PDA

View Full Version : South Africa's White Holocaust



Parzifal_
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 09:08 PM
Why is there so little interest in this forum on the future of South Africa's 7 million-plus whites? Every thread on the subject has met with little interest whilst the noses of Armenians and asses of Capoids are eagerly discussed (and with elaborate references to boot!). There is a holocaust there in the making and which has surely begun. The white tribe is largely of pure Nordic stock and barring the debacle of apartheid is now in a very genuine state of peril. This is unlike the situation in Israel/Palestine where both populations are essentially genetically similar, certainly in terms of IQ etc. Palestinians, whatever your bias may be, are of comparable intellectual potential (as borne out by statistics in the USA showing a very high social achievment index for the group).

In South Africa by contrast you have an overwhelming ocean of stone-age level blacks within which exists the white tribe. Blacks in South Africa are as savage and primitive, if not moreso, as anywhere else in Africa. Crime is part of the general culture and HIV is at epidemic levels. Whites have created a first world economy and infrastructure however with the transition of political power whites are now an economically priveleged yet maligned and politically underdog population. Objectively speaking, what does the forum think will happen to this white enclave in a few decades? Do you think that there is any hope for them as a European outpost severely outnumbered and outgunned?

Loki
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 05:38 PM
http://www.thephora.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7656

Business Day (Johannesburg)
OPINION
October 22, 2003
Posted to the web October 22, 2003

Dan Roodt
Johannesburg

Never before have the volk' been so weak, so divorced from their own language and so intent on self-annihilation

AFRIKANERDOM today represents a house divided against itself. Afrikaans newspapers reflect the internecine squabbles of a defeated people, some lamenting the decay of their language. Others accuse their fellow Afrikaners of racism, sexism and other platitudes of the new order with the zeal of the newly converted.

It seems amazing that only 10 years ago Afrikaners ruled SA, presiding over what was thought to be the most powerful state in Africa. Afrikaner scientists once built the atom bomb at Pelindaba, programmed missiles and performed pioneering heart transplants. They wrote poetry and composed symphonies in the modern style. They designed buildings and founded universities. They translated Homer, Vergil, Cervantes and other classics into Afrikaans and once possessed a lively literary culture.

With the best will in the world, even those sympathetic to Afrikaans and Afrikanerdom must acknowledge that both are rapidly decomposing.

Today everything Afrikaans has a moribund and sickly air about it; it reeks of the funeral parlour and the old-age home. In fact, the only people still able to speak Afrikaans properly are 70plus. One may delight in the articulate flow of their language, spoken with a pride and self-confidence that nowadays appear out of place, even a little mad.

Of course, most of them are disgusted with the new SA, its licence and crime, and complain endlessly of Afrikaner failure. They are old enough to have seen the rise and fall of their people.

Very soon "proper Afrikaans" will die out with this generation. In its place a new hodge-podge Afrikaans is coming to the fore, actively promoted by the media company ironically known as Nasionale Pers. Although founded as a patriotic concern in 1915, Naspers, or Media 24, is regarded by some as the greatest enemy of Afrikanerdom.

Its chairman, Ton Vosloo, once head of the formerly secret society known as the Broederbond, said last year that terms like "Afrikaner" and "volk" are repulsive and should be abandoned.

Once a figure of veneration in the pages of Naspers newspapers, the Afrikaner is now an object of disparagement and guilt. The editor of Die Burger, Arrie Rossouw, recently said that "apartheid caused AIDS". Rapport editor Tim du Plessis a few years ago compared his fellow Afrikaners to the Nazi camp commanders of Auschwitz and Dachau.

Something has gone decidedly wrong in the collective psyche of the Afrikaner.

In his study of cultures and civilisations, Arnold Toynbee spoke of "spiritual breakdown". One may call it a deathwish or cultural suicide but, like someone standing on a cliff looking to jump, it is sickening to behold.

Once seen as a conservative and disciplined people, Afrikaners have become prone to decadence and moral drift. This new Afrikaner is best exemplified by "Advocate Barbie", a young lawyer with breast implants and dyed blonde hair, who entertained her lover by taking home orphaned children for group sex.

Apparently Afrikaner men now have the highest suicide rate in the world. And there are regular reports of family suicides.

