Crying Wolf: The Genocide That Just Isn't

Greetings, good people.

For years now, some South Africans have been spreading the rumor that a genocide was taking place in South Africa - a genocide that has been proceding unimpaired, unattended to by law enforcement, ignored or downplayed by the media, and also ignored by the outside world - a genocide, which conspiracy theorists would have us all believe, is being conducted against white, Afrikaans-speaking South Africans - and farmers in particular.

Nevertheless, after Afriforum went to all the trouble of throwing South Africa under the bus by presenting a cocktail of lies to the man who might very likely be the very last US president and first actual dictator - and all that followed, I decided to take a serious look at these claims that a genocide was underway in South Africa against white South Africans.

What are the facts?

Let's start with Afriforum. You may have heard mention of it recently in all the international news covering this story - not the least of which directly from the orange lips of Trump himself, in US news interviews, particularly the one where he addresses reporters at an airport. You might wonder what set that off.

In 2025, Afriforum engaged with US President Donald Trump and his administration primarily to address concerns regarding the Expropriation Act in South Africa 4. Here's a quick breakdown of their interactions:

• Lobbying against the Expropriation Act: Afriforum representatives visited the USA in January 2025 to voice their opposition to the Expropriation Act, which allows for expropriation without compensation under certain conditions 4. They presented their concerns to the American government, suggesting potential property rights violations 4.
• Trump's response: Trump, after hearing Afriforum's concerns, publicly stated that South Africa was confiscating land and mistreating certain groups, echoing Afriforum's viewpoint 4. He announced he would cut aid to South Africa pending an investigation 2 4.
• Afriforum's Stance: Following Trump's announcement, AfriForum stated they would ask the US to directly punish senior ANC leaders, rather than the South African people in general 2.
• Executive Order: Trump signed an executive order that cut off aid to South Africa, claiming the country had taken aggressive positions toward the U.S. and its allies 1 6. The order also offered humanitarian relief, including potential resettlement in the U.S., for Afrikaners in South Africa who are victims of unjust racial discrimination 6 7.

Afriforum has been reported to use the term "farm murders" to highlight the deaths of white people in rural areas, presenting it as evidence of the vulnerability of white communities in South Africa 1. They have been accused of weaponizing these incidents to support an ideological agenda 2 1. Some reports claim Afriforum has backtracked on "white genocide claims" 7 8.

While I can find no sign of Afriforum itself pushing the narrative of a white genocide in South Africa in those exact words, a lot of the sort of people who typically support Afriforum and their narrative regarding the Land Expropriation issue can generally be seen promoting the notion of a "white genocide" taking place in South Africa - verbatim. If you live here, you can easily find these sorts of people and overhear their conversations at social gatherings, chatting at your workplace, and of course - on social media. 

The first thing they point their fingers at, is the high levels of violent crime in the country, and specifically their view that white farmers are at the very tip of the pyramid of the victims of violent crime - and to place blame squarely on the shoulders of South Africa's government, which for 30 years now has been dominated by the African National Congress, or ANC. As we all know by now, it's easy to point fingers and make accusations, but -

What is the truth?

There has always been a confusing lack of clarity about the numbers of victims of this alleged "genocide", often accompanied by scant news articles to produce in support. There is for example, no complete list of all the victims of this "genocide".

Numbers put forward by "concerned citizens", activists and community organizations seemingly do not agree with crime statistics provided by various government and non-governmental watchdog bodies, and the waters have been made murkier by yet more conspiracy theories, and the efforts of extreme nationalists pushing sinister agendas to support a white supremacist separatist ideology.

Additionally, experts and analysts suggest that the narrative of a white genocide in South Africa is a debunked myth 2. Gareth Newham from the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa, notes that white farmers are likely targeted due to their wealth and vulnerability in remote areas, rather than their race 2. Newham also stated that far-right groups in South Africa actively promote this white genocide narrative 2.

It has also been argued that by defining violent crime that targets white people as genocide, such groups elevate those events above similar crimes that happen to other South Africans 1. This trivializes the violence experienced by other groups, particularly poorer Black people who are disproportionately at risk 1.

I also personally do not believe that this point alone - even if true - is sufficient to meet the definition of an actual genocide.

