South African Govt votes to seize land from white farmers without compensation

[KiwiElf]

South Africa votes to seize land from white farmers without compensation

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8234461.html

'We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land'

South Africa‘s parliament has passed a motion to seize land from white farmers without paying them compensation.

Passed by an overwhelming majority of 241 votes to 83 votes against, the proposal to amend Section 25 of the constitution would allow expropriation of land without any financial recompense.

It was put forward by the radical left Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party, whose leader Julius Malema told the country's parliament: “We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land.”

The ruling African National Congress (ANC) amended but supported the motion. The party has promised reforms to address the racial disparities in land ownership which persist more than two decades after the end of apartheid.

South Africa's new president, Cyril Ramaphosa, said he would speed up the transfer of land from white to black owners after his inauguration two weeks ago.

But he stressed it must be conducted in a manner which preserved food production and security.

Speaking to the National Council of Provinces in televised remarks earlier this week, Mr Ramaphosa said he wants talks on the contentious topic to avoid panic.

But he said he aimed to resolve the issue of racial disparities in property ownership "once and for all."

"I will shortly initiate a dialogue with key stakeholders," he said, adding: "There is no need for any one of us to panic and start beating war drums.

"We are going to address this and make sure that we come up with resolutions that resolve this once and for all. This original sin that was committed when our country was colonised must be resolved in a way that will take South Africa forward."

Parliament instructed a committee to review the constitution and report back by 30 August.

The ANC’s deputy chief whip, Dorries Dlakude, said the party “recognises that the current policy instruments, including the willing-buyer willing-seller policy and other provisions of section 25 of the constitution may be hindering effective land reform.”

The official opposition, the Democratic Alliance party (DA) opposed the motion, arguing changes to Section 25 will undermine property rights and scare off potential investors.

The DA’s Thandeka Mbabama told parliament expropriation without compensation was a way to divert attention from the failure by successive ANC-led governments to get to grips with the issue.

Critics have compared the move to the disastrous redistribution of land in neighbouring Zimbabwe, which was often accompanied by violence and left farms neglected.

In South Africa, corruption and lack of training for farmers remain obstacles to land redistribution.

The government’s land reform policy has been criticised over the years as many farms transferred to emerging black farmers lay fallow and unproductive.

Other Links:

'We are not calling for the slaughter of white people - at least for now': South African parliament votes to SEIZE white-owned land as experts warn of violent repercussions

White South African farmers to be removed from their land after parliament vote
The motion for 'expropriation without compensation' passed by a landslide
It was brought about by Julius Malema who said white farmers are 'criminals'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...oved-land.html

Taking white-owned land in South Africa: Correcting injustice or tit-for-tat racism?
Published time: 1 Mar, 2018 15:25
© Andreea Campeanu / Reuters

Black South Africans need to take their land back from white ‘foreigners’, the leader of Black First Land First told RT. However, the president of the Transvaal Agricultural Union says this will lead to an ‘Arab Spring’.

South Africa's parliament voted on Tuesday in favor of new legislation that could see land from white farmers seized without providing any compensation.

The motion brought by the leader of the radical Marxist opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters, Julius Malema, passed by a wide margin of 241 votes for to 83 against.

RT discussed this move with Andile Mngxitama, president and founder of Black First Land First (BLF), and Louis Meintjes, president of the Transvaal Agricultural Union. (Full story at link below)

https://www.rt.com/news/420203-south-africa-white-land/

[Flash]

Isn't it what happened in the now starving Mozambique?

Whites born in South Africa must feel very bad at the present time, and they probably mostly know nothing else either. I bet no provision has been made for their bare survival. Doing the same harm to others that has been done to ourselves never help to solve problems.

[Helene West]

This is simply one old lady's opinion based on observation, reading and her small experience:

You won't hear these blacks spew their 'dignity' rap against the asians that are taking over african resources as imo it's not being fueled/sourced by blacks but by the largely (non-gentile?) white ruling class of the western world. Western rulers, and now Eastern, will remunerate well black puppets to obliterate anything 'ostensibly' white. The whites who actually own huge assets will just remain more hidden let alone never be stupid enough to live in a place like south africa as opposed to the white middle class who everywhere are in some hypnotic denial about what is happening to them.

The ruling class do not fear blacks or browns. They see them as easily bought off. They fear the one group that interfered with elitist dominance centuries ago and who continue today to research, write about and call out the elites, largely white gentile middle class males. At this point, the majority of the white race have been so brainwashed to hate themselves, while at the same time calling the self-hate being anti-racist, so frightened of being called white supremists if they evince minimal, normal human ethnic identity, the ruling class will probably succeed in a progressive cultural if not biological extinction.

It is amazing that these whites chose to stay when the hand writing was on the wall 30 years ago. They had the chance to emigrate then. They can't even get political asylum now in Canada and other places because well, the ruling class - Rules! And they are in the governments of all western countries and their orders are clear. Since the plan is to phase-out caucasians who don't belong to the very small minority who own the banks and corporations or their service workers (largely obedient gentiles) you won't hear any concern by governments of western countries though clearly these whites will be made to starve in ghettos.

Someone put up a thread with Paul Joseph Watson's vid on the islamic state of sweden. Some say that will happen here. I say not. The elites have a good thing going with the black victim / bad whitey paradigm here in this country and they haven't played it out to the max as yet. Muslims will play their part here but that will be through the rural lands using tribal Indian governments as obama was behind the scenes for eight years doing his best to kill states rights and convincing Indians they have so much in common with middle easterners that they should embrace muslims. (Look up the works of the remarkable American Indian activist, ELAINE DEVARY WILLMAN, MPA for more on this subject.)

Many of us are already seeing our children and grandchildren shaping into progressive, self-loathing brownshirts, ready to thwart freedom, choice, commit violence in some cases in an effort to try and expunge themselves of this state induced guilt and feel better.

Unless there comes some spiritual leaders who are able to penetrate the mind control of caucasians and get the message across that they don't have to be Jesus Christ on the Cross Crucified Again, forget it.

