Kort na 7-uur die aand gaan die krag weer aan en Lorraine vra klein Mechaela (7) om gou te gaan bad want dit is amper slaaptyd.

Volgens beriggewing het Lorraine die bad se kraan oopgedraai, die bad ingetap en vir ‘n kort rukkie by Mechaela gesit terwyl sy gebad het. Lorraine was ‘n paar keer uit die badkamer en hoor toe skielik ‘n gil waarna sy teruggehardloop het. Sy vind vir klein Mechaela regop in die bad waar sy aan die kraan vat met haar oë teruggerol in haar kop.

‘n Paramedikus wat naby aan die Schroeders woon was vinnig op die toneel en het vir ‘n halfuur lank alles in sy vermoë gedoen om Mechaela by te probeer bring maar dit was tevergeefs.

Hoe kan ‘n kraan jou doodskok?

‘n Paar dinge moet gebeur vir ‘n huis se krane om geëlektrifiseer te raak, maar dit kan tog gebeur en dit is belangrik om die risiko te verstaan.

Huise word aan die kragnetwerk gekoppel met ‘n “lewendige” draad wat krag na die huis toe bring en ‘n “neutrale” draad wat die krag weer wegneem uit die huis uit om die elektriese stroom te voltooi.

Huise en elektroniese toestelle het ook ‘n “aard” draad wat gebruik word om die krag by die kragbreker af te sit indien kortsluitings gebeur.

Indien daar ‘n probleem met die “neutrale” draad weg van die huis af is behoort die stroom te breek en moet die huis nie meer krag hê nie. Indien daar egter ook ‘n fout met die huis se “aard” draad is, kan dit gebeur dat krag deur die “aard” draad na die aarde vloei sonder dat die kragbreker uitskop. In talle huise met koperpype gebruik elektresiëns die koperpyp om die “aard” kabel na die grond te herlei, want wanneer die kragbreker werk, neem dit slegs ‘n splitsekonde vir die kragbreker om uit te skop.

Wanneer die “neutrale” draad tussen die huis en die kragnetwerk breek en daar is ‘n fout met die “aard” draad en die elektrisiën het die koperpype gebruik om die “aard” draad aan die aarde te koppel, word elke kraan in die huis ‘n dodelike gevaar.

Een gevaarteken om voor uit te kyk is ligte wat flikker. In die tragiese gebeure in Bethal hierbo genoem is ek nie seker waarom Lorraine nie geskok is toe sy die badkraan oopgedraai het nie. Dit mag wees dat die neutrale draad toe nog gewerk het, of dit mag wees dat sy skoene met sole gedra het wat verhoed het dat die elektriese stroom deur haar vloei.

Volgens die webwerf van TasNetworks in die deelstaat Tasmanië in Australië is ‘n gebreekte “neutrale” draad ‘n relatiewe algemene verskynsel. Daarom het hierdie elektrisiteitsverspreider die stap geneem om ‘n toestel genaamd CablePI te vervaardig en gratis aan hul kliënte te verskaf. Hierdie toestel prop by ‘n muurprop in en ‘n alarm gaan af indien die toestel ‘n aanhoudende stroom op die “aard” draad bespeur.

In Suid-Afrika is die risiko vir gebreukte “neutrale” drade op die elektriese netwerk heelwat groter weens die hoë koers waarteen koperkabels in die netwerk gesteel word. Dit is daarom belangrik vir mense om bewus te wees van die risiko rondom ‘n gebreekte “neutrale” draad en die lewensgevaarlike bedreiging wat ‘n foutiewe aardlekstelsel in hierdie omstandighede inhou.

Deel/Stuur

We must not forget that self determination does not only mean taking ones own, local political decisions and determining the school curricula of one’s own ethnic group.

Self determination depends on another crucial aspect: that aspect is self sustainability or in simpler terms, making a living off of locally available, regenerative or abundant resources as much as possible.

This material aspect of self government has a multitude of implications. The first implication is obviously, that self sustainability makes the community more independent from import and export and therefore less vulnerable to economic crises or outside pressure issued by sanctions or denied access to trade routes.

The second powerful implication of self sustainability is its tremendous importance in building the sense of identity and belonging in the hearts of the native population.

Beeing able to use locally available resources in the most effective and sustainable way for every need in daily life requires a learning process that spans over many generations. In this process the native population developes the skills to make most of their food, clothes, houses and tools out of what they have available locally. The population develops a mastery in the skills required for doing that. In that they become able to create unique goods of high value that can be traded for all necessary items which defnitely can not be made locally. However, the people also learns to abstain from the use of tools, luxuries and customs that can not be supplied easily by local resources, while it strengthens the traditions and customs that indeed are nurtured by the local environment.

All of that gives birth to a unique style of all aspects of life and that unique style is what consitutes culture and identity in the first place. It developes a unique knowledge, practical skill, lore, use of language, clothing and food culture which is passed down the generations and makes a nation what it is. In essence, it establishes a connection of the human beeing with the earth it lives on, a connection that, if healthy and wise can last for thousands of years because it has achieved a balance. It has achieved sustainability. It has established real independance which is not just a political independance, but also an economical one.

This is in essence what only can instill in the youth the sense of pride, joy, beauty and meaning of real culture and ethnicity. It will inevitably change the very physical appearance of a people. It turns this people into a product of the earth it lives on but it also shapes and influences the environment in a healthy way. It not only gives this people the right to claim that territory for themselves, because they have learned to live on that territory in a sustainable way, no, it literally makes that ethnic group a property of the earth itself because just as every other animal and plant species existing in that territory, it shapes and preserves the nature of that territory and becomes an integral part of it. It gives said ethnic group not only the right to say, “this earth belongs to us”, but “we belong to this earth”, we are indistinguishable from it.

This is why the judeo-christian definition of “earthly” in “earthly pleasures” for example is kind of misleading. Because what is really earthly is never destructive and selfish, like endulging in selfish and addictive pleasures and unncessary luxury. Earthly in the sense of this presentation has the meaning of wholesome, sustainable, natural, morally correct and honourable. The way to eternal, heavenly light must be walked in accordance with the laws of nature and earth, not in conflict with them. Any activity that destroys the creation can not be in accordance with the will of the creator.

What does that mean for Orania specifically?

With this philosophy in mind I looked at Orania and made some simple observations that  I would like to share with this audience.

With the apparent lack of housing Orania’s construction sector is booming at the moment. Labour is short. Houses must be built quickly and cheaply. I see a plot full of dolorite rocks and ant hills made of clay. The builders now engage in the costly task of clearing that plot of all rocks and ant hills. They spend fuel and energy, maintance work on trucks and working hours of truck drivers to carry away all those materials and dumping them somewhere else. At some other place time and energy is spent to articifially create cement bricks, concrete and aluminum sheets to make the building material of the new house. All of those materials have to be carried to the plot again, which again costs energy and time. Now finally the construction can commence, a construction which requires basic skills found everywhere else in this country, even in the whole world, because the type of house that is built can be found anywhere on the world. It requires no local, unique skill and tradition of craftsmanship. It uses no locally available resources and it probably does not provide any unique benefits in terms of endurance and heat management that make it especially suitable for the local climate and energy efficient.

I simply can not believe that building a house out of cement bricks in an environment abundant in rock, clay and straw is in any circumstance more economical than just building it out of what is available locally. In my view, the only thing that lacks for the unique Karoo Afrikaaner Rockhouse to take shape is the skill of the craftsman and the will and consiousness of the community.

I would like to leave this simple example as a symbol for everything I have mentioned above and for the essence of self determination and self sustainability, culture and ethnicity. It is a  symbol for the balance between nature and man so necessary for claiming a right to live anyhwere on this beautiful planet.