Perhaps we should start by taking a look at what genocide is. 

What Is Genocide?

In brief, genocide is the intentional destruction of a group of people because of their nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion. 

But it doesn't end only with those descriptors, it can apply to any sort of group centered around a common identity - even something as nebulous as a subculture, such as Goths for example, or a sexual orientation or gender identity.

What's important to know about the process of a genocide - and yes, it is a process, not just the final act of destruction itself - that leads up to that destruction, and what comes thereafter.

To reiterate; genocide is a process, and to understand the process that leads to genocide, we need to examine the framework that explains it.

The Ten Stages Of Genocide

The "Ten Stages of Genocide" model developed by Dr. Gregory Stanton is a tool for understanding how genocide occurs, its purpose, and its recognition by various international organizations.

Who Developed It:

Dr. Gregory Stanton, a former research professor and the founding president of Genocide Watch, created the "Ten Stages of Genocide" model 2 3. He developed this model after studying the Holocaust, the Armenian Genocide, the Cambodian Genocide, and other genocides 2 5. 

Why it was Developed:

• Understanding the Process: The model serves as a framework to understand the progression of genocide 1. It explains how societies can engage in genocide, which isn't the work of an individual but requires the cooperation of many within a state 3.
• Predictability: Stanton developed the model to show that genocide occurs in predictable stages 2 3 5.
• Prevention: By understanding these stages, people can better identify warning signs and potentially prevent genocide 2 3.
• Not Linear: It's crucial to understand that these stages aren't linear but rather processes that can occur simultaneously 2 5 7.

The Ten Stages:

The ten stages of genocide are classification, symbolization, discrimination, dehumanization, organization, polarization, preparation, persecution, extermination, and denial 1 2 3 5. 

1. Classification: Dividing people into "us" and "them" based on ethnicity, religion, or nationality.
2. Symbolization: Assigning names or symbols to the classifications, including colors or religious symbols.
3. Discrimination: A dominant group uses laws, customs, and political power to deny the rights of other groups.
4. Dehumanization: A group denies the humanity of another group by equating its members with animals, vermin, or diseases.
5. Organization: Genocides are always organized and often involve special army units or militias.
6. Polarization: Extremists drive groups apart, and moderates are silenced or eliminated.
7. Preparation: Plans are made for mass killings, and victims are identified and separated.
8. Persecution: Victims are identified, arrested, and sometimes forced into concentration camps or ghettos.
9. Extermination: The mass killing legally defined as genocide begins, as the perpetrators do not believe the victims to be fully human.
10. Denial: The perpetrators deny that they committed any crimes.

These points are crucial for framing the response to the question "is there a white genocide taking place in South Africa?" Please keep them in mind as we proceed.

Recognition by International Organizations:

• Standard for Study: The Genocide Report recognizes Stanton’s "Ten Stages of Genocide" as the standard for studying and evaluating the process of genocide 4.
• Wide Use: Stanton's model is widely used in teaching comparative genocide studies in university courses and museum education 2.
• Preventative Measures: The model is also used for determining preventative measures 2.

Below is a list of institutions that indicates the model's influence and use by various entities:

• Genocide Watch: Pioneered the model along with its former president Dr. Gregory Stanton 3.
• The Genocide Education Project: Uses and edits the model for educational purposes in high schools 1.
• University Courses and Museum Education: Stanton's model is widely used in teaching comparative genocide studies 1.
• The Genocide Report: Recognizes Stanton’s "Ten Stages of Genocide" as the standard for studying and evaluating the process of genocide 1.
• Holocaust Memorial Day Trust: Summarizes symbolization as ‘a visual manifestation of hatred’ 3. 

It is important to note that Genocide Watch suggests that the United Nations impose arms embargoes on governments and citizens of countries involved in genocidal acts 4. Not that I have any faith left in the UN these days, since it is rapidly declining in the wake of the collapsing USA, but that's another story.

Now we come to the part where we put the claims that there is a "white genocide taking place in South Africa" under a magnifier.

