by Vryburger | Sep 24, 2017 | Who is the Boer?, Wie is die Boer?
By Adriana Stuijt
This family history is being repeated by every Boer family in South Africa right now – people are again losing their ethnic identity and confused about what to call themselves – Boers, Afrikaners or whites, which are you?
They are losing their ethnic identity – and it’s not the first time this tragedy is occurring.
So who are these people – first called the Grensboere (Border-boers), then the Voortrekkers, then Boers, then Afrikaners – and who again being degraded to “whites” – people in other words, who have no right to live on the African continent.
Many people in the news media still ridicule me whenever I write about “Boers” or “Voortrekker-descendants” on the website The referenced website does not show this link anymore – either by accident or for alternative reasons/agendas GO BACK here for MORE INFO from other sources – original link at bottom of page. But has anybody ever figured out why so many people have stopped referring to themselves as Boers since 1902 even though they know they were directly descended from Boers?
And does anybody know today why there are so many Afrikaners still refusing to admit that the Boer history even existed?
There are still some South Africans who are still referring to themselves as “Afrikaners” such as Dan Roodt of the Pro-Afrikaans Action Group (PRAAG) but this number is dwindling rapidly as their identity is being taken away from them by the current regime. But refer to this group as Boers and they get angry.
And increasingly one finds this besieged minority referring to themselves in the same racist terms used by the ANC, namely “whites”. So what is going on here? Many people not familiar with South African history are confused – and with right, because the history has become very muddled-up over the years.
And now, these people are again at risk of losing their ethnic identity even further – and thus also losing their rights to remain in Southern Africa as a unique, ethnically different nation.
Even those still daring to call themselves “Afrikaners” are falling victim to this identity crisis, which is being created by the ANC-regime.
How did this tragedy — the loss of one’s ethnic identity and the loss if the history of your people — actually come about?
As soon as all these people start referring to themselves as “whites” they will have lost all rights to remain in South Africa. We know why their identity is being taken away.
But we don’t know how these so-called Afrikaners have also actively participated in the steady removal of the Boer nation’s identity before these current events. And that’s what makes a lot of people confused about their own identity.
It’s a little-known part of history which started shortly after the end of the Anglo-Boer war in 1902, when the Boers were a defeated, poverty-stricken people who had been chased off their farms and whose towns had been destroyed by the British. They were dirt-poor and plunged into an unprecedented famine. Many had to flee to the cities to survive – places which were totally alien to them, places were only English was being spoken, places where their churches were being run by people who referred to themselves as Afrikaners.
Up to that point, the Boers had had a rich history and people still find old history books referring to this nation.
Recently a kind lady from Louisiana mailed me a copy of the “History of the Boers in South Africa,” written in 1887 by a Canadian missionary with no political axe to grind: namely George McCall Theal.
It contains a map showing the territories which were being farmed by the Boers: from the Olifants/Limpopo rivers in the north to below the Orange River in the South (Colesburg).
It shows the names of the towns they had started which carried names such as Lydenburg, (Place of Suffering) Vryheid, (Place of Freedom) Pietermaritzburg, (named after the famous Voortrekker leader) Philippolis and Bethulie, (named after their beloved Bible) and Potchefstroom, Rustenburg, Winburg and Bloemfontein… as they Trekked, the Boers named the map of South Africa, and many of its vegetation and wildlife as well.
All these Boer names are now being wiped off the map of South Africa in one fell swoop by the ANC-regime — even though the Boers’ official history had ended in 1902, long before the elitist-Afrikaners who ran the secret Afrikaner Broederbond cabal had started apartheid in 1948.
Yet this is not the first time that the Boers are facing such an ethnic cleansing campaign by a nation which is hell-bent to remove their very rights to exist in South Africa – this is actually already the third time in Boer history.
The first time the British tried to eradicate them from the map of South Africa with their vicious war and their even more vicious concentration camps where many tens of thousands of Boer women, children and elderly starved to death within just a few months.
After this first genocide to target the Boer nation, their descendants still managed to cling to their identity for at least another generation – until the secret cabal of wealthy Afrikaners called the Afrikaner Broederbond gained hegemony — and then took away their identity from about 1933 onwards.
When the Afrikaner Broederbond ‘s National Party won the elections, and took over the governance of South Africa from 1948 and launched the system of apartheid, the first thing they did was to completely rewrite the Boers’ history.
Suddenly, all the accomplishments of the Boers became ‘Afrikaner’ accomplishments.
The Boer Women’s Monument in Bloemfontein, erected in memory of the murdered Boer women and children who died in the British concentration camps written about so eloquently by British pro-Boer campaigner Emily Hobhouse, even became the Afrikaner Women’s Monument – a truly vile insult to their memory. The Voortrekker Monument is described in terms which honour the memory of Afrikaners — not the Boers who had actually undertaken the Great Trek.
Paul Kruger, their last president who was so sadly exiled to the shores of a lake in Switzerland, became an “Afrikaner” president in the history book — when he himself never referred to himself in any of his correspondence as anything except a Boer.
