Contact Stuart Agnew MEP

25 Regent Street
Great Yarmouth
Norfolk, NR30 1RL
Tel: 01493 856744

Stuart Agnew

Update: South Africa Farm Attacks

6th September 2018

Expenses without compensation: The NDR failed (Translated)
September 6, 2018 by Ernst Roets
Submission to the Constitutional Committee
Fifteen years ago, the South African government accepted David Rakgase's offer to buy the farm he had hired from them. To date, the South African government was unable to transfer ownership to him.
Earlier this year, the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform issued a resignation order on Akkerland Farming and informed them that they were given seven days to vacate their land at a compensation of 10% of the market value. This only to promote Chinese interests in South Africa.
This week, AfriForum had to bring an urgent application to the High Court to compel the South African Police Service to act against land occupiers on the ground of a Gauteng farmer, Dr. Motodi Maserumule. The police simply refused to open Maserumule's case.
Mr. The chairman, without compensation or under market value, indicates a lack of respect for property rights as basic human rights.I only have 10 minutes at my disposal, so I will keep it short and powerful. In my submission I will -
- be referring to the ideological goals of the ANC alliance;
- prove the historical error of thought that serves as a motivation for expropriation without compensation;
- explain why the willing-seller-willing buyer principle failed;
-  explain why the policy will be catastrophic;
-  and why the so-called "hunger" is a verdict of the ANC/EFF alliance.
The ANC and its alliance partners are rooted in Marxism-Leninism.According to its own strategic and tactical documents, the movement believes in a national democratic revolution, which implies that power is centralized in the state, provided that it is allowed by the balance of power so that state-owned governments can be used to promote the goals of the revolution, namely to lead South Africa on the road to socialism to ultimately create a communist utopia. That is why disaster-rich policies such as those of the Soviet Union, Communist China, Cuba, Cambodia, Zimbabwe and Venezuela are so often acclaimed by the ANC / EFF alliance, while policies that created the world's wealthiest economies and most harmonious communities as racist, oppressive policies are proposed.
This is why emerging black farmers complain that they do not receive government support. This is why 23% of people in South Africa already live in state ownership and half complain about the quality of this land. That is why only 6% of all land acquired by the current government has since been transferred from state-owned private property.
It is often argued - especially in this House - that "whites have stolen the ground". It is the greatest single historical lie of our time. There are three ways in which whites gained land, namely:
1.  Settlement on uninhabited land;
2.  The purchase of land through treaties, cooperation and agreements;
3.  andthe most controversial, but unimportant, by conquest.
There were, of course, legislation such as the 1913 Native Law Act and the Group Areas Act of 1950. These injustices need to be rectified, but it must be dealt with specifically and not used to construct major false narratives or promote new racial policies.
Should you, however, argue - as we have heard - that land ownership by white people should be regarded as illegal because Africa is the black people's mainland, you should also be prepared to fend off with far-sighted fascists in Europe who claim that Europe white people's mainland and that there is therefore no place for black people in Europe. If you assume that white people in Africa should not receive equal treatment, but that the rights of black people in Europe must be protected, you are nothing but a racist hypocrite.
The government has already spent more than R50 billion on land reform and has little to say about it. The Motlanthe Commission found that government's inefficiency and corruption are major obstacles to effective land reform. About 5% of agricultural land is available for sale on the market annually. If the government used to spend this money by buying farms, it would have bought up almost half of the country's farms so far. But this approach would not have met the ideals of the National Democratic Revolution, and that is why the ANC / EFF alliance prefers a government bureaucracy which allows complicated processes to be exploited to enrich itself at the expense of the people.
The land reform debate raged at a time when the government could afford it least to lose investor confidence. Investment security leads to the accumulation of capital, which leads to more jobs and higher production. An impact on private property leads to investor insecurity and economic decline.
By 2015, South Africans invested abroad for the first time on record than foreigners invested in South Africa - a clear sign of loss of investor confidence.
To argue that property rights will be eroded and that economic freedom will be compromised in a way that will boost economic development is to argue that KFC will be expanded in a way that will ensure prosperity of chickens be.
Those claiming ownership of ownership could not yet prove that the aggressive implementation of an already unsuccessful policy would lead to anything other than an aggressive failure. This is Albert Einstein's definition of madness: To do the same thing over and over, but expect another result every time.Christopher Hitchens said that whatever allegedly proves to be rejected without proof. We are now expected to comment on expropriation without compensation, despite the screaming fact that no evidence has been given that it would lead to positive results in the first place.
However, the joy that the ANC / EFF alliance experiences through the middle class and the rich suffering, weighs much heavier than the desire to lift poor people. The problem is, however, that expropriation and the resulting economic collapse will hurt poor people more than rich people who can simply leave the country, in which case you not only created a food shortage for all South Africans, but in any case you also lost your tax base.
Land Hunger
All available evidence indicates that the hunger for agricultural or rural land in South Africa is largely a myth:
- 59% of all land claims to date have been introduced for urban land.
- 84% of all landmines in recent years have taken place in urban areas.
- South Africans, but especially black South Africans, urbanized at a rapid pace.
- 93% of all people who did the effort to institute a land claim indicated that they would rather have money than land.
- A recent survey by the Institute for Race Relations found that only 1% of all people in South Africa believe that land reform will improve their lives and that 0.6% land reform is considered South Africa's most serious unresolved problem.
We can not unravel this issue into a racial issue. Unfortunately, the president did it already when he used the words "our people" to refer to black people. The deputy president also did so when he threatened with a violent takeover if white people did not want to hand over their land voluntarily to black people. The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Zweli Mkhize, did this when he said that no property of any black person or black group would be expelled.
It has become a favorite time for members of this House to blame every white person for the crimes of every other white person. Imagine if we blame every black person for the crimes of every other black man. If we have to continue with the way we currently evaluate and contextualize history, white people would have made allegations such as "black people murderers" simply because some black people committed the crime of murder, or that black people had to pay damages for the Bloukrans and Weenen slaughter, or the extinction of Van Rensburg's draw company. We all agree that such claims would be regarded as horrific racist remarks that are unbearably unfair. In addition, I am convinced that those of you who aggressively claim compensation do not even agree with the Bloukrans or Weenen slaughter, or know the Van Rensburg trek. Why not? Because you are drunk with ideology. It is an ideology not based on historical accuracy but on a desperate attempt to blame racial hatred and division, while the real goal of promoting state power and hopeless socialism is under the guise of "corrective measures".
Yes, you are drunk with ideology - the ideology of a national democratic revolution that clearly fails. You are drunk with power - because every decision you make is an attempt to gain more power and control. You are drunk with hatred and contempt - not only for white people but for the poorest South Africans who suffer from your policies daily and will suffer even more if you continue to destroy the economy and hate hate and divide.
Thank you very much.

Latest Posts