PDA

View Full Version : Million Whites Leave South Africa - Study



Haldís
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 04:42 AM
Million whites leave SA - study
24/09/2006 16:37
By: Peet van Aardt

Johannesburg - One million white South Africans - almost a fifth - have left the country in the past ten years.

This figure was released last week in a report from the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR).

Frans Cronjé, who compiled the report, said it was especially crime and affirmative action which had driven a fifth of South Africa's white population out of the country.

He did an analysis of Statistics South Africa's Household Surveys between 1995 and 2005, emigration figures and other reliable estimates on population numbers.

Cronjé said the results left himself and his colleagues dumbfounded.

"When we drew the graphs we saw that almost a whole generation of white South Africans are not here anymore."

Young people, children leaving

The SAIRR's population pyramid of white South Africans show a definite loss of young people and children under the age of ten.

The figures for 2005 put the number of white South Africans in the country at 4.3 million, 841 000 fewer than the 5.2 million of 1995.

Cronjé predicts that the white population would continue to shrink, and, he said, the situation would have a far-reaching impact on the economy.

"The white population is getting older, which means the white taxpayers are only going to contribute to the economy for the next twenty years. There would have to be a huge influx of skilled workers to fill this gap. This, unfortunately, is not the case."

Due to the inequalities of the past, the education of most of the black children is still not on par to fill these gaps.

Last year, for example, only 3 000 black learners passed matric with higher grade mathematics, said Cronjé.

Economically productive

Most of the white emigrants are economically productive people, said Marco Macfarlane, co-author of the report.

However, in the last decade the black economically productive population grew by 81%. Some of these people have slot into the high-income group, where black people make up a third of the top earners.

Whites, however, still account for half of this group, where Indians and coloureds make up 7% and 6% of the high-income group respectively.

The rest of the black entrants to the labour market are busy in the informal sector, which do not necessarily contribute to the tax income.

"Black people are entering the economy at a stiff pace, but of the economically active middle class (the country's biggest tax contributors), blacks only account for 1%."

Macfarlane said crime and affirmative action are the top reasons for the exodus of whites.

More whites going to leave

"And because the crime figures are not going to decline rapidly and affirmative action is to continue, more whites are going to leave.

"The young people reckon they are being punished for what happened in the previous dispensation. They are furious, because they feel they had no part in it," said Macfarlane.

According to the report the emigrants are between 20 and 40 years old.

"This is the group that have children and help grow the population, but now they're getting their children overseas. And they don't come back. That means the white population is going to continue to shrink."

The decline in the white population in the decade to 2005 is estimated at 16.1%.

http://www.fin24.co.za/articles/economy/display_article.aspx?Nav=ns&lvl2=econ&ArticleID=1518-25_2003186

Berliners Remember
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 06:01 AM
Good im glad they are starting to leave that place. I wonder what the ANC and thier supporters think of this... no doubt the South African economy will continue to decline and situations in that country will be even more dire. So this number has increased steadily, but where are the majority of them going?

Drakkar
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 08:18 AM
That place is such a mess since the ANC integrated. Nowadays whites have such little rights its no wonder why they keep leaving. With the current government, there is really no reason to stay.

Liberator Germaniae
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 04:30 PM
It would be interesting to know what kind of Whites are leaving South Africa. There was, for example, a large exodus of immigrant Cyprian Greeks in the early nineties.

During my five-year-long stay in South Africa during the last years of Apartheid I had not met a single non-Afrikaans White who demonstrated any allegiance towards the country. They used to say, "I do not agree with the system", meaning the Afrikaans-dominated Apartheid state. Loyalty towards the country also seemed to have been lacking among most English-speakers, who always pretended to be "multi-racial", "liberal" etc. Actually, the only thing that made English-speakers "liberal" was the fact that they disliked Afrikaaners more than Blacks. I wonder how many of these multi-liberal “Engelse”, as they were referred to in disdain by Afrikaaners, remained in South Africa.

Interestingly, neighbouring Rhodesia’s 400.000-member-strong White community (English-speakers with small Italian and Greek communities) dwindled to about 100.000 in the early eighties after the political transition had taken place in Zimbabwe.

In South West Africa/Namibia the picture is altogether different: More than 100.000 Whites lived there in the mid-seventies until the first multi-racial elections took place in 1978. After the pullout of Afrikaans blue-collar workers the number of Whites has been relatively stable at 60.000 to 70.000 since then, even after Independence as a Black majority state in 1990.

It is an irony that the end of White Africa had been less severe in South Africa and Namibia than in Rhodesia and the former Portuguese overseas provinces of Angola and Mozambique, where no racial policies had been in place.

Æmeric
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 05:06 PM
Interestingly, neighbouring Rhodesia’s 400.000-member-strong White community (English-speakers with small Italian and Greek communities) dwindled to about 100.000 in the early eighties after the political transition had taken place in Zimbabwe.

In South West Africa/Namibia the picture is altogether different: More than 100.000 Whites lived there in the mid-seventies until the first multi-racial elections took place in 1978. After the pullout of Afrikaans blue-collar workers the number of Whites has been relatively stable at 60.000 to 70.000 since then, even after Independence as a Black majority state in 1990.

It is an irony that the end of White Africa had been less severe in South Africa and Namibia than in Rhodesia and the former Portuguese overseas provinces of Angola and Mozambique, where no racial policies had been in place.
The situation with the White population in South Africa is different then with other White communities in Africa. In Rhodesia for example most of the Whites were born somewhere else & had non-Rhodesian passports. When Black rule came many Whites simply did not have a sentimental attachment to the land & it was easy for many to pull up stakes & go somewhere else. For many Whites in Africa somewhere else use to be South Africa. Now with Black rule in that nation there is no choice but to leave the continent. In South Africa many of the Whites have roots in that country going back to the 17th century. A large number of White South Africans, especially Afrikaners, do not have non-South African passports. Also with such a large White population (more than 5 million at independence versus less than 1/2 million for any other settler society in Africa) & the current immigration laws discriminating against Whites it is difficult for all Whites who want to leave South Africa to do so. If immigrations rules were relaxed in America & the British Commonweath nations for White South Africans I think the number of Whites in that country would probably drop to less than a few hundred thousand very quickly.

Pervitinist
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 10:13 PM
I think there are some important lessons to be learned from the tragic failure of white settlement in SA.

(1) "Black is Black, and White is White, and never the twain shall meet": There is no point in trying to "mix" black and white populations and create a homogenous whole. What you get is only a third category of 'coloureds' that develops into a separate social group as soon as they are numerous enough.

(2) Apartheit is not enough: It is not sufficient to divide blacks from whites within a society. They have to be divided into separate societies. Otherwise egalitarianism will sooner or later raise its ugly head, tear down the social divisions - and help bringing a non-white majority to power.

(3) Democracy doesn't work in a mixed-racial state with a non-white majority: Whenever a non-white majority has the opportunity to overrule a white minority in a parliamentary system they will try to 'take revenge' for their supposed past 'discrimination' by whites. So white people will be treated unfairly, no matter if they have sympathies for blacks or not.

(4) Never make concessions to anti-white resistance leaders: Mandela and his clique were dangerous, so why did nobody execute or kill them when there was still time? There is no value in treating such individuals 'humanely', because they will not return that favour.

With non-white immigration levels on the rise in Europe I can only hope that European politicians will soon learn their lesson from the developments in South Africa - before it is too late and the first European nation will be 'ethnically cleansed' of Europeans (France is a likely candidate for that).

Aistulf
Saturday, September 30th, 2006, 10:19 PM
It looks like Jews got what they want (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=68432). Yet, "Israel" is to be tollerated and supported where Palestinians are treated worse than street dogs; where as a matter of fact the occupier and oppressor is the ‘victim’ and the oppressed is the ‘tyrant’ ("terrorist").

fms panzerfaust
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 02:38 AM
A image that speaks words...

kharas
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 04:55 AM
Is relatively good that whites leave that black lands...

After a few years they will go down on wild life again, just as is in the almost whole rest of that doomed continent.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 05:30 AM
Where are the South Africans going? True, I hear more SA accents now in California than ever before but they are not all coming here. Are they going to Australia? I hope the Jewish SAs will go to Israel.

Pro-Alpine
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 06:52 AM
Making settlements there was a bad idea to begin with.

SineNomine
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 08:12 AM
Making settlements there was a bad idea to begin with.
I am from Zuid Afrika, and I couldn't agree more - and now of course we are paying for the greed of our ancestors. The only way a South African state can exist for whites is if they secede. The only black party willing to help such a cause (as it supports it for the Zulus) is the Inkatha Freedom Party (as well as the ARM on part of the whites), which is powerless, sadly, vis-a-vis the wretched pseudo-Communist ANC. It is infinitely annoying to have your very country swept from under your feet... and also interesting to observe how racist the blacks have become.

Horagalles
Sunday, October 1st, 2006, 10:53 PM
Million whites leave SA - study
24/09/2006 16:37
By: Peet van Aardt
...
http://www.fin24.co.za/articles/economy/display_article.aspx?Nav=ns&lvl2=econ&ArticleID=1518-25_2003186That figure seems to be exaggerated. But people I know here, usually will know other people that actually are staying overseas now, esp. UK, CANADA, New Zealand.


Something more promising:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGh4lA1S7yc

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 09:24 AM
The emigration of whites from South Africa started in the early 1970´s, long before the end of the post-apartheid-state in 1994 and the introduction of an affirmative action policy by the black-majority ANC-government.

As I have already pointed out in my previous contribution to this thread, there hardly existed any `sense of [a white South African] community´ among immigrants from Britain and Mediterranean countries, not even a deep love for the geographic area, as may be observed among ethnic Germans living in Namibia (Namibian Germans usually have a dual loyalty towards Namibia and South Africa due to historical reasons). Such white population groups were only there to enjoy the economic benefits that the country had to offer and there were visible signs from early on that such people would not be prepared to take up arms in the case of any eventuality.

For example, young qualified Jewish adults were the first to leave. In the 1980´s the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg was even said to have introduced a numerus clausus for Jewish students applying to study medicine, because they were known to leave the country after the completion of their studies. If I remember correctly, South Africa (and not the USA) was the first to recognise Israel’s (illegal) `independence´, and in an effort to glorify Israel, the National Party-ruled apartheid regime’s broadcasting corporation exposed its subjects to pro-Jewish, anti-Arab and Zionist propaganda and lies about Nazi Germany. There was also a consistent rumour never denied by the Ministry of Finance that foreign exchange control regulations did not apply to Jews. But despite all these efforts to appease Jews who played a prominent role in liberal politics and in the anti-apartheid movement, the Afrikaans-dominated state never succeeded in gaining acceptance among this particular community, for instance. The number of Jews living in South Africa has dropped significantly from about 120.000 in the early 1970´s to below 80.000 at present.

Many English-speakers seemed to have felt at home only as long as South Africa had a dominion status within the British Empire. During two world wars this country used its own resources to engage in the Anglo-American struggle against Germany, and its English-speakers were quite happy to throw a couple of bombs on Germany’s historical cities during World War II. Things changed when South Africa was excluded from the Commonwealth and became an independent Republic in 1961. The exodus of Whites began a decade later with the onset of political violence.

The former white-run state spent a fortune on certain white groups who only enjoyed the benefits that the Afrikaans-dominated Apartheid-state had to offer. Very few gave something back in return. I do not want to sound bitchy, but where are all these pseudo-liberal whites who wanted political change, but started leaving the country already before the black-majority state was established?

