Talk:Orania

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Planning Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to WikiProject Urban studies and planning, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the WikiProject: Urban studies and planning, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. You may also be interested in contributing to the Portal:Planning
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

Arcive 1 Up to 30 June 2006

Wikipedia is not a forum for free speech. It is a tool striving to supply unbiased information to the general public. Let us discuss the merits of each statement in the article which contributors may conceive as being biased. -Gemsbok1 10:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, what the hell, this article is extremely biased with the false information that this is trying to recreate apartheid. Couldn't be more wrong, this is a White Afrikaans speaking safe haven, no other ethnic group can live or work in Orania, so racism is non-existent because there is only one racial group living in the area, which is White, the right to self-determination is internationally recognized and not born out of racism but the protection of culture and identity.

Contents 1 Chill out, please 2 Lifting tag 3 The Eleventh Hour Has Passed! 4 Archive 5 Racist or not?

[edit] Chill out, please

OK, I haven't bothered reading through all of the below argumentation, but the bits I've seen suggest that both parties need to calm down, do some research, and come back with something substantiated. Here are a few points:

• The "boer" ethnic distinction is one made only by a minority of Afrikaners (a term commonly used to refer to white, Afrikaans-speaking South Africans). Most Afrikaners, including even those at www.boer.co.za, an Afrikaner cultural organisation, really don't care about making the distinction. The creation of an Afrikaner culture was a process which happened throughout the 20th century, and the end result is a strongly self-identifying cultural group, desirous of maintaining its cultural identity.
• Note, however, that it seems to me that there's a correlation between people distinguishing themselves as "boers" from the rest of the Afrikaner group, and their being right wing white supremacists. Certainly, the majority of the places I've encountered the distinction have been on white supremacist websites.
• Orania is not a "white town in a black country". It is an exclusively Afrikaner town in a multicultural, multiracial, albeit majority "black", country. Note that "black" in South Africa is misleading, as within that racial grouping, which was largely a construct of apartheid, there are numerous self-identifying cultural groups, such as Zulu, Xhosa, Sotho, Venda, and quite a few others.
• The vast majority of Afrikaners interested in maintaining their cultural (and linguistic) identity, seek to do so by ways that are non-exclusive. "Afrikaanses" (Afrikaans speaking people) is a new term conveying the inclusion of non-white Afrikaans speakers into a broader, multi-cultural Afrikaans linguistic culture. An example, for instance, is the hugely popular Afrikaans television show, Sevende Laan, which has a broadly multi-racial cast.
• The current government has considered, and rejected the idea of a self-governing, all-Afrikaner enclave in South Africa. They have, however, made a commitment to the protection of Afrikaner linguistic and cultural identity, on an equal footing with all other minority groups' cultural identities in the country.
• Orania is not a self-governing Afrikaner enclave. It is a corporate entity that owns private property (and reserves right of admission). Prior to the re-defining of municipal boundaries, at the end of the 90's, it was a distinct municipality. It is now incorporated into a larger local municipality, which has governmental jurisdiction over it. Any inhabitant of Orania is entitled to all the services provided by the South African government to its citizens. They are also subject to the corporate policies of the "Vluytjeskraal Aandeleblok", where those do not contravene South African law.
• It would really amuse me if the government decided to enforce affirmative action on the Vluytjeskraal Aandeleblok. At present, I think, every company with more than 50 employees has to meet certain quotas in terms of representativity in its employees. The fact that the government hasn't taken such measures could be seen as conciliatory.-Kieran 12:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Kierano, after doing some research, you will find that the Affirmative Action legislation is not applicable to Vluytjeskraal Aandeleblok in particular, as the company does not have more than 50 employees. Conciliation is not an issue. Orania does not attempt to disrupt the South African government, therefore there is no dispute that may need conciliation or mediation. -Gemsbok1 10:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I had wondered about the 50 employee limit. It kinda puts a cap on how big the town can get, though (unless they subdivide the company, or something). By conciliation I meant towards Afrikanerdom in general, and towards the Afrikaner right in particular. That the ANC was willing to talk about a Volkstaat, and include the Volkstaat Council in the constitution, was a big step for them. That the Afrikaner right didn't violently rebel against the fall of apartheid was a big step for them, too. If you dig down, the ANC (at least the upper leadership) have shown a lot of goodwill and tolerance towards the Afrikaner right since coming to power. -Kieran 14:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the two poles has done a great deal of conciliation each to give South Africa the peace it enjoys. To accuse the people of Orania, especially the leadership, of racism is however not accurate, as the founder of Orania, Prof Carel Boshoff, spent his life as a missionary to the Bantu people. Trying to preserve your own in a world dominated by market forces does not equate to the hatred of others. I would however agree that there are many people who want the Volkstaat to succeed for the wrong reasons, such as racism. These people will need to be rehabilitated, but they do not represent the idealism of Orania. --Gemsbok1 20:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

