Ours is a problem in which deception has become organized and strong; where truth is poisoned at its source;
one in which the skill of the shrewdest brains is devoted to misleading a bewildered people.
-- Walter Lippmann
Apartheid is most often portrayed as being about colour and race, where people of colour were treated differently from white people. What is often missed when using such overly simplified descriptions is that the differences were all about human rights and treatment under the law.
Today almost three decades after the start of our Democracy these same human rights are once again under threat. However, this threat is largely going unchallenged by the general public and the black majority. Many even are supporting, not understanding what they supporting.
Human rights are one of those things that many take for granted and don't fully appreciate until it's too late and has been taken away.
Apartheid's Colour Of Human Rights
If we had to critically look at Apartheid and look for the single biggest difference and most impactful law between white people and people of colour, what would that be?
Did standing in different lines or using different toilets really harm peoples lives?
We can see how human rights matter when we look at the state of South Africa at the 1994 elections. Almost all people of colour were living in poverty, and almost all white people were living middle income or better lives. Why, what was the difference?
The single biggest difference that changed the lives of several generations was the lack of private property rights. It's the one thing that made all difference. Without the ability to own property, people were unable to build any form of wealth and were unable to pass that wealth effectively down generations.
We can see this throughout the country as the true legacy of Apartheid was not racism but rather the enduring poverty that it left behind. Poverty is created and endures by unequal human rights and a lack of private property rights.
History Of Freedom
If we had to look over the history of mankind, paging through the last few thousand years. We see that for most of human history, leaders in the form of royal monarchies owned and controlled everything. Everyone else lived on the land but served the royal landowners.
It does not matter if we talking about tribes of Africa, Europe or Asia. The only difference was the names we used to describe the kings, chiefs or emperors. This was true across the globe, with less than 1% of people owning and controlling almost all the wealth.
This all changed in 1789 with the advent of Democracy and universal human rights in the US and France, culminating with the signing of the "Bill of Rights" and the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen".
In the 200 years that followed, Democracy and human rights spread and with it, poverty in the world went from 90% of people living in poverty to less than 10% of the world living in poverty and continues to drop.
The Democratic Difference
So we might ask, what was the difference? Why did thousands of years pass and nothing changed, then with Democracy, everything changed? There were laws governing people and countries before Democracy. What was the magic sauce that allowed 90% of the world to get out of poverty after Democracy?
The signing of the "Bill of Rights" in the US and the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen" in France, were game changes. For the first time in history, we had universal human rights. Where leaders of a country regardless if it is a king or a prime-mister, were treated the same under the law as the poorest person.
Before universal human rights, the king of a country could torture, kill, execute and murder the citizens of that country freely and without question. The citizens, in turn, could do nothing about any abuse of power. They could not appeal to a court or lay charges against anyone. The royal family of a country was the law of the land.
When universal human rights were invented, with it came equal rights to life, property, access to education and movement. Under these rights, something like slavery was impossible because slavery would go against a person's rights.
For the first time in history, if a leader of a country abused their power and abused its citizens, people could do something about it legally and in a non-violent way. Holding people accountable for their actions was built into the law and applied to everyone equally.
Private Property & Economic Freedom
When we look at how people get out of poverty, we see that governments and leaders don't lift people out of poverty. People pull themselves out of poverty through slow and steady wealth creation made possible through private property rights.
In simple terms, the ability to own property and not have it unreasonably taken away allows the poorest people in the world to build wealth and get out of poverty.
This economic miracle did not happen everywhere equally or at the same speed. We see in countries where there is strong government involvement, the pace is much slower. In countries where people are free to choose how they grow their wealth, the faster this growth takes place.
Private property rights work best when people can choose how they use these rights relevant to their personal situation. So if a person wants to trade their labour for free, because they seeking work experience and skills, they should be able to do so. This is that what Economic Freedom is all about. The freedom of choice of how to trade and function economically.
The more economically free people are with the least amount of government control, the faster people can grow their wealth, through the accumulation of private property.
