The Orange Free State Vierkleur flag was adopted on Feb 23 1857 on the third anniversary of the Orange Free State Republic. The flag was designed in 1856 but was not adopted until 1857 due to conflicting proposals for the coat of arms. This flag served as the national flag of the Orange Free State until the conclusion of the second Anglo-Boer War. The red / white & blue horizontal tri colour flag in the canton recalls the tri colour which was used for the first Boer Republics at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet in 1795 on the Cape frontier. The overall design of the OVS Vierkleur flag is loosely based on the national flag of the United States of America as the Constitutions of the two major Boer Republics were based on those of the United States & France. The Orange Free State Republic flag is notable within the popular De La Rey video noting the Bitterender phase of the second Anglo-Boer War.
January 5, 2009
The Adoption of the OVS Vierkleur Flag.
The Orange Free State Vierkleur flag was adopted on Feb 23 1857 on the third anniversary of the Orange Free State Republic. The flag was designed in 1856 but was not adopted until 1857 due to conflicting proposals for the coat of arms. This flag served as the national flag of the Orange Free State until the conclusion of the second Anglo-Boer War. The red / white & blue horizontal tri colour flag in the canton recalls the tri colour which was used for the first Boer Republics at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet in 1795 on the Cape frontier. The overall design of the OVS Vierkleur flag is loosely based on the national flag of the United States of America as the Constitutions of the two major Boer Republics were based on those of the United States & France. The Orange Free State Republic flag is notable within the popular De La Rey video noting the Bitterender phase of the second Anglo-Boer War.
The Adoption of the Natalia Republic Flag.
The Natalia Republic flag was adopted on December 24 1839. The Natalia Republic was a short lived Boer Republic established close to a year after the Battle at Ncome River. The Republic was later annexed by Britain in 1843 & most of the Boers there then trekked into the Transvaal & Transorangia where other Boers were establishing themselves. The first few minutes of the following video mentions this flag including a number of other 19th cent Boer Republican flags which are located in the Cenotaph Hall under the Heroes Hall at the Voortrekker Monument.
The above picture shows the Natalia Tri Colour at the Right.
The Adoption of the Vierkleur Flag.
The renown Transvaal Vierkleur flag of the old Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek - also called the Transvaal Republic - was adopted on this date Jan 6 1857. The same date as the birth of the ZAR itself which was then just composed out of the former Potchefstroom Republic joined with the Rustenburg district as the Zoutpansberg Republic & the Lydenburg Republic [ despite a prior agreement] were yet to join. Note: The Lydenburg Republic joined the ZAR in 1860 & the Zoutpansberg Republic joined the ZAR in 1863. Marthinus Pretorius [ the son of the famous Andries Pretorius & for which the later capital of the ZAR was named ] was sworn in as the first President of the ZAR on this date as well.
The Transvaal Vierkleur [ four colour ] flag was designed by a Dutch Reverend named Di
rk van der Hoff & its red / white & blue horizontal tri colour motif recalls the first Boer Republican flag used at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet in 1795 - during the time of the first Boer Republics - as well as the flag of van der Hoff's homeland of Holland. The ZAR Vierkleur flag was first raised at Potchefstroom. The Vierkleur was temporarily discontinued as the national flag of the ZAR from October 1874 until May of 1875 when Thomas Francois Burgers was President due to his dislike of the Vierkleur. The flag of the old Potchefstroom Republic was used instead during this brief time frame - but the Vierkleur was restored as the national flag of the ZAR by the Volksraad when President Burgers was abroad.
The Potchefstroom Republic flag was based on the Saltire flag used by the Voortrekkers who followed Hendrik Potgieter & was also used at the Winburg
Republic as well as the later Zoutpansberg Republic. The main difference being that the Potchefstroom Republic flag [ as well as the one briefly used by the ZAR ] had a white border around the red saltire on the dark blue background thus adhering more to heraldic customs. This flag though was retained as the Presidential flag.
The Vierkleur flag was once again discontinued when Britain annexed the Transvaal Republic in 1877 but made a comeback again in 1880 when the local Boers rebelled against British rule thus starting the first Anglo-Boer War of which the Boers won & regained the independence of the ZAR in 1881 with the Pretoria Convention. Though Britain retained control of its foreign policy but that too later changed when the ZAR regained its full independence in 1884 with the signing of the London Convention.
The Transvaal Vierkleur [ as well as the OVS Vierkleur pictured at right ] became a very
important symbol to the Boerevolk during the second Anglo-Boer War as a symbol of resistance to British Colonial oppression in which close to 50 % of the Boer child population died in the concentration camps. Due to those circumstances the flag has taken on added significance other than just an old Boer Republican flag & is still flown by many today representing a nation which was almost wiped out but flies as proof of the continued existence of the Boer Nation.
