# Social Category > South African Politics Forum >  Dubula ibhunu --- (Shoot the Boer) A Nation in Trouble

## ChrisNG53

South Africa is a constitutional democracy that came into being, with the rapturous acclaim of the whole world, as epitomizing the ultimate triumph of good over evil. In 1994 Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela stood astride an adoring world; a moral giant in his embodiment of everything that was truly good about the human spirit. 

Thereafter South Africa adopted a constitution, that it has touted as being the best in the world, so as to ensure that these perceptions were not just an illusion, but a reality for all of its people.

Today, 17 years later, the nation is as divided as ever. Our Black dominated government leads the Black majority in emotional rhetoric that rejects, condemns and demeans a judgment of its own court of justice. At the very heart of this angry discontent is the fact that the court has, in a judgment, sought to protect the rights and interests of a White minority. For this the Black majority is being encouraged to be deeply offended and/or angered. 

The exhaustively reasoned judgment of a High Court Judge, (sitting in the Equality Court) arrived at after some five months of consideration, is dismissed out of hand. He is wrong, he is wrong and is seeking to expunge Black struggle history is the resounding refrain bugled right from the top.

The facts are simple. Julius Malema, controversial African National Congress Youth President, repeatedly sang a struggle song, the impact line of which is "dubula ibhunu", which literally translated means “Shoot the Boer”. The term Boer has always referred to White Afrikaner farmers. AfriForum, a zealously driven White Afrikaner dominated interest group, took the issue to the Equality Court,  arguing that the singing of the song constituted hate speech as it could reasonable induce endangerment, dislike/antipathy for and/or a demeaning of its members. 
a)	There was no dispute that the ordinary meaning of the words, “Shoot the Boer”, in the song, constitutes hate speech.
b)	Julius Malema, and the ANC, argued that the ordinary meaning of the words should not be applied, as when the song was conceived and sung, during the struggle, it referred to “destroying the evil apartheid system” and not to the killing of White farmers. 
c)	It was therefore in this “historical context” that the song was still being sung, and since no mischief was intended, its singing was not hate speech. 

The Court agreed with AfriForum that the words constituted hate speech and banned the singing of the song in public or in private, ruling that it had no longer has a place in our constitutional democracy, with its legislated imperatives of nation building.

The universal response to this ruling at leadership level has been one of deep offense and anger. This nation is in trouble. It is in trouble because it is blindingly obvious that there is a complete lack of understanding of the imperatives of our constitutional democracy, particularly the most precious commodity of *equality* before the law. It is therefore necessary to set out with the simplicity that characterizes truth an explanation of the reality of our situation. Judge Colin Lamont has already set out, with commendable exhaustiveness, a jurisprudential version of this. This is for our leaders and all of us ordinary folk.

1.	When our constitution was adopted everything changed forever! 
2.	Hostilities ended, races were reconciled and all citizens were rendered equal before the law.
3.	In such a situation there can be no room for any person calling for the shooting (killing) of any other person, whatever the reason.
4.	The fact that the words used have a particular meaning that was ascribed and applied in struggle history changes nothing as, by law, Judge Lamont was constrained to apply the “ordinary meaning” of the words.
5.	In doing so Judge Lamont is upholding his sworn duty under our Constitution to apply the law “without fear, favour or prejudice”. He has no option. His hands are tied.
6.	In any event, common sense tells us that, 17 years after the fact of the struggle there are likely to be more, not less, human beings who are totally unaware of the particular meaning that the ANC ascribes to the words. Farmers are already being killed at significant levels by criminal elements. The exhortation in the song can only make things worse.
7.	In giving this judgment the court has in no way “expunged ANC history”, as emotively claimed by just about all leaders of the ANC. History can never be expunged. That is a simple fact. History is just that – history. By its very nature history remains in the past. It does not exist in the present. Expunging ANC history was, and remains, an impossibility.
8.	In effect, the judge has ruled that the ANC cannot dredge up historical behaviour and culture so as to endanger, threaten or demean citizens to-day. 
9.	There is nothing new about the fact that practices, behaviour, and culture that had a strong place in history are discarded, even criminalized. No one can deny that the inequality of women generally was once entrenched. Today the Constitution forbids it. One twin was killed at birth. Today that would constitute infanticide. In isiNdebele culture a baby would be killed (as a wizard/witch) if its top teeth appeared first. That too is now classified as murder. There are many other examples. 
10.	Conversely White Afrikaners are debarred from preaching that Blacks were Biblically ordained to be “hewers of wood and drawers of water” which was their culture, used to underpin the evil apartheid system. Preaching that now would undoubtedly be classified as hate speech.
11.	Like the song in question all these historical practices are now part of history. Whether they can or cannot be invoked is a matter of law as applied under our “World beating” Constitution, however much we may be emotionally or romantically attached to that historical practice.

