The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Why Hatred of Whites Is Here to Stay
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_745121380

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Not so long ago, mere mention of the deliberate murder of whites in South Africa—country folk and commercial farmers, in particular—was called “racist.” “Raaacist!” the media collective brayed when candidate Trump retweeted a related “white genocide” hashtag.

It’s still “racist” to suggest that the butchering of these whites, almost daily, in ways that beggar belief, is racially motivated. Positively scandalous is it to describe the ultimate goal of a killing spree, now in its third decade, thus: the ethnic cleansing of white, farming South Africa from land the community has cultivated since the 1600s.

Be thankful for small mercies: At least the international media monopoly is finally reporting facts, such as that just the other day Andre and Lydia Saaiman, aged 70, were hacked to death in Port Elizabeth. (Imagine being chopped up until you expire.)

Or, that the elderly Bokkie Potgieter was dealt a similar fate as he tended his small, KwaZulu-Natal holding. Potgeiter was butchered during the October “Black Monday” protest, which was a nation-wide demonstration to end the carnage. Internationally reported as well were the facts of Sue Howarth’s death. The 64-year-old pharmaceutical executive was tortured for hours with … a blowtorch.

This black-on-white murder spree has been ongoing since a dominant-party political dispensation (mobocracy) was “negotiated in my homeland for South Africans. (Learn about “The American Architects of The South-African Catastrophe.“) But while the criminal evidence is at last out in the open, the motive for these hate crimes is only mumbled about for fear of offending the offenders.

In South Africa we find a criminal class, born into freedom after 1994, that burns with white-hot hatred for whites.

Why?

The South African state’s stout indifference to the plight of whites does not exist in a void. Witness the steady, anti-white venom the dominant-party cobra-head, the ANC, spits out. “The de facto situation is that whites are under criminal siege explicitly because of their race,” writes a South African historian, cited in “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa” (2011).

“The black criminal collective consciousness understands whites are now historical fair game.”

The physical, existential vulnerability of white South Africans flows from a confluence of historical antecedents that have placed them in a uniquely precarious position. “The white minority surrendered political dominance in return for non-racial constitutional safeguards.” By forswearing control over the state apparatus, whites ceded mastery over their destiny, vesting their existential survival in a political dispensation: a liberal democracy.

In a needlessly optimistic assumption, whites imagined blacks too would be bound by the same political abstractions, and would relinquish race in favor of a constitutional design as an organizing principle in the society they now controlled.

ORDER IT NOW

Having “surrendered without defeat,” for a tepid peace, Europeans are, moreover, particularly and uniquely vulnerable within this political dispensation because of their history on the continent. Remedial historical revisionism notwithstanding, South Africa—with its space program and skyscrapers—was not the product of the people currently dismantling it. Rather, it was the creation of British and Dutch settlers and their descendants.

For what they’ve achieved and acquired—and for the original sins of apartheid in South Africa; slavery in America—whites are the objects of envy and racial enmity.

The observations of liberal, African-American journalist Keith Richburg are particularly pertinent here. Richburg believes that on the Dark Continent, tribal allegiance trumps political persuasion and envy carries the day. He cites the fate of the Tutsi—an alien, Nilotic African people, who formed a minority in Rwanda and Burundi—among the Hutu who are a Bantu people.

The Hutu have always resented the tall, imposing, attractive Tutsis, who had dominated them on-and-off since the 15th century. When Hutus picked up machetes to slash to bits nearly a million of their Tutsi neighbors in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, they were, on a deeper level, contends Richburg, “slashing at their own perceived ugliness, as if destroying this thing of beauty, this thing they could never really attain, removing it from the earth forever.”

Are shades of this impulse alive in the savagery inflicted on the European “settlers” of South Africa (and Zimbabwe and the Congo before them)? Who can say for sure? This much I know: Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities.

It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design.

Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers. And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him—all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not.

Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly paleolibertarian column since 1999, and 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 & YouTube.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Africa, Afrikaner, Boers, South Africa 
Hide 294 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. gustafus says:

    For once. I’m speechless. Well done young woman.

    Read More
    • Agree: dc.sunsets
    • Replies: @ILANA MERCER
    CORRECTION: Well into middle-age, please.
    , @Jake
    Ilana Mercer has been telling such ugly truths since she's been over here. And that is the main reason I suspect that virtually all of the people who post on websites accusing her of being a white-hating Jew are paid to do so by Leftist organizations, perhaps only Jewish founded and/or run Leftist organizations.
    , @LauraMR
    The racists agree with Ilana, which is the whole point.

    Whites are going to continue being hated... by some people.

    Blacks are going to continue being hated... by some people.

    Who are these hating people? The racist.

    How many are there? Some.

    Are racists representative of everyone? Nope. Only of themselves.

    Are racists going to change? Unlikely. Racist are generally speaking people with low IQs, traumatic experiences, or both. See feminists for a theme twist of the same hatred.
    , @colin
    she ain't young no more. and the woman part is also presumptive in modern days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /imercer/why-hatred-of-whites-is-here-to-stay/#comment-2071607
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    A million Afrikaners could tip the balance of Australian or Canadian politics to the right. A million Afrikaners in the Netherlands would make Wilders the PM, and begin the repatriations.

    Our elite don't want them here, for the above reason, and for the deep desire to see them reduced to serfdom and then blurred from existence like the Redlegs of Barbados.
    , @Thomm
    Indeed. This is why those who stayed after 1992 or so failed to act in self-preservation.

    Even those who have land to sell can sell it to the Chinese (who will never allow blacks to kill them).
    , @jilles dykstra
    My relative, who lived there from 1955 to 1985, he died some eight years ago, but went back regularly, loved S Africa for its beauty, indeed told me that many whites like to leave, but are financially unable to do this.
    , @pyrrhus
    Whites remain in South Africa because they refused and continue to refuse to acknowledge reality, and in many cases are still egalitarian cucks. Many, like the great golfer Gary Player and his extended family, continue to welcome and support the black establishment that will ultimately exterminate them and confiscate everything they own. I have been pointing this out to whites living in Southern Africa for decades, with little effect. Just remember, 3/4 of Jews in Germany had years to get out, and were even offered money to leave by the Nazis, but stayed anyway.
    , @neutral
    And go where exactly, America, Germany, France, Britain, etc ? Wherever I go do you think the hatred and persecution of whites will be any less in the future? Just look how things bad are now in those places, now imagine that with South African demographics (which is rapidly occurring in most of the post West).
    , @SimpleHandle
    Whites have been pushed out of jobs in South Africa by extreme affirmative action policies. Many have been impoverished. The poor whites don't leave because they can't afford to.

    Boer farmers have a tie to their land that goes back centuries. So they really don't want to leave a country that they consider to be theirs as much as a Pole considers Poland to be his country. This despite the shocking level of violent crime against them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. @gustafus
    For once. I'm speechless. Well done young woman.

    CORRECTION: Well into middle-age, please.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woof
    My grandfather once said that he had to take the kid down the street to the Doctor. I said how old is she. He said, "she is about 60 or 61."

    Age is relative!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Corvinus says:

    “Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities.”

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It’s unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    “It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design.”

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    “And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him…”

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    “…all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not.”

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Read More
    • Troll: Kevin C.
    • Replies: @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.
    , @Bro Methylene
    My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions makes you worthy of a position with the Clinton campaign - or at least CNN.
    , @anonymous
    Corvinus, your statement

    "However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down."

    Then, from the very article you link, in supposed support of your claim says:

    "South Africa's murder rate is steadily increasing" .

    It also says:

    "Murder has increased for a fifth consecutive year, said Gareth Newham, head of the institute’s justice and violence prevention division. Most of the victims are young men, also indicative of an increase in gang-related violence and the state’s struggle to curb it, especially in Cape Town. Murder remains the most reliable way of telling how a country is coping with crime “because most murders can be independently verified, there is a dead body that you can count,” he said."

    Are you going to admit that you did not actually read the article, or am I going to have to write off your future comments as BS?

    Thanks,

    Concerned Reader
    , @anonymous
    Corvinus, you claim that "violent crime in South Africa" appears to be "down", yet the article you cite says that murder has increased for a fifth consecutive year.

    OK, maybe you specifically meant a decreasing rate for overall violent crime, not just the rate for murder (not nearly as pertinent to Illiana's article, but anyway...). In that case, the article you link to also says this:

    "There are crimes that South Africans are just unwilling to report because they believe it will lead nowhere. These include crimes such as “smash-and-grabs,” in which thieves break an unsuspecting driver’s window to snatch their cellphone or purse. Even more serious crimes, especially sexual offenses, are also rarely reported because of the associated trauma and stigma—and the low rate of convictions. What all of this shows is how South Africans have learned to live with crime as part of daily life."

    Very misleading.

    , @Jasper
    Seems like the Hasbara drones have already arrived in this thread.

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.

     

    What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?

    If you actually did some research, you would know that most Afrikaners don't have the means to just move to another continent. They cannot partake in any special programs for refugees, and even if they were to show up at the airport, chances are they'd have their passports taken away on suspicion of "fleeing the country." In reality, the Afrikaners are being held as a captive managerial class, who are forced to do what is necessary to just barely keep the country afloat.


    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

     

    In reality, the article states the following:

    South Africans are at a “substantially higher risk” of being victims of crime than five years ago, according to the Institute of Security Studies.
     
    (FYI, nearly 500,000 murders have been committed since the end of Apartheid, and that's just the ones that have actually been reported to the police: https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/178233/half-a-million-south-africans-murdered-since-1994/)
    , @Randal

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.
     
    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it's "necessary for the greater good".

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren't busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to "use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage".

    Contemptible treason.
    , @Nicholas Stix
    "Collectively, contact crimes, in which the perpetrator physically harms a victim—including murders, sexual assaults and robberies—are at their lowest rate since 2013-14. That number has been lowered by decreases in charges related to sexual violence (-4.3%), assault (with common assault down by -5.7% and grievous bodily harm down by -6.7%), but belies the increase in crimes such as murder and robbery."

    If you believe that murder and robbery could rise, while violent crime in general goes down, I have a great deal for you on a slightly used bridge.
    , @TTSSYF
    This is why I no longer engage in any kind of political or philosophical conversation with people on the political Left.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    I was wondering when the cucks were going to show up; that was fast.
    , @Alanna
    "
    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.
    "
    So South Africa and America are the creation of people who came from Europe and settled, but were not European settlers?

    You have the nerve to spout this self-contradictory mumbo jumbo, when we are talking about the slow genocide of an entire people? What kind of human being are you?

    Mr Corvinus Troll, please go away and die, so that you stop spreading your mindless hate.
    , @daniel le mouche
    'South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa.'

    You're right--American blacks are far worse.

    'One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.'

    Yes, I suppose one could, if that is one pulled one's head out of one's ass to discern the fucking obvious. Mischief. Indeed. But yes, it's probably highly likely that once the kukamunga's take over they will fully uphold the Constitution--although one does wonder, what with the recent mischief being made, e.g. defacing of Jefferson, Washington and Lee statues, takeovers at several universities by a handful of kukamungas who are very, very loud and self assertive.

    '“Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”
    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.'

    This thought is, if possible, deeper than your opening comment: you know, America is not South Africa and all that.
    , @Kali
    Someone said:

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    Then, to this, you argue:

    "No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe."

    Corvinus, your comment is hopelessly idiotic. But I guess you can't even realize, how dumb it is.

    Then, you mention a link that, you say, shows a decrease in the crime rates for South Africa... when the article mentions a sharp INCREASE in criminality there. You didn't even read the article!

    If you are a troll, you are a really bad one, and if you are sincere, poor you...

    , @interesting
    "whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage"

    that is surly a laugh out loud moment.......apparently you've not been paying attention only whites can be racists and discriminate....
    , @SimpleHandle
    The anti-white rhetoric in America is ratcheting up while whites are still a majority, it will only get worse when whites are a minority. Only a very foolish white person thinks the demographic transition will end well for whites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jasper

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

     

    I don't think it's the arrogance of "imperial Europe" that bothers you, as you probably have very little against mass immigration from the 3rd world into European countries that never colonised any parts of the Americas, Africa, Asia and/or Oceania, such as Switzerland, Finland, Luxembourg, and pretty much all of Eastern Europe.

    Or do you?
    , @Anon
    Please elaborate on that "stolen wealth". To make sense of what you assert I take you to mean that
    (a) various unspecified sometime colonies of European powers had wealth in some and what forms (effcient businesses, precious metals. slaves....???) that they could have now or would have been the source of extra wealth today if Europeans hadn't deprived them of it;
    (b) that Europeans became rich from such despoliation and kept on getting richer therefrom without the natives of the colonised territories receiving anything ĺike significant compensating advantage.

    Can you substantiate that cause for resentment in even a few of the ex colonial cases? How do you factor in the vast increases in population, the end of slave trading and other limpacts on demography of the more advanced Europeans?
    , @Logan
    Right.

    The world outside Europe was peaceful and prosperous until Europeans came along and stole their wealth for themselves. So now those countries are poor.

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    "Although these theories exercised a great deal of influence at the time, economic evidence does not bear them out. Economic expansion in Europe continued to be fueled mostly by trade and expansion within the developed world, not with new colonies. Key industries may very well have benefited from imperial holdings, but few countries could boast that their colonies as a whole provided a net profit to the national economy."


    https://faculty.unlv.edu/gbrown/westernciv/wc201/wciv2c23/wciv2c23lsec3.html

    It is certainly a fact that whites did not "steal the wealth" of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area.

    , @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.

    Democracies, with their emphasis on "equality" are particularly prone to envy.
    , @Clyde
    Retard---What colonies did Sweden and Norway have in black and Muslim territories?
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on the backs of slave bodies. Likewise, the diamonds in South Africa were all stolen. All the white man had to do was trick a gullible Zulu shaman or two, walk a mile and a half towards the Earth's core with a shopping cart and fill it up like a looter at Payless. And the Native Americans, living in a utopia of noble savagery and inter-tribal harmony, had deeds filed with their respective county clerks showing ownership of all the land in their possession, which was, likewise, subsequently stolen.
    , @Colleen Pater
    actually its the price they paid for not completely destroying every last person they conquered especially the jews as all conquerors have learned is the only prudent course. The game is hardly over either we or the chinese will again take back the world and this time reduce it to one race one and for all
    , @dc.sunsets
    More straight line forecasting, the hallmark of small minds.

    Sooner or later those who are under assault will wake up. When that occurs you will discover that the people who invented the machine gun, the rotary cannon, mustard gas, weaponized biological pathogens and neutron bombs are of one race, and once awakened are more than capable of turning that unique ingenuity to systematically exterminating their adversaries.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.
    , @joef
    You mean the European colonialism that provided farming, water supply, sewage treatment, electric grid, telephones, railroads, refrigeration, factories, hospitals, medicine, light bulbs, indoor plumbing, and other similar prosperity?? Oh, that must have been terrible... lol
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Blacks are more muscular and more aggressive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions makes you worthy of a position with the Clinton campaign – or at least CNN.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    +1
    , @Corvinus
    "My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions..."

    Such as?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Corvinus, your statement

    “However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.”

    Then, from the very article you link, in supposed support of your claim says:

    “South Africa’s murder rate is steadily increasing” .

    It also says:

    “Murder has increased for a fifth consecutive year, said Gareth Newham, head of the institute’s justice and violence prevention division. Most of the victims are young men, also indicative of an increase in gang-related violence and the state’s struggle to curb it, especially in Cape Town. Murder remains the most reliable way of telling how a country is coping with crime “because most murders can be independently verified, there is a dead body that you can count,” he said.”

    Are you going to admit that you did not actually read the article, or am I going to have to write off your future comments as BS?

    Thanks,

    Concerned Reader

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Maj. Kong says:
    @Voortrekker
    Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    A million Afrikaners could tip the balance of Australian or Canadian politics to the right. A million Afrikaners in the Netherlands would make Wilders the PM, and begin the repatriations.

    Our elite don’t want them here, for the above reason, and for the deep desire to see them reduced to serfdom and then blurred from existence like the Redlegs of Barbados.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Maj. Kong says:

    South African blacks were promised First World living standards within a generation, now that the time has passed and the results haven’t been achieved: would they really blame the debauched man in the mirror, or blame the nefarious Boer Kulak for not committing wholeheartedly to socialism?

    Read More
    • Agree: gustafus
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Corvinus, you claim that “violent crime in South Africa” appears to be “down”, yet the article you cite says that murder has increased for a fifth consecutive year.

    OK, maybe you specifically meant a decreasing rate for overall violent crime, not just the rate for murder (not nearly as pertinent to Illiana’s article, but anyway…). In that case, the article you link to also says this:

    “There are crimes that South Africans are just unwilling to report because they believe it will lead nowhere. These include crimes such as “smash-and-grabs,” in which thieves break an unsuspecting driver’s window to snatch their cellphone or purse. Even more serious crimes, especially sexual offenses, are also rarely reported because of the associated trauma and stigma—and the low rate of convictions. What all of this shows is how South Africans have learned to live with crime as part of daily life.”

    Very misleading.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Oops, misspelled “Ilana”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Thomm says:
    @Voortrekker
    Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    Indeed. This is why those who stayed after 1992 or so failed to act in self-preservation.

    Even those who have land to sell can sell it to the Chinese (who will never allow blacks to kill them).

    Read More
    • Replies: @dcite
    They've "allowed" Malays to kill them in Malaysia and other southeast Asian places where they settled. World on Fire
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The nightmarish downward spiral that is South Africa is nothing more or less than the spectre haunting all advanced, civilised western societies.

    The really shocking thing is how many people of European descent are actively welcoming this wreckage. Shows what a tiny, tireless minority can accomplish when it has wrested the reins of society and infected it with its propaganda.

    Read More
    • Agree: joef
    • Replies: @HallParvey
    Shocking? Not really. After 16 plus years of public school brainwashing, decades of exposure to self hating religions ( All of you have sinned, and need redemption or you'll burn in hell for all eternity. Now for a mere ten thousand dollars, we here at the church of "What's Happening Now" can offer a free pass into Heaven ), years of "entertainment" produced to extoll the virtues of harmonious diversity, and steeping in the freedom to be manipulated, no amount of insanity should surprise.
    , @ANON
    "all" is a dangerous word for credibility and tends to make forecasts of doom seem hysterical. Australia and New Zealand for example face nothing much worse than a drag on their upward spirals from careerist and SJW left of centre politicians pandering to the sense of entitlement of the unproductive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. ThaboZulu says:

    I’m irked this Jewish b*tch called Africa her homeland. I hope farm murders continue until Boers go back to Holland where they came from.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    I hope your family starves to death.
    , @daniel le mouche
    Same goes for you kukamumgas in Europe and America.
    , @Ace
    Well, that was like turning over a rock.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Jasper says:
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Seems like the Hasbara drones have already arrived in this thread.

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.

    What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?

    If you actually did some research, you would know that most Afrikaners don’t have the means to just move to another continent. They cannot partake in any special programs for refugees, and even if they were to show up at the airport, chances are they’d have their passports taken away on suspicion of “fleeing the country.” In reality, the Afrikaners are being held as a captive managerial class, who are forced to do what is necessary to just barely keep the country afloat.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    In reality, the article states the following:

    South Africans are at a “substantially higher risk” of being victims of crime than five years ago, according to the Institute of Security Studies.

    (FYI, nearly 500,000 murders have been committed since the end of Apartheid, and that’s just the ones that have actually been reported to the police: https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/178233/half-a-million-south-africans-murdered-since-1994/)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?"

    I'm just using the same logic employed by the Alt Right, who believes that certain groups of American citizens are undesirable and ought to return back to their original homeland, even though they have made their positive mark on society.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Jasper says:
    @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    I don’t think it’s the arrogance of “imperial Europe” that bothers you, as you probably have very little against mass immigration from the 3rd world into European countries that never colonised any parts of the Americas, Africa, Asia and/or Oceania, such as Switzerland, Finland, Luxembourg, and pretty much all of Eastern Europe.

    Or do you?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Please elaborate on that “stolen wealth”. To make sense of what you assert I take you to mean that
    (a) various unspecified sometime colonies of European powers had wealth in some and what forms (effcient businesses, precious metals. slaves….???) that they could have now or would have been the source of extra wealth today if Europeans hadn’t deprived them of it;
    (b) that Europeans became rich from such despoliation and kept on getting richer therefrom without the natives of the colonised territories receiving anything ĺike significant compensating advantage.

    Can you substantiate that cause for resentment in even a few of the ex colonial cases? How do you factor in the vast increases in population, the end of slave trading and other limpacts on demography of the more advanced Europeans?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. unit472 says:

    The idea that there was vast wealth waiting to be stolen in North America, South Africa, Australia or anywhere else where Europeans settled seems to be a fantasy of darker skinned peoples. There was land and there were minerals of course but these resources were either unknown to the soot toned inhabitants or were beyond their ability to develop. Manhattan was only worth something as a port and to need a port one had to have ships capable of crossing the sea and cargoes for those ships to carry.

    Its worth noting I suppose that Spain, which did manage to plunder gold and gemstones from its colonial possessions, ended up the poorest of the colonial powers precisely because the pursuit of easy money neglected the long term development of agriculture and industry. Iron ore and coal may not have set off ‘gold rushes’ but they did, with the application of human ingenuity, create far more wealth than Columbian emeralds or any vein of gold.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    S. Africa has massive deposits of gold, diamonds and uranium, so it's a lot more like S. America than N. America. Of course, like S. America and N. America, it's also ideal for agriculture.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    Not to worry: TPTB are working feverishly to ensure those pesky Northwestern Europeans will never again be in a position to unleash such chaos in the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. fnn says:

    Based Jewish guy on Cville:

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    shouldn't these gasbags be flipping burgers?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Heros says:

    White South Africa was the first western country destroyed by an invasion of very low intelligence Blacks looking for some civilization to plunder. This was at the behest of communist jews who hated the Boers.

    Note that the Boers were the first whites after the industrial revolution to suffer genocide at the hands of the jews who wanted control of their diamond and gold mines. Note also that the Boer War was the first time the jews used concentration camps to murder entire innocent white Boer families.

    Jay Lamprecht (a South African) discusses this material in depth on his blog: http://historyreviewed.com/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool

    White South Africa was the first western country destroyed by an invasion of very low intelligence Blacks looking for some civilization to plunder
     
    Maybe the demographic catastrophe that led to the current plight of Boer farmers is not likely to repeat itself today or next week in Europe or the U.S. But with 4 billion desperate, starving Africans, made possible by the irreproachable wildlife management skills of Western do-gooder charities, a South Africa redux writ global starts looking a lot more plausible.
    , @Jake
    Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?

    It was England destroying the Boers. It was the British Empire that used early concentrations camps to spread terror across Boer communities. It was WASP culture that decided to conquer the Boers and force them into serving the British Empire.

    Were some Jews involved? You bet. That was a given, because WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Randal says:
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.

    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it’s “necessary for the greater good”.

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren’t busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to “use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage”.

    Contemptible treason.

    Read More
    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @TTSSYF
    Absolutely. And to suggest that it can't happen in America is complete nonsense. It's already happening, and at a quickening pace with each passing day.
    , @Jake
    Whites in South Africa, like those in Rhodesia, were betrayed by England, which booted them from the Commonwealth, which over time dealt major blows economically and meant the eventual total isolation from the world that was demanded by the American WASP Elites.
    , @dc.sunsets
    Don't bother replying to leftist self-haters. Theirs is a mental affliction, so you're essentially arguing with a schizophrenic.

    All we await is for the 50 year delusion that seized First World whites (of all nationalities) to reach its natural reversal.

    It won't matter if the USA is majority minority or if Europe is 15% African, there will still be ample numbers of high capability whites to invest their ingenuity into expelling those who are determined to harm them.

    Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children's future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won't remotely be a fair fight.
    , @Corvinus
    "There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world."

    Indeed, how dare those liberal whites and their black cronies insist that the shackles of apartheid be removed.

    "The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it’s “necessary for the greater good”.

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was "necessary for the greater good"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Logan says:
    @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Right.

    The world outside Europe was peaceful and prosperous until Europeans came along and stole their wealth for themselves. So now those countries are poor.

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    “Although these theories exercised a great deal of influence at the time, economic evidence does not bear them out. Economic expansion in Europe continued to be fueled mostly by trade and expansion within the developed world, not with new colonies. Key industries may very well have benefited from imperial holdings, but few countries could boast that their colonies as a whole provided a net profit to the national economy.”

    https://faculty.unlv.edu/gbrown/westernciv/wc201/wciv2c23/wciv2c23lsec3.html

    It is certainly a fact that whites did not “steal the wealth” of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.
     
    In most cases, it was a net loss for the country as a whole, and did very little to benefit poor Europeans. But as with today's wars of 'democracy promotion' and 'régime change,' it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).
    , @Corvinus
    "It is certainly a fact that whites did not “steal the wealth” of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area."

    You are a fool. South Africa has been the world's leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world's platinum. In fact, mining in South Africa was once the driving force behind its economy. The continent was rich in palm oil, petroleum, copper, chromium...and gold. Only South America outstrips Africa's contribution to the growth of the global bullion supply.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    “Collectively, contact crimes, in which the perpetrator physically harms a victim—including murders, sexual assaults and robberies—are at their lowest rate since 2013-14. That number has been lowered by decreases in charges related to sexual violence (-4.3%), assault (with common assault down by -5.7% and grievous bodily harm down by -6.7%), but belies the increase in crimes such as murder and robbery.”

    If you believe that murder and robbery could rise, while violent crime in general goes down, I have a great deal for you on a slightly used bridge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.

    Democracies, with their emphasis on “equality” are particularly prone to envy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.
     
    Many of your pale-faced business Hos seem quite happy living and leeching off the rich gulf nations.

    Anyway, would Europe be any worse than the spiritually cursed pagan polytheist human worshipping decadent blackhole it is now?

    I don't think so. :D
    , @Ace
    It already is and the police outdo themselves to grovel at the feet of their inferiors. Hmm. Make that "at the feet of their equals."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Clyde says:
    @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Retard—What colonies did Sweden and Norway have in black and Muslim territories?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Retard—What colonies did Sweden and Norway have in black and Muslim territories?

    Here you go. I'd be surprised if there were not some black and or Muslims in the Africa where Sweden held colonies.

    In addition to extensive territory around and beyond the Baltic, Sweden possessed overseas colonies from 1638 to 1663, and from 1784 to 1878, mainly in North America and Africa, selling or losing its territory to the Netherlands, France, and Great Britain.
    http://web.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Swedish_colonial_empire
     
    Norway coouldn't have had them until very late since it was subject to Sweden for quite a while.

