The Dangers of Incest

Famous photo.

These are often said to be men from the American South or from Appalachia, and the photo is often used to make fun of US White Southerners or hillbillies’ tendency to have sex with, marry and make babies with family members.

Actually the photo is from The Cape Horn region of South Africa (the whiter and more Dutch part of South Africa even today), and was taken around 1993 by Roger Ballen. These are two Afrikaner brothers. However, it is quite possible that their appearance is a result of inbreeding. Afrikaners have always been pretty “hillbillyish” as far as White folks go.

There are websites out there who will give you the names of the brothers, but I didn’t have time to look it up although I saw that information at one time recently.

For Starters, Let’s Have a ‘Reality Show’ That’s Really About Reality

Repost from the old site. This is basically a guest post by a young female college student in the US. It takes on Jews in a pretty serious say, so prepare yourself. My comments in bold brackets.

I Don’t Hate the Jews, I Hate Everyone, published in February on this site, was one of the most widely read and linked articles to have appeared on this blog so far. It’s been read over 2000 times so far.

Although it was published seven months ago, I continue to get hits for it to this day, and it is still being linked. Hotly controversial, the piece was vilified by many as anti-Semitic, while others praised it as anti-racist.

This dual view of the piece was exemplified by a spate of recent Indymedia posts of the article. Some of the commenters praised it as an anti-racist piece, and it was filed under “Anti-Racism” at one Indymedia site. Of course, that is how the piece was intended.

On another Indymedia site, it was attacked as “racist garbage” (probably by a Jewish commenter) and it was placed in the Hidden category as a violation of the terms of the site.

The fact that a single article can be portrayed as either anti-racist or racist, depending on one’s POV, illuminates how hard it is to for humans to objectively define anything, which is exactly what semiotics, poststructuralism, Derrida and the rest were getting at.

The article focused on a group of British former liberals and Leftists who have formed a movement that I called the “Pro-War Left”. Basically, the PWL is a British corollary to the US neoconservatives, albeit with some differences in etiology, political orientation (more leftwing), trajectory and history.

To this day, interestingly, there has not been one other article anywhere in the worldwide media that has explored the “British Pro-War Left” as a corollary grouping to the neocons.

I continue to receive mail about this piece. I don’t usually publish mail, but a recent mail I received about the piece had so many nice points that I have decided to publish it, albeit with my own comments interspersed. I will call the author “Anonymous”, since I don’t know if she wants her name published. The author is a young female US college student.

Here goes:

In regards to race, I personally don’t believe in the concept. There is no defined line along the spectrum of people to warrant such a dangerous theory, really. We could even go so far as to say each one of us is our own race making the whole point moot, and it is.

[RL: I don't agree. Clearly, one can make a case for 12 different races: Asian, East Indian, Caucasian, American Indian, Black, Pygmy, Hottentot, Negrito, Polynesian, Micronesian, Melanesian and Aborigine. Really, we could probably make even more if we want to start splitting.]

The concept seems to have been invented by some Europeans to make it easier to gain support in order to colonize, subjugate and enslave people.

[RL: Whether or not the modern concept of race was invented by Europeans in the 19th Century or not is not all that relevant, as humans seem to have been making distinctions like this for thousands of years.]

However, whether it’s a fact or not, we must acknowledge it because it’s with us, and I refuse to play the game that we should remove say, Affirmative Action, in an effort to erase the concept of race. That’s ridiculous. White men have had Affirmative Action since day one in this country by default, so it’s only fair that people of color and women have that protection as well.

[RL: This blog takes a nuanced stance on Affirmative Action. While I think it is necessary, it is not acceptable for less qualified members of certain races to be promoted over more qualified members of other races. And yes, this has been done a lot by the AA system.]

But back when race was being defined, with it came racism.

[RL: I will disagree and say that humans have always been racists; in fact, that the natural, normal state of man is a racist state.]

As race is a concept invented by “whites”, naturally the victims have always been people of color.

[RL: The victims of human racism have always been simply the "Other", which often was something as simple as the "tribe over that hill over there".]

The people of color also happened to live in lands the “white” people found attractive, and the darker folks seemed easier to enslave or conquer because of their lack of guns, germs and steel (yes, Jared Diamond).

And that byproduct called racism created movements like White Supremacy, Zionism, etc. All of these theories appeared noble and even Biblical, and all were based on the belief that the favored people were supreme in some way. The supremacism was portrayed in various ways, biologically, or even as victims (the “worst victims in history” theory used by the Jews, even though Zionism began long before WWII).

Americans, Israelis, Australians, white Africans, etc., are all just upholding the ideals of what is actually ongoing colonization. I do believe people are basically good, and the imperialists know this, so they must invent something that good people would support.

If you can tell a compelling enough story, and you know the components that are needed to make the story work, people will believe it. Religions are a testament to that.

Most people can’t or won’t believe their leaders are so capable of evildoing that they’d actually lie and kill for imperial reasons rather than “innocent” self defense. I mean, who wants to wake up one day to discover mommy and daddy are criminals?

I personally hated the day I woke up and realized that my leaders were doing this, although it didn’t actually happen in one day, but the realization built up to the point where there was one day when it all hit me. It dragged on for days, and now years – this realization that our government is an evil empire has made life very difficult for me to live here.

A pure capitalist society – a byproduct of ongoing imperialism and colonization – is absolute Hell. I feel that pain everyday, and most Americans feel it too yet they don’t realize that pure capitalism is the culprit. They think it’s just life. Capitalism is sold to us as one of the freedoms of democracy!

Funny thing is, you cannot have individual freedoms and democracy at the same time. If the majority doesn’t like your idea of freedom, you can’t have it! But any extreme system like pure capitalism is bound to be problematic.

People complain about dealing with bad customer service, or lack of choice of cable telephone services, or DSL/Cable connection, or bad customer service from conglomerates, or the loss of funding for social programs, the arts, education, or not having health care if they’re not employed by a corporation, or the ridiculous cost of college.

All of this is a product of pure capitalism, where maximizing profits goes above all else, even if it means people have to live in poverty or die. Oh well. They are just casualties of life, I guess, but as long as the corporation is making a profit, it’s all worth it, right? It gives people jobs, right? Except how do these corporations explain themselves when suddenly they send most jobs overseas?

Bizarrely, people still support that in some way or another, defending the company’s right to maximize its profits because, that is the American “dream” right? If only people would just stop and listen to themselves. They’ve been convinced that they don’t even deserve to be employed because it might get in the way of a company’s bottom line! That’s one amazing campaign!

I do want to preface the rest of this by saying that I don’t believe Jews would be naturally imperialistic or controlling if it weren’t for Israel.