Where I come from, in Germany, we used to have unique houses in the mountainous forests, houses built of sandstone and wood, with roofs and even wall casings of beautiful slate. In the planes and near the rivers houses were built of fired bricks and roof tiles because of the abundance of clay and at the coast the roofs were made of a thatch of straw or reeds. All these building techniques used to create a unique culture of craftsmenship and a powerful sense of identity, independance and pride.

This example from the construction sector is probably most suitable to use for Orania, because construction is booming here at the moment. However this principle can be applied to pretty much any economic or domestic activity in a region and among an ethnic group.

I personally wish that this consciousness reawakens in the peoples of this world and I endorse and give legitimacy to any community that manages to successfully move in this direction of real sustainability and culture.

Many more aspects of a sustainable and beautifully unique lifestyle should be discussed in this kind of presentation, however this must suffice for now. I hope I have deservedly drawn the attention of the audience with my speech. I wish to thank you for listening and granting me this unique opportunity to voice my opinion.

Deel/Stuur

Is self determination of a people synomymous with Democracy?

Then:

What is democracy?

We understand democracy as the rule of the people, as opposed to the rule of a single ruler or the rule a few in form of a wealthy oligarchy.

Democracy is supposed to be the system which best serves the interests of the whole people instead of just those of a few, because it grants participation in the government to every single citizen.

What is mostly overlooked though is a crucial basic ingredient for democracy to work at all and that is ethnicity.

For debate and participation in the political process, communication is key. Therefore the democratically ruled state must speak one language. Knowing merely the basic vocabulary for small-talk however is not enough for engaging in the political process. Democracy requires us to have profound knowledge of our language. By the mastery of our language political debates are won. When proficiency and knowledge meet charisma, rhetoric skill and an honourable standing in society, that is when a speaker is able to persuade the minds of the public and therefore exercise his right of democratic participation to its full extent.

However there is even more to this. When engaging in political debate, it is crucial to narrow down the spectrum of possible issues, so that the time spent in the parliament can be used effectively and the most important issues discussed and solved pleasingly. When a parliament starts to discuss cultural issues like which language, religion or tradition should be taught in school or which festivals held publicly, then that is not a democratic debate. It as an international debate and as such a form of conflict and warfare and one has to wonder why it has to be conducted in the first place. If there are two peoples or nations who respect each others customs, trust in each other and value each others existance and right of self government, why would they want to meddle in each others interior affairs?!

Real democratic, political debate can only occur within a homogeneous ethnic group, which already agrees on the fundamental values and principles of its society, which shares a deep understanding of its common language and legacy. Only in such a mostly homogeneous group there is time for real and constructive debate on practical issues of government: How much tax should we impose? How should this money be spent? Should we improve the water supply, the transport network or build a bigger school for our children? Democratic debate can only concern internal affairs of a largely cohesive ethnic group. Only this cohesiveness can provide the basis for the second most crucial prerequisite of a functioning democratic society: a high level of education which nurtures a strong sense of loyalty, belonging and responsability towards the community in the younger generation.

It is interesting to observe, that democracy historically evolved only in rather small communities with such a high level of education and a sense of ethnic identity. It required a sense of identity that is amplified by a rich language, cultural and religious tradition and a zealous pride in its own independance which the people is willing to defend tenaciously even against overwhelming odds.

The prime example of such a place is the ancient Greece of roughly 2400 years ago. Specifically ancient Athens is regarded by modern, western historiography as the birthplace of democracy.

The smaller the community, the more easily ethnic and cultural homogeneity and therefore mutual understanding is preserved. This is why in modern times, countries like Sweden, Iceland or Finland, used to be good examples of well functioning democracies. A small and homogeneous population lived in a vast country which provided room for everybody and reduced friction and potential social unrest. All that has changed of course in times of accelerating urbanization and the transformation of European cities into multicultural melting pots.

To undestand the essence of a concept it is very valuable to indentify something that could be regarded as its opposite. In the case of democracy it is therefore tremdendously important to ask: what is its alternative or adversary. What threatens or opposes democracy? What is “not democracy”?

The democracies in Ancient Greece where decentralized. They thrived in city states, which were connected through trade, mutual agreements and religous and cultural festivities and gatherings, like the Olympic games. However connected through culture, these city states were each independantly governed, sometimes by vastly different political systems and codes of law.

The greatest rivals threatening the indepenance of these democracies, were gigantic Empires like Ancient Persia and Rome.

So democracy is the right of a distinct ethnic group to rule over its own affairs, live in its own territory and decide upon the usage of the resources of that territory to best suit the needs of its inhabitants.

Imperialism on the other hand is the exact opposite.

In an empire, a central government decides over the affairs of many different tribes with different cultures and languages. The administration manages and allocates the resources of all terrorities not for the benefit of each individual population, but for the the needs of the central authority or ruling oligarchy. Much of these resources are lost in the friction that is caused by the size of the Empire and its diverse populations. The funds have to be spent on an ever increasing bureaucracy and military to keep up the imperial dominion. Not at least the funds have to be spent in costly wars of expansion, to add new territories and tributaries to the state.

If an empire is by definition a multicultural state, then a multicultural state is by definition an empire. It is by definition an oppressive state in which the individual enjoys the least right of political participation imaginable. An empire is ruled by an oligarchic elite, not by the will of the people itself. That is a natural property of this kind of powerstructure, because all the nations and people included in the empire naturally tend to thrive for autonomy. Only through the oppression of the interests of the individual ethnic groups by the central government can the empire secure its existance against the forces which drive it apart.

I believe that individual expression is first and foremost ethnic. It is strongest in one’s own culture and language and nurtured by the depth of one’s and one’s ancestors connection to the nature of the homeland. Therefore, freedom of expression is at its lowest within the boundaries of an imperial powerstructure. In such a state people move around driven by the clockwork of the imperial economy instead of the eternal cycles of the seasons and the natural environment to which the locals belong.

Concerning all of that, a democratic, egalitarian society can only be an ethnically homogeneous one. A multicultural society can only be an imperial one based on opression by force and propaganda.

The oppressive force used to be exercised by the imperial military and the propaganda induced by the religious dogma of the church.

In our modern times however, the suggestive power of moving images and sound has reached an unprecedented scale. Therefore religious dogma has lost much of its importance in keeping the imperial dominion over different ethnic groups. Nowadays, religious dogma has been largely replaced by global consumerism which is fanatically spread by the media using buzzwords like tolerance, equality, human rights, freedom and democracy.

It is ironic, that multiculturalism and mass-migration is promoted with this same spirit of human-rights and democracy while it leads to a multi-ethnic, imperial society in which every citizen can only have less influence on the politics and the affairs of the state as ever before.

Such a mixed society can only be ruled by force and is therefore diametrically opposed to democracy, the very concept wich is nowadays used to justifiy and promote multiculturalism.

The reason for that is not only to be found in the diverting interests of the ethnic groups forming the society. It is also found in the erosion of the second prerequiste of a functioning democracy mentioned above: a sophisticated education system. The education must inevitably deteriorate in a multiethnic empire, because ultimately education is consciousness and it comes at first through learning the vocabulary of one’s own language and in this vocabulary the history and culture of one’s own ethnic group. Only by understanding the complexity of one’s own history in the context of the history of other peoples and nations, a sense of identity can be nurtured. Only with such a sense of identity comes a sense of responsability for the community at large, a will to participate in the political process altruistically. Only with a strong consciousness of one’s own identity a sense of respect and appreciation towards other cultures and tribal identities can emerge.

A person indifferent towards his own culture is also indifferent towards other cultures as he does not even know what to look for and appreciate in them. Such a person can only think in economical terms and terms of the short lived satisfaction of selfish needs.