[Stephanie]

An interesting article by Marion L. Tupy.

https://capx.co/ramaphosas-land-grab...ctive-mistakes
Ramaphosa’s land grab will repeat Zimbabwe’s destructive mistakes

"The new President of the ruling African National Congress, Cyril Ramaphosa, has recently committed his party to “land expropriation without compensation.” That measure, if implemented, is guaranteed to turn a sophisticated economy responsible for generating 20 per cent of sub-Saharan Africa’s output into a basket case, like Zimbabwe.

What’s going on? Here, some historical context is in order.

In 1979, Margaret Thatcher’s first Foreign Secretary, the apparently immortal Lord Carrington, brokered a peace deal between a multi-racial, but internationally unrecognised, government of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia and an assortment of African nationalists led by Robert Mugabe. Under the terms of the Lancaster House agreement, Mugabe was allowed to take power in Zimbabwe in return for agreeing that farmland in the African country would be bought and sold on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis.

That agreement held until 2000. At the start of the new millennium, however, the government found itself under political pressure from its erstwhile supporters, who claimed that they did not benefit from Mugabe’s rule. True enough, in the first 20 years of his rule, Mugabe’s socialist policies strangled the economy and stagnation set in. Unfortunately, the dictator was allowed successfully to deflect the blame for his failures on to a tiny minority of white farmers, who were, subsequently, deprived of their land and livelihoods.

An epic catastrophe followed. Farms stopped producing crops and hunger ensued. Banks, which loaned money to farmers in exchange for land as collateral, shuttered. The government, which relied on farm export earnings to pay its bills, ran out of money. And so Mugabe started printing money, leading to hyperinflation. The economy ceased to function. Many Zimbabweans, black and white, were murdered by Mugabe’s goons. Many more lost their jobs and Zimbabwe’s educated middle class dispersed around the globe. Some four million victims of Mugabe’s incompetence and venality ended up in exile in South Africa.

Meanwhile, in 1994, South Africa went through its own political transition from a white minority rule to a black majority rule. Under the terms of that country’s internal settlement, known as the Convention for a Democratic South Africa, Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress was allowed to take power in exchange for a set of guarantees, including the right of individuals to private property. The 1996 Constitution did allow for the normal eminent domain takings, but the government was obliged to compensate the losers at market prices.

As was the case in Zimbabwe, the South African settlement largely held for about two decades. In fact, many white farmers willingly sold their land at market prices to the government, which then redistributed the purchased land among the previously landless Africans. From an economic standpoint, the programme was a massive failure, but the government proceeded in a legal and orderly way. That, alas, may not continue for much longer.

Over the last decade, South Africa’s average annual growth rate has hovered around two per cent – far short of the six per cent that the government needs in order to tackle the country’s unemployment rate of 28 per cent. The relatively slow growth rate is a result of a number of factors. South Africa’s taxes are onerously high, regulation increasingly burdensome and quality of government slowly deteriorating.

Partly as a result of slow growth and partly because of growing corruption, the ANC has been losing electoral support. Its coalition partners, the Communist Party and the trade unions, are rebellious. A Maoist group of so-called Economic Freedom Fighters, who are led by a racist demagogue called Julius Malema, has been getting traction in the opinion polls.

Cyril Ramaphosa, who has recently replaced the disgraced Jacob Zuma as leader of the ANC, believes that he can shore up his party’s electoral prospects by adopting some of the EFF’s policies. To that end, Ramaphosa has recently promised to turn South Africa into “the garden of Eden” by expropriating South Africa’s farmers without compensation.

Ramaphosa has also promised that expropriation without compensation will not damage South Africa. That, alas, is not possible. As Zimbabwe shows, when property rights are taken away, other basic human rights also fall by the wayside."

[Cardillac]

@Helene West

very, very well stated, Helene- couldn't agree with you more-

when will most "white-ies" wake up (!) and realize there's a silent war going on against us and so far, due to most people's dire lack of perception, we "ain't" winning-

it's the slow kill- but don't worry: it'll be ratcheted up soon; to quote David Icke: it's the "totalitarian tip-toe"-

if one looks at true world history (not the crap we were taught in school) and I'm not being racist, for God's sake- am just quoting true historical facts: any black, sub-Saharan country has never, ever developed ANYTHING on their own unless they had the influence/help of whites (+ more recently: Asians)-

darker skin/hair/eyes are dominant genes and pastell-colored skin/hair/eyes are reccesive genes; if my read sources are correct in ancient times there were many, many more whites than nowadays- everywhere on the planet- we whites are slowly being eradicated-

if one looks at the refugee crisis here in Europe (Sweden is now gone forever) people of "pigment" are not only getting a free ride (to the detriment of whites who will monetarily have to pay for this) but are being put above the law and are being granted special privileges- this is fact-

and there's not a war against whites?- the sad thing is many whites in the highest positions are complicit with this (like start with the wench-Merkel gov't here in Germany) but what these people don't realize is that they will be next on the list; these well-paid elites are being well-paid to promote their own future demise-

enough for now; I could sing an entire Wagner "Ring Cycle" on this subject-

please continue to stay well Helene and all readers-

Larry

[Star Tsar]

Dear misinformed Larry you contradict yourself, you say and I qoute: "if one looks at true world history (not the crap we were taught in school) and I'm not being racist" but is it not the school of the west that ommitted nations of colour from history & human development?

Which in turn leads to idiotic statements just like this one "any black, sub-Saharan country has never, ever developed ANYTHING on their own unless they had the influence/help of whites (+ more recently: Asians)"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=yEtDLBGGQeQ

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zaoyqZn1ELI

I am astounded as to some of the views some Avalonians hold, What some agree with & What is allowed to get posted of late.

[JohanB]

Hi all, as a South African that was born here, just the following comments on this topic.

Although the vote that happened is "worrying" to most of us "whites", it's definitely not a definite conclusion that all white people are destined for extinction here. When the new president got elected, there was a new sense of "hope" amongst most of us. He already did some drastic changes in the rule making cabinet and hopefully a lot of corruption will end.

