The Union of South Africa 1910 (A result of foreign legislation)
The macro State known as South Africa [ composed out of two British Colonies & two
former Boer Republics ] did not exist prior to the 20th cent as it was created by an act of
British legislation which was passed in the British Parliament.
Quote: [ The South Africa Act passed by the British Parliament in 1909 merged the selfgoverning British colonies of the Cape, Natal, Orange River and the Transvaal into the Union
of South Africa, a dominion within the British Commonwealth. The Act, which served as the
Union's constitution until 1961, established a parliamentary regime along the lines of the
Westminster model, composed of a directly elected House of Assembly and an indirectly
elected Senate. ] The Republic of South Africa Electoral System.
This foreign legislation effectively created an artificial macro State in Southern Africa which
joined the conquered Boer Republics with the British ruled Cape & Natal Colonies which had
earlier annexed Xhosa land & Zulu land in the 19th cent. & wherein most of the non-Boer
descended Afrikaner population was living in the Western Cape region. Therefore what this
foreign imposed legislation did was to cobble together an artificial mega State structure
which lumped the various diverse peoples under a single administration for the first time
ever. In other words the creation of this state reversed the natural independent status of
various peoples & it imposed a blocking mechanism against the self determination which was
expressed by many of its peoples prior. The natural tendency of its peoples [ & peoples in
general ] is to gravitate towards independence & self determination which was stunted &
reversed when the British imposed an artificial macro State based on an imperial model &
then recruited members of the local White population to administer it with their government
as a surrogate Colonial ruler on behalf of the British power.
This act was the direct result of the friction which later followed [ the State rulers prevented
both Boer self determination / Boer Republics restoration & Bantu political petitions for
control of macro State ] as the newly empowered White regimes were reluctant to give up
control of the macro State [ with later modifications as per the Bantu homeland independence
policies ] they were recruited to administer as their general White constituent population were
often concerned about inherently becoming an oppressed demographic minority within a
universal suffrage based macro State. The British power elite appeared to have used this
unfolding political machination to great success as it later gave them the opportunity to
reclaim South Africa under the covert guise of the post Apartheid regimes who are financed
& propped up by them. After all the British went to great lengths to set up & impose the
macro State of South Africa - even to the point of killing off 50 % of the Boer child
population in concentration camps during the British war to conquer the Boer Republics.
Therefore it stands to reason that the British would not just simply walk away from the region
[ as the Republic of South Africa has only ever existed in name alone ] nor cede true
executive control over to any local peoples of the region. This was confirmed with the basic
premise of the South African Act of 1909 being incorporated & thus perpetuated into the
various Constitutions of South Africa thereby perpetuating the very state apparatus executive
control mechanism [ which perpetuated Apartheid in the past & the neo Apartheid of the
present ] which works against the various peoples' desire for ethnic group or nation based self
determination. Thus the various Constitutions have retained the centralization of power.
The Boers Recognized With 5 Conventions.
The Boers have been recognized through conventions at least 5 times. The Sand River
Convention of 1852 - which lead to the independence of the Boer Republics within the
Transvaal region / the Orange River Convention of 1854 - which lead to the independence of
the Orange Free State within the Transorangia region / the London Convention of 1881 which lead to the re-established independence of the ZAR in the Transvaal region / the
London Convention of 1884 - which lead to the full independence of the ZAR in the
Transvaal region / the Vereeniging Treaty of 1902 which concluded the second Anglo-Boer
War.
The Boer Republics Were Recognized.
The two major Boer Republics: the Transvaal Republic & the Orange Free State which
fought against Britain during the Anglo-Boer War were recognized around the world prior to
the outbreak of the war.
The Republic was now in possession of a Convention, which from the
nature of its provisions seemed to promise a peaceful future. In
addition to Great Britain it was recognized in Holland, France,
Germany, Belgium, and especially in the United States of America. The
American Secretary of State at Washington, writing to President
Pretorius on the 19th November, 1870, said: "That his Government,
while heartily acknowledging the Sovereignty of the Transvaal
Republic, would be ready to take any steps which might be deemed
necessary for that purpose."
From: The Story of the Boers. C W van der Hoogt. Published in 1900. Page 97.