But why can such a cultural consciousness not be nurtured in a multicultural state? Simply because it depends on education and naturally the quality and intensity of teaching must be divided by the number of ethnicities present in the class-room. If Germans, Arabs, Africans and Chinese or in South-Africa, Bantus, Boers, Zulus and English resepectively are sitting in a classroom, whose history and tradition should be taught and in whose language?

The only means for the imperial education system to solve this issue is to find the lowest common denominator between the people who are educated and this results in a very shallow teaching. This teaching however at the samte time creates the kind of citizen the empire needs to secure its rule. It creates a dumbed down subject with a sense of blind obedience to the central government, a lack of a sense of individual power to change anything, a lack of pride in the individual culture and a weak will of defending said culture. It creates a consumer with low expectations and a low productive value which leads to a low quality of the goods and services in circulation which must create a downward spiral that inevitably leads to the collapse of the empire as observed again and again throughout history.

Now what can be concluded from these observations in terms of self determination and self sustainability of a people?

Just as we in Germans in the European Union, the Boer people are living in the South-African Union. Both these Unions are imperial states driven by mechanisms of global trade and capitalism which can only have a corrosive and destructive influence on the individual nations that are subdued by the empire.

Since empires must inevitably collapse over time, as we have just concluded, the time is on the side of the nations within the empire who cherish their history and tradition and wish to survive and carry that tradition into the future.

Reestablishing their own institutions and education systems even under the foreign occupation of an imperial state is the first step towards securing the existance of one’s own tribe, of surviving the collapse of Rome. Within these institutions and schools, the national tradition and language can be taught and therefore the foundation for the future be laid. A rudimentary and independant form of government can be created that co-exists with the imperial government and challenges it, protecting the interests of the cultural group against the enthropy and decay of the power-structure.

In this regard Orania has apparently made considerable progress. It seems to have successfully created a sanctuary for the Afrikaaner people. Its existance is not only important for the people who manage to come and live here among their own kin. It’s existance also serves as a beacon of hope for all Afrikaaners who can not come here. It strengthens their resolve in continuing to teach their traditions to their kids and to keep up their cultural values. Also globally, Orania can emanate a strong symbolic value and give people hope and confidence in maintaining their traditional values in these troubled and alienated times.

Deel/Stuur

Ek moet seker hier noem dat daar, soms in die agtergrond, maar deurlopend, groepe Afrikaners, onder bekwame leierskap, die Afrikaner bemagtig het, begrond het, en gelei het om weer ons identiteit te kry. Ek wil twee uitsonder, daar is vele ander groepe wat ook meegewerk het, maar ek dink twee het die deurslag gegee. Orania, met die werkbare model van eie arbeid, eie instellings en eie grond, en Solidariteit/AfriForum, wat ons afhanklikheid van ‘n staat en die vreemde heersers gebreek het met ‘n strategie van selfdoen.

Ek leef vandag in ‘n Suid-Afrika, waar ons kinders met Afrikanerpolitiek, en ek bedoel nie party dualisme nie maar identiteit en politieke verantwoordelikheid, in moedersmelk grootword. Die kunste eggo dit hard en duidelik, ons sing oor grond en volk en vaderland. En ‘n volk breek met die twis en tweespalk van die verlede, en ‘n volk breek met die apatie wat ons lamgelê het, en ‘n volk breek met die skuldlas van ‘n gefaalde vorige bedeling… en ‘n Volk staan op.

Iemand vra my gister: “Hoe kan jy positief bly en aanhou hoop?”

Ek kyk na die skare vasberade Afrikanermoed rondom my, ek kyk na die stelsels en strukture wat ons alreeds in plek het, ek kyk na my mense, en ek vra terug: “Hoe kan jy nie…”

Deel/Stuur

Ek was dalk ook onbillik om die media al die skuld te probeer gee, hulle rapporteer egter maar net wat hulle hoor, selektief en ingekleur, maar darem nie heeltemal uit duime gesuig nie en dit bring my by my punt… President Cyril Ramaphosa en sy staatsrede:

“We will improve our capacity to support black professionals, deal decisively with companies that resist transformation, use competition policy to open markets up to new black entrants, and invest in the development of businesses in townships and rural areas.”

“We will accelerate our land redistribution programme not only to redress a grave historical injustice, but also to bring more producers into the agricultural sector and to make more land available for cultivation.”

“Guided by the resolutions of the 54^th National Conference of the governing party, this approach will include the expropriation of land without compensation.

We are determined that expropriation without compensation should be implemented in a way that increases agricultural production, improves food security and ensure that the land is returned to those from whom it was taken under colonialism and apartheid.”

“Alle grond onder kolonialisme en apartheid gevat…” ek sou ‘n ossewa binne hierdie stelling kon draai.

Mei 2018, met die bekendstelling van die ANC se verkiesingsveldtog hoor ons hom weer:

“We are going to take land and when we take land we are going to take it without compensation,”

“We are going to do it in the interest of our people because our people want land for housing, they want land so that they can live, they want land so that they can use it as an economic resource.”

Volgens mnr Ramaphosa is daar duidelik ‘n ons en ‘n hulle. Ek is net nie so seker dat al die onse wat hulself as deel van mnr Ramaphosa se pond reken, werklik deur hom daarby ingereken is nie.

Die werklike ons en hulle, is nie die tipiese wit- en swart-pole wat almal wil aanbied as die twee groepe nie, maar ‘n burgery, van wit en swart Suid-Afrikaners, wat op die punt staan om met staats-gewapende roof, hul eie en hul kinders se toekoms te verloor… en as die usefull idiots die eintlike bedreiging totaal mis te kyk.

Dit is die ons en hulle, ‘n burgery wat hulself moet beskerm, teen die vergrype van ‘n magshonger regering wat ter wille van party-politiek, die burgers wat aan hul toevertrou is, sal offer. Diegene wat verwag dat hulle nou skielik, ‘n lekker pasella gaan kry, en dat dit hulle ryk gaan maak, moet maar deur die Venezuela-handboekie blaai. Ek twyfel of hierdie mense werklik in die praktyk, binne die ons van mnr Ramaphosa en sy ANC gereken word.

En die tragedie is, dat hierdie hulle, hierdie dade van magsvergrype, moontlik gedryf deur argaïese en uitgediende ideologieë, deur die ons van die burgery maand na maand na maand befonds word… Links, links, links… marsjeer ons die afgrond af.

Deel/Stuur

• Soewereiniteit is nie deelbaar nie. Soewereiniteit in die volkereg beteken staatkundige / politieke onafhanklikheid. Binne erkende landsgrense kan daar net een soewereiniteit wees, gesetel in die verkose sentrale regering.
  So bv., hoewel die Amerikaanse deelstaat Kalifornië die sewende grootste ekonomie ter wêreld het, is dit nie soewerein nie – dié berus by die Amerikaanse federale regering. Onder sekere omstandighede kan ‘n gedeelte van ‘n land of staat wel afskei, soos bv. Suid-Soedan van Soedan en indien dan aan bepaalde vereistes voldoen word, word ‘n splinternuwe staat gevorm met sy eie soewereiniteit – terwyl die moederstaat sy/haar eie soewereiniteit behou.

• Die term selfbeskikking is nie altyd duidelik omlyn nie, maar verwys meesal na ‘n volk om seggenskap oor homself te hê – dus eintlik word bedoel verwesenliking van eie soewereiniteit. Daaraan gekoppel is die term vryheid – in hoogste vorm behels dit die situasie waar ‘n volk op eie grondgebied demokraties oor sy eie lot beslis – dus weereens verwesenliking van soewereiniteit.

• Vryheid is in die gene van die Afrikaner. Dit word bewys uit sy geskiedenis. In die boek Offerland van FA Venter word verhaal dat die dag toe die Voortrekkers opgepak het om terug oor die Drakensberge weer die binneland in te trek, het die karakter Meester as meereisende onderwyser, voor die klas gestaan en die swartbord skoongevee. Hy draai toe om na die kinders en sê vir hulle: “Vergeet alles wat ek julle ooit geleer het. Onthou net hierdie een ding.” Hy draai toe na die bord en skryf daarop in groot letters: “Vryheid”.

