“De La Rey” Causes Stir in South Africa
One of the greatest embarrassments for Marxists of all varieties these days is the post-Apartheid experience of South Africa. Since the fall of that system, South Africa has gone from being the economic powerhouse of Africa (with a GDP exceeding the rest of the continent combined) to a basketcase whose distinction these days is as the rape capital of the world- a London firm actually sells “rape insurance” to South African women to cover the cost of AIDS treatments. Their esteemed President, Mr. Mbeki, believes that AIDS is actually not caused by a virus, but rather is a plot of the white man to hold down African achievement, and has funded “alternative medicine” studies to test the prescriptions of native witch doctors- the most popular of which, tragically, is the belief by many Africans that sex with a virgin cures AIDS- this obviously exacerbates the rape situation.
What should be most embarrassing for the Marxists is the racial record of the new government. Whereas apartheid was physical separation and political disenfranchisement in an otherwise free society, the new government has mandated all sorts of racial preference laws. Among these are regulations that all businesses must be at least 50% black-owned, extensive affirmative action programs, gun confiscations from law-abiding citizens, and seizing land and property- not to mention the predictable lack of crime prosecution. So garden-variety oppression, mild by African standards, has been replaced by Communist anarcho-tyranny.
In the middle of all of this is a little-discussed group of Christian people called the Afrikaners, or Boers, Dutch-descended Protestants who have formed the backbone of the productive part of the country for 200 years. Very few people realize that South Africa was mostly uninhabited when the Boers arrived, save for a few primitive nomadic Stone Age tribes. Only later did Zulus and other tribes now claiming oppression move in and try and claim the land. In fact, much of the racial problem in South Africa stems from the fact that so many blacks from other parts of Africa moved there for a better life- to get a job and make a living beyond subsistence farming- and to escape the much more onerous oppression (usually of the machete-wielding limb-chopping variety) of their fellow black tribes in their native lands. A curfew and an assigned neighborhood sounded pretty good compared to getting your arm chopped off, and so the apartheid government actually had a huge problem with illegal immigration, esp. since the relatively small British and Dutch population was hungy for cheap labor. Is this beginning to sound familar?
The Boers have a rich history as a Christian people, their adventures in many situations reading like something out of the Old Testament. Consider the Afrikaner holiday called “The Day of the Vow”:
The day is observed as a religious holiday by some Afrikaners in memory of The Battle of Blood River between a group of about 470 Voortrekkers and a much larger Zulu force on 16 December 1838.
Before the battle, the Voortrekkers had received word that a force of 10 to 20 thousand Zulu was approaching. Certain of being overwhelmed, the Voortrekkers assumed a prime defensive location at what is now known as Blood River. As the Zulus approached, the Voortrekkers prayed that they would not be killed. The name Day of the Vow stems from this prayer, in which they made a covenant to God that, if they were delivered, they would build a church there and keep the day as a holy Sabbath for them and all that followed in their lineage. At the end of the battle, only three Afrikaners were wounded, although over 3,000 Zulu warriors had lost their lives. The Voortrekkers built a church at the location, and passed the vow to their descendants.
Unfortunately, and as I will cover similarly in a subsequent post on the War Between the States, such a Christian people could not be tolerated by the coming age. In 1899, the British initiated a war with the Boers over gold deposits in their lands- in short, the British wanted them and the Boers weren’t keen on letting them have them. Playing out much like our own conflict, the Boers proved hard to conquer, inflicting mass casualties on the British at little cost to themselves. The British, like the Union, could only win by breaking Christian law and declaring war on women and children- in this case, coining the word “concentration camps” for where Boer women and children were taken after having their farms and houses burned, often starving to death (despite British food surpluses, much like how Lincoln starved Confederate POW’s in a land of plenty) or dying of disease in unsanitary conditions.
One of the leaders of the war was a general named Koos De La Rey:
He married Jacoba Elizabeth Greeff and the couple settled on the farm Elandsfontein. They had ten children. De la Rey was deeply religious and a small pocket Bible was rarely out of his hand. He had formidable looks - a long neatly trimmed brown beard and a high forehead with deep-set eyes that gave him a prematurely patriarchal appearance.
