Kenweb Oplossings » Gr 4 Bybelonderrig geskandeerde handboek
Gr 4 Bybelonderrig geskandeerde handboek
Hierdie handboek word aanbevel vir Bybelonderrig Gr 4.
Titel: 'Laat My lammers wei' Boek 1 'n Studie van die Bybel vir 10 tot 12-jariges. Skrywer: J v Niekerk. Aantal hoofstukke: 30. Aantal bladsye: 96.
Opgesomde inhoud: Ou Testament. Die skepping, opstand teen God, Noag, Abraham, Isak se gesin, die familie van Jakob, Josef en sy broers, die geboorte en roeping van Moses, die tien plae en die uittog, God beskerm en lei sy volk, die Koning gee sy wette aan sy volk, eindelik in die Beloofde Land. Nuwe Testament. Twee wondergeboortes, Jesus in die Tempel en gedoop. Jesus begin sy werk as Verlosser. Verskillende wonderdade. Gelykenisse. Jesus se sterwe. Die Koning is getrou en voer sy beloftes uit.
Download Size 15.7MB Leon Lemmer: Die werklikheid van die hedendaagse Suid-Afrika in fiksie – praag.co.za
KM Breakey, ‘n Kanadees, het ‘n kwarteeu lank as rekenaarprogrammeerder gewerk voordat hy in 2016 voltyds begin skryf het. Hy het vyf romans gepubliseer, waaronder: Never, never and never again (2018, 563p; Amazon Kindle $5,74). Die titel is ontleen aan die toespraak wat Nelson Mandela in 1994 tydens sy inhuldiging as president gelewer het (Kindle 2722). ‘n Mens moet nie oorspronklikheid van Mandela verwag nie. “Nooit weer nie” is ‘n frase wat al talle kere met verwysing na die Holocaust gebruik is. Onderliggend aan Mandela se uitlating is dus die gemene en heeltemal onvanpaste vergelyking van apartheid met naziisme. Mandela moes eerder geweld afgesweer het, wat hy nooit in sy bestaan van meer as nege dekades gedoen het nie. Desmond Tutu munt ook uit in onoorspronklikheid met die woord “reënboognasie” wat sedert die jare sestig dikwels in Amerika gebruik word om uitdrukking aan daardie nuutgeprese multikulturaliteit te gee.
Aan die einde van sy boek spreek Breakey sy lesers direk aan. Hy noem dat die hedendaagse Suid-Afrika “a hellzone for whites” is (7655). Breakey is sedert sy jeug in Afrika geïnteresseerd, bv vanweë boeke soos dié van Wilbur Smith, gebore in Noord-Rhodesië/Zambië, asook James Michener, ‘n Amerikaner, se The covenant (1980). Met sy boek sit Breakey die verhaal van Suid-Afrika voort. “It’s an attempt to draw attention to [white] people in grave danger. Call it political activism through fiction. White South Africans are lovely, hardworking people. They’re neither evil nor racist, they’re simply trapped in a situation they didn’t create or choose. As I wrote the book, I keenly followed the country’s appalling descent. A few stories stuck with me. Cherize Smuts heroically speaking through the anguish of losing her parents and grandparents [Modderbult, near Balfour, 2017]. The brutal rape and murder of Hannah Cornelius [Stellenbosch, 2017].* There are many more, for those brave enough to look” (7662). In die boek word daar ook verwys na Amy Biehl, die oorverligte blanke Amerikaanse student aan die Universiteit van Wes-Kaapland, wat in 1993 in Gugulethu met messe en klippe vermoor is (2474).
