Talk:Warriors of the Boer Nation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What about this then: "Today it has been fixed up and between 500 and 600 white Afrikaners, including around 100 children, live in Orania under the slogan of "selfwerksaamheid" (self-reliance). Black or coloured (mixed-race) people are not allowed to live or work here" - Source: [1] and another source from BBC, again confirming the whites-only policy [2] -max rspct 20:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Good grief! I knew I should have returned back here sooner.
I responded to this exact text in both your & my talk page the day you posted it.
Just in case you missed it: here it is reposted.
What you fail to realize is that this in itself is not "a revival of Apartheid" as Apartheid was an official State sanctioned set of public legislation & centralized laws which created internal discrimination amongst local established national & ethnic groups (with the exception of the self governed "homelands") while the Oranians on the other hand are working to avoid this state of affairs by purposely living in a sparsely inhabited region where only they will constitute the demos. Since Orania is owned by a private company any policy that the private company chooses to have can not ever be considered "a revival of Apartheid" since a private company has the right to decide who their members or shareholders are & is within its discretion to decide such matters just as a proprietor of any property has the right to choose its policies & associations.
The whole point behind Orania restricting non Afrikaans peoples from living or working there is precisely to avoid the very sort of Apartheid that you claim they are attempting to revive. Do you not realize this? Orania is committed to doing all of their own labour & those that run it do not want to compromise these principles or allow non Afrikaans peoples to permanently live there as it would threaten the integrity of the project. This is not about race as English speakers are also not allowed or encouraged to live there either. What you conveniently forget is that if they allowed non Afrikaans people to live there, the newcomers would bring their language & culture to the region thereby compromizing the goal of creating an Afrikaans cultural & linguistic enclave.
Remember: Orania is not a State. In fact it is the wave of the future in many ways as this sort of private sector enterprise will likely one day replace the public sector & the apparatus of the State as news reports in the past have suggested. The right of freedom of association is a recognized right of individuals & private companies & asserting that any policy enacted by such is somehow a revival of Apartheid -which has the coercive power of the State- is an intellectually dishonest statement.
I just can not figure you out. In one breath you lambaste the so called "rich white minority" -which is in fact English speaking not Afrikaans- accusing them of killing more people than the numbers of farm killing victims without a shred of evidence, yet when a small group of Boers & Afrikaners take proper measures to attain greater self determination through the peaceful settlement of a sparsely populated region of scorching desert: you accuse them of reviving Apartheid practices.
The whole aim of Orania is to create an Afrikaans population consolidation as a result of another Great Trek which in itself would prevent the revival of Apartheid practices as there would exist a natural majority demographic Afrikaans population center.
Postscript.
It was the rich White minority which was responsible for ultimatley reversing the Boers' independence in the Transvaal Republic. But in your twisted logic, somehow this rich English speaking minority is supposedly behind the Boeremag. (huh?)
Furthermore: there is not even a shred of evidence that these specific groups even exist considering that the only thing that ever made mention of them was a series of suspicious / anonymous / unsubtantiated & unauthenticated letters which were sent to Afrikaans newspapers.
Contents |
[edit] Critical Analysis of the Report.
Now let's analyze this BBC report.
This group is totally unknown & no one has ever heard of it before which would cause any reasonable person to question whether it even exists at all. How can an unknown group "claim" responsibility if it has not even been established that it even exists & how can its supposed claim be taken seriously when the said claim originates from an e-mail? An unreliable & questionable source to be sure as anyone can fabricate an e-mail to appear to be something it might not in fact be.
This flimsy source is not sufficient to conclude that this group was behind such an act let alone that even such a group exists.
The government seems to be intent on blaming " White extremists" a claim which must be viewed with skepticism considering the source & the inherent conflict of interest of the Xhosa minority run State.
This fact alone raises the suspicion as to the authenticity of the group as the Boeremag itself has been exposed as a government front group with Vorster being a CIA agent.
Henk van Zyl, one of the 22 co-accused -- and only the third of 260 state witnesses to testify in the 10th month of the Pretoria "treason trial" -- testified Friday that the so-called "leader" of the plot Tom Vorster, worked for the CIA and that his wife was a police informant..
This latest testimony makes one wonder about what is really going on in this increasingly odd "treason trial".
Not only is it wending its way at an excruciatingly slow pace through the law courts-- which means that 14 of the 22 arrested, innocent Afrikaners are facing having to spend the next 22 years in Pretoria Central prison with convicted criminals -- but now it seems that at least two of the first three witnesses who testified thus far show evidence of extensive tampering with the very existence of this so-called "rightwing terror group."
