South Africanada

8/3/2019 South Africanada

1/18

SOUTH AFRICANADA

Located in Trafalgar Square London England lays the culture center and social

club known as Canada House. Opposite Canada House sits South Africa House, home

of the South African embassy, and formerly a popular target for activists to throw things

at during the era of apartheid. They face across from each other as two branches thatgrew off of the British Empire, and remain united to the trunk by the Commonwealth.

This puts South Africa in an advantageous position to be the proxy for spreading Global

Canada through the African continent, motherland to all humanity. First: a brief history.

Wikipedia

Most of the colonial possessions that were controlled by the European empires

can be divided into two categories. Some were just a source of raw materials, cheaplabor, and forcing the locals to buy your crap. Others were targeted for large scale

settlement, creating a colonial civil society modeled closely on west-European culture.


2/18

Category 2 colonies included ones in Australia, New Zealand, and the Americas.

Category 1 colonies were found more in South Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. In Africathere was one notable exception, to be found at the southern edge of the continent, where

a hybrid of a Category 1 and a Category 2 colony was created.

European colonization began with a Dutch port in the Cape of Good Hope, to re-

supply ships that traveled along the trade routes between Europe and Asia, making it a lot

like the trading posts that fur trappers frequented in the wilderness of New France.

With the liberation of the serfs in the Netherlands there were a lot of landless

farmers that went to southern Africa in the same spirit as European immigrants who went

to the New World, to find some land for themselves. The Dutch were joined byGermans, and the French Huguenots. As a religious minority in France, the Huguenots

left in the same spirit as the Pilgrims on the Mayflower. Just as the descendants of

European settlers in the Americas eventually began to think of themselves as Americans,

the white people born of these European refugees came to think of themselves asAfricans. Thats right, White Africans.

Just as the English did with New France, they took over South Africa and

imposed their rule. Just like the residents of Quebec, the non-English speaking whites

were not too happy with this arrangement. In both New France and South Africa, not

only did the English rule over them, but they began bringing their own settlers, creating aprivileged minority loyal to the crown, just like in the plantation of Ireland.

So, even amongst whites there was a sense developed of us and them. Thosewho spoke English became the permanent outsiders, while those who spoke the local

form of Dutch, mixed with French and German, were the true Africans, or as they called

themselves in their own language Afrikaners.

As they also did throughout their empire, the English brought in a sizeable

population of cheap skilled workers, mostly from their largest Category 1 colony, India.

In all of these ways, South Africa seemed like a Category 2 colony, like Canada.

South Africa was also like a Category 2 colony in that the land European settled on

already had people living on it. And, like in the Americas, it was easy to push the nativesaside, because they did not use the same kind of concepts of property and ownership, and

they lacked firearms.

No longer tolerating British rule, the Afrikaners headed deeper into the interior of

the continent, just as settlers in North America headed into the Wild West. They even

traveled in covered wagons. Unfortunately for the Afrikaners, on this land where theyhad established the Boer Republics of the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, there was

plenty of diamonds and gold that England wanted for itself. Canada sent troops to aid

England in the Anglo-Boer War, although many French-Canadians opposed this,

sympathizing with the Boers as another group of European colonists being subjected to


3/18

English rule. During the war, many of the Afrikaners, including women and children

were rounded up and put in concentration camps.

Just like how the adjacent English colonies of Upper Canada, Lower Canada,

New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia were each given a degree of self governance, so were

the adjacent English colonies of Cape Colony, Natal, the Transvaal, and the Orange FreeState. And just as these four British North American colonies were united under the self

governance of the Dominion of Canada, these four British African colonies were united

in their autonomy as the Union of South Africa, founded in 1910.

For all of these forms of parallel development, there was one really big difference

between South Africa and Category 2 colonies. They never saw the same large influx of

constant newcomers from Europe that Australia or the Americas saw. As such, the whiteAfricans did not manage to push into every nook and cranny of habitable land in South

Africa. Settlers, in South Africa faced a problem that no true Category 2 colony faced.

They had never become the majority.

In North America, the First Nations were eventually given the civil rights, on

paper at least, of full citizenship. This was only after centuries of decimation guaranteedthat they werent going to be taking over the government. Cecil Rhodes never got to see

the same demographic change that General Custer did. Coincidentally, South Africa was

a bit slower to grant citizenship to its darker skinned residents.

Even amongst the white population, Afrikaners felt like they were left in a

position of being underprivileged. Having traditionally been the elite, English-speaking

white South Africans remained the wealthiest residents. Each group remained separatefrom the other, living in different areas, working in different jobs, and attending different

schools. This sounds much akin to the lines that have long been drawn between

Americans of different races. And sounding a lot like the ideas of Black Power seen inthe United States, Afrikaners sought to establish their own institutions for their own

communities, so they wouldnt have to be dependent on the English-speaking whites,

who were living their parallel lives. I can kind of see how this might have inspiredpolitical ideas that were yet to come to full fruition.