[RL: Unfortunately, I am not so sure about that!]

The diamond industry is another story.

But support for Israel is one of those “things” that push most Jews to believe they are superior in some way, or at least more deserving. The campaign to support Israel is very well-done and extremely powerful.

In my efforts to learn more and more about Palestine/Israel, I discovered the fundamentals of colonization. They’re always the same, for the most part, so much so that it makes you wonder if there isn’t a book out there called Colonization Cookbook, Land Grab in Ten Easy Steps, and they’ve all used it.

They all do and say the same things – the European Christians said there were no people here in the Americas because they didn’t consider the natives human, the European Christians said what became Australia was terra nullius for the same reason, and the European Jews said that Palestine was a land without people for a people without a land, and on and on.

The colonists raised themselves to a higher status as a “race” and went from there. Agreements/treaties with the native people were continuously promised, then made, and finally broken.

The natives were eventually corralled into camps, reservations, Bantustans or ghettos, and the colonial violence against the natives continued until protests or a native insurgency eventually put a stop to it. But even after the colonization was halted, there was a tendency to start it back up again somewhere else, especially if our military-industrial complex is having a bad year or two.

Then the colonists either discover a new enemy or invent one. I do not believe Arabs/Muslims are behind the majority of our present day “terrorism.”

[RL: I respectfully disagree, but it depends on how you define terrorism.]

Regarding South Africa (SA), I have definitely studied that case. I was fortunate enough to meet a South African man who fought in the struggle and he told me lots of interesting stories. I also believe that the system of Apartheid and the State of Israel’s founding, both in 1948, is only slightly coincidental.

Cecil Rhodes and Herzl communicated and swapped colonization tips. And the largest stockholder of Rhodes’’ company, the DeBeers precious metals company, was Sir Ernest Oppenheimer. DeBeers is still owned by the Oppenheimers.

South Africa’s main industry at its founding was diamonds, and the diamond industry is now controlled almost entirely by Jews in diamond districts in New York, Amsterdam, Israel (20%), and other parts of the world. So the similarities between Israel and SA are no coincidence, it just remained hidden. Sadha, my South African friend, told me that it was the Zionist Jews who made dismantling Apartheid the most difficult.

I mean, why else did the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith work with and help the SA Apartheid government by spying and sabotaging anti-Apartheid movements in the US for many years? How did that help Jews fight “anti-Semitism”?

Of course, Israel and SA were partners for many years – note the arms deals, nuclear weapons, diamonds, etc. My theory is that Zionists finally agreed to let Apartheid fall because they needed the bodies to populate Israel, in order to fill the place because of the impending “demographics” issue.

[RL: Dubious. I realize that Jews have a lot of power in this world, but I don't think they have THAT much power, thank God, and it is not helpful to ascribe more power to the Jews than they already have. Anyway, I am not aware that a huge number of South African Jews headed off to Israel after the fall of Apartheid.]

A special city project was developed in Israel for the SA Jews, and many moved there. The SA Jews acted like desperate white folks, left to live amongst the now-freed savages.

[RL: It's a fact that many SA Jews, despite the fact that factions in their community played a significant role in dismantling apartheid, headed right out of SA as soon as Black rule took over.]

And despite the fall of Apartheid, the diamond industry is still exploiting Africans all over Africa.

Another issue is that Jews still control many industries that have immense power in this country and elsewhere.

For instance, they control the Entertainment Industry, the Mass Media, the Marketing of the Holocaust Industry, and US Middle East foreign policy (though not an industry per se). Such control is mostly to keep people’’s attention away from Israel until Israel carries out its goal of ethnically cleansing all non-Jews from Palestine, to make way for greater Israel.

[RL: I doubt it. The takeover of US mass media and entertainment by the Jewish elite (mostly accomplished from 1900-1930) was done for other reasons, not to keep people's minds off of Israel. In fact, at the time of the takeover, there was no Israel!

As far as why the Jewish elite decided to take over these industries and engaged in actual conspiracies to do just that in the US, that is a complex issue that is the subject of an entire post itself.

Jews took over the Holocaust Industry for a variety of reasons. Number one, clearly this is an issue of prime concern to almost all Jews. Another reason is more cynical - to facilitate Gentile support of Jewish causes and to perpetuate the notion of Jewish victimhood. Control over US Middle East foreign policy is simply being done out of sheer Jewish self-interest.

That's because Israel, the Jewish state, is central to US ME foreign policy. And let's not forget that the simple goal of making money for the Tribe runs like a river through each of these projects.]

Of all these industries, the Entertainment Industry shapes American opinion above and beyond any other. Just look at the way Arabs are portrayed in American films, or read the book Reel Bad Arabs by Jack Shaheen to see it spelled out for yourself.

Arabs are almost never portrayed in a positive light; the Arab is always a dirty, thieving, polygamist subhuman. Nowadays, he often plays the role of token terrorist. I am now taking a class called History of Film. In the reading for the class I came across this text:

Interestingly, the men who founded these companies (which are obviously still the major powerhouses in Hollywood) had a lot in common. They were all originally independent producers and distributors who climbed the ladder from nickelodeon operator and eventually outlasted the powerful MPPC.

Interestingly, they were all first generation Jewish immigrants with little education, yet in charge of the most significant form of mass entertainment in history enjoyed by a vastly Christian population.

Hollywood is still controlled primarily by Jews who are almost all Zionists, both liberal and right wing.

[RL: Actually, the Hollywood Jews are overwhelmingly male, secular, hedonistic, irreverent, and liberal to Leftist. Rightwing Jews are almost nonexistent in Hollywood.]

Take a look what happened to Vanessa Redgrave because of her part in the 1977 film, The Palestinians.

[RL: She was effectively blacklisted in Jewish-controlled Hollywood].

Due to Jewish control over Hollywood, that film was never shown here. Just try to get a Palestinian art exhibit or film shown in a major US city and see how far you get.

Paul Findley’s book They Dare to Speak Out deals with the Jewish Hollywood angle and many taboo topics along similar lines. The Jewish – Israeli Lobby is extremely powerful in the US. Recently, AIPAC has targeted college campuses. They are working closely with Hillel, the US Jewish college student organization. Both groups are promising to really ramp up the pro-Israel position on campuses this fall.

No group is perfect, and any group can be supremacist because we are all human; and I know that Palestinians are no angels, and neither are Muslims.

As an atheist, I could go on and on about the problems of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. But let’s take a look at another imbalance: note that people have no problem discussing Christian and Islamic Fundamentalism, but why the taboo about Jewish Fundamentalism?