The Transvaal Vierkleur [ four colour ] flag was designed by a Dutch Reverend named Di
rk van der Hoff & its red / white & blue horizontal tri colour motif recalls the first Boer Republican flag used at Swellendam & Graaff-Reinet in 1795 - during the time of the first Boer Republics - as well as the flag of van der Hoff's homeland of Holland. The ZAR Vierkleur flag was first raised at Potchefstroom. The Vierkleur was temporarily discontinued as the national flag of the ZAR from October 1874 until May of 1875 when Thomas Francois Burgers was President due to his dislike of the Vierkleur. The flag of the old Potchefstroom Republic was used instead during this brief time frame - but the Vierkleur was restored as the national flag of the ZAR by the Volksraad when President Burgers was abroad.The Potchefstroom Republic flag was based on the Saltire flag used by the Voortrekkers who followed Hendrik Potgieter & was also used at the Winburg
Republic as well as the later Zoutpansberg Republic. The main difference being that the Potchefstroom Republic flag [ as well as the one briefly used by the ZAR ] had a white border around the red saltire on the dark blue background thus adhering more to heraldic customs. This flag though was retained as the Presidential flag.The Vierkleur flag was once again discontinued when Britain annexed the Transvaal Republic in 1877 but made a comeback again in 1880 when the local Boers rebelled against British rule thus starting the first Anglo-Boer War of which the Boers won & regained the independence of the ZAR in 1881 with the Pretoria Convention. Though Britain retained control of its foreign policy but that too later changed when the ZAR regained its full independence in 1884 with the signing of the London Convention.
The Transvaal Vierkleur [ as well as the OVS Vierkleur pictured at right ] became a very
important symbol to the Boerevolk during the second Anglo-Boer War as a symbol of resistance to British Colonial oppression in which close to 50 % of the Boer child population died in the concentration camps. Due to those circumstances the flag has taken on added significance other than just an old Boer Republican flag & is still flown by many today representing a nation which was almost wiped out but flies as proof of the continued existence of the Boer Nation.
The Commemoration of the Vow in Perspective.
There are a few misconceptions in the West about the Day of the Vow & the battle which occurred at Ncome River. First one must remember that this battle did not occur in a vacuum as the Zulus of Dingaan first massacred the Boers including young children at Bloukrans & Saailaager after Dingaan killed Piet Retief & his delegation earlier. [1] The battle at Ncome River of December 16 is sometimes called a "massacre" but this is a rather odd term to employ when considering the fact that the local Boers were under attack therefore: what occurred was an act of war & if the Boers sat back & did nothing to defend themselves then they would have certainly been massacred themselves.
Those who commemorate this day are not commemorating the battle itself as much as they are commemorating the Vow they took prior for protection. When about 15 000 Zulus under Dingaan decided to attack the Boers numbering less than 500 camped [2] in Natal: there was no choice left to the Boers but to defend themselves.
This battle was even avoidable because Pretorius sent back some captured Zulus & told Dingaan that he was prepared to enter into negotiations [3] for peace with Dingaan if he were to restore the vacant land south of the Tugela River that he had intially offered to Piet Retief before killing him & his delegation then later the civilians at Bloukrans & Saailaager. The King's response was in the form of the now famous attack on December 16 at Ncome River.
The Great Boer Trek. From: Stephen Crane.
Quote: [ The church in Pietermaritzburg and the annual celebration of Dingaan's bear witness that they kept their pledge. They were not fighting for revenge. On three occasions the scouts brought in some captured Zulus, and Pretorius sent them back to Dingaan to say that if he would restore the land he had granted Retief he would enter into negotiations for peace. ]
Therefore: the battle at Ncome River MUST be viewed in proper context.
The point of the battle was not about "massacring" or "defeating" or conquering the proud Zulu
nation. Because the Boers would have defended themselves in exactly the same way if they were being attacked by the British / German or Spanish power. Furthermore: the Boers allowed the Zulus to govern themselves in Zululand after the battle & entered into an alliance with the new Zulu King Mpande for quite some time afterwards. The Zulus were not conquered until the British came & conquered them in 1879. Long after the establishment of the major Boer Republics.
Remember also that the Boers & Zulus had reconciled & in 1840 exchanged rocks of peace in commemoration of this reconciliation. The Boers & the Zulus also later stacked rocks as a symbol of peace in 1866 at Ncome River.
Pieter Mulder noted this fact as well in an Address in Parliament. On Feb 16 2005.