He is generally regarded as the most powerful and unyielding of the Boer generals during the Second Boer War and as one of the leading figures of Afrikaner nationalism. As a guerrilla, his tactics proved extremely successful. De la Rey opposed the war until the last, but when he was once accused of cowardice during a Volksraad session, he replied that if the time for war came, he would be fighting long after all those clamoring for war had given up. This proved to be the case.
In South Africa today, the Boers are pretty much prohibited from any expression of national pride. In fact, celebration of the Day of the Vow can be considered a “hate crime”, while of course African tribal groups are encouraged to celebrate their history and holidays. Again, does this sound familiar?
So you can imagine the stir when a young Afrikaner folk singer named Bok van Blerk releases a rock anthem called “De La Rey” that becomes a cultural sensation:
The question goes out, and the response is always the same.
“I’m proud of my language and culture. Are you?” Bok van Blerk demands of the emotionally charged crowd.
Up goes the cheer, and then comes the song - an Afrikaans folk number about a Boer war general that has become a sensation in South Africa as an anthem for young whites who say they are tired of being made to feel guilty about the apartheid past.
The song, De La Rey, has swept into rugby matches and pubs where Afrikaners belt out its plea for the old Boer general to come back and lead. Many stand with a hand over their heart as they sing the lyrics about a “nation that will rise up again” as if it were a national anthem.
But while the song is a best seller among South Africa’s 2.5 million Afrikaners, it is also generating a heated debate about what its success means.
Bok van Blerk characterises De La Rey as a stand against historic guilt.
“Young Afrikaners are tired of having the apartheid guilt trip shoved down their throats. This song makes them proud of their heritage,” he said.
The song is about an Afrikaner Boer war general, Koos de la Rey, who opposed war with the British because he did not believe the Afrikaner republics could win. But once war began de la Rey threw himself into the fight, playing a heroic role in the British defeat at Magersfontein.
The government, obviously, is not very keen about this young man, as South Africans do not enjoy free speech, esp. when spoken in a Dutch tongue:
The Department of Arts and Culture responded … warning that “those who incite treason, whatever methods they employ, might well find themselves in difficulties with the law.” The Democratic Alliance opposition party responded by saying that the song was not nearly as potentially subversive as ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma’s song Umshini wami (Zulu for “bring me my machine gun”).
Youtube music video and translated lyrics below:
On a mountain in the night
we lie in the darkness and wait
In the mud and blood I lie cold, grain bag and rain cling to meAnd my house and my farm
burned to ashes,
so that they could catch us
But those flames and that fire
burn now deep, deep within meChorus:
De la Rey, De la Rey
Will you come to lead the Boers?
De la Rey, De la Rey
General, General, as one man we’ll fall in around you
General De la ReyAnd the Khakis that laugh, a handful of us against their whole great might,
with the cliffs to our backs, they think it’s all overBut the heart of the Boer lies deeper and wider,
that they’ll still discover
At a gallop he comes, the Lion of the West TransvaalBecause my wife and my child are perishing in a concentration camp,
and the Khakis’ reprisal is poured over a nation that will rise up againGeneral De la Rey
De la Rey, De la Rey
Will you come for the Boers?
We are ready
February 27th, 2007 at 8:18 am
Tom, either you are not South African and have been fed a bunch of (EXPLETIVE DELETED) from your right-wing buddies or you are South African and are part of the problem in our country.
Nearly every single thing you have said in this blog post is inaccurate, and much of it rings with apartheid defenses used by the National Party. I can’t even begin to understand how you can say that “apartheid was physical separation and political disenfranchisement in an otherwise free society”… what planet are you living on?
I don’t want to start a big argument here, but for the record I don’t agree with you and advise anyone else reading this to do a little more research before believing what you have to say.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:04 am
[...] I noticed, while reading some blogs on this issue, is that the knee-jerk response in defense of the song (the call to ban the song was taken by many as a hypocritical slight on the entire Afrikaner culture), is to defend De La Rey, his principles and his legacy. It is not hard to defend De La Rey, he certainly merits defense and some have done this in a way that makes sense. Others, however, haven’t. [...]
February 27th, 2007 at 10:48 am
I apologize for having to remove your comment temporarily, but I had to edit out the profanity for a family audience.
