It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who really is attempting to rewrite history?

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
This post might not be off great interest to the Americans and Europeans on here, but to us South Africans, this is an important matter. I felt like sharing it, just so you might get a perspective on an issue we currently have in SA.

We have a political figure, called Julius Malema, leader of the Anc Youth league, wich is part of the ruling Anc party in SA. This guy has been very controversial in his reign as leader of the youth league. In the last week he has been taken to court for violating some free speech principals and possible human rights.

He has been singing this song, claiming it is a song from the "struggle", back in the Apartheid days. Nothing wrong with that, the problem is the words in the song. Things like "kill the boer", "kill the farmer" or "one bullet one boer". In this context Boer reffers to the white minority in Sa. Clearly this song is used to instigate people against whites.

Malema however claims he is doing nothing wrong, since it is a "struggle" song, a song the freedom fighters use to sing. However is it really?

Lets have a look.

Is the controversial song urging the killing of “Boers” truly part of the ANC’s liberation struggle heritage, or are such claims simply an ingenuous, or perhaps sinister, attempt by the ANC leadership to defend its Youth League leader Julius Malema by distorting the historical truth? Or is the ANC itself trying to rewrite history after it accused the courts of doing so when two successive court rulings found the song to incite racial hatred – findings in line with one already made by the Human Rights Commission (HRC) as long ago as 2003?
These are questions that come to the fore from an investigation into the origins of the controversial song, "Dubula iBhunu".
The truth seems to be that words to the same effect first were chanted in Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC) circles in the early 1990s along with their infamous slogan of “one settler, one bullet”. Shortly thereafter, the late ANC youth leader Peter Mokaba borrowed the slogan and began chanting his “kill the Boer, kill the farmer” version in 1993 after the murder of ANC and Communist Party leader, Chris Hani.
In none of the sources on the origins of the song which could be identified, could any indication be found that the song has ever been part of the ANC repertoire of songs during the struggle days.
Although the controversial song sung by Malema is claimed now to be a historical liberation struggle song, it was not included in a 2-CD history and recording of 25 freedom songs released in 2002. Senior ANC and former Umkhonto we Sizwe leaders, including Ronnie Kasrils, Baleka Mbete and Pallo Jordan among others, had collaborated in the production of the collection.
At the time of its release, the CD set was described as a collection of field recordings of songs and chants used in the liberation struggle, complemented by a radio documentary providing an overview of the songs, their history and context in the struggle. These songs were sung in ANC camps, at meetings, mass rallies, demonstrations and other gatherings.
The set, it was said, was designed as an archival and historical document. Nowhere did it mention “kill the Boer, kill the farmer” or “shoot the Boer”.
All indications are that the slogan or chant and the song, or even songs that developed from it, originated with the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC).
In August 1999, Thomas Ramaila told the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that he had been a PAC operative and had been influenced by what he called a PAC slogan, namely “kill the farmer, kill the Boer” to kill a farmer, Neville Rudman. Most of Ramaila’s testimony and his amnesty application were rejected, but his reference to the slogan was not.
The slogan/song in any version was used first in circles associated with the PAC in the early 1990s, although the PAC never officially took ownership of it and, after the first democratic elections of 1994, distanced itself from it. At almost the same time, the ANC’s Mokaba began using the slogan in 1993 when the armed struggle for all intents and purposes was a thing of the past.
In that same year, a large crowd of PAC supporters marched through Cape Town’s Kenilworth and Claremont suburbs, demanding the release of PAC members who had been arrested in connection with the massacre of 11 churchgoers at the St. James Church and chanted “kill the Boer, kill the farmer”, “one settler, one bullet” and “one church, one bomb”.
Also in 1993, at a rally in Tembisa near Johannesburg, both Mokaba and a PAC representative used these or similar words in speeches to the large crowd. Mokaba reportedly also urged the crowd to direct their “bullets” at then president FW de Klerk, declaring that he hated De Klerk. To which the PAC representative added, “war against the enemy... kill them”.
In March this year, a former participant in an August 1993 march (called “Operation Barcelona”) against increased exam fees in Cape Town, wrote in a comment to an article on the Internet, that he was among PASO (PAC student wing) students in the march who chanted “kill the Boer, kill the farmer” immediately before American student Amy Biehl was killed by members of that mob.
In 2002, then president Thabo Mbeki, as president of the ANC, and in 2003 then ANC secretary-general Kgalema Motlanthe - who is now ANC deputy president - firmly and unambiguously distanced the ANC from any such song or slogan, saying it had never been, and would never be, a part of the ANC. No claim was made then that it – in any form - ever had been an ANC liberation struggle song.
That is until now, when, in March this year, Malema began singing a generic version of Mokaba’s chant. Suddenly senior ANC leaders, among them secretary-general Gwede Mantashe, are claiming this to be an old ANC liberation struggle song that apparently never was sung to incite violence against white farmers or whites in general, but was aimed against the apartheid regime.
Mcebisi Ndletyana, senior researcher at the Human Science Research Council - in another defence of the song and attack on the judges who ruled against its use in an article in "The Sunday Independent" - claims the song embodies black hatred of “whiteness”, but not of people of European descent... with a very wooly explaination of what the difference is intended to be.
No documentary or other evidence could be found that the chant or related songs were indeed ANC liberation songs before 1993, when the liberation struggle was practically over and constitutional negotiations in full swing.
The Mokaba chant of “kill the farmer, kill the Boer” was next heard in June 2002 at an ANC Youth League meeting in Kimberley, and at Mokaba’s funeral in Limpopo. The funeral was attended by prominent ANC leaders, including Nelson Mandela and Mbeki, and the chanting was stopped immediately.
The Freedom Front lodged a complaint of hate speech with the HRC, which subsequently rejected it. However Mbeki, as president of the ANC and the country at the time, on 19 June of that year told Parliament: “Nobody in our country has a right to call for the killing of any South African, whatever the colour, race, ethnic origin, gender or health condition of the intended victim. Those farmers and boers are as much South African and African as I am...”
In June 2003, the HRC, chaired by Professor Karthy Govender, assisted by Professor Henk Botha and Mr Khashane Manamela, heard an appeal by the Freedom Front against the earlier HRC ruling. In their decision, delivered on 15 July, they overturned the earlier HRC ruling and found that the slogan "Kill the farmer, kill the boer" as chanted at the ANC youth rally in Kimberley and at the funeral of Mokaba constituted hate speech as defined in section 16(2)(c) of the Constitution.
What is even more interesting is that part of the record of submissions made to the HRC at the time contains a letter from Motlanthe, then ANC secretary-general, stating that the ‘’utterance has never been, cannot and will never be a slogan of the ANC, not used by the ANC at all.’’ The logical assumption then is that, according to Motlanthe, it was not part of the ANC’s liberation struggle heritage.

