The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
The American Architects of the South-African Catastrophe
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Yes, it has happened. A mere 23 years after the 1994 transition, in South Africa, to raw ripe democracy, six years following the publication of a wide-ranging analysis of that catastrophe, Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa, a Beltway libertarian think tank has convened to address the problem that is South Africa.

The reference is to a CATO “Policy Forum,” euphemized as “South Africa at a Crossroad.” One of the individuals to headline the “Forum” is Princeton Lyman, described in a CATO email tease as having “served as the U.S. Ambassador to South Africa at the time of the transfer of power from white minority to black majority.” At the “Forum,” former ambassador Lyman was to discuss “America’s original hopes for a new South Africa and the extent to which America’s expectations have been left unfulfilled.” (Italics added.)

The chutzpah!

The CATO Institute’s disappointment in the South Africa the United States helped bring about is nothing compared to the depredations suffered by South Africans, due to America’s insistence that their country pass into the hands of a voracious majority. Unwise South African leaders acquiesced. Federalism was discounted. Minority rights for the Afrikaner, Anglo and Zulu were dismissed.

Aborted Attempts at South African Decentralization

This audacity of empire is covered in a self-explanatory chapter of Into the Cannibal’s Pot, titled “The Anglo-American Axis of Evil,” in which Lyman makes a cameo. (It’s not flattering.) From the comfort of the CATO headquarters, in 2017, the former ambassador will also be pondering whether “growing opposition will remove the African National Congress [ANC] from power.” The mindset of the DC establishment, CATO libertarians included, has it that changing the guard—replacing one strongman with another—will fix South Africa, or any other of the sites of American foreign-policy interventions.

So, what exactly did Princeton Nathan Lyman do on behalf of America in South Africa? Or, more precisely, who did he sideline?

Ronald Reagan, who favored “constructive engagement” with South Africa, foresaw the chaos and carnage of an abrupt transition of power. So did the South Africans Fredrick van Zyl Slabbert, RIP (he died in May 2010), and Dr. Mangosuthu Buthelezi. The first was leader of the opposition Progressive Federal Party, who, alongside the late, intrepid Helen Suzman became the PFP’s chief critic of Nationalist policy (namely Apartheid). The second was Chief Minister of the KwaZulu homeland and leader of the Zulu people and their Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). At the time, Buthelezi was the only black leader with any mass following who could act as a counter to the ANC. These men were not “lunch-pail liberals” from the West, but indigenous, classical liberal Africans—one white, one black—who understood and loved the country of their ancestors and wished to safeguard it for their posterity.

Both Buthelezi and Slabbert had applied their astringent minds to power-sharing constitutional dispensations. Both leaders were bright enough to recognize democracy for the disaster it would bring to a country as divided as theirs; they understood that “a mass-based black party that received enough votes could avoid having to enter into a coalition and could sweep aside the minority vote.” Thus, Buthelezi espoused a multi-racial, decentralized federation, in which “elites of the various groups” would “agree to share executive power and abide by a system of mutual vetoes and spheres of communal autonomy.” Paramount to Buthelezi was “the preservation of the rights of cultural groups and the protection of minorities.” Slabbert studied a “new system that entrenched individual rights, encouraged power-sharing through a grand coalition of black and white parties, and gave a veto right to minorities in crucial issues.”

Although he eventually threw his intellectual heft behind simple majority rule, in better days, Slabbert had spoken with circumspection about “unrestrained majoritarianism,” expressing the eminently educated opinion that, were majority rule to be made an inevitable corollary of South Africa’s political system, the outcomes would be severely undemocratic. It’s worth considering that even Zimbabwe for its first seven, fat years of independence, allowed “white members of parliament [to be] elected on a special roll to represent white interests.”

Washington Destroyed South African Federalism Before It Began

In his tome, Partner to History: The US Role in South Africa’s Transition to Democracy (2002), Princeton Lyman, the American Ambassador to South Africa from 1992 to 1995, records the active role Americans performed in the transition to democracy, especially in “dissuading spoilers”—the author’s pejorative, it would appear, for perfectly legitimate partners to the negotiations. One such partner, introduced above, was Buthelezi; another was military hero and former chief of the Defense Force, Constand Viljoen.

Avoid “wrecking the process”: This ultimatum was the message transmitted to the Afrikaner general and the African gentleman, loud and clear. The United States, with Lyman in the lead, failed to lean on the African National Congress (Nelson Mandela’s goons) to accommodate a federal structure. It promised merely to hold a future South African government to its “pre-election commitments, including shared power and the protection of minorities.” Until then, the skeptical Buthelezi was instructed to trust the ANC to relinquish the requisite power. Enraged, Buthelezi threatened to take his case to the American people and “spotlight” the knavish confederacy between their government and the ANC. (Then, Republicans were generally with Buthelezi, Democrats with the ANC. These days, both parties are with the ANC.) Being the man Prime Minister, F. W. de Klerk was not, Buthelezi rejected the pressure and overtures from the West. “I am utterly sick of being told how wrong I am by a world out there,” he wrote to Lyman. The dispensation being hatched was “an instrument for the annihilation of KwaZulu.”


