"Farmlands" Documentary by Lauren Southern

Jenn

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
#1
Me and Keyhole watched a documentary called "Farmlands" by Lauren Southern which is about the current political and social situation in South Africa. Southern is known as a controversial YouTuber and "free-speech activist". It was enlightening and shocking, to say the least. The documentary can be viewed on her website or on youtube which I have embedded below.

A brief description based on what I saw: South Africa's history is murky and according to the documentary, when the Dutch East India company settled in South Africa, they obtained land by trading with locals etc. and established a colony that then split off. Some tribes were not happy about these foreigners living in the area and bloodshed ensued to take the land back. Then the good old British got involved and the union of South Africa (SA) was formed. This then led to the apartheid and the forming of the National Party who fought against the apartheid, they are now the ANC?. Fast forward to today and the ANC is basically preparing to take land from the whites and give it back to the blacks, even if it means taking it by force and it leading to a civil war. The documentary tells the harrowing stories of white families who have been attacked, murdered and effectively pushed aside by society because of their skin colour.


Here's a couple of articles on the topic:




https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/999601/South-Africa-white-farmers-racism-land-anc
 

Carl

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#2
I watched this the other day and meant to post here. It was very depressing to watch, and so much revealed that I didn't know about South Africa. From the sounds of it, the farmlands will simply be taken by uneducated and unskilled people, fall into disrepair, and the government will blame climate change or the economy or "the white man" in any other way possible.

Meanwhile Russia is taking in these fleeing farmers in droves...
‘A matter of life & death’: 15,000 white South African farmers seek refuge in Russia, report says

It really seems that soon there will be a few countries in the world where you can go and find sanctuary from the absolute craziness going on, whatever form it takes.
 

Ant22

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#3
Sounds really interesting, thank you for sharing Jenn. I haven't watched it but living in London comes with the benefit of meeting people from all over the world so I have had the chance to hear some first hand reports.

South Africa needs to look no further than across the border, to Zimbabwe, to see what such haphazard land reform can lead to. Zimbabwe's land redistribution (2000-2018) ruined the country's economy and affected the lives of everyone involved, regardless of their race.

Not to mention that Western powers made some money out of the mess too.

Some data describing the aftermath of land redistribution in Zimbabwe:

Land reform in Zimbabwe - Wikipedia
Before 2000, land-owning farmers had large tracts of land and used economies of scale to raise capital, borrow money when necessary, and purchase modern mechanised farm equipment to increase productivity on their land. Because the primary beneficiaries of the land reform were members of the Government and their families, despite the fact that most had no experience in running a farm, the drop in total farm output has been tremendous and has even produced starvation and famine, according to aid agencies.

Export crops have suffered tremendously in this period. Whereas Zimbabwe was the world's sixth-largest producer of tobacco in 2001, in 2005 it produced less than a third the amount produced in 2000. Zimbabwe was once so rich in agricultural produce that it was dubbed the "bread basket" of Southern Africa, while it is now struggling to feed its own population. About 45 per cent of the population is now considered malnourished. Crops for export such as tobacco, coffee and tea have suffered the most under the land reform. Annual production of maize, the main everyday food for Zimbabweans, was reduced by 31% during 2002 to 2012, while annual small grains production was up 163% during the same period. With over a million hectares converted from primarily export crops to primarily maize, production of maize finally reached pre-2001 volume in 2017 under Mnangagwa's "command agriculture" programme.

(...) Critics of the land reforms have contended that they have had a serious detrimental effect on the Zimbabwean economy.
The rebound in Zimbabwean GDP following dollarisation is attributable to loans and foreign aid obtained by pledging the country's vast natural resources—including diamonds, gold, and platinum—to foreign powers.

In response to what was described as the "fast-track land reform" in Zimbabwe, the United States government put the Zimbabwean government on a credit freeze in 2001 through the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 (specifically Section 4C titled Multilateral Financing Restriction), which collapsed the trade surplus in 2002. Where there was a trade surplus of $322 million in 2001, in 2002 the credit freeze led to a trade deficit of $18 million, to grow rapidly in subsequent years.

Revenge at all cost rarely is a successful strategy. I think South Africa needs to tread carefully not to repeat the mistakes of their neighbours who ended up cutting off their own nose to spite their faces.