[* White women almost never walked alone in South Africa, and to do so at night was asking for trouble. Coloured gangs were known to stalk girls around the once-safe grounds of Stellenbosch, and recent horror had everyone on high alert” (3501). “Back in the day, Stellenbosch was not only safe, it was a shrine to Afrikanerdom” (3508). Só lyk die vrugte van inklusiwiteit, diversiteit, multikulturaliteit, transformasie en globalisme. Die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse werklikheid word soos volg verwoord: “A woe-in-me attitude creeping in. A desperate, draining fear. Fear of robbery. Rape. Murder. Torture. Fear for family and friends. Fear of going outside. Fear of being home alone. Fear of being alive in a place where a murderous attack could happen anytime. And if it did, the world would shrug indifference … Sometimes, she [Samantha – see below] dreamed of being whisked to a place where carefree people laughed and joked. Where they were casual with valuables and women walked alone without fear. Where people left doors unlocked, and didn’t huddle behind fences and razor wire” (3515). En niemand vra verskoning vir die toestand waarin die land verval het nie. “Where will it end, she wondered. When will the Blacks be happy? She knew the answer – never – and it terrified her … ‘I worked hard to get where I am, and they call it White privilege. They call me racist'” (3522).]
Die boek handel by uitstek oor Afrikaners. “I employed a particular manner of speech for many of the Afrikaner characters. This was in no way meant to diminish their intelligence. It was meant to serve as a visceral reminder of (1) the straightforward and unpretentious manner of these fine people, and (2) that they would likely be speaking Afrikaans” (7681). Die manier waarop Breakey Afrikaners laat Engels praat, is vir my die irriterendste kenmerk van die boek. In die aanhalings wat volg, kom voorbeelde hiervan voor. Afrikaners gebruik glo “is” pleks van “are”, ens. Die punt is dat die outeur nie weet hoedanig die tipiese Engels is wat Afrikaners praat as hulle Engels nie goed magtig is nie. Breakey se gebrek aan eerstehandse kennis van Afrikaners blyk ook duidelik uit die soort gesprekke wat plaasgevind het nadat Pieter van Zyl die eerste keer met sy aanstaande vrou by sy ouers se plaas opgedaag het (hoofstuk 13).
Ek kon nie vasstel of Breakey ooit in Suid-Afrika was nie. Hy noem dat hy kontak met uitgeweke Suid-Afrikaners in Kanada het (7672). Ook: “Some noteworthy figures that inspired me to write this book (some of whom don’t know it) – Steve Hofmeyr, Dan Roodt, Ilana Mercer [ Into the cannibal’s pot – Praag 29.12.2013], Cuan Elgin [Bulala] and my friend, Simon Roche [Suidlanders]” (7681). Die verhaal speel in Kaapstad en omstreke af, moontlik omdat Breakey die beste oor hierdie deel van Suid-Afrika ingelig is. Dit bring onder meer mee dat Josef van Zyl, ‘n mynmagnaat, sy hoofkantoor op ‘n onwaarskynlike plek, naamlik in Kaapstad, het. Maar ek gaan nie die storie, wat van 1976 tot 2018 strek, in besonderhede hervertel nie omdat dit eintlik net as steier vir die mededeling van besonderhede oor die hedendaagse Suid-Afrika dien. Die inligting word chronologies aangebied en sal ongetwyfeld begrip vir die blankes, by uitstek die Afrikaners, se situasie in veral die Engelstalige buiteland op ‘n heilsame manier bevorder. ‘n Mens kan selfs dink dat Breakey neig tot oordrywing ten gunste van Afrikaners; ‘n welkome uitsondering omdat ons gewoonlik verguis word.
Met die Van Zyl-gesin as gevallestudie beskryf die outeur die gestadigde agteruitgang en vernietiging van die Afrikanerdom. Die boek vertel die verhaal van drie geslagte Afrikaners: Josef van Zyl, sy seun Pieter (die hoofkarakter) en dié se seun Joe. Josef is, soos dit hoort, getroud met ‘n Afrikanervrou. Pieter, daarenteen, trou met ‘n dame uit Engeland, Audrey Hudson, maar sy leer om Afrikaans te praat (2196).* Joe trou met ‘n Kanadees, Shannon. Hulle het ‘n seun, Connor, en ‘n dogter, Olivia. Joe se suster, Samantha, trou terwyl sy reeds swanger is met “olive skin” (5208) Ryan Tan, ‘n Kanadese half-Asiaat (3374, 4412, 4688) – sy pa is ‘n Chinees (4970). “He’s as far from Afrikaner as you get” (5260). Die derde geslag Van Zyls woon in Kanada en nie meer in Suid-Afrika nie. Joe noem homself ‘n “half” of “honourary” Afrikaner (3431, 5312). Met Josef as beginpunt is daar by die vierde geslag Van Zyls geen sprake meer van Afrikaans as eerste en moedertaal nie. By die Van Zyls kom Afrikaanse voorname later ook nie meer voor nie. “Pieter would be the last of ten [Van Zyl] generations [in South Africa]” (5269). “The remnants of our culture is vanishing. Is probably gone in another twenty-four years” (7573).
