Why
am I keeping myself busy with something as impossible as this? Simply
because it causes so much division, friction, dissension and confusion
among white South Africans.
While
the term Boer should possess all the makings of national pride, it is a
term used and abused, thrown around and lightly uttered as if for no
reason other than to identify with a particular group due to peer
pressure rather than by honest sincere conviction. On the other hand it
also creates a discriminatory better-than-thou class differentiation
where those supremacists who call themselves Boers look down upon anyone
else as if they the Boers are a special superior race and the rest are
of an inferior, lesser breed.
Then
there is also a stigma attached to the term Boer, one of being
Afrikaans speaking right-wing, discriminatory racists, an insult to say
the least. This stigma was created by none other than the so-called
“Boers” themselves due to common disrespectful behaviour.
I
shall attempt to show how this supremacist nature of the modern Boer is
actually a product of the Afrikaner-Broederbond and that it never was
the nature of the original Boers.
The
problem is that while we as SA whites are currently hanging by our
necks with out feet dangling in the air due to the ruthless oppression
of our people by a terrorist Marxist-Leninist Regime, that should have
united us, trivial supremacist, elitist, religious and language
distinctions are keeping us divided.
As
background I wish to quote a few examples that, in my view, highlights
the seriousness and gravity of the Boer identity problem.
The Confusion about the Boer Identity
The Difference Between A Boer and An Afrikaner according to Piet 'Skiet' Rudolph:
"The
difference between a Boer and an Afrikaner is the strive for freedom.
The Afrikaner groups want self rule and a piece of ground or Volkstaat
that they can call their own. The Boer people want the old Boer Republic
that their forefathers had and fought and suffered for. Not more or
less. Those who don't know the Afrikaner history won't understand this
struggle or quest, therefore the Boer and the Afrikaner can never be the
same."
(Original
text can be found here)
While
this is Piet Rudolph's definition of a Boer, there are many Boer
movements striving for an independent homeland / volkstaat. See
Boer.co.za where the following important revelation is also made:
'Until the 27th April, 1994, we could still sing : "Do you know the land where the Boer nation lives....?"
On
that date, however, the Boer-Afrikaner nation took the fatal step to
give up its country, to give it away, to sell it in order to gain the
goodwill of the Black man in South Africa and of the rest of the world.
The sophistry of power sharing, broadening of democracy and all the
clichés used by politicians to take the Boer-Afrikaner nation in tow,
reached a climax on that day. Since then the Boers as a nation do not
have their own land anymore.'
For more on this read my article "Survival of the White South African Part 2"
Observe the use of the term Boer-Afrikaner in the above.
From the website of the Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie (VVK) that recently held a Boer / Afrikaner Election comes the following:
VVK, what is your nation?
Friday, 12 August 2011 09:00
The
members of the nation, know which is their nation. They know its name,
its flag, and its boundaries, in particular biological and spiritual.
Southern
Africa, 2011. The Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie (VVK), the Electoral
Commission of white Afrikaners, who supports the so-called “white
Afrikaner nationalism” (promoted by the Union of South Africa – the
British dominion forged by international capitalism - in order to
consolidate itself against the Boer nationalism), asked a simple
question to its own candidates: to announce the name of “nation” to
which they belong. Contradictory and conflicting responses of the same
candidates, of what should be the future “Parliament” of the “white
Afrikaner nation”, are the best testimony that doesn’t exist (and never
has existed) an Afrikaner nation. Such responses (summarized below, in
blue), often grotesque, testify - unfortunately - even the deep identity
crisis of many biological descendants of the Boers. A crisis of
identity promoted by international capitalism, through people,
organizations and States that have taken place in southern Africa.
Citing some of them: the Union of South Africa; the Republic of South
Africa (RSA); the Afrikaner Broederbond; the Nasionale Party (NP); the
Vryheidsfront (VF); and today the VVK.
The
VVK is basically a creature of Verkenners. And Verkenners appear as a
new form of Afrikaner Broederbond (the “Afrikaner Brotherhood”), a kind
of white Afrikaner Freemasonry, which works to confuse the true
nationalism (Boer) with a false (white Afrikaner). Just as the
Freemasons, usually, work to confuse Evil with Good.
Among
the candidates of the VVK there are also good people, probably in good
faith, as are surely in good faith so many of its supporters, but this
doesn’t change the truth of the things. Identity crisis is the DNA of
the VVK, and his diabolical project is a new attack to Boer identity. A
new chapter of the Boer genocide, written by non-Boer white Afrikaners.