• Die konsep van volk. Uit die Woord is dit duidelik dat bepaalde samelewingsverbande die wil van God is – huwelike tussen man en vrou, gesinne met ouers en kinders, families met voorgeslagte en volke volgens hul geskape etnisiteite. Hieruit kry ook die Afrikaner as volk sy beslag – ‘n konsep wat egter in ons dag deur die Bose so ver as moontlik afgetakel word.
  Daarom is dit nodig, meer as ooit, dat die Afrikaner weer sy volkskap ontdek, daarvan eienaarskap neem en dit met trots uitdra. Dit het niks met diskriminasie te doen nie, maar is bloot erkenning van die geskape werklikheid. Ander etnisiteite word gerespekteer en terwyl elkeen sy plek in die son gegun word, eis die Afrikaner ook syne op.

• In die lig van die voorafgaande is dit duidelik dat daar vandag ‘n skeidslyn loop deur die Afrikaner as volk: Aan die een kant diegene wat steeds glo hul heil en toekoms lê in die groot bont sg. “reënboog” Suid-Afrika. Dit is egter die SA wat vandag lyk soos dit lyk.
  Aan die ander kant is daar diegene wat glo dat selfbeskikking, uiteindelik in ‘n soewereine, selfstandige en volhoubare Afrikanerstaat die enigste opsie is vir oorlewing en uitlewing van Afrikanervolkskap. Vir hierdie doel sal daar noodwendig op regmatige grondgebied gekonsolideer en uitgebou moet word – laertrek as jy wil.
  Dit is die onontwykbare keuse wat elke Afrikaner vandag in die gesig staar. Daar is nie iets soos “kulturele selfbeskikking” of “vry” tussen aanhalingstekens nie.

• Onverklaarde burgeroorlog. Sedert 1994 is in SA regstellende aksie, swart ekonomiese bemagtiging, kwotas, plaasmoorde, terroristiese aanvalle, ‘n hemelhoë stapel diskriminerende wetgewing om die swart meerderheid teen die blanke minderheid te beskerm, niks anders as onverklaarde burgeroorlog teen blankes / die Afrikaner nie.
  Dít gesien tesame met toenemende swart politieke radikalisme, ongelooflike korrupsie en die verval van infrastruktuur tot menslik-gesproke onredbaar – wie sien nog in die huidige SA ‘n rooskleurige toekoms vir die Afrikaner?

• Wat grond betref, is, eerstens grondgryp gronddiefstal. Punt. Daarmee saam moet egter realisties besef word dat vir sy voortbestaan as volk, die Afrikaner êrens op een stuk grondgebied sal moet konsolideer. Dít kan verkry word uit onderhandeling met die regering van die dag, met dien verstande dat die Afrikaner ‘n onvervreembare reg het op ‘n gedeelte van SA as hul vaderland. In hierdie opsig leen die Noordwes-Kaap onder die omstandighede sigself die beste.
  Te Orania en die omliggende aangekoopte grond, beskik die Afrikaner de jure en de facto reeds oor eie grondgebied wat as ononderhandelbare basis kan dien.

• Emigrasie is nie die antwoord nie. Die Afrikaner het geskiedkundig, juridies en prakties ‘n onvervreembare reg op SA of dan ‘n gedeelte daarvan as hul vaderland. Daarby is daar emigrasie sonder prysgawe van volkskap nie.
  Hoekom regeer die ANC vandag oor die Afrikaner? Net een rede: Getalsoorwig. Hulle is nie beter nie en verdien dit nie op meriete nie. Die ANC is Godloos, korrup tot in die kern en in wese terroristies. Volgens die Woord sal die goddelose nie wen nie, maar wel die gelowiges.
  Dus hoekom padgee uit SA?

• Daar is ‘n wesentlike verskil tussen stadsbou en staatsontwikkeling. ‘n Stad fokus op plaaslike dienste – munisipale sake – en bly te alle tye onderhorig aan die (soewereine) sentrale regering. ‘n Staat daarenteen vereis ander organe, soos demokrasie, trias politica, burgerskap, toegangsbeheer, wet en orde, arbeidsreëlings, ekonomiese ontwikkeling, eksterne verhoudinge, ens. en beweeg hierin aan na uiteindelik soewereiniteit.

Om saam te vat, die Afrikaner is huidig by ‘n kruispad soos nog nooit in sy geskiedenis nie. Wat dit betref, is uit die voorafgaande die vraag eenvoudig: Is daar ‘n beter keuse as konsolidasie en ontwikkeling te Orania en omliggende gebied tot ‘n soewereine, vrye, suksesvolle en volhoubare volkstaat?   

So ‘n volkstaat is moontlik indien dit in geloof gegrond word op al die beloftes in Gods Woord, een waarvan vervat is in Jesaja 43:18-19: Dink nie aan die vorige dinge nie, en slaan geen ag op wat vroeër gebeur het nie. Kyk, Ek gaan iets nuuts maak; nou sal dit uitspruit; sal julle dit nie merk nie? Ja, Ek maak ’n pad in die woestyn, riviere in die wildernis.  

Deel/Stuur

Dit is 15 Julie 2020, en Brittanje is al vir ’n paar jaar in ’n politieke maalkolk. Die Brexit-krisis het in Augustus 2018 die Konserwatiewe regering van eerste minister Theresa May laat val. Die Britse Arbeidersparty onder die verlinkse Jeremy Corbyn het in ’n blitsverkiesing aan bewind gekom. Sy veldtogtema Make it Great Britain Again, het kiesers se verbeelding aangegryp. Corbyn se boodskap van radikale transformasie en ’n heimwee na die Britse “groot” verlede, was soos manna uit die hemel vir die moedelose kieserspubliek. Hy het sy politieke teenstanders geklop, en sy (gematigde) vyande binne sy party uitgeskop. Daar was nie eers een teenstem oor toe hy hul voormalige leier en eerste minister, Tony Blair, uit die Arbeidersparty geskors het omdat hy die Britse werkersklas “verraai” het nie.

Radikale agenda
Corbyn het met sy Make it Great Britain Again-veldtog Downingstraat 10 oorgevat met ’n groot agenda van radikale transformasie volgens klas en (Britse) ras. Dit het uit agt punte bestaan, wat hy, soos hy aan die juigende skares belowe het, binne ses maande deur ’n oorblufte parlement gestoomroller het.
Die eerste punt was die sentralisering van Brittanje. Corbyn het die uitgebreide magte wat vorige regerings aan Skotland, Wallis en Noord-Ierland afgewentel het, teruggetrek, en al drie hul parlemente ontbind. Almal is weer sentraal uit Londen regeer.
Die tweede punt was die herinstelling van Sosialisme, wat met hemelhoë belastings op maatskappye en “ryk” mense befonds is. Hulle was immers sy politieke opponente wat tradisioneel vir die Konserwatiewes gestem het. Die instelling van ’n omvattende welsynstelsel het die lojaliteit van miljoene gewone Britte, Skotte, Walliesers en Iere gekoop.

Britsifikasie
Die derde agendapunt was die radikale “Britsifikasie” van die hele land. Die Skotse en Walliese taal en geskiedenis is in skole verbied en met een grootse Britse meesterverhaal vervang. Die openbare sing van die bekende “Flower of Scotland” is verbied, en die Katolieke van Noord-Ierland is “op hul plek” gesit. Die name van historiese strate, dorpe en selfs stede is verander en met dié van Britse helde vervang.
Die vierde agendapunt was Radikale Transformasie volgens verteenwoordigende bevolkingsformules. Die posvlakke in alle staatsinstellings, die privaat sektor en sportspanne moes landwyd die nasionale bevolkingsgetalle weerspieël: 85% Engels, 8% Skots, 5% Wallies en 3% Noord-Iers. Dit is streng afgedwing met swaar boetes vir oortreders. Lojale pro-Corbyn-aktiviste van die Arbeidersparty is landwyd ontplooi om seker te maak dat sy politieke beleid afgedwing word.

