Black EmpowerMUNT by Extortion (BEE)

ANC spokesmonkeys are forever rambling on about "our people" - "our people must have this", "our people must have that", they drivel incessantly. "Nothing wrong or unusual about that", the tourist to Azania...er, sorry, the New South Africa, might say. "Governments everywhere are always making promises to their people, some of which are even granted".

However, the typical tourist visiting SA has probably been programmed to be utterly faithful to the Mandelatopian "Rainbow Nation" fantasy that he has been hearing about for years, and may even have to chosen to visit SA in order to confirm the reality of the much-touted "miracle". He is probably unaware that there is such an immense social and cultural gulf between black rulers and their white erstwhile "subjects" that black and white can never, ever, truthfully be considered as part of the same country, however much self-delusional white liberals might want or wish it to be. So when the ANC mouths the weasel words "our people", they most certainly are not including whites, esp where the demands of "our people" need to be fulfilled. On the contrary whites are regarded as "alien people" or "non-people" - an incidental "un-natural" resource to be mined and exploited to the limit.

Consider BEE, in which at first large, then medium, and eventually small and family-sized "white" businesses cannot do business without appointing a (thoroughly useless and parasitical) black "partner". In some respects this is similar to the rules in many countries (mostly of the turd world variety) where foreigners cannot do business without a "local partner". So the first thing we notice is that the ANC has - with barely a whimper of outrage - created laws wherein white south africans have been demoted, de facto if not yet de jure, to "alien" or even "non-person" status within their own country.

However, in countries with "local partner" regulations (India quite possibly), the prospective foreign partner knows the rules beforehand and of course he is free to choose a local partner with useful skills and capital to contribute. Neither of course is the case in Apezania where blatantly racist BEE legislation forces whites to donate 100% of their skills and maybe 30% of their profits (more later, needless to say) to a "partner" whose sole "qualifications" are his/her ANC membership and black skin. This amounts to no more, nor less, than anti-white extortion by a "legalised" criminal fraternity, the ANC.

ANC = Afro-Nazi Criminals

BEE = Blacks Extorting Europeans

Knowledge cannot be "stolen".

http://www.ilanamercer.com/Safari.htm

The idea that knowledge (or civilisation) can be "stolen" from others, in the way that artifacts (eg, books) can be stolen, and that such "stolen knowledge" is forever lost to the originators of that knowledge (or civilisation) is so patently looney it really does not deserve discussion. The only possible way this could have been achieved would have been for the Greeks (or other evil whites) to have utterly exterminated the inferentially superior (sic) black (sic) creators (sic) of such a civilisation (sic). And, to the white mans everlasting cost and grief, this ultimate world-cleansing ecological achieveMUNT was sadly was never even considered by white men - not even by the Boers - although they had every incentive and right to do so after one third of their number were treacherously and butchered by the cowardly Dingaan, Shaka's half-brother and assassin.

(Shaka, btw, despite his bloodlust, clearly admired the whites. It is rumoured he learnt his devastating military tactics from his mentor Dingishwayo who, whilst an outcast from his tribe, had spent a lot of time with a British officer who had deserted and "gone native". It is more than likely that, over camp fires, the renegade oficer spoke about military tactics and transferred some of his knowledge to the carefully-listening black man. Anyway, as he was being budgeoned to death by Dingaan and accomplices, Shaka reputedly said "you fools, the white men will now come and conquer you".)

Something never remarked upon is that, historically, genocide is rarely if ever performed by a superior race. On the contrary, it is ALWAYS performed by a cognitively inferior (but numerically superior) race/group against a cognitively superior (but numerically inferior) one. The Nazi's did not contradict this generalisation because, although the Germans are quite probably the most intelligent European nation, Ashkenazi Jews are even brighter. This was an extremely rare, possibly unique in all of history, example of an otherwise highly civilised people engaging in genocide.