I do realize we are "Mickey Mouse" compared to the USA + most other first world countries, but just some perhaps unknown facts.

Quite a few "x"-South Africans are well known to name a few e.g. Elon Musk [Tesl Moters / Spacex] ; Dr Christiaan Barnard [first successful human heart transplant] ; Trevor Noah [The Daily Show is an American late-night talk and news satire television program]

Maybe of interest for some: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_South_Africans

I am like Star Tsar astounded as to some of the views some Avalonians hold

[Foxie Loxie]

Our History.....it is such a shame that our true history here on the planet has been erased. I am learning much from some new posts Herve put up yesterday.

For instance.....this Anglo Establishment mentality that we all live under in this present day & age seems to have all started with a man named Cecil Rhodes around 1891. He started a Secret Society in England where a very few plotted the control of all the rest of us! So it seems the Banksters have been the ones controlling us.....then agressively writing OUT their part in world events!

In South Africa during Rhodes time the blacks were involved in voting as equals with the whites, but he changed all that. Here on Avalon we know that there have been many great civilizations in ALL parts of the world; some we are still discovering to this day. Thank you, Star Tsar for the two videos you put up! Each of us only knows what we have been raised in & we all need to widen our views to include the past history that has been hidden from us. Another "biggie" for me was learning about the country of Khazaria which also was written OUT of history!!

Let's hear it for Avalon! We have an amazing Library here where we CAN learn if we want to!

[Helene West]

StarTsar, you are missing the important points regarding racism today. No one is saying there hasn't been accomplished blacks before whitey came along. For pete's sake we just finished black history month which has been going on since 1926. It started as Negro History Week in 1926 and in 1976 officially became black history month. 92 years this has been going on, a whole month out of the year we are made to know about accomplished blacks.

One of the main points we really need to grasp, acknowledge and refute is the concept of The Proxy, The Substitute - THE HUMAN SACRIFICE THAT ATONES FOR SINS OF OTHERS. The group that owns 92% of everything we read, watch and listen to have been quietly molding this concept into all our brains for decades now in regards to caucasian peoples and we have to pull it out from our Subconcious, make it Conscious and Refute it.

For example - (granted a not great example but here goes):

StarTsar, let's say your home was severely ransacked. Everything of value you own was stolen including all your important papers that could be used also for identity crimes. You're devastated. The cops have no leads, except a neighbor says she saw men leaving the premises who looked Asian.

You happen to live in a society where, because the authorities can't find the specific guilty party they can take someone associated with that group. There's an asian family down the block and they bring the father in for questioning and arrest him because of guilt by association. You and others are outraged. The father is a substitute for the guilty party because he has the same skin color. But that is the society you live in.

This is how everyone is being trained to see caucasians, including caucasians. We are guilty by association for our skin color. We can be raped, mugged, murdered, stolen from, passed over for jobs, grants, admissions, etc. and though unfortunate we are expected to go along with this because after all, we are the guilty ones, the bad people. We are all walking symbols. We are all to be human sacrifices that others can put to scorn as atonement for sins that others may or may not have committed. As a racist black teacher in Evergreen College in Washington proclaimed that whites need to get used to abuse.

--Is it ok for you to be a symbol, not a person? That's what whites are.

--Is it ok for you to be a proxy, a substitute to stand in for someone else's supposed crimes? That is what we are being primed for.

--Should you be sacrificed on an altar of sanctimony to assuage someone's need for malice?

Whites are keeping so much to themselves. It's like a suggestion has been planted into our subconcious en masse to not defend ourselves, to not be able to see, to think, to speak, to express when it comes to race. Dealing with the concept of the proxy needs to be extracted from our minds and openly discussed. It could be in the forum of an Ethics discussion as well as a race discussion but I see it as a sociological phenomenon that is going unmentioned.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I am hearing the race card again.

It is an almost perfect means of division. Easily identifiable and identifying.

It is not possible at this level to solve the issue. Any discussion at this level is only to establish context.

Solutions must come from levels where the problem originated.

Who is to blame is not as much a solution as why they are in the position to be blamed. And who is doing the blaming is not as important as to why they need to blame in the first place.

What mindset leads to conquest? Which to subjugation?

[Star Tsar]

Posted by Helene West (here)
StarTsar, you are missing the important points regarding racism today. No one is saying there hasn't been accomplished blacks before whitey came along.

Read post post1211494

And secondly I am not interested in how you see my human family or world.

[Helene West]

Posted by Star Tsar (here)

Posted by Helene West (here)
StarTsar, you are missing the important points regarding racism today. No one is saying there hasn't been accomplished blacks before whitey came along.

Read post post1211494

And secondly I am not interested in how you see my human family or world.

Sorry I had chosen to respond to your post in particular. Won't happen again.

Nevertheless, I believe I am contributing positively to 'my human family' as well. There is so much being unsaid. Generalities like dismissing potential discussion points as just more 'race card' will go off into the ethers doing nothing, contributing nothing. Generalities that boil down to 'can't we just get along' will go off into the ethers, doing nothing, contributing nothing.

When a phenomenon is being deliberately orchestrated there is a need to analyze techniques.

In my post above I'm trying to be specific for the purpose of Focus on one point though there are several. I don't believe it is positive for OUR human family for whites to acquiesce to becoming SYMBOLS of scorn, symbols to be abused. Thanks

[Bob]

A ten thousand foot viewpoint - ethnicity, population distribution in South Africa

http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/...y-south-africa

During the colonial times, the Dutch East Indian introduced racial segregation.

In 1795 the British took over the Cape of Good Hope, and they continue with racial segregation. The concept of race became a particularly explosive idea during colonization, as well as during the Apartheid period which begun in 1948. Race is defined as a social concept referring to a group of people who share distinct and similar physical characteristics.

Before colonisation and apartheid in South Africa, the concept of ethnicity was rooted in the ideas of bonds in kinship, biology and ancestry.

Ethnicity has been associated with the belief that ethnic groups are extended kinship networks that serve as basic dividing lines within societies, embracing groups differentiated by colour, language, religion and race.

