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.
originally posted by: Sahabi
When the indigenous people of a land are systemically displaced and disenfranchised by colonizers and their descendants, can we really judge or demonize those indigenous people for being less than loving to those occupiers?
Selective Outrage: Being upset by a Struggle Song, but ignoring and justifying the inequity and inhumanity of the history that led to the creation of said song.
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Sahabi
Are you conveniently ignoring the constant migration of tribes in Africa who displaced other indigenous tribes and committed atrocities on each other for centuries well before any European colonists arrived on the continent.
Tribal warfare and conflict is endemic in Africa.
I'm not trying to trivialise or dismiss some of the horrors that occurred in Africa and elsewhere during the European colonial period but many, many such horrors happened before their arrival and many have happened since the end of colonial rule.
But of course that doesn't play into the in vogue narrative that all of Africa's problems are down to those bastard White European colonist Empire builders.
Its as if 'they' are trying to promote the myth that Africa was some sort idyllic land of peace and harmony where Africans lived in balance with nature and with each other prior to the advent of the evil white man.
Its absolute bollocks.
This. That's why I quote 'left' and 'right'. It's good vs evil at this point. In reality it's the 1% attacking the 99% so the 99% is divided and attack each other, but most (don't mean you) don't see this.
originally posted by: EternalShadow
a reply to: ancientlight
I don't think this particular flavor of subculture cares about left or right politics. They will simply choose the side that allows them to live their best narcissistic life.
California can't deliver on their reparations which means they won't and that sets the stage for all kinds of "justified" outrage and more looting.
The culture clash will be addressed whether people want to be apathetic or proactive about it. It's going to be dealt with eventually. It's not a race war but a fight between the civil and uncivilized. This rotten culture isn't bound to one group, it crosses many lines; many lines that it shouldn't have crossed. It's become mainstream.
originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Sahabi
I am with some others, your comments are kind of stomach turning... you think its ok to assault/injure/delete people that were born and raised in south africa after apartheid?
This would be like black people in the states born this century going on a killing spree against whites over slavery even though neither were ever oppressed or oppressors.
”I am sorry but you’ve got things wrong for once more.
Kill the Boer is a song that has been condemned and according to the High Court amounts to hate speech. The High Court decided the song is discriminatory, harmful, and against the dignity of Afrikaners.
Trying to defend the politician who has been forbidden by the court to sing the song back in 2011 by the High Court, is just a desperate attempt.
You've clearly confused your arguments.”
The singing of the song Dubul’ ibhunu - “Kill the Boer - Kill the Farmer” - was not hate speech, Judge Edwin Molahlehi, sitting as an Equality Court in the High Court in Johannesburg, ruled on Thursday.
“It does not constitute hate speech and deserves to be protected under the rubric of freedom of speech - it articulates the failure of the current government to address issues of economic empowerment and land division,” he said.
He said he was not bound by the previous judgment by Judge Lamont because the Constitutional Court had deemed the provision of the Act – which prohibited speech that was “harmful” – to be unconstitutional.
“The broad principle of freedom of expression is tolerance of different views. Society has a duty to allow and be tolerant of both popular and unpopular views of its members,” he said.
The judge said that while under a different inquiry, the chant may be found to be “offensive and undermining”, Afriforum had failed to make out a case that it was hate speech, as defined in the Act.
”Last year, South Africa’s Equality Court in Johannesburg ruled the song did not constitute hate speech or incitement, after a case was brought by AfriForum—which advocates for South Africa’s Afrikaners, the descendants of its Dutch colonizers—which argued the song incites violence and murder. The court ruled, however, the song was protected by freedom of speech and that its lyrics—“shoot to kill, kill the Boer, kill the farmer”—are not intended to be taken literally.”