[* Toe sy nog maar ‘n kort tydjie in die land was, het Audrey die geradbraakte Kaaps van ‘n bruin man teëgekom: “Audrey discerned much of what the man said” (791).]
Hoewel Breakey ongetwyfeld baie moeite gedoen het met navorsing oor sy onderwerp, kom daar foute in die roman voor, soos Belleville (134), The Cape Town Times (1132) en dat Jan van Riebeeck in 1642 sy opwagting in Tafelbaai gemaak het (564). Oor 1976 word beweer: “We don’t have television” (638; ook 1564), terwyl televisie ná proefuitsendings in 1975 op 5 Januarie 1976 amptelik ingestel is. Maar ná die Soweto-opstand, 16 Junie 1976, “the Prime Minister went on state television to address and comfort the nation” (2064). Ná die 1994-verkiesing: Mandela “selected de Klerk as his First Deputy and Thabo Mbeki his Second” (2801). Dit was andersom. Met verwysing na die 1950’s en 1960’s: “Not many American cars then” (4430). Breakey se informante onthou nie ver genoeg terug nie. Tot die jare sestig was Amerikaanse motors prominent op ons paaie. Byvoorbeeld, my pa (1905-1981) het agtereenvolgend ses motors gehad, almal Amerikaans.
Daar is heelwat Afrikaans in die teks: bakkie (228), Rooinek (266), Baas (272), boet (287), lekker (332), ja nee (332), voetsek (382), blankes (512), alleenlik (512), biltong (529), braai (791), Boer (937), voorhuis (1075), sies (1091), bliksem (1123), swart gevaar (1161), ek sal probeer (1582), dompas (1925), vetkoek (2606), volkstaat (2766), bakgat (3094), plaasmoorde (3637) – later foutiewelik plaasmorde (3651, 7351), welkom in Suid-Afrika (3763), dom ding (3959), en[e]tjie (4122), lanklaas ou maat (5866), jou ou donder (6236), ag, dit is belaglik (6366), jou vuilgoed (6583), jou arme ding, ons is hier om te help (6800), my vriende (6846), hoe gaan dit met jou? (7207).
Oor die bosoorlog in Rhodesië word gesê: “A pack of savages trying to tear down White rule … They slaughtered my Uncle’s family … Is a violent place, Africa” (544). Sal daardie situasie hom ook in Suid-Afrika voordoen? Nee. “We never surrender” (554). “As for these Black bastards, the terrorists, we won’t be intimidated. Never” (618). “For not one moment did a true Afrikaner doubt they would prevail, even amidst the unholy chaos of the late 1970s” (2094). “Afrikaner culture – symbols, schools, language – would be preserved. Law and order would prevail” (1659). “Apartheid isn’t meant to be evil. Is necessary for our survival” (574). Apartheid word “the bold experiment” genoem (1066; ook 1652). “In 1976, the neighbourhood was safe and crimefree” (1075). “This is Africa. Life’s never easy” (2121). “Whites is the best thing that happens to Africa” (1161). Van die Afrikaners word gesê: “They’re not only good people, they’re relentlessly, aggressively good” (5049).
Pieter van Zyl noem homself “that rare species, the moderate Afrikaner” (582; ook 1251). “Pieter admired the Indians of South Africa. They were industrious and clever, always two steps ahead” (807). “The hardliners, the Broederbond, would never accept Pieter. They’d say he turned his back on their Volk” (2154). Pieter noem swartes “dangerous and violent. They must be constantly supervised and they respond only to discipline. If we not showing them who’s boss, they kill us” (600). Demografies verswak die blankes se situasie voortdurend weens “the exploding Black population” en “the country was also a magnet for the rest of Africa, atttacting migrants from places like Zimbabwe and Nigeria” (727). “They is not like us” (1171).