The tragic upshot of this episode is that, post WW2, the best interests of the white race have been irreparably harmed by legions of guilt-wracked "white liberals" subjecting the entire white race to everlasting penance and humiliation in the form of "multi-culti" race mixing - a course which can only lead to our own self-destruction - in a foolishly misguided attempt to right this historic wrong...! The post WW2 policy of giving "freedom" to inferior races which have been "oppressed" by whites is part and parcel of this penance seemingly without end. Indeed it would be no exagerration to liken it to a gigantic sacrificial offering - a free feast for the "useless turd extruders" (UTE's) of the "turd world" - in which Rhodesia was the small but tasty appetiser, South Africa the substantial and delicious entre, and no prizes for guessing the name of the yet to be served but enormously rich and satisfying main course...!

In case any of the jewish and american liberals who generously "donated" Rhodesia and South Africa to the "UTE's" are reading this - dont say you weren't warned..!!!

The greatest irony of all is that, ultimately, the white race (of which Ashkenazi Jews are a part) will suffer far more from this never-ending penance than the original victims.

To continue where I left off -

Assume I am the inventor and world authority on hydrolastic dododecahedron widgits (HDW´s). Nobody can "steal" my knowledge from me although, through books, articles, lectures, and the electronic media, I can if I wish choose to disseminate my encyclopaedic knowledge of HDW´s to the ignorant unwashed masses. But, unless my knowledge and expertise is absorbed and taken to new higher levels by another (smarter and more capable) individual, I will remain the world authority until I die or am otherwise eliminated from society.

Note that the person/persons who manage to climb new heights of HDW´s must either be cleverer or more vigorous (or both) than myself. Thousands of years of total lack of achieveMUNT have shown that this is clearly NOT the case with blacks vis a vis whites.

The very fact that many blacks have convinced themselves that "their once great knowledge" was irretrievably stolen from them by evil exploitative whites, is in itself compelling evidence that they are the complete imbecilic morons they most assuredly are...!!!

The Paradox of "Anti-Racism"

Greg Kaffir-Boetie said (on SAS 01 Aug 2007) –

Most of you people who post here are indeed racist, of the worst kind, like the KKK and even neo-Nazis. I spent six months in SA, most of that time in Johannesburg. During that time, I circulated among blacks, including on minibus taxis and at taxi ranks. The vast majority are not criminals, but are hard-working people, they clean your houses most likely for those of you who live in SA. As for crime, yes there is crime there, I got robbed near MTN taxi rank. Yet the bloggers here and even the media like www.iol.co.za and news24 blow the crime problem out of proportion. Millions of South Africans enjoy their days without encountering crime. As for the hatred that some crimes, like farm attacks, exhibit, that is indeed horrendous. However, what you fail to mention each time is that over three hundred years of white racism and brutality, and forty years of sheer brutality under apartheid (the murder of Biko in 1977 just one case in point among many), has produced some blacks who hate whites to the point that they will do horrendous things. The same happens in US on a lesser scale. But that has not turned me into a racist. In fact I am much more likely to believe AZAPO than anything bloggers here have to say. Many bloggers here accuse ANC of being Marxist. They are far from it, having taken a 360 degree turn since the 1994 election from their previous economic policy statements, to the point that many, including AZAPO, COSATU and the PAC accuse ANC of pandering to foreign investors. Whether that charge is entirely true is something I still need to examine. Clearly, the ANC is not, contrary to what bloggers here say anti-white. There are whites who still work for ANC in Lutuli house in Johannesburg. The ANC has long included whites who truly understood the struggle - like Joe Slovo.

To Bantu Education - I do not have a blog, never said I have one. I just started posting comments here because I got fed up with the racism, and did not want to hide behind anonymous. I am white, live currently in Cincinnati, Ohio USA. While I was in South Africa I made friends with a few black South Africans and I can see that they are right - there is still a lot of white racism in South Africa.

What about black racism Greg KB? In my 16 years in this country I recall maybe a dozen examples of whites killing blacks, some of which were clearly accidental like the recent “I thought it was a dog” case or, some years ago, a poor white smallholder Nicholas Steyn heard rustling noises on his land; having called out a verbal warning he then fired a warning shot in the air that richocheted off a power line and killed 2 yr old “Baby Angelina” who was hiding in the bush with her sister. The black family apparently squatted on the Steyn's land and poor blacks and poor whites were on good terms with each other according to some newspaper accounts.