Younger Afrikaners are mostly jobless and poor, victims of affirmative action, as well as their parents' identity crisis and a high divorce rate. Increasingly anglicised and coming out of a deteriorating school system, they have difficulty speaking or writing Afrikaans. They are also ignorant, a sort of post- literate generation. They console themselves with rock music, which has been touted as the saviour of the beleaguered Afrikaans language.

One of the newer rock singers, Karen Zoid, was promptly seized upon as a political pawn of the new Broederbond, who subscribes to the notion that Afrikanerdom should cease to exist.

Not only does Ms Zoid, née Greeff, regularly muse: "I am not an Afrikaner", but she is most famously against any form of what she terms "breeding". Afrikaners should cease to procreate, is what she seems to be saying.

Demographic statistics seem to be indicating just that, with the average Afrikaner woman now only having 1,4 children far below the replacement rate of 2,1.

Canadian sociologist Heribert Adam describes contemporary Afrikanerdom as an "internal diaspora" floating like atoms above the landscape their forefathers had dared to call theirs.

In 1902 Lord Milner vowed to, as he put it, "eradicate the last vestiges of Afrikanerism from SA". Not only did he fail, but Afrikanerdom rose like a phoenix from the ashes to create a history that Mr Mbeki recently dismissed as "bad" while standing in the Groote Kerk, in Cape Town.

Whatever one's own political stance, being an Afrikaner today is certainly something to be ashamed of. Both the NG Kerk and the venerable ATKV, which once championed the Afrikaans language and culture, have prostrated themselves before African National Congress men in an almost histrionic show of loyalty to the current government.

NG Kerk spokesmen regularly talk about abandoning Afrikaans in favour of preaching to the multicultural faithful in English.

Afrikaners, despite the myth of their attachment to the African continent, have also been emigrating in large numbers to mainly English-speaking countries.

Never before have Afrikaners been so weak, so eager to please, so confused, so little able to speak or write their own language, and so eerily intent on self-annihilation. No doubt their many enemies in SA and overseas notably in Britain will be glad to see them disappear, as some of the recent ethnic invective against Springbok rugby player Geo Cronje has borne out.

Roodt is an Afrikaner author and commentator. He writes regularly on the www.praag.org website.

Eric34
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 07:41 PM
Here are 3 galleries about that South-African white people massacre...

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery1.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery2.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery3.htm

Tommy Vercetti
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 08:33 PM
Here are 3 galleries about that South-African white people massacre...

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery1.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery2.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery3.htm


pretty nasty shit :(

Telperion
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 11:26 PM
Apparently, the Blacks in South Africa are fond of saying to Whites, whenever they feel slighted by a White person, "Wait 'till Mandela dies..." - as in, "Wait until Mandela dies, then we will kill you all!". Anecdotally, one White South African police officer was told precisely that by a Black officer. :burn

The absence of reporting on this topic by the Western media is as predictable as it is disgraceful. There was an article in the April 10th Edition of 'The Economist' on South Africa, and reading it you'd think everything was right as rain as far as the status of Whites in South Africa is concerned (although they did make a token nod to the 'distressing prevalence' of violent crime - committed by whom, and against whom, they gloss over.) In other words, news about the status of South African Whites is :censored in the Western media.

The only 'good' news is that so many Blacks are HIV+, they are set to pretty nearly extinguish themselves at a rapid rate within the next few decades. The question is whether they will follow through on their plan to kill all Whites in South Africa (and adjacent countries) before that happens. You might want to look at Zimbabwae as an example of what is most likely in store for the White population of South Africa in the meantime (and note that Mbeki has nothing bad to say about Mugabe's misrule there).

bocian
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 11:39 PM
Apparently, the Blacks in South Africa are fond of saying to Whites, whenever they feel slighted by a White person, "Wait 'till Mandela dies..." - as in, "Wait until Mandela dies, then we will kill you all!". Anecdotally, one White South African police officer was told precisely that by a Black officer. :burn

The absence of reporting on this topic by the Western media is as predictable as it is disgraceful. There was an article in the April 10th Edition of 'The Economist' on South Africa, and reading it you'd think everything was right as rain as far as the status of Whites in South Africa is concerned (although they did make a token nod to the 'distressing prevalence' of violent crime - committed by whom, and against whom, they gloss over.) In other words, news about the status of South African Whites is :censored in the Western media.

The only 'good' news is that so many Blacks are HIV+, they are set to pretty nearly extinguish themselves at a rapid rate within the next few decades. The question is whether they will follow through on their plan to kill all Whites in South Africa (and adjacent countries) before that happens. You might want to look at Zimbabwae as an example of what is most likely in store for the White population of South Africa in the meantime (and note that Mbeki has nothing bad to say about Mugabe's misrule there).



