We are all settlers in South Africa
The crux of the black Communist argument for land "redistribution" (land invasions and murder and rape of whites) is that we are told that we "stole" land from blacks, and we are constantly told to "go back" to where we came from and even when we are indigenous, born and bred in South Africa, blacks insist on calling whites "Setters" and "Colonists". How ironic is this!
Look where the Bantu migrated from AFTER we discovered South Africa, and whites developed South Africa, making whites the first to set foot in SA after the SAN, and making WHITES the indigenous peoples of SA and black people of SA descendants of the "Bantu Setters" and "Bantu Colonists".
How IRONIC that the opposite is taught Leftist funded Hollywood movies and in SA schools, and the black Communists together with their white and Indian leftists can't see this, even when you prove it to them in every single way possible???
COMMUNIST INDOCTRINATION OVER GENERATIONS USING BLACK ANTI WHITE PROPAGANDA! That's how!
The Bantu (black man) was not in South Africa when the whites discovered SA!
South Africa is not our adopted country, we are indigenous.
(Firstly, most South African minorities are not settlers or colonists – Most of us were born in South Africa, and therefore we are African, just as many, and not all, other black Africans were born here.
The first white person to set foot on Southern African soil in 1487 was the Portuguese explorer Batholemeu Dias who reached Angola, and in 1488 Dias named the ‘Cape of Good Hope’. In 1497 Vasco da Gama put foot on South African soil at present-day St. Helena Bay and encountered the first Khoi-Khoi, who were the only indigenous people in South Africa at that time.
In 1503 Antonio de Saldanha, leading a Portuguese squadron, enters Table Bay. They are the first Europeans to climb Table Mountain, which they name Taboa do Cabo
In 1510 the first race murder occurred in 1510. A Portuguese Viceroy was killed by the Khoi-Khoi, probably due to a misunderstanding arising from barter between the Khoi-Khoi and the Portuguese at the mouth of the Salt River in Table Bay. Thereafter, Portuguese traders tend to bypass the Cape itself, relying on Robben Island for fresh meat and water.
On 1580 - 18 June, An English admiral, Francis Drake, rounds the Cape on his voyage round the world in his quest to reach India for the English Crown.
On 1595 - 4 August, four ships under Cornelis de Houtman reach São Bras. This is the first contact of the Dutch with the coast of Southern Africa.
White navigators/ explorers arrived in Southern Africa in this order:
1487 Portuguese
1580 English
1595 Dutch
In 1615 Sir Thomas Roe attempts to land some deported British criminals at the Cape, but those who are not drowned or killed by Khoikhoi are soon removed from the Cape and the scheme is abandoned.
In 1652, the Dutch East India Company establishes a refreshment station at Table Bay.
In 1300 - c. 1500, the Khoisan are established as the dominant power in the southern and south-western Cape regions. But they were not an enemy to our ancestors. The Zulu’s were our oldest enemies.
When our ancestors arrived in South Africa from Europe we became African, with our own South African flag, government and culture. White South Africans are often wrongly accused by black South Africans of settling in Southern Africa AFTER their black ancestors arrived here. Yet there were no Zulu’s in the South where we settled first –the forebears of Bantu-speaking people, in c. AD 200 established themselves in the north, south of the Limpopo River, which is North of South Africa towards Mozambique.
http://
**************************
On Land Ownership in South Africa - myths debunked
https://groups.google.com/
There is a common belief in South Africa that the Natives Land Act of 1913 shoved blacks on reserves (‘7% of the land’) and ‘prohibited them from buying land in white areas’. That ‘whites forcibly removed blacks to these reserves and that these reserves were on the worst land in the country with no mineral riches and that whites kept all the best land and minerals for themselves’. Now if I was a black man, I would probably also want to believe that myth, because it would ensure me eternal victimhood status and compensation for generations to come. Unfortunately, it is a blatant lie and can be attributed to the lack of reading ability or legal comprehension of the journalists and historians of our time. First of all the biggest Platinum reserves in the world runs through the former Black homeland of Bophuthatswana (North West province). The former Nationalist government had no problem allocating this area to the Tswana tribes for self rule - although they already had a massive country called Botswana given to them by the British. It was originally part of South Africa, called Bechuanaland. Blacks further got another two massive countries from the British called Lesotho and Swaziland. There goes their 7%.
LIE NUMBER TWO: ‘Black homelands were on the worst land in South Africa’.
THE TRUTH: When one compares the rainfall map of South Africa and anybody with elementary knowledge of South Africa will tell you that the largest part of South Africa is called the Karoo. It is a semi dessert comparable to Arizona or Nevada in the USA. Blacks never even entered this area let alone settled it. Whites made it blossom and created successful sheep farms producing meat of world quality. Black “settlements” are found on the north and east coast of South Africa. The East Coast has a sub tropical climate and the north a prairie-like climate with summer rainfall and thunder storms. An exception to this is the Western Cape with a Mediterranean climate and winter rainfall. The northern and eastern part of South Africa with its beautiful green grasslands and fertile soil is where the blacks eventually coalesced and this is the land they chose for themselves. Their eventual homelands were found on the land they inhabited out of their own free will. The Afrikaners even have a song praising the greenness of Natal, called “ Groen is die land van Natal” ( Green is the land of Natal). It was perfect grazing area for the cattle herding blacks.
LIE NUMBER THREE: ‘Blacks are indigenous to South Africa and first settled it’.