Jewish fundamentalism – that’s exactly what Zionism is!

[RL: I don't really agree. There are many types of Zionism - secular Zionism, religious Zionism, ultra-Orthodox Zionism. It doesn't make sense to wrap the entire Zionist enterprise in the Jewish religion.]

You can’t even mention the phrase “Jewish fundamentalism” without getting horrific looks; nevertheless, Jewish fundamentalism surely exists. The dirty looks are testament to the power of the Holocaust Industry. This Jewish special privilege is allowing Zionists to get away with murder.

Right now, the Palestinians are absolutely the victims of Judaism as an imperialist, supremacist movement AKA Zionism, just as the native peoples of the Americas, Australia, Africa and parts of Asia were victims of European Christianity as an imperialist, supremacist movement.

The native peoples of those lands did not leave their lands to colonize, subjugate and ethnically cleanse people on another land.

They didn’t steal others’ land and then deny it, claiming the land was vacant or, if caught in that lie, try to justify it by calling it bringing democracy to the natives or civilizing the savages, or, best of all, claim that God had given them the land, as both the European Jews and European Christians claimed!

[RL: I have to disagree here. The notion that only European Christians and Jews have been colonizing other people is an especially pernicious myth that is drastically in need of busting.

Fact is, colonization has been going on all over the globe for, as best we can tell, 1000's of years. The examples of non-Judeo-Christian colonization and ethnic cleansing are voluminous and cannot be summarized in this comment bracket. Perhaps a subject for another post?]

So at least since history has been documented, the Europeans have had the upper hand in conquest and destruction, whereas others were simply either fighting back or left in the wake and rubble of former colonization efforts. Examples of this can be seen in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, parts of Asia, various oceanic islands, and of course the US.

[[RL: Well, I would agree that Europeans have been doing some of the more prominent colonizing in the past 500 years, but the rest of the planet has been colonizing away on their own during this same period; it's just that their efforts were usually on a smaller scale.]

The American people have an obligation to focus on Israel right now, to bring it to the top of the list as the worst atrocity being committed on this planet side by side with the war on Iraq and Afghanistan, even above Darfur.

[RL: I am going to strongly disagree. If the Israelis had treated the Palestinians in the past two years as the Arabs are treating the Africans in Darfur, the following a catastrophe would have occurred.

A catastrophe that looked like this: 1.3 million out of the 3.9 million Palestinians in the Territories would have been ethnically cleansed to Egypt or Jordan or wherever. The Israelis would have killed 120,000 Palestinians, often with extreme cruelty.

The Palestinians would have been herded into horrible refugee camps, where scores would have died every day of hunger and disease while the world dithered and Israel deliberately obstructed relief supplies.

Israeli soldiers and armed civilians would have gone a mass raping spree. Thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of Palestinian women would have been raped in this mass Rape-a-Thon. Many Palestinian women would have been murdered by the Jews after being raped.]

Zionists love to put the spotlight on Darfur because it helps their cause by pointing out that Muslims are always the bad guys, as though Christians and Jews have never done anything bad in the name of their religion.

The Israeli-Palestinian issue is of prime importance to Americans – the Iraq war is Israel’s war, and we’re fighting it for them and with them.

[RL: True in part, see my comments here on whether the Iraq War is "all about Israel" or not.]

US support is the only thing that keeps Israel afloat. By natural selection, Israel would have been gone by now if it weren’t for the extremely expensive American life support system and the very powerful Jewish Lobby.

So, although I hear people say Jews do not control the world, they do control as much of the world as they want.

[RL:I don't agree with that. My God, if the Jews were that powerful, God help us all!]

They don’t want the whole world, they just want Israel and they will work through the power of the US to hold back the world whenever it gets in the way. But what they do control is all it takes to control the world – America, America’s opinion, and America’’s veto.

As columnist Tony Judt wrote recently in the New York Times Review of Books, Israel is an anachronism, since colonization itself is archaic, yet there the Israelis are, milking an archaic system that should have been defunct by now.

And Americans are falling for it, because most have no idea what’s really going on over there. Why? Because of Zionist control of Americans’ opinions on Israel and the Holocaust by way of the Entertainment Industry, the media, and our Middle East foreign policy.

Because the Israel’s colonial system is an anachronism, we are starting to see some desperate measures by the Israelis. Like a passengers on a sinking ship, Israelis won’t give up the Israel ship until there is nothing left to hold on to, and they’’ll lie, kick, scream, and kill as it goes down, taking a lot of innocent people down with them.

And this scenario I cannot accept. Just as I would not have stayed silent during the Holocaust, or during the French colonization of Algeria, or during the US slavery or Jim Crow eras, or during Apartheid, neither will stay silent now in the face of Zionism, nor will I accept that Zionism is simply an aspect of human nature.

At some point, we humans to learn from past mistakes and rise above such greed and hate and become a better species, shouldn’t we? We have the capacity to do so; we just all need to take an active interest.

It’s unfortunate that politics has been lumped in with religion as a subject not fit for polite discussion. This is nuts. One of them, politics, represents direct reality.

[RL: Well, potentially, anyway. The Bush Administration has shown us that the marriage of surrealism and politics is feasible.]

The other, religion, actually represents mythology, not direct reality. But politics’ place as a taboo subject is certainly by design, and undoing that edifice may be the hardest task of all.

To start, I suppose we could have a reality TV show that is actually about reality.

Letter from India

I read your article India Is a Shithole, and I must say that you have been extremely lenient in criticizing my country. My name is V., I am an Indian (hate to be one but am) myself and read the comments of my fellow Indians, but I will be bold enough to say this, even if they kill me, for it is true – INDIA IS A SHITHOLE! I wanted to post a comment highlighting the veracity of what you had said but was unable to find the tab to do so. Hence I thought its best if you could put my remarks on your blog for me.

Please allow me to give you an in depth account of the same. On Dec 16, 2012 a girl was out with her guy friend at around 2130 hrs.

They boarded a bus, which as it is in this country are shitty and carry around the filth migrating from the Indian villages to its cities (or should I say shitties). In that bus were 5 guys who started passing lewd comments at this girl. When her guy friend protested and slapped the guy who did so, he was beaten up with iron rods and the girl was brutally raped, beaten, the iron rod inserted into her. Finally when these five ‘Indians’ had their fun, they threw the guy and the girl out of the bus after stripping off her clothes.

The usual events which follow such cases in India took place. The media hyped it; people protested right outside the Parliament. Everybody has been screaming for a very long time about the way rapes are spreading like an epidemic in this country. People have been demanding that the rapists be brutally executed. But let me tell you what will happen: sooner or later, the media will forget about this issue, the people will go silent and forget about it, no amendments will be passed, and in all probability, the rapists will be allowed to go scot free.

