by Ernst Roets
The second development was the end of the Cold War in November 1989, when the Berlin Wall – which divided West and East Germany – was destructed. The destruction of the Berlin Wall has been described as the single greatest political event of the 20th century.51 The destruction of the wall and the reunification of Germany eventually led to the collapse of Eastern European regimes,52 which led to a worldwide decline in communism.53
A NEW SOUTH AFRICA
The banning of the ANC and other communist-aligned organisations was rescinded in February 1990.54 This resulted in a return of between 10 000 and 15 000 MK soldiers who had been living in exile, including in ANC camps in various African countries. Farm murders especially started skyrocketing since 1990.55 Although the ANC’s policy of targeting white farmers in the 1980s has never officially been rescinded, it is reasonable to believe that the decisions made at the 1985 Kabwe Conference are no longer ANC policy. Over the years, however, a disturbing silence from government leaders, and particularly leaders within the ANC alliance (including the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the trade union federation COSATU), on the issue of farm murders has developed. Where government leaders do speak out on the topic, their concern almost never results in any form of action.
A key issue that was discussed from the outset right up to the very end of the negotiations was the question on the extent to which minority communities should receive protection within a new constitutional dispensation.56 The idea of group rights was fiercely opposed by Mandela.57 ANC leader Pallo Jordan acknowledged that the recognition of minority rights was indeed a prerequisite for empowerment and self-determination (of minorities), but that it would be ‘reactionary’ to acknowledge minority rights in South Africa, since the recognition of minority rights was regarded by the ANC as undermining the rights of the majority.58
When the NP lost a strategic by-election in Potchefstroom to the CP, FW de Klerk announced a referendum in which white people had to vote on whether they supported the continuation of the reform process that had been initiated by the government with the aim of drafting a new constitution.59 Sixty-nine per cent of white people voted ‘yes’, which provided the NP with the mandate it wanted to continue its negotiations with the ANC.60
The Interim Constitution of 1993 was accepted by the governing Tricameral Parliament, in which coloured and Indian people had voting rights. This 1993 Constitution paved the way for the election of 27 April 1994, during which equal voting rights for all races were acknowledged for the first time.61 After the election, a government of National Unity was established, which led to the acceptance of the 1996 Constitution on 10 December 1996.62
The Constitution states that South Africa is a sovereign, democratic state, founded on the values of human dignity, the achievement of equality, the advancement of human rights and freedoms, non-racialism, non-sexism, supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law and others.63
The Constitution further states that everyone is equal before the law64 and that everyone has the right to human dignity65 and the right to life.66 Freedom and security of the person67 and the right to privacy68 are also protected, among other things.
‘Where’s the iron?’ asked one of the attackers. ‘I immediately knew what they meant, but I pretended that I didn’t. ‘The iron? Here’s the iron,’ Robert answered, pointing to the iron stove. ‘No!’ they screamed. ‘The iron! The iron! The iron!’ ‘You mean an iron for clothes?’ asked Robert. ‘Yes! Where’s the iron?!’ ‘We don’t iron clothes, we send it out,’ responded Robert. That was when they saw the blowtorch on the coffee table.
Robert was tied up and made to sit down on the couch. They made him sit on his usual spot. Given that they could not find the clothing iron, they decided that the blowtorch would suffice.
CHAPTER 11
Zeitgeist
Equally or perhaps even more concerning than the sudden surge of farm attacks since the rescinding of the prohibition of the ANC and other communist-aligned organisations and the lack of action to address these attacks, is the continual verbal attacks that are launched towards white farmers in particular, not only by senior government leaders, but by political leaders in general.
Since the early 1990s, a political climate – or zeitgeist, if you wish – has started to develop in which white and Afrikaner farmers in particular are continuously presented as the source of evil in South Africa. It is a climate in which white farmers are depicted as racist ‘criminals’ who stole the land and who exploit the workers. In the political sphere, the white farmer has become the personification of the Afrikaners/Boers, and Afrikaners/Boers have become the personification of everything that is wrong with South Africa. Consequently, white farmers are repeatedly slandered from political platforms, in speeches, in statements and even in struggle songs. It has been argued that white farmers acquired what they have through ‘violence’ and that there is no moral qualm about responding to this ‘violence’ with physical violence. As a result, violence towards white farmers is frequently romanticised, especially in struggle songs. These songs are not merely sung by fringe groups, but by government leaders. In 2010, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) even went to court to protect its so-called right to sing songs in which the murder of white farmers is romanticised. More on this in the chapters to follow. Other than that, AfriForum has found that the mainstream media have also become an active role player in the campaign to depict white farmers as racist oppressors. The media’s reporting on farm murders will be dealt with in Chapter 16.
Zeitgeist
The German word Zeitgeist means ‘spirit of the time’. It is generally used to refer to the dominant set of ideals and beliefs that motivate the actions of the members of a society in a particular period in time. Where the word is used in this book, it is particularly used with reference to the perceptions propagated about white farmers by the ruling elite, radical activists and the mainstream media.