THE TRUTH: Today Blacks in South Africa often tell Afrikaners and other minorities such as the Coloureds, Indians, Chinese or Jews to’ adapt to their misrule and corruption or “Go Home”…implying that we, who have been born here, who hold legal citizenship through successive birthrights; should emigrate to Europe, Malaysia, India or Israel. That the only ones who have a legal claim to South Africa, all of it, are the blacks. Blacks believe that they are ‘ indigenous to South Africa ‘ – but they are not: it was proven by DNA research. We are ALL settlers in South Africa. All South Africans are settlers, regardless of their skin colour, and their DNA carries the proof. So says Dr Wilmot James, head of the African Genome Project, a distinguished academic, sociologist and, more recently, honorary professor of human genetics at the University of Cape Town.
Where is the archeological proof that blacks ‘settled’ South Africa? Apart from a few scattered archeological remains found of black culture in the far northern Transvaal prior to 1652, it is generally agreed that Blacks and Whites were contemporary settlers of South Africa. I use the term “Settler” loosely, because blacks never ‘settled’ South Africa, their presence was nomadic. Blacks were itinerants who travelled from place to place with no fixed home. Whole capital “cities” of grass huts could be moved if grazing was exhausted. They had no demarcated areas, no fences, no borders, no maps, no title deeds to proof ownership of any land apart from a verbal claim and mutual understanding that their temporary presence in a certain area in a certain period of time constituted “ownership” of the land. They left behind no foundations of buildings, no statues, no roads, no rock paintings, not a single proof of “settlement” of the land prior to the Whites settling South Africa. The only rock paintings were made by the Bushmen and the Hottentots (Khoi-Khoi and San) in the caves they temporarily occupied. Blacks were pastoral-nomads and the Bushmen/Hottentots were hunter-gatherer- nomads.
Whites on the other hand built cities, railroads, dams and a first world country comparable to the best in Europe and the new world…their legacy speaks of a people who intended to live there for a thousand years, if not eternity. To claim that ‘the whole of Africa belongs to Blacks’ is absurd. It is like an Italian claiming the whole of Europe belongs to Italians, including Norway. In fact, the pyramids of Egypt are proof of white settlement going back thousands of years – and also the Phoenicians settling Carthage and the Greeks settling Alexandria. The Arabs settled North Africa soon after the Prophet Mohammed died and the whites settled Southern Africa from 1652 onwards. Today there are three Africa’s as Dr. Eschel Rhoodie calls it in his book “The Third Africa”(1968)… Arabic up north, Black in the centre and Whites at the south… The White settlers of the Cape first came face to face with the Bantu around 1770 on the banks of the Great Fish River, 120 years after Van Riebeeck came to the Cape and 1000 km east of Cape Town.
LIE NUMBER FOUR: Whites created black reserves and homelands.
THE TRUTH: Blacks created the homelands themselves, thanks to Shaka Zulu. The common belief is that the ‘black tribes at the time were all living peacefully and in the spirit of ‘Ubuntu’ with each other in a virtual liberal paradise’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Shaka-Zulu was a genocidal maniac who wiped out some 2-million black people in the Defecane. The Zulu tyrant Shaka, at the time was committing genocide against other tribes. Wiping out an estimated 2 million people in what is now
known as the Defecane (great scattering). The Swazis and the Ndebeles fled back north in the direction of central Africa where they migrated from. The Sotho’s fled into the mountains of what is today, Lesotho. The rest of the smaller tribes huddled together trying to find strength in coalescing. That is the history of black South Africans that blacks prefer to ignore… that blacks drove other blacks of their land, not whites. It is into this Maelstrom of black chaos that the Boers trekked in 1838. As far as they went they found large open sections of country uninhabited by anyone. Black tribes fleeing Shaka’s carnage grouped themselves into areas finding protection in concentrated numbers. This is how Sir Theophilus Shepstone later found the remnants of black refugees huddled together on self-created reserves. He just demarcated it in order to protect them from each other. The creators of the Bantustans were not the Boers or the Whites, it was a black man called Shaka.
__________________________
Mike Smith is notorious for not mincing his words - He does not try to pamper his readers sensibilities (rightly so), with niceties, but he is probably the most researched, the most truthful and the most to the point debunker of lies and myths made up about our South African people and politics. His writing style is simple enough for all to understand - Regarding the land issues, Mike Smith sheds complete light all over it:
Opening Pandora’s Apartheid Box
By Mike Smith
Mike Smith Political Commentary: Where the Truth Hurts
http://
http://
The word kaffir, was used in the former South Africa to refer to a black person. Now an ethnic slur, it was previously a neutral term for black southern Africans.
The word is derived from the Arabic term Kafir, which means 'disbeliever' or literally, 'one who conceals the truth'.
**************************
Words – Harder than Concrete
The following piece was written over a year ago for publication by a South African professional Journal but was declined because it was viewed as too racially contentious. It is relatively upbeat about possible solutions and I have to say that my view has become considerably more pessimistic about South Africa in the subsequent year.
The basic principles remain valid however as they relate to the fundamental psychology of human beings and the role of words in this psychology.
I have previously addressed a number of issues which are potentially impacting the success of the South African experiment. An experiment in peaceful regime change that caught the imagination of many around the world. An experiment that continues to be monitored. In this piece I will look at another facet of what is absolutely vital to the success of the "rainbow nation" -- language -- words -- psychology:
1. An early hard lesson – words and psychology are harder than concrete
When I started out doing what I do today, I was of the opinion that psychology was "for sissies" – I was an engineer, I KNEW how to design things that worked, "the soft issues", psychology, were "fluff and stuff" that I did not need to know about.
