South Africa: Land Seizure, Plight of the Boers

[Des-Bal]

Technically, it was the Europeans who stole African land. But I get what you're saying.

You're missing the point. This is a landgrab by the political elite and whatever efforts are made to ensure the land is given to those who can make of it are going to be secondary to ensuring the political elite reap the benefits.

[Ultramarr]

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but you can’t exactly choose to be white. Nor can you choose who your family members are. It’s a thing called biology.

She would tell you otherwise:



Joking aside You can choose who you associate with though, which is what matters, especially if you are an adult. That and family is the ones you choose not the ones you are born with necessarily. Biology plays minimal role in such matters. And most importantly in this case the descendant in question chose to inherit the house so to speak and with it the ghosts. Lets give an example:

Say A man known as John owns a farm of about 40 Acres. Said farm and it's ownership were acquired via killing of a man named Gregory 40 years ago whose family have since declared they will one day have vengeance upon him. Now John has a "biological" son named Howard. Howard is now 20 years of age and as a result John desires to retire and give the land to Howard. Now at this point Howard has a choice knowing full well the history of the land in question to either

A accept the land grant from John and thereby accepting all the responsibilities that come with it
or
B Not take the land

Either way he is making a choice and accepting or not responsibility one way or the other. If he chooses to accept the land he either passively or not accepts the fact that Gregory's family can and one day probably will enact their revenge and it will occur onto him since he is holding the land. The land has a blood debt on it and anyone who acquires it other than Gregory's surviving family implicitly accept the fact that said debt might one day be called in whether they like it or not. When it does they have only themselves to blame. Don't take the land or other things with blood on them and this won't be a problem for you. The only way one can rectify the blood debt? Rectify the previous injustice that made said debt and restore what is lost to those who have been lost and their descendants before it's too late. That or you can fight the blood debt as is one's right to do. The power of the whip allows for such things. Justice won't be served sadly in that case but such is such. World isn't a fairy tale.

Muh "historical injustice" is a way for the butt hurt to steal and plunder from those doing better for muh "injustice" free gibs. If I inherited land I wouldn't give a flying horse crap about the "history" its mine. Your basically anti white you are demanding they have their property looted and they became self loathing and not "associate" with their race and became a self loathing liar like Racheal more and claim to be and suck up to another race. Its obvious your just a black supremacist demanding free stuff

[Imperium Sidhicum]

I guess this current treatment of Afrikaners once again proves the age-old truth - if you have established yourself as the master once, better make damn sure your slaves never ever get the better of you.

[Conserative Morality]

I guess this current treatment of Afrikaners once again proves the age-old truth - if you have established yourself as the master once, better make damn sure your slaves never ever get the better of you.

It's a cautionary tale against keeping slaves.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

I guess this current treatment of Afrikaners once again proves the age-old truth - if you have established yourself as the master once, better make damn sure your slaves never ever get the better of you.

It's a cautionary tale against keeping slaves.

I actually agree - to enlist the services of something as pathetic as a slave doesn't really do one much credit, nor does it benefit the enslaver to any degree in the long term.

Slaves represent the basest breed of humanity, individuals with so little personal dignity that they will readily accept continued existence as somebody's playthings over resisting enslavement to death, and while they certainly deserve no better fate for this reason, consorting with their sort to any degree is unfortunately equally corrupting to the slavemasters as well.

So in hindsight, asides from failing to resist the temptation of power and domination, and whatever short-term gains the subjugation of natives might have brought, Afrikaners of the earlier ages made the usual mistake that is the eventual undoing of all slavemasters - they grossly underestimated their slaves' potential for subversion. Now their descendants suffer for that dreadful oversight.

[Albrenia]

It's not so much a case of the passage of time making what was done 'right', but the holding of ancestral grudges punishes those not responsible for the actual crimes.

Should people in positions of privilege from past evils do their best to help correct the harm their forebears did? In my opinion, yes they should. Not out of guilt, but out of decency towards one's fellow humans.

Should said people be robbed or killed for the crime of having asshole grandparents? No.

[Conserative Morality]

It's not so much a case of the passage of time making what was done 'right', but the holding of ancestral grudges punishes those not responsible for the actual crimes.

Should people in positions of privilege from past evils do their best to help correct the harm their forebears did? In my opinion, yes they should. Not out of guilt, but out of decency towards one's fellow humans.

Should said people be robbed or killed for the crime of having asshole grandparents? No.

If your parents steal ten million dollars and invest that money into holdings that increase in worth to twenty million dollars, when they die and you inherit it, and the people from whom it was stolen finally track you down, do they have a right to any of your 20 million worth of holdings y/n?

[Albrenia]

It's not so much a case of the passage of time making what was done 'right', but the holding of ancestral grudges punishes those not responsible for the actual crimes.

Should people in positions of privilege from past evils do their best to help correct the harm their forebears did? In my opinion, yes they should. Not out of guilt, but out of decency towards one's fellow humans.

Should said people be robbed or killed for the crime of having asshole grandparents? No.

If your parents steal ten million dollars and invest that money into holdings that increase in worth to twenty million dollars, when they die and you inherit it, and the people from whom it was stolen finally track you down, do they have a right to any of your 20 million worth of holdings y/n?

A good question.