What matters today are those whites that stay on for many different reasons, who take care of their heritage and who contribute towards the upliftment of the entire population, including non-whites. It becomes us to face life in adverse circumstances (Cicero?).

Please click here for the melody of the patriotic Afrikaans song "land van ons vaders" ("Land of our Fathers"): http://www.fak.org.za/blerkas/musiek/019.mid

Horagalles
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 09:38 AM
Adding to what Euhesperides just said:
* There was some White emigration from SA long before, but this was insignificant and lower then the White immigration figures
* The NP (under Vorster) exposed some pro-Jewish sentiment. They even were one of the first to ban a Holocaust critical book. I think it was "Did six million really die".
* Jews were the groups most actively emigrating in the pre 1994 chicken run. One can recognize this btw. by the empty synagogues. There used to be Jews in any hamlet pof the Free State. Today there's only a few pensioners left. Vrystaat is virtually judenfrei:D . I think the total number of Jews in SA is far less then half of what it used to be.
* South Africa and "Israel" cooperated concerning nuclear weapons. Most if not all of the uranium for the Israeli nukes came from South Africa.
* Indeed it is interesting that those Whites paying lip-service to "diversity", "change" and "multi-culturalism" were amongst the first to be "packed for Perth". Actually those Whites were not ideological lefties, all they did was trying to be fashionable. Their action do show, they are as "racist" as anybody else. They chose to live in White areas and sent their children to White school - of course they'd remark that this was about "crime", "services" and not about race.
* Amongst the Afrikaners the Broederbonders were the influential group mostly in the (para-) state sector. The English were more influential in the commercial sector.
* While SA was engaged in the wars against Germany, their was a strong opposition against those wars. I.e. Ossewa Brandwag.

Spjabork
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 09:52 AM
Also with such a large White population (more than 5 million at independence versus less than 1/2 million for any other settler society in Africa) & the current immigration laws discriminating against Whites it is difficult for all Whites who want to leave South Africa to do so. If immigrations rules were relaxed in America & the British Commonweath nations for White South Africans I think the number of Whites in that country would probably drop to less than a few hundred thousand very quickly.Does this only apply to whites from SA or to whites in general? In any case, it is outright "race discrimination" by the self-appointed multiculturalists, who always claim there is no such thing as "race". I do not understand how these laws could pass any legislative body...

Well, it becomes more and more obvious: it isn't about "equality" at all, also, it isn't about political correctness. It is about the annihilation of the whites... Somebody wants to wipe them out.


South Africa and "Israel" cooperated concerning nuclear weapons. Most if not all of the uranium for the Israeli nukes came from South Africa.Yes, but this "cooperation" was a one-way-street. The South Africans got little in return, so the Zionist made only full use of them.

Once I had a talk with a Jew. He complained, that some friends of his were much more fortunate, for their ancestors went to the Cap Colony immediately after the Boer War. They could cheaply purchase vast areas, expropriated from the Boers by the British, as reals estate ground...

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 10:06 AM
Does this only apply to whites from SA or to whites in general? In any case, it is outright "race discrimination" by the self-appointed multiculturalists, who always claim there is no such thing as "race".

Yes, in Namibia, for instance, it is impossible for ethnic Germans without a German passport to return to Germany or to gain permanent residence permit for Germany. Such Germans do not qualify for German citizenship, because their parents or grandparents applied for "naturalisation" in the late 40´s of the previous century in an effort to prevent their property from being expropriated after WW II.

Many Namibian Germans however have three citizenships: Germany (through descent), South Africa (by birth) and Namibia (by birth).

Spjabork
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 10:30 AM
Yes, in Namibia, for instance, it is impossible for ethnic Germans without a German passport to return to Germany or to gain permanent residence permit for Germany. Such Germans do not qualify for German citizenship, because their parents or grandparents applied for "naturalisation" in the late 40´s (...) Many Namibian Germans however have three citizenships: Germany (through descent), South Africa (by birth) and Namibia (by birth).Can you give exact figures?

SineNomine
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:25 AM
The former white-run state spent a fortune on certain white groups who only enjoyed the benefits that the Afrikaans-dominated Apartheid-state had to offer. Very few gave something back in return. I do not want to sound bitchy, but where are all these pseudo-liberal whites who wanted political change, but started leaving the country already before the black-majority state was established?
Good question. The only reason my own family, as well as many other Afrikaaners, left for Europe is due to a fear that ZA would end up like Zimbabwe (which it will, anyway, judging from current trends) - we've often contemplated returning, but the job situation for whites in the nation is horrendous. It wasn't out of any pseudo-liberal pretensions. My family which stayed there was self-employed, and therefore had no problem in staying on.


What matters today are those whites that stay on for many different reasons, who take care of their heritage and who contribute towards the upliftment of the entire population, including non-whites.
Personally, I'd like to the IFP's plans come into fruition - if a white region within a confederal state or a secessionary white nation forms itself, then I think it might be possible to go back. Orania is an example of a white-only community that currently exists. :) I mean, we can trade with the blacks - it's just that we don't have to share a state with them to do so.

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:25 AM
Can you give exact figures?

No, unfortunately not. I should point out that this is a very sensitive issue. The present `German´ government does not care and the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs does have hostile attitudes towards Namibian Germans. The Namibian government does not tolerate dual citizenship.

Some 30.000 Germans lived in South West Africa / Namibia in the mid-70´s. Today’s exact figure should be somewhere between 20.000 and 30.000. From independence in 1990 onwards a considerable number of young ethnic Germans applied at the newly established German Embassy for EU-passports to go and work overseas, but many have returned subsequently, as times are getting harder in Germany.

(German) landowning families usually have a dormant South African citizenship. Germans born in South West Africa between 1961 and 1977 (I think) also have a dormant South African citizenship, and therefore qualify automatically for permanent residence in South Africa.

A German passport is not crucial for a German identity in Namibia. All ethnic groups regard Germans living in Namibia as "Germans" regardless of the passport they might hold.

Independence has had some benefits for local Germans. For instance, it was difficult for Germans to make a career in the civil service under the previous Afrikaans-dominated administration with its anti-German attitudes. After 1990, for the first time since the end of the German colonial period in 1915, a few (non-political) Germans have been promoted to high positions in the government and in parastatal organizations.

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:33 AM
@ Sinenomine:

Please, I do hope that you understand me correctly when I refer to "pseudoliberal whites", who did not have any strong bonds with South Africa. I know that there are exceptions as many whites left after 1994 for personal and other reasons, which is a different matter.

SineNomine
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:36 AM
I understood - I am simply clarifying. :) I have little respect for those whites (and non-whites, like the many Indians and Jews there) who just came to leech from the nation.

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:38 AM
I understood - I am simply clarifying. :) I have little respect for those whites (and non-whites, like the many Indians and Jews there) who just came to leech from the nation.

Absolutely :thumbup !

Horagalles
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 11:57 AM
...A German passport is not crucial for a German identity in Namibia. All ethnic groups regard Germans living in Namibia as "Germans" regardless of the passport they might hold..
They certainly understand the principle that one is German by blood and not by paper.

Independence has had some benefits for local Germans. For instance, it was difficult for Germans to make a career in the civil service under the previous Afrikaans-dominated administration with its anti-German attitudes. After 1990, for the first time since the end of the German colonial period in 1915, a few (non-political) Germans have been promoted to high positions in the government and in parastatal organizations.You should also mention that Germans were interned and harassed before 1948. I would not say that the "the previous Afrikaans-dominated administration" had actually "anti-German attitudes" - You just had to be connected with the Broederbond (or with the masons in the private sector). But maybe you can give some examples I won't know of. I know the Transvaal better - and here Germans don't join the Civil service, but become technicians and engineers;) .

Spjabork
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 01:22 PM
The present `German´ government does not care and the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs does have hostile attitudes towards Namibian Germans.This is true for all German overseas minorities. As soon as you give up BRD-citizenship, you feel almost like an outlaw on the globe. And as long you "keep" it, they don't care much either.

But of course, a GERMAN government should pay special attention to the Südwester. And that they do not is one of the biggest shames and most obvious proof that they are a gang of traitors.

The Namibian government does not tolerate dual citizenship.What happens when they find out someone is "dual"?

Some 30.000 Germans lived in South West Africa / Namibia in the mid-70´s. Today’s exact figure should be somewhere between 20.000 and 30.000.There are no exact statistics?

A German passport is not crucial for a German identity in Namibia. All ethnic groups regard Germans living in Namibia as "Germans" regardless of the passport they might hold.But I suppose, I couldn't settle down in SWA, could I? Or I have to marry one of the German girls there. ;)

Independence has had some benefits for local Germans. For instance, it was difficult for Germans to make a career in the civil service under the previous Afrikaans-dominated administration with its anti-German attitudes. After 1990, for the first time since the end of the German colonial period in 1915, a few (non-political) Germans have been promoted to high positions in the government and in parastatal organizations.Well, as you live in SWA, you know how it is. As a linguist, I know some things only from textbooks (as every good scientist :D). I read a doctor-thesis of a Südwester from 1984. He described in detail the suppression of the German language by the Afrikaans-administration.

But from 1984 till 1990, German was allowed as an official language, I think in a last effort of the South Africans, to "stabilize" the situation.

And SWAPO immediately after getting power abolished German as official language. Even private institutions must not use it when they offer "public" services, because this would be "discrimination". So I think the situation is mixed up. Because my point of departure always is the language, I feel things are not in favour of the Germans.

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 02:33 PM
What happens when they find out someone is "dual"? [...] There are no exact statistics? [...] But I suppose, I couldn't settle down in SWA, could I? Or I have to marry one of the German girls there. ;) [...]. I read a doctor-thesis of a Südwester from 1984. He described in detail the suppression of the German language by the Afrikaans-administration. But from 1984 till 1990, German was allowed as an official language, I think in a last effort of the South Africans, to "stabilize" the situation. [...] And SWAPO immediately after getting power abolished German as official language. Even private institutions must not use it when they offer "public" services, because this would be "discrimination".

The Namibian government expects its citizens to travel with one passport only. Namibian Germans (numbering 26.000?) therefore should avoid producing the wrong passport when stating that they are Namibian citizens when entering or leaving the country.

Marrying a German girl with Namibian citizenship will qualify you automatically for permanent residence in Namibia, but not a Namibian passport.

It is true that the former Administration of Whites (but not the central government!) recognised German as an `official´ language in the mid-1980´s, but this did not change or improve anything. This did not compel Afrikaaners or the English to learn a bit of German, whereas German pupils had to learn all three languages at school. The possible introduction of German as the second official language was however seriously discussed by SWAPO-delegates in the National Assembly in the first or second year of independence (1990). German is not widely spoken in Namibia; even the other two white population groups speak German in exceptional cases only.

I think that the reason why private German institutions in Namibia are compelled to compile their statutes in English is a legal one only. It is up to Namibian Germans to cultivate their mother tongue and their traditions. Nobody else will do it for them.

I will reply in detail to Horogalles´ questions about the anti-German attitudes of the Afrikaans-dominated system in the former South West Africa in my next contribution to this thread. I will also try to explain the possible causes of the rise of an anti-Afrikaans sentiment among Germans in SWA during the 20th century. This might seem to divert from the topic, but the way this discussion has developed shows how closely interlinked South Africa and Namibia still are!

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 2nd, 2006, 10:36 PM
Where are the South Africans going? True, I hear more SA accents now in California than ever before but they are not all coming here. Are they going to Australia? I hope the Jewish SAs will go to Israel.