I think your response to this post reflects your worldview. My worldview tells me that man has a fallen, evil nature and that everything we do is a series of tradeoffs. There are no good forms of government, just worse and worst. We need to let go of our idealism and look realistically, based on facts and not ideology, for the “least worst” solution.
In South Africa’s case, and though one could make a specious argument that the jury is still out, the situation post-apartheid seems to vindicate the conservative view that a revolutionary change in favor of Communist agitators like Mandela and Mbeki was not a move towards the “least worst.” The old system had many flaws and injustices (though again, mild by African standards), but when fallen man is involved, casting out one demon often leaves a vacuum for seventy more to fill.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:24 am
Vincent, I wouldn’t bother trying to communicate with a basket case like this. He believes there’re reds under every bed? SA today is as far from communism as you can imagine
Mandela was never a communist, perhaps he should learn his history. It’s also infinitely better than the hellhole it was up to 1994.
You’re right, facts don’t seem to bother him too much, day of the vow a hate crime, what nonsense. All businesses 50% black-owned. A pack of lies. Thought that was against the 10 commandments or something, but I guess not.
SA is in much better shape economically now than ever before. Perhaps he fled from the ‘reds’ in fear, and is trying to justify his choice.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Finally, some meat to chew on from the critics!
Proprosition #1: Nelson Mandela is/was a Communist.
A quote from Mandela:
“Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro… Cuban internationalists have done so much for African independence, freedom, and justice. We admire the sacrifices of the Cuban people in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of a vicious imperialist campaign designed to destroy the advances of the Cuban revolution. We too want to control our destiny… There can be no surrender. It is a case of freedom or death. The Cuban revolution has been a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people.” -Nelson Mandela
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro
This is a photo of Mandela in front of a Soviet flag flashing the fisted salute:
Proposition #2: Blacks are awarded ownership in businesses against the will of white owners.
The “Black Economic Empowerment” initiatives are not only employment-based reverse discrimination programs, but also wealth redistribution programs requiring businesses to turn over ownership to black shareholders:
“It sets quotas for black ownership of companies across various significant economic sectors in South Africa, including but not limited to mining, financial services, IT, tourism and agriculture.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Economic_Empowerment
While not technically required by law, it is all but impossible to operate without complying:
“Private companies must apply the codes if they want to do business with any government enterprise or organ of state - that is, to tender for business, apply for licences and concessions, enter into public-private partnerships, or buy state-owned assets.”
http://www.southafrica.info/doing_business/trends/empowerment/bee.htm
Reaction of Afrikaner business owners:
http://www.afrikanerfuture.info/artamericans.htm
“My heart goes out to the plight of the Afrikaner people. America should open its doors to them, as their suffering is incredible.” Miss Allan also explained that under the ANC’s ‘Black Economic Empowerment’ (BEE) laws, Afrikaners can’t even keep their own businesses any more, because owners are being forced to open even family-owned businesses to “black shareholders.”
“A business woman wrote me this week that she is now being forced to take black strangers off the street and turn them into co-owners of her family business just to satisfy the demands of BEE.” “I don’t see any future for the Afrikaner people - especially due to this ‘black economic empowerment’ policy of the ANC government.”
For my fellow Americans reading this, don’t write this off as a parochial South African problem. In South Africa, we see our immediate future if we allow our immigration policies to turn us into a Third World country. And South Africa’s distant future is Zimbabwe, where Mbeki’s Communist friend Robert Mugabe is conducting a vicious ethnic cleansing campaign against white farmers.
The reactions of these two critics is a look into our own future, where liberals will continue to deny facts in front of their face to redeem their irrational faith in the goodness and equality of men.
We have been forewarned by the South African experience.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:00 am
Tom your a toss. I really wish that I had the energy to break down your argument but Vincent did it well in hist post so i wont waste my time. People like you are polluting our youth. You edited Vincents comment for your family audience? My left arse cheek, if you have to edit profanity out then edit your own post first because it is filled with factually incorrect swear words of historic inaccuracy.