Racial issues don't exist in a vacuum. Making emotionally charged political decisions without taking the socio-economic aspects into account is very shortsighted and I don't think there's ever been a time in history when such political myopia ended well.


It really seems that soon there will be a few countries in the world where you can go and find sanctuary from the absolute craziness going on, whatever form it takes.

Agreed carlise. What I find peculiar is that the "absolute craziness" is often committed in the name of 'justice'.
 

truth seeker

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#4
Thanks for posting, Jenn. I found the film surreal and heartbreaking but also very informative. The situation they are facing over there is insane and I hope that somehow, not only the farmers, but all those under threat of attack will find a way through it.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#5
The problem of taking land back and giving it to the "original inhabitants" is a precedent that is very bad because it can then be applied ad infinitum. What happens? Where do you stop? Take back Britain from the Angles and Saxons and give it to the Welsh, the earlier Britons? Completely throw anybody with British ancestry out of Ireland? Take Scotland back from Irish immigrants and give it to the Picts? Take back Spain and give it to the Basques, the earlier occupants? Take back France and give it to the Celts/Gauls? Take back the US and give it to Native Americans? Take Palestine from the Jews and Arabs and give it back to the Phoenicians? And so on.
 

whitecoast

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#6
If my understanding is correct, in South Africa land could be returned from whites to blacks in the post-apartheid era under the laws of restitution, but only if it could be conclusively proven that the land was indeed stolen, instead of purchased, exchanged to settle a debt, etc. With the new land reform and constitutional changes taking place in South Africa, the model of reconciliation has moved away from restitution in the name of "justice" (which has its roots in English common law) to straight-up redistribution for the aim of "racial equity" (which is Marxist).

Stefan Molyneux has been following the situation in South Africa pretty closely as well, and has some interesting podcasts and interviews that imo does shows the drive for equity in SA since the end of apartheid has caused a lot of harm to the industries they've pursued demographic equity in (the salient example being power generation, although white-black farm ownership has been getting much more attention recently especially with regard to the original post). And that's not even going into the increasing rates in murder, deteriorating financial stability, etc.

 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#7
The problem of taking land back and giving it to the "original inhabitants" is a precedent that is very bad because it can then be applied ad infinitum. What happens? Where do you stop? Take back Britain from the Angles and Saxons and give it to the Welsh, the earlier Britons? Completely throw anybody with British ancestry out of Ireland? Take Scotland back from Irish immigrants and give it to the Picts? Take back Spain and give it to the Basques, the earlier occupants? Take back France and give it to the Celts/Gauls? Take back the US and give it to Native Americans? Take Palestine from the Jews and Arabs and give it back to the Phoenicians? And so on.
Yes. Then again, it can be tricky - for example, when the GDR was founded, most companies and "capitalists" were expropriated and the lands nationalized. After the German reunification, many of theses assets went back to the original owners, many of whom living in the west. Was that okay? Was that fair? I think in many situations it was, but in many it wasn't. Or take the Palestinian issue: should every descendant of a Palestinian family who was dislodged in 1948 hope to get land back in Israel? Would that be just and fair? Again, I think it depends on the case, and it can be very complicated. The categories of "justice" and "fairness" and "entitlement", especially over generations, can be pretty messy and difficult. There is also the risk of engaging in some kind of "collective justice", "clan liability" or "group think". It seems to me that such questions can only be settled by a good, well-functioning court system on a case by case basis. But ideologues of all colors hate such messy, complex and non-black-and-white answers and prefer sweeping, morally loaded and simple answers. Just some thoughts.
 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#8
Watched this the other day - great documentary. It's mind-boggling how complex this issue and South African history in general are as opposed to the SJW caricature we've been fed. And the current government is pathological beyond belief. It comes down to this: you cannot fight injustice, historical or otherwise, with more injustice. That we even have to spell it out like this is insane.
 

Pashalis

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#9
It comes down to this: you cannot fight injustice, historical or otherwise, with more injustice. That we even have to spell it out like this is insane.
That pretty much sums it up I think. In regards to this, I like how the russians handled it in their own country and continue to promote it around the world in places where there is such a difficult situation/history. Which is pretty much everywhere to one extend or the other as Laura pointed out!