    Norway's quest for independence began on May 17, 1814, with the signing of a new Constitution. Yet, Norway's forced union with Sweden, which began Jan. 14, 1814 (after 400 years of domination by Denmark), was to last until 1905 when Norway proclaimed, and secured, full independence. May 17, Norway's Constitution Day, is often celebrated as an "independence day
    http://www.lawzone.com/half-nor/crispo.htm
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. When playing the victim you have to have a victimizer to blame. Every incompetent minority needs someone to blame for their own shortcomings. The Whites with their ability and success and imperialist past are an obvious target. The rich and successful far-eastern nations hold a low profile and avoid blame. The Arabs blame Israel and people of color blame whites for their self-inflicted woes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Send the ingrates back to where they came from.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on the backs of slave bodies. Likewise, the diamonds in South Africa were all stolen. All the white man had to do was trick a gullible Zulu shaman or two, walk a mile and a half towards the Earth’s core with a shopping cart and fill it up like a looter at Payless. And the Native Americans, living in a utopia of noble savagery and inter-tribal harmony, had deeds filed with their respective county clerks showing ownership of all the land in their possession, which was, likewise, subsequently stolen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on sic the backs of slave bodies.
     
    Well maybe not on slave bodies, but on slave bones…

    A group of anthropologists from Howard University studied the area and found materials of West African traditions along with skeletal remains of over 400 men and women with evidence of bone lesions, muscle tears and spine fractures.
    It turns out, that area of Lower Manhattan bordered New Amsterdam's "Common" and the only place that "free" and enslaved Africans were allowed to bury their dead during the 1600s until 1794.

    The African Burial Ground National Monument, New York, NY

    https://www.recreation.gov/marketing.do?goto=acm/Explore_And_More/exploreArticles/TheAfricanBurialGroundNationalMonumentNewYorkNewYork.htm
     

    , @dcite
    Whenever anybody tells me blacks "built" the cities, it sounds so absurd. The urbanizing areas of 19th and early 20th century America had very few blacks and enormous white immigrant working class populations. 1/3 of Cinciannati was white immigrant in 1890. The death rate among Irish immigrants in laboring jobs was particularly high. A history professor said the Irish were preferred for really dangerous jobs in the ante-bellum South because there was an unending supply of them, and blacks were too expensive to risk. A black co-worker taking the class passed that on to me.
    Even in the late 20th century they had to find builders from Italy to refurbish the mayor's mansion in downtown Baltimore. I still remember people being afraid that the future mayors would all be black, and the exquisite mansion would be gradually destroyed. They'd had experience with black takeovers and it was never good. I don't know what it looks like today.
    Blacks' labor was, however, crucial in maintaining cities in the Gulf area and probably other southern cities. Apparently even skilled labor became associated with black or "mulattos" and even skills like brick laying would indicate someone's race. This did not happen outside the Gulf area. I think the French/Spanish influence had something to do with the attitudes in New Orleans and the Gulf area.
    White creole women even insisted that their husbands be born in Europe and not America, which led to a lot of interesting arrangements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. TTSSYF says:
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    This is why I no longer engage in any kind of political or philosophical conversation with people on the political Left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. TTSSYF says:
    @Randal

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.
     
    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it's "necessary for the greater good".

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren't busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to "use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage".

    Contemptible treason.

    Absolutely. And to suggest that it can’t happen in America is complete nonsense. It’s already happening, and at a quickening pace with each passing day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Heros
    White South Africa was the first western country destroyed by an invasion of very low intelligence Blacks looking for some civilization to plunder. This was at the behest of communist jews who hated the Boers.

    Note that the Boers were the first whites after the industrial revolution to suffer genocide at the hands of the jews who wanted control of their diamond and gold mines. Note also that the Boer War was the first time the jews used concentration camps to murder entire innocent white Boer families.

    Jay Lamprecht (a South African) discusses this material in depth on his blog: http://historyreviewed.com/

    White South Africa was the first western country destroyed by an invasion of very low intelligence Blacks looking for some civilization to plunder

    Maybe the demographic catastrophe that led to the current plight of Boer farmers is not likely to repeat itself today or next week in Europe or the U.S. But with 4 billion desperate, starving Africans, made possible by the irreproachable wildlife management skills of Western do-gooder charities, a South Africa redux writ global starts looking a lot more plausible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Every incompetent minority needs someone to blame for their own shortcomings.

    What explains the need for majorities, both competent and incompetent, to blame others for their troubles?

    Yesterday’s majorities blamed commies and nazis. Protestants blamed Catholics and Catholics blamed Protestants. Large portions of each blamed Jews and Jews blamed them. Today they scapegoat Muslims and blacks.

    Note to author of the article.:

    Please quit trying to play the victim card. It’s laughable. And no, I didn’t bother to read your scribbling;the title alone was enough to nauseate me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon-og
    Note to author of the article.:
    Please quit trying to play the victim card. It’s laughable. And no, I didn’t bother to read your scribbling;the title alone was enough to nauseate me.

    Oh but how can she quit, she ultimately has a pro-Israel agenda here as is always the case with her, and the victim card is their favorite one to play.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. wayfarer says:

    ” The Zionist Infestation of Africa: Zimbabwe to Uganda, Congo to Somalia and Beyond “

    source: http://www.maskofzion.com/2012/04/zionist-infestation-of-africa-zimbabwe.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    the blacks in south Africa came from the Middle of the continent. So when you say “send them back where they came from” I guess that’s where you mean.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    I was wondering when the cucks were going to show up; that was fast.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. StephenC says:

    Some of the best arguments against mass immigration are inadvertently made by leftists.

    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    Leftwingers plainly state that mass immigration is a punishment upon white folks for the ostensible sins of their fathers. There’s no dressing it up as something good for the country, their take on mass immigration is no different from that of the goose-steppiest nationalist in our midst.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glaivester
    Exactly. Leftists simply hate whites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    Why debate it on the basis of country?

    Imperialism, like war, benefits certain individuals, usually the most sociopathic, at the expense of multitudes of others, both at home and in the colonies. Sometimes the benefit, in a material sense, was minimal for the individual, but probably a net loss for most others. An example would be King Leopold’s private empire in the Congo. He benefitted minimally, his country probably not at all, while the African peoples suffered greatly

    In other instances no one benefitted whether one evaluates it on the basis of individuals or countries. For example, who benefitted from Mussolini’s dumbass, completely unprovoked “adventures” in East Africa? Or the utterly senseless Brit wholesale slaughter of Sudanese defenders?

    Who benefitted but a few goofy generals who could in a little more tinsel on their costumes?:

    Unhappily for Ethiopia this was the time when a certain Government considered that the European situation made it imperative at all costs to obtain the friendship of Italy. The price paid was the abandonment of Ethiopian independence to the greed of the Italian Government. This secret agreement, contrary to the obligations of the Covenant, has exerted a great influence over the course of events. Ethiopia and the whole world have suffered and are still suffering today its disastrous consequences.

    - Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethiopia, Appeal to the League of Nations, June 1936

    https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/selassie.htm

    In a non-material sense everyone loses and we’re left whining about the results today, and probably for many more days as well.

    Now, let’s talk about Palestine…

    Read More
    • Agree: Beefcake the Mighty
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. @Bro Methylene
    My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions makes you worthy of a position with the Clinton campaign - or at least CNN.

    +1

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. wayfarer says:

    Keep an eye on the 9/11 patsy Saudi Arabia, besides Iran, it’s also in the Zionist cross-hairs.

    “Greater Israel: Zionist Plan for the Middle East”
    source: https://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

    “Jews Behind NATO’s Rape of Libya”

    Read More
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Bro Nathaniel was on fire there! Good one.

    With all that going on, we have people here whining about how bad others are.

    Fuggedaboudit. Time we clean our own noses first. Or maybe we should just drain the swamp. Yeah; like that's gonna happen.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.
    In N America the Indian population nearly disappeared, through deliberate slaughter, such as the Sand Creek Massacre, and through European illnesses, these illnesses were in part unavoidable, in part deliberately brought to the Indians with blankets with bacteria.
    Having said this, when Zimbabwe still was Rhodesia, it was a prosperous country.
    South Africa could be a prosperous country, in time, if it was properly governed.
    Since there is black rule S Africa goes downhill, with slogans ‘a bullet for a Boer’.
    Mandela understood that the economy of the country depended on whites.
    That blacks in S Africa do not like the whites is understandable, yet, by driving the whites away, by what method, they will hurt themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.
     
    Of course. But maybe not especially. The Portuguese and Spaniards have a lot to answer for all over America. Also, it wasn't only the colonists, but the conquistadores who visited appalling atrocities on the people of the Americas. I

    I think the torturers at Abu Ghraib must've learned from the Spaniards, or at least their probable
    Israeli teachers did.

    jyles, have you read this? It's a classic and I'm sure you'll find it informative.

    "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" by Dee Brown.

    "On March 8, the militiamen arrived at Gnadenhutten. Accusing the [innocent] American Indians of the attack on the Pennsylvania settlements, the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight. The militiamen then voted to [gruesomely and cold bloodedly] execute their captives the following morning. Informed of their impending deaths, the Christian Delawares spent the night praying and singing hymns. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. "

    http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Gnadenhutten_Massacre

    , @Troy McClure
    Jilles, you are a moron.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @Voortrekker
    Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    My relative, who lived there from 1955 to 1985, he died some eight years ago, but went back regularly, loved S Africa for its beauty, indeed told me that many whites like to leave, but are financially unable to do this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    actually its the price they paid for not completely destroying every last person they conquered especially the jews as all conquerors have learned is the only prudent course. The game is hardly over either we or the chinese will again take back the world and this time reduce it to one race one and for all

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Christianity must be destroyed in preparation for the Jew Messiah, Moschiach. The war on whites is part of a Jewish plan/scheme to destroy Christianity. Antagonize a peaceful God loving people until they violently react, then guilt them in to forsaking Christ. Moschiach is on his way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    Antagonize a peaceful God loving people
     
    My apologies for being pedantic, but in the context of said faith, you forgot to pluralise "God" there. You see, the devil, literally too in the context of said faith, is in the detail.

    And, peaceful?? Hahahahaha!! Get off those hallucinogens dude(tte).

    forsaking Christ
     
    The white racist, which means most of the white race, will never attain spiritual peace. They will forsake Christ now, then forsake whatever heathen abomination their cursed ancestors cooked up in their fertile imaginations, flailing from one abomination to another, until the end of mankind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Anonymous
    The nightmarish downward spiral that is South Africa is nothing more or less than the spectre haunting all advanced, civilised western societies.

    The really shocking thing is how many people of European descent are actively welcoming this wreckage. Shows what a tiny, tireless minority can accomplish when it has wrested the reins of society and infected it with its propaganda.

    Shocking? Not really. After 16 plus years of public school brainwashing, decades of exposure to self hating religions ( All of you have sinned, and need redemption or you’ll burn in hell for all eternity. Now for a mere ten thousand dollars, we here at the church of “What’s Happening Now” can offer a free pass into Heaven ), years of “entertainment” produced to extoll the virtues of harmonious diversity, and steeping in the freedom to be manipulated, no amount of insanity should surprise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @wayfarer
    Keep an eye on the 9/11 patsy Saudi Arabia, besides Iran, it's also in the Zionist cross-hairs.

    "Greater Israel: Zionist Plan for the Middle East"
    source: https://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

    “Jews Behind NATO’s Rape of Libya”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmjsBMExKJg

    Bro Nathaniel was on fire there! Good one.

    With all that going on, we have people here whining about how bad others are.

    Fuggedaboudit. Time we clean our own noses first. Or maybe we should just drain the swamp. Yeah; like that’s gonna happen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wayfarer
    Probably the most compelling attribute about Brother Nathanael, is that he's simply shinning a light on some verifiable truths. It really seems there are next to no holes in his NWO narratives. The dude's a unique character, who's effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.

    “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” – Buddha
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Glaivester says: • Website
    @StephenC
    Some of the best arguments against mass immigration are inadvertently made by leftists.

    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.
     
    Leftwingers plainly state that mass immigration is a punishment upon white folks for the ostensible sins of their fathers. There's no dressing it up as something good for the country, their take on mass immigration is no different from that of the goose-steppiest nationalist in our midst.

    Exactly. Leftists simply hate whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    Yes, but the issue is WHY?

    Because Christendom was built and maintained by white people, meaning men.

    Leftism is another (like Manichaeanism, Islam, Catharism, Marxism) attempt to replace Christianity. Blacks and Asians became Christian from the beginning, but only whites, steeped in Hellenistic culture, built a true Christian civilization.

    That is the reason certain whites are not hated, even when they are assumed Christian. The Left does not hate the Episcopal Church, because it ordains women and marries gays. So the Left is fine with white men who are Episcopalian. Ditto all but a couple of Lutheran and other Anglican groups.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @jilles dykstra
    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America's, especially in N America.
    In N America the Indian population nearly disappeared, through deliberate slaughter, such as the Sand Creek Massacre, and through European illnesses, these illnesses were in part unavoidable, in part deliberately brought to the Indians with blankets with bacteria.
    Having said this, when Zimbabwe still was Rhodesia, it was a prosperous country.
    South Africa could be a prosperous country, in time, if it was properly governed.
    Since there is black rule S Africa goes downhill, with slogans 'a bullet for a Boer'.
    Mandela understood that the economy of the country depended on whites.
    That blacks in S Africa do not like the whites is understandable, yet, by driving the whites away, by what method, they will hurt themselves.

    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.

    Of course. But maybe not especially. The Portuguese and Spaniards have a lot to answer for all over America. Also, it wasn’t only the colonists, but the conquistadores who visited appalling atrocities on the people of the Americas. I

    I think the torturers at Abu Ghraib must’ve learned from the Spaniards, or at least their probable
    Israeli teachers did.

    jyles, have you read this? It’s a classic and I’m sure you’ll find it informative.

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.

    “On March 8, the militiamen arrived at Gnadenhutten. Accusing the [innocent] American Indians of the attack on the Pennsylvania settlements, the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight. The militiamen then voted to [gruesomely and cold bloodedly] execute their captives the following morning. Informed of their impending deaths, the Christian Delawares spent the night praying and singing hymns. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”

    http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Gnadenhutten_Massacre

    Read More
    • Replies: @GourmetDan

    ... the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight."
     
    And the moral of the story is... don't be like them... don't be unarmed... shoot back...
    , @Ron Unz

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.... The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”
     
    I'll admit I haven't read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind "genocide" at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It's certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I've read here and there, I've gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater "urban crime genocide" for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I'd wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.
    , @jilles dykstra
    No, but I do have
    Stan Hoig, "The Sand Creek Massacre', Oklahoma, 1961, 1982
    Ronald Wright, 'Stolen Continents, Conquest and Resistance in the Americas', 1992, London
    John R. Cook, 'The Border and the Buffalo, An untold story of the south western plains', 1907, 1989, Austin, Texas,
    the deliberate extermination of the buffalo to make the Indian way of living impossible
    Francis Parkman, ‘The Oregon trail’, New York, 2002, Boston, 1883, 1847
    Edward H. Spicer, 'Cycles of Conquest, The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States of the Southwest', 1533 - 1960', Tucson, 1962, 1970
    As Churchill stated 'the higher civilisation has the better weapons'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. theMann says:

    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers. And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him—all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not.”

    And it is men’s nature to virulently hate those who are superior to them. The more inferior, the greater the hatred.

    What incredible insanity ever possessed so many millions of Whites, to start treating our inferiors as our equals, and blindly unaware that they would hate us all the more for it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    That answer is easy: post-Christendom Liberalism, which replaced traditional Christian morality.
    , @helena
    Apart from conspiracy it is also the case that ideology didn't change even though technology did.

    Hence the continued urge to help people whose population is now larger than that of Europeans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Jake says:
    @gustafus
    For once. I'm speechless. Well done young woman.

    Ilana Mercer has been telling such ugly truths since she’s been over here. And that is the main reason I suspect that virtually all of the people who post on websites accusing her of being a white-hating Jew are paid to do so by Leftist organizations, perhaps only Jewish founded and/or run Leftist organizations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Jake says:
    @theMann
    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers. And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him—all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."


    And it is men's nature to virulently hate those who are superior to them. The more inferior, the greater the hatred.


    What incredible insanity ever possessed so many millions of Whites, to start treating our inferiors as our equals, and blindly unaware that they would hate us all the more for it?

    That answer is easy: post-Christendom Liberalism, which replaced traditional Christian morality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Clyde
    Retard---What colonies did Sweden and Norway have in black and Muslim territories?

    Retard—What colonies did Sweden and Norway have in black and Muslim territories?

    Here you go. I’d be surprised if there were not some black and or Muslims in the Africa where Sweden held colonies.

    In addition to extensive territory around and beyond the Baltic, Sweden possessed overseas colonies from 1638 to 1663, and from 1784 to 1878, mainly in North America and Africa, selling or losing its territory to the Netherlands, France, and Great Britain.

    http://web.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Swedish_colonial_empire

    Norway coouldn’t have had them until very late since it was subject to Sweden for quite a while.

    Norway’s quest for independence began on May 17, 1814, with the signing of a new Constitution. Yet, Norway’s forced union with Sweden, which began Jan. 14, 1814 (after 400 years of domination by Denmark), was to last until 1905 when Norway proclaimed, and secured, full independence. May 17, Norway’s Constitution Day, is often celebrated as an “independence day

    http://www.lawzone.com/half-nor/crispo.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Alanna says:
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.


    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    So South Africa and America are the creation of people who came from Europe and settled, but were not European settlers?

    You have the nerve to spout this self-contradictory mumbo jumbo, when we are talking about the slow genocide of an entire people? What kind of human being are you?

    Mr Corvinus Troll, please go away and die, so that you stop spreading your mindless hate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You have the nerve to spout this self-contradictory mumbo jumbo, when we are talking about the slow genocide of an entire people? What kind of human being are you?"

    South Africans are not being genocided. Do you need a virtual brown paper bag for your hyperventilation?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Jake says:
    @Glaivester
    Exactly. Leftists simply hate whites.

    Yes, but the issue is WHY?

    Because Christendom was built and maintained by white people, meaning men.

    Leftism is another (like Manichaeanism, Islam, Catharism, Marxism) attempt to replace Christianity. Blacks and Asians became Christian from the beginning, but only whites, steeped in Hellenistic culture, built a true Christian civilization.

    That is the reason certain whites are not hated, even when they are assumed Christian. The Left does not hate the Episcopal Church, because it ordains women and marries gays. So the Left is fine with white men who are Episcopalian. Ditto all but a couple of Lutheran and other Anglican groups.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Semper Fidelis

    The Left does not hate the Episcopal Church, because it ordains women and marries gays. So the Left is fine with white men who are Episcopalian. Ditto all but a couple of Lutheran and other Anglican groups.
     
    The protestant church's pandering to the left is the reason why we rarely attend church anymore. If they grow some balls, once again hold their grounds on gay marriage, stop being accessories to illegal immigration and Muslim refugee sponsorship, I will think about returning. As it is the Mormon church and the Catholic church are fighting to recruit hispanic illegals, the Lutheran church is in competition with the Catholic church to sponsor Muslim refugees. One Lutheran church in the area is even holding special weekly services in Mandarin, right here in America, WTF?!

    Our churches have all cucked out, religion is now a business in America, making money in the name of God. They're in it for the money like everyone else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Negrolphin Pool
    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on the backs of slave bodies. Likewise, the diamonds in South Africa were all stolen. All the white man had to do was trick a gullible Zulu shaman or two, walk a mile and a half towards the Earth's core with a shopping cart and fill it up like a looter at Payless. And the Native Americans, living in a utopia of noble savagery and inter-tribal harmony, had deeds filed with their respective county clerks showing ownership of all the land in their possession, which was, likewise, subsequently stolen.

    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on sic the backs of slave bodies.

    Well maybe not on slave bodies, but on slave bones…

    A group of anthropologists from Howard University studied the area and found materials of West African traditions along with skeletal remains of over 400 men and women with evidence of bone lesions, muscle tears and spine fractures.
    It turns out, that area of Lower Manhattan bordered New Amsterdam’s “Common” and the only place that “free” and enslaved Africans were allowed to bury their dead during the 1600s until 1794.

    The African Burial Ground National Monument, New York, NY

    https://www.recreation.gov/marketing.do?goto=acm/Explore_And_More/exploreArticles/TheAfricanBurialGroundNationalMonumentNewYorkNewYork.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Yes, we know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. Jake says:
    @Randal

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.
     
    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it's "necessary for the greater good".

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren't busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to "use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage".

    Contemptible treason.

    Whites in South Africa, like those in Rhodesia, were betrayed by England, which booted them from the Commonwealth, which over time dealt major blows economically and meant the eventual total isolation from the world that was demanded by the American WASP Elites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Jake says:
    @Heros
    White South Africa was the first western country destroyed by an invasion of very low intelligence Blacks looking for some civilization to plunder. This was at the behest of communist jews who hated the Boers.

    Note that the Boers were the first whites after the industrial revolution to suffer genocide at the hands of the jews who wanted control of their diamond and gold mines. Note also that the Boer War was the first time the jews used concentration camps to murder entire innocent white Boer families.

    Jay Lamprecht (a South African) discusses this material in depth on his blog: http://historyreviewed.com/

    Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?

    It was England destroying the Boers. It was the British Empire that used early concentrations camps to spread terror across Boer communities. It was WASP culture that decided to conquer the Boers and force them into serving the British Empire.

    Were some Jews involved? You bet. That was a given, because WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Heros

    "Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?"
     
    An ad-hominem, a straw man and a non-sequitor in one line. Bravo.

    It was Rothschild and Oppenheimer who ended up stealing the mineral wealth and controlling the thriving western country the Boers had created from nothing. The English "Wasps", which you seem to be obsessed about, had long been mere tools of the cabal run Bank of England, after Napoleon. Parallel to the Boer genocide in SA, the Sassoon's were getting British goyim soldiers killed in the Opium wars in China, where they exported all the opium from their colonies in India. Then and now, goyim die all over the globe to advance the agenda of cabal control. Then and now goyim lives are ruined by drugs pushed by the same cartel.

    Speaking of ignorance, you would probably claim that the Dolchstoss was not primarily about Balfour, and that Balfour wasn't the root cause of both world wars.

    , @Anon
    Aren't the Boers mostly Calvinist?
    , @Semper Fidelis

    WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.
     
    WASP aristocracy in Europe are always aligned with the Jews because they are all indebted or in bed deep with the Rothschilds, who ran all their central banks and financed all the wars between the European nation states since the 1800s, getting themselves enormously wealthy in the process.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family


    From London in 1813 to 1815, Nathan Mayer Rothschild was instrumental in almost single-handedly financing the British war effort, organising the shipment of bullion to the Duke of Wellington's armies across Europe, as well as arranging the payment of British financial subsidies to their continental allies. In 1815 alone, the Rothschilds provided £9.8 million (in 1815 currency, about £566 million, €717 million or US$869 million today, when using the retail price index, and £6.58 billion, €8,34 billion or US$10.1 billion when using average earnings) in subsidy loans to Britain's continental allies.
     
    Cecil Rhodes, who founded the largest diamond company in the world in South Africa, De Beers, built the company with financing from the Rothschilds. Lionel Rothschild was the first practicing Jew to sit as a member of the British parliament. The British elite are in bed deep with the Jews because of the Rothschilds. Today the family owns 50% of The Economist magazine, not surprisingly it has become the biggest promoter of the open borders, mass immigration and globalist agenda.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    More straight line forecasting, the hallmark of small minds.

    Sooner or later those who are under assault will wake up. When that occurs you will discover that the people who invented the machine gun, the rotary cannon, mustard gas, weaponized biological pathogens and neutron bombs are of one race, and once awakened are more than capable of turning that unique ingenuity to systematically exterminating their adversaries.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    LOL! Only a truly deranged psychopath takes pride in the psychopathy of his kind.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.
     
    The devil laughs at you. ;)

    We perceived lesser people do not doubt that your cursed kind has the desire and will to exterminate us all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. wayfarer says:
    @jacques sheete
    Bro Nathaniel was on fire there! Good one.

    With all that going on, we have people here whining about how bad others are.

    Fuggedaboudit. Time we clean our own noses first. Or maybe we should just drain the swamp. Yeah; like that's gonna happen.

    Probably the most compelling attribute about Brother Nathanael, is that he’s simply shinning a light on some verifiable truths. It really seems there are next to no holes in his NWO narratives. The dude’s a unique character, who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.

    “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” – Buddha

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    The dude’s a unique character, who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.
     
    I hope you're correct.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. TG says:

    Many interesting points, but with respect, there is another major factor that you are forgetting.

    The current black South African government – like the white one before it – is using massive immigration from the rest of Africa to drive wages for working-class South African blacks ever lower. The protests at this abusive cheap-labor policy by South African blacks, against the excessive importation of blacks from other nations, has of course been largely unreported by the mass media, except for occasional accusations of ‘nativism’ against South African blacks.

    But when the populace is being crushed into poverty, the elites need an enemy to deflect the energy of all those hungry and angry young men. So in South Africa today it’s whites, in Mao’s China during the misery of the 1950′s it was counter-revolutionaries, in today’s Iran, it’s the Great Satan the USA, etc.etc.

    So sure, people tend to hate others who are different, and even more if these different people are more successful. But the elites love to fan these hatreds, and channel them towards visible but vulnerable minorities, to keep the pitchforks and torches away from their own palaces.

    Because some things are even more primal than race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Nothing new here. Africa is a tribal society in which the chiefs routinely sold their own people into slavery in return for trinkets. This is only a new version of that ancient practice.
    , @jacques sheete

    But the elites love to fan these hatreds, and channel them towards visible but vulnerable minorities, to keep the pitchforks and torches away from their own palaces.
     
    And employing nauseatingly sappy, scribbling rabble-rousers to ignite and fan those flames is part of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @Randal

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.
     
    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it's "necessary for the greater good".

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren't busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to "use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage".

    Contemptible treason.

    Don’t bother replying to leftist self-haters. Theirs is a mental affliction, so you’re essentially arguing with a schizophrenic.

    All we await is for the 50 year delusion that seized First World whites (of all nationalities) to reach its natural reversal.

    It won’t matter if the USA is majority minority or if Europe is 15% African, there will still be ample numbers of high capability whites to invest their ingenuity into expelling those who are determined to harm them.

    Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children’s future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won’t remotely be a fair fight.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark Presco
    Agree. The new religion of anti-racism is on the wane due to the overt hyper-racism of non-whites, especially blacks. It’s just a matter of time.
    , @Corvinus
    "Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children’s future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won’t remotely be a fair fight."

    There you go again all Banneresque on us. You really believe this collective inner meatgrinder white rage that has been suppressed will appear out of thin air and turn "bad whites" and their non-white pets into sausage.

    Perhaps, perhaps not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. J1234 says:

    I don’t know how, or if, it could be done, but white Americans need to send white SA’s guns and ammunition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. woof says:
    @ILANA MERCER
    CORRECTION: Well into middle-age, please.

    My grandfather once said that he had to take the kid down the street to the Doctor. I said how old is she. He said, “she is about 60 or 61.”

    Age is relative!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Heros says:
    @Jake
    Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?

    It was England destroying the Boers. It was the British Empire that used early concentrations camps to spread terror across Boer communities. It was WASP culture that decided to conquer the Boers and force them into serving the British Empire.