“Fear was the revolutionary’s tool … necklacings. It was dirty work, but essential to the struggle” (777). Die swartes redeneer soos Mandela: “The Boers have built this country on the backs of our people. They herd us like cattle.They loot our precious resources. They indoctrinate us with their loathsome language” (937). Swartes het hierdie voordeel: “Outside South Africa, these confused Western leaders will never condemn us. Do you hear? No matter what we do, there is no penalty. No matter the ruthless measures we take, we are justified in the eyes of the world. And we will be ruthless. A passive revolution will not work with the Boers. The only justice is revolutionary justice. This is an armed struggle … It is war” (990). “There was the violence. Always escalating, always barbaric” (1123). Wat doen die blankes normaalweg hieromtrent? “We sit in our cozy suburbs and pretend it never touches us” (1123). “Like frogs in boiling water; people accepted the heat” (3253).
Die koloniale Britte het die land benadeel:'”[They] plundered and pillaged for centuries” (1204). “Brits weren’t always so nice to them [Afrikaners] … We’ve always been a snobby bunch … We think we’re too good for everyone” (1790). Deesdae: “An infinitely more dangerous enemy [than the blacks] Western liberals. They were noicy, righteous, and they wielded power with their governments” (1675). “It was trendy for celebrities and college students to castigate South Africa. To hold Afrikaners up for scorn. Hollywood made movies with White South African villians. Western governments joined the chorus of condemnation with hard-hitting rhetoric and hardline sanctions. South Africa felt the pain economically and spiritually” (1684). Daar was ook sport- en wapenboikotte.
“The [NP] government’s rallying cry became self-sufficiency … Armchair critics refused to acknowledge the complexities and danger of unravelling Apartheid law. They ignored cultural differences and the potential for violence. America [with a white majority] lived under one-man-one-vote, and by gosh, every country on the planet should be like America. It was crazy talk, of course, as any Afrikaner would tell you. The English diaspora would, too, in private. One might only look at Rhodesia for proof of the looming danger. The country was a bloodbath-in-progress and civilization was unravelling. The Western world – the media, the military, the governments – ignored the catastrophe … The National Party was still in power and by now, even the English supported them” (1692). “The international press attacked relentlessly, and Anti-Apartheid protests in places like London and New York were commonplace” (1706). “The Soviet-regime sought to reinvent South Africa in communist form, annihilating Afrikanerdom along the way. They saw Blacks as a useful tool, easily manipulated, along for the ride albeit with their own race-based motives” (2415).
Pieter van Zyl en die Brit Audrey het in 1977, dus kort na die Soweto-opstand, getrou. “She was moving in as the first wave of Whites were flooding out” (2163). “Pieter’s hardline stance gave way to compromise and tolerance. Conversely, Audrey’s views drifted steadily right. In the early days, she was diehard liberal” (2330). “Throughout the 1980s, the Black majority transformed en masse into an ungovernable behemoth. In the ANC’s view, everyone was a revolutionary using any means possible. Those who didn’t conform were punished, and township violence was heinous” (2422). Namate die nuwe Suid-Afrika al hoe meer vorm aangeneem het, het Pieter se politiek meer konserwatief geword. In die voorportaal van sy huis het portrette van die vorige blanke staatshoofde, Verwoerd, Vorster en Botha, gehang. “So was de Klerk, but Pieter got rid of him long ago” (4023).
“The ANC continued to prosper and embrace Marxist ideology … The saturation of resistance made keeping a lid on uprisings impossible. The ruling class had backs to the wall. The threat of terrorism was constant and sanctions were taking a toll. Despite propaganda, moral among the [white] people flagged. Something had to give. The tide had been turning since the 1960s, when Third World membership in the UN exploded, and new members began setting the tone for global policy, none of which favoured a segregated South Africa. By the late 1980s, the rest of the world held the small nation hostage: make changes or else” (2429).
“For Britain, the situation was especially embarrassing, given their long history with South Africa. Other members of the commonwealth chimed in with simplistic condemnation. Australia, New Zealand, and Canada were smugly critical, even as they grappled with their own native populations, which had long ago been beaten into submission. They chanced upon lands with fewer and less obdurate indigenous peoples, and it allowed them to happily claim high moral ground” (2435). Amerika was kwalik in ‘n beter situasie om homself moreel meerderwaardig jeens Suid-Afrika te beskou.