In 1931 the same Statute of Westminster that granted Canada complete control

over its own legislation also gave South Africa its full independence. Eventually all of theother colonies in Africa broke free of colonization. However in South Africa, although

they were now independent of Europe, the people left in charge of the military, the

police, and the government, were all of European descent.

South Africa might have seemed like a unique case of a colony gaining

independence but it is more of a microcosm of what was typical for post-colonial states.In every case of decolonization, the conquerors left in place the sense of nation-state that

developed in Europe.


4/18

Also, although they were rarely white, residents of the colony who were the most

familiar with the systems of governance that the colonial powers established became the

leaders of the newly independent states, and continued to use the same styles of laws,economics and social organization that the empires established. It ensures that the

perceptions of property and ownership imported from Europe remain the law of the land,

and anyone who ever hopes of being in any position of importance must learn and live bythose principles. The former colonial powers find governments like the one in South

Africa the easiest to do business with. They speak the same language, money.

If the old colonial empires no longer had teeth it was because they remained

embedded in the wounds they inflicted. Like in other countries, most South Africans still

lived traditional lifestyles, but they were not the ones with the authority. Without the

means to take control for themselves and preserve their access to the resources that gavethem the independence to survive on their own, for many people living a traditional

lifestyle came to mean living in poverty.

I think one thing tourists like about Australia, is that the land seems so exotic, butthe lifestyle and the people are comfortably familiar. South Africa also has an exotic

landscape, and for a long time if tourists walked the city streets, most of the people theywould see were white like them. Of course, in South Africa this was only maintained

because of curfew laws placed on blacks, who were not allowed to live in the same parts

of the city, but relegated to metal shacks in the townships that were only close by enough

to provide cheap labor during daylight hours. Unlike Australia, South Africas populationwas over 70% pure black African, and it could only look like Australia to the people in

charge because of some very restrictive housing laws underapartheid. As much as we

might like another Australia in the world, our conscience should tell us that there issomething wrong with that.

International opinion of the apartheidgovernment, even amongst whites inEurope and North America, was often negative. White South Africans have had some

trouble understanding this, because they saw our culture as being from the same western,

European roots as their own. Many of the people who have denounced apartheidwouldnot be ready to admit it, I believe that there is a chance that their condemnation might not

have been so strong had they lived in South Africa and been amongst the privileged

minority. This still doesnt mean that they were wrong to condemn injustice. An

apartheid-era politician said that South Africa could not be held hostage by the U.S butdid that justify the National Party government holding South Africa hostage itself?

History will now show that apartheid eventually came to an end, and all SouthAfricans were granted the rights of universal suffrage. Many white South Africans came

to accept these changes, but many missed the days when the justices of the peace,

administrators of governance, and civil servants looked the same as them and shared theircultural values. Almost a million whites have emigrated since the end of apartheid.

It is easy to argue that the situation for white South Africans is in many ways

worse now than it was forty years ago. When the government is no longer primarily


5/18

concerned with ensuring that everyone amongst the white minority has a job,

unemployment figures amongst Afrikaners are certainly going to go up. Furthermore,

with continuing income inequalities combined with the repeal of segregation laws thathad maintained a barrier between the rich and the poor, the end of apartheid was marked

by an increase in crime. Many would argue that this also had to do with a loss of

government efficiency when jobs in the service sector, economic management, and policeenforcement were given to mostly inexperienced black South Africans. White

supremacists will of course argue that this proves that blacks are inherently inferior, but

when few blacks had access to higher education there is going to be an experience gap.

With the legacy of apartheid, it explains, but does not justify, why there are some

in South Africa who feel like the whites do not belong in their country. There have been

many documented cases of farmers and their families being attacked because they werewhite. Many were tortured before being eventually killed. A lot of whites used to live in

neighboring Zimbabwe, but most have been driven out, and their president has stated that

whites should not live in Zimbabwe. There are fears that this reverse color KKK

mentality could take root in South Africa as well.

There have been instances when the South African Police Force has kept jobpositions unfilled rather than give them to whites. South Africans had good reason to fear

the brutality of white cops during the era of apartheid, but with the new democratic

government they would finally be the protection force for the whole country, regardless

of their color. This is doing a disservice to a country that has been plagued by high ratesof violent crimes like rape and murder. It also indicates that there might be some

government officials with a screw you attitude towards the white minority.

