NationStates Jolt Archive

And it slowly circles around the drain.


http://www.news.com.au/story/print/0,10119,16466182,00.html



White owners ordered off farm
From correspondents in Windhoek, Namibia
02-09-2005
From: Agence France-Presse


NAMIBIA'S government has quietly expropriated its first white-owned farm under the terms of its land reform program, ordering its former occupants off the premises by the end of November, the farm's owner said today.
Hilde Wiese is among 15 white farm owners who were told in May last year by the south-west African state's government to "make an offer" for the sale of their land.

Ms Wiese said the government paid 3.7 million Namibian dollars ($773,900) for the Ongombo West farm about 40km east of the capital.

"The ministry of lands and resettlement handed the cheque last week to my lawyer," Ms Wiese said.

The 69-year-old farm owner, who last month estimated the 4000 hectare farm at a value of around nine million Namibian dollars, has reluctantly agreed on the set price.

"The money was paid into a trust account and I will receive it only once the transfer is completed," she said.

The Wiese family also have to pay 6000 Namibian dollars in transfer fees saying they were "forced to do that by the ministry of lands, although usually the buyer pays the costs and not the seller".

Namibia's 3800 white farmers own most of the arable land in the desert country, an imbalance the government has vowed to redress.

Owning Ongombo West farm for the past four generations, the Wieses were drawn into a political storm of land ownership after a dispute last year with six farm workers who were evicted.

The workers were reinstated after an order by Namibia's labour court.

The family and 70 black farm workers will now have to be off the farm by the end of November.

"Where do they go from here, why can't they stay and be resettled?" Ms Wiese asked.

Namibia's lands ministry confirmed it had paid the money.

"Payment was made last week and we now wait for the transfer of ownership to be completed," said a government official.

Former president Sam Nujoma singled out the Wiese farm in a speech, saying "some of the whites are behaving as if they came from Holland or Germany" for evicting their workers.

Sooo, when Namibia begins to starve as well can I point and laugh a la Nelson?

"Namibia's 3800 white farmers own most of the arable land in the desert country"

hmm, i wonder how that happened....

Sooo, when Namibia begins to starve as well can I point and laugh a la Nelson?Nah. They've got enough problems with other things already. It isn't good manners to laugh at other people's misery.

"Namibia's 3800 white farmers own most of the arable land in the desert country"

hmm, i wonder how that happened....

The same way you're "residing" in Wisconson. Would you be willing to leave your home for 1/3 its value to have it returned to a local tribe?

The same way you're "residing" in Wisconson. Would you be willing to leave your home for 1/3 its value to have it returned to a local tribe?

yes

Then do it.

African nations are not the only one's to revoke land ownership, the power is even vested in the Australian Constitution. People are often paid far less then their land value by the state.

And let's not forget how this land came be in the hands of a white minority.

The same way you're "residing" in Wisconson. Would you be willing to leave your home for 1/3 its value to have it returned to a local tribe?
Asssuming that tribe were the voting majority and made up the governemnt you could certainly expect it.

African nations are not the only one's to revoke land ownership, the power is even vested in the Australian Constitution. People are often paid far less then their land value by the state.

And let's not forget how this land came be in the hands of a white minority.

So the answer to discriminatory racist policies from a hundred years ago is discriminatory racist policies today?

Then do it.

can't. don't own the building, and no tribe is currently making specific claims on sheboygan. but should an organized land redistribution movement arise, i would support it. though i would prefer that any land redistribution not be based on ethnicity, but rather aimed at collective ownership.

"Namibia's 3800 white farmers own most of the arable land in the desert country"

hmm, i wonder how that happened....

It happened because they went there and settled on the land, and over a period many years developed it into arable farms. No-one else was farming it before then.

Asssuming that tribe were the voting majority and made up the governemnt you could certainly expect it.

That doesn't answer the question. Would you be willing to give up your home that had been in your family for over 100 years for 1/3 its cost to make up for past injustices that you had nothing to do with?