You can't just go in and blindly rebuild/create justice here ore there, and forget that you likely create similar injustice now by doing it on an emotional whim, coupled with psychopaths who sneak in quickly and use that opportunity to their advantage. You have to look at the broader picture and closely see the current situation for what it is and how fragile everything becomes as soon as a new emotional based "change" is implemented in "the name of justice".

I think in the book "Liberal Fascism" (see forum thread) it becomes quite clear that the idea to radically change things, better right now then tomorrow, while neglecting, forgetting and dismissing the current nuanced situation and especially science and past history, again and again led to worst situations then before.
 

Turgon

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#10
Thank you for sharing the documentary, and whitecoast, for the talks with Stefan Molyneux. They provided a lot of additional context and better understanding of the gravity of the situation and why the farmer's murders are so brutal, but also seeing where concepts like equity of outcome and 'historical reparations' will lead to - complete disaster. Like everyone else, I always just assumed apartheid in South Africa was a terrible situation similar to Israel/Palestine and thought of Nelson Mandela as a hero of sorts trying to lift his people out of poverty, but to hear that things became worse in just about every measurable quality of life statistic after apartheid ended and that most of what we understand as the 'black' majority population in South Africa aren't even the original inhabitants of that land, but like the European settlers, colonialists from the northern Bantu tribes that essentially committed genocide towards the native tribes of South Africa really goes to show how complicated a situation this is. The fascist government is taking land away from farmers because of the color of their skin and giving it to the descendants of the people who killed off the original inhabitants of that land.
 
#11
Like everyone else, I always just assumed apartheid in South Africa was a terrible situation similar to Israel/Palestine and thought of Nelson Mandela as a hero of sorts trying to lift his people out of poverty, but to hear that things became worse in just about every measurable quality of life statistic after apartheid ended and that most of what we understand as the 'black' majority population in South Africa aren't even the original inhabitants of that land, but like the European settlers, colonialists from the northern Bantu tribes that essentially committed genocide towards the native tribes of South Africa really goes to show how complicated a situation this is. The fascist government is taking land away from farmers because of the color of their skin and giving it to the descendants of the people who killed off the original inhabitants of that land.
I know this is not a laughing matter but the historical aspect of who invaded who did put a grin on my face. Sort of "Sooooo It wasn't just a White Man thing.". The real issue was technological advancement.

White man came where locals could not compete with them on the level of technology. As we know "Might Makes Right" and the rest is always down hill. No matter what race, people do not easily give up what they think is theirs. The key very often is the "what they think is ...". The vocal activist in the documentry who was saying that they will take everything no matter how it is done , I suspect, was raised in a radical environment of apartheid discrimination where rule of law was just a make believe. Now the tables have turned around. However the difference is that those who have power are not capable of running the show where order exists. Hence they will slowly drag the country in the same direction as Zimbabwe.

I don't know how Africa would have developed if white colonists didn't show up there and it was left alone. But I have a hard time believing that they would have been able to produce anything like Switzerland in terms of governance.
 

Ant22

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#12
I know this is not a laughing matter but the historical aspect of who invaded who did put a grin on my face. Sort of "Sooooo It wasn't just a White Man thing.". The real issue was technological advancement.

White man came where locals could not compete with them on the level of technology. As we know "Might Makes Right" and the rest is always down hill. No matter what race, people do not easily give up what they think is theirs. The key very often is the "what they think is ...". The vocal activist in the documentry who was saying that they will take everything no matter how it is done , I suspect, was raised in a radical environment of apartheid discrimination where rule of law was just a make believe. Now the tables have turned around. However the difference is that those who have power are not capable of running the show where order exists. Hence they will slowly drag the country in the same direction as Zimbabwe.

I don't know how Africa would have developed if white colonists didn't show up there and it was left alone. But I have a hard time believing that they would have been able to produce anything like Switzerland in terms of governance.

The below quote comes from an early session and it's been often said that some of them could have been influenced by the individuals who attended but the C's made an interesting remark about black people:

Q: (L) Now, relating to what we have been discussing lately. Did any groups of the black race, on their own, ever create a high civilization as has been reported by several archaeologists or other individuals.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) On their own without assistance?

A: No.

Q: (L) Who did they have assistance from?

A: Lizards.

Q: (L) Why have black people, in general, for most of recorded history, been living in such primitive conditions with such primitive mind set?

A: Isolation from modern interaction.

