'dubul’ibhunu' ('shoot the Boer.') He issued an injunction against Malema, ordering him to no longer sing the song. The phrase is now considered hate speech.
Julius Malema was shortly thereafter removed as President of the ANC Youth League, and ejected from the ANC. However, Malema’s followers have defied the judgment and continue to sing the song. Even President Jacob Zuma sang 'Shoot the Boer' at the ANC Centenary Celebration event in January of 2012. He claimed that its use at the ANC Centenary was not intended as hate speech, but rather to commemorate the struggle against apartheid.
Despite President Zuma’s proclaimed intent, his singing of the song may be contributing to an increasingly hostile environment that threatens the safety of white South Africans. The number of murders of Boer farmers has increased each month in 2012.
For ten years, Genocide Watch has been the only international human rights group willing to declare an Alert about the high murder rate of Boer farmers, perhaps because it is not 'politically correct' to defend the rights of people who once supported apartheid. Genocide Watch is opposed to all forms of racism, from whatever the source. The President of Genocide Watch actively supported the anti-apartheid movement in constitutional consultations with the United Democratic Front when he was a Fulbright Professor of Law in Swaziland. He has visited South Africa several times since and will soon visit again."
http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html
***
Now, let's go back to the original question:
Waarom het niemand omgee vir die Afrikaner-volksmoord in Suid-Afrika?
(Translation from Afrikaans to English: Why doesn't anyone care about the Afrikaner genocide in South Africa ?)
Perhaps Genocidewatch is right and it's simply "politically incorrect" to defend those who supported Apartheid. The theory certainly has some merit, especially when you consider the fact that most journalists are leftist frauds, no matter what country they come from. There's one theory, and it has plenty of legs. But that's just half of the story.
The big reason that the dead-enders in the press are ignoring the Afrikaner-volksmoord in Suid-Afrika is the fact that it's a Marxist inspired genocide. From beginning to end, the above tale shows how leftism corrupts and destroys nations. This narrative doesn't agree with the liberal point of view that Marxism brings Utopia and thus it will be ignored.
When this madness strikes the US, will they report on it then ?
No comments:
Post a Comment