The mentality of Indians is what’s the most fucked up, Robert. People will blame the girl and say that its her fault that she left her house late at night and then say that its the kind of clothes that women wear that provoked the rapists. I feel like smashing the faces of such assholes; every day I just feel anger at my peoples retarded mentality! While our politicians do nothing, the people who are genuinely protesting outside the Parliament are being beaten up by the cops. The cops were not even provoked by the protestors!

Moreover a woman is raped every 20 minutes in India. This Robert is just the tip of the iceberg. The kind of social stigma that women in this country after being raped ensures that most of the cases are not reported. Incredible India?? My ass! I would like to make it very clear to the Indian men: “You fucking retards! Even if a woman is standing naked on the streets, it does not give you the right to touch her, grope her or pass lewd comments at her! Grow up or we’ll remain a 3rd world shithole!”

Another thing I’d like to go into detail is the Indian leadership. Our prime minister, the so called Dr Manmohan Singh, is a loser! A fucking coward! All he has given this country since his government came to power is fucking scams! Here is a list of a few:

- The 2G Scam
- The 3G Scam
- The Adarsh Scam
- The Commonwealth Games Scam
- The Coal Gate Scam

The way a leader reacts after a crisis has happened is extremely important. This piece of shit didn’t even make a statement to the Indian people or address us as to why such a state of affairs exists or that his government would hunt down those responsible.

You’d said in your article:

The Indian state exists only to suck up to the rich or in its human form to move up classwise and become part of the elite class. The state cares nothing about workers, consumers, the environment…Hell, about anything relating to the people.

You couldn’t be more right. The soul of the Indian people has been sucked dry by the leadership of leeches that lead us. I personally would like to gouge out the eyes of each of these politicians, break their necks and deliver unspeakable brutalities on them, however corruption
is so intricately woven into the system that it’ll neuter me even before I can think of striking it.

Have you seen the personality of our leaders? They must be like 7000 years old and with pot bellies. Whenever I switch on a news channel to watch how our politicians debate, I feel fucking embarrassed. They act like a bunch of rowdy fools with no regard for anyone’s opinions but their own, and the debate turns into a competition wherein each one is trying to drown out the others voice. Just switch on NDTV, and you’ll know what I’m talking about. The lack of civility is evident. In contrast when I watch the BBC, it a pleasure to watch Hard Talk.

Have you seen the condition of Indian roads (or rather the lack of them)? I am an avid biker, but if I even think of going for a long cruise on our roads, it’ll be like me dancing with the devil. There are no markers for speed breakers, and they pop out from the middle of nowhere. There are so many potholes, that if I think of speeding up or going over 50 kms/hour I will end with up fractured bones and my flesh ripped off.

To aggravate our misery, our driving sensibility kicks in i.e. no respect for pedestrians, overtake from the left or right as you please, never give an indication while switching lanes, and even if I do, I’m afraid the moron behind me will speed up as though someone grabbed his balls, and he’ll run me over.

I would now love to tell you about our ‘education system’ and about our ‘competitive exams’. Firstly please let me clarify that all the education system has not really succeeded in education anyone in this land of crap. Education means that people know that for civilization to exist, we must imbibe the principles, values and ethos necessary to ensure that the society not only remains civilized but also grows and flourishes. All the ‘education’ in India has managed to do is ensure that people are literate. If you ask an India what being polite, respectful or being politically correct means, he won’t know what the hell you’re talking about. The Indians who exemplify this as I said earlier are our politicians.

Why is the Indian system of education so dysfunctional? The short answer is that it suffers from government interference, which hobbles the system – primarily by constraining the supply of quality education. This it does by not allowing free entry and investment in education. By constraining the supply in face of increasingly high demand, the prices go up, the quality goes down and this opens up avenues for corruption. The high price allows the government to directly extract profits from the system – through rationing out the limited supply to favored groups in exchange for their political support.

The competitive exams in India are also geared towards this strategy. These exams do not test the suitability of the candidate to study a subject, rather they are designed to weed out 98% of the applicants. As a result what you are left with are the most diligent of the lot. Whether or not you teach them anything, they will be successful in the narrow domains of their specialization.

Good education should open ones mind to think logically and creatively, and make it able to process different kinds of knowledge. But by stitching students into tight subjects early on, buttoning these with monologue teachings and objective type exams, India does the opposite. This is often justified by using an old fixation, namely education must equal jobs.

Another thing that pisses me off is the way that we Indians take credit for the success of Indians who migrate to the states or to any other developed nation. If we can’t retain our own people and give them the resources to replicate their brilliance back home, then who are we trying to fool by saying that Indian possess genius?? People will do their masters from here, go abroad and do their PhD’s and if they try and come back here, they are told to go back as they are overqualified. I’ll give you an example; for a personality like Sunita Williams people in India celebrate her success. Why? Because her name ‘sounds’ Indian…Sunita. Not only are we uncivilized and uncouth, we are also hypocrites.

Trust me Robert, I could go on and on and give you the intricacies of how fucked up India is. When I raise my voice in my own country, people don’t give a shit. Hence I must go through you. The only thing that gets my people to act is foreigners telling us how fucked up we are
(This is true! I shit you not!).

You compared India to Ethiopia. Dude, I lived in Botswana for 3 years from 1995 to 1998. That country gained independence in 1966, we Indians in 1947. To date India does not have potable running water in its taps or 0 power cuts in its households, whereas when I was in Botswana, I could drink water right out of any tap, regardless, and not fear death from an infection. The same cannot be said about my country.

Risible bloody shithole!!

US Republicans and the South Africa Question

Repost from the old site.

It’s pretty common nowadays to call US Republicans racist. That is often true. After all, the South didn’t turn from Democrat to Republican after the Civil Rights Act was signed for no reason. Nixon’s Southern Strategy was explicitly racist, as were his Wars on Crime and Drugs.

So was Bill Clinton’s ending of “welfare as we know it” (done under extreme Republican pressure), and so is, in my opinion, the entire Republican war on federal government spending. Federal government social spending is so unpopular precisely because it is assumed that White families do not benefit from it and Blacks and Browns do.

To put it explicitly, the federal government taxes “hard-working Whites”, takes their hard-earned money, and gives it to Blacks and Browns who are “lazy, criminal, parasitical, hostile to Whites and a scourge upon our nation”. Or so it is constructed, in my opinion, in minds of tens of millions of White voters.

