The China Mail - Reverse Apartheid" in SA?

USD -
AED 3.673028
AFN 70.514885
ALL 85.866306
AMD 383.76049
ANG 1.789623
AOA 916.000191
ARS 1182.249591
AUD 1.529333
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70406
BAM 1.688822
BBD 2.018142
BDT 122.249135
BGN 1.68887
BHD 0.377196
BIF 2942
BMD 1
BND 1.27971
BOB 6.921831
BRL 5.506225
BSD 0.999486
BTN 85.958163
BWP 13.345422
BYN 3.271062
BYR 19600
BZD 2.007728
CAD 1.35586
CDF 2877.000286
CHF 0.812235
CLF 0.024416
CLP 936.95964
CNY 7.181595
CNH 7.181725
COP 4113.87
CRC 503.844676
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.875
CZK 21.431009
DJF 177.720157
DKK 6.44187
DOP 59.360893
DZD 129.793007
EGP 50.255016
ERN 15
ETB 134.398376
EUR 0.86373
FJD 2.238696
FKP 0.736284
GBP 0.735545
GEL 2.740238
GGP 0.736284
GHS 10.303098
GIP 0.736284
GMD 70.493572
GNF 8654.999632
GTQ 7.681581
GYD 209.114263
HKD 7.849825
HNL 26.106691
HRK 6.507497
HTG 130.801014
HUF 347.486987
IDR 16279.05
ILS 3.498955
IMP 0.736284
INR 85.99555
IQD 1310
IRR 42100.000278
ISK 124.449898
JEP 0.736284
JMD 159.534737
JOD 0.708971
JPY 144.396497
KES 129.499647
KGS 87.449711
KHR 4025.000116
KMF 426.49891
KPW 900
KRW 1358.344971
KWD 0.30596
KYD 0.832934
KZT 512.565895
LAK 21665.000453
LBP 89600.000143
LKR 300.951131
LRD 199.601923
LSL 17.939754
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.604891
LYD 5.445049
MAD 9.119498
MDL 17.092157
MGA 4455.00004
MKD 53.146147
MMK 2099.907788
MNT 3581.247911
MOP 8.081774
MRU 39.620401
MUR 45.379478
MVR 15.404966
MWK 1736.000108
MXN 18.91433
MYR 4.246007
MZN 63.950343
NAD 17.939576
NGN 1541.909956
NIO 36.295699
NOK 9.89988
NPR 137.533407
NZD 1.646985
OMR 0.384503
PAB 0.999503
PEN 3.618529
PGK 4.138002
PHP 56.386499
PKR 282.949801
PLN 3.69105
PYG 7973.439139
QAR 3.640602
RON 4.3379
RSD 101.254962
RUB 78.626024
RWF 1425
SAR 3.751863
SBD 8.347391
SCR 14.217342
SDG 600.507518
SEK 9.46597
SGD 1.27964
SHP 0.785843
SLE 22.04976
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.512179
SRD 38.740954
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.745774
SYP 13001.9038
SZL 17.940603
THB 32.423034
TJS 10.125468
TMT 3.5
TND 2.923969
TOP 2.342103
TRY 39.362445
TTD 6.785398
TWD 29.432989
TZS 2579.43203
UAH 41.557366
UGX 3603.362447
UYU 40.870605
UZS 12787.50116
VES 102.167041
VND 26061.5
VUV 119.102474
WST 2.619188
XAF 566.420137
XAG 0.027522
XAU 0.000295
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.70726
XOF 567.496125
XPF 103.924995
YER 243.349761
ZAR 17.804655
ZMK 9001.2023
ZMW 24.238499
ZWL 321.999592
  • CMSC

    0.0900

    22.314

    +0.4%

  • CMSD

    0.0250

    22.285

    +0.11%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.04

    0%

  • SCS

    0.0400

    10.74

    +0.37%

  • RELX

    0.0300

    53

    +0.06%

  • RIO

    -0.1400

    59.33

    -0.24%

  • GSK

    0.1300

    41.45

    +0.31%

  • NGG

    0.2700

    71.48

    +0.38%

  • BP

    0.1750

    30.4

    +0.58%

  • BTI

    0.7150

    48.215

    +1.48%

  • BCC

    0.7900

    91.02

    +0.87%

  • JRI

    0.0200

    13.13

    +0.15%

  • VOD

    0.0100

    9.85

    +0.1%

  • BCE

    -0.0600

    22.445

    -0.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.1000

    12

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.1200

    73.71

    -0.16%


Reverse Apartheid" in SA?




