South Africa to amend constitution to allow land expropriation

[realibrad]

And so what? Blacks were not dispossessed from that land by white colonialism & apartheid.

Blacks were. How does that justify doing something that looks like it will hurt everyone? There are better methods if you want to improve the lives of those that historically were suppressed.

 

[Vic]

I don't think you get it. Folks like @Jhhnn don't care if the "oppressed" are made better (or even worse) by actions intended to cut the oppressors down to size, just that they are cut down. If that means the oppressed need to suffer starvation as a price of admission then so be it. It's all about who has what and how to "properly" distribute it, regardless if those on the receiving end can unlock the value of what they're receiving. Or any value at all really, the important thing is that the oppressor cannot be allowed to have it anymore.

And folks like you just always assume that the oppressed should be thankful to their oppressors, presumably because the oppressed are barely capable of tying their shoes without their oppressors' help.
Seems to me like you both suffer from a kind of slave mentality, but only one fears the risks of freedom.

 

[Sinsear]

Cant support stealing like this though.

They did this in Zimbabwe with that moron mugabe and it was a complete disaster, they suffered after the white farmers were kicked out. They would have been better off with the white farmers who know how to farm the land.

This is what the majority of people want. This is the rightful payback for generations of oppression. I hope they go through with it. I look forward to all the future success and soaring economy stories.

 

[realibrad]

And folks like you just always assume that the oppressed should be thankful to their oppressors, presumably because the oppressed are barely capable of tying their shoes without their oppressors' help.
Seems to me like you both suffer from a kind of slave mentality, but only one fears the risks of freedom.

Are you getting that from his post, or previous things he has said?

 

[pauldun170]

There are better methods if you want to improve the lives of those that historically were suppressed.

What are some examples of better methods that the South African government should be doing?

 

[Vic]

Are you getting that from his post, or previous things he has said?

Both. I can wholeheartedly agree that payback for the sake of payback against "the oppressors" is wrong and will result in failure. When the motive is immoral, the results will be to. But at the same time, the assumption that the oppressed WILL fail, and thus they should continue to accept oppression for their own good, is simply deplorable. There are ways to move forward from situations like this that can result in the betterment of all, and it's unfortunate that conservatives seem so eager to reject that premise.

 

[realibrad]

What are some examples of better methods that the South African government should be doing?

For this, its what I already said which is to give them education and training. You also set up incentives for businesses to give out loans to the targeted groups. You see this type of thing with student loans when they want to target minority groups.

You could also give incentives to the current farmers to help with the experience and or training. I presume not all are so racist that they would not like some extra revenue. Hell, some may actually want to do it for moral reasons too.

Are those not reasonable?

The main barriers I see are knowledge, money/capital, experience. Giving them the land only addresses the 2nd issue.

 

[realibrad]

Both. I can wholeheartedly agree that payback for the sake of payback against "the oppressors" is wrong and will result in failure. When the motive is immoral, the results will be to. But at the same time, the assumption that the oppressed WILL fail, and thus they should continue to accept oppression for their own good, is simply deplorable. There are ways to move forward from situations like this that can result in the betterment of all, and it's unfortunate that conservatives seem so eager to reject that premise.

One small adjustment to what you said vs what I think you mean to say. The motive might be moral, but, the result and method are flawed and would lead to bad outcomes. I get what I think you were trying to say though.

That said, I don't think his argument here is that we should just accept what is happening because that one method is flawed. I think his argument is that doing what jhhnn wanted would cause unneeded suffering for everyone for the goal of punishing those that were the oppressors. Just as we saw in Zimbabwe, this could easily cause extreme harm to people even though the goal was to help them.

As for the presumption that they will fail, that does not seem unreasonable. Farming is not easy and throwing someone into it seems silly.

 

[glenn1]

Both. I can wholeheartedly agree that payback for the sake of payback against "the oppressors" is wrong and will result in failure. When the motive is immoral, the results will be to. But at the same time, the assumption that the oppressed WILL fail, and thus they should continue to accept oppression for their own good, is simply deplorable. There are ways to move forward from situations like this that can result in the betterment of all, and it's unfortunate that conservatives seem so eager to reject that premise.

The betterment of all would involve not taking the white farmers' land without compensation and having a plan for how to develop the future owners to be fully capable of operating them without issues. SA doesn't seem interested in the first and I've seen no indication they plan to learn from the Zimbabwe example and implement the second. Not caring if you fail so long as you "stick it to the man" is for the ideologically poisoned like @Jhhnn who have come only to care about retribution against their class enemies.

 

[pauldun170]

For this, its what I already said which is to give them education and training. You also set up incentives for businesses to give out loans to the targeted groups. You see this type of thing with student loans when they want to target minority groups.

You could also give incentives to the current farmers to help with the experience and or training. I presume not all are so racist that they would not like some extra revenue. Hell, some may actually want to do it for moral reasons too.

Are those not reasonable?

The main barriers I see are knowledge, money/capital, experience. Giving them the land only addresses the 2nd issue.