THE BRUTAL FARMER/LAND THIEF STEREOTYPE
‘The concept of the “farmer” has been deployed as a signifier of depravity and an expression of abuse in the South African countryside. (I wonder if any other occupational group has had the dubious honour of attracting, or being targeted by, a political chant: “Kill the farmer, kill the Boer”?) Their supposed propensity for brutality is a commonly vented trope – even when … it is unfounded,’ writes Terence Corrigan of the Institute of Race Relations (IRR).1
He continues: ‘In reality, there is little hard evidence to support this narrative. There are certainly instances in which farmers have behaved criminally. Each one is to be condemned, and each is grist to the mill of the farming community’s detractors. But, by all appearances, these are individuated cases, and hardly constitute a trend.’2
There are so many examples of hatred that is encouraged towards white farmers that it would not be possible to deal with each one. The few examples mentioned in this chapter should be regarded as only the tip of a much larger, disturbing iceberg.
In February 2013, for example, Lulu Xingwana, the then Minister for Women, Children and People with Disabilities, said during a television interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that young Afrikaner men were raised to believe that they owned ‘everything’, but particularly women and children, and that they therefore believed that they can murder them when they please:
Young Afrikaner men are brought up in the Calvinist religion believing that they own a woman, they own a child, they own everything and therefore they can take that life because they own it.
Xingwana later apologised, but faced no consequences for her comment.3
ANTI-WESTERN SENTIMENT
This political zeitgeist and the targeting of white and Afrikaner farmers by politicians should be seen in the light of the significant levels of anti-Western sentiment by those in power in South Africa. There is ample evidence of this. In 2008, the ANC pushed to have the street in which the embassy of the United States of America (USA) is situated renamed after former
Cuban President Fidel Castro.4 In 2014, it was formally proposed that one of the main streets of the capital city be renamed after the communist dictator, Mao Zedong.
The ANC argued that this had to be done because Chairman Mao, as he was known, was a revolutionary who should be credited for South Africa’s relationship with China and that ‘he was never found guilty’.5 Both these proposed changes were prevented, however, partly as a result of pressure by AfriForum. In the same year, when the then Public Protector, Thuli Madonsela, released a report about corruption and illegal state expenditures at the private homestead of president Jacob Zuma, she was accused by Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Kebby Maphatsoe of being ‘on the payroll of the CIA’.6
In 2016, then ANC Secretary General Gwede Mantashe accused the United States of holding regular meetings at the USA embassy to plot a regime change in South Africa. He was unable to provide any proof for his claim.7 Finally, in 2018, it became known that the USA was considering cutting funding to South Africa, after an analysis of South Africa’s voting record at the UN found that South Africa was among the top ten countries that most frequently opposed the USA at the UN. 8
ENCOURAGING VIOLENCE
On 8 January 2012, during the centenary celebrations of the ANC in Bloemfontein in the Free State, former President Jacob Zuma burst into song. The words of the song can be translated as follows:
We are going to shoot them with the machine gun
They are going to run x 2
Shoot the Boer
We are going to hit them
And they are going to run x 2
We are going to shoot them with the machine gun
They are going to run x 2
Shoot the Boer
We are going to hit them
And they are going to run x 2
The Cabinet is going to shoot them with the machine gun x 29
It would seem inconceivable that the bearer of the highest office of state of the most developed country on the continent could utter these words without attracting international outrage, and yet, the deafening silence lingers on.
During the ANC’s 2013 election campaign current President Cyril Ramaphosa, (then Deputy President), told people that they should vote for the ANC, otherwise ‘the Boers’ will come back into power, presumably to oppress black people.10
In January 2015, former President Jacob Zuma said at the ANC’s 103rd birthday celebrations in Cape Town that the arrival of Jan van Riebeeck in Cape Town in 1652 had been the beginning of all South Africa’s problems. Van Riebeeck is of course generally seen as the founding father of white people, Afrikaners or even of Western civilisation in South Africa. Zuma was seriously chastised for his remark.
Pieter Mulder, the then leader of the FF Plus, accused the former President of resorting to ‘scapegoat politics’ and filed a complaint of hate speech with the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) against the President. ‘What is the understanding of ordinary ANC supporters?’ asked Mulder. ‘They understand that if one gets rid of the white man, all problems are solved.’ Dave Steward, Executive Director of the FW de Klerk Foundation and spokesperson for former President FW de Klerk, said that the anti-Jan van Riebeeck campaign is ‘yet another example of the disturbing and increasingly overt anti-white posture of the president and the ANC’. The story made international headlines.11
In February of the same year the former President Zuma rephrased, insisting that he did not intend Afrikaners to leave the country, but re-emphasised that ‘the problem began when Jan van Riebeeck came here’. He then continued, saying that the black masses should be given the land.12
This is the same President who said earlier that his understanding of democracy was that minority communities should have ‘fewer rights’ than the majority: ‘Sorry, we have more rights here because we are a majority. You have fewer rights because you are a minority. Absolutely, that’s how democracy works.’13
In 2016, Zuma’s sentiment on the arrival of white people was echoed by an ANC MP who claimed in Parliament that Jan van Riebeeck came to South Africa ‘2 000 years ago,’ to ‘steal everything’:
Also (be reminded) that not all who visit our country come with the right intention, as they did 2 000 years ago, by a person named Van Riebeeck … They stole everything, even our dignity, because they took advantage of our kindness.14
The MP was mocked by opposition parties for believing that Van Riebeeck’s arrival happened 2 000 years ago, claiming that she was confusing Van Riebeeck with Jesus Christ. She reiterated: ‘Whether two thousand years or whatever, but, they took, they stole our land … This is the story to tell our children. ’15
Zuma’s sentiment on minority rights was also echoed in 2017 by the ANC’s spokesperson Zizi Kodwa. When members of the mostly coloured community of Eldoradopark in Johannesburg protested the appointment of a black principle at a local high school, Kodwa responded that people who played an integral part in the Struggle should not feel as if they have been reduced to the status of a minority group.16
In 2010, students at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) started complaining about posters that were put up by members of Sasco, the ANC Youth Leauge- (ANCYL-) affiliated student movement. At this time Julius Malema was still President of the ANCYL . The posters were displayed for the upcoming student council election and were intended to persuade students to vote for the South African Students Congress (SASCO). The poster read:
A vote for Sasco is a vote for ANC and
A vote for ANC is a vote for Julius
MALEMA*
One Boer one bullet
Viva Julius Malema viva!!!