Rather leave SA than cry that it isn’t what it used to be. If it was that, then we’d all be dead, screwed or overseas. It is what it is and it’s better.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:05 am
Nic, if you care to challenge a specific set of facts I’m unable to refute I’d be more than happy to repent of my thoughtcrime against the South African regime.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Consider the fact that more people have died in the period from 1994 to 2004, than during the height of the so-called “struggle” period between 1984 and 1994, when the country was embroiled in a civil war.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Vincent’s post is mostly rhetoric, and I have addressed the factual challenges he brings up- see comment above re: Mandela, reverse discrimination laws, etc.
I have sympathy for what it must be like to live in SA, to have a liberal mindset and to have those dreams of a multi-culti utopia dashed on the hard rocks of the reality of human inequality. Liberal whites in SA, esp. those who sincerely love their country, are having to deal with an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance squaring the government’s rhetoric with its actions. I can see how this could psychologically lead to a sort of Stockholm Syndrome among white liberals, where you start to identify with and make excuses for your oppressors.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Er, Tom. Your attempted refutation of Nelson Mandela being a communist is a little factually-challenged. I’d learn logic if I were you. An example. I like rugby. Hey, once I was even photographed at rugby stadium. Holding a ball! Doesn’t mean I’m a rugby player.
Anyway, have a nice life in your own delusional world, I’m sure it’s fun in there.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Again 90% rhetoric, 10% actual content from my critics. Delusions are based on imagination, not actual facts verifiable by third party references.
So if I had a picture of someone in front of a Nazi flag, doing the Nazi salute, and who was on record praising Adolf Hitler, that wouldn’t qualify such a person as a Nazi in your book?
Again, I think it’s self-evident liberalism is more of a religous faith than a logical worldview. And a faith not based on a underlying verifiable body of evidence, but a faith that if anything seems to glory in denying the reality in front of its face.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Being a Communist is as simple as having a Communist mindset.
Mandela makes Communist quotes and praises Communist leaders = Mandela is a Communist.
Being on a rugby team is more than just a mindset, but being a rugby fan is similarly a mindset.
The analogy you were looking for is that if a picture of you was taken at an All Blacks rugby match, while wearing an All Blacks jersey, and cheering an All Blacks goal, then it would mean you were an All Blacks fan.
That would be a correct logical deduction.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Tom, I see you have been swarmed. But your would-be refuters seem to assume that others are unable to read the news from South Africa (from ‘mainstream’ news media) for themselves, and to see the facts and read the patterns for themselves. And much as these commenters may insist that things in S.A are just hunky-dory, I have encountered plenty of commenters on other forums and blogs who say just the opposite, and who agree with the original blog entry.
Anecdotal ‘evidence’ can cut both ways.
March 1st, 2007 at 3:07 am
Tom
You are trying to create an image of this country that is completely twisted. Your comments suggest that anyone exercising his or her right to freedom of expression is cut down by an intolerant communist government. This is not the Soviet Union or even China. South Africa has one of the most liberal constitutions in the world today (in some respects the US Constitution looks intolerant and conservative compared to ours).
What we do have is a history of terrible injustices perpetrated against the non-white majority of our population by a racist government. While circumstances are hardly perfect in South Africa (crime being a big issue for us), the government and South Africans in general have taken a number of positive steps towards remedying the wrongs of the past. One of these steps is the Black Economic Empowerment imperative which has certainly been controversial and difficult for white South Africans. At the same time it is a necessary process which will hopefully come to an end sooner rather than later.
Your views are more representative of the views that got us into the mess we are in in the first place. You are looking in from the outside with a specific perspective and if this is all you see then you have missed the miracle that was achieved when power shifted in 1994 and the good work that has been done in the meantime. Granted our government is not perfect and come up with some real gems at times but South Africa has made some real progress in the last decade or so. At least give us the respect we deserve for doing the best we can in the face of such historic challenges.
March 1st, 2007 at 3:09 am
Oh and as far as your comment about being forewarned by the South African experience is concerned, you Americans should only be so lucky to have had our experience.
March 1st, 2007 at 3:14 am
Paul I agree, it is hypocrisy for someone from a nation systematically brutelizing the middle east because it challenges their hegemony to be criticizing the peaceful changeover of power in South Africa.
March 1st, 2007 at 7:19 am
Tom, whilst I usually ignore posts such as this, I could not help but be tempted by your claims of a factual basis for your argument.