Viljoen, who represented the hardliner Afrikaners and the security forces, believed de Klerk had abdicated his responsibilities to this electorate. He planned on leading a coalition that would have deposed the freelancing de Klerk and negotiated for an Afrikaner ethnic state. Likewise, Buthelezi, whose championship of self-determination had been denied, was fed up to the back teeth with being sidelined. He and his Zulu impis (warriors) were every bit as fractious as Viljoen; every bit as willing to fight for their rightful corner of the African Eden. For setting his sights on sovereignty, the Zulu royal and his following (close on twenty percent of the population) were condemned as reactionaries by the West (and by CATO’s point person).

Hardly a dog of an American commentator missed the opportunity to lift his leg in protest against Buthelezi, for making common cause with Afrikaner decentralists and against the ANC. “Wreckers” is how the gray eminence of American newspapers—The New York Times, also known as “Pravda on the Hudson”—dubbed the two leaders and the millions whom they represented. The two, alleged the Times in a 1994 editorial, were locked in an “unscrupulous alliance to disrupt the first elections in South Africa in which all races will have a vote.” Following the might-makes-right maxim—and committing a non sequitur in the process—Times editorialists demanded that the leaders of these African and Afrikaner ethnic minorities relinquish demands for sovereign status because their political power was at best “anemic.” Meanwhile the Times dismissed Buthelezi as a puppet in Pretoria’s blackface minstrelsy.

This was drivel. Buthelezi, a crafty leader who had rejected “the ignoble independence accorded to other homelands” within apartheid’s framework, was never a collaborator. Understand: For two centuries Africans and Afrikaners had been clashing and alternately collaborating on the continent. Shaka (1787–1828), Dingane (1795–1840), Mpande (1798–1872), Cetshwayo (1826–1884)—Buthelezi was heir to these Zulu kings who had been wheeling, dealing, and warring with Boers well before the inception of The New York Times.

Masters of mass mobilization, the ANC used the political tinderbox ignited in the ramp-up to the first democratic elections to great effect in discrediting the security forces, and claiming that the apartheid government was fomenting the intra-ethnic violence between Inkatha (Zulu) and the ANC (Xhosa). But while the ANC accused the security forces of arming Inkatha, the latter faction blamed the security forces for allying themselves with the ANC, especially when Zulu hostels and squatter camps were raided in response to ANC pressure. For the National Party government, the ongoing ethnic conflict was a lose-lose proposition.

But not for the savvy ANC.

Nelson Mandela harnessed the situation by accusing Prime Minister de Klerk of “either complicity or of not caring enough about black deaths” to stop black-on-black violence. The foreign press helped fuse fact with fancy by transmitting this claim, later to be dismissed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (That body eventually determined that there was “little evidence of a centrally directed, coherent and formally instituted third force.”) Nevertheless, a constellation of unfavorable circumstances was aligned against Buthelezi, who capitulated in the end.

Buthelezi was the intellectual bête noire of the communist ANC — and one of the few leaders in South Africa to mine the Western canon widely and wisely for what it teaches about liberty and the dangers of centralizing political power. He cited with characteristic passion and poignancy, in July 2009, a poem (“The Second Coming”) that W. B. Yeats wrote in January 1919:

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned …

In contrast to what South Africa became, the United States is a country where the constitution was supposed to thwart the tyranny of the majority. This averting was meant to occur by means of a federal structure, in which powers are divided and dispersed between— and within— a central government and the constituent states. Yet the Americans sided with the ANC—the consequence of which has been the raw, ripe rule of the mob and its dominant, anointed party.

Ilana Mercer is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) & Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow her on Twitter, Facebook,Gab & YouTube channel.

• Category: History • Tags: Apartheid, South Africa 
Hide 90 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. anarchyst says:

    Apartheid was put in place to keep the normally warring tribes from decimating each other. As a result, South Africa became one of the most economically stable countries in Africa. Despite the so-called “evils” of apartheid, there was a large influx of immigrants into South Africa. Food was plentiful. Apartheid was able to “keep the peace” and was successful until communism’s “inventors”–the leftist jews (despite having arms agreements with South Africa) helped dismantle apartheid. The rest is history . . . South Africa is a “basket case”; its white farmers (producers) are being murdered. Farms that have been “appropriated” by blacks are being looted–not usable for farming anymore because anything of value is being sold for scrap.
    If one good thing comes of this, it will be the deserved “retribution” placed on the South African leftist jews for being a major part in destroying this once-prosperous country.
    I, for one would welcome the emigration of South African whites to the United States. However, current immigration laws do not apply to whites who wish to immigrate to America. Only third-world non-whites need apply . . .

  2. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Maybe it would have been better to partition South Africa. The white population might have made a go out of a small homogeneous state for themselves while allowing the African populations to sort out their own affairs with the rest of the land.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @Wally
  3. @anarchyst

    I am surprised at your saying in effect that black South Africans would be accepted as immigrants when white South Africans wouldn’t.

    Do the laws/rules governing the Green Card lottery discriminate?

    Apart from that, which would only account for a small part of the immigrant numbers, I guess, what are the laws/rules that discriminate?