Great Brics
Nommer vyf was ’n nuwe buitelandse beleid. Corbyn het handelsbande met die VSA en die Europese unie verbreek, en Brittanje by Brics laat aansluit. Op voorstel van ’n uitgelate president Putin is die organisasie terstond na Great Brics herdoop ter ere van Brittanje se toetrede. Corbyn het die skielike verswakking van die pond en die skerp styging van die inflasiekoers en staatskuld afgemaak as tydelike verskynsels, gedryf deur vyandige kapitaliste wat sy projek om die armes op te hef, wou dwarsboom.
Punt ses was radikale ekonomiese transformasie om historiese ongelykhede gelyk te maak. Corbyn het ’n beleid van radikale BBBEE (British Broad Based Economic Empowerment) ingestel om die Britse werkersklas te bevoordeel. Drakoniese BBBEE-handveste vir elke sektor het die ekonomie so drasties begin reguleer dat dit in die praktyk op nasionalisering neergekom het. Die ekonomiese inkrimping kort hierna is gevolg deur ’n rekordtekort op die land se lopende rekening, ’n val van sakevertroue en ’n “beleggingstaking”. Die skielike toename in werkloosheid is deur Corbyn teengewerk deur groter staatsindiensname van sy ondersteuners. Ekonome wat gewaarsku het dat die welsynstelsel en staatsdienssalarisse alleen die land oor ’n fiskale afgrond kan stoot, is deur Corbyn beskuldig as onpatrioties en anti-Brits.

Onteiening
Punt sewe van Make it Great Britain Again was onteiening sonder vergoeding. Corbyn het veral die grond van ryk Britte geteiken, omdat hulle dit, volgens hom, deur die histories onbillike klassestelsel verkry het. Hy het ook groot stukke “onderbenutte” grond in en rondom stede en dorpe aan armes uitgedeel, wat informele strukture laat opskiet het.

Massamigrasie
Nommer agt was massamigrasie uit Statebondslande. Ná grootskaalse onluste die behuisingsnood van die nuwe aankomelinge in die openbare kollig geplaas het, het die regering groot behuisingskemas aangepak. Klagtes dat hierdie skemas bykans elke dorp “omsingel” met onooglike staatsbehuising wat eiendomswaardes laat daal, die omgewing benadeel en misdaad laat toeneem, is deur die regering as rassisties afgemaak.
Corbyn se radikale transformasie van die land het tot wye onbestendigheid in Brittanje gelei. Daar was ’n skerp toename in geweldsmisdaad en ’n grootskaalse verval van dorpe, stede en staatsinstellings. ’n Korrupsieplaag het soos ’n veldbrand deur die land getrek, aangeblaas deur onbevoegde politieke aanstellings.

Onluste
Die verswakkende ekonomie kon eenvoudig nie voldoen aan die hoë verwagtings wat die politiek geskep het nie, en die vervallende staatsdiens kon nie die beloftes uitvoer nie. Dit het gelei tot landswye protesaksies wat al meer gewelddadig geraak het. Die regering se planne vir staatsgedrewe ekonomiese groei deur staatsondernemings, is gestuit toe die meeste reuseverliese begin maak het en herhaaldelik deur die belastingbetalers gered moes word. Oproepe vir privatisering is deur regeringslui bestempel as ’n neokapitalistiese projek om weer beheer oor die staat te probeer verkry.

Hofuitspraak
Skotland se historiese Edinburg-universiteit is deur die radikale transformasie van die universiteitsektor gedwing om die universiteitsraad, -bestuur, -personeel en studentekorps volgens bevolkingsformules te transformeer. Geboue, kurrikulums en die onderrigtaal moes aan die eise van Britsifikasie voldoen. ’n Skotse Burgerregtegroep wat ’n hofsaak gemaak het oor die gedwonge transformasie, het hul saak mét kostes verloor. Hulle is in die meerderheidsuitspraak van die getransformeerde hoogste hof en deur die nuwe BBC gekritiseer as verregses wat aan die verlede vasklou en toegang vir voorheen benadeelde klasse probeer strem.

Koalisieregering
Die groeiende krisis in Brittanje het tot sulke groot ontevredenheid gelei dat premier Corbyn ’n vervroegde verkiesing moes uitroep. Die Arbeiders kon nie ’n meerderheid by die stembus kry nie, en is gedwing om ’n koalisie met die Skotse Nasionaliste van Nicola Sturgeon te sluit. Sturgeon se voorwaarde van ’n Skotse referendum oor onafhanklikheid was ’n bitter pil om te sluk vir die regering.

Skotse referendum
Maar Corbyn se naelskraapse sege het niks aan die werklikhede verander nie, en hy is nie ’n tweede wittebrood gegun nie. Graderingsagentskappe het Brittanje op sy tweede inhuldiging as premier tot totale rommelstatus afgegradeer. Sy verleë minister van finansies moes hom hoed in die hand tot die Internasionale Monetêre Fonds (IMF) wend vir noodlenings om die land van bankrotskap te red. Hulle het die land prakties onder administrasie geplaas, terwyl Corbyn magteloos moes toekyk. Sturgeon het deurgedruk met die referendum, en die Skotse kiesers het drie keuses gekry:
• Bly deel van Brittanje (en hoop dinge word én bly beter);
• Herstel van Skotse selfbestuur (interne selfbeskikking);
• Skotse onafhanklikheid (Scotex) (volle selfbeskikking);
Die Nasionaliste het met ’n slagspreuk van “Eersteklasburgers van Skotland eerder as tweedeklasburgers van Brittanje”, die referendum met bykans 75% gewen. In ’n gelyklopende referendum het Wallis net vir die herstel van hul selfbestuur gekies. Die rimpeleffek het Corbyn se regering laat val en die Konserwatiewes het weer oorgeneem. Dit het Sturgeon se nuwe regering laat besluit om sekere afgewentelde magte soos verdediging, ekonomie en buitelandse sake wat deur Corbyn weggevat is, weer op te wentel na Brittanje. Die voorwaardes was dat die nuwe Britse regering Sosialisme laat vaar, weer by Navo aansluit, en sy pro-Westerse buitelandse beleid hervat.

Skotse lesse vir Afrikaners
Dit bly moeilik om oplossings vir die groeiende krisisse in Suid-Afrika raak te sien, omdat dit net menslik is om vas te kyk in die huidige omstandighede en aanvaarde denkbeelde van ons tyd. Daarom het ek hierdie politieke toekomsverhaal oor Skotland geskryf, om te kyk of dit nie kan help om nuut en vars te dink oor die wisselwerking tussen die Suid-Afrikaanse en Afrikaneruitdagings nie.
My ervaring is dat liberale Afrikaners nie die beginsel van selfbestuur of selfbeskikking verstaan nie, en dat die meerderheid voorstaanders van selfbeskikking nie die praktiese toepassing daarvan verstaan nie.
Albei groepe verwar dit op die een of ander wyse met apartheid.