As I entered the world of non-tangible projects I walked "slap bang" into a series of projects in which I discovered that, in fact, psychology, and the words that create psychology, were harder than concrete.
A person who has adopted a mental position or stance and is resisting change or refusing to change is much more difficult to identify than a block of concrete in the road and a lot more difficult to move.
Blocks of concrete, buildings and similar physical world components standing in the way of change can be simply blown up and trucked away. A human being who is mentally standing, arms akimbo and saying "you want me to do that? Try me and see" is much harder to identify and much harder to shift.
As a person who has passionately believed in this country all my life I now find myself reading the words that are being spoken by diverse people, listening to conversations and listening to what is NOT said and I am DEEPLY concerned.
So this article is intended as a technical discussion of some principles that I hold are vital to understanding the dynamics of our lovely country and to charting the future of peace and prosperity that we all so earnestly desire.
I have come to understand that in order to succeed one must ensure that failure does not happen.
Thus, where I discuss negative aspects or factors that may cause failure it is within this context – the context of an engineer who is passionate about engineering and therefore who is passionate about success being achieved by NOT failing.
2. Words design and build engineering systems and …
There is a lot of talk these days about nationalizing farms and mines without compensation and other talk that, for many, causes deep discomfort.
What is a farm, a mine, an economy?
An economy is the consequence of a symbiotic interaction between different people with different knowledge and experience, who interact to create value such that there is sufficient value created that the people who created the value have something left for their own enjoyment.
But let us step back a moment.
How does a farm, a mine, a building or a bridge come into existence?
Fundamentally all significant things, technologies and methodologies come into existence through an exchange of ideas between human beings and then an interaction between human beings to make the thing a reality.
A bridge is designed by a person who has the knowledge and experience to identify the need to get to the other side of a river or gorge, communicating that need to someone who knows how to design a bridge.
That person then produces sketches and drawings which are annotated with … well, words, a drawing is valueless without the words and numbers that explain what it is about, what materials are used, what dimensions apply, etc.
The system or structure is painstakingly created by human beings using words to communicate to other human beings what needs to be done – "excavate a rectangular hole, three meters long and two meters wide until you reach bedrock" would be one such instruction. Design and construction requires a continuous stream of words between human beings who understand the meaning of those words – if I use the word "bedrock" and you do not know what "bedrock" is we are stuck right there until we find a common understanding that allows you to determine when the hole has reached bedrock.
Mines, like farms and like bridges, are the consequence of symbiotic interaction between human beings using words to conceptualize, design and direct the action of other human beings towards the desired outcome. Remove the human beings who have the knowledge and experience to operate the mine and we are left with a hole in the ground and infrastructure sold for scrap as in the recent failure of Aurora that was widely reported. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
3. Numbers are very special words
In discussing words it is important to recognize that numbers are actually very special words and symbols – they have very specific meanings.
Engineers constantly use numbers as special words in their communications to indicate dimensions, flow characteristics of fluids, time, etc. Without numbers engineers do not have a basis to communicate.
Understanding of the quantum significance of a numeric value is fundamental to understanding technology in nearly all cases.
As I prepared to write this article, a newspaper headline stated "at least 40,000 potholes fixed every month in Gauteng since beginning of year" – a mind blowing statistic which I find hard to believe and, if it is correct, a massive indictment of the state of disrepair of roads in Gauteng. One has to ask whether the person who made that statement had their facts correct or whether perhaps the person who recorded and reported the statistic perhaps made a mistake. For a technical person who understands roads and road repair that number carries with it all sorts of crisis meaning that is not available to most who read the article without that insight.
4. Words operate by association
As with the case above, words work by association – "Lion" has no meaning until some basic impartation of knowledge takes place. "Lion" has a different association if one has seen a poor quality photograph; or if one has studied in detail a book full of close-up photographs and many pages of text; or if one has actually seen lions in a zoo or in a game reserve; and a much greater association if you have been chased by a lion; attacked by a lion; or lost a leg or a loved one in an attack by a lion.
"Bedrock" in the preceding point carries with it different meaning depending on the depth of one's understanding of geology.
"40,000 potholes a month" has a different significance if you actually spend your life repairing potholes.
And, so it goes.
Calling people "thieves" or "criminals" carries with it a particularly unpleasant association and, by association, opens the door to mental pictures of how one might deal with such people. When this is publicly widely stated and repeatedly reported it triggers negative attitudes in the minds of those who are NOT branded as thieves and criminals and also in the minds of those so branded. This is particularly so IF they consider the label to be inappropriate or, in fact totally unjust and uncalled for. This leads to other negative word associations and potentially strong and hostile negative reactions.
Such words are being bandied about in certain quarters and, having been spoken to those they have been applied to, they are increasingly generating very negative responses. One of those negative responses is that people are leaving, another is that they are mentally "resigning", giving up. There are other responses as well that are even less desirable.
5. Words build morale and tear it down, start wars and end wars, define love and destroy love
Words build morale and tear it down.
A very powerful book on building constructive relationships between human beings is "How to win friends and influence people" by Dale Carnegie -- see Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/
It is an excellent book on how to get the best out of people … through the use of constructive and uplifting words. If you have not read it I heartily recommend it.
It so happens that almost the entire book deals with the words people use towards one another and their attitude in using those words. Having read the book some years ago I took significant measures to adjust my way of dealing with people and my way of speaking to people.
Words start wars, and end them.
Winston Churchill's stirring oratory "we will fight them on the beaches … we will NEVER surrender" is widely credited with the British Isles fending off the German attack in the Second World War and, at some level, turning the war around resulting in Germany's defeat.