The Constitution & Rule Of Law
For your average person that does not have a law degree, the concept of the rule of law and how it relates to the constitution is often unclear and confusing. Many focus on narrow aspects and specific human rights but don't always see the big picture.
One important role of the constitution that many don't appreciate, is to protect the citizens and people of a country from the state. For most of human history, governments and leaders of territories have been responsible for the most death and suffering.
Another significant role of the constitution is to empower people to take control of their own lives and live the best possible life possible. With private property rights at the heart of this empowerment of citizens.
What glues this all together is the rule of law. Where everybody is treated equal, and the laws of a country are enforced equally and fairly. This makes private property rights a fundamental part of the rule of law. If private property rights are not equally and fairly protected, the rule of law breaks down and people in government can use the powers of the state to abuse citizens.
Value Of Expropriation Without Compensation
Many parts make up a high functioning and prosperous society. One key aspect of society is the concept of value. Everything can have value from a loaf of bread to a picture of the sunset, and the main way we measure value is with money.
This concept of value and ownership are linked. Something can only be given value if it can be owned. If somebody can't own something, they will not be willing to pay for it, making anything that cant be owned worthless.
Ownership and value are enforced and defined through contracts that people agree to. The enforcement of contracts underpins the value of the items in the contract. If people, companies and governments could break contracts as they see fit, the assets that are regulated by those contracts also become worthless.
Expropriation without compensation makes it possible for a government to break any contract and destroy all related value. We see how this destruction of value plays out in countries that have done this before, with inflation of the local currency sky-rocketing in something called hyperinflation. This is where you see things like a billion-dollar Zimbabwean note.
What many supporters of expropriation without compensation don't understand is that anything that is expropriated instantly becomes worthless, and cannot be sold for any real value. If you are given land that is expropriated and look forward to selling it, think again. Nobody will be willing to risk buying land that was expropriated.
By giving the state the power to break any contract, undermines all contracts governed by that government. Leading to the devaluation of the local currency and hyperinflation. Hyperinflation can destroy a country in a matter of months and takes decades to fix and recover from.
Bringing Back Apartheid
The Apartheid government had the power to take peoples property away from anyone, and we saw them leverage this power in the form of forced land removals.
Today our constitution protects peoples rights equally, and private property is protected from everyone, including the government. This protection allows people to start businesses and invest money in South Africa, knowing their investments are protected from government abuse. If another person tries to take another person's property, it is called theft, and there will be consequences.
Thus, to bring back Apartheid or the environment that made it possible requires a change in the constitutional protection of human rights and the undermining of private property rights.
Under Apartheid, only the government had the power to destroy peoples lives and take peoples property away. Today, the ANC and EFF are seeking to give the government back this power in the form of a constitutional amendment and the introduction of the expropriation bill.
Lies Of The Poison Idea
The ANC tried several times to bring a new Expropriation bill to parliament long before there were any discussions about changing the constitution. Thus far, each attempt was defeated because it went against our constitution or the opposition was too strong.
The ANC, together with the EFF, switched tactics and decided they would divide and conquer. They decided they would together seek to amend the constitution and introduce a new Expropriation bill at the same time. This time they would make it look like it was the will of the people. They kicked off a constitutional amendment process that would run as a parallel process to the Expropriation Bill.
This has led to several lies pushed onto the public and the media. When we look at the details of what is being proposed, and what we are being told. We see these things do not match up because we are being lied to.
1. Willing buyer willing seller has failed
The current land claims process was negotiated and rolled out after the creation of our constitution in 1996. It allows for people that felt wronged by Apartheid through forced removals to put in a claim and open a compensation case. This process came to an end in 2014, with 95% of all land claims have been processed and finalised.
Many have expressed frustrations with the land claim process, with claims taking very long to complete. This led to calls from media, politicians and groups on social media to suggest the process was flawed because it only cover land occupied during Apartheid. Alternative dates proposed, ranged from 1800 to 1652 and effectively opened the entire country up to possible land claims.
This led to claims made to fix the wrongs of the past using these new dates will take many 100's of years to complete using the current system and process, and that the current process was a failure.
