A White American Talks About Home
mans struggle for community.
interview by Robert S. Griffin
Denis Ruiz is
a 50-year-old computer programmer who lives with his wife and
daughter near Philadelphia. A short time before I interviewed
him, he learned he had non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a form of cancer.
He was in significant pain at the start of our conversation, and
I wasnt sure he could complete it, but as the interview
progressed his voice grew stronger, and his manner became that
of a healthy man.
grew up in the 1950s in a little town called Fairview Village
in south Jersey. It was a planned community designed by a fellow
named Litchfield, and offered a pleasant environment for people
who worked in the shipyard in nearby Camden. Fairview Village
had what you could call garden community architecture. Brick houses
were attached to each other in clusters of four, and sometimes
two, so the houses were in rows, but the rows were broken up.
The houses all had yards, and there were common areas on every
block where they didnt build houses. Some blocks had no
houses at all; there was just grass and trees. Neighbors would
walk their dogs, and kids would play football.
This could never be
home for Denis Ruiz.
People planted lovely oak trees,
so by the time I lived there the trees were mature, maybe sixteen
to eighteen inches in diameter. There was a town square with park
benches, and people would sit and talk and get to know each other,
and there were stores and businesses. It was a socially and economically
self-contained unit. Looking back on it, the neighborhood where
I grew up seems idyllic, with its parks and shaded streets. In
fact, one fellow who had lived in England remarked that Fairview
Village was like a little English town.
In the late 1950s, economic changes
had a big effect on my hometown. The shipyard folded, as did an
iron and forge plant where a lot of people worked. So the town
was weakened. But I think it would have rebounded by the end of
the 1970s as other businesses reflecting the change away from
industrialization came into that arealike the business I
am in, the computer business. But that never happened because
a second process was at work: the integration of non-whites.
Before it became illegal, realtors
in Fairview Village showed houses only to white families. Although
this has been painted as unfair, it reflected the desires of the
people who lived there. They wanted to live among their own people.
They wanted to live in a white community. Now, I see this as the
highest form of self-determination: people defining their own
community, deciding what comes into their collective lives, determining
their own standards.
Where I grew up
has gone the way of a typical urban black area.
It doesnt matter if their
standards dont seem rational or moral to someone else. People
have a right to decide who they will live with. This is not a
matter of rationality or of morality. It is simply human. Its
not that they have ill will toward anyone; its just that
they know what atmosphere they like. When realtors screened people
and showed houses only to whites, it wasnt a dark conspiracy.
They were being true to the community, part of the community.
But, of course, the issue was never defined this way, and in the
late 60s-early 70s lawsuits forced realtors to sell
houses to blacks and anyone else who wanted to move in.
A lot of the blacks who moved
in have been section eights. Section eight is part
of a law according to which the government helps pay the rent
for poor minorities, so they can afford to move into white areas.
Section eight has turned out to be deadly poison for
the Fairview Village of my youth.
The neighborhood where I grew
up is now a wasteland. Whites are still a majority55 percentbut
Fairview Village has gone the way of a typical urban black area.
When I was living there, when a tree died, an Irish guy named
Fred Fagan would plant a new one. Now, those saplings are mighty
trees. When a tree dies these days, no one plants a new one. There
is broken glass everywhere, and things like busted up shopping
carts block the alleys. Many of the old brick houses are covered
with some kind of awful siding. When I was a kid, people made
repairs and restorations in the mode of the architecture of the
town. Now, the houses are all different, from one to the next,
and there is no common thread to their appearance. There used
to be hedges and white picket fences that lent a common feel to
the areano more.
My mother still lives there. When
I get out of my car I wonder, Is this an ambush? Is someone
going to jump me? Recently, a black teenager knocked my
mother to the ground injuring her, and took her purse. This sort
of thing was unheard of in the old neighborhood, but it is common
now. The black woman across the street was just arrested for robbing
When I was growing up, kids could
go anywhere in town. We could go in the woods and explore down
by the creek. Now, you would never allow your child even to walk
around the block. Just this year, two black men abducted a young
white woman, took her where we used to play ball, and raped and
murdered her. Heinous crimes happen regularly there.
A strong community
from the likes of Jim Morrison.
There is no sense of connectedness
among the people in my old hometown. A white teenager hanged himself
in his bedroom. The word is he spent a lot of time alone, listening
to rap music. So much popular music these days is dark and sinister,
and for someone already on the edge, as I assume this kid was,
that can be deadly. In the old days, the risk of a terrible thing
like this was much less. Back then, this boy would have had a
supportive white community and way of life.
Back in 1967 or so, I listened
to Jim Morrisonhe was the lead singer of the Doorsand
took what he sang very seriously, as if he were Keats or Walt
Whitman or somebody like that. I remember one Morrison songI
think it was Alabama. The message was, I must
have whiskey or your wife. It was about drunks going from
house to house looking for alcohol and sex, and there is Morrison
recasting it in a way that glamorized and legitimized scum of
the earth. That was what I was taking in. But I lived in a place
that counteracted that poison. I had something the boy down the
street didnt have. I had a community.
The place I live in now, on the
outskirts of Philadelphia, was clean and safe when my wife and
I moved here 15 years ago, but the pattern of my childhood home
has been repeated. Non-whites have moved in, and the neighborhood
has deteriorated drastically. Before, there was a fair number
of poor white people, but they were never a problem.
We have problems now, and I increasingly
find this isnt a suitable place for my family. It doesnt
reflect our heritage and values. The Catholic school here pushes
multiracialism and doesnt emphasize academic excellence.
My daughter, who went there for a time, told us the black boys
were aggressive, and that she didnt like them. That didnt
come from us; we hadnt said a word to her about race. We
learned first hand, and the hard way, that these liberal, multicultural
schools dont work. We realized that we wanted a school of
our own flavor. The school that provides the closest thing to
a European-type education is unfortunately 35 miles from where
we live. So, every day, either my wife or I drive 35 miles there
and back. At the same time, because of the expansion of office
parks, what used to be a nine-mile drive to my work is now a 25-mile
What this means is that there
is no neighborhood here for me at all. A neighborhood is where
your friends are, and where your kids go to school, and where
you workthats what makes a neighborhood. Our people
like to be bound to the earth. I need to belong to a certain soil,
to a certain locality, and I need to stay in that locality, and
for that process to go on for generations. I really believe that
my desire to be groundedliterallyis a basic white
or European impulse. There are cultural factors working against
us, like increased consumerism and individualism, and theres
the globalization of the economy. But whatever is going on, I
have to go to some other part of the region to find work. I feel
like a migrant worker.
A lot of whites have been building
gigantic houses on three-quarter-acre lots in the far reaches
of the suburbs, and this makes them pretty much impervious to
encroachment; blacks are not going to go there. But these white
people lose in the process, too, because they have to own a $350,000
house, and they are paying out of their ears to keep up with the
mortgage. All that money could be used to have a richer life on
another level with their children and family. If they lived in
an old-style house, they could get by on one salary. They wouldnt
have to work two jobs. If they could build a simple three bedroom
semi-detached house in a town like the one I grew up in, where
the lots are small and there are little gardens and walkways and
so on, they could have something affordable, and experience something
really worthwhile: living in a tight-knit community of white people.
The vineyard he never
Because of what has happened to
the neighborhood, if my wife and I move we wont get more
than we paid for our house fifteen years ago. Without those changes,
I would be in much better financial shape. At one time, my mothers
house was a desirable property, but it is worth very little now.
I dont want to end up like my mother, or in a situation
like the one Im in now, where the neighborhood is declining,
and I have to either stay and feel trapped or get out.
Id like to grow apple trees,
and it takes years to do that, and you cant take trees with
you when you move. So we are probably going to rent near where
I work, and also buy a rural place and go there on the weekends
and fix it up. When I retire in fifteen years well move
What I would really like to do
is turn back the clock 50 years. I have been going to homesteading
sites on the Internet, and reading homesteading magazines to get
guidance and inspiration. Im reading about people who are
forming small communities in places like Kentucky, and I correspond
with people who are actually doing this, to get a sense of what
homesteading entails and what their lives are like. They are all
white, and though they dont talk about race, I suspect there
is a racial impulse behind what they are doing, at least to some
extent. Some homesteaders in rural Pennsylvania have invited me
to visit, which I plan to do when I get over my current health
It saddens me to think that I
can no longer live where my mother lives and where I grew up.
There would be nothing more rewarding than to have a property
like that passed down to me in the condition it was once in. Everywhere
my family has lived in, we made improvements, such as putting
in a nice garden or gutting the walls and putting in new sheet
rock, and improving the drainage. Over decades, these changes
add up to significant improvements: a better garden, a vineyard,
fruit trees, a nice deck. By staying in one place, your property
improves and you improve the community, and you form deep, lasting
connections with people. That is the way our ancestors in Europe
lived. They were tied to a place. I feel that I am all the time
planting and that I am never going to get the harvest; that I
am never going to live in a true community.
