u/fluxaeternalis

https://preview.redd.it/0fz6fld45rjh1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad8dae3361c2d1336fc6e76c82654ffdd8539844

For the sake of the argument I'll define pro-Palestinian as being the position that all of Israel belongs to the Arabs. They can believe that the newly created Palestine should be a secular state, like what the PLO believed, or that it should become a Taliban-like regime, like what Hamas' current goal is. Pro-Boer is meanwhile what I'll define as being the position that the South African Boers should have a state of their own in South Africa. This can range from forming an independent Volksstaat in South Africa similar to what the Freedom Front believes to actively trying to reconstruct Apartheid-era South Africa like is the case with the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging.

Without delving into horseshoe theory, as we see pro-Palestinian rhetoric on the left and pro-Boer rhetoric on the right, it strikes me as odd that both have very similar rhetoric and similar talking points, which is what I'm willing to discuss.

Just a few examples I can point towards would be the following:

• Both the pro-Boer and pro-Palestinian accuse their respective rulers of humanitarian crimes. I don't think I have to delve much into the idea that pro-Palestinians accuse Israel of genocide and apartheid, but it is worth noting that on the pro-Boer side we see things like Conservapedia arguing that the African National Congress is committing apartheid against whites. Donald Trump even echoed at one point to help Boers leave South Africa because according to him there was a genocide occurring against the Boer people.
• Both the pro-Boer and pro-Palestinian side emphasise crimes done by the other people living in the area. With pro-Palestinians the emphasis is usually on settler violence whilst as with the pro-Boer side the death of white farmers at the hands of Black people becomes a major talking point.
• Both the pro-Boer and the pro-Palestinian side point to activities a nation does and reframes them as crimes that a nation commits on its minorities. With the pro-Palestinian side this is usually focused on Israeli immigration laws that favour Jewish immigration whilst as on the pro-Boer side the emphasis is on South African Boers being in a higher tax bracket compared to South African Blacks and South African affirmative action programs.

My question to pro-Palestinians is the following: Imagine for a second that a pro-Boer person comes to you and says something to the tune of: "Israel is indeed committing a genocide on Palestinians, and the African National Congress is committing a genocide on Boers." What would your response be? Would you agree with the pro-Boer person that there is a genocide happening in South Africa? Or would you actively try to dismantle his rhetoric of a genocide occurring against the Boers? How would you go about proving that there is no genocide happening against the South African Boers by the African National Congress if you choose to dismantle his rhetoric?