The Claims:

The narrative promoted by these individuals and by some organizations has contributed to the spread of myths on social media regarding a supposed "white genocide" in South Africa, claims that have been repeatedly debunked 2. Scholars argue that incidents of farm attacks and robberies are part of a broader pattern of violent crime in South Africa, which ranks among the most dangerous nations globally.

It's important to note that while nobody is denying that South Africa has a very high violent crime rate internationally, and even that although white farmers form a part of this victim demographic since they form part of the population of the country, they are certainly not special in those terms.

AfriForum has on several occasions itself been accused of a racist bias in failing to condemn farm murders when these involved black victims 4. Afriforum has on occasion rebutted these accusations by stating that they condemn all murders in the strongest possible terms, irrespective of the race of the victims 4. 

Even so, there is still no concrete quote to demonstrate that Afriforum has labelled farm murders "a genocide" in those specific terms, although, as I alluded to earlier, I have personally experienced the phrase and accusation being prominently and frequently thrown about by those supporting the organization, and most recently by those supporting a literal takeover of South Africa by Donald Trump - as though it might even happen.

But, from the sick twisted fantasies of a few sad neo-Nazis, it's time to look at -

The Facts:

This model outlines ten predictable stages in the genocidal process, from classification to denial, and suggests implementing preventative measures at each stage 1 3 9.

To repeat, the ten stages of genocide are as follows, this time with my own added notes to provide context for this article:

1. Classification: All cultures have categories to distinguish people into "us and them" by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality.
   
   While South Africa does still classify its population into groups by race (ie. white, African, coloured, Asian, Khoisan), discrimination is legally codified as an offense. This has also been offset by the policy of BEE or (Black Economic Empowerment). At first glance, this system sets race quotas for the employment market, with the majority of jobs being reserved for non-white South Africans - but it also sets expectations for employment equity for other historically marginalized groups such as women, disabled people and LGBTQ+. It is essentially South Africa's equivalent to DEI in the USA, or "affirmative action" in other countries. This system has been criticized vocally by many white South Africans since its inception in the 1990s, and I have no doubt that it would form part of the list of items presented as evidence of a "white genocide".
   
   
2. Symbolization: Names or symbols are given to classifications.
   
   In Nazi Germany for example, persecuted groups were forced to wear visible symbols on their clothing to distinguish themselves visibly from "pure Germans". Jews had to wear a yellow Star of David on their garments, by law. In the concentration camps, captives also had to wear symbols specifying their particular reason for internment - Jews again wore the Star of David on their striped uniforms. Gay men had to wear pink triangles. Lesbians and women accused of various other social infractions were forced to wear black triangles - there was a littany of similar identifications, names and symbols.
   
   Under Apartheid laws (the Pass Book Law for one) Africans had to carry a "dompas" on their person to give them permission to move through areas reserved for whites. That system was finally repealed in 1986, and there exists no such system, or  any system to the abovementioned points in South Africa today. 
   
   If anyone in South Africa has been trying to visually separate white South Africans from the rest of the population, it has been elements within the white population itself - some Afrikaners have moved to a town called Orania, described as a "white homeland" which maintains a white supremacist, separatist culture - and with the continued indulgence of the national government. Many white South Africans today, including some English-speaking South Africans still cling to symbols of the past which have hateful connotations to the majority of other South Africans - for example, the old South African flag (1910-1994), which to many represents the oppressive Apartheid regime. Some also fly the "Vierkleur", the flag of the old Transvaal Boer republic as a symbol of nationalism. Others still fly the triple-7 flag of the AWB, a violent neo-Nazi group that rose to infamy in the 1990s when it launched a terror attack on South Africa's World Trade Center in 1993 in protest of South Africa's coming first multi-racial democratic elections. This Afrikaner nationalist separatism, in my humble opinion, is what separates Afrikaners from the rest of South Africa, and not through any exclusive practices of government or broader South African society in that sense. 
   
   The claim of "genocide" does not meet the requirements of this point - at least as far as I understand it.
   
   
3. Discrimination: A dominant group uses laws, customs, and political power to deny the rights of other groups.
   
   
   While to a certain limited extent, the aforementioned policy of BEE does limit accessibility to the job market or other various opportunities (for example access to university or college level studies) for white males in South Africa, it's not a total exclusion, and there are no laws against hiring white applicants, or preventing white students from studying. There are also no laws which specifically prevent white people from opening their own businesses, participating in business, or in fact, in any field in South Africa.
   