It is important to note that the rightwing trend for US White voters began in the 1960′s, with the new immigration bill that expanded the ranks of preferred immigrants from White Europeans to include non-Whites the world over (especially Asians and Hispanics). At the same time, the federal government passed many civil rights laws, primarily effecting US Blacks, but to a lesser extent also Hispanics.

Simultaneously, government social spending was dramatically increased with the advent of Medicaid, AFDC, food stamps, general relief, WIC, federal housing and Social Security for the disabled non-elderly. Around the same time, Black riots rocked our land and the US crime rate skyrocketed for largely unknown reasons. The increase in the crime rate was heavily driven by the skyrocketing crime rate of young Black men.

In the 40 years since, Black and Hispanic street gangs have become a blight on our big cities and have become so entrenched as to prove almost ineradicable.

Appallingly, the advanced country of the US was actually exporting vile and wicked street crime gangs to the backward, feudal, fascist nations of Hispanic Central America, notably Honduras, and especially El Salvador. These two nations, especially El Salvador, are now in the midst of a street crime wave that boggles the mind.

Here in the US, we are now in the midst of a wild, rollicking debate about illegal immigrants that pits the outraged average American against distant elites of both the US Democratic and Republican Parties. The Democrats love the illegal alien criminals because to oppose them, in PC lingo, is de facto racism. Also, the Democrats need the Hispanic vote.

The Republicans love illegal alien job thieves because they are a source of hyper-exploitable labor that has devastated the wage structure of many working class occupations in the West, especially California, in the last 15 years.

I bring all this up to point out to you to the salience of race in US politics. Most US Whites won’t admit to being racist, but the fact is that White racism has been the principal factor driving Whites towards conservative politics for 40 years now. Not that we are allowed to talk about it.

Now, there are a lot of conservatives that are not racist. I know this because I know these people. I would like to toss something out to these non-racist Republicans (including Black and Jewish Republicans). What exactly, I want to ask them, do you think about South Africa?

Do you realize that under the Reagan Administration, the US government supported South Africa to the hilt, against the will of virtually the entire international community?

Do you realize that those Republicans who were in the forefront of support for South Africa are still in power in the US Republican Party and include George Bush’s father, Dick Cheney and almost all Republican Congressmen who date back to the 1980′s?

We should allow people and political parties to make mistakes in life and we should accept their apologies.

I want to ask non-racist Republicans if they are aware that the Republican Party has never apologized for supporting South Africa, and that not one Republican politician, including Cheney and Bush Sr., has ever apologized for supporting that nation?

How do you feel about the fact that your political party supported apartheid 100%, has never apologized for it, and never will? Do you realize what apartheid was all about?

Keep in mind that our media gave us only whitewashed version of apartheid. How about, from this excellent comment on Daily Kos, the lowdown on what apartheid was really all about?

It was the white terrorist government of apartheid South Africa that declared Mandela a terrorist. There is no conundrum about Mandela vis-a-vis freedom fighter/terrorist. Repeat – no conundrum, no conundrum. Mandela fought the oppression and exploitation and land expropriation of South Africa’s 87% majority African population.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFICATION FOR APARTHEID, NONE, NONE, NONE. South Africa’s whites never bought a drop of land on any fair terms (they stole 99.99% of it), they never provided a sustainable land base for the majority black population.

Apartheid separated men into horrific labor camps in E Goli, Tshwane, E Tekweni, Cape Town and all of South Africa’s cities. Women were not allowed to stay with their husbands. Apartheid encouraged the spread of AIDS in its dying years. It planted false propaganda that AIDS was a western creation to keep Africans from reproducing. They took no action to educate about AIDS.

Apartheid South Africa created a dual economy trapping poor people in horrendous conditions in Bantustans; they built walls around their white homes and kept Africans in “their place”. They stirred up ethnic conflict by dividing Venda from Tshangan from BaPedi, from Zulu from “coloured” from !Xhosa.

There is no way under God that there is any construction of anything Nelson Mandela ever did that was terrorism. Each and every white voter of apartheid South Africa declared war and terror on the African majority EACH AND EVERY TIME they voted for the National Party.

Forced Removals was terrorism. The Bantustans project was terrorism, the labor system was terrorism, funneling weapons to the IFP was terrorism. Mandela was NEVER, NEVER, NEVER a terrorist, He reacted to a terrorist state. And a terrorist state that DICK Cheney supported. This is why I so hate Dick Cheney and am confident that his space in hell is reserved.

Wow, reading what apartheid was really about, an inescapable conclusion becomes clear. I read major US newspapers (Los Angeles Times) read major US newsmagazines (Time and Newsweek) and watched US TV News (CBS, NBC and ABC) during the apartheid tumult of the 1970′s and 1980′s.

Never once was the real story, portrayed above, spelled out for me. Instead, as I recall, the issue was obfuscated with moral relativism to the point where you could not tell the good guys from the bad guys. Barring other theories for now, is there no other conclusion other than that the US media (as described above) is profoundly White Supremacist, or at least was 15-30 years ago?

Anyway, back to my Republican friends. Do you support apartheid? Do you realize that if apartheid existed today, the US Republican Party and almost all Republicans would probably support it, based on past conduct? Does this bother you? If so, why do you vote Republican?

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

Repost from the old site.

This is one of the more hot-button issues surrounding the Israel/Palestinian conflict. The very issue has aroused horrible controversy on the heavily Jewish and Zionist-dominated Wikipedia, as you can see by the preposterous, typical allegations at the top of the page.

This is what Jewish activists do to any issue that criticizes the Jews or Israel – unleash a torrent of lawyerese garbage, threats, attacks, character assassination, logical fallacy, red herrings, ad hominem, diversion, phony comparisons, you name it.

The Zionist Jews on Wikipedia are up in arms over the Israeli Apartheid article and have been attacking it for over a year with everything they have. It’s amazing it is still up there.

But meanwhile, let’s examine the issue itself. Is Israel an apartheid state? Shall I count the ways? Thanks to the anti-Harry’s Place blog, Jihad and the City, for these facts.

*****
1. Israel: A separation wall tears communities apart and steals land. Furthermore, inside the Green Line, abhorrent “Judaization” policies are pursued in Arab districts, which involve surrounding Arab areas with Jewish settlements.

South Africa: Bantustans were set up for the Black natives, comprising about 10% of the land, while the Whites stole almost all the rest (similar to Israel, where 93% of the land – mostly stolen Arab land – is reserved for Jews only) .

2. Israel: In West Jerusalem, Jews wait for government services in short waits in air-conditioned rooms. Arabs in the same area (East Jerusalem) must line up overnight in hopes of getting seen that day. When the office opens, they must wait outside for hours in the heat before they get the main gate, where they are endlessly grilled for what should be routine document examination. Many times, they go home with nothing.

