Apologetic against the argument that whites have no claim in Africa, and can own no land in Africa, because we are visitors.
How long does a family have to be in a country before it’s naturalized?
If you compare the US & South Africa, you’ll notice they were colonized around the same time.
Columbus arrived in America 1492, but the first settlement was only in 1607. 45 years before the first settlement in South Africa, in 1652.
So if South Africa and the US are basically the same age, then why do white South Africans have no claim on anything? Or are you saying white Americans have no claim on anything either?
White South Africans arrived in the country 368 years ago
If you are going to argue that 368 years is not enough to naturalize whites, then I have to ask how long is enough to naturalize anyone?
If you say forever, then I argue that black tribes have no place here either, and no claim.
The black tribes arrived in South Africa somewhere between the year 100 AD and around the time of the white settlers themselves. For arguments’ sake let’s say the year 100.
Up to date information tells us that there were two migrational drifts over a few hundred of years of Bantu into South Africa first around 300 AD and then on the eastern flank between 800 AD to 1300 AD. In the South East the Khoena migratory drift and early Bantu migratory drift resulted in mixed communities by the 1400s. The forebears of the Khoena had their own migratory drift from about 400 BC to 200 AD first into the northern parts of SA and then down into the Western Cape and Eastern Cape. Markers of the forebears of those who came to develop San social formations go back to antiquity times but appear from East and West and Central to South Africa.
Those were the overland migratory drifts. Starting in 1658 and right through to the late 1870s a paradigm shift occurred resulting in rapid mass migration of Bantu to Cape Town and across the Western Cape via maritime travel. The first 400 West Africans to arrive in Cape Town via the sea occurred in 1658. Then later Africans trickled in from Madagascar but by the 1770s most of the slaves arriving in the Cape were Masbiekers (East African and Zambesi region slaves). In the 1820s-1850s thousands of west and East African ‘Prize Slaves’ also arrived. Of over 75,500 imported slaves over 60% were Bantu Africans. After 1838 there followed a 35 year period of Indentured Labour and most of the thousands of labourers brought to the Cape were African Masbiekers. Decisions were taken by the colonial authorities to classify all of these imported Africans and their descendants as ‘Coloured’.
Between 1652 and 1900 there were around a dozen other forms of forced and voluntary migration to the Cape by people of colour. At least five of those streams also involved West Africans and East Africans.
Nguni people had migrated within South Africa to KwaZulu-Natal by the 1st Century AD, and were also present in the Transvaal (province) region at the same time. Nguni people brought with them sheep, cattle, goats and horticultural crops, many of which had never been used in South Africa at that time.
Can you ever be naturalized?
So if you can never be naturalized to a land, then no one owns South Africa. And if black people have a claim to the land and citizenship here, then so do white people.
If white people have no claim and can’t be naturalized, then neither can black people be. Then all black South Africans should return to Central & West Africa.
While we’re talking about returning people to their place of origin, because they have no claim if they arrived in a place, what about the immigrants that have arrived in the USA over the years?
What makes their citizenship of the US any more valid than the claim white South Africans have to the country of our birth, which was entirely white owned when we were born into it?
Likewise the slaves, now African Americans. Why do they have claim to anything? Including American citizenship? Surely by the same reasoning that whites don’t belong in Africa, African Americans don’t belong in America?
Maybe we should consider swapping out the white South Africans for all the African Americans? Equalize the playing fields?
As for those US African Americans of slave descent…
If your ancestors weren’t slaves, your life would have been way worse. You’d still be in Africa.
If you’d come from South Africa, you’d have nothing. First because you would have been a victim of apartheid and racial segregation going back as far as the slave trade, and second because the black government that came into power stole what they did take from the apartheid government.
Or you’d be in one of the other third-world African countries, which are WAY worse than South Africa. You could be one of the 18 Nigerians killed for violating curfew, or the 20 Kenyans killed by police for various reasons during lockdown.
As a resident of a third world African country - believe me, you lost out on nothing.
If you believe that life would have been so much better if you stayed in Africa, then why don’t you go back? I ask the immigrants into America, why don’t you leave to go home to your country?
There’s a reason you don’t see a rush of African Americans clamouring to regain their lost African roots. Because after a few years of living somewhere else, the place you originally came from just isn’t home anymore.
And like every citizen feels like a citizen of that country after receiving their papers, South African whites call South Africa home - and have for as long as our families have existed.
South African & International Immigration Legislation
But, for argument’s sake, let’s look at the situation as if white South Africans were immigrants.
An interesting fact about these laws and changes in government: most countries have laws applying before and after a date that marks a changeover in government powers. For example, the UK, has allowances that deal with commonwealth countries.
South Africa made no allowance for this, never addressing the issue of citizenship for whites. Popular rhetoric with the politicians, and the constitutional change to allow expropriation of land without compensation, refers to whites as not being true citizens and having no right to own land in Africa.
So let’s take a look at various immigration laws and how they compare.
- In South Africa you are not a citizen if you are born in the geography. Neither do you qualify for citizenship if you are born to stateless parents.
- How does this compare around the world? Well it’s basically 50/50.
- Surprisingly Western & Latin American countries are much more likely to give citizenship to those born on the soil. African countries are very exclusive.
- South Africa does give citizenship to descendants of those who were born to South African parents, no matter where they were born.
- This is pretty standard around the world.
- South Africa has a naturalization process.
- This is also on par with world averages, where most countries have a naturalization process.
- South Africa has 5 years of naturalization roughly.
- Under these criteria, all white South Africans would currently qualify.
- Even if you lifted it to the world extreme of 30 years, white South Africans would be four years away from naturalization since the elections in 1994.
- If it was counted from our date of birth then most would qualify completely already.
- Under the law, minor children become naturalized citizens and white South Africans were here as minors.
- And all children would qualify as children born to naturalized citizens.
- We would also be refugees and stateless otherwise. We have nowhere to go to except as refugees.
- If we look at fairly and logically, and on the extreme end, then after 25 to 30 years no one should be able to be told that they don’t belong, or don’t have a claim.
- Over 7% of countries have religious, race or other discriminatory factors in their requirements.
- All these laws favour Latin American, Arabic, Moslem and Negro (as referred to in the legislation) persons.
- So while there are clearly states that are exclusively black, arabic, moslem or Latin American, Western countries are expected to open their borders?
- On the whole, Western countries have way shorter naturalization periods than other countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
I wonder how people around the world would act if Western countries used immigration laws giving white Christians preference over those of other races and religions?
Read more about origins of white supremacy, and how it differs from white nationalism and racial segregation at https://www.lifecoachestoolbox.com/index.php/understanding-institutionalized-racism-the-origins-of-white-supremacy
If we can settle this question of naturalization, then perhaps we can put this part of the debate to bed? Perhaps white South Africans do have as much of a legitimate claim on the land as black South Africans do?
And if not, does what happens in South Africa now set a dangerous legal precedent for other countries, like the US, to have white populations forcibly removed and stripped of assets in the future? Or just a populist precedent that triggers ongoing land grabs, the way Zimbabwe’s actions are being echoed now, in South Africa?
Read more about the author at Am I a crazy white supremacist? (TL;DR: No): https://lifecoachestoolbox.com/index.php/am-i-a-crazy-white-supremacist-tldr-no