“Deport him”, “necklace him”, “strip him of his citizenship”, “curtail his freedom of expression”, the “British immigrant pig”. Advocating for Cape Independence is not for the faint of heart, but nothing underscores its necessity better than the feral nature of the opposition to it.

The concept of Cape Independence confronts deeply held beliefs which many people would rather keep hidden in the darkest corners of their souls. “By their deeds shall ye know them”. When the best known proponent of the idea was not born in South Africa and speaks with a distinctly British accent, then his ancestry becomes a lightning rod for those people’s underlying bigotry.

I am that person. There is currently a change.org petition running demanding that I be removed from South Africa, MP Vuyo Zungula has formally requested that Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber investigate my immigration status, and an NGO has reported me to the South African Human Rights Commission.

I seek no sympathy, I chose this fight. Churchill once said, “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” I was offered the opportunity to end the petition against me and declined, and I hope the Human Rights Commission does investigate me. I have plenty to say that they would benefit greatly from hearing.

A really important question however, is exactly why are these people so upset?

South Africa has regressed

I came to South Africa legally. I have fully integrated into the community in which I live. I have learned a uniquely South African language, married a South African, and had children here. I have created jobs for others and I have paid my taxes. Everything and almost everyone I hold most dear is now here in South Africa.

Since immigrating twenty years ago, South Africa has considerably regressed. The symptoms are a massive increase in unemployment, rising crime rates, endemic corruption, ever expanding racial discrimination against ethnic minorities, declining services, increasing national debt, bouts of civil unrest, and a growing threat to property rights. The cause is an ideology rooted in socialist ideals, critical race theory, and African nationalism. The black African majority vote for it, ethnic minorities of all hues vote against it.

A positive contribution to South Africa

South Africa is a constitutional democracy. The Constitution sets out the rights to which everyone is entitled including the freedom of belief and opinion and the freedom of expression. By its very nature, democracy is a contest of ideas.

My response to the problems South Africa is currently facing has not been to sell up and run back to England, or to moan around the braai and do nothing. Instead, I have rolled up my sleeves and worked tirelessly to solve them.

I co-founded the Cape Independence Advocacy Group (CIAG). I helped organise petitions and marches, and I conducted lengthy research to become an expert on the right of self-determination. Through the CIAG I commissioned polls to find out how many other people felt like we did, and I negotiated both the referendum bill and a provincial referendum with the DA. I instigated the Western Cape Devolution Working Group which pulled together civil society, political parties, and academics. I conceived the Western Cape Peoples Bill and I led the team which wrote it.

When it became clear that the DA did not have the stomach for a fight that was desperately needed, I compiled a team of like-minded people and we formed the Referendum Party (RP) which then contested the 2024 elections. With the CIAG and RP teams, I am currently working on a Constitutional Amendment Bill which will end all race-based policy in South Africa, a Provincial Prevention of Illegal Evictions Bill which will equip the Western Cape Government to combat illegal land invasions, and a privately organised Peoples Referendum on Cape Independence.

Throughout, I have steadfastly promoted non-racialism, democracy, the rule-of law, and peaceful means.

People are entitled to not like the solutions I am proposing and the values for which I stand, but no-one can say that I have not made a positive contribution to the South African democratic order.

Which brings us back to the same question, why are some people so upset?

Non-racialism and unity

The answer is, in the vast majority of cases, it is about who they are and not who I am. There is a chasm between the values upon which democratic South Africa was founded, and the values held by many South Africans including government leaders and members of the judiciary. In all likelihood, these differences will never be reconciled.

The preamble of the Constitution states that South Africa “belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity”, whilst its very first chapter proclaims that non-racialism is a founding value.

It should be self-evident that present day South Africa is anything but non-racial. We have more race laws now than we did during apartheid, and to all intents and purposes, we still use the same system of racial classifications. That the ideologically compromised ConCourt has habitually used legal gymnastics to justify endemic racialism is an indelible stain on its credibility.

There is a tendency to gloss over “United in our diversity’’, but in many ways its implications are even more profound. The right of all peoples to self-determination is the essence of this expression. Unity requires consent. For South Africa to be united in its diversity, the diverse peoples who make up South Africa’s population must opt in to the system believing it is in their best interests. If you refuse them the option of opting out, you deny them the opportunity of opting in.

I could argue strongly that South Africa is a majoritarian regime. I could point to the fact that the black majority has unerringly elected a government which has repeatedly legislated for the explicit advancement of black people to the detriment of people of other races, and that that government has intentionally packed the Constitutional Court with judges supportive of that agenda. I could demonstrate that by grouping people together by skin colour and not language, coloured, Indian and white people have been disproportionately negatively affected by government policy. I could present research that shows that a majority of black citizens consider that they have a greater claim to South Africa than do ethnic minorities regardless of what the Constitution might say. I think these are considerable injustices and tragic wasted opportunities, but in the context of this article, they are largely moot.

My campaign has been for the Western Cape people’s existing and inalienable right to self-determination to be acknowledged, and for them to be given an opportunity to collectively vote on whether they wish to redefine their relationship with South Africa. For the Western Cape people to be governed according to the policies they have habitually voted for, and for them to live in a truly non-racial country.

Nothing about this is at odds with the Constitution or the concept of united in our diversity. Ultimately, it can only strengthen our democracy.

Make Kaapenaars want to stay

Instead of Cape Independence’s opponents trying everything in their power to deny the Western Cape the opportunity to democratically express their wishes using a provision of the Constitution in exactly the manner it was intended, they should be reflecting on how they can make South Africa so attractive to Kaapenaars that they would have no reason to even consider leaving in the first place. There was no Cape Independence movement in 1994. It was the election of Jacob Zuma and all that followed which changed that.

My message to those who think attacking me will end Cape Independence is simple. Shooting the messenger is a terrible strategy, you will only make a martyr out of me. If you must, do your worst, but I am going nowhere. South Africa is my home.

Phil Craig is the co-founder of the Cape Independence Advocacy Group.