Again, noteworthy that it’s all conveniently near urban centers. So these are our new and upcoming farmers? Any sign yet of new agricultural activity?
If they ever grab large scale farms in northern Limpopo, it will be for no other reason than to strip them of valuables and then abandon them.
In the meantime, the current land grabs are presumably illegal? I wonder when we can expect to see the police remove them…
Well, if the article is to be believed, this may be a watershed for our dear Pres. to show whether he is bark or bite.
Australia starts considering fast-tracking visas for South African farmers. I guess if SA doesn’t want productive people producing food, many other countries would be glad to have them. I wonder how far this could end up going if wholesale disowning of property accelerates.
Edit: And SA responds.
Edit2: Spoiler alert: “That’s racist”
In his SONA speech he made a big thing about how the constitution must be obeyed. So we’ll see whether he was serious.
If nothing is done about these squatters, you can be sure South Africa will see yet another round of emigration, with yet more capital and brains lost.
It will become difficult for western countries to justify how they can give what amounts to refugee status to some SA whites but not all.
No idea what she said. I’m far too enamoured with her eyes.
Then I guess you should look up her recent documentary about SA farm murders.
Malema is not merely a fascist - if there is one thing one can say for Mussolini, it is that he was at least not a racist (he privately thought Hitler’s anti-Semitism and ethnic theories were utterly absurd). The EFF is a bunch of Afro-Nazis, pure and simple.
It’s a pity, because Malema is not stupid and many of the issues he raises are genuinely important and must be addressed. Instead of addressing them, he uses them for self-glorification.
People who post black vs white occupation of SA land need to
1: apprise themselves of the history of black migration, archaeological digs (Iron age), Great Zimbabwe ruins, mining activities (copper, iron), rock art etc that clearly indicate that many tribes lived in Southern Africa as far back as 2000 years ago. Up to 4 waves of migration took place over 3000 years with the largest Bantu migration starting about 2000 years back. The Western part of South Africa (Cape) was occupied by the Khoikhoi and San people who also migrated about 700 years ago.
2. understand that the historical time frame of white vs black occupation of land is irrelevant (IMHO) in the current debate of land redistribution. The current position is clearly untenable and requires a rational (not emotional) approach to move SA to a peaceful and fair dispensation.
3. realise that while “ownership” of land is not the same as “occupation”, the de facto position is that access to viable agricultural land is the underlying issue.
4. appreciate that ‘tribal land’ is a reality however uneconomic it may be; the utilisation and possible redistribution of such land needs nevertheless to be placed on the agenda as well in the current debate.
I don’t think there are many South Africans of any race who oppose land reform on principle. But expropriation without compensation is likely to inflict catastrophic harm to the economy.
There is probably no way to work out who to “restore” the land to, at least not for cases dating back to before the 1913 (?) Land Act, which, if I remember correctly, was the cutoff point for land claims. How do we identify who must get the land then? This is a question that will have to be answered, sooner or later (presumably none of the ANC’s sane members have a Zim-style, chaotic land grab in mind).
As I have noted here before, part of the problem is that the ANC does not in fact have any clear and coherent policy on this. On this issue the EFF is in fact far more clear about what they want - all land should be nationalized and become state property. I doubt if the ANC would be interested in such a plan. Any sane person would know that it would be completely unworkable.
I am not sure this land issue is in fact much of an issue at all. I suspect the ANC doesn’t really want to solve it either, because unsolved it is a valuable propaganda tool. Hand out 80% of the land to new black farmers (most of whom will almost certainly promptly fail) and the issue ceases to have any political value. Instead, it serves their purposes far better to vaguely complain about “colonizers” occupying the land, and making vague promises to “restore it to its rightful owners”. They are probably hoping to drag out this issue indefinitely.
Now to the extent that there are (a probably rather smallish number of) black South Africans who want to farm and need land to do it on, I am fully and passionately in favor of them being given land, and proper support and training. I’m not sure any new land needs to be expropriated or bought; the government already owns millions upon millions of unused hectares.