    • Replies: @Che Guava
    , @Bill Jones
  4. Wasn’t the great mistake of South African white governments to treat blacks as all permanently unsuited to joining and maintaining modern civilisation, even the Afrikaner dominated South African version? If they had got hold of the smartest 25 per cent of kids for a good education and then treated them as equal citizens on graduation and getting a job would they have had to worry about a Communist influenced ANC? To keep up appearances they would probably have had to have limited suffrage. All existing white voters could vote plus those with the stipulated educational or professional qualifications and others who satisfied a property test such as used to be common in the Anglosphere. But of course SA was not really Anglophone and that may have been a severe handicap.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  5. It of course is quite possible that also in S Africa the USA brought democracy and human rights, with the usual results, as in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libia, etc.
    On the other hand, why could Singapore become a prosperous nation, and why did not any black nation become prosperous ?
    How stupid S Africans are one saw recently, admission to universities was going to be limited.
    Widespread student agitation.
    They are unable to understand that sociologists, and degrees in politicology, produce nothing.
    In W Europe there is the same problem, competent technical employees are scarce.

  6. @anon

    The economic means still are in the hands of non black people.
    Mandela understood this very well.
    The present idiots who have political power shout ‘a bullet for a Boer’.
    It maybe is going to resemble Sudentenland etc., after the expulsion of the Germans the economies collapsed.
    ´Als die Deutschen weg waren, Was nach der Vertreibung geschah: Ostpreussen, Schlesien, Sudetenland’, 2005, 2007, Reinbek, Adrian von Arburg, Wlodzimierz Borodziej, Jurij Kostjaschow, Ulla Lachauer, Hand-Dieter Rutsch, Beate Schlanstein, Christian Schulz

  7. @anarchyst

    Rhodesia is, I think, the example of how a prosperous country collapsed without whites.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    , @rpdiplock
  8. Realist says:

    Perhaps you should explain your father’s role in the down fall of white South Africa.

  9. The US government officials leading the effort to support the transition in SA were no doubt of a mindset that the US federal system is deeply flawed. SA was their chance to show the world a better way. Never mind all that historical crap you cited: It’s all flawed because it emanates from White European Males.

  10. Ex-Saffer says:

    Upside-down clown world: Libertarian, crypto-Randian organ the Cato Institute helps install hardline Stalinist kleptocracy.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  11. Not a single line here of South Africa and BRICS. Hmmm.

  12. One of Scottish philosopher, David Hume’s French pals warned him when he took in and befriended the crazy, exiled J.J. Rousseau — “You are taking a viper into your bosom” Robert Mugabe, Nelson Mandela, Barack Hussein Obama — what do they have in common? Vipers! They snookered guilt-ridden, rich white lefties into giving them power, fantasizing how wonderfully equal everyone would be when they were done. Rhodesia to Zimbabwe, Detroit, circa 1950 to Detroit, 2017 — racial resentment and revenge at its best. Obama’s damage was not as extensive as that of the two thugs whose modus operandi he emulated, but he faced more constraints. Is Trump a temporary reprieve from America’s forced march to Zimbabwe? Who knows?

  13. Jason Liu says:

    To be fair, I think the ANC (or any dominant party) would have destroyed any federalist structure even if they had been set in place. You’d be surprise how few people outside the West care for “checks and balances”.

  14. jack ryan says: • Website

    Wasn’t the total surrender hand over of White South Africa to ANC Black misrule, wasn’t this done under President George HW Bush?

    President Bush I was my most disappointing President. I didn’t expect much of anything good from Bush II, or Clintons and Obama.

    I seem to recall Mr. and Mrs. Bush I scrambling to get to the international publicity photo ops with Nobel Peace Prize winner Nelson Mandela and Mrs. Mandela, invite them to White House Dinners.

    Mrs. Mandela personal beat an 8 year old boy to death.

    What does some Bush Connecticut Yale WASP type wear to a White House Dinner party with ANC Black Communist terrorists that beat little boys to death?

    • Replies: @druid
  15. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Apartheid was the south-african catastrophe.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    , @anon
  16. This article would make more sense if it were titled “The American Communist Architects of the South African Catastrophe”.

    The US communist are all democrats, neocon-Zionist, democrat socialists, and all diversity-and-inclusion ideology spouting fruitcakes.

  17. Agent76 says:

    April 26, 2017 The Globalization of War. America’s “Long War” against Humanity

    America’s hegemonic project in the post 9/11 era is the “Globalization of War” whereby the U.S.-NATO military machine –coupled with covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime change”— is deployed in all major regions of the world. The threat of pre-emptive nuclear war is also used to black-mail countries into submission.

  18. TG says:

    Yes, but missing a key factor.

    Both the white minority government, and the current ‘democratic’ black government, are using massive immigration from the rest of South Africa to drive wages for the many into sub-poverty levels, while boosting profits for the few. And any black South African who complains is a ‘racist’ (sound familiar?).

    I’m not defending apartheid, but South Africa used to be pretty prosperous, and even blacks did not that bad. That means that wages were relatively high, which means that profits were less than they could have been. So the white majority did what corrupt oligarchies always do: they imported massive numbers of foreign nationals to drive down wages.

    If they had not, and South Africa had remained prosperous, perhaps some more workable transition to something better could have been arranged. But nothing good happens when people are losing their jobs and increasingly unable to support their families…

    The western press has largely edited this away, but many of the ‘anti-apartheid’ riots were anti-uncontrolled immigration!