But the hapless Steyn was accused of "murder" and savaged relentlessly by the media for a year or more and at every court appearance had to run the gauntlet of packs of hate-dripping blacks baying for his blood and wanting to savage him in traditional fashion. In fact Steyn was so much in fear of his life be begged to be kept in jail and not let out on bail.

Like many others since, this incident was manipulated by the ANC into a general white-bashing opportunity. Mandela couldn't resist joining in the anti-white hate-fest by staging a “photo opportunity” with Angelina's “grieving family” where he issued grave threats to "racist gun-toting whites" whilst not expressing an ounce of sympathy for Steyn's unfortunate predicament and his equally traumatised and very frightened old folks.

My point is this - in EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE the media paints white on black killings as racist-inspired. Meanwhile, black on white crime being so downplayed and under-reported, I have barely been aware of the tip of the white genocide iceberg, but even so I must have heard of many hundreds if not thousands. As best as I recall, NOT A SINGLE ONE has ever been painted by the media as racist-inspired..!

And what better example than the murder of Juan Lee Olivier, a few stories down from this one ?

And then we have the anti-white rantings of comrade M’beggi who, every time he opens his mouth, implies that all whites are racist and only whites are ever guilty of racism. How come I get the distinct impression that the noble oppressed peaceloving blacks are incapable of contracting this white social disease.?

Given that "racism" is said to be the most repugnant social disease of our times, then anyone who claims, or implies, that whites are capable of racism whilst blacks are not is really saying that whites have lower moral standards than blacks. The irony of this position should be patently obvious but moralising "anti-racists" like greg, who only ever see whites as racist, are blind to the mote in their own eyes. Because to imply that one race has lower moral standards than another is one of the very definitions of racism itself..!! In other words "anti-racists are the real racists.."..!

Although the media will occasionally (but very infrequently) label a black beast like Mugabe as a racist, the dirty label somehow doesn’t stick for long and is not really taken seriously either by the media or the blacks themselves. Therefore, because the racist label is almost invariably only ever used (abused) against whites, it amounts to a form of HATE SPEECH to use exclusively against whites..!

Greg's attitude reminds me of the white traitors who were used by the ANC to transport weapons and explosives in their cars and cache them in their houses/garages for later use by the ANC. (These "whites" were incredibly useful to the black terrorists because they could move around without suspicion). A few years ago ANC-TV made a documentary glorifying these white “struggle heroes”. I particularly remember an otherwise attractive young white couple who admitted on camera that, after all their dedicated traitorous work, they were “rather disappointed” when the promised and hoped-for bloodbath of whites by blacks did not eventuate…!!! In the annals of history, has any other race stooped to such lows of self-abasement as these "whites"..?

But perhaps their “work” wasn’t in vain – maybe the bloodbath is still coming..? If, or rather when, it does it will be largely due to the efforts of self-abasing race traitors like Greg KB who use every opportunity and excuse to slander white south Africans as “a despicable bunch of racists”..!

"Mystified" Liberals just dont get it

Liberals are not mystified when Comrade “Great African Liberator” Robber Mugarbage steals white farms, even though this meant destroying the very foundations of the Zimbabwe economy.

Liberals are not mystified when Comrade Chairboy Tarboii M’beggi feigns to engage in “quiet (ie, silent; ie, non-existent) diplomacy” when faced with such typicals act of African "enterprise" as stealing, extortion, and murdering.

So we have established that Liberals are not at all mystified when blacks terrorise, pauperise, and even murder whites, because (they smugly self-justify) such regrettable actions have “understandable” historical justifications.

Cultural Note 1: notice how often liberals employ mawkish over-sentimentality - words like “understanding”, "concerned", and "regrettable" are among the most popular in the liberal lexicon of self-deceit.

BUT when, in his exalted duty of “getting rid of our colonialist legacy”, the demented despot Mugarbage destroys the livelihood of millions of blacks, liberals wring their guilt-wracked hands in agonized horror and claim to be "MYSTIFIED” as to why he would want to hurt “his own people”?