Students please vote for SASCO 100%
BLACKS ONLY ORGANISATION
(STRICTLY SOUTH AFRICANS)
Amandla!!
Mbulelo Mandlana, the then President of SASCO, denied ownership of the poster, but also refused to investigate whether it had been drafted by one of its branches or members. Instead, Mandlana alleged that the poster had been ‘produced by white racist students’.17
Andile Mngxitama, leader of Black First Land First (BLF), said that farmers are being killed as a form of retribution from their ‘black slave’ farm workers. ‘If you look at the gruesome manner in which farmers are attacked‚ it is more like a response or revenge. Even the farmers that are not involved in brutality end up becoming victims because of the culture of violence. The death of these farmers is minuscule compared to the horrors that black people face. Black people are backed into a corner … Farm life for black people is characterised by dispossession and violence. Farms are controlled by white people and the workers are just property‚’ Mngxitama said. ‘The murders of black people on farms are not counted. (Actually, the murders of black people on farms are also counted and form part of the statistics on farm attacks in so far that they comply with the definition.) Occasionally people react when white farmers are slain.’18 Mngxitama argues that ‘the history that we inherited’ was one of ‘500 years of white supremacy’.19 ‘Until all black people are liberated from poverty, unemployment and inequality, no black people are free, with the implication that whites are to blame.’20
But driving white people into the sea would still not be enough to solve the so-called problem of white privilege, argues Gugulethu Mhlungu, City Press columnist.21
On 27 February 2017 Esethu Hasane, spokesperson for Fikile Mbalula, who was Minister of Sport at the time, tweeted: ‘Only Western Cape still has dry dams. Please God, we have black people there. Choose another way of punishing white people.’22
This was at a time when the Western Cape was suffering from the worst drought in decades. AfriForum requested Hasane’s dismissal, but received no response from Mbalula.23 Mbalula was appointed as Minister of Police shortly thereafter.
In 2016 AfriForum opened a complaints channel through which members of the public can report cases of hate speech or incitement to violence on social media. Since then, AfriForum has received more than a tho
usand complaints about the encouragement of the genocide of white people, the slaughter of white farmers and other atrocious acts such as the raping of farmers’ wives and children.
One such case is that of Lindsay Maasdorp, spokesperson for the BLF movement – an organisation said to be funded by the billionaire Gupta family,24 Maasdorp repeatedly called for the attacking and murder of white people, but white farmers in particular, on social media. Several examples are listed verbatim:
On 29 February 2016, he tweeted: ‘We must turn our anger towards the enemy. A few of us will have to act and turn majority to see @Mngxitama #BLF #africansspeak’25
On 7 March 2016, he tweeted: ‘Let’s not be lazy with #FeesMustFall #endoutsourcing, decolonisation is no process! Its a violent revolution, a taking back of the land!’26
On 23 February 2016, he tweeted: ‘FUCK WHITE PEOPLE!’27
On 11 February 2016 he tweeted: ‘Let’s unite principled black forces of occupied Azania. We must remove the non-whites, go on and destroy white-power. #ShutDown SONA’28
(Azania is the Pan-Africanist name for South Africa.)
On 23 March 2016, he posted a link to a News24 article titled ‘Resign, for the kids, Johann Rupert urges Zuma’, on his Facebook profile, accompanied by the following comment: ‘We need to do it for our children. No flight, and no ship; 3ft under, a shallow grave! This arrogant white fool has reaped from the blood and sweat of black lives, we must deal with him decisively’.29
On 3 January 2017, when the Cape Town area was scorched by veld fires, he posted on his Facebook page: ‘black god needs servants in CT: wind + matches + white owned farms.’30
Confronted about these comments by the investigative journalism television show Carte Blanche, Maasdorp responded that ‘Black people are upset and angry and rightfully so, because land has been stolen historically and it needs to be returned. And so if black people are responding to that violence with violence then they are well in their rights to take back the land by any means necessary.’31