What if white owned land does need to be taken? Well, if it is done without compensation we’ll have a disaster, and I suspect Ramaphosa knows that full well. On the other hand, the willing buyer, willing seller thing was problematic because it artificially drove up the price of land beyond its real worth. I.e. farmers must be paid a fair price, to be determined by a non-partisan body, perhaps one including international experts.
Some suggestions, in case Mr. Ramaphosa is a a member of this board:
- As noted above: train and support the new farmers properly, or there is no point.*
- Hand over land to individuals rather than communities, because when no single person is responsible you have a recipe for disaster.
- The new owner should be a real owner, i.e. have the right to sell the land.
*And who should do this training? Well, we have thousands of experts handy, in the form of existing white farmers. How about the government working with them for a change instead of against them? How about, for example, taking steps to improve security in the rural areas (so that there are fewer farm attacks) in return for the farmers sharing their expertise? Instead they constantly have to hear the narrative that, based on the color of their skin, they are not actually really real citizens of this country, but unwelcome colonizers.
I got as far as “only permitted into town for an hour on a Sunday” into the article Yes, we can – and must – expropriate land >:(
Seems like a rather complicated plan. I’m not sure South Africa has the required administrative ability to oversee it. I am also not too sure one can extrapolate European farm sizes to South Africa: they have a very different kind of climate there, and different societies and infrastructure etc. The fact that a small Dutch farm can produce a boatload of beetroot does not mean the same can be achieved with maize in South Africa. But I am no expert.
It seems to me the most obvious solution is already being put into place by the people themselves, without help from the government, and that is simply large scale urbanization. I am always a bit suspicious of large scale attempts at social engineering of the sort this writer suggests. It might work, or it might not - it’s difficult to predict all possible outcomes.
In the meantime the land situation is perhaps not as disastrously unfair as the politicians would have us believe, if this article can be believed:
Blacks already own substantial chunks of agricultural land, and are owning ever more even as we speak. I’m not sure to what extent this land is being put to good use.
Here’s an insightful statistical link on agric land in SA:
https://tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/arable-land-percent-of-land-area-wb-data.html
Factor in to the equation:
Land occupied by cities, towns and villages (both with title deed or without and then you have tribal land (old homelands) where Permission to occupy PTO applies
Land unsuitable for farming…weather limitations, land unsuitable to farm (mountains, dams, rivers, wetlands eg.)
national parks and other ‘heritage sites’
and you’re essentially left with little to pass around to the millions clamouring…who will get and who won’t??? To paraphrase Julius: "Land gives dignity.…poverty steals dignity (the latter is my insertion! >:D
Another bit of data I would like to see: who exactly is clamoring for land?
who will get and who won't??? To paraphrase Julius: [i][b]"Land gives dignity.[/b][/i]...poverty steals dignity (the latter is my insertion! >:D
Yup. Without proper training and support, land will not give dignity to the new farmers; it will effectively remove it. Unless said farmers can sell their land and buy property in the city.
This. Also which land exactly is in the wrong hands currently?
Perhaps a committee of cronies will make the decision. As well as deciding who should get it. 
From what I understand this is already happening and part of the problem. The govt. paid farmer X rand and then turned the land over to the people who immediately sold it back to said farmer for X - Y rand. Farmer got a nice payout, people took money and did whatever, taxpayer fitted the bill. Everyone is outraged that they still don’t have land cause the stats don’t change all that much.
Moreover saying land gives dignity is a bit like saying “I demand respect”. It’s a misunderstanding of where those things come from. Lots of white people have dignity without having owned land their entire lives.
Oh using the current political outlook this is easy to define:
“Black people” are clamoring for land (note how this doesn’t include anyone else). “They” are just not being very specific about what land exactly: Top shelf farms are up for grabs but I’m not sure “they” are thinking of desolate pieces of land in the middle of nowhere that require work and infrastructure to be self provisioned.
… and …
White people’s hands are the wrong hands. They are guilty by birth. This is somehow not racism.