In South Africa, ethnicity involved more visible local communities, built on face to face signal of dialect, kinship, status, religion, cultural practices, and on the force of understanding and fear produced by rural isolation.

Ethnicity refers to

• shared cultural practices,
• perspectives, and distinctions

that set apart one group of people from another.

"The most common characteristics distinguishing various ethnic groups are ancestry, territorial possession, language, forms of dress, a sense of history and religion.

"These characteristics were the units of social, economic and political organisations and inter-communal relations. Ethnic differences are not inherited; they are learned. "

"South Africa consists of different ethnic groups located in different rural homelands.

"They were peasants or self-providing groups and their economy was agriculture.

"Land was important to the reproduction of social and economic life."

During the colonial and apartheid periods, the Black population of South Africa was divided into major ethnic groups;

namely Nguni people which consisted of: Zulu, Xhosa, Ndebele and Swazi, Sotho people which consisted of Northern Sotho (Bapedi), Southern Sotho (Basotho) and Tswana, Shangaan-Tsonga and Venda, as well as Coloured and Afrikaans.

There were separate Bantustans for the Zulus, Xhosas, Sothos, Tswanas, Vendas, Pedis and Shangaans.

In urban areas, Africans were housed in the urban townships on ethnic lines and received their schooling in ethnic schools. Indians, Coloureds and Africans were also allotted separate schools.

The largest ethnic group in South Africa is the Zulu and the majority of them live in KwaZulu Natal Province and Gauteng Province.

The second largest is the Xhosa group; they are located in the Eastern Cape Province and Western Cape Province.

South African ethnic groups are also found across South Africa's boundaries in neighbouring countries.

For example, Nguni-speaking Swazi people make up almost the entire population of Swaziland.

At least 1.3 million Sesotho speakers live in Lesotho, and more than 1 million people in Botswana speak Tswana. Tsonga and related languages speakers live in Mozambique, and Venda is also spoken by several thousand people in Southern Zimbabwe.

One of the main characteristics of ethnicity is language.

In South Africa, there are more than ten languages and others are grouped as Nguni and Sotho languages.

IsiZulu, isiXhosa, siSwati and isiNdebele are Nguni languages.

Sepedi (Northern Sotho), Sesotho (Southern Sotho) and Setswana (Tswana) are Sotho-Tswana languages.

Venda and Tsonga are the other two official languages in South Africa.

English and Afrikaans are also official languages spoken in South Africa.

"The majority of the White population, about 60 percent is Afrikaans, with many of the remaining 40 percent being of British or European descent. The Coloured population has a mixed lineage, which often comprises the indigenous Khoisan people and White settlers. Most of the Coloured population live in the Northern and Western Cape Provinces, whilst the majority of the Indian population live in KwaZulu-Natal. The Afrikaner population is especially concentrated in the Gauteng and Free State Provinces."

"The apartheid government ended in 1994 and was replaced by the Constitutional democracy.

"South Africa is a multi-racial democratic country which embraces its diversity.

"Symbolically, the image of the ‘Rainbow Nation’, made popular by Archbishop Desmond Tutu in 1994, is the most important symbols used to promote the ideology of a free, multiracial democratic society.

"Other symbols include the constitutional recognition of eleven official languages."

"The South African Constitution provides equal human, political and social rights to all individuals regardless of race, ethnicity or language. "

Section 9.3 of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa states that the “state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly” on grounds including race, colour, ethnic or social origin, culture or language.

A subsection of the same section further states that “discrimination on one or more of the grounds listed in subsection (3) is unfair unless it is established that the discrimination is fair” and sections of the Bill of Rights and the broader Constitution also states that ‘the nation’ is committed to ensuring redress for past racially discriminatory policies.

Zulu -
Zulu people refer to themselves as ‘the people of the heavens' and they are the largest ethnic group of South Africa, with an estimated 10 to 12 million Zulu residents in KwaZulu-Natal.

Their written history can be traced back to the fourteenth century.

Zulu identity has changed over time. Before the ascendancy of King Shaka, the term Zulu referred to only one clan that recognized "Zulu" as its founding ancestor. After Shaka's mission of conquest and consolidation, the term came to refer to hundreds of clans under the control of the Zulu monarchy.

After the beginning of British colonial rule of Natal in 1843, Zulu identity became associated with a particular territory, especially the northern part of KwaZulu-Natal Province, formerly known as Zululand. Today Zulu "ethnic" identity is linked to the language and the monarchy.

Oral history lists eight kings, including the currently reigning king, Zwelithini Goodwill.

Shaka Zulu is often considered the first and most prominent of these kings, particularly with regard to military proficiency and command and the integration and mobilization of smaller "tribes" into a kingdom.

By the beginning of the nineteenth century the Zulu, like some other tribes with equivalent military capabilities, attempted to subjugate other groups and establish political supremacy.

LAND

Land Tenure. All land in "tribal areas" is under the control of a "chief who allocates land for residential purposes as well as for cultivation at a household head's request.

Historically, "chief's" had full authority over the incorporation of people into their chiefdoms.

However, their roles were fully absorbed into the colonial system, in which those roles were reduced to that of a tax collector; their land was taken away from them.

The title chief is no longer acceptable among these traditional leaders because it evokes their subjugation under colonial rule as the "bossboys" of an oppressive regime.

They prefer to be called by the Zulu alternative amakhosi (singular, inkosi).

People who live on farms and work for white farmers also have limited scope to practice subsistence agriculture for themselves because they work under controls and constraints that relate to their terms of rent and remuneration as farm workers.

Urban Zulu dwellers live under various arrangements of rent, private ownership, and rate payments.

Political Organization.

The Zulu have a monarch who commands respect from a large number of people who live under the immediate authority of their amakhosi ("chief's").

Amakhosi pay respect to the king by attending the House of Traditional Leaders and mobilize support for festivities organized by the king.

The "chief's" have subdivisions (izigodi) within the chiefdoms, which are looked after by headmen (izinduna).