    Were some Jews involved? You bet. That was a given, because WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.

    “Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?”

    An ad-hominem, a straw man and a non-sequitor in one line. Bravo.

    It was Rothschild and Oppenheimer who ended up stealing the mineral wealth and controlling the thriving western country the Boers had created from nothing. The English “Wasps”, which you seem to be obsessed about, had long been mere tools of the cabal run Bank of England, after Napoleon. Parallel to the Boer genocide in SA, the Sassoon’s were getting British goyim soldiers killed in the Opium wars in China, where they exported all the opium from their colonies in India. Then and now, goyim die all over the globe to advance the agenda of cabal control. Then and now goyim lives are ruined by drugs pushed by the same cartel.

    Speaking of ignorance, you would probably claim that the Dolchstoss was not primarily about Balfour, and that Balfour wasn’t the root cause of both world wars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. pyrrhus says:
    @Voortrekker
    Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    Whites remain in South Africa because they refused and continue to refuse to acknowledge reality, and in many cases are still egalitarian cucks. Many, like the great golfer Gary Player and his extended family, continue to welcome and support the black establishment that will ultimately exterminate them and confiscate everything they own. I have been pointing this out to whites living in Southern Africa for decades, with little effect. Just remember, 3/4 of Jews in Germany had years to get out, and were even offered money to leave by the Nazis, but stayed anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Just remember, 3/4 of Jews in Germany had years to get out, and were even offered money to leave by the Nazis, but stayed anyway.

    Actually more than 2/3 left.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jake
    Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?

    It was England destroying the Boers. It was the British Empire that used early concentrations camps to spread terror across Boer communities. It was WASP culture that decided to conquer the Boers and force them into serving the British Empire.

    Were some Jews involved? You bet. That was a given, because WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.

    Aren’t the Boers mostly Calvinist?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. pyrrhus says:
    @TG
    Many interesting points, but with respect, there is another major factor that you are forgetting.

    The current black South African government - like the white one before it - is using massive immigration from the rest of Africa to drive wages for working-class South African blacks ever lower. The protests at this abusive cheap-labor policy by South African blacks, against the excessive importation of blacks from other nations, has of course been largely unreported by the mass media, except for occasional accusations of 'nativism' against South African blacks.

    But when the populace is being crushed into poverty, the elites need an enemy to deflect the energy of all those hungry and angry young men. So in South Africa today it's whites, in Mao's China during the misery of the 1950's it was counter-revolutionaries, in today's Iran, it's the Great Satan the USA, etc.etc.

    So sure, people tend to hate others who are different, and even more if these different people are more successful. But the elites love to fan these hatreds, and channel them towards visible but vulnerable minorities, to keep the pitchforks and torches away from their own palaces.

    Because some things are even more primal than race.

    Nothing new here. Africa is a tribal society in which the chiefs routinely sold their own people into slavery in return for trinkets. This is only a new version of that ancient practice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Africa is a tribal society in which the chiefs routinely sold their own people into slavery in return for trinkets. This is only a new version of that ancient practice.
     
    Sounds like modern industrialized societies, or have you been reading Tolstoy lately?

    Modern wage slavery, debt slavery, tax slavery. Hey, what's not to like?


    “But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage.”

    - Leo Tolstoy

    A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7
     

    One wonders what system the tribal dealers had in place to brainwash the captives that it was all cool. We call it school.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. joef says:

    This black-on-white murder spree has been ongoing since a dominant-party political dispensation (mobocracy) was “negotiated in my homeland for South Africans.

    “The black criminal collective consciousness understands whites are now historical fair game.”

    This is obviously a similar racial condition in the USA. And afro americans appear not to be retreating from this position, but advancing it. It does not matter that no one is a slave holder today (nor were their ancestors slave holders), or that most white ancestors immigrated to this nation after slavery was abolished, and these same immigrants started out poor. Afro animosity cannot be appeased, thus libs cannot pander enough to try to appease.

    I have commented in the past that it does not matter how we feel about the afros, because they are the primary aggressors… it matters how they feel about us, and how they act out on their hateful feelings… we can only respond to them. Despite liberal promises to the contrary, the last half century has gotten steadily worse in race relations with afros (and economically more expensive to support). MSM (especially NPR) obsesses repeatedly about the subject to no avail, race relations continue to deteriorate.

    The amount of American residents that afros kill daily (Asians/Hispanics/Whites/Blacks) aggregated over the last half century is truly staggering. And the only response of remorse we get from them is we must stop black on black crime, which implies that black on everyone else crime is okay. There is not any other category of people that kills as many as the afros themselves do.

    Furthermore, the accumulated welfare state, from local, to Federal levels, is our biggest expense (States and municipalities do not have national defense budgets). Thus, it is the largest contributor to our total govt debt levels, which afros being the biggest recipients of these entitlements. Add to that all the subprime credit loans constantly provided for afro appeasement, results in a total accumulated debt levels (public & private) that far exceeds our GDP, or M2 money supply.

    This is obviously an unsustainable problem, and the canaries in the coal mine are showing up in defaulted/bankrupted municipalities, and downrated bond rating with high credit default swaps for State governments. Even Republicans shy away from providing working families with tax cuts because of this. It is only a matter of time before this ponzi scheme not only slows the economy, but destroys it.

    This leads to a very unwelcome conclusion in the form of: racial balkanization + economic decline (national bankruptcy) = massive social unrest. Afros having the temperament of spoiled children, who refuse any accountability for their criminal antisocial/economic parasitical actions, will of course blame Whitey (which to afros means everyone else who is not Black), and the looting, arson, rioting, raping, and killing, will not just last a few days when this happens.

    So what can be done about it:
    >Afro americans refuse to reform themselves, instead just make further demands for more, and want no accountability for their criminal behavior.
    >Limo libs, who are mostly elites, or professional suburbanites, feel insulated from the consequences of directly dealing with them, and believe they are solving the problem by complaining that other Whites are racist (in their cocktail parties), and demand more sacrifices from us.
    >Leftist enjoy the fact that they can use afro americans as their political useful idiots in order to obtain their next communist revolution.
    > They both believe that they can control afros into believing that they are the good white people, not understanding that afros do not make such distinctions (especially when the welfare check stops).
    > Other liberals are panicked because they know it’s like a wolf by the ears situation, and they want to continuously postpone the inevitable by kicking the can down the road.

    Thus the above groups present enormous obstacles to a political solution. As is, afro americans are our biggest national problem, and all the obfuscations & denial won’t change this fact. So it comes down to what do we do when we no longer have the luxury to ignore it (like many suburbanites, living in cupcake land are doing now).

    By acknowledging this, the MSM/Academia will insist that you want to commit genocide; however many of us know what this is really about is preventing the afro initiated genocide from happening to the rest of us (non afros). We did not ask for this situation, but eventually it will confront us, and we will then be forced to respond to it (what will you do then?). Lets hope that I am wrong (but I don’t think so).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  71. @jacques sheete

    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.
     
    Of course. But maybe not especially. The Portuguese and Spaniards have a lot to answer for all over America. Also, it wasn't only the colonists, but the conquistadores who visited appalling atrocities on the people of the Americas. I

    I think the torturers at Abu Ghraib must've learned from the Spaniards, or at least their probable
    Israeli teachers did.

    jyles, have you read this? It's a classic and I'm sure you'll find it informative.

    "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" by Dee Brown.

    "On March 8, the militiamen arrived at Gnadenhutten. Accusing the [innocent] American Indians of the attack on the Pennsylvania settlements, the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight. The militiamen then voted to [gruesomely and cold bloodedly] execute their captives the following morning. Informed of their impending deaths, the Christian Delawares spent the night praying and singing hymns. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. "

    http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Gnadenhutten_Massacre

    … the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight.”

    And the moral of the story is… don’t be like them… don’t be unarmed… shoot back…

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    And the moral of the story is… don’t be like them… don’t be unarmed… shoot back…
     
    While true. another moral is to never trust a SoB. Especially when they have power over you.

    Another one is that most of us are in no position to be pointing fingers., but I doubt that'll sell.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. nickels says:

    But South Africa wasn’t real multiculturalism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. @ThaboZulu
    I'm irked this Jewish b*tch called Africa her homeland. I hope farm murders continue until Boers go back to Holland where they came from.

    I hope your family starves to death.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @ThaboZulu
    I'm irked this Jewish b*tch called Africa her homeland. I hope farm murders continue until Boers go back to Holland where they came from.

    Same goes for you kukamumgas in Europe and America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThaboZulu
    Showing your primitive unevolved mind. I dont care about blacks in Europe or America I'm only concerned about extirpating whites in Africa.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Mark Presco says: • Website
    @dc.sunsets
    Don't bother replying to leftist self-haters. Theirs is a mental affliction, so you're essentially arguing with a schizophrenic.

    All we await is for the 50 year delusion that seized First World whites (of all nationalities) to reach its natural reversal.

    It won't matter if the USA is majority minority or if Europe is 15% African, there will still be ample numbers of high capability whites to invest their ingenuity into expelling those who are determined to harm them.

    Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children's future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won't remotely be a fair fight.

    Agree. The new religion of anti-racism is on the wane due to the overt hyper-racism of non-whites, especially blacks. It’s just a matter of time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Ron Unz says:
    @jacques sheete

    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.
     
    Of course. But maybe not especially. The Portuguese and Spaniards have a lot to answer for all over America. Also, it wasn't only the colonists, but the conquistadores who visited appalling atrocities on the people of the Americas. I

    I think the torturers at Abu Ghraib must've learned from the Spaniards, or at least their probable
    Israeli teachers did.

    jyles, have you read this? It's a classic and I'm sure you'll find it informative.

    "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" by Dee Brown.

    "On March 8, the militiamen arrived at Gnadenhutten. Accusing the [innocent] American Indians of the attack on the Pennsylvania settlements, the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight. The militiamen then voted to [gruesomely and cold bloodedly] execute their captives the following morning. Informed of their impending deaths, the Christian Delawares spent the night praying and singing hymns. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. "

    http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Gnadenhutten_Massacre

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown…. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”

    I’ll admit I haven’t read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind “genocide” at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It’s certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I’ve read here and there, I’ve gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater “urban crime genocide” for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I’d wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I’d wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.
     
    Numbers, schmumbers. It's the principles involved.
    , @Rurik

    erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.
     
    Well Mr. Unz, I'm far, far from erudite, but I'll chime in with one perspective for what it's worth.

    I don't think it's about numbers per se. I think it's more about an ancient and tribal way of life that was extinguished to make room for the white folks and their way of life.

    Just as I wouldn't characterize the blacks of Africa as having been genocided by the whites who carved Rhodesia and South Africa out of the jungle, even if many thousands or more were ultimately killed in the process. The festering wounds there are not about the hundreds of years old deaths, but rather about the presence of the whites on that continent and in their midst, reminding them of the vast chasm that divides these two races of peoples, just as the descendants of the Amerindians (on poverty stricken reservations) no doubt resent the white man's presence in N. America, (as a reminder of what was lost, and their relative status today in the lands of their proud ancestors)

    in defense of the whites- the blacks and the Amerindians were hardly treating each other with kindness and compassion before the whites came. One only think of the human sacrifice practiced by the Incas and the Aztecs and Mayans. Or the notorious savagery of the Apache or Mohawk or Comanche. If the whites were to leave Africa tomorrow, who doubts but that the entire sub-Sahara would descend into tribal savagery and even perhaps cannibalism?

    But then again, look at how the white man exploits these lands and rapes them dry. Look at how pristine and beautiful the continents of N. America and Africa were for century after glorious century, until the white man came and wiped out the buffalo and fauna (both American and African) and built his concrete jungles of spiritual materialism and benumbing, infinite greed.

    Soon N. America and Africa will be barren and desolate of all wild life forms, to be replaced with bipedal farm animal$. As Ted Nugent wrote, the 'the white man.. couldn't see beyond his billfold'

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people's self-determination in their own lands. But the PTB today are bored, and like Michael Vick, only with humans instead of dogs, they get their thrills by cramming incompatible peoples into forced proximity with each other- like Roman 'nobles' watching the gladiators fight to the death for their petty amusements. And so separate and sovereign territories for the myriad tribes of the planet won't be allowed to happen.

    Best to just go to Uruguay and watch the strife from a from a nice distance.
    , @Logan
    A relatively small number of white massacres of Indians show up repeatedly in the accounts: Sand Creek, Washita, Wounded Knee, Gnadhutten, etc. This is for the simple and obvious reason that such massacres were out of the ordinary, and when they did happen were for the most part conducted by frontiersmen or militia, which were often little more than mobs, not the regular armed forces of the US government. The frontiersmen in particular were often just about as uncivilized as those they fought.

    Meanwhile, the norm for most tribes were atrocities that made just about any of the white massacres of the Indians look like a nice outdoor lunch. Comanches, for instance, particularly enjoyed gang-raping captive women while they were being tortured to death.

    AFAIK, whites, even frontiersmen, much less the Army, never took great pains to bring captive Indian men, women and children home so they could be leisurely tortured to death as slowly as possible. Most Indian tribes did, quite routinely.

    You can make a darn good case that whites, in the cases where they did commit extreme atrocities, were simply showing the good manners of imitating the traditions of the land.

    The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.

    Meanwhile, at about the same time as the last of the great Plains Indian wars, the Argentines really did set out to exterminate their Indians, and pretty much succeeded.

    , @whoever
    I'll only make a brief comment about the Christian Delawares, since I am Brethren and my ancestors, both of European and American extraction, had some connection to these events. If you want to delve into first-hand accounts, or as near as we can get to that, of that era, the peoples and conflicts, may I suggest you start with Geschichte der Mission der Evangelischen Brüder unter den Indianern in Nordamerika. Although our people had been in British North America for generations by that time, we still wrote in German, but here is a contemporary English translation: History of the mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America.
    You may also find interesting A narrative of the mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians : from its commencement, in the year 1740, to the close of the year 1808 ; comprising all the remarkable incidents which took place at their missionary stations during that period ; interspersed with anecdotes, historical facts, speeches of Indians, and other interesting matter.
    While much of the conflict of those days was between Indians and "whites," a subset of the conflict was between the English and the Germans; the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.
    ....
    I had thought to write a long comment, but I've changed my mind. Suffice it to say that the ancestor who led directly to me, after the horrors of the year of the bloody sevens and subsequent events, had had enough of the English and traveled west until he fetched up at the Rocky Mountains, where he and his descendants remained until the Mexican-American War and ensuing events led to three decades of disaster. While not that many of of that branch of my family's ancestors were actually killed in fighting, half of all that population died of cholera in 1850, a disease hitherto unknown to them. Smallpox, chicken pox, scarlet fever, measles ... all took their toll in subsequent years, as well. There were massacres, combats with militias and soldiers, killing and killing until the final, abject surrender of the pitiful remnants.
    Was it a premeditated genocide -- or just what happens when two peoples fight for possession of the same land and the stronger wins? Does it matter? It was what it was.
    Had the victors, the white Americans, wanted to exterminate the pitiful survivors of the plains tribes, they could have done so with hardly any effort at all. But they didn't do that. Instead, they extended a helping hand, and offered to welcome them into their civilization, placing images of plains Indians on their coinage, teaching their young boys and girls Indian ways, as in this once-popular book: Indian scout talks; a guide for Boy scouts and Campfire girls.
    We should not forget all the bad that happened in the struggle for this continent. America is fought-for land. But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.

    Coda:

    But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind “genocide” at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.
     
    Substitute "Jew" for "Amerind" and "German" for "American" in your statement: how does that make you feel? And do you care about arguing about absolute numbers of deaths or whether those who died perished from disease and starvation or were directly executed? Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?
    , @SolontoCroesus
    Ron --

    Marshall Eakins, professor at Vanderbilt, produced "Conquest of the Americas" for The Teaching Company
    https://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/conquest-of-the-americas.html

    Eakins lectures cover all the Americas, and (iirc) argue for a very high body count.

    Now that you heightened focus on the topic, I'll have to listen to the lectures again. As I recall, they were very well done, carefully argued, fully documented.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. joef says:
    @George Orwell
    Indeed, this is very much the price of European colonialism. The Europeans grew very fat and rich off the people they conquered and pillaged, but they failed to realize that stolen wealth would act as a beacon for all the poor and wretched of the earth.

    A few centuries from now, you can expect a much browner and more Muslim Europe because of their imperial arrogance.

    You mean the European colonialism that provided farming, water supply, sewage treatment, electric grid, telephones, railroads, refrigeration, factories, hospitals, medicine, light bulbs, indoor plumbing, and other similar prosperity?? Oh, that must have been terrible… lol

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    ‘South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa.’

    You’re right–American blacks are far worse.

    ‘One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.’

    Yes, I suppose one could, if that is one pulled one’s head out of one’s ass to discern the fucking obvious. Mischief. Indeed. But yes, it’s probably highly likely that once the kukamunga’s take over they will fully uphold the Constitution–although one does wonder, what with the recent mischief being made, e.g. defacing of Jefferson, Washington and Lee statues, takeovers at several universities by a handful of kukamungas who are very, very loud and self assertive.

    ‘“Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”
    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.’

    This thought is, if possible, deeper than your opening comment: you know, America is not South Africa and all that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. It is part of nature to fear and dislike the different. But there is another nature that longs for the different.

    Dogs and humans for instance. Dogs feel closer to humans than to other dogs. Dogs revere humans as superior. And many people have higher opinion of dogs than for humans. Dogs are seen as loyal and loving.

    Even among humans, there could be preference for the Other if the Other is seen as more just, more able, more fair, more attractive. Taiwanese are Chinese but they prefer American hegemony over the Pacific because they see fellow Chinese in the mainland as yellow barbarians.
    Many Zimbabweans wish for return of white rule because Mugabugabe and his black tribal thugs have been so vile.
    Most Arabs would rather go live in Germany than deal with their haggly-waggly kind.
    And some whites wax romantic about the Other as wiser or more spiritual or ‘cooler’. People tend to undervalue & take for granted what they got and overvalue & obsess about what others got.

    Many non-whites are drawn to white nations because they see whites as superior in every way. These non-whites get little or no justice from fellow non-whites who are superstitious, corrupt, brutal, and clannish. So, they want to go to America(or Canada or Australia) and live under white rule. Also, they find whites to be sexually more attractive.

    This may seem counter-intuitive because non-whites scream about ‘white racism’ and ‘white guilt’. One might think, “If they hate whites so much, why do they want to run from their own kind and live in white nations?”

    But it is precisely because they prefer whites and want to live in white nations that they use PC to lower white defenses against non-white immigration/colonization.
    And in a way, whites who welcome mass-colonization from Third World are practicing a kind of soft subconscious supremacism. They feel, “You darkies wanna leave your own inferior nations and cultures because you know that the white world and white people are better. You want to live in our superior world because you are incapable of creating anything so good in your own world.”

    Most non-white ‘immigrants’ are closet-white-supremacists. They want to run away from their own kind, own nations, and own cultures to start new lives and take on new identities under white rule. They prefer white nations(esp those created by Northern Europeans) to their own kind with long history and culture. Chinese, Hindus, and Arabs have long deep history, culture, and identity going back 1000s of years, but they are willing to give that all up just to have a chance to live with whites, have sex with whites, work for whites, and take o white names like ‘Heather’ and ‘Robert’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThaboZulu
    Americans are delusional Zimbabweans don't want whites back and I hope you disabuse yourself of that notion.
    , @anonymous
    Much of what you say may be true, but the likes of you forget that whites are for the most part, Pagans, Polytheist, Human-Worshipping Spiritual-Losers.

    Finite Winners on the one side, and Infinite Losers on the other.

    People like you get to gloat, as you have so well articulated above, but I hear there will not be much gloating in Hell.
    , @Okechukwu

    Many Zimbabweans wish for return of white rule because Mugabugabe and his black tribal thugs have been so vile.
     
    This is absurd. You can probably count on one hand the number of Zimbabweans that want "white rule" and they're all in the mental institution.

    have sex with whites
     
    Haha. You people live in some kind of weird alternative reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @wayfarer
    Probably the most compelling attribute about Brother Nathanael, is that he's simply shinning a light on some verifiable truths. It really seems there are next to no holes in his NWO narratives. The dude's a unique character, who's effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.

    “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” – Buddha

    The dude’s a unique character, who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.

    I hope you’re correct.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wayfarer
    ... who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains of truth.

    “ On the mountains of truth you can never climb in vain: either you will reach a point higher up today, or you will be training your powers so that you will be able to climb higher tomorrow.” – Friedrich Nietzsche
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Ward Churchill, ‘A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present’, San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Ward Churchill, ‘A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present’, San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.
     
    He sounds like an "academic holocaust-denier" to me. I suspect that the true number of Amerinds exterminated by whites in North America was at least six quintrillion...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @TG
    Many interesting points, but with respect, there is another major factor that you are forgetting.

    The current black South African government - like the white one before it - is using massive immigration from the rest of Africa to drive wages for working-class South African blacks ever lower. The protests at this abusive cheap-labor policy by South African blacks, against the excessive importation of blacks from other nations, has of course been largely unreported by the mass media, except for occasional accusations of 'nativism' against South African blacks.

    But when the populace is being crushed into poverty, the elites need an enemy to deflect the energy of all those hungry and angry young men. So in South Africa today it's whites, in Mao's China during the misery of the 1950's it was counter-revolutionaries, in today's Iran, it's the Great Satan the USA, etc.etc.

    So sure, people tend to hate others who are different, and even more if these different people are more successful. But the elites love to fan these hatreds, and channel them towards visible but vulnerable minorities, to keep the pitchforks and torches away from their own palaces.

    Because some things are even more primal than race.

    But the elites love to fan these hatreds, and channel them towards visible but vulnerable minorities, to keep the pitchforks and torches away from their own palaces.

    And employing nauseatingly sappy, scribbling rabble-rousers to ignite and fan those flames is part of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @pyrrhus
    Nothing new here. Africa is a tribal society in which the chiefs routinely sold their own people into slavery in return for trinkets. This is only a new version of that ancient practice.

    Africa is a tribal society in which the chiefs routinely sold their own people into slavery in return for trinkets. This is only a new version of that ancient practice.

    Sounds like modern industrialized societies, or have you been reading Tolstoy lately?

    Modern wage slavery, debt slavery, tax slavery. Hey, what’s not to like?

    “But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage.”

    - Leo Tolstoy

    A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

    One wonders what system the tribal dealers had in place to brainwash the captives that it was all cool. We call it school.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @jacques sheete

    Of course the European colonists in S Africa behaved in the same way as they behaved in the America’s, especially in N America.
     
    Of course. But maybe not especially. The Portuguese and Spaniards have a lot to answer for all over America. Also, it wasn't only the colonists, but the conquistadores who visited appalling atrocities on the people of the Americas. I

    I think the torturers at Abu Ghraib must've learned from the Spaniards, or at least their probable
    Israeli teachers did.

    jyles, have you read this? It's a classic and I'm sure you'll find it informative.

    "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" by Dee Brown.

    "On March 8, the militiamen arrived at Gnadenhutten. Accusing the [innocent] American Indians of the attack on the Pennsylvania settlements, the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight. The militiamen then voted to [gruesomely and cold bloodedly] execute their captives the following morning. Informed of their impending deaths, the Christian Delawares spent the night praying and singing hymns. The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. "

    http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Gnadenhutten_Massacre

    No, but I do have
    Stan Hoig, “The Sand Creek Massacre’, Oklahoma, 1961, 1982
    Ronald Wright, ‘Stolen Continents, Conquest and Resistance in the Americas’, 1992, London
    John R. Cook, ‘The Border and the Buffalo, An untold story of the south western plains’, 1907, 1989, Austin, Texas,
    the deliberate extermination of the buffalo to make the Indian way of living impossible
    Francis Parkman, ‘The Oregon trail’, New York, 2002, Boston, 1883, 1847
    Edward H. Spicer, ‘Cycles of Conquest, The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States of the Southwest’, 1533 – 1960′, Tucson, 1962, 1970
    As Churchill stated ‘the higher civilisation has the better weapons’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Ron Unz says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Ward Churchill, 'A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present', San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.

    Ward Churchill, ‘A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present’, San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.

    He sounds like an “academic holocaust-denier” to me. I suspect that the true number of Amerinds exterminated by whites in North America was at least six quintrillion…

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    In addition to the above mentioned books you might read:
    ⦁ Paul Kane, 'Wanderings of an artist among the Indians of America', 1859, 1996, New York
    ⦁ Walker D. Wyman, ‘Nothing but prairie and Sky, Life on the Dakota Range in the Early Days’, 1954, University of Oklahoma
    ⦁ Margaret Irvin Carrington, ‘Absaraka, Home of the Crows, Experience of an officers wife on the Plains’, 1868, 1983 University of Nebraska
    ⦁ William Bartram, ed. Mark Van Doren, `Travels of William Bartram, Trough North & South Carolina, Georgia, East & West Florida, Cherokee, Muscogulges, Chataws’, 1791, 1955, New York
    ⦁ Hugh L. Willoughby, ‘Across the Everglades, A Canoe Journey of Exploration’, 1898, 1992, Port Salerno, Florida
    How many Indians lived originally in what now is the USA, nobody will ever know for sure.
    You do not understand the title of the book, the denial mentioned is the holocaust of the Indians.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Ron, a bug recurs. I tried to email Hank Rearden's succinct demolition job #169 but the CAPTCHA system again didn't work. I.e. The needed CAPTCHA letters and/or numbers didn't appear for copying.
    (I am using a phone app).
    BTW why is Hank Rearden's comment surrounded by an orange/brown rectangle? Is that to show your personal approbation? If so, and anyway, Is there a function for finding all such celebrated comments?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @GourmetDan

    ... the soldiers rounded [ the unarmed Indians] up and placed the men and women in separate buildings in the abandoned village overnight."
     
    And the moral of the story is... don't be like them... don't be unarmed... shoot back...

    And the moral of the story is… don’t be like them… don’t be unarmed… shoot back…

    While true. another moral is to never trust a SoB. Especially when they have power over you.

    Another one is that most of us are in no position to be pointing fingers., but I doubt that’ll sell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Ron Unz

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.... The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”
     
    I'll admit I haven't read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind "genocide" at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It's certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I've read here and there, I've gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater "urban crime genocide" for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I'd wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I’d wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    Numbers, schmumbers. It’s the principles involved.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Rurik says:
    @Ron Unz

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.... The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”
     
    I'll admit I haven't read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind "genocide" at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It's certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I've read here and there, I've gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater "urban crime genocide" for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I'd wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    Well Mr. Unz, I’m far, far from erudite, but I’ll chime in with one perspective for what it’s worth.

    I don’t think it’s about numbers per se. I think it’s more about an ancient and tribal way of life that was extinguished to make room for the white folks and their way of life.