Thus all the history books were rewritten and Boers with too-long memories such as Robert van Tonder of the Boerestaat Party and Eugene Terre’Blanche (of the incorrectly-named) Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging were persecuted publicly by the regime, aided and abetted by the Afrikaans-language news media. Eugene’s heart is in the right place: he bears the flag of the old Boer Republic and he refers to himself as a Boer. But his organisation’s name bears witness to his ethnic confusion, caused by the Afrikaner Broederbond’s rewriting of his own history.
And now the ANC is completing this vile task which was started by the Afrikaner Broederbond, and has even changed the names of their towns – and even of the historically–important “Voortrekker” streets which indicate the routes which the old Voortrekker Leaders such as Bezuidenhout had taken while battling their way to the north to get away from British hegemony in the Cape.
The old Voortrekker Streets all over South Africa are now being renamed to Chris Hani and Nelson Mandela streets and other names of people who, unlike the old Voortrekkers, actually have contributed absolutely nothing to the development of those streets whatsoever.
Thus the ANC is proving itself to be just as fascist in its nature as the old Afrikaner Broederbond they had replaced.
Both organisations are still hell-bent to wipe out all evidence of the Boer history.
They even continue to persecute and jail anyone who wants to rekindle Boer history such as Eugene Terre’Blanche and the Boeremag-15, undergoing their hyped-up, trumped-up treason trial in Pretoria High Court.
It’s no coincidence that the public prosecutor of the Boeremag-21 just happens to be a well-known former Afrikaner Broederbonder, Paul Fick, who even admitted to being a Broederbonder when I interviewed him for the Sunday Times during the apartheid-era, when his organisation had launched plans for a new flag and wanted to test public opinion…
And if Robert van Tonder, riddled with cancer and suffering terribly, hadn’t committed suicide a few years ago, they would have also had him in jail by now under trumped-up charges.
He and other Boers still proudly spoke the Taal, the language of their forebears – the language which now is being wiped off the map of South Africa.
Today, people no longer know who these Boers were – nobody knows about those dirt-poor Boer women who founded the garment workers’ union, those famished women who had left their beloved farms and had gone to the cities to try and survive after their defeat in 1902.
Women like Johanna and Hester Cornelius of Thabazimbi, who even wrote their own plays, describing the Boers’ history in the cities, those many thousands of women and girls who had marched behind the Red Flag of the communist party in the cities of South Africa.
And the Boer men who founded the Mineworkers union (now named Solidarity), and who had fought so valiantly against the mine magnates during the mineworkers’ uprisings at the Witwatersrand and of whom thousands had been shot dead by their own compatriot soldiers from the countryside, who had been told by the government of Jan Smuts that these men were the enemies, the “communists”. They were shooting their own Boer kindred and didn’t know it…
Nobody knows the history of these Boer people today because the Afrikaner Broederbond has deliberately written these facts from their history books.
History researcher Elsabe Brink wrote brilliantly about these defeated Boers in the cities of South Africa who put up such a valiant fight for their own identity – and whose ethnic identity is now again being discarded today in the latest ethnic cleansing facing them.
The elitist Afrikaners of the Cape, who had been ashamed of the Boers to the north who had fought against the British, were equally ashamed of these poor, defeated Boers who were trying to survive in the cities — forced to work in mines and factories “like black girls in the factories” as they referred to them.
Hand-labour was as abhorrent to these elitist Afrikaners as it is to this day. That’s why Orania is so newsworthy: because these Afrikaners are actually doing all their own labour…
The old Boer mineworkers were equally despised – they and their families were referred to as the “new poor-white problem” in a Red Cross report published about the devastating poverty among the descendants of the Boers in 1923.
But these weren’t “whites” — these were all Boers. I recorded many of the names of the mineworkers in the Witwatersrand towns like Springs and Vrededorp who had been shot in the Cottlesloe uprising by Jan Smuts’ troops – and they were carrying Boer names.
I also have a record of all the Boer children of Langlaagte and other Afrikaner-run orphanages who were adopted by wealthier English-speakers over those years — and thus were lost to the Boer nation forever.
These adoptions went on until well into the early 1970s and I know many people today with English surnames who were raised as Englishmen yet do not know that they are descended from Boer families.
And again we find these Boers back today – again growing increasingly poor and again fighting for their survival and their ethnic identities in internal refugee camps, and again giving up their children for adoption to wealthier elites.
These internal refugee camps for Boers are now run by organisations such as “Afrikaner Charity.”
Yet this is also the very same group who still refers to themselves as Boers to this day. Just go and talk to them and ask them about their history. They know who they are descended from.
So please don’t refer to these dirt-poor working-class people, who refuse to be defeated and who refuse to forget their own history, merely as “whites.’
It’s an insult to their proud history.
by Vryburger | Sep 10, 2017 | Who is the Boer?