Where have all the
I talked with my daughter about
the country place Im thinking about buying or building.
I asked her, If Mom and I build a place like that, would
you like to stay there, live there after we are gone? She
said yes, she would. She is only seventeen years old, but I think
she understands the costs of having to pick up and start over,
and she doesnt want to get into that pattern. That house
will reflect 20 years of our labor. We will plant gardens and
fruit trees and a vineyard, and make improvements. And we will
be in a community where we are with people who see the world as
we do, and we will know people and they will know us. And then
we will give the house to our daughter. Ill bet when my
wife and I pass on she wont just sell it and move. She will
consider it the place where she should live, and shell build
on it herself. My sickness has come out of nowhere, but once I
get over this, Im going to get that house.
Denis didnt get the house.
He died a few months after telling me this.
Robert S. Griffin is the author
of the book, The Fame of a Dead Mans Deeds: An Up-Close
Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce. Displaced
is adapted from his latest book, One Sheaf, One Vine: Racially
Conscious White Americans Talk About Race. The book can be
ordered from author house.com.
• BACK TO TOP • •
Black Rule (Part II)
In Part I, Dan Roodt explained
that Afrikaners are a white nation held together by language,
history, tradition, and respect for their ancestors. The black
rulers of South Africa are trying to suppress Afrikaner nationalism,
which they see as a threat to black dominance and national
unity. Dr. Roodt describes the Afrikaner battle for survival
as a microcosm of the entire West, which also faces a rising
in Africa have given the Boer a racial perspective unlike
that of other whites. In a passage that would today be considered
scandalous, the Afrikaner historian Gustav Preller wrote in
1937 (Daglemier in Suid-Afrika ) that, although
science would be sluggish in pointing out a remarkable physiological
difference between the Bantu and the white man of European
descent, it is certainly curious that the Afrikaners of a
hundred years ago were aware of this natural difference .
. . . In this respect [refusing miscegenation] the Afrikaner
has always been alone among all the European peoples that
have come into contact somewhere in the world with natural
race mixingto suit liberals.
Another historian, Hermann
Giliomee, author of a recent mammoth volume called The
Afrikaners: Biography of a People, has sought to explain
Afrikaner race feeling by evoking the role of the Boer woman
who, in the early days of the Cape, discouraged the liaisons
between white men and slave women that were tolerated in other
slave societies. Dutch women jointly owned their husbands
estates and were often better informed and educated than the
men. They saw to it that competition from slaves and natives
for white men did not arise. If a man fathered a child with
a slave woman it was grounds for divorce, and served as a
further deterrent against miscegenation.
Some mixed marriages did take
place in the first decades of the new Dutch colony because
of the acute shortage of white women, but they soon came to
an end. As Mr. Giliomee has written elsewhere, Taking
a black wife evidently entailed such a loss of status that
it was considered better to remain a bachelor. European men
unable to find a European wife tended not to marry. A study
of the 1731 census showed that 59 percent of Cape Towns
European men and 51 percent in the rural western Cape never
During the apartheid years,
English-speaking liberals used to joke that Afrikaners had
fathered the mixed-race Colored population. Why else would
they speak Afrikaans? As noted above, some miscegenation did
take place during the early years of Dutch rule. However,
most Coloreds are not descendants of black-white mixes, but
of intermarriage between Oriental slaves from Indonesia and
Madagascar with the local hunter-gatherers known as Khoi-khoi
or Bushmen. Although classed as a single population group
under the apartheid system, the Coloreds are extremely heterogeneous,
running from pure Khoi stock to Cape Malays who practice Islam.
During the first 150 years of European settlement, the hunter-gatherers
lost their own Khoi languages and assimilated to the early
Afrikaner culture, as did the Oriental slaves.
Boer women discouraged
the liaisons between white men and slave women
that were tolerated in other slave societies.
According to statistics published
in the 1930s before the legal prohibition of mixed marriages
under apartheid, there were fewer than 10 black-white marriages
per year in the entire country. Of these, almost all were
white menusually Englishmarrying black women.
In quite a few years, marriages between white women and black
men were officially recorded as zero, or one or two per year.
Even now in South Africa, it is so unusual for an Afrikaner
to marry a black that it usually makes the front page of the
newspapers. At once or twice a year, it would be close to
the historical norm, despite enormous governmental and media
pressure for Afrikaners to fuse with Africans.
Afrikaner-Colored marriages are only slightly more common,
and occur only in the Cape, never in the north.
A columnist from the liberal
Sunday Times visiting Stellenbosch University complained
recently that she saw no mixed couples, whereas at the English-language
University of Cape Town a few miles away, race-mixing is fashionable.
The Beeld newspaper in Johannesburg runs a bride
of the month competition, with many photographs of Afrikaner
brides published every month, and I have yet to see one of
these brides marrying a black or Colored man.
Television soap operas are,
of course, a mixed-race utopia where all races are represented
in all social situations. The effect of this government propaganda
has been to alienate many viewers from television, or at least
for them to see it for what it is: a highly artificial representation
of South African life.
Verwoerd to his
detractors . . .
According to one retired newspaper
editor, blacks fear Afrikaners more than any other whites
because we know and understand them so intimately. In previous
times, most Afrikaners spoke African languages, giving them
insight into a magical, irrational worlda domain of
spirits, witchcraft and superstition. Even the most liberal
Afrikaners have a sense of black differences in mentality
and physical characteristics, and although they would not
make too much of them, they admit such differences exist.
The ANC hates whites, but
hates Afrikaners even more, and the reasons are not hard to
find. The black revolutionary Frantz Fanon wrote that the
most common sentiment Africans used to feel for their white
colonial masters was envy. Millions of black South Africans
envy English-speaking whites their wealth and prosperity,
but in the case of the Afrikaner, black envy reaches pathological
extremes as they gaze upon excellence, not only in economics,
but also in sports, in the maintenance of an indigenous Germanic
language and culture, academic and scientific prowess, social
cohesion and disciplined behavior. One merely has to visit
the nearest Afrikaans school, or look at the results of the
end-of-year examinations to understand black envy of a people
they are intent on destroying once and for all.
Whatever form destruction
takes, its vehicle will be demography. Whereas Johannesburg
in the 1940s was still a European city whose population was
less than a third black, the reverse is now true. Downtown
Johannesburg has been completely taken over by blacks, provoking
one of the largest recent instances of white flight in the
world. Like almost all Westerners, Afrikaners have a declining
birthrate of approximately 1.4 children per woman, and a shrinking
population is further depleted by emigration. Violence and
race preferences serve the black cause: either fearful whites
emigrate to escape crime and mayhem, or they send their children
abroad to get jobs.
Once the white population
falls below a certain critical mass that precludes serious
resistance, Mr. Mbeki will make his move just as his friend
Robert Mugabe has in Zimbabwe, and drive the remaining whites
out or perhaps even commit organised genocide. Either way,
there will be no international outcry, let alone intervention.
Years of propaganda have seen to it that international opinion
will view such action by South African blacks as getting
their own back, and will conclude that the whites
are receiving their just desserts for apartheid.
. . . and to his
In the meantime, part of the
campaign to marginalize whitesspecifically the Boersis
the imposition of African symbolism and values. There is even
a quest for Afrocentric science, law and medicine. Just as
the Soviet Union ignored the laws of science and practised
proletarian science during the Lysenko era, the
South African government is spending millions of mainly white
taxpayer money on what it calls the African Renaissance.
This is a fundamentalist revival whose objective is the replacement
of Western precepts of science and law.
The government-funded African
Renaissance Institute has branches all over the country. Its
offices are lavish and its personnel wear designer clothes
and drive luxury cars. The head of the branch at the University
of South Africa recently derided South Africas Western
legal system, based on Roman-Dutch law, as neo-colonial,
and called for its abolition. African tribal customs were
recognised by former white governments when it came to settling
dowry disputes or clashes over tribal land, but the idea that
a sophisticated economy and society should return to palavering
elders under a tree beggars belief.
Traditional ideas and superstitions
are definitely in resurgence. Patients going to witchdoctors
will soon be able to file insurance claims, and a recent article
in the local edition of Sports Illustrated described
the use of muti or medicine in the National
Soccer League, where players and teams routinely cast spells
and drink potions before matches. Christianity has had little
success in stamping out animal and sometimes even human sacrifice.
Police statistics record an average of 400 so-called muti
murders every year, in which body parts are harvested
for magic rituals. Progressive theologians, both black and
white, have stopped fighting muti, and are calling
for the reconciliation of ancestor worship and Christianity.
Some have proposed animal sacrifices in churches.
to be turned over to blacks.
The subversion of the South
African takes many forms, and as we saw in the case of Kleinboer,
the Afrikaner is not exempt. People as diverse as Nietzsche
and the French-American historian Jacques Barzun (From
Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life,
2001) have accused the West of decadence. As Westerners, albeit
also white Africans, Afrikaners share this decadence. The
loose morals, lawlessness, and free availability of drugs
that have accompanied black rule have further weakened them.