    Just as I wouldn’t characterize the blacks of Africa as having been genocided by the whites who carved Rhodesia and South Africa out of the jungle, even if many thousands or more were ultimately killed in the process. The festering wounds there are not about the hundreds of years old deaths, but rather about the presence of the whites on that continent and in their midst, reminding them of the vast chasm that divides these two races of peoples, just as the descendants of the Amerindians (on poverty stricken reservations) no doubt resent the white man’s presence in N. America, (as a reminder of what was lost, and their relative status today in the lands of their proud ancestors)

    in defense of the whites- the blacks and the Amerindians were hardly treating each other with kindness and compassion before the whites came. One only think of the human sacrifice practiced by the Incas and the Aztecs and Mayans. Or the notorious savagery of the Apache or Mohawk or Comanche. If the whites were to leave Africa tomorrow, who doubts but that the entire sub-Sahara would descend into tribal savagery and even perhaps cannibalism?

    But then again, look at how the white man exploits these lands and rapes them dry. Look at how pristine and beautiful the continents of N. America and Africa were for century after glorious century, until the white man came and wiped out the buffalo and fauna (both American and African) and built his concrete jungles of spiritual materialism and benumbing, infinite greed.

    Soon N. America and Africa will be barren and desolate of all wild life forms, to be replaced with bipedal farm animal$. As Ted Nugent wrote, the ‘the white man.. couldn’t see beyond his billfold’

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands. But the PTB today are bored, and like Michael Vick, only with humans instead of dogs, they get their thrills by cramming incompatible peoples into forced proximity with each other- like Roman ‘nobles’ watching the gladiators fight to the death for their petty amusements. And so separate and sovereign territories for the myriad tribes of the planet won’t be allowed to happen.

    Best to just go to Uruguay and watch the strife from a from a nice distance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sollipsist
    The spectacle of savagery was enjoyed by all the Roman people, regardless of wealth and class. In fact, there were fewer ways for upcoming politicians to gain the approving popularity of the poor masses than by spending lavishly on "the games" (although subsidizing the grain dole always helped). This would not have been a consistently winning public relations strategy if it had only been the rich and powerful that were titillated by contests of suffering and death.
    , @anonymous

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands
     
    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.

    It is so fucking simple! Really!

    But, will the cursed west follow such a strategy? ;)
    , @Gaius Vandali
    These farm animals of North America is what feeds the world. Revert 100 years and the entire world will starve to death.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. neutral says:
    @Voortrekker
    Why do whites remain in South Africa unless they are unable to liquidate assets to emigrate? Are they held hostage by some real or imagined foes?

    And go where exactly, America, Germany, France, Britain, etc ? Wherever I go do you think the hatred and persecution of whites will be any less in the future? Just look how things bad are now in those places, now imagine that with South African demographics (which is rapidly occurring in most of the post West).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @unit472
    The idea that there was vast wealth waiting to be stolen in North America, South Africa, Australia or anywhere else where Europeans settled seems to be a fantasy of darker skinned peoples. There was land and there were minerals of course but these resources were either unknown to the soot toned inhabitants or were beyond their ability to develop. Manhattan was only worth something as a port and to need a port one had to have ships capable of crossing the sea and cargoes for those ships to carry.

    Its worth noting I suppose that Spain, which did manage to plunder gold and gemstones from its colonial possessions, ended up the poorest of the colonial powers precisely because the pursuit of easy money neglected the long term development of agriculture and industry. Iron ore and coal may not have set off 'gold rushes' but they did, with the application of human ingenuity, create far more wealth than Columbian emeralds or any vein of gold.

    S. Africa has massive deposits of gold, diamonds and uranium, so it’s a lot more like S. America than N. America. Of course, like S. America and N. America, it’s also ideal for agriculture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Logan
    Right.

    The world outside Europe was peaceful and prosperous until Europeans came along and stole their wealth for themselves. So now those countries are poor.

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    "Although these theories exercised a great deal of influence at the time, economic evidence does not bear them out. Economic expansion in Europe continued to be fueled mostly by trade and expansion within the developed world, not with new colonies. Key industries may very well have benefited from imperial holdings, but few countries could boast that their colonies as a whole provided a net profit to the national economy."


    https://faculty.unlv.edu/gbrown/westernciv/wc201/wciv2c23/wciv2c23lsec3.html

    It is certainly a fact that whites did not "steal the wealth" of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area.

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    In most cases, it was a net loss for the country as a whole, and did very little to benefit poor Europeans. But as with today’s wars of ‘democracy promotion’ and ‘régime change,’ it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).

    Read More
    • Replies: @wayfarer

    But as with today’s wars of ‘democracy promotion’ and ‘régime change,’ it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).
     
    Financed by N M Rothschild & Sons, Rhodes succeeded over the next 17 years in buying up all the smaller diamond mining operations in the Kimberley area.”

    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Rhodes
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_M_Rothschild_%26_Sons
    , @Logan
    Well, of course. But the comment I was responding to implied that imperialist nations became wealthy by plundering the wealth of those they colonized. Which is not at all what happened.

    As you say, individuals and companies profited greatly. Nabobs of the East India Company and Caribbean planters of the 18th century first among them.

    But England, France, Germany not so much.

    The early days of colonialism, primarily by Netherlands, Spain and Portugal there was a good deal of
    outright plundering that went on. Making the home countries indeed more wealthy overall. But at least in Spain and Portugal this was a highly two-edged sword, damaging the imperialist powers perhaps more than the conquered.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. wayfarer says:
    @jacques sheete

    The dude’s a unique character, who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains.
     
    I hope you're correct.

    … who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains of truth.

    “ On the mountains of truth you can never climb in vain: either you will reach a point higher up today, or you will be training your powers so that you will be able to climb higher tomorrow.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Love it.

    I feel a need for a mountain of truth to somehow escape this dunghill of lies, theft and murder.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. wayfarer says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.
     
    In most cases, it was a net loss for the country as a whole, and did very little to benefit poor Europeans. But as with today's wars of 'democracy promotion' and 'régime change,' it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).

    But as with today’s wars of ‘democracy promotion’ and ‘régime change,’ it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).

    Financed by N M Rothschild & Sons, Rhodes succeeded over the next 17 years in buying up all the smaller diamond mining operations in the Kimberley area.”

    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Rhodes
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_M_Rothschild_%26_Sons

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Tiny Duck says:

    Maybe if whites would show compassion and a willingness to share other people wouldn’t have to seek justice

    maybe if whites were the only group that didn’t vote overwhelmingly republican while all others voted liberal than people wouldn’t be angry

    Read More
    • Troll: Beefcake the Mighty
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  95. Realist says:

    Ilana.

    You and your father fought for anti-apartheid which when accomplished led to the current situation

    Read More
    • Replies: @europeasant
    Maybe she has owned up to the error of her ways and of her tribes peoples ways. Itz never too late to learn.
    She sees a far greater threat to the planet as "The Threat of a .... ......"

    Itz never too late.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. gT says:

    My father always used to tell me about how he and my uncle used to ride their donkeys to school in the morning. They would be wearing their school uniform and school shoes and would chew bubble gum on the way to school (back then we owned shops as well as farms). Once the bubble gum was devoid of any flavour they would spit the bubble gum out onto the ground and then white kids wearing only flour sacks with holes cut in for the head and arms would rush to grab the discarded bubble gum from the ground to put it into their mouths so that they could also experience some of the flavour of the bubble gum.

    This is what the majority of Afrikaners were like before Apartheid. Apartheid took them from poor whites to modern, educated citizens while at the same time reducing non-whites to a destitute existence.

    Even the famous cattle of the Afrikaners, also called the Afrikaner also by the way, is just an indigenous breed stolen from the Khoikhoi (Hottentots), one of Southern Africa’s original inhabitants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaner_cattle

    The Bushmen / San are the original inhabitants of South Africa, the Whites and Blacks (Bantu) are just settlers here. The Whites arrived by sea onto the west coast and the Blacks migrated down the east coast.

    I therefor have to take with a heavy pinch of salt the story about the farm murders. It has often been observed that when a white person dies its a tragedy because a human being has lost his / her life, while when a non white kicks the bucket its not even a statistic. Methinks the crooks doth protest too much.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Apartheid was a big affirmative-action program for poor Afrikaners. Not just keeping the blacks down so they wouldn't have to compete with them, but also pushing Boers into the middle/upper class professions traditionally dominated by English and Jews.
    , @Anon
    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence. It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced. Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it. Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.
    , @A South African
    You are a totally ignorant individual. There are both black AND white farmers murdered. This year has averaged 3 murders on the farms a day. Farmers produce all the raw material for feeding the South African population. It is one of the most dangerous occupations in the world. Murder rate 154 per 100k. Normal murder rate in South Africa is 65 per 100k. We white people are forced to band together to protect ourselves, and we can NOT trust any person of color. That is a sad situation. The hatred on social media just grows by the day. Anyway, I have no interest in living in any other EU or Anglo nation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Logan says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.
     
    In most cases, it was a net loss for the country as a whole, and did very little to benefit poor Europeans. But as with today's wars of 'democracy promotion' and 'régime change,' it greatly benefited a few, wealthy, connected individuals (think Cecil Rhodes).

    Well, of course. But the comment I was responding to implied that imperialist nations became wealthy by plundering the wealth of those they colonized. Which is not at all what happened.

    As you say, individuals and companies profited greatly. Nabobs of the East India Company and Caribbean planters of the 18th century first among them.

    But England, France, Germany not so much.

    The early days of colonialism, primarily by Netherlands, Spain and Portugal there was a good deal of
    outright plundering that went on. Making the home countries indeed more wealthy overall. But at least in Spain and Portugal this was a highly two-edged sword, damaging the imperialist powers perhaps more than the conquered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    Right you are. And a similar thing happened in the South. Before the Civil War only a small minority of whites--about 25% of them--owned slaves, and about 80% of the slaves were owned by a mere 2% of the whites (the big plantation owners). Yet it is routinely alleged that all American whites everywhere--even in the states where slavery never existed, in fact, even in the states that did not yet exist when slavery was still practiced--are said to have somehow benefited from the peculiar institution ("white privilege").

    The élites are very good at shifting blame, aren't they!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Logan says:
    @Ron Unz

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.... The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”
     
    I'll admit I haven't read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind "genocide" at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It's certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I've read here and there, I've gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater "urban crime genocide" for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I'd wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    A relatively small number of white massacres of Indians show up repeatedly in the accounts: Sand Creek, Washita, Wounded Knee, Gnadhutten, etc. This is for the simple and obvious reason that such massacres were out of the ordinary, and when they did happen were for the most part conducted by frontiersmen or militia, which were often little more than mobs, not the regular armed forces of the US government. The frontiersmen in particular were often just about as uncivilized as those they fought.

    Meanwhile, the norm for most tribes were atrocities that made just about any of the white massacres of the Indians look like a nice outdoor lunch. Comanches, for instance, particularly enjoyed gang-raping captive women while they were being tortured to death.

    AFAIK, whites, even frontiersmen, much less the Army, never took great pains to bring captive Indian men, women and children home so they could be leisurely tortured to death as slowly as possible. Most Indian tribes did, quite routinely.

    You can make a darn good case that whites, in the cases where they did commit extreme atrocities, were simply showing the good manners of imitating the traditions of the land.

    The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.

    Meanwhile, at about the same time as the last of the great Plains Indian wars, the Argentines really did set out to exterminate their Indians, and pretty much succeeded.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gustafus
    Goose stepping Nationalist ... REPORTING FOR DUTY

    I am a devoted racist. I sift my darkies as needed, with a healthy eye for intrinsic goodness. There are good reasons for enjoining some of them.

    That said - I'll never forget a flight over the Andes with a wealthy investor from a Colorado Ski town.... Our guide was a government rep extolling the virtues of modern day Chile -- assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous.... no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    AGAIN - I"m a committed racist - knowing the black and brown hordes of the 3rd world are charging the gates of Western Civilization ... with blood in their eyes.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    Somehow I think Chile will survive the exploding populations of Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.

    , @Corvinus
    "The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance."

    Actually, it was proven about our nation's genocidal policy toward Native Americans. All because they had land and resources we wanted.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Century_of_Dishonor

    http://americanhistory.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-42
    , @jilles dykstra
    I see a persistent belief in fairy tales.
    There are two reasons for the almost complete disappearence of Indians from the present USA
    - the Indian immune system differs from the European one, Indians died from the bacteria and viruses the traders and colonists brought with them
    - the systematic driving west of the Indians, to areas where they could not live, killing them if they resisted to depart.
    There also was intentional infecting Indians with illnesses, such as smallpox, by giving them blankets from hospitals.
    At the first visit of Europeans to the what is now USA east coast, from Florida nothwards, the coast was inhabited.
    At the second visit European diseases had depopulated completely the coastal regions.
    That the USA violated all agreements with the Indians is beyond all doubt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Anon-og says:
    @jacques sheete

    Every incompetent minority needs someone to blame for their own shortcomings.
     
    What explains the need for majorities, both competent and incompetent, to blame others for their troubles?

    Yesterday's majorities blamed commies and nazis. Protestants blamed Catholics and Catholics blamed Protestants. Large portions of each blamed Jews and Jews blamed them. Today they scapegoat Muslims and blacks.

    Note to author of the article.:

    Please quit trying to play the victim card. It's laughable. And no, I didn't bother to read your scribbling;the title alone was enough to nauseate me.

    Note to author of the article.:
    Please quit trying to play the victim card. It’s laughable. And no, I didn’t bother to read your scribbling;the title alone was enough to nauseate me.

    Oh but how can she quit, she ultimately has a pro-Israel agenda here as is always the case with her, and the victim card is their favorite one to play.

    Read More
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. I order you to please stop.
    You are scaring me to death.

    However I see this same behavior in my part of the world.
    It will end soon when we as a collective wake up.
    Keep the channels open.
    Keep well
    Europeasant

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. dcite says:
    @Thomm
    Indeed. This is why those who stayed after 1992 or so failed to act in self-preservation.

    Even those who have land to sell can sell it to the Chinese (who will never allow blacks to kill them).

    They’ve “allowed” Malays to kill them in Malaysia and other southeast Asian places where they settled. World on Fire

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    But they were diaspora Chinese from long before China became powerful again. In Africa there are increasing numbers of Chinese from today's Communist about to be superpower.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Art says:

    Why Hatred of Whites Is Here to Stay

    Clearly – in America it is the Jew control of the media.

    With Jews like Martin Baron running the Washington Post – white Christian America is doomed.

    Baron – is the lead anti-white matrix of news in America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hank Rearden
    White Christian America is enthralled by Jewish fables of a fantastical afterlife, offered to those willing to hate their own blood (Luke 14:26, Matthew 19:27-30) and pledge allegiance to a foreign king (John 1:49) in a foreign capital city (Revelation 21:2). They willingly give American's wealth to "our greatest ally," as the (((Bible))) commands:

    "They were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews' spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings." (Romans 15:27)
     
    Benedict Arnold wasn't half the traitor that White Christian America is to their own blood and soil.

    "Jews first!" (Romans 1:16)
     
    White Christian America brought a quick end to the America First Committee (1940-1941,) and sacrificed the nation's blood and wealth to make the world safe for (((Communism))). Hey, Bible says "they owe it to the Jews."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @fnn
    Based Jewish guy on Cville:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGWCLhbBKQI

    shouldn’t these gasbags be flipping burgers?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. “The physical, existential vulnerability of white South Africans flows from a confluence of historical antecedents that have placed them in a uniquely precarious position. “The white minority surrendered political dominance in return for non-racial constitutional safeguards.” By forswearing control over the state apparatus, whites ceded mastery over their destiny, vesting their existential survival in a political dispensation: a liberal democracy”

    See, this is what happens when you don’t have a wall!

    USA, are you listening?

    Get the wall built. Right now!

    Manned by the USA Army.

    Even in this case, we the common man will man the forts when our land is in danger.

    BTW look at the demographics of Central and South America.

    I count about 560 million. What do you count?

    Letz get the wall built unless the same fate awaits us as South Africa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I am all for building a wall for practical and symbolic seasons.

    But what happened in South Africa is the direct result of several hundred years of internally mismanaging human capital.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. dcite says:
    @Negrolphin Pool
    Right, the NYC skyline was literally built by on the backs of slave bodies. Likewise, the diamonds in South Africa were all stolen. All the white man had to do was trick a gullible Zulu shaman or two, walk a mile and a half towards the Earth's core with a shopping cart and fill it up like a looter at Payless. And the Native Americans, living in a utopia of noble savagery and inter-tribal harmony, had deeds filed with their respective county clerks showing ownership of all the land in their possession, which was, likewise, subsequently stolen.

    Whenever anybody tells me blacks “built” the cities, it sounds so absurd. The urbanizing areas of 19th and early 20th century America had very few blacks and enormous white immigrant working class populations. 1/3 of Cinciannati was white immigrant in 1890. The death rate among Irish immigrants in laboring jobs was particularly high. A history professor said the Irish were preferred for really dangerous jobs in the ante-bellum South because there was an unending supply of them, and blacks were too expensive to risk. A black co-worker taking the class passed that on to me.
    Even in the late 20th century they had to find builders from Italy to refurbish the mayor’s mansion in downtown Baltimore. I still remember people being afraid that the future mayors would all be black, and the exquisite mansion would be gradually destroyed. They’d had experience with black takeovers and it was never good. I don’t know what it looks like today.
    Blacks’ labor was, however, crucial in maintaining cities in the Gulf area and probably other southern cities. Apparently even skilled labor became associated with black or “mulattos” and even skills like brick laying would indicate someone’s race. This did not happen outside the Gulf area. I think the French/Spanish influence had something to do with the attitudes in New Orleans and the Gulf area.
    White creole women even insisted that their husbands be born in Europe and not America, which led to a lot of interesting arrangements.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Realist
    Ilana.

    You and your father fought for anti-apartheid which when accomplished led to the current situation

    Maybe she has owned up to the error of her ways and of her tribes peoples ways. Itz never too late to learn.
    She sees a far greater threat to the planet as “The Threat of a …. ……”

    Itz never too late.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    Are you her spokesperson?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.

    Maybe study up on the Renaissance a bit, especially its precursors, and starting with the precursors and working your way through the Renaissance and how Europe, and NW Europe, got swept up in it, watch how that whole arc works itself out.

    Look more closely at the demographics than – it is obvious – you already have.

    Not that the basic statement is wrong – America is indeed the creation of NW European settlers, but the narrow causal sliver you want to walk away from with this leads to wide sweeping swaths of misery.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. LauraMR says:
    @gustafus
    For once. I'm speechless. Well done young woman.

    The racists agree with Ilana, which is the whole point.

    Whites are going to continue being hated… by some people.

    Blacks are going to continue being hated… by some people.

    Who are these hating people? The racist.

    How many are there? Some.

    Are racists representative of everyone? Nope. Only of themselves.

    Are racists going to change? Unlikely. Racist are generally speaking people with low IQs, traumatic experiences, or both. See feminists for a theme twist of the same hatred.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Miro23 says:

    It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design.

    Some foolish Anglo Americans may believe this, the same as some foolish white South Africans did, but it’s an aspect of over-civilization. There’s too much trust. The reality is that they’ll be physically attacked and kicked out ,the same as in South Africa, which looks like the project of the US’s own ruling Jewish not-so-idiocracy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    That's the irony of left-liberalism - they believe all people can be like left-libs aspire to be, ie magnanimous in all they do, say, and think. That makes the lib-left the ultimate supremacist. It's Christianity gone mad; instead of contemplating conversion the idea is to befriend every religion/ethic culture on the other religion/culture's terms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. ANON says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    The nightmarish downward spiral that is South Africa is nothing more or less than the spectre haunting all advanced, civilised western societies.

    The really shocking thing is how many people of European descent are actively welcoming this wreckage. Shows what a tiny, tireless minority can accomplish when it has wrested the reins of society and infected it with its propaganda.

    “all” is a dangerous word for credibility and tends to make forecasts of doom seem hysterical. Australia and New Zealand for example face nothing much worse than a drag on their upward spirals from careerist and SJW left of centre politicians pandering to the sense of entitlement of the unproductive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TTSSYF
    It's not hysterical to say that something "...haunts all..." Didn't say it's going to happen to all, with certainty, only that it haunts them all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @dcite
    They've "allowed" Malays to kill them in Malaysia and other southeast Asian places where they settled. World on Fire

    But they were diaspora Chinese from long before China became powerful again. In Africa there are increasing numbers of Chinese from today’s Communist about to be superpower.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. “It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design.

    Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers. And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him—all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not”

    Ilana,
    This is some of your best stuff.
    God Bless You.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. I am unclear how to respond to this. Because the title is probably correct. Some people will always hate some other people for some reason – even for an artificial a benign as skin color.

    The reason that whites in South Africa are facing any dilemma at all is because they entered the country claiming that whiteness was the superior color and justified killing blacks as consequence. In typical European fashion they created an ethic they could not sustain. Instead of incorporating blacks into their schema they chose to keep them out and then proceeded to use that as cause for why they should be kept out. And that is the hypocrisy that supposedly ignorant blacks understood right away. One tact that the dominant society has down pat is using their errors as the fault of those complaining of foul play.

    So whites came in hating and now blame blacks for hating. White came in killing and now blame black for killing. Whites went in stealing and now blame blacks for stealing. I am not an advocate for stealing, hating, or killing. I cannot help but to recall a story I read when I was a kid — it was called the other foot. And along clear eyed look at history revels that black on the order of killing – especially to motive of skin color — have a good many millions to go before they dent the matter.

    I support Mr Trump, but anyone who thinks he would be Pres today if his skin color were a shade darker is living in a pink bubble fairy land. Why our Pres would be making comments about S. Africa is bizarre. Especially comments regarding color dynamics.

    This morning, I was beside myself with anger about what people do to others. I don’t understand trying to measure such behavior in terms of something as nonessential as skin color. I was once rear ended by a car and as I understand it the person to blame was me. And while the police report indicated otherwise, it is still claimed by interpretation of the data that it could still be my fault. Because there were no tire marks, it’s safe bet that someone was drinking and it wasn’t me. But no sobriety test were taken (I don’t drink). Statistical analysis requires a keen adherence to integrity in building the model and executing it’s parameters and then interpreting the results. The African societies before Europeans had their share of wars and human nastiness. But all of them also had laws of governance and civil order – some very complex. Unless you are inclined to get your history of the continent from Tarzan movies, one knows this. Goodness, even Tarzan movies managed to observe that reality, depending on what Tarzan movie one watched. Because of that tradition, I am confident that Africa will fare quite well in rebuilding from the mess left by whites as well as the messes they have all their own. Not pretending that South is not the creation of whites behaving superior soly on the basis of skin color — is to create a very inaccurate model of human relations and behavior in the region.

    Each of us has our foibles, but sometimes, constructs and events are the direct result and fault of others. But no one is to blame for failing to fulfill the promises made by the dominant society, except the dominant societies. Integrity means, that if we are in a business deal and I leave a folder n the table to get something, you don’t open that folder despite its vulnerable position. If you take that information an e it for your gain, the argument seems to be here that I am at fault for leaving the document on my table. Those dumb blacks didn’t know how valuable the diamonds were so we took them and we killed to ensure we could and that is their fault. It’s the fault of the tax payer and consumers that wall street engage in malpractice and then blames homeowners for the result. I have to tell you I am deeply disappointed that the current executive seems to have a ethical deficit in this arena.

    If the power structure creates a dog eat dog world, then it a very tough sell that it the supposed dogs fault, now that the dogs have turned on the trainers. If you have power and use that power to antagonize, unfairly disadvantage in the name of evolutionary superiority, you had better have a an accurate understanding of evolution. I think maybe whites have gotten it all wrong.

    Fortunately for me, I don’t buy into evolution —
    _________________

    Hmmmmm . . .

    dare I say hyperbolic nonsense. Look people hate people. That is sadly a part of the human condition. The country has been around for some two thirty plus years, and in that time (in my lifetime), there has not been a year that goes by in which the evidence is pretty high that whites people (some white people) hate blacks.

    A commentary that does somersaults to acknowledge a very common human frailty that is as described a condition begging a question that need not be begged.

    Sure there are people that have animus towards another because of something as benign as hair color, though skin color is far more problematic because of the meanings that have been placed on it. One could effectively argue that mutual hatred is a kind of reciprocity. But of this I am sure, the level of violence visited on blacks by hatred exceeds the level of hatred based behavior visited on whites.

    If for no other reason it is impractical. I have heard more animus filled speech from the mouths of angry white women far more than angry black men during my years in professional and academic life.

    There is one difference, blacks to my knowledge are not couching their animus in legal jargon to disenfranchise whites . They are not advocating special tests or extra legal measures to prove citizenship (I favor voter ID). There’s no race to put into law, that whites should be barred from education, legal representation, housing, employment in private or public sectors . . .

    I lean heavily on the matter of faith. And I can admit to a certain level of bitterness. But thus far, it has not inhabited my being such that I would take any action to deny another citizen his right to what is guaranteed in the Constitution and beyond that fair play. But even a cursory look at the US makes it clear the dominant skin colored citizen cannot make that claim. And when whiteness failed, the majority in skin color turned to the billy club.

    There is not much in the way of evidence that black hatred, if it exists is a real threat to white society. For example, I doubt there’s much evidence that black police officers are using excessive force with whites merely because they are white. Despite the history of whites cratering human existence to defend their whiteness by all means of violence and accompanying rhetoric to justify it. By Even all accounts blacks remain relatively tolerant of white fragility on all fronts.

    Even the issue manufactured by white women, that of the marauding black man seeking to rape white flesh doesn’t bear out much in the way of significance. But it does highlight the level of paranoia to rest the fears of an incident which occurs less than .05% . It the same with crime stats, police officer homicide rate are up 47%, there’s a war on police. Not if one examines motive and the total number of officers slain (sadly) to the number of officers on duty nationally. One would think that confronting a criminal is the riskiest act an officers does. But if I recall, most officers are killed on duty a the result of traffic stops. I am not saying police work is not hazardous, it is. But the “war on cops” is not born out the numbers of the circumstances.

    Statistically, it is unlikely tat you will run into many of any black people who hate you because of your kin color, and less likely that if they do hate you you they will take some action against you. A more likely scenario is that you will fear some black person needlessly , run to some white male with a complaint of fear, said white male desirous to protect your whiteness will engage in all manner of tactics to see tat the black male get put in his place for simply ignoring your demand or telling you –”No.”

    And like attorney General Sessions has done, he will have done his duty to reinforce the time warn standard, that black, especially black men had better watch-out how they speak to white women. Maybe what many of you call hatred is actually the flight or fight defense of elf preservation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef

    it is unlikely tat you will run into many of any black people who hate you because of your kin color, and less likely that if they do hate you you they will take some action against you
     
    I fear for you... you really do lack street smarts ... please don't repeatedly test your theoretical preferences in an urban ghetto setting, you may get hurt... seriously. You are obviously well read, but you profoundly lack real world experience (based on what you said). I hope you never have to learn the hard way that what you believe does not actually correspond with reality. I know to you I have no credibility because you dismiss any empirical experiences that are in conflict with your preferred theoretical readings, but your confirmation bias may someday put you at risk. Sincerely Good Luck.

