Klarinet Archive - Posting 000708.txt from 1998/01

From: Gysbert <gysbert@-----.za>
Subj: Re: Boere
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 02:45:22 -0500

At 01:58 PM 98/01/14 -0500, Matt wrote:

Firstly - This is the last time that I will react over a non-clarinet
issue on the clarinet list. I participate on the list because I am=20
a clarinet student - trying to preserve a little of my western heritage
in dark continent that is fast becoming darker and darker. Should anyone
like to debate with me they may contact me personally.

Secondly - If you live in the shadows of death where you are a definitive=20
target to be murdered, raped, kidnapped and robbed - the world opinion or
the opinion of study moralists who talk on hear-say is not an issue
anymore.

Thirdly - The term Boers (pronounced boors) is used which is a derogative=20
for my people. We are called Boere - which means farmer.=20

Fourthly - Boere do not equal South African whites or Afrikaans speaking
South African whites.

=20
>Apartheid has everything to do with morality! If you try and deny that you
>are a fool! I recognize the great struggle that the Boere people had with
>British Imperialism, and know of the 27,000 deaths during the Boere War,=
but
>you must take into consideration the mistreatment of the native Africans by
>the Boere people. Treating the Khoikhoi and Bantu peoples with harsh
>exclusionist policies, the dispossession of most of the original=
inhabitants
>and slavery WERE NOT caused by Anglo-American greed. Slavery??? Not a=
moral
>issue? I don't think so. Slavery existed until the English bought Cape
>Colony in 1814 and abolished it in 1833.

Excuse me - you mention slavery and apartheid in one breath. What has
apartheid to do with slavery. As far as I am concerned slavery is where
people are owned, they can only do work for their owner at no pay, and
they only receive food and clothing from their owner. Show me one case
where that happened under apartheid. Winnie Mandela and many black=20
businessmen became millionaires under this "oppressing" apartheid. The
wealthiest ethnic group in South Africa today are the Indians. They=20
were subjected to the same laws! The fact that you equalize slavery with
apartheid proves that you are the fool that gobbles everything you see
on TV, hear on radio and read in the newspaper without trying to verify
wider than what is presented as the obvious. And the ironic thing is=20
those people choosing to work with perceptions rather that facts often
regard themselves as "thinkers". Another thing - in 1833 the Boere people
did not even exist then. The Boere people only come into existence after
the Great Trek in 1836/38. The Great Trek originated from the Eastern=20
border of the Cape. British authority was situated on the western side=20
of the Cape. According to records made in 1821 there were 20 000 slaves
in the western side of the Cape and only 1135 on the Eastern side. Then
also remember that the Eastern Cape was where the British settlers lived.
To spread slavery on our bread may just be a little far fetched.

You say the English bought the Cape Colony in 1814. From whom? :-)))
On 7 Jan 1806 a skirmish took place between 7000 British soldiers
under Genl Baird and a 1000 hired troops which included Hottentots.
That is how the Cape was annexed. It must be most awful to do=20
business in that way - I say old chap! =20
=20
> And apartheid laws? Not a moral issue? The laws determined where
>members of each group could live, what jobs they could hold, and what type=
of
>education they could receive! Laws prohibited most social contact between
>races, authorized segregated public facilities, and denied any=
representation
>of nonwhites in the national government! People who openly opposed=
apartheid
>were considered communists and the government passed strict security
>legislation which in effect turned South Africa into a police state! Not a
>moral issue???=20

Funny that the SACP (South African Communist Party) has more than 40%=20
representatives in the cabinet today - the highest decision making body in=
=20
the country without fighting an election. And Mr Mandela's friends - that=20
darling of the world - Gadaffi and Castro. You talk about a police state.=20
Without having the statistics ready the per capita amount of police in
South Africa was always lower in South Africa than for instance in Britain
and the USA. And today - SA being the murder and rape capital of the world
- but this seems to be more preferable for some people - especially if you
sit safely in a first world country and can ponder over morality issues=20
in a armchair in front of you fire place (TV?) or in the warmth of your
study. Furthermore if I may quote from The War Atlas by Michael Kidron and
Dan Smith which was current in 1983. The ratio of military people to medical
people is quoted as follows:

Israel 22 : 1
World Average: 2.3 : 1
USA 2.0 : 1
Britain 1 : 1
South Africa 1 : 1

> Before apartheid became the official policy, South Africa had a long
>history of racial segregation and white supremacy. In 1910 parliamentary
>membership was limited to whites and legislation passed in 1913 restricted
>black land ownership to 13 percent of South Africa's total area. Many=
Africans
>opposed these restrictions. Not a moral issue??? =20

You say 13%. Does this figure include the protectorate of Betchuanaland=20
(Botswana), Swaziland and Basutuland (Lesotho). Again working with colonial=
=20
borders and you qualify yourself to judge morality issues. Do you know that=
=20
South Africa is a semi-dessert and that the 13 percent you are talking about=
is=20
the best agricultural land in the country (Kwa-zulu, Transkei and the=
Ciskei)?
That 13% decision was made on historical grounds and the Black peoples - as=
=20
there are many white peoples in Europe (Germans, Dutch, French, etc.) - were
mainly located in the high rainfall areas.

><<<Then I can also say a lot about the way Americans, Canadians,=20
>Australians and New Zealanders solved their aboriginal problems. Talking=
about
>bigotry ....>>>
>
>You have no right to speak of this matter. The Boere people also had=
terrible
>policies against aboriginous peoples. At least I can admit that my=
ancestors
>made mistakes, and not try to defend them.

You reserve the right to speak about my people freely, but deny
myself the same right. Your underwear is now really hanging out!=20

>Sorry that I misused your highly valued clarinet list to correct an
>extremely biased
>and misinformed view (clich=E9 ?) that was unfortunately promoted on your
>list.>>>>
>
>Can you be more of a hypocrite? Come on now!!!! You are making=
misinformed
>views about your own people!

Sorry I do not understand - you should be more specific.

>One final comment:
>
>I think you should examine the facts here.

Facts or perceptions

> Of course I do not live in South
>Africa.....Of course I do not know first hand of the events there......but
>history speaks for itself.

You do not know our history either. By the way I think you should not visit
South Africa. If you have not heard - there is an increasing trend that=20
overseas visitors are becoming crime statistics.

> The Boere people are not the victims here in many
>cases.....sure, British Imperialism was a great struggle, but does that=
mean
>the Boeres have permission to to wipe away the culture of native Africans? =
I
>did not mean to offend you in any way, Gysbert, but I cannot understand=
your
>views. I am not looking for a debate, just trying to show that yes,=
apartheid
>is a very moral issue. History is not an excuse.

I am not easily offended. We are quite used to it. But I do however identify
common ground. You ask whether the Boere have permission to wipe away the=20
culture of native Africans. I agree - no one has that right. That was what=
=20
apartheid was all about. To provide homelands (countries) to all indigenous
peoples to rule themselves to their own values and to provide their own
education
in accordance with their own values and traditions and not to use colonial
borders to define a nation or regard all black people as one nation with one
language. But we as Boere also demand that same right. Today we have a
unitary state, Xhosa and communist dominated government, socialist value
system, effectively a single language viz English. Unique cultural values
for all the peoples are denied in favour of a rainbow nation. Now the=
culture
of the various native African peoples and the Boere people are denied. But=
=20
still the world applaud this "democratic wonder" called the New South=
Africa.
And the happiest of them all is the Anglo-American money powers.

I do not use history as an excuse, but I do not deny it as a given. If I=
cannot
understand someone else's views I shall refrain myself from giving a=
pedantic
moral judgement on it.=20

Kindest regards to all

Gysbert