Yes, there were MANY other factors but, were it not for the high level of motivation and morale of the British during those days it is unlikely that they would have survived the onslaught.
Words define love and tear down love.
Words…
Words …
Words …
Words are, in a very real sense, the very essence of advanced society and human interaction.
We have a choice every moment of every day to utter words that build up or words that tear down.
And … the harsh reality is that it takes far fewer negative, destructive words to tear down and destroy morale than it takes to build it up.
It takes far fewer words of distrust to destroy trust than it takes to build trust.
And, from where I sit, there are too many negative words being uttered by African people in public life in South Africa today for the good of the nation. Deteriorating morale is far more prevalent than is healthy.
From where I sit "kill the farmer / Boer" is language I will not accept and will not tolerate. I have family who farm. I regularly receive reports of farmers who have been brutally murdered or beaten up. My entire grounding in language and words tells me there is a solid and unavoidable correlation between the words and the deeds.
I cannot comprehend how anyone who claims to want goodwill in this society can argue for the singing of that song and I even more cannot comprehend how they can talk of appealing the recent Court Order (2011) against singing “shoot the Boer”.
With this context you will see how I find the two video clips above so TOTALLY unacceptable.
We need to speak constructive words over this nation.
We need to SING constructive words over this nation.
6. "Sorry" one of the most important words
I have learned over many years that I make mistakes.
And, I have also learned that when I make mistakes the most powerful words are "I recognize that I have … and I want to apologize unreservedly for what I have done" or simply "I am really sorry, please forgive me".
What would it do for the psyche of this nation if those who have insisted on championing "shoot the Boer" were to say "we have realized that these words cause great discomfort to a large number of people, that was not our intention, we are truly sorry for the pain and discomfort we have caused and we apologize unreservedly and commit to never again sing or speak those words"?
Whites NEED to hear this LOUDLY and PUBLICLY from President Jacob Zuma IN PERSON.
7. "No" another very important word
There is a time to say to someone that what they are doing is unacceptable.
We should NOT have to let things get so out of hand that we are so angry that we are able to mobilize ourselves to say "no". All that is required when confronted with unacceptable behaviour is to say "I do NOT accept that behaviour, kindly cease at once". And, surely if the other party is seeking to build relationships, build morale and build a nation they will go out of their way to understand why the other person is upset and to change their behaviour or their words in a constructive manner.
People who do this are ambassadors for peace.
People who go the other way are ambassadors for war as much as they may proclaim alternative agendas. I think particularly of President Jacob Zuma in the Videos above.
It would NOT be necessary to hold "disciplinary hearings" if leaders said "no" consistently and clearly when behaviour was out of line.
It is people's words more than anything else which direct our behaviour and influence our attitudes.
There is a need to say "no, we will not …" and to be clear about it – either it is government policy to seize farms and mines without compensation or it is not. Why are we CONSTANTLY fed mixed messages?
If it is not then all that is required is "no, we will not …" and if it is then it is time to be open and honest with all the people of this country.
8. Silence – a very powerful word
An extension of the previous point – silence.
Some years ago I attended a speaking course on "the nine types of silence in public speaking" which discussed at length, with examples, how silence can be used for emphasis in speaking.
Ever since then I have become intensely aware of silence as an element of communication. In particular, a long silence will get people's attention and, if too long, will make them uneasy.
So it is in the public arena – when a person in the public eye makes statements that are widely reported, especially when at some level that person purports to represent the powers that be, those who are impacted by those statements pay attention and look for those in power to either confirm or deny the uncomfortable statements.
Ultimately, the harsh reality is that when someone in a high profile position allied to government states that farms and mines will be nationalized and government does not robustly countermand those statements and say "NO" the unavoidable conclusion is that government actually is saying "yes" – there is a saying "a deafening silence" and that is what has accompanied certain public utterances for an uncomfortably long period of time now.
When that person calls whites "criminals and thieves" and there is silence one has to conclude that the leadership of the ANC agree and that rumours that Julius Malema was actually the spokesperson of the ANC to the masses were valid and that it was only when he overstepped the mark and criticized his sponsors that he was disciplined.
People are drawing conclusions, those conclusions are not favourable, and they are taking measures in response. Reports indicate that well over one million people -- highly skilled and highly educated and therefore highly economically active people, including their families -- have left South Africa since 1994 and indications are that the exodus continues. A recent report indicates that "800 graduate professionals are leaving South Africa every month".
9. Words, will determine the success or failure of the South African experiment
For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the loss of these people is starting to threaten the technology framework and infrastructure of this rainbow nation, whether in education, in engineering, in … the drain is happening. Racially flavoured words about "too many …" and "not enough …" are sapping morale and sending a message to many that they are not welcome and should get out while the going is good.
The trillion dollar question is whether the economy of this country can thrive despite this loss – words will determine the outcome.
Other nations go out of their way to attract graduate professionals and business people. As one of those people I have to say that the message I am consistently receiving from the ruling elite in South Africa is that I am no longer welcome in the country of my birth – I wonder if that really IS the message they want to send?
If not, it is time for course correction, it is time for clear, concise, consistent communication that says that ALL South Africans are welcome and valued in the country of their birth. Words will make or break this country in the months and years ahead.”
Either President Zuma and the ANC condone the murder of white South Africans or they do not -- all their words and their silences at this point indicate that they DO condone these murders -- they will have to change their language radically and consistently if I am to conclude that they are opposed to these murders.