Recent claims have surfaced suggesting that white South Africans face systemic discrimination akin to apartheid, a term historically associated with the institutionalised racial segregation of black South Africans by the white minority from 1948 to 1994. These allegations, often amplified on social media and by certain political figures, point to issues such as land reform policies, farm attacks, and affirmative action programmes as evidence of a supposed "reverse apartheid." This article examines the validity of these claims, exploring the socio-political context, economic realities, and lived experiences in contemporary South Africa.

The notion of apartheid against whites primarily stems from debates over land reform. In 2025, South Africa’s government, led by President Cyril Ramaphosa, implemented a law allowing expropriation of land without compensation under specific conditions. The policy aims to address historical inequalities, as white South Africans, who make up roughly 8% of the population, still own a disproportionate share of arable land—estimated at over 70%—decades after apartheid’s end. Critics argue this policy targets white farmers unfairly, with some claiming it constitutes racial persecution. However, no documented cases of such expropriations have occurred to date, and the policy requires judicial oversight to ensure fairness. The land reform debate is less about race and more about correcting colonial and apartheid-era dispossessions, though its implementation remains contentious.

Another focal point is the issue of farm attacks, which some allege are racially motivated against white farmers. South Africa’s rural crime rates are high, with farmers of all backgrounds facing risks due to the country’s economic inequality and unemployment, which hovers around 33%. Data from the South African Police Service indicates that farm attacks, while tragic, are not disproportionately racial. In 2024, approximately 50 farm murders were recorded, affecting both white and black farmers, with motives often tied to robbery rather than race. Nonetheless, the narrative of a "white genocide" persists, fuelled by inflammatory rhetoric from figures like Julius Malema of the Economic Freedom Fighters, whose past chants of "Kill the Boer" have been widely condemned. Courts have ruled such statements as hate speech, and Malema has since distanced himself from inciting violence.

Affirmative action policies, designed to uplift historically disadvantaged black, coloured, and Indian populations, are also cited as evidence of anti-white discrimination. Programmes like Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) prioritise non-white hiring and business ownership to address the economic legacy of apartheid, where whites dominated wealth and opportunity. Some white South Africans, particularly Afrikaans-speaking Afrikaners, feel marginalised, claiming these policies limit their job prospects. For instance, in 2018, white employees at the Sasol corporation protested against alleged exclusion from bonus schemes. Yet, economic data paints a different picture: white South Africans still enjoy higher average incomes and lower unemployment rates (around 7%) compared to black South Africans (over 40%). The Gini coefficient, a measure of inequality, remains among the world’s highest at 63.3%, reflecting persistent disparities that affirmative action seeks to address.

Social tensions also play a role. Many white South Africans report feeling culturally alienated in a nation where African languages and traditions dominate public life. Afrikaans, once a symbol of white authority, is less prominent in schools and government, prompting some to perceive this as erasure. Conversely, black South Africans argue that these shifts are necessary to reflect the country’s 80% black majority. Incidents of racism, such as black students reporting unfair treatment in schools, highlight that prejudice cuts both ways, complicating claims of one-sided oppression.

The "apartheid against whites" narrative has gained traction internationally, particularly in the United States, where former President Donald Trump in 2025 claimed white South Africans face "genocide." He offered asylum to white farmers, citing videos purportedly showing attacks. These claims were debunked, with South African authorities and independent analysts confirming no evidence of genocide. The videos, some dating back to the apartheid era, were misrepresented. Such international interventions often overlook South Africa’s complex reality, where poverty, not race, drives much of the crime and unrest. The country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established post-1994, aimed to heal racial divides, but its recommendations for economic justice remain only partially implemented, leaving both black and white communities frustrated.

South Africa’s challenges—high crime, unemployment, and inequality—stem from apartheid’s long shadow, not a new racial regime. White South Africans, while facing real anxieties about their place in a transforming society, retain significant economic advantages. Claims of apartheid against whites exaggerate isolated incidents and mischaracterise policies aimed at historical redress. The country’s path forward lies in addressing poverty and fostering dialogue, not in perpetuating narratives of racial victimhood.