Afrikaners still mostly control agriculture in South Africa, owning most of the

farms. The skills of white farmers have been a valuable resource in making the land

productive. Although this makes them important for national interests it doesnt meanthat they deserve special rights, or keep the black farm workers they employ from owning

their own homes. But this shouldnt mean that someone should have to give up their farm

just because they are white. Whites used to also dominate the farmland in neighboringZimbabwe. Zimbabwes government was more concerned about removing this image of

their colonial past than they were with smart development, so they quickly seized all of

the land from the white farmers and redistributed to government supporters who had very

little knowledge about how to tend the land. A country that was once known as thebreadbasket of Africa is now threatened with famine. Despite this failure, some South

African politicians want to take the same route and cut off their nose to spite their face.

During apartheid, the South African government was by the Afrikaners, and for

the Afrikaners. From the hardships their ancestors faced to settle the land, with a history

often written in blood, there is this feeling that South Africa really is their homeland.Like any tribe, they felt it was their duty to protect their homeland, and to be first and

foremost concerned for the well-being of their own. For this reason many white South

Africans felt betrayed when their government negotiated a transition to black majority

rule. Some feel a longing for many aspects of their former lives that now feel lost, like a


6/18

sense of security sovereignty, and the right to preserve ones own culture. With

sentiments of feeling cheated by the power-sharing negotiations that preceded the

election of Nelson Mandela as the first black president, it is obvious that there are somewhite South Africans who miss the comforts they had under apartheid. I can understand

this.

I have just one question. HOW THE HELL DID THEY THINK THEY WERE

GOING TO DO IT? We are talking about less than 20% of the population thinking they

could maintain control over the destiny of the other 80% of the people living in theircountry. But out of curiosity, let us try to think up things that the apartheid era

government could have done differently to better serve the white people in the long run.

It is fair to speculate that the present situation in South Africa would be a lot morefavorable to everybody, including Afrikaners, if the government began deconstructing

apartheid much earlier. I wish someone could have shown a crystal ball to the architects

of apartheid, and made them see that despite their best efforts, Afrikaners would no

longer be in control fifty years in the future. Perhaps then we could have convinced themto start introducing political reforms, to appease both international and domestic demands

for change and thus buy time to help birth a future non-racial South Africa.

A good place to start political reform would have been Namibia, the large

territory to the north-west that they were given trusteeship over. They extended the laws

of apartheid to Namibia, where whites made up an even smaller portion of the populace.The United Nations thus decreed that South African control of Namibia was illegal.

It might have been possible to convince South Africa to not apply the laws ofapartheid to Namibia. The white government would only do this if they thought they had

something to gain from it, so such a proposal would want to be worded as if it was to the

benefit of the whites. Well for one, making a conciliatory gesture to the internationalcommunity could have opened up new trading opportunities. Also, if they had shown

more enlightened governance of its trust-territory, Britain might have given more serious

consideration to South Africas request to for jurisdiction over the neighboring territoriesof Bechuanaland and Rhodesia (now Botswana and Zimbabwe respectively). It would

also give them good practice in organizing a non-racial society for themselves.

The apartheid government was not completely oblivious to the pressures ofreform, but they still wanted a country where Afrikaners could be in charge. This inspired

the new constitution in the 1980s that would have provided a tri-cameral legislature. One

house of parliament would be for whites, one for the Indians, and one for the Coloreds(mixed race population). However, it was still set up so the white parliament would have

most of the power, and it still did not grant full civil rights to the Indian or Colored

minorities. Both of these communities put together were still less numerous than thewhite South Africans, so even if they were given universal suffrage they would not have

robbed the Afrikaners of their numerical majority in the government. The white

government could have easily granted this without conceding control, but even that was

considered being too charitable.


7/18

Even with the multiracial tri-cameral parliament, the South African government

was still ignoring the black majority. The government justified itself by saying that thesepeople were mostly uneducated, and were too unfamiliar with western norms to become

fully integrated into the system. They did however give the title of honorary whites to

immigrants from Taiwan or Japan. They justified this because they considered thesepeople, although not Caucasian, as being educated and familiar with the standards and

social norms of living in an industrialized society. Among the tens of millions of black

South Africans surely the government could have found at least a couple of million whocould have qualified. Nelson Mandela was a lawyer for Christs sake. If they granted full

rights of citizenship to a fraction of the countrys blacks they could have still maintained

a white majority in the government but given the appearance of being more inclusive.

Even this would not erase the evils of apartheid however. It might have offered

the opportunity to allow many black South Africans to join the middle class, but millions

of others would still be left in the poverty of the townships. But then, this is not so

different from the present day reality of South Africa. Although the African NationalCongress now controls the government, for many blacks life is as hard as it was during

apartheid. Had the reality of the black middle class been established while the whites stillcontrolled the country it would have put more pressure on the government after it was

finally transferred to black majority rule to narrow the income gap.

If there was going to be true democracy, the Afrikaners still wanted to have acountry where they could be the majority. This inspired them to create the homelands,

areas of land within the established borders of South Africa set aside for the different

cultural groups within the black South African community that would eventually be madeinto independent countries.