Cultural Note 2: the liberal mindset applies a double or even triple moral standard. Whites cannot be forgiven for mistreating blacks, whereas blacks can and are forgiven for everything, especially mistreating whites. In other words liberals admit (and EXPECT) blacks readily (and naturally) discriminate against whites in favour of their fellow blacks, which amounts to a subliminal acknowledgment that blacks are natural-born racists..!

What liberals fail to understand, and will never admit, is that negroids are a PSYCOPATHIC sub-species and the human qualities of empathy and altruism (which are most developed in the white race) are either very weak or non-existent in most of these vile creatures.

Blacks as Jekyll and Hyde Creatures.

When negroids are in their natural subservient position they are typically smilingly obediant and jolly, which of course endears them to us. Other times they can be obsequious to the point of grovelling, which tends to embarass us. But when given even a small degree of power they quickly develop an "attitude". They lose their smile and become surly, arrogant, and bullying. When they are given great power they become totally demented devils who simply DONT CARE about anyone except themselves and their inner circles, with whom they share a symbiotic need to keep each other in power.

It should be clear to any level-headed INTELLECTUALLY HONEST person that blacks are very different from whites - and we are not talking about physical appearance, but social behaviour. It should also be obvious - given their glaring lack of any useful contribution to civilisation - that they are a very INFERIOR race. However, most whites are so riddled with "equality" nonsense and the guilt this engenders (because it must be whitey's fault that blacks are clearly not "equal"), that they are repelled by the very notion of "inferiority" in respect of race, although they will routinely use it to apply to almost anything else.

DIRE - The Doctrine of Innate Racial Equality

It is the insidious neo-marxist DIRE propaganda that has infected these liberals and, unless it is totally rejected as the falsehood it clearly is, will surely end in the self-destruction of the white race.

Communism may have lost the cold war but marxist theory lives on and flourishes in all our government-funded educational institutions, which have become breeding grounds for these internal enemies and race traitors (aka white "liberals").

Ultimately it is not blacks and muslims - evil as they are, but both of whom we can defeat easily in a fair fight - but the entire post-WW2 liberal "education" system we are fighting against.

Colonise Africa with Chinese

If there were ever to be a contest for the most politically-incorrect letter ever published by a major newspaper, then this is the one which surely must win.
Aside from its content, there are several very intersting things about this letter. The first of course is, to our PeeCee-ingrained sensitivities, its almost naively earnest honesty. Galton realised (as has been conclusively proved since) that Africa is wasted on the Africans and it was (and still would be) a brilliant idea to populate Africa with hard-working thrifty Chinese colonists. If Galtons suggestion had been taken up, one can be sure that today Africa would be a much better and safer place, it would be exporting food and would not have become the worlds biggest and filthiest begging bowl.

Another remarkable thing, especially when one considers the chaotic conditions in China at that time, is Galton's obvious respect for the many good qualities of the Chinese people. If Galton were a blindly bigoted racist (which no doubt today he would be considered to be) you would expect him to look at conditions in China and dismiss them as "a useless race" much as we do today (and Galton did back then) with the Africans (and the Arabs too, hehe..!). But Galton was smart enough to realise that the poverty of the Chinese was a result of poor governance and not something innate in the Chinese character. Of course it is worth noting that, although his letter doesnt make it clear, he presumably wasn't promoting Chinese administration in Africa - such matters being best left to British colonial overseers. And, considering the phenomenal successes of Hong Kong and Singapore who can say he was wrong?

Another thing to remember is that in 1873 (aside from South Africa) European control was limited to a few coastal enclaves. This was written 11 years before the BerlinCongress of 1884 decision to carve-up Africa amongst the major European nations in order to (hopefully as ever) bring the benefits of European civilsation to the Dark Continent.

Africa For The Chinese. (June 5 1873)

To The Editor of The Times.

Sir, - In a few days Sir Bartle Frere will return to England, and
public attention will be directed to the East Coast of Africa. I am desirous of availing myself of the opportunity to ventilate some speculations of my own, which you may, perhaps, consider of sufficient interest to deserve publication in the Times.