    [Official crime stats alone obviously conflict with your above statement (yeah, I know you reject this, because you only accept the data you personally approve of, and all those crime victims from afro violence never actually existed... unfortunately for those victims, they do not know this)]. You don't have to respond back, we both know that we do not agree (but my opinions are not the ones that will get us hurt... yours could).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @europeasant
    "The physical, existential vulnerability of white South Africans flows from a confluence of historical antecedents that have placed them in a uniquely precarious position. “The white minority surrendered political dominance in return for non-racial constitutional safeguards.” By forswearing control over the state apparatus, whites ceded mastery over their destiny, vesting their existential survival in a political dispensation: a liberal democracy"

    See, this is what happens when you don't have a wall!

    USA, are you listening?

    Get the wall built. Right now!

    Manned by the USA Army.

    Even in this case, we the common man will man the forts when our land is in danger.

    BTW look at the demographics of Central and South America.

    I count about 560 million. What do you count?

    Letz get the wall built unless the same fate awaits us as South Africa.

    I am all for building a wall for practical and symbolic seasons.

    But what happened in South Africa is the direct result of several hundred years of internally mismanaging human capital.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Corvinus says:
    @Bro Methylene
    My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions makes you worthy of a position with the Clinton campaign - or at least CNN.

    “My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions…”

    Such as?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Such as you’re a contemptible cuck.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Corvinus says:
    @Jasper
    Seems like the Hasbara drones have already arrived in this thread.

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.

     

    What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?

    If you actually did some research, you would know that most Afrikaners don't have the means to just move to another continent. They cannot partake in any special programs for refugees, and even if they were to show up at the airport, chances are they'd have their passports taken away on suspicion of "fleeing the country." In reality, the Afrikaners are being held as a captive managerial class, who are forced to do what is necessary to just barely keep the country afloat.


    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

     

    In reality, the article states the following:

    South Africans are at a “substantially higher risk” of being victims of crime than five years ago, according to the Institute of Security Studies.
     
    (FYI, nearly 500,000 murders have been committed since the end of Apartheid, and that's just the ones that have actually been reported to the police: https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/178233/half-a-million-south-africans-murdered-since-1994/)

    “What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?”

    I’m just using the same logic employed by the Alt Right, who believes that certain groups of American citizens are undesirable and ought to return back to their original homeland, even though they have made their positive mark on society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    As usual Corvinus, you lie.

    We are not demanding that America's black population self deport to Africa.

    We are offering to pay them to go! We'll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!

    (And at that price it will be a bargain for us, taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Corvinus says:
    @Randal

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back.
     
    There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world. Betrayed by men like yourself, Corvinus, with your endless apologies for the foul, dishonest antiracism that will end in the South Africanisation of the entire European world if it is not properly dealt with.

    The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it's "necessary for the greater good".

    And when that day comes, those few of you who aren't busy pretending you never held the beliefs you now claim to hold will still be desperately blaming the victim, and claiming that if only whites had kept on apologising and submitting while the boot went onto on the other foot, whites would have been able to "use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage".

    Contemptible treason.

    “There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world.”

    Indeed, how dare those liberal whites and their black cronies insist that the shackles of apartheid be removed.

    “The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it’s “necessary for the greater good”.

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was “necessary for the greater good”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was “necessary for the greater good”?
     
    The problem is different races in the same country, and it's a question of power.

    Historically, races have separated geographically, with for example the French in France and the Germans in Germany. The French have their own language and culture in France and the Germans have their own language and culture in Germany. There's no illusion that French and German culture are the same.

    If different races happen to share the same country (usually an artificial sort of place) there's always the question of power. In Belgium for example, about half the country are French speaking (and French culture) Walloons, and half are Dutch speaking (and Dutch culture) Flamands with something of a permanent cold war between them. If Belgium was entirely Walloon, the Walloons would be a lot happier, and if it was entirely Flemish, the Flemish would be a lot happier).

    Power needs to belong to the majority, and this is tricky in an evenly divided country like Belgium, They have to run an uncomfortable type of Democratic power-sharing. It would have been better for them to have a clear Walloon or Flemish majority, with the unquestioned dominant group under Democracy, respecting the rights and interests of the minority.

    The South African case was back to front.

    The majority are clearly Black Africans, and it is their country. The South African White settler minority happened to develop the country, and make it rich, at a time when Imperialism (inc. ideas of racial superiority - true or otherwise) was the fashion and quite acceptable, but still, they had no right to impose apartheid on the Blacks - although in the end it was Realpolitik - they knew that the Blacks couldn't/wouldn't run a Western style Democracy that would protect a rich White South African minority. They were right of course, and sadly they are now being chased out of Africa.

    The United States is a different situation.

    After the last spasms of Imperialism (the WW2 failure of the German Eastern, and Japanese Asian Imperialist projects) the US was left with a majority Anglo-European population with a legitimate right to power. The current problem, is that this right is being challenged by a rich and powerful Jewish minority, acting tribally, who themselves are only 2% of the population (with Democracy denying them power). The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by "Homeland Security".

    It didn't work in South Africa, and it probably isn't going to work in the US, and if/when it fails, the critical question is going to be the attitude of Anglo-European Americans. Radical Jewish activists have led the movement for the mass immigration replacement of Whites, the demonization of Whites, the removal of Whites from positions of power in their own country, and the looting of the country to benefit Israel (plus the WMD and 9/11 deceptions).

    So will Jews eventually be chased out of the US (South African style), or will they return to being a minority under Democratic protection, with power corresponding to their 2% of the population. White Anglo-Europeans are not Black Africans , and they have a long Democratic tradition, so it's an open question.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Corvinus says:
    @Alanna
    "
    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.
    "
    So South Africa and America are the creation of people who came from Europe and settled, but were not European settlers?

    You have the nerve to spout this self-contradictory mumbo jumbo, when we are talking about the slow genocide of an entire people? What kind of human being are you?

    Mr Corvinus Troll, please go away and die, so that you stop spreading your mindless hate.

    “You have the nerve to spout this self-contradictory mumbo jumbo, when we are talking about the slow genocide of an entire people? What kind of human being are you?”

    South Africans are not being genocided. Do you need a virtual brown paper bag for your hyperventilation?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Corvinus
    "My God, Corvinus, one hardly knows where to begin.Your series of lies and evasions..."

    Such as?

    Such as you’re a contemptible cuck.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    Right.

    The world outside Europe was peaceful and prosperous until Europeans came along and stole their wealth for themselves. So now those countries are poor.

    In actual fact it is a matter of considerable debate whether empire was a net loss or gain from a financial POV for the imperialist country.

    "Although these theories exercised a great deal of influence at the time, economic evidence does not bear them out. Economic expansion in Europe continued to be fueled mostly by trade and expansion within the developed world, not with new colonies. Key industries may very well have benefited from imperial holdings, but few countries could boast that their colonies as a whole provided a net profit to the national economy."


    https://faculty.unlv.edu/gbrown/westernciv/wc201/wciv2c23/wciv2c23lsec3.html

    It is certainly a fact that whites did not "steal the wealth" of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area.

    “It is certainly a fact that whites did not “steal the wealth” of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area.”

    You are a fool. South Africa has been the world’s leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world’s platinum. In fact, mining in South Africa was once the driving force behind its economy. The continent was rich in palm oil, petroleum, copper, chromium…and gold. Only South America outstrips Africa’s contribution to the growth of the global bullion supply.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?

    Did whites "steal the wealth"that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?
    , @renfro
    '' You are a fool. South Africa has been the world’s leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world’s platinum.''>>>

    It is the South Africans who are the fools as the Jews have been raping and stealing their resources by bribing their politicians to give them rights diamond and mineral mining
    This is just one of the diamond mafia Jews, there are others.

    'Israel’s richest man and Israeli diamond vulture Beny Steinmetz— put up a pink diamond for sale with Sotheby’s. Beny is also a mafia style/Mossad connected plunderer of African nations ore mines—-also now under investigation by the US Justice Dept. and four other countries for fraud and corruption—also raided and tossed by the Swiss police.—also found by his latest plunder victim, the nation of Guinea to be guilty of fraud and corruption in the purchase of a ore mine.


    Sotheby’s has had to attach a new ‘risk factor’ report to its annual report about ‘third parties’ it is associated with—like Steinmetz.

    $83 million diamond default: Sotheby’s and Israeli war crimes
    Tuesday, 08 April 2014 12:17
    https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/americas/10775-83-million-diamond-default-sothebys-and-israeli-war-crimes
    snips…
    ‘’Last November, amid a fanfare of international publicity, Sotheby’s achieved a world record $83 million for a pink diamond auctioned in Geneva. Four months later, on February 27, Sotheby’s disclosed that they were forced to take the diamond, they then valued at $73 million, into their inventory when the consortium of investors led by Isaac Wolf, a New York diamond cutter, defaulted.
    There is a lot about this story that doesn’t add up; key questions remain unanswered leading to the suspicion of a cover-up.
    A brief, but significant new “Risk Factor” included in Sotheby’s Form 10-K Annual Report on February 27, 2014, may offer a clue to this turn of events. It warns: “Sotheby’s could be exposed to reputational harm as a result of wrongful actions by certain third parties. Sotheby’s is involved in various business arrangements and ventures with unaffiliated third parties. Wrongful actions by such parties could harm Sotheby’s brand and reputation.”
    Sotheby’s has not explained why they felt it necessary to include this previously unreported risk factor. According to numerous media reports Sotheby’s claimed the buyer of the pink diamond “couldn’t pay and defaulted”. Isaac Wolf has not given any interviews or responded publicly since the news broke at the end of February. When asked by JCK magazine why the diamond wasn’t sold to one of three under bidders, Sotheby’s “declined to comment”.

    Diamonds that are associated with gross human rights violations would not be a good “hedge against inflation and devaluation of currencies” which is what the investors sought. Wolf described the diamond, originally known as the Steinmetz Pink, as “a fantastic hedge”.
    It is likely that the inclusion of the previously unreported risk factor in Sotheby’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Form 10-K filing was spurred by information published in 2013 and detailed…………
    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/07/08/buried-secrets

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-11/billionaire-steinmetz-s-home-said-to-be-raided-by-swiss-police.html
    Geneva home of Beny Steinmetz, the billionaire diamond and natural-resources investor who is Israel’s richest person, was raided by Swiss police.

    The IDF supporting diamond king has had a reversal of fortune. He lost his ore mine–Guinea took it back– and Rio Tinto, one of the worlds 2 largest miners has secured the mining rights on a twenty-billion-dollar “investment” with Guinea at last getting their rightful share of the profits and with guess who as the partner with Rio?—-China!
    http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/two-mining-behemoths-battle-an-israeli-billionaire

    I just checked and the latest news is Steinmatz was arrested this past August

    http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israeli-billionaire-arrested-in-international-money-laundering-probe-502413

    On 14 August 2017, Steinmetz—along with David Granot, Tal Zilberstein, Doron Levy, and Asher Avidan—was arrested as part of a joint investigation by Israeli and Swiss anti-corruption officials over “allegations of largescale fraud, breach of trust, bribery, obstruction of justice and false registration of corporate documents” with the apparent purpose of money laundering
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Realist says:
    @europeasant
    Maybe she has owned up to the error of her ways and of her tribes peoples ways. Itz never too late to learn.
    She sees a far greater threat to the planet as "The Threat of a .... ......"

    Itz never too late.

    Are you her spokesperson?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Corvinus says:
    @dc.sunsets
    Don't bother replying to leftist self-haters. Theirs is a mental affliction, so you're essentially arguing with a schizophrenic.

    All we await is for the 50 year delusion that seized First World whites (of all nationalities) to reach its natural reversal.

    It won't matter if the USA is majority minority or if Europe is 15% African, there will still be ample numbers of high capability whites to invest their ingenuity into expelling those who are determined to harm them.

    Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children's future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won't remotely be a fair fight.

    “Changes to collective moral calculus occur frequently throughout history. When whites embrace a belief that their children’s future depends on wiping out those who have had a history of attacking them (and oh boy do we already have that precondition), it won’t remotely be a fair fight.”

    There you go again all Banneresque on us. You really believe this collective inner meatgrinder white rage that has been suppressed will appear out of thin air and turn “bad whites” and their non-white pets into sausage.

    Perhaps, perhaps not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Okechukwu says:

    More black farm workers and farmers are killed than white ones.

    Don’t write nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    More black farm workers and farmers are killed than white ones.
     
    Cite your sources for this claim ooogaboooga man.
    , @Wally
    Your proof is .... ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. KenH says:
    @Okechukwu
    More black farm workers and farmers are killed than white ones.

    Don't write nonsense.

    More black farm workers and farmers are killed than white ones.

    Cite your sources for this claim ooogaboooga man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @wayfarer
    ... who’s effectively moving some fair-sized mountains of truth.

    “ On the mountains of truth you can never climb in vain: either you will reach a point higher up today, or you will be training your powers so that you will be able to climb higher tomorrow.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

    Love it.

    I feel a need for a mountain of truth to somehow escape this dunghill of lies, theft and murder.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    On a train bound for Piza I met a man dressed in leather who said he was a physicist, and we began to talk. He said, 'Inglesa, there are three things that only God can know - and they are definability, demonstrability and truth. True story, black leather, hot day. I have little idea what it means but who am I to argue with a physicist?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Wally says:
    @Okechukwu
    More black farm workers and farmers are killed than white ones.

    Don't write nonsense.

    Your proof is …. ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. whoever says:
    @Ron Unz

    “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” by Dee Brown.... The next morning the soldiers took the Christian Delaware in pairs to a cabin and murdered them. ”
     
    I'll admit I haven't read the book in question, nor have much expertise on the topic of the American Indian Wars. But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind "genocide" at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    It's certainly true that whites and Amerinds fought numerous vicious wars over a couple of centuries, and these frequently involved brutal massacres (on both sides). But from the bits and pieces I've read here and there, I've gotten the impression that the body count of North American Amerinds killed, whether in battle or massacre, probably totaled somewhere in the tens of thousands over a 200+ year period. If so, then America has been experiencing an ongoing and vastly greater "urban crime genocide" for the last half century.

    But like I said, my historical knowledge in this topic is minimal, and I'd wonder whether some of the more erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.

    I’ll only make a brief comment about the Christian Delawares, since I am Brethren and my ancestors, both of European and American extraction, had some connection to these events. If you want to delve into first-hand accounts, or as near as we can get to that, of that era, the peoples and conflicts, may I suggest you start with Geschichte der Mission der Evangelischen Brüder unter den Indianern in Nordamerika. Although our people had been in British North America for generations by that time, we still wrote in German, but here is a contemporary English translation: History of the mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America.
    You may also find interesting A narrative of the mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians : from its commencement, in the year 1740, to the close of the year 1808 ; comprising all the remarkable incidents which took place at their missionary stations during that period ; interspersed with anecdotes, historical facts, speeches of Indians, and other interesting matter.
    While much of the conflict of those days was between Indians and “whites,” a subset of the conflict was between the English and the Germans; the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.
    ….
    I had thought to write a long comment, but I’ve changed my mind. Suffice it to say that the ancestor who led directly to me, after the horrors of the year of the bloody sevens and subsequent events, had had enough of the English and traveled west until he fetched up at the Rocky Mountains, where he and his descendants remained until the Mexican-American War and ensuing events led to three decades of disaster. While not that many of of that branch of my family’s ancestors were actually killed in fighting, half of all that population died of cholera in 1850, a disease hitherto unknown to them. Smallpox, chicken pox, scarlet fever, measles … all took their toll in subsequent years, as well. There were massacres, combats with militias and soldiers, killing and killing until the final, abject surrender of the pitiful remnants.
    Was it a premeditated genocide — or just what happens when two peoples fight for possession of the same land and the stronger wins? Does it matter? It was what it was.
    Had the victors, the white Americans, wanted to exterminate the pitiful survivors of the plains tribes, they could have done so with hardly any effort at all. But they didn’t do that. Instead, they extended a helping hand, and offered to welcome them into their civilization, placing images of plains Indians on their coinage, teaching their young boys and girls Indian ways, as in this once-popular book: Indian scout talks; a guide for Boy scouts and Campfire girls.
    We should not forget all the bad that happened in the struggle for this continent. America is fought-for land. But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.

    Coda:

    But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind “genocide” at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.

    Substitute “Jew” for “Amerind” and “German” for “American” in your statement: how does that make you feel? And do you care about arguing about absolute numbers of deaths or whether those who died perished from disease and starvation or were directly executed? Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.
     
    How can anyone ever forget? We have it drilled into us 24/7 from cradle to grave, and while some of it is true. a lot of it is rubbish, and we should never forget that either. The hypocrisy and finger pointing are hideous not magnanimous.

    Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?

     

    I would agree with that.

    For me the point is that no one has clean hands so instead of pointing and blaming and rabble rousing, maybe we need to wash our own hands first.
    , @daniel le mouche
    'the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.'

    That says it all, to my mind. The English, to this day, deserve only contempt and disgust--i.e. all that they are capable of giving. Yo English fuckers, what's your fucking problem?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. joef says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    I am unclear how to respond to this. Because the title is probably correct. Some people will always hate some other people for some reason - even for an artificial a benign as skin color.

    The reason that whites in South Africa are facing any dilemma at all is because they entered the country claiming that whiteness was the superior color and justified killing blacks as consequence. In typical European fashion they created an ethic they could not sustain. Instead of incorporating blacks into their schema they chose to keep them out and then proceeded to use that as cause for why they should be kept out. And that is the hypocrisy that supposedly ignorant blacks understood right away. One tact that the dominant society has down pat is using their errors as the fault of those complaining of foul play.

    So whites came in hating and now blame blacks for hating. White came in killing and now blame black for killing. Whites went in stealing and now blame blacks for stealing. I am not an advocate for stealing, hating, or killing. I cannot help but to recall a story I read when I was a kid -- it was called the other foot. And along clear eyed look at history revels that black on the order of killing - especially to motive of skin color --- have a good many millions to go before they dent the matter.

    I support Mr Trump, but anyone who thinks he would be Pres today if his skin color were a shade darker is living in a pink bubble fairy land. Why our Pres would be making comments about S. Africa is bizarre. Especially comments regarding color dynamics.

    This morning, I was beside myself with anger about what people do to others. I don't understand trying to measure such behavior in terms of something as nonessential as skin color. I was once rear ended by a car and as I understand it the person to blame was me. And while the police report indicated otherwise, it is still claimed by interpretation of the data that it could still be my fault. Because there were no tire marks, it's safe bet that someone was drinking and it wasn't me. But no sobriety test were taken (I don't drink). Statistical analysis requires a keen adherence to integrity in building the model and executing it's parameters and then interpreting the results. The African societies before Europeans had their share of wars and human nastiness. But all of them also had laws of governance and civil order - some very complex. Unless you are inclined to get your history of the continent from Tarzan movies, one knows this. Goodness, even Tarzan movies managed to observe that reality, depending on what Tarzan movie one watched. Because of that tradition, I am confident that Africa will fare quite well in rebuilding from the mess left by whites as well as the messes they have all their own. Not pretending that South is not the creation of whites behaving superior soly on the basis of skin color -- is to create a very inaccurate model of human relations and behavior in the region.

    Each of us has our foibles, but sometimes, constructs and events are the direct result and fault of others. But no one is to blame for failing to fulfill the promises made by the dominant society, except the dominant societies. Integrity means, that if we are in a business deal and I leave a folder n the table to get something, you don't open that folder despite its vulnerable position. If you take that information an e it for your gain, the argument seems to be here that I am at fault for leaving the document on my table. Those dumb blacks didn't know how valuable the diamonds were so we took them and we killed to ensure we could and that is their fault. It's the fault of the tax payer and consumers that wall street engage in malpractice and then blames homeowners for the result. I have to tell you I am deeply disappointed that the current executive seems to have a ethical deficit in this arena.

    If the power structure creates a dog eat dog world, then it a very tough sell that it the supposed dogs fault, now that the dogs have turned on the trainers. If you have power and use that power to antagonize, unfairly disadvantage in the name of evolutionary superiority, you had better have a an accurate understanding of evolution. I think maybe whites have gotten it all wrong.

    Fortunately for me, I don't buy into evolution --
    _________________

    Hmmmmm . . .

    dare I say hyperbolic nonsense. Look people hate people. That is sadly a part of the human condition. The country has been around for some two thirty plus years, and in that time (in my lifetime), there has not been a year that goes by in which the evidence is pretty high that whites people (some white people) hate blacks.

    A commentary that does somersaults to acknowledge a very common human frailty that is as described a condition begging a question that need not be begged.

    Sure there are people that have animus towards another because of something as benign as hair color, though skin color is far more problematic because of the meanings that have been placed on it. One could effectively argue that mutual hatred is a kind of reciprocity. But of this I am sure, the level of violence visited on blacks by hatred exceeds the level of hatred based behavior visited on whites.

    If for no other reason it is impractical. I have heard more animus filled speech from the mouths of angry white women far more than angry black men during my years in professional and academic life.

    There is one difference, blacks to my knowledge are not couching their animus in legal jargon to disenfranchise whites . They are not advocating special tests or extra legal measures to prove citizenship (I favor voter ID). There's no race to put into law, that whites should be barred from education, legal representation, housing, employment in private or public sectors . . .

    I lean heavily on the matter of faith. And I can admit to a certain level of bitterness. But thus far, it has not inhabited my being such that I would take any action to deny another citizen his right to what is guaranteed in the Constitution and beyond that fair play. But even a cursory look at the US makes it clear the dominant skin colored citizen cannot make that claim. And when whiteness failed, the majority in skin color turned to the billy club.


    There is not much in the way of evidence that black hatred, if it exists is a real threat to white society. For example, I doubt there's much evidence that black police officers are using excessive force with whites merely because they are white. Despite the history of whites cratering human existence to defend their whiteness by all means of violence and accompanying rhetoric to justify it. By Even all accounts blacks remain relatively tolerant of white fragility on all fronts.

    Even the issue manufactured by white women, that of the marauding black man seeking to rape white flesh doesn't bear out much in the way of significance. But it does highlight the level of paranoia to rest the fears of an incident which occurs less than .05% . It the same with crime stats, police officer homicide rate are up 47%, there's a war on police. Not if one examines motive and the total number of officers slain (sadly) to the number of officers on duty nationally. One would think that confronting a criminal is the riskiest act an officers does. But if I recall, most officers are killed on duty a the result of traffic stops. I am not saying police work is not hazardous, it is. But the "war on cops" is not born out the numbers of the circumstances.

    Statistically, it is unlikely tat you will run into many of any black people who hate you because of your kin color, and less likely that if they do hate you you they will take some action against you. A more likely scenario is that you will fear some black person needlessly , run to some white male with a complaint of fear, said white male desirous to protect your whiteness will engage in all manner of tactics to see tat the black male get put in his place for simply ignoring your demand or telling you --"No."

    And like attorney General Sessions has done, he will have done his duty to reinforce the time warn standard, that black, especially black men had better watch-out how they speak to white women. Maybe what many of you call hatred is actually the flight or fight defense of elf preservation.

    it is unlikely tat you will run into many of any black people who hate you because of your kin color, and less likely that if they do hate you you they will take some action against you

    I fear for you… you really do lack street smarts … please don’t repeatedly test your theoretical preferences in an urban ghetto setting, you may get hurt… seriously. You are obviously well read, but you profoundly lack real world experience (based on what you said). I hope you never have to learn the hard way that what you believe does not actually correspond with reality. I know to you I have no credibility because you dismiss any empirical experiences that are in conflict with your preferred theoretical readings, but your confirmation bias may someday put you at risk. Sincerely Good Luck.

    [Official crime stats alone obviously conflict with your above statement (yeah, I know you reject this, because you only accept the data you personally approve of, and all those crime victims from afro violence never actually existed... unfortunately for those victims, they do not know this)]. You don’t have to respond back, we both know that we do not agree (but my opinions are not the ones that will get us hurt… yours could).

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I cannot respond to comments that don't reflect what I believe or have expressed.


    The only aspect of your comment that I can respond to is this.


    There is no "afro" demographic, as you defined the term, in a previous conversation. It does not exist. It does not exist in Africa and it does not exist in the US. I think it is safe to say a model predicated on a nonexistent demographic is fundamentally flawed in build, in application and result.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Corvinus
    "What an incredibly dumb statement. There are over 4.5 million whites in South Africa, which is equivalent to the populations of countries like New Zealand, Ireland, and Croatia. Do you think it would be feasible to just move all those people to the other side of the world, and let them leave behind all of the things they created with their blood, sweat and tears?"

    I'm just using the same logic employed by the Alt Right, who believes that certain groups of American citizens are undesirable and ought to return back to their original homeland, even though they have made their positive mark on society.

    As usual Corvinus, you lie.

    We are not demanding that America’s black population self deport to Africa.

    We are offering to pay them to go! We’ll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!

    (And at that price it will be a bargain for us, taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "We are offering to pay them to go! We’ll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!"

    Who is this specific "we"? Are you a Daddy Warbucks who is opening up their wallet? Or, are there particular people in mind who are funding this endeavor? Please offer citations.

    "the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us."

    Actually, our civil society has been eroded by ALL of us, not just one particular group of people.

    , @joef

    taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us
     
    a very accurate description of our current predicament (especially when we have so many libs living in denial, thus perpetuating it).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Logan says:
    @Corvinus
    "It is certainly a fact that whites did not “steal the wealth” of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area."

    You are a fool. South Africa has been the world's leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world's platinum. In fact, mining in South Africa was once the driving force behind its economy. The continent was rich in palm oil, petroleum, copper, chromium...and gold. Only South America outstrips Africa's contribution to the growth of the global bullion supply.

    How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?

    Did whites “steal the wealth”that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThaboZulu
    They stole our land and we are taking it back the bloody way. Long may farm murders continue.
    , @Corvinus
    "How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?"

    Diamonds were discovered in 1867 near the Vaal River in South Africa. Originally, blacks and whites worked separately on their own claims, but the British in the area gained control through large mining companies. In 1886, the largest deposit of gold-bearing owe was discovered. Again, the British secured control through their own corporations. How? Legislation passed restricted the liberty of blacks to own mining claims and trade their products. Local governments passed laws that limited the right of black Africans to own mining claims or to trade their products. Soon, blacks were designated to be the workers in the minds, rather than owner/operators and share in the profits.

    http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his312/lectures/southafr.htm

    "Did whites “steal the wealth”that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?"

    Blacks were quite cognizant of the diamond and gold discoveries, as they desired to earn profits by their own inclusion in the businesses. However, whites prevented blacks from having the opportunity to compete in the marketplace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Corvinus says:

    “We are offering to pay them to go! We’ll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!”

    Who is this “we” other than yourself that has made this specific offer? Cite your sources.

    “And at that price it will be a bargain for us, taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.”