Many have become prostitutes and drug addicts, others luxuriate
in gay or interracial sex, or they have become just as enamored
of flashy consumer goods as their black rulersmaterialistic,
Other Afrikaners are collaborationists
who will bend to the black mans will even to the detriment
of their own people, language, and culture. Such is Dr. Theuns
Eloff, the president of the last remaining Afrikaans university,
in Potchefstroom, who recently succumbed to pressure to merge
with a third-rate black institution so that his campus may
be swamped by blacks demanding instruction in English. We
had no choice, is their favorite refrain.
Abandoned by the West
The tragic fall of Afrikanerdom
from having been almost a ruling aristocracy, with the English-speakers
providing the merchant class in Africas only industrial
power, is in no small part due to the fanatical opposition
of most Western governments. South African whites have made
many mistakes, but they are today ruled by Africans mainly
at the behest of their Western kin, who until recently vilified
and ostracized them, even imposing economic boycotts and arms
sanctions as if they were Saddam Hussein.
The reasons for this are complex,
and range from the worldwide syndrome of white guilt to the
sheer incompetence of Afrikaner leadership after the assassination
of Hendrik Verwoerd in 1966. Verwoerd did his utmost to implement
a policy that would ultimately have led to the creation of
an ethnic federation in South Africa, guaranteeing the Afrikaners
own future as well as that of other whites in an independent
state free of black domination. After his death, however,
the most talented Afrikaners preferred medicine, law and business
to politics. Perhaps this was understandable in a country
where any white politician could be certain of few things,
except being misquoted, vilified, caricatured and condemned
by most of the world media.
When black activist Steve
Biko died in police custody in 1977, this single African death
on a continent where millions are routinely slaughtered in
genocides, civil wars, organised famine, etc., caused a worldwide
outcry. Since 1994, at least 1,500 Afrikaner farmers have
been killed in horrible atrocities by marauding black gangs
responding to the ANCs slogan, kill the Boer,
kill the farmer, yet not a single editorial has been
written in the West condemning these killings.
It is not easy
to give this up and move to Orania.
One Afrikaner who understood
the intimate relationship between white dominance in South
Africa and Western dominance on the global scale, was G.D.
Scholtz. He was a personal friend of Hendrik Verwoerd, and
wrote an elaborate philosophy of apartheid as well as a multi-volume
Afrikaner political history. In his 1964 book with the prophetic
title, n Swart Suid-Afrika? (A Black South
Africa?), Scholtz warned that white people worldwide were
no longer in their previously dominant position, something
which would have grave consequences. One of the greatest
tragedies regarding South Africas whites, he wrote,
is precisely the fact that so many of them remain in
complete ignorance as to the great change that has occurred
in the world and how their own position as a privileged aristocracy
has been affected by it. . . . In this ignoranceand
consequently also negligencethat so many whites display
toward the major changes in the world, lies the biggest danger
that currently threatens the civilization at the southern
tip of Africa.
In the early sixties when
G.D. Scholtz was writing, the notion that South Africa could
be governed by blacks was as farfetched as the United States
being governed by Nigerians, but he correctly predicted that
the threat would not come from anything blacks could do, but
from international pressure to give up power. Despite decades
of advance warning in this and other publications, South Africas
whites blundered along until they ultimately surrendered simply
to please their Western kin.
Afrikaners must, in turn,
take some blame for the collapse of Rhodesia because, as a
prelude to selling out their own people, their leader at the
time, John Vorster, stabbed the white Rhodesians in the back
in an attempt to appease Great Britain. Just a few years later,
after having turned over the second most prosperous country
in Africa to Mr. Mugabe and his thugs, Britain fixed its sights
on South Africa.
After betrayal by the West,
demography has been the great weight on Afrikaner shoulders.
On the first page of his book, Scholtz cited the South African
population census of 1960 that recorded 15,841,128 people,
of which 10,807,808 were Bantu as they were then called; 3,067,638
were white, 1,314,392 Colored, and 477,414 Asian, including
Indians. Even the most radical demographic projections at
the time did not foresee a rise in the black population to
its current level of 36 million, nor did it anticipate the
Colored demographic explosion to almost four million, while
the white figure barely crept up to 4,500,000.
Kloop Dam: part
of the infrastructure
handed over to the ANC.
Since the black takeover,
South African census figures are no longer accurate. Perhaps
deliberately, as many as one million whites were not counted
in the 2001 census.Whether whites are five or six million
makes little difference, given the total population of 45
million, of which black Africans are just under 80 percent.
A hundred years ago the black-white ratio was less than two
to one, and now it is six to one and getting worse. For the
next few years, AIDS deaths will keep the population from
growing, but after that it is projected to double again by
the year 2025.
There is also a steady stream
of immigration from other African countries, with some estimates
putting the number of illegal immigrants at ten million. A
Western government would have tightened controls and sealed
the borders. The ANC plans to abolish all visa requirements
for other Africans, and the ultra-liberal/communist Constitutional
Court has just ruled that foreigners qualify for welfare payments
and health benefits. Up to a third of blacks may well be foreign-born,
and have simply walked across the border from other African
It is true that since Verwoerds
assassination in 1966, Afrikaners have been making concessions
to black South Africa so consistently that the 1994 vote to
give them the country may seem inevitable in retrospect. However,
the same trend has been seen in the West since 1920. Every
European or North American country has made one concession
after another with regard to immigration or race preferences.
Here and there the tide has been temporarily halted on minor
issues, but the trend continues. The influential Italian postmodernist
author Umberto Eco, representing mainstream intellectual opinion
in the West, already accepts European decline and the disappearance
of the white race, writing in 2001: Europe will become
a multiracial continentor a colored one,
if you prefer. Thats how it will be, whether you like
it or not. In this sense, Afrikaners will have to liberate
themselves from the West and its pessimism if they are to
escape the prevailing trend of white surrender.
N. P. van Wyk Louw:
the gamble of a small nation.
In his often brilliant 1975
essay on Afrikaner history, The Puritans in Africa,
W.A. de Klerk describes Afrikaner civilization as a
mere fragment of that vaster edifice known as the West,
but it is a fascinating fragment, well worth preserving. The
Afrikaner struggle for survival under the domination of vastly
more prolific and thus more numerous Third-World peoples,
mostly African, but also Indians and mixed-race Coloreds,
descendants of slaves and Khoi-Khoi hunter-gatherers, foreshadows
the coming survival contest of the West itself.
By a curious historical and
demographic twist, the percentage of white people in South
Africanine percentcorresponds precisely to the
portion of whites as a share of the global population. South
Africa is a microcosm of the world. The processes of demographic
expansion, territorial occupation, and moral and intellectual
subversion we have suffered are similar to what the entire
West is experiencing. Thabo Mbekis vociferous calls
for an end to global apartheid and a free sharing
of world resources among the developed and undeveloped worlds
may sound extreme today, but in the context of the dominant
values of our time they are by no means outlandish. George
W. Bush, Tony Blair, Jacques Chirac or Gerhard Schroeder may
also undergo a conversion like F.W. de Klerk,
throwing open their countries to a global system in which
a few hundred million ageing whites will forever be subject
to the young and growing populations of Africa, Asia and Latin
We Always Had a Choice
We had no choice,
is the phrase heard over and over again in the recent history
of South Africa. Yet we always had a choice. The Goethe of
Afrikanerdom, a poet named N.P. van Wyk Louw, published a
famous essay entitled Die ewige trek (The Eternal
Trek) in 1939, in which he wrote that the entire coming
into being of a small nation is a gamble. It must rise up
between the major powers like a small plant between the feet
of great cattle. At any moment it may be crushed. Let it beware
if it thinks that its rights alone will protect
it in a world of great power moves. He goes on to discuss
major turning points in Afrikaner history, showing that upon
every such occasion there were two equally attractive alternatives,
the one rational and logical, the other emotional and irrational.
At each point the Afrikaner had gambled on the irrational
alternative and won.
He wrote that one must sometimes
choose the rational course and sometimes the irrational one,
not knowing which is which, nor being certain of the outcome.
If Louw had been alive in 1994, his theory would have been
vindicated, for the Afrikaners chose the rational course of
conceding to world opinion, and lost, horribly so. If they
had chosen to persevere, to call the black nationalist bluff
of revolution or outright war, they would today have had many
Rationally, the Afrikaners
do not stand a chance against South Africas 40 million
blacks or against the 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa, predicted
soon to reach a billion despite AIDS, wars, and famine. However,
at the Battle of Blood River the Voortrekkers were also outnumbered
at least 30 to one by Zulus. When the Boers took on the British
Empire, according to one estimate, they were outnumbered two
hundred to one. If the British had not played dirty with their
concentration camps for women and children, they would probably
have had to abandon the war, and South Africa today would
still be an Afrikaner republic. Without English liberals and
communists to propagate their cause, blacks would never have
Some of the 64
bronze wagons of the
laager at the Blood River memorial.
