Q&A with AfriForum's Ernst Roets on the Senekal unrest

How do you feel about their behaviour?

It's certainly not something we encourage.

You're not exactly condemning it either, are you?

We are condemning it, but that's not going to make it go away.

Conditionally?

Yes.

Shouldn't lawlessness be condemned unconditionally?

You could argue that. The fact is .

Why are you so reluctant to condemn it unconditionally?

Because the fact of the matter is a young man was beaten to death. This sends a message that people are very angry.

Does that make rioting acceptable?

That's not our view. But the underlying issue is not being addressed. We need to see the numbers of attacks and murders going down.

How do you do that?

Better policing, treating it as a priority crime. It also goes to the political side of it. To the president saying in New York that there are no killings of farmers in SA .

Don't you go to the other extreme by telling Fox News there's a genocide against white farmers?

I've written a book about how you cannot say there's a genocide in SA.

Don't you exacerbate tensions by spreading the narrative that the murders are motivated by racism?

We've said since the beginning that some of them are, but not all.

Do you agree that many of the victims are black farmers and black farmworkers?

Sure, yes.

Can farmers demand law and order when they are seen to have no respect for it themselves?

That is something people should consider. But I do think their frustration is underestimated.

How can they think overturning a police vehicle will improve the situation?

The ANC certainly believes that's an efficient strategy.

Now your farmers believe that too?

People think that in the South African context if you're angry about something, you burn down a school, or turn over a police van. Then the government will respond. That's the type of language the ANC has created.

Sounds like you're defending their behaviour?

I'm explaining their behaviour.

Aren't you saying under certain circumstances it's justified?

I'm saying there could be circumstances under which you can do that with moral authority.

Can there ever be moral authority for this kind of behaviour in a constitutional democracy?

That depends how you define constitutional democracy.

Is it for the farmers to decide if our constitutional democracy is worth recognising or not?

Why is it such a massive problem when white people do this, but when black people do this it's just business as usual?

Aren't you in fact quick to condemn them when they behave like this? Unconditionally?

It goes back to what the reason is for that behaviour.

PODCAST | Survivors recount their farm attack experiences

Subscribe for free episodes: iono.fm | Spotify | Player.fm | Pocket Casts