The Meaning of Modern Afrikaner Nationalism
What happens to a nation after defeat? An unfiltered conversation about guilt, God, and the return of Afrikaner nationalism.
Dr. Adi Schlebusch/Heike Claudia Petzer
Dec 16, 2025 - 2:53 PM
Share
I recently sat down with Dr. Adi Schlebusch to explore the changing meaning of Afrikaner nationalism in South Africa today. For many outside the community, nationalism is either a relic of a discredited past or a blunt political weapon best left untouched. For Schlebusch, however, it remains something far more intimate and enduring: a living tradition shaped by loss, memory, faith, and the struggle to belong after defeat.
1994
Our conversation began with 1994, the moment Afrikaners lost political power and were forced to renegotiate their place in a country transformed almost overnight.
“1994 was a turning point in our history,” he told me. “We lost all political power. Suddenly we were a small minority in a very big country with many cultures and ethnicities, and our 'enemies' were ruling us. We had to regroup and find new ways to maintain our identity and culture.”
For Schlebusch, the shift from state power to cultural preservation was not a retreat but an inevitability. It forced Afrikaners to confront a deeper question: what defines a people once power is gone? Language, history, faith, and communal bonds moved to the foreground. Yet, he insists, this is not the end of the story.
“We do have a political future as a people. We should strive to consider innovative political solutions.”
Loving One’s Own
One of the most contentious debates around nationalism is whether a deep love for one’s own people automatically implies hostility toward others. Schlebusch rejects this idea outright.
“A nation is essentially a large extended family,” he said. "Loving your own children is a prerequisite to truly understanding the love that other parents have for theirs. If you don’t value your own culture, you will never be able to value someone else’s.”
For him, nationalism is both particular and universal: rooted in the dignity of one’s own, and therefore capable of recognising the dignity of the other.
“There’s no global peace without nationalism,” he argues. “It is what allows you to respect another nation’s identity.”
Beyond Post-Apartheid Guilt
I asked Schlebusch about the idea that post-apartheid guilt hollowed out Afrikaner identity, leaving younger generations unsure of what their identity meant. He sees guilt not as reconciliation, but as a political strategy.
“Post-apartheid guilt was used to subdue Afrikaner nationalism,” he said. “White guilt is destructive and based on many lies. Without pretending apartheid was perfect, it was a twentieth-century attempt to solve problems created by British imperialism.”
He believes the community is now moving beyond that psychology — and that the revival of Afrikaner identity is, at once, resistance, healing, and re-orientation.
Not Just a South African Story
Is the current revival simply a reaction to local marginalization or part of a larger shift in the Western world? Schlebusch sees both.
He describes the feeling of Afrikaners as one of being “uniquely oppressed” under Black Marxism and says this has created resistance. But he also sees parallels with Europe and America, where demographic change and cultural insecurity have become defining issues.
“What Afrikaners have experienced for over a century,” he told me, “is now becoming the reality for native European populations and white Americans. The same struggles are emerging everywhere.”
The Power of Memory
Every nation revives itself through memory, myth, trauma, and story, and I asked which narratives shape Afrikaner revival today. Here, Schlebusch returned immediately to Blood River, the 1838 battle that defined Afrikaner nationalism for generations.
“It shaped us as a covenant people, a people tied to God through a vow,” he said. “The memory of leaders like Paul Kruger, the heritage of the old Boer republics, these stories still shape modern identity.”
A People of Two Worlds
Perhaps the most contested question of all is this: Are Afrikaners settlers or natives? Schlebusch rejects the colonial label completely.
“We are not colonial. We didn’t come here for any European power,” he said. “Many of our ancestors fled Europe because of persecution. Our identity was formed in Africa, through our experiences here and our interactions with other people.”
Afrikaners, he argues, are European in heritage, African in history, and unique in identity. He cites former president Jacob Zuma’s line describing Afrikaners as “the white tribe of Africa” as unexpectedly accurate.
Faith as Foundation
For Schlebusch, national revival is impossible without spiritual revival. Secular nationalism, he argues, is ultimately shallow.
“No nationalism survives without solid spiritual foundations,” he said. “The only nationalism worth fighting for is Christian nationalism. The Afrikaner and the West must return to God and publicly acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus Christ.”
Here, his argument leaves the world of politics and moves into the realm of calling and destiny. Despite the current focus on culture, he insists nationalism cannot stay apolitical.
“We need to be political,” he told me. “We need self-determination, we need our own homeland. The goal is our own independent Afrikaner-Boer republic.”
Whether that happens through existing parties or through new forms of organization remains to be seen. What matters, in his view, is that identity eventually requires a political home.
A Vision of a Reborn Nation
I ended the interview by asking what a reborn Afrikaner nation would look like. He offered a vision that was less about borders and more about a total cultural environment:
“A Christian republic that openly confesses Jesus Christ as King. A place where our laws reflect God’s ordinances. Where our children learn our real history and take pride in it. Where Afrikaans language, humour, music, and art are cultivated without shame.”
In his vision, nationalism is not an argument or a political tactic, it is a way of life made visible in education, culture, institutions, and law. Whether one agrees or disagrees with Schlebusch’s views, the conversation underscored something important.
Afrikaner nationalism is no longer a debate about the past. It is a debate about identity in a world where everything is changing, and about what it means for a small nation to imagine a future after losing political power. The revival is real. The question now is where it leads.
