Episcopal Church ends partnership with US gov’t over white Afrikaners resettlement dispute

FireDragon76 said:

the South African government denies that there is systematic oppression of white Afrikaners in South Africa

Click to expand...

John G. said:

To paraphrase the late Mandy Davies, "well, they would say that, wouldn't they?".
In fact, the ANC has driven S. Africa to the ground. Crime is rampant and white farmers have paid the price.
The ANC insists on the right to confiscate farmland belonging to whites which would put S. Africa well on the way to becoming another Rhodesia.
The mistakes of the West in Rhodesia must never be repeated in S. Africa or elsewhere. Migration to the US is the least president Trump can do for these farmers.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

It's untrue that there is land confiscation going on against white farmers

Click to expand...

John G. said:

Nobody said that and, despite your now toned-down language, I am going to demand a public apology fo this:

"Siding with the grievances of those who have benefitted from oppressive structures is not consistent with a Christian witness. It's also a lie that there is land confiscation going on against white farmers."

The ANC government did in fact insist on its right to confiscate white-owned land in a reply to Trump's query - during his first term - about violence against white farmers.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

From what I gather, the South African government denies that there is systematic oppression of white Afrikaners in South Africa. South Africa is a liberal democracy committed to the integration of all people, regardless of race, into its society. This has been the case since Nelson Mandela and de Klerk ended the Apartheid regime decades ago.

I think Trump is confusing the fact that a few Afrikaners are racist and have grievances, with oppression. This is, in fact, weaponizing the language of oppression to shame South Africa's multi-racial democracy. In addition, people like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel, who have enormous influence on the New Right, both lived in South Africa during formative years and seem to have been raised to agree with the older Apartheid regimes' racial policies.

Click to expand...

South Africa’s recent land‐reform legislation—the Expropriation Act signed into law in January 2025—has indeed expanded the government’s powers to acquire privately owned land, but it does not amount to a policy of unjust, race-targeted seizure of white‐owned farms:

• Legal framework and due process
  The Act retains “just and equitable” compensation as the norm and only permits nil compensation in narrowly defined circumstances (e.g. truly abandoned or speculatively held land), after a multi-step negotiation and judicial oversight process; it does not authorize blanket confiscation or extra-judicial land grabs Reuters.
• Not targeted at white farmers
  Government spokespeople have been explicit that the law is colour-blind, aiming to correct historical skew in land distribution rather than to single out any racial group. “This misrepresentation fuels unwarranted fears … that white South Africans … are being targeted,” said a Department of International Affairs official ReutersReuters.
• No instances of mass confiscation so far
  Although the law allows expropriation without compensation in rare cases, as of May 2025 no farmland has been confiscated under this provision, and the government maintains that any use of “nil compensation” will be closely scrutinized and exceptionally applied NPR.
• Broader context and safeguards
  Land reform in South Africa is rooted in correcting the legacy of apartheid, which left some 75 percent of privately held land in white hands despite whites being under 10 percent of the population. The Act requires negotiation, community consultation, and, ultimately, judicial review before any expropriation can proceed. While individual cases of unlawful farm invasions or criminal land grabs have occurred, these are carried out by private actors—sometimes organized criminal groups or corrupt officials—and are not sanctioned by central government policy.

In sum, the South African government’s current land-reform policy is not an unjust campaign against white farmers. It is a constitutionally guided programme with built-in procedural safeguards, aimed at reducing deeply entrenched inequalities in land ownership.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

It's called emminent domain. Every state has the right to seize land if it isn't being used productively or presents a hazard. Aside from some land on a game reserve, no land of white farmers has actually been seized.

Click to expand...

Tuur said:

Eminent domain, at least in the US, requires compensation. My involvement is on the edges, as our utility has to relocate facilities for highway projects and often the land is taken by eminent domain. In the first instance I was involved in, we held off moving our lines on a job because the land owner was taking the state to court. It turned out that the case was over the amount of compensation, not over eminent domain itself, and we were holding up the project.

What's happening now in South Africa is land confiscation without compensation. That is not the same thing. That's like what went down in Zimbabwe.

Click to expand...

Dear People of God in The Episcopal Church:

I am writing today with some significant news about Episcopal Migration Ministries, the organization that leads The Episcopal Church’s refugee resettlement ministry.

Since January, the previously bipartisan U.S. Refugee Admissions Program in which we participate has essentially shut down. Virtually no new refugees have arrived, hundreds of staff in resettlement agencies around the country have been laid off, and funding for resettling refugees who have already arrived has been uncertain. Then, just over two weeks ago, the federal government informed Episcopal Migration Ministries that under the terms of our federal grant, we are expected to resettle white Afrikaners from South Africa whom the U.S. government has classified as refugees.

In light of our church’s steadfast commitment to racial justice and reconciliation and our historic ties with the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, we are not able to take this step. Accordingly, we have determined that, by the end of the federal fiscal year, we will conclude our refugee resettlement grant agreements with the U.S. federal government.

I want to be very clear about why we made this decision—and what we believe lies ahead for Episcopal Migration Ministries’ vital work.

It has been painful to watch one group of refugees, selected in a highly unusual manner, receive preferential treatment over many others who have been waiting in refugee camps or dangerous conditions for years. I am saddened and ashamed that many of the refugees who are being denied entrance to the United States are brave people who worked alongside our military in Iraq and Afghanistan and now face danger at home because of their service to our country. I also grieve that victims of religious persecution, including Christians, have not been granted refuge in recent months.

As Christians, we must be guided not by political vagaries, but by the sure and certain knowledge that the kingdom of God is revealed to us in the struggles of those on the margins. Jesus tells us to care for the poor and vulnerable as we would care for him, and we must follow that command. Right now, what that means is ending our participation in the federal government’s refugee resettlement program and investing our resources in serving migrants in other ways.

Click to expand...

seeking.IAM said:

Proud to be a part of a church that thinks white immigrants should not get a pass to cut to the front of the line.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

That's fearmongering.

Click to expand...

I write to thank you for your call on Sunday, and to assure you of our gratitude for the stand you have taken in support of ACSA and South Africa in regard to the group of South Africans being resettled by your Administration.

What the Administration refers to as anti-white racial discrimination is nothing of the kind. Our government implements affirmative action on the lines of that in the United States, designed not to discriminate against whites but to overcome the historic disadvantages black South Africans have suffered.

By every measure of economic and social privilege, white South Africans as a whole remain the beneficiaries of apartheid. Measured by the Gini coeficient, which measures income disparity, we are the most unequal society in the world, with the majority of the poor black, and the majority of the wealthy white.

While U.S. supporters of the South African group will no doubt highlight individual cases of suffering some members might have undergone, and criticise TEC for its action, we cannot agree that South Africans who have lost the privileges they enjoyed under apartheid should qualify for refugee status ahead of people fleeing war and persecution from countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

From what I gather, the South African government denies that there is systematic oppression of white Afrikaners in South Africa.

Click to expand...

ANC rejects US’s decision to grant refugee status to Afrikaners​