XPost: alt.agriculture.misc, alt.politics.immigration, alt.law-enforcement   
   From: PFWTM@cumcast.net   
      
   The following recent edition of the TLU/TAU (SA)'s International   
   Bulletin expertly outlines the true facts about the historic land issue   
   in South Africa, and thereby effectively destroys the outlandish claims   
   being spewed out by the ANC regime :-   
      
      
      
   IGNORANCE IS NOT ALWAYS BLISS, AND CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!   
      
      
      
      
   CNN TV presenter and political guru Fareed Zakaria recently pontificated   
   on the controversy surrounding the decision by US president Donald Trump   
   to bring 59 white South Africans to his country as refugees. It takes a   
   strong heart to leave South Africa, arguably the world most beautiful   
   country, but they left for reasons that made sense to them. Not only is   
   context crucial in assessing political events: cause and effect are key   
   tenets of world history. Mr. Zakaria’s ten minute litany of South   
   Africa’s “troubled” past contained every cliché in the book. There were   
   falsehoods as well, but this has become par for the course where South   
   Africa is concerned. The popular narrative has been set in cement and   
   the more it is repeated, the harder it is to refute. Facts frankly mean   
   nothing: they are dismissed as biased or fake news. Very few question   
   that which has been set in stone for so long.   
      
      
      
   To many South Africans who live at the bottom of a blighted continent,   
   the CNN clip was embarrassing. Surely someone like Zakaria should have   
   carried out some background research as to why South African whites are   
   relentlessly criticised while their genetic kin in other countries of   
   the new world have literally gotten away with murder!  White South   
   Africans were faced with a conundrum no other white group has had to   
   face in history! Yet the popular narrative on wicked white South   
   Africans continues unabated. It is given currency by ignorant TV   
   presenters masquerading as experts. Cherry-picking items to give   
   plausibility to a story, is egregious. Combined with ignorance, it is   
   just plain dishonest.   
      
      
      
   It is the question of land in South Africa upon which we concentrate, if   
   only to allow some fresh air into the stale cell of the imprisoned   
   narrative that whites “took” blacks’ land.   
      
      
      
   LAND   
      
      
      
   Land in South Africa is viewed by two opposing viewpoints – the first   
   and third worlds, the two mindsets that have clashed from the first time   
   they met on the South African veld.  Land rights are perceived as being   
   valid by black and white for entirely different reasons – either by   
   “occupation” or “use” on the one hand, or through provable heritage   
   and/or Western-style written and recorded title. Land as an issue in the   
   political “liberation” of Africa has been one of the continent’s prime   
   vote getters, with promises made to “return” land to those who either   
   occupied or used it, notwithstanding the fact that the occupiers held no   
   title and, more importantly, had not developed the land either   
   agriculturally or otherwise.  As well, in most cases, the “occupation”   
   was of a migratory or temporary nature.   
      
      
      
   Black people ventured into Southern Africa from the north of the country   
   at around the same time as the Afrikaner Voortrekkers moved into inland   
   South Africa from the Cape.  They met around 1778. These whites’   
   forefathers had arrived in Cape Town in 1652, just a few years after the   
   American Plymouth Rock landing and the formation of the English   
   settlement at Jamestown in the USA. South Africa’s white settlers were   
   no different from their counterparts in the rest of the new world, and   
   their legitimacy cannot now be challenged any more than white settlers   
   in America, Canada or Australia. (It is interesting that the first white   
   settlement in Australia was in 1788 at Botany Bay, 136 years after the   
   first Europeans landed in the Cape.  How far back then is settler   
   “legitimacy” established?)   
      
      
      
   It is important to note that in no area inhabited by blacks was there   
   any system of individual freehold land. Tribal members only possessed   
   usage rights within the territory of their particular group. Some land   
   was occupied by different tribes at different times. The question arises   
   as to how long land would have to be occupied before any legal right (in   
   the Western sense) to the land would be established.   
      
      
      
   As in other parts of the new world, the land question created the same   
   conundrum. None of the ancient migratory inhabitants, even those who   
   “utilised” the land for periods of time, had title to land in the   
   Western sense. Western law had taken priority, and land ownership had to   
   be designated to claimants according to modern systems already existing   
   in the rest of the world. It was a new world movement inculcating a   
   system of regulating and controlling primitive tribes wandering through   
   the land at will. It had to happen. What else could South Africa do? It   
   did what everyone else was doing. It introduced legislation to bring   
   order to chaos.   
      
      
      
   THE 1913 LAND ACT LEGISLATION   
      
      
      
   The Bantu Land Act of 27 of 1913 was designed to regulate and apportion   
   land to the different peoples of South Africa. The Act embodied the   
   principle of territorial segregation of black and white. It was not the   
   Afrikaners who created and legalised this segregation – it was the   
   British colonial government under whose rule South Africa existed at the   
   time. Already it was obvious to the government that they were dealing   
   with two different worlds –the subsistence cultivation of the black   
   tribes and the commercial agriculture of Western heritage which farmed   
   not for one day but for current and future consumption. For everyone in   
   the country to be fed, it was impossible to continue with South Africa’s   
   third world subsistence mentality. The land available remained a   
   constant, while the number of people who wanted to live on a little   
   piece of ground and plant corn, far outnumbered the land available.   
      
      
      
   BLACK POPULATION EXPLOSION   
      
      
      
   The black population explosion turned the original apportionment of land   
   on its head. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911, 11th   
   edition, Vol. 27, p.226, the 1904 SA census showed a SA population   
   figure of 3,495,000 blacks and 1,118,000 whites . In 1921, blacks   
   numbered 4,697,813 and whites 1,519,468. In 1936, blacks were at   
   6,596,689 and whites 2,003,069. In 1960, blacks totalled 10,926,00 and   
   whites 3,088,000. In 1996, the black population figure was 31,128 000   
   and whites 4,434,000. In 2024, according to Stats South Africa, the   
   population was 63 million, of whom there were 51,5 million blacks –   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)