To think that Trump's offer to take in South African farmers was one of his few good decisions, and confused why some people were angry over it?

[Carla786]

I loved Lauren St John's books as a child, and I'm now reading her memoir of growing up in Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) during the civil war of the 70s. She writes extremely well about the postwar realisation that not having apartheid didn't mean Rhodesia hadn't discriminated against its black citizens. She also writes of the terrorism during the war where white Rhodesians' farms were attacked and families murdered.

It made me consider Trump's actions for white South Africans. Now, I think his use of the word 'genocide' was extremely poorly advised. Like the war in Gaza, it seems to be inflating genuine suffering into a very specific term which should only be used sparingly for circumstances where it actually applies.

But I think he was right to take in the farmers. I think Trump in general is a disgusting person and President. But that doesn't mean any action he has done is automatically bad. It's well known that South Africa is an extremely dangerous place to live in general and farms are particularly targets. I know that white South Africans disproportionately own farms so this is probably a strong reason why they are targeted. It's also arguable that there's probably some element of racial revenge in some criminals, given the country's agonised history, but I don't think that raises it to the level of genocide.

Whatever the motives are, the fact remains that white South Africans are arguably in danger where they live. Why was there such criticism of a decision to help people in danger, at no great discernible cost to the US?

Thank you. It does seem possible that there could be some form of revenge discrimination against white people by some people embittered by previous discrimination against black people. But as you say, the crime problem is a separate issue, though race might well be a motive for some attacks.

And obviously South Africa is a completely different country to the US. Any claim of reverse discrimination is more believable in a black majority country than in a country like the US where black people are only 13% of the population. I think reverse discrimination could certainly be possible in a US area where black people were the majority, but the US as a whole? No.

I do think there are legitimate issues around DEI that should be discussed (similarly, there are legitimate questions about systems like Indian reservation measures to reduce caste discrimination) . But that's more complex than a simplistic 'reverse discrimination ' narrative.

YANBU. White South Africans are in danger, and there are specific laws to disadvantage and discriminate against them.

The same people who bleat about Trump being racist for allowing white South Africans to resettle in America, are the same people who think white people shouldn’t be in Africa at all and that their very existence is an affront.

If Donald Trump genuinely wanted to help the situation in South Africa, when Cyril Ramaphosa visited the White House he'd have actually listened to what he had to say instead of speaking over him and showing a ridiculous film that he insisted was something it wasn't.
Cyril Ramaphosa was extremely dignified and calm with him.
I'd have found it hard not to deck him, personally. He is not trying to be helpful, he has a white supremacist agenda.
Also the white SAfrican farmers now living in the US are not exactly going to be inclusive harmonious members of a multi-racial society, given that they jumped at the chance of being seen as legitimate victims.

'there are specific laws to disadvantage and discriminate against them.'

• might you please elaborate on this? There are racially discriminatory laws? Which?

Hmm- well I think it's credible that some attacks on white farmers have anti-white sentiment as one motive among others. Many victims appear to have that impression.

And if someone's living in terror of robbery, murder, and rape, whether because of skin colour or not, I think it would be legitimate to consider themselves a victim!

It doesn't necessarily mean they are racist and don't want to live in harmony with black peoplem

Re in being in danger- they certainly are, tragically. But are they in more danger due to their skin colour? Or in danger from living in a high-crime nation?

It’s purely political, nothing to do with danger (over and above the general population)

I think this is a balanced article OP.

www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2lvk2gql97o.amp

From my understanding black people are most likely the perpetrators and the victims of crime in South Africa, not surprising given the ethnic makeup up of the country (approx 80% black and 7% white).

Black men, women and children are statistically as likely or more likely be victims of violent crime than whites in South Africa, but just like here, the media portrayal of who is a worthy victim of crime is very much determined by race. The rape of a black child would not make the news like the rape of a white one, for complex reasons. Of course, Trump is not gonna go around suggesting offering asylum to Black Africans because the MAGAs would implode.

Do you know anything about Apartheid, OP? It was a proper genocide. Black people slaughtered by the government, not being allowed out of townships to live in the normal white people parts of towns and cities, people classified by tribal origins and sometimes forcibly moved to areas away from their friends and family because of how they were racially classified. Black children not allowed to go to white schools, or play in white playgrounds, or have white friends. Black women, and men too, raped by white police officers.

The colonial history of South Africa is why there is the level of violence and corruption there is today. You can’t have entire generations grow up utterly traumatised by political violence and then expect them to function kindly and respectfully in society. If anyone needs helping by foreign powers, it’s the people who are still clawing out from underneath that oppression. Apartheid only ended when I was a teenager, so the vast majority of adult South Africans would have grown up under Apartheid. It’s still very recent history.

