Brilliant Article

Pitbull

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,429
Reaction score
5,076
Location
Hartbeespoort
News24

'Angry white youths dangerous'


17/07/2008 20:03 - (SA) Johannesburg - Many Afrikaner youths are angry and hold rigid views about black people, Professor Jonathan Jansen said on Thursday.

Jansen, delivering the 5th Annual Bishop Hans Brenninkmeijer memorial lecture in Johannesburg, said these Afrikaner youths had had no direct experience of apartheid and were born around the time of former state president Nelson Mandela's release from prison.

"They (Afrikaner youths) carry within them the seed of bitter knowledge that left unchallenged can easily germinate into the most vile and vicious racial attack."

He cited the Waterkloof Four, the Reitz residence "initiation" video, and the Skierlik killings as examples.

"The Afrikaner youths' troubled knowledge was transmitted through the family, the church, the schools, cultural associations and peer groups," he said.

Supported white domination

These agencies transmitted "dangerous" messages in all white circles despite spectacular changes in the formal institutions of democracy.

Jansen said the Afrikaner youths' beliefs and behaviours mirrored those of their parents - "who upheld, supported and benefited from white domination in the decades before they were born".

The threat of social collapse around white people resulted in them reinforcing racial exclusivity (we belong to ourselves); racial supremacy (we are better than black people) and racial victimisation (we are being targeted by black people), said Jansen.

"In the belief system of white youth, these social events are interpreted through a singular lens: black incompetence, black greed, black barbarism and black retaliation," said Jansen.

In a bid to understand their "anger" Jansen said he lived inside the lives of white Afrikaners. His findings were that it was hard to change their views of other people.

However, he said for transformation to be successful, South Africans on both sides (blacks and white) had to be prepared to make a move towards each other.

'Represent red flags'

He said white people had to move out of their "comfort zones" and embrace not tolerate, their fellow human beings if they wanted to "make it" in the new South Africa.

"But white fathers loomed large as racial gatekeepers in their homes. We must get together and figure it out for the sake our country and the future," said Jansen.

In his lecture, Jansen highlighted that many white South Africans felt that the recent xenophobic attacks, and the escalation in fuel and food prices, and interests rates, were a "black problem".

"In other words, the weight of public discourse suggests a white man's burden," said Jansen.

On the "shaky democracy", Jansen blamed the ANC Youth League "thugs" for their "kill for Zuma" talk.

"The precipitous state of public institutions - the Human Rights Commission, the Presidency, the SABC and the Judiciary - represent the red flags of our fragile democracy," he said.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
What I read in it, is that the kids are "angry" because of their parents influence on them.
"The Afrikaner youths' troubled knowledge was transmitted through the family, the church, the schools, cultural associations and peer groups," he said.
Click to expand...
I suppose current laws excluding these kids from fair employment might not be another possible cause, since it is "fair discrimination".

From: http://www.news24.com/News24/MyNews24/Letters/0,,2-2127-2129_2359766,00.html
News24 said:
This is in response to the article which mentions "angry white youths". That is a headline designed to incite. In fact, it could have been shortened to just "angry whites", and even then the word angry is a misinterpretation of the facts.

So, who designed this headline that appeared on News24? I would like to refer readers to an article that appeared on the same date in Beeld titled "Ek's 'n weeskind in my land, gee my 'n familie" - which when translated reads "I am an orphan in my country, give me a family".

I would appreciate person's of the public to notice the difference. The first article on News24 was about a professor, but his degree gives him the authority and right to make a statement based on his opinion only, yet thousands of readers' attitudes will be influenced by that.

The article in News24 states the following: "The Afrikaner youths' troubled knowledge was transmitted through the family, the church, the schools, cultural associations and peer groups." This is a generalised statement. Is it fair? Is it accurate? Deduced by a revered academic?

The professor said the Afrikaner youths' beliefs and behaviours mirrored those of their parents - "who upheld, supported and benefited from white domination in the decades before they were born".

He continues: "In the belief system of white youth, these social events are interpreted through a singular lens: black incompetence, black greed, black barbarism and black retaliation."

Sir, with all respect, who and what gives you the right to come to that conclusion? You state that all white youth have a singular lense? Even uneducated people know better than to conclude a whole portion of society shares the same view.

