The Afrikaner, The Boer Nation And The Ongoing White Genocide In South Africa

THE IDENTITY OF THE BOER NATION

volkstaat-boerestaat_map.jpg

Hello to everyone,

For those who do not know if they are Boer, I hereby attach the document we submitted to the UN in Geneva during 1995. I also addressed the UN to give us Boervolk [the Boer nation. Ed] recognition as an indigenous people.

Please give this document to any person who has clarity about who he is, especially the Afrikaners. Many of those who regarded themselves as Afrikaner, just do not realize that they are Boer. The liberal media and the political ministers headed by the secret Broederbond over the decades brainwashed them to believe that they are Afrikaner and not Boer. Their goal was to destroy the identity of the proud and hateful Boervolk and to destroy us, for help the liberal leaders of our country.

I would like to point out that the war against the English, also known as the Boer War, was under the command of the Boer generals and not Afrikaner Generals.

Boer regards,
Fred Rundle

1. Introduction:

1.1 There is a conception held by the outside world that all the White peoples of South Africa are a uniform group – that they are all united and until very recently, all wished to dominate other peoples under the banner of Apartheid. This is a misconception, a factual inaccuracy, perpetrated by those who had either absolute political power in South Africa as their aim, or who wished to see the only indigenous White people of Southern Africa, the Boers, be taken up and destroyed in a larger whole. It is therefore, the purpose of this paper to show that there are Whites in South Africa who are not part of the colonial heritage; who are not part of the “white South Africans”: who until recently were regarded as the polecats of the world. This group of people is known as the Boers.

2. Definitions:
2.1 According to the Oxford Dictionary, “indigenous” is an adjective meaning “native, belonging naturally to the soil,” (from the Latin indigena). An indigenous people is, therefore, a people occupying a territory whose roots can be shown to have come from that particular territory, and not some other part of the globe. His is a crucial definition to bear in mind when the Whites of the Republic Of South Africa analyzed.

2.2 Although the outside world has now for many years wrongly regarded the Whites of South Africa as a single ethnic group, there are in fact three distinct ethnic groupings:

(i) the English-speaking South Africans,

(ii) the Afrikaners, and

(iii) the Boers

2.3 The distinction between these three ethnic groupings, and particularly the last two (the “Afrikaners” and the “Boers”) is of crucial importance in determining the Boers’ rights as an indigenous people.

3. White Settlement:

3.1 Although the first Whites landed at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652, they did not come as settlers. They were Hollanders who came to set up a refueling station for their ships traveling to and from the east. The first White Hollander ashore, Jan van Riebeeck, in fact, left Africa shortly afterward and never returned.

3.2 It was, however, a number of other Europeans who came to the Cape shortly after this Dutch supply station had been set up, who formed a core of real settlers, based around the Western Cape. These settlers came from various European countries such as Holland, Germany, France and a number of other smaller nations.

3.3 Many of these people were members of the Protestant Churches in Europe and came as religious refugees. This wave of Protestants firmly established a Protestant ethnic in South Africa to the extent that to this day Protestantism is the dominant Christian religion in the country.

3.4 The Cape was all this while under Dutch rule, which became increasingly autocratic and intolerable. Slowly but surely a section of these white settlers, many of whom had already once fled persecution and therefore had an already established tradition of independence, began to agitate against The Dutch colonial rule. This agitation resulted in the “Vryburger” movement (the “Free Burger”) which pressed the Dutch colonialists for more and more independence.

3.5 The Vryburgers were the first Whites in South Africa to make the transition from “settlers” to an indigenous people growing “out of the soil”. Most of the Vryburgers had been born in Southern Africa, and many were two or more generations removed from Europe already. It was members of this community which started migrating away from the Cape, motivated by a desire to escape Dutch Colonial rule.

3.6 This agitation against colonial rule can be said to be the first origins of the only White indigenous people of Africa. It is, therefore, crucial to bear in mind that the very first anti-colonial movement in Africa was the White Vryburger movement – which was the Boer nation in germination. These attempts to escape colonialism were the origin of the Boer people.

3.7 However, it is also equally true that a large number – in fact, the majority – of White settlers at the Cape did not support the Vryburger movement. Most of them were quite happy with the colonial situation and perfectly happy to stay under the Dutch flag. These people formed the core of what is today known as the “Afrikaner” people – mainly Cape-based. This group is dealt with in detail below.