By Ron:
There appears to be a long running blind spot concerning the Afrikaans speaking population of the Western Cape as some authors &; commentators have routinely conflated them with the Boer population of the Cape frontier. Discussions on the Great Trek by those authors therefore refer to an amorphous Afrikaner group thereby overshadowing the actual Boer population which went on the Great Trek. Thereby openly insinuating that the Great Trek was something “only a minority of Afrikaners” engaged in when in reality the bulk of the Boer people engaged in it &; very few actual Cape Dutch did. The most egregious example of this blind spot was demonstrated by an Anglo-Boer War era author from France whose misunderstanding was so extreme that he actually erroneously thought that most “Boers” remained behind at the Cape during the Great Trek simply because most of the Afrikaans speaking population – the Cape Dutch population – remained. The author in question: Yves Guyot wrote the following.
[Ancestors of the Boers had more than once acted in a similar manner towards the Dutch East India Company when dissatisfied with their administration, and unwilling to pay their taxes. But Pro-Boers have a curious habit of magnifying things. One would imagine, hearing them speak, that every Boer in the Cape had packed wife, children, and goods into ox-wagons and had trekked north. As a matter of fact, the greater proportion remained behind, and their descendants formed the majority of the 376,000 whites enumerated in the census of 1891. The Great Trek was really composed of various detachments which started one after another in 1836. Statistics of the numbers of trekkers vary from 5,000 to 10,000.]
The “greater proportion” of the Afrikaans speakers he was referring to was in fact the Cape Dutch [i.e. non-Boer] population of the Western Cape who have always outnumbered the Boer population which developed on the Cape frontier. [Circa 1679 – 1735] Therefore his devise of trying to imply that most “Boers” did not go on the Great Trek falls flat &; underscores his total misunderstanding over who the greater proportion of the Afrikaans speaking folks at the Cape were because most of them have never ascribed to the independence outlook of the Boer population of the frontier nor saw themselves as Boers. Therefore his feeble attempt at implying that the Boers who trekked somehow represented a “marginal” or “minority” decision [as he views the Afrikaans speakers as one monolithic group when in reality the Boers developed into a separate group away from &; distinct from the Cape Dutch] does great damage to the reality that the bulk of the Boer population [if not even most] were driven to trek.
Therefore Guyot was employing a technique which is still commonly used to marginalize the aspirations of the Boer people by implying that they are simply “a minority” within a larger language based whole who “must respect the majority decision” of the artificial larger whole &; accept the decisions of the establishment Afrikaner leadership &; “abandon” their centuries long struggle for Boer self-determination.
This glaring misconception &; the accompanying blind spot to the larger Cape Dutch population is also erroneously asserted &; propagated in books such as The White Tribe of Africa [ authored by a British BBC journalist who specifically sought out &; largely parroted an Afrikaner Broederbond tinged perspective ] most notable in the incorrect assertion within the line: [ One hundred and fifty years ago, the Boers had nothing but a determination to escape from those who prevented them from living as they wished. Today their descendants control the whole of South Africa. ] Which of course is impossible &; a false claim because the Boers are no more than 40 % of the entire White Afrikaans speaking population. How could they control “the whole of South Africa” when they did not even control the whole of the Afrikaner designation? The macro Afrikaner group which inherited control of South Africa was mainly of Cape Dutch descent as the Boer segment was the smaller portion. The Cape Dutch descendants make up at least 60 – 65 % of the White Afrikaans speaking population ergo when the White Afrikaans speakers inherited the macro State of South Africa: the Boer segment could not possibly have controlled “the whole of South Africa” as they were naturally outnumbered by the Cape Dutch originated Afrikaners whose votes carried more weight. Cape Dutch, English speakers &; Boers all had access to the vote under South Africa ergo the Boer segment did not have the numerical strength to take control of South Africa via the electoral process. Why do some authors purposely omit the Cape Dutch ancestors of the Afrikaner named group? Are they simply ignorant of them? Are they simply influenced by Afrikaner Broederbond propaganda? Did the Cape Dutch descended Afrikaners suddenly die out? Of course not. So why are the Cape Dutch segment curiously rarely mentioned? The Cape Dutch were not an invisible people as they had in fact named the Afrikaans language as such &; started the first Afrikaans language based newspaper. One would think that this act would have put them on the map. Though they did so under the Afrikaner designation thereby obscuring the Cape Dutch roots. In fact the Boer population were the ones dying out as per the 50 % loss of their children in the concentration camps during the second Anglo-Boer War. Thereby giving the Cape Dutch an even greater population momentum within the Afrikaner designation. Therefore it is mathematically impossible for Boers to have controlled the WHOLE of South Africa as they would only have held sway within the regions they dominated numerically via the electorate though tragically under Afrikaner political domination.