“It was a perfect storm for unified global condemnation, and the ANC fanned every ounce of sympathy. They played to every note of hysterical propaganda, and discovered their own misdeeds, however heinous, would be overlooked. Or if raised, they would be unanimously justified. The price of sustaining Apartheid had become too high and finally, FW de Klerk capitulated. Not outright – full surrender happened across several years – but he put his people on the slippery slope” (2442). “[The ANC] wanted – nay demanded – massive change and they held powerful cards. Mandela’s status was godlike. The doting international press was euphoric in praise and critics were shouted down with cries of racism. Mandela also held a special card if ever things went against him: mass uprising and willingness to engage in violence and destruction of property” (2456). In werklikheid het die immorele ANC ‘n beleid van verskroeide aarde gevolg, soortgelyk aan die Britte tydens die Anglo-Boereoorlog; dus, dat die land maar in puin gelê kon word, solank hulle as die oorwinnaars en dus regeerders uit die stryd tree.
“De Klerk won support for a milestone referendum [in 1992]” (2456). De Klerk en sy groepie ondersteuners “pumped their message through mass media – television, radio, newspaper – using scare tactics and propaganda spins. It worked. Sixty-eight percent of the White electorate voted Yes [for negotiations] … Many Afrikaners felt bitter betrayal. They called de Klerk a traitor and a turncoat. Without self-determination, they said, we will perish” (2464). “The word transformation began popping up everywhere, a word many would eventually associate with anti-White nationalism … White South Africans … were heartened by Mandela’s conciliatory tone. It was an about-face from the hardline one settler, one bullet message some revolutionaries preached. The ANC’s focus on reconciliation was heartwarming, but was it sincere? Were they not a terrorist organization well-versed in slaughter and destruction?” (2483).
“When Rhodesia fell, Whites lost First World lifestyles immediately. The land grabs and barbarism came soon after. Not long prior, people spoke of Rhodesia in the same breath as Australia, Canada, and South Africa. Rhodesia was chilling proof everything can vanish overnight. What more evidence was needed? Unchecked, the Black tide would wash over them, destroying their language, their traditions, their people. Expecting racial harmony was delusional. Such views were the domain of insulated liberals, delicate flowers who would fare least well against imminent violence. Overall, public opinion followed a bell curve. Few expected Utopia, few expected genocide. The only certainty was uncertainty … Naïve optimism was common in those heady days. As for the Black majority, there was irrational optimism. Ordinary Blacks dreamed of relief from the violence and grinding poverty. Their streets, if you could call them that, were deadly dangerous. Law and order, the hallmark of Apartheid, was practically nonexistent in townships, and Blacks naïvely believed it would improve under ANC rule” (2492).
“South Africa … was the world’s most mineral-rich country. It had First World infrastructure and best-in-class agriculture. There was plenty for everyone … Alas, it was the call of socialism, a system that excelled in the classroom and was inevitably foiled by man’s greedy nature. Still, something had to be done about the glaring wealth gap … Was there a magical piece of social engineering that could raise Blacks up without tearing Whites down? Without tearing apart the economy? Taxation, charity, welfare, land reform? … the few precedents of transition to Black rule failed miserably. Haiti was a bloody massacre, and Zimbabwe was headed down the same path” (2513).