This situation related to slowness, frustration and failure was deliberately set up by the ANC. By limiting the resources of the land claims court, with small annual budgets and limiting the number of judges, the pace cases could be completed was greatly hampered.
The land claim process was set up to look like a failure and convince the general public that the state needed more power to fix the wrongs of the past at an accelerated rate.
2. The people are land-hungry
A consistent theme of these new tactics is that the people are desperate and hungry for land. It is the will of the people to take the land to correct the wrongs of the past.
When journalists and researchers investigate the claim that people are land-hungry, they find a very different situation with two things standing out to refute these claims.
When looking at the land claims that have been processed, we find that 97% of claimants opted to be compensated financially, with only 3% seeking a transfer of land instead of money.
Polls and surveys further point to a different picture when researchers asked people what they think is the biggest issues faced by South Africa. Consistently, for many years, the number one issue was lack of jobs and unemployment, and the lowest-ranked issue was land reform, with less than 4% of people asked saying land reform was an important issue.
The people want jobs and economic opportunities.
3. We only clarifying & updating the wording
Depending on the audience, EWC promoters change their tactic and speak out of two mouths.
When talking to business and mainstream media, they would say that the EWC Bills are amendments and only minor updates. They just updating wording to make things clear, and this is normal and done all the time.
When speaking to the poor and previously disadvantaged, we see EWC supporters vilifying current landowners and businesses, promising radical changes so the state can save the poor from the poverty they find themselves in today.
When we read the details being proposed in these new laws, we see the wording and meaning changes significantly. The changes have far-reaching consequences, fundamentally changing how private property is defined and the rights of the state over private property.
Additional changes also significantly change processes and procedures to be in favour of the state. Giving people little room to oppose or contest any expropriation order. One of the most significant process changes is the push to sideline the courts from the process as much as possible.
4. It's only about land
One of the most blatant lies is that the changes only relate to land, but the new Expropriation Bill clearly states that the Bill relates to but is not limited to land.
The proposed Expropriation Bill allows the state to take any property of any kind, not just land.
5. We giving land back to the landless
When speaking to the media or poor struggling communities, the ANC and EFF will tell them they want to give land and dignity back to the landless black people.
When we look at previous efforts regarding land reform and what these same supports call for during negotiations, we see something completely different.
The ANC and EFF are pushing for the state to take ownership and retain ownership in something they call custodianship. Then the people will be required to lease the land from the state. In short, the people will need to pay the state for the right to use the land, turning land reform into a business.
Any improvements made to land leased by the state is considered state property. Additionally, at anytime the state could change who is allowed to lease and work the land. Effectively they will be able to do forced land removals whenever they wanted similar to what we saw under Apartheid.
Based on what is being proposed, the landless will continue to be landless, and the state will control and own everything.
6. Avoiding Title Deeds
We have seen several times under the existing land reform process how the state has avoided the handing over of Title Deeds. The state wants to retain control and power over the land for as long as possible and then leverage that power as they see fit.
This Title Deeds avoidance is most disgracefully related to existing state-owned land. We talking about townships and informal settlements, where people have been living for decades on government-controlled and owned land.
Under the current laws, the government can and is encouraged to transfer Title Deeds to people that live on state land. This is something the ANC government avoids as much as possible. When it is done, it's done as slow as possible.
Millions of people live on state land today, and they live there because of Apartheid. If the ANC and EFF wanted to give the landless land, all they would need to do is give out Title Deeds. Making millions of the poorest people in South Africa land and homeowners.
Handing out Title Deeds does not require any change of laws. However, this is avoided by the ANC government because it undermines their desire for power and control. Once the people have their Title Deeds, the ANC lose leverage over the people. Then they would need to deliver on different promises to retain peoples votes and support and don't have anyone to point at and blame.
7. There is no other way
One of the biggest injustices the ANC has perpetrated is how it sabotaged to poor and weaponised poverty against itself. This takes many forms, from sabotaging land reform processes to reducing the quality of education and the handing out of Title Deeds. All done to increase the poor's dependency on the state.
