Adapt and Die—South Africa’s New Motto

By Dr. Dan Roodt, Afrikaner Action Group (PRAAG)
February 2005

During the time of National Party reforms in the seventies and eighties, the cliché “adapt or die” used to do the rounds. Nowadays, given the highest murder rate in the world, this should be modified slightly to read, “adapt and die”. For the endemic social violence in South Africa is probably incurable.

Optimists think that violent crime can be solved through better policing, more efficient courts and more secure prisons. Even assuming that such improvements were possible under conditions of hard-core affirmative action, it must be admitted that criminal justice treats the symptom and not the cause of social violence. The Department of Correctional Services, for one, has lost 496 out of 500 former Deputy Directors since 1994, representing most of the intellectual capital in the department. Newcomers may learn their job properly, or they may not, but they have to be flown to overseas countries to find out how prisons work as most of those previously involved in managing our prisons are no longer there.

South Africa used to have a problem of political violence. It was not as bad as elsewhere in Africa, but for some reason elicited hysterical international condemnation. However, actors in political violence are mostly driven by some sort of creed or belief system. Whether such a person is a communist, an anarchist, a neo-Nazi or an ethnic or religious guerilla fighter, he is usually amenable to persuasion or compromise. Even a group of Muslim suicide bombers might declare peace if they were given a territory in which to set up an Islamic theocracy, governed only by themselves and not subject to any outside influence.

In the same way, South Africa’s so-called liberation movements who were at one time fanatically convinced of the need for violent and bloody revolution, laid down arms and bombs upon being told that F.W. de Klerk would surrender power unconditionally. Solving political violence is often intractable, but not impossible.

Not so social violence. Endemic crime, the breakdown of the social fabric, a sense of drift regarding norms of good conduct, point to a far deeper problem. The freedom fighter or urban terrorist is ultimately rational, despite a value system that normal society might find idiosyncratic.

But what is “normal society”? It is only the sum-total of behaviours prevalent in any given society at any given time. The Aztecs, infamously, practised daily human sacrifice to appease their sun god. It might revolt many of us today, but to them it was entirely normal. South Africa currently sacrifices about 87 humans per day to violent crime, or 32 000 per year. Those are only the ones who actually die. Scores of others are injured, maimed, traumatised, robbed, raped, burgled and so on.

In any suburb today an entire history of murders, hijackings, and other violent events can be written, if only the locals were narcissistic enough to consider their own history worth recording for posterity. On the other hand, social violence lacks the charm and grandeur of political violence as it is usually not committed in the interest of some glamorous cause like national liberation or world revolution but simply to acquire some hapless person’s BMW or rape his wife because she happened to be inside.

However, some time ago a Johannesburg newspaper engaged in chronicling some local history in the suburbs of Westdene and Lakefield in Benoni. Nearly every resident had a story to tell, an entire litany of mayhem. Mr. John Gee miraculously survived a shot through the eye, but now feels traumatised. His wife says, “One lives in fear in one’s own home. One does not sleep. One prays for protection, yet only more fears come.”

But who are the authors of South Africa’s social violence? Even asking this question presents one with a sense of discomfort, because most violent criminals in South Africa are young black men between the ages of 16 and 36. As one surgeon who had stitched together at least three child rape victims, two of whom were infants, said recently, “Probably white men commit such acts too; it is just that no-one in South Africa has come across such a case.”

Of course, it would be preposterous to say that all young black men are prone to violence. Judging from our daily experiences in crime-torn South Africa, however, a sub-section of that population, large enough to cause more havoc than even a well-equipped guerilla army of a few thousand men, has taken up practices such as heists, hold-ups, murders, sexual violence exacted upon women and children, and so on.

Explanations for such deviancy are manifold. The ubiquitous answer of it being due to apartheid might have been satisfying if other African societies never subject to group areas and a homeland system did not display similar traits. The Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone come to mind. There is a whole nature/nurture debate around black violence, except that no adherent of the “nature” side would publicly admit to being one, for fear of being branded a racist. Even though mainstream American cancer research has conclusively shown that black men have higher levels of testosterone than their white counterparts, few would hazard the notion that this might be linked to their greater propensity for violent crime.