   
   The courts in South Africa are independent of government and uphold the constitution. As such, laws prevent discrimination against anyone because of their race, religion, sexual orientation and the like, and should anyone feel aggrieved or discriminated against, justice in these matters is accessible via a number of mechanisms, for example, the Equality Court, Labour Court, Press Ombudsman and various other industrial ombudsmen and unions and etc. 
   
   
   One of the points proponents of the "white genocide" theory often make, is that the police are unhelpful or fail to respond, or that violent crime disproportionately affects white people more than any other group in South Africa. This is simply not the case.
   
   
   South Africa has a high murder rate compared to other countries that record crime statistics. Crime analyses indicate that violence is not evenly distributed across society and varies among gender, age, and race groups 1.
   
   Homicide Rates by Race:
   
   Coloured Population: Historically, the Coloured population has had the highest homicide rate in South Africa 1. In the past, the homicide rate for Coloured males has been significantly higher than that of Coloured females 1.
   
   
   Black African Population: The homicide rate for Black South Africans has fluctuated, with rates for males being higher than those for females 1.
   
   
   White and Asian Populations: White and Asian homicide rates are generally lower than both the Coloured and Black rates 1.
   
   Therefore, the claim of "white genocide" does not meet the requirements for this point either.
   
   
4. Dehumanization: One group denies the humanity of another group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases.
   
   
   While several figures on both sides of South Africa's political divide have historically made inflammatory statements which cause offense, such as on a radio or TV program or the like, these are relatively rare, and have always been resolved in the legal arena - which would not be likely under the conditions proposed under this framework - whereas a targeted, persecuted minority group would have little to no recourse for justice in the circumstances leading up to an actual genocide.
   
   
   In other cases - for example, the chant "one settler, one bullet" used by various African liberation and subsequent political groups, even since 1994, has been the subject of multiple legal cases in South Africa to determine if it constitutes hate speech 2. Despite the back-and-forth dances in various courtrooms, there is still no finality on that particular matter; but over-all, the obvious incitement to violence and racial hatred tends to be taken very seriously.
   
   
   That said, to be brutally honest, individuals on both sides of South Africa's remaining racial divide have been heard to use dehumanizing language towards the other, typically as bluster. More typically, because of the continuing rule of law and the fear of legal consequences, proponents of racist ideologies tend to be very careful about what words they use in public arenas. When in private, or when they think noone of a dissenting viewpoint can hear them, it's a different matter.

   
   

   It is extremely rare for government and its representatives as authority figures to make utterances containing dehumanizing language against the many groups that exist within the country. The two examples I could find include: 
   

   
   

   A Gauteng government official, Velaphi Khumalo, posted on Facebook that white people in South Africa "deserve to be hacked and killed like Jews" 1. The Equality Court found him guilty of hate speech and ordered him to apologize 1. In a second example, after the murder of a white professor, a senior SANDF officer (a Major) posted on Facebook that it was white people's turn and the professor should have had his eyes and tongue cut out 1. The SANDF gave Mohlala a warning 1.
   
   
   As such however, I don't think the "white genocide" claim meets the requirements of this point either, as this sort of language is clearly viewed as contentious, illegal and is reacted to by the authorities.
   
   
5. Organization: Genocide is always organized, usually by the state, often using militias. 
   
   
   There several militia-type groups known to be active in South Africa today. Below is a lengthy list of currently active groups of this type, apologies for that, but once you've read through them, I will clarify the reason for elaborating to such an extent.
   
   
   Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB): This is an Afrikaner nationalist, white supremacist, and neo-Nazi group in South Africa that was founded in 1973 by Eugène Terre'Blanche 2 4. The AWB advocates for secessionist Afrikaner nationalism and the establishment of an independent Boer-Afrikaner republic, referred to as the "Volkstaat" or "Boerestaat," within part of South Africa 2. Here are some of the AWB's current and historical activities:
   
   Recruitment: As of 2016, the AWB reportedly had approximately 5,000 members and utilized social media platforms for recruitment 2. The Mail & Guardian newspaper reported in 2008 that the AWB group had over 5,000 members, and appealed to 18- to 35-year-olds to join the organization's youth wing 2.
   