So Louws gamble of the
small nation continues. Some Afrikaners are doing the rational
thing and emigrating, others are collaborating with the regime
in the forlorn hope that they and their families will be spared.
More and more, however, I see the most talented Afrikaners
opting for the irrational, to challenge the black power ruling
over them, to insist on their birthright at the cost of being
denigrated as racists and rightists.
Even left-wing and liberal
authors who castigated the old apartheid government are starting
to criticise the new black one. Hermann Giliomee, for one,
was a liberal critic of apartheid ostracized by the old Afrikaner
Nationalist establishment, yet he has played a leading role
in the current struggle for Afrikaner rights, and, through
his book, rekindled international interest in Afrikaner history.
Small groups of dedicated activists are rising to the challenge
to make our message heard in the world, knowing that the major
powers will always support black South Africa, if only to
keep their own multicultural societies from exploding under
them. The Afrikaner is the scapegoat of the West, and has
been put on the altar to die, as the price the West has to
pay for its colonial history and resulting sense of guilt.
A left-wing French philosopher
visiting South Africa two years ago took one look at the place
and told me, you Afrikaners should call out an independent
republic in five years time, and do your own thing.
That is the obvious answer, but to make the psychological
jump to Afrikaner secession after a century of South Africanism
would not be easy. Afrikaner farmers still own 70 percent
of the land in South Africa. The Afrikaner attachment to the
land acts as an impediment to leaving parts of it to attain
freedom in just one corner of the country.
Also, the ANC government is
fearful of any Afrikaner attempt to break out of its fatal
embrace, for it would lose half of its taxes and most of its
intellectual slaves, possibly scuppering the system of institutionalized
parasitism known as the South African economy. It has recently
passed a new bill defining as terrorism any attempt
to alter the constitutional order of the country. Without
Afrikaners, South Africa in its present condition might collapse
and become another Zimbabwe.
Has it been a trek
There is another theory about Afrikaner history.
I would call it the lessons theory. Afrikaners
are probably as likely as any people to treat blacks as equals,
take their utterances at face value, and so on. However, on
at least four occasions they have learnt very painfully that
being under the power of blacks translates into utter horror.
The first period was in the Eastern Cape during the 1820s
when the combination of lax British colonial rule and zealous
foreign missionaries siding with the Xhosa tribesmen against
indigenous whites led to the burning of farmsteads and an
insecure existence like that of South Africa today. This triggered
the Great Trek into the interior, where Afrikaners encountered
the warring Zulu tribe for the first time. Here they experienced
the treacherous killing of Piet Retief and his men by King
Dingaan in 1838, and the subsequent slaughter of the women
and children at Blaauwkrans and Weenen, where the brains of
white babies were dashed out on wagon wheels by Zulu warriors.
This second lesson is indelibly marked upon the Afrikaner
consciousness. Vengeance was taken at Blood River, the quintessential
racial confrontation of the 19th century (see the following
article for a short account of the trek and several battles).
The third lesson was during
the Anglo-Boer war, when Britain armed up to a hundred thousand
black men to terrorize the Boer women and children. This piece
of history has been carefully suppressed, but many Boer women
were massacred and others were raped by marauding black soldiers,
resulting in the birth of mixed-race children. In the northern
parts of the country, this is often cited as a cause of the
revulsion against race-mixing that endured until perhaps 10
or 20 years ago.
experiment in applying mainstream Western race
theory in South Africa by submitting to rule by
black Africans is turning out to be the worst
mistake in their history.
Now, for the fourth time in
our history, we are experiencing black terror first hand,
and despite the ideological brainwashing by the media and
the government through the schools and universities, every
Afrikaner knows what our most recent Nobel prize winner, J.M.
Coetzee, an anglicized Afrikaner, wrote in his 1999 Afro-pessimistic
novel Disgrace: they do rape. While
the newspapers omit the race of perpetrators in their daily
reports on South Africas constant wave of killings,
robberies and sex crimes, and liberal commentators blame the
crimes on patriarchy, apartheid, or
the cult of maleness, Afrikaners are not hoodwinked.
The race of any white who commits a violent crime is always
reported so it can be said, see, whites also do it,
sometimes; therefore all those other crimes must be
committed by blacks.
The Afrikaners experiment
in applying mainstream Western race theory in South Africa
by submitting to rule by black Africans is turning out to
be the worst mistake in their history, apart from the siege
of Ladysmith, which was a waste of troops that enabled the
British safely to land their forces in 1900, instead of having
to take the country from the sea. According to conservative
estimates, 30,000 Afrikaners have already been killed by blacks
since 1994, more than the number of women and children who
died in the British camps from 1899 to 1902, and 30 times
more than the number of soldiers who died in the Angolan war
against the joint Russian, Cuban and Angolan forces over more
than a decade. For the fourth time, Afrikanerdom is receiving
a bloody awakening because it failed to read its own history.
It may be that the anti-Afrikaner
season in the West is bottoming out, and that we are on the
way up again. But the price in human lives and suffering is
as high as it has ever been. In 410 AD the Romans submitted
without resistance to barbarian invasion. Was the Western
imposition of black rule in South Africa a decade ago a similar
sign of effete surrender to the Third World? The drama unfolding
in South Africa may determine the future of the West, and
1994 may yet become the date that marked the beginning of
the end for Western peoples as they succumbed to the syndrome
of white guilt and penance for 500 years of excellence.
Dr. Roodt holds degrees
from the University of the Witwatersrand and Université
de Paris VIII (Vincennes/St. Denis). He is a well-known novelist
and Afrikaner commentator who has played a leading role in
what has become known over the past four years as the Third
Afrikaans Language Struggle. Like his ancestors, he
is forced to live in a laager, a Johannesburg security
village surrounded by an electrified fence and cameras, and
patrolled by armed guards.
• • • BACK TO TOP • •
Dutch ancestors of todays Afrikaners founded the first
permanent white settlement near present-day Cape Town in
1652. In 1795, following the French victory over the Netherlands,
the British occupied the Cape Colony to secure the sea lanes
around the Cape of Good Hope. The Dutch chafed under what
they considered heavy-handed British rule. They resented
the abolition of slavery in 1834, and the tendency of the
British to treat them as they did the native blacks. These
policies were, in the words of one Boer woman, contrary
to the laws of God and the natural distinction of race and
religion, so that it was intolerable for any decent Christian
to bow down beneath such a yoke, wherefore we rather withdrew
in order to preserve our doctrines in purity.
Between 1835 and 1843, some
12,000 Boers, a quarter of those living in the Cape Colony,
hitched their oxen to covered wagons, and, with their wives,
children, servants, and livestock, moved to the interior
in what became known as the Voortrek, or Great Trek, the
defining event in Afrikaner nationalism.
The Boers intention
was not conquest. The lands in and around the Traansvaal,
north of the Orange River, had been largely depopulated
by tribal warfare. Piet Retief, a Boer leader, had written
in a published manifesto that, We propose . . . to
make known to the native tribes our intentions, and our
desire to live in peace and friendly intercourse with them.
Nevertheless as the Voortrekkers continued north across
the Vaal River they entered lands claimed by the Ndebele,
the second most powerful native tribe in southern Africa
after the Zulu, and now a substantial portion of the population
of Zimbabwe. The Ndebele under Chief Mzilikazi let the first
Boer wagons pass unmolested, but began attacking later parties,
killing women and children. It was during the fighting against
the Ndebele that the Boers perfected their style of warfare.
The granite monument
at Blood River.
On October 19, 1836, a party
of 40 Boer men, along with their women and children, successfully
fought off an attack by thousands of Ndebele warriors at
the Battle of Vegkop. They formed their 50 wagons into an
outer laager, or ring, lashed them together with
chains, and jammed thorn bushes under and between them to
prevent attackers from creeping through. Each Boer kept
a spare gun or two that his wife had loaded for him. The
Boers also cut their bullets so they would split apart in
flight and hit several men.
During the battle, Boer
women and children sheltered inside an inner laager of
four wagons formed into a square and covered with planks
and hides. The Boer men used the laagers only as
a final retreat, riding out on horseback with long, large-caliber
muskets, called snaphaans, which they loaded and
fired from the saddle. They rode well away from the laager
and tried to pick off as many warriors as possible before
The Ndebele suffered heavy
losses at Vegkop, perhaps 1,000 dead. Their spears could
not penetrate the thick canvas covering the wagons, while
a blast from a musket loaded with splintering bullets could
take down as many as six men. The Boers lost just two men
at Vegkop and no women or children. In early 1837, the Boers
launched a punitive raid against Chief Mzilikazi, burning
his village and killing 400 warriors.