The first witness has already admitted that he was a paid informer for the State who had even coined the name for the organisation and had even set off explosive charges and lured many of the present trialists into pre-arranged, tape-recorded meetings.
- The man was, in other words, a paid government agent provocateur.
- How believable and reliable can such a witness be?
- And now this man claims that he had overheard the State prosecution claiming that their background security check of Tom Vorster had unearthed the unsavoury information that Tom Vorster was actually a military intelligence expert who had had close ties with the American foreign security organ, the CIA, and that Vorster's wife had been a state "informant"...
- Tom Vorster meanwhile, who denied that he was ever their leader, is now being shunned by his fellow trialists -- thus discord and distrust is being constantly sown and which is interfering with these people's rights to a fair trial.
Are all these "Boeremag coup" claims just another pre-arranged scam, wholly created to boost the (international) standing of SA president Thabo Mbeki by murky security operatives -- similar to the "coup" claims also being bandied about against 87 other South Africans who are still incarcerated in Zimbabwe and Equatorial Africa?
The above can be found at this link.
Back to the BBC report.
This report does not even state which one. There were in fact numerous Boer Republics. The Transvaal Republic also known as the South African Republic / the Orange Free State / the Natalia Republic & the New Republic or Vryheid (Freedom: a town & its capital) Republic (built on land granted to the Boers by the then Zulu King Cetswayo later incorporated into the South African Republic then later annexed as part of northern Natal province) are the most well known Boer Republics.
Note: the claim. This whole episode is based on nothing but a dubious & unsubstantiated claim.
They are still investigating the veracity of this letter therefore how can there even be an article on this group when no conclusion of the matter has been determined?
This just about says it all. This has all the hallmarks of a false flag group just as has been seen in other countries where the State attempts to feign the existence terrorist opposition in order to advance their authoritarian & self serving agenda. This is reminiscent of the German Reichstag fire which the Nazis blamed on its opponents & the ANC has been reported in the past as having a National Socialist bent. Think about it. Not one single Boer stands to gain from these senseless terrorist actions, but the State on the other hand stands to gain quite a lot & would have an excellent rational to crack down on groups that they view as opponents & are hostile towards.
More at on the Nazism of the ANC found at: Racial Discrimination in South Africa.
Just a response to your edit line.
Racial separatism is not necessarily to be equated with racial supremacism since even going by what little has been puprorted of this group, it is clear that they are looking to restore territorial Boer self determination & are not interested in supremacism as it has been purported & alleged that they wanted to "expel" the non Boers not rule over them as Apartheid did.
[edit] Boer Separatism Not White Supremacism.
This group whether it exists or not is clearly a Boer separatist group. Not a White supremacist group like the White Liberation Movement. (Blanke Bevrydingsbeweging) of past. The so called Warriors of the Boer Nation -also reported as the National Warriors & the Boer Nation Warriors- if genuine is only interested in promoting Boer separatism & is not interested in promoting White supramacism or separatism. The alleged group after all has the phrase Boer Nation in its title & not White Nation.
Remember: The Boers are not White Colonials -as the English speakers were- but are indigenous as they were formed on African soil from the VOC servants from the Netherlands & northern Europe who amalgamated with religious & political refugees from France & Belgium (including a slight absorption of Indians -who were slaves of the VOC- Khoi -the indigenous people of the Western Cape- & Malays taken from Java) who arrived in the Cape from the 1650s into the 1700s becoming a nation before their first encounter with a local Bantu group (the Xhosas) during the mid 1770s as they trekked eastwards into the expanding eastern Cape frontier.
The fact of the matter is that this alleged group can not be automatically presumed to be a White Supremacist group since a Boer nationalist group of generals rebelled against the White Afrikaner rulers of South Africa in 1914 - then run by Louis Botha - in an exact attempt at restoring the Boer Republics. Therefore the assertion that this group is a White Supremacist group simply because they seek to reestablish the Boer Republics that even the Boer Generals of 1914 attempted to -is erroneous & presumptuous.
The statements attributed to this group makes no mention of White Supremacism, but does explicitly mention Boer separatism. This group -whether it is real or not - is aimed at Boer self determination & nothing has indicated that it is aimed at White Supremacism or even teamed up with any other White South African ethnic group.
[edit] The Letters Have Not Been Authenticated.
This entire article is in violation of the NPOV rule as it is based on a supposition which is based on nothing more than unauthenticated letters which were sent to pro government Afrikaans newspapers.
Remember: these letters to which the report is based on have not been authenticated which means that any article concerning this group is rather presumtuous & premature at best & erroneous & disparaging at worst.