Who
knows his nation, has no doubts about his identity. That is: who is
Boer declares himself Boer, and stay on the side of the Boers. Nothing
else.
What is the name of our nation?
Alwyn de Klerk, Secretary of the Verkenners, says that all names: “Boer”; “Afrikaner” or “Boer-Afrikaner”; are good.
Andries Breytenbach,
leader of the Herstigte Nasionale Party (HNP), says that “Afrikaner”
and “Boer” are synonymous. According to this outlandish claim (a
fundamental of the so-called white Afrikaner “nationalism”) all
Afrikaans-speaking whites would be a nation, that it would be like
claiming that all Anglophone whites are a nation.
Ben Geldenhuys,
President of the Verkenners, says that “Afrikaner” and “Boer” are
synonymous, and that disputes about them are made to divide their nation
(but which nation?!). To support his argument he cited Christiaan de
Wet. A typical behaviour of those who work to confuse Evil with Good.
Indeed Christiaan de Wet may be remembered especially as a Boer general
who fought for the Boers, even against non-Boer white Afrikaners (mainly
“Cape Dutch”) and against the Union of South Africa.
Pieter Aucamp,
of the Verkenners, says that “Boer” and “Afrikaner” are not synonymous,
that all Boers are Afrikaners, but not all Afrikaners are Boers.
Ferdie Devenier,
of the Evangeliese Gereformeerde Kerk (EGK, in English: Evangelical
Reformed Church) prefers the term “Boer-Afrikaner”, and with it he seems
to mean all white people.
Flip Bruwer, of the Verkenners, prefers the term “Boer”, but also “Afrikaner” and “Boer-Afrikaner” are good for him.
Frans Pieterse,
of the HNP, thinks the term “Boer” refers to the period of the Boer
republics, whereas today all (Boers and other non-Boer
Afrikaans-speaking whites) would be “Afrikaners”.
Franz Jooste,
leader of the Kommandokorps (KK), thinks that term “Boer-Afrikaner” is
better, now that many people confuse the term “Boer” with “farmer” (in
Afrikaans, boer = farmer; Boer = Boer) and “Afrikaner” with “African”
(the meaning of “Afrikaner”, in Afrikaans, is just “African” in a
geographical sense).
Jaco Steyn,
of the HNP, thinks that term “Boer” and “Afrikaner” are good, as were
synonymous, so term “Boer” refers to the past (the Boer republics) and
“Afrikaner” to the present.
Kleintjie Rabie
thinks that is possible to use any name, to not create divisions; but
then, why don’t use the name “South Africans”, to not exclude no-one?
Peet Joubert, of the HNP, declares himself Afrikaner, but also says it is good “Boer-Afrikaner” or “Boer”.
Philip Nieman, of the Verkenners, declares himself “Boer-Afrikaner”.
Steyn van Ronge,
new leader of the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB), says that all
terms: “Afrikaner”; “Boer”; and “Boer-Afrikaner”; are good, to not to
exclude anyone. The times (1995) in which the AWB was part of the Boere
Republikeinse Verkiesingskommissie (BVK, the Boer Republican Electoral
Commission, which at the UN declared that Afrikaners were not part of
the Boer nation), now seem very distant.
Tiaan Theron,
of the Verkenners and Orania Beweging, declares himself
“Boer-Afrikaner”, where the term “Boer” seems to be understood as
“farmer”.
Abel Malan,
Vice-President of the Verkenners, has a lot of “identities”; he prefer
declares himself “Boer” or “Afrikaner patriot”; but also
“Boer-Afrikaner”; “member of the Covenant People / Covenant-Afrikaners”;
“Burger”; and even “Bitterender” (term for Boer fighters who fought
till to the end during the Second Boer War of Liberation, and for those
who rebelled against the Union of South Africa). He says that isn’t very
important the name used (and maybe not even identity, at least for
him).
Sakkie van der Merwe
declares himself Boer, and remark that there have never been
“Afrikaner” wars of liberation nor “Afrikaner” concentration camps. Also
Etienne Le Roux declares himself Boer, a member of the Boer nation. But
if they are really Boers, what are they doing among these people?
(The original text can be found here)
From
the above it should be quite clear how deeply embedded this problem is.
