South African history

[arapahoepark]

Considering the fact that South Africa is listed on Genocide Watch for advocating the killing of white Boers, I was wondering if there are any good histories on the country. A few places that I have come across tend to be kinists that whitewash Apartheid while liberals downplay the genocide like conditions.
What has been happening there seems eerily similar to the propaganda campaign here.
Perhaps our PB brothers in South Africa could be of some help? @Von

South Africa | genocidewatch

www.genocidewatch.com

 

[Von]

A few places that I have come across tend to be kinists that whitewash Apartheid while liberals downplay the genocide like conditions.

You're pretty much right.
I would like to discuss this further, especially the genocide-bit, but I do not have the time at the moment. Will come back to you.
One of the best histories that I've read was THE PURITANS IN AFRICA. Written by a white South African in the 1970's, but banned from the country for a while.

 

[alexandermsmith]

An excellent book on South African history is "The Great Trek" by Oliver Ransford. It's much cheaper in the UK than in the US on Amazon, I'm afraid, but you might be able to find it elsewhere:

Great Trek: Amazon.co.uk: Ransford, Oliver: 9780351179495: Books

Buy Great Trek New by Ransford, Oliver (ISBN: 9780351179495) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.

www.amazon.co.uk

It is concerned with the Voortrekkers (descendants of the original Dutch settlers) who left the Cape Colony inthe early 19th century due to the oppressive rule of the British. It is a wonderful and inspiring story, particularly when dealing with the Battle of Blood River which was a glorious deliverance by the Lord of a small band of Afrikaners against a huge Zulu force.

The book also provides helpful information on the history of migrations into southern Africa: the Whites arriving at the cape of good hope in 1652 and the Blacks migrating down from central Africa into what is today the east of South Africa (Whites and Blacks didn't meet until the late 18th century along the border of present day cape province and the natal). You'll learn a lot of valuable history which you won't hear nowadays. I wouldn't trust any modern day English histories of the country. They will almost certainly be tainted by anti-White prejudice. And I wouldn't trust anything written by de Klerk. He betrayed his people and his personal character leaves a lot to be desired.

Another book that might be of interest is this one about the missionary Andrew Murray:

Andrew Murray by Vance Christie

Andrew Murray’s writings and influence are still felt today and Vance Christie skilfully and faithfully brings his story to life for a new generation.

www.christianfocus.com

It doesn't deal with South African history, per se, but would give you some insight I'm sure.

 

[Von]

Another book that might be of interest is this one about the missionary Andrew Murray:

I'm originally from the hometown of Andrew Murray - The church that I grew up in was the church that he preached from. Although I was a fan earlier on, and although I do believe that he was a God-fearing man with great piety, his teachings leave a lot to be desired. He was an early charismatic and his books have arminian tendencies.

And I wouldn't trust anything written by de Klerk.

WA de Klerk (the man that wrote the book that I suggested) and FW de Klerk (the former president of SA) are not related.

What has been happening there seems eerily similar to the propaganda campaign here.

Add to that the fact that the whites in SA are the minority - it complicates things a bit. And you've got a further schism between English-speaking whites (liberal) and Afrikaans-speaking (more conservative, but changing) whites.

 

[alexandermsmith]

WA de Klerk (the man that wrote the book that I suggested) and FW de Klerk (the former president of SA) are not related.

Oh that's good!

 

[arapahoepark]

I'm originally from the hometown of Andrew Murray - The church that I grew up in was the church that he preached from. Although I was a fan earlier on, and although I do believe that he was a God-fearing man with great piety, his teachings leave a lot to be desired. He was an early charismatic and his books have arminian tendencies.

WA de Klerk (the man that wrote the book that I suggested) and FW de Klerk (the former president of SA) are not related.

Add to that the fact that the whites in SA are the minority - it complicates things a bit. And you've got a further schism between English-speaking whites (liberal) and Afrikaans-speaking (more conservative, but changing) whites.

Thank you! While we are on it, any good histories of Africa, particularly modern focusing on the influx of communism?

 

[W.C. Dean]

If you want to learn more about communism in Africa pick up one of the books by Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith. He lived through it all.

 

[Jonatan Boon]

I am from South Africa and my father did his PHD on the missionary history of South Africa focussing on the first half of the 19th century. In this time the Great Trek (1838) and the abolition of slavery happened (1834/1838). He investigates amongst others the attitude of a Moravian missionary towards these events. Here is a link to his thesis (you can download it for free): http://scholar.ufs.ac.za:8080/xmlui/handle/11660/1133 .
The historiography of South Africa is quite complicated. You have basically two views: the 'older' view that is extremely biased towards the Afrikaners and puts the Voortrekkers only (or mostly) in a positive light and that the Voortrekkers were only very faithful people. This view was very common in the Apartheid era.
The 'newer' view is the direct opposite. Putting the Voortrekkers (later the Afrikaners) and other colonialists in a very negative light. This view focusses on how the natives were only suppressed by the colonialists and are only the victims of colonialism. This view is at the moment very popular and the one I learned in school.
The truth is somewhere between these two views. The Voortrekkers and colonialists were not always super godly and they are responsible for a lot of wrongdoings. But so is the native population (you can argue that they are not really native, because they migrated from central Africa just before the Europeans came) also responsible for the killing of other tribes. Someone for example like Shaka Zulu (early 19th century) was responsible for a genocide (called the Difeqane).
My fahter tried to sail between these two wrong views in his thesis. Chapters 9, 10, 12 and 13 might be of interest to you, because they deal with these topics.

 

[alexandermsmith]

Blacks are not native to southern Africa. Their migration down south was concurrent with the Whites' migration east. If one insists on referring to "natives" of that land then that would be the Khoisan, or Bushmen (classified as "coloured" during Apartheid). They are a quite distinct group of people (who have also been persecuted by the Blacks). The Zulus- the largest ethnic group in South Africa and the group which claims South Africa as their country- did not exist as a distinct group until the early 18th century, fifty years after Whites first settled in southern Africa. And it wasn't until the 19th century that any distinct Zulu "nation" was formed.

When Whites first arrived in southern Africa the land which is now South Africa was largely empty. The Khoisan lived in small subsistence farming communities which did not settle in any one place for long. As the Whites migrated East they did not encounter Blacks until the late 18th century along the border of present day Cape Colony and Natal. The Afrikaners then migrated north east into what became the Orange Free State and the Transvaal. The Transvaal did at one time before this contain a large Black population but this was practically exterminated by the Zulus in the early 19th Century (the Mfecane). So when the Afrikaners first migrated into this land it was essentially empty. The Whites never "stole" any land from Blacks. There were no Black nations or cities in these regions to be "stolen" by Whites. The only real territorial skirmishes were in the Natal region where the Blacks had established a substantial long term presence. In this region the Whites attempted to negotiate with the Zulus in order that both peoples might live in the land peacefully. What happened was the Zulus betrayed the Whites and slaughtered their diplomatic envoys.

 

[Von]

I am from South Africa

Are you afrikaans-speaking?

 

[lynnie]

You might like this book. I got it a couple years ago and read some, skimmed some. It has a great deal of history. The book reviews are interesting and enlightening if you scroll down. It isn't exactly light reading. In fact, it can be agonizing to read.

Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa: Ilana Mercer: 9780984907014: Amazon.com: Books

Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa [Ilana Mercer] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa

www.amazon.com

Her father was a liberal rabbi who fought hard against apartheid for a long time, and she grew up in that environment and was herself liberal. I guess with a title like "Into the Cannibal's Pot", you can guess what she thinks about South Africa now.