A certain status quo has settled in to the daily SA political chatter in the past decade or so. White journalists on every major platform in South Africa have adopted a jaundiced outlook on civil rights organisations like Afriforum and independent commentators critical of black nationalism. They insist that the genocidal rhetoric, violence, and public antagonism engendered by the revolutionaries shares moral equivalence with the demand for security and human dignity coming from their victims.
In order to avoid any semblance of allegiance to the Afrikaner community, long deemed philistine second-class settlers by Anglo writers and journalists going back to the early days of the 19th century, journalists like Chris Roper, Adriaan Basson et al, have drawn disparaging caricatures of the desperate efforts of the rural white minority to draw attention to their plight. Equally, the media seems keen to dismiss Coloured activists who rebel against both the Anglo-dominated DA and the black supremacist ANC.
The Cape Coloured Congress, formerly known as Gatvol Capetonians, rough round the edges though they have been, are fully in their right to be angry. Despite being the majority ethnicity in the region, and the original inhabitants of the Cape, they are only allocated jobs in their native territory according to the overwhelmingly black demographics of the rest of the country, meaning a population of 2/3rds of the Western Cape is allocated only 9% of the jobs in the formal economy. I have much repeated the problem of state-sanctioned gang violence destroying the Coloured communities and the theft of land by black interior migrants. This is news to white and black audiences, but not Coloured ones.
Afrikaners have the privilege of falling under the umbrella of the collective protection and advocacy movement Solidariteit, but nevertheless are seeing their language purged from every institution in the country. Even in private schools it is taught that Afrikaans is a language of oppression, and in former Afrikaans universities like Stellenbosch, it is even forbidden to speak Afrikaans in private. Private schools are now teaching that white people are all irredeemably evil and black people are blameless for hating them under the guise of modern CRT “diversity” training, as Richard Wilkinson has been reporting on in great detail. Those who try to draw attention to farm murders are still mocked and accused of racism.
Silence in the face of predation is the only desired response. Anglo journalists tend to put ethnic minority complaints and accusations into sarcastic scare quotes, and sneer at their attempts to assert a modicum of dignity in the land of their birth. There is an assumption that Anglo journalists and commentators are representative of all minorities, and their friendliness to radical progressive and ethno-majoritarian politics generally is taken to be a validation of that system of political domination. “I’m not oppressed, I’m privileged” - yes you are, but not for the reasons you claim.
This isn’t the first time that members of a minority defended those who would destroy them. Today, the history of the Third Reich is a central narrative of our global, westernised world. It defines the zero-point of evil in secular politics. And yet much of the finer details which may provide the most salient lessons today are forgotten. Foremost is the unavoidable similarity between the openly genocidal rhetoric and thuggish militant mob politics of the EFF (and ever more so of the ANC), which is deliberately ignored since, as every smug university educated intellectual knows, “black people can’t be racist”.
A more recherche character with much to teach us here is the creature known as Max Naumann. Naumann was a German-speaking Jew who saw himself as a German patriot. At the time, the Jewish population was divided between the cosmopolitan semi-integrated German-speaking population, and the Yiddish-speaking population, who were frowned upon by the German Jews, and their language regarded as a backwater jargon which deserved to die out. Some German Jews embraced the notion of Zionism, and sought a homeland as a defensive position from which to escape persecution, and their representation as a minority stateless group at the League of Nations gave hope to many, especially Yiddish Jews.
Europe at the time, unlike after WWII, was a patchwork of ethnicities not corresponding cleanly to any borders. For centuries, Jews, unlike most Europeans, were generally educated, and consequently far wealthier on average than gentiles. Gypsies, descended from Indian nomads, were illiterate, insular, and had a reputation for thieving and fraud. Both groups consisted of between 5 and 10% of the population in central Europe, and were broadly discriminated against, and blamed for all kinds of social ills, particularly the Jews, who were thought to be part of a grand conspiracy to dominate Christian Europe through its banking system. They were often subject to violence, though they were mostly tolerated in major cities, where liberal cosmopolitan society reigned.
Like many German Jews, Naumann looked down on the Yiddish as divisive and dangerous. He regarded Zionism as a form of extremism that ought eventually to be expunged, in favour of an assimilationist position. Those who did not show loyalty to the German nation in its rising wave of anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist fervour, did not deserve to be a part of it and had to be coerced. He founded an organisation called the Association of German National Jews, and supported the rise of Adolf Hitler, right up until the very point of his assumption of power, after which his senses began to get the better of him, and he found himself a critic, albeit a mild and tentative one. And like many critics of the Nazi regime, he was bundled off to a concentration camp in 1935, where he died of cancer, just before WWII broke out.
The unanimity of support for the National Democratic Revolution and its violent fantasies, justified by demands to make sacrifices to the community, whose only true representatives are black, is common among English-speaking South Africans, especially those with university educations. In most major newspapers, support for land reform and Marxist economics, or even MMT (aka Mugabenomics) is the limit of the allowable discourse, and the failures of the NDR and forced integration and black supremacy can only be chalked up to “bad apples”, never the ideas themselves. “Redress” (revenge) is seen as a moral imperative, and any who resist comprehensive race-based dispossession are treated as cowards with a congenital case of white fragility.
Like so many German Jews, these Anglos have foreign passports, and while continuing to trumpet the revolutionary ideals of our deranged regime from their comfortable seats overseas (for example, Andrew Feinstein), they refuse to acknowledge the consequences or live through them, preferring the preening esteem they receive from fashionable and civilised circles of cocktail-sipping London society.
Faced with the inevitability of the coming ANC/EFF coalition in 2024, they seem to desire to position themselves to both be in support of the 2nd phase of the NDR, and against its inevitable consequences.
We have often called these people “virtue-signallers”, but all they signal to me is cowardice and spite.
"Like so many German Jews, these Anglos have foreign passports, and while continuing to trumpet the revolutionary ideals of our deranged regime from their comfortable seats overseas (for example, Andrew Feinstein), they refuse to acknowledge the consequences or live through them, preferring the preening esteem they receive from fashionable and civilised circles of cocktail-sipping London society." Truer words have never been penned Robert!
These people are the real problem on the front of propaganda...they keep the machine smooth and they are rewarded for pushing the propaganda.