Property expropriation without compensation - Communist landgrab in South Africa

Por Tasnim News Agency, 

CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47502685

That ONE phrase in CYRIL'S SPEECH, 
which many people failed to noctice

National Front SA

The media is buzzing after Ramaphosa's late-night speech 

as leader of the ANC, rather than president of the country, 

in which he announced that the revision of the constitution 

will continue to expropriate property without compensation. 

This had an immediate negative impact on the economy 

with the Rand plunging to new depths against the dollar.

Ramaphosa's speech was an indication that the ANC 

now regards itself as superior to Parliament 
and any legal processes. 

The committee that has to make recommendations 
regarding the proposed amendment to Article 25, 
is still busy with public hearings 

before submitting their report only on 28 September. 

They could just as well forget about it - the whole process 

is just to mark off all the bills on the list. 

The ANC has already decided and so it will be.

However, there is one small phrase, 
half in the middle of the speech, 

which has almost passed unnoticed, 
and which is like a bucket of ice cold water, 

if you think about it a little. 

Ramaphosa said: 

"...to transform the unjust spacial realities into urban areas ..."

What does it mean? 

In practice, 

exactly the same as what happened in urban and suburban areas 

in every other Communist country. 

It will no longer be acceptable for a black family of 6, 

to live in a three-story storage hut, 

that stands only a few meters from the next hut, 

while a retired white couple or a single person 

occupies a house on an estate in a suburb 

or in an enclosed housing complex.

Exactly how they plan to correct that, one does not know. 

Will they, in the expropriation of property, 

force the homeowners to take in other people, 

like what happened in St. Petersburg and Moscow 

after the Communist takeover? 

Are they expropriating the house and giving it to three families, 

while the homeowner moves to a one-bedroom apartment, 

somewhere, like what they did in Warsaw and Riga 

after the communist takeover? 

Are they giving permission to the squatters 

to set up their huts on the property, 

because the plot had been expropriated, 

as happened in Bucharest and Dobrovnik and Budapest 

after the Communist takeover? 

Surely, they will focus on people who own a second property 

- the townhouse or beach house or apartment 

that is rented out for an extra income. 

Will it simply be confiscated and handed over 

to the squatters for habitation, 

as was done in Havana and Caracas and Krakow 

after the Communist takeover?

We do not know. 

All that we know is: "Urban areas" are specifically mentioned. 

The expropriation plan is not just the farmers' crisis. 

It's the crisis of every one of us, 

who owns a house. 

It literally means that urban neighbourhoods 

would be used to provide the solution 

for the overpopulation in the squatter camps.

Now people may ask: 

"Yes, but what about us who have mortgages on properties? 

What about our bank mortgages? 

No, no-one knows, all we know is: 

If they want to take your home, 

they will definitely not have any sleepless nights 

about how to pay your debts. 

Go and ask any Zimbabwean 

if Mugabe offered to repay his bank mortages".

It is bitterly disturbing 

if you realize the implications of this plan. 

Cyril Ramaphosa rang the deathbell 
for the South African economy, 

for Freedom and Justice and, above all, 

for any possibility of a peaceful and prosperous co-habitation 

in South Africa.

The ANC now runs the risk 

of not being remembered in history 
as a liberation movement, 

but as the movement 
that plunged a once-prosperous country, 

into a fierce racial conflict, 

in which streams of blood will flow, 

from which nobody can benefit 

and everyone will surely suffer.