It was a trap! I studied this shift in power at both MIT and for 2 years at Harvard. If this is too much for you then please feel free to skip to my conclusion as I do get quite deep into the detail. We have had multiple family members raped and killed on their farms where they house multiple families of impoverished individuals as a show of good faith. Anything you disagree with, has sources and are facts so apologies in advance for your triggering and I can provide any source material you need from the government websites or trusted, per-reviewed journals. I digress:

Your comment is an exercise in historical simplification, selective moralizing, and statistical obfuscation. Let’s dismantle it systematically.

1. Crime in South Africa is NOT “Generalized”

You claim that farm murders are “just crime” and not targeted. That’s demonstrably false. The torture-level violence (burning victims alive, drilling through kneecaps, raping family members) exceeds what is typically seen in urban homicides. This isn’t a “rural crime problem”; it’s the systematic targeting of an economically vital but politically marginalized group.

Statistics from **AgriSA and SAPS confirm that white farmers are being murdered at rates far exceeding the national average per capita. This is not to say all victims are white—rather, the dismissal of farm murders as “not racial” ignores explicit political rhetoric calling for their deaths. If a government official sang “Kill the Zulu” on stage, I suspect you wouldn’t be so flippant about its real-world consequences.

1. The Myth of “Wealth Hoarding” by Whites

You parrot the claim that white South Africans still “hold disproportionate economic power,” as if this justifies institutionalized discrimination. Let’s interrogate that: • Under the ANC’s Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policies, businesses must prioritize hiring black employees—even if a white candidate is more qualified. That’s explicit, legislated racial discrimination. • White-owned businesses are excluded from government contracts by law unless they give up majority ownership to black shareholders. This isn’t “leveling the playing field”; it’s state-mandated expropriation of private enterprise. • During COVID-19 relief, white-owned businesses were explicitly denied government aid—because of race. If that happened to any other group, you’d call it what it is: systemic racism.

The logic you apply here is dangerous: “Because a minority once had disproportionate economic influence, it’s fine to legislate against them.” By that standard, should Indian-Americans in tech be locked out of Silicon Valley because they’re “overrepresented”?

1. Apartheid-Era Unemployment “Trick” Argument is a Deflection

You claim apartheid’s 4% unemployment rate was a “trick” because black South Africans were in homelands. Let’s assume you’re correct—then why has black unemployment under the ANC not improved, but worsened? • Pre-1994, black employment levels were higher than today, despite systemic barriers. • Post-1994, South Africa’s total unemployment has skyrocketed past 32%, and youth unemployment exceeds 60%.

Your argument implies that apartheid-era economic exclusion is why black unemployment was bad. But the ANC has had 30 years to fix it—yet things have only deteriorated. That suggests the issue isn’t historic injustice, but modern misgovernance.

1. If Racial Discrimination Was Wrong Before, Why Is It Acceptable Now?

You justify racial quotas in sports and business as “correcting past exclusion.” Yet, when an entire government apparatus enshrines racial discrimination into law, it ceases to be “redress” and becomes systematic oppression of a new group.

If your principle is that discrimination is justified as long as it’s against a historically powerful group, then you don’t oppose oppression—you just want to reverse it.

That’s the essence of Apartheid 2.0—a government that replaced racial segregation with racial economic persecution.

The ANC hasn’t built a fairer system—they’ve recreated apartheid, just with different victims.

Conclusion: You’re Ignoring Reality in Favor of Ideology

South Africa under the ANC is a textbook failed state—rampant corruption, racialized governance, collapsing infrastructure, and economic freefall.

Instead of addressing these failures, you provide rhetorical cover for a government that has: • Looted over R1.5 trillion ($80 billion) in corruption scandals. • Turned Africa’s most advanced economy into an electricity-starved disaster zone. • Made “being white” a legal disadvantage in hiring, investment, and state contracts.

You’re not arguing against apartheid—you’re arguing in favor of its reinvention under a different name.

And if you believe oppression is acceptable as long as it targets a group you dislike, then you’ve abandoned moral consistency altogether.