In some chiefdoms "chief's" have additional councilors who, together with headmen, form part of what is called the Tribal Authority, which helps the "chief" govern.

In addition, structures of the democratically elected local government administer access to facilities and services to all the people in KwaZulu-Natal Province. These structures work closely with the provincial government, and their relationship with the 'chief's' is a contentious issue.

Social Control.

The Zulu have been influenced by individualism to some extent.

Although the older generation boasts of a time when disciplining the younger generation was the responsibility of everyone in the community, most people tend to mind their own business.

Institutions such as the church and the family have limited control of people's behavior, but sanctions are not imposed as communally as the older generation has led people to believe.

Punishment of specific misbehavior is also a responsibility of institutions such as schools, the police, and the Tribal Authority (the chief's' structure of governance).

Conflict.

Conflict occasionally arose between chiefdoms, particularly over boundaries.

Colonial land policies and relocations exacerbated those conflicts. In the early twenty-first century such conflicts usually led to feuding between the concerned parties and the intervention of other state institutions, such as the police, the defense force, and the courts.

Other kinds of conflict involved clashes between political parties over political issues.

In the precolonial period there was some conflict between tribes over property or boundaries and as a result of attempts by some groups to subdue others and expand their boundaries, which occasionally involved non-Zulu groups such as the Xhosa in the south and some BaSotho groups.

Religious Beliefs.

The Zulu people have a strong belief in the potency of their ancestors.

Their cosmology is characterized by God in various forms: uMvelingqangi (a male god responsible for all life), uNomkhubulwano (a female god who provides food security, particularly through good harvests), and a god for the control of weather, particularly thunder.

Their cosmology also includes ancestors who can have a significant positive impact on their families' lives if they are appeased.

The Zulu cosmology also includes the potency of the natural world, particularly herbs and animals when made into umuthi (medicine), which can be used or abused to affect people negatively or positively. This is done mainly in the realm of traditional medicine.

and

Medicine.

Medicine takes two forms. First, there is the kind of medicine that targets physical ailments and deals with the physiological problems of the human body.

Second, there is medicine that works magically to produce a negative or positive impact on those toward whom it is directed.

This type of medicine is used more like a weapon and is often implicated in the acts of animosity people level against each other.

Zulu people use Western medical practitioners as well.

The relationship between the two systems of healing is not characterized by mutual respect.

However, most Zulu people use both systems, depending on what they perceive to be the source of their problems.

Additional reference material for the above quotes provided by: https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/...geography/zulu

Images:

[Matondu]

Oh my.. Oh my..

Unfortunately these developments have been coming for some time. And the watchful observers have predicted this.
Couple years ago on a trip through Botswana we stayed at a guest farm. As we were the only guests at the time we had extended time to chat with the owner family during our stay. It turned out that they had quite the story to tell. The were original from Zimbabwe. They owned a pretty huge farm there. He told us about the night the were kicked of their land and how they were only allowed to take what fit into their car. They actually only survived because their former staff protected them from the angry mob that showed them off. These people wanted to kill them. But their farmworkers convinced them that they were good bosses and always treated everyone fair.

Well, then they moved to South Africa and resettled there. With time they had earned enough money to successfully buy and run a new farm in SA. But within 3 years, 5 of his surrounding neighbors were killed by robbers. Sometimes the whole family butchered with machetes. He told us how they had formed their own militia guarding their premises and families. He spoke quite openly about the fact that he took out more then one assailant with his rifle. It was really tough to imagine the fear they had to live with. And as these incidents became more and more common in SA and because he not only had to fear for himself but for his 3 children, they decided to move again. He told me that back then he saw that it would only be a matter of time when the events of Zimbabwe would happen in SA too and the white people would be kicked off their land. And that he was not going to stick around to experience that again. Seeing everything you build getting taken away over night.
So they sold their land under price and moved to Botswana. Bought a farm there and turned it in to a private nature reserve. But even now he wasn´t sure about the future. Understandably; after going through all that you develop a quite fatalistic view. You can imagine the dinner talks were not the most politically correct.
Seems like he did the right move.

[Bob]

History for violence, seizing land, and conquering other tribes to put them under their 'kingdom'.. is not a new concept.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...civil-war.html

In 2017 the Zulu president Jacob Zuma was rallying support for the take over of productive land, seizing their businesses, the developed wealth from the owners and re-distributing it.

Is South Africa heading for civil war? The country is lurching ever closer to conflict as its volatile Zulu president vows to seize land from whites - while Afrikaner fighters train in the bush

On stage in a stadium in Soweto, the township at the heart of the uprising against apartheid, South Africa’s president, in a green and gold leather jacket, was dancing a Zulu war jig.

A court order against ‘hate speech’ meant Jacob Zuma, a former cattle herder, was banned from singing his favourite ‘liberation’ songs, including Bring Me My Machine Gun and Shoot The Boer.

But, after listening to speeches in which a succession of obsequious cronies described him as a ‘giant’ alongside African leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Zuma delighted supporters at his 75th birthday celebrations a few days ago with fiery rhetoric instead — and in doing so sounded the death knell for the Rainbow Nation.

This IS very black and white (literally) based on the war-like stance established by the ZULU nation for hundreds and hundred of years.

"On the Attack: Jacob Zuma has vowed to take back land from white South Africans"

In 2017, the rabble rousing stance

In front of more than 20,000 people — party loyalists and others bussed in with the promise of free food and ‘Zuma T-shirts’ — he warned the white population he was coming for their land.

Let's put this in a VERY CLEAR perspective

"As armed bodyguards, in black suits and sunglasses, scanned the crowds from the stage, Zuma attacked his white opponents, saying: ‘They are telling us that we will be breaking the law when we take the land — but they broke the law first by stealing our land!’

"As cheers rang out, he added: ‘No normal person would sit idly by after his land has been stolen from him. Why should I keep quiet about the land issue? [Whites] hate me because I touched a raw nerve by talking about the economy that all should share in.’