The crux of the black Communist argument for land "redistribution" (land invasions and murder and rape of whites) is that we are told that we "stole" land from blacks, and we are constantly told to "go back" to where we came from and even when we are indigenous, born and bred in South Africa, blacks insist on calling whites "Setters" and "Colonists". How ironic is this!
Look where the Bantu migrated from AFTER we discovered South Africa, and whites developed South Africa, making whites the first to set foot in SA after the SAN, and making WHITES the indigenous peoples of SA and black people of SA descendants of the "Bantu Setters" and "Bantu Colonists".
How IRONIC that the opposite is taught Leftist funded Hollywood movies and in SA schools, and the black Communists together with their white and Indian leftists can't see this, even when you prove it to them in every single way possible???
COMMUNIST INDOCTRINATION OVER GENERATIONS USING BLACK ANTI WHITE PROPAGANDA! That's how!
The Bantu (black man) was not in South Africa when the whites discovered SA!
South Africa is not our adopted country, we are indigenous.
(Firstly, most South African minorities are not settlers or colonists – Most of us were born in South Africa, and therefore we are African, just as many, and not all, other black Africans were born here.
The first white person to set foot on Southern African soil in 1487 was the Portuguese explorer Batholemeu Dias who reached Angola, and in 1488 Dias named the ‘Cape of Good Hope’. In 1497 Vasco da Gama put foot on South African soil at present-day St. Helena Bay and encountered the first Khoi-Khoi, who were the only indigenous people in South Africa at that time.
In 1503 Antonio de Saldanha, leading a Portuguese squadron, enters Table Bay. They are the first Europeans to climb Table Mountain, which they name Taboa do Cabo
In 1510 the first race murder occurred in 1510. A Portuguese Viceroy was killed by the Khoi-Khoi, probably due to a misunderstanding arising from barter between the Khoi-Khoi and the Portuguese at the mouth of the Salt River in Table Bay. Thereafter, Portuguese traders tend to bypass the Cape itself, relying on Robben Island for fresh meat and water.
On 1580 - 18 June, An English admiral, Francis Drake, rounds the Cape on his voyage round the world in his quest to reach India for the English Crown.
On 1595 - 4 August, four ships under Cornelis de Houtman reach São Bras. This is the first contact of the Dutch with the coast of Southern Africa.
White navigators/ explorers arrived in Southern Africa in this order:
1487 Portuguese
1580 English
1595 Dutch
In 1615 Sir Thomas Roe attempts to land some deported British criminals at the Cape, but those who are not drowned or killed by Khoikhoi are soon removed from the Cape and the scheme is abandoned.
In 1652, the Dutch East India Company establishes a refreshment station at Table Bay.
In 1300 - c. 1500, the Khoisan are established as the dominant power in the southern and south-western Cape regions. But they were not an enemy to our ancestors. The Zulu’s were our oldest enemies.
When our ancestors arrived in South Africa from Europe we became African, with our own South African flag, government and culture. White South Africans are often wrongly accused by black South Africans of settling in Southern Africa AFTER their black ancestors arrived here. Yet there were no Zulu’s in the South where we settled first –the forebears of Bantu-speaking people, in c. AD 200 established themselves in the north, south of the Limpopo River, which is North of South Africa towards Mozambique.
http://
**************************
On Land Ownership in South Africa - myths debunked
https://groups.google.com/
There is a common belief in South Africa that the Natives Land Act of 1913 shoved blacks on reserves (‘7% of the land’) and ‘prohibited them from buying land in white areas’. That ‘whites forcibly removed blacks to these reserves and that these reserves were on the worst land in the country with no mineral riches and that whites kept all the best land and minerals for themselves’. Now if I was a black man, I would probably also want to believe that myth, because it would ensure me eternal victimhood status and compensation for generations to come. Unfortunately, it is a blatant lie and can be attributed to the lack of reading ability or legal comprehension of the journalists and historians of our time. First of all the biggest Platinum reserves in the world runs through the former Black homeland of Bophuthatswana (North West province). The former Nationalist government had no problem allocating this area to the Tswana tribes for self rule - although they already had a massive country called Botswana given to them by the British. It was originally part of South Africa, called Bechuanaland. Blacks further got another two massive countries from the British called Lesotho and Swaziland. There goes their 7%.
LIE NUMBER TWO: ‘Black homelands were on the worst land in South Africa’.
THE TRUTH: When one compares the rainfall map of South Africa and anybody with elementary knowledge of South Africa will tell you that the largest part of South Africa is called the Karoo. It is a semi dessert comparable to Arizona or Nevada in the USA. Blacks never even entered this area let alone settled it. Whites made it blossom and created successful sheep farms producing meat of world quality. Black “settlements” are found on the north and east coast of South Africa. The East Coast has a sub tropical climate and the north a prairie-like climate with summer rainfall and thunder storms. An exception to this is the Western Cape with a Mediterranean climate and winter rainfall. The northern and eastern part of South Africa with its beautiful green grasslands and fertile soil is where the blacks eventually coalesced and this is the land they chose for themselves. Their eventual homelands were found on the land they inhabited out of their own free will. The Afrikaners even have a song praising the greenness of Natal, called “ Groen is die land van Natal” ( Green is the land of Natal). It was perfect grazing area for the cattle herding blacks.
LIE NUMBER THREE: ‘Blacks are indigenous to South Africa and first settled it’.