At first glance the homeland idea might seem like an acceptable proposal. Itensured that everyone got a slice of the cake that was South Africa. But imagine someone

who is about to have a slice of cake for themselves, but instead of taking the small wedge

shaped slice, you see them claim the large Pac-man shaped piece representing themajority of the cake only for themselves. So it was with the land distribution that the

white South Africans intended to keep for themselves. The homelands (aka Bantustans)

totaled a land area of about 13% of South Africa, to be set aside for over 70% of the

population. And despite their limited size, these homelands were distorted into oddshapes and fragmented territories that looked too ridiculous to ever be taken seriously as

independent countries. This was to ensure that white land owners could still have

unfettered access to the best land. That is hardly generous.

Furthermore, when giving independence to the Bantustans, South Africa followed

the same pattern used in de-colonization. The homelands were left impoverished, andwithout any infrastructure of their own, so they were still economically dependent, and at

the mercy of their former masters. The administrators left in charge of these new

governments were rarely democratic, but rather despotic puppet regimes.


8/18

The apartheid government dictated the reality of the Bantustans, and they had a

distorted perception of what was equitable. To even come close to being fair, the territory

of the independent homelands would have had to have been much bigger, and made outof contiguous pieces of land.

The map on the left, from Wikipedia, shows the size and locations of the former

Bantustans in South Africa. The altered map on the right shows what the size of theBantustans would have been if they actually reflected the distribution of the population

groups they were meant to represent. Even then, the non-black minority would be left

with a disproportionately large share of the country. This would only come close toseeming equitable if you take into account that most of the arable land is in the east, and

if whites offered full rights to the Colored population who dominate most of the western

half of the country. They once had those rights, until the apartheid regime removed them.

Another alternative is that if in addition to these 10 Bantustans there was anadditional Bantustan meant for Afrikaners. Like the Bantustans, it would be limited in

size, and the rest of South Africa outside of these Bantustan areas would be a multiracialdemocracy, like South Africa is today. The demand for an Afrikaner Bantustan was never

too great however since the white rulers still deluded themselves into thinking they could

control the country as a whole.

Proposing a power distribution in South Africa that looked like the map on the

right would never have been accepted by the apartheid government. What is strange isthat now many people who used to support apartheid might wish they had such an

arrangement, since it would leave whites in control over a much larger area than they do

now.

Even this multicolored map on the right does not accurately reflect the

multicultural nature of South Africa. Areas where one cultural group form a clear

majority still often have a large minority made up of other cultural groups. A largeportion of the white population lives in the eastern part of the country, despite being

clearly outnumbered by groups like the Zulu and Sesotho. If each of these regions were to


9/18

be exclusively for the people in the majority then millions of South Africans would

become internally displaced.

One possible alternative that South Africa could have tried was to not try to

classify the homelands as independent ethnically exclusive countries, but rather as

provinces. This way they could comprise a larger area without carving up the Republic ofSouth Africa like a roast. For instance, the Xhosa homelands of Transkei and Ciskei

would be united as one, and be roughly the same size and shape as the current province of

the Eastern Cape, where over 80% of the people speak Xhosa. Like Namibia, theseprovinces would be apartheid-free zones.

Most African countries only use the languages of their former colonial masters as

official languages. South Africa however now has eleven official languages. I do worrythough that, just like French in Louisiana and Gaelic in Nova Scotia that most of these

languages might be in danger of falling into novelty status. During apartheid, most signs

in South Africa were in English and Afrikaans. Rather than now include nine other

languages, new signs are usually in English only, even if the majority in that area speakAfrikaans, Xhosa, Zulu, etc.

The new provinces of South Africa, formed after the dismantling of apartheid,

look a lot like the map with the envisioned enlarged Bantustans. There are provinces

where different languages are in the majority, but in commerce and government

preference is still always given to English. This is another example of just emphasizingthe use of the language that is already the most popular to learn. Will there be much

incentive for most people to take the time to learn these languages? I fear that this could

turn into another example of the growing gap between many people speaking a fewlanguages, and a few people speaking many languages, and being threatened with

insignificance. It makes it seem in South Africa, like in Ireland, as if the ultimate victory

still belongs to the British Empire.

To preserve linguistic diversity, I would be a Language Nazi, and enact in all of

these new South African provinces stringent measures to preserve and promote theselanguages. That being, on the provincial level that regional language is the only official

language, and if any signs or documents are going to be in more than one language, the

official language would still be displayed the most prominently. Everyone in the Free

State would be expected to learn Sesotho, everyone in the Eastern Cape would beexpected to learn Xhosa, and everyone in Kwazulu-Natal would be expected to learn

Zulu. Provincial boundaries might be adjusted to more closely reflect linguistic areas.