South Africa: In Johannesburg, Whites, Coloreds and Blacks were sent to separate entrances of government offices and were given services or not depending on their skin color – Whites had the shortest wait, then Coloreds and last Blacks.

3. Israel: In East Jerusalem, Palestinians have strict regulations regarding who they can marry, where they can live, where they can go to school and where, or if, they can go to a hospital. Jews face no such restrictions.

South Africa: There were identical restrictions based on who one could marry, where one could live, attend school or go to a hospital. It was all based on race.

4. Israel: Palestinians in East Jerusalem, many of whom were born there, are nevertheless classed as immigrants with “permanent resident” status and are denied citizenship in Israel.

South Africa: Similarly, most of the Black population were denied citizenship in South Africa and were labeled as immigrants in the cities and states they resided in. Most were said to be citizens of the Bantustans, but many of them had never been to these Bantustans,

5. Israel: Israel is now the only Western country that denies building permits based solely on race.

South Africa: Construction permits were issued or denied with race being the only criterion.

6. Israel: Urban planning (Judaization) has had the goal of trying to eliminate Arabs from Israeli cities or relegate them to slums. This is especially true in East Jerusalem, where the gross inequality, a product of exquisite state design, grows each year.

South Africa: Similar to Judaization, the “group areas” policy had the effect of trying to make Blacks invisible by moving them away from White districts.

7. Israel: As noted above, through the Jewish National Fund (Jewish Microsoft billionaire and all-around jerk Steve Ballmer is a major contributor to the JNF) and the Israeli Lands Agency, Israel has reserved 93% of Israeli lands for Jews only. Much of this land was stolen Arab land, and the Arab owners were never compensated for it.

South Africa: 87% of South African lands were reserved for Whites (compare to the 93% figure above for Israel). The Population Registration Act lumped South Africans into racial classes that determined who would be permitted to live on White-reserved lands.

8. Israel: Israel has separate school systems for Jews and Arabs, ostensibly due to language differences, but actually as a cover for state-mandated discrimination in schooling. As an example, Jewish schools receive far more funds than Arab schools.

South Africa: Separate but unequal school systems were an essential part of the system, designed to siphon Blacks off into menial labor in the mines, factories and fields. The school system has yet to recover from this dual system to this day, though Apartheid has been history for over a decade.

9. Israel: Israelis who marry Palestinians are not allowed to bring their spouses to live with them inside the Green Line.

South Africa: Until the Komani Ruling in the mid-1980′s overturned the pass laws, these laws were used to break up Black families by preventing spouses living in rural areas to unite with their spouses working in urban areas.

10: Israel: Part of the dominant paradigm underlying Zionism is that the Jews are a people chosen by God and that their Holy Books justifies their racism and exclusivity. Many Israelis see their victories in four wars against the Arabs as meaning God sided with the Jews against the Arabs.

South Africa: Similarly, the Dutch Reformed Church also used the backwards, tribal and barbaric (Jewish) Old Testament to claim superiority for the Afrikaners. Based on their victory over the Zulus at Blood River, they believed that God had sided with the Whites against the Blacks.

11. Israel: The victimized population has been demonized as terrorists to justify the Apartheid policies. Israel blames the victims for the oppression that Israel hammers them with. Israel absolves itself of all charges of Apartheid and immorality by blaming the victim.

South Africa: The South African regime did the exact same thing, calling the Blacks oppressed by Apartheid terrorists and blaming the victims for the misery that Apartheid saddled them with.

12. Israel: Israel represents itself as the last outpost of civilization, democracy and Western Values on the frontiers of (Arab, African, Middle Eastern, Islamic = non-Western) barbarism and dictatorship.

Nevertheless, bizarrely, instead of being compared with the West that Israel aligns herself with, Israel demands to be compared with the backwards non-Western societies she is surrounded with and with which she is defending the West against. Chutzpah!

South Africa: South Africa also represented herself as a last outpost of civilization, Western values and democracy amidst Black African barbarism, backwardness, dictatorship and just general non-Western values.

Similarly, South Africa also refused to be compared with the West she aligned with and demanded to be compared with the backwards African societies that surrounded her and against whom she was defending the West.

13. Israel: Israel is building a network of parallel roads in the West Bank – one much superior road system for Jews, one vastly inferior road system for Arabs.

South Africa: South Africa maintained a very similar system of dual roads for Whites and Blacks.

14. Israel: The Security Wall is actually also intended to grab quite a bit of land from the Palestinians. Israel’s colonization policy in the West Bank has been all about grabbing the best land and most all of the water for the Jews and relegating the dregs to the Arabs.

South Africa: Similarly, Apartheid was all about grabbing the best land for the Whites and pushing the Blacks into the least livable and serviceable parts of the country.

15. Israel: The Israeli state, both inside and outside the Green Line, is continuously seizing, destroying and bulldozing Palestinian homes, fields, orchards, businesses and lands in order to give them to Jews or use them as “security buffers” to protect Jewish colonists from the people the Jews stole the land from.

South Africa: Although this went on to a much lesser extent in South Africa, there were population relocation programs that involved the destruction of Black property.

David Hirsch, a fave Zionist Jewish academic from Britain, is one of the point men in International Zionism’s war against the Israeli Apartheid meme. He is a professor of sociology at Goldsmith’s College at the University of London. He played a leading role in the reversal of the British AUT Teachers Union decision to boycott Israeli academics.

Although he is an ardent Zionist, curiously, he is also a specialist in genocide. No, he doesn’t advocate genocide, he supposedly opposes it. That’s the curious part.

International Zionism has unleashed the usual torrent of bullshit, nonsense, lies, dissimulation, sophistry, lawyer-speak, politician-speak, Pravda-style propaganda, and the usual Jewish avalanche of logical fallacy all in an attempt to fight off the notion that Israel is an apartheid state.

A good overview of this very clever silliness, in which all 15 points above are brushed aside in favor the numerous differences between Israel and South Africa, can be seen in the Wikipedia piece, which the Wikipedia Jews have now “protected from editing”. That means that no one can do any more work on the article until all the phony Jewish complaints have been resolved, if that ever happens.

The Death of Johannesburg

Although of course I opposed apartheid, supported the ANC and the transition to democracy, let’s face it. It hasn’t all been peaches and roses, now has it? On balance though, I would say that it was the right thing to do. One man one vote is the only way to go. Apartheid, racist rule by a tiny minority, was just wrong, period, whatever benefits it may have had for whoever.