3.8 A third wave of White settlers arrived in South Africa in large numbers after 1820. The British Empire had by this stage occupied the Cape during the Napoleonic wars in Europe to protect the eastern Sea Route. As a result of the British occupation of the Cape, a large number of English-speaking settlers arrived in the Cape, bringing with them their language, religion, and other cultural expressions.

4. The Cape Dutch Settlers:

4.1 When the White population at the Cape split over the colonial issue – as detailed above, those who wanted to escape colonial rule migrated away from the Cape, while those who had no nationalistic zeal and who wished to keep their links with Europe stayed behind. These people who stayed behind were all Dutch citizens, and when the British occupied the Cape, were perfectly happy to become loyal British citizens.

4.2 Those who stayed behind in the Cape became known amongst the independence-minded Boers as the “Cape Dutch” – symbolizing their attachment to Europe. This group loyally supported any European colonial government and vehemently opposed all attempts by the fledgling Boer population to break ties with the colonial governments.

This group stood in strong opposition to the fledgling Boer population and differed with them on all levels – starting with their approach to colonialism and extending all the way through even to language. It is not widely known for example that there are for example marked accent and pronunciation differences between the Boers and the “Cape Dutch”.

4.3 The vehemence with which the Cape Dutch opposed the Boer population was underlined when the Boers were excommunicated from the Cape Dutch Reformed Church when they moved away from the Cape.

4.4 This group of Cape Dutch settlers therefore always opposed the Boers’ drive for independence and anti-colonialism, and, along with the British settlers, were the true colonial masters of Southern Africa, while the Boers always tried to get away from this mentality and state of affairs.

5. THE ENGLISH SPEAKING SOUTH AFRICANS

5.1 After the British occupied the Cape for the first time in 1795, the British decided that Africa should be added to the then expanding British Empire. For this purpose, the British government engaged in large-scale settlement of its citizens in South Africa. The first large wave came in 1820, and these people settled in first the Cape and then later in what became known as Natal.

5.2 The British occupation of the Cape is important because it once again showed that the Boers, who, it will be remembered, had already started migrating away from the White Dutch rule in the Cape, also rebelled against the White British colonial rule.

5.3 The Boer rebellion against British rule in the Cape reached a high point with an armed rebellion in 1812/1813, known as the Slagtersnek rebellion. Although this rebellion failed, it did exemplify what the difference between the Boers and the “White settlers” – both Dutch speaking and English speaking – was all about. The Boers wanted no part of colonization, while the other settlers were just colonists and nothing else.

5.4 The British settlement in South Africa formed the second major ethnic grouping of Whites in South Africa. To this day they have retained their British heritage and affinity for their homeland, even down to the extent of most of them having dual nationality or at least access to such dual nationality – South African and British.

5.5 This English speaking element, for the greatest part, has remained loyal to Great Britain throughout their history in South Africa, and needless to say, actively opposed the Boers’ anti-colonization drive as well. The language, religion, and culture of these English settlers is still firmly part of their European homeland.

6. THE BOERS

6.1 As the first anti-colonialist drive began under the Dutch colony in the Cape, so did the most zealous “Boers” (the word originally means a farmer) begin to move away from the Cape in search of freedom and independence. These people were continually moving further and further away from the Cape and eventually met the first great Nguni migrations – the Xhosa people – who were moving South at the same time. This meeting took place in what is today known as the Eastern Cape.

6.2 As the two great migration – Boer and Xhosa – met at the Fish River in the Eastern Cape, so did these two migrations stop for a while. In the interim, however, the British Empire occupied the Cape Colony, and the Boers, who had sacrificed so much to escape their White colonial Dutch masters, once again found themselves under White British rule.

6.3 It was from the Eastern Cape that the first of what has become known as the Great Trek movements started. This Great Trek was, in fact, the migration of the Boer people away from the British Empire – proof yet again that the first anti-colonial movement in Africa was a Boer movement – an indigenous people trying to escape colonization by an European power.

6.4 The main cause of the Great Trek was the British colonial masters trying to colonize the Boers of the Cape frontiers. There were other smaller factors, but it can be said in summation that it was the Boers’ desire to be free and independent of colonial rule which caused the Great Trek.