This misunderstanding still shows up in present times. As an example: when the host of the African Crisis website read a book noting that there were more Afrikaans speakers at the Cape during the Anglo-Boer War. He then outrageously &; erroneously proclaimed: “I read that there were more ‘Boers’ in the Western Cape than there were in the Boer Republics. “! Which of course is totally wrong &; demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of who the Boer people are &; who the Afrikaans speaking population at the Western Cape were / are. While some Boers of the Cape frontier remained behind during the Great Trek – the vast majority of the Cape Afrikaans speaking population are of course the Cape Dutch of the Western Cape. This misunderstanding is compounded further as many do not even know that the Great Trek was from the Eastern Cape where the Boer population lived &; not from the Western Cape of the Cape Dutch. This misunderstanding was typified when an American website host erroneously thought that the Great Trek was from Cape Town [probably confusing the re-enactment which occurred during the centennial &; started from Cape Town] when the fact of the matter is that the Great Trek was virtually exclusively from the north eastern Cape frontier from towns like: Cradock / Uitenhage / Grahamstown / Swellendam / Somerset East / Graaff-Reniet etc. There were around 10 000 Boers at most who went on the Great Trek out of a total Cape Afrikaans speaking population of at least 30 000 – 40 000. The vast majority of the 30 000 – 40 000 Afrikaans speakers were the Western Cape based Cape Dutch.
The population statistics for the late 19th cent show that there were around 400 000 White inhabitants at the Cape – with the vast majority of the Afrikaans speakers being from the Cape Dutch population. While there were never more than 250 000 to 300 000 Boers at most prior to the second Anglo-Boer War thereby demonstrating as plain as day that the erroneous notion that Boer descendants could have governed South Africa alone by themselves is mathematically impossible &; totally disregards the numerically larger Cape Dutch population group.
This regrettable misunderstanding &; conflation got perpetuated further as the African Crisis website host Jan Lamprecht misinformed the large listening audience of the Jeff Rense radio program on April 5 of 2010 when he erroneously stated ad nauseum that the Boer Republics were established by the “Afrikaners” [ when the Afrikaners of the time were in fact not even yet trying to co-opt the Boers via the Afrikaner Bond ] when in fact the Cape Dutch Afrikaners have NEVER wanted freedom or independence &; have NEVER established any republics until 1961 when they turned the Union of South Africa into the nominal Republic of South Africa largely as a result of Boer population support via the national referendum on the topic. Then during the same broadcast he made the most outrageous assertion when he claimed that the National Party rose to power as a result of a “Boer conspiracy”! I kid you not. While the rise of the National Party could be ascribed as having been the result of an Afrikaner Broederbond conspiracy – the fact that Lamprecht attempts to shift blame ENTIRELY on then largely impoverished &; working class Boer people [who are the SMALLER segment of the White Afrikaans speaking population] &; TOTALLY OMITTED MENTIONING the role of the Afrikaners [who are mostly of Cape Dutch origin] spoke volumes / betrays ignorance &; would suggest an anti-Boer agenda at worst. Because he has been informed in the past but continues to peddle erroneous assertions.
Why does he speak of “Afrikaner Republics” when the Afrikaners of the era were OPPOSED to the Great Trek of the Boers? Why does he speak about a “Boer conspiracy” when the Afrikaners engaged in said “conspiracy” [his term] would be of Cape Dutch origin as well? He could have called it accurately an “Afrikaner conspiracy” but he chose to call it a “Boer conspiracy”. The term Afrikaner was used when he was talking about Boers &; the term Boer was used when he was taking about Afrikaners. This is rather curious. While there were certainly a number of Boer descendants [now part of the Afrikaner coalition &; only identifying themselves as Afrikaners] who participated in the rise of the National Party with some also recruited into the Broederbond – it would certainly be a total distortion &; an outright lie to blame the Boer people for engaging in a “conspiracy” when the vast majority of the Afrikaners were descended from the Cape Dutch population &; thus not were not even from the Boer population.
The Boer people were under the thumb of the Afrikaners &; blaming Boers exclusively for the actions of the Afrikaners neglects the role of the larger &; dominant Afrikaans speaking population group. Furthermore the driving force behind the “conspiracy” was not even the average Afrikaner but rather the Afrikaner Broederbond which was a then semi-secret society which was unknown to most Boers &; Afrikaners. But Lamprecht blames an entire ethnic group for the actions of a very small &; secretive group. The two most notable drivers of the rise of the National Party were D F Malan &; Hendrik Verwoerd. Both not from the Boer people. [Malan was from the Cape Dutch &; Verwoerd was a naturalized Afrikaner originally from Holland.] Henning Klopper who was one of the founders of the Broederbond might have been of Boer descent BUT he was totally initiated into viewing himself as an Afrikaner via the speeches of JBM Hertzog &; thus on board with the Afrikaner teleocratic agenda to work within macro State to take it over for the bulk of the Afrikaans speakers [ which Hertzog actually opposed as he wanted to promote a bi-lingual coalition via “English Afrikaners” working together with “Afrikaans Afrikaners” ] &; the Afrikaner Broederbond in particular. Lamprecht also gave a dangerous false impression when he spoke of Terre’Blanche as being the only one who “stood up” to be counted while totally neglecting the much longer role that Robert van Tonder played as he left the National Party in 1961 to defend the Boer people &; to advocate for the restoration of the Boer Republics. The political outlook of Robert van Tonder would later play a significant role in the political outlook of Eugene Terre’Blanche – particularly when Terre’Blanche got on board with the Boer freedom struggle &; began to call for the restoration of the Boer Republics by 1985 due to the influence of van Tonder. Therefore ignoring the role of Robert van Tonder was also curious. Van Tonder had to endure a lot more abuse / threats &; violence than Terre’Blanche did in the defense of his people yet nary of word.
