Correct Term: Boer Nationalist Not Right Winger.

The Boer Republicans / Boer Nationalists / Boer Irredentists & other modern era Boers who are working towards & struggling to regain the self determination which was stripped from them after the Anglo-Boer War & were further marginalized after 1994 are often recklessly & erroneously labeled as Right Wingers despite the fact that the Boer Nation is a volk / people & not an organization therefore as such is not a political element of a contrived one dimensional political spectrum or a special interest group.

Please note that the correct term is "Boer nationalists" and not "rightwingers". We are not an (extremist) element on the spectrum of the South African professional party-political comedy. We wish to be no part of this "rainbow spectrum". We do not consider ourselves bound in conscience by a constitution, laws, rules and statutes made on our behalf without any form of consultation with us or consent by us. If and when we do obey these oppressive laws, we do it out of a higher conscience, and out of respect for the semblance of the order of things. We have a right to resist an oppressive constitution and oppressive laws. Actions borne from coercion can never be interpreted as the giving of consent.

From an open letter Professor Tobias Louw addressed to the Institute for Security Studies dated September 16 2003.

---

After their arrest and conviction for illegal armed occupation, their khaki-clad leader, Willem Ratte, wrote furiously from gaol to contest his English press depiction as some right wing anachronism. what outweighed this was a First Anglo-Boer War antecedent. In his torrential and powerful manifesto, Ratte insisted:

Were the Boers of 1880 called right-wingers, for resisting the imperialist British occupation? Then, as now, you had an alien regime lording it in Pretoria over our people, whose gutless president had betrayed and handed over his sovereign state.

Then, as now, the new (neo) colonialist administration pretended to be God's gift to the supposedly "dirty and dumb dutchmen", and tried its beast to smear the pro-independence party as only a few backward "Don Quixote's tilting at windmills". Our struggle has nothing to do with right or left ... this being incidental, like religion in the Irish-British conflict, but everything to do with a nation having an inherent right to be free.

From: The Politics of War Memory and Commemoration. Page: 121.
Chapter 3. The South African War / Anglo-Boer War 1899 - 1902. and political memory in South Africa. Bill Nasson.

The one dimensional / nebulous & reckless term Right Wing therefore does not accurately describe nor does justice to the centuries old just struggle of Boer self determination as the mass use of the term even post dates the first Boer freedom struggle & was not even used to describe to the Boer Commandos of the Anglo-Boer War.   

Verwoerd Was Not a Friend of the Boer Nation.

During an interview with the Right Perspective radio program: Theuns Cloete of Boervolk Radio noted that the Dutch born architect of the Separate Development phase of the Apartheid laws: Hendrik Verwoerd was not a friend of the Boer Nation as he was interested in amalgamating the region under an economic sphere & scuppered the restoration of the Boer Republics.

Hendrik Verwoerd was a traitor to the Boerevolk. He was not a friend of the Boer Nation. He was there to amalgamate everything in one under an economic sphere. Hendrik Verwoerd did great damage to the Boer Nation. He gave a false pretense that here is a republic so that the Boers could feel okay. It's the same with Malan. Malan was a traitor to the Boer Nation. The Boers stood up [ at ] 500 000 when they had the OB. The Ossewa Brandwag. Or the Oxwagen band of people - Guard in the 1940s to 48. When Malan came to power. Him & Jan Smuts organized & they broke this down to nothing.

Where the Boers would have had the Boer Republics soon after that because the Boers were shouting - all these people were shouting: "back to the republics - back to the republics". What republics were they talking about? If you talk to people today who are politically motivated or are involved in politics: they've got no idea what you're talking about. They think about Hendrik Verwoerd's republic.

Hendrik Verwoerd's republic came fifteen years later - or twelve years later. After - the only person - the was only one person ever: J G Strijdom - he was pro Boer - he was a Boer himself. We believe strongly that he was killed. Because when he started talking- when he became Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa & they found out that he was starting to say: "let's reinstate the Boer Republics: it's the only solution to the southern tip's problems" we're sure that that is when he was poisoned. Because he suddenly became ill - but one day forensics will find out no matter when. Unless they destroy his remains. But we hope not. So we have a problem Frank we have a tremendous problem. A lot of people blame us & say there's is so much infighting. There's no infighting amongst the Boers. The infighting is between the Boer & Afrikaner.

The above is an excerpt from the interview Theuns Cloete did on December 7 2007 & can be heard here starting at 59 minutes. Few Westerners appear to understand the political intricacies which went on often conflating the Boers with the Afrikaners & Afrikaner Nationalism which in fact worked against the interest of the Boers as Afrikaner Nationalism was in many ways just an extension of British Imperialism but with a Cape Afrikaans face aiming at controlling the macro State which subjugated the Boers in the process due to their smaller numbers in the face of the larger Afrikaner population.

The Boers Are Not Europeans.

From time to time the Boers are sometimes referred to as Europeans when in fact the European connection is a distant one as they were formed in Africa as a distinct group having cut their ties to Europe quite early on & have been there ever since. The Boers have ancestors which go back 355 years in Africa & most of them have never even been to Europe. Just as it is not accurate to call White people in Europe "Asian" & Amerindians in America "Asian" just because their ancestors originally came from Asia: so too it is not accurate to call Boers European just because most of their distant ancestors were originally from the European continent.

A given culture can only be part of the continent on which they were formed as it makes little sense to label them as being part of a distant continent in which their distant ancestors were from long ago before forming a new people & culture on the continent they are now found.

The following are excerpts noting this fact.

Naturally, order amongst the different nations, forced together into one unnatural state, had to be maintained by unnatural measures - apartheid! Had the English not interfered, had the English not created this unnatural state, had the English not disregarded the ethnic identity of every previously free and self-governing people in Southern Africa, and had the English not erected signs saying "Europeans" and "Non-Europeans" the various nations of Southern Africa could have been spared ethnic friction and its resulting misery!

From: Fritz Meyer.

Open Letter to the Office of the British High Commissioner Pretoria.

---

The British system of apartheid, which they applied all over the world (for instance also in India, Australia and New-Zealand), had to be imported to control the mixed population. The first manifestation of this were signs reading "Europeans" and "Non-Europeans". No Boer ever regarded himself as a "European". Apartheid invoked racial friction and even racial hatred which has in no means abated to this very day, and the bitter irony is that the Boerevolk, who had not been in power since 1902 and who also suffered severely under apartheid in the sense that apartheid robbed them of their land and their work-ethics, are being blamed for apartheid.

From: Hennie Barnard.

The Concentration Camps.

---

Is George W Bush of Irish descent(?) not an American in the same vein as Chief Sitting Bull in Arizona? Why then are Whites in South Africa not referred to as Africans!!! The Whites, and then the Afrikaans-speaking Whites are nothing other than a people (= Volk) similar to the Venda, Xhosa and Griqua peoples. The difference being language and ethnicity.

From: C J Kruger.

From the Transvaal Agricultural Union site.

---

The trend among some to inaccurately label which continent the Boers are associated with has the effect of implying that the Boers are not part of the continent they were formed on & have been associated with for well over 3 centuries now.