Daar’s nie ’n Afrikaner-Skotland
Die Skotse voorbeeld is met twee redes gebruik. Die eerste is om aan liberale Afrikaners wat net aan individuele regte glo, te verduidelik wat kulturele selfbestuur is en dat dit noodsaaklik kan word vir oorlewing. Die tweede rede is om aan voorstaanders van selfbeskikking te probeer verduidelik dat die praktiese toepassing in ons omstandighede uiters moeilik is.
Afrikaners het nie ’n Afrikaner-Skotland wat deur ons bewoon, besit en bewerk word nie. Selfbeskikking en ’n volkstaat kan dus nie onderhandel, gestem, deur die VN afgedwing, deur die regering gegee, of deur ’n hof beveel word nie. Daar bestaan nie so pasklaarland wat net met ’n besluit ’n werklikheid gemaak kan word nie.
Afrikaners se bestaansuitdaging is dat ons nie gekonsentreerd bly nie, maar yl verspreid. Ons is orals ’n minderheid met dieselfde probleme. Selfbeskikking soos in Skotland kan dus nooit hier ’n volledige oplossing wees nie, maar hoogstens deel van ’n groter oplossing.
Die onverstandige gebruik van die begrip selfbeskikking deur sekere voorstaanders daarvan, het dit so vergiftig dat liberales nie daaraan wíl vat nie, en geloofwaardige voorstaanders nie daaraan kán vat nie.

Grondwet of grondgebied
Hierdie skrywe is ’n boodskap vir liberale Afrikaners dat daar (dalk vinnig!) ’n tyd mag kom dat die Grondwet Afrikaners as persone en/of as gemeenskap nie meer beskerm nie, en dat die enigste uitweg grondgebied is.
As hulle dit dan nie hier kry nie, gaan hulle na ’n ander grondgebied trek soos Kanada, Australië of Nieu-Seeland, tot nadeel van die land en al sy inwoners.

Volkstaat of vrystad
My boodskap aan proselfbestuur-Afrikaners is dat die mislukking van die vroeëre volkstaatprojek juis gespruit het uit die feit dat daar nie ’n Afrikaner-Skotland bestaan wat net in werking gestel kon word nie. Die pogings om massas Afrikaners na ’n groot volkstaat toe te laat trek, het ook nie gewerk nie.
Maar daar is ’n meer praktiese uitweg, en dit is om klein te begin en groot te bou. As ’n “kitsvolkstaat” nou onmoontlik is, is daar niks wat Afrikaners keer om byvoorbeeld Orania van ‘n dorp tot ’n Afrikaner-vrystad uit te bou nie. So ‘n vrystad kan later tot ‘n provinsie of selfs meer groei. Dit kan deel wees van ‘n landswye risikobestuursplan van groeiende selfbestuur tot kulturele selfstandigheid, deur netwerke van sterk gemeenskapsorganisasies.
Gebruik jul vryheid om ’n stad van onder af te bou, omdat ’n staat nie van “bo” af gegee kan word nie. Dis tog selfs vir liberale Afrikaners beter om te help om ’n veilige “Perth” hier te bou as om jul geliefdes na Perth in Australië te sien trek. Dit kan ’n onderdeel van ’n veel groter en landswye projek van groeiende selfstandigheid wees. Emigrasie is net ‘n oplossing vir ryk enkelinge, nie vir ‘n hele volk nie.
Kom, laat ons ophou om vir mekaar te sê dat ’n suksesvolle ANC-regeerde Suid-Afrika, óf ’n Afrikanerstad, onhaalbare drome is. Kom ons werk eerder aan albei.
Daar is ongelukkig nie meer maklike oplossings oor nie. Daarom sal ons visie oor die toekoms, sterker moet wees as ons geheue oor die verlede.

Deel/Stuur

In Orania is seker die grootste behoefte, volgens die inwoners, medies. Verkieslik ʼn hospitaal met spesialiste, maar ten minste ʼn voltydse dokter met sy praktyk. Die onvoldoende mediese dienste is waarskynlik die grootste enkele rede dat mense weer wegtrek en ander nooit kom nie. Ons sit egter met ʼn hoender-eier situasie. ʼn Mens kan nie ʼn privaathospitaal vir miljoene der miljoene bou vir minder as 2000 mense nie, waarvan ʼn groot deel dit in elk geval nie kan bekostig nie. ʼn Hospitaal net vir Orania-inwoners is nie op hierdie stadium haalbaar nie. Dan praat ons nog nie eers van die wetgewing nie, wat liefs alles rondom medies in die staat se hande wil plaas. Self net ʼn voltydse dokter vir Orania kon nog nie volhoubaar gevestig word nie, om die eenvoudige rede dat die getalle (veral die wat private medies kan bekostig) nog te min is. Tans is hier darem ʼn homeopaat met sy privaatpraktyk, ʼn gratis kliniek met ʼn besoekende dokter wat verskeie kere per week oop is, en ʼn suster met haar eie privaatpraktyk. Medisyne kan per aflewering daagliks gekry word. ’n Staatshospitaal en twee goeie dokters is in Hopetown, sowat ʼn halfuur se ry, en alle ander mediese geriewe is in Kimberley, ʼn uur en ʼn half se ry.

Dit is seker nou nie ʼn troos nie, maar Orania en Suid-Afrika se mediese probleme moet in perspektief gestel word: mense is orals in die wêreld ontevrede met medies, en hoe meer hulle ontvang, hoe groter raak hulle behoeftes. Selfs in Eerste Wêreldlande is mense dikwels kwaad oor die mediese geriewe: die staatsmedies is nie goed genoeg nie, die privaatmedies is te duur en daar is altyd klagtes oor ʼn “tweeklasse-medies”. Dink maar aan die VSA en die hele debakel rondom Obamacare, om van vorige en toekomstige pogings nie eens te praat nie. Ook in ander Westerse lande is dit ʼn gedurige twisappel.

Die feit bly staan dat medies nie net privaat gedoen kan word nie, want dan raak gesondheid ʼn klassekwessie. Dokters het ook ʼn eed tot hulp afgelê en kan nie iemand laat doodgaan omdat die beursie leeg is nie. Net so min is enige staat, nie eers die mees voorspoedige Westerse welsynstaat, in die posisie om die hoogste gehalte medies vir almal te voorsien nie. Hoeveel minder dan nog Suid-Afrika met sy smal basis belastingbetalers en sy hordes armes. Van dokters kan ook nie verwag word om jarelang ten duurste te studeer, om dan teen ʼn hongerloon hulle lewens in gevaar te stel in swak toegeruste staatsklinieke en -hospitale nie.

Feit is ook dat Suid-Afrikaners oor die algemeen talle siektes het. Van dit is oorerflike, kroniese siektes waaraan jy niks kan doen nie, of dit is as gevolg van ongelukke. ʼn Groot deel is egter ook te wyte aan swak leefstylpatrone wat alombekend is maar nog steeds voortgesit word: te veel suiker, te veel alkohol, rook, stres, te veel sit voor die rekenaar of in die motor, te veel rooivleis en stysel, alles doodgekook en doodgebraai, te min vars groente, vrugte en natuurlike voedsel en te min stap en oefening. Natuurlik kan ʼn gesonde leefstyl jou nie van alle siektes bewaar nie, maar dit help. Die wat kla oor onvoldoende mediese dienste (orals in die wêreld) kan solank by hulleself begin en daarmee help om die druk op mediese dienste te verlig. Mediese fondse het maar hulle beperkinge en is net nie vir almal bekostigbaar nie, maar almal behoort iets vir medies weg te sit, selfs die heel armes. Dit is goeie advies om ʼn aparte spaarrekening vir mediese uitgawes te skep waarin die werkgewer ʼn deel van die salaris betaal. In Orania word dit toenemend gedoen en dit skep meer stabiliteit.

Deel/Stuur

Tweedens vind mens die uitgebreide familie-, vriende- en kollegakring, gewoonlik met hul gades of metgeselle, en tradisioneel hul kinders ook, alhoewel dit deesdae ‘n grootmensding word, só ‘n troue.