America has a gargantuan prison population of two million, over half of which consists of African-Americans. This is despite their minority status in the USA, comprising only 12% of an overall population amounting to 290 million. South Africa could neither afford nor succeed, given the dire state of our criminal justice system, in jailing a similar number of black male offenders. Currently, only 10% of murderers in South Africa get arrested and only 6% are convicted. Any murderer therefore has a 94% chance of getting away with it.

If by some miracle all serious criminals in the country had to be caught and imprisoned, the prison population would surely treble or quadruple from the present 200 000, which is already high by world standards. Not only is such an improvement inconceivable under current conditions, but it would also be politically unpopular with the ruling ANC who would be incarcerating large numbers of young black males who are mostly its own supporters at the polls. Few whites, if any, commit violent crime and there are only 3 900 of them in prison, mostly for white-collar offences such as fraud or insider trading on the stock exchange.

All that remains in the world’s most violent society, is precisely to adapt and die. Twice as many South Africans of all races now die of murder than of road accidents—even though the road accident rate is also the highest in the world, surpassing that of Turkey. Crime extends to trade in driver’s licences, so that a large number of drivers use so-called “bought licences”, hardly a contribution to road safety.

There are some people naive enough to think that “something can be done about crime” in South Africa, mostly opposition politicians who dream about diverting funds from arms procurement to policing, but this would be futile. There are already three times as many private security personnel as state-employed policemen, and even they do not succeed in containing what has become Africa’s only peacetime killing field.

“I killed them because they were white.” These famous words were spoken last year by William Kekana, who participated in one of the most horrendous incidents in which the entire family of Mr. Clifford Rawstorne was wiped out, consisting of his fiancée, baby, as well as his own mother. Even this massacre of an entire family would not have made headlines, were it not for the fact that one year-old Kayla was executed on her very first birthday with a shot in the head. Needless to say, the two adult women were first raped before being killed. Both William Kekana and his accomplice, Charles Fido Baloyi, fell into the high-risk group of young black (and Coloured) males who commit almost all violent crime in the country.

South Africa actually has a Minister of Safety and Security, which to some might seem like an example of absurd humour. His Excellency Mr. Charles Nqakula, whose official résumé proudly states that he was once “a waiter and wine steward”, has immortalised himself by euphemistically stating that there was no real crime problem in South Africa, except that it was “a little on the high side”.

All in all, South Africa has got remarkably used to its new-found status as the crime capital of the world. The high-rise districts of Hillbrow and Berea in Johannesburg have been officially designated by Interpol as having the highest murder rate in the world, that is, 600 people per 100 000 population members per annum. Consider for a moment that such a figure represents 12 times the rate found in inner-city ghettoes in the United States, often seen as no-go zones by many Americans.

One British immigrant to South Africa who has survived three car hijackings, refuses to emigrate, stating that he is now accustomed to having Kalachnikovs pointed at him from point-blank range. Everyone knows a relative or friend who has been killed or at least subjected to some form of violent crime, and no South African can remotely imagine a society where people do not live behind razor wire, electrified fences, high walls, burglar bars and similar decorative props.

Outsiders might find our lifestyle bizarre, but many pundits in South Africa consider our society to be much more “normal” now than at any time in the past, which was tarnished by ethnic separation albeit without the present large-scale violence. At the height of segregation and apartheid under Hendrik Verwoerd, South Africa was almost as peaceful as Switzerland but she was immoral. Today we are the apotheosis of racial morality and political correctness, yet as violent as the Congo or Liberia. Surprisingly, however, our economy continues to function amid the carnage. No economist has ever studied this as far as I know, but not only is crime our biggest industry—bigger than gold-mining or manufacturing—it also stimulates consumption as stolen goods are replaced; it is a boon to the insurance and security industries and ultimately makes surgeons and undertakers rich. The government earns billions of rands in Value-Added Tax on stolent goods being replaced with new ones. So crime pays.