Very few so-called Afrikaners understand the term Boer and very of them can
identity with it. On the other hand very few SA whites can identity with
the term Afrikaner or Boer for that matter. The two paragraphs above about Freemasonry and the attack on Boer identity must be the two most confusing paragraphs I have read in a very long time. They clearly have no clue what they're trying to convey or they're deliberately playing politicians.
From Boerevryheid.co.za comes the following, which I translated into English (Original Afrikaans text can be found here):
From a international customary law perspective, what is a Boer?
"international customary law" (I chose this term based on the following discussion)
Can an Afrikaner become a Boer?
Can a Brit become a Boer?
I guess that I qualify as a Boer. All my grand-fathers were either on the front-line, or in the concentration camps.
But would I be disqualified as a Boer if I for instance became a member of the SACP?
Can "being Boer" be viewed the same as for instance "being Zulu"?
I would like to hear what everyone's opinion is...
I found the answer given by “Mike” the most logical, objective and meaningful:
The
Boer Volk originated from the "Emigranten Boeren" or "Emigrant Farmers"
that left the Cape Colony during the Great Trek. (See post #2 in
original text here
http://www.boerevryheid.co.za/forums/showthread.php?4697-Wat-is-n-Boer)
The
Boer Volk is composed from different European nations. It has never
been a requirement to be born a Boer to be part of the Boer Volk, or
that your home language should be Afrikaans, or that your should belong
to this or that church. In fact, during the Great Trek the "church"
excommunicated the Trekkers (Boer Volk) and placed them under censure,
and they had to do without actual ministers.
Requirements
for acceptance were that you should be assimilable (pure white) and
that you should be willing to use the Boer Language as means of
communication with other Boers. Even today there are very good Boers
that speak English, German, Serbian or Hungarian at home, but are as
much Boer as you and I. It is also expected that a Boer should believe
in the Bible.
Chinese or Koreans are not European whites and do not share our broader European culture.
On
the other hand during the Anglo-Boer War Bible Believers fought on the
side of the Boers from countries like Ireland (Catholics), Turkey
(probably Armenian, Armenian Orthodox Church), Russians (Russian
Orthodox), etc.
Of the Johannesburg foreigners that fought on the Boer side there were also whites from various countries.
There obviously were various languages, but communication was mainly in Afrikaans and often in English.
Siener speaks of Boer Hearts. Boership is a conviction in your heart.
The genetic make-up of the Boer
A Boer is generally described as::any descendant of the Dutch-speaking settlers of the eastern Cape frontier in Southern Africa during the 18th century;any
descendant of those who left the Cape Colony during the 19th century to
settle in the Orange Free State, Transvaal (known as the Boer
Republics), and to a lesser extent Natal;who is Christian preferably belonging to one of the original Dutch Churches; andwho speaks Dutch
Unfortunately the above definition of a Boer is ill-conceived and pure fallacy.
The
Trekboere, as they were originally known, were mainly of Dutch origin
and included Calvinists, Flemish and Frisian Calvinists, BUT they also
included French Huguenot and German and British protestants who first
arrived in the Cape of Good Hope during the period of its administration
(1652 – 1795) by the Dutch East India Company. Besides these the Boers
also included lesser migrations of Scandinavians, Portuguese, Greeks,
Italians, Spanish, Scots, English and Irish immigrants, which also
contributed to this ethnic mix called Boers.
It
should also be remembered that not all Boers joined the side of the
Boers, many defected and joined the British. Genetically though they
were also true Boers. Very few Boers actually went to battle. The vast
majority of Boers stayed behind on their farms and never partook in any
Boer war or Boer battles of any kind. Genetically and historically though they were also
true Boers.
The Religion of the Boer
The
Boer nation has revealed a distinct Calvinist culture and the majority
of Boers today are still members of a Reformed Church. A small number of
Boers may also be members of Baptist, Pentecostal or Lutheran Churches.
As
is the case with the Dutch element so too with the religion of the
Boer, while the majority of Boers may have been Dutch they were not
exclusively Dutch. While the majority of Boers may have been Dutch
Reformed Christians, they were not exclusively Christian.
Do
not fool yourself, not all Boers, not even Boers of direct Dutch
descent were Christians. There is strong evidence pointing to even Piet
Retief not having been a Christian and he was not the only one.
Having had Russians and so many others among them certainly points to not all having been Christians.