Many Boers were content
with the lands they settled in the Traansvaal, but others,
including Piet Retief, believed the Afrikaner nation needed
access to the sea. This meant crossing into Natal, the land
of the powerful Zulus. Retief thought he could negotiate
with the Zulu, and on February 6, 1838, he led a party of
66 Boers and 30 black servants under a flag of truce into
the camp of Chief Dingaan. After three days of feasting,
Dingaan suddenly ordered his fiercest warrior regiment,
the Wild Beasts, to Kill the Wizards! The massacre
of Retief, his men, and their black servants began the Zulu-Boer
On February 17, 1838, the
Zulu attacked the Boer laagers along the Blaauwkrans
River, killing 85 adults and 148 children. It was on this
day that Zulus earned a permanent place in the Afrikaner
memory by killing infants by dashing their brains out against
wagon wheels. Zulu raids continued throughout the year,
killings hundreds of Voortrekkers.
By late 1838, the Boers
had a new leader, Andries Pretorius (for whom Pretoria is
named), who was determined to avenge the murder of Retief
and the massacre at Blaauwkrans. On December 15, Pretorius
and his force of 470 men spotted an approaching Zulu army
of 12,500 men along a tributary of the Buffalo River near
present-day Dundee. Pretorius formed his wagons into a D-shaped
defensive ring, with two cannon to cover the entrances.
Although facing overwhelming odds, his men carried modern
Western weaponsflintlock rifles and musketswhereas
the Zulus carried only shields and short stabbing spears
known as assegaais, which they seldom threw.
Before the battle, the Boers
made a covenant with God: Here we stand, before the
Holy God of heaven and earth, to make to Him a vow that,
if He will protect us, and deliver our enemies into our
hands, we will observe the day and date each year as a day
of thanks, like a Sabbath, and that we will erect a Church
in His honor, wherever He may choose and that we will also
tell our children to join with us in commemorating this
day, also for coming generations. For His name will be glorified
by giving Him all the honor and glory of victory.
The Zulu attacked at dawn
on December 16, 1838. The Boers held off the first attack,
and the second. Although the Zulu drove right up to the
line of wagons, they fought in such tight groups their men
stumbled over each other, and withering fire from inside
the laager drove them back. After the second repulse,
the Zulu seemed hesitant to attack again, but Pretorius
lured them into a third assault by sending some men outside
the laager as bait. When they attacked again, Pretorius
routed the Zulu with cavalry. The fleeing army left behind
more than 3,000 dead along the banks of what became known
as the Blood River. Astonishingly, not one Boer was killed,
and only three were wounded. To the Afrikaners, the victory
was indeed divinely ordained.
The Boers kept their vow
to God. They built a memorial church in Pietermaritsburg
two years later, and celebrated each December 16 as the
Day of the Covenant (which the ANC government has officially
renamed Reconciliation Day). There are two monuments on
the site commemorating the victory. The first is an ox-wagon
sculptured out of granite. Nearby is a reconstruction of
the laager made of 64 full-size ox-wagon replicas
cast in bronze.
Another Zimbabwe in the Making?
many forms of white disposession.
reviewed by Ian Jobling
South African Land Scandal
2004, 271 pp. (softcover), $25.
here have been muted reports
about the attacks on white farmers in South Africa since
the African National Congress (ANC) took power in 1994,
but Philip du Toits new book is the first detailed
account of the many wrongs they have suffered officially
at the hands of a hostile and incompetent government. This
book dramatically illuminates the failure of South Africas
land restitution program, which transfers white-owned
land to blacks. In case after case, the government has taken
once-profitable and well-managed farms from whites and turned
them over to blacks who run them into the ground. This process
could have a devastating effect on South Africas agriculture.
Dr. du Toit is a lawyer
who has represented many of these farmers in court, and
has thoroughly researched the struggles of white farmers.
Although the book is sometimes confusing for Americans unfamiliar
with South Africa, it does a valuable service in fleshing
out the details of a tragedy of which the world is only
When the ANC came to power
in 1994 it passed the Restitution of Land Rights Act, which
promised to transfer 30 percent of white-owned land to blacks
during the next 10 years. This was meant to compensate blacks
who lost land after the passage of the 1913 Native Land
Act, which restricted black ownership. In subsequent years,
white governments relocated millions of blacks to native
homelands that comprised about 12 percent of the area of
The 1994 Land Rights Act
also established the Land Claims Courts to govern restitution.
Claimants had to prove in court that they or their ancestors
had been dispossessed of the land after 1913, and that they
had not been fairly compensated. The land-owners could present
evidence that the claim was invalid, and haggle over the
value of the land. Valid claimants were eligible for government
help to buy the land. The deadline for applications for
land restitution was Dec. 31, 1998, by which time blacks
filed 68,878 claims. This legal process has been slow, and
blacks have received about three percent of white-owned
land. Militant groups constantly criticize the government
for its slow pace.
In response, the ANC amended
the Land Rights Act in 2003 so that the Minister of Agriculture
and Land Affairs does not need a court decision to take
land, as long as the minister is satisfied the claimants
were dispossessed, and that the owners are getting a fair
price. Predictably, this change has outraged white land-owners.
As Andries Botha of the Democratic Alliance Party said:
We are moving from the rule of law to the law of rule.
ANC ministers imagine themselves as beings of infinite wisdom
whose actions should not be questioned. In 1990 the Zimbabwean
minister of agriculture also held this kind of view.
Dr. du Toit points out that
the land restitution process has always been fraudulent.
Courts favor blacks, and often award land even when claims
do not meet legal standards. A particularly egregious example
is that of the Botshabelo mission in Mpumalanga Province
established by Germans in the 19th century on land not owned
by any tribe. The missionaries sheltered black refugees
from tribal wars, and gave them education and training.
The missionaries built a village with a mill, a book bindery
and press, a blacksmith, and other industries where the
refugees worked. In 1972, the government removed the descendants
of the refugees, and gave them housing and compensation
in another area. After 1994, the resettled tribesmen successfully
claimed the missionary land for themselves on the grounds
that their forefathers lived there, although they were there
only because of the generosity of the missionaries and never
in any sense owned it. Nor did the claimants have to prove
they were the people who were resettled, or their descendants.
Dr. du Toit offers many
examples of such haphazard and unjustified restitution.
One case is that of the Mamathola 635 tract, in the Northern
Province, from which the government removed Mamathola tribesmen
in the 1940s because they were overgrazing. The government
resettled them and more than adequately compensated them:
The new area was larger than Mamathola 635, and had houses,
roads, and infrastructure that more than equaled what the
tribesmen left behind. In 2000, the Mamathola filed a successful
land claimnot for the original Mamathola 635 area,
but for land that was several miles away! The farmers who
lived on the claimed land pointed out this inconsistency,
but an African bureaucrat replied that the Mamathola would
claim their cattle had grazed in this area as well. The
claim was filled with other inaccuracies: that the land
on which the Mamathola had been resettled was too
small, and that they had had to build their own houses.
The court does not appear to have even tried to verify any
of these claims.
In many cases the actual
claimants never get the land. None of the tribesmen who
petitioned for the Mamathola land had returned there by
the time Dr. du Toits book was published. Instead,
the government appointed a committee mainly of Pretoria
residents to manage the land. None of its members had any
connection to the Mamathola, and Pretoria is not even in
the Northern Province. They are probably ANC loyalists being
rewarded for service. Most of the committee members did
not move onto the land, and none farmed it. Many farms awarded
under the Botshabelo land claim also ended up in the hands
of government bureaucrats and their relations. Dr. du Toit
has heard that local warlords claim to own the farms, and
are selling off parcels.
White South Africans have
successfully farmed unfriendly soil because they have mastered
modern farming techniques, which require substantial investment
and intelligent management. The new African owners usually
know nothing about these methods, and often scorn the help
of previous owners. The infrastructure whites installed
breaks down, and the farms become unproductive.
On the Mamathola tract,
whites had equipped a farm with a computerized irrigation
system of pumping plants, pipelines, and canals. They had
also established an Irrigation Board to manage water use
on various farms. When they left, the farmers told the claim
committee that they would be willing to train the new owners.
The committee rebuffed this offer, declaring
not only that Africans were perfectly capable of running
the farms, but that they would even restructure
operations to improve them. When one of Dr. du Toits
teams of researchers surveyed the land in 2003, they found
it in a state of collapse. The packing sheds were empty,
the pipes from the dam were broken, the fruit trees were
sunburned, the tractors were rusting, the electricity was
cut off, and not a soul was working.
Dr. du Toit has gathered
so many examples of farm failure that he likens his book
to a broken record. In another case, the government bought
a modern, white-owned pig farm in Mpumalanga Province and
gave it to a chief. Before the transfer, the farm supported
2,400 pigs. A short time after the transfer, all of the
pens were in disrepair, and the 500 surviving pigs were
so hungry they were eating each other.
When the government handed
over a profitable Northern Province fruit farm to blacks
in 2000, the previous owner agreed to stay on for five years
to manage the handover. He later resigned in disgust, saying
the new owners did nothing but argue about salaries. They
stopped paying the electric bill, and had their power cut
off. Eventually, they sold all the farm equipment for next
to nothing and now survive by fishing and grazing cattle.