From what I gathered, training and education is not the issue. I've also heard that there is plenty of knowledge transfer between white farmers and blacks. I've also read that the ability to raise capital to cover ongoing costs related to larger scale commercial farming is an issue for black farmers. Another issue is the lack of established relationships.
There is more to farming than just having the land and producing crops. There are distribution networks. Suppliers. Relationships that white farmers have been able to nurture for over a century.

"The deposit that is required it is too high, and the land is expensive. The queues for government [aid] are too long," he told HuffPost on Wednesday.

Letuka says the conditions attached to loans taken out through the Land Bank make it almost impossible for an ordinary South African to buy arable farmland.

"You need an upfront deposit of 10 percent. Five hundred hectares of land [costs] about R10-million. They need the cash upfront."

"We do not have the financial resources; there is nothing we can do. Now you want to buy a machine – once again you need a hard-cash deposit. You go to the bank, and they say you need collateral. We do not have hard cash," he said.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/20...ack-farmers-struggled-to-get-land_a_23373172/

Land expropriation without compensation would only occur in limited situations, such as where land was sitting idle for speculation. Cases would be tested in the Constitutional Court.

The Moletele community itself came close to disaster after 1 615 families took over the area of 70 000 hectares that was found to be theirs in 2007.

"Those who were denied the opportunity to participate in the economy must now be enabled to be the key role players," said then land minister Lulama Xingwana.

But because of a lack of cash, training and limited market access, the hopes of the Moletele quickly turned to despair.

"Farming was very difficult because we have to pay for inputs such as fertilisers or electricity. All costs but we didn't have money," recalls Nkosi. "So we advertised for people who could assist in running the farm."
..
The Moletele agreed to pay a percentage of the land's revenues over 20 years to the established local farmer in return for expertise.

Following the deal, the former landowners became the workers while the one-time labourers became the bosses.

And against the odds, the arrangement was a success.

"When we took over the farm, there was really nothing going on there, it was totally neglected," said farmer Duo Landman.

"What we did is we took our practices from our own farms and just implemented them. Now it's definitely profitable."

The Moleteles' venture has since benefited from their partners' know-how, their processing facilities and their extensive distribution networks.
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/...as-land-reform-scores-a-rare-success-20170802

 

[realibrad]

From what I gathered, training and education is not the issue. I've also heard that there is plenty of knowledge transfer between white farmers and blacks. I've also read that the ability to raise capital to cover ongoing costs related to larger scale commercial farming is an issue for black farmers. Another issue is the lack of established relationships.
There is more to farming than just having the land and producing crops. There are distribution networks. Suppliers. Relationships that white farmers have been able to nurture for over a century.

Oh, I'm sure there are far more issues out there that I don't know about. I am staying that giving land to people and expecting them to pick up with no drop off in production is dumb. None of the things you addressed would be solved by doing that. It would effectively set people for failure.

 

[Vic]

The betterment of all would involve not taking the white farmers' land without compensation and having a plan for how to develop the future owners to be fully capable of operating them without issues. SA doesn't seem interested in the first and I've seen no indication they plan to learn from the Zimbabwe example and implement the second. Not caring if you fail so long as you "stick it to the man" is for the ideologically poisoned like @Jhhnn who have come only to care about retribution against their class enemies.

A few questions:
- For those who face the possibility of having their property taken without compensation, what was their acquisition cost for the property? Should we just ignore that many of these properties were acquired illegitimately? Should thieves be compensated when they are made to return what they stole?
- Why are you assuming that the possible future owners will be incapable? Or that the required education and training will not be provided?
- What indications are there specifically that show that SA has not learned from Zimbabwe's example?

 

[realibrad]

A few questions:
- For those who face the possibility of having their property taken without compensation, what was their acquisition cost for the property? Should we just ignore that many of these properties were acquired illegitimately? Should thieves be compensated when they are made to return what they stole?

Absolutely we should look at trying to get justice. The issue here is how and if the method is the right way, and what the right way is.

The problem with trying to correct the injustice of what was done would appear to cause more harm than good. It seems dumb to do it because there are better options.

- Why are you assuming that the possible future owners will be incapable? Or that the required education and training will not be provided?

For the same reason that you would not hire a kid just out of high school that has no experience and or training for the position. If the plan is to give land to people that already farm, and do it over time so they can acclimate then that is better than just giving it to people all at once.

Further, the education and training is not something that you can do in a few weeks or even months. That takes time if you have spent time talking to farmers.

- What indications are there specifically that show that SA has not learned from Zimbabwe's example?

Because the plan seems to be the same and no plan to address why it failed in Zimbabwe.

Why did Zimbabwe fail, and how is this plan different?

 

[KMFJD]

Mostly this is political posturing because the ANC has been losing ground steadily to both the DA and the EFF, so they are upping the rhetoric to show people how tough they are

 

[Jhhnn]

Because the plan seems to be the same and no plan to address why it failed in Zimbabwe.