The population in these provinces could still be multiracial, and people could still speaktheir own languages, but they would need a working knowledge in the language of the

local majority. The country as a whole could still have multiple official languages, just as

Canada as a whole has two official languages.

Even after making all of these pro-active reforms, the white government still

would not have been able to save apartheid, but it would have been a lot easier to make


10/18

the transition to an apartheid-free South Africa. This would have made the current

situation better for all South Africans, including the whites.

Amazingly, well before Nelson Mandela was released from prison, many white

South Africans thought that they had already made too many concessions. Giving away

scraps is hardly charity. This shows how delusional ones perceptions of fairness can be.Had the apartheid government any common sense they would have yielded much more in

order to preserve their institutions, but cognitive dissonance kept them from seeing the

truth of their inevitable future.

Not realizing the inherent impermanence of apartheid, the former rulers of South

Africa had missed a golden opportunity to ensure that the well-being of the white South

Africans they served would be secure in the present time. By starting earlier to begintearing down the barriers of apartheid, they could have bought themselves time to make a

much smoother transition, avoiding economic and social chaos that so many whites lost

their livelihoods because of. By helping to create a large black middle class, it would

mean the lines of rich and poor did not coincide so closely to white and black. This couldhave defused a lot of resentment that has been focused towards whites, and often made

them the targets of hate crimes.

Many Afrikaners keep hope for a brighter future. For some, this still entails

picturing a state in Africa with a white majority, but by different means than the failed

homelands plan. Even as a minority, white South Africa is a nation larger than thepredominantly white nation of New Zealand. In every province white South Africans are

a minority. However, the western half of the country is populated mostly by Coloreds,

who make up a local majority in much of South Africa, even though they make up aneven smaller percent of the country as a whole than the mostly urbanized whites do.

Despite being a minority in Canada as a whole, French Canadians form a regionalmajority in Quebec, and if they wanted to whites in South Africa could be the same way.

The white population in South Africa is much larger than the whole population of the

thinly populated Northern Cape, which is the largest province. If they all decided to movethere they might be more visible in a multiracial South Africa.

As global warming becomes an undeniable fact, the people who tried to deny it as

long as possible tend to be the same ones who come up with the wrong approachestowards dealing with it. Likewise, Afrikaners who did their tribe no favors by failing until

the last minute to recognize that apartheids days were numbered are still making

unrealistic plans for their future.

One lunatic fringe group promoting white South African nationalism is the AWB,

known in English as theAfrikaner Resistance Movement. They actually believed that theapartheid government was too liberal. They still believe in the implausible vision of

complete separation of the whites from other South African groups. They support a rabid

white independence with the people spread out as thinly as they can, with an extreme

individualism which is why they lost the Anglo-Boer War in the first place.


11/18

The AWB talks about being united in their religious values. As a testament to

their faith they use a symbol that incorporates the number 777, because the say that is thenumber of God. They use the color white which is supposed to represent the courage in

their hearts and the purity of their intentions. They also use the color red, which is

supposed to represent the blood that Christ shed to save his people. They want there to beno mistake about where their faith lies, and state clearly that the insignia of the Afrikaner

Resistance Movement is meant to be a Christian symbol. However, when I look at what

they came up with, I get the sneaking suspicion that they might have gotten theirinspiration from somewhere other than Jesus.

Wikipedia

Even without their Nazi-esque symbols, the hatred behind the AWB is well

known. If they give other South Africans more excuses to hate whites back, then theAWB is as guilty as anyone for the murder of white farmers. That is certainly not going

to help their fellow Caucasians.

Another unrealistic goal in Afrikaner nationalism is the Boerstaat movement. The

basis of this movement is that the Boer Republics of the Transvaal and the Orange Free

State were illegally annexed by the United Kingdom, and that they should be restored asindependent countries meant for white, Afrikaans speaking people (and dont forget

Christian). These regions lost their independence over a century ago, and were only

actual countries for less than 50 years. They are also in the area where most of the blackSouth Africans live. Are they supposed to just leave?

The following Wikipedia map of South Africa has had sections colored in to

represent where white separatists would like their future country to be located, along withthe location of another secessionist movements proposed state.


12/18

The location of the former, short-lived Boer Republics (black)

Territory claimed by the Cape Party (blue)

A more modest (and realistic) proposal comes in the form of the Cape Party. This

group advocates complete independence of the western half of the country, where the use

of English and Afrikaans is predominant instead of the Bantu languages. It is more

realistic because it not only acknowledges the right of different cultural groups to self-determination, but doesnt require any population transfers. Non-blacks already form the

majority in this region. It is also more inclusive, by acknowledging the Afrikaans-

speaking Coloreds as a part of their nation, something that most white Afrikanernationalists have never done.