    As with so many elites, short term profits of cheap labor come at the expense of long-term stability. Ask the elites of the Ivory Coast, that also used to be prosperous, they imported vast numbers of muslim refugees, until they had doubled the population, and the resulting poverty tore the country apart in a bloody civil war…

    Demographics, and how the elites manipulate it via immigration, is one of the most powerful forces affecting the fate of nations. And the one that has been almost banned from public discussion.

    Ask the ghost of the Roman emperor Valens, who imported all those Goths to lower his military labor costs…

  19. …Beltway libertarian think tank has convened to address the problem that is South Africa.

    The reference is to a CATO “Policy Forum,”

    Yes, we all know that CATO bills itself as “libertarian,” but that’s another laughable fraud.

    The description, “libertarian” as used here, is about as meaningful as the laughable labels, “left” and “right” when applied to present day gangsterism.

  20. Jake says:

    This subject is another in the endless line that mark how the problems we face originate with at least the Elites of the culture that most of us adore and assume would save the world if only it were in charge.

    From whence came this hatred of South Africa? Who first decided to punish South Africa to bring it to heel, as defined by the punisher?

    The original WASP Elites: the ones in the UK. The British Commonwealth isolated South Africa and named it pariah. The original WASP Elites rounded up the leaders of the Anglosphere to pile on South Africa, and eventually they – the original WASP Elites of the UK – got the Americans on board.

    Those of you who fancy that some kind of return to WASP leadership and WASP values will save you are bassackwards. WASP Elites directing WASP culture are the very reason we are here, about to be tossed into the cannibal’s pot.

    Yes, Jews have benefitted from this cultural suicide far more than any other group, ethnic or religious. But they did not start it. They merely saw the opportunity to profit wildly as WASP Elites went on their merry way arranging for cultural suicide.

    Of course, WASP Elites have never really wanted suicide – certainly not for their class. What they have always wanted is the deaths of all other white Christian cultures that refuse to capitulate and assimilate. Working class English used to take great comfort that their WASP Elites hated not them but the Irish, Scots, and Welsh, and the other white trash, like Poles and Italians and Iberians.

    The WASP Elites will always ally with non-whites and non-Christians against all white Christians. What WASP Elites have done to South Africa is what they plan to do to America.

    • Replies: @Wally
  21. @anon


    Apartheid allowed South Africa to remain a beacon of the white race.

    As the great Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd noted, integration really means disintegration–the disintegration of the white race.

    If the Afrikaners made any error it was their willingness to exploit blacks as cheap labor rather than inducing them to emigrate.

  22. @jilles dykstra

    Au contraire … Rhodesia went out on top. It’s the wayward stepchild Zimbabwe that is a basket case.

  23. Che Guava says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    As you may know, the initial wave of Dutch immigration roughly coincided with one from the North.

    The Boers, as far as I can see from historical records, didn’t make a huge point of wiping out the genuine natives, although the invaders from the North (in Africa) were keen on it.

    Also for rape, gigantic bums and huge thighs, a result for some descendants .

    So the Brits had the Zulu wars (invasion from the north) and the Boer war (as any reader of history would know, very vicious).

    As always, Ilana dodges the central question of her own Rabbi father’s role.

    • Replies: @druid
    , @Priss Factor
  24. MarkinLA says:

    If one good thing comes of this, it will be the deserved “retribution” placed on the South African leftist jews for being a major part in destroying this once-prosperous country.

    No, they just use their Jewishness to run to Israel and then the US.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
  25. Illana Mercer’s rabbi father was a leader in the anti-apartheid movement. They were kicked out of South Africa because of this.

    • Replies: @druid
  26. @MarkinLA

    “Mercer is also an assumed name. Her father’s surname was Isaacson. A rabbi, he was a stout voice for the new South Africa of murdered farm families and ANC ‘big men’, enough so that he exiled himself, with Ilana in tow, from the old govt.” copied from comment 16 in

    It’s getting harder and harder to find certain pieces of history on the internet. I am good at doing internet research but was ultimately reduced to pulling this up.

    It’s my personal opinion that Mercer pere knew full well the genocidal state that his ANC sympathies would ultimately create. Like any rat on a sinking ship he got out while the getting was good.

  27. druid says:

    Two points:

    Apartheid was not created to keep potentially warring parties apart. It was pure unadulterated racism and economic favouritism in the interest of white.

    Immigration during Apartheid was only for whites from European countries and the other colours and races were tolerated as third class and worker-bees, mostly living in appalling conditions.

    The Jews who were mostly Zionist are all gone. They supposedly were for a free South Africa, but as soon as apartheid end they were the first to leave to Canada, New Zealand, US, Israel and Australia. There are only left. And they took most of their riches with them, often by illegal or rigged means!

  28. druid says:
    @jack ryan

    She did NOT personally beat him to death!!!!
    There may be room to say she had it done or her thugs had it done

  29. I think all this talk of democracy and minority rights and etc is pointless.

    It’s really about race.

    If South Africa were 80% white, the kind of democracy it has now would have worked just fine.

    But it’s mostly black, and democracy meant black rule.

  30. druid says:
    @Che Guava

    Oh puuhhleeeaaaseee, this tired of old canard!
    Same as they was no Palestine!

  31. druid says:

    Jews left on their own. Read my other post!

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  32. @Thorfinnsson

    Most of the blame must fall on short-sighted whites.