Since if these letters turn out to be a hoax & there is no such group as the Warriors of the Boer Nation than the entire article would be compromised & entirely incorrect. Therefore your wording is far too POV as it presumes the authenticity of the letters while -as the news article you cite points out- the authorities theselvese have not authenticated the letters.
Furthermore your erroneous assertion that the " rich White minority" is behind the Boeremag is further dispelled when considering the fact that the English speaking segment of the White population is much better off in the current dispensation as their language English is now the standard language of business & politics. While the Afrikaans language on the other hand is facing extinction as a result of its removal from even formerly Afrikaans universities & its demotion in official use despite the fact that there are more native speakers of Afrikaans (of which half of whom are of the mixed race cultural groups of the Cape) than English.
The fact of the matter is that numerous individuals within the super rich among the White minority were instrumental in handing control of the South African State over to the ANC. The fact of the matter is that most of these rich folks are not as affected by the governments racist employment policies & repressive political legislation while the average & poor White person on the other hand is left holding the bag for the actions of the rich.
Singling out the so called rich White minority is reminiscent of the German Nazis who singled out their so called rich minorities as well. History has shown where this sort of scapegoating can lead. As a matter of fact it has already begun on the farms of the poorer segment of Boers & others of which Gregory Stanton -the president of Genocide Watch- stated that the killings & attacks against the Boer farmers constitues a genocide under the Genocide Convention. The Boers in point of fact are not even part of the rich segment as much as the English speakers who still dominate the business & economic sector.
Close to about 25 % of the local South African Boer & Afrikaner population are living under the poverty line as it has been reported in the recent past that almost 500 000 Afrikaners are living under the poverty line in the republic.
The Afrikaners are also now subjected to Nuremberg type laws that the German State used against Jews.
I notice that you like to point out the presumed actions of a very small fringe group of Boer radicals within the so called White minority while ignoring the bombs that the Cape Malays within the Coloured minority have set off in the past.
The so called Warriors of the Boer Nation likely does not even exist at all let alone as a formally structured organization with signed up membership lists or cards. Those who are allegedly associated with this supposed group have been arrested which appears to moot the possibility that such a group could still exist now (if it ever did) given this pertinent fact. Furthermore it is associated with the discredited Boeremag which has been exposed as a suspected government front group (its leader Tom Vorster is an admitted government informant with ties to the CIA of the US) further casting suspicion on the authenticity of the alleged group.
I find it most bizarre & hypocritical that you have created a page which in implication admits the existence of the Boer nation considering your recent past assertion that the Boers "belong to a particular period of SA history" & your right wing based assertion -as the term Afrikaner & its false "unity" was promoted by the National Party & the Afrikaner Broderbond & other right wings sources- that the Boers are all somehow now Afrikaners despite the fact that the Boers -particularly of Voortrekker descent- are & have ever been a minority of the total White Afrikaner population.
This whole scenario of alleged radical Boer terrorism is likely a set up by the State to justify the pushing out of the Boers from their homeland. Classic State manipulated tacticts.
The Boers are not a racial group but a cultural / national group.
The notion that this alleged Warriors of the Boer Nation group is a White Supremacist group is a bit of a misnomer based on the fact that the alleged group is specifically aimed at Boer separatism not White supremacism nor even general White separatism. The fact of the matter is that a radical element among certain Boers would resist government repression even if the government were to be White (as Boers did in 1914) & even if the Boers themselves were to be non White. (Remember: there are Zulus who are & were also violently opposed to the racist Xhosa clique which runs the ANC) There are in fact Boer separatists who do exist, but they are striving peacefully for the self determination of specifically the Boer nation. Not a greater White alleged dominance of the British created macro State. The Boers have been struggling for independence since 1795 on the Cape frontier & achieved it for 50 years within the internationally recognized Boer Republics of the past.
There needs to be further independent verification that such as group calling itself the Warriors of the Boer nation does in fact exist before an encyclopedic article can be created about it since as it stands now the only source pertaining the the alleged existence of this group emanates solely from the word of questionable & unauthenticated letters sent to Afrikaans newspapers. Remember: even the police are not sure that these letters (claiming responsibility under the alleged group's name) are authentic but are presuming such simply as a precaution.
The following is a transcript of a segment of what Gregory Stanton said in the Carte Blanche television program.
Read the full transcript of this program at this link.
Dr. Stanton is a retired American professor of law who heads Genocide Watch, the organisation that co-ordinates the international campaign to end genocide.
We met him in Berlin where he was attending a conference in remembrance of the Holocaust.
He believes that, apart from crime, there's also another motive.
Gregory: “There's a motive of hatred, that these are hate crimes, that people are tortured, that they're murdered in ways that are de-humanising.”