6.5 It is of crucial importance to note that whenever reference is made to the Great Trek, it is always said that the “Boers” took part in the Great Trek. There was no “Afrikaner” Great Trek, and there were no “Afrikaner” Great Trek Leaders, just Boer Great Trek Leaders. This is an indication that at this stage already the Boers had developed an identity of their own, as distinct from the Cape Dutch and English settlers of the Cape.

6.6 The independence-minded Boers packed up their belongings and headed north – into what today is known as the Orange Free State, Transvaal and into Natal. Although there were scattered Nguni-speaking peoples living in these territories, particularly in Natal where the Zulus held sway, large parts of these territories were vacant, having been decimated by the Difaquane, or inter-tribal wars said to have originated with the Zulu King Shaka.

6.7 The first Boer movement into Natal attempted to negotiate land from the Zulu King, Dingaan. These attempts to trade land with the Zulu ended in failure and the Boer leaders were murdered.

6.8 The Zulu army was however defeated at a Battle which became known as the Battle of Blood River in 1838, and the first Boer Republic was established in Natal shortly thereafter.

6.9 The Battle of Blood River is regarded by Boers as the symbolic birth of their nationhood, although of course, in reality, the Boers had established an own identity long before this event. The reason why the Boers, however, regard the battle as being the symbolic birth of their nation was that they felt that their victory against overwhelming odds was divinely inspired. The Boers had taken an oath to God [YHWH. Ed.] that if He was given the victory that day they would hold the day as holy, but ever since that a “House would be established” to the Lord [YHWH. Ed], that means in biblical terms, that a nation would be founded.

6.10 The Boers then renewed negotiations with the Zulus, and their new King, Mpande, agreed to let the Boers have territory in Natal. It can be seen that from this early period then, the Boers were recognized by other peoples in Southern Africa as an independent nation and not part of the colonial governments – in other words already then they were recognized as indigenous, but rather as merely an extension of the European colonies, then the Zulus, for example, would not have settled with them but rather with the European powers directly.

6.11 However, the British Empire still wished to colonize the Boers, and in 1840 annexed Natal. After a few skirmishes with the British, the Boers once again packed up their belongings and left Natal, leaving behind only a small number in Northern Natal.

6.12 The Boers in Natal then went and joined their fellow Boers in the Orange Free State and the Transvaal, which had in the meantime been put on the road to nationhood as well. Although there were other indigenous peoples living in parts of these territories, the Boers were accepted by them as another indigenous people and it is worthwhile to note that very few major clashes took place between the Boers and the Black peoples of this time. When such clashes did take place, they were usually over matters such as stock or grazing – at a time very normal matters for indigenous peoples to argue over.

6.13 Finally in 1852 the British Empire itself was forced to recognize Boer independence at the Sand River Convention. This year marks the firm establishment of the Boers as an indigenous people in international law. At this early stage, not one, but two independent Boer Republics were recognized by the whole world, and were granted contractual capacity as with any other independent indigenous nation. The mere fact that the British colonial masters accepted this state of affairs shows that even the European powers recognized that this independent and free nation had sprung from Africa and not from some colonial experiment.

6.14 The Boers had in the interim developed their own culture and language – in fact, the language spoken by the Boers of the Transvaal and Orange Free State Republics is one of the newest languages on earth. It is a language unlike any European language, and many of its words have origins in Africa – and not in any European language. Linguistically then, the language of the Boers was created in Africa – yet another indication that the Boers and their culture are indigenous to Africa, and not a colonial import.

6.15 It is also of crucial importance to note that when any mention is made of the independent republics, they are always called “Boer Republics” – and never “Afrikaner Republics”. This is of course confirmation that the Boers had a separate identity from the Cape Dutch settlers. This separate identity was confirmed in International Law by the Sand River Convention of 1852.

6.16 Although the Boers thought thy had at last found freedom from colonialism, they were wrong. The British Empire launched two more attempts to recolonise them – the second time being successful.