Malema, now leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), again appeared in court in 2022 for allegedly singing the song in a case brought by Afriforum where the issue of whether or not the song was hate speech was debated. Judge Edwin Molahlehi of the Johannesburg High Court ruled that the chant and song were not intended to be taken seriously; that Afriforium had failed to establish a causal link between the song and violence; that the reference to Boer did not literally refer to White or Afrikaans people; that the song did not incite hatred towards White people generally; and ruled the song was not hate speech. Afriforum said it would appeal the judgement to the Supreme Court.
originally posted by: Sahabi
a reply to: AlienBorg
I am sorry but you’ve got things wrong and you've clearly confused your arguments.
Throughout the narrative of this entire thread, not once have you stepped away from the half-truths to tell the full story.
In 2022, the High Court of South Africa overturned the earlier rulings against Julius Malema, completely exonerating Malema from the hate-speech allegations related to his public singing of the song “Shoot the Boer” (Dubul' ibhunu); ruling that the singing of this song is constitutionally protected free speech.
Judge rules that “Kill the boer - Kill the farmer” is not hate speech
The singing of the song Dubul’ ibhunu - “Kill the Boer - Kill the Farmer” - was not hate speech, Judge Edwin Molahlehi, sitting as an Equality Court in the High Court in Johannesburg, ruled on Thursday.
“It does not constitute hate speech and deserves to be protected under the rubric of freedom of speech - it articulates the failure of the current government to address issues of economic empowerment and land division,” he said.
He said he was not bound by the previous judgment by Judge Lamont because the Constitutional Court had deemed the provision of the Act – which prohibited speech that was “harmful” – to be unconstitutional.
“The broad principle of freedom of expression is tolerance of different views. Society has a duty to allow and be tolerant of both popular and unpopular views of its members,” he said.
The judge said that while under a different inquiry, the chant may be found to be “offensive and undermining”, Afriforum had failed to make out a case that it was hate speech, as defined in the Act.
It appears as though you purposely ignored and failed to mention this, because the fact was stated in the linked article of your op:
What To Know About South Africa’s ‘Kill The Boer’ Chant—As Elon Musk Sounds Alarm
”Last year, South Africa’s Equality Court in Johannesburg ruled the song did not constitute hate speech or incitement, after a case was brought by AfriForum—which advocates for South Africa’s Afrikaners, the descendants of its Dutch colonizers—which argued the song incites violence and murder. The court ruled, however, the song was protected by freedom of speech and that its lyrics—“shoot to kill, kill the Boer, kill the farmer”—are not intended to be taken literally.”
It also clearly states all of this in the paragraph immediately following the paragraphs that you quoted from Wikipedia:
Malema, now leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), again appeared in court in 2022 for allegedly singing the song in a case brought by Afriforum where the issue of whether or not the song was hate speech was debated. Judge Edwin Molahlehi of the Johannesburg High Court ruled that the chant and song were not intended to be taken seriously; that Afriforium had failed to establish a causal link between the song and violence; that the reference to Boer did not literally refer to White or Afrikaans people; that the song did not incite hatred towards White people generally; and ruled the song was not hate speech. Afriforum said it would appeal the judgement to the Supreme Court.
The singing of this specific song has been most recently declared, by the High Court of South Africa, to be constitutionally protected free speech for about a year now.
Withholding this vital fact from the audience of this thread amounts to half-truth, and basing entire debates, arguments, talking points, and conclusions on half-truths, in my book, equates to the intentional spreading of misinformation and disinformation.
ATS, Deny Ignorance
In March 2010 South Gauteng High Court found that the phrase, spoken or sung, dubul’ibhunu ('shoot the boer') amounted to hate speech and was therefore not protected free speech as outlined in section 16 of the South African constitution.
In September 2011, the Equality Court at the South Gauteng High Court ruled that the song was discriminatory, harmful, undermined the dignity of Afrikaners, and thereby constituted hate speech; and that it "prima facie satisfies the crime of incitement to murder." The court ruled that Julius Malema, who was brought before the court for previously singing the song at rallies, was forbidden from singing it in the future. Following the ruling Malema changed the wording of the song to "Kiss the Boer" and sang that instead—however, it can be argued to still have the same psychological influence as the original, due to the well-known context for the altered lyrics. The following year, the ANC stated that they would not sing the song any more.