Q: (L) Why is this?

A: Karma. Punishment for past society which was cruel master hierarchical.

If their condition is in fact a result of karma, then the West is creating some for itself too at the moment.

Yet the picture isn't black and white - pun not intended. Take this recent article form SOTT for example: Not So Fun Fact: Theresa May Leads the West in Stealing Africa's Wealth -- Sott.net


There was also this exchange in the session of 19 July 1995:

Q: (L) Okay. Now, earlier we had a discussion about crime, the involvement in crime of black people versus white people, and, looking at the numbers, it seems that there is an inordinate number of black people involved in crime or criminal activities, or negatively oriented behavior than white people; the figures are really outstanding: blacks are eight times more likely to commit crimes than whites. And many of the explanations that are used, such as poverty or discrimination do not seem to account for this disparity, considering the poverty and discrimination exhibited toward many other ethnic groups with no such relationship. Is there something significant in this fact, and is there some reason why this condition exists?

A: Perhaps you should try one question at a time.

Q: (L) Why do blacks commit more crimes than whites?

A: That is too broad spectrum a concept to be answered simply. Please try to break down the question into several parts so that the answers can adequately explain.

Q: (L) Can you suggest a way for me to break it down; it is a difficult subject?

A: Normally this is not the procedure, however, one suggestion may be, for example, to ask, first of all, what is it that causes individuals to commit crimes; secondly, is there any connection between one's race and national origin or physical state of being and one's proclivity to commit crimes, etc. In other words, this is a broad spectrum subject. In order for it to be answered adequately, it must be broken down into many consecutive questions.

Q: (L) What is it that causes individuals to commit crimes?

A: Well, now you see, that too, has many answers. We will choose one and then let you contemplate. One answer is, of course, as we mentioned previously, the alteration of blood, body and brain chemistry through the use of ultra- high frequency sound waves. Of course, as you can well imagine, one effect that this may have would be what you would refer to as anti-social behavior. Do you not see this?

Q: (L) I do. Okay, is there anything about a person of a particular race or body type which makes them more susceptible to this manipulation than another race or person?

A: Well now, that brings into question the physical differences between races, including the obvious body chemistry differences, a subject that has not been adequately explored on the third density level of existence. For example, it is very obvious the different "races" as it is called, are human beings that have different chemical make-up in their bodies. Would you not say this?

Q: (L) I would say that might be probable.

A: Now, if one takes this one step further, perhaps if one race has a brain chemistry make-up or blood chemistry make-up that can alter the emotions in such a way so as to commit what is called anti-social behavior, at least in social environment to which you are accustomed, then this, perhaps, would explain why there may be a higher percentage of crimes committed by persons of a particular race as opposed to persons of a different particular race.

Q: (L) Are there any specific chemicals that we could isolate or name that would be involved with this condition?

A: Tumoxifene.

Q: (L) And, what is that?

A: A hormone secreted by the pituitary gland. You'll find this particular hormone to be in high concentrations in persons of what is referred to as the Negro race.

Q: (L) And why does this hormone make a person susceptible to these ultra-high frequency sound waves, so that they exhibit anti-social behavior?

A: That's actually a question that skips over some necessary ingredients, however the best way to answer that is that when this hormone is in high abundance, then one's aggressive nature is heightened, since it already exists in higher levels within individuals of the Negro race, it does not require much alteration to increase it to what would be referred to as the danger level. Therefore, aggressive or anti-social behavior can be more easily facilitated in those of the Negro race, and those of other races.

Q: (L) Is it possible, or does it happen, that people of the other races, white, Hispanic, or oriental, to have individuals born into those races, who, by some fluke, have higher levels of this hormone?

A: Are you asking: "Do some individuals of other races besides the Negro race have high levels of that hormone?" Well, obviously each individual situation is different. It is averages that make up the important composition.

Q: (L) So, this is what we could call, in a general sense, the "Crime Hormone?"

A: It is certainly one of them, anyway. Although, aggressive behavior does not necessarily translate into criminal behavior.

Q: (L) True. What is it in the blacks that tends to make aggressive behavior translate into crime?

A: That question is not answerable when put in that way. Please reverse and ask a more basic foundational question.