The Russians and the Anglo-Boer War. by Apollon Davidson and Irina Filatova:
Several
hundred Russians came out to fight for the Boers and to be their nurses
and doctors. Many fought for the Boers and probably accounted for the
majority of the entire Russian contingent. The often anti-Semitic
Russian nationalists who flocked to the Boer cause formed a separate
Russian Commando unit in the Boer Army and refused to allow Russian Jews
to join it.
Not
much is known about the Russian Jews who fought on the Boer side,
though several rose to significant rank; we find a Commandant Kaplan and
a Commandant Isaac Herman, while two others, Josef Segal ('Jackals')
and Wolf Jacobson ('Wolf'), who acted as scouts, were legendary figures
in their time; Segal became a special adviser and secret agent for the
Boer general, Christiaan de Wet. Benzion Aaron, by now a very wealthy
man and a personal friend of Kruger, set up a Jewish Ambulance Corps and
bankrolled whole depots for the Boers.
At
the same time so many of the Boer Leaders and Generals were Freemasons.
They were not members of the Afrikaner Broederbond, the Afrikaner
Broederbond did not exist by then and the aim of the Afrikaner
Broederbond was to establish an Afrikaner nationalism and an Afrikaner
pride. While the Broederbond was exclusively Dutch Reformed and required
their members to be member of a Dutch Reformed church, being a Boer had
no such requirement, which is proven by the history of the Boers. While
the Broederbond was founded by so-called Afrikaners for so-called Afrikaners, the oldest
and largest geographical Freemason Lodge in the World is the Transvaal
Lodge, the Lodge of the Boers. Afrikaners were not allowed to be members
of the freemasonry as they had to belong to the Afrikaner Broederbond.
Only in 1940 did the Afrikaner-Broederbond decide to warn youth against
membership of the Freemasonry. Until then it was perfectly acceptable.There is ample evidence that the Broederbond deliberately implemented a smear campaign against the Freemasonry in order to build the Broederbond as its primary opposition. It was an anti-British move more than anything else.
Boer versus Afrikaner
In
South Africa the Boer / SA white of today is a unique breed of people.
We the whites of South Africa truly are a cosmopolitan rainbow nation
made up of Dutch, English, Irish, Scottish, French, Germans, Italians,
Portuguese, Greeks, Spanish, Serbians, Polish, Turkish, Hungarians,
Russians, Russian Jews, etc.
Over
the past few hundred years we have interbred and even the Boers
themselves were not exclusively Dutch, because they had a number of
non-Dutch fighting alongside them, who were also Boers, wearing the
insignia of the Boers. Ever hear of English speaking Boers? Well its a
fact that cannot be denied.
A
Boer was also someone who fought with the Boers on the side of the
Boers against the British Empire. It is a known fact that many British
soldiers defected to the Boers and thus became Boers, because they were
fighting for the same cause. The Irish came here by their hundreds to
fight with the Boers against Britain. They became instant Boers. They
felt like the Boers, they felt for the Boers, they had the hearts of
Boers. They were English speaking Boers. The same as with the Russians
who came here to help the Boers and never left, they were Russians yet
they were Boers. The foreigners that joined the ranks for the Boers were
fully integrated and accepted among the Boers.
The
Boers did not reject the foreigners, they did not shun them away, they
accepted and appreciated and respected them as fellow Boers.
As
can be seen the Boers were not exclusive, in fact they were very open
and inclusive, because they themselves had been foreigners that came
here from a variety of European countries and they appreciated any help
they could get.
The
Afrikaners on the other hand were not inclusive in the least and were
rather elitist exclusive to the extreme. The so-called Afrikaners are purists.
"To
tell the truth, there was not a man amongst us who would have asked
better than to make prisoners of the Cape Mounted Rifle's and of
Brabant's Horse. they were Afrikaners, and as Afrikaners, although
neither Free Staters nor Transvalers, they ought, in our opinion to
have been ashamed to fight against us." - Genl C.R. de Wet in the English translation of his book “Die stryd tussen Boer en Brit” (The Battle between Boer and Brit)
The Afrikaners were defenders of the status quo, while the Boers rebelled against the status quo. Genl. de Wet was one of the signatories to the Treaty of Vereniging, which was the signing away of the Boer Republics, but he also joined Genl. Maritz in the rebellion against the decision to take up arms against Germany during WW1.
