Sunday, May 30, 2010

Why should South Africa remember 31 May?


51 years later, on 31 May 1961, the country was declared a Republic. South Africa ceased celebrating Republic Day every year on 31 May after it was handed over to the Black Marxist majority in April 1994.

A Mysterious Coincidence

On 31 May 2001, exactly 40 years after South Africa was declared a Republic, a rather ironic occurrence happened in the city centre in Pretoria. The Strijdom Square monument was mysteriously demolished. The monument, which was unveiled in 1972, consisted of a huge dome covering a bust of former prime minister Johannes Gerhardus Strijdom. The entire monument was totally destroyed leaving a crater the size of a rugby field. The bust of the former Apartheid leader broke in two and lay ominously in the centre of the huge hole. See the media report of this incident, “Strijdom's head rolls on old Republic Day”. Note the sarcastic headlines!

When the incident occurred my first reaction was that the monument had been blown up by explosives, in an apparent gesture by our new (7-year old) Marxist rulers that they were now in control, and that they could do exactly as pleased in the country. By 2001, the city centre of Pretoria was already looking like Hammanskraal. The Strijdom Square monument was definitely not on the government’s list of favourite places, -- thanks to the crazed actions on 15 November 1988, when a 23-year old man by the name of Barend Hendrik Strydom, decided to do some shooting practice on a number innocent black pedestrians in the vicinity of the monument. Click here to read the story.

The collapse of the structure was later blamed on structural fatigue and neglect. Rumours that a bomb caused the damage floated around for a while, but no one made a big issue about it, and neither did the media – as far as I can recall. The fact that the monument was destroyed on the 40th anniversary of apartheid SA's Republic Day was shrugged off as a mere coincidence.

An interesting 360-degree view of what the Strydom Square in Pretoria looks like today can be seen at this link.

The question on my mind right now is why should we remember 31 May? Has this specific date any significance at all for people living in this country in the year 2010? My feelings at this very moment is, --- let’s bury it for good!

31 May, -- whether it is celebrated or remembered for Union Day, Republic Day, or whatever day, will always be linked to the day an apartheid monument collapsed in 2001 in the capital city of South Africa, and in due course of this remembrance, the name Barend Hendrik Strydom will most definitely pop up!

This was the reason why I was rather reluctant to post this article, and why I don’t want to make a big issue of the date, 31 May, -- for the same reason why I posted nothing last year on this date. So next year in 2011, if I’m still around, there will definitely be no remembrance of 31 May!

Picture Credits:

Related Post:

A significant date: 16 December


Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

There is a much more important aspect to the
date of May 31 as that was the date that the Boers signed the "peace agreement" & officially lost the independence of their internationally recognized Boer Republics. It was a sick joke when this date was chosen as the founding date of the macro State of South Africa: a macro State that was created with the South Africa Act of 1909 - a piece of British legislation which was passed n the British Parliament.

The Boer people not only lost their independence but also lost 50 % of their child population in the British concentration camps.

There is also another aspect to why the Strijdom monument was destroyed. When Strijdom was Prime Minister: he began to talk about restoring the Boer Republics [ as the Boers were calling for during the late 1940s ] & was soon found dead leading many to speculate that he was likely killed in office in order to prevent him from implementing his plan to restore the Boer Republics. One must remember that to this day even the ANC regime is just as adamantly opposed to the restoration of the Boer Republics as their Afrikaner Nationalist predecessors were in the past.

Strijdom was in office for just four years becoming the shortest serving Prime Minister of South Africa when the natural tendency was to be in office for at least a decade. I suspect the Strijdom monument was destroyed as part of the regime's effort at suppressing history they do not want known & to continue preventing the macro State from breaking up.

There will come a time when Strijdom's body will have to be exhumed in order to determine the cause of death because it is highly likely that he was killed.

Tia Mysoa said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Ron, thanks for sharing these facts!

When I compiled this posting, I did not delve too deep into the life and times of J G Strijdom, and neither did I go into the finer background of the politics of that time. We are talking here about a time in SA history long before H F Verwoerd came on the scene, and we all know how warped the worldview has became concerning this gentleman.

Despite the fact that our history books have been re-written, the facts that you’ve mentioned here should not be forgotten. I must admit that I was not aware that J G Strijdom was possibly murdered. The question is, --- is their anyone alive today who can follow up on this and expose the truth?