News about killings or shoot-outs no longer elicits the slightest surprise. It is part of our daily existence, and one assumes the lethal risks attending to something as simple as going shopping or driving to work. My wife, for example, has twice been to the local shopping centre where in the one instance a shoot-out was taking place in the parking area so that she had to hide between the cars with our 18 month-old son in her arms; in the second case an armed robbery had just taken place with the robbers casually strolling by with their guns and their loot.

Everyone knows someone who has been killed, raped or maimed. Just this week, the wife of a friend and former literary editor of Die Burger, François Smith, was stabbed to death with a screwdriver in their home in Wellington, near Cape Town. Her murderer was a 16-year-old squatter camp resident whose race was omitted by the press but presumably few, if any whites, reside in his particular squatter camp which is dedicated to black Africans. Lisbé Smuts-Smith was a well-known academic and head of the Afrikaans literature department at the University of Cape Town. Just two weeks ago, another UCT academic, mathematician Brian Hahn, was attacked by a former student, dr. Maleafisha Steve Tladi (35). Hahn died in hospital a week later, while Tladi was released on bail of R500 (about $80).

Two years ago Louw Rabie, a brilliant albeit reclusive geologist and brother of author Jan Rabie, was beaten to death with a fence pole by two Coloured men to whom he had lent some money a week earlier. Police in the small Cape town of Montagu readily caught his murderers because they happened to have drinking money during the week, taken from his home. He was 80 years old, but in good health. He is reputed to have been one of the most brilliant geologists and intellectuals this country has ever produced, writing copiously throughout his life but disdaining publication and public esteem. Africans with their oral tradition are fond of saying that “when an old person dies, a library burns down”. What strikes me about the relentless killings of educated whites, is that the criminals are indeed “burning down the libraries” of this country and physically exterminating the intellectual class, much like Pol Pot did in Cambodia.

The media are celebrating youth, dance, colour, being black and exuberant—as opposed to the quiet studiousness of middle-aged and elderly whites, the bearers of knowledge and understanding. Are these learned whites who are being killed in exuberant, paradisiacal outbreaks of violence simply the remnants of a civilisation that is being eradicated in the name of decolonisation? No government spokesman has ever condemned such killings; so we may assume that the present regime is completely indifferent to them, where such killings do not enjoy their tacit support.

Around our local school in the past week there have been two car hijackings, as well as one murder. It is not really considered to be an exceptionally violent area. Most of this is not even reported in the press, because there really is not enough space and ordinary crime is no longer newsworthy. It needs some further sadistic element to make the front page, such as babies getting killed or raped, or elderly farmers being tortured to death. Farming in South Africa is now arguably the most dangerous profession in the world with more than 1600 farmers murdered since 1994, often in macabre and dehumanising ways.

To the outside world, white South Africans are congenitally evil. If our murderers and rapists had been white and their victims black, Europe or the United States would long ago have sent an expeditionary force to put a stop to it. At present, news of white suffering in South Africa inspires the occasional yawn in Western capitals. This is why a recent article in The Despatch, detailing the rape of a dog by three black men, gave me some hope that a chord will be struck somewhere in the coolly indifferent breasts of our fellow-Westerners. Even if the lives of Louw Rabie, Brian Hahn, Lisbé Smuts-Smith, Kayla Rawstorne and tens of thousands of others are of no value to them, perhaps they will take pity on the mongrel bitch in Grahamstown that was recently raped by three black men. Or perhaps two black men, as the third one protested his innocence upon being dragged out of the shack by screaming, “I came here to relieve myself. These two were raping the dog when I arrived!” Cruelty to humans, especially white humans, is today a normal feature of our society, just like human sacrifice used to be in the culture of the Aztecs. Cruelty to animals, or non-consensual sex with dogs, may still evoke some sympathy, not only locally, but also internationally. I therefore feel sorry for Masganda—the name of the dog concerned—who was rescued with a bleeding vagina and in need of veterinary attention, but perhaps this lowly creature of uncertain lineage could become a martyr for our cause in alerting opinion-makers and political leaders of our plight.