Afriforum said it would appeal the judgement to the Supreme Court.
Withholding this vital fact from the audience of this thread amounts to half-truth, and basing entire debates, arguments, talking points, and conclusions on half-truths, in my book, equates to the intentional spreading of misinformation and disinformation.
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Sahabi
Would you be equally supportive if white farmers - the few that are left - were singing Kill The Zulu/Xhosa/Ndebele?
Of course you wouldn't because that would quite clearly be promoting racist, divisionary hate speech.
So why is it different when Black people are promoting the same against White people?
Please, a simple explanation for the double standards will suffice or you can go into as much detail as you wish. I just want to try and understand why hypocrisy is deemed acceptable in these sort of circumstances?
originally posted by: Sahabi
a reply to: AlienBorg
• The High Court of South Africa overturned earlier verdicts and ruled that the singing of “Shoot the Boer” is not hate speech.
• The High Court of South Africa ruled that the signing of “Shoot the Boer” is protected free speech.
• The High Court of South Africa fully acquitted Julius Malema of hate speech on this precise topic.
• The High Court of South Africa then ruled that Julius Malema’s accusers (AfriForum) are responsible for paying all of Malema’s court and legal costs related to the case.
• Dr. Bongani Ngqulunga, Director of Johannesburg Institute for Advanced Study (JIAS) and former Deputy Director General and Head of the Private Office of the President, Chief of Staff, and Spokesperson for former President Jacob Zuma, recalled struggle songs from the apartheid days in which people proclaimed they were going to march to Pretoria, the capital city, or that Nelson Mandela would be released from prison the next morning. The people singing those songs were not actually planning to march to Pretoria, nor did they really think that Mr. Mandela was about to be released, he said. Similarly, he said, the phrase “kill the Boer” — the word means farmer in Dutch and Afrikaans — is not meant to promote violence against individual farmers. “It was a call to mobilize against an oppressive system,” Mr. Ngqulunga said.
• Naledi Nomalanga Mkhize, professor and historian at Nelson Mandela University, said of the chant: “Young people feel that it rouses them up when they sing it today. I don’t think that they intend it to mean any harm.”
Julius Malema maintains that singing the song in today’s context is not to be taken literally and only serves as a rallying song against racial inequity in general.
Honorable Judge Edwin Molahlehi (High Court of South Africa) is the most recent judge to rule on this topic and agrees with Julius Malema’s reasoning, interpretation, and freedom. Prestigious and well respected South Africans such as Dr. Bongani Ngqulunga and Naledi Nomalanga Mkhize also agree.
Is your experience, knowledge, or wisdom of South Africa beyond these three individuals? Are your South African judiciary, political, and educational credentials superior to these three individuals?
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Sahabi
Are you conveniently ignoring the constant migration of tribes in Africa who displaced other indigenous tribes and committed atrocities on each other for centuries well before any European colonists arrived on the continent.
Tribal warfare and conflict is endemic in Africa.
I'm not trying to trivialise or dismiss some of the horrors that occurred in Africa and elsewhere during the European colonial period but many, many such horrors happened before their arrival and many have happened since the end of colonial rule.
But of course that doesn't play into the in vogue narrative that all of Africa's problems are down to those bastard White European colonist Empire builders.
Its as if 'they' are trying to promote the myth that Africa was some sort idyllic land of peace and harmony where Africans lived in balance with nature and with each other prior to the advent of the evil white man.
Its absolute bollocks.
originally posted by: Sahabi
When the indigenous people of a land are systemically displaced and disenfranchised by colonizers and their descendants, can we really judge or demonize those indigenous people for being less than loving to those occupiers?
Selective Outrage: Being upset by a Struggle Song, but ignoring and justifying the inequity and inhumanity of the history that led to the creation of said song.