RSA now has the highest rates of rape, and car theft in the world, and probably murder and AIDS as well. It's incredible how and why they want to kill all the whites. When whites ruled, it was a much better place for everyone, same thing applies to all former colonies in Africa...as soon as whites leave, chaos ensues.

Telperion
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 11:48 PM
RSA now has the highest rates of rape, and car theft in the world, and probably murder and AIDS as well. It's incredible how and why they want to kill all the whites. When whites ruled, it was a much better place for everyone, same thing applies to all former colonies in Africa...as soon as whites leave, chaos ensues.Absolutely right.

Parenthetically, Jomo Kenyatta, the founder of the post-colonial Kenyan state (previously a Mau Mau insurrectionist) was once quoted as saying,"I like the English - In England. The Whites must go. Africa is for the Africans." Of course, Kenyatta is regularly touted as one of the 'heroic' figures of post-colonial Africa.

Imagine what would happen to any European Prime Minister or President today who said "I like the Kenyans - In Kenya. The Blacks must go. Europe is for the Europeans." Naturally, he or she would be crucified...that tells you something about the agenda of those who control the mainstream press and academia today.

Eric34
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 10:55 AM
Here are 3 galleries about that South-African white people massacre...

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery1.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery2.htm

http://www.kkkk.net/southafrica/gallery3.htm

I took these picture-links on a popular nationalist forum too, but the moderator deleted them... He said:. "these pictures are too brutals." Uh, sure. A massacre pictures are always brutals...

Oskorei
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 11:11 AM
Why is there so little interest in this forum on the future of South Africa's 7 million-plus whites? Every thread on the subject has met with little interest whilst the noses of Armenians and asses of Capoids are eagerly discussed (and with elaborate references to boot!). There is a holocaust there in the making and which has surely begun. The white tribe is largely of pure Nordic stock and barring the debacle of apartheid is now in a very genuine state of peril. This is unlike the situation in Israel/Palestine where both populations are essentially genetically similar, certainly in terms of IQ etc. Palestinians, whatever your bias may be, are of comparable intellectual potential (as borne out by statistics in the USA showing a very high social achievment index for the group).

In South Africa by contrast you have an overwhelming ocean of stone-age level blacks within which exists the white tribe. Blacks in South Africa are as savage and primitive, if not moreso, as anywhere else in Africa. Crime is part of the general culture and HIV is at epidemic levels. Whites have created a first world economy and infrastructure however with the transition of political power whites are now an economically priveleged yet maligned and politically underdog population. Objectively speaking, what does the forum think will happen to this white enclave in a few decades? Do you think that there is any hope for them as a European outpost severely outnumbered and outgunned?
I think there is very little interest in the fate of SA Whites in most Nationalist groups. It is weird, since the propaganda-use of pics like those in this thread are sure to make at least some whites think a little about the nature of negroes.

At the moment there is very little hope for them I think, and maybe it is best that they migrate back to Europe. We could sure need their Nordic traits right now, and also we could need people who have seen the multiracial hell with their own eyes. Once we've secured Europe we can always return to SA with a vengeance. :chainsaw

Parzifal_
Monday, April 19th, 2004, 05:57 AM
I think there is very little interest in the fate of SA Whites in most Nationalist groups. It is weird, since the propaganda-use of pics like those in this thread are sure to make at least some whites think a little about the nature of negroes.

At the moment there is very little hope for them I think, and maybe it is best that they migrate back to Europe. We could sure need their Nordic traits right now, and also we could need people who have seen the multiracial hell with their own eyes. Once we've secured Europe we can always return to SA with a vengeance. :chainsaw
Let me repost a response from an earlier thread that petered out : http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=100147#post100147
"Only a fraction of the priveleged or highly skilled could afford to emigrate. How do you rescue 6-7 million people? To me the only reasonable alternative would have been to move en masse whilst in power to a zone within the borders of South Africa and claim it as a separate white state. The problem of course is that whites there did not think things through for the long term and make the sacrifice. They were comfortable with the subservience of blacks and the cheap labor force and did not think of their world in 50 years when the inevitable would take place. That eventuality has come to pass. Blacks are in power and all hell has broken loose. Now, as captives in a land of plenty that whites had created, all they can do is watch the dismal destruction of their first world accomplishment into a third world banana republic. Is it still likely that whites possess enough clout or will power to salvage things for themselves?