My proposal is to make the encouragement of the Chinese
settlements at one or more suitable places on the East Coast of Africa a par of our national policy, in the belief that the Chinese immigrants would not only maintain their position, but that they would multiply and their descendants supplant the inferior Negro race.

I should expect the large part of the African seaboard, now sparsely occupied by lazy, palavering savages living under the nominal sovereignty of the Zanzibar, or Portugal, might in a few years be
tenanted by industrious, order loving Chinese, living either as a semi-detached dependency of China, or else in perfect freedom under their own law. In the latter case their would be similar to that of the inhabitants of Liberia, in West Africa, the territory which was purchased 50 years ago and set apart as an independent State for the reception of freed negroes from America.

The opinion of the public on the real worth of the Negro race has halted between the extreme views which have been long and loudly proclaimed. It refuses to follow those of the early abolitionists, that all the barbarities in Africa are to be traced to the effects of a foreign slave trade, because travelers continually speak of similar barbarities existing in regions to which the slave trade has not penetrated. Captain Colomb has written a well-argued chapter on this matter,
in his recent volume. On the other hand, the opinion of the present day repudiates the belief that the negro is an extremely inferior being, because there are notorious instances of negroes possessing high intelligence and culture, some of whom acquire large fortunes in commerce, and others become considerable men in other walks of life.

The truth appears to be that individuals of the mental caliber I have just described are much more exceptional in the negro than in the Anglo-Saxon race, and that average negroes possess too little intellect, self-reliance, and self-control to make it possible for them to sustain the burden of any respectable form of civilization without a large measure of external guidance and support.

The Chinaman is a being of another kind, who is endowed with a remarkable aptitude for a high material civilization. He is seen to the least advantage in his own country, where a temporary dark age still prevails, which has not sapped the genius of the race, though it has stunted the developed the of each member of it, by the rigid enforcement of an effete system of classical education which treats
originality as a social crime. All the bad parts of his character, as his lying and servility, spring from timidity due to an education that has cowed him, and no treatment is better calculated to remedy that evil than location in a free settlement. The natural capacity of the Chinaman shows itself by the success with which, notwithstanding his timidity, he competes with strangers, wherever he may reside. The Chinese emigrants possess an extraordinary instinct for political and social organization; they contrive to establish for themselves a police and internal government, and they give no trouble to their rulers so long as they are left to manage those matters by themselves. They are good-tempered, frugal, industrious, saving, commercially inclined, and extraordinarily prolific. They thrive in all countries, the natives of the Southern provinces being perfectly able to labor and multiply in the hottest climates. Of all known varieties or mankind there is none so appropriate as the Chinaman to become the future occupant of the enormous regions which lie between the tropics, whose extent is far more vast than it appears, from the cramped manner in which those
latitudes are pictured in the ordinary maps of the world. But take a globe and examine it, and consider the huge but poorly-peopled bulk of Africa, by whose side the areas of India and of China look insignificant, and think what a field lies there for the development of a suitable race. The Hindoo cannot fulfil the required conditions nearly as well as the Chinaman, for he is inferior to him in strength, industry, aptitude for saving, business habits, and prolific power.

The Arab is little more than an eater up of other men’s produce; he is a destroyer rather than a creator, and he is unprolific. The history of the world tells a tale of the continual displacement of populations, each by a worthier successor, and humanity gains thereby.

We ourselves are no descendents of the aborigines of Britain, and our colonists were invaders of the regions they now occupy as their lawful home. But the countries into which the Anglo-Saxon race can be transfused are restricted to those where the climate is temperate. The Tropics are not for us, to inhabit permanently; the greater part of Africa is the heritage of people differently constituted to ourselves.

On that continent, as elsewhere, one population continually drives out another. Consider its history as it extends over successive centuries. We note how Arab, Tuarick, Fellatah, Negroes of uncounted varieties, Cadre, Hottentot surge and reel to and fro in the struggle for existence. It is into this free flight among all present that I wish to see a new competitor introduced-namely, the Chinaman.