THE TRUTH: Today Blacks in South Africa often tell Afrikaners and other minorities such as the Coloureds, Indians, Chinese or Jews to’ adapt to their misrule and corruption or “Go Home”…implying that we, who have been born here, who hold legal citizenship through successive birthrights; should emigrate to Europe, Malaysia, India or Israel. That the only ones who have a legal claim to South Africa, all of it, are the blacks. Blacks believe that they are ‘ indigenous to South Africa ‘ – but they are not: it was proven by DNA research. We are ALL settlers in South Africa. All South Africans are settlers, regardless of their skin colour, and their DNA carries the proof. So says Dr Wilmot James, head of the African Genome Project, a distinguished academic, sociologist and, more recently, honorary professor of human genetics at the University of Cape Town.
Where is the archeological proof that blacks ‘settled’ South Africa? Apart from a few scattered archeological remains found of black culture in the far northern Transvaal prior to 1652, it is generally agreed that Blacks and Whites were contemporary settlers of South Africa. I use the term “Settler” loosely, because blacks never ‘settled’ South Africa, their presence was nomadic. Blacks were itinerants who travelled from place to place with no fixed home. Whole capital “cities” of grass huts could be moved if grazing was exhausted. They had no demarcated areas, no fences, no borders, no maps, no title deeds to proof ownership of any land apart from a verbal claim and mutual understanding that their temporary presence in a certain area in a certain period of time constituted “ownership” of the land. They left behind no foundations of buildings, no statues, no roads, no rock paintings, not a single proof of “settlement” of the land prior to the Whites settling South Africa. The only rock paintings were made by the Bushmen and the Hottentots (Khoi-Khoi and San) in the caves they temporarily occupied. Blacks were pastoral-nomads and the Bushmen/Hottentots were hunter-gatherer- nomads.
Whites on the other hand built cities, railroads, dams and a first world country comparable to the best in Europe and the new world…their legacy speaks of a people who intended to live there for a thousand years, if not eternity. To claim that ‘the whole of Africa belongs to Blacks’ is absurd. It is like an Italian claiming the whole of Europe belongs to Italians, including Norway. In fact, the pyramids of Egypt are proof of white settlement going back thousands of years – and also the Phoenicians settling Carthage and the Greeks settling Alexandria. The Arabs settled North Africa soon after the Prophet Mohammed died and the whites settled Southern Africa from 1652 onwards. Today there are three Africa’s as Dr. Eschel Rhoodie calls it in his book “The Third Africa”(1968)… Arabic up north, Black in the centre and Whites at the south… The White settlers of the Cape first came face to face with the Bantu around 1770 on the banks of the Great Fish River, 120 years after Van Riebeeck came to the Cape and 1000 km east of Cape Town.
LIE NUMBER FOUR: Whites created black reserves and homelands.
THE TRUTH: Blacks created the homelands themselves, thanks to Shaka Zulu. The common belief is that the ‘black tribes at the time were all living peacefully and in the spirit of ‘Ubuntu’ with each other in a virtual liberal paradise’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Shaka-Zulu was a genocidal maniac who wiped out some 2-million black people in the Defecane. The Zulu tyrant Shaka, at the time was committing genocide against other tribes. Wiping out an estimated 2 million people in what is now
known as the Defecane (great scattering). The Swazis and the Ndebeles fled back north in the direction of central Africa where they migrated from. The Sotho’s fled into the mountains of what is today, Lesotho. The rest of the smaller tribes huddled together trying to find strength in coalescing. That is the history of black South Africans that blacks prefer to ignore… that blacks drove other blacks of their land, not whites. It is into this Maelstrom of black chaos that the Boers trekked in 1838. As far as they went they found large open sections of country uninhabited by anyone. Black tribes fleeing Shaka’s carnage grouped themselves into areas finding protection in concentrated numbers. This is how Sir Theophilus Shepstone later found the remnants of black refugees huddled together on self-created reserves. He just demarcated it in order to protect them from each other. The creators of the Bantustans were not the Boers or the Whites, it was a black man called Shaka.
__________________________
Mike Smith is notorious for not mincing his words - He does not try to pamper his readers sensibilities (rightly so), with niceties, but he is probably the most researched, the most truthful and the most to the point debunker of lies and myths made up about our South African people and politics. His writing style is simple enough for all to understand - Regarding the land issues, Mike Smith sheds complete light all over it:
Opening Pandora’s Apartheid Box
By Mike Smith
Mike Smith Political Commentary: Where the Truth Hurts
http://
http://
The word kaffir, was used in the former South Africa to refer to a black person. Now an ethnic slur, it was previously a neutral term for black southern Africans.
The word is derived from the Arabic term Kafir, which means 'disbeliever' or literally, 'one who conceals the truth'.
**************************
Words – Harder than Concrete
The following piece was written over a year ago for publication by a South African professional Journal but was declined because it was viewed as too racially contentious. It is relatively upbeat about possible solutions and I have to say that my view has become considerably more pessimistic about South Africa in the subsequent year.
The basic principles remain valid however as they relate to the fundamental psychology of human beings and the role of words in this psychology.
I have previously addressed a number of issues which are potentially impacting the success of the South African experiment. An experiment in peaceful regime change that caught the imagination of many around the world. An experiment that continues to be monitored. In this piece I will look at another facet of what is absolutely vital to the success of the "rainbow nation" -- language -- words -- psychology:
1. An early hard lesson – words and psychology are harder than concrete
When I started out doing what I do today, I was of the opinion that psychology was "for sissies" – I was an engineer, I KNEW how to design things that worked, "the soft issues", psychology, were "fluff and stuff" that I did not need to know about.
