Do the Afrikaners have any legitimate historical claim to South

Do "Americans" have a claim to the USA?

Honestly at this point it doesn't make a difference and any Afrikaner with half a brain should leave if they don't want to get eaten alive in the coming years.

Deciding when you're a "native" is an arbitrary distinction. The Bantu peoples that Afrikaaners displaced had themselves migrated from further north and displaced the Khoisan. The "we were here first" contest is almost always just a fight between hypocrites arguing that they stole the land before the next group did.

All that said, if you're a local and you don't approve of people "invading your land" you don't have to just roll over because otherwise you're a hypocrite. If you do that, expect your society to be subjugated eventually.

File: eyeroll2.png (10KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 429x410px

>>1680872
>legitimate historical claim

File: The Edge.png (435KB, 1019x765px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1019x765px

Power is legitimacy

>>1680920
>The Bantu peoples that Afrikaaners displaced
I thought that the proto-Boer people (those VOC colonists of Dutch, German,and French background) were there quite some time before the Bantu even showed up?

Afrikaaners only became the Afrikaaners as we know of them today when the Voortrekkers moved landinwards under British rule and solidified the Boer ethnicity well after those earlier frontiersmen split from into the Cape Dutch - and eventually reintegrated under the South African Union (which had received an influx of Brits).

IIRC: The Portuguese had been there since like 1492 or someshit

do you think arabs ever questioned if they had legitimacy in occupying and genetically destroying indo-aryan peoples like the berbers and persians? why are white ethnicities so detached from their own tribalistic interests they'd question their own existence?

>>1681135
it's the kind of thinking that got us global hegemony. not shitting where we eat.

>>1681135
> indo-aryan peoples like the berbers and persians
Berbers aren't indo-aryan.

>>1681135
To be fair, when said occupation and destruction of Persians and Berbers was happening, neither whites nor arabs cared about race.

>>1680900
>Honestly at this point it doesn't make a difference and any Afrikaner with half a brain should leave if they don't want to get eaten alive in the coming years.
SRSLY

GTFO people.

Make a fucking run for it already.

>>1681548
What about Orania?

Of course they are. They were the first people to inhabit the area that wasn't occupied by a few scattered Khoisan groups. The aren't the natives of those areas of course, but everywhere else (That is, the majority of the country) is theirs. They were there first. This idea that people can't own land if they're of a certain skin color is bizarre.

>>1681185
Not in the sense of "silly leftist strawman of race", no certainly not, but if you told a Persian "A group of Arabs are going to come wipe and destroy your Persian religion, try to annihilate your Persian culture and Persian language, kill all of the Persian men they can, enslave the Persian women and Persian children, try and breed your Persian people's genetic lineage out of existence by raping said Persian women, and then brag about it" he'd be pretty fucking upset.

>>1681185
>when the world seems massive and the most extreme difference in ethnicity/race is a bunch of semitic caucasoid people and some eurasian turkic people, ethnicities identify with their ethnos and not their greater race
>when the world is smaller and races completely different to each other encounter one another ethnicities belonging to a greater race begin to identify with coincidentally the most genetically related ethnic kin-groups