The gain would be immense to the whole civilized world if we were to out-breed and finally displace the negro, as completely as the latter has displaced the aborigines of the West Indies. The magnitude of the gain may be partly estimated by making the converse supposition –namely, the loss that would ensue if China were somehow to be depopulated and restocked by negroes.

The pressure of population in China is enormous, and its outflow is great and increasing. There is no lack of material for a suitable immigration into Africa. I do not say that it would be possible at any moment to persuade communities of men and women from
Southern China to establish themselves in Africa; but I am assured, by excellent authorities, that occasions of political disturbances frequently arise when it would be practicable to do so by the promise of a free, or nearly free, grant of land. The Chinese have a land hunger, as well as a love for petty traffic, and they would find a field in which to gratify both of these tastes on the East African Coast.

There are many Chinese capitalists resident in foreign parts who
might speculate in such a system and warmly encourage it. If once successfully started, it ought to maintain itself. The colonist could not starve; and when they began to succeed they would send money to their relatives to enable them to follow, just as they now do from the many other parts of the world where they are located. For these reasons it is probable that the streams of emigration from China have sufficient "head" to enable them to reach and overflow the coasts of Eastern Africa if they were watched and judiciously diverted in that
direction.

I have finally to speak of the political effort necessary to secure a free right of occupancy and of settlement at suitable points on the coast. No very serious obstacle seems to stand in the way; certainly none was met with when Liberia was founded. It is probable that as the success of such an enterprise would be of equally great value to all nations commercially interested in those parts, no national jealousy would be excited by its promotion, and the necessary territory could be obtained with little difficulty and at a small cost, to be advanced in the first instance as a charge on the land and hereafter to be redeemed.

Francis Galton

read more about this fascinating Victorian gentleman here

Kibbutzim for Africa?

There once was (and in a way still is) a liberal side to me and (dont ask me why now) like many whites I often thought about the problem of Africa and how we could "help" the blacks. Of course I never approved of food handouts, foreign aid, and other freebies, and most certainly never wanted to adopt any nigglets, but rather through ideas.

Specifically I naively thought that the Israeli Kibbutz system could (or should) be adopted in Africa. After all, before whitey arrived and "destroyed their culture" by spitefully creating cities and industries to which they were "forced" to migrate and look for “wek”, they apparently lived an idyllic communal lifestyle in which reigned a harmonious spirit of co-operation and communal sharing (or "ubuntu").

That was in my pre-SA days before I understood blacks and their "culture" better. In reality their much-trumpeted "ubuntu" is a modern myth and their idyllic rural "economy" was largely based on wholesale pillage (often accompanied by slaughter) of their weaker neighbours’ wealth (ie, chiefly cattle and women).

I have come to realize that because the Kibbutz system involves a high degree of conscientiousness, commitment, co-operation, hard graft, and trust, it would never work with Africans…..unless the whole project were to be supervised by white overseers with strict disciplinary powers.

I sometimes wonder what God’s purpose was in creating such a useless parasitic race, unless it was to torment whites and perhaps make us stronger? However, this assumes that God is ultimately good whereas someone I know who has suffered repeatedly at their hands believes them to be “Satans People”.

So perhaps the existence of blacks (and Muslims) is compelling evidence for this realm being created by an evil God (aka Satan) as was believed by the Gnostics and Cathars…? Just something spiritual to think about this weekend.

Affirmative Action = Corruption & Nepotism

(K)AffirNative Action is a malignantly evil form of racism that intrinsically amounts to an extended form of NEPOTISM or inter-tribal favouritism. It is innately evil and thoroughly corrupt to its foundations.

Even where it benefits a minority (as was the original intention in the USA) once the AA Genie has been let out of the bottle it can never be put back in without a racial civil war against the beneficiaries.

In Arsezania, where it benefits the ruling majority tribe, there will NEVER be a sunset clause for the very simple reason that, in virtually every important sphere of life, whites are magnitudes more capable than blacks, who tend to be lazy, sullen, envious, rude, unreliable, un-cooperative, strike-prone, and larcenous. Not to mention, although I will, congenitally STUPID…!