The only problem is that the Cape Party has so little support. They are only aregistered political party in the Western Cape, a small portion of the territory they claim

for their future state. And even there, they have only managed to attract a fraction of one

percent of the vote during elections. Most moderate white South Africans probably thinkthat it makes little sense to split up the most prosperous and developed country on the

continent, and leave the commercial-industrial centers of Cape Town and Johannesburgin two different countries.

The most appealing part about the Cape Party Movement is that if they succeeded

they would limit the power of the African National Congress (ANC). Since the end of

apartheid, the ANC has dominated South Africas government. There is some concernthat with their power, the ANC might be losing sight of their original principles. When

they were banned, it was easier for members to remember their principles, because being

involved did not offer much hope for power. Now, being a member of the ANC providesthe best opportunity to be in a position of power, and like it was for the Afrikaners, power

can be intoxicating and overpower common sense.

Many white South Africans think Nelson Mandela destroyed everything theybuilt. But white South Africans have as much reason to be thankful that Mandela was

their first black president as anyone. Mandela knew that to do that forgiveness had to take

priority over vengeance, because he saw white South Africans as partners in building thecountry. Whites could have had some megalomaniac like Mugabe, with his thinly veiled

racism towards whites, as their countrys first black president.


13/18

But Nelson Mandela is not immortal, and leadership in South Africa has passed to

a new generation. They often dont use the language of reconciliation as much as

Desmond Tutu does. There was a lot of support for changing the name of South Africasrugby team, but those efforts were stopped by Mandela, who saw that there was nothing

to gain from it. I like the new South African flag and national anthem a lot more than the

old one, but I still worry that the drive behind removing familiar symbols could be a signof contempt towards the white minority.

The fact that Julius Malema leads the ANC Youth League makes me worry howfar contempt could go. His criticism of all political opponents would make him the

perfect Republican in the U.S. He especially shows contempt for any concerns voiced by

white politicians. He is also known for proudly singing songs about killing white farmers.

Most disturbing of all might be Malemas support for Robert Mugabe. Mugabe

has been president of neighboring Zimbabwe since that country removed its own white-

minority government. He has ruled with an iron fist, and directed his hatred not only

towards the few white Rhodesians who still live there, but the entire half of the countrythat supports the Movement for Democratic Change. He has solidified his power by

getting his cult-like supporters riled up against everyone else, and refuses to rescind hispower, even though he is driving the country into the ground. He sees love of Zimbabwe

as being directly tied to support for his rule, accusing his opponents of treason, and any

criticism as being from foreign influence. He has also voiced claims that God is on his

side. It is for all of these reasons that I refer to Mugabe as the African Bush.

I would rather see South Africa split in two than be completely under the rule of

someone like Mugabe or Malema. There is some hope in preventing complete ANCdominance from the Democratic Alliance. Most white South Africans give their vote to

this party, but this party is not an heir of the apartheid politicians, and has a home grown

sense of liberal-democratic values and social equity that the National Party neverpossessed. It proves that many white South Africans are now more progressive minded.

The Democratic Alliance also gets a lot of support from the Asian and Colored

communities. This is because they are conscious of the fact that, like the whites, they area minority in South Africa, and as such worry about being disregarded by the ruling elite.

It is because the Coloreds form the majority in Western Cape that the Democratic

Alliance forms the government in that province. It is the only province that is notcontrolled by the ANC. KwaZulu-Natal was once dominated by the opposition Inkatha

Freedom Party advocating for more sovereignty for the Zulu nation. However, the ANC

now dominates there as well, and many of its supporters hope that someday they mayalso be able to gain control of Western Cape as well, leaving no one to oppose them. Just

as I would like to see Canadas Liberal Party and New Democratic Party work together to

oppose the Conservative Party, I hope that the Democratic Alliance, the Inkatha FreedomParty, the Minority Party (representing the Asian community), and the Congress of the

People (made up of ANC defectors) can work together to keep the ANC in check.


14/18

Some white South Africans say there is now reverse apartheid, claiming they

cant get jobs because they are white. Yet, despite Black Economic Empowerment

(BEE), white unemployment is still much lower, and their standard of living is still muchhigher. Cities like Johannesburg are a lot like Montreal, in that most of the top offices in

the skyscrapers are occupied by people from an elite WASP minority, while most of the

people from the majority group live in the less affluent neighborhoods.

Some white South Africans try to claim that apartheid was wrong, but that it is in

the past. The past still haunts the present. If you look at an economic development map ofGermany, you can clearly make out the old border between East Germany and West

Germany, more than 20 years after reunification. The disparity between the two halves of

Germany was never as great as the disparity of wealth between black and white South

Africans, and apartheid ended more recently. Also, if you look at a map of South Africashowing population density in different regions, you can clearly see that the outlines of

the old Bantustans are still visible.