White South Africans as well as Ex-Rhodesians usually emigrate to Australia (especially the Perth area), where they were used to be called "the new boat people".

Jewish South Africans habitually join family members throughout the world when they decide to leave South Africa, but they have strong links with Israel, the USA, Britain and other English-speaking countries (SA-Jews considered themselves to be "Jewish South African English" although most of them originated from Eastern Europe in the 19th century = Ashkenazy!). So it is quite possible that the South African accents you have been hearing in California have actually been emanating from a Jewish mouth :D!

Liberator Germaniae
Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006, 08:01 PM
You should also mention that Germans were interned and harassed before 1948. I would not say that the "the previous Afrikaans-dominated administration" had actually "anti-German attitudes" - You just had to be connected with the Broederbond (or with the masons in the private sector). But maybe you can give some examples I won't know of.


I am replying to Horogalles´ questions about anti-German attitudes of the Afrikaans-dominated system in the former South West Africa (SWA). I will also try to explain the possible causes of the rise of an anti-Afrikaans sentiment among Germans in SWA during the 20th century. The way the conversation of this topic has developed into a discussion about Afrikaans-German relations in SWA shows how closely interlinked the history of South Africa and Namibia actually is.

Afrikaans-Germans relations had been extremely good until the outbreak of WW I. After the failure of the (pro-German) Maritz Rebellion (also called “Boer Revolt” or “Five Shilling Rebellion”) led by former Boer War generals (in South Africa) in 1914, troops of the Union of South Africa invaded German-South West Africa. This treachery caused extreme bitterness among Germans as there were many Afrikaaners among the Union troops (:thumbdown). After South Africa received the de iure mandatory power over the former German territory in 1920, the Afrikaans-dominated Union government immediately proceeded to settle mostly illiterate, low-class Angolan Afrikaaners, the descendants of the so-called “Dorslandtrekkers”, in SWA (:thumbdown).

Nevertheless German immigration was tolerated and even encouraged by the mandatory power for one simple reason: only Germans were paying the loans on their acquired farms. In contrast, the debts that Angolan Boers had towards the administration were cancelled twice during the 1920´s (German farmers and not the majority of Afrikaans farmers were the main debtors of the Agricultural Bank of SWA until the 1970´s!) (:thumbdown).

Germans in SWA became a minority white group already during the first decade of mandatory rule. The fact that SWA had been a German Protectorate, the rise of National Socialism in Germany and the above-mentioned events in SWA led to the rise of an (anti-South African) National Socialist movement (“Deutscher Bund”, banned in 1934?) in SWA. It is an irony that this movement and ideology was the strongest and most formidable force that the South African mandatory administration had to cope with in the 1930´s and 1940´s (:-O). It was only in the 1950´s that black opposition became a serious factor.

After South Africa declared war against Germany in 1939, all Germans (in SWA, but also South Africa!) had to fill in questionnaires regarding their political convictions. Usually women declared that they would take up arms in favour of Germany should the “Wehrmacht” approach the borders of SWA, while men stated that they would remain peaceful. In 1940 all adult German males (with a few exceptions) were deported by two trains to `internment camps´ (this is actually a decent word for `concentration camps´) at Andalusia, Baviaanspoort and Koffiefontein in South Africa, where they were guarded by armed black guards. During this time German women took care of the farms; most were “farminterniert”, which means, that they were practically under house arrest: for instance, when travelling to a nearby village or town to purchase groceries, they had to report to the nearest police station first. Such restrictions were only lifted a few years after WW II. For example, when my grandparents married in 1946, they had to apply for permission to hold a wedding reception, because more than five Germans were to attend the event (:thumbdown).

Adult Germans who had been interned in South Africa were released in 1947/1948, but had to spend one more year in South Africa before they were allowed to return to SWA. During this last year they were compelled to live and work as labourers for white farmers. There were however many pro-German Afrikaans farmers, who disagreed with South Africa’s participation in WW II (it was this dissatisfaction that brought the National Party to power in 1948) and who were quite happy to host such German ex-detainees (:thumbup).

During WW II there had been frequent calls in the South African parliament and media to expropriate and expel SWA´s German population, but even Prime Minister Jan Smuts spoke out against this, warning that this could lead to a dangerous decrease of SWA´s white population figures (;)).

Anyway, ethnic Germans in SWA, who were either stateless people or citizens of the enemy-country Germany, had the possibility to apply for what is termed `naturalisation´ after WW II. Many took advantage of this opportunity in order to retain their property. At the same time, the National Party came into power in South Africa in1948, and the great sense of insecurity came to an end for a while (:thumbup).

It was only from then on that a South African identity could develop among Germans in SWA. German, which was abolished in schools in the first year of the war, was re-introduced as a medium of instruction for German pupils at primary school level in the early 1950´s, and by 1976 this practice was extended to junior secondary school level.

However, there was a simmering anti-German sentiment in the Afrikaans population (as many South African war veterans who had fought against Germany had been settled in SWA after WW II) as well as in the Afrikaans-run administration that did not promote ethnic Germans to high positions in the government. Germans made a living in the private sector, as they still to today, but I think it was the cultural and economic superiority of Germans that caused the (largely really very low-class and narrow-minded) Afrikaans community to feel insecure (Afrikaaners from SWA / Namibia have also been frowned upon by Afrikaaners in South Africa!).

In the mid-1970´s the (black/largely Owambo-run) SWAPO-movement however intensified its armed struggle against civilian targets in SWA. Germans were particularly affected (terrorist attacks on farms owned by Germans (but not only Germans!), bomb explosions in German-run café’s in Windhoek and Swakopmund etc.). It has been suggested that the reason for this was that SWAPO, (supported by Yugoslavia’s anti-German dictator Tito) and the Soviet Union under Breznew considered Germans to be the only sedentary parts of the white population. It is quite possible that they had hoped that unsettling Germans in SWA would destabilise the whole white population. Sam Nujoma, the leader of SWAPO and Namibia’s first President, is even on record of stating in the 1970´s that there would be no place for Germans in an independent Namibia (:( ).

All this made it quite easy for Germans to regard the anti-communist South African government and state as their protector. With post-war Germany being in a mess, and Central Germany under communist rule, South Africa became another new fatherland. During this time the number of media reports hostile towards Germans in SWA also increased in Germany.

However, an underlying anti-German sentiment continued to exist in the white-administered country of SWA. The politically progressive attitudes of Germans, who voted for the multi-racial DTA rather than the segregative AKTUR, `confirmed´ the suspicions and hostile attitudes that Afrikaaners in SWA had against Germans. Elections too place and the wife of the (white) National Party’s leader was even overheard saying that she doubted how one could vote for a German candidate (“Hoe kan ´n mens vir ´n Duitser stem!” she said in contempt). During this time, for instance, there was an Afrikaans youth gang in Windhoek that had a passion for beating up German kids. I remember, for example, how I was being spit at by Afrikaans children, when I was on my way home from school (:thumbdown), but I should also point out that were English kids (who shared their secondary school with Afrikaaners) who tried to restrain the said Afrikaans pupils.

In 1989 the South African government agreed to UN-Resolution 435 for the independence of South West Africa / Namibia, and subsequent multi-racial elections brought the SWAPO-movement to power. White-instigated German-bashing came to a sudden end (:thumbup), and from now on Afrikaaners began to feel what it is like to be a minority(:-O)! The black majority government immediately started phasing out German and other non-English languages as medium of instructions in schools, although German and Afrikaans were retained as subjects. As anti-Afrikaans attitudes prevailed among Germans, many former exclusively German schools (schools are now open to all races) eventually phased out Afrikaans totally because there was simply no demand for this language, and there are quite a number of German youths and young adults today in Namibia who do not speak Afrikaans very well, although adults and the elderly do speak Afrikaans fluently and have sentimental bonds with South Africa.

But what implication does this have for the topic of this string, namely the large-scale emigration of whites from post-Apartheid South Africa? If, for instance, Germans in SWA were able to display a patriotic loyalty towards the Republic of South Africa despite their very unusual and many negative experiences of Afrikaans-dominated administrations and society’s in SWA and South Africa, then the many pseudo-liberal anti-Afrikaans English-speakers resident in South Africa must have been very superficial and shallow about their livelihood if they were able to give South Africa a miss when the white era came to an end!

Imperator X
Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006, 10:20 PM
Under white rule the average life expectancy for blacks was 34. Many were forced to work jobs that seperated them from their wives for years. They were also not allowed to visit their wives, when the latter lived as live-in servants for white families. The education facilities for blacks were sub-par and were not funded anywhere as much as the white students. Blacks were forced to move onto arid and infertile land. South Africa had at one point the 2nd highest standard of living (for whites) behind the United States. Not to mention the situation faced by East Indians in the country. If I were a Bantu South African I would be mad too. We can't just pretend as if we were benevolent rulers.

SineNomine
Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006, 10:30 PM
And neither will we capitulate to black rule though - if they are truly so inimical to racism, they shouldn't practise it themselves. We have a right to self-determination, and it is time we took advantage of it. If the blacks truly wanted to repair South Africa, they'd create a land of equal opportunities - not one of affirmative action biased against us. Maybe it is time we parted ways and let them have their own territories, and we keep hold of our own city-states.

Spjabork
Wednesday, October 4th, 2006, 02:13 AM
Making settlements there was a bad idea to begin with.
It is no good us all fleeing elsewhere. The same thing will soon happen to them as well. If we cannot find a solution now, with some hope of support from elsewhere, our last kinsfolk in europe or the US will have even less of a chance later on.This fight is worldwide. It has been said, white South Africans "go" to Australia, especially the Perth region. What they want to do there? What do they expect there? Rose gardens? Isn't there a strong multi-culti movement, too? Isn't there much talk about changing the flag, the anthem etc.?

You can run away, run and run. But at a certain point, you have to stay for good.

It is foolish to think, if we do not "bother" others, they won't "bother" us, if we never went to Africa, they would (have) never come to Europe. Foolish! Life is struggle. Life is eternal war.

But amongst this war - which takes place anyway - the white people have shown and proven they can create and uphold something like culture. If the whites disappear from earth, war will not disappear with them, but "human" culture.

Spjabork
Wednesday, October 4th, 2006, 05:11 AM
Making settlements there was a bad idea to begin with.This has been posted today by an Australian girl;
You're wrong. There are plenty of Chinese here, sure, but more Vietnamese, Malaysians, Indonesians, Philippinos, Singaporeans etc. In my area there are a startling number of Japanese and more Northern Chinese too. Like I said there are Koreans here also (in lower numbers). I would say that there are people here from every East Asian country. They live next door to me, across the road... if I go to the shops I sometimes have to remind myself that I'm in Australia and not China or Singapore....

The Asians here are very discriminatory and often hateful towards Australians of Euro background, and what's more, I believe they will soon come to outnumber us. What will become of us then? And even now, there are certain local shops that I won't go into because the Asian owners look down on whites and treat us like s***. So, making settlements there was a bad idea too? And what about the Asians? Why they do not think it is a "bad idea" to settle there?

Liberator Germaniae
Wednesday, October 4th, 2006, 03:59 PM
Under white rule the average life expectancy for blacks was 34. Many were forced to work jobs that seperated them from their wives for years. They were also not allowed to visit their wives, when the latter lived as live-in servants for white families. The education facilities for blacks were sub-par and were not funded anywhere as much as the white students. Blacks were forced to move onto arid and infertile land. South Africa had at one point the 2nd highest standard of living (for whites) behind the United States. Not to mention the situation faced by East Indians in the country.