Quote: [ Go and read about the relationship between the [ Boers ] and the Zulus in Natal. How, after the battle of Blood river in 1840 they handed rocks of peace to each other and in 1866 came together at Blood river and stacked rocks as a symbol of peace. How Cetswayo gave land to the Boers after they helped and protected him. The Republic of Vryheid dates from that period. ]
The Boers might have been settlers to this specific region [ in Natal ] but they were not settlers to Africa as the Boers are a homegrown / indigenous people who were formed on the Cape frontier [4] & who are a distinct entity even from the Afrikaans speakers of the Western Cape. [5] The Boers did not have an "unfair advantage" because of their weapons as they were greatly outnumbered by the Zulu warriors. It was indeed a miracle that they survived even with the crude rifles they had because one must remember that they were no where near as effective as modern day rifles. The Zulus chose to attack at a most bizarre time of day & as such miscalculated thereby giving the Boers a slight fair advantage. Fair because they still had to fight for their survival against staggering odds.
The Apartheid regime did not start the holiday of commemorating the Vow as the South African regime only STOLE / usurped & co-opted this date because the ZAR [ Transvaal Republic ] declared it a holiday back in 1865. Long before the rise of the Apartheid regime. After a time of waning commemoration of the date: the later future President Paul Kruger - as part of a Triumvirate government - restarted the commemoration of this date in 1880 when the Boers were fighting to regain their independence from Britain & when the ZAR was re-declared as an independent Boer Republic leading to the first Anglo-Boer War.
The date of the battle at Ncome River was always commemorated by the descendents of those who participated in the battle then later adopted as a public holiday in the ZAR but it was not politicized until the 20th cent when the Cape Dutch were using it as a tool to co-opt the Boers into their agenda as a British appointed surrogate ruling power of the macro State the British created with an act of legislation in the British Parliament [6] which robbed the Boers of their republics & forced them into an artificial macro State which lumped all of the region's diverse national groups under a single administration for the first time ever.
I should also point out that this was a battle which involved the Boers camped in Natal & not "Afrikaners" as the bulk of the yet to be named Afrikaners of the Western Cape had previously taunted the Boers with impending doom of their trek & with exactly the sort of scenario that they ultimately faced at Ncome River -only the Cape Dutch thought that the Boers would all die off. It is also interesting to note that not all Boers made the vow [7] for fear of the consequences should their descendents break the promise. It appears that a few Boers had some insight into what could happen if one were to later take lightly a vow made to God. Which in fact is what one did see among many about 150 years later.
While the Zulus did at times appear as a military threat again: it is important to remember that the Boers were on friendly terms with the Zulus of the Northern Natal & King Dinizulu gave a large part of northern Natal to the Boers as payment for services the Boers offered the King upon his request when he was facing trouble from a British backed Zulu segment creating disorder in his region. The Vryheid Republic of 1884 was later established there in a portion of northern Natal until its south eastern half was annexed by the British & its north western portion was absorbed into the ZAR. or Transvaal Republic. None other than Louis Botha - one of the founders of the Vryheid Republic & Boer General & Statesman & later British puppet Prime Minster - was life long friends with King Dinizulu & released him from prison after the latter was found guilty of participating in the Bambtha Rebellion.
Notes.
1. The Bloukrans Massacre.
Quote: [ At about midnight on 16-17 February 1838 the Zulus began their assault on the Trekker encampments over a 9 km front along the Bloukrans River. The Zulus fell upon the sleeping Liebenbergs, Besters and de Beers near the confluence of the Umlaas River (also called the Little Murder Spruit) and the Bloukrantz Rivers. ]
2. The Battle of Blood River.
Quote: [ On the morning of the 16th December 1838, some fifteen thousand Zulu warriors charged the 460 Voortrekkers, and charged again, and again for a third time but were repulsed. ]
3. The Great Boer Trek. From: Stephen Crane.
Quote: [ The church in Pietermaritzburg and the annual celebration of Dingaan's bear witness that they kept their pledge. They were not fighting for revenge. On three occasions the scouts brought in some captured Zulus, and Pretorius sent them back to Dingaan to say that if he would restore the land he had granted Retief he would enter into negotiations for peace. ]
4. The Boers in East Africa: Ethnicity and Identity. Brian M. Du Toit. Page 1.
Quote: [ The Boers had a tradition of trekking. Boer society was born on the frontiers of white settlement and on the outskirts of civilization. As members of a frontier society they always had a hinterland, open spaces to conquer, territory to occupy. Their ancestors had moved away from the limiting confines of Cape society to settle the eastern frontier. In time this location became too restricted, and individuals and families moved north across the Orange River. ]