Wikipedia

South Africa has definitely had some growing pains, but it is imperative for them

to recover from the chaos they face. This is not only for their benefit, but for the benefitof underrepresented, and underprivileged groups throughout the world. If they fail it will

make the old colonial assumptions that people of color were incapable of governing

themselves seem like they have some credibility.

Hypothetically, if there were to be an Afrikaner sovereignty movement, a more

down to earth proposal might be Orania, a town that was established by Afrikaners that

saw that apartheids days were numbered. They were just a group of people who decided

to live and work together, where their language and culture could be in the majority.When I learned about Orania it gave me mixed feelings. I hoped that Afrikaner culture

could be preserved, but being a liberal-minded WASP it is hard to endorse any proposalthat sounds like white separatism.

Imagine you heard someone say I thought Orania was crazy, But when you see

your own people in charge, you begin to believe reality is here. How does that sound toyou, exclusionary? Racist? Well, this is real quote that I took from an old National


15/18

Geographic article, but the person quoted was not talking about Orania, but the proposed

Canadian territory of Nunavut. I learned about Orania around the same time I heard about

plans to create Nunavut. The stated purpose of creating Nunavut was so there could be anadministrative area in Canada where the Inuit could be in the majority, and thus control

the regional government. If Inuit can have self-determination why not Afrikaners?

Of course, in the case of Nunavut, the Inuit majority was not created by

migration. Also, the Inuit are largely impoverished, while the Afrikaners are not. I worry

they might try to use a white homeland as a tax haven to avoid helping alleviate poverty.

The Orania movement should change some of its language and state that it has no

objectives of removing non-Afrikaners, and that like Nunavut, the right to vote and the

full protection of the law would be given to everyone in their jurisdiction, regardless ofbackground. They should also drop the goal of a completely independent Afrikaner state.

It would be better if Orania was like Quebec. They could form a province where

anyone with citizenship could live there, but with a focus on linguistic conservation ofthe Afrikaans language. The Northern Cape would be the most ideal place for this, since

Afrikaans is already one of the most widely used languages in that region. If a bunch ofwhite South Africans feel like they want to consolidate themselves in one area, it is there

right to live within their national borders where they like. Of course, they cant make the

people already living there feel unwelcome.

I would rather that white people live throughout the country to remind the world

that South Africa is supposed to be a rainbow nation. Support among white South

Africans for Orania is weak anyhow. Even if they are in the minority, you would find alot more white people in cities like Cape Town. People can join together and play fort

like a bunch of pioneers, but I prefer a more cosmopolitan environment, and since most

Afrikaners live in urban environments I am guessing that they do as well. Only a fewthousand people live in Orania. You could find enough white people in Zimbabwe to fill

that town, and they might have a greater need for it.

Orania might be an improvement over other white sovereignty movements like

the Boerstaat, but it still needs to dial down the crazy a little bit, and modify its visions, if

it wants to have any lasting effect. However, as a minority, I understand the need for

white South Africans to protect their rights, just as all minorities do. That is why I amglad that the Afrikaners were accepted into the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples

Organization. But if they can do so, so can any of the other national groups in South

Africa, none of which forms a majority by itself.

In another light I could look at Orania as a town like Clare, Cheticamp, or another

Acadian community. A town where a certain culture dominates the seen, but it is still apart of the country that it is in. If Orania wanted to reinvent itself as a living museum they

might have the support of the South African tourist board.


16/18

The question is could it be more than just a town? There are certainly enough

white South Africans to turn it into its own little country. Over 850,000 white South

Africans, have left the country. Tens of thousands have moved to Canada to get betterpaying jobs and escape the violence and chaos of their home country. They have made

themselves settled.

In one highly publicized case reported by the BBC, a white South African named

Brandon Huntley who had been violently attacked seven different times (stabbed on three

of those occasions), sought asylum in Canada, and was allowed to stay when CanadasImmigration and Refugee ruled that the South African government had not done enough

to protect him. The ruling ANC condemned this ruling as racist.

This large scale emigration is a brain drain for South Africa, which can no longeruse their knowledge and skills to help build their country. There is now a website called

homecomingrevolution.co.za to encourage these expatriates to return. If all of these

people moved to the Northern Cape they could have easily made up the majority in the

southern half of the province. At least then they could still put their education and skillsto the service of South Africa.

Here is what I propose. Many white South Africans have complained that

Affirmative Action laws have made it impossible for them to find work in their home

country, which is why they emigrate. I propose that a portion of the sparsely populated

Northern Cape south of the Orange River be made exempt from these Affirmative Actionlaws to encourage disaffected whites to move there as an alternative to living abroad, and

attract some of the emigrants who have packed for Perth to return. It might also give

economic incentive to fill this empty quarter of the country.