   

   Security Plan: In 2010, Steyn van Ronge, the new leader of the AWB after Terre'Blanche's death, announced a security plan to keep farmers safe 1. He stated that the movement intends to work within the law 1.
   
   

   Land Claims: The AWB plans to demand land that they claim is legally theirs in terms of the Sand River Convention of 1852 and other historical treaties, potentially through the International Court of Justice in The Hague, and if that failed, taking up arms 2. Several areas in South Africa have been earmarked as part of a future Volkstaat according to three critical title deeds. The areas include Vryheid in KwaZulu-Natal, the old Republics of Stellaland and Goshen in the far North-West and sections of the Free State 2.
   
   
   Kommandokorps: An Afrikaner survivalist group that organizes paramilitary camps for youths, teaching self-defense and propagating racial ideologies 1. It is led by Colonel Franz Jooste, who served in the South African Defence Force during the apartheid era 1. The group organizes paramilitary camps for youths between 13 and 19 years old 1. Here's what's known about the Kommandokorps:
   
   Training: The teenagers attending the camps are taught self-defense and how to combat a perceived Black enemy 1. They receive infantry-style training and are lectured on racial differences, including the claim that Black people have a smaller cerebral cortex than Whites 1.

   
   Ideology: The group promotes racial ideologies and Afrikaner nationalism 1 2. Colonel Franz Jooste has been quoted as saying, "Aside from the Aborigines in Australia, the African black is the most underdeveloped, barbaric species of the human race on Earth" 2.

   
   Activities: The Kommandokorps organizes paramilitary camps where teenagers are taught self-defense and survival skills 1. They also attend the funerals of right-wing leaders, such as Eugène Terre'Blanche 1.
   
   

   Criticism: The Kommandokorps has been criticized by AfriForum and the Democratic Alliance 1 3. (How extreme does a right wing group need to be for it to be criticized by another right wing group, in this case, Afriforum?) The Democratic Alliance has called for the group to be closed and its activities investigated by the Human Rights Commission 1. 
   
   

   Unity Pact: In 2011, the Kommandokorps signed a unity pact (saamstaanverdrag) with the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging and the Suidlanders 1.
   
   
   "Crusaders": In 2019, members of this white supremacist group were arrested for plotting attacks against Black targets 4. The "Crusaders," officially known as the National Christian Resistance Movement, is a white supremacist group in South Africa 1. Here's what's known about the group:
   
   Terrorism Conviction: The leader of the Crusaders, Harry Knoesen, was convicted on terrorism and weapons charges in June 2022 for attempting to overthrow the state in 20191. He faces a minimum sentence of life imprisonment for terrorism, with an additional minimum of 15 years for soliciting support to carry out terrorist attacks 1.
   
   

   Plot Details: Knoesen had been planning an insurrection since December 2018. He was arrested hours before the planned attack in November 2019 1.
   
   

   Motivations: The plot to overthrow the government was driven by extreme perceptions of farm killings and threats from Black First Land First (BLF) and EFF leader Julius Malema's song "Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer" 1.
   
   

   Biological Weapon: Knoesen had also explored the possibility of using a biological weapon to infect and kill Black people 1.
   
   
   "Suidlanders": The fourth such known organization active in South Africa, a South African right-wing, ethnonationalist Afrikaner survivalist group 2. Founded in 2006 by Gustav Müller, the group anticipates a race war or civil war, referred to as "Uhuru" or the "Night of the Long Knives", and the collapse of infrastructure in South Africa 2. They advocate and plan for the evacuation of white South Africans from major cities in the event of a race war 2. The Suidlanders' ideology is based on the prophecies of Boer Siener van Rensburg, who they believe predicted a massive civil insurrection that would lead to an alleged race war in South Africa 2. The Suidlanders are led by Gustav Muller and supported by a Leaders Council 7. Simon Roche is their public face 2. They claim to have 150,000 members, but this number is not verifiable 4. The group has been prepping for what they believe is an imminent race war where whites will be targeted by blacks 3 5. They have been accused of propagating the "white genocide" conspiracy theory 2. Simon Roche says their concept is about fleeing a crisis, regrouping, and operating a defense if necessary 3. They conduct training in civil defense, including logistics, operations, refugee control, first aid, firearms training, and communication 2.
   