As I entered the world of non-tangible projects I walked "slap bang" into a series of projects in which I discovered that, in fact, psychology, and the words that create psychology, were harder than concrete.
A person who has adopted a mental position or stance and is resisting change or refusing to change is much more difficult to identify than a block of concrete in the road and a lot more difficult to move.
Blocks of concrete, buildings and similar physical world components standing in the way of change can be simply blown up and trucked away. A human being who is mentally standing, arms akimbo and saying "you want me to do that? Try me and see" is much harder to identify and much harder to shift.
As a person who has passionately believed in this country all my life I now find myself reading the words that are being spoken by diverse people, listening to conversations and listening to what is NOT said and I am DEEPLY concerned.
So this article is intended as a technical discussion of some principles that I hold are vital to understanding the dynamics of our lovely country and to charting the future of peace and prosperity that we all so earnestly desire.
I have come to understand that in order to succeed one must ensure that failure does not happen.
Thus, where I discuss negative aspects or factors that may cause failure it is within this context – the context of an engineer who is passionate about engineering and therefore who is passionate about success being achieved by NOT failing.
2. Words design and build engineering systems and …
There is a lot of talk these days about nationalizing farms and mines without compensation and other talk that, for many, causes deep discomfort.
What is a farm, a mine, an economy?
An economy is the consequence of a symbiotic interaction between different people with different knowledge and experience, who interact to create value such that there is sufficient value created that the people who created the value have something left for their own enjoyment.
But let us step back a moment.
How does a farm, a mine, a building or a bridge come into existence?
Fundamentally all significant things, technologies and methodologies come into existence through an exchange of ideas between human beings and then an interaction between human beings to make the thing a reality.
A bridge is designed by a person who has the knowledge and experience to identify the need to get to the other side of a river or gorge, communicating that need to someone who knows how to design a bridge.
That person then produces sketches and drawings which are annotated with … well, words, a drawing is valueless without the words and numbers that explain what it is about, what materials are used, what dimensions apply, etc.
The system or structure is painstakingly created by human beings using words to communicate to other human beings what needs to be done – "excavate a rectangular hole, three meters long and two meters wide until you reach bedrock" would be one such instruction. Design and construction requires a continuous stream of words between human beings who understand the meaning of those words – if I use the word "bedrock" and you do not know what "bedrock" is we are stuck right there until we find a common understanding that allows you to determine when the hole has reached bedrock.
Mines, like farms and like bridges, are the consequence of symbiotic interaction between human beings using words to conceptualize, design and direct the action of other human beings towards the desired outcome. Remove the human beings who have the knowledge and experience to operate the mine and we are left with a hole in the ground and infrastructure sold for scrap as in the recent failure of Aurora that was widely reported. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
3. Numbers are very special words
In discussing words it is important to recognize that numbers are actually very special words and symbols – they have very specific meanings.
Engineers constantly use numbers as special words in their communications to indicate dimensions, flow characteristics of fluids, time, etc. Without numbers engineers do not have a basis to communicate.
Understanding of the quantum significance of a numeric value is fundamental to understanding technology in nearly all cases.
As I prepared to write this article, a newspaper headline stated "at least 40,000 potholes fixed every month in Gauteng since beginning of year" – a mind blowing statistic which I find hard to believe and, if it is correct, a massive indictment of the state of disrepair of roads in Gauteng. One has to ask whether the person who made that statement had their facts correct or whether perhaps the person who recorded and reported the statistic perhaps made a mistake. For a technical person who understands roads and road repair that number carries with it all sorts of crisis meaning that is not available to most who read the article without that insight.
4. Words operate by association
As with the case above, words work by association – "Lion" has no meaning until some basic impartation of knowledge takes place. "Lion" has a different association if one has seen a poor quality photograph; or if one has studied in detail a book full of close-up photographs and many pages of text; or if one has actually seen lions in a zoo or in a game reserve; and a much greater association if you have been chased by a lion; attacked by a lion; or lost a leg or a loved one in an attack by a lion.
"Bedrock" in the preceding point carries with it different meaning depending on the depth of one's understanding of geology.
"40,000 potholes a month" has a different significance if you actually spend your life repairing potholes.
And, so it goes.
Calling people "thieves" or "criminals" carries with it a particularly unpleasant association and, by association, opens the door to mental pictures of how one might deal with such people. When this is publicly widely stated and repeatedly reported it triggers negative attitudes in the minds of those who are NOT branded as thieves and criminals and also in the minds of those so branded. This is particularly so IF they consider the label to be inappropriate or, in fact totally unjust and uncalled for. This leads to other negative word associations and potentially strong and hostile negative reactions.
Such words are being bandied about in certain quarters and, having been spoken to those they have been applied to, they are increasingly generating very negative responses. One of those negative responses is that people are leaving, another is that they are mentally "resigning", giving up. There are other responses as well that are even less desirable.
5. Words build morale and tear it down, start wars and end wars, define love and destroy love
Words build morale and tear it down.
A very powerful book on building constructive relationships between human beings is "How to win friends and influence people" by Dale Carnegie -- see Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/
It is an excellent book on how to get the best out of people … through the use of constructive and uplifting words. If you have not read it I heartily recommend it.
It so happens that almost the entire book deals with the words people use towards one another and their attitude in using those words. Having read the book some years ago I took significant measures to adjust my way of dealing with people and my way of speaking to people.
Words start wars, and end them.
Winston Churchill's stirring oratory "we will fight them on the beaches … we will NEVER surrender" is widely credited with the British Isles fending off the German attack in the Second World War and, at some level, turning the war around resulting in Germany's defeat.