I forsee the white nation as becoming a historic memory in 50 years unless they achieve some means of self-protection now. Leaving for Europe is a nice thought but who will take in the burden of 7 million people? Maybe if they claim Jewishness Israel will open her doors. :D Actually Israel would LOVE an influx of Euro-genes under any pretext (thats what the Russian "Jewish" immigration to Israel is actually all about.) European genes are a precious commodity and the Jewish state knows that as have Jews throughout their long presence in Europe. For such a tenaciously self-loving group is'nt it interesting how freely they have been open to European miscegenation? Show me one racially self-hating Ashkenazi and I'll show you a liar."

mathydd
Wednesday, April 21st, 2004, 02:58 PM
http://www.amren.com (http://www.amren.com/)

This sight has a April 15 2004 article comparing Mugabe to Mbeki. Also the new
Amren paper has a front page about SA.

Parzifal_
Wednesday, April 21st, 2004, 08:04 PM
http://www.amren.com (http://www.amren.com/)

This sight has a April 15 2004 article comparing Mugabe to Mbeki. Also the new Amren paper has a front page about SA.Interesting articles. The problem is that Afrikaners have no systematic defense in place for the preservation of their way of life and for themselves as a racial stock. The ultimate ambition of the new dispensation is to inflict a humiliating revenge for apartheid. The idea is to break Afrikaner resolve by murder, economic deprivation, land grabbing, and a systematic phasing-out of Afrikaner culture. The last is the most dire threat since Afrikaner youth are susceptible to the inflections of the the popular media as in the USA....and guess who controls the media in South Africa? Lets not go there for now.

The idea is to also force a steady exodus of whites, Afrikaners in particular, so that the land will be fully in black hands. The Pan Africanist Congress, another old anti-white organization, revels in its slogan of "One settler, one bullet". Needless to say, if that happens, South Africa will become another post-colonial wreck with zero economy and zero ability to sustain itself in ANY way. Blacks have fought apartheid but ironically will full bellies thanks to superior Afrikaner agriculture techniques. They have struggled against it using all the first world resouces that Afrikaner ingenuity established in the pit of Africa itself. Should Afrikaners leave there is no doubt that the country will simply reverse direction and equilibrate with the rest of Africa within 15 years at most. At the root of this coming Afrikaner holocaust is the obvious unconnectable racial divide. It is a holocaust most certainly because Afrikaner identity is one with the land itself. Whites of British descent ambivalently still talk of their "right of return" to England and have NEVER fully embraced belonging to the new land unlike Afrikaners who speak of it as a "fatherland". Blacks are intellectually inferior and socially still in a neolitic frame of consciousness. One can not take a hunter-gatherer skin-clad people and evolve them to be with the rest of the world in 100 years. Evolutionary time itself will prevent that. There is simply no future in sight for Africans and their descendants except to be left to the slow processes of evolution. No where else in the world are Whites menaced by African racial retrogression as in South Africa itself. Without the military advantage Afrikaners are simply "sitting ducks". If Afrikanerdom collapses the irony will be indeed "No settlers, no country".

mathydd
Wednesday, April 21st, 2004, 11:46 PM
I know very little of the history of South Africa, I remember seeing a photo of a monument, I believe it was in Pretoria of Afrikaner "pioneers" with ox-carts in a circle defending themselves from the "savages". I was struck with the thought of how similar it was to the American pioneers pushing west, fighting the natives to make a better life for their people. I think they were called Voor Trekkers?

Dr. Solar Wolff
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 06:01 AM
Every time we come to South Africa and these Afrikaner people, I just want to attempt enlistment in some sort of militia there, especially after a couple beers. How hard can Afrikaans be to learn? These people gave the British all they could handle, twice. I will bet they have some weaponry left over from the Apartheid years. In my mind, these are the toughest people in the world and we should not count them out in open warefare, especially with Kaefers.

Parzifal_
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 06:45 AM
I know very little of the history of South Africa, I remember seeing a photo of a monument, I believe it was in Pretoria of Afrikaner "pioneers" with ox-carts in a circle defending themselves from the "savages". I was struck with the thought of how similar it was to the American pioneers pushing west, fighting the natives to make a better life for their people. I think they were called Voor Trekkers?
You know Mathydd, with that avatar, you look like an old time Voortrekker yourself! :D

Sword Brethren
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 06:46 AM
If you want in the Boer militia, contact me. I am in charge of the American branch of the SAFL militia.