What a load of bollocks.

Yes, there HAVE been attacks on white farmers. That is not in dispute. But statistically, the attacks on white farmers are relatively low compared to attacks on black people of different types. And yes, black women are in huge danger, all the time.

Stories like the one above about a cousin and her husband whose sister had been kidnapped and raped multiple times - that's a truly awful story but it is not, in any way, the norm for white families, anywhere in South Africa.

It is absolutely true that many businesses cannot sell to white owners. That is because South Africa is desperately trying to reverse some of the massive wrongs that were done to black people, one of which is the way they were excluded ecomically. Asking people to share wealth, to share business experience, to share business skills is nowhere near enough to address this, so yes, the government is making it compulsory.

Trump is incisting further division not only in South Africa, but in his own country with this rhetoric and it's frankly disgusting. But don't worry about south africans - most of the ones left behind are very happy to see the back of the "refugees" as clearly they were dead wood anyway, and contributing nothing.

Lots of ethnic minorities in many countries are being actively persecuted because of their ethnicity / religion / racial traits.

Can someone point out which of the other ethnic minorities that claim they are being persecuted have been offered asylum on similar terms to the White South African farmers in 2025?

There must be loads and loads to point to, right?

That's what I hate about all of this.

If there are eg. white South Africans and persecuted Christians (another group Trump is calling attention to, in Nigeria and elsewhere) who the Democrats could have safely helped but weren't interested in helping, due to those factors, that's really bad. If there are eg. Muslims, black South Africans etc that the Trump admin could have safely helped but weren't interested in helping due to those factors, that's equally bad.

I'm fed up with the politicisaton of suffering. Obvs the US can't help all suffering people. But humanity will only progress if we help people based on need and our own ability, rather than based on their skin colour or religion serving a political agenda.

Thank you for the info.

I understand the rules re businesses. I can see how this could potentially fuel resentment but otoh so will a situation where 7% of the population owns 70% of the land. Very difficult..

It's a bit like the Indian caste reservation system I mentioned. This started longer ago (1947) and it is controversial but otoh casteism is still a big problem. And apartheid only ended in the early 1990s.

It’s amazing how people are now falling over themselves looking for reasons to deny these people safety.

Stopping them from coming over isn’t going to take a place away from another person because Trump wasn’t going to give them a place anyway!

You can’t on the one hand say white South Africans are colonial and historically stole land and simultaneously begrudge them from leaving, like someone else said

Stop using Grok, unless you are a fan of fascism

I’ll tell you something the UK never helped the British expats in Zimbabwe. I had British born , uk citizen relatives who moved there when it was still Rhodesia. They lived through all the unrest and of course their money in what was now Zimbabwe was worthless over here I guess.

they were still there in the early 90s but did move back to the uk a while later due to failing health. They were entitled to nothing, no benefits, no housing, no nhs care. I am hazy about the details as I was a teenager but I remember my mum being upset.

Crime in South Africa is horrendous. Both my husbands cousin and aunt (both white) were murdered in the most brutal (and totally unnecessary) fashion. And the casual use of extreme violence is terrifying, they don’t just rob you, you’re robbed, tortured and murdered. It’s rife everywhere.
as was said above because of the ethnic makeup the proportion of crime against blacks will always be more. I visit it for a holiday, but hell would freeze over before I moved there.
its an amazingly beautiful country with so many absolutely fantastic people and I hope that one day they do manage to get a grip on the crime.

Because in January 2025 he shut down every single other refugee program other than white south africans. Adding white south africans to the mix of eligible refugees is one thing. Making them the only eligible refugees is another.

Thank you, this is key imo

If this administration really cared about human suffering in any way, they would likely not have (under the guidance of Elon Musk) shut down USAID, which it is estimated will cause over 14 million preventable deaths by 2030.

Exactly...😢

I have 6 South African cousins, 3 have left the country, well founded fear of violence including sexual violence is the main reason. The other 3 tried to leave hut ended up going back for a mixture of reasons, relationship breakdown/ professional dissatisfaction/ elderly parents.

While South Africans have been being murdered and ran off their land for quite some time now horrific yet seen by those running them off as paying the price for the crimes committed by those before them.

My Zimbabwean friend visits home maybe once every four years but her family lives in a highly secure gated compound.

That is terrible 😢

As pps have said, crime in South Africa is generally very high... Do you think white South Africans are in more danger than black South Africans?