Cycling has become a popular sport in South Africa. However, its practitioners regularly get shot at by gangs of black youths in the street, so that many of them carry guns and knives for self-defence on their bicycles. Members of the Johannesburg mountain-bike club were outraged a while ago when two cyclists, Scott and Lloyd Griffith, were charged with murder after an armed battle with their four black assailants, one of whom succumbed to his wounds.

Most of the time, however, whites are helpless victims of crime. The government has recently passed a new gun law which makes it difficult, if not impossible, to own a fire-arm. They have also abolished rural commandos of military reservists entrusted with crime-prevention in the country, without any police units replacing them. Occasionally the newspapers carry stories of crime victims successfully defending themselves against attacks, offering armed resistance. As a result of the new gun law, this will soon end and we shall simply be able to hide or flee from our assailants. Defending oneself against a marauding robber or rapist might be a manifestation of racism, and is therefore frowned upon as being a kind of “right-wing” response.

Being robbed of one’s vehicle or household belongings is now considered quite normal, and often people ascribe escaping with their lives to their own astuteness, such as being friendly to the robber, helping him load the effects into a vehicle, not looking him in the face so as not to recognise him afterwards, et cetera. A friend of mine in Kempton Park kept up a reasonable conversation with the thieves emptying his house, tied up as he was with a gun pointed at him. He survived, although his elderly mother was badly roughed up and had to be hospitalised. In other instances, of course, people are not so lucky and they become just another murder statistic. Then they simply adapt and die.
*
The first draft of this article was submitted to the British Spectator, who turned it down about a year ago. I have now updated it with references to more recent incidents. Probably no mainstream newspaper in South Africa will publish it, because it refers to the race and gender of violent criminals, which is taboo here as elsewhere in the Western world. As George Orwell said, however, “during times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”.

In the interest of drawing attention to the anarchy that exists in South Africa, the author qualifies his copyright on this article and invites everyone to post it on his or her website, copy it and mail it to friends and mailing lists, translate it into other languages and to distribute it far and wide. The only condition is that no element must be changed or censored.
A PDF-version of the article which can be printed out, photocopied and distributed otherwise than on the internet, is available for download on the home page of www.praag.co.za.
Dan Roodt is an Afrikaner author and activist.
Posted by The Uhuru Guru

CRIMCAM

THE FAECES SPECIES

One look at the sneering arrogance and the cold vacant stare on these representative samples of simian sub-humanity surely proves that, with their belief in Phrenology, the Victorians were on the right path to an accurate facial id of the criminally-inclined. The politically-correct revisionists who attempt to dismiss Phrenology as a “nowadays discredited pseudo-science" are the ones who should be throughly discredited and thoroughly ashamed, because Phrenology could save many lives of many innocent crime victims.

I’ve always maintained that the preventive elimination of criminally intentioned individuals (preferably at birth, if not before) would be an infinitely more efficient method of crime control than our idiotic system of waiting for the sub-human scum to commit their evil deeds, then trying to catch them at public expense, then trying to convict them at even greater public expense, and then having to pay to have these creatures incarcerated, fed and cared-for at enormous public (human) expense for the remainder of their useless turd-extruding lives.

OK, the rest of this post is satire...but,

Someone should invent a crim-catching camera, one that incorporates facial-recognition software that rates faces for criminal propensity on an index of 1-10, with "1" being the face of a totally honest and sincere person like Madiba (sarcasm), and "10" being the complete opposite, like Mugarbage or the lumps of putrid excrement illustrated above.

Now if I were to write such a piece of software, I would vastly simplify the code by giving every nigger face a default "flag-fall" criminality index of no less than 5..!! Most race realists would rightly aver and say "what ONLY 5..! Bullshit, at least 9"..! This is my liberal side coming out..!