Much
of what we observe in the attitudes and thinking of the modern-day
Boers of today has little or nothing in common with the original Boers. The
exclusivity and elitist supremacist behaviour of the modern-day Boer is
nothing other than Afrikaner-Broederbond traits adopted by the modern
so-called Boers.
The
Afrikaner Broederbond wanted to breed Afrikaner Pride and create a
highly exclusive click. The Afrikaner is the elitist snob who refuses to
speak English and demands an impeccable Afrikaans be spoken to him.
Afrikaner nationalism and Afrikaner snobbishness originated after Dr.
Malharbe had returned from Nazi Germany. Read “Die Afrikaner-Broederbond
Eerste 50 Jaar” by A.N.Pelzer (Tafelberg 1979) to understand where and how this Afrikanerdom originated and how they purposefully set out to
instill snobbishness in the Afrikaner and create an image of supremacist
elitism, how they deliberately set out to make the Afrikaner an
exclusive click.
While
most of what we today understand as Boer achievements should be
attributed to the achievements of the Afrikaner-Broederbond without whom
the Afrikaner / Boer would have amounted to nothing really. The
Afrikaner-Broederbond made us what we are today.
So confused are the modern Boers that they actually refer to Dr. Verwoerd
as a Boer? One of the key role-players in the Afrikaner-Broederbond and
someone who never used the term Boer. This while the very modern-day
Boers do not regard one of the most successful people during the second
Boer War, Genl. Jan Smuts, who served under Genl. Koos de le Rey as a Boer?
When
Genl. Smuts and Genl. Louis Botha wanted to import more skilled white
Europeans into the country to build the numbers of the whites in South
Africa the Afrikaner-Broedenbond halted the move in its tracks, because
as they said, it would threaten the Afrikaner’s existence, yet most of
those that Smuts and Botha imported became Afrikaans speaking white
South Africans, typical Boers. Had the Afrikaners listened the balance
between black and white in South Africa would (could) have been very different today.
While Genl Jan Smuts, who commanded one of the most successful Boer forces ever, opposed the Afrikaner-Broederbond, Henderik Verwoerd was a strong member of the Afrikaner-Broederbond. Yet the modern-day Boers reject the Boer and idolise the Afrikaner?
There was not a single grain of anything pointing towards Verwoerd
having been anything remotely resembling a Boer, yet the modern-day
Boers idolise him as their messiah. His lecture notes and memoranda at Stellenbosch
stressed that there were no biological differences between the large racial groups, and concluded that "this was not really a factor in the
development of a higher social civilisation by the Caucasians.”
The
establishment of the independent sovereign Republic of South Africa was
not the work of the Boers, but rather the work of Afrikaners under the
guidance of the Afrikaner-Broederbond. The Boers never wanted a United
Independent Sovereign Republic of South Africa, all they ever wanted were the old Boer Republics that their, primarily Freestate Boer Generals, had signed away. Yet they idolise one of the architects of the Afrikaner
Republic of South Africa. Hendrik Verwoerd continued the work of Adv. J.G. Strijdom
and ensured that we obtained our greatest achievement, the independent
sovereign Republic of South Africa (RSA). He realised J.G. Strijdom’s Afrikaner dream, that is Verwoerd's legacy.
Confusion
All
of this seems quite irrational and confusing and it is. Why do we have
this confusion among white South Africans? Only due to a lack of
knowledge and insight into the history of this country. The friction
between Afrikaner and English was created by the Afrikaner-Broederbond.
The confusion in the Boer / Afrikaner identity is the result of many
years, the Afrikaner-Broederbond’s role in the Afrikaner Nationalism and
the development of the Afrikaner identity. We had joiners among the ranks of the old Voortrekker Boers and those that stayed behind in the Cape Colony were happy about having been sold to Britain like sheep.
The late Robert van Tonder
actually in a sense created the Boer identity that exists today. Before van Tonder there
was no real mention of Boer anywhere by anyone as most had settled into
the Afrikaner identity. Since van Tonder all of that changed and we now
have this new animal called a modern-day Boer. Suddenly everyone that
used to be proud Afrikaners are now proud Boers. Proud Boers following
the ideologies laid down by the Afrikaner-Broederbond. Strange, but
true.
What the modern-day Boers stand for and wish to fight for are mostly Afrikaner-Broederbond ideologies.
