Afrikaner farmers feel ‘safe and happy' in US
Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, left, greets Afrikaner refugees from South Africa, Monday, May 12, 2025, at Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Va. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
The US embassy and state department are mum about how the claims of relocated Afrikaners were verified
This content is restricted to
subscribers only
.
Join the M&G Community
Our commitment at the Mail & Guardian is to ensure every reader enjoys the finest experience. Join the M&G community and support us in delivering in-depth news to you consistently.
Subscription enables:
- M&G community membership
- independent journalism
- access to all premium articles & features
- a digital version of the weekly newspaper
- invites to subscriber-only events
- the opportunity to test new online features first
Already a subscriber?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
3 hours ago
- The South African
Afrikaner 'refugees': What happens now after Elon Musk's rant?
Elon Musk's fallout with US President Donald Trump has sparked concern for Afrikaner 'refugees' who arrived in the US last month. To date, two groups of white South Africans have resettled in the country under a programme signed off by the president. Elon is cited as 'influencing' Trump on claims of 'white genocide', 'farm confiscation,' and 'racist laws' happening in his country of birth. However, all of these contentious issues have been disputed by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. Could the feud between the world's richest man and the world's most powerful man halt the refugee plans, or possibly see the 'persecuted' South Africans deported back home? On Thursday, 5 June, Elon Musk and President Donald Trump's feud over a clash in the legislature reached a boiling point. On the X platform – owned by Elon – many wondered what would become of the Afrikaner refugees whose plea to be freed of 'persecution' was aided by the two men. For many, this was a running joke about the 'misinformation' that has been spread about South Africa. Comedian David Kau posted: 'I stand with the 49 Afrikaner Americans in these difficult times'. Comedic puppet Chester Missing added: 'Elon and Trump getting divorced? So tragic. Who keeps the Afrikaner refugees?' Here's what others had to say… With President Trump threatening to cut all government contracts to Elon Musk, and possibly distance himself from him altogether, what does this mean for the Afrikaner 'refugees' already in the US? The group of white South Africans was offered asylum based on proving their fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. Elon Musk's ties to Trump have been irreparably severed. What happens to Afrikaner 'refugees' now? Images via X: @usembassysa Under US and international immigration laws, refugees who have received asylum cannot simply be deported to their country of persecution. Legislation also strongly protects their rights to stay in their new adoptive country. However, their status can be terminated should they be found guilty of serious crimes or if they fraudulently sought asylum. According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), there are stringent travel restrictions in place for asylum seekers. In the case of Afrikaners, returning to South Africa – their country of 'persecution' – could come at their peril: there is no guarantee of their readmission into the US. Returning to SA could also be considered evidence that the refugee's alleged fear of persecution is not genuine. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
Mail & Guardian
3 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
We must all reclaim our information space
Elon Musk. (File photo) More South Africans arrived in the United States this week. But it is an old resident who made the most headlines. Elon has left the Doge office. He did so in bizarre pomp and ceremony, with Donald Trump looking to save both their faces with a predictably awkward golden key award ceremony. Musk and his Javier Milei-inspired chainsaw are no longer a factor in Washington. The same cannot be said for public life. Musk owns X/Twitter, one of the biggest social media platforms on the planet. He's had a huge following on it long before he took control in 2022. He relishes using that influence to peddle all manner of absurdity and falsity. Musk has been the figurehead of the open conspiracy of tech oligarchs that reign in the White House. They have made no secret of their willingness to do whatever is asked of them, knowing that the reciprocation will be ample (or indeed, the punitive repercussions for a failure to toe the line would be grave.) Meta owner Mark Zuckerberg's sycophantic about-turn on moderation was a perfect example of that reality playing out in real time. In that now infamous announcement video, he waxed lyrical about how he created Facebook to be a democratic marketplace of free ideas. That is a lie, of course. He created Facebook so college boys could rate women on the internet. Regardless, with other media and search engine owners included in the cohort, the fact remains that a few powerful men control the dominant means of creating and sharing information in 2025. Those white South Africans arriving as refugees in the US should be all the reminder we need of how pernicious a narrative can be; and that real-world consequences need not be grounded in truth or rational reasoning. It bears repeating: there is no white genocide in South Africa. It is imperative that we, as individual news consumers and practitioners, reclaim our information space. For as much as the oligarchs strut with the swagger of impunity, that is far from the case. While this would be an obvious segue into launching into a pitch to get you to subscribe, the struggle we face goes beyond promoting ideas of established media. There's a war going on for our attention. The mistake would be in thinking we have to take sides. We have to respect each other and the process of sharing ideas civilly, with a respect for the truth. If our engagement begins and ends with a retweet, our society will begin to look even bleaker. The algorithm only wins if you surrender to it.
The Herald
7 hours ago
- The Herald
Ban on entry of international Harvard students blocked by US judge
Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard 'a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators', claims the school has previously denied. 'Harvard's behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire US student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. It must face the consequences of its actions,' Jackson said. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the US to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the US state department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. 'The proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the US, because noncitizens who are impacted by the proclamation can enter the United States so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard,' the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multifront attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argued the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. The university sued after homeland security secretary Kristi Noem announced on May 22 that her department was immediately revoking Harvard's student and exchange visitor programme certification which allows it to enrol foreign students. Noem's action was temporarily blocked almost immediately by Burroughs. On the eve of a hearing before her last week, the department changed course and said it would instead challenge Harvard's certification through a lengthier administrative process. Nonetheless, Burroughs said she planned to issue a longer-term preliminary injunction at Harvard's urging, saying one was necessary to give some protection to Harvard's international students. Wednesday's two-page directive from Trump said Harvard had 'demonstrated a history of concerning foreign ties and radicalism' and had 'extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries', including China. It said Harvard had seen a 'drastic rise in crime in recent years while failing to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus' and had failed to provide sufficient information to the homeland security department about foreign students' 'known illegal or dangerous activities'. The school in Thursday's court filing said the claims were unsubstantiated. Reuters