In my ideal future eco-cities powered by the renewable energy of nigger criminals on treadmills (I never said it was “clean” or "emission-free" energy, just renewable and in great abundance), any citizen scoring a perfect "1" on the "CRIMCAM" would be licenced to take random photos of suspicious looking characters (nigger and muslim mug-shots would obviously be prime targets – and muslims hate being photographed, hehhe) and, once the criminal is captured and caged and put to good use producing electricity, manure, and pig-swill, the crim-cam toting citizen would receive a reward. No criminals, no police force, no courts, no lawyers (they will be on the treadmill too), and no wages to pay – would this not be the perfect society?

1790 - Boers save Australia from starvation

Image: Sirius Rock and Plaque at Mosman Bay.

This historical episode has been virtually forgotten by modern Australians who, of all people, should remember when their nascent and fragile colony was saved from starvation by the racist Boers..!!

The frigate HMS Sirius was the Royal Naval flagship that escorted the “First Fleet”, departing Portsmouth in August 1787 bound for Botany Bay, NSW, where they arrived in Jan 1788. After depositing their human and animal cargoes, the 11 transport ships returned to England, leaving only the Sirius and the smaller Supply to defend the new penal colony.

After a few months it became clear that the harvest was not going to be sufficient to feed the colony, partly because the land around Sydney Cove was not very productive but also because the convicts did not make good farmers. By October the food supply had become so critical that Sirius, a warship not a transport, was sent on a perilous emergency mission to the nearest reliable wheat growing source. And where was that? It was half-way around the world at the Cape of Good Hope, at that time administered by the Dutch East India Company (VOC), and not yet a British colony.

Sirius circumnavigated the globe via Cape Horn, loading up at Kaapstad with Boer-grown wheat and other Boer produce, returning to Port Jackson 7months later in May 1789 with enough food to keep the colony alive until the next (better) harvest and/or the arrival of the 2nd fleet.

After this epic RTW voyage the Sirius was in a bad state, so she was beached on a remote cove of the largely unexplored north shore of Port Jackson where she was repaired and “careened” of marine growth, etc, before returning to service. Just months later, in March 1790, HMS Sirius was wrecked on the reefs of Norfolk Island. Her anchor was later recovered and is on permanent display in Macquarie Place, close to Circular Quay. The outdoor seating area of the adjacent "Customs House" pub is a good place to sit and appreciate it.

The sheltered bay where Sirius was beached was initially named “Great Sirius Cove”, but later renamed “Mosman Bay” after the owner of the whaling industry that later occupied the bay. (Nearby "Little Sirius Cove" abuts onto the famous Taronga Park Zoo). Today, this beautiful spot only a 20 minute ferry ride from Circular Quay, is surrounded by 1920's mansions and expensive apartments, and packed with yachts, notably the 42m “Nelson” (hopefully named after the naval hero and not the false black “saint”!). It is one of the most expensive Sydney suburbs, expect to pay $A700,000+ (R5 million) for a small 2br apart with good views.

Every Australian child is taught about the first fleet, in fact any Australian who can trace their line to a convict, especially a 1st Fleet arrival, is regarded almost as a national treasure. But very few remember this episode, and even fewer (in fact NONE) have ever thanked the Boers of South Africa for having saved their once fragile colony.

On the contrary todays smugly self-satisfied offspring of petty criminals and ten quid trash who "call Arse-stray-liar home", have done everything politically, economically, and culturally possible to destroy their race relatives in South Africa by cynically conspiring with Black Thugs and Islamo-Fascists and self-hating white neo-Marxists, in the international anti-white "morality" fest that "triumphantly" ended in the undeserved gift of Africa's only civilised nation to Mandela’s moronic (IQ67) and psycopathic Xhosa savages. Meanwhile, in their stupefying self-righteous ignorance, Arse-stray-liars have been led by the nose to believe Mandela's Xhosa savages are the local “Aborigines” whose land it once was..!!! Fact is that, before 1900, when a few hundred black wekkas were imported from the Transkei region to help build Cape Town's new Victoria dock, there were no Bantu settleMUNTS within 1000km of Cape Town.