Another curious thing about Lamprecht was when he noted on his website that he could not identify most of the Boer flags used during the Boer Protest March of March 2006. How can someone who cannot even identify various Boer flags let alone not even admit that the Boers are not Afrikaners [as the Boers are from the Cape frontier not the Western Cape] – be taken so seriously on the Jeff Rense Radio Program concerning the history of the Boer people? One of the most outrageous lies was when he distorted a quote when he claimed that Eugene Terre’Blanche said that: “an Afrikaner just wants to be an Afrikaner”. When in reality what he said was &; what the actual quote was: “A Boer just wants to be a Boer”. While Terre’Blanche also used to sometimes erroneously refer to himself as an Afrikaner at times due to his conditioning – he used the term Boer in that quote &; not Afrikaner. There is no ethnicity of Afrikaner [it is a continental derived term like American which also encompasses multiple ethnic groups] as it was &; is an umbrella term used to describe anyone whose home language was Afrikaans. While the Boers are a minority within the Afrikaner designation.
The newly adopted Afrikaner flag also plays into the Afrikaner domination of the Boer Nation as they purposely hijack Boer flags &; attach them within an Afrikaner colour scheme dating back to the Prince Flag as used by the tyrant Jan van Riebeeck: the original oppressor of the ancestors of the Boer people at the Cape. The flag no doubt aims at co-opting the Boer people into the Afrikaner camp so that any Boer Republican secessionist movement is neutralized because the Afrikaner leadership is adamantly opposed to the restoration of the Boer Republics which will no doubt be the natural result of an authentic Boer independence movement.
This drastic misunderstanding causes great damage &; harm to the actual Boer people because the Afrikaner establishment has always worked AGAINST them denying them their independence &; the conflation of the Boer with the Afrikaner makes the Boers responsible &; a scapegoat for actions taken &; driven mainly by ANOTHER ethnic group. This is why one often hears the ignorant lament &; harmful straw man argument of: “the Boers should have created a homeland for themselves when ‘they’ were still in power” because those who utter such a sentiment betray their total lack of knowledge of the situation &; who the actual Boer people are. There were Boers struggling to “create a homeland for themselves” all throughout the 20th cent but they were prevented &; stopped by the Afrikaner establishment. The very regime that the ignoramuses erroneously believe was “Boers who should have created a homeland for themselves”. Mind you this is the same Afrikaner establishment that many folks insist that the Boers must stand with in the name of “unity” for reasons that entirely escape one because so long as the Boers stand with the establishment Afrikaners so long will their long running independence movement get stalled. While there were numerous folks of Boer descent part of the past regimes – one must remember that they had long since been conditioned to view themselves as Afrikaners &; many rejected the Boer Nation &; therefore did not work on even trying to accommodate Boer self-determination.
There are folks who try to deny the Boers their own cultural identity asserting that they should fold themselves into – or be assimilated into the Afrikaners but I have never heard anyone make the same argument &; claim that the Acadians should do the same &; fold into the French Canadians &; Quebecois because Boer identity should be as respected as Acadian identity is in Canada. Someone on another website once commented that Boers who are proud of their culture &; display their historical Boer Republican flags are “extremists” yet once again I never hear the same argument put forward against Acadians who are proud of their distinct culture &; display their own distinct Acadian flag.
The fact of the matter is that so long as this persistent blind spot &; lack of insight continues – the actual Boer people will be damaged / maligned as “extremists” / misrepresented / accused &; marginalized under the Afrikaners simply because a larger uninsightful public has been conditioned to view all Afrikaans speakers as a mythological monolithic block due to the Afrikaner Broederbond propaganda of the past &; the curious omission of the larger Cape Dutch population by some authors whose tragic myopic misunderstanding only sees Boer ancestors of the Afrikaners thus negating &; ignoring the larger Cape Dutch population.
by Vryburger | Sep 3, 2017 | Transvaalse Separatiste, Wie is die Boer?