    If they had any sense, they would have been EVEN MORE RACIAL or RACE-IST in their thinking and acted like Zionists in Palestine, soon to be Israel.

    Zionists were race-ist(conscious of race as political action), and they ensured that Israel would be majority Jewish. They did this by ethnically expelling Palestinians, allowing only Jewish immigration, and pushing Jewish natalism.

    There was a time when South Africa could have done this and gotten away with it. They could have divided South Africa into White Nation over here and Black Nation over there. Whites in South Africa missed their window of opportunity when the West was proud to be white and healthily race-ist and nationalist in their thinking. I mean the US fought WWII deriding the Japanese as ‘evil Japs’. No one would have cared what South Africa did in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and even much of 60s.

    But whites got lazy and hazy. The problem is Apartheid didn’t go far enough. Economically, whites came to rely on cheap black labor. And even white farms and households came to rely on blacks doing a lot of work.

    In contrast, Israel was founded by Jewish National Socialists. They combined nationalism with socialism. Socialism for Jews meant all Jews would be respected regardless of work he did. Also, it meant there was honor in physical labor like working on farms and factories. So, both the brains and labor in Israel was mostly Jewish.

    But South African whites decided to favor ideal of privilege for whites and ‘dirty’ labor for blacks. And that doomed South Africa for the same reason reliance on slavery doomed the American South.
    And what killed white California? Reliance on Mexicans as cheap helots.

    PC says white privilege is about white power, but nothing has been more damaging to white power than white privilege. Once white got to thinking in terms of ‘privilege’, they got non-whites to do all the ‘dirty’ work. White elites began to look down on manual work. And this snotty attitude spread to all whites, even ones without privilege. And now, we are seeing same trend in East Asia. Many people in East Asia would rather commit suicide than take on ‘dirty, demeaning, and dangerous’ work. That stuff is left to immigrants.
    When a people lose a sense of nationalism + humanism, they are doomed.

    True white power derives from white dignity, not white privilege. And a society of dignity does not look down on labor as ‘dirty’. But a society that thinks that way gets OTHER people to do the dirty work, but in the long run, they come to outnumber the people of privilege.
    Look what happened to California.

    • Agree: Daniel H
    • Replies: @James H
  33. Wally says:

    Note that Zionist anon is attempting to rationalize Israel’s apartheid wall.


    sexist Israel refuses to allow women to pray at Western Wall

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Anon
  34. Wally says: • Website

    “Yes, Jews have benefitted from this cultural suicide far more than any other group, ethnic or religious. But they did not start it. They merely saw the opportunity to profit wildly as WASP Elites went on their merry way arranging for cultural suicide.”

    Then why have supremacist Jews have been marketing the ‘6,000,000’ lie since at least 1869?

  35. @Che Guava

    As always, Ilana dodges the central question of her own Rabbi father’s role.

    You can’t attack someone for ‘filial piety’.

    Mel Gibson’s pa said crazy things, but I’m glad Gibson doesn’t denounce his pa in public.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  36. @Wizard of Oz

    They should be awarded refugee status: if anyone has a “credible fear of persecution” it’s white South Africans.

    • Agree: anarchyst
  37. @Ex-Saffer

    CATO is “Libertarian” in name only. It’s a tool of the Koch brothers, fascists to the core.

  38. @Jus' Sayin'...

    “It’s getting harder and harder to find certain pieces of history on the internet. I am good at doing internet research but was ultimately reduced to pulling this up.”

    You are absolutely correct. There’s an awful lot of stuff that was available even ten years ago that’s been memory holed.

    The web is being very carefully pruned.

    • Replies: @republic
  39. anarchyst says:

    Apartheid WAS instituted to keep the normally-warring parties apart. Even the largest tribe, the Zulus agreed that separation into homelands was a good idea.
    Despite apartheid, black immigration IN to South Africa was substantial, as jobs for blacks were plentiful, unlike the other African “basket cases”.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    , @Ed
  40. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Your spun out buddy. Seriously.

    • Replies: @Wally
  41. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Demographics made it unworkable. The white population might have done better to create a small country for themselves where they were a majority.

  42. @Thorfinnsson

    “If the Afrikaners made any error it was their willingness to exploit blacks as cheap labor rather than inducing them to emigrate”

    There’s that “cheap labor” again. Shortsighted greed sowed the seeds of their demise and may do the same for the whites of America and other Western nations.

  43. republic says:
    @Bill Jones

    The Corbett report had a piece on this topic

    Censorship in the 21st century

    I experienced first hand heavy handed censorship in Turkey a few days ago. The Turkish government has blocked all editions of Wikipedia in all languages over a dispute with Wikipedia and its refusal to delete an offending passage regarding Turkish ties to terrorism.
    I think it was a block of 35 million pages. It has been blocked since early May.

    It is the great firewall of Turkey

    I had to use a special version of Tor to get to any useful websites.

    • Replies: @mcohen
  44. Wally says:

    You’re a Zionist, definitely.
    Much more need not be said.

  45. @druid

    Some did but some were kicked out. I read that Mercer and her family were kicked out.