5. The Great Trek. Wallace Mills.
Quote: [ Trekboers certainly recognised the differences in language, religion, etc. between themselves and the British. They had certainly developed a way-of-life and a set of values that were distinctive, but they were also significantly different from people of Dutch descent in the western province areas of the Cape. The latter regarded the Trekboers as rather wild, semi-barbarous frontiersmen and the sense of common identity was limited and incomplete. ]
6. The Republic of South Africa Electoral System.
Quote: [ The South Africa Act passed by the British Parliament in 1909 merged the self-governing British colonies of the Cape, Natal, Orange River and the Transvaal into the Union of South Africa, a dominion within the British Commonwealth. ]
7. The Great Trek. Oliver Ransford. Chapter 9.
Quote: [ It is interesting to note that Alexander Biggar and the other Englishmen in the commando joined in making the vow, but that five Boers abstained for fear of God's vengeance on their descendants if in years to come they broke the promise. ]
Post Script. Due to the fact that this event is often not well understood in the West: it is often distorted & used to infer that the Boers were conquerors when in fact under Piet Retief: they had initially negotiated a peace treaty with Dingaan for the use of vacant land which he had already promised to the British prior.
Those who commemorate this day are not commemorating the battle itself as much as they are commemorating the Vow they took prior for protection. When about 15 000 Zulus under Dingaan decided to attack the Boers numbering less than 500 camped [2] in Natal: there was no choice left to the Boers but to defend themselves.
This battle was even avoidable because Pretorius sent back some captured Zulus & told Dingaan that he was prepared to enter into negotiations [3] for peace with Dingaan if he were to restore the vacant land south of the Tugela River that he had intially offered to Piet Retief before killing him & his delegation then later the civilians at Bloukrans & Saailaager. The King's response was in the form of the now famous attack on December 16 at Ncome River.
The Great Boer Trek. From: Stephen Crane.
Quote: [ The church in Pietermaritzburg and the annual celebration of Dingaan's bear witness that they kept their pledge. They were not fighting for revenge. On three occasions the scouts brought in some captured Zulus, and Pretorius sent them back to Dingaan to say that if he would restore the land he had granted Retief he would enter into negotiations for peace. ]
Therefore: the battle at Ncome River MUST be viewed in proper context.
The point of the battle was not about "massacring" or "defeating" or conquering the proud Zulu
nation. Because the Boers would have defended themselves in exactly the same way if they were being attacked by the British / German or Spanish power. Furthermore: the Boers allowed the Zulus to govern themselves in Zululand after the battle & entered into an alliance with the new Zulu King Mpande for quite some time afterwards. The Zulus were not conquered until the British came & conquered them in 1879. Long after the establishment of the major Boer Republics.Remember also that the Boers & Zulus had reconciled & in 1840 exchanged rocks of peace in commemoration of this reconciliation. The Boers & the Zulus also later stacked rocks as a symbol of peace in 1866 at Ncome River.
Pieter Mulder noted this fact as well in an Address in Parliament. On Feb 16 2005.
Quote: [ Go and read about the relationship between the [ Boers ] and the Zulus in Natal. How, after the battle of Blood river in 1840 they handed rocks of peace to each other and in 1866 came together at Blood river and stacked rocks as a symbol of peace. How Cetswayo gave land to the Boers after they helped and protected him. The Republic of Vryheid dates from that period. ]
The Boers might have been settlers to this specific region [ in Natal ] but they were not settlers to Africa as the Boers are a homegrown / indigenous people who were formed on the Cape frontier [4] & who are a distinct entity even from the Afrikaans speakers of the Western Cape. [5] The Boers did not have an "unfair advantage" because of their weapons as they were greatly outnumbered by the Zulu warriors. It was indeed a miracle that they survived even with the crude rifles they had because one must remember that they were no where near as effective as modern day rifles. The Zulus chose to attack at a most bizarre time of day & as such miscalculated thereby giving the Boers a slight fair advantage. Fair because they still had to fight for their survival against staggering odds.
The Apartheid regime did not start the holiday of commemorating the Vow as the South African regime only STOLE / usurped & co-opted this date because the ZAR [ Transvaal Republic ] declared it a holiday back in 1865. Long before the rise of the Apartheid regime. After a time of waning commemoration of the date: the later future President Paul Kruger - as part of a Triumvirate government - restarted the commemoration of this date in 1880 when the Boers were fighting to regain their independence from Britain & when the ZAR was re-declared as an independent Boer Republic leading to the first Anglo-Boer War.