The issue here is not how bad the apartheid regime was, which it no doubt was.

In fact the average life expectancy in Namibia, for instance, has even decreased drastically after independence as a black majority state due to the effects of AIDS. The situation in South Africa should be similar.

It is true that at least 3 million non-whites were affected by resettlement ("Group Areas Act"), but so were some white groups like the Kaffrarian Germans. The South African government expropriated the land they had settled on for more than a century in the Eastern Cape province when it established the Ciskei, a black homeland, there.

Indians in South Africa (app. 60% Hindu, 40% Muslim) enjoyed the longest life expectancy among all races already in the closing years of the apartheid era.

SineNomine
Wednesday, October 4th, 2006, 11:25 PM
The issue here is not how bad the apartheid regime was, which it no doubt was.

In fact the average life expectancy in Namibia, for instance, has even decreased drasticallyafter independence as a black majority state due to the effects of AIDS. The situation in South Africa should be similar.

It is true that at least 3 million non-whites were affected by resettlement ("Group Areas Act"), but so were some white groups like the Kaffrarian Germans. The South African government expropriated the land they had settled for more than a century in the Eastern Cape province when it established the Ciskei, a black homeland, there.

Indians in South Africa (app. 60% Hindu, 40% Muslim) enjoyed the longest life expectancy among all races already in the closing years of the apartheid era.
Correct. Let me share the South African government's enlightened view on how to cure AIDs: Potatoes. :)

Yep, they have find the cure for AIDs. Potatoes. :thumbup

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/davidblair/september06/hiv.htm

Putzfleck
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 12:12 AM
Good im glad they are starting to leave that place. I wonder what the ANC and thier supporters think of this... no doubt the South African economy will continue to decline and situations in that country will be even more dire. So this number has increased steadily, but where are the majority of them going?
why should whites leave the RSA, when most blacks are descendants of African immigrants who came AFTER the European settlers. South Africa, what a tragedy :~(

camdunn
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 01:45 PM
Is relatively good that whites leave that black lands...

Black land? Read this (german content):
http://geschichte.cjb.cc/seppdepp/005.htm

Most oft the white SA emmigrants are going to the UK, Australia and NZ. My Cousin from Auckland is married to a SA girl. Met a lot of them down there, pretty good guys.

Horagalles
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 03:02 PM
why should whites leave the RSA, when most blacks are descendants of African immigrants who came AFTER the European settlers. South Africa, what a tragedy :~(I think I need to clarify this a bit. South Africa as a state with his present geography exists since 1910. This is an area of more then 1.000.000 km2. Before those were several territories:
- Cape Colony
- Boer Republics (Transvaal, Oranje Vrystaat)
- Natal Colony
- several Black tribal territories.

Whites officially arrived in South Africa in 1652. There were previous expeditions and it may be of some merit that the pre-historic population was of an ancient European type (see socalled Bushmandrawings).

When Jan van Riebeck started in what is today Cape Town, there where Hottentot and Bushmen present in what is today the Western Cape. They also had contact with them. They were not Bantus, who are of a negroid type. The population was however so scarce that the Dutch V.O.C. brought in slaves and prisoners from other countries and tried to recruit volunteers to settle in the cape.

First contact with Blacks was in about 1770 in the Eastern Cape. So it took the descendents of Dutch, German and French settlers more then 100 years to make contact with Blacks in South Africa!

This brings us to the historic fact that the Eastern Cape and Natal were inhabited by Black people when Whites were settling in South Africa. In the 1830s came the 'Great Trek' - The area targeted was the Highveld which was not or only sparsely inhabited by anyone. Note that they avoided the areas occupied by Blacks and made contracts with Black kings on what the proper borders between their respective territories ought to be. This lead to the founding of the Boer Republics. The Boer Republics included White territories and Black autonomous areas as well. In 1902 Britain occupied then and the Union of South Africa in 1910 gave the country its modern shape.

So that's it Whites can claim territory in South Africa on historic reasons, just as the Blacks do. Just that the ANC things they can claim the whole of the RSA territory, because they are the majority, if one considers all the area.

Liberator Germaniae
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 03:03 PM
Black land? Read this (german content):
http://geschichte.cjb.cc/seppdepp/005.htm



The issue here is also not the question whether whites or blacks got there first, and that those who got there only later should leave because they are a minority with no political power and that they do not have a blood-right to the country after all.

I think that apart from the fact that affirmative action and a high crime rate have led to a large-scale emigration of whites there are other, long-term factors why certain white groups have never become sedentary in the formerly white-ruled South Africa, and some contributions to this discussion seem to show that this was the case.

Aistulf
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 05:39 PM
I hope the Jewish SAs will go to Israel.
What did the Palestinians do to deserve that?! Jews should go to the USA, the USA has a great Jewish community already - greater than anywhere else in the world - and a Jewish culture.

Above all, most Americans seem to be fond of Jews; so Jews would be a lot safer off too (i.e., not ‘threatened’ by Palestinian "terrorists").

Spjabork
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 05:56 PM
there are other, long-term factors why certain white groups have never become sedentary in the formerly white-ruled South Africa
Well sedentary in a strict sense are always and everywhere only farmers/peasants. The very word 'Boer' means farmer (German 'Bauer').

So could this also be true for North America? Or for Australia? I recently saw an "Australian" citizen, i.e. passport-holder of the "Commonwealth of Australia". The man had an Italian surname, looked like a mafioso and all in all id not seem to me very "sedentary". But he was president of a college, so he was of some social importance. I think, if and when there will occur some ethnic conflicts in Australia, this "Australian" will leave "his country" and go back to Italy. And how many like him may there be in, say, the USA?

What is the overall ratio between sedentary and non-sedentary whites in the "Germanic settlements" out of Europe? I think they are everywhere only a small minority! Because this is exactly a feature of "high development": beeing not "sedentary"!!

The modern economic system: the industrial society is asking for mobility, flexibility. In English, people do not say: "We in our country..." but the say: "We in this country...". well, who lives in "this" country with ease also might live in 'that' country with even more ease...

South Africa was rated among the leading industrial nations in the world. At that time, there was no need for "sedentary people". It all worked well.

The problem the white people have today is a world-wide one. The white people have built up an industrial, modern, even post-industrial and post-modern 'society', which looks great and good from outside. Its like a mighty oak, but this oak has no root anymore. So it is not sticking in the ground. It really sticks nowhere! For the farmers have become everywhere but a small minority, dispersed and shattered all over vast areas.

Horagalles
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 08:46 PM
Well sedentary in a strict sense are always and everywhere only farmers/peasants. The very word 'Boer' means farmer (German 'Bauer')....
South Africa was rated among the leading industrial nations in the world. At that time, there was no need for "sedentary people". It all worked well.
...I think he ment sentary in a different sense.
He was talking about people saying this (South Africa) is our homeland. To most of the non-Afrikaner Whites this did not apply. The English mostly saw the United Kingdom as their homeland. This attitude was so strong that they managed to draw South Africa into two wars it did not have to take part in (On the side of the United Kingdom, of course.).

Oswiu
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 10:04 PM
it may be of some merit that the pre-historic population was of an ancient European type (see socalled Bushmandrawings).
Could you show us these? Maybe making a new thread? I am sceptical to say the least. ;)

Pervitinist
Thursday, October 5th, 2006, 10:19 PM
http://www.greatestescapes.com/images/00trip05g_04.jpg
Obviously, a white Bushman! :)

Spjabork
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 02:56 AM
I think he ment sentary in a different sense.
He was talking about people saying this (South Africa) is our homeland.
Yes, an in exactly this meaning I am sure that Italian mafioso-lookalike I mentioned above does not consider Australia his homeland. Large parts of the intellectual elite have no strong feeling toward their "homelands" if this term should refer to the issuer of (one of) their passport(s).

Compare the Roman saying: "UBI BENE IBI PATRIA", "Where it feels good, there is the Fatherland!" :D People were roaming around the Roman Empire, just like they are roaming around the Western Civilized World today. Moreover, many are outspoken "globetrotters". On average, it is said, every US-American family moves once in three years. they don't feel at home in one state of the US. So they must compete now with Hispanics, East Indians, Chinese, Arabs etc. for some place were to stay for a while.

When I entered this forum here, one of the moderators(!) suggested, Germanics should leave the US and try to make a fortune elsewhere. Maybe they should go to Mexico(!).

I know a man who was born in Scotland. Most of his life he served in the British Army all over the world. In Malaysia he found his wife, an ethnically Chinese. Since twenty years (he is over sixty), they "live" in Australia (i.e. they "settled :D down" there). They have two children who study/work in Europe (but not Britain). The old man still is visiting sometimes his mother in Scotland. Doing so, he must go by plane around half the globe.

So what do you think: is this man "sedentary"? And if so, where? There are tens of millions of white people like him. If he is sedentary at all (which is doubtful), then it would be in Scotland.

To most of the non-Afrikaner Whites this did not apply.
And why not? The British are there since 1795, this is only seven years less than in Australia (1788)! And in fact 45 years longer than in New Zealand (1840)! No: I see there no difference. The same calibre of "English speaking liberal minds" who leave SA also will leave other places some day. But they will not go home (for they don't have any), rather they will search for a "better place". Almost as jews always do. In fact, the Germanics have become to a large extent "judaisiert", for they have lost any bond, both physically and mentally, with any soil (Boden).

Blut und Boden! (Blood and soil.)

The English mostly saw the United Kingdom as their homeland. This attitude was so strong that they managed to draw South Africa into two wars it did not have to take part in (On the side of the United Kingdom, of course.).Same is true for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, New Foundland.

Liberator Germaniae
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 09:00 AM
There are a few things that need to be clarified, although they are not of direct importance to the topic of this string.

1.
Whites officially arrived in South Africa in 1652. There were previous expeditions and it may be of some merit that the pre-historic population was of an ancient European type (see so-called Bushmandrawings).


The pre-historic aborigine Non-European Khoisan population was not able to resist White expansion from the Western Cape in the 17th and 18th centuries, and only continued to exist on the margins of white settlement areas. There was some intermixing with Whites that gave rise to the Griquas, Cape Coloureds, and the Rehoboth Basters. The latter left the Cape Colony in the 1870´s and settled in pre-colonial South West Africa on the eve of German colonialism.

2.
This brings us to the historic fact that the Eastern Cape and Natal were inhabited by Black people when Whites were settling in South Africa. In the 1830s came the 'Great Trek' - The area targeted was the Highveld which was not or only sparsely inhabited by anyone. Note that they avoided the areas occupied by Blacks and made contracts with Black kings on what the proper borders between their respective territories ought to be. This lead to the founding of the Boer Republics. The Boer Republics included White territories and Black autonomous areas as well. In 1902 Britain occupied then and the Union of South Africa in 1910 gave the country its modern shape.


It is largely a myth that Afrikaaners had entered a largely unpopulated interior when they embarked on the Great Trek in the 1830´s (and that there was an internally-induced process of black-on-black destruction, also known as `Mfekane´). Controversial revisionist research by Rhodes University history professor Dr. Julian Cobbing (Journal of African History, 1988) indicates that the Mfekane had been the construct of Apartheid politicians and historians attempting to justify the longstanding oppression of black South Africans by white colonisers. Cobbing argues that much of the violence had been brought about by White slave traders and settlers, who had contracted local tribal leaders to capture slaves for sale at the Portuguese settlement at Delagoa Bay.