    • Replies: @Druid
  46. Art Deco says:

    There is no ‘South African catastrophe’. The place has been chronically troubled for generations. Per Angus Maddison, the ratio of gdp per capita in South Africa to that in the United States has been as follows:

    1910: 0.23
    1948: 0.27
    1983: 0.22
    1994: 0.15
    2010: 0.16

    The World Bank has the following assessments for the ratios regarding GDP per capita (nominal):

    1983: 0.18
    1994: 0.12
    2010: 0.15
    2015: 0.10

    And the following for GDP per capita (PPP)

    1994: 0.24
    2010: 0.24
    2015: 0.24

    The relative decline vis a vis the most advanced occidental economies was logged between 1983 and 1994, by and large.

    Homicide rates in South Africa have been as follows:

    1983: 29 per 100,000
    1994: 70 per 100,000
    2008 / 09: 36 per 100,000
    2014: 33 per 100,000

    One problem you do see is in the realm of public health. Life expectancy has seen no net improvement since 1981, and declined by about 11 years between 1994 and 2005

    No ‘catastrophe’. Just a set of conditions.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  47. An alternative history scenario:

    The Uganda Program was finally rejected by the Zionist movement at the Seventh Zionist Congress in 1905, but Nahum Syrkin and Israel Zangwill called an alternative conference to continue the plan of the Uganda scheme.

    What if.. Zionism failed to gain entry into Palestine and settled for Uganda as the New Jewish state.

    Would Jews have done what Afrikaners did in South Africa?
    A Jewish elite population outnumbered by black African as helot caste?

    Or would Jews have done what they did in Palestine? Suppose Jews ethnically cleansed most black Africans from most of Uganda and create a Jewish-majority state in Africa.

    If Jews did like Afrikaners did, they would have been finished in the long run(like whites in South Africa are doomed).
    If Jews did like Zionists in Palestine, they would have had a working state, even a ‘liberal democracy’ with majority Jewish population.

    The BIG Problem would have been in international affairs. Because US has a huge black population and because of the slavery and ‘Jim Crow’ narrative, blacks gained moral sanctimony in the West. Also, black oratory, success in sports, and black music made blacks iconic and special. So, it was very useful for Jewish profit and politics to ally with blacks against whites. Jews could tie Holocaust with Slavery. Jews as victims of white supremacism and blacks as victims of white supremacism. (Europeans also gained moral credit after WWII as victims of Nazism. But over time, Jews subverted and discredited most of it. Films like SORROW AND THE PITY argued French were a bunch of collaborators. Also, the anti-imperialist struggle, like in Algeria, led to the narrative that French and British imperialists were no better than Nazis. So, in the end, Jews remained as the only legit victims of Nazis. In contrast, Europeans were either collaborators of Nazis or did Nazi-like things in Algeria or Congo or Namibia.)
    Jews could maintain the Jewish-Black alliance because the Civil Rights Movement was managed and funded by Jews. Also, even though Zionists suppressed Palestinians/Arabs, them folks never amounted to much in American Consciousness. (Europeans are bit more sensitive about Arabs and Muslims because Europeans ruled over Middle East for awhile.) Because American Moral Narrative focuses on blacks and since American Narrative came to dominate the world, it became especially evil for whites to suppress blacks. But when US used bombs and sanctions to ruin the lives of so many Arabs across the Middle East, no one cared. Arabs simply aren’t iconic or ‘cool’ in the Western Imagination.
    Also, Arabs and Palestinians aren’t renowned in sports, music, comedy, movies, and intellectual stuff. So, they mean little to most people. Even Liberals base much of their sympathy based on who is ‘cool’ and ‘hot’. Arabs are not ‘cool’ or ‘hot’. Tibetans get more sympathy than Uighurs because Dalai Lama’s cuddly yoda-act. Stuff like that shouldn’t affect political or moral conscience around the world, but it does. It’s like if Che Guevara had looked like Danny Devito or Don Knotts, he would never been a romantic icon or the jesus-figure of Marxism.

    Anyway, suppose Jews had made Uganda into Jewish state. Then, a whole bunch of blacks would have seethed at Jews. And American blacks would have stood up for their black African brothers. Then, it would have been much more difficult for American Jews to forge an alliance with American blacks. The ONLY way American Jews could form an alliance would be by denouncing Zionist Uganda. If American Jews had sided with Zionist rule in Uganda, American blacks would have hated Jews totally. MLK sided with Zionists against Palestinians because he cared about Negroes, not Sand Negroes. But he would have had a hard time siding with Zionists if their ‘victims’ had been black Ugabugandans.

    It’s true Israel was closely allied with South Africa, but there were also communist Jews in South Africa who fought Apartheid and white power. So, things got evened out. But if Jews had made Ugabuganda into a Jewish State, the black-Jewish political alliance would have been so much more difficult. And American Jews would have a much harder time justifying Jewish suppression of African blacks than of Arab Palestinians.

    All politics is racial.

    In a way, maybe Israel lucked out because there were two kinds of Jews: Europeans and Middle Eastern ones. European ones are smarter, the Middle Eastern ones are like Arabs with Jewish identity. So, Europeans did the brainy stuff, the Middle Eastern Jews did the menial stuff. In a way, due to long separation, both groups were different. In some ways, Middle Eastern Jews were closer to Arabs genetically, and European Jews(many of them) were either white or substantially white. But because of the link of Jewishness, they could form a bond. And white Jews could serve as the mind, and the Middle East Jews could serve as the hand.