Reality belies South Africas
propaganda of racial reconciliation. In 2001, when a white
farmer in Eastern Cape Province transferred part of his
land to blacks and agreed to help the new owners, Thabo
Mbeki himself lauded him in Parliament as a model citizen
of the new South Africa. The local newspaper published a
glowing story, White and Black Farmers Join Hands,
with pictures of the former and current owners smiling and
chatting over a fence. Two years later, the farmer had given
up on his neighbors; they made unnecessary purchases he
had advised against, and had no fodder for their animals.
The Africans had divided into two groups and were fighting
and arguing. I dont want to be involved any
more, he said. If anything goes wrong, they
Dr. du Toit
has gathered so many examples of farm failure
that he likens his book to a broken record.
Another new law, the Extension
of Security and Tenure Act of 1997, makes it virtually impossible
for white farmers to expel tenants who refuse to pay rent
or fire laborers who will not work. A farmer must get a
court order to remove tenants, and must give them new homes.
On Gert Pretoriuss farm in North West Province, workers
he fired years ago still live in houses on his land. They
steal his cattle and slaughter them in his sheds, and his
staff must clean up after them. Since he does not have the
money to buy them new houses, there is no way to get rid
Camps of squatters, some
containing tens of thousands of people, have formed all
over South Africa, even in the public parks in Pretoria.
Squatting on white-owned farms is common. In some cases,
tribal warlords actually sell white-owned land to squatters.
In 1999, Jabulani Mdlalose, a KwaZulu/Natal warlord, announced
to farmer Steve van Jaarsveld that he would start settling
people on white land. Sure enough, blacks began setting
up shacks on Mr. van Jaarsvelds land. When he complained
to the police, they said they could do nothing because the
squatters had bought the land fair and square! Dr. du Toit
believes that policeman are often very good friends
of the warlords. Mr. van Jaarsveld, like many of the farmers
in the area, has suffered attacks from Zulus who have burned
his crops and shot him in the leg.
Even if they dont
take over, blacks can cripple farms by stealing and poaching.
One white farm owner in Mpumalanga Province described in
Dr. du Toits book says he has found 4,000 traps on
his property over the past two years. In 2003, he lost 20
head of cattle and 400 impalas to these traps. Like many
white farmers, he pays for private security personnel, since
the police his tax dollars support are useless to him. He
notes that black neighbors with farms thrash poachers to
within an inch of their lives, but he knows he would go
to jail if he did that. We are fair game, he
Stock theft is rampant.
According to the Traansvaal Agricultural Union, everything
is stolenrailway lines, telephone cabling, thousands
of cars, electronic equipment, household goods, firearms,
clothing, crop, stock, and even houses (brick by brick).
Marauders stole 37,000 head of cattle and 70,000 sheep and
goats in 2000. That year depredations of this kind cost
farmers R300 million ($43 million).
Of all the outrages suffered
by white farmers, the worst are violent invasions by blacks,
accompanied by theft, arson, rape, and murder. There have
been 8,000 armed attacks on farms and 1,600 murders of farmers
since 1994. Blacks have attacked one in five commercial
farms in South Africa, and fewer than three percent of the
attackers have been convicted. South Africa says it will
not tolerate Zimbabwe-style land invasions, and there is
no evidence it promotes them, as Zimbabwe does. However,
law enforcement in the South African countryside is so lax,
and the justice system so biased, that the difference between
the two countries increasingly appears to be a matter of
Attacks on South African
farmers are most prevalent in the KwaZulu/Natal province.
Dr. du Toit devotes a chapter to the experiences of the
Dunns, an extended family that owns farms bordering on a
Zulu reserve called the Macambini Tribal Authority. The
chief, Inkosi Mathaba, is an Inkatha Freedom Party strongman
who ran hit squads that committed murder and arson before
the handover in 1994.
With his encouragement,
Zulus have been moving onto Dunn farmland since 1993. These
invasions got worse after the 1994 elections, when the squatters
began building solid structures. Since then, the Dunns have
faced robbery, threats, intimidation, arson, and even rape
and murder. One of the wives, Pat Dunn, says Zulus shot
her husband and beat her so badly they broke three vertebrae.
They stole her car and destroyed it, killed her dog, and
have burned her crops five years in a row.
White farm wives
learning how to shoot Uzis.
The Dunns called on the
South African courts to stop the invasions. However, because
Chief Mathaba filed a land claim on the property in 1994,
the courts refuse to do anything until the claim is settled.
The Dunns also complained to the KwaZulu/Natal provincial
government, which claimed that the KwaZulu government
will not allow a precedent for Zimbabwe-style land invasions
in the province. However, they have done nothing.
Dr. du Toit comments:
This type of behavior
has become a hallmark of the present government. Promises
to look into the matter, to [get] back
to the complainants, to appoint a commission
of enquiry, to address the problem are
made, but nothing happens. In most cases, the situations
actually worsen. [Derisive] laughter greets official promises
now, laughter from all shades of the population.
In many cases, blacks simply
kill white farmers. Theft explains some of these murders,
but Dr. du Toit points out that this is not the entire explanation.
First, many killings are unnecessarily brutal, and some
involve torture. Prosperous black shop owners in the same
area are not nearly as likely to be killed as white farmers.
South Africas blacks have always been poor, but no
other period has seen anti-white violence on such a scale.
The more plausible explanation is that blacks are trying
to drive whites off the land entirely.
Dr. du Toits book
is a useful corrective to the bland pap about South Africa
that appears in the mainstream press. In January, The
Economist ran a story about South Africa entitled More
Squeeze than Grab: Dont Expect Zimbabwe-style Land
Invasions in South Africa. Max Boot of The Weekly
Standard tells us in his recent panegyric to the transition
to black rule, the most inspiring thing about South
Africa is that there seems to be so little rancor.
This book argues persuasively that South Africa is not nearly
as harmonious, nor as different from Zimbabwe as these writers
suggest. Moreover, the recent amendment to the Land Rights
Act shows that the government is losing patience with even
the trappings of fairness, just as Robert Mugabe did when
he found land reform going too slowly for his tastes. Dr.
du Toit deserves a large, world-wide audience for this disturbing
The Great South African
Land Scandal can be purchased by credit card at www.salandscandal.co.za
or by sending a $35.00 international money order to: Legacy
Publications, Private Bag X122, Centurion, South Africa,
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
has been a trickle of South Africans applying for asylum in the
United States on grounds of racial persecution. Almost all have
1999, Michael and Carol Gormley, both 55, came from Durban to
the US on a tourist visa, in part to visit family near Seattle,
but also because they were victims of the New South Africa.
Mr. Gormley worked as a construction supervisor and Mrs. Gormley
was a cargo coordinator for the railway. Both lost their jobs
to affirmative action, and could not find work. They
claimed that the new affirmative action laws amount to race-based
persecution, and told the court they were victims of violent,
rampant crime, largely aimed at whites.
April 22 of this year, a three-judge panel of the Ninth US Circuit
Court of Appeals ruled that the Gormleys have established
only that they fear (1) future racial discrimination with adverse
economic consequences, and (2) potential criminal attacks from
black assailants. These fears, while perhaps well-founded, do
not amount to persecution. (In order to qualify for asylum,
applicants must demonstrate persecution based on race, religion,
national origin, political opinion or membership in a distinct
Gormleys lawyer, Carol Edward, says they are considering
an appeal to either the full circuit court or the US Supreme Court.
They are afraid to go back, she says. Our argument
was that the South African government took one racist government
and replaced it with another one that is racist. [David
Kravets, Court: Being White Not Grounds for Asylum from South
Africa, AP, April 23, 2004. Sam Skolnik, South Africans Lose Persecution
Appeal, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 23, 2004.]
white South Africans are so desperate to leave the country they
fall prey to criminals who claim they can get work visas for them
in the US. Wessel and Frieda Steenkamp and 26 other South Africans
each paid $2,000 to Petras Botes, who claimed to be a recruiter
for temporary agricultural workers in the US. When the group arrived
in Salina, Kansas, Mr. Botes was missingimmigration authorities
had arrested him and four relatives on charges of alien smuggling
and visa violations. The Steenkamps and their two young children
were stranded with virtually no money, and the problems with their
visas meant they could not work.
Steenkamps decided to apply for political asylum, since they had
been farmers in a region where blacks have murdered many whites.
My husband farmed with a gun on his body, Mrs. Steenkamp
told a reporter. She said she quit her job at a bank in town because
it was unsafe to drive on country roads, and that blacks were
raping white women and girls because they thought it would cure
INS advised them to travel to Mexico and reenter the country legally,
so they borrowed money, rented a car, drove from Kansas to Mexico,
turned around and recrossed the border. They surrendered their
questionable visas, asked for asylum on the grounds of racial
persecution, and were granted parole status, which meant they
could work while their case was considered. The Steenkamps got
jobs on a farm in Warner, South Dakota, attended a local church,
and were by all accounts model immigrants.