Sorry for the huge post, just wanted to bring this to your attention,.

VVV




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
 


At least you are not fooled. Let others in your country know. Don't let them slip the revisions over on your people. There's too much of that going around these days.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
History has always been written by the Victors and probably always will be.

Hell of a thread - you've obviously put in a great deal of effort.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
I honestly don't know enough about SA history and even contemporary history to pass what would be an 'informed' opinion on that specific matter. However there are parallels which exist in Europe.

Take the good ole' British National Anthem for example - A previous verse which is now deemed no longer acceptable was -

Lord, grant that Marshal Wade,
May by thy mighty aid,
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush,
and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King.

It spoke of crushing the Scots - who of course now have the same Monarch as the English hence the verse above is now no longer acceptable or indeed sung.

However it has to be said that the Scots continue to sing songs which include words like;

In 1320 Scotland said
Should England dare our soil to tread
The blood will flow in rivers red
before capitulation

Although I can understand any English man or woman baulking at these words the song has to be put in its historical context. It relates to the past, it sings of the past, and is firmly rooted in the past. There is nothing within it which relates to now or indeed should relate to now.

If the anti-boer song you speak of can still be used to inflame passions and can be directed to incite violence against a group of people then it should be banned from public performance. Banning songs is something I would never advocate in private. What you choose to do within the confines of your own home for example should be sacrosanct. But public performance of a song inciting violence should be banned.

From what I see however - this would be dependent upon a group of people still existing who would identify with 'Boer' - do they still exist? Or is 'Boer' a group which existed historically and no longer has a recognisable equivalent in the South Africa?

If no one identifies themselves with 'Boer' then it's a moot point and the song should stand as it is.

Oz



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?


I am sorry for offending you with my wall of text. Unfortunately i cannot express this message in pictures, so sorry, but you have to read.

Basically, i come to the conclusion that what Malema is singing is not based on "struggle" or freedom songs at all, but a very twisted song, of the original messages. A song he now sings to basically cause an instigation under the black mayority in SA.

Very basic summary, but the gist of it.

VVV



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?



Its a simple but familiar story.
White people are never ever allowed to say anything negative about blacks, because that is racist.
Black people are allowed to talk (or sing) about killing whiteys, shooting them dead, because thats a "struggle".



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by kro32
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?