It is as simple as that. Hence the tragedy of rampant misunderstanding at leadership level. A Court of Justice is now being portrayed as traitorous. One revered political commentator even  adverted to the fact that Judge Lamont was of apartheid vintage. Such talk and posturing is highly irresponsible and dangerous. 

The nation is in trouble. If our leaders do not understand the realities of a constitutional democracy we are in serious trouble. The danger is of new tyrannies becoming manifest on account of a culture of “might is right”. The extent to which minorities are protected is a sure indicator of the extent to which a country is strong or weak on social justice and human rights. History has repeatedly shown that the majority is often wrong. That is why we have courts to ensure protection of all, and equality under the law. The seeming contempt with which a carefully considered judgment of a court of justice is being rejected undermines the very essence of our constitutional democracy. The courts are being brought into disrepute and the rule of law subverted.

Will everyone please take a step back, take a deep breath and quietly and soberly reflect on these realities.

----------

Blurock (14-Sep-11)

----------


## adrianh

South Africa == Isreal 

(I wonder how long its going to take the ruiling party to start building walls through the middle of Durbanville)

----------


## murdock

why did they not use a black judge...a white judge just makes the result as ridiculous as the court case to start with...

i apparently verbally abuse my ex wife...within 20 minutes i was arrested and thrown into the back of a police van and removed from the property...my firearms were confiscated and i was charged...go figue

if there were no farmers...white boers not being killed at a rate that they are ...i would say no problem...sing the song if thats what blows your hair back...the fact is that the boer (white farmers) are being targeted and killed...and i hear..." apparently" there is some serious sick torture going on before they actually kill the famers...its all stories or is it?

----------


## Justloadit

The alarming thing to me is that the very people who are placing the judgement in disrepute, are the very ones supposedly preaching that they are not racist. In my books, anyone who continues an action which offends another human being, has no respect for that human being, is that not the basis of racism? I don't like you so I will continually offend you, and when you retaliate, I will cry foul.

----------


## Dave A

> b)	Julius Malema, and the ANC, argued that the ordinary meaning of the words should not be applied, as when the song was conceived and sung, during the struggle, it referred to "destroying the evil apartheid system" and not to the killing of White farmers.


Perhaps not too relevant to the drawing of conclusions on ANC reaction to the judgement, but personally I have my doubts about that purported "real meaning". I suggest the enemy of the time was in truth the Afrikaaner Nationalist government - the "Boer" as ringleader of unjust white oppression. Even I, merely within the far less militant environment of NUSAS at the time, saw the draconian government of the day as the enemy. Apartheid, and the practical implications of that policy was merely the "why".

To suggest that cadres in ANC military training camps were being revved up against apartheid (as opposed to the boer oppressor) is proving a bit hard to swallow for me. About as hard to swallow as suggesting that conscription troops were being revved up to defend democracy. Not at all - they were being psyched up to kill terrorists.

But perhaps I muddy the water unnecessarily. It's the past after all; and obviously we're at that stage where recalled memory prefers to soften the true ugliness of it all in a romantic light. Perhaps it's as well that the judge did not venture into this ground in his judgement, and rather dealt with the matter as presented to him, with an eye clearly on today and, dare I say it, the *future* for all the diverse citizens of this country.

Clearly something very absent in the ANC response.

----------


## murdock

something to mention from being one of those brainwashed troops...one thing that still stands out the most about my visit to angola...firstly...why we were even there...we were not fighting the MK(anc) but SWAPO the so called terrorist and FAPLA angolan goverment troops...which for those who dont know are (SWAPO)south west african peoples organisation or so i was told...at no stage did we ever fight with MK...were were on a border which wasnt even the south african border...fighting against blacks and cuban people who we were told were going to do exactly what the black people of south africa are doing to our families and women at present...but those people had nothing to do with south africa at the time nor present day...black people are peeed off with the old apparthied goverment...what about all us SA troops who wasted years of our youth for me 4 years in total fighting for something i didnt even understand at the time...the first time i arrived in ongiva (angola) at the age of seventeen it was one of the scarist days of my life....as we were confronted by troops who we were told was the enermy...they were walking around with rpg rocket launchers...ak 47 assult rifles dressed in green...camo and just an old clothes...talk about confused...where we being taken in as prisoners or where we supose to shoot...all i remeber is i sat very quietly with millions of thoughts running thru my mind...they were unita troops who i also ended up spending some time with.

so food for thought....if there was still a white appartheid govermant in place at present and i knew what i do today...i would have joined MK instead of the SADF...just a pity the anc is allowing people like malema to destroy the anc heritage and what it stands for...by the way the struggle is over...it is time for south africans to unite as a country...if we dont there is gona be a civil war.