The
arrogant Afrikaner is the one who demands that he be addressed in
Afrikaans, he is the one who speaks the impeccable Afrikaans and attends
elocution classes to speak it perfectly. It is one of the telltale
signs of an Afrikaner-Broederbonder, their impecable Afrikaans. They
have this air about themselves, a total give-away of their nauseating
snobbishness.
The
Boer is humble, the Boer communicates with his workers in their
language to make himself clearly understood. He is the one who has no
problem communicating with the English in English. He also has no
problem communicating in Afrikaans while the Englishman speaks to him in
English. The Boer is not an elitist, because he is humble.
The
so-called Boer that demands to be addressed in Afrikaans is not a Boer
he is a product of the Afrikaner-Broederbond demonstrated by his supremacist snobbish elitism. The Afrikaner-Broederbond
replaced the humble Boer with the supremacist elitist snobbish
Afrikaner.
The
modern-day Boers and Afrikaners have intermixed the two concepts and
today we find the Boers also wanting to establish themselves as an
exclusive elitist group just like the Afrikaner of the
Afrikaner-Broederbond. These modern-day Boers that demand Afrikaans as
the only language, are NOT Boers, they are confused Afrikaners
pretending to be Boers.
The
Boer is not attached to the Netherlands like the Afrikaner. The
Afrikaner-Broederbond made it their business to retain and strengthen
the ties with the Netherlands. When the Boers came here they became Africans, because South Africa had not even a dream yet. They accepted this country as their motherland and they
left their countries of origin in their past. The Afrikaners' Misguided Attachment to the Netherlands is based on the Afrikaner-Broerbond’s desire to be exclusive and
elitist. Clinging on to the Netherlands lends some kind of prestige to
them, while the Boer’s prestige lies in his many legacies throughout
our country’s history.
What are we?
"She
is not a whore if she sleeps with thee, he and me, she is a whore if
she has the heart of a whore" George C. Scott in ‘The Last Run’ (1971)
Similarly, you are not a Christian if you flash it around, attend Church every Sunday and pay your 10th, you’re a Christian if you have the Heart of a Christian.
And, you are not a Boer if you have a bloodline of Dutch Descent, speak an impeccable Afrikaans, and are a Christian... you are a Boer if you have the heart of a Boer.
“To
me you’re a King, to you you’re King and to your friends you’re a king,
but to a King you’re no damn King.” Anthony Quinn in ‘Zorba the Greek’ (1964)
So to me you’re a Boer, to you you’re a Boer and to your friends you’re a Boer, but to a real Boer you’re no damn Boer.
My family arrived in the Cape in 1681, not too long after Jan van Riebeeck
himself. The Great Trek started on the farm of one of my forefathers.
The Boarder wars against the Xhosa was fought from that very farm. My
great grand-father on my grand-mother’s side was one of the Boers that
guarded the body of Major-General Sir George Pomeroy Colley after he was killed in battle. We feature prominently during the entire history of this country. Does that make me a Boer in modern-day terms?
One
should think so, but my father married a direct descendant of a 1820
British Settler, which strictly speaking disqualifies me from being
classified as a Boer in terms of the modern-day definition of a Boer. That is notwithstanding the fact that my English speaking mother is
more of a Boer than most modern-day Afrikaans speaking, Christian, wannabe Dutch Boers. She is more proud of being
married to a direct Boer descendant than she could ever have been of her
own blue blood-line, which she despises rather.
A Boer has no Physical Identity
A
Boer could be anyone. It could even be someone born and still living in
the USA, or the UK for that matter. As can be seen from the past
history of the Boers, anyone who feels akin to the Boers, who supports
the cause of the Boer, anyone of any language, of any religious view,
from any country could be a Boer, as was the case way back then.
A
Boer is not someone of Dutch descent, it is not someone that speaks
Afrikaans and belongs to a Christian Church, let alone a Dutch Reformed
Christian Church. Anyone even if he is a Freemason could be a Boer like
so many of the old Boers themselves. Anyone that aligns himself with the
ideals and objectives of a Boer is a Boer.
An
Afrikaner is something completely different and the two should never be
confused. Afrikaners do not associate with anyone outside their elitist group.
The Afrikaners lost their pride when they gave the country away and became appeasers. The Afrikaners have become a nation of appeasers.
The Boers of today have adopted what the Afrikaners had lost and given away. Boers have taken over many of the ideals of the Afrikaner and aim to preserve it and Boers associate freely with anyone that wishes to join their ranks. Boers fight for what is being lost at the particular time in history.