3.
Well sedentary in a strict sense are always and everywhere only farmers/peasants. The very word 'Boer' means farmer (German 'Bauer'). […]
So could this also be true for North America? Or for Australia?
What is the overall ratio between sedentary and non-sedentary whites in the "Germanic settlements" out of Europe? […]
Its like a mighty oak, but this oak has no root anymore. So it is not sticking in the ground. It really sticks nowhere! For the farmers have become everywhere but a small minority, dispersed and shattered all over vast areas.

I doubt if all Afrikaaners can be regarded as a sedentary people, as the Great Trek and its aftermath had been nomadic phenomena. The `Dorslandtrekkers´ (“Thurstlandtrekkers”) even migrated from Transvaal across the territory of what later became Betchuanaland (modern-day Botswana) and South West Africa, where some Trekkers founded the `Republic of Upingtonia´ in the Grootfontein area. Eventually they settled in the south of Portuguese Angola for a few decades until they were resettled by the Union government in South West Africa in the 1920´s, much to the dismay of disgruntled German settlers.

In the late 1970´s many Afrikaaners left the former South West Africa and returned to South Africa, when it became clear that SWA would not continue to exist as a fifth province of South Africa anymore. But even before this Afrikaans pensioners from SWA would often spent their retirement in South Africa. In comparison with ethnic Germans, Afrikaaners do not seem to have formed a strong sentimental bond with SWA, which they sometimes refer to as “Duitswes”.

4.

When I entered this forum here, one of the moderators(!) suggested, Germanics should leave the US and try to make a fortune elsewhere. Maybe they should go to Mexico(!).

I was told that Mexicans are very pro-German and do not tolerate German-bashing!

5.

Same is true for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, New Foundland.

What makes the former White Africa (South Africa, South West Africa, Rhodesia and the Portuguese colonies of Angola and Mozambique different from white settlement areas on other continents is the fact that the autochthon or indigenous (black) population had never been exterminated! This is also something that Americans, Australians and the like should keep in mind when judging (or should I rather say "damning"?) the history of Southern Africa.

So far we have arrived at the conclusion that an Afrikaans-dominated South Africa had no long-term attractiveness for immigrant white groups from Britain and Mediterranean countries, among them also Jews.

@SineNomine: Do you perhaps know of factors other than a high crime rate and affirmative action that have driven Afrikaaners abroad? How do Afrikaaners personally feel about the end of Afrikaans hegemony?

SineNomine
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 12:11 PM
@SineNomine: Do you perhaps know of factors other than a high crime rate and affirmative action that have driven Afrikaaners abroad? How do Afrikaaners personally feel about the end of Afrikaans hegemony?[/B]
High crime and affirmative action are by far the primary causes of people exiting the country. For the majority of Afrikaaners, they are glad the apartheid is over as they see it as a huge mistake. It was one. However, most are discontent with what they are seeing now (e.g., ZA used to have some of the best uni's and hospitals globally - now it is amongst the worst), and of course there remains a minority which wants to see a restoration of apartheid (the ARM is one such group). I think many there would be open to secession. Surprising also is the number of Afrikaaners who are pro-Monarchy. For these reasons, very little improvement in the nation is being seen, and I think people are losing patience. By the way, don't forget property laws in South Africa - if someone squats on your property (and they are black), you have no power to expel them. This practically undermines one's right to self-determination even.

This is very interesting: http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=9182

Their dislike for the term Afrikaner may seem funny at first, but if you read this article you'll understand why: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boer#Modern_usage.

Here is one of our better parties: Inkatha Freedom Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inkatha_Freedom_Party)

Liberator Germaniae
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 12:39 PM
However, most are discontent with what they are seeing now (e.g., ZA used to have some of the best uni's and hospitals globally - now it is amongst the worst), and of course there remains a minority which wants to see a restoration of apartheid (the ARM is one such group). I think many there would be open to secession. Surprising also is the number of Afrikaaners who are pro-Monarchy.


1. What kind of monarchy do some Afrikaaners envisage?

2. I actually prefer using the term "Afrikaner" or "Afrikaaner", because English-speakers and non-white groups have used the term "Boer“ in a derogatory way.

3. Yes, I also consider the former excellence of state hospitals and universities in South Africa under the previous dispensation as something that makes me feel very proud of South Africa even today. Notwithstanding the fact that tertiary educational institutions in South Africa had to be consolidated once the number of new students decreased drastically since the mid-1990´s, I personally find it unfair how the forced merger of formerly Afrikaans universities with non-white universities (e.g. "Potchefstroomse Universiteit vir Christelike Hoër Onderwys" into a campus of "Northwest University", "University of Port Elizabeth" into the "Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University" and "Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit" into "Johannesburg University"etc.) has hit Afrikaans sentiment.

Horagalles
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 02:37 PM
Could you show us these? Maybe making a new thread? I am sceptical to say the least. ;)
I will briefly respond to this:
http://www.greatestescapes.com/images/00trip05g_04.jpg
Someone posted this one, but of course the men is not drawing, but pointing to something:D . There might be cave drawings from different ages. And newer drawings might be an attempt to emulate older ones as well.
I rather had drawings like the "White Lady of Brandberg in mind". Here is a reconstruction of that drawing.
http://static.flickr.com/36/115258785_01c0fac733.jpg
This is a cave drawing from Spain:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/5/58/Hoehlenmalerei-jaeger.jpg

Liberator Germaniae
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 02:54 PM
There might be cave drawings from different ages. And newer drawings might be an attempt to emulate older ones as well.
I rather had drawings like the "White Lady of Brandberg in mind".

While it is true that the mystery surrounding the rock painting "White Lady" is still open to debate, and that the so-called Bushmen paintings might actually be work done by a pre-San population, they are hardly useful for a eurocentric interpretation of White Africa, I think.

The written evidence (Herodotus) mentions a Phoenician circumavigation of Africa in the 7th century BC, but I find it difficult to imagine that the "White Lady" is holding a lotus flower. The "Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung" however reported in the early years of the 20th century of the Schutztruppe´s discovery of an apparently ancient shipwreck quite a distance away from the coastline to the south of Lüderitzbucht. Recent attempts to find the article again in the flood of information contained in the newspaper have unfortunately not been successful.

Pervitinist
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 02:57 PM
I will briefly respond to this:
http://www.greatestescapes.com/images/00trip05g_04.jpg
Someone posted this one, but of course the men is not drawing, but pointing to something:D .

Of course, this was a joke. I merely expressed my (uneducated) disbelief in the existence of white bushmen. Khoisanid people living today sometimes seem to have a more dirty-yellowish than black complexion. But does that really point to a European origin? An alternative explanation would simply an adaption of Negrids to South African climate (or they are descendants of a racial type that is older than Europids and Negrids). Are there any anthropological studies concerning the white Bushmen hypothesis?


There might be cave drawings from different ages. And newer drawings might be an attempt to emulate older ones as well.
I rather had drawings like the "White Lady of Brandberg in mind". Here is a reconstruction of that drawing. [...]
This is a cave drawing from Spain: [...]


That's interesting and might indicate that the Bushmen differentiated themselves consciously from black Africans; but again, does it really prove that there is something Europ(o)id about them? After all, the ancient Greeks had the famous "black figure" style of painting while nobody would (yet :)) claim that Achilles and Odysseus were Black Africans.

Horagalles
Friday, October 6th, 2006, 03:14 PM
+ @ Euhesperides

...That's interesting and might indicate that the Bushmen differentiated themselves consciously from black Africans; but again, does it really prove that there is something Europ(o)id about them? After all, the ancient Greeks had the famous "black figure" style of painting while nobody would (yet :)) claim that Achilles and Odysseus were Black Africans.I agree that this is merely speculation unless one would find skeletons of this ancient day and age. I once reat a report. that 80% of human genetics could be found amongst the Eastern Cape (Xhosa). The Xhosa are actually a mixture of Khoisan and Negroid elements - I know quite a few specimens whose appearance indicates that well;) .

I'm not sure, if they included Europoid genetics in that "80%" as well.


Maybe we need a thread to discuss the genetics/ancestry/population of ancient Southern Africa.

SineNomine
Saturday, October 7th, 2006, 02:29 AM
1. What kind of monarchy do some Afrikaaners envisage?

Constitutional/parliamentary, I suppose, much like Scandinavia. We are a germanic people in more than one way, especially with our love for symbols of authority. A Christian Monarchy is an ideal symbol of such power. I personally think the Afrikaaners would be very open to the idea of Minarchist-Monarchy, because this gives powers to communities to exclude anyone they would rather not associate with - immigration is largely dependent then on private property/rent, and of course, the final word of the Monarch. I personally hate democracies - Minarchism eliminates the need for popular consent; ergo, it might be possible to even go with an absolute Monarchy (accompanied possibly by a Platonic-style aristocracy).



2. I actually prefer using the term "Afrikaner" or "Afrikaaner", because English-speakers and non-white groups have used the term "Boer“ in a derogatory way.
I prefer Boer really - I hate any word that links us to that continent. But for practical purposes, I agree with you, Afrikaaner has less negative connotations implicit in it.



3. Yes, I also consider the former excellence of state hospitals and universities in South Africa under the previous dispensation as something that makes me feel very proud of South Africa even today. Notwithstanding the fact that tertiary educational institutions in South Africa had to be consolidated once the number of new students decreased drastically since the mid-1990´s, I personally find it unfair how the forced merger of formerly Afrikaans universities with non-white universities (e.g. "Potchefstroomse Universiteit vir Christelike Hoër Onderwys" into a campus of "Northwest University", "University of Port Elizabeth" into the "Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University" and "Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit" into "Johannesburg University"etc.) has hit Afrikaans sentiment.

I cannot express how much it irritated me to not even be able to attend university in my own country - not because I couldn't, but because the standards are so horribly low. Not even the worst of the English universities have as low entry standards as Cape Town U., for instance. Sure, life for blacks has improved in some ways in ZA - but in many ways the country is a pale image of its former self. It is only the continental superpower because all other African countries are so pathetic. I am very much an anglicised Boer, but that doesn't eliminate my love for the country.

Spjabork
Saturday, October 7th, 2006, 06:26 AM
There are a few things that need to be clarified, although they are not of direct importance to the topic of this string.As we have so few Südwester here, it's OK. I think we must consider the whole southern Africa, as opposed to "South Africa", as one single area of white settlement. The best proof is...

There was some intermixing with Whites that gave rise to the Griquas, Cape Coloureds, and the Rehoboth Basters. The latter left the Cape Colony in the 1870´s and settled in pre-colonial South West Africa on the eve of German colonialism.What language did they speak? Afrikaans??

I doubt if all Afrikaaners can be regarded as a sedentary people, as the Great Trek and its aftermath had been nomadic phenomena. The `Dorslandtrekkers´ (“Thurstlandtrekkers”) even migrated from Transvaal across the territory of what later became Betchuanaland (modern-day Botswana) and South West Africa, where some Trekkers founded the `Republic of Upingtonia´ in the Grootfontein area. Eventually they settled in the south of Portuguese Angola for a few decades until they were resettled by the Union government in South West Africa in the 1920´s, much to the dismay of disgruntled German settlers....the history of the Boers out of (later) South Africa. Can you say more about these "Dorslandtrekkers"? How far they moved? You mentioned in a posting above, they reached as far as Angola?? But I think they were never officially recognized by the Portuguese authorities? Didn't some of them move to Mocambique as well?

What about the Afrikaans toponyms (f.e. 'Windhoek') in Deutsch-Südwestafrika? How old are they and do they stem from those "trekkers"? Why the Germans kept them instead of changing them?