Derdens tref mens hierdie uitgebreide groep mense, met bepaalde belange by die egpaar wat daar voor staan/kniel/sit afhangende van die gebruik, met hul manier van dinge doen aan. En hiermee bedoel ek natuurlik hul kultuur, alhoewel die verhoudingsbande en godsdiens waarskynlik ook onder die hofie “kultuur” kan val.

Ek dink geen ander geleentheid bied ‘n kultuur só uitkenbaar en herkenbaar aan as ‘n tradisionele troue nie. Die Jode, as kulturele en godsdienstige groep het hul herkenbare seremoniële, so ook die Amerikaners, Duitsers, Italianers, Engelse ens. Natuurlik speel sosiale klas/kas/status ook ‘n rol, maar meermale verskil die hoëre dele van die kulturele samelewing s’n slegs van die laere dele in die hoeveelheid blink goedjies wat van die kandelare en tussen die halse hang. Hoe dit ook al sy, mens kan ‘n kultuur herken, volgens my observasie in elk geval, aan die manier hoe daardie kultuur se mense met mekaar in die eg tree, en al die gebeure rondom die bepaalde dag se verrigtinge.

Dit bring my by my tema van hierdie skrywe wat ek heel pretensieus en groots aanbied as: “Kulturele kruisbestuiwing” en minder pretensieus en groots “en die Tannie met die pienk rok” alhoewel die grootsheid van die rok ten nouste met die grootsheid van die tannie gelees moet word.

Soos ek tussen die vierde “Tant Koek se Hoenderhaan” en ‘n half geprewelde verleë poging van vier dapperes tot “Kinders by dosyne” aan my JC le Roux sit en teug, bekyk ek die Afrikaner kulturele skouspel wat voor my afspeel: Die bewende hande van die heildronkers, die onder die belt en flou grappies van die seremoniemeester, wat lyk of hy op ‘n Orkney mynpaartie tweede gekom het, die kinders wat om die tafels hol, en die mikrofoon wat heel duidelik kringfluit om die mense tog op en wakker te hou; die stoelstaan en kousband en minder en meer mollige dames wat soos ‘n losgemaal agter verlepte rose en loof aan duik; die tiener neefs en niggies wat skelm agter die lapa Camels double clutch en deodorant in hul monde spuit; die laat middeljarige ooms wat die kroeg volstaan en rugby praat; die dominee en sy vrou wat gereeld horlosie kyk soos hul wag op die “segen Vader, segen sop” en die buffet ry wat skielik te lank geword het; die studentevriend met die laptop en sy lekker speakers; en die dansbaan, wat selfs na versoek dat ander moet deelneem, toontrappend deur die bruidegom en bruid deurgetrippel word op hul “spesiale liedjie” waarop hulle gister moes besluit; die twee tannies wat skinder oor die magie wat onder die wit rok skynbaar wys. Alles dinge wat tussen die heildronke en grappies en liedjies deur as eg Afrikaner herken kan word, tot die kulturele kruisbestuiwing later die aand die teorie begin karring.

Ek gebruik die woord bestuiwing, omdat dit lekker by die huwelikstema inpas, maar daar is min sprake van die oor en weer wisselwerking van kruisbestuiwing, dit is eerder blatante infiltrasie, wat die aard van die een vir ewig verander, terwyl die ander onaangeraak bly. Dit is hier, ná die poeding en koek sny, dat die tannie met die pienk rok my, en waarskynlik die paar ander observeerders van menslike gedrag wat op die rant van die buitekring by dié tipe geleenthede kantel, aandag trek. Ek sê tannie, maar sy is waarskynlik nie my tannie nie, ook nie oud genoeg om my tannie te wees nie, maar êrens in haar later middeljare. Dit is sy wat hard uitroep dat almal nou moet opspring, en sy giggel en wiggel op die maat van die volksvreemde bewegings van die Macarena en daarna die Hoenderliedjie, en daarna kom die verouderende hippie-oom van die sestigs, in sy klokpypbroek en wys almal, tot almal se verlies, skade en skande, hoe Zorba nog altyd gedoen moet word…

Ek sluk maar diep aan die laaste borrel van my JC le Roux, en moet erken, dat alhoewel baie van hierdie gebeure wat vandag hier voor my afgespeel het, erfgoed van ander kulture is, dit darem ‘n eg-Afrikaner geur bygekry het, en hierdie eg-Afrikaner geur, het vandag ‘n pienk rok aan.

Deel/Stuur

Everybody has heard about the Amish, who are known for their horse-and-buggy way of life. Those strange people in America who have many wives? (Wrong: This is such a common misconception. People get this confused with the Mormons.) These are such different people. The Amish are among the most easily recognizable peoples in North America.  For some, they may seem a living remnant of a bygone era, or a people stubbornly clinging to outdated ways. But who are they and why are they so “strange”? What makes them like this? But most importantly, what lessons can we take from them are implement for ourselves?

One of my beliefs is that one should be curious and see what one can learn from other people. There might be something of great value. This is certainly the case of the Amish. Stephen Covey says in his Seven Habits of Highly Effective People: “Seek first to understand (others) before you will be understood.”

But let us get down to the REAL facts (and not “fake news”!) If there was a beacon of light in a world gone mad, this is them:

Strong Faith

1. If ever there was a group of people with strong Christian beliefs and are prepared to live by these beliefs, this is them. I do not know of any group of people who have done this. Many in the past died for their beliefs.

2. Quite a few were burnt at the stake for their beliefs. This shows you how strong their faith is. They had the chance to save themselves by renouncing their faith, but they would not.

3. They are pacifists. They have forsaken ALL violence, even to defend themselves. So, they went to their deaths gracefully and with dignity.

4. Because of their non-violent beliefs, they do not have moustaches as they see this is a symbol of European militarism.

5. Forgiveness is a strong element of their faith. The most extreme example is where a mentally unbalanced gunman killed and injured a number of Amish girls, and then turned the gun on himself and committed suicide. The Amish community forgave the gunman and even supported his family and attended his funeral. This is known as the e 2006 West Nickel Mines School shooting at Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania. There is move made about this called Amish Grace and you are thoroughly recommended to watch it. I do not know of anyone who has watched this move and who has not had a tear in their eye.

Strong Growth

6. There are nearly 251,000 Amishpeople in America and Canada, according to Ohio State University researchers. That’s more than double the estimated population in 1989 of about 100,000. Researchers estimate the population will double again to half a million within about 21 This study was done in 2012. They are one of the fastest growing groups in the USA, albeit off a low base.

7. Much of the growth has to do with the fact that more Amish children are staying with the religion and starting their own high-fertility families. This is now over 90%

8. The Amish live in small groups of 20 or 30 families known as settlements. In 1990, there were 179 settlements in the U.S. By 2012 there were 456, including a handful in Canada.
9. As the number of settlements has grown, so has their geographic reach. The Amish have traditionally lived in places like Lancaster County, Pennsylvania or Holmes County, Ohio. Now they are spreading to other parts of the country, from New York to Missouri, Wyoming, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma and even one South Dakota. The move to the West and the plains states is only just starting. But the strongest growth is on the east coast, such as Maine and New York. The growth is being directed by where property values have fallen dramatically. Changing agricultural economics are also driving a lot of Amish to new territory. As farmers leave their farms or sell them off, sparsely populated rural areas become prime real estate for the Amish.

Strong Agriculturalists

10. The Amish have strong agricultural skills and it is part of their history that they were sought as good citizens by countries who welcomed them with open arms.
11. Agriculture is their preferred occupation and because of this the Amish are a rural community people.
12. The Amish have large families and the children work on the farm from an early age. From about 13 years of age the children have significant responsibilities on running the farms. So they learn solid practical skills.

Strong way of life

13. Their way of life is driven by their belief in the Bible and particularly 1 John 2:15-17:

On Not Loving the World

¹⁵ Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. ¹⁶ For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. ¹⁷ The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.