 |
|
ONS STRYD
- TRANSVAAL BEHOORT AAN DIE BOERVOLK
- ONS STRYD IS VRYHEID
- GROND IS VRYHEID
- DIE PRYS VAN VRYHEID IS JOU ERFPAG AAN DIE OPKOMENDE GESLAG
- VRYHEID BETEKEN SELFWERKSAAMHEID
- ‘n VOLK IS NIE ‘n SOSIOLOGIESE, HUMANISTIESE OF VERGEESTELIKE BEGRIP NIE
- ‘n VOLK IS ‘n ETNIESE GROEPERING
- EENHEID IS VERVLEG MET VRYHEID
- VERDEELDHEID LE IN POLITIEKE PARTYE
- HULLE WIE SE SWEET DIE GROND BENAT, BESIT DIE GROND
|
Vierkleur image by Himasaram – Source: Drawn by User:SKopp /This vector image was created with Inkscape.Reference: http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/za_kv.html, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link
DIE NUWE VRYHEIDSTRYD
Die nuwe Vryheidstryd begin waar die oue opgehou het (Anglo-Boereoorlog). Dit gee aan ons (die Boervolk) die onbetwisbare reg op die Boerestate en Vryheid, soos ook beredeneer word in die Boerestaat geskrifte van Robert van Tonder.
Grondgebied, Boervolk, Afrikaans as enigste amptelike taal en ‘n volkstaat vorm van regering, vorm die hoekstene van die nuwe Vryheidstryd. Die enigste oplossing vir die Boervolk se probleme is ‘n eie grondgebied, bestuur volgens sy aard en wese. Die party-politieke stelsel is ‘n erfenis van die Brits-imperialistiese stelsel en ‘n onding wat primêr verantwoordelik is vir die kunsmatige bymekaar hou van die Afrikaner-nasie en die verdeling van die Boervolk binne partye, op beginsels wat persoonlike moraliteite behels (verlig-verkramp, progressief- behoudend) , oppervlakkig en verwyderd van die realiteite is. Diegene wat hierteen kapsie het, speel speletjies met die begrip volk, wat etnies van aard is, en nie ‘n sosiologies, humanistiese of vergeestelike begrip kan wees nie. Soortgelyke ideale en strewes tussen verskeie etniese groepe maak hulle nié een volk nie. ‘n Volk sal as alle kondisioneringswyses geëlimineer word, ‘n gemeenskaplike ondertoon hê. Hierdie basiese strewe van ‘n volk is sy grondgebied en genepoel.
Die Boervolk se enkel grootste uitdaging in hierdie tyd is om die kondisionerings propaganda van die partypolitici oor die afgelope 76 jaar van hom af te skud. Die propaganda is die groter wordende nasie begrip (Afrikanerskap) wat aan die politici die demokratiese mag gee om oor etniese lyne heen te regeer en sodoende nie ‘n enkele etniese groep volledig kan bevredig t.o.v. sy basiese behoeftes nie.
Kom ons kyk na twee van hierdie veranderende begrippe wat met die tyd ingevoer is en stilweg deur die verskeie etniese groepe as korrek aanvaar is.
- Die begrip Afrikaner
Hierdie woord ontken die fisiese skeiding van die kolonialiste in 1836, met die Groot Trek, en wil ‘n vergeestelike samehorigheid die bindende element van etnisiteit maak. As die lawwe argumentasie voortgesit word dan eindig ons met ‘n afhanklikheid sindroom t.o.v. die stamlande en stuur ons af op ‘n Babelse strewe. Nêrens word daar gepraat van die Anglo-Afrikaner oorlog nie, net maar van die Anglo- Boereoorlog. (Die vraag bly dus, waar was die Afrikaners.) Die antwoord is eenvoudig. Hulle is maar eers in 1910 deur die politici geskep om die Boere se identiteit te vervang met ‘n nuwe konsep, naamlik Afrikaner. Hoe is dit moontlik dat een deel van ‘n ‘volk’ op ‘n aparte grondgebied kon stry om hierdie ‘faksie’ (Boere) se vryheid.
- Die Landsvlag
Die huidige landsvlag is ‘n kompromie vlag van ‘n groter wordende nasie, nié van die Boervolk Daar word maklik gepraat van die 26,000 offers van die Afrikanernasie in sy stryd oor 300 jaar. Dit is vals en verleidend. Die offers van die Anglo-Boereoorlog is in die Vierkleur begrawe. Hulle het nie hierdie kompromie kleed van die 1910 debakel geken nie.
Uit basis van ons stryd is dit dus duidelik dat geen party-politikus, in die RSA-raamwerk, die ideaal van die Boervolk sal kan verwesenlik nie, solank as wat ons geestelik verknegd bly aan hierdie volksvernietigende parasiete wat ons steun gebruik vir die verkryging van ‘n magsbasis in die RSA parlement en ons nie ons ware volksbasis besef en dit in perspektief stel tot die Milner-sisteem waarin ons vasgevang is, sal ons (Boervolk) nooit die steriliteit van die Brits-imperialistiese stelsel kan afskud nie en hervat waar die 1910 debakel ons laat vergeet het van die ware stryd en volksbou wat ons in die gesig staar maar nie wil aanvaar nie.