If the professor was earnest in his wish to "get together and figure it out for the sake our country and the future", he should refrain from generalising and labelling a whole portion of society. This was demonstrated recently by xenophobic incidents that I believe were activated by political and economic frustration and not race.

So I question the motivation for the statement in this article that "angry white youths [are] dangerous". Why this incitement? What will this achieve? Surely not reconciliation. So why does this headline appear? Is it to take the focus away from other problems on the political playing field?

Sure, many white people are unhappy. Not only young people but also old people. And so are some black people and coloured people. Why? I believe it is because of government policy, overall incompetency, and government official's greed and that has absolutely nothing to do with black and white relations in this country.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
What I read in it, is that the kids are "angry" because of their parents influence on them.

I suppose current laws excluding these kids from fair employment might not be another possible cause, since it is "fair discrimination".
Click to expand...

This is what I read.

The poor kids are frustrated for being at the back tit for something they had not participated in. To a degree it makes allot of sense
 
dlk001 said:
Very true!
Click to expand...

It is. And this would have happened naturally over time. Forcing people to suddenly share and live together after years of government control is just silly. Make it an equal playing field for everyone, else all you will have is people feeling that they didn't get something because of some law, or only got there because of some law. Which doesn't help people to accept each other in the end. Quality education should have been given a lot more attention.
 
Yes, the Afrikaner youth are angry.

The black youth are also angry.

Should we have a national debate over who has more of a "right" to be angry?


We're ALL victims of each other in SA, whether you be white or black or anything else.

Victims of the past and victims of the present....there really is little distinction. We're all victims.
 
Debbie2 said:
Yes, the Afrikaner youth are angry.

The black youth are also angry.

Should we have a national debate over who has more of a "right" to be angry?


We're ALL victims of each other in SA, whether you be white or black or anything else.

Victims of the past and victims of the present....there really is little distinction. We're all victims.
Click to expand...

+1 Debbie2
 
The english youth are all peaches and cream pplz ^_~ jk

I agree with most of the article. I think however that alot of people are not willing to admit that racism can be created through experience with racism. No parental propoganda required, just add colouring ^_^
 
Last edited:
A few points:

  1. My church has never preached or suggested hatred towards another person. Acceptance and love for your fellow man is the name of the game.
  2. My English friends are just as bad as my Afrikaans friends.
  3. From the looks of things, the black youth is also hungry (here's looking at you ANCYL)

QFE:

Debbie2 said:
Yes, the Afrikaner youth are angry.

The black youth are also angry.

Should we have a national debate over who has more of a "right" to be angry?


We're ALL victims of each other in SA, whether you be white or black or anything else.

Victims of the past and victims of the present....there really is little distinction. We're all victims.
Click to expand...
 
Obviously white youths are angry. They are being punished for something they had nothing to do with.
 
If most white people felt that way (that blacks were inferior) then there would not have been a handover of power, as the majority of white South Africans wanted to hand over power and do was right. I do know however that after 14 years under the ANC, most whites would not want to hand over power to an incompetent government, though they would have abolished Aprtheid and tried to fix the mistakes of the past.

The Reitz residence "initiation" video was not racist, infact it was white youths going through allot of trouble to make the workers there feel as part of the hostel through the process. Sure it was funny, but in a sweet and caring manner. If I was a racist I don't believe I would waste my time going through all that trouble for those black workers.

"In the belief system of white youth, these social events are interpreted through a singular lens: black incompetence, black greed, black barbarism and black retaliation," said Jansen.
Click to expand...
How has the ANC and the black South Africans I fear on the street proved this otherwise?

There is a difference between fact supported by past events and experiences and a belief held in ignorance.
 
lsuacner said:
The Reitz residence "initiation" video was not racist, infact it was white youths going through allot of trouble to make the workers there feel as part of the hostel through the process. Sure it was funny, but in a sweet and caring manner. If I was a racist I don't believe I would waste my time going through all that trouble for those black workers.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't bad then why was the hostel closed down?

I agree with the sentiments of the article but it applies to everyone. The article comes across trying to make victims out of only one sect of the population.
 
Fudzy said:
If it wasn't bad then why was the hostel closed down?

I agree with the sentiments of the article but it applies to everyone. The article comes across trying to make victims out of only one sect of the population.
Click to expand...

Why was it closed down? White people more than ignored blacks and BOOM "racist whites closed down".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X