6.17 The first attempt to colonize the Boers came with the occupation of the Transvaal by a small British contingent in1877. This event led directly to the First Anglo-Boer War (note again that it is called an “Anglo-Boer War” and not an “Anglo-Afrikaner War”) and by 1881 the British forces had been defeated by the Boers to such an extent that the British were forced to once again recognize the independence of the Boer Republics. This recognition was given formal effect by the London Convention of 1884 – the second time that the Boers had been recognized as an independent and indigenous people in international law.

6.18 It is a sobering thought for people in the 1990’s to realize that the very first liberation war against colonial masters was in fact fought by the White Boers against the White British colonialist – preceding any Black liberation war by many decades. It can be argued that only an indigenous people can wage a liberation war. And this shows once again that the Boers are an indigenous people.

6.19 The second attempt by the British to colonize the Boers resulted in the Second Anglo-Boer War of 1889 – 1902 (once again note that it is called the Anglo-Boer war and not the Anglo-Afrikaner war). This war resulted in the development by the Boers of the guerrilla warfare method, since used by many liberation movements in all parts of the world. Although the Boers fought bravely against overwhelming odds, the British used a cruel until then unheard of measure of fighting – they rounded up as many Boer women and children as they could find and put them into concentration camps scattered around South Africa. In these camps, as a result of judicial executions, starvation, disease and ill-treatment, some 27,000 Boer women and children died – some 20 percent of the total Boer population of the time.

6.20 Against such inhumane methods the Boers could not fight, and eventually the British succeeded in their dream of colonising the entire Southern Africa in 1902, when the treaty of Vereeniging, ending the Second Anglo-Boer War, was signed. Even in defeat, the Boers were recognized under international law.

6.21 The position of the Cape Dutch and English settlers during this conflict also goes to show that these people did not associate themselves with the Boers. Although a few Cape Dutch did take up arms and fight on the side of the Boers, (they became known as the “Cape rebels” for this reason – and they were severely punished if caught) the vast majority of the Cape Dutch and English settlers in the Cape and Natal supported the British colonization of Southern Africa, which then also included today’s Botswana, Zimbabwe, Zambia and territories even further north.

6.22 The treaty of Vereeniging therefore marks the subjugation of the Boers by White European colonial masters – a fate shared by countless other indigenous peoples while the British and other European empires still regarded Africa and other parts of the world as their personal possession. The Boers were however unique in that they were the only White indigenous people to be subjected in this way – a nation called the “White Tribe of Africa” by the British Broadcasting Corporation.

7. The ‘Afrikaners’

7.1 Thus at the time of the ending of the Second Anglo-Boer War, there were three distinct ethnic groupings amongst the broad White population of South Africa:

(i) the internationally recognized and indigenous Boer people;

(ii) the Cape Dutch Settlers, loyal to the British Empire; and

(iii) the English speaking White settlers, also loyal to the British Empire.

7.2 The British Empire realized that it had to bring the Boers under control for once and for all, and therefore devised a plan to neutralize the Boer Republics – a plan to make them join up with the other two White segments of their colonies in South Africa.

7.3 The British masters of Southern Africa therefore engineered the National Convention of 1908, which saw the creation of the Union of South Africa. This union consisted of the former Cape Colony, the Natal Colony, and the two former Boer Republics.

This union was not merely a geographic convenience, but a deliberate plan to try and destroy the independence-minded Boers by mingling them with the Cape Dutch and the English settlers.

7.4 It is worth noting that the British Empire used their technique in other parts of Africa as well -reference can be made to the short-lived federation of Nyasaland (Malawi); Northern Rhodesia (Zambia); and Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) to name but one.

7.5 The prime representative of the British Empire in South Africa, Sir Alfred Milner, put it this way: “The new tactic (to subjugate the Boers) must be to consolidate the different areas of British South Africa into one nation. Although unification will be initially put the Boers into political control of the entire South Africa, it will, ironically, eventually lead to their final downfall.”

7.6 This was of course precisely what happened – but not until a new name had been developed for the new “nation” which Milner spoke about. They could not continue to call the new nation a “Boer state” because the Boers had been subjugated. They could not call it a “Cape Dutch” state, as the Dutch colonialists were now British colonialists, and they could not call it a British state, for obvious reasons. The answer then was to give a general term to all White inhabitants of the new union – “Afrikaners”. Although the word originally means “African” it as politicized by a group of Cape Dutch propagandists under one SJ du Toit in 1880 (the same year the Boers took up arms to fight the British colonialists) in the literature of the time.