Ons betoog vir die Transvaal en Vryheid sluit in, ‘n solidariteits gevoel met die Vrystaat wat dieselfde paadjie as ons sal moet loop om ook hulle verowerde staat vrygestel te kry uit die RSA miernes van state. Op grond van Blamke etnisiteit kan ons nie hulle saak beveg of hulle ons s’n nie, maar soos in die Anglo-Boereoorlog kan ons gesamentlik die owerhede beveg om die poliieke moeras te be-eindig deur ‘n Vryheidstryd.
Partisie is ‘n onaanvaarbare politieke credo wat die reëls van die spel verander maar nie die spel self nie. Die spel bly onwerkbare apartheid in die grote Suid-Afrika met die witvolk as Vader Kersfees en ‘n gevisualiseerde oorblywende witland (restant). Hierdie witland sal bewoon word deur alle etniese groepe (wit en gekleurd) en stadig sal die getalle geweld weer teen hom opbou.
‘n Volk kan net floreer en veilig wees as hy die enigste bewoner van sy grondgebied is en sy eie volkshuishouding bestuur en bedryf en op sy eie arbeid toegesê is. Laat niemand die huidige RSA ekonomie afskaal na die vrye Republiek van Transvaal en sy twee miljoen Boere en dan die stelling maak dat dit ekonomies onwerkbaar is nie. Hierdie tipe ekonomiese argumente is net so leeg soos alle ekonomiese voorspellings. Die ware en hele ekonomiese realiteit is dat enige ekonomiese blok lewensvatbaar is en kan floreer as sy arbeids-uitset groter is as sy verorberingsdrang (lewensstandaard volgens ekonome).
Sover dit die PWV gebied aangaan sal ‘n finale begrensing op ‘n demokratiese stemming moet berus. Daardie dele wat dan kies om in die kosmopolitaanse deel opgeneem te word sal op ‘n huurpagstelsel van 50 jaar aan die sentrale regering van die dag toegesê word om hulle ekonomiese bedrywighede voort te sit teen ‘n billikke heffing wat aan die Transvaalse Republiek betaalbaar sal wees.
Elke vreemdeling wat nie tot die Boervolk behoort sal hom self op eie koste, of die van die RSA regering, moet verplaas na daar waar hy ‘n etniese aanklank vind en vry voel. Daardie mense elders in die RSA wat etniese aanklank vind en vir die Boervolk aanvaarbaar is sal die nuwe Groot Trek moet aanpak na Gelofteland toe.
Weg met die administratiewe mededeelsame paternalistiese meerderwaardigheid van ‘n blanke nasie. Terug na die volksbegrip van arbeidsaamheid en spreekwoordelike skoffel en pik in die hand, vry op die grond van u Vadere, as lid van die Boervolk.
Manifes van die TRANSVAALSE SEPARATISTE
Uitgereik deur lede van die Boervolk.
Hiermee verklaar ons:
- Dat ons staan vir die herstel van die geskonde vryheid van TRANSVAAL en VRYHEID vir die Boervolk onder die Vierkleur met sy bekende volkslied.
Ken jy die Volk vol heldemoed
En tog so lank verkneg
Hy het geoffer goed en bloed
vir Vryheid en vir reg
Kom burgers! laat die vlae wapper
Ons lyding is verby
Roem in die sege van onse dapp’res
‘n Vrye volk is ons
‘n Vrye volk
‘n Vrye volk
‘n Vrye, Vrye volk is ons |
Ken jy die land so min bekend
En tog so heerlik skoon
Waar die natuur haar wonders skenk
en kwistig stel ten toon
Transvalers! Laat ons feeslied galm
waar vas ons volk moet staan
waar onse vreugdeskote ge’knalt
Daar is ons vaderland
‘n Heerlik land
‘n Heerklik land
Dit is; Dit is ons vaderland |
Ken jy die staat, nog maar ‘n kind
In wêrelds statery
maar tog deur magtig brits bewind
weleer verklaar as vry
Transvalers! edel was ons strewe
en pynlik onse smaad
maar God wat uitkoms het gegewe
sy lof vir eie staat
loof onse God!
loof onse God!
loof onse God vir land en staat! |
|
|
(Met dank aan die vertaler) |
- Dat die RSA en sy voorloper, die Unie van SA, waarnemende regeringsvorme is van die Brits-imperialistiese stelsel en dat volwaardige vryheid die saamgevoegde volkere, onder sy jurisdiksie toekom.
- Dat Grondwet 83 ‘n tydelike grondwet is wat die weg moet baan vir die ontbinding van die RSA in sy afsonderlike state vir die volkere wat dit begeer.
- Dat die ondernemings gegee aan ons Vadere by oorgawe in 1902, en die vorming van die uniale sisteem en weer in grondwet 83, skandelik verbreek is en dus aan ons, hulle wettige erfgename, die reg gee om op staatregtelike basis, die ontbinding van sodanige strukture wat daaruit voortgespruit het, te kan opeis.
- Ons verwerp die beginsel dat ‘n nasie beskikkingsreg het oor die lotgevalle van volke in sy midde.