    Actually, the erosion of our “civil society” is due to people of all races and ethnicities, you included.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. utu says:
    @pyrrhus
    Whites remain in South Africa because they refused and continue to refuse to acknowledge reality, and in many cases are still egalitarian cucks. Many, like the great golfer Gary Player and his extended family, continue to welcome and support the black establishment that will ultimately exterminate them and confiscate everything they own. I have been pointing this out to whites living in Southern Africa for decades, with little effect. Just remember, 3/4 of Jews in Germany had years to get out, and were even offered money to leave by the Nazis, but stayed anyway.

    Just remember, 3/4 of Jews in Germany had years to get out, and were even offered money to leave by the Nazis, but stayed anyway.

    Actually more than 2/3 left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. renfro says:
    @Corvinus
    "It is certainly a fact that whites did not “steal the wealth” of sub-Saharan Africans. There was no wealth to steal in this area."

    You are a fool. South Africa has been the world's leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world's platinum. In fact, mining in South Africa was once the driving force behind its economy. The continent was rich in palm oil, petroleum, copper, chromium...and gold. Only South America outstrips Africa's contribution to the growth of the global bullion supply.

    ” You are a fool. South Africa has been the world’s leader in diamond production and also produces 75% of the world’s platinum.”>>>

    It is the South Africans who are the fools as the Jews have been raping and stealing their resources by bribing their politicians to give them rights diamond and mineral mining
    This is just one of the diamond mafia Jews, there are others.

    ‘Israel’s richest man and Israeli diamond vulture Beny Steinmetz— put up a pink diamond for sale with Sotheby’s. Beny is also a mafia style/Mossad connected plunderer of African nations ore mines—-also now under investigation by the US Justice Dept. and four other countries for fraud and corruption—also raided and tossed by the Swiss police.—also found by his latest plunder victim, the nation of Guinea to be guilty of fraud and corruption in the purchase of a ore mine.

    Sotheby’s has had to attach a new ‘risk factor’ report to its annual report about ‘third parties’ it is associated with—like Steinmetz.

    $83 million diamond default: Sotheby’s and Israeli war crimes
    Tuesday, 08 April 2014 12:17

    https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/americas/10775-83-million-diamond-default-sothebys-and-israeli-war-crimes

    snips…
    ‘’Last November, amid a fanfare of international publicity, Sotheby’s achieved a world record $83 million for a pink diamond auctioned in Geneva. Four months later, on February 27, Sotheby’s disclosed that they were forced to take the diamond, they then valued at $73 million, into their inventory when the consortium of investors led by Isaac Wolf, a New York diamond cutter, defaulted.
    There is a lot about this story that doesn’t add up; key questions remain unanswered leading to the suspicion of a cover-up.
    A brief, but significant new “Risk Factor” included in Sotheby’s Form 10-K Annual Report on February 27, 2014, may offer a clue to this turn of events. It warns: “Sotheby’s could be exposed to reputational harm as a result of wrongful actions by certain third parties. Sotheby’s is involved in various business arrangements and ventures with unaffiliated third parties. Wrongful actions by such parties could harm Sotheby’s brand and reputation.”
    Sotheby’s has not explained why they felt it necessary to include this previously unreported risk factor. According to numerous media reports Sotheby’s claimed the buyer of the pink diamond “couldn’t pay and defaulted”. Isaac Wolf has not given any interviews or responded publicly since the news broke at the end of February. When asked by JCK magazine why the diamond wasn’t sold to one of three under bidders, Sotheby’s “declined to comment”.

    Diamonds that are associated with gross human rights violations would not be a good “hedge against inflation and devaluation of currencies” which is what the investors sought. Wolf described the diamond, originally known as the Steinmetz Pink, as “a fantastic hedge”.
    It is likely that the inclusion of the previously unreported risk factor in Sotheby’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Form 10-K filing was spurred by information published in 2013 and detailed…………

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/07/08/buried-secrets

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-11/billionaire-steinmetz-s-home-said-to-be-raided-by-swiss-police.html

    Geneva home of Beny Steinmetz, the billionaire diamond and natural-resources investor who is Israel’s richest person, was raided by Swiss police.

    The IDF supporting diamond king has had a reversal of fortune. He lost his ore mine–Guinea took it back– and Rio Tinto, one of the worlds 2 largest miners has secured the mining rights on a twenty-billion-dollar “investment” with Guinea at last getting their rightful share of the profits and with guess who as the partner with Rio?—-China!

    http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/two-mining-behemoths-battle-an-israeli-billionaire

    I just checked and the latest news is Steinmatz was arrested this past August

    http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israeli-billionaire-arrested-in-international-money-laundering-probe-502413

    On 14 August 2017, Steinmetz—along with David Granot, Tal Zilberstein, Doron Levy, and Asher Avidan—was arrested as part of a joint investigation by Israeli and Swiss anti-corruption officials over “allegations of largescale fraud, breach of trust, bribery, obstruction of justice and false registration of corporate documents” with the apparent purpose of money laundering

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @gT
    My father always used to tell me about how he and my uncle used to ride their donkeys to school in the morning. They would be wearing their school uniform and school shoes and would chew bubble gum on the way to school (back then we owned shops as well as farms). Once the bubble gum was devoid of any flavour they would spit the bubble gum out onto the ground and then white kids wearing only flour sacks with holes cut in for the head and arms would rush to grab the discarded bubble gum from the ground to put it into their mouths so that they could also experience some of the flavour of the bubble gum.

    This is what the majority of Afrikaners were like before Apartheid. Apartheid took them from poor whites to modern, educated citizens while at the same time reducing non-whites to a destitute existence.

    Even the famous cattle of the Afrikaners, also called the Afrikaner also by the way, is just an indigenous breed stolen from the Khoikhoi (Hottentots), one of Southern Africa's original inhabitants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaner_cattle

    The Bushmen / San are the original inhabitants of South Africa, the Whites and Blacks (Bantu) are just settlers here. The Whites arrived by sea onto the west coast and the Blacks migrated down the east coast.

    I therefor have to take with a heavy pinch of salt the story about the farm murders. It has often been observed that when a white person dies its a tragedy because a human being has lost his / her life, while when a non white kicks the bucket its not even a statistic. Methinks the crooks doth protest too much.

    Apartheid was a big affirmative-action program for poor Afrikaners. Not just keeping the blacks down so they wouldn’t have to compete with them, but also pushing Boers into the middle/upper class professions traditionally dominated by English and Jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. helena says:
    @theMann
    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers. And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him—all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."


    And it is men's nature to virulently hate those who are superior to them. The more inferior, the greater the hatred.


    What incredible insanity ever possessed so many millions of Whites, to start treating our inferiors as our equals, and blindly unaware that they would hate us all the more for it?

    Apart from conspiracy it is also the case that ideology didn’t change even though technology did.

    Hence the continued urge to help people whose population is now larger than that of Europeans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. helena says:
    @jacques sheete
    Love it.

    I feel a need for a mountain of truth to somehow escape this dunghill of lies, theft and murder.

    On a train bound for Piza I met a man dressed in leather who said he was a physicist, and we began to talk. He said, ‘Inglesa, there are three things that only God can know – and they are definability, demonstrability and truth. True story, black leather, hot day. I have little idea what it means but who am I to argue with a physicist?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    ...who said he was a physicist.
     
    There's yer problem!

    People like that probably don't even know what they're talking about either. And the truth is, it doesn't matter!

    ;)

    Thanks for the story!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. helena says:
    @Miro23

    It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design.
     
    Some foolish Anglo Americans may believe this, the same as some foolish white South Africans did, but it's an aspect of over-civilization. There's too much trust. The reality is that they'll be physically attacked and kicked out ,the same as in South Africa, which looks like the project of the US's own ruling Jewish not-so-idiocracy.

    That’s the irony of left-liberalism – they believe all people can be like left-libs aspire to be, ie magnanimous in all they do, say, and think. That makes the lib-left the ultimate supremacist. It’s Christianity gone mad; instead of contemplating conversion the idea is to befriend every religion/ethic culture on the other religion/culture’s terms.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. ThaboZulu says:

    I support Boer genocide they are a white cancer on African soil. They must all be exterminated. I’m a native born Zulu by the way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  139. ThaboZulu says:
    @Logan
    How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?

    Did whites "steal the wealth"that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?

    They stole our land and we are taking it back the bloody way. Long may farm murders continue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Good luck with that. It's worked out so well for Zimbabweans. As they have discovered, land of itself is simply not a source of wealth. It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth. The main effect of the "taking back"of land by Zimbabwean blacks has been a drastic drop in the wealth produced by that land. It seems that those who take it back capable of or much interested in the hard and intelligent work needed to make that land produce wealth.
    , @daniel le mouche
    May your infinite relatives in Europe meet the same fate.
    , @Troy McClure
    No, they didn’t steal anything. They TOOK it. As in conquered your primitive Stone Age asses. Deal with it, loser.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Brenda says:

    Unlike the author who has made such comments before (I wonder what her husband thinks.), I don’t find the Tutsis, or any other Africans “attractive.” They look exactly as their DNA suggests — primitive. From the cocoa-colored hybrid, Barack Obama, to the darkest of the Congolese, I personally find them quite unattractive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Some people may be outwardly unattractive, and I don't mean a certain kind of people in particular, but others are inwardly attractive.

    I have no idea if you are outwardly attractive, even though your name suggests a fugly redneck, but you kind is clearly inwardly unattractive.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. I’m waiting for the day when the author tells us whether goy hatred is permanent or not .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I think you’ll be awaiting quite a while for that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @whoever
    I'll only make a brief comment about the Christian Delawares, since I am Brethren and my ancestors, both of European and American extraction, had some connection to these events. If you want to delve into first-hand accounts, or as near as we can get to that, of that era, the peoples and conflicts, may I suggest you start with Geschichte der Mission der Evangelischen Brüder unter den Indianern in Nordamerika. Although our people had been in British North America for generations by that time, we still wrote in German, but here is a contemporary English translation: History of the mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America.
    You may also find interesting A narrative of the mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians : from its commencement, in the year 1740, to the close of the year 1808 ; comprising all the remarkable incidents which took place at their missionary stations during that period ; interspersed with anecdotes, historical facts, speeches of Indians, and other interesting matter.
    While much of the conflict of those days was between Indians and "whites," a subset of the conflict was between the English and the Germans; the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.
    ....
    I had thought to write a long comment, but I've changed my mind. Suffice it to say that the ancestor who led directly to me, after the horrors of the year of the bloody sevens and subsequent events, had had enough of the English and traveled west until he fetched up at the Rocky Mountains, where he and his descendants remained until the Mexican-American War and ensuing events led to three decades of disaster. While not that many of of that branch of my family's ancestors were actually killed in fighting, half of all that population died of cholera in 1850, a disease hitherto unknown to them. Smallpox, chicken pox, scarlet fever, measles ... all took their toll in subsequent years, as well. There were massacres, combats with militias and soldiers, killing and killing until the final, abject surrender of the pitiful remnants.
    Was it a premeditated genocide -- or just what happens when two peoples fight for possession of the same land and the stronger wins? Does it matter? It was what it was.
    Had the victors, the white Americans, wanted to exterminate the pitiful survivors of the plains tribes, they could have done so with hardly any effort at all. But they didn't do that. Instead, they extended a helping hand, and offered to welcome them into their civilization, placing images of plains Indians on their coinage, teaching their young boys and girls Indian ways, as in this once-popular book: Indian scout talks; a guide for Boy scouts and Campfire girls.
    We should not forget all the bad that happened in the struggle for this continent. America is fought-for land. But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.

    Coda:

    But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind “genocide” at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.
     
    Substitute "Jew" for "Amerind" and "German" for "American" in your statement: how does that make you feel? And do you care about arguing about absolute numbers of deaths or whether those who died perished from disease and starvation or were directly executed? Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?

    But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.

    How can anyone ever forget? We have it drilled into us 24/7 from cradle to grave, and while some of it is true. a lot of it is rubbish, and we should never forget that either. The hypocrisy and finger pointing are hideous not magnanimous.

    Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?

    I would agree with that.

    For me the point is that no one has clean hands so instead of pointing and blaming and rabble rousing, maybe we need to wash our own hands first.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Kali says:
    @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    Someone said:

    “Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers.”

    Then, to this, you argue:

    “No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.”

    Corvinus, your comment is hopelessly idiotic. But I guess you can’t even realize, how dumb it is.

    Then, you mention a link that, you say, shows a decrease in the crime rates for South Africa… when the article mentions a sharp INCREASE in criminality there. You didn’t even read the article!

    If you are a troll, you are a really bad one, and if you are sincere, poor you…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Well, it is clear that Koos Van der Merwe was right all along, wasn’t he?

    It is time for the UK and the Netherlands to pay to bring home the descendents of British and Dutch heritage, or pay for them to emigrate to somewhere like Australia. All who wish to leave should be allowed, for humanitarian reasons to avoid being massacred. Then South Africa can figure out how to run their country without those they hate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  145. @jacques sheete
    I'm waiting for the day when the author tells us whether goy hatred is permanent or not .

    I think you’ll be awaiting quite a while for that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. 2073635

    Like most liberals he is both stupid and dishonest. He also adds cuckoldry to the mix.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @joef

    it is unlikely tat you will run into many of any black people who hate you because of your kin color, and less likely that if they do hate you you they will take some action against you
     
    I fear for you... you really do lack street smarts ... please don't repeatedly test your theoretical preferences in an urban ghetto setting, you may get hurt... seriously. You are obviously well read, but you profoundly lack real world experience (based on what you said). I hope you never have to learn the hard way that what you believe does not actually correspond with reality. I know to you I have no credibility because you dismiss any empirical experiences that are in conflict with your preferred theoretical readings, but your confirmation bias may someday put you at risk. Sincerely Good Luck.

    [Official crime stats alone obviously conflict with your above statement (yeah, I know you reject this, because you only accept the data you personally approve of, and all those crime victims from afro violence never actually existed... unfortunately for those victims, they do not know this)]. You don't have to respond back, we both know that we do not agree (but my opinions are not the ones that will get us hurt... yours could).

    I cannot respond to comments that don’t reflect what I believe or have expressed.

    The only aspect of your comment that I can respond to is this.

    There is no “afro” demographic, as you defined the term, in a previous conversation. It does not exist. It does not exist in Africa and it does not exist in the US. I think it is safe to say a model predicated on a nonexistent demographic is fundamentally flawed in build, in application and result.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef
    The MSM, governments (census), academia, and American Blacks themselves identify with African American (afro american... or afro for short) as a distinct demographic group, so you are actually conflicting with them, not me.

    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments... you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality... you seem to use statistical outliers as a refutation of any criticism against the afros (oh, Im sorry, African American). And you don't seem to acknowledge that statistics can be manipulated for preferred outcomes (you seem to believe that your favorite research authors on the subject are above reproach, and have no hidden political agendas).

    I am sorry, I am not looking to insult you, I just can't live in make believe fantasy island that you seem to be promoting. Again when professed research conflicts with my own, and many others, personal empirical experience, I go with the experience... not a confirmation bias that is equivalent to saying touching a hot stove is okay. Be safe and good luck (based on your opinions, you will need it more than me).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. TTSSYF says:
    @ANON
    "all" is a dangerous word for credibility and tends to make forecasts of doom seem hysterical. Australia and New Zealand for example face nothing much worse than a drag on their upward spirals from careerist and SJW left of centre politicians pandering to the sense of entitlement of the unproductive.

    It’s not hysterical to say that something “…haunts all…” Didn’t say it’s going to happen to all, with certainty, only that it haunts them all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. KenH says:

    White S. Africans are the first white population that Jewish machinations might successfully murder wholesale. They could be the first domino to fall in the ongoing war against the very existence of Europeans whites on this planet.

    What worse is that the governments of white majority nations have shown no interest or concern for S. African whites and if they did it would quickly anger and enrage Jewish power brokers, deracinated, self hating goys, black supremacists and SJW’s of all stripes.

    White S. Africans may want to consider mass conversion to Islam as then hundreds and possibly thousands of fighters from across the Muslim world would pour into S. Africa to fight the ANC on their behalf. They won’t get any help from Christians or the pope, who wouldn’t want to be seen as helping former racist oppressors, or governments of any majority white nations, or the white hating U.N. It’s truly a pathetic state of affairs in the white world largely under Jewish management.

    After conversion the poorer whites could then easily enter Europe or America as Muslim refugees and get personally welcomed and hugged by Angela Merkel. Perhaps rape some women if they’re undersexed. After a period of time and after gaining citizenship they could then renounce Islam, but they would lose their privileges to rape with impunity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of "Muslim rape," even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.

    Just one of those examples;

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41741615

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll
    BBC poll that consisted of more than 2,000 British adults found the majority of people said nothing when sexually assaulted, with 63 per cent of women and 79 per cent of men saying they had not reported the incident. Some women questioned in London said they were unlikely to make a formal complaint despite the viral #MeToo campaign.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?

    Did whites "steal the wealth"that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?

    “How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?”

    Diamonds were discovered in 1867 near the Vaal River in South Africa. Originally, blacks and whites worked separately on their own claims, but the British in the area gained control through large mining companies. In 1886, the largest deposit of gold-bearing owe was discovered. Again, the British secured control through their own corporations. How? Legislation passed restricted the liberty of blacks to own mining claims and trade their products. Local governments passed laws that limited the right of black Africans to own mining claims or to trade their products. Soon, blacks were designated to be the workers in the minds, rather than owner/operators and share in the profits.

    http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his312/lectures/southafr.htm

    “Did whites “steal the wealth”that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?”

    Blacks were quite cognizant of the diamond and gold discoveries, as they desired to earn profits by their own inclusion in the businesses. However, whites prevented blacks from having the opportunity to compete in the marketplace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    The comment to which I originally replied stated that European societies had become wealthy by plundering the existing wealth of native peoples.

    This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers.

    But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.

    Did the whites in question "take wealth away from" the natives? Nope, because they didn't have any existing wealth to steal. They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level.

    An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don't own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing.

    Did the oil company "steal our wealth?" No. We just didn't share in wealth discovered and produced by others.

    Should blacks have been excluded from the right compete for wealth in SA? Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful. But there is a huge difference between not being given the opportunity to acquire new wealth and having existing wealth stolen from you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. gustafus says:
    @Logan
    A relatively small number of white massacres of Indians show up repeatedly in the accounts: Sand Creek, Washita, Wounded Knee, Gnadhutten, etc. This is for the simple and obvious reason that such massacres were out of the ordinary, and when they did happen were for the most part conducted by frontiersmen or militia, which were often little more than mobs, not the regular armed forces of the US government. The frontiersmen in particular were often just about as uncivilized as those they fought.

    Meanwhile, the norm for most tribes were atrocities that made just about any of the white massacres of the Indians look like a nice outdoor lunch. Comanches, for instance, particularly enjoyed gang-raping captive women while they were being tortured to death.

    AFAIK, whites, even frontiersmen, much less the Army, never took great pains to bring captive Indian men, women and children home so they could be leisurely tortured to death as slowly as possible. Most Indian tribes did, quite routinely.

    You can make a darn good case that whites, in the cases where they did commit extreme atrocities, were simply showing the good manners of imitating the traditions of the land.

    The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.

    Meanwhile, at about the same time as the last of the great Plains Indian wars, the Argentines really did set out to exterminate their Indians, and pretty much succeeded.

    Goose stepping Nationalist … REPORTING FOR DUTY

    I am a devoted racist. I sift my darkies as needed, with a healthy eye for intrinsic goodness. There are good reasons for enjoining some of them.

    That said – I’ll never forget a flight over the Andes with a wealthy investor from a Colorado Ski town…. Our guide was a government rep extolling the virtues of modern day Chile — assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous…. no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    AGAIN – I”m a committed racist – knowing the black and brown hordes of the 3rd world are charging the gates of Western Civilization … with blood in their eyes.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    Somehow I think Chile will survive the exploding populations of Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Chilean wealth was achieved in large part by brute force. Pinochet was his Name-O. Perhaps you have modeled your own business acumen after his nefarious schemes, which included human rights violations, tax evasion, and embezzlement. If that be the case, you are no different than those "3rd world hordes charging the gates of Western Civilization".

    You would have to go back.

    , @Logan
    Your guide was, I suggest, more than a little confused about his history.

    While studies vary, it appears the "average" Chilean is something like 60% "white" and 40% "native American."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Chile#Indigenous_communities

    That's based on genetic studies, not self-identification.

    The percentages are quite different on the other side of the Andes, where ancestry is generally 80% white.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2009/12/how-argentina-became-white/#.Wgg6WWi3zIU

    In the 19th century history of the area, Chile allied itself with the Indians of both sides of the mountains against the Argentinians, providing the Indians with refuge from reprisal by Argentina. To which Argentina eventually responded by pretty much exterminating their Indians.
    , @jacques sheete
    Maybe one in 10,000 comments contains some useful info. Of those, maybe 1 in 10,000 is stunning and useful, though not a bit surprising, and yours is one of them.

    ...assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous…. no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.
     
    I find it interesting that lot of whites are in denial of both those facts and the fact that economically speaking, most whites may just as well be part of the off-white to black underclasses. In other words, our Lords are unlikely to give a damn about anyone outside their class whether white, black, purple or anything else, and all of us are probably disposable or worse, in the eyes of the plutocrats.

    The moral is plain, but will no doubt be denied until its too late.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Corvinus says:
    @ThreeCranes
    As usual Corvinus, you lie.

    We are not demanding that America's black population self deport to Africa.

    We are offering to pay them to go! We'll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!

    (And at that price it will be a bargain for us, taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.)

    “We are offering to pay them to go! We’ll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!”

    Who is this specific “we”? Are you a Daddy Warbucks who is opening up their wallet? Or, are there particular people in mind who are funding this endeavor? Please offer citations.

    “the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.”

    Actually, our civil society has been eroded by ALL of us, not just one particular group of people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    You got me, Corvinus. Nobody is ponying up the $10,000 to pay blacks to head back to Africa. But a fellow can dream, can't he? I too "have a Dream".

    By the way, the Jews in Israel did give African "Jews" 5000 bucks to depart. (You might know they'd take my idea and cut it in half--being Jews and all, they'd drive a harder bargain. But hey, it worked!)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Corvinus says:
    @gustafus
    Goose stepping Nationalist ... REPORTING FOR DUTY

    I am a devoted racist. I sift my darkies as needed, with a healthy eye for intrinsic goodness. There are good reasons for enjoining some of them.

    That said - I'll never forget a flight over the Andes with a wealthy investor from a Colorado Ski town.... Our guide was a government rep extolling the virtues of modern day Chile -- assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous.... no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    AGAIN - I"m a committed racist - knowing the black and brown hordes of the 3rd world are charging the gates of Western Civilization ... with blood in their eyes.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    Somehow I think Chile will survive the exploding populations of Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.

    Chilean wealth was achieved in large part by brute force. Pinochet was his Name-O. Perhaps you have modeled your own business acumen after his nefarious schemes, which included human rights violations, tax evasion, and embezzlement. If that be the case, you are no different than those “3rd world hordes charging the gates of Western Civilization”.

    You would have to go back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    A relatively small number of white massacres of Indians show up repeatedly in the accounts: Sand Creek, Washita, Wounded Knee, Gnadhutten, etc. This is for the simple and obvious reason that such massacres were out of the ordinary, and when they did happen were for the most part conducted by frontiersmen or militia, which were often little more than mobs, not the regular armed forces of the US government. The frontiersmen in particular were often just about as uncivilized as those they fought.

    Meanwhile, the norm for most tribes were atrocities that made just about any of the white massacres of the Indians look like a nice outdoor lunch. Comanches, for instance, particularly enjoyed gang-raping captive women while they were being tortured to death.

    AFAIK, whites, even frontiersmen, much less the Army, never took great pains to bring captive Indian men, women and children home so they could be leisurely tortured to death as slowly as possible. Most Indian tribes did, quite routinely.

    You can make a darn good case that whites, in the cases where they did commit extreme atrocities, were simply showing the good manners of imitating the traditions of the land.

    The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.

    Meanwhile, at about the same time as the last of the great Plains Indian wars, the Argentines really did set out to exterminate their Indians, and pretty much succeeded.

    “The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.”

    Actually, it was proven about our nation’s genocidal policy toward Native Americans. All because they had land and resources we wanted.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Century_of_Dishonor

    http://americanhistory.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-42

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @helena
    On a train bound for Piza I met a man dressed in leather who said he was a physicist, and we began to talk. He said, 'Inglesa, there are three things that only God can know - and they are definability, demonstrability and truth. True story, black leather, hot day. I have little idea what it means but who am I to argue with a physicist?

    …who said he was a physicist.

    There’s yer problem!

    People like that probably don’t even know what they’re talking about either. And the truth is, it doesn’t matter!

    ;)

    Thanks for the story!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. True. Good thing we know the answer in any case!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  157. ThaboZulu says:
    @daniel le mouche
    Same goes for you kukamumgas in Europe and America.

    Showing your primitive unevolved mind. I dont care about blacks in Europe or America I’m only concerned about extirpating whites in Africa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @daniel le mouche
    Yes, Kookamunga, I'm sure you'd beat my primitive mind in a debate on any subject other than jungle dancing, rape, weapons, and general moronic violence.
    Got out the ol thesaurus and found yourself a big word, extirpater? Or did plain curvilinear thinking get you there? (My guess is it was rapshite combined with the endless negroid hate videos on youtube)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. ThaboZulu says:
    @Priss Factor
    It is part of nature to fear and dislike the different. But there is another nature that longs for the different.

    Dogs and humans for instance. Dogs feel closer to humans than to other dogs. Dogs revere humans as superior. And many people have higher opinion of dogs than for humans. Dogs are seen as loyal and loving.

    Even among humans, there could be preference for the Other if the Other is seen as more just, more able, more fair, more attractive. Taiwanese are Chinese but they prefer American hegemony over the Pacific because they see fellow Chinese in the mainland as yellow barbarians.
    Many Zimbabweans wish for return of white rule because Mugabugabe and his black tribal thugs have been so vile.
    Most Arabs would rather go live in Germany than deal with their haggly-waggly kind.
    And some whites wax romantic about the Other as wiser or more spiritual or 'cooler'. People tend to undervalue & take for granted what they got and overvalue & obsess about what others got.

    Many non-whites are drawn to white nations because they see whites as superior in every way. These non-whites get little or no justice from fellow non-whites who are superstitious, corrupt, brutal, and clannish. So, they want to go to America(or Canada or Australia) and live under white rule. Also, they find whites to be sexually more attractive.

    This may seem counter-intuitive because non-whites scream about 'white racism' and 'white guilt'. One might think, "If they hate whites so much, why do they want to run from their own kind and live in white nations?"

    But it is precisely because they prefer whites and want to live in white nations that they use PC to lower white defenses against non-white immigration/colonization.
    And in a way, whites who welcome mass-colonization from Third World are practicing a kind of soft subconscious supremacism. They feel, "You darkies wanna leave your own inferior nations and cultures because you know that the white world and white people are better. You want to live in our superior world because you are incapable of creating anything so good in your own world."