So, in order that some selfish self-righteous Arse-stray-liars could heal their (IMO, unjustified) guilt-complex about their own worthless indigenous sub-humans, and feel that re-assuring inner glow of goodness that comes from doing supposedly charitable deeds; every year thousands of South African whites are brutally murdered (and frequently tortured) by prowling bands of predatory sub-human psychopaths let loose and virtually sponsored by the gang of criminal psycopaths that unjustly mis-rules a once-great country that they KNOW they could never have built and KNOW they will never be able to maintain. The Afro-Nazi Criminals (ANC).

White South Africans are paying a terrible price for the arrogant selfish hypocrisy displayed by (many) white Australians, especially their political leaders.

“The degree of sympathy whites feel for blacks is in inverse proportion to their actual experience with them”. How true..!

The mystery of Albert Schweitzer's heretical passage.

Remember this..?

"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."

I'll return to that, but meanwhile....

Many people today would be amazed and shocked to discover that, prior to WW2 (and, to a gradually lesser degree, until the early 1960’s) virtually all white men of learning and distinction would today be regarded as “racial supremacists of the worst sort”. This is largely why the acronym “DWEM” (Dead White European Male) had to be coined, in order to belittle their academic heritage whilst poking fun both at their imperfect morality and their mortality.

“Young people – don’t be in awe of past generations of white men – firstly they are dead, so they cannot have been as great as they have been portrayed, and secondly you can safely ignore much of what they said because most of them were odious racists”.

For example, here are a couple of quotes from 2 famous American “liberals”
(uh-oh, I can’t vouch for their accuracy either, but they do ring truthful for their times)

Inscribed on the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC in reference to Negro slaves:

"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free.”

Thomas Jefferson's actual words:

"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."

Abraham Lincoln to a group of Negro community leaders on August 14th of 1862:

"Why should the people of your race be colonized, and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated."

Therefore, it came as no great surprise to find that Albert Schweitzer held “racist” opinions about blacks, especially so since he lived amongst them for 50 years. That is to say he didn’t believe the prevailing orthodoxy - the Marxist misinformation that “all races are inherently equal”, and that if some APPEAR not to be equal it is only because they haven’t been educated”. In other words, its whiteys fault AS USUAL of course, as it is our responsibility to educate them isn’t it? (If, like me, you can immediately spot the flagrant flaw within this classic case of “liberal logic”, then you are obviously a racist too..!)

Now if one hundred liberals had loudly proclaimed that Schweitzer, a Nobel Prize Peace Prize winner, “never said such a thing” I would have rightfully ignored them due to the liberal urgency to grasp at the flimsiest straw that would seem to support racial equality whilst ignoring the strongest tree pointing in the opposite direction. Liberals are part liar, part fools, and part self-deceivers, but mostly they are intellectually dishonest LIARS..!

However, once a single “race-realist” (ie, an intellectually honest person) sincerely questions the veracity of the passage, then I really have to think again. Also the more I thought about this "quote" the more I began to get suspicious, esp as there was no chapter/page reference. It is very important that us RR's dont publish untruths - that is the trademark of the lying liberal.

A bit of internet searching didn’t throw any new light on the matter, so it necessitated a trip to my local library, which in my case is the South African Library in the Company Gardens. The first surprise - given it supposedly contained the heretical passage - was that they had the book at all. But they have both the original German version and the 1938 English translation (by Mrs C.E.B.Russell) .

As the title suggests, “African Notebook” is rather a short book, of about 132 pages, and doesn’t appear to have any controversial content aside from a short chapter (p.48-56) entitled “differences between white and black people". (Today, to even suggest there are ANY differences aside from skin colour would be considered controversial, as we all now know there are NO differences, don’t we?) But even this potentially scandalous chapter doesn’t say anything negative about Africans – on the contrary - rather like a “progressive” white apologist, Schweitzer is at pains to focus on a few common traits wherein (given a bit of liberal embellishMUNT) Africans could in some trivial ways considered to be BETTER than whites..!