----------


## wynn

> ...if we dont there is gona be a civil war.


Or a 'Genocide'

----------


## murdock

it depends if the blacks decide they dont want white or indian or cloured people in this country it would be a genocide because they could literally walk and just kill everyone in their path much like locust do...if it was black on black it would be a civil war...in 1986 i had first hand experience of what it would be like if they decide to take over...we were 14 troops and police officers in total against i dont know how many thousand...they pushed the fence over which was holding them back and the only thing that saved our lives that day were the caspers which arrived in their numbers to assist and litterall drove over the people to stop them from getting to us...no matter how many rounds were shot the back people just pushed the front forward and squashed whoever fell...and there was nowhere for us to go...it was one of those days were i looked up and said..."thank god"

----------


## Dave A

Well, it was going to happen somewhere sooner or later. Strains of Shoot the Boer ring out at Cosatu meeting.

So what happens now?

----------


## Justloadit

It is quite evident from the statements by the Cosatu and ANC leaders, that they are really not interested in reconciliation. If this was paramount in their minds, they would turn round to their constituents and say that we must respect the constitution and the law, and lets not sing this song as a way to reconcile with our other members of South Africa, lets sing many other songs which are in the ANC song book. They are being defiant against the law, but duck under it when it suites them.

----------


## adrianh

I want the Gollywog put back into Noddy because I read Noddy when I was 5 and it is part of my heritage! We should all draw the Gollywog in our kids's Noddy books out of defiance for the discriminatory ban on the poor little guy.

----------

Blurock (24-Sep-11)

----------


## twinscythe12332

There's nothing in place to ensure the song isn't sung, as far as I can see. The song will be sung out in defiance simply because there isn't any form of punishment that will occur. I highly doubt that everyone who has spoken out against the ban are really as thick as they're pretending. Either the leadership has moved progressively more backward in its mindset as the years have passed, or I've been a lot more aware of current affairs than I used to be.
All I can say for certain is this:
We are fighting ghosts. For whatever reason, our government has spooked itself into believing it needs to defend itself against an apparently non-existent threat. Policies have suddenly become race-related where they don't need to or shouldn't be.

----------


## Dave A

Maybe they can't give up on harking about the past because what they're doing today doesn't look nearly as shiny.

----------


## ChrisNG53

*Update:* 
An Australian court has ruled that articles on fair skinned Aboriginals contravened their Racial Discrimination Act.
The articles, which were published in 2009, were headlined "It's so hip to be black'' and "White fellas in the black''.

Federal Court Justice Mordy Bromberg found that fair-skinned Aboriginal people were reasonably likely to have been "offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated by the imputations conveyed'' in two articles written by Mr Bolt. 

This case is of relevance to South Africa's consideration of the Malema "Kill the Boer" court saga, in that the court was faced with the same test of the "likelihood" of harm accruing to human beings.

Our Judge Lamont appears to be vindicated.

----------


## KristiKat

> *Update:* 
> An Australian court has ruled that articles on fair skinned Aboriginals contravened their Racial Discrimination Act.
> The articles, which were published in 2009, were headlined "It's so hip to be black'' and "White fellas in the black''.
> 
> Federal Court Justice Mordy Bromberg found that fair-skinned Aboriginal people were reasonably likely to have been "offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated by the imputations conveyed'' in two articles written by Mr Bolt.


so it is racist to call a "black" person white?

this is the best thing I've read in ages....

you see the problem with these black people ruling the country is that THEY WANT TO BE WHITE,

they usurped the WHITE POLITICAL FORUM for themselves,

they are still using the SAME PARLIAMENT,

they are dressing like WHITE MEN,

they are THINKING like WHITE POLITICIANS................

they WANTED TO HAVE WHAT THE WHITE MAN always had,

now that they HAVE IT,

they find it DIFFICULT to control....

yet the IMAGE OF "BEING A BETTER WHITE MAN" is still there.