Since it was the people who were robbed directly, they'd have a legal right to the money since it was stolen from them. They'd have no right to harm the inheritor, nor expect any of the potentially missing funds out of their personal wealth, but the stolen money should be returned.

Six generations down the line, not so much.

EDIT - as for any profits from invested stolen money, I'd probably include any of said profit that was linked to the original amount in provable ways in the stolen money returned.

[Conserative Morality]

A good question.

Since it was the people who were robbed directly, they'd have a legal right to the money since it was stolen from them. They'd have no right to harm the inheritor, nor expect any of the potentially missing funds out of their personal wealth, but the stolen money should be returned.

Six generations down the line, not so much.

Good thing SA is hardly a generation out of apartheid then.

[-Ocelot-]

This will be bad for everyone. Farmers will lose their land, South Africa will not be able to actually replace them and white supremacists will use these news to promote their agenda.

They say that when you make a decision that is bad for you and bad for others, this decision is dumb. And this one is definitely dumb, regardless of the reasons behind it.

[Albrenia]

A good question.

Since it was the people who were robbed directly, they'd have a legal right to the money since it was stolen from them. They'd have no right to harm the inheritor, nor expect any of the potentially missing funds out of their personal wealth, but the stolen money should be returned.

Six generations down the line, not so much.

Good thing SA is hardly a generation out of apartheid then.

Those more recently ousted from their homes (such as during apartheid) should get their land back, yes.

They should get it back because it was stolen from them, not because of 'blood debt' of white people, though. Also obviously if those who did the theft are still around, they should be punished by the law, not with purgings. Their offspring should not be punished.

[Ultramarr]

It's not so much a case of the passage of time making what was done 'right', but the holding of ancestral grudges punishes those not responsible for the actual crimes.

Should people in positions of privilege from past evils do their best to help correct the harm their forebears did? In my opinion, yes they should. Not out of guilt, but out of decency towards one's fellow humans.

Should said people be robbed or killed for the crime of having asshole grandparents? No.

If your parents steal ten million dollars and invest that money into holdings that increase in worth to twenty million dollars, when they die and you inherit it, and the people from whom it was stolen finally track you down, do they have a right to any of your 20 million worth of holdings y/n?

No they don't. Its yours now

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Well your obviously a hateful anti white leftist or black supremacist

No he's/she's not

[El-Amin Caliphate]

If your parents steal ten million dollars and invest that money into holdings that increase in worth to twenty million dollars, when they die and you inherit it, and the people from whom it was stolen finally track you down, do they have a right to any of your 20 million worth of holdings y/n?

No they don't. Its yours now

You support theft?

[Ultramarr]

No they don't. Its yours now

You support theft?

Its not theft if you inherit something your family owned for a long time

[Claorica]

It's not so much a case of the passage of time making what was done 'right', but the holding of ancestral grudges punishes those not responsible for the actual crimes.

Should people in positions of privilege from past evils do their best to help correct the harm their forebears did? In my opinion, yes they should. Not out of guilt, but out of decency towards one's fellow humans.

Should said people be robbed or killed for the crime of having asshole grandparents? No.

If your parents steal ten million dollars and invest that money into holdings that increase in worth to twenty million dollars, when they die and you inherit it, and the people from whom it was stolen finally track you down, do they have a right to any of your 20 million worth of holdings y/n?

Except at the worst it was taken in war, at no time was it taken in an criminal act of thievery

[El-Amin Caliphate]

You support theft?

Its not theft if you inherit something your family owned for a long time

Yes it is.

[Washington Resistance Army]

What about all the white farmers who legitimately bought their land and have bills of sale and things like that? Are they getting hit with this too and not getting compensation?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

What about all the white farmers who legitimately bought their land and have bills of sale and things like that? Are they getting hit with this too and not getting compensation?

They especially shouldn't be harmed.

[Eibenland]

A good question.

Since it was the people who were robbed directly, they'd have a legal right to the money since it was stolen from them. They'd have no right to harm the inheritor, nor expect any of the potentially missing funds out of their personal wealth, but the stolen money should be returned.

Six generations down the line, not so much.

Good thing SA is hardly a generation out of apartheid then.

The land wasn't taken during apartheid but three or four centuries ago.

[Neanderthaland]

Its not theft if you inherit something your family owned for a long time

Yes it is.

Doesn't that undermine the Palestinian's rights to Palestine?

[Eibenland]

Yes it is.

Doesn't that undermine the Palestinian's rights to Palestine?

The argument of both Israelis and Palestinians is "our ancestors owned this".

[Rojava Free State]

Good thing SA is hardly a generation out of apartheid then.

The land wasn't taken during apartheid but three or four centuries ago.

Much of the land wasn't even taken. No one was there to steal it from. There were agricultural Africans but it's foolish to think every inch of that area was inhabited. The land the white farmers owned was acquired fairly, and now a tyrannical bastardization of Nelson Mandela's party is stealing it from them and handing it to their cronies.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Yes it is.

Doesn't that undermine the Palestinian's rights to Palestine?

The Israelis won a series of defensive wars, so even according to Sharia it sucks to suck

[Aillyria]

Its not theft if you inherit something your family owned for a long time

Yes it is.

Sons don't inherit the sins of the father.......