It was then decided to try and blend the Boers into the Cape Dutch and English speaking White populations but calling them all Afrikaners instead of referring to their real ethnic bases.

7.7 This then is how the world began to hear of “Afrikaners” – although only 80 years ago there was no such word in the international vocabulary.

7.8 By forcing the Boers into the Union of South Africa, the British made them co-responsible for the policy of racial segregation, which had of course been established and legislated by the British colonial government.

7.9 The new “Afrikaners” – in fact, a coalition of Cape Dutch, English speaking Whites and some Boers – tried as best they could to come to grips with the racial and geographic legacy left to them from the British colonial times – and it was from this disaster that the policy of Apartheid was developed.

7.10 It is supreme importance to note here that the Boers were dragged unwillingly into the Union of South Africa – and at the first opportunity which presented itself, they tried to extricate themselves by force of arms. This was the unsuccessful 1914 Boer rebellion, which ended when some Boer war-era generals were killed or imprisoned by the pro-British Union of South Africa government.

7.11 It is thus unfair of the international world to regard the “Boers” as having been responsible for what happened in South Africa during the second part of the 20th century – the Boers were just as many victims of the colonial powers as were any other indigenous people of Africa.

7.12 Milners’ words (as in 7.5 above) were true – by forcing the Boers into the false Union of South Africa, he was forcing them to be subjugated by the broad South African British colony.

8. An Indigenous People

8.1 The false Union of South Africa led directly to the attempt to extend and hold the British originated policy of racial separation in South Africa – an attempt which ended with the election of April 1994 and the coming to power of the African National Congress in South Africa.

8.2 This change over of the reins of power does not, however, mean that the underlying causes of the downfall of the Union of South Africa (later the Republic of South Africa) have been removed. They are still there – namely the reality that there are numerous different ethnic groupings in the greater Southern Africa, all wrestling to establish their own territory and space.

8.3 The Boer nation is one of these groups. The Boers have not disappeared – the British Empire and their unitary state tried to define them out of existence, but this did not happen in reality.

8.4 The existence of the Boer nation has nothing to do with racism or apartheid – the Boers existed long before Apartheid, for that matter. The Boers are a well established indigenous grouping who fought the first anti-colonial liberation wars in Africa. It did not matter that the colonialists were also White. If the Boers were, as the world might like to view them, just “white racists” then they would never have come into conflict with the White colonialists!

8.5 The subjugation of the Boers does not however negate the fact that the Boers are a people all by themselves – they have their own unique history, their own traditions, own festival days, political dispensation, political philosophy, they had their own territory (state), own symbols, own flags, anthems and so on – ALL DEVELOPED IN AFRICA! This then is truly an indigenous people – in contrast to the other two White ethnic groupings in South Africa, who developed nothing new or original but remained loyal to their colonial masters’ emblems and traditions.

8.6 The Boers do no want a state or territory for the “Whites” of South Africa. This is a falsehood which must be dispelled for once and for all. All the Boers want is an own independent territory, just as they had before the White colonialists took it away from them. Nothing more and nothing less will do. We repeat: this has nothing to do with race or racism – merely the desire of an indigenous people to be themselves and to rule themselves in their own territory.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 The Boervolk fully endorses the 42 Articles of the Draft Declaration of the UN’s Sub-Commission on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and it wishes to play a supportive role in obtaining those ideals for whoever qualifies for such recognition.

9.2 The Boers are the only white nation in South Africa who justify the status of an indigenous people who may rightfully lay claim to self-government in an own geographical area.

9.3 The Boer Electoral Commission has been set up in 1995 to coordinate efforts to ensure that democratically elected representatives of the Boer nation can be in any forum with authority on behalf of the Boer nation to speak and act. A delegate of the Boer elections board and the subsequent House of Assembly to the UN, for example, will therefore always have a democratically elected representative of the Boer nation, and not of a political party.

9.4 At this stage it is uncertain when the first Boer election will take place, but consideration is being given now to an interim representative body in place.

StopwhitegenocodeinSA/Boerevolkstaat

SOURCE

SOURCE

Enjoyed this post? Share it!