Voor die 1994-verkiesing “De Klerk seemed to think his party had a chance, naïvely it turned out … For the thousandth time, Pieter wondered if Mandela and company could waltz in and run the country. Were they not terrorists and killers?” (2616). ‘n Waarnemer sê: “So 350 years building the finest nation on the planet, we hand it to a pack of terrorists. Communists. We hand it over, no compensation. Nothing” (2644). “Not surprisingly, people voted overwhelmingly along racial lines … The ANC captured 252 seats from among four hundred, just shy of the two-thirds mark which would give them unbridled power … People ran out of superlatives to describe Mandela – he was nobility, royalty, even deity. Saint Mandela could do no wrong” (2653). “His background in terror, however, had some wondering, [for example]: ‘Once a communist, always a communist. A terrorist, too. He orchestrating death and destruction'” (2731). “No one would mistake the man [Mandela] for a rocket scientist. His contribution to a First World economy would be bottom rung at best. But in his mind, life would be sunshine and lollipops. Democracy meant unearned prosperity for all” (2817). “Ja nee, we should worry. When Black government is taking over, they always killing the Whites. Look all over Africa” (2739). “Confiscation of White-owned land wasn’t on anyone’s radar in 1994” (2793). “Whites had carved civilization into the harsh African veld, and they sensed their insular bubble was punctured” (2660). “The only way for the Afrikaner is self-determination. Sovereignty” (2766).
In die nuwe Suid-Afrika “the pursuit of wealth had spread like a virus … the minting of countless new millionaires. The emerging nouveau riche, the Black bourgeoisie with lavish houses and flashy cars” (2841). ‘n Swarte sê: “For too long, Whites have raped the land and lined their pockets on the backs of our people … It is our turn to reap the benefits” (2902). Terselfdertyd eskaleer swart misdaad en geweld weens hierdie nuutgevonde vryheid. “The violence, the cruelty … Never been this bad” (2951). “Murder and rape … not saying was ever right – but now, it’s so commonplace” (2959). Wat was die beweerde winste? “A new flag. A new president. A new national anthem” (2996). Pieter het tereg gewonder: “By the time his kids were grown, what would it be like? Hell, what would the damn country be like? (3076).
“With few exceptions, the Black leadership emerged from a culture of terror and killing. They harboured a view of life – and the value of life – markedly different from Westerners. These inconvenient truths tainted and warped the new democracy. And if a ruling party starts out corrupt and immoral, can it ever change?” (3259). “The people of South Africa continued to pretend. At the turn of the century, the country’s precipitous economic and social decline wasn’t yet fully apparent, especially to the willfully blind. What would become of the White South African, people asked with morbid curiosity, as they went about their lives in First World majesty” (3275). In 2002 “South Africa was taking bold steps backwards” (3314). “The place had gone all to hell since the Blacks took over” (3354). “We Saffas [South Africans] don’t stop living ‘cause of assholes. We take precautions, but we don’t live in no bubble” (3420).
In rekenaarterminologie word die ANC se beleid Apartheid 2.0 genoem (3558, 4213). Jacob Zuma word Mugabe 2.0 genoem (3814). “At best, their [Whites’] future was precarious and uncertain. Despite the initial spirit of cooperation, Rainbow Nation never blossomed. In fact, by almost any measure, it suffered a rapid decline since White rule ended. 1994, critics charged, wasn’t the dawn of democracy. It was the great sell-out. The year the ANC started destroying South Africa not only bottom-up, but top-down as well. By 2017, the exodus of Whites was bigger than ever. Fear of violent crime was a key factor, as was lack of employment opportunities. That latter sorry circumstance was no accident. It was entirely attributable to a piece of legislation called Black Economic Empowerment, BEE for short. The world’s most extreme affirmative action program. Ever. In any country. By a long shot … The law demanded corporations adhere to draconian, unachievable racial quotas” (3558). “The ANC hates nothing more than a White person with a job” (4980). “Getting documents from the government – a government which was once among the world’s highest-functioning – was near impossible. Clerks were incompetent, slow, and corrupt” (3573).
“In twenty-three years, so much of South Africa was in ruins. In twenty-three years, the ANC transformed the continent’s most prosperous state into a corrupt tyranny … Wheels were falling off. Standard & Poor lowered South Africa’s credit rating to junk status … It was massive, breathtaking incompetence, but it paled in comparison to the corruption … Transformation … became repugnant and dirty. Proxy for anti-White” (3629). “The Military and Police Service eroded, and the disenfranchised had little deterrence to committing crime. Murder, rape, and robbery became the Rainbow Nation’s social fabric … in the holocaust that came to be known as Plaasmoorde, the scale was beyond comprehension” (3637). “The 2015 film, Treurgrond, dramaticized the Plaasmoorde horrors” (3645).