And why have so many indigenous poeple in the German territory Afrikaans (not German) given names (f.e. Hendrik Witbooi)?

And why the Dorslandtrekkers could not become "ordinary" settler as other Boers? Weren't they happy being eventually given a piece of land in SWA? And having not to pay back their debts, which every normal farmer is dreaming of? I'm under the impression you suggest some (racial?) inferiority of those Dorslandtrekkers, so they were not of the same calibre as "normal" Boers?

I was told that Mexicans are very pro-German and do not tolerate German-bashing!Well, this may be. But I doubt whether whites in larger numbers could or would be allowed to settle down in "reservations" on Mexican territory. They would be allowed, probably, to live and work in the cities, forming only small family groups, not whole, homogenous, white communities. And only the latter would be helpful to "white preservation" in the long run.

And this guy was refering to Germanics (especially US-Americans), not Germans.

Liberator Germaniae
Saturday, October 7th, 2006, 10:30 PM
I think we must consider the whole southern Africa, as opposed to "South Africa", as one single area of white settlement.

What language did they [Coloureds] speak? Afrikaans??

Can you say more about these "Dorslandtrekkers"? How far they moved? You mentioned in a posting above, they reached as far as Angola?? But I think they were never officially recognized by the Portuguese authorities? Didn't some of them move to Mocambique as well?

What about the Afrikaans toponyms (f.e. 'Windhoek') in Deutsch-Südwestafrika? How old are they and do they stem from those "trekkers"? Why the Germans kept them instead of changing them?

And why have so many indigenous poeple in the German territory Afrikaans (not German) given names (f.e. Hendrik Witbooi)?

And why the Dorslandtrekkers could not become "ordinary" settler as other Boers? Weren't they happy being eventually given a piece of land in SWA? And having not to pay back their debts, which every normal farmer is dreaming of? I'm under the impression you suggest some (racial?) inferiority of those Dorslandtrekkers, so they were not of the same calibre as "normal" Boers?


It is actually not such a bad idea that the discussion surrounding this topic has developed into a holistic debate about the different white population groups of the now defunct White Africa.

Before answering the questions of the previous post to this string, I should point out to the fact that Afrikaaners or Boers are people of white skin colour, but of mixed racial descent, namely mainly Dutch, but also (French) Huguenot (as suggested by the surnames "Viljoen", "Le Roux", "Terreblanche", "Labuschagne", etc.), German (surnames "Pretorius", "Wasserfall", etc.), Portuguese (surnames "Ferreira" and "Perreira") settlers and immigrants to the Dutch Cape Colony, but also indigenous Khoisan (!), Bantu (!) and Southeast Asian slaves (!). Research about the controversial racial descent of Afrikaaners began in the 1980´s.

In my first post to this string I forgot to mention that Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) had a (English-speaking) white population of 60.000 before independence in 1964. Thereafter, this group declined drastically to about 3.000. This also raises questions about the sedentary nature of resident English(-speakers) in other Southern African countries

It should also be mentioned that the former Portuguese colonies of Angola and Mozambique had German communities. In Angola they used to live in the area of Benguela in the south and in Northern Angola, where they used to own coffee plantations. Almost all have fled these countries and lost their property after independence in 1975. Many lived in South Africa and SWA, doing rather simple jobs in comparison with what they used to do for a living (for instance, working in a supermarket!). All Angolan Germans that I have met were of upper-class origin with impeccable manners that never once complained about their traumatic fate.

1. The mother tongue of mixed-race groups in Southern Africa has usually been Afrikaans, although English is also common among the more wealthier and educated class of Cape Coloureds in South Africa. Similar to Jews and to Germans in Namibia, Coloureds have the ability to pick up languages easily.

2. The "Dorslandtrekkers" left Western Transvaal in the 1870´s, due to (minor) religious disputes with the official "Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk" (Calvinist Dutch-Reformed Church). Suffering from malaria and water shortage, they trekked with ox-waggons across the harsh wilderness of Betchuanaland to pre-German colonial SWA and settled provisionally in the area of Grootfontein in SWA ("great" + "spring" = "Große Quelle"), where they wanted to establish the "Republic of Upingtonia", which they ironically named after the (British) governor of the Cape Colony, Sir Thomas Upington (1884-1886) in the hope that Britain would establish its hegemony over SWA (please note that the "Boers" left the Cape Colony in the 1830´s to evade British rule, and now suddenly preferred British rule to German hegemony!). In 1879 they settled in the area of the Etosha Pan (Rietfontein, graves!) and the Kaokoland, but it should be mentioned that they basically lived from poaching, ivory trade etc. (nothing to write home about!).

When Germany seemed to be establishing its sovereignty over SWA, they trekked to Southern Angola, and settled in the vicinity of the city of Mocamedes (today: Namibe) and the central highland of Huambo. It should also be pointed out that the Portuguese in Southern Africa are traditionally pro-Afrikaans, and the cause for this should be sought in an Anglo-British dispute which eventually resulted in the Portuguese territories of Angola and Mozambique of being permanently split (1890). I doubt if many Afrikaaners ever settled in Mozambique before 1994, but some groups of Afrikaaners, who were not prepared to live in South Africa under British rule after the end of the second Anglo-Boer War in 1902, emigrated to Argentina, the USA and German-South West Africa, which illustrates how unsettled this ethnic groups basically was!

When the Dorslandtrekkers were eventually resettled in SWA during the 1920´s by the government of the former Union of South Africa (established 1910), they were regarded as Afrikaaners or "Boers". The (Anglo-Afrikaans) administration of the Union government was really at odds what to do with these illiterate people! In SWA they actually formed a uniform group of people with other Afrikaaners, who increasingly entered the country as from 1915, when 60.000 South African troops conquered German-South West Africa (no. of German troops / Schutztruppe: 5.000!). It started with haphazard immigration of low-class Afrikaaners (and Jews!), who had nothing to loose. As mentioned before, Angolan Boers were settled in the 1920´s in the area of Gobabis and Grootfontein. In the years after WW II former Afrikaans (and some English) South African war veterans were also settled on the huge properties of the former "Liebig´s Extract of Meat Company" west of Windhoek, east of Okahandja and at Otjimbindi (Gobabis area), where they received farming land for which they were expected to pay cheap loans at very, very low interest rates. It is this that caused the minority of German farmers to remain the main debtors at the Agricultural Bank of SWA until the 1970´s and this is also one of the factors that fuelled German discontent.

3. Cape Dutch, a primitive form of Dutch/Afrikaans, had already been spoken in SWA before the advent of German colonialism (Afrikaans replaced Dutch as one of the official languages of the Union of South Africa only in 1925). The colonial period in SWA did not start with the first whites, but rather with the arrival of the (Khoisan) Nama people from the area south of the Orange River. Jonker Afrikaner (*1790 Tulbagh, Cape Colony; 1861 in Okahandja near Windhoek), the chief of the (Koisan-Nama) Oorlam-tribe (please note that his surname should not be confused with the term "Afrikaaner" used in this string and that the (Malaysian? slave!) term "Oorlam" has been translated as "superior people") eventually settled at Ai//gams ("Hot Springs") in 1840, which he renamed "Windhoek" after the Winterhoekberge (Cape Colony), in the vicinity of which he was born. The Germans adopted the term "Windhoek", but spelled it as "Windhuk". The Nama-leader Hendrik Witbooi, who fought German colonial rule in SWA early in the 20th century, was actually born in Pella, in today´s western South Africa. Even today, the Nama people (residing in Southern Namibia) have actually two mother tongues, namely Nama and Afrikaans. Afrikaans is also the mother tongue of the Rehoboth Basters, who immigrated from the Cape Colony in the 1970´s and crossed the Orange River with the German missionary Heidmann), and the first language of the Cape Coloureds that migrated to SWA after WW II. Afrikaans remains a lingua franca in modern-day Namibia despite English being the only official language of the (majority black-ruled) Namibian state. Even Germans will usually converse with other racial groups in Afrikaans rather than in English or German (German is not used among non-German speakers in Namibia due to its difficulty).

4. When SWA became a German protectorate in 1884, the existing names of places were usually adopted, but sometimes also germanized, such as "Swakopmund" for the river "Tsoakaup" (Nama language: "Dirty Water" and German: "Mündung" for the place where the river flows into the Atlantic Ocean). One major reason why existing names were retained should be sought in the very nature of “scientific colonialism” of the German Reich, as new territories were also investigated scientifically from the beginning. This had made it necessary to adopt existing terms.

5. German-South West Africa had actually been a very racially tolerant place (racial intermixing was tolerated, but such unions were never legalized!), and this is also a reason why some Afrikaaners who settled there after 1902 left again, because they preferred to be "slaves of the British Empire" rather than "free man in German-South West Africa"!). Descendants of such racial intermixing were totally assimilated among the Rehoboth Basters, as surnames also suggest, but there are also cases among the Hereros. Post-WW I German immigrants, as most Germans in Namibia actually are (surprise, surprise!), however frown upon intermarriage with other white groups, and the handful of `Germans´ that do mix with other races are ostracised! Ethnic intermixing within the different races has been widespread in post-WW II SWA, but as the German element usually soon gets lost in unions with Afrikaaners and the English, Germans remain the racially pure group among all ethnic groups in Namibia.

Racial intermixing is not really welcome here, and I remember a Coloured woman as saying that "elke volk hoort op sy plek" ("each nation should have a place of its own"). Her mother was actually a supporter of the former (racially segregative) "Konserwatiewe Partei" or "Conservative Party" in South Africa that favoured a Confederation (of nations and races) in South Africa) in the late 1980´s.

Horagalles
Sunday, October 8th, 2006, 04:07 PM
...Before answering the questions of the previous post to this string, I should point out to the fact that Afrikaaners or Boers are people of white skin colour, but of mixed racial descent, namely mainly Dutch, but also (French) Huguenot (as suggested by the surnames "Viljoen", "Le Roux", "Terreblanche", "Labuschagne", etc.), German (surnames "Pretorius", "Wasserfall", etc.), Portuguese (surnames "Ferreira" and "Perreira") settlers and immigrants to the Dutch Cape Colony, but also indigenous Khoisan (!), Bantu (!) and Southeast Asian slaves (!). Research about the controversial racial descent of Afrikaaners began in the 1980´s....That's were the famous "7% non-White genetical content amongst Afrikaners" come from. I have no doubt that some Afrikaners have non-White ancestry/genetics, but I suspect that this figure actually does not originate from research, but rather from politically motivated wishful thinking. This bogus-argument worked as follows:
1.) Assumption: "Afrikaners have 7% non-White blood."
2.) Insinuated Conclusion:
a) You might have non-White blood as well
b) There is no purpose of separation, since we are all mixed, beyond restoration.

One of my favourite replies is:"Would that be an argument for or against eugenics?!"

Liberator Germaniae
Monday, October 9th, 2006, 10:38 AM
That's were the famous "7% non-White genetical content amongst Afrikaners" come from. I have no doubt that some Afrikaners have non-White ancestry/genetics, but I suspect that this figure actually does not originate from research, but rather from politically motivated wishful thinking.

The mixed racial origin of Afrikaners was not mentioned to cast aspersions on this group! Meanwhile an internet search has been helpful to find information about Prof. Heese´s research about Afrikaner origins:

“Genealogy of Afrikaners
Exhaustive research was carried out by Professor JA Heese for his book Die Herkoms van die Afrikaner (The Origins of Afrikaners) published in 1971. Professor Heese studied parish registers and numerous other sources to track down how many European (Dutch and German, mainly) settlers married non-European brides.