Parzifal_
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 06:54 AM
Every time we come to South Africa and these Afrikaner people, I just want to attempt enlistment in some sort of militia there, especially after a couple beers. How hard can Afrikaans be to learn? These people gave the British all they could handle, twice. I will bet they have some weaponry left over from the Apartheid years. In my mind, these are the toughest people in the world and we should not count them out in open warefare, especially with Kaefers.
Open warfare is out. To annihilate the Afrikaners the government could simply foment and invasion by spear-carrying natives (I mean it!) into white suburbs and it would be all over. It doesn't take much to impel blacks in South Africa to kill. The culture is quite violent and psychopathic. Because that would not fly internationally the m.o of the new regime is one of "slow-kill". Of course the volk would fight till the last man but in truth there is no way to win a military war against empowered blacks. The capitulation of de Klerk was the end of Afrikanerdom politically. The USA pushed for it whilst allowing a true apartheid monster like Israel to thrive unfettered. How the present state of affairs benefits Washington is unclear but political idiots like mBeki will do anything to kiss ass with folks on capitol hill. The Afrikaner was however a different kettle of fish to deal with, one with his own sense of destiny. Maybe thats all it was about - control. The fact is that without the USA, the ANC stood no chance.

mathydd
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 03:07 PM
The United States undying support of Mandela was disgusting. The man was a communist who even condoned the slaughter of fellow blacks of the Inkata party. The British deserve as much if not more blame than the U.S. for the current situation. If the Transvaal and Orange Free State had been allowed to become an independant nation things might be different today.

Praxus
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 03:12 PM
Where was Mandela when those white South African farmers were being forcibly ousted from their own land? If Mandela had his way, he would of systematically killed all the white people in South Africa...but, of course, the liberal-Jew paints him as a hero just because he rotted in jail.

mathydd
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 05:10 PM
Whites in America as well as Africa have suffered from a mistaken belief in the need for cheap black labor. Slavery is clearly one of the gravest mistakes ever made by the American people seeing as how they now have a sizeable problematic black population to contend with. Perhaps the Afrikaner desire for cheap black labor was one of their mistakes also. They would have been better off trying to form an all White nation in Africa instead .

Parzifal_
Friday, April 23rd, 2004, 05:00 PM
Whites in America as well as Africa have suffered from a mistaken belief in the need for cheap black labor. Slavery is clearly one of the gravest mistakes ever made by the American people seeing as how they now have a sizeable problematic black population to contend with. Perhaps the Afrikaner desire for cheap black labor was one of their mistakes also. They would have been better off trying to form an all White nation in Africa instead .If they had any long-term vision they would have done exactly that. I still feel however that it does not take vision to recognize the dangers of coexistence with a neolithic people. Blacks are as a group, socially very problematic. They have no means of usefully integrating into and contributing to a high order of society. They simply do not have the IQ to manage that. The criminalization of black culture is a worldwide phenomenon except in parts of Africa (like the Ivory coast) where, left to their own ways they find a peaceful mode of life....perhaps. In the rest of the world, they fail in any competition of worth with other races and devolve to crime and parasitism.

Afrikaners should have known that but yes, they took them in as cheap labor and felt justified biblically in doing so. That oversight is costing them everything now. If blacks were forced into neighboring Zimbabwe in the early 1900s and the borders sealed in concrete there would be zero problem today. The truth is that today the white South African lives in barbed wire prisons, sleeps poorly and is hunted the moment he leaves his home. He fears for the safety of his kin and has a tortured psychology. He knows not when the "swaart gevaar" (black threat) will claim him or his as the next victim. It is an untenable state of affairs. There can be no possible future there now. War is pointless and logistically unfeasible. The Afrikaner should call it quits, focus all his energy on a new homeland, and work vigorously to emigrate with all of his people. Where might that new homeland be? Former Soviet republics in dire need of Nordic genius and agricultural skills? Europe is out of the question. There is simply no place. South America someplace? Albania?? My guess is Eurasia - vast tracts of fertile unused and underpopulated land and vast mineral resources.

Razmig
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 01:12 AM
If Norway is for Norwegens, South Africa is for Africans.....
Not that I condone any negroes harming honest white immigrants into the nation, but If your going to be a bleeding heart preservationalist, you have to realize "sticking your nose" into another persons continent doesnt seem to make sense if your going to point the finger at them for not wanting you on their land.