Breakey het ‘n fiktiewe karakter, Kaspar Coetzer, geskep. Hy is iemand wat internasionaal in die bres vir Afrikaners tree; ‘n eertydse linkse wat tot politieke inkeer gekom het. “His progressive belief system spontaneously imploded” (3667). “‘There was nothing gradual about the decline of Afrikanerdom,’ he stated.’We fell off a cliff.’ On negotiations between de Klerk and Mandela: ‘The biggest mistake the National Party made was they assumed they were dealing with men of decency. Rational men'” (3682). Ja, en natuurlik die fundamentele fout om te veronderstel dat swartes soos blankes dink en handel. Die groot kultuurverskille is nooit verreken nie. “Kaspar stirred in them [Afrikaners] a distant but deep-rooted sentiment. Pride. He reminded them of their once great heritage. That it still was great. That is was never not great. He taught them to reject the shame inflicted on them by the force of the Western and non-Western world” (3689).
Coetzer het sy idees in ‘n fiktiewe boek gepubliseer: A canary in the coal mine (3714).* “The book charted the course of South Africa’s extraordinary fall since Transformation … In meticulous detail, Kaspar showed how Afrikaners were a powerless minority persecuted by bigoted ANC rule. Apartheid 2.0, Kaspar argued, was much worse than White rule. The ANC seemed hellbent on burning the country down and exacting revenge in the process. They seemed to lack both morality and competence … Kaspar characterized the Afrikaner plight as harbinger for an emerging global phenomenon. Epidemic demonization of Whites. An anti-White pogrom” (4206). “The White people brand is in trouble all over the globe” (5650). “I see Trump for what he is. A gift to the Free World. Perhaps not enough to save it, but enough to slow its descent” (6079). “Trump had become a beacon of hope to White South Africa, a people who long ago abandoned hope the world might come to their aid” (7266).
[* “I don’t invent the term. Heard it from a fellow traveller, my old pal Dan Roodt. He been waving the red flag for decades” (5668).]
In sy eerste hoofstuk skryf Kaspar Coetzer: “In 1994, liberals touted Transformation as triumph of human spirit. South Africa was purging evil to become a Utopian paradise. They don’t say that today. They don’t say much of anything about South Africa today, if they can help it, because South Africa is a scathing indictment of their worldview. The corruption, the staggering economic decay, the telltale signs of genocide. It’s simply too embarrassing. So much easier to turn a blind eye, to focus on more convenient injustices, like White privilege or Islamophobia. When pressed, they resort to ancient talking points – Apartheid was evil, Mandela was a saint – and delve into modern-day illusions. The illusion of education, the illusion of government, the illusion of law and order. Rainbow nation is hogwash. The oppressor is the oppressed. The roles of good and evil have reversed” (4222).
“The language … far right, White nationalist … It’s designed to smear and silence” (4256). Die blanke boere word “the best farmers in the world” genoem (4275). Oor hulle situasie: “Quite a holocaust. Ever since the ANC recklessly disbanded our Commandos, is more dangerous being a farmer than a soldier in Afghanistan. Since 1994, ten percent of our farmers is killed. Not only killed, tortured … It’s genocide. That’s what Gregory Stanton is saying. He’s president of Genocide Watch. Says we at Stage 6” (4285). “Was it not birthright to walk freely in one’s homeland?” (5635).
Die verhaal van die Van Zyls is onderhoudend omdat dit opbou tot ‘n aanval deur ‘n bende van agt misdadigers op die familiewoning. “[Crime] unchecked by the state, nay, encouraged by the state … We have only ourselves to rely on” (5568) “[with] safe zones ever-shrinking” (5586). “Demand for private security skyrocketed, as did supply. The industry grew larger than the police and army combined. In most home invasions, private security was first responder” (5577). “Whites no longer had the power to be dangerous. They advocated not for aggression, but for defence of their people” (5775). Selfs voor die aanval was daar al hoe meer twyfel of dit vir blankes wys is om in Suid-Afrika te bly woon. “Did these first-world trappings, these hallmarks of civilization – air travel, political stability, rule of law – did they belong in Africa? Or was this continent destined to be a haven for tribalism, tyranny and lawlessness? Perhaps the White man was never meant to be here” (5701). “Perhaps Western civilization is never meant to flourish here” (6062). “Maybe South Africa reverts to its natural state – kings and chiefs and tyrants” (6053).