Then propaganda and misinformation campaigns are used to blame and point fingers away from the ANC and towards some strategic villain. A common and easy target is Apartheid to blame the past for current failings. Another is white people in general as a way of blaming the current here and now.
First, the ANC sabotaged programs designed to help the poor and set up scapegoats and people to blame. Next, the ANC tell people they have tried to help the people fix the wrongs of the past, but they can't unless the government has certain powers. The ANC will tell the people and the media there is no other way of fixing the wrongs of the past without expropriation without compensation because current laws and rights are getting in the way.
We know that this is a carefully coordinated plan that undermines all ideas or processes to help the poor and reduce poverty in South Africa. Then have the conversation set up in such a way as to sell expropriation without compensation as this wonderful silver bullet, that will fix all our problems, and there is just no other way forward.
8. The process with well managed
When we look for details and specifics, we find there is none. The ANC refuses to point to a single piece of land they want to expropriate as an example where they require these powers. The ANC and EFF always keep all discussions on the topic as vague and as abstract as possible and avoid any specifics.
This lack of clarity and specificity makes many uncomfortable and question the ANC's ethics and their previous track record regarding governance and management of state projects and programs. Their response is that we must trust them. We told the ANC will put the necessary processes in place and they will ensure there will be no abuse of power or corruption, regarding the use of the states power to expropriate without compensation.
Constitutional experts tell us that laws should be written with the worst possible government in mind. Laws should not require a good and ethical government to function properly. The laws and constitution should be written in such a way that abuse of power is limited by default, and it should not be ambiguous, vague and broad concerning state powers over the people.
When we look at other countries, we find some governments can rule conterminously regardless of performance as a one-party state. North Korea, Zimbabwe, China, Iran, Egypt, Cuba, Belarus, Venezuela, to name a few, are all examples of countries where a single authoritarian government has been in power for several decades.
Some of these countries will even pretend to have democratic elections, but they turn out to be meaningless. The only way this is possible in any country is if the state has certain powers over the people, and the people have little to no power over the state.
These powers always remove or undermine human rights, with private property rights the single most important right of all. If the state can break contracts, take peoples property as it sees fit, it can abuse and bully its citizens without repercussions.
A government with unlimited power over its citizens is then able to leverage its position and power to rule continuously. This is what the ANC wants and actively seeks so it can rule forever.
The ANC does not like needing to beg and grovel to its citizens to support and vote for them. The ANC want to control everything and not need to be accountable to anyone. Expropriation without compensation gives them this power.
Power & Greed
When we look at the problems of South Africa and the legacy we inherited from Apartheid, we find poverty being the single biggest issue faced. Expropriation without compensation does nothing to fix poverty. Jobs, economic growth and opportunities are how we fix poverty.
The only thing expropriation without compensation achieves, is to undermine people's rights and give unlimited power in a country to the state.
Everywhere in the world where expropriation without compensation has been legal and used, greed and destruction followed.
Expropriation without compensation is the ultimate form of corruption, giving into the greedy and the power-hungry.
Stripping People Naked
In war, it is easy to see how well prepared and protected a group or country is. How much amour and weapons they have and the size of their army are all things you could easily measure and count.
In a Democracy, the people's human rights and laws that govern those rights are the defensive armour and weapons at play. These are all things that are difficult to measure and are intangible. You cant touch and hold your rights the same way you can a shield or firearm.
In the warfare of politics, Socialist organisations like the ANC and EFF want to strip away the people's armour and make the people defenceless. They want to strip the people naked before the state and then promise to cloth and feed the people.
Once you give up the right to private property, you are naked and powerless before the government. Without private property rights, you are a government slave.
Modern Government Slavery
In traditional slavery that we learn about in history, the people who were forced into slavery were powerless. Slavery took place for thousands of years, and what made slaves so weak and powerless, unable to oppose their master's rule, was the fact that they had no rights. Most importantly, they were not allowed to own anything and build their own wealth.
A person without human rights, and most importantly without secure private property rights, is a slave. A slave of the government.
Apartheid enslaved people of colour by not giving them the same rights white people had. Now the ANC and EFF want to bring back this form of slavery but want to own us all.