"He also attacked his critics among the black population, branding them ‘back stabbers and cowards’. Anyone opposing him was a ‘racist’.

"Zuma had earlier informed the South African parliament that he planned to introduce a new law allowing land seizures to go ahead without compensation, saying all blacks should unite to ‘take back the land’.

"Mzwandile Masina, a prominent member of the ruling African National Congress (ANC), made his own incendiary contribution, warning that ‘we will crush’ anyone who stands ‘in the way of nation building’."

Manipulation of Public Sentiment

"To underline the scale of the country’s woes, 23 years after apartheid ended, business leaders have just taken out an extraordinary advert on page three of the South African Sunday Times newspaper, warning that the State has been ‘captured’. ‘South Africa is in crisis,’ it said, blaming Zuma for the ‘illegitimate acquisition of South Africa’s natural and financial assets’. The government was guilty of ‘propaganda, slogans, racism and lies’ to silence criticism.

"The economy is undoubtedly in peril after government bonds were downgraded to junk status. Once a net exporter of food — as neighbouring Zimbabwe was before Robert Mugabe seized land from whites in a programme of ‘racial transformation’ — the country is now forced to rely on imports to feed the population.

"Unemployment is 90 per cent in some townships, and riots — described as ‘service delivery protests’ by the ANC — are so widespread and frequent they barely get reported."

Hearing the 'Insanity; First Hand

Crime is rampant — with more than 50 murders a day, many sadistic and barbaric — while South Africa is shamed by an appalling record on rape, with a woman sexually assaulted every 23 seconds.

Now, many have had enough. Black opposition leaders and a coalition called Save South Africa are staging protests, calling for Zuma to quit.

Certainly, Jacob Zuma does not inspire confidence when it comes to running what has long been regarded as Africa’s superpower. Born in Nkandla in 1942, the site of famous battles with British forces in the late-19th century, he was raised in a traditional village.

His father, a policeman and village chief, was an adviser to a local Zulu king. As a boy, Zuma herded cattle, collected wild honey and hunted small animals with a spear.

Aged 11, he was circumcised with a traditional stone implement after a period learning about Zulu tradition at camps run by elders in the bush. It was there, too, that he was taught about sex, a subject he has taken a close interest in ever since. ‘I was told to be a man among men,’ he said once.

Zuma left home at 16 with no qualifications and one year later joined the ANC, becoming a foot soldier for Umkhonto We Sizwe — Spear Of The Nation, the armed wing of the liberation movement which carried out a bombing campaign in a bid to end white minority rule.

He was arrested aged 21 for conspiring to overthrow the government and served ten years on Robben Island — alongside Mandela — in the infamous jail.

Upon release, he travelled to ANC bases in neighbouring countries such as Mozambique, Zambia and Botswana, and became head of the ANC’s internal intelligence wing known as Mbokodo, or ‘the stone that crushes’.

When Nelson Mandela was released in 1990, after 27 years in prison, Zuma returned to South Africa and became deputy president under Thabo Mbeki, from 1999, until being forced out amid corruption allegations in 2005. He became the nation’s fourth black president in 2009.

Zuma has had six wives and 22 children and has been linked with numerous other women. In 2005, when he was accused of raping the daughter of an ANC friend, he denied the charges, claiming it was consensual and it was his duty as a ‘Zulu warrior’ to have sex with a woman if she wore a short kanga — an African wrap — and he could not leave her ‘unfulfilled’.

‘In the Zulu culture, you cannot just leave a woman if she is ready,’ he told the court. ‘To deny her sex, that would have been tantamount to rape.’

Despite knowing that the woman was HIV positive, in a country where one in three carries the virus, Zuma was unfazed by criticism that he hadn’t used a condom. ‘I had a shower afterwards,’ he said, cheerfully.

Eventually Zuma was cleared, but it is his financial rather than his sexual activities that are the cause of the greatest fears for the future of South Africa.

Zuma is now fabulously rich, with a personal fortune estimated at between £15 million and £100 million. How he has acquired this wealth is of particular interest to his opponents. He has been accused of taking huge bribes in an arms deal, and could face up to 783 charges.

The real evidence of just how far Zuma has come is at Nklanda, the sprawling palace he built using taxpayers’ funds near the rural home where he grew up.

In the style of a Zulu king’s kraal, he has homes here for four of his wives, reportedly connected to his own grander house by tunnels, as well as two helicopter landing pads, and an area for cattle.

In a scathing report last year by the public prosecutor, he was ordered to pay back some of the costs of upgrading the presidential palace, including the price of a swimming pool he claimed was needed for water in case of a fire. As Zuma’s wealth and power have grown, the parallels with the collapse of Zimbabwe are ever more striking. Military veterans, who answer only to Zuma and who served in the ANC’s military wing, have paraded on the streets. They formed a guard of honour at Zuma’s recent party.

Zimbabwe’s despotic president, Mugabe, also used ‘military veterans’ to seize white farms in 2000, tipping the country into years of decay by following the policies now being proposed by Zuma.

Not surprisingly, some white South Africans are taking extreme measures in response. Where once ANC guerrillas camped in the bush, plotting against white rulers, now it is white militias training at secret camps.

These are run by leaders of the Kommandokorps, a volunteer force who wear the brown military uniforms of South Africa’s old apartheid-era forces. On remote farms, recruits are being trained with pistols, pump-action shotguns and 303 rifles.

More than 2,500 volunteers, aged from 14 to 38, have been drilled. Their leader is Colonel Franz Jooste, a former officer in the old South African army, who fought what he calls ‘black terrorists’ in secret operations in Mozambique, Angola and Zambia.

‘We are in a heightened security situation,’ he told me. ‘We have to prepare for anarchy and how we can protect ourselves.’

The ANC is also training thousands of ‘national rural youth service corps’ at military bases. There are reports that volunteers on the two-year programmes have been promised land.

Former president F.W. de Klerk, who, in 1993, was awarded a joint Nobel Peace prize with Mandela, believes thieving from state coffers will spell disaster.