----------


## dix

Black people were once one before colonization, so if you fought with SWAPO you fought a brother or a sister to a black in South Africa and so the fight is not only on political ground but also on the grounds of race and concerning colonization the fact that it happened it will have negative effect, because people will never keep quite while they look like refugees in their own land.

What we should be talking about how to avoid such fights before they actually even take place because I agree with the person who says ANC somehow is defiant against the law, but duck under it when it suits them (It is the strategy they use at present to retain their land which was taken by force), and concerning that my friends only God knows whats these people are going to do next to retain their land; I fear sometimes that they can do exactly like Zimbabwe.

Lastly one day if not soon these born free generation will look into the history and see what white people have done to Africa and will be wiser than the current black people and curve their own path which is characterized by black parliament, judiciary...etc in the making, and they will realize that the land is taken through war just like it was taken from their fathers, and where will be the future of white people in Africa in general?

We need to work together to reverse the effect of apartheid in time and the white people should be the one's who drive that change

----------


## Dave A

That's an interesting outlook, dix.

----------


## Butch Hannan

This shows how long I have been absent from The Forum. Your piece is well written. History tends to repeat itself. The Afrikaners were very anti the British and rightly so because of the concentration camps where thousands of their women and children died. As an English speaking South African I was subjected to a barrage reminding me of what we English did to their women and children.
The question that we need to ask of everyone is do they truly forgive others. If they keep on dragging it up all I can say is that they have not forgiven.
The present scenario will not change until there is a change of government which I doubt will not happen for many years to come.

----------


## desA

Who brought the wheel to Africa?

What will replace the wheel when the potholes become craters & the craters become sinkholes?

----------


## Justloadit

There are thousands of hectares of open land, yet these open spaces have not had any claims against to repatriate, mmm interesting.
It's all about greed, the only land they are interested in is the land that has been developed and is producing. 
Far easier to take a working farm, than a a piece of wild land and making it a farm.

----------


## Butch Hannan

Dix I really question your first sentence. The black people were never one and are unlikely to be because of tribalism. Have a look at the following piece which I wrote in one of my blogs.


Democracy Africa Style
Butch on July 17th, 2011

Democracy Africa  Style.

I found the following meaning of the word democracy in Wikipedia which you can see at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. It can also encompass social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. The term comes from the Greek: δημοκρατία  (dēmokratía) rule of the people,[1] which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos) people and κράτος (Kratos) power, in the middle of the 5th-4th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC.[2]

The first sentence gives a wonderful concept of what democracy should mean and be in an ideal world. As I get older, I am sorry to say that I am getting rather more cynical. Sadly,Democracy African Style does not encompass the original Greek concept of this word. What in effect happens in Africa is that the majority give the power to certain people to rule over them and in most cases not in the voters best interests. The individuals voted into power become a brotherhood for self enrichment of family and friends. Once in a position of power it is extremely difficult to get them out. I defy anyone to name one African country that has not followed this trend and sadly I include South Africa near the top of the tree.

More Africans have died at the hands of Africans in power than were ever killed by the colonial powers. Here again I defy anyone to prove me wrong. One of the root causes of this is plain tribalism which is still rife throughout Africa.

During the rule of the colonial powers in Africa the clarion call was to free the inhabitants of this tyranny. In my humble opinion the tyranny that exists in Africa is far worse and a great deal more sinister.

Most of us have read Alan Patons book Cry the Beloved Country which he wrote during the apartheid years. This book was on the banned list.  As a parting thought I wonder what the contents of his book would be if he wrote it today. The title would stay the same but the contents would in all probability be vastly different.

You can see this at http://www.storiesandissues.co.za/

----------


## Blurock

Tribalism has allowed a certain fellow to be crowned king of the Zulus. He owns farms and land and has palaces all over the province. These farms are largely unproductive, so that he requires a budget of more than R50 Million (growing annually) and paid for by the tax payers, to fund his lifestyle. His "subjects" live mostly in poverty in rural KZN.

Then there is a chief who is actually more important than this king. He has built himself a palace, spending more than R246 Million of taxpayers money. 

I have always thought that a king is the leader of a monarchy and a president the leader of a republic, as chosen by the PEOPLE. A republic is democracy, ruled by the power of PEOPLE. Here in Africa we seem to be confusing the roles. Once chosen, a president becomes the supreme authority and a law unto himself.

----------


## whytep



----------