Mandela showing some Cuban loving: Firstly please link to the correct wikiquote page, and secondly please understand the context of what is being said by our former President, and Nobel peace prize winner. His remarks are one of identifying with Fidel Castro’s cause, but in no way aligning the ANC with Communism. Bear in mind Mandela is also famous for ‘identifying’ with the PLO in Palestine however he doesn’t support the PLO’s cause, but I don’t see you including this as it doesn’t support your argument.
‘Communist’ picture: Please provide source of picture, as I suspect this too has been taken out of context. And the ’salute’ was/is used by the ANC in much the same way as the extended raised fist is synonymous with ‘black power’, rather than that of communism.
Wikipedia definition of BEE: Please note that the neutrality of that wikipedia entry has been disputed, and as such I can’t see how you can use it as a source of ‘hard facts’.
“While not technically required by law, it is all but impossible to operate without complying”: You then refer to a South African site describing BEE. I would stress any of your readers to actually read the full article to gain an understanding of the BEE process rather than your ’snippet’ which only serves to blur the facts.
“Reaction of Afrikaner business owners”: Are you really trying to use this article as a source of facts? Come on… communist friend?- rubbish!
“For my fellow Americans reading this, don’t write this off as a parochial South African problem. In South Africa, we see our immediate future if we allow our immigration policies to turn us into a Third World country.” - Your condition is called- Xenophobia.
How do you like them apples?
March 1st, 2007 at 10:37 am
This is hilarious. Someone who calls the Communist atheistic regime of Cuba “a source of inspiration for all freedom-loving people” is a Communist. Case closed. The fisted salute is the universal identifier of Marxist movements around the world.
The BEE is clearly a wealth redistribution program, which you acknowledge as such, yet refuse to see the injustice of forcing family businesses to turn over ownership to quota-entitled beneficiaries.
You won’t accept any source I could offer because it conflicts with your religous faith in liberalism and psychological need to make excuses for why reality is in conflict with your ideology. You produce no proof, you reference no sources, but just advance ad ignoratum objections and insistence that you are right because you say so. That is the very essence of how liberals argue: no facts, just generalizing and moralizing.
But, just for sport, let’s review a little more of the Mandela history:
In this video, you see Mandela sing about killing whites-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc
Here is a quote from a similar rally where he praised the Communist cause:
Here is a page from the Associated Press documenting that they have video footage of several events of Mandela and his wife with Communists, with a description:
And finally, a photo of Mandela with his buddy Castro:
That’s the face of two comrades, not uneasy political allies.
Regarding the BEE laws:
Quoting directly from regulations issued by the South African government:
This is, plain and simply, mandatory government redistribution of wealth on a racial basis. You may make excuses for it or justify it, but it does not change what it is. At least have the decency to not abuse the meaning of language to enable an honest debate.
And most blatantly, the SA government now reveals a plan to continue down the path of land seizing and ethnic cleansing pursued by their Communist allies in Zimbabwe:
You can drink the Kool-Aid all you want, but if protecting my daughters from the fate of living in a multicultural hellhole where there’s a market for “rape insurance” makes delusional liberals call me a “xenophobe”, I’ll gladly accept the label. Besides, that’s not really fair- I think the US ought to give full citizenship and free land to any Afrikaner family who wants to emigrate out of the SA mess before it’s too late.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:04 pm
@Tom- In the video please note the following:
1.) ‘Bhulu’, is not translated directly as meaning all/any white people, it refers to oppressive whites.
2.) Mr Mandela is not singing. (I accept this point is weak, however I feel it is worth noting.)
3.) He is standing next to a white man, and there is at least one other white man in the clip.
Once again regarding the ‘communist fist’, your misinterpretation of this gesture is baffling. You seem to have the time on your hands- you do the research and tell me I’m wrong!
The (sic) BEE is a wealth distribution program- case closed! No arguments there, however the justification behind it is a logical one, and should you feel the need to argue the logic of BEE as a means to an end, then please offer a viable alternative rather than poking holes in a solution.
“Here is a quote from a similar rally…” and you link to a website/article aimed at spreading conservative ideas… not exactly impartial representation of facts if you ask me.
“At least have the decency to not abuse the meaning of language to enable an honest debate.”- Please explain how you come to the conclusion that the redistribution of land and ethnic cleansing are linked?…and please don’t abuse the language.