Between 1652 and 1800 over 1200 marriages were performed between white and 'black' or white and 'mixed blood' people. By that figure Professor Heese determined that approximately 7.2% of Afrikaner heritage is non-white. (Similar studies have suggested this might be as much as 10% in reality).

Professor Heese suggested a genetic mix for the average Afrikaner to be: 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% African/Asian/Khoi, 2.6% British, 2.6% Other European, and 3.5% undetermined. Hardly the ancestry you'd expect from such ardent segregationalists.”
Source: http://africanhistory.about.com/od/southafrica/p/AfrikanerGene.htm


@SineNomine: Can you inform us about Greek emigration from South Africa back to Greece and Cyprus? I have been told that 80% of Greek passport holders actually reside outside Greece.

@Horagalles: Do you know anything about the Afrikaans-speaking section of the Jewish community in South Africa? I gather that there was a region or district (in the Orange Free State?) where Afrikaans had been the mother tongue of such Jews. How have they adapted to the new social, economic and political situation?

Is there anything that both of you can tell us about the (Christian) Lebanese, who came to South Africa (after WW I?)?

Horagalles
Monday, October 9th, 2006, 11:15 AM
...“Genealogy of Afrikaners
Exhaustive research was carried out by Professor JA Heese for his book Die Herkoms van die Afrikaner (The Origins of Afrikaners) published in 1971. Professor Heese studied parish registers and numerous other sources to track down how many European (Dutch and German, mainly) settlers married non-European brides.That kind of research bases on assumptions and suggestions, but not on genetical research. The assumption is basically the shortage of White women in the olden days of the Cape.


Between 1652 and 1800 over 1200 marriages were performed between white and 'black' or white and 'mixed blood' people. By that figure Professor Heese determined that approximately 7.2% of Afrikaner heritage is non-white. (Similar studies have suggested this might be as much as 10% in reality). The claim with the marriages may even be a fact. The marriage registers however did not indicate the race, but the social status/vocation of the individuals involved (i.e. freemen, slave etc.). But even here one needs to bear in mind that not all slaves were non-White. The "researchers" also leave out that children from such marriages were becoming part of the Coloured population of the Cape. So I'd actually go that far to say that these marriages actually did not directly contribute to Non-White genetics amongst Afrikaners.

Professor Heese suggested a genetic mix for the average Afrikaner to be: 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% African/Asian/Khoi, 2.6% British, 2.6% Other European, and 3.5% undetermined. Hardly the ancestry you'd expect from such ardent segregationalists.”
Source: http://africanhistory.about.com/od/southafrica/p/AfrikanerGene.htm
My suspicion is rather that White looking Coloureds are the actually source for those Non-White genetics. One must bear in mind that children from Coloured parents may actually look White in appearance. I.e. a White looking Coloured girl may then marry a White man. That way more recessive non-showing non-White genes may be carried into the White gene-pool.

There are rare cases were children from White parents show apparent non White features. But from the general appearance of Afrikaners I'd conclude that the presence of non White genes is actually lower then in Southern or Eastern Europe.

Upper Class Afrikaner Girls are generally Blond, blue eyed and Nordid looking with Cromagnid, Dinarid and Meditarenid features present as well. This is what Agrippa would call progressive. Darker more primitive feature are usually more common in the lower classes. In my opinion The class gap amongst Afrikaners is weaker then amongst the British, but stronger then amongst
Germans.

As for mixed ancestry and segregation guess who does dislike Negroes the most in South Africa, It's the Coloureds, the Indians and the Jews. Afrikaners usually follow a more paternalistic approach, while they of course prefer to mingle with their own kind.

...
@Horagalles: Do you know anything about the Afrikaans-speaking section of the Jewish community in South Africa? I gather that there was a region or district (in the Orange Free State?) where Afrikaans had been the mother tongue of such Jews. How have they adapted to the new social, economic and political situation?...These are the so called "Boere Jood". There are some Jews that indeed speak Afrikaans well. Not sure whether this is their first language. They usually peddled trash on the platteland(so they'd to know the lingua franca very well), but I suspect their real mission was to find out about gold and diamond discoveries. Those dealing with Jews will know that their community is actually some kind of an Informant system. They gather information and distribute amongst them for later use. This is what makes them succesful merchant since knowledge of demand and supply at different locations is actually very handy.

Many older Jews speak German quite good as well.

Melenios
Monday, October 9th, 2006, 12:00 PM
White Americans are next.

SineNomine
Monday, October 9th, 2006, 04:08 PM
@SineNomine: Can you inform us about Greek emigration from South Africa back to Greece and Cyprus? I have been told that 80% of Greek passport holders actually reside outside Greece.

I can't really help you too much with this. All I can tell is that Cyprus has a considerable amount of South Africans who emigrated to it - the vast majority are Cypriot expatriates. Same with Greece, only in its case we are referring to Greek expatriates. My mother is a Boer and my father, although of Greek origin, was pretty much like the Boers in every regard. Therefore I have limited contact with actual expats from these countries.

BTW, thanks for the information Horagalles. ^^

Spjabork
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 01:01 PM
White Americans are next.
Breaking news: US popstar Madonna adopts child from Malawi. :D

SineNomine
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 02:12 PM
Professor Heese suggested a genetic mix for the average Afrikaner to be: 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% African/Asian/Khoi, 2.6% British, 2.6% Other European, and 3.5% undetermined. Hardly the ancestry you'd expect from such ardent segregationalists.”
Source: http://africanhistory.about.com/od/southafrica/p/AfrikanerGene.htm


Well, at least I know for a fact that my family there is of pure Dutch extraction on the one side and Greek on the other. No non-Europid blood. Another thing I'll add - why does this ancestry make it inappropriate to segregate? Many Scandinavians have some little Mongolid blood, yet no one would say this makes them less white. 7.2%, even if it is true, is nothing.

Wolfssangel
Monday, October 23rd, 2006, 02:13 PM
My closely had been Anglo-Saxon for Northern Germany and later mixture of most Hallstatt Nordid for Germany and Netherlands. My blood type is Norwegian (Thonder), German (Hallstatt Nordic) and Dutch (Hallstatt Nordic). My language is first Afrikaans and second English. I'm proud of Boer heritage and Boer flags.

SineNomine
Wednesday, October 25th, 2006, 03:40 AM
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=664621#post664621 Read this, and the article I posted up in the Articles sub-forum.

darthantares
Wednesday, October 25th, 2006, 06:15 AM
I have been interested for some time in visiting South Africa. It has actually been close to the top of my list of countries to visit because it seems like it doesn't have much time left before it is completely decayed into the third world. I am interested in cultural tourism in countries that I visit and I would appreciate some advice on where to get information on getting to experience Afrikaner culture. However, the only thing I can seem to find is stuff like those tours to experience the culture of the townships which doesn't interest me tremendously ;) . I actually have Bruce Donaldson's beginners Afrikaans book and audio cds and want to be able to learn a little of the language. I think it would be interesting to know the language so I could attend a service in a Gereformeerde Kerk. Any advice or is it just too dangerous to be a viable tourist destination?

Liberator Germaniae
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 04:13 PM
SA cabinet ministers blast émigrés over crime complaints

By Mariette le Roux

CAPE TOWN – South African government ministers Tuesday turned on citizens bemoaning rampant crime and fleeing a country where some 50 people are murdered every day.

“What we need is partners in the battle against crime, not these eloquent spectators speaking from exaggerated comfort ... elsewhere,” Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota told parliament.

He was responding, during debate on President Thabo Mbeki’s state of the nation address last Friday, to opposition parties who cited various people who claim to have fled South Africa because of crime.

“We must avoid the temptation to evaluate the national progress on the basis of reactions by individuals who may be traumatised by personal tragedy or those who may be seeking justification for their action or inaction,” the minister said.

He said most crime victims were poor and black, and questioned the motivation for singling out “the voice of some wealthy individual who can afford (to) take the whole family and leave this country”.

Lekota was equally critical of a black letter-writer “who is sitting in the exaggerated comfort of European cities pointing a finger and saying how wrong this country is”.

“We are interested in the citizens of this country who want to sit here and ... make South Africa a better place”.

Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula, who last year advised crime “whingers” to leave the country, Tuesday blamed violent crime on moral decay and social inequalities created by apartheid, suggesting “wealth and skills transfers” were part of the solution.

The racially oppressive apartheid system officially ended 13 years ago with South Africa’s first multi-racial elections.

Crime was an “emotional matter”, Nqakula told MPs.

“While we must all agree that crime is a serious matter in South Africa, it is incumbent on all of us as leaders to be logical and rational in our response to the scourge.”

Opposition parties have criticised Mbeki for being too soft on crime in his address last week, and for failing to show empathy with citizens who feel beleaguered.

In the past financial year, the country of 47 million people recorded 18 528 murders, 54 926 rapes and 119 726 violent robberies.

Mbeki, who came under fire for insisting recently that most citizens did not feel crime was out of control, made some concessions in his address last week.

“We ... cannot claim the happiness that comes with freedom if communities live in fear, closeted behind walls and barbed wire, ever anxious in their houses, on the streets and on our roads, unable freely to enjoy our public spaces,” he said in parliament.

The president undertook to boost police levels to 180 000 by 2010, from just over 152 000 currently, as well as improve pay and working conditions.

Tony Leon, leader of the main opposition Democratic Alliance, dedicated his speech to the thousands who had fallen victim to violent crime and their families.

“The country is desperate for empathy; for a belief that the campaign against crime is fuelled by passion and steely-eyed determination,” he said.
“Our people want to see crime elevated to the top of the national agenda. The orgy of violent, sickening crime continues relentlessly.”

Independent Democrats leader Patricia de Lille called for a crime summit to explore ways of acting “against the criminal minority that is holding our country hostage”.

African Christian Democratic Party leader Kenneth Meshoe warned about the impact of crime on South Africa hosting the 2010 football World Cup.

“We want to warn the president that if violent crime is not drastically reduced, the privilege of hosting this prestigious event may slip through our fingers.” – Sapa-AFP.

Last updated
14/02/2007 14:44:49



Source (http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?pDesc=32223,1,22)

Dutch Dennis
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 04:23 PM
“We are interested in the citizens of this country who want to sit here and ... make South Africa a better place”.

But only as long as you follow your rules and you can take the credit if it works.


Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula... Tuesday blamed violent crime on... apartheid, suggesting “wealth and skills transfers” were part of the solution.

How long will Apartheid be used as the whipping boy for South African government failures? Over a decade and the country is still standing still or moving backwards.

Tax the 'rich' white folks and pay off the 'poor' black folks. It sounds like a sickening reversal of the present Affirmative Action scheme in the USA. The majority blacks trying to exploit the whites.

Æmeric
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 04:29 PM
“Genealogy of Afrikaners
Exhaustive research was carried out by Professor JA Heese for his book Die Herkoms van die Afrikaner (The Origins of Afrikaners) published in 1971. Professor Heese studied parish registers and numerous other sources to track down how many European (Dutch and German, mainly) settlers married non-European brides.

Between 1652 and 1800 over 1200 marriages were performed between white and 'black' or white and 'mixed blood' people. By that figure Professor Heese determined that approximately 7.2% of Afrikaner heritage is non-white. (Similar studies have suggested this might be as much as 10% in reality).