The independence of the Boers north of the Orange River was recognized internationally first
with the Sand River Convention which granted independence to the Boers north of the Vaal
River up to the Limpopo River in 1852 then with the Orange River Convention of 1854
which recognized the independence of the Boers north of the Orange River which extended
up to the Vaal River wherein the Orange Free State was declared existing right up to the
conclusion of the second Anglo-Boer War.
The Boers Did Not Create Apartheid.
There is a troubling trend among ignorant persons of attributing the creation of Apartheid to
the Boers & the even more troubling rhetoric of that all of the Boers should have been killed
by Britain during the Anglo-Boer War -in which Britain did kill an estimated 27 000 Boer
civilians in concentration camps. Some of these bigoted racists are even calling for the
genocide of the Boers who survived the genocide against them in the past from the British &
are facing a current growing genocide against them now. These uniformed & hateful antiBoer bigots erroneously claim that the total genocide of the Boers would have somehow
prevented Apartheid. Nothing could be further from the truth. This shows both hatred &
ignorance on the part of those racist anti-Boer bigoted fools since those who hatefully &
arrogantly presume that killing off all the Boers "would have prevented Apartheid"
demonstrate their ignorance on the matter since even if the British did kill off every single
Boer: Apartheid would still have occurred!!!!! For the simple reason that the Boers did not
devise nor pass Apartheid as it was invented by the British then later expanded upon during
the 1950s mainly by the non-Boer descended Cape based Afrikaners who were often on the
side of the British during the Anglo-Boer War. The main architects of Apartheid were: Cecil
Rhodes: British Imperialist - financier - politician - Premier of the Cape. / Theophilus
Shepstone: the British Secretary of Native Affairs in Natal. / D F Malan: Cape Dutch
descended Afrikaner cleric - politician from the Western Cape. - Prime Minister. / Hendrik
Verwoerd: Holland born naturalized Afrikaner politician who was educated abroad. Minister
of Native Affairs & later: Prime Minister. This means that even if every single Boer was
killed off in the concentration camps: it would still not have prevented Apartheid from
occurring since Apartheid was not formulated by the Boer people. While there were some
Boer descendents who assisted in the passage of Apartheid: one must remember that they did
so as part of the Cape Dutch dominated Afrikaner coalition. The following is an excerpt of
some relevant text from the American libertarian author Joseph Stromberg concerning this
question.
Although Rhodes did not live to see his work consummated, it is worth
getting his “take” on the native question. Running for office in
1887, he said, “there must be Pass Laws and Peace Preservation Acts.
. . . We must adopt a system of despotism, such as works so well in
India, in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa.” Already
in the policies adopted by the Chamber of Mines, the Rhodes-dominated
mining interest group, we can discern the outlines of the statecapitalist pattern with which Apartheid ran wild. Political
regulation of natives would keep labor below its free-market price;
large-scale bureaucratic fiddling would replace the direct
patriarchal style of management of the Boers.
The Journal of Libertarian Studies.
Those ignorant bigoted persons who erroneously presume that the total genocide of the
humble Boers during Anglo-Boer War would have prevented Apartheid should take
particular & close note of that final & important line in the excerpted paragraph. The
Apartheid system as devised by the British & the Cape based Afrikaners replaced the Boers'
direct patriarchal style of management. How then can the Boers be to blame for a system
that replaced their own form of management? How could the Boers have had any significant
clout in the devising of Apartheid when most had been left impoverished after the war
competing for jobs in the cities? The fact of the matter is that the Apartheid establishment had
to actually work to get the Boers on board which began most notably after the Rand
Rebellion when they tailored the "Colour bar" job reservation laws in an effort at preventing
impoverished Boers from being a political obstacle to the plans of the Broederbond & the
Afrikaner Nationalists who were working at co-opting the Boers into their camp.
I find it most alarming how anyone could call for the genocide of an entire people -especially
when they do not even take the time to learn about the very people they condemn. This
hateful rhetoric is even ironic considering where it often comes from: British neoImperialists. Further rich irony is noted when one considers the fact that Hitler actually
admired the British Empire & its excesses inspired him.
The most brutal aspects of Apartheid were the oppressive top-down features that were
devised by the British. When the Afrikaner Nationalist government later came to power &
expanded these British segregationist laws: they even used the same names for the laws that
the British gave them. As a matter of fact the main difference between the Afrikaner
Nationalists version of Apartheid compared to the original British version was that the
Afrikaner Nationalists created the option of granting outright independence to the various
reserves [ built around the traditional settlements ] or the option of joining a confederation.