If you're from Australia, have you offered your home to an Aboriginie?

That doesn't answer the question. Would you be willing to give up your home that had been in your family for over 100 years for 1/3 its cost to make up for past injustices that you had nothing to do with?

If you're from Australia, have you offered your home to an Aboriginie?
Well given I'm black, I think I'll keep it?

So the answer to discriminatory racist policies from a hundred years ago is discriminatory racist policies today?

a hundred years ago?! dude, what the fuck are you on? namibia gained independence from south africa 15 years ago. you might remember a little thing called apartheid...

So the answer to discriminatory racist policies from a hundred years ago is discriminatory racist policies today?
Firstly, not a hundred years ago. Decades ago. Secondly you cannot oppress a people for hundreds of years anot expect them to take back what's their's once they finally regain power.

can't. don't own the building, and no tribe is currently making specific claims on sheboygan. but should an organized land redistribution movement arise, i would support it. though i would prefer that any land redistribution not be based on ethnicity, but rather aimed at collective ownership.

What you "prefer" doesn't matter. You're not Native American(or black African in the case of Namibia etc.), you don't have anything to say in the matter.

It's always easy to make offers of giving things up when you don't own anything.

Actually we should redistribute everything. We can start by giving the Japanese home islands back to the Ainu, then we can restore greater britian and ireland to the beaker people. Of course, the russians in moscow will all have to move back to scandanvia, so the eastern europeans can be pushed back to the steppes.

Land redistribution based upon what happened in the past is the silliest idea in the world.

a hundred years ago?! dude, what the fuck are you on? namibia gained independence from south africa 15 years ago. you might remember a little thing called apartheid...

And since you didn't read the article, the family has owned the land for over 100 YEARS. While they may not have dark skin, they are Africans. This is racism plain and simple.

Land redistribution based upon what happened in the past is the silliest idea in the world.No it isn't. It just depends on the circumstances whether it is silly or not.

Well given I'm black, I think I'll keep it?

Are you Native Aborigine?

It happened because they went there and settled on the land, and over a period many years developed it into arable farms. No-one else was farming it before then.

i somehow doubt that. mainly because by the time europeans arrived, bantu farming cultures had already pushed the hunting and gathering groups of southern africa into the areas that were unfit for farming. got a source?

No it isn't. It just depends on the circumstances whether it is silly or not.

What circumstances? Everyone who was around when this land was originally settled and developed is dead. It is what it is, and there is absoulutely no way to justify this other than gangsterism.

And if you think this is right, then must also think that the US government land grabs from the natives on this continent were right too.

the family has owned the land for over 100 YEARS.

under explicitly racist colonial regimes. so what?

No it isn't. It just depends on the circumstances whether it is silly or not.
And I suppose you, in all your infinite wisdom, get to decide what is silly and what is not. :rolleyes:

Actually we should redistribute everything. We can start by giving the Japanese home islands back to the Ainu, then we can restore greater britian and ireland to the beaker people. Of course, the russians in moscow will all have to move back to scandanvia, so the eastern europeans can be pushed back to the steppes.


The Tribes that were native to my area are extinct. Who should I give my land back to? I'm also of mixed European descent. To whom should I make my claim of land over there to?

What circumstances? Everyone who was around when this land was originally settled and developed is dead. It is what it is, and there is absoulutely no way to justify this other than gangsterism.

And if you think this is right, then must also think that the US government land grabs from the natives on this continent were right too.Like I said, it depends on the CIRCUMSTANCES. In English, that means that every case is different and while one case might be appropriate, another would not.

And I suppose you, in all your infinite wisdom, get to decide what is silly and what is not. :rolleyes:Of course. And don't you doubt me! :p
I just know what cases I would consider silly and which ones I wouldn't. My opinion isn't legally binding.

under explicitly racist colonial regimes. so what?