The main purpose of this posting was to point out that there was a determined effort made by our rulers (in collaboration with traitors in the SA security forces) to bury the memories of apartheid and men like J G Strijdom. There are simply too many coincidences involved here with the date 31 May. That a man with a similar surname (Strydom) committed murder on that spot, was most likely a coincidence. But it sparked off the formulation of a plan that would be implemented on an appropriate date, namely: 31 MAY.

Almost 13 years later on 31 May 2001, the J G Strijdom monument mysteriously collapses in a cloud of dust in the early hours of 31 May, at an appropriate time to minimize the loss of lives. Another coincidence is the quick reaction of an ANC official who lied through his teeth when he said: "That monument was one of our most prominent landmarks, and a work of art. It is always a sad day when an irreplaceable artwork is lost." BULL DUST! Those words were spoken for one reason only, and that was to pacify the Afrikaner resistance prevailing at the time, and to create the impression that the ANC was really concerned.

Then lastly, the MSM steps in with “REPUBLIC DAY” HEADLINES – “Strijdom's head rolls….” An ominous warning to all the supporters of the old apartheid regime that – “Your heads will roll too – so watch it”. The psychology behind this ploy has been amazingly effective!

Laager said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

May 31st is an intrinsic part of SA history as Ron points out. Equally as important as December 16th.
That is why SA became a Republic on May 31st. The symbolic date when the Boere reclaimed their land and independence.
It cannot, and should not, be wished away because of the Barend Strydom incident.

For me the big unanswered question is:
Why was the Strijdom monument not rebuilt?
Public subscription within the Afrikaner community would have raised the funds in no time for the re-construction.

Certainly there appear to be some major political intrigues surrounding this event

If the intent of the action was to send a message to the Whites it certainly has come true over the last 16 years with 40,000 randomly slain.

Tia Mysoa said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Hi Laager, -- it’s good to hear from you!

I’ve been following your comments on SASucks, but don’t always have the time to respond. And as you once said on one of their postings, sometimes other commentators beat you to it!

The 31 MAY issue coupled with the destruction of the J G Strijdom monument has always intrigued me. Very good question? Why wasn’t it rebuilt, and what happened to the huge bust? Surely it could have been restored and placed back in its original postion! I think the fact that this was NOT done is further proof that the collapse of the monument was no coincidence.

I know there is another bust of JG Strydom in Krugersdorp, close to the Paardekraal Monument.

Yes I agree -- 16 December will always be a very significant date>>

….. but I still say, “Let’s bury 31 May!”

My next posting will reveal why, that is if your read between the lines!

Flat White said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

This date actually goes back further to 31 May 1902, when the Second Anglo Boer war ended. They even mentioned it today on Australian national radio, which is how I learned this fact.

Check out

What a sad day this is when Australians still remember their soldiers who died in the Boer war, but the Afrikaner has no clue...

Tia Mysoa said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

@ Flat White

Yep, I see that the 2nd Boer War was fought from 11 October 1899 until 31 May 1902.
Thanks for pointing this out!

As you said, this is truly a sad state of affairs!

Regtig pateties!!!!!

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Well I pointed the significance if the May 31 date in my first post here as it was the day the Anglo-Boer War ended & the "peace treaty" was signed at Vereeniging. The very place that F W de Klerk would later represent in Parliament. Talk about symbolism. Makes one wonder if the town is not cursed.

I rather doubt the ANC wants to bury the memory of Apartheid after all the memory of Apartheid is still their main effective recruiting tool for staying in power. A lot of Black people dislike the ANC - as well along with probably most White people & Coloured people - BUT the fear concerning the memory of Apartheid always forces many of them to keep voting for the ANC. All though I am sure the electoral process is rigged in any event.

It was certainly rather interesting that Strijdom [ whom Malan did not want to succeed him as Prime Minister ] was followed in office by Verwoerd who went about turning South Africa into a nominal republic in order to placate the demands the Boers had for restoring their republics but of course the problem with Verwoerd's republic was that it kept the Boers under Afrikaner domination as most Afrikaners are not of Boer descent & do not have the republican heritage which the Boer descendants value so much. There was a clear Boer Republican vs Afrikaner neo Colonial struggle going on during the Strijdom administration [ & prior ] with the Afrikaner neo Colonial outlook wining & the Boer Republican outlook being forced to go underground. A notable Boer Republican of the era named Robert van Tonder decided to LEAVE the National Party in 1961 in order to advocate for the restoration of the Boer Republics full time as he also retired at around the same time. Robert van Tonder had an illegal printing press & was severely repressed by the Afrikaner establishment [ including beaten ] & later founded the Boerestaat Party after he failed to get the other political parties to adopt the notion of restoring the Boer Republics. Hans Strijdom was one of the few Boer descendents who ever governed South Africa. Others include: Louis Botha / [ possibly John Vorster ] / P W Botha & F W de Klerk. The rest were all of Cape Dutch descent. Despite the fact that two of them fought on the side of the Boer Republics but thy were both exposed as British double agents. Which is why they were promoted to run South Africa for such long terms during the era of overt British rule - whereas the British power runs things in a more covert manner now.