    Most non-white 'immigrants' are closet-white-supremacists. They want to run away from their own kind, own nations, and own cultures to start new lives and take on new identities under white rule. They prefer white nations(esp those created by Northern Europeans) to their own kind with long history and culture. Chinese, Hindus, and Arabs have long deep history, culture, and identity going back 1000s of years, but they are willing to give that all up just to have a chance to live with whites, have sex with whites, work for whites, and take o white names like 'Heather' and 'Robert'.

    Americans are delusional Zimbabweans don’t want whites back and I hope you disabuse yourself of that notion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hank Rearden
    If Zimbabweans don’t want whites back, then why does News24 and The Washington Post say they do want White farmers back? Fact is, the Bongo can't grow anything in the Congo, at least without the White Devil showing them how. This is no surprise, since sub-Saharan black Africans are "at the borderline of mental retardation".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @Art
    Why Hatred of Whites Is Here to Stay

    Clearly - in America it is the Jew control of the media.

    With Jews like Martin Baron running the Washington Post - white Christian America is doomed.

    Baron - is the lead anti-white matrix of news in America.

    White Christian America is enthralled by Jewish fables of a fantastical afterlife, offered to those willing to hate their own blood (Luke 14:26, Matthew 19:27-30) and pledge allegiance to a foreign king (John 1:49) in a foreign capital city (Revelation 21:2). They willingly give American’s wealth to “our greatest ally,” as the (((Bible))) commands:

    “They were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” (Romans 15:27)

    Benedict Arnold wasn’t half the traitor that White Christian America is to their own blood and soil.

    “Jews first!” (Romans 1:16)

    White Christian America brought a quick end to the America First Committee (1940-1941,) and sacrificed the nation’s blood and wealth to make the world safe for (((Communism))). Hey, Bible says “they owe it to the Jews.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    There are many different views of god. The Christian God and the Jew god are two different entities.

    The Christian God is god to the universe. He is forgiving and hopeful for all beings. Whereas the Jew god is a puny little mean unforgiving mendacious one-tribe god.

    With that said, there is no question, but that Judaism is baggage to Christianity.

    More and more Christians are turning away from the Old Testament mean cruel god of Judaism. (Jews too.)

    Think Peace --- Art
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @Rurik

    erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.
     
    Well Mr. Unz, I'm far, far from erudite, but I'll chime in with one perspective for what it's worth.

    I don't think it's about numbers per se. I think it's more about an ancient and tribal way of life that was extinguished to make room for the white folks and their way of life.

    Just as I wouldn't characterize the blacks of Africa as having been genocided by the whites who carved Rhodesia and South Africa out of the jungle, even if many thousands or more were ultimately killed in the process. The festering wounds there are not about the hundreds of years old deaths, but rather about the presence of the whites on that continent and in their midst, reminding them of the vast chasm that divides these two races of peoples, just as the descendants of the Amerindians (on poverty stricken reservations) no doubt resent the white man's presence in N. America, (as a reminder of what was lost, and their relative status today in the lands of their proud ancestors)

    in defense of the whites- the blacks and the Amerindians were hardly treating each other with kindness and compassion before the whites came. One only think of the human sacrifice practiced by the Incas and the Aztecs and Mayans. Or the notorious savagery of the Apache or Mohawk or Comanche. If the whites were to leave Africa tomorrow, who doubts but that the entire sub-Sahara would descend into tribal savagery and even perhaps cannibalism?

    But then again, look at how the white man exploits these lands and rapes them dry. Look at how pristine and beautiful the continents of N. America and Africa were for century after glorious century, until the white man came and wiped out the buffalo and fauna (both American and African) and built his concrete jungles of spiritual materialism and benumbing, infinite greed.

    Soon N. America and Africa will be barren and desolate of all wild life forms, to be replaced with bipedal farm animal$. As Ted Nugent wrote, the 'the white man.. couldn't see beyond his billfold'

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people's self-determination in their own lands. But the PTB today are bored, and like Michael Vick, only with humans instead of dogs, they get their thrills by cramming incompatible peoples into forced proximity with each other- like Roman 'nobles' watching the gladiators fight to the death for their petty amusements. And so separate and sovereign territories for the myriad tribes of the planet won't be allowed to happen.

    Best to just go to Uruguay and watch the strife from a from a nice distance.

    The spectacle of savagery was enjoyed by all the Roman people, regardless of wealth and class. In fact, there were fewer ways for upcoming politicians to gain the approving popularity of the poor masses than by spending lavishly on “the games” (although subsidizing the grain dole always helped). This would not have been a consistently winning public relations strategy if it had only been the rich and powerful that were titillated by contests of suffering and death.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    if it had only been the rich and powerful that were titillated by contests of suffering and death.
     
    they set the tone

    the sheople will always be the sheople, no matter what region or tribe you're speaking of

    we here at Unz are attempting a critique of the rich and powerful, so that someone holds a light up to their treachery and treason, evil and enormities

    hopefully as a way towards creating a better paradigm, and healing some of the enormous suffering that is caused directly by the evil and treachery of the rich and powerful, no?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Ron Unz

    Ward Churchill, ‘A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present’, San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.
     
    He sounds like an "academic holocaust-denier" to me. I suspect that the true number of Amerinds exterminated by whites in North America was at least six quintrillion...

    In addition to the above mentioned books you might read:
    ⦁ Paul Kane, ‘Wanderings of an artist among the Indians of America’, 1859, 1996, New York
    ⦁ Walker D. Wyman, ‘Nothing but prairie and Sky, Life on the Dakota Range in the Early Days’, 1954, University of Oklahoma
    ⦁ Margaret Irvin Carrington, ‘Absaraka, Home of the Crows, Experience of an officers wife on the Plains’, 1868, 1983 University of Nebraska
    ⦁ William Bartram, ed. Mark Van Doren, `Travels of William Bartram, Trough North & South Carolina, Georgia, East & West Florida, Cherokee, Muscogulges, Chataws’, 1791, 1955, New York
    ⦁ Hugh L. Willoughby, ‘Across the Everglades, A Canoe Journey of Exploration’, 1898, 1992, Port Salerno, Florida
    How many Indians lived originally in what now is the USA, nobody will ever know for sure.
    You do not understand the title of the book, the denial mentioned is the holocaust of the Indians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Many Afrikaners to my personal knowledge have migrated to Commonwealth countries as their first choice and the USA as their second choice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  163. joef says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    I cannot respond to comments that don't reflect what I believe or have expressed.


    The only aspect of your comment that I can respond to is this.


    There is no "afro" demographic, as you defined the term, in a previous conversation. It does not exist. It does not exist in Africa and it does not exist in the US. I think it is safe to say a model predicated on a nonexistent demographic is fundamentally flawed in build, in application and result.

    The MSM, governments (census), academia, and American Blacks themselves identify with African American (afro american… or afro for short) as a distinct demographic group, so you are actually conflicting with them, not me.

    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments… you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality… you seem to use statistical outliers as a refutation of any criticism against the afros (oh, Im sorry, African American). And you don’t seem to acknowledge that statistics can be manipulated for preferred outcomes (you seem to believe that your favorite research authors on the subject are above reproach, and have no hidden political agendas).

    I am sorry, I am not looking to insult you, I just can’t live in make believe fantasy island that you seem to be promoting. Again when professed research conflicts with my own, and many others, personal empirical experience, I go with the experience… not a confirmation bias that is equivalent to saying touching a hot stove is okay. Be safe and good luck (based on your opinions, you will need it more than me).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments… you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality…

    Clearly you do believe in a harsh reality. You harshly believe in your intellectual superiority – putting down others. You are proud to proclaim your supremacy.

    Telling people over and over that they are inferior – is harsh. It is hurtful – why insist on voicing your distain? Why do you need the one-upmanship?

    Jesus said, “to those with much – much is expected.” You claim much - but give harshness.

    Think Peace --- Art
    , @EliteCommInc.
    Laughing and laughing very hard. The definition you are providing is completely different than the one you posed in our discussion on the topic of athletes. The definition that you provide above is standard for those blacks living in the US.

    An contrary to the unique definition you proferred previously would no unique link to the population you attempted to note in Africa, I think it was central Africa. I would go dig it up, but it wouldn't be worth the hassle. But applying this definition makes you entire previous advance which you insisted was based on personal and professional experience even lesser in value that the Occam's razor gymnastics you pressed.

    A I said previously, if nothing else you are entertaining. Let me know when you decide which definition of "Afro" you will decide to settle on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Logan
    A relatively small number of white massacres of Indians show up repeatedly in the accounts: Sand Creek, Washita, Wounded Knee, Gnadhutten, etc. This is for the simple and obvious reason that such massacres were out of the ordinary, and when they did happen were for the most part conducted by frontiersmen or militia, which were often little more than mobs, not the regular armed forces of the US government. The frontiersmen in particular were often just about as uncivilized as those they fought.

    Meanwhile, the norm for most tribes were atrocities that made just about any of the white massacres of the Indians look like a nice outdoor lunch. Comanches, for instance, particularly enjoyed gang-raping captive women while they were being tortured to death.

    AFAIK, whites, even frontiersmen, much less the Army, never took great pains to bring captive Indian men, women and children home so they could be leisurely tortured to death as slowly as possible. Most Indian tribes did, quite routinely.

    You can make a darn good case that whites, in the cases where they did commit extreme atrocities, were simply showing the good manners of imitating the traditions of the land.

    The notion that there was some sort of general and intentional genocide plan over a period of several centuries is comprehensively disproven by the fact that there are probably more Indians around now than ever. If we really did want to kill them all, what stopped us? Not their resistance.

    Meanwhile, at about the same time as the last of the great Plains Indian wars, the Argentines really did set out to exterminate their Indians, and pretty much succeeded.

    I see a persistent belief in fairy tales.
    There are two reasons for the almost complete disappearence of Indians from the present USA
    - the Indian immune system differs from the European one, Indians died from the bacteria and viruses the traders and colonists brought with them
    - the systematic driving west of the Indians, to areas where they could not live, killing them if they resisted to depart.
    There also was intentional infecting Indians with illnesses, such as smallpox, by giving them blankets from hospitals.
    At the first visit of Europeans to the what is now USA east coast, from Florida nothwards, the coast was inhabited.
    At the second visit European diseases had depopulated completely the coastal regions.
    That the USA violated all agreements with the Indians is beyond all doubt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hank Rearden
    I too see a persistent belief in fairy tales, like the one anti-White zealot Ward Churchill concocted about super-villainous Whites who intentional infecting Indians with illnesses. Fact is...

    Churchill fabricated events that never occurred—namely the U.S. Army's alleged distribution of smallpox infested blankets to the Mandan Indians in 1837.

    Did the U.S. Army Distribute Smallpox Blankets to Indians? Fabrication and Falsification in Ward Churchill's Genocide Rhetoric
    Ann Arbor, MI: MPublishing, University of Michigan Library, 2006
    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.009/--did-the-us-army-distribute-smallpox-blankets-to-indians?rgn=main;view=fulltext
     
    Sure, many Injuns died of smallpox, but that's because they attacked a hospital that was treating smallpox victims, thus giving themselves the disease.

    Indians allied with the French ignored the terms of a surrender worked out between the British and the French, broke into the garrison hospital and killed and scalped a number of patients, some of them suffering from smallpox. The blankets and clothing the Indians looted from the patients in the hospital and corpses in the cemetery, carried back to their villages, reportedly touched off a smallpox epidemic....The dreadful epidemic of 1837–38 and smallpox in general did not come to American Indians through any scheme of the U.S. Army. The only documented attempt to infect Indians with smallpox was the dirty work of Swiss mercenaries serving the British crown before the United States’ founding as a constitutional republic. American Indians did indeed succumb in huge numbers to smallpox, measles, tuberculosis and influenza, due to contact with whites, the Indians’ own feeble immune systems and malnutrition once rounded up and sequestered on the reservations. That was a cultural catastrophe, a heart-rending tragedy—but it was not premeditated genocide.

    Smallpox in the Blankets
    Wild West Magazine, 2012
    http://www.historynet.com/smallpox-in-the-blankets.htm
     
    Ward Churchill is an anti-White liar. Don't repeat his nonsense.
    , @Logan
    Why again exactly are they European diseases? Most if not all originated in Asia.

    Europeans of the time were (somewhat) resistant to these diseases because they were descended from ancestors who had survived repeated similar virgin field epidemics over the previous millenia. The Indians had the bad luck to be exposed in a very short timespan to the accumulated pathogens developed over thousands of years in the Old World .

    Europeans of the time had no idea how disease of this type spread, nor of how to prevent it. The germ theory of disease wasn't really confirmed till the late 19th century and for the most part effective treatments didn't come along till quite some time later.

    The spread of disease wasn't the white man's "fault." The real cause was the merging of the Old and New World's disease ecosystems. Exactly the same depopulation would have happened in the New World had it been the one more advanced technologically and hence had "discovered" Europe.

    Driving the Indians west wasn't all that much of a problem for them. You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains, and they did. Even Oklahoma isn't too bad, with the eastern half not really all that different from their original homelands.

    That the treaties were shamefully broken by the US government I can't argue against. One of the most disappointing discoveries of my life was a discussion of Jefferson's Indian policies in a book about Lewis and Clark.

    T. Jefferson was cited extensively in his letters to various Indian agents negotiating treaties. He was entirely open about their being instructed to make treaties with the sole purpose of keeping the Indian quite for a few years until it became convenient to further dispossess them. IOW, the entire treaty process was not only eventually violated, it was conducted in bad faith from the beginning.

    This does not necessarily apply to every administration. Some (Washington, Adams, Grant) appear to have tried to deal justly and fairly with Indians, given the constraints they were under.

    , @gwynedd1
    So the Europeans gave blankets to the Indians?

    Don't you find it strange that the Indians would accept gifts from their enemies? Perhaps you are suggesting that the relations were so good at the time that the ruse was so plausible? Do you have the historical reference for this act?

    The only historical record we have( historian Francis Parkman) was Indians suffering from small pox which was linked to looting the hospital after the siege of Fort William Henry.


    So you left out the element that the Indians were hostiles besieging the hospitals and it was infected loot extorted from the besieged.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. joef says:
    @ThreeCranes
    As usual Corvinus, you lie.

    We are not demanding that America's black population self deport to Africa.

    We are offering to pay them to go! We'll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!

    (And at that price it will be a bargain for us, taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us.)

    taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us

    a very accurate description of our current predicament (especially when we have so many libs living in denial, thus perpetuating it).

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    Living without fear is one of the four basic freedoms. A nation cursed by the presence of African blacks cannot live in peace and tranquility. Their presence imposes a tremendous logistical burden and takes a terrible psychological toll on the besieged population.

    Whenever a white American travels to a country that has an insignificant percentage of blacks, they are at first bewildered and then surprised by how pleasant life can be. They find themselves able to relax, to let their guard down. It comes as a revelation to an American white that life can be enjoyed; that there is such a thing as "the good life" this side of the grave and that all that is required to know this by experience is freedom from blacks.

    It's so simple really. Blacks have the anti-Midas touch. Everything they touch turns to sh*t.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Fine with me. After WWII places like Czecho and Poland discovered they had a lot of Germans within their border who had proved to be more trouble than they were worth.

    The solution was to run them off and the dead bodies ran into the six figures, and this was after VE Day.

    Simply put, people will defend themselves and if a group is seen as responsible, then the group will have to go.

    This solution has proven very viable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  167. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    (Imagine being chopped up until you expire.)

    Imagine being tied and dragged around behind a truck, until you expire.

    Imagine being hanged from the nearest tree, until you expire.

    Imagine being lynched, until you expire.

    Imagine being flogged, until your skin tears open.

    You racist joo scum!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  168. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.

    Democracies, with their emphasis on "equality" are particularly prone to envy.

    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.

    Many of your pale-faced business Hos seem quite happy living and leeching off the rich gulf nations.

    Anyway, would Europe be any worse than the spiritually cursed pagan polytheist human worshipping decadent blackhole it is now?

    I don’t think so. :D

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @jilles dykstra
    I see a persistent belief in fairy tales.
    There are two reasons for the almost complete disappearence of Indians from the present USA
    - the Indian immune system differs from the European one, Indians died from the bacteria and viruses the traders and colonists brought with them
    - the systematic driving west of the Indians, to areas where they could not live, killing them if they resisted to depart.
    There also was intentional infecting Indians with illnesses, such as smallpox, by giving them blankets from hospitals.
    At the first visit of Europeans to the what is now USA east coast, from Florida nothwards, the coast was inhabited.
    At the second visit European diseases had depopulated completely the coastal regions.
    That the USA violated all agreements with the Indians is beyond all doubt.

    I too see a persistent belief in fairy tales, like the one anti-White zealot Ward Churchill concocted about super-villainous Whites who intentional infecting Indians with illnesses. Fact is…

    Churchill fabricated events that never occurred—namely the U.S. Army’s alleged distribution of smallpox infested blankets to the Mandan Indians in 1837.

    Did the U.S. Army Distribute Smallpox Blankets to Indians? Fabrication and Falsification in Ward Churchill’s Genocide Rhetoric
    Ann Arbor, MI: MPublishing, University of Michigan Library, 2006
    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.009/–did-the-us-army-distribute-smallpox-blankets-to-indians?rgn=main;view=fulltext

    Sure, many Injuns died of smallpox, but that’s because they attacked a hospital that was treating smallpox victims, thus giving themselves the disease.

    Indians allied with the French ignored the terms of a surrender worked out between the British and the French, broke into the garrison hospital and killed and scalped a number of patients, some of them suffering from smallpox. The blankets and clothing the Indians looted from the patients in the hospital and corpses in the cemetery, carried back to their villages, reportedly touched off a smallpox epidemic….The dreadful epidemic of 1837–38 and smallpox in general did not come to American Indians through any scheme of the U.S. Army. The only documented attempt to infect Indians with smallpox was the dirty work of Swiss mercenaries serving the British crown before the United States’ founding as a constitutional republic. American Indians did indeed succumb in huge numbers to smallpox, measles, tuberculosis and influenza, due to contact with whites, the Indians’ own feeble immune systems and malnutrition once rounded up and sequestered on the reservations. That was a cultural catastrophe, a heart-rending tragedy—but it was not premeditated genocide.

    Smallpox in the Blankets
    Wild West Magazine, 2012
    http://www.historynet.com/smallpox-in-the-blankets.htm

    Ward Churchill is an anti-White liar. Don’t repeat his nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Ward Churchill is a liar about a particular event in American history. Adding this "anti-white" nonsense, however, undercuts your serious inquiry into this matter.

    Now, from your source was this nugget --> "The only documented attempt to infect Indians with smallpox was the dirty work of Swiss mercenaries serving the British crown before the United States’ founding as a constitutional republic."

    Was it referencing to what happened at Fort Pitt and the reference made by William Trent? Because the source here makes no mention of the "dirty work of Swiss mercenaries".

    http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring04/warfare.cfm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Art says:
    @Hank Rearden
    White Christian America is enthralled by Jewish fables of a fantastical afterlife, offered to those willing to hate their own blood (Luke 14:26, Matthew 19:27-30) and pledge allegiance to a foreign king (John 1:49) in a foreign capital city (Revelation 21:2). They willingly give American's wealth to "our greatest ally," as the (((Bible))) commands:

    "They were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews' spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings." (Romans 15:27)
     
    Benedict Arnold wasn't half the traitor that White Christian America is to their own blood and soil.

    "Jews first!" (Romans 1:16)
     
    White Christian America brought a quick end to the America First Committee (1940-1941,) and sacrificed the nation's blood and wealth to make the world safe for (((Communism))). Hey, Bible says "they owe it to the Jews."

    There are many different views of god. The Christian God and the Jew god are two different entities.

    The Christian God is god to the universe. He is forgiving and hopeful for all beings. Whereas the Jew god is a puny little mean unforgiving mendacious one-tribe god.

    With that said, there is no question, but that Judaism is baggage to Christianity.

    More and more Christians are turning away from the Old Testament mean cruel god of Judaism. (Jews too.)

    Think Peace — Art

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    Christianity must be destroyed in preparation for the Jew Messiah, Moschiach. The war on whites is part of a Jewish plan/scheme to destroy Christianity. Antagonize a peaceful God loving people until they violently react, then guilt them in to forsaking Christ. Moschiach is on his way.

    Antagonize a peaceful God loving people

    My apologies for being pedantic, but in the context of said faith, you forgot to pluralise “God” there. You see, the devil, literally too in the context of said faith, is in the detail.

    And, peaceful?? Hahahahaha!! Get off those hallucinogens dude(tte).

    forsaking Christ

    The white racist, which means most of the white race, will never attain spiritual peace. They will forsake Christ now, then forsake whatever heathen abomination their cursed ancestors cooked up in their fertile imaginations, flailing from one abomination to another, until the end of mankind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hank Rearden
    And why shouldn't we Whites forsake (((Jesus)))? Just like today's degenerate, anti-White, leftist Jews, he taught that I have to hate and forsake my own blood and soil!

    "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

    "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life." (Matthew 19:29)
     
    Le happy afterlife merchant's animosity to a White man's blood and soil is why this fellow noted the following:

    "Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity—the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against 'race:' the undying chandala hatred is disguised as a religion of love." -Friedrich Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols)
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Art says:
    @joef
    The MSM, governments (census), academia, and American Blacks themselves identify with African American (afro american... or afro for short) as a distinct demographic group, so you are actually conflicting with them, not me.

    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments... you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality... you seem to use statistical outliers as a refutation of any criticism against the afros (oh, Im sorry, African American). And you don't seem to acknowledge that statistics can be manipulated for preferred outcomes (you seem to believe that your favorite research authors on the subject are above reproach, and have no hidden political agendas).

    I am sorry, I am not looking to insult you, I just can't live in make believe fantasy island that you seem to be promoting. Again when professed research conflicts with my own, and many others, personal empirical experience, I go with the experience... not a confirmation bias that is equivalent to saying touching a hot stove is okay. Be safe and good luck (based on your opinions, you will need it more than me).

    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments… you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality…

    Clearly you do believe in a harsh reality. You harshly believe in your intellectual superiority – putting down others. You are proud to proclaim your supremacy.

    Telling people over and over that they are inferior – is harsh. It is hurtful – why insist on voicing your distain? Why do you need the one-upmanship?

    Jesus said, “to those with much – much is expected.” You claim much – but give harshness.

    Think Peace — Art

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef

    Clearly you do believe in a harsh reality. You harshly believe in your intellectual superiority – putting down others. You are proud to proclaim your supremacy.
     
    Pointing an error/falsity does not make one superior, merely attempting to be accurate. Either I am correct and it is occurring, or I am not... and based on how many millions victims of afro violence & aggression, it is obviously occurring (over and over again for the last half century)... and I am actually defending those voiceless victims that politically correct crowd refuses to acknowledge, because they are inconvenient to polite conversation. By ignoring their stories, you are actually the harsh one, not me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @ThaboZulu
    Americans are delusional Zimbabweans don't want whites back and I hope you disabuse yourself of that notion.

    If Zimbabweans don’t want whites back, then why does News24 and The Washington Post say they do want White farmers back? Fact is, the Bongo can’t grow anything in the Congo, at least without the White Devil showing them how. This is no surprise, since sub-Saharan black Africans are “at the borderline of mental retardation”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    If Zimbabweans don’t want whites back, then why does News24 and The Washington Post say they do want White farmers back?
     
    On what basis do you find those to be credible sources? Do all of them want all whites back?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @dc.sunsets
    More straight line forecasting, the hallmark of small minds.

    Sooner or later those who are under assault will wake up. When that occurs you will discover that the people who invented the machine gun, the rotary cannon, mustard gas, weaponized biological pathogens and neutron bombs are of one race, and once awakened are more than capable of turning that unique ingenuity to systematically exterminating their adversaries.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.

    LOL! Only a truly deranged psychopath takes pride in the psychopathy of his kind.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.

    The devil laughs at you. ;)

    We perceived lesser people do not doubt that your cursed kind has the desire and will to exterminate us all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    If white people have a confirmed desire and will to exterminate you all, what's stopping us?

    Surely you are aware that white people, if united in this desire, could accomplish it relatively easily from a technical POV.

    Some considerable difficulty taking out China, to be sure, but a combined Russia/US first strike nuclear attack would no doubt be successful, perhaps with some losses to counterstrikes.

    We would also run into challenges determining "who is white?" in Latin America, Middle East and elsewhere.

    But it's clear that the only thing preventing us from doing this is simply that few white people have any desire to do it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Priss Factor
    It is part of nature to fear and dislike the different. But there is another nature that longs for the different.

    Dogs and humans for instance. Dogs feel closer to humans than to other dogs. Dogs revere humans as superior. And many people have higher opinion of dogs than for humans. Dogs are seen as loyal and loving.

    Even among humans, there could be preference for the Other if the Other is seen as more just, more able, more fair, more attractive. Taiwanese are Chinese but they prefer American hegemony over the Pacific because they see fellow Chinese in the mainland as yellow barbarians.
    Many Zimbabweans wish for return of white rule because Mugabugabe and his black tribal thugs have been so vile.
    Most Arabs would rather go live in Germany than deal with their haggly-waggly kind.
    And some whites wax romantic about the Other as wiser or more spiritual or 'cooler'. People tend to undervalue & take for granted what they got and overvalue & obsess about what others got.

    Many non-whites are drawn to white nations because they see whites as superior in every way. These non-whites get little or no justice from fellow non-whites who are superstitious, corrupt, brutal, and clannish. So, they want to go to America(or Canada or Australia) and live under white rule. Also, they find whites to be sexually more attractive.

    This may seem counter-intuitive because non-whites scream about 'white racism' and 'white guilt'. One might think, "If they hate whites so much, why do they want to run from their own kind and live in white nations?"

    But it is precisely because they prefer whites and want to live in white nations that they use PC to lower white defenses against non-white immigration/colonization.
    And in a way, whites who welcome mass-colonization from Third World are practicing a kind of soft subconscious supremacism. They feel, "You darkies wanna leave your own inferior nations and cultures because you know that the white world and white people are better. You want to live in our superior world because you are incapable of creating anything so good in your own world."

    Most non-white 'immigrants' are closet-white-supremacists. They want to run away from their own kind, own nations, and own cultures to start new lives and take on new identities under white rule. They prefer white nations(esp those created by Northern Europeans) to their own kind with long history and culture. Chinese, Hindus, and Arabs have long deep history, culture, and identity going back 1000s of years, but they are willing to give that all up just to have a chance to live with whites, have sex with whites, work for whites, and take o white names like 'Heather' and 'Robert'.

    Much of what you say may be true, but the likes of you forget that whites are for the most part, Pagans, Polytheist, Human-Worshipping Spiritual-Losers.

    Finite Winners on the one side, and Infinite Losers on the other.