The usual definitions of a Boer are a self-limiting definitions that has to has to imply the ultimate disappearance of the Boer. The Boer is not stagnant it is dynamic, constantly being replenished by adding new fresh strong blood to the pool. It has been the case throughout our history, first the Dutch came, then later they were joined by the French and Italians, etc. to culminate in that strong robust group of people that lost the Cape Colony and the Boer Republics, just to come back and take over the Union of South Africa and eventually taking it all by declaring independence as the Republic of South Africa.
While even the Broederbond fought the Boers and the Afrikaners dissociated themselves from the Boers, there were Boers among them, it was the Boer blood inside them that caused them to ultimately declare the triumph by taking it all as an independent sovereign RSA. The Afrikaners lost it all due to their elitist supremacist ideologies that caused them to lose their focus and betray their roots.
A Boer is a Rebel and a Rebel is a Boer
Boers are rebels within the larger group. The Boers were those that rebelled against the VOC for having sold the Cape Colony to the British Empire, inhabitants and all. The Boers were those that rebelled against the mighty British Empire for wanting to take their Boer Republics. The Boers were those that rebelled against the Boers when they wanted to take up arms against Germany during WW1. The Boers were the members of the Ossewa Brandwag. The Boers were those that rebelled against the UK by demanding their independence to establish their own sovereign Republic of SA. The Boers were those who rebelled against the establishment of the New SA. The Boers of today are those who rebel against what is happening in this country today.
Being
a Boer is siding with the Boers, being a Boer is fighting alongside the
Boers, being a Boer is wanting to be a Boer, being a Boer is supporting
the cause of the Boer. The Boers are not a nation, the Boers are a
people with unity of thought, unity of purpose, unity of destiny, that
is a Boer.
In
South Africa today we have English, Afrikaans, Portuguese, Greek,
Italian, Polish, Dutch and many other kinds of Boers. We have atheist Boers, we have Protestant and
Catholic Christian Boers, we have Freemason and Broederbond Boers. There
are people in other countries who would, if they could, land at our
airports tomorrow to fight for the cause of the Boers and they too are
Boers just like the Irish and the Russians so many years ago, because they are rebels.
Boers are people who share Unity, Duty and Destiny in their opposition to the unacceptable status quo...
That is what makes them Boers, the rebel inside us, the strength of our conviction to stand up for what is right and the determination to succeed.
The Bottom Line
Bottom line is this, none of us were born as Boers. We were all born either under the Union of SA or under the RSA or under the New SA. Being a descendant of a Boer does not make you a Boer. The Boers were people that lived a hundred years ago and longer. The term Boer is a new thing that does not belong to any exclusive group. ANYONE can use the term Boer if he she wishes to do so, provided he/she is opposed to the status quo.
The terms Afrikaner and Boer cause nothing but division. Even those that call themselves Boers and Afrikaners are all wrong, for they are simply Afrikaans or English speaking white South Africans.
What Boers are proud of today was not of their making, EVERYTHING the Boers fought for was lost in 1902 and never regained. Most of what we are proud of today was the making of the Afrikaner-Broederbond. We have much to be proud of, we have achieved so much in this country since 1652 and no single group can lay claim to all those achievements. We're a mixed breed of people, we have nothing to do with the Netherlands or the UK, we're a nation on our own in our own right. Both the UK and the Netherlands have screwed us so hard that we lost everything we had achieved so stop clinging to those two countries, because they feel NOTHING for you.
We should focus on our achievements, be proud of all our achievements and strive towards getting it back, period. Language and religion are what is causing our division more than anything else.
No one will ask you if you're a Boer, an Afrikaner or English, if you're white you're the enemy. Those whites that realise it and try preparing themselves for it, are awake and alert stand a chance, those that are deaf and blind will forever remain in the dark.
Stop living in the past, trying to be something you can never be.
You could call yourself a Boer if you like, an Afrikaner if you like, but you will remain just another white South African like the rest of us.
Those of like mind will stand together anyway, doesn't matter what they call themselves.
In conclusion I would like to state the following:
There is another word for a Boer, an English word..... "Patriot", because the following describes both perfectly and applies equally to a Boer / Patriot.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." - Edward Abbey
The rest will remain appeasers, liberal brain-washed white South Africans.