That they had nothing to do with establishing. Is the land going back to the direct decendants of the original inhabitants? Most likely not. It is now Government owned. Taken away for the express reason that they were Caucasion. A racist policy is a racist policy no matter which way you cut it.

i somehow doubt that. mainly because by the time europeans arrived, bantu farming cultures had already pushed the hunting and gathering groups of southern africa into the areas that were unfit for farming. got a source?

I always thought the Bantu primarily settled south of the Limpopo and didn't spread throughout southern africa until after Europeans arrived.

And no, I don't have a source.

The Tribes that were native to my area are extinct. Who should I give my land back to? I'm also of mixed European descent. To whom should I make my claim of land over there to?

You could say exactly the same about much of the land owned by whites in southern africa. You could also say the same about many of the whites who are currently there.

Like I said, it depends on the CIRCUMSTANCES. In English, that means that every case is different and while one case might be appropriate, another would not.

Laws, however, need set definitions. You can't have decisions like that based on the whim of a few judges.

These people had been on the land for 4 generations. Do yo think it was appropriate in this case?

Laws, however, need set definitions. You can't have decisions like that based on the whim of a few judges.

These people had been on the land for 4 generations. Do yo think it was appropriate in this case?They are being paid for it. As far as I've heard, they're not being horrendously underpaid as in Zimbabwe (this features in German programs a bit because Namibia was a German colony). They're also not doing it all at once, the way it was being done in Zimbabwe. The problem is, Namibia is taking Zimbabwe as an example as how to continue with it.
I support a bit of disownment, but not the complete disownment of whites.

They are being paid for it. As far as I've heard, they're not being horrendously underpaid as in Zimbabwe (this features in German programs a bit because Namibia was a German colony). They're also not doing it all at once, the way it was being done in Zimbabwe. The problem is, Namibia is taking Zimbabwe as an example as how to continue with it.
I support a bit of disownment, but not the complete disownment of whites.

1/3 the actual value.
While "better" than Zimbabwei, that country is turning into a hell-hole.

Had the family only been there a short while, there might be some arguement. They had been there over 100 years.

Actually, they have ancestral right to live there, as tens of thousands of years (or hundreds of thousands of years ago... i'm too lazy to look up the exact date,) early man migrated out of Africa and into Europe. Therefore, all humans are justified in going to Africa and claiming other people's lands as their own.

The reason it is alarming is because the government has decided to ignore the rule of law yada yada yada... Africa is a mess, and it is probably never going to get any better.

And then, when they [Zimbabweans] kick out the only people who can farm, they will starve and the Western world will once again have to hand them out food. Only difference is they'll own more land to starve on.

And then, when they [Zimbabweans] kick out the only people who can farm, they will starve and the Western world will once again have to hand them out food. Only difference is they'll own more land to starve on.

Actually, it's all very environmental. Governments in Southern Africa are currently engaged in massive depopulation projects. Eventually they reach sustainable hunter gather levels. At which point the chinese will take their land.

A lot of ex-Zimbabwean (white) farmers, who considered themselves Zimbabweans in the fullest sense of the word, have moved to Australia to work on farms here. My family is friends with a couple of ex-farming families, and basically they said they were given a token amount (a dollar) for their entire farm and all stock/seed/buildings on it, and essentially forced to leave. It is a really sad state of affairs that the former 'Breadbasket of Africa' has now instituted stupid land distribution policies, that similar to the soviets in the 30's and 40's are now starving the country. The Zimbabwean dictatorship (its not a democracy) are f*cking their own people in the ass by getting rid of the people who have the business know-how of running effective farms and redistributing it in small blocks that will never be able to turn a profit. It is a shame to hear that the Namibians may be going down the same path. I suppose this is further proof of the ineffectiveness of pouring aid into corrupt countries or military dictatorships.
NB I am not against providing aid to countries which have low levels of corruption and in which there is a democratic government