"Over 3,000 have been killed since 1994. Now the ANC is accused of fanning the hate."Finally, a western journalist dares to mention the unmentionable
Sunday Times report
"Over 3,000 have been killed since 1994. Now the ANC is accused of fanning the hate."Finally, a western journalist dares to mention the unmentionable
3 comments:
Over at the Times Online, in the discussion, there is some comment about SA under apartheid having been a civilized place to live, and a response from another commenter saying, "You call apartheid 'civilized'?"
This reflects the thinking behind the silence of the news media regarding the genocide of whites in SA. They are in effect saying that apartheid was such a great evil that what is happening now is simply a correction to it and is therefore not newsworthy in the least. This of course ignores the fact that under apartheid, black people were materially far better off, and enjoyed a vastly more stable life, than they have today under the black dominated government.
Apartheid was indeed wrong, but not for the reasons that are commonly thought. It does indeed recognize the fundamental differences between races, and to that extent it is correct. This difference is seen in that every black ruled nation on the face of the earth is a disaster, and this is not due to lack of help from the rest of the world. Instead, it is inherent in the black people.
Apartheid was wrong for the reason identified by Arthur Kemp in his book, The Lie of Apartheid. Kemp points out that whenever white society incorporates a large minority with the intent to the labor of that minority, the result will be that eventually the minority will grow to overwhelm the white minority. The minority, living in the midst of the whites, will have the benefits of better nutrition, health care, education, etc., and will reproduce without restraint. This will cause their numbers to grow very rapidly, to the point that they will soon dominate the white minority. It is unavoidable. The "lie" of apartheid is the idea that this could be avoided.
We see this same idea being played out today elsewhere with other nonwhite populations. In Europe and the UK, we have both blacks and muzlims that are invading and multiplying at frightening rates, and rapidly becoming dominant over the indigenous white populations. In Australia, there are muzlims invading and multiplying, and again gaining the upper hand in areas there. In the USA, there are problems with blacks, mestizos, and muzlims, all as invasive species that potentially will expand rapidly and gain the upper hand over the Anglo-Saxon majority. The only solution is for white people to entirely separate from these invaders, and to cast them out of our lands. Push them back where they belong. We must do our own work, provide our own labor. We cannot rely upon them for labor, nor can we tolerate them among us.
Dr.D, I think in a strange sort of way Western elites think it is just deserts. They would be appalled by the severity of the bestial violence but can not interpret it as savagery as we do so not facing it is the answer for them.
For years the liberal watchword in this country and probably others, was: "We did it to them now they can do it to us." I don't think they expected this or for them to revert to type but masochism is part of how Whites are trained to be.
The sickening hypocracy is that these liberal masochists allow others to suffer for them while they live in safe areas.
Dr.D, I think in a strange sort of way Western elites think it is just deserts. They would be appalled by the severity of the bestial violence but can not interpret it as savagery as we do so not facing it is the answer for them.
For years the liberal watchword in this country and probably others, was: "We did it to them now they can do it to us." I don't think they expected this or for them to revert to type but masochism is part of how Whites are trained to be.
The sickening hypocracy is that these liberal masochists allow others to suffer for them while they live in safe areas.
Post a Comment