Why did Zimbabwe fail, and how is this plan different?

You merely represent them to be the same when no plans have been announced.

You also refuse to recognize that the situations & the political climates are entirely different.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Interesting perspective from South Africans on the SA reddit sub forum regarding Trump's tweet. Consensus seems to be that Trump's motive for the tweet is suspect it at least forces the international media to cover the situation, something they been very timid to do prior.

https://www.reddit.com/r/southafric...d_trump_on_twitter_i_have_asked_secretary_of/

 

[pcgeek11]

This is probably going to end badly, just as it has before...

The US should stay out of it and let them sort their own demons.

 

[UglyCasanova]

The US should stay out of it

Absolutely

 

[Vic]

This is probably going to end badly, just as it has before...

The US should stay out of it and let them sort their own demons.

Which is why Trump is tweeting about getting us involved, right?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Which is why Trump is tweeting about getting us involved, right?

Trump is tweeting about in a futile attempt to try and take pressure off his own domestic problems. Read through the thread I linked above, it seems many in SA are grateful it’s shining an international light on the situation and forcing coverage in the media even if his intentions are less than noble.

 

[pcgeek11]

Which is why Trump is tweeting about getting us involved, right?

I don't know. Looks like you need to take that up with Trump.

And reading his tweet he did not mention getting "involved" in anything. He said he asked Pompeo to "closely study ...". Which can be done without getting involved or participating in said issue.

It is my opinion we ( the USA ) should allow them to handle their own affairs.

 

[Jhhnn]

The betterment of all would involve not taking the white farmers' land without compensation and having a plan for how to develop the future owners to be fully capable of operating them without issues. SA doesn't seem interested in the first and I've seen no indication they plan to learn from the Zimbabwe example and implement the second. Not caring if you fail so long as you "stick it to the man" is for the ideologically poisoned like @Jhhnn who have come only to care about retribution against their class enemies.

So persecuted!

 

[Bitek]

While I can understand the moral justification, this just seems like a really bad idea. It would be much better to just slowly raise the taxes on them until they had to sell off pieces.

The same justification could be used in Hawaii, most of the United States, Mexico and South America. At some point, you sort of need to accept that what happened in the past happened. You should use the current injustices to justify change, not things that happened generations ago.

Yaknow, the world's biggest problem with post-colonialism is how to give back stolen land 100+ years after the fact.
The OP's biggest problem with it is his belief that black people are inferior.

To post a counter point..

The situation is bigger than farmland from colonial times.

I have relatives where their property was seized by the apartheid govt for no other reason than race. No compensation given. Just GTFO.

This was the childhood home. Not 100+ years ago, less than 50. These people are still living.

They recently went to visit the house, just to see the place, knocked on the door and talked to the owners. Once the new owners (3rd owners since seizure) realized who they were, they freaked out and sent them away, worried my relatives were just scoping out in preparation for a legal challenge to get it back.

Not what they were doing, but it's indicative of the terrible situation. These owners didn't steal the land, someone else did, but they still occupy stolen property.

How would you feel if Trump stole your house and resold it? Would you not want it back?


Now multiply all the problems SA has with the economy, inequality and all the corruption and distraction the current govt is leading. This is a difficult situation for a competent, well meaning govt, let alone the one they have.

 

[realibrad]

You merely represent them to be the same when no plans have been announced.

You also refuse to recognize that the situations & the political climates are entirely different.

No, that is what is being said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-45026931

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ion-to-allow-land-expropriation-idUSKBN1KL2VN

The proposal was first suggested back in December. At that time, the only thing discussed was taking the land without compensation. No other issues about that have been discussed, at least, not in public. As for right now, the only thing being said is taking land without payment.

Ill ask you this knowing that you probably wont answer as you seem to avoid hard questions. If they only planned to take land and not pay for it, and that was the only thing they did, would you for for or against that?

 

[VRAMdemon]

Trump is tweeting about in a futile attempt to try and take pressure off his own domestic problems. Read through the thread I linked above, it seems many in SA are grateful it’s shining an international light on the situation and forcing coverage in the media even if his intentions are less than noble.

I'm sure this is one of the reasons Trump decided to make a statement about this. Another is to throw his white supremacist followers and his favorite RW commentators a bone, especially when he words it as "large scale killing of farmers"

In view of Trump having decided, as usual, apparently out of nowhere, to chime in on the subject, it would seem the land redistribution idea that is being floated has hit the RW chattersphere lately as the latest example of a recurring line among RW commentators (Carlson & Hannity) that "South Africa is in meltdown" and that "any day now the ANC will show its true communist, marxist or merely racist-revengeist colors". More fear and scare mongering.

It is my understanding that only land which had been unfairly taken from black communities through discriminatory laws is considered for redistribution.

Is there data that South African farmers are being killed systematically primarily due to their race or profession?. Also, Is there enough data to say whether the rate of farmer deaths has increased significantly? and anything tying that directly to government reparations initiatives.