For the sake of argument, lets imagine that the Afro-Nazi Criminal guvMUNT were to announce that from (say) 2014 there would be no more AA and, from that date on, all govt departments would have to completely ignore race and hire solely on the basis of ability. Further suspending reality, we will also have to pretend that the personnel hirers (all AA appointees) would co-operate with the new directive and suspend their innate racial bias. (All this also pre-supposes that when “ability-day” dawns there will still be a “significant” white minority).

Assuming all these improbable caveats are met, the incoming (mostly white) non-affirmatives would be so appalled by the laziness, incompetence, arrogance, and corruption of the entrenched black AA employees that (even without the racial divide) the 2 groups would immediately be at daggers drawn, with the “affirmatives” constantly trying to frustrate and sabotage the incomers attempts at introducing efficiency, integrity, and diligence to the workplace. By then the system would be thoroughly rotten from top to bottom, the merit employees would find themselves completely unable to do their job properly.

I’m sure anyone who thinks about it would realize that, as long as South Africa has a significant white population, there is absolutely no possibility that a black govt would, or even COULD, bring an end to blatant racial bias in hiring (AA).

The only possibility of AA being repealed would be if 95% of the whites were to conveniently disappear from the scene. Such a dramatic decline in the white population wont happen through emigration alone.

The "Old SA" could have survived much longer

I wrote this in response to someone who said -

"if SA did not change to majority rule, the world's noose (ie. Britain & US) would've been tightened to the degree where the country would not function, and white-ruled SA would have been forced to surrender."

I agree with you that white minority ruled SA could not have continued INDEFINITELY. Where I disagree with you is your implied notion that the "Old SA" could not have survived much beyond 1994 because it would have economically collapsed. I believe it could have survived for AT LEAST another decade and possibly (although not probably) for a lot longer. 10 years may not sound like much of a breathing space until you consider a couple of factors -

1) ZIMBABWE – Since 1980 Mugarbage had been aching to evict and dispossess his white farmers and, had Mandela not been freed in 1989, thus presaging eventual black rule in SA, it is almost certain that he would have acted on his desire well before 1994. If Mugarbage had done in 1990 what he was later to do in 2000, it is almost inconceivable that a majority of SA whites would have voted for black rule (not that they actually did, but that is another story). The rumour that the ANC, on learning of Mugarbage’s plans, begged him not to do so until after they had gained power, is highly credible and would account for the ANC’s otherwise inexplicable defence of Mugarbage.

2) EASTERN EUROPE FREED – Largely due to the black uprisings since 1976 and the resultant economic sanctions, SA had been starved of its usual sources of white immigration, ie, Western Europe. It is a tragedy therefore that the demise of the Soviet Empire and its satellites occurred just a few years before De Klerks traitorous scheming. Had there been a longer window of opportunity it is almost certain that SA could have boosted its white population by at least 500,000 white East Europeans, unburdened with (unjustified) "white guilt".

What I am saying is that, largely due to Judas De Klerk (ably assisted by Slick Willie Clinton’s 30 “pieces of silver”) SA prematurely caved-in to black moronity rule. I believe that if white-ruled SA had hung on for another 10 years the political situation would have been more favourable and, we almost certainly could have got a much better deal than we did. We will never know.

What I do know is that white liberals and greedy race traitors like Judas De Klerk have effectively sentenced thousands of whites to be butchered by blacks in the inhuman fashion typical of their sub-human race. Mark my words and write them down.

Bantu Education was too good for most Bantu

Anne Paton's "why I am fleeing SA" (here) is a classic example of liberal hand-wringing, self-deception, and stubborn denial of the innate depravity of blacks, whose psychopathic character traits quickly rise to the surface in the absense of a strong authority figure. After a lifetime of liberal indoctrination and self-denial Paton has obviously failed to learn the most important lesson whites need to know about this primitive sub-species of humanity. (see Albert Schweitzer below) Which is that, when he is faced with the incomprehensible sight of the white man surrendering his authority and baring his soft white neck to the predatory instincts of his species, Sipho’s natural subordination and respect for the white man goes out the window.

But, as the saying goes – "there’s no greater fool than an old fool..!"