Sometimes doing the right thing causes more problems than doing the wrong thing. In that case, as a Western Christian, I would still say that we should do the right thing anyway for no other reason than to do the right thing. Doing the right thing is proper and correct in and of itself, regardless of whatever consequences flow from that decision.

Besides, the notion that Blacks lived in paradise under apartheid is highly dubious!

Reading through the comments, many of which are racist, one point keeps getting hammered home over and over. The nonracist side of me cringes when I hear it, but nevertheless, all arguments should be entertained in the quest for truth. Just because an argument is racist doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Sadly, racist arguments may indeed be correct even if the people making them are bad people.

The argument is that Blacks not only cannot create higher civilization in the first place on their own, but when handed a higher civilization created by another group (typically Whites) in a matter of time, a few decades or less, they pretty much unravel that advanced civilization and turn the place into a dirty, dangerous, chaotic, polluted, unhealthy slum. Those pictures in that video could be of Detroit, East St. Louis, Camden, Newark, Chicago’s South Side or Oakland.

Whether or not Blacks are civilization destroyers once they become a majority is an interesting question, but once one accepts the premise just for the purposes of argument, one still wonders at the reason.

One argument is IQ. However, the US Black IQ is ~87. That’s certainly high enough to create stable civilization. The African IQ is controversial. One paper says it is only ~69. In that case, civilization wrecking would seem to be par for the course. Yet a new study puts the African IQ at ~80.

I am not sure if that is correct, but if it is, that should be high enough to create a functional society. After all, the Moroccan IQ is 82, the Indonesian IQ is 79 and the Qatari IQ is 78. All of these peoples have produced more or less functional societies with ~80 IQ’s, so an 80 IQ should be plenty enough to create a working society.

Another argument is high testosterone. High testosterone may explain higher Black crime rates until age 33. Would Black crime alone in and of itself be enough to completely unravel civilization in that way we see in Detroit and in the video? Isn’t there more going on there than just crime? At any rate, Black women commit little crime, and after age 33, Black men’s testosterone is lower than that of Whites. Surely Black women and older Black males ought to be able to create functional societies as they don’t have testosterone to blame.

At the end of the day, the arguments just don’t seem to be make sense. The, yes, racist argument that Blacks are civilization wreckers in at least quite a few cases stings, but even non-racists must wonder painfully if it’s true. Yet that arguments put forward for why Blacks dismantle civilization seem to lack explanatory adequacy.

Even more painfully, let us suppose that Blacks have civilization dismantling properties. Are they doomed to do this forever and ever? Is there any hope for Blacks? Are admixed Blacks (mulattos, zambos, etc.) also likely to do this? If so, do they do it at the same rate or a lesser rate?

I’m sure that quite a few Black people like to live in chaotic, filthy, disordered, and dangerous places. On the other hand, we have Black commenters and authors on this site who are as repulsed by these places as I am.

Before attacking Blacks wholesale for dismantling civilization, let us keep in mind that the primary victims of Black civilization dismantling are Blacks themselves. Other races suffer from the downside of this unraveling at a dramatically reduced rate. As Blacks dismantle civilizations, they inflict an unbelievably horrific cost of suffering, pain, illness and death on their very own kind. That right there is as sad as a bottomless well. That Blacks are the primary victims of this entropic impulse makes it even more imperative that we get to the bottom of it.

How Capitalism Causes Crime

In the comments, Aakash writes:

RL: “You get a lot of good with capitalism – I would admit that. You also get a lot of bad, and one of the bad things is crime.”

Indeed. Excessive capitalism has the potential to breed excessive yearning, competitiveness, envy, resentment and passion among people across class barriers. Combine that with a proclivity to obtain gratification via short cuts (which is all too common nowadays) and it is no surprise that crime pretty much rises with a rise in capitalism.

Even the libertarians and gun owners agree to that. Why the hell would they even need more guns otherwise? It is obvious that they expect crime to rise with increasing deregulation (which is the same as increasing capitalism).

This fact has really hit the capitalist fanboys on this blog hard. There’s a real problem with people who love capitalism – they will never admit that there’s anything wrong with their precious system.

What’s wrong with saying that there are a lot of good or even great things about capitalism, but there is also a serious downside, one aspect of which is crime? You want all the goodies that comes along with capitalism? Fine, a lot of us do. But then you’re going to have to accept all the crime that goes along with it.

Leavening capitalism with doses and layers of various forms of socialism tends to reduce the crime that capitalism generates. Socialism preaches solidarity and equality, and a society run on those lines often does not have a lot of crime. Making society more equal reduces feels of envy, frustration and rage and fewer people feel like losers and failures. A more equal society has less crime. A more unequal society has more crime.

Deep down inside, people believe in fairness. They don’t think a few folks should be stinking filthy rich while tens of millions of others wear rags and live in shacks. People are going to redistribute wealth one way or another! You can either have the state do it or if not, people will just take matters into their own hands and redistribute it themselves via crime.

Capitalism preaches competitiveness, and anything for a buck, but don’t break the law, wink wink. Yet people do break the law under capitalism, and the motivation is typically the desire to make a buck, or a lot of bucks, or to strike it rich. A society run on the basis of self-interest and unrestrained greed will cause tons of crime, especially theft.

Blacks do seem to have a tendency to violence and crime if we look at the group as a whole and not individuals. But socialist societies have attenuated that tendency. In Mozambique under Samora Machel’s Marxist regime, you could walk from one end of Maputo to the other in the middle of the night and no one would bother you. Try that now.

It would seem that Blacks don’t do well in societies that are highly capitalist. Due to a variety of factors, they tend to fall behind other groups in the race for the bucks and the success. This leads to society labeling them as losers and them seeing themselves as losers. They get frustrated with falling behind and try to get, by hook or by crook, the cash and success that America preaches anyone can get one get.

I quit watching TV. One commercial after another tells me I’m a loser because I’m not rich. “Why aren’t you rich?! Why aren’t you rich!? Loser! Loser!” That’s what those endless commercials tell me. I have a lot of self-control, but others don’t.

Obviously capitalism causes tons of property crime, but what about violent crime? This is much less clear, but a lot of violent crime is also related to theft or money in some way or other.

White Nationalist Lies About Portugal and the Dangers of Mulattoization

Here is a typical lie that the White nationalist scum tell about Portugal and the dangers of Whites interbreeding with Blacks:

Portugal – Once a 16th century world power with colonies around the world – moor/negro slave interbreeding after 400 years has left it with a 40% illiteracy rate. The most backward country in Europe. Slow mongrelization without a shot being fired.