Its a simple but familiar story.
White people are never ever allowed to say anything negative about blacks, because that is racist.
Black people are allowed to talk (or sing) about killing whiteys, shooting them dead, because thats a "struggle".


You know - I'm walking a fine line trying not to offend anyone with this post but I don't know if what you say above is true.

I agree that Black people in general appear to be able to say negative things, particularly in song and poetry about white people which is derogatory - and yet all hell lets loose when it's reversed.

However, white people have dominated culture in the western world for centuries and in many ways didn't have to write their prejudices into ephemeral things like song because they actively played out their prejudices in all the major aspects of society. In some ways, the only power of 'voice' black people had, was in the spoken word, songs and poetry.

It's a tradition that continues because whether we like to acknowledge it or not black people are still discriminated against - and so they won't let go of their songs. They won't let go of their bitching at whites - and really who can blame them? Whites (which I am) don't need songs because we still have the power to discriminate.

Can folks see what I'm getting at? The majority of Black people only have the power of voice - Until we can truly stand by one another's side as equals we won't put down those things which we use to score points over the other.

Oz



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekeye2
History has always been written by the Victors and probably always will be.

Hell of a thread - you've obviously put in a great deal of effort.


Simply put, winners of war writes history. If Nazi won, the holocaust never happened, no one would hate Nazis because those who did lost the war.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Originally posted by kro32
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?


I am sorry for offending you with my wall of text. Unfortunately i cannot express this message in pictures, so sorry, but you have to read.

Basically, i come to the conclusion that what Malema is singing is not based on "struggle" or freedom songs at all, but a very twisted song, of the original messages. A song he now sings to basically cause an instigation under the black mayority in SA.

Very basic summary, but the gist of it.

VVV


I had to look up some things to understand the problem... and whoa.

www.news24.com...

www.news24.com...

www.bloomberg.com...


Nice guy you have there..



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Dude nobody is gonna read that wall of text. Can you sum it up in like one or two sentences?


kro32, the longer posts are content minimized in the condensed digest area. saves a lot of time



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
The song is just a side issue. What needs to happen is long overdue landreform. Most of the farmland is monopolised by the white minority.
Also the mineral wealth, the gold, diamond, platinum mines etc must be nationalised without compensation.
They`ve been sucking gold out of the ground since 1886, diamonds since 1867, and platinum since 1924.
No compensation is deserved after the trillions (in todays prices), have been exploited and repatriated to Europe.

I`d like to suggest a lyric for a new song of "struggle".
One farmer, one takeover,
One mine, one owner (the people).



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Saracen1
 


Are you possibly a Zimbabwe National?
Nowhere on earth did nationalization work. The communistic ideology is well proven to fail wherever it is attempted. Even China is currently a mixed economy. There you have the Communistic government and a very Capitalistic economy. Just the Chinese are very education orientated.
Mines are planned and developed over 20 years plus. It takes huge investment, before the first rand is earned from the resources extracted. The government starts earning from taxation the moment the minerals are harvested. The mine owners are looking at 20 years plus before their capital investment is paid back.
Nationalize the mines and all development motivation is removed. It will be like our famous Escom that did no further infrastructural development after 1994. Only when they had to implement "Load Shedding" did they spring into action.
The mines will be dry, with no further development under the nationalized concept. There are no motivation to plan longer term than what the politicians serve. Also, when the new politician enters, with the responsibility of the nationalized mines, he/she will implement their idea of governance on that system. Therefore you cannot expect long term stability.
Regarding Farming, very similar arguments are valid. You will cause the biggest starvation exercise in the history of South Africa.
You cannot grow any ethnic group by displacing another. Your approach is racist and on par with the Apartheid ideology.
Sir, your ideas are flawed.
edit on 19-4-2011 by Boertjie because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Boertjie
 


So the land and resources must remain in the hands of a tiny minority, otherwise the majority will starve?
Also you state that if the government returned the mines back to the people, there will be no further investment and the mines will all close.Moreover you claim that I`m a racist for even attempting to debate the issue.

Let me point a few things out to you, that you may find useful in forming a legitimate opinion.
The South African majority since 1994, have realised what all the other Africans know. There can be no true political liberation without economic liberation.The wealth of Africa must be owned and controlled by the African people themselves. They must benefit from the fruits of their labours, and they will, once the land and its wealth is returned to the nation.

The days of Cecil Rhodes, King Leopold etc are over. A new generation is demanding economic liberation!



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Just for the Record, just because I am white does not mean I am a criminal and I didn't steal anyones land. For those of you still focused on race you need to grow up and realize that race means nothing now. We all have nothing to do with what our ancestors did long ago so get over it. I am human and so are you... Hopefully, lol =)



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join