With the benefit of hindsight it was suspicious that a specific chapter or page was never mentioned, only the name of the book. Also, in 1950, the Useless Nations (in a foretaste of the lunacy for which it was to become known) solemnly declared that all humans were equal.
All in all, it would have been surprising for him to have won a Nobel Prize AFTER saying such things, even back in 1951.

Of course, this does not mean that Schweitzer NEVER expressed these words, but if he did then I am now quite sure it was not in a mainstream publication – more likely it was in an interview (or letter) to an obscure European magazine and most probably not long before his death at the age of 90 in 1965. Old people are inclined to speak their mind – it is perhaps the only advantage bestowed by old age. Besides which, it is apparently acknowledged even amongst liberals that Schweitzer did have some racist traits – he would not sit at the same dining table as Africans, for example, and this dovetails rather closely with some of what he purportedly said in the heretical passage.

The bottom line is, it doesn’t really matter whether he said it or not, because anyone who knows the African mentality well, knows the sentiments expressed are 100% accurate.

The Disaster of Democrazy..!

DEMOCRAZY is a fatally flawed concept, even in civilised countries. Last night I watched in disgust as Billary blatantly bribed the MORONITY with freebies and subsidies and suchlike.

But as bad as it is in the West it is an unmitigated disaster for white people in African countries. And yet, if you were to ask them, 99% still claim to believe in it. Whites have truly become tragic victims of their own well-intentioned propaganda.

The only way out of this bind is for like-minded people to seek out under-populated land in friendly host countries that would be willing to offer very long leases in which to create new city-states and mini-states from scratch.

Many South/Central American countries have vast swathes of under-utilised territories and might be amenable. Such enclaves/colonies would offer many advantages for the host country too.

Qualified franchise seems like a good idea, but qualified by what parameters?

This is a subject I’ve put quite a lot of thought into because I have long believed that, in an ideal society, citizens should be able to earn additional votes by virtue of one’s commitment and contribution to society, etc. This does not nullify the basic democratic principle of One Man One Vote, but rather extends it in acknowledgement of the obvious fact that some individuals are more worthy than others, and therefore SOME MEN deserve MANY VOTES..!

Listed below, in ascending order of importance, are what I have nominated as the qualifiers for CommonSense Democracy. (note that with our existing IRRATIONAL system “Citizenship” is the only qualification, which is rather like passing a driving test by merely knowing which side of the road to drive on.) Under CSD, Citizenship will remain the basic qualification but, in terms of an individuals voting power, it will be the least valuable of 5 qualifiers. Note that people will vote for ISSUES, not POLITICIANS..! In the future (as in the past) there will be no need for Politicians as we know them, by which I mean PROFESSIONAL (ie, highly paid) POLITICIANS.

QUALIFIERS FOR COMMONSENSE DEMOCRACY (CSD)

1) CITIZENSHIP – basic single vote for all citizens.
2) CONDUCT – eg, temporary suspension of voting rights for misconduct.
3) COMMITMENT – length of residence in a particular community.
4) CONTRIBUTION – taxes, rates, etc, contributed to the community.
5) COMPREHENSION – an individuals knowledge of the issue he is voting on.

In our existing hyper-capitalistic societies, a very clever chap is one who earns big bucks but withholds as much as he legally can from the state. In a decent society, this would amount to unethical behaviour but, Arsezania being what it is, I am of course 100% in agreement with this!. But in a society of our own making, tailored to our own specifications, there can be no better incentive to not dodge ones taxes, etc, than to be able to boast “I pay $xxx in taxes, so I qualify for maximum votes in the legislature..!”

How many additional votes one might qualify for under such a system would obviously be a matter for furious debate, but in order not to concentrate too much power in any one individual there should be an upper limit.
An average worthy citizen might qualify for between 10 and 30 votes (depending on his/her score in category 5) and a maximum of 50 or 100. As I said this is highly contentious topic.