Well, guess what? It’s just not true. The Portuguese are not a mongrelized or mulatto people by any stretch of the imagination. Overall, the Portuguese are about 3.5% Black. In the South and Far South it is a lot higher, with some of the highest rates in Europe at around 5%.

Look, there is no way on Earth that 3.5-5% Black DNA in White genes is going to jack to your population. More Black genes than that? Maybe so. Whatever happened to Portugal, it had nothing to do with introgression of Black genes.

Another one of their lies talks about the greatness of “White Egypt.” Except there never was any White Egypt, scumbags. There was an Arab Egypt. You know, Arabs, those inferiors? And even the great Arab Egypt had ~12-13% Black genes. The glory of ancient Egypt shows that at least in the ancient world, one of the greatest societies the world ever produced was accomplished with a fair amount of Black genetics and mulattoization.

You know how these scumbags like to talk about the glories of great White South Africa? Guess what, fucktards? Those great White South Africans you love so much are 11% Black by genetics. There have even been cases of two White parents producing a child who looks pretty mulatto.

Let us look at the Arab World. The Arab World has gotten a lot Blacker over time with the introduction of Black slaves via Islam, but there was no corresponding degeneration of society. In fact, at the moment, the Blackest parts of the Arab World are the wealthiest of all.

Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Kuwait have quite a bit of Black genes in their populations. Percentages generally range from ~13-17%. But these are some of the wealthiest countries on Earth, with First World health and developmental figures, spectacular architecture, suburbs that look like Phoenix and a stunningly low crime rate, especially for violent crime.

So moral and economic degeneration of your population via low levels of mulattoization (~15% Black genes) is not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination.

In fact, in recent times, we have few to no cases of mass mulattoization of any population anywhere on Earth. Show me one great, prosperous White society anywhere on Earth that degenerated into a moral and economic basket case in modern times due to mulattoization. Show me one, one, one, one.

Show me one in the Caribbean. One in South America. One in Central America. One in the Arab World. One in Africa. One anywhere.

Not that I think that mass introgression of Black genes into a White society is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Instead I think it is nothing much to worry about, since it doesn’t seem to be happening anywhere on Earth, which is probably a good idea.

South Africa: A Marxist Analysis

From here.

One very nice thing about Marxist analyses of various capitalist societies is that they explain so many things.

I’ve seen other analyses of South Africa that didn’t seem to explain the situation very well.

The standard is “the Whites oppressed the poor Blacks and wasn’t it terrible.” Well, of course that tells us a lot, but does it give us the whole story? No.

How about the White point of view? Whites build the nation into a great nation and now the Blacks are destroying everything the Whites built. Well, ok, this tells us some things.

How about the White nationalist analysis of the situation? The Blacks are waging genocidal war on us and trying to exterminate us via a racial war. I’m not even sure if that’s correct, forget explaining anything.

The Marxists like to say that it all boils down to economics. What’s an economic analysis of South Africa look like?

Something like this below. It’s interesting because he talks about capital accumulation. I don’t understand it very well, but under capitalism, you need capital accumulation. Capital accumulation is acquired iin various ways, but one of the best ways is to oppress your working class as much as possible. The more your keep your working class down and the less you pay them, the more capital is accumulated via the capitalist class via capital accumulation.

So it appears that mass repression of the working class is necessary for capital accumulation, which is one of the building blocks of a capitalist economy. If that’s true, and it seems that it is, well, what’s so great about that? Most of us are just workers. Why should we support a system that has as its building block the mass repression of our class. What’s the point of that?

And if capital accumulation is not built on the backs of workers, how then is it to be accomplished?

The analysis below is also interesting because it suggests that the motivation for most farmer killings has been robbery rather than some genocidal project.

I don’t think that anyone would seriously want a return to apartheid if they understood that the present intensified pauperization of a significant portion of Black South Africans is a direct consequence of the forces of global capitalism. The ANC rejected the Freedom Charter in favor of neoliberal ideology and the majority of South Africans have paid a bitter price.

Apartheid was a form of capitalism that was calculated to use the White Afrikaner working class, impoverished by British imperialism, as a means for the Afrikaner landed aristocracy of super rich farmers (a tiny minority) to make inroads into industrial capitalism which was controlled in South Africa by English speaking Whites of mostly British ancestry.

Apartheid also served to produce a significantly accelerated capital accumulation because the workers could be paid a lower wage than was required to reproduce the workforce, a luxury not available at the time to European and North American capital. This was because the wages of the workers were subsidized by the rural landholdings of their families in the Bantustans.

By the 1980s it became apparent that Apartheid was no longer an efficient means of capital accumulation and the leading members of the business elite went behind the governments back and did a deal with the ANC at a meeting in Lusaka, Zambia.

In short order, Mandela was released from prison, the Freedom Charter was rejected in favor of neoliberalism, and the ANC came to power with no intention of making the fundamental socioeconomic policy changes required to provide justice for all in South Africa.

A few blacks were co-opted into the white bourgeoisie, became board members of large corporations and joined the ranks of millionaires while very little changed for the majority. Neoliberal globalization was a far better way of exploiting the people of South Africa than Apartheid.

The result today is incredibly high unemployment amongst Blacks and a high crime rate which has led to the murder of a great many White farmers. What the neo-Nazis don’t tell you, however, is that the Black murderers are equal opportunity murderers and will kill Blacks as readily as the kill Whites if there is material gain to be had from the murder.

Murder Capitals of the World

People assume that murder capitals of the world would have to look like Detroit – more or less bombed out ruins. Not so at all. Some of the world’s murder capitals:

Belize City, Belize
Georgetown, Guyana
Johannesburg, South Africa

If you go to any of these places or look at them on Google Earth, they don’t look anything like Detroit at all. Georgetown and Belize City look pretty nice, plenty of pretty old Victorian houses. Johannesburg is nothing like a bombed out wreck at all; though clearly some areas are terrible, nevertheless, many neighborhoods look very good.

South Africa reportedly recently set a world record for homicides – going over 100 per 100,000. That’s 10/10,000 and 1/1,000. Imagine that. In a small town of 15,000 people, 15 of them would be murdered every single year. Every year, you would probably personally know one of the murder victims.

The 100/100,000 rate seems to be some sort of a ceiling effect. Once you go that high, you really can’t go any higher in peacetime. If it does go any higher, you probably don’t even have peacetime anymore, you have something like Somalia – warlordism with warlord gangs going at it all the time. Whatever the Hell that is, it’s not really peacetime anymore. Since South Africa hit that ceiling effect, the homicide rate has been declining.

All of these cities, of course, share a high% Black population. The epicenter for Georgetown’s homicides is Tiger Bay, 100% Black.