The date of the battle at Ncome River was always commemorated by the descendents of those who participated in the battle then later adopted as a public holiday in the ZAR but it was not politicized until the 20th cent when the Cape Dutch were using it as a tool to co-opt the Boers into their agenda as a British appointed surrogate ruling power of the macro State the British created with an act of legislation in the British Parliament [6] which robbed the Boers of their republics & forced them into an artificial macro State which lumped all of the region's diverse national groups under a single administration for the first time ever.
I should also point out that this was a battle which involved the Boers camped in Natal & not "Afrikaners" as the bulk of the yet to be named Afrikaners of the Western Cape had previously taunted the Boers with impending doom of their trek & with exactly the sort of scenario that they ultimately faced at Ncome River -only the Cape Dutch thought that the Boers would all die off. It is also interesting to note that not all Boers made the vow [7] for fear of the consequences should their descendents break the promise. It appears that a few Boers had some insight into what could happen if one were to later take lightly a vow made to God. Which in fact is what one did see among many about 150 years later.
While the Zulus did at times appear as a military threat again: it is important to remember that the Boers were on friendly terms with the Zulus of the Northern Natal & King Dinizulu gave a large part of northern Natal to the Boers as payment for services the Boers offered the King upon his request when he was facing trouble from a British backed Zulu segment creating disorder in his region. The Vryheid Republic of 1884 was later established there in a portion of northern Natal until its south eastern half was annexed by the British & its north western portion was absorbed into the ZAR. or Transvaal Republic. None other than Louis Botha - one of the founders of the Vryheid Republic & Boer General & Statesman & later British puppet Prime Minster - was life long friends with King Dinizulu & released him from prison after the latter was found guilty of participating in the Bambtha Rebellion.
Notes.
1. The Bloukrans Massacre.
Quote: [ At about midnight on 16-17 February 1838 the Zulus began their assault on the Trekker encampments over a 9 km front along the Bloukrans River. The Zulus fell upon the sleeping Liebenbergs, Besters and de Beers near the confluence of the Umlaas River (also called the Little Murder Spruit) and the Bloukrantz Rivers. ]
2. The Battle of Blood River.
Quote: [ On the morning of the 16th December 1838, some fifteen thousand Zulu warriors charged the 460 Voortrekkers, and charged again, and again for a third time but were repulsed. ]
3. The Great Boer Trek. From: Stephen Crane.
Quote: [ The church in Pietermaritzburg and the annual celebration of Dingaan's bear witness that they kept their pledge. They were not fighting for revenge. On three occasions the scouts brought in some captured Zulus, and Pretorius sent them back to Dingaan to say that if he would restore the land he had granted Retief he would enter into negotiations for peace. ]
4. The Boers in East Africa: Ethnicity and Identity. Brian M. Du Toit. Page 1.
Quote: [ The Boers had a tradition of trekking. Boer society was born on the frontiers of white settlement and on the outskirts of civilization. As members of a frontier society they always had a hinterland, open spaces to conquer, territory to occupy. Their ancestors had moved away from the limiting confines of Cape society to settle the eastern frontier. In time this location became too restricted, and individuals and families moved north across the Orange River. ]
5. The Great Trek. Wallace Mills.
Quote: [ Trekboers certainly recognised the differences in language, religion, etc. between themselves and the British. They had certainly developed a way-of-life and a set of values that were distinctive, but they were also significantly different from people of Dutch descent in the western province areas of the Cape. The latter regarded the Trekboers as rather wild, semi-barbarous frontiersmen and the sense of common identity was limited and incomplete. ]
6. The Republic of South Africa Electoral System.
Quote: [ The South Africa Act passed by the British Parliament in 1909 merged the self-governing British colonies of the Cape, Natal, Orange River and the Transvaal into the Union of South Africa, a dominion within the British Commonwealth. ]
7. The Great Trek. Oliver Ransford. Chapter 9.
Quote: [ It is interesting to note that Alexander Biggar and the other Englishmen in the commando joined in making the vow, but that five Boers abstained for fear of God's vengeance on their descendants if in years to come they broke the promise. ]
Post Script. Due to the fact that this event is often not well understood in the West: it is often distorted & used to infer that the Boers were conquerors when in fact under Piet Retief: they had initially negotiated a peace treaty with Dingaan for the use of vacant land which he had already promised to the British prior.
December 30, 2008
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.
From an open letter Professor Tobias Louw addressed to the Institute for Security Studies dated September 16 2003.
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.
- 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.
December 23, 2008
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.
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.
- 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.
December 17, 2008
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.
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.
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.
- 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.
- 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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