2002, a federal immigration judge denied asylum, saying black
attacks on white farmers are criminallynot raciallymotivated,
and ordered deportation. Carey Nilsson, the man who offered them
jobs, said, Its the biggest injustice Ive ever
seen in my life. [Mr. Steenkamp] is doing everything for all the
right reasons to make a better life for his kids. Hes here,
keeping all his money here, and theyre going to kick him
out. Another associate said, If there were good productive
people who would be an asset to our state and this country, it
would be these people. The government deported Wessel and
Frieda Steenkamp and their two sons on January 9, 2003. [Betsy
Rice, Warner Couple Forced to Return to South Africa, AP, January
has been at least one successful but odd case. In 1997, after
black employees of Michelle Thomass father-in-law tried
to kidnap one of her children, Mrs. Thomas and her family fled
their home in Durban to the United States. The Thomases applied
for political asylum, claiming they would be persecuted and possibly
killed by blacks if they returned to South Africa. Mrs. Thomas
said her father-in-law, Baas Ronnie, was a racist
who abused blacks, and that his workers would retaliate against
her and her family. She said blacks poisoned her dog, ransacked
her home, and threatened to kill her in front of her children,
and that the police did nothing. She claimed that as a white South
African she became a victim of persecution by black South Africans.
1999, an immigration judge denied asylum because he found that
the South African government did not promote violence against
or persecute whites. The Thomases appealed, and this March, Immigration
Appeals Court Judge Ferdinand Fernandez granted asylum. While
he argued that merely being white in South Africa was not sufficient
grounds, he believed the Thomases were targeted because they are
members of a particular social groupthe family
of the allegedly racist Baas Ronnie. [Marthinus van
Vuuren, SA Family Gets US Asylum, News24.com (S. Africa), March
Africans who want asylum but dont have a racist
father-in-law might try contracting exotic diseases. In April,
after a five-year legal battle, Canadian authorities granted permanent
residency on compassionate grounds to a South African family that
suffers from porphyria, a potentially life-threatening allergy
to sunlight. The disease forced the Vivier family to leave Johannesburg,
which receives 3,126 hours of sunshine each year, for the tiny
Canadian port of Prince Rupert, 40 miles from Alaska, and Canadas
wettest and cloudiest town. It gets 100 inches of rain and snow
per year, and only about a third as much sun as Johannesburg.
[Jane Flanagan, Family Find Their Dream Place in the Gloom, Telegraph
(London), May 2, 2004.]
Standards or Else
the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) Law Schools
140 graduates in 2004, only five are black and two are Hispanic.
The 2006 class has even fewer. Other law schools across the country
also graduate few non-whites. That, says UMKC professor Rogelio
Lasso, an immigrant from Panama, is a formula for disaster
in the making.
He wants the blindfold
20 years, he asks, when Hispanics, African Americans,
Native Americans and Asians make up nearly 50 percent of this
nations population, who will be the judges, lawmakers, and
business leaders? Prof. Lasso says lawyers are the guardians
of the rights and liberties of all members of society,
but thinks whites will not be good at this when they become a
I know that I am more comfortable
with people who look and are like me. White prosecutors and judges
will see themselves in young white offenders and are more likely
to cut them a break. To the white judge or prosecutor,
a black or Latino offender is more alien, more likely to be perceived
He says whites are fighting to
maintain dominance in the courtrooms and legislatures as their
numbers dwindle, and fears this may lead to a form of apartheid,
or minority white control over a non-white majority. Unless whites
make way for non-whites in higher education, he says there could
be disturbances like the riots of the 1960s. In a very real
sense, he says, the health of the nation and of our
communities depends on how much access we give to the growing
population of color to higher education and professional schools.
Prof. Lasso thinks law schools
put too much emphasis on objective criteria like the Law School
Admissions Test (LSAT), on which blacks and Hispanics do poorly.
He has designed an alternative law school admissions system that
would increase the number of non-whites. His goal is to produce
a critical mass of non-white lawyers who can help
run a post-white America. [Carmen Cardinal, UKMC Law School is
as Segregated as Ever, But Now for Different Reasons, MissouriBarReview.com,
April 16, 2004.]
Nuran Halitogullari, a 14-year-old
Turkish girl, survived kidnap and rape, but her father Mehmet
believed her defilement stained the family honor, so he garroted
her. Miss Halitogullari is the latest victim in the centuries-long
tradition of honor killings in Turkey and other Islamic
countries. The Turkish government, under pressure from international
womens groups, is trying to stop the practice. [Turkish
Father Strangles 14-Year-Old in Honor Killing, Orlando
Sentinel, April 30, 2004.]
In Khanbary, Pakistan, a man known
only as Ibrahim suspected his wife Rozina was having an affair.
In keeping with local custom, he chopped off her right ear and
shaved her head. The practice of removing the ears and shaving
the heads of adulteresses is a longstanding tradition in remote
northern Pakistan, but the local police arrested Ibrahim anyway.
[Pakistani Husband Cuts Off Wifes Ear Over Suspected Affair,
AFP, May 4, 2004.]
Americans have quaint customs,
too. On March 30, in Volusia County, Florida, police discovered
Michael Rogers, an American Indian, skinning the head of a bald
eagle. Mr. Rogers, who has a license to handle live bald eaglesbut
not mutilate dead onessays he found the bird already dead
and was preparing the carcass for a spiritual ritual and burial
at an Indian mound near the Daytona International Speedway. The
police arrested Mr. Rogers, who faces a $500 fine or 60 days in
jail. They sent the eagle to Colorado for an autopsy. [American
Indian Arrested After Skinning Head of Bald Eagle, Local6.com
(Orlando), April 20, 2004.]
On April 14, police partially
evacuated the Palm Beach County, Florida, Courthouse and called
the bomb squad after discovering a suspicious package and a bag
of dead animals near the entrance to the judges parking
garage. The bomb squad blew up the package, which contained only
brown powder. Investigators think the powder and the dead animalsthree
birds and a turtlemay be part of a Santeria spell that someone
put on either the courthouse or the judges. Animal sacrifice is
an important part of Santeria, a religion popular among Caribbean
immigrants. [A Suspicious Package and Bag of Dead Animals Left
Outside the Palm Beach County Courthouse, Palm Beach Post, April
The latest class of recruits to
the Baltimore Fire Department is entirely white, the first time
this has happened in 50 years. Although the test was carefully
vetted for bias, almost all the candidates who passed
were white. The blacks who passed had criminal records or failed
a drug test.
This caused much distress. The
Baltimore Sun put the story on the front page, with the
headline, City Fire Department Recruits 1st All-White Class
in 50 Years. A group of retired black firefighters said
the results set this department back 50 years. One
councilman declared the results of the test unbelievable.
Fire Chief William J. Goodwin
held a press conference and promised, We will make sure
that this never happens again. Was [the process] fair?
he asked. It was absolutely fair. Did we follow all the
civil service laws? Absolutely. Later he added, The
process will be changed immediately. The department quickly
let six blacks join the class on probation. [Reginald Fields,
City Fire Department Recruits 1st All-White Class In 50 Years,
Baltimore Sun, April 20, 2004. Les Kinsolving, A Fair
Process Results In All Whites! WorldNet- Daily, May 1, 2004.]
Are the Criminals?
Starting in late March, rumors
of immigration raids began spreading in Houston, and were picked
up by Spanish-language radio and television. Illegals lay low,
and construction sites, meat markets, and taco stands were emptier
than usual. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) denied raids
were taking place, but many Hispanics did not believe them.
Houston authorities felt compelled
to lay their fears to rest. On April 26, immigration officials,
police, and politicians held a meeting, conducted almost entirely
in Spanish, to explain that illegals had nothing to fear. Joseph
Webber of ICE promised his agency had not been conducting raids.
The Houston police explained there was nothing to fear from them,
since Houston is a sanctuary city that does not enforce immigration
law. US Representative Gene Green said the main goal of immigration
services was to protect national security. If you dont
get in trouble with the law, you probably wont get picked
up, he said, implying that immigration violations were not
really against the law.
The crowd took an accusatory and
indignant tone, as if illegals deserved compensation for the disturbance
they had suffered. Immigrants rights groups complained that
ICE was causing panic by parking its vehicles near work sites.
The groups made it clear the meeting did not let ICE off the hook,
and that they were keeping an eye on them.
This was too much for Congressman
Tom Tancredo of Colorado. Two days later, he angrily demanded
a White House investigation into the meeting. The fact that
an administration official and a United States Congressman would
take such pains to publicly assure people that they have no plans
to enforce the laws they are sworn to uphold is simply mindboggling,
and they owe the people an explanation, he said. [Edward
Hegstrom, Work Nearly Grinds To Halt as Immigrant-Raid Rumors
Circulate, Houston Chronicle, April 16, 2004. Edward Hegstrom,
Immigrant Roundup a Myth, Officials Say, Houston Chronicle, April
26, 2004. Tancredo Slams Immigration Bureaucrat For Refusing to
Enforce the Law, Press release from Congressman Tom Tancredo,
April 28, 2004.]