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Hans Strijdom differs from the other Boer descended rulers as he was pro Boer during his term in office [ which is why he was probably killed ] while all of the others were notably anti-Boer. Louis Botha crushed the Maritz Rebellion of 1914 which had as part of is aim the restoration of the Boer Republics. P W Botha refused to consider granting the Boers a homeland & had a frosty meeting with Eugene Terre'Blanche on the topic. F W de Klerk refused to allow the Boers a vote on restoring the Boer Republics to which Robert van Tonder then publicly called de Klerk an "undemocratic oppressor" within a 1991 Dutch documentary on the topic.

Hendrik Verwoerd was certainly misrepresented BUT as longtime Boer Patriot Theuns Cloete [ Transvaal Separatists & now runs Boervolk Radio & is trying to convince the Boers that they need their OWN media ] astutely pointed out:
Verweord was not a friend of the Boer Nation [ Watch this segment at this link. ] as he was working to create an economic sphere & scuppered the Boers' movement to restore the Boer Republics & wanted to maintain an Afrikaner domination within which all of the various White constituent groups were subjugated under. The history books were rewritten LONG before the ANC came to power as they were rewritten by the Broederbond [ which was the intermediary between British rule & its puppet ANC rule ] which distorted & redacted some crucial Boer history in order to promote a dangerous Afrikaans speaking coalition which was manufactured for the sole purpose of capturing the macro State from the British but marginalized the Boers in the process as the Boers' identity was submerged under the Afrikaner designation & tethered to the erstwhile pro-British & more numerous Cape Dutch population.

A lot of folks have a dangerous blind spot when its comes to the ancestry of the Afrikaners because the Afrikaners are in fact mostly of Cape Dutch origin but are often only thought of as being of Boer origin. The term Afrikaner was promoted by the British & the various politicians but this term encompassed ALL White folks who spoke Afrikaans as a home language. Therefore the Afrikaners were in fact a coalition of Cape Dutch & Boer with the Boers being the SMALLER segment of the new Afrikaner designation group.

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Laager. The Boers NEVER reclaimed their land / republics & they certainly did not reclaim their independence! The Boers were under Afrikaner domination due to their smaller numbers within the Afrikaner designation. The Boers were struggling all throughout the 20th cent at various times at reclaiming their republics but were denied by the Afrikaner establishment. The macro State of South Africa was only NOMINALLY [ ie: a false republic as it was only a republic in name while they RETAINED the British Parliamentary political system & turned the office of Governor General into the office of ceremonial State President ] turned into a republic. Declaring the macro State a republic but without adopting any authentic republican institutions does not constitute an authentic republic. The Afrikaners [ as a coalition of Cape Dutch & Boer ] inherited this new nominal republic only because they were the largest segment of the White population BUT The Boer segment was still subservient to the Cape Dutch segment[ as per Afrikaner domination ] as the Cape Dutch segment had the power of their votes & the Broederbond which they dominated. Therefore it is an absolute LIE to erroneously claim that the Boers "reclaimed" any part of their republics when they were still under the British Parliamentary system & under non-Boer descended Afrikaner domination.

Tia Mysoa said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

31 May 1902
Peace Treaty of Vereeniging, signed at Melrose House in Pretoria (not in Vereniging). The British Union Jack is victoriously hoisted over the entire South Africa.

31 May 1910
Union of South Africa established, incorporating the previously separate colonies of the Cape, Natal, Transvaal and the Orange Free State. The Afrikaans language as well as other (Volk)-ideals Are officially accepted. A milestone in the history of the Afrikaans Nation.

31 Mei 1928
A new unique South African flag is designed, but not officially adopted for 10 years.

31 Mei 1938
The new flag is hoisted next to the Union Jack in Cape Town, and a new National Anthem is sung. The new flag and anthem (Die Stem) becomes the symbol of growing Afrikaans Nationalism. The proceedings are planned to coincide with the 100th centenary of the Great Trek (1838- 1938).

31 May 1961
The long-awaited Republic of South Africa comes into being. The orange-white-blue flag remains unchanged as the National flag of SA.