Please provide information regarding where and when the photo of Mandela and Castro was taken. (By this logic anyone with Castro is a communist http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/pope/bio/papal/link.pope.castro.jpg)
“Multicultural hellhole”- yip you’re a xenophobe- let’s be fair.
“There’s a market for ‘rape insurance’”, - there’s a market for insurance against everything all over the world… I can imagine you’re busy looking over your alien abduction protection policy as we speak. But hey- I’m the delusional one.
Here’s an important question Tom which I need you to answer. Have you been to South Africa, do you have any idea what you are talking about. The reason I ask is because I need to understand whether your opinions are from personal experience or are they founded in what the media is telling you.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
The SA Constitution is quite clear:
Everyone is Equal…
Confusion sets in only if you don’t realize that some BEE more Equal than others
March 1st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Grant, again, you demand proof. I provide proof. The proof’s not good enough. It can never be. The proof is sufficient for my purposes and for reasonable readers. My purpose here is not to convince you, but to provide sufficient evidence for my readers, which I have done.
You’re a delusional liberal and there is no way for our worldviews to be reconciled.
For my readers, the final word, as my time to spend responding, casting pearls before swine, is limited:
1. The prescence of white liberal “useful idiots” singing the song proves nothing. There has always been a small elite of intellectuals who work against the interests of their people, hoping to carve out a niche for themselves post-revolution. This is merely one piece of evidence, at a minimum establishing the violent, revolutionary nature of Mandela, something inline with a Communist viewpoint.
2. “The raised clenched fist was popularized by the Communist Party, and in some locations it maintains that association. In the United States, the raised fist was associated with the Black Power movement.”
3. You admit that the BEE IS wealth redistribution, but you support it because you believe in liberal Marxist delusions about the equality of man, enforced at the point of a gun of course. I do not, so therefore I oppose it, and feel no need to propose an alternative to free enterprise. But at least we agree on the facts, which is progress.
4. The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank, but I do not think they have a record of fabricating quotes. Absent a contradicting reference, a reasonable person would assume the report true. You ignore the much weightier evidence of the AP archives.
5. The Mandela/Castro picture is part of the body of proof and adds to the case that Mandela is a Communist. By itself it means little, but with Mandela’s other documented statements and associations, there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Mandela is indeed a Communist.
6. A South African woman has a 1 in 3 chance of being raped by her 18th birthday. That qualifies the country as a hellhole, and it is certainly multicultural: thus a multicultural hellhole.
That’s got to be hard to process through your ideological filter, but facts are facts. This is UC-Berkeley reporting, not a conservative group in any sense.
7. The very definition of ethnic cleansing is seizing people’s land on an ethnic basis. You can sugar-coat it by calling it “redistribution” but it is what it is. They’re taking it from one owner and giving it to another on the basis of ethnicity. That’s ethnic cleansing. I’m not sure where you’re getting the genocide idea from- SA’s still a ways off from Zimbabwe, though that’s coming I’m sure. They’ll take your land, then they’ll start killing you once they realize their dreams of a free ride are not going to happen due to economic realities and corrupt African leadership.
8. 50,000 people have purchased rape insurance according to the Berkeley article. That is not only a market, but a huge one. There is an insurance market where there is risk to be mitigated, and in SA the risk of rape is very real for every woman. No similar situation exists in any other nation that I’m aware of, where a major insurer is issuing these kinds of policies. To compare the plight of South African rape victims to delusions of alien abduction is cruel and reveals the depths to which the liberal mindset will sink to redeem their sick ideology.
I understand this is a very unpleasant set of facts to discuss, and I find it somewhat distasteful- I know that man is fallen, but sometimes I prefer to not expose myself to the details of man’s depravity, especially on that most depraved of continents, Africa. However, I think it is inspirational to consider the history of the Boers, a Christian people who have survived and until recently, prospered, amidst so much spiritual darkness. Their experience of pioneering a virgin land and fighting merciless enemies parallels the America experience.
I just hope the parallel stops at some point before we find ourselves in a similar position as the Boers today. And I’m serious- we should offer Afrikaner amnesty to extend Christian charity to this proud people now being oppressed under a corrupt Communist government.