While the British created segment of Apartheid on the other hand was total domination. The
editor of the Johannesburg Star newspaper even stated in the 1960s that the Apartheid laws as reformed by the Afrikaner Nationalists- were "an improvement" over the previous British
created Apartheid laws. The Sharpeville Massacre was a prime example of the oppressive
top-down nature of British created segment of Apartheid in action as the protesters were
protesting the Pass book laws which the British brought into being with their pass laws.
There is also the nature of cause & effect. Without the brutality of the Boer civilian deaths in
the concentration camps: there would have been little fuel for the later rise of Afrikaner
Nationalism which was mainly used by the Cape based Afrikaners -who were not
numerically affected by the camp deaths as the Boers were as they were not interned & were
often on the side of the British- to first co-opt the Boers in order to prevent Boer secession (as
was attempted by notable Boer Generals in 1914) & then to propagate Afrikaner hegemony
over the new British created artificial macro State which lumped numerous nations & tribes
under a single administration for the first time ever in the region.
Therefore those who hatefully & ridiculously assert that the British should have killed off all
of the Boers do not seem to realize that not only would this not have prevented Apartheid but that it would have made the situation even worse since the Afrikaner Nationalists would
have had even more fuel on which to rise to power on the platform of ethnic domination. A
program of domination which they effectively stole from the British since it was the original
idea of the British to ethnically dominate South Africa with English speakers -but when that
plan failed -they simply turned to the newly radicalized Cape based Afrikaners as
collaborators to fill this role as the surrogate colonial power for the new macro State devised
by the British.
The main reason the Afrikaner Nationalists even rose to power in the new British created
macro state at all was due to the excesses of British brutality in the concentration camps
which lead to the deaths of 24 000 Boer children - which was close to 50 % of the Boer child
population - of which the Afrikaner Nationalists were able to effectively marshal a political
response to in the mobilization of the greater White Afrikaans speaking population even
though this also lead to the marginalization of the actual Boer people in question since the
loose political association of the White Afrikaans speaking groups made the Boer people a
minority under the control of the Cape based Afrikaners who only used the Boers' history in
order to justify their control of the new macro State imposed by the British with the South
Africa Act of 1909 onto the region.
Furthermore: the Boers fought two wars of independence against Britain & against the
formation of the macro State of South Africa which made Apartheid the expansive
centralized system that it was. The architects of Apartheid were formally educated -often
abroad- while most Boers were often not formally educated -neither at home nor abroad. The
architects of Apartheid did not even invent anything new as they simply went abroad to see
how other countries were doing it & basically adopted the ideas & formulas of other
countries. The Apartheid laws of South Africa were based largely on the Jim Crow laws of
the American South / the strict separation along confessional lines of Holland & the Canadian
Indian Affairs Act. With the addition of attempting & often granting independence to
reserves turning them into independent states. The Apartheid establishment even poured
money into them & built them up. Which makes it all the more ridiculous & inappropriate to
call for the genocide of a people who often worked to develop other peoples. Though it
would be inappropriate to call for the genocide of any people regardless of their past.
The Long Struggle For Self Determination.
The Boers have had a long struggle to acquire self determination. A struggle which dates
back to 1795 on the eastern Cape frontier when the first Boer Republics at Swellendam &
Graaff-Reinet were established in rebellion to Dutch rule. The Boers would later achieve a
high level of self determination after the Great Trek when numerous other Boer Republics
were founded north of the Orange River. The main republics were the Transvaal Republic
also known as the ZAR / the Vryheid Republic & the Orange Free State Republic. When the
two major republics of the ZAR & the OVS were conquered by the British after the second
Anglo-Boer War -the struggle for self determination resumed first during the Maritz
Rebellion in 1914 which was triggered when the South African government sided with the
British less than 15 years after the devastation of the British concentration camps which
killed close to 50 % of the Boer child population. The Rebellion leaders were jailed &
prevented from participating in politics. The movement to restore the Boer Republics
resumed again during the 1940s but was crushed by the Afrikaner establishment & the
government. Then in 1961 Robert van Tonder left the National Party to pursue the restoration
of the Boer Republics full time. Later still during the 1970s this movement began to grow but
was later curtailed again as well. The movement to restore the Boer Republics or to acquire
some form of Boer self determination continues but is still facing strong obstacles & is often
not represented in a fair nor accurate manner in the West.