Loki
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 08:11 AM
If Norway is for Norwegens, South Africa is for Africans.....
Not that I condone any negroes harming honest white immigrants into the nation, but If your going to be a bleeding heart preservationalist, you have to realize "sticking your nose" into another persons continent doesnt seem to make sense if your going to point the finger at them for not wanting you on their land.

You have to realise that vast swathes of South Africa were inhabited by white settlers even before the black tribes moved southwards. The Cape is one example. Of course, the San and the Khoi (Capoids) were there before both black and white, but they are nearly extinct now. Black and white met "officially" at the Fish River in the eastern Cape, a long stretch away from Cape Town. The white Dutch pioneers colonised unchartered and uninhabited territory. Of course, they also eventually drove out some black tribes in an expansionist exercise - but this was mainly because they were fleeing unfair British rule at the Cape.

But I understand your point completely. I am a South African by birth, and I am willing to say that South Africa (and all of sub-Saharan Africa) should go to the black Africans completely, if all blacks would leave Europe. That would be about an even swap demographically.

Of course, we'll have to face the consequences to nature then, also. For starters, it is a sure thing that the African rhinos will go extinct in maybe less than 5 years if all the whites are gone. The white rhino (Ceratotherium simum) would already have been extinct, had it not been for the preservationist efforts of the Boers/Afrikaners.

Razmig
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 12:41 PM
You have to realise that vast swathes of South Africa were inhabited by white settlers even before the black tribes moved southwards. The Cape is one example. Of course, the San and the Khoi (Capoids) were there before both black and white, but they are nearly extinct now. Black and white met "officially" at the Fish River in the eastern Cape, a long stretch away from Cape Town. The white Dutch pioneers colonised unchartered and uninhabited territory. Of course, they also eventually drove out some black tribes in an expansionist exercise - but this was mainly because they were fleeing unfair British rule at the Cape.

But I understand your point completely. I am a South African by birth, and I am willing to say that South Africa (and all of sub-Saharan Africa) should go to the black Africans completely, if all blacks would leave Europe. That would be about an even swap demographically.

Of course, we'll have to face the consequences to nature then, also. For starters, it is a sure thing that the African rhinos will go extinct in maybe less than 5 years if all the whites are gone. The white rhino (Ceratotherium simum) would already have been extinct, had it not been for the preservationist efforts of the Boers/Afrikaners.
I don't know much about the history of South Africa or Cape Town, neither does it matter if or if not the primitive tribes had or had not inhabbited those regions prior to European settlements. Like you've said, if all Europeans willingly leave Africa, all Africans should then be sent to South Africa. Europe is for Europeans, and not Africa. Argueably enough, all civilized nations in Africa were controlled by non Africans (Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, South Africa, ETC). It's enough that the whites have given blacks the gift of civilization (such includes the slaves brought to America, without such slave trading those people would still be living in bushes), I don't think the whites should be giving anymore (like, their women?)

mathydd
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 04:44 PM
There can be no possible future there now. War is pointless and logistically unfeasible. The Afrikaner should call it quits, focus all his energy on a new homeland, and work vigorously to emigrate with all of his people. Where might that new homeland be? Former Soviet republics in dire need of Nordic genius and agricultural skills? Europe is out of the question. There is simply no place. South America someplace? Albania?? My guess is Eurasia - vast tracts of fertile unused and underpopulated land and vast mineral resources.
The United Nations and world community in general would probably prevent an Afrikaner Nation from being formed in some other part of the world. The more I learn about the plight of the Boer people the more depressed about the situation I become. It sounds good to say that Europe should take them in or America, Australia, Canada, etc. but this still amounts to the end of their nation. The Afrikaner is no more a European than a white Canadian, American, or Australian is a European. They have a European style society and culture, but they are not European. I agree with you Parzifal that Open warfare is out of the question. ( Dr. Solar Wolff and Sword Brethren your hearts are in the right place, my first instinct is "take up arms and fight!" also but alas even if the cause was realistic, the family I now have to support would prevent my involvment.)