Also note that, in principle at least, any individual could qualify for maximum votes. Nobody is penalized on account of his/her lowly heritage, education, or IQ. Neither would one be disadvantaged by colour or creed.

Mbeki's "Quiet Ethnic Cleansing" a prelude to open Genocide

Mbeki said “the victory of the national liberation struggle did not result in the departure of the foreign ruling class." In other words “the struggle is not complete till we’ve finally rid ourselves of the whites (foreign ruling class)”.

But I would not describe the Afro-Nazi Criminals present tactics as genocide (at least not yet) but rather as “quiet ethnic cleansing” facilitated by a climate of “anarcho-tyranny”. They actually do not want us to leave too quickly – or whilst we still possess some wealth they can steal – for their intention is, as always, to have their cake and eat it. To “punish” – through crime and pauperization - as many of us as possible whilst simultaneously whittling our numbers down to a level at which point the genocide option will look increasingly attractive to them. The big question is – what residual number of whites will they consider a suitably lower level for them to openly enact a “final solution”?

Consider Rhodesia - at its peak in the mid-70’s whites numbered about 250,000, but two-thirds left within the first few years of black rule. Unlike the backs-to-the-wall situation SA whites now find themselves in, Rhodies were lucky to have a friendly white-ruled country just a car drive away. So, after just a few years of black rule, whites (never more than 5% of the total) were reduced to less than 1% of Zim’s population. Even so it was many years before Mugarbage gathered the “courage” to finally address his “white problem”, although rumour has it that he had planned to act earlier (around 1990), but the ANC begged him to wait till after they had consolidated power. (thus explaining Mbeki’s “quiet diplomacy”).

The existing ANC programme of rampant racial discrimination, demonisation, and indirectly sponsored violence has reduced SA’s whites from about 5.2m in 1994 to maybe 4.2m in 2008 (about 14% a decade). SA whites not having the luxury of “a friendly country just down the road”, and as half of those who can leave easily have probably already done so, it will take something VERY BIG to reduce the white pop’n down to 1%. And even if it were to happen, there would still be at least 500,000. Therefore, if they intend to maintain a white attrition rate of 14% per decade, let alone increase the rate, the ANC will have to step up their hate campaigns substantially.

Assuming an attrition rate of 14% a decade, the future white pop’n can be extrapolated as…

2008 – 4.20 m (estimate)
2018 – 3.61 million
2028 – 3.10 m
2038 – 2.67 m

If we assume the black population (excl coloured and Indian “honorary blacks”) to be 40 million now, it may take 20 years before whites are reduced to the 5% of Rhodesia’s peak, even with a continuing huge influx of illegal blacks.

Remember that in the main cities and other parts of the country where they are concentrated, whites are “only” outnumbered about 5 to 1 or less and, unless armed with AK’s, cowardly blacks will not have the “courage” to openly attack us with less than 20 to 1 odds. And yet I also cannot see them having the patience to wait more than another decade for the final “re-distribution” of whites “ill-gotten apartheid gains”. South Africa being such a large country I also don’t believe they will be able to plan, let alone enact and co-ordinate a “spontaneous” national uprising.

Therefore, the most likely scenario is that, sometime before 2020, the relentless demands of the majority and a massive (possibly worldwide) financial crisis plus, will force the ANC to play its dirty hand, probably through some radical surrogates like the youth league.

In localized rural areas the black uprising may well take the form of a Rwandan-style “panga pogrom”, but in the cities for such an uprising to be successful a large number of blacks would need to be armed with AK’s, and it is very unlikely that this can be done without giving ample warning to the intended victims.

If, or rather when, something like this happens, it will prove be a blessing in disguise, as even the liberals must then finally awake from their mandelatopian dreams and realize their only hope is to carve out their own enclaves from the ruins of the rainbow nation.

The bottom line is - I believe the blacks greed and impatience will bring this scenario about sooner rather than later.

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