‘Corruption is a deadly threat to South Africa,’ he told me. ‘It has enriched the leadership group — but will make it difficult for the great majority of South Africans to escape from poverty. Most seriously, it has corrupted the values for which leaders like Nelson Mandela struggled.

‘President Zuma is dangerously stoking up racial animosities. The ANC claims that it does not want to repeat the mistakes of Zimbabwe — but it is difficult to see how it would avoid this if it proceeds with expropriation [land grabs] without compensation.

‘We hope that the world will condemn growing institutionalised racism against (white) minorities with the same vigour with which it condemned apartheid.’

Then, if all this were not grim enough, there is Julius ‘Ju Ju’ Malema, a former ANC youth leader tipped as a future South African president, before he fell out with Zuma and created his own anti-white party called the Economic Freedom Fighters.

Self-styled ‘Commander in Chief’ Malema has attracted millions of supporters. He has a penchant for fast cars and expensive Breitling watches and makes Zuma seem like a moderate. He has urged blacks to illegally seize white land ‘wherever they see it’.

‘We are not calling for the slaughter of white people — at least for now,’ he said in a recent speech.

Let us put this in a VERY clear perspective..

"We are not calling for the SLAUGHTER OF WHITE PEOPLE -- at least for now..."

( Can that be made any clearer? )

[Bob]

Understanding background - rallying point for the seizure of lands - Jacob Zuma

More than two decades after white-minority rule ended in South Africa, most of its profitable farms and estates are still owned by white people, and about 95 percent of the country's wealth is in the hands of 10 percent of the population. That bothers the "have nots".

https://citizen.co.za/news/1837059/j...ll-be-charged/

The decision to prosecute Jacob Zuma for corruption – or not – has been made by national director of public prosecutions (NDPP) advocate Shaun Abrahams, but it will have to wait while stumbling blocks in the way of making the public announcement resolve themselves.

Abrahams will be fighting Corruption Watch, Freedom Under Law, and the Council for the Advancement of the SA Constitution (Casac) to keep his job in the Constitutional Court today.

The three organisations are seeking a confirmatory order of a High Court in Pretoria invalidity declaration of certain sections of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act, former NDPP Mxolisi Nxsana’s R17 million resignation, and Abrahams’ appointment.

Gauteng Judge President Dunstan Mlambo also hamstrung Zuma by removing his power to appoint another NDPP by finding Zuma was conflicted by his 18 pending charges.

Casac’s Lawson Naidoo took the matter a step further by obtaining an agreement from Abrahams he would not withdraw the charges against Zuma while waiting for the Constitutional Court decision and if he intended to do so, had to give Casac two weeks’ notice.

“Should he not provide such an undertaking Casac may apply for an interdict to this effect, and may also seek a personal costs order against Abrahams,” Naidoo said at the time.

NPA spokesperson Luvuyo Mfaku told The Citizen yesterday the state attorney had written to Casac’s attorneys to inform them of Abrahams reaching a decision on the matter.

Reading sections of the letter, Mfaku said Abrahams would communicate his decision to Zuma’s lawyers and other interested parties and make public his decision after the lapse of the agreed time which had been calculated as March 15, unless Lawson agreed to waive the two weeks.

“The 15th is not the date on which the decision will be announced,” Mafaku said.

He said only on March 15 would Abrahams be allowed to inform Zuma’s lawyers and only when that is done, could Abrahams announce a date on which the decision would be made public.

Naidoo said he had heard about the state attorney’s letter but had not seen it himself. Once he had, then he would make decision on the two-week notice period.

Made up of 12 counts of fraud, four of corruption, one of money laundering and one of racketeering, Zuma’s charges stem from 783 payments allegedly made to – and on his behalf – by Schabir Shaik and his Nkobi group valued at more than R4 million.

==update==

https://taarifa.rw/2018/02/14/presid...ges-await-him/

President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma has bowed out this evening. His decision has ignited mixed reactions across the country.

There were over half a dozen Motions of No Confidence across almost 1000 days where the ANC had opportunities to rid South Africa of Jacob Zuma and his toxic corrupt web.

Zuma now faces the 783 criminal charges still awaiting him before the Courts.

Zuma’s time as president has been marked by controversy, ranging from his relationship with the controversial Gupta family, dropped charges of corruption and his acquittal on a charge of rape, to the upgrades to his Nkandla homestead.

He broke his silence on Wednesday afternoon for the first time since discussions to oust him started in a televised live interview with SABC.

The ANC caucus met on Wednesday morning on the outcomes of a meeting of the party’s national executive committee (NEC). ANC treasurer-general Paul Mashatile told the media afterward that they had given Zuma until Wednesday to resign.

If not, the ANC would proceed with a motion of no confidence against him on Thursday to legally force him to resign according to the Constitution, he said.

ANC secretary general Ace Magashule and his deputy Jessie Duarte delivered Zuma’s recall letter to the presidential guesthouse on Tuesday morning.

Zuma’s much-anticipated resignation comes after the party’s highest decision-making body, the national executive committee (NEC), decided after a marathon meeting into the early hours of Tuesday morning that he should go.

The ANC called the urgent meeting following ANC president Cyril Ramaphosa’s direct talks with Zuma. An emergency NEC meeting, that was meant to happen last Wednesday, was cancelled by Ramaphosa after his Tuesday meeting with Zuma.

Ramaphosa replaced Zuma as leader of the ANC at its elective conference in December.

On Tuesday last week, Parliament’s presiding officers postponed Thursday’s State of the Nation Address (SONA) amid fears that it might descend into chaos.

The concept of land takeover has been in the works for a long time.

[Bob]

The land seizure concept goes back earlier than Zuma though.

Lindiwe Zulu seeks land seizure without payment
May 03 2017 22:59

She is the minister of small business development and had this to say:

Minister Lindiwe Zulu said in an interview at the World Economic Forum on Africa in Durban on Wednesday:

“There’s nothing wrong with changing the constitution where it’s not helping you - where we need to change it, we will change it,” she said. “Our people are not going to forgive us if we prolong this thing.