(New International Version)

14. This society believes that the pathway to heaven is paved with modesty. Amish believe that a person must be separate from the world, forsake self-interest and humbly submit to the authority of the church. This is the only way to be righteous in the sight of God. Any show of pride is sin and must be avoided. Thus, there are no elites in Amish society. Individualism and pride is avoided.
15. They have standard dress codes and behaviour codes that everyone follows. There are even codes for the style of their horse-drawn buggies. There is no ornamentation in their homes and few possessions and that those required for living, as anything else is deemed ostentatious. This is so that they remain “plain”.
16. They avoid the negative influences of the outside world by living apart. They do interact with the outside world but do not adopt the outside world customs and behaviours. (People outside of the Amish community are known as “The English”.)
17. For this reason, they have a very distinctive dress code. They have “plain” clothes. Humility is one of their core values and thus do not want to “stand out” by having fancy clothes and jewellery. The Amish are also known as the “Plain” people.
18. Also, they use only own labour. This is aided by their large family size and the help of the community. They are well known for their craftmanship
19. They believe in the judicious and appropriate use of technology. They do not phones in their homes as this can be distractive but do make use of outside pay phones. For the same reason they do not have TV’s. (Stephen Covey says that indiscriminate viewing of TV “is like having a sewerage pipe into your lounge with the value open” and he was not even Amish! Please note that these are quite extreme views. TV’s are a blessing to many people, especially the elderly who are not mobile and would be otherwise cut off from the world. But everything in moderation …)
20. They also retain their independence so that they do not have to compromise any of their values. For this reason, they do not want to be dependant upon any grid such as electricity, water or communication grid over which they have no control of that they cannot do without if “push comes to shove”. They DO use electricity, but only from their own generators. An example of this is milking machines and refrigerators.
21. They only horse drawn vehicles. But you also find some anomalies: have a horse drawn agricultural implement but where the implement itself is powered by either petrol or diesel engine … it looks quite strange but there you have it! The reason for only using horse drawn power is three-fold:
    1. It slows down the pace of life
    2. They are in control
    3. It limits your capability and thus keeps you humble. (i.e. Your farm size will be dictated by what you manage with a team of horses … This is in aligned with the principle of “Enough for your need but not your greed”

They do accept lifts in motor vehicles and use public transport in times of emergencies.

22. Have a strong community spirit and this is demonstrated best in what is called “barn raising” where the whole community comes together to build a barn for someone.
23. The help of neighbours is a core value. They do help the “English” neighbours in times of disasters by physically helping them to rebuild homes if destroyed by disasters.
24. They do not have pensions and medical aid. They cope by having the three generations living together and by the community helping financially where necessary. Thus, they do not have insurance (this follows a biblical interpretation of not “being unequally yoked”). This also makes one more cautious in life if you do not have insurance cover. (Please do not go and give up your medical aid and all your insurance cover after reading these statements)
25. They do not believe “in going to law” to settle disputes. They prefer to settle this within their communities and with the help of their leaders/elders. But sometimes the community has had to go to law to fight government legislation that negatively impacts the Amish way of life. The Amish have won the right to have their own schools. (There is constant pressure from some bureaucrats to get the Amish to conform and send their children to normal schools). Often, they Amish decline to fight legal matters but then outside parties sympathetic to the Amish go and fight the legal battle for then without being asked to do so.
26. The Amish believe strongly in education, but only provide formal education through the eighth grade. They are exempt from state compulsory attendance beyond the eighth grade based on religious principles. The Amish do not undertake formal higher education. The teachers in the Amish schools are often the older girls who themselves only have a grade eight education.
    Education is a very controversial subject have but the Amish believe that it is appropriate to their society and their beliefs in modesty and humbleness. [1]
27. In an Amish community you cannot volunteer to be leader … you have to be “called”. They mere fact of volunteering will disqualify you.
28. They are very cost conscious, often preferring home births and traditional medicine where appropriate. But they will use modern medicine when it is called for.
29. The Amish require that both parties to a marriage be baptized within the church. Due to the structured nature of Amish culture, allowing mixed marriages would threaten to destabilize Amish society.  Most Amish youth become baptized between the ages of 18-22, after which they are likely to get married. In rare cases, an outsider may join the Amishin order to get married to an Amish person.  Amish do accept converts, though they generally do not proselytize or encourage outsiders to join. It has also occasionally happened that a married Amish individual has left the faith while the spouse has stayed behind.
30. However, the pressures of modern society are changing the way of Amish live and many of the youngsters are finding it harder and harder to obtain land to be farmers and are having to resort to other forms of occupations. There is strong pressure from the younger generations to start using cars, tractors, computers etc. Sometimes some Amish my leave the community and join their sister-faiths such as the Mennonites who are less strict over these matters
31. They distance themselves altogether from politics.
32. Order is maintained by a practice called “shunning”.[2] This is where everyone avoids you. In a society where violence is forsaken this is a very effective way of disciplining people. The offender soon comes right or leaves the community. Crime is virtually non-existence in their community.
33. They pay their taxes diligently and but not accept any state subsidies that they are entitled to as they deem it unfair enrichment and a form of dependence.

Amish Origins

34. Amish roots are in Europe, though none live there today. The Amish are a product of the Protestant revolution in Europe. In the early 1500’s a group of devout Christians in Zurich, Switzerland developed a set of beliefs counter to both the state Catholic church as well as the Protestant groups that rebelled against it. Among other beliefs, this group felt strongly that individuals should be baptized as adults, not infants. They also believed in a Scriptural doctrine of non-resistance, which would prevent them from doing military service or any other acts of violence. Due to their belief in adult baptism, this group was given the derogatory name “Anabaptists”, which literally means “rebaptizers”.
35. Early Anabaptist history is bloody. Anabaptists were seen as undermining the power of the State church. For their threatening beliefs they were persecuted—captured, tortured and in some cases killed—and were forced to worship in secret. Over time they found refuge in various locations throughout Europe, including parts of Switzerland, France, Germany, Holland, and even as far east as Poland and Russia. In Europe they developed methods of farming to make the best of the poor-quality lands they were forced to inhabit, and in the process developed a strong agricultural reputation.

Conclusion

To a lot of Americans, and the greater world, the Amish are a distant light of sanity in a world overwhelmed by consumerism and materialism and individuality. This is a check and balance and a pointer to an older, quieter, calmer way of life, where people are control of their lives. They would feel very uncomfortable if the Amish were not around. To many South Africans they see Orania and the Afrikaners in the same light. Orania has a strong drive to build craftmanship and other skills

Obviously, this way of live is impossible for many as too much sacrifice is called for to achieve this. But there are small steps that we can start taking is inch slowly towards a saner way of life. But Oranians are very similar in many ways such as: Value education, strong ethics, strong desire of independent (e.g. off the grid) and prospering by own labour, solving problems within the community and avoiding going to law, cost consciousness, modesty, no consumerism or materialism. Both groups are very strongly agriculture based, and this gives them a major advantage for food security.

There are a number of significant differences. Biblical scriptures are open to interpretation in several ways. The Amish have chosen a very specific interpretation and it works for them. However, in Orania there is a wide diversity of interpretations and is a much more “open” society. The Oranians value higher education which is actively encouraged and promoted. Although there are no elites in Orania, individualism is a trait of Afrikaners. The younger generation in Orania are quite modern in their outlook. There are no restrictions such as dress code and use of technology. Rather, there is an encouragement to get off the electricity grid. The Amish are probably the best prepared Western society for a post fossil-fuel future. Orania is the best such prepared community in South Africa … the implementation of this is decades ahead of any other modern community.

Our “hats off” to the Amish and to Orania for their achievements!

[1] http://www.exploring-amish-country.com/amish-education.html

[2] http://www.exploring-amish-country.com/amish-shunning.html

Deel/Stuur