    Anyway, Israel in Uganda would make an interesting alternative-history-movie-idea.

  48. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Jesus, what a fucking moron

  49. G Pinfold says:

    From Wiki about the treason trial that landed Mandela in the clink:

    The Rivonia Trial was named after Rivonia, the suburb of Johannesburg where leaders had been arrested (and documents discovered) at Liliesleaf Farm, privately owned by Arthur Goldreich, on 11 July 1963. The farm had been used as a hideout for the African National Congress and others.

    Arrested were:

    Nelson Mandela
    Walter Sisulu
    Govan Mbeki
    Raymond Mhlaba
    Andrew Mlangeni
    Elias Motsoaledi, trade union and ANC member
    Ahmed Kathrada
    Denis Goldberg, a Cape Town engineer and leader of the Congress of Democrats
    Lionel “Rusty” Bernstein, architect and member of the South African Communist Party (SACP)
    Bob Hepple
    Arthur Goldreich
    Harold Wolpe, prominent attorney and activist
    James “Jimmy” Kantor, brother-in-law of Harold Wolpe

    Quite revealing about the ANC/SACP (communist party) alliance, as it was known. In fact the election in 1994 was won, not by the ANC, but by the ANC/SACP.

  50. Well spoken! Thanks for articulating some of my thinking of which I was not yet fully conscious.

  51. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Didn’t Zimbabwe try something similar – and failed horribly?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  52. We’re from the USA, and we’re here to help you.

  53. mcohen says:

    south Africa was a great country.braaivleis and biltong ek se.sunny skies and Chevrolet.and then the Berlin wall came down,white conscripts were no longer longer economically viable to guard the empire feeding at the trough.Russia and Cuba withdrew and then regime change……vote yes for meaningful change was the madison avenue thought up slogan…..adapt or die
    that is what white south Africans face….adapt or die.
    well the afrikaaner is a resilient species of white man and when he decides that the guilt tripping is over.when truth has been reconciled.I expect an uprising.

  54. mcohen says:

    I read that a lot of science is also disappearing.turkey is pushing to discredit darwins theories.those big bones they found ……they are actually just dog bones.

    evidently archaeologists found a 20 inch penis encased in amber…….belonged to a Caribbean pirate.

  55. @Anonymous

    You may be right but I suspect that, apart from any detailed design problems on which I claim not a jot of expertise it was all too late because of factors that had grown up beyond the Rhodesians’ control from the 1930s onwards.

  56. @Jus' Sayin'...

    This reminds me a bit of the (quite possibly apocryphal) story that Ayn Rand’s father used his friendship with Yagoda (eventually first head of the NKVD, but merely a high-ranking official then) to secure passage out of Russia after the Bolsheviks consolidated power.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
  57. Art Deco says:
    @G Pinfold

    IIRC, the Communist Party of South Africa never had more than about 3,000 members. The Congress of Democrats had about 1,500 members during it’s brief run as a legal organization. It had some cadres of use to the ANC (e.g. Ruth First) and some cash.

  58. Che Guava says:
    @Priss Factor


    That is very different. Plus, I know very well from reading that you agree with many of Mel’s father’s views, perhaps the Catholic part is a sticking point for you.

    The analogy you make is also poor.

    Ilana’s father was an activist rabbit, not too distant from Joe Slovo, I am surprised that you don’t see the obvious.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  59. @Che Guava

    Critical of Jewish supremacist power, yes.

    Never defended Neo-Nazi BS on Holocaust or Hitler-worship.

    I find even Buchanan’s book on WWII to be crazy.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  60. Art Deco says:
    @Priss Factor

    Critical of Jewish supremacist power, yes.

    There is no such thing.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  61. Art Deco says:

    Apartheid WAS instituted to keep the normally-warring parties apart.

    No, it was an elaboration on existing social and political practice in South Africa meant to keep Afrikaners on top. There were no ‘normally warring parties’ in 1948. There was intramural violence between Inkatha (Zulu) and ANC partisans (plurality Xhosa), but that was nearly four decades later and circumscribed in time.

  62. Ed says:

    Apartheid was put in place to placate the Afrikaaner working classes, who wanted to be protected against labor competition from urban blacks, Indians & Coloured. English speaking whites didn’t really care they were about the money and the orderly running of the state.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
  63. Ed says:

    This is simply false and doesn’t even make any intuitive sense.

  64. Interesting connection: the nephew of Helen Suzman, mentioned in the article as a key critic of apartheid, now runs global strategy for the Gates Foundation:

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  65. Art Deco says:
    @Cowboy Shaw

    What’s interesting about that? (Other than that he emigrated. His parents decamped to England when his father retired. His aunt in her last years was plain about the ANCs failures and general grossness).

  66. Hibernian says:
    @Art Deco

    So you know what you’re talking about. I’ve met South Africans who came, or in one case returned, to the United States.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  67. James H says:
    @Priss Factor

    South Africa was divided into tribal ‘homelands’, but only 4 of them (from 3 ethnic groups) ever took it up.

    The rest of the world refused to recognise them, and they were little more than self-governing labour pools, block holes of [white] taxpayers’ money. There were forced removals to accomplish it.

  68. Art Deco says:

    It’s a problem country. It’s never not been a problem country. It hasn’t gotten appreciably worse since 1994 when assessed making use of key metrics. The public life has gotten somewhat grosser. Jacob Zuma is a caricature. That in and of itself is not a disaster, just another nuisance in a world filled with them.