Proposed Northern Cape territory exempt from Affirmative Action Laws

Politics must not resemble what existed under apartheid however, and equality

under the law must be guaranteed to all residents of Northern Cape Province regardless ofrace. Economic aid from supporters of this social experiment must not only be used to

establish infrastructure for the expatriates they hope to lure back to South Africa, but to

the current residents. If Afrikaners are going to become predominant, the non-whites

should not be left behind again, and their standard of living should be raised significantly.If they are critical of the African National Congress then they should do what the ANC


17/18

has only had partial success with, and no longer let color determine who the haves and

have-nots in South Africa are.

It is also important that Afrikaners see that their language, more than their skin

color, is the key to cultural preservation. It makes their concerns more legitimate and less

racist. There should be at least one province where the same kinds of measures that aretaken to promote French in Quebec are used to promote Afrikaans. But regardless of race,

everyone who identifies the use of Afrikaans as a part of their cultural identity, should be

accepted as a part of the Afrikaner nation, establishing themselves as a domestic-globalempire. It will also help their cause if they support the rights of other linguistic groups to

cultural preservation, and agree that whites living in areas with a Xhosa or Zulu majority

should try to learn their languages.

A spirit of philanthropy is also indispensable. If white South Africans want to

remain significant and visible then it benefits them greatly to have a sense of

responsibility and volunteerism, not only for their cultural community but for South

Africa as a whole. Mentor underprivileged children, care for the environment, bestewards of the land. Give back what you can. It might sound like communism, but it

isnt if you do it willingly. By staying educated and focused on participating in the well-being of the country, whites can be an indispensable resource to South Africa. White

farmers from South Africa and Zimbabwe could help teach black farmers more effective

agricultural practices.

Just like Erinsville Ontario, South Africa could be a potential home for a future

Gaeltacht. A lot of South Africans have Celtic ancestry, and a Gaeltacht would be a

testament to just how culturally diverse the country is, and how even small minoritygroups can remain significant and visible in the Rainbow Nation. Similar communities

could be established with the goal of providing a space for a revival of French, German,

and Dutch speaking communities, which provided the roots for Afrikaans.

The king of the Zulus is given ceremonial status even though political power is

held elsewhere. Several other tribal kings are given similar recognition by the SouthAfrican government. The people do not have to acknowledge these monarchs, but many

choose to because it is a part of their cultural identity. I would suggest that in addition to

these monarchs of the Bantu nations, the British Monarch and the Dutch Monarch also be

counted among the official royalty, to firmly state that the citizens who trace theirancestry to those nations are also a part of South Africa.

***

There is a lot that Canada and the world can learn from South Africa as it was and

as it is, and how it could be. Not just amongst the militant and crazy fringe of the of theAfrikaner tribe, there are forces of tribalism that could threaten national unity. There is

the question of what it means to Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaner, English, Sesotho, Tswana,

Swazi, Indian, Malay, Colored, as well as the question of being South African, and can

you be both without sacrificing your sense of belonging to one or the other.


18/18

There are a lot of violent clashes that take place in the name of tribal loyalties, but

in the end, what have they done to help any tribe? Obviously they have not helped SouthAfrica reach its full potential. Would the tribes not all benefit from a South Africa that

can avoid the fate of so many African nations, as long as there is a policy of the

prosperity of the country being for the benefit of all? Can they not then put aside violencenot only out of what is best for them as South Africans, but what is best for their tribe?

Likewise, we must ask ourselves if we can move our world towards the futureeven in terms of what is best for our nations. Can there be a world without nations? Can

there be a South Africa without tribes? And if so, was the cost for unity worth it, and was

that cost necessary?

More specifically for the rest of the world, and in particular countries like Canada

and the United States, there is something that can be learned from South Africa. It helps

give white people a sense of what it would be like to be a minority. Perhaps we can feel a

sense of sympathy for the white Africans based on our similar cultural backgrounds. Wellwhatever you want for the whites of South Africa, you must then give to the non-whites

in your own countries. Even when people like the Afrikaners and the English SouthAfricans are not given this courtesy they deserve as a human right, remember to be

willing to see that non-whites in the western world still deserve to be able to be

considered a part of those countries.

We should still remember that it is supporting someone elses right to call a land

home that will support your own right to do the same. A large Buddhist temple outside of

Johannesburg was targeted by attack by a white terrorist. They might as well haveattacked themselves. White South Africans should realize that the Asians and Coloreds

are also visible minorities, and like different non-white groups are natural allies in North

America, different non-black groups are natural allies in South Africa. By defending therights of others that are seen as different you are defending your own rights.

Like in North America, there really is no group in South Africa that is in themajority. In either case it is the diversity we fail to see that makes it seem like there is a

dominant group. And it is only when we can acknowledge the differences that some use

to divide us that we can truly be whole when we are united. And everyone must feel like

they can have their space, and that there is enough space for everyone.

South Africanada

Documents