Q: (L) Well individuals such as members of the Celtic background are historically and evidentially quite aggressive, yet they do not as frequently, in fact less frequently, commit crimes as a result of their aggression. Why is this?

A: Well, there is more than one answer, of course. Everyone's chemical nature or make-up is oriented toward their native environments. Of course, if one thinks of the Negro race as having lived for many thousands, in fact millions, of years in the general climate and environmental situation they are native to, then perhaps it could be said that a greater level of Tumoxifene would be needed for survival in that environment. Now, when removed from that environment to an entirely different environment whereby such chemical balance is not correct for the new environment, then increased amounts of this chemical may produce aggressive behavior of one or two particular types. Whereas other races or cultures, when exposed to any stimuli which causes increases or changes in various brain chemistry, this may cause aggressive behavior of a different sort which can be channeled into more acceptable pursuits within the given society.

Q: (L) Is there anything that can be done chemically to alter this aggression or crime hormone to reduce it or to convert its effects into other behavior?

A: That's an extremely complicated question because any tampering with chemistry of the brain is similar to what you would describe in cliché as shooting in the dark at this point in your development, because you do not understand all of the intricacies involved. Therefore, it is very difficult also to positively answer that question when put in that form.

Q: (L) Is there any form that question could be put into where it could be answered more simply?

A: That is up to the one asking the questions to determine. Obviously the answer is yes, but if you are asking how to formulate the question, we cannot do that for you because that is part of your learning process. If we now are reduced to asking or rather telling, how to ask questions, this is rather like leading you by the hand, is it not?

Q: (L) Yes. Is there a simple, practical action that could be taken to assist members of the black race in reducing this aggressive behavior?

A: Well, again, you keep asking nearly impossible questions because, you must realize that this is not a simple black and white issue, no pun intended. What it is is trying to answer an extremely difficult question with very simple answers and this will not work because there are so many different directions involved here. There is just an impossible number of difficulties involved in trying to deal with this. Apparently you don't see that it is not something where one can simply formulate an injection, for example, and line up all the members of the black race for this injection. Can you imagine the extreme difficulty in even trying to contemplate such a thing? And, all of the resistance that would be received from every imaginable corner of your society at even the mere suggestion of such a thought? Obviously this is a problem that will only be taken care of at a later time, as you measure time, when the shift from 3rd density to 4th density takes place. There really is no point in trying to climb backwards up the side of a mountain with nothing but your slippery bare feet and hands to work with. That is what you would be trying to do if you tried to answer such a problem so simply.
 
Last edited:
#13
If their condition is in fact a result of karma, then the West is creating some for itself too at the moment.
I'm with you on this one. Looking at history (that I have managed so far to read in some detail) I am coming to the same conclusion.

Karma is not erased, it needs to be worked/burned off. I'm just not clear on who is leading and who is being led to bring people to such heavy karmic situations. Was it Karma that took them to Africa and made them buy land from the locals ? .... and on and on
 

Scottie

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#14
Wow, if that's what's going on, it's a lot worse and more complicated than I thought.

I have only one problem: Why the heck is Lauren Southern so popular?

I know the history, but it seems odd than a 23-year-old college dropout could so rapidly become "famous" for saying and doing things that many people are saying and doing - including saying some things that were downright stupid and inflamatory.

IOW, I have to wonder if she was/is backed by somebody to stoke up the tension?

On the other hand, like I said, if that's what's happening in S. Africa, then it's a damn fine video.
 
#15
I have only one problem: Why the heck is Lauren Southern so popular?

I know the history, but it seems odd than a 23-year-old college dropout could so rapidly become "famous" for saying and doing things that many people are saying and doing - including saying some things that were downright stupid and inflamatory.
Bingo !!! Initially what rang my "bell" was when I saw her fingernails while she was showing us her typing skills on the laptop. I though, "Now what sort of character puts on such "props" on a serious topic as this ?". As you can guess I received no answer besides my standard one "Henry, go into Conspiracy Mode." :-)

So all your questions are very valid because as always one MUST know who the messenger is and how they got their job. That would shed some light regarding why we are getting the message.

Still, I will give them a lot of credit for laying out the historical background to this situation. What we do not know is what is driving these people to attack with such viciousness. Shot to the head I can see but what was being described is getting close to the level of the cannibalistic attacks on Papua New Guinea.

Another level of existence
 
Top Bottom