Wednesday, May 24, 2017
  Search 
Home
Opportunities
Partners
Publications
About Us
 
 
Please enter your email here, we would like to keep you informed.
 
 
Connect With Us - Facebook RSS
<May 2017>
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031
Sections
Liberty In The News
Liberty Events
Conference Proceedings
Culture
Agriculture
Democracy
Development is the Key
Economic Freedom
Education for Life
Enterpreneurship
Environment
Freedom of Expression
Freedom to Trade
Globalization for the Good
Health is Wealth
Intellectual Property Rights
International Relations
Liberty is Security
Limited Government
Principles of Politics
Privatisation
Population - the ultimate resource
Property Rights
Regulatory Affairs
Rule of Law
Tax Freedom
Facts & Figures
Opportunities
Competitions
 Property Rights
 
Land Distribution Paradoxes and Dilemmas
The Helen Suzman Foundation, South Africa Thursday, October 31, 2013

Leon Louw
“The land question” is seldom a question. Typically it is a slew of dogmas and myths as tenacious as they are erroneous. Virtually every supposed fact about land in South Africa is not just wrong, but so far off the mark as to make the adoption of sound policies virtually impossible. Few issues are as bedevilled by the hard-wired inclination to see issues of race in black and white, in both senses of the term. A binary imperative seems to drive us into adopting one of two sides when things are seldom that simple. How many well-informed South Africans are even vaguely aware of the tenure under which Coloureds and Asians lived historically or live today, or how much land was “set aside” for their occupation, asks Leon Louw in this paper published by The Helen Suzman Foundation.

“The land question” is seldom a question. Typically it is a slew of dogmas and myths as tenacious as they are erroneous. Virtually every supposed fact about land in South Africa is not just wrong, but so far off the mark as to make the adoption of sound policies virtually impossible.

We all know – do we not? – that black land dispossession started precisely 100 years ago with the 1913 Natives Land Act, that blacks had 13% of the land until 1994, that land is economically important, that landless people are condemned to destitution, that current land policy is to redistribute 30% of South Africa’s land to blacks, that apartheid land policy ended in 1994 when blacks were given full “upgraded” land title, that whites own most South African land, that black housing is RDP housing, that black commercial agriculture is a disastrous failure, and so on.

We also know that things changed profoundly in 1994, especially regarding “the land question”. Yet, as we shall see, these axioms are all largely or completely false, and, when it comes to land, plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose (the more things change the more they stay the same).

In the emotional land discourse, nefarious motives and ideological agendas tend to be read into whatever corrective facts are cited. Basic facts are perceived, usually with justification, as being political, even racist, rather than informative. Point out, for instance, that land dispossession started long before 1913, or that many blacks who lost land after 1913 have been denied restitution since 1994, and you are advancing a “black” agenda. Note, on the other hand, that “settlers” acquired much land by treaty rather than coercion, or that some blacks were themselves settlers (from the North) who seized the land of truly indigenous blacks, and you are an anti-transformation racist.

Few issues are as bedevilled by the hard-wired inclination to see issues of race in black and white, in both senses of the term. A binary imperative seems to drive us into adopting one of two sides when things are seldom that simple.

Since the land debate is construed as a binary black-white matter (pun intended), it is hard to find references to land in the context of other population groups. How many well-informed South Africans are even vaguely aware of the tenure under which Coloureds and Asians lived historically or live today, or how much land was “set aside” for their occupation? What, if any, future did apartheid envisage for them? What proportion of land do they have now, and is it included in the white or black estimates?

This article was published in the The Helen Suzman Foundation on Thursday, October 31, 2013. Please read the original article here.
Author : Mr Leon Louw is the Executive Director of the Free Market Foundation, in South Africa.
Tags- Find more articles on - land reforms | South Africa | South African politics

Post your Comments on this Article

Name  
Email    
Comment  
Comments will be moderated

RELATED ARTICLES
The Tragedy of Land Reform
More Related Articles
Property Rights
More Articles


 
An Initiative of
LIBERTY INSTITUTE, INDIA
All rights reserved.