"Radical economic transformation - what does that mean? Ownership of the means of production. What does that mean? Bringing black people into the space of the bigger economy of South Africa.”

(Change the laws in retrospect to suit whomever is in power at the time in other words; - why is the spectre of George Orwell and "Animal Farm" seemingly looming?)

“We have to really push it now because if we don’t, we will find ourselves with the same people we said we liberated saying, ‘You liberated us and then what? We are not going to eat politics’,” Zulu said. “Where government feels there mustn’t be any compensation, there shouldn’t be compensation.”

While Zuma is due to step down as leader of the ANC in December, his successor (Cyril Ramaphosa) will pursue similar policies because the “ANC is not an individual,” she said. Still, redistribution must be “orderly” and the land should be used for agriculture and housing.

“This government must not be diverted from the real issues that are facing South Africa,” Zulu said. “The real issues facing South Africa are poverty, inequality and unemployment.” (** see note below)

‘Too slow’

Jeff Radebe, a minister in the presidency and the ANC’s policy chief, said while land redistribution had been too slow, land grabs weren’t being considered at this stage. (back in May 03 2017).

“That is not on the table at the moment,” he said in an interview at the Durban conference. “Everything that we do is in accordance with the constitution.”

Radebe also said the government and ruling party were also working to restore the country’s investment-grade credit rating, which was cut to junk by S&P Global Ratings and Fitch Ratings after Zuma fired Pravin Gordhan as his finance minister.

====================

Seizing land is one thing - what about the material assets needed to make the farms run?

The land on its own is roughly 10% of the total value of a typical farm operation, if fixed and moveable assets are taken into account.

Would sunk investments that make up the rest of the 90%, like general farm infrastructure, machinery and other investments, be subject to expropriation without compensation too?

If compensation is due for farm assets, and not the land itself, then the technical argument that arises is: Would it be prudent for government to pay 90% in compensating farmers for improvements to the land, in order to obtain the 10% that represents the actual land value?

Is it going to then be a grab and who pays for it in the long run?

When Zimbabwe tried it 18 years ago, they stopped short of a seizure, and realized payment is needed. (https://qz.com/1218309/south-africa-...g-white-farms/)

Second is the complication that would emerge from the existing fact that South African agricultural land is heavily indebted. Farm debt emanating from title deeds to secure loans already stands at over $13.7 billion (160 billion rand), bringing into question how the government will handle indebted land.

If farmers aren’t compensated, will the state repay to banks who are de facto partial owners of that land through debt? If government exonerates itself from compensating the banks, this would translate to $13.7 billion wiped off the banks’ books.

If government commits to cover this debt, it contradicts the policy, becoming instead expropriation with compensation—except that the money goes to the bank not the farmer.

"If the South African government seizes private property for free, someone somewhere within the economy will have to pay (for the seizure), whether directly through loss in current and future on farm job opportunities as well as export revenues, or through protracted economic decline that will erode the purchasing power of money, losses in pensions and savings, and de-industrialisation that will destroy future economic growth and off-farm job opportunities for the current generation." - Professor Johann Kirsten and Wandile Sihlobo, South African agricultural economists

ref: "Animal Farm, 1944, George Orwell"

** Note, that statement has been heard before: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - a slogan popularised by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program. The Soviet Union adapted the policy as: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work (labour investment). ref: Busky, Donald F. (July 20, 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey.

[Justplain]

This is not a very intelligent path for the SA government to go down. The 10% that own huge portions of SA are identifiable as whites, however the rest of the world suffers the same problem, just not under the racist identifiers. This land grab is likely going to lead to armed conflict, since the afrikaaners were willing to take on the british empire just over a century ago, in a war they barely lost. Can you imagine an war outcome where the whites win? A further racially divided landscape, subdivided into racial enclaves.

The SA government is best advised, if they want to redistribute some of the land, to try an experiment in a district where they appropriate land with compensation, and then see if they can train blacks to properly farm it. Also, they should want to retain the skills of the white farmers, so allowing them to keep some of their land is a good idea.

The way things are currently going, the results could be catastrophic for all south africans.

[Flash]

Posted by Justplain (here)
This is not a very intelligent path for the SA government to go down. The 10% that own huge portions of SA are identifiable as whites, however the rest of the world suffers the same problem, just not under the racist identifiers. This land grab is likely going to lead to armed conflict, since the afrikaaners were willing to take on the british empire just over a century ago, in a war they barely lost. Can you imagine an war outcome where the whites win? A further racially divided landscape, subdivided into racial enclaves.

The SA government is best advised, if they want to redistribute some of the land, to try an experiment in a district where they appropriate land with compensation, and then see if they can train blacks to properly farm it. Also, they should want to retain the skills of the white farmers, so allowing them to keep some of their land is a good idea.

The way things are currently going, the results could be catastrophic for all south africans.

They will do it. This has been done in all their neighboring countries, land seized, no compensation, killings, and then poorer than ever:

this is typical LESSON NOT LEARNED behavior.

[Helene West]

Bob, thanks for all the interesting info you've given us on SA and some of the tribalism aspects.

I've wondered myself along the lines that JustPlain brought up above why does it not occur to these blacks, whether in government or as community outreach groups of some kind, to just ask the white farmers for help with the other lands? To help them develop and properly farm the other non-white farmlands?

When I'm needy I ask someone to help me just like the billions of humans before me and like they still do now. Why is this common human reflexive behavior seem to be missing from the equation? Why must it be this almost predictable element of vicious, vindictive, divisive?

I don't think it's all coming from the blacks. Methinks the same super-rich ruling class creeps that are currently sowing dissent in our country (U.S.) with censorship moves against our bill of rights, have a hand in this. Dot connection time. Wherever you once had a prosperous white middle class, 'Diversity' has been mandated, but what they didn't tell us a few decades ago when they started the PR on all this Diversity, whether in Europe, the U.S. or SA, is that they want diversity with Division, they don't want diversity in a peaceful melting pot. Diversified but separate and hateful... they left that part out of the memo, and it's not blacks that wrote the memo...