31 May 2011
Afrikaner Volksraad!!!!!!!
The “Volksraad” (House of Assembly) will, on 20 and 21 May 2011, elect members and plan on establishing the “House of Assembly” ... on 31 MAY 2011... ??????????

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Thanks for that correction. But the negotiations which led to the peace treaty took place at Vereeniging which is why the peace treaty was named such. The flag was officially adopted in 1927 [ but not raised until the following year ] but it had to be flown by law next to the Union Jack. But in 1957 this practice was abolished [ under the Strijdom administration ] & the orange / white & blue South African Union Flag was flown as the only South African national flag.

The Afrikaner Nationalists wanted to adopt a new flag for the Republic of South Africa as the so called republic simply adopted the previous flag. Hendrik Verwoerd signed off on a design which was to be inaugurated on the tenth anniversary of the RSA on May 31 1971 but his successor Vorster did not want to reopen the acrimonious flag debate as it almost split the macro State apart in 1926 - 1927.

There is no single Afrikaans nation. As dialects of the Afrikaans language is spoken by various groups: Boer descendents / Cape Dutch descendents / Griquas / Cape Malays / Basters Cape Coloureds etc. The Cape Dutch in particular did not develop a sense of identity until the LATE 19th cent [ read more in the book: Cecil Rhodes & The Cape Afrikaners by Mordechai Tamarkin ] when they started a language rights movement at a time when most of the Boers were living in their internationally recognized Boer Republics or were still living on the Cape frontier.

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

The Cape Dutch [ re baptized as Afrikaners from 1875 onwards ] intellectuals were the ones who coined the term Afrikaans for the ligua franca which developed at the Cape during the late 17th cent but the Boers still simply called their dialect "die taal" or Boeretaal & many Boers still refer to their dialect as such. Therefore one must be mindful of not adopting too much Cape Dutch / Afrikaner terminology because the Boers did not coin the various terms which were popularized by the then ascending Afrikaner Nationalist / neo Colonial outlook. One must also remember that Afrikaner Nationalism was simply British Imperialism with an Afrikaans face as it simply placed the Afrikaans speakers into the role as the surrogate Colonial rulers of the macro State of South Africa which was built on the dead bodies of the Boer children the British killed in the various concentration camps during the war fought to conquer & abolish the Boer Republics.

Die Stem was a symbol of Afrikaner Nationalism not not necessarily Afrikaans nationalism. Just as the flag would become despite the fact that it was rejected by many Afrikaans speakers mainly over the inclusion of the Union Jack. Afrikaner Nationalism was the construction of a political entity which sought to create a coalition between the Cape Dutch & the Boers in order to outnumber the English speakers & dominate the political realm.

There was no authentic Republic of South Africa because it was declared in name only as it was a nominal republic. The new so called republic maintained the unworkable British Parliamentary system & turned the Governor General into a ceremonial State President. An office which did not become an executive office until 1984 [ after a change in the Constitution ] when P W Botha was seeking to implement reforms in a quasi dictatorial manner.

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

There is not much movement among the average Afrikaner for establishing another Volksraad but one should look to the Boer descended segment as they are & have historically been involved in establishing mechanisms for re-establishing their stolen self determination.

Tia Mysoa said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

@ Ron

Thanks again for your valuable contribution to this post. Sorry I’m not always quick to respond, as I am not always near a computer during the day.

The Boer history is indeed a fascinating one. I can see that you also have a passion for this subject.

I have not read the book, “Cecil Rhodes & The Cape Afrikaners”, but will make a point to do so ASAP!

While I’m online, I might as well share the following, which I picked up on Wikipedia:

On 31 May 1902, when the Anglo-Boer War came to an end with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging, many Boers were unhappy with the political state of affairs. This is evident from the Boer diaspora that followed soon afterwards.

Starting in 1903, the largest group emigrated to the Patagonia region of Argentina. Another group emigrated to British-ruled Kenya, from where most returned to South Africa during the 1930s, as a result of warfare there with indigenous people. A third group, under the leadership of General Ben Viljoen, emigrated to Chihuahua in northern Mexico and to states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas in the south-western USA. Others migrated to other parts of Africa, including German East Africa (present day Tanzania, mostly near Arusha). Some refugees went to Angola, where smaller and larger groups settled on the Bihe and the Humpata plateaus, respectively.