   Here is the crux of this matter - of these militia-type groups listed, all are right-wing, white supremacist groups. I didn't list only groups of this type out of a personal bias, I did so for two reasons. The first being that there seems to be no sign of any opposing militia groups from the other side of the aisle, as one might expect under the circumstances described by this framework should there be any merit to claims of a "white genocide". The second reason, was to demonstrate the extent to which racist ideology underpins the ideologies of these groups, fuels their paranoia and hatred for people of other races, but especially for black South Africans. 
   
   Alarmingly, these groups are still known to be active in South Africa, and the government has given no indication that it will restrict their activities or make their operations illegal. Instead, they are solely acted against whenever they are known to violate the law. Thus it seems obvious, that if even these despicable Afrikaner hate groups are not experiencing oppression from the government, how could their claims of a "white genocide" have any provable merit?
   
   
6. Polarization: Extremists drive the groups apart. Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda.
   
   This too evokes my earlier mention of symbolism - white South Africans are not othered in South Africa, rather in my humble opinion as a white South African, it is Afrikaner nationalism and separatism and attitudes of white superiority which responsible for the more racist portion of white South Africans to remain separated from the rest of South African society. Thus, in my own view - in plain language, it is self-inflicted. They've had 30 years to move on from Apartheid and to fit into the "New" South Africa, and while many have, a bitter core of separatists have withdrawn and continue to think of themselves as superior and better than others.
   
   That said, propaganda of a polarizing nature is not commonplace, and I can find no examples being publicly broadcast by - with the sole exception of Afrikaner nationalists claiming that white farm murders are indicative of and inexoribly linked to a "white genocide".
   
   
7. Preparation: Plans are made for genocidal killings.
   
   I could find no examples of such plans - past or present, from any organization claiming to represent any race group in South Africa since 1994, other than the example given earlier at point 5, where the "Crusaders" militia group were said to have considered using bio-weapons to target black South Africans. 
   
   This evokes to me the notion of an "Accusation in a Mirror": This is a propaganda technique where one falsely attributes one's own motives and/or intentions to one's adversaries. The saying "accuse your enemies of that which you yourself are guilty" is an example of this - and with that disclosure, I think I've framed my thoughts on this particular point.
   
   
8. Persecution: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity.
   
   This simply doesn't happen in present day South Africa, at least not under the conditions described in this framework.
   
   
9. Extermination: Extermination begins and becomes the mass killing.
   
   The answer to this one is obvious, I'd say. Aside from being rife with crime of all types, including violent crime, there simply isn't any mass killing or extermination going on in this country.
   
   
10. Denial: The perpetrators deny they committed any crimes.
    
    Since there is simply no evidence to support the claim that a genocide is taking place, it is logical that there can be no perpetrators.

Genocide is not committed by an individual or small group; rather, it takes the cooperation of a large number of people and the state 1. The genocidal process starts with prejudice that continues to grow 1.

While there are reports of violence against farmers in South Africa, including white farmers, these incidents do not meet the criteria for genocide 1 2 3. Genocide involves the intentional destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group 3. These claims therefore do not provide sufficient evidence of a systematic, state-sponsored campaign to eliminate the white population group in South Africa 1 2 3.

Conclusion:

Afriforum's claims of a white genocide in South Africa do not align with the established understanding and criteria of genocide as defined by the "Ten Stages of Genocide" model developed by Dr. Gregory Stanton 1 2 3. 

South Africans have grown used to seeing and hearing Afrikaners complaining about farm attacks - and the horrific brutality of these attacks. To my mind, these would qualify as hate crimes - but to qualify as "genocide", they would need to meet the standards of the Stanton framework. They simply do not. 

To me, claims to the contrary are simply a matter of denial and a cry for special treatment, like spoilt children who simply can't make peace with the reality that they've lost the privileged position they enjoyed previously and are now being treated just like everyone else. 

Nor is there - as far as I can see - any credible indication that such claims are likely to have merit in future either.