here we go. Yes I accuse the leadership of racism, regardless whether or not the founder was a missionary to the bantu people. His missionary activity does not prove or disprove his policies nor justify them. I can't figure out how people think this way. You provide no detail to his missionary work, and you make no effort to think critically. The policy of denying employement to people based on their skin color is a form of racism. The policy of discriminating from people based on their skin color is a form of racism. We've been through this before, skip to the end. Moving on! --208.254.174.148 12:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Refer to the topic below for the racism issue. Let me know which detail you need on Prof. Boshoff's missionary work, and I will gladly endeavor to supply you with it. --Gemsbok1 15:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lifting tag

The goal of Wikipedia is to be a reliable and unbiased source of information. Please provide a list of statements that may be perceived as not being neutral, so that these may receive attention or be deleted, in order for the tag to be lifted. -Gemsbok1 10:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

If no objections is provided by 31 July 2006, I will proceed to lift the neutrality tag. -Gemsbok1 20:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Eleventh Hour Has Passed!

• Objection #1: you blanked out the comments of others in the talk page. That is cited below by another user.
• Objection #2: The 2nd 'citation needed's throughout the first paragraph violates the Wikipedia NPOV policy regarding information that is widely known to be true. It is widely known that criticism regarding the Volkstaat principles revolves around the fear that they will reintroduce apartheid. That is not the same as saying that they actually ARE going to do it, but there are critics throughout the country (which makes requiring a citation invalid) and over much of the world (news reports abound of the controversy regarding the enclave).
• Objection #3: the 3rd and 4th 'citation needed' is also redundantly out of line. You cannot cite a claim based on a request to cite a source. The use of 'citation needed' at this point becomes one of using a red-tape method to bury one side of the debate in endless administrative requirements.
• Objection #4 While hypocritically the statement "...being the the only all-Afrikaner enclave in South Africa and is one of the safest low crime ridden communities in South Africa as well." is placed, without citation, and without a 'citation required'. (I assme this is a statement taken as fact not requiring validation?) This statement is also immature in it's articulation. The phrase "low crime" followed by the word "ridden" is an example of prejudice by the writer, empathizing their intense preference to this city, without looking at the facts of the entire country. We really do not know, nor have any citation to whether or not there are other cities in S. Africa who have a low, or even lower crime rate than this one. Also, the laws of the city are not administered directly by the state, and thus the problems in the city (employment discrimination, housing discrimination, etc) are not addressable as 'crimes'. In addition, the implication is violent crimes, which also I would assert is unnecessary. Many ultra-small cities in S.Africa have very low crime rates. Comparing Orania's 700 family size lack of criminality to a larger urban area is misleading. Finally the misapplication of S.Africa's greater social and economic issues are lost in the assumption that Orania is founded on principles that inherently create a less violent community since this city has little or no reported violent crime at this point. I believe this is a [Peacock_term] statement sprinkled with a little weaseling.
• Objection #5: The statement "On the other hand, supporters contend that Orania strongly prohibits the exploitation of black labour, which was a common practice under apartheid." is misleading and dishonest. One, I cannot find a single supporter who has explained this in that way. In fact the word Apartheid means "seperate-ness", and actually was an institution that forbade black people to work in certain areas in certain jobs in Afrikaaner areas AS WELL AS exploit black labor in allowed areas by paying substandard wages. The Orania proposal follows the Aparheid philosophy by refusing employment to black people in the city altogether. Thus the statement is technically true in the same sense one could say that "Terrorists have chosen to halt all attacks on the Twin Towers in the USA" since the towers are already destroyed. So the sentance should say "Orania supporters believe that employment discrimination against blacks is a justifiable method of resolving black labor exploitation." And in fact, this prejudiced form of reasoning is yet another indicator as to how ignorantly racist the Orania supporters are. (Hi, we will solve the exploitation by... not paying you fairly... but instead... refusing you to work at all and earn a living.)