In die aanval op die familiewoning word Pieter van Zyl, die hoofkarakter in die boek, gedood. “Races of perpetrators and victims weren’t mentioned [on television], and they didn’t have to be. People could fill in the blanks” (7034). “It was a story that should have immediately dominated the news cycle. However … mainstream media steadfastly ignored it” (7043). Op Pieter se begrafnis is gesê: “Let it not go unsaid, he was also an Afrikaner. We a dying breed” (7135). Samantha, Pieter se dogter, het uit Psalm 11 voorgelees, bv vers 3: “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (7152). Later sê sy: “This country’s lost. Our people are lost … Everything we strived for, worked for, slaved for, they say it’s not ours. That we stole it … They’re playing by different rules. Hell, they have no rules” (7218). “I never want to see this backward, barbaric place again. We should have left long ago” (7296).
Pieter se Engelse en eens verligte weduwee, Audrey, sê: “We tried to do the right thing. We trusted Mandela, we bought into Rainbow Nation. Now we know the truth. They had no intention of working with us. Not ever. Now Pieter’s gone. So many of our people are gone … The government will strip us clean of every dignity” (7239). “I find it incredible that some Whites still pretend everything’s normal. Ha, I used to be like that. No more. Part of me died with Pieter. I hate this country with all my heart. I hate it” (7246). Van die oorlewende Van Zyls word gesê: “There was nothing left for them in South Africa” (7256). Pieter se weduwee, Audrey, en haar twee kinders, Joe en Samantha, het hulle in Kanada gevestig. Pieter se beste vriend, Jaco Jansen, sy vrou, Charlize, en vier van hulle ses kinders het na Nieu-Seeland geëmigreer (7602).
Aan die einde van die boek word ‘n toespraak van Kaspar Coetzer weergegee: “Rainbow Nation has failed. There is no Rainbow Nation. There never was … We, Whites of South Africa, Afrikaner and English alike, were sold a bill of goods – a colossal lie … Today, we stand defeated, humbled, swindled, humiliated. Betrayed. Yet still despised. Still labelled racist. Supremacist” (7377). “I see atrocities of war … In 2018, any prejudice from Whites is coming from fear. Justified fear. Any racism is defensive. In fact, we Afrikaners has taken a defensive posture since the day we set foot in Africa four centuries ago” (7387).
“The government is openly hostile. They call us settlers. They stoking anti-White rage at every chance. The malfeasance is only matched by the incompetence. The ANC has gutted South Africa … our cities and towns is ceasing to function. Infrastructure will collapse and anarchy will rule. Some say that day is here, and when I see what’s happening in places like Coligny, I wonder if they right” (7395). “This … is the fruit of radical economic transformation, the fruit of false promise, where people are dependent on a failed state. Dependent on a state that was destined to fail … The true wealth of my people is … their spirit, the love they have for each other and for their country [as it used to be]” (7411).
“My people … The dispossessed class. The nowhere-to-run class … No country to call home” (7420). “Nothing left but scorched earth” (7437). “We needing forceful, vocal advocacy” (7447). “No Black government in South Africa will ever treat Whites fairly. Never. Not for eternity. Sorry, there is no evidence to the contrary. Their hatred is too deep, the chasm is too wide, the desire for vengeance too great … That leaves two paths: A homeland within, or we get the hell out” (7506). “Any First World nation will do [but] … the world ain’t used to White refugees” (7543). “If South Africa is not our homeland, then Europe most certainly is” (7552). “Every fear we have in 1994 has come to fruition and some we don’t even think about” (7577).
Skrywer Leon LemmerGepubliseer op 13 Julie 2019 Kategorieë Leon Lemmer, RubriekeSleutelwoord Desmond Tutu, Hannah Cornelius, James Michener, KM Breakey, Suid-Afrika, Wilbur Smith
Vorige Vorige artikel: Dan Roodt: Boikot alle Britse goedere en maatskappye!
Volgende Volgende artikel: Dan Roodti: Sondagaktueel 3