Ron. said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

Thanks. I actually contributed in part a large portion of that text as I came across the books: The Boers in East Africa: Ethnicity and Identity & Boer Settlers of the South West which expand on this topic & both books are by Brian M Du Toit who is from the Afrikaans population. The Patagonia Boers are the only Boer diaspora of the era which is still around but the younger generations are increasingly becoming assimilated & absorbed into the dominant Spanish speaking population.

Laager said... .....Click here to refresh this blog

@ Ron

Interesting debate - been away for a week

My statement - "regained their Republics" - was not intended to be a lie.
It was my (naive?) interpretation of what I experienced around me as I grew up in this era. The whole country was now their Republic - not just the old OFS and ZAR.

Certainly there was joy amongst the Boere/Afrikaners when formal colonial ties were cut with Britain in 1961. Under the Governor General system the SA parliament was still beholden to Westminster. Britain could, if it chose to do so, veto any law or action by the SA Parliament. Peculiarly they never did despite growing world opposition to the Union of SA because of the Apartheid system.

My guess is that the Brits were quite happy for the status quo to remain undisturbed as it maintained a flow of cheap labour to the mines and handsome profits to the big shareholders in the UK.

To the best of my knowledge the only time Westminster intervened in the affairs of a Dominion was when the Australian Governor General dissolved the Labour Govt of Gough Whitlam (?) in the early 70s. Can't remember what the issue was.

Could you be more specific on defining Afrikaners and Boere? Certainly there was a difference in that the Western Cape Afrikaners did not feel the need to trek. They liked where they lived, were becoming prosperous and seemingly got along with the British. It was the militants (descendants of the Trekboere) on the East Cape frontier that decided to head north to escape the British. Are you now saying that their descendants in the OFS and Transvaal (old Republics) are numerically smaller than the Afrikaners in the old W, E, and N Cape?
Just where are the Boer strongholds now and who are were/are their leaders?

On changing the Oranje, Banje, Blou flag.
One of the reasons I recall for not changing it was that John Vorster (?) did not want to alienate English South Africans. With the demise of the United Party many conservative English SAs found a political home within the National Party - hence the increased majority wins for the Nats during the 70s. Plus the English still were majority controllers of big business and needed to be kept sweet. At grass roots level the old divisions between Boer and Brit were softening. This was probably best illustrated by more Afrikaners making it into the national cricket team.

On "Declaring the macro State a republic but without adopting any authentic republican institutions does not constitute an authentic republic."
Please elaborate.
The only missing element was universal franchise and majority rule.
This now exists and satisfies the whole world.

Latest 5 Featured Posts:

Operation Vula, its Secret Safari, and Zuma’s band of comrades - Dec. 2013
During 1986 the ANC launched an underground operation called Operation Vula. A lesser-known fact is that it continued to operate after Nelson Mandela's release in February 1990, and for three years after his speech in August 1990 when he reiterated the total commitment of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe and the SACP to the Groote Schuur Minute.

Heritage Day Photographs (Voortrekker Monument) - Sept. 2013
This posting includes a few photographs taken on Heritage Day 2013. The posting introduces an unusual but beautiful new structure called QUO VADIS? (with the question mark) which I’m sure many readers have never heard of.

The Yellow-Bucket Marula Tree: A Mystery Solved! - Oct. 2013
I came across a rather strange phenomenon one day while travelling along the R561 route between Tolwe and Baltimore in the Limpopo province of South Africa. A small yellow bucket was attached high-up in a branch of a Marula tree, hence the name of this posting. It’s a real funny story which I’m sure most readers will enjoy - as much as I enjoyed compiling the article  - (with illustrations).

Pretoria’s Monument for Victims of Terrorism - July 2013
Many people (including myself) had almost forgotten about a noteworthy monument in Pretoria that stood at the entrance of the old Munitoria building on the corner of Van der Walt and Vermeulen Streets (now renamed Lilian Ngoyi and Madiba Streets). When the Munitoria building was demolished on 7 July 2013 nobody could tell me whether the monument was still standing or not, so I decided to go look for myself.

Remembering The Battle of Delville Wood - July 2013
14 July marks a day when the South African 1st Infantry Brigade got engaged in the 1916 (WW1) Battle of the Somme, in France. The battle was one of the largest of World War I, in which more than a million men were wounded or killed, making it one of humanity's bloodiest battles. One specific encounter during this battle, known as The Battle of Delville Wood, is of particular importance to South Africa. The posting includes a comprehensive article (with pictures) compiled and written by Petros Kondos.

African Countries (Alphabetical list):
(The links will redirect to the page dealing with the specific country.)