Parzifal_
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 09:01 PM
If Norway is for Norwegens, South Africa is for Africans.....
Not that I condone any negroes harming honest white immigrants into the nation, but If your going to be a bleeding heart preservationalist, you have to realize "sticking your nose" into another persons continent doesnt seem to make sense if your going to point the finger at them for not wanting you on their land.As Loki pointed out South Africa was uninhabited by Bantu speaking people when the Dutch arrived in 1652. It may have been a black continent but not the southernmost region. I take issue with this concept of racially defined continents but not regions. Your people, the Armenians, remembered the Turkish genocide a few days ago. It would be insensitive to say they deserved it for not being in their own country.

People move and have always done so. Even if the Bantu people were there when the Dutch arrived I would not change my position. I believe apartheid was responsible for much cruelty to black people and was often brutal and inhumane. HOWEVER...it represented a last ditch effort to maintain Afrikaner preservation and was never intended as a gross exercise in oppression. If blacks were in a minority there there would have been no apartheid. It was a reaction to a very real threat, a corralling of the volk against the surrounding black ocean. It was in sociological terms a very normal phenomenon at the root level. I maintain that Afrikaners ought to have had the foresight to create a secure homeland 100 years ago and forget cheap black labor. Had they done so they would still have attracted millions of Europeans seeking a better life willing to work the menial jobs in the beginning as in the USA. Heck, even bringing in Mexicans on work visas would have been better. The rich Arab states have 40-70% of their populations constituted by Filipino and Indians. The work permits are strict and there is no "black" problem socially.

The problem in South Africa is the problem of 2 very different racial types inhabiting the same land yet contributing very differently. Blacks there are consumers and propogaters. They do not have the wherewithall to build a 10 century civilization much less a 21st century one. The fact that it is a black continent has been exploited by those who seek Afrikaner destruction like the present black government (I use the word loosely, very loosely). It is used by people to gloss over historic fact and rationalize the destruction of a formidable folk. So thanks Razmig but no thanks. You don't have a clue what you are talking about with respect to South Africa and the situation there. Stick to Armenia, Turkey and Greece. Shad shenorhagal em.:stop

Razmig
Sunday, April 25th, 2004, 05:54 AM
As Loki pointed out South Africa was uninhabited by Bantu speaking people when the Dutch arrived in 1652. It may have been a black continent but not the southernmost region. I take issue with this concept of racially defined continents but not regions. Your people, the Armenians, remembered the Turkish genocide a few days ago. It would be insensitive to say they deserved it for not being in their own country.

People move and have always done so. Even if the Bantu people were there when the Dutch arrived I would not change my position. I believe apartheid was responsible for much cruelty to black people and was often brutal and inhumane. HOWEVER...it represented a last ditch effort to maintain Afrikaner preservation and was never intended as a gross exercise in oppression. If blacks were in a minority there there would have been no apartheid. It was a reaction to a very real threat, a corralling of the volk against the surrounding black ocean. It was in sociological terms a very normal phenomenon at the root level. I maintain that Afrikaners ought to have had the foresight to create a secure homeland 100 years ago and forget cheap black labor. Had they done so they would still have attracted millions of Europeans seeking a better life willing to work the menial jobs in the beginning as in the USA. Heck, even bringing in Mexicans on work visas would have been better. The rich Arab states have 40-70% of their populations constituted by Filipino and Indians. The work permits are strict and there is no "black" problem socially.

The problem in South Africa is the problem of 2 very different racial types inhabiting the same land yet contributing very differently. Blacks there are consumers and propogaters. They do not have the wherewithall to build a 10 century civilization much less a 21st century one. The fact that it is a black continent has been exploited by those who seek Afrikaner destruction like the present black government (I use the word loosely, very loosely). It is used by people to gloss over historic fact and rationalize the destruction of a formidable folk. So thanks Razmig but no thanks. You don't have a clue what you are talking about with respect to South Africa and the situation there. Stick to Armenia, Turkey and Greece. Shad shenorhagal em.:stop
LOL My point is simply that if your going to divide the human race, you cannot include settlements. True that I do not know much of South Africa, but the Armenians were killed in their own nation, so I don't see how that comparison makes sense. I'll keep my opinion to myself because perhaps your right, and perhaps I'm wrong...only because you spoke to me in Western Armenian. :D

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Friday, September 3rd, 2004, 05:33 PM
We need to save them and give them safe passage to Europe.

Razmig
Friday, September 3rd, 2004, 11:50 PM
We need to save them and give them safe passage to Europe.
Even Europes borders are diminishing or beginning to include non-European nations (Israel). WTF is Israel doing in European affairs!? ****! ;(