One of the purposes of this blog is to demolish the slanderous (to SA whites) myth that apartheid was a "Crime Against Humanity" and an "evil system of racial classification" bereft of any moral justification or redeeming qualities. So I will begin by focussing on the subject of "Bantu Education", perhaps the aspect of apartheid most condemned by non South African useful idiot whites when they want to feel smug and morally superior.

In her "fleeing" article Anne Paton made this typical "blame it on whitey" comment - One of the worst legacies of that time is that of the Bantu Education Act, which deliberately gave black people an inferior education.

Nobody is arguing that the white government didn’t spend proportionately much more on the education of white kids. However, nobody ever mentions that during apartheid, when blacks contributed virtually zero to the nations fiscus, 40% of the education budget – almost exclusively white-funded - was allocated to the education of blacks. It would have been a crime against humanity (ie, whites), and the superior white intellect, to have allotted equal amounts to every individual based on absurd Marxist ideals of innate racial equality. After all, if every individual were allocated the same amount of state education funding, then the state would be unable to give any financial support to universities. (Given "transformed" uni entrance exams maybe a good idea for the Rainbow Brain-No Nation)

But lets look at this from another angle. Since when has it been my responsibility to ensure that my neighbour’s kid (even if he is a good friend) gets a decent education? If I were to interfere in my neighbour’s private family affairs, surely he would be entitled to take my interference as a gross insult to his own fatherly ability, maturity and responsibility? So why is it always presumed to be the moral duty of whites to educate blacks, and never the blacks own moral duty? Is it because, secretly, the white liberal knows that blacks are irresponsible and incapable of doing these things without white assistance? We all know the answer to that.

And besides, what sort of education could whites give that would not be intended to teach (inferentially inferior) blacks the (inferentially superior) ways of the whites? If a strong dose of "Eurocentric" education is such a desirable thing (for blacks) that whites are morally bound to project it (by force if necessary) onto them, does that not strongly imply that black culture is so vastly inferior to white culture that blacks would (or should) welcome it with arms outstretched and regard "education" as manna from heaven, and something more desirable than a herd of cattle?

Assuming the apartheid-era SA economy was the worlds richest and the white minority so prosperous that they could have, in theory, given the black majority a "white" standard of education, I am sure that such a concerted effort to educate blacks in the ways and morals of whites would have been retrospectively condemned by the Patons of this world as a "racist" and patronising..! Why is it that liberals consider blacks as either too incapable, too lazy, or too irresponsible to educate their own people in their own "African culture"? This can only be a subliminal admission that whites represent the superior (adult) culture and blacks the inferior (childlike) culture.

Finally, although finance was an important factor, ultimately it was not the biggest reason for giving blacks an "inferior education". The fundamental reason for doing so was that the black intellect itself is inferior to that of whites, and thus their capacity and ability and willingness to learn is in itself inferior.

I have some figures somewhere – which I will later post on my blog – which indicate that as few as 1% of African blacks (versus 50% of whites) have an IQ over 100.

The truth is that "Bantu Education" was too good for all but a tiny minority of Bantu

Albert Schweitzer's opinion of Africans

"I have given my life to try to alleviate the sufferings of Africa. There is something that all white men who have lived here like I must learn and know: that these individuals are a sub-race. They have neither the intellectual, mental, or emotional abilities to equate or to share equally with white men in any function of our civilization. I have given my life to try to bring them the advantages which our civilization must offer, but I have become well aware that we must retain this status: the superior and they the inferior. For whenever a white man seeks to live among them as their equals they will either destroy him or devour him. And they will destroy all of his work. Let white men from anywhere in the world, who would come to Africa, remember that you must continually retain this status; you the master and they the inferior like children that you would help or teach. Never fraternize with them as equals. Never accept them as your social equals or they will devour you. They will destroy you."

Dr Albert Schweitzer, Nobel Peace Prize Winner 1951 ("African Notebook" 1939)

postscript: the beginnings of post-war political-correctness - a phenomenon largely spearheaded by left-wing Jewish intellectuals - ensured that this passage was omitted from later editions of African Notebook. (thanks UC..!)