Yes, there were MANY other factors but, were it not for the high level of motivation and morale of the British during those days it is unlikely that they would have survived the onslaught.
Words define love and tear down love.
Words…
Words …
Words …
Words are, in a very real sense, the very essence of advanced society and human interaction.
We have a choice every moment of every day to utter words that build up or words that tear down.
And … the harsh reality is that it takes far fewer negative, destructive words to tear down and destroy morale than it takes to build it up.
It takes far fewer words of distrust to destroy trust than it takes to build trust.
And, from where I sit, there are too many negative words being uttered by African people in public life in South Africa today for the good of the nation. Deteriorating morale is far more prevalent than is healthy.
From where I sit "kill the farmer / Boer" is language I will not accept and will not tolerate. I have family who farm. I regularly receive reports of farmers who have been brutally murdered or beaten up. My entire grounding in language and words tells me there is a solid and unavoidable correlation between the words and the deeds.
I cannot comprehend how anyone who claims to want goodwill in this society can argue for the singing of that song and I even more cannot comprehend how they can talk of appealing the recent Court Order (2011) against singing “shoot the Boer”.
With this context you will see how I find the two video clips above so TOTALLY unacceptable.
We need to speak constructive words over this nation.
We need to SING constructive words over this nation.
6. "Sorry" one of the most important words
I have learned over many years that I make mistakes.
And, I have also learned that when I make mistakes the most powerful words are "I recognize that I have … and I want to apologize unreservedly for what I have done" or simply "I am really sorry, please forgive me".
What would it do for the psyche of this nation if those who have insisted on championing "shoot the Boer" were to say "we have realized that these words cause great discomfort to a large number of people, that was not our intention, we are truly sorry for the pain and discomfort we have caused and we apologize unreservedly and commit to never again sing or speak those words"?
Whites NEED to hear this LOUDLY and PUBLICLY from President Jacob Zuma IN PERSON.
7. "No" another very important word
There is a time to say to someone that what they are doing is unacceptable.
We should NOT have to let things get so out of hand that we are so angry that we are able to mobilize ourselves to say "no". All that is required when confronted with unacceptable behaviour is to say "I do NOT accept that behaviour, kindly cease at once". And, surely if the other party is seeking to build relationships, build morale and build a nation they will go out of their way to understand why the other person is upset and to change their behaviour or their words in a constructive manner.
People who do this are ambassadors for peace.
People who go the other way are ambassadors for war as much as they may proclaim alternative agendas. I think particularly of President Jacob Zuma in the Videos above.
It would NOT be necessary to hold "disciplinary hearings" if leaders said "no" consistently and clearly when behaviour was out of line.
It is people's words more than anything else which direct our behaviour and influence our attitudes.
There is a need to say "no, we will not …" and to be clear about it – either it is government policy to seize farms and mines without compensation or it is not. Why are we CONSTANTLY fed mixed messages?
If it is not then all that is required is "no, we will not …" and if it is then it is time to be open and honest with all the people of this country.
8. Silence – a very powerful word
An extension of the previous point – silence.
Some years ago I attended a speaking course on "the nine types of silence in public speaking" which discussed at length, with examples, how silence can be used for emphasis in speaking.
Ever since then I have become intensely aware of silence as an element of communication. In particular, a long silence will get people's attention and, if too long, will make them uneasy.
So it is in the public arena – when a person in the public eye makes statements that are widely reported, especially when at some level that person purports to represent the powers that be, those who are impacted by those statements pay attention and look for those in power to either confirm or deny the uncomfortable statements.
Ultimately, the harsh reality is that when someone in a high profile position allied to government states that farms and mines will be nationalized and government does not robustly countermand those statements and say "NO" the unavoidable conclusion is that government actually is saying "yes" – there is a saying "a deafening silence" and that is what has accompanied certain public utterances for an uncomfortably long period of time now.
When that person calls whites "criminals and thieves" and there is silence one has to conclude that the leadership of the ANC agree and that rumours that Julius Malema was actually the spokesperson of the ANC to the masses were valid and that it was only when he overstepped the mark and criticized his sponsors that he was disciplined.
People are drawing conclusions, those conclusions are not favourable, and they are taking measures in response. Reports indicate that well over one million people -- highly skilled and highly educated and therefore highly economically active people, including their families -- have left South Africa since 1994 and indications are that the exodus continues. A recent report indicates that "800 graduate professionals are leaving South Africa every month".
9. Words, will determine the success or failure of the South African experiment
For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the loss of these people is starting to threaten the technology framework and infrastructure of this rainbow nation, whether in education, in engineering, in … the drain is happening. Racially flavoured words about "too many …" and "not enough …" are sapping morale and sending a message to many that they are not welcome and should get out while the going is good.
The trillion dollar question is whether the economy of this country can thrive despite this loss – words will determine the outcome.
Other nations go out of their way to attract graduate professionals and business people. As one of those people I have to say that the message I am consistently receiving from the ruling elite in South Africa is that I am no longer welcome in the country of my birth – I wonder if that really IS the message they want to send?
If not, it is time for course correction, it is time for clear, concise, consistent communication that says that ALL South Africans are welcome and valued in the country of their birth. Words will make or break this country in the months and years ahead.”
Either President Zuma and the ANC condone the murder of white South Africans or they do not -- all their words and their silences at this point indicate that they DO condone these murders -- they will have to change their language radically and consistently if I am to conclude that they are opposed to these murders.
No comments:
Post a Comment