  69. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Her parents never got out of Russia. Apparently they died in Leningrad during the second world war.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  70. @G Pinfold

    Ahmed Kathrada, the only Indian in the group was a Gujarati Muslim, whereas the naked old fakir, Mohandas Gandhi aka Mahatma was a Gujarati Hindu…

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
  71. @Pachyderm Pachyderma

    Had the ANC/SACP been meeting in Durban rather than Joburg, the house would have been filled with Indians. The Natal Indian Congress was an auxiliary of the ANC/SACP.

  72. @Ed

    You are correct, sir.

    Although working-class English-speaking whites (e.g. in mining and manufacturing) did tend to see the world from the Afrikaners perspective.

  73. What a surprise, another liberal Jew appointed by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton) wrecked another white run country.

    At the end of the day, demography is destiny. South Africa is 76% black, 9% white. How long can the 9% white continue to run a country that is 76% black? Meanwhile, name one black run country in the world that is actually well run? None. SA was doomed no matter who is in charge, like the rest of Africa. You can only blame so much on history. A long time ago we were all savages, the difference is most countries move on and progress, from the ashes of war, plague, famine, colonialism. But sub Saharan Africa remains firmly stuck in the dark ages. And don’t blame whites for slavery either, Arabs and Africans themselves were involved in slavery long before whites came along.

    As much as the Jews like to pin the blame on Christian whites like they do everything else, Africa was ruined by Africans. Now the same group of people are emigrating en masse to Europe so they can wreck Europe, like the way they wrecked Portugal. Portugal imported lots of African slaves to their own country, at one point 20% of their population was African, today many of their population are mixed African race. Coincidentally or otherwise it became the poorest country in western Europe. That’s the future of all of western Europe and eventually the entire western world if we don’t stop this African+Muslim+Jewish scorch, these 3 groups of people make trouble wherever they go.

  74. Mark Caplan says: • Website

    One should reasonably expect to see the “South-African Catastrophe” reflected in two places: the South African stock market and South Africa’s currency exchange rate.

    The iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (symbol: EZA) has risen 46% since early 2016.

    Also from early 2016, the rand has gone from 16 rands to the dollar to 13 rands to the dollar (meaning the rand has risen 23% against the dollar).

    This past April 10, a Financial Times headline read: “Foreign investors pile into South African bonds despite fears.” “South African assets keep bouncing back.”

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  75. Druid says:

    Only a handful were kicked out for political activity. The rest left. They were nominally progressive and anti-Apartheid, but in reality were closet racists, who left first as a group after Apartheid ended.

  76. Druid says:

    Dumb statement! Emigrate to where, Europe? They were native and a huge population compared to the European settlers!

  77. @druid

    other colours and races were tolerated as third class and worker-bees, mostly living in appalling conditions

    Much better conditions and wages than for blacks elsewhere in Africa, hence why so many blacks immigrated there.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  78. Art Deco says:

    Better wages. Worse in certain other respects. Horrible crime in South Africa, and blacks were subject to all sorts of vexatious restrictions on where they could put one foot in front of the other.

  79. Art Deco says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    It’s my personal opinion that Mercer pere knew full well the genocidal state that his ANC sympathies would ultimately create.

    The ‘genocidal state’ is in your imagination only. The country has a problem with street crime.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
    , @Hibernian
  80. @Jus' Sayin'...

    Oh yes, as a tiny toddler, Mercer (married name) nee Isaacson (maiden name) knew “full well the genocidal state that [her father’s] ANC sympathies would ultimately create.” Jews, especially Jewish toddlers, control the world.

  81. @Art Deco

    The ‘genocidal state’ is in your imagination only.

    The loose definition of genocide perpetuated from certain quarters, namely that the winning of the West vs various Indian tribal confederations constituted a genocide, has obviously spread way beyond left-wingers.

  82. Hibernian says:
    @Art Deco

    It’s quite possible to enable street crime by not taking it seriously, based on empathy for the perpetrators and/or lack of empathy for the victims. This has begun to happen in the United States also.

  83. Hibernian says:
    @Mark Caplan

    Man does not live by bread alone.

  84. rpdiplock says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Zimbabwe did not ‘collapse’ it was quite deliberately suffocated, like Cuba and North Korea, et al because the Anglo-American corporations had a ‘dummy-spit’ about the native folks wanting to take control of the wealth producing resources of their lands.

  85. @druid

    It was pure unadulterated racism and economic favouritism in the interest of white.

    You mean the white elites. Favoritism toward the average white man would result in the exclusion of blacks altogether.

  86. Marellus says:

    Mrs Mercer

    My thanks to you for shedding some light on South Africa. May God, the Elohim, bless you.

    Sadly I must admit that the future of South Africa is a violent one. There’s no more avoiding it. I contend and I believe that a genocide is coming to South Africa, and at that, on a scale that will make Rwanda look like a picnic.

    Rwanda had a divine warning in the marian apparitions of Kibeho. South Africa had Siener van Rensburg and Johanna Brandt.

    Pray for those yet to be slaughtered in their millions in one Egyptian Night in Johannesburg. Read this if you want to. I did not write it, but I believe it to be true.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?