May issue, p. 42.
The American Association of Retired
Persons commissioned a Gallup poll on the state of race relations
in America, and the May cover story of their magazine reports
the results. It says Americans have made great progress,
meaning they accept integration more than they used to. The writer,
Adam Goodheart, believes the strongest evidence of this inclusive
spirit is the finding that 71 percent of Americans and 66
percent of whites said they would not object if a child or grandchild
married someone of another race, which is up from just four percent
of whites in 1958. Non-whites are more enthusiastic about miscegenation
than whites: the results for blacks and Hispanics were 86 percent
and 79 percent, respectively. The article fails to point out that
the statistics for actual intermarriage are low: only 3.5 percent
of whites and 4 percent of blacks marry someone outside their
Fifty-seven percent of whites,
61 percent of Hispanics, and 78 percent of blacks said they would
prefer to live in a neighborhood that is mostly mixed,
again showing that non-whites find whites more attractive than
the other way around. The 2000 census shows, however, that segregation
has not decreased over the past 10 years, and some researchers
claim that it has actually increased, and is now at the level
of the 1960s. One wonders how genuine this inclusive spirit
Whereas 42 percent of Americans
thought race relations would always be a problem for their country
in 1963, 63 percent do today. Moreover, respondents over 65 were
most optimistic about the prospects for harmonious race relations,
and those under 30 were least optimistic. [Adam Goodheart, The
New America, AARP Magazine, May 2004, pp. 43-61.]
According to the 2000 census,
six percent of Georgias 8.2 million people are Hispanic,
but demographers say the actual number could be twice as high.
Hispanics started moving to Georgia in large numbers during the
late 1980s and 90s to work in the carpet mills of Dalton
and the poultry plants around Gainesville, but are now spreading
everywhere. Theres not one single county in the state
of Georgia that does not have Latinos. We are everywhere,
says Sara Gonzalez, president and CEO of the Georgia Hispanic
Chamber of Commerce. (In Henry County, southeast of Atlanta, the
second-most common foreign language after Spanish is the Indian
language of Guajarati, of all things.)
Hispanics make no secret of their
desire to reshape America. In 2050 [when Hispanics are projected
to be at least one quarter of the US population], were going
to look back and sort of laugh about the fact that in 2004, we
pointed to [just] one Latino governor and a handful of Latino
members of Congress as the extent of our opportunity for future
Hispanic leadership, says Adam Segal, director of the Hispanic
Voter Project at Johns Hopkins University. I would certainly
question anyone who would suggest that Spanish will not become
a far more dominant language in the United States by that time.
[Larry Copeland and Haya El Nasser, Population Getting More Diverse
as it Gets Bigger, USA Today, March 18, 2004, p. 2A.]
It already is. This fall, voters
in Hall County, Georgia, (home of the Gainesville poultry plants)
will have a choice of ballots in English or Spanish. The federal
government says counties in which more than five percent of voting-age
residents do not understand English must offer foreign-language
ballots. Although Hall County has not yet reached that thresholdmost
of its 19.6 percent Hispanic population is under 18state
officials decided to offer the Spanish ballots as part of a pilot
program to prepare for the future. [Elliot McLaughlin, Bilingual
Ballots Come to Northeast Georgia, Herald (Miami), April 15, 2004,
In St. Paul, Minnesota, the Hispanic
population doubled between 1990 and 2000; in neighboring Minneapolis,
it quadrupled. Many smaller cities and towns in Minnesota have
also seen big increases. Just five years ago, only 48 of Minnesotas
439 schools districts had at least 100 Hispanic students, and
only four had more than 500. The current figures are 68 and 14,
The proximity of Latin America,
coupled with modern technology, means todays immigrants
are not assimilating as the Scandinavians did when they settled
large parts of Minnesota and the upper Midwest. Ive
been back and forth a few times, says Mexican immigrant
Jose Salinas. I maybe want to stay here. But even if I do,
I cant forget my country, my family, my traditions.
Dan Pena, an American-born Hispanic
who is a chef at a restaurant in Chaska, Minnesota, doesnt
expect Hispanics to assimilate. When Europeans came here,
home was an ocean apart. For Mexicans, its a river, just
60 feet wide. . . . We are headed toward that one world
thing, like it or not. [David Peterson, Immigrants Not Settling
in Traditional Enclaves, Star Tribune (Minneapolis), March 18,
• BACK TO TOP • •
| L E T T E R S
F R O M R E A D E R S
SirI read with fascination
the first part of Dan Roodts article on the Afrikaners,
and am left with a great mystery. Why did such a strong and proud
people turn over their country to blacks? This is particularly
incomprehensible, given that South Africans have lived with blacks
all their lives, and have seen the chaos of black rule in dozens
of countries to the north.
1994 was a terrible mistake that
cannot easily be undone. The only option now is withdrawal into
enclaves like Orania, where a remnant of a once-happy people can
perhaps continue in some form. This ghetto solution is particularly
risky in Africa, however, where a black government can run amok
any time, and the rest of the world will do nothing.
Perhaps Part II will explain.
Ellen Sturges, Roanoke, Va.
SirI enjoyed Dan Roodts
article on the struggles of the Boer nation. Afrikaners are indeed
a tough people, and that is why I am surprised Mr. Roodt did not
include any of the great Afrikaner boxers in his list of accomplished
Boers. In the last 20 years, there have been three heavyweight
boxing champions from South Africa. All three have been white,
including two Afrikaners (Gerrie Coetzee and Francois Botha) and
one Anglo (Corrie Sanders). These men were not especially big
or fast. But they were strong, and fought with a will that served
them well against their often more physically gifted black opponents.
All South African whites will
need these same fighting qualities if they are
to survive the increasing savagery.
Christopher Glenn, Seattle, Wash.
SirAccording Samuel Francis,
Charles Murray says a society must have religionin combination
with other important ingredientsif it is to create great
art. I think a good case can be made for this view. At the same
time, a good case can be made for the view that white men need
religion in order to maintain coherence as a race. It may not
be coincidence that the destruction of white racial consciousness
took place during the second half of the 20th century, at a time
when religion went into decline, certainly in the United States
and even more so in Europe.
Christianity, like any religion,
sets limits and boundaries. It posits a clear distinction between
good and bad. It sets a path for men to follow. Without religion,
Western man seems to have lost the capacity to make distinctions
of any kind. It is not only the traditional prohibitions of fornication,
theft, lying, and excessive materialism that have gone by the
boards. Western mans cynicism now extends to distinctions
between the beautiful and the ugly, the healthy and unhealthy,
male and female. This is why there is so little outrage when urinals
are displayed as art, AIDS carriers are treated like innocent
victims, and homosexuals claim to want to marry. Can it be a surprise
that such a society cannot draw racial distinctions either? If
a crucifix in a jar of urine is art, then everything else we always
thought must be wrong. If a man can marry your son, a black should
certainly be able to marry your daughter.
The sturdy Christianity of our
grandfathersnot the mush that passes for Presbyterianism
or Methodism these dayswould have been a bulwark against
these things. And, who knows, it might even provide the social
framework Dr. Murray says is needed for great art.
Angela Weishart, Tampa, Fla.
SirIn his letter to the
editor in the April issue, Thomas Oleson writes, I would
like to see all illegal aliens deported and our borders closed
by whatever means necessary. Mexico, however, is a special case,
because it needs a safety valve to avoid chaos.
It is hard to see how chaos in Mexico could cause us anywhere
near the harm we are already suffering by the US governments
unconstitutional refusal to stop the current invasion. Some problems
really do have simple solutions: Enforce border law! This is just
as true whether or not Mexico is in chaos. It is not our job to
prop up corrupt Mexican elites, the same elites who promote invasion.
Besides, how in the long run does it help the Mexican people for
us to serve as a safety valve for a government that
is so corrupt and inept that it cannot otherwise survive? In the
final analysis, if we do not have the courage to defend our own
borders, no amount of cowardly fudging with half-baked guest
worker schemes and the like will save usnor should
Tom Andres, Sonora, Calif.
SirWhere did you get the
figures for Hispanic marriage rates on page three of the March
2004 issue (The Myth of Hispanic Family Values)? If
the source was Census Bureau data, the rates are probably too
My wife is an RN in the maternity
ward of a Massachusetts hospital, and one of the things she must
find out from patients is their marital status. Even though a
Hispanic patient may refer to a man as her husband,
when my wife asks if they are legally married, with a license,
nine out of ten times the answer is no. It appears
that Hispanics have a different concept of marriage from the rest
of us. If a couple has been living together long enough or has
children, they apparently consider themselves married.
Many Hispanics who claim on their
census forms that they are married probably arent. If they
will lie to a maternity ward RN about their marital status, whats
to stop them from lying on a piece of paper from the Census Bureau?
Marshall North, Belchertown, Mass.
• BACK TO TOP • •