Not only does Stanton believe farm murders are hate crimes, but he's also recently warned the world that the white farmers in South Africa could be facing genocide. Twenty years ago he witnessed the horrors of the Cambodian genocide.
Gregory: “I realised, I think, from that point forward that I would spend the rest of my life working to stop genocide and to bring those who committed it to justice.”
Years later, that's exactly what he did. He was the person responsible for drafting the UN resolutions that created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Stanton has identified eight stages of genocide by comparing the history of genocides in the 20th century. He describes it as a process, rather than an act that could take many years to be effected.
Gregory: “The third stage is really where you begin the downward spiral into genocide and that is the stage of de-humanisation. It is where you treat the other people as though they're less than human.”
A scene like this, he says, should have the alarm bells ringing.
This farmer was ambushed at his farm gate, shot in the back and left to die. His vehicle was burnt out and his body displayed with the lights and number plates.
Gregory: “These are clearly hate crimes. It's such a symbolic expression of de-humanisation. They're so treating him like a thing.”
It's often thought that a whole group needs to be killed before it's defined as genocide, but that's not the case.
Stanton says the more than one thousand four hundred farmers killed in South Africa could be classified under the Genocide Convention.
Gregory: “Even if it's a few hundred individuals who have been targeted, that is an act of genocide under the convention.”
However, Stanton warns that South Africa has already slipped into the fifth stage of the process, or what he refers to as polarisation.
Gregory: “Extremists attempt to drive out the centre, they attempt to divide the world into just two camps; into us and them.”
And from there on, he says, it's a small step to the seventh stage when the actual genocide takes place and where the word genocide is used.
Gregory: “People who commit this crime often think amazingly enough that they're purifying their society in some way or another, you know - they're getting rid of insects or some kind of less than human form of life.”
A civil war is potentially more likely, says Moolman.
Prof Neels Moolman: “I don't think we are there yet, but I think that we are speeding to that point very fast if the radicals are not controlled properly.”
Gregory: “They will say that the genocide was really just a civil war as though a civil war somehow was an opposite of genocide when in fact many genocides occurred during civil wars.”
Watch part of this special at this link.
The above sheds light on the situation facing the Boers & why the government finds it easy to blame them for the bombing (as an oppressed group) despite the complete lack of evidence in even establishing wether a Boer terrorist group exists or not.
[edit] Stop Fabricating.
Stop asserting things which have not been certified. The very reports that you cite have not claimed that this group even exists!!!!! The authorities have stated right in the report you cite that the letters have not been authenticated, therefore when you assert that this group "has claimed responsibility": you are asserting something that has not been determined & you are violating the NPOV rule. Furthermore: if this group in fact exists it is much more of a Boer Separatist group -analogous to the Transvaal Separatists of the 1990s- & is not a White Supremacist group.
Stop asserting that this group exists when it has not yet been determined as is stated in the very news reports that you cite. Stop asserting that this group is a White Supremacist group when there has not been a single indication that it is anything other than a Boer Separatist group.
No one has claimed that this group even exists. It is not "original research" to state the clear & known facts that this group has not been substantiated & that the letters have not been authenticated. The reports even mention this explicitly when they note that the letters have not been authenticated. Asserting that this group exists & that it "claimed responsibilty" is in complete contradiction to the report. No sinlge person affiliated or otherwise with the alleged group in question has claimed responsibilty -this is significant. The letters claimed responsibilty while the letters themselves have not been authenticated. This is explicitly mentioned in the report. Stop posting your offensive POV in these articles. Read what the very report you cite actually states. Stop fabricating.
[edit] There Were Advocates For The Restoration of the Boer Republics During the Apartheid Era.
The restoration of the Boer Republics is not analogous to a return of Apartheid as there were movements for the restoration of the Boer Republics during the Apartheid era. The most notable example was that of Robert Van Tonder who left the governing National Party in 1961 at the height of Apartheid specifically to pursue the restoration of the Boer Republics as they existed before the Anglo-Boer War. Therefore: if Boer Republic restoration was all about reinstituting Apartheid: Robert van Tonder would certainly not have left the party of Apartheid at the height of the Apartheid era -in 1961 when Apartheid appeared unstoppable - in order to pursue the ideal of Boer Republic restoration.
Robert van Tonder wrote a book about the subject called "Boer State" & was the leader of the Boerestaat Party which he founded in 1986 after being frustrated which the other political parties for not pursuing the ideal of Boer Republic restoration.
The Boers of Voortrekker descent did not believe in imposing their beliefs or culture onto the other national groups - consistent which their Calvinist faith- as the Christian missionaries had while the Afrikaners of the Cape tended to be neo colonial.