Professor Heese suggested a genetic mix for the average Afrikaner to be: 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% African/Asian/Khoi, 2.6% British, 2.6% Other European, and 3.5% undetermined. Hardly the ancestry you'd expect from such ardent segregationalists.”
Source: http://africanhistory.about.com/od/southafrica/p/AfrikanerGene.htm


Why does Professor Hesse assume that the offspring of mixed marriages were absorbed into the Afrikaner group? Isn't it more likely they became part of the Coloured group?

I had the impression that most slaves at the Cape came from India & Java. So if there is recent non-White ancestry in Afrikaners it would probably be Asian & not Negro.

SineNomine
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 06:14 PM
How long will Apartheid be used as the whipping boy South African government failures? Over a decade and the country is still standing still or moving backwards.

Here's something of interest:


De la Rey rides again

Rapport editor Tim du Plessis looks at the emergence of a new Afrikaner


In the mid-1990s, when white Afrikaners were struggling to come to terms with the political changes taking place, Canadian sociology professor and scholar of SA politics Heribert Adam used the phrase "phantom pains" to characterise what the Afrikaners were going through. Phantom pain is the pain people with amputated limbs feel. It is real pain, but it comes from a leg or an arm that is no longer there.

Adam's theory of phantom pains explains much of what has gone on in the collective mind of white Afrikaners in the past 12 years.

WHAT IT MEANS
Afrikaners have lost privileges not rights
The new Afrikaner seeks economic independence

We confused loss of privilege and political power with loss of rights. We became depressed and melancholic, believing, wrongly, that we were being stripped of our rights - whereas we had only lost privilege.

But the Afrikaans community is not a static one. It had no choice but to adapt to the changing landscape. They complained, but they adapted. Nelson Mandela made it easier, Thabo Mbeki less so.

Many left the country, something once anathema to everything they were taught for generations about the Afrikaners' God-given claim to SA.

Quite a few emigrated inwardly, to use Nick Binedell's apt description of the process where whites emotionally and psychologically "leave" the country, but physically remain behind in gated suburbs and fortified houses.

The era in which the theory of phantom pains could be used to understand what was going on in the white Afrikaans community is now coming to an end. There is a new generation of Afrikaans whites with no first-hand experience of privilege and political power. They are without amputated limbs, so to speak.

But they are here and they are starting to find their voices. I don't know how many readers of the FM have heard of the Afrikaans rock singer Bok van Blerk and his nostalgic, if rousing song De la Rey. Van Blerk and De la Rey have been all over the Afrikaans newspapers, magazines and media since last spring.

Bok van Blerk is the stage name of Louis Pepler, a 28-year-old Pretoria boykie with a degree in construction site management. The song is about Anglo-Boer War general Koos de la Rey, known in Afrikaner folklore as "Die Leeu van Wes-Transvaal".

A true Afrikaner patriot and democrat, De la Rey opposed Paul Kruger on going to war with Britain, warning that the Boer minority of the Orange Free State and Transvaal would not prevail against the mighty empire.

But once the decision was taken, he fought gallantly, emerging as one of the heroes of the British defeat at Magersfontein. When Kruger was safely on his way to exile in Europe, De la Rey fought on until the bitter end.

The song's rousing refrain - "De la Rey, De la Rey, sal jy die Boere kom lei" - has for some reason struck a hitherto unknown chord among white Afrikaners of all classes. And not only because it's a damn good piece of rock music.

I am told that when the song is played in pubs and drinking holes in the Free State and other towns and villages in SA, young and old Afrikaners jump up, do the right-hand-across-the-chest salute and sing along, full throttle.

This is sometimes followed by the singing of Die Stem, the previous national anthem, though Van Blerk has publically disassociated himself from the old flag, which is occasionally waved at his concerts.

I have an Afrikaans friend in a very prominent corporate job in SA. This friend has lived abroad for a substantial period and regularly hobnobs with the black power elite - a "new South African" if ever there was one, totally devoid of all nostalgia for the past. This friend was simply blown away by Van Blerk and De la Rey and has, since hearing the song for the first time, been playing it night and day.

The De la Rey CD has sold more than 100 000 copies - huge by SA standards. Van Blerk's concerts are sold out, week after week. In Margate, over December, young holiday makers pulled their cars in a circle, opened doors and windows, slid the De la Rey CD into the CD players and on cue hit the play button, blasting the KwaZulu Natal seaside town with the song's stirring lyrics and beat.

The De la Rey phenomenon has been analysed to near pulverisation in the Afrikaans media. It's the "rudderless volk" looking for a leader. It's young Afrikaners "rebelling against affirmative action". Some even say it's the early phase of an Afrikaner rebellion Euro la the IRA. And so on.

Max du Preez, English-speaking SA's favourite interpreter of all things Afrikaans, says it's phantom pains, bad old attitudes refusing to die and an inability to adjust.

I'm not so sure. I cannot speak for 2,5m white Afrikaners. But from my observation post at Rapport (1,6m readers), I do get the sense of a gear shift taking place. People are feeling more assertive than before. As if they want to say: we are fed-up with being singled out as the only scapegoat for all the evils of SA's racist past. Was it only white Afrikaners who benefited from apartheid? Is our whole history sullied and compromised? Did we do only bad things? We feel as if we are constantly being delegitimised and we are gatvol.

Like the Soweto generation of 1976, who brushed aside the "quiet diplomacy" approach of their parents, the De la Rey generation of 2006 is telling my generation (50-plus): "If you feel hesitant to reclaim your Afrikaans identity, then make way. We don't."

University lecturers who are in regular contact with smart young Afrikaners say there is a steely determination among these youngsters that has been absent for quite a while. They come to the universities to equip themselves to stand on their own feet. They no longer complain about affirmative action because they believe to do so is futile. The are asking no favours from the new SA.

They know the public sector is a no-go area and they don't care. The corporate sector is best avoided also because of affirmative action and black economic empowerment (BEE) rules.

As one student put it: "I want to qualify as a professional or start a business where I can work for myself, be comfortable, but remain small enough not to be bothered with BEE. Or become well-qualified so that I can work anywhere in the world."

White Afrikaners, even progressive ones, firmly believe that only cities and towns with Afrikaans names are being targeted for name changes.

And they were quite upset to learn that the, mostly white, military conscripts who died in the conflict in Namibia and Angola in the 1970s and 1980s will not be honoured in the proposed wall of remembrance in Freedom Park in Pretoria, while the names of the Cuban victims, who fought with the ANC and Swapo, will be there.

Does all of this mean an Afrikaner rebellion is brewing? I don't think so. Rise and resist to achieve what? End up in C-Max like the Boeremag trialists?

No way, though some people did feel a tinge of sympathy, especially when seeing the gloating presence of police commissioner Jackie Selebi in court following the arrest of the two fugitive trialists three weeks ago.

Afrikaners are merely migrating to a new space. It's a natural, spontaneous process without the erstwhile marshals of the Nat party, the Broederbond and the Afrikaans churches.

It's not the dead-end radicalism of the Boeremag, but it's also not ANC co-option personified by the acquiescent presence of Marthinus van Schalkwyk in the Mbeki cabinet.

They had no choice but to become new South Africans. Now they want to be new Afrikaners.

Bok van Blerk - Capturing the spirit of the new Afrikaner


"Afrikaners are migrating to a new space. It's a natural process without the erswhile marshals of the Nat party, the Broederbond and the churches" - TIM DU PLESSIS

http://free.financialmail.co.za/07/0209/features/efeat.htm

This is good - definitely good. :) I would hope that one day this will lead to a secession.

What the article mentions about the corporate sector is true - the very companies that white capital created are now forced to turn away white applicants, or suffer repercussions. I am pleased by this though - it will breed such hatred for government and all its concomitant features that it may incite people into action.

What disgusted me was how filthy Cuban rebels were honoured, but white South Africans are not in their own country...

Aeternitas
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 09:34 AM
Fleeing whites feared black rule, says Lekota

February 15 2007 at 04:50AM

By Angela Quintal

South Africans who emigrated post-1994 were more motivated by racist fears of black rule than concerns about crime, according to Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota.

Replying to questions from the Cape Times a day after he criticised expatriate crime-whingers and labelled them unpatriotic and disloyal, Lekota said he did not believe his comments would damage the government's drive to attract skilled South Africans to return home.

Nor did he mince his words about race in Australia and the status of black people there.

Lekota also had uncharitable words for Vi Rathbone, whom DA leader Tony Leon had used as an example of someone who had emigrated to Australia, unwillingly, after a close relative was attacked.

Lekota questioned whether the octogenarian had been motivated by concerns about crime, or because "white people were still law" in Australia, unlike South Africa. [...]
More... (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20070215011627931C389012)

Dutch Dennis
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 01:32 PM
Why is the Defence Minister being asked about emigration, crime and things like that?

South Africa isn't a military regime, is it?

Horagalles
Saturday, February 17th, 2007, 07:23 PM
Why is the Defence Minister being asked about emigration, crime and things like that?

South Africa isn't a military regime, is it?I still haven't figured out what kind of regime it really is. All I can say is that they steal lots of money from the public and do not perform what a government ought to do.

But he is somehow right with what he is saying:

South Africans who emigrated post-1994 were more motivated by racist fears of black rule than concerns about crime, according to Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota.

Replying to questions from the Cape Times a day after he criticised expatriate crime-whingers and labelled them unpatriotic and disloyal, Lekota said he did not believe his comments would damage the government's drive to attract skilled South Africans to return home.
On the other hand this is a false dilema, since Black "Rule" = More crime.

Liberator Germaniae
Sunday, February 25th, 2007, 11:35 AM
It’s not all milk and honey in US

Simpiwe Piliso
25 February 2007

Six years ago, Danzel van Zyl left Cape Town to study in the US — and has remained there since.

Within a few days of arrival in Washington DC, he met a number of South Africans who had made the US capital their home.

Now the lawyer, who often thinks of returning home, works for the Africa Program of the International Human Rights Law Group.

“I really miss life and the easygoing nature of our people back home in South Africa,” he said.

Born in Grabouw, a town 65km outside Cape Town, Van Zyl regularly visits his family in South Africa.

But although he often gets homesick, Van Zyl, a sports fanatic, has made the US his home and often finds time to play club rugby in Washington DC. He was selected to play for the USA Eagles Sevens squad and the Mid-Atlantic Rugby Football Union.

He was recently involved in organising a trip to South Africa for the Potomac Athletic Club Rugby Team, one of the top ranked rugby union football clubs in the US.

Asked about crime in DC, he said although he wouldn’t venture out in certain parts of the city , he thought the US capital was relatively safe.

According to the Washington Post, the capital city saw “a rise in bloodshed” in 2005.

Across Washington DC, there were 466 murders in 2005, compared with 420 in 2004.

In July last year, the law enforcement authorities declared a “crime emergency” in the city in response to 13 murders reported in just 10 days.

The 90-day emergency Bill expired in October.

Almost five years ago, Van Zyl and his wife were robbed at gunpoint.

“We were returning from a late-night movie just after midnight and we took a short cut past the basketball courts when a man with a ski mask appeared and ordered us to move against the fence. He had an Uzi machine gun and cocked it,” said Van Zyl.

He said a woman then appeared and took their wallets, watches, cellphones, rings and his Green Card.

“The case was never resolved and we received a letter six months later that the case will be temporarily closed until new evidence came up. And that was that,” he said about the attack.

A year earlier, while a student at the University of Western Cape, he had been robbed twice, once at gunpoint and the second time he was threatened with a knife.

Van Zyl said that he was worried about crime in South Africa, but he had plans to return to the country of his birth soon.



Source (http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/PrintEdition/News/Article.aspx?id=395393)