Talk:Boers

Boer distinct from Afrikaner

In the introductory paragraph someone added [Citation needed] where it says "Boers are a distinct group of the larger Afrikaner nation" on the last line, but this is explained further on in the article, in the section Modern Usage. I have nothing to do with either, so I don't feel I have the right to remove the citation request. If nobody who feels responsible for the article fixes this then I will remove the request some time in the future. --sinisterstuf ^(talk) 15:59, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That's according to the two nations theory, which is a bogus minority position among some Boere-Afrikaners. Fact is that the terms Afrikaner and Boer are synonymous and that Boers or Afrikaners are one nation and not two. Boers are not a distinct (ethnic) groups among Afrikaners, there is just a group that prefers the terms Boer over Afrikaner. And if they are supporters of the two-nation-theory, they will also reject being called Afrikaner. --41.151.123.251 (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

That ship has sailed a long time ago. There is no putting the genie back into the bottle now in the era of mass communication & access to information / books & documents. Those who have actually studied this topic in depth will not be fooled by your erroneous & one dimensional cant. The true bogus minority position & erroneous theory was the one nation theory which was cobbled out of agenda driven political ideology that forced two distinct nations into a single political rubric. The historical record is as clear as day that the Boers developed into a distinct people on the northern & eastern Cape frontier from the Trekboers - who in fact were initially from German families as the genealogical record shows - who are distinct from the Cape Dutch who coalesced within the southern & western Cape region. Since the Cape Dutch were never associated with the Boer people & thus never called themselves Boers: those who refer to themselves as Boers today will only ever be a "minority" under the artificial & compromised Afrikaner designation since the Boers are historically the smaller group when compared next to the larger Cape Dutch. Notice how the above anti-Boer propagandist attempts to project an air of "illegitimacy" onto the valid distinction by implying that those who use the Boer designation are a "minority" as if that psy-op based assertion has any validity because since the Boers are outnumbered by the Cape Dutch: the Boers will always be a "minority" within the artificial Afrikaner designation. This is tantamount to asserting that the Canadians are a "minority" under the North American designation & arguing based on that that the Canadians are not a legitimate people distinct form the bulk of the North American population.

Ron7 (talk) 06:50, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Boer and Afrikaner are synonymous terms, there is no distinct/different nations respective of the names, plain and simple. 105.12.3.118 (talk) 17:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. Please. Anyone who would take the time to study the family trees of the Boers/Afrikaners at length would see that the two nation theory simply does not hold water. In my own family many remained in the Cape Colony, some settled in the Boer Republics, some were even Cape Boer rebels during the Anglo Boer War. Mieliestronk (talk) 03:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

There is a persistent misunderstanding evident within this brief paragraph. No one is suggesting that the Boers of the Boer Republics are a different nation to the Boers of the Cape. All of of the Boers of the Boer Republics were originally from the Boers of the Cape frontier. The Cape Rebels of the Cape were essentially all from the Cape Boers of the Cape frontier. What people like myself and others are pointing out is that the rural and rustic Boers ( whether they are in the Cape or the Republics or beyond ) are a different people / nation to the urbane Cape Dutch that coalesced in and around Cape Town during the time frame when the Boers emerged from the Trekboers of the Cape frontier by circa 1700. There was an important and relevant bifurcation that occurred early on in the history of the Cape Colony as run by the Dutch East India Company when Trekboers emerged within the then Cape frontier and began to trek further and further away from Cape Town and its emerging Cape Dutch population.

The reason why there is still so much confusion over the distinct and separate national status the Boers have apart from the larger Cape Dutch based Afrikaner grouping is because after the Boers were chased off of their farms by the British during the aftermath of the second Anglo-Boer War: they were forced to trek to the cities in search of work. When they arrived to these cities ( then mostly foreign cities to them ) they often encountered folks referring to themselves as Afrikaners ( a term that was then used virtually exclusively back then to refer to the Cape based political ideology of the Afrikaner Bond and the Society of True Afrikaners ) who were in the process of taking control of and or creating their own major institutions in the newly created state of South Africa.

Most of these Afrikaners were from the Cape Dutch population that had came out to the Boer Republics - especially to Johannesburg in the wake of the discovery of gold. As these Afrikaners took control they by extension influenced the younger generation of Boers to inadvertently subscribed to the Afrikaner ideology as the Boer children were now being taught in the new schooling system. This is how so many Boers were conditioned to see themselves as Afrikaners too even though the term was meant only to describe a political ideology and not an ethnic or cultural group. Ron7 (talk) 09:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

So we deal with two issues here. 1. The strange claim that White folks in Stellenbosch that speak Afrikaans are somehow a different nation from White people in Sinoville/Pretoria (Afrikaners vs Boers)... 2. A cult that actually pushes that notion and will do so in endless debate.

Now for sure you get some regional differences as you get that with any nation by the way. But that doesn't mean that you can have two distinctive nationalities/ethnicities by the virtue for them being slightly culturally different (e.g. political views), if culture furthermore is more than similar including language, habitus etc. And best of all... Those that push the Boer vs Afrikaner agenda often aren't even Boer/Afrikaners at all. I came across Italian and English people that did do so. And they did do so in an obsessed way as well. 105.0.4.83 (talk) 21:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Slavery ignored?

Why so little talk about slavery, evil, oppression BY Boers not on Boers. Juror1 (talk) 16:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Interesting this coming from a sockpuppet account of GADFLY46 --105.12.3.118 (talk) 17:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Attribution: Afrikaans

Attribution: content in this section was copied from Afrikaans on April 18, 2019. Please see the history of that page for full attribution.) --Bhistory 07:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boershistory (talk • contribs)

Requested move 4 February 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (closed by non-admin page mover) BegbertBiggs (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

---

Boer → Boers – The plural demonym of this ethnic group in English is Boers. As per WP:ETHNICGROUPS that's the best name for the article. The fact that the plural may differ in Afrikaans is not relevant. Park3r (talk) 23:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PLURAL. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom; style guide is clear that a plural demonym should be used. 75.162.124.147 (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom and WP:PLURAL. HouseBlaster^talk 13:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Xhosa/Frontier wars

I've just briefly compared the Xhosa Wars article and the Frontier Wars section in this article. I adjusted some information here to better reflect that article, but I am not great at non-copyediting work. The section is quite biased towards the white colonial viewpoint. It largely ignores Xhosa viewpoints, motivations, and victories. While a small degree of skewing of focus could arguably make sense given the article topic, the removal of things that makes the Boers and the whites in general seem bad doesn't - for example, the killing of King Hintsa ka Khawuta. It's also pretty important that the Boers have been described as the instigators of the wars. If someone could balance it out a bit, that'd be wonderful. --Xurizuri (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Native name?

There has been a somewhat recent edit that changed the native name to "Boervolk". I personally have no idea if that is correct, but the person who has made that edit also made edits on the Boeraans page, and everything they have added seems to be non-sense that doesn't meet Wikipedia's standard of quality at all. Also the same edit also added "Messianism" to the religion list. :p Scupake (talk) 01:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)