Given the Radical Economic Transformationist’s race to the bottom, you would be forgiven for thinking that EWC is not only possible, or probable, but now heading into the realm of completely certain. But take heart my dear property owners, this is not the case.
EWC, is an unwinnable game for the RET’s. The policy is a hand over-played; a contradiction of their goal to have a steady flow of hosts, that no hypocrite, even the arch puss-in-red overall and boots, can evade. To combat EWC, or TWP (Taking Without Paying), you need not join Afriforum, or donate to the IRR and FMF (but you probably should anyway). No, the only armour you need against EWC is found in a one syllable, two letter word: “NO!”
You see EWC is not so subtle a strategy of fleecing as taxation. Under taxation, the compromise is between no theft and some theft. But EWC is no such compromise. It is the total and complete difference between no theft and utter loss. And whereas tax only takes a few toes here and there, EWC is cutting you off at the knees and selling your kidneys on the black market.
But don’t be lured in to total complacency, my property-rich lovelies. The RET’s still have a chance of taking the cup of crap ideas, but whether they do or not, is entirely up to you. What the RET’s are counting on, is that you will willingly make yourself available and supine for your own molestation, and they are already half-way to their goal.
They have already conned you, quite successfully, into believing that “the will of society” or “the public interest” (as it’s expressed in EWC talk), has ascendancy over your basic human rights: life, liberty and property. They have also successfully bamboozled you into thinking about your life, your survival and your property, as separable things. Don’t believe me? Well, take a look at your latest payslip, till slip and the invoice for your wife’s latest addition to her sexy-time’s negligée slip.
But here, my dear Pam Golding’s, is the shining light in your life: EWC is not taxation. With tax, the clever RET’s have managed to jam their sticky fingers in between every cent you spend or earn, well before you spend or earn a cent, leaving you basically helpless to protest. And to their credit, they take only that amount which does not wake you up from your democratic nightmare.
But with EWC, there is no easy opening for the pry of their Bostik-like grip. They will have to come with police, with mobs, with entire armies to pry your property out of your warm-live hands. And they won’t and can’t do it, without your consent. Let me repeat that: They won’t and can’t do it, without your consent.
You see, the RET’s just can’t risk the bad press of their EWC wet-dream. They know full well that if one image of one policeman, throwing one person out of their one bedroom house, makes its way to one international news organization that their game would be kaput.
Unlike taxation, which most everyone here and abroad has accepted as a ‘necessary’ and ‘legitimate’ form of strong arm robbery, what they, here and abroad, will not accept is an equation that reads: my money + my money = fok*l. If you should be in doubt about this, ask our friends at the Zimbabwean border. Or in fact, just turn around and ask one of the millions of Zimbabweans that crossed said border to escape that State of depressing affairs.
And it is precisely because of this my fellow real-estate magnates, that the RET’s are trying, silently and desperately, quite pathetically, to retreat back to the original section 25 of our constitution. They know full well that if they go ahead with their form of envisioned EWC that very soon they will have no warm bodies left from which to feed parasitically from.
And in this retreat, we have our opportunity to not only embarrass the kak out of them, but to possibly end up with stronger property rights than those currently contemplated in Section 25, as it stands. But again, this is entirely up to us.
I harbor no doubts that any proposed amendment to Section 25, will carry a get-out-of-embarrassment-free-card by way of a clause allowing compensation. But I want you to remember your power word, “NO!”, if they should ever come to you with an offer to get paid for your bathing-suit area, rub-down.
Although the clause of compensation is probable, what is not probable is that the offer of compensation would fit your or my definition of the term “just and equitable”. How could it? How would they be able to show their faces at the next SACP rally without being able to brag to their comrades that they “stuck it to the capitalist pigs” by offering said pigs fair compensation?
But, even if the offer by some miracle is “just and equitable”, I implore you, refuse it! To go along is to lend credence to their sordid little game. A strategy of expropriation with some compensation is a two-fold scheme of deplorability: to add an air of agreement and legitimacy to the extortion of their intended victims (that’s you and me).
But I did say that we might do better than keeping Section 25 as it is, and we can. If all property owners stand strong and entertain no claims and accept no offers, the RET’s will be utterly checked-mated and put where they belong: in their subservient place, reminded that they survive by our good graces, and not the other way round. If we wanted to, that moment would be as good as we would ever have to attack their retreating, tail-between-the-legged, backsides.
By way of Afriforum and the like, we might call for a referendum or challenge the validity of Section 25, as it stands, in the Constitutional Court, while the memory of the RET’s defeat was fresh in all of our minds. On that wave of momentum, with the example of its folly so near at hand, we might once and for all codify perfectly unassailable property rights into our socialist-syphilitic constitution.
But either way, the sky is the limit, because it us and not them who hold the power. You have already presented your behind for a good and decent rogering every time you earn or spend a cent. Do not allow them to prison rape you, even if they offer you a reach around (compensation). As we all well know, with any rapist, the first point of the battle back, is to assert a firm and resounding, “NO!”, and if that fails? Well, you take your buck-knife out and castrate the S-O-B.