So Gemsbok, as you continue to mislead the public about Orania, I continue to thwart and frustrate your efforts to present this article as a testament of white pride and an even subtler indicator of moral and ethical white superiority. Remember I can read between the lines. I also take pride in knowing that I don't have to just complain about your unfair methods, but I can break them down, expose them, and show the readership here how misleading your "lines of reasoning" are in the talk pages. --Zaphnathpaaneah 04:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Zaph, you sound like a mad Himmler on a quest. Here are my comments:

• Objection#1 - I cleared the talk page in order for progress to be made on the discussion as it became very cluttered and hard to follow. It was I who requested Dalf to archive the details that I deleted after he pointed the option out to me.
• Objection#2 - Your comments are not widely known to be true, as it is only your viewpoint. The onus is on the writer to be able to proof his/her statements when requested. If it is widely known facts, you should be able to provide ample quotations from published articles in the public domain to substantiate your claims.
• Objection#3 - No request for sources can be an admistrative hassle for a true wikipedian, research is exactly what we are supposed to do.
• Objection#4 - You are welcome to place your own requests for sources with "citation needed" tabs. I am not the only person modifying the article, as you should have noticed in the "History" tab. I do however wish to refer you to your own "Objection1" as it is widely known in South Africa that Orania has a 0% violent crime rate.
• Onjection#5 - You are welcome to site your views, if you are able to provide independent proof of your claims from independent sources in the public domain.

You are welcome to modify articles according to the rules and best interest of wikipedia, but you must be carefull of treading onto the grounds of vandalism. Gemsbok1 06:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

this edit may be ill advised in blanking most of the page. Since I have not read the blanked text and don't know if it was perhpas simply a case of clearing the air I am not going to bother putting it back or archiving it. However, in general you shoudl archive the talk page rather than deleting it especially if you are deleting the remarks of someoen who disagrees with you. If you need some help archiving the content drop me a note and I can help. Dalf | Talk 10:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I will. --68.60.55.162 13:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Racist or not?

Zaph continually accuse the founders of Orania of being racist. As a proudly black wikipedian (refer to Zaphnathpaaneah)), Zaph is convinced through his biased view that Orania discriminate against black people only, and therefore are being racist.

It is true that Orania does not want to accomodate black people. It is however also true that Orania does not want to accomodate any other white people who are not Afrikaners.

The discrimation of one ethnic group against all others, is commonly known as the right to associate. The United Nations resolution 47/135 of 18 Dec 1992 grants ethnic minorities this right in Article 2, point 4.

Zaph must note that Afrikaners are an internationally recognized seperate ethnic group, and they are as different from the other white South Africans, as the English are different from the French.

The fact that Orania discriminate against all non Afrikaners, including whites, therefore proves beyond any doubt that Orania is not racist, but enacting it's internationally sanctioned right to associate as an Afrikaner and minority ethnic group. -Gemsbok1 06:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)