- Ons verwerp die begrip AFRIKANER op grond van die feit dat dit – sinteties is – na ‘n nasie verwys – party-polities geinspireerd is.
- Ons verwerp die party politiekestelsel (vir die Boervolk) van demokrasie aangesien dit lei tot ‘n onpersoonlike entiteit (die party) wat die volksiel beheer en manipuleer.
- Ons aanvaar die aristokratiese vorm van demokrasie wat ‘n konkrete realitiet in die midde van die volkshuishouding is en dus tot orde geroep kan word.
- Alle terme, groeperings, name en konnotasies wat die begrip Afrikaner behels word summier verwerp as volksvreemd en ideologies onsuiwer t.o.v. die Boervolk.
- Die gelofte van Bloedrivier bind die Boervolk en hulle nasate sowel as die daaropvolgende ‘trekkers’ wat hulle by die Boervolk-laer aangesluit het, en nog sal, tot volksbou en nie tot arbitrêre rituele nie.
- Dat die Boervolk willens en wetens die Gelofte verbreek het op 31 Mei 1910 en dat geen aanpassings behalwe die verkryging van die vryheid van die Boervolk weer die Gelofte in ere sal kan herstel nie.
- Ons erken die Skepper van hemel en aarde en sy Goddelik geïnspireerde geskrifte, maar ingelyks is ons bewus van die menslike listigheid wat nie die suiwer bewaring van Godswoord aan ons kan waarborg nie. (Hierdie deel moet ERNSTIG HERSIEN word)
- Ons stel ons dit ten doel om ons grondgebied op vreedsame wyse te herwin mits ons teenstanders dit vreedsaam met ons wil besin en besleg.
Ons voorsien om op die volgende wyses te werk te gaan ten einde ons doel te bereik:
- ONS SELF TE ORGANISEER OP ‘N PARTYLOSE VOLKSTAATBASIS MET DIE HUIDIGE KIESAFDELINGS AS VERTREKPUNT
- VERKIESINGS TE VEG OP DIE BETROKKE GRONDGEBIED d.m.v. ONAFHANKLIKE KANDIDATE
- DIE GRONDGEBIED VAN ELKE VEROWERDE SETEL SAL OUTOMATIES BESKOU WORD AS OM OP ‘N DEMOKRATIESE WYSE VRYGESTEL TE WEES VAN DIE RSA OP TWEEDE EN DERDE VLAK VAN REGERING EN DAN SAL DAAR MAKSIMUM DEVOLUSIE VAN MAG OPGEëIS WORD OM DIT TE BESTUUR VOLGENS DIE BOEREVOLKSTAAT BEGINSELS
- Op eerste vlak van regering sal verowerde setels se verteenwoordigers in alle toepaslike liggame en strukture hulle plekke inneem ( uitgesluit die RSA parlement wat ‘n burgerstaatlike forum is ) en betoog vir die afskeiding van Transvaal en Vryheid as onafhanklike state: Insgelyks sal hulle, hul beywer vir ‘n nasionale konvensie van alle groepe om die huidige party politieke en daaruit voortspruitende strukture se steriliteit te oorbrug in die soeke na ‘n onderhandelde oplossing.
U is deel van die stryd as u JA kan antwoord op die volgende …..
- Transvaal, Vryheid en Vrystaat is Gelofteland.
- Die Vierkleur is my simbool van Vryheid.
- Afrikaans moet die taal van my kind se opvoeding wees.
- Ek wil in my eie land deur my eie mense regeer word.
- Werk is edel.
- My land moet sy eie onverbonde geldsisteem hê.
- Partypolitiek is ‘n onding.
- Ek moet self dag vir dag stry vir die verkryging van my en die nageslag se vryheid.
- Die Gelofte kan net herstel word as Transvaal, Vryheid en Vrystaat hul vryheid herwin het.
- Afrikanerskap verkneg my Boerskap.
- Ek is deel van die Boervolk.
As u dan JA geantwoord het op al die voorafgaande dan is u deel van die stryd ! !
Gaan dan uit met die enkel doel voor oë om die Boervolk bymekaar te maak in u kiesafdeling. Moenie wag op ‘n party of organisasie om u instruksies te gee nie. Begin en organiseer u self om die ideaal van Vryheid, wat u alleen kan bekom deur u spesifieke setel deur ‘n onafhanklike kandidaat te verower. Met net 40 kiesafdelings wat hierdie ideaal bereik kan die Boervolk hom self weereens uit die Raadsaal in Pretoria regeer.
(Hierdie laaste paragraaf hierbo “As u dan JA geantwoord…” was bedoel vir die 1989 verkiesing toe ons nog met die samewerking van die KP, HNP en AWB die Transvaal kon beheer het.)
|
HEROWER TRANSVAAL REEDS SIMBOLIES … |
|
IDENTITEIT |
|
|
HYS DIE VIERKLEUR ELKE DAG |
|
BRING |
|
|
OP NOG ‘N VIERKANTDUIM BOEREGROND! |
|
VRYHEID |
|
Recent Comments