    People like you get to gloat, as you have so well articulated above, but I hear there will not be much gloating in Hell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. “slavery in America”

    I’ve often wondered how slavery became a uniquely American thing……it’s as if it only existed in the United States and no where else in the history of the world. I’ve actually read an author who called the USA “the land of slavery”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Yup. It existed always and everywhere, but somehow it became uniquely American.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @Corvinus
    "Empowering political majorities in Africa has helped, not hindered, the propensity of hostile masses to exact revenge on helpless minorities."

    The whites in South Africa are hardly helpless. Perhaps they ought to go back. Remember, their ancestors invented the Invade The World, Invite The World philosophy. It's unfortunately a boomerang effect.

    However, it would appear that statistics indicate that violent crime in South Africa is down.

    https://qz.com/1110367/south-africa-crime-statistics-violent-crime-shows-a-steady-increase-even-as-the-overall-rate-declined/

    "It would be a mistake to believe, as the American ruling Idiocracy preaches, that minorities in the US—soon to form a majority—will relinquish race and tribe as unifying principles, in favor of the US’s constitutional design."

    South Africa is not America. America is not South Africa. One could hold an opinion that American minorities, as a majority, could make mischief for whites in the future. Perhaps. However, whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage.

    "Like South Africa, America is a creation of (northwest) European settlers."

    No, they were the creation of people who happened to be from Europe.

    "And it is in Man’s nature to dislike those who are unlike him..."

    That would depend upon a host of factors. It is not as simplistic as you make it out to be.

    "...all the more so when they, as a group, have accomplished what he has not."

    Remember how Europeans developed their colonies. By brute force. Sure, there were a number of benefits they brought to their conquered peoples, but the overarching ideology was the belief of superiority.

    “whites could use anti-discrimination laws to their advantage”

    that is surly a laugh out loud moment…….apparently you’ve not been paying attention only whites can be racists and discriminate….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rurik

    erudite commenters could affirm or contradict my sense about the numbers.
     
    Well Mr. Unz, I'm far, far from erudite, but I'll chime in with one perspective for what it's worth.

    I don't think it's about numbers per se. I think it's more about an ancient and tribal way of life that was extinguished to make room for the white folks and their way of life.

    Just as I wouldn't characterize the blacks of Africa as having been genocided by the whites who carved Rhodesia and South Africa out of the jungle, even if many thousands or more were ultimately killed in the process. The festering wounds there are not about the hundreds of years old deaths, but rather about the presence of the whites on that continent and in their midst, reminding them of the vast chasm that divides these two races of peoples, just as the descendants of the Amerindians (on poverty stricken reservations) no doubt resent the white man's presence in N. America, (as a reminder of what was lost, and their relative status today in the lands of their proud ancestors)

    in defense of the whites- the blacks and the Amerindians were hardly treating each other with kindness and compassion before the whites came. One only think of the human sacrifice practiced by the Incas and the Aztecs and Mayans. Or the notorious savagery of the Apache or Mohawk or Comanche. If the whites were to leave Africa tomorrow, who doubts but that the entire sub-Sahara would descend into tribal savagery and even perhaps cannibalism?

    But then again, look at how the white man exploits these lands and rapes them dry. Look at how pristine and beautiful the continents of N. America and Africa were for century after glorious century, until the white man came and wiped out the buffalo and fauna (both American and African) and built his concrete jungles of spiritual materialism and benumbing, infinite greed.

    Soon N. America and Africa will be barren and desolate of all wild life forms, to be replaced with bipedal farm animal$. As Ted Nugent wrote, the 'the white man.. couldn't see beyond his billfold'

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people's self-determination in their own lands. But the PTB today are bored, and like Michael Vick, only with humans instead of dogs, they get their thrills by cramming incompatible peoples into forced proximity with each other- like Roman 'nobles' watching the gladiators fight to the death for their petty amusements. And so separate and sovereign territories for the myriad tribes of the planet won't be allowed to happen.

    Best to just go to Uruguay and watch the strife from a from a nice distance.

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands

    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.

    It is so fucking simple! Really!

    But, will the cursed west follow such a strategy? ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik


    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands
     
    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.
     
    fair enough

    now, where do you want to draw the borders?

    you see the problem isn't with rational people, but with the irrational elites who run globalism

    I'm sure you and I could agree that Europe should be allowed to say Europe, and Africa - Africa. Just as I'm sure we'd agree on most places. Perhaps divide the USA into regions where the blacks and whites and browns and reds and yellows could all have a region of their own, much like the "reds" (I don't think that's a pejorative is it?) have reservations that are theirs.

    I'd be happy to give the blacks large swaths of the South, and I bet most whites would happily agree if they too could be given regions of their own, perhaps in Appalachia or other, adjacent areas of the South. Just so long as they had their own and all trade and immigration was all consensual between all parties, as opposed to being imposed by the do-gooders in the fecal government. (agents of the Fiend)

    But the problem is the Fiend would never allow that. (think Catalonia right now, as the fiends in the Spanish government consider those people their perpetual slaves, unwilling serfs) It is (forced) proximity = diversity that = strife. And the Fiend verily thrives on strife, and hatred, and crime. That's where it gets its spurious 'authority' (power) to dominate everyone, by creating enough strife and hatred and misery, that it can come in and tell everyone how much the Fiend's goons are necessary to keep order.

    It's a sad and tiresome strategy that goes back centuries.

    If we limited the conversation to say, the United States, would you be willing to grant white people a commiserate percentage of the land as their numbers represent today? Or would you insist that they all leave and hand over the land to the blacks and browns and yellows and reds, because whites are congenitally evil and should all return to Europe and stay there.

    Well, guess what... if it came down to that, I'd have to agree (not that they're evil, obviously), but I'd rather see the whites of the planet all return to Europe and fortify its borders even if they had to give up Oceana and N. America and everywhere else, and let those people create whatever kind of societies suit them, so long as Europe and Russia and the historic lands of white folks could retain their respective character.

    But the Fiend would NEVER allow that. In million years, because the existence of white society, (Western civilization) with everything that means... - is the very thing that drives the Fiend (and all his armies of butt-hurt orcs and envious losers) insane with murderous hatred for the accomplishments and sublime beauty of white, Western civilization and its people. The Asians would tolerate it OK, because they too are quite capable, but the ((Fiend)) would grow apoplectic at such a development, and his head would explode.

    so in a way, the best defense for Western civilization, is a certain amount of offence, at least insofar as they demand to retain what they have today, even it they tell everyone else that they too are entitled to self-determination in their own lands.

    Britain for the British, Jamaica for Jamaicans', and so forth. No?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Brenda
    Unlike the author who has made such comments before (I wonder what her husband thinks.), I don't find the Tutsis, or any other Africans "attractive." They look exactly as their DNA suggests -- primitive. From the cocoa-colored hybrid, Barack Obama, to the darkest of the Congolese, I personally find them quite unattractive.

    Some people may be outwardly unattractive, and I don’t mean a certain kind of people in particular, but others are inwardly attractive.

    I have no idea if you are outwardly attractive, even though your name suggests a fugly redneck, but you kind is clearly inwardly unattractive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @KenH
    White S. Africans are the first white population that Jewish machinations might successfully murder wholesale. They could be the first domino to fall in the ongoing war against the very existence of Europeans whites on this planet.

    What worse is that the governments of white majority nations have shown no interest or concern for S. African whites and if they did it would quickly anger and enrage Jewish power brokers, deracinated, self hating goys, black supremacists and SJW's of all stripes.

    White S. Africans may want to consider mass conversion to Islam as then hundreds and possibly thousands of fighters from across the Muslim world would pour into S. Africa to fight the ANC on their behalf. They won't get any help from Christians or the pope, who wouldn't want to be seen as helping former racist oppressors, or governments of any majority white nations, or the white hating U.N. It's truly a pathetic state of affairs in the white world largely under Jewish management.

    After conversion the poorer whites could then easily enter Europe or America as Muslim refugees and get personally welcomed and hugged by Angela Merkel. Perhaps rape some women if they're undersexed. After a period of time and after gaining citizenship they could then renounce Islam, but they would lose their privileges to rape with impunity.

    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of “Muslim rape,” even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.

    Just one of those examples;

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41741615

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll
    BBC poll that consisted of more than 2,000 British adults found the majority of people said nothing when sexually assaulted, with 63 per cent of women and 79 per cent of men saying they had not reported the incident. Some women questioned in London said they were unlikely to make a formal complaint despite the viral #MeToo campaign.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of “Muslim rape,” even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.
     
    Muslim rape and sexual assault in the U.K and Europe is very real and you don't have to look very far for evidence. But if you say it's "hyperbolic deceit" then to be fair Abu Ghraib is hyperbolic deceit. You sound like a Muslim in denial which isn't anything new.

    Concerning the rape/ho culture, you are terribly confused as I'm not black or Jewish. Blacks embrace and perpetuate that culture while Jews dominate the hardcore porn industry in America that cheapens and devalues women.

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll
     
    Fake news. And the BBC is an ultra liberal news organization. English men tend to be extremely restrained and gentlemanly towards their own women and women in general so if there is a harassment problem it's likely being committed by third world men who have little concept of chivalry towards women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Ace says:
    @ThaboZulu
    I'm irked this Jewish b*tch called Africa her homeland. I hope farm murders continue until Boers go back to Holland where they came from.

    Well, that was like turning over a rock.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Ace says:
    @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    A browner and more Muslim Europe would be a craphole.

    Democracies, with their emphasis on "equality" are particularly prone to envy.

    It already is and the police outdo themselves to grovel at the feet of their inferiors. Hmm. Make that “at the feet of their equals.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Jake
    Yes, but the issue is WHY?

    Because Christendom was built and maintained by white people, meaning men.

    Leftism is another (like Manichaeanism, Islam, Catharism, Marxism) attempt to replace Christianity. Blacks and Asians became Christian from the beginning, but only whites, steeped in Hellenistic culture, built a true Christian civilization.

    That is the reason certain whites are not hated, even when they are assumed Christian. The Left does not hate the Episcopal Church, because it ordains women and marries gays. So the Left is fine with white men who are Episcopalian. Ditto all but a couple of Lutheran and other Anglican groups.

    The Left does not hate the Episcopal Church, because it ordains women and marries gays. So the Left is fine with white men who are Episcopalian. Ditto all but a couple of Lutheran and other Anglican groups.

    The protestant church’s pandering to the left is the reason why we rarely attend church anymore. If they grow some balls, once again hold their grounds on gay marriage, stop being accessories to illegal immigration and Muslim refugee sponsorship, I will think about returning. As it is the Mormon church and the Catholic church are fighting to recruit hispanic illegals, the Lutheran church is in competition with the Catholic church to sponsor Muslim refugees. One Lutheran church in the area is even holding special weekly services in Mandarin, right here in America, WTF?!

    Our churches have all cucked out, religion is now a business in America, making money in the name of God. They’re in it for the money like everyone else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Logan says:
    @Corvinus
    "How much gold and platinum was being mined in what is now South Africa when whites arrived? How many diamonds?"

    Diamonds were discovered in 1867 near the Vaal River in South Africa. Originally, blacks and whites worked separately on their own claims, but the British in the area gained control through large mining companies. In 1886, the largest deposit of gold-bearing owe was discovered. Again, the British secured control through their own corporations. How? Legislation passed restricted the liberty of blacks to own mining claims and trade their products. Local governments passed laws that limited the right of black Africans to own mining claims or to trade their products. Soon, blacks were designated to be the workers in the minds, rather than owner/operators and share in the profits.

    http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his312/lectures/southafr.htm

    "Did whites “steal the wealth”that had been produced by Africans,or did they create wealth by developing resources the natives had been utterly unaware even existed?"

    Blacks were quite cognizant of the diamond and gold discoveries, as they desired to earn profits by their own inclusion in the businesses. However, whites prevented blacks from having the opportunity to compete in the marketplace.

    The comment to which I originally replied stated that European societies had become wealthy by plundering the existing wealth of native peoples.

    This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers.

    But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.

    Did the whites in question “take wealth away from” the natives? Nope, because they didn’t have any existing wealth to steal. They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level.

    An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don’t own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing.

    Did the oil company “steal our wealth?” No. We just didn’t share in wealth discovered and produced by others.

    Should blacks have been excluded from the right compete for wealth in SA? Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful. But there is a huge difference between not being given the opportunity to acquire new wealth and having existing wealth stolen from you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers."

    It wasn't "sometimes", it was often. Furthermore, this plundering extended to the French, British, and Dutch.

    "But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing."

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    "Did the whites in question “take wealth away from” the natives? Nope, because they didn’t have any existing wealth to steal."

    The existing wealth was from the ground, you disingenuous twat. It laid there undiscovered. Once found out, the British, with their in-born greed, chose to freeze out the Africans. Furthermore, Africans historically had mined gold, so they clearly understood its value.

    "They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level."

    Assuming that advanced technology is the definitive trait of what constitutes "proper" civilization.

    "An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don’t own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing."

    Except that was not what happened in Africa. At first, white and blacks worked along the rivers where there had been a discovery in diamonds. They made their individual claims and drew up contracts stating that it was their property. Furthermore, the British were able to procure a "diamond zone" for themselves through political manipulation, leaving out the territorial considerations of the Orange Free State, the South African republic, and Tswana chiefs.

    "Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful."

    You do not know that for certain. It wasn't for the British to unilaterally make that decision.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Logan says:
    @interesting
    "slavery in America"


    I've often wondered how slavery became a uniquely American thing......it's as if it only existed in the United States and no where else in the history of the world. I've actually read an author who called the USA "the land of slavery"

    Yup. It existed always and everywhere, but somehow it became uniquely American.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Logan says:
    @anonymous
    LOL! Only a truly deranged psychopath takes pride in the psychopathy of his kind.

    I laugh at those who think this contest is already over.
     
    The devil laughs at you. ;)

    We perceived lesser people do not doubt that your cursed kind has the desire and will to exterminate us all.

    If white people have a confirmed desire and will to exterminate you all, what’s stopping us?

    Surely you are aware that white people, if united in this desire, could accomplish it relatively easily from a technical POV.

    Some considerable difficulty taking out China, to be sure, but a combined Russia/US first strike nuclear attack would no doubt be successful, perhaps with some losses to counterstrikes.

    We would also run into challenges determining “who is white?” in Latin America, Middle East and elsewhere.

    But it’s clear that the only thing preventing us from doing this is simply that few white people have any desire to do it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    If white people have a confirmed desire and will to exterminate you all, what’s stopping us?
     
    Maybe we're too busy killing off each other en masse as, for example, in the world wars.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Logan says:
    @jilles dykstra
    I see a persistent belief in fairy tales.
    There are two reasons for the almost complete disappearence of Indians from the present USA
    - the Indian immune system differs from the European one, Indians died from the bacteria and viruses the traders and colonists brought with them
    - the systematic driving west of the Indians, to areas where they could not live, killing them if they resisted to depart.
    There also was intentional infecting Indians with illnesses, such as smallpox, by giving them blankets from hospitals.
    At the first visit of Europeans to the what is now USA east coast, from Florida nothwards, the coast was inhabited.
    At the second visit European diseases had depopulated completely the coastal regions.
    That the USA violated all agreements with the Indians is beyond all doubt.

    Why again exactly are they European diseases? Most if not all originated in Asia.

    Europeans of the time were (somewhat) resistant to these diseases because they were descended from ancestors who had survived repeated similar virgin field epidemics over the previous millenia. The Indians had the bad luck to be exposed in a very short timespan to the accumulated pathogens developed over thousands of years in the Old World .

    Europeans of the time had no idea how disease of this type spread, nor of how to prevent it. The germ theory of disease wasn’t really confirmed till the late 19th century and for the most part effective treatments didn’t come along till quite some time later.

    The spread of disease wasn’t the white man’s “fault.” The real cause was the merging of the Old and New World’s disease ecosystems. Exactly the same depopulation would have happened in the New World had it been the one more advanced technologically and hence had “discovered” Europe.

    Driving the Indians west wasn’t all that much of a problem for them. You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains, and they did. Even Oklahoma isn’t too bad, with the eastern half not really all that different from their original homelands.

    That the treaties were shamefully broken by the US government I can’t argue against. One of the most disappointing discoveries of my life was a discussion of Jefferson’s Indian policies in a book about Lewis and Clark.

    T. Jefferson was cited extensively in his letters to various Indian agents negotiating treaties. He was entirely open about their being instructed to make treaties with the sole purpose of keeping the Indian quite for a few years until it became convenient to further dispossess them. IOW, the entire treaty process was not only eventually violated, it was conducted in bad faith from the beginning.

    This does not necessarily apply to every administration. Some (Washington, Adams, Grant) appear to have tried to deal justly and fairly with Indians, given the constraints they were under.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains...
     
    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.

    Without herds of bison, or cheap oil and machinery, I'd like to see anyone survive there. Even today, with all the advantages, I'm amazed that people even live in the Western (short grass or no-grass prairie) Great Plains at least.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @joef

    taking into account how much we will spend supporting blacks for the duration of their lives here, the cost of their crime, the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us
     
    a very accurate description of our current predicament (especially when we have so many libs living in denial, thus perpetuating it).

    Living without fear is one of the four basic freedoms. A nation cursed by the presence of African blacks cannot live in peace and tranquility. Their presence imposes a tremendous logistical burden and takes a terrible psychological toll on the besieged population.

    Whenever a white American travels to a country that has an insignificant percentage of blacks, they are at first bewildered and then surprised by how pleasant life can be. They find themselves able to relax, to let their guard down. It comes as a revelation to an American white that life can be enjoyed; that there is such a thing as “the good life” this side of the grave and that all that is required to know this by experience is freedom from blacks.

    It’s so simple really. Blacks have the anti-Midas touch. Everything they touch turns to sh*t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef

    Blacks have the anti-Midas touch
     
    Yes, that is an economic truism in many U.S municipalities where they are the majority population. It is usually blamed upon white flight as the cause of the municipal decline. However if afros were not the problem, then a city would remain thriving with or without Whites (we would be superfluous).

    Living without fear is one of the four basic freedoms. A nation cursed by the presence of African blacks cannot live in peace and tranquility. Their presence imposes a tremendous logistical burden and takes a terrible psychological toll on the besieged population.

     

    Unfortunately that is an experience that many people do not share, because:

    Either they are the millennial offspring of White flight refugees, who do not understand what their parents actually escaped from (the prosperity produces complacency), and the school system filled them with politically correct propaganda, and white guilt;

    Or they are elites, or limo libs, who are isolated in there country club atmosphere, never having to deal with it on a personal level, and are more than willing to sacrifice the rest of us on the alter of politically correct opinion;

    Or they are distracted suburbanites, who care more about being entertained, than their fellow countrymen who suffer at the hands of afro aggression;

    Or they are delusional libs who are full of self deception, denying reality, in order to prove how politically correct they are (even in my old city neighborhood, you had these wack jobs who were actually proud when they were victimized by an afro, and demanded the same from you);

    Or corporatist republicans (& neocons) who are more interested in protecting corporate profits, and obtaining cheap labor, than protecting the nation from afro destructive actions/behavior;

    And finally you have the leftist who actually want to see the rest of us suffer under afro aggression so they can attempt to obtain their communist nirvana.

    Due to the above, this problem will probably not be acknowledged until it is too late, and the damage is done (when the real chaos begins).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Yes, of course.

    Because an occasional male hand on a pretty, well-exposed knee beneath a short skirt here and there, or a blushing, drunken invitation to a young adult lady to go to bed is ten times worse, more immoral and more illegal than the systematic, deliberate, organised gang-rape, beating, kidnap and trafficing for prostitution of hundreds of defenceless White schoolgirls across every town in northern England for the past 40 years by hundreds of vicious, White-hating racist Moslem sand-niggers, isn’t it ?

    You dumb left-liberal cultural marxist fuck.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  190. @Jake
    Are you that ignorant? Do you really think the Boer War was Israel versus the Boers?

    It was England destroying the Boers. It was the British Empire that used early concentrations camps to spread terror across Boer communities. It was WASP culture that decided to conquer the Boers and force them into serving the British Empire.

    Were some Jews involved? You bet. That was a given, because WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.

    WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.

    WASP aristocracy in Europe are always aligned with the Jews because they are all indebted or in bed deep with the Rothschilds, who ran all their central banks and financed all the wars between the European nation states since the 1800s, getting themselves enormously wealthy in the process.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

    From London in 1813 to 1815, Nathan Mayer Rothschild was instrumental in almost single-handedly financing the British war effort, organising the shipment of bullion to the Duke of Wellington’s armies across Europe, as well as arranging the payment of British financial subsidies to their continental allies. In 1815 alone, the Rothschilds provided £9.8 million (in 1815 currency, about £566 million, €717 million or US$869 million today, when using the retail price index, and £6.58 billion, €8,34 billion or US$10.1 billion when using average earnings) in subsidy loans to Britain’s continental allies.

    Cecil Rhodes, who founded the largest diamond company in the world in South Africa, De Beers, built the company with financing from the Rothschilds. Lionel Rothschild was the first practicing Jew to sit as a member of the British parliament. The British elite are in bed deep with the Jews because of the Rothschilds. Today the family owns 50% of The Economist magazine, not surprisingly it has become the biggest promoter of the open borders, mass immigration and globalist agenda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jbwilson24
    Yes, but it is deeper than that.

    Jews started interbreeding heavily with the English aristocracy during the industrial revolution. Sagging fortunes of noble families were oft revived by the happenstance marriage of a young Jewish woman to a son of the family. Check out the lineage of a lot of English nobles... it was so obvious that Americans were actually commenting on this back in the 1920s.

    The idea that there is a separation between the Jewish elite in England and the 'WASP' elite is not tenable giving the heavy interbreeding. It appears that Jews had the upper hand in the empire as well, given the crown jewels such as the south african diamond mines ended up in the hands of the latter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @Corvinus
    "We are offering to pay them to go! We’ll throw in $10,000 per person if they will just get on a plane (ticket gratis) and leave us in peace!!!"

    Who is this specific "we"? Are you a Daddy Warbucks who is opening up their wallet? Or, are there particular people in mind who are funding this endeavor? Please offer citations.

    "the cost due to the erosion of our civil society their presence imposes upon us."

    Actually, our civil society has been eroded by ALL of us, not just one particular group of people.

    You got me, Corvinus. Nobody is ponying up the $10,000 to pay blacks to head back to Africa. But a fellow can dream, can’t he? I too “have a Dream”.

    By the way, the Jews in Israel did give African “Jews” 5000 bucks to depart. (You might know they’d take my idea and cut it in half–being Jews and all, they’d drive a harder bargain. But hey, it worked!)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @Ron Unz

    Ward Churchill, ‘A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present’, San Francisco 1997
    mentions an estimate of a 100 million.
     
    He sounds like an "academic holocaust-denier" to me. I suspect that the true number of Amerinds exterminated by whites in North America was at least six quintrillion...

    Ron, a bug recurs. I tried to email Hank Rearden’s succinct demolition job #169 but the CAPTCHA system again didn’t work. I.e. The needed CAPTCHA letters and/or numbers didn’t appear for copying.
    (I am using a phone app).
    BTW why is Hank Rearden’s comment surrounded by an orange/brown rectangle? Is that to show your personal approbation? If so, and anyway, Is there a function for finding all such celebrated comments?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @anonymous

    Antagonize a peaceful God loving people
     
    My apologies for being pedantic, but in the context of said faith, you forgot to pluralise "God" there. You see, the devil, literally too in the context of said faith, is in the detail.

    And, peaceful?? Hahahahaha!! Get off those hallucinogens dude(tte).

    forsaking Christ
     
    The white racist, which means most of the white race, will never attain spiritual peace. They will forsake Christ now, then forsake whatever heathen abomination their cursed ancestors cooked up in their fertile imaginations, flailing from one abomination to another, until the end of mankind.

    And why shouldn’t we Whites forsake (((Jesus)))? Just like today’s degenerate, anti-White, leftist Jews, he taught that I have to hate and forsake my own blood and soil!

    “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

    “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.” (Matthew 19:29)

    Le happy afterlife merchant‘s animosity to a White man’s blood and soil is why this fellow noted the following:

    “Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity—the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against ‘race:’ the undying chandala hatred is disguised as a religion of love.” -Friedrich Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Semper Fidelis

    WASP Elites have always allied with Jews to wage some type of war against white Christians the WASP Elites hate and/or fear because they know them to be more conservative (in terms of historic European Christian cultures) than they are.
     
    WASP aristocracy in Europe are always aligned with the Jews because they are all indebted or in bed deep with the Rothschilds, who ran all their central banks and financed all the wars between the European nation states since the 1800s, getting themselves enormously wealthy in the process.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family


    From London in 1813 to 1815, Nathan Mayer Rothschild was instrumental in almost single-handedly financing the British war effort, organising the shipment of bullion to the Duke of Wellington's armies across Europe, as well as arranging the payment of British financial subsidies to their continental allies. In 1815 alone, the Rothschilds provided £9.8 million (in 1815 currency, about £566 million, €717 million or US$869 million today, when using the retail price index, and £6.58 billion, €8,34 billion or US$10.1 billion when using average earnings) in subsidy loans to Britain's continental allies.
     
    Cecil Rhodes, who founded the largest diamond company in the world in South Africa, De Beers, built the company with financing from the Rothschilds. Lionel Rothschild was the first practicing Jew to sit as a member of the British parliament. The British elite are in bed deep with the Jews because of the Rothschilds. Today the family owns 50% of The Economist magazine, not surprisingly it has become the biggest promoter of the open borders, mass immigration and globalist agenda.

    Yes, but it is deeper than that.

    Jews started interbreeding heavily with the English aristocracy during the industrial revolution. Sagging fortunes of noble families were oft revived by the happenstance marriage of a young Jewish woman to a son of the family. Check out the lineage of a lot of English nobles… it was so obvious that Americans were actually commenting on this back in the 1920s.

    The idea that there is a separation between the Jewish elite in England and the ‘WASP’ elite is not tenable giving the heavy interbreeding. It appears that Jews had the upper hand in the empire as well, given the crown jewels such as the south african diamond mines ended up in the hands of the latter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Jews aren't always doing so well these days. Without daddies arranging the marriages of their doltish offspring, they can end up in bad positions. For example:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3585800/Why-18m-Rothschild-heiress-hooked-bad-boy-rappers-FEMAIL-explores-Kate-s-relationship-latest-beau.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    The comment to which I originally replied stated that European societies had become wealthy by plundering the existing wealth of native peoples.

    This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers.

    But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.

    Did the whites in question "take wealth away from" the natives? Nope, because they didn't have any existing wealth to steal. They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level.

    An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don't own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing.

    Did the oil company "steal our wealth?" No. We just didn't share in wealth discovered and produced by others.

    Should blacks have been excluded from the right compete for wealth in SA? Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful. But there is a huge difference between not being given the opportunity to acquire new wealth and having existing wealth stolen from you.

    “This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers.”

    It wasn’t “sometimes”, it was often. Furthermore, this plundering extended to the French, British, and Dutch.

    “But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.”

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    “Did the whites in question “take wealth away from” the natives? Nope, because they didn’t have any existing wealth to steal.”

    The existing wealth was from the ground, you disