By August Pointneuf
Southern Africa has been used as a platform by those who have hoped to prove, and then impose upon all, their personal philosophies of “human homogeneity”.
These people intended that the destruction of white administrative control in Southern Africa would vindicate their aspirations and justify the terrorist killings of the “anti-apartheid movement”.
The final unhinging of “white colonist rule” was to become the triumphant demonstration that a multicultural, multiracial land (and world) would be happier, safer and devoid of ethnic tension. Expulsion of the white colonist was expected to release the saintly tolerance latent in the African native. Mandela’s hand, raised in benediction, would be all the assurance required.
But more important to these revolutionaries was that their intended success, modelled in South Africa and Rhodesia, would validate an ultimate aim to impose on all Europeans their self-proclaiming high moral philosophy. This would be an irreversible experiment (implanted by manipulative propaganda and forced by law) which has no exemplar in history, with an outcome which was pure supposition, existing only in their speculative fantasy.
Let us then look at the outcome of their meddling with South Africa. What follows happened years after white control was ablated and therefore could not be caused by any handicaps inflicted on the black man by white dominance.
It is trite history that white administrations in Southern Africa brought to an end the “Black Wars” of the 19th century. Marauding black impi bent on exterminating competing tribes, invading rustlers and rapine raids were, for all practical purposed, held in check by efficient colonial law.
The resulting peace and economic growth made the white administered colonies highly attractive destination for the populations of all sub-Saharan states.
However the civic orderliness created by a white presence was hurled into disarray by the “independence” of the Southern African nations. Administrations collapsed and the African National Congress became unable to control the borders of South Africa. Many millions of the most impoverished people in Africa flooded in, searching for a slice of the cake created earlier by white enterprise.
Perversely the most qualified, creative and productive potential immigrants who now apply for entry and residence into South African, via the formal bureaucratic structures, are obstructed and defeated by the notorious Department of Internal Affairs. The very people who could have enhanced the wealth of South Africa, its healthcare, and its capacity to better standards of living universally, are refused entry because, it seems, of their white, ethnic background.
Meanwhile large numbers of unskilled black refugees continue to enter South Africa covertly, their numbers unknown, stressing South Africa’s limited social resources*. Amongst the most successful economic refugees into South Africa are Somalis
These black Hamitic people are expert traders, and many opened small shops in the black townships to become more successful than their Bantu competitors (who had themselves invaded the land during the last millennium).
Somalis were able to provide a significant social service, sold more cheaply, and so benefited their new-found communities. In these poor areas, small margins make a great difference. The benchmark price of bread sold by Bantu was R7.00 (53p). This was reduced by the Somalis to R6.00 (45p).
The Bantu reacted to Somali success by aggressive destruction. Much the way the Bantu had set about destroying the success of the civilisation of the white colonists, so began the Bantu ethnocide against the Somali. Somali traders were shot, “necklaced” and burnt along with their families and stores.
Abdul Kadir Karakoos, a Somali leader in Cape Town, says that his community has buried, since 2002, over 600 of their countrymen, killed in anti-immigrant violence. ANC Security Minister Charles Nqakula admits that the police have no accurate numbers of Somalis killed.
Although the ANC government has attempted to pass this ethnocide off as “random violence” or “common robbery” the true reasons were shown by threatening letters from Bantu to the Somali ordering them to leave their domicile, or be killed. And they were killed.
In mid-June 2009 police arbitrators reduced tension by forcing the Somali traders to increase their prices to match their Bantu competitors. But Somalis continue to live in terror in South Africa.
This black on black ethnocide, re-appearing after a hundred years of white administered peace, demonstrates again the failures of “racial integration” and that “multiculturalism” and “poly-communities” will not succeed. It also demonstrates the immutable return to inherent, latent behaviour patterns, which have not been softened by “independence’, education, freedom of speech or “civilisation”,
Such patterns of black behaviour can now be expected to be transmitted to Europe, as trans-cultural migrants continue to move, domino like, into the first world.
With the indisputable failure of the hoped-for “African Model” of inter-racial harmony, how is it that governments in Europe continue to endanger the future of their own vulnerable native populations by gambling with counter-cultural immigration? How often, in how many ways, and in how many countries, does it need to be demonstrated that this forced fantasy of “communalism” and ‘human homogeneity” can only bring disharmony, impoverishment and violence?
* Black immigrants into South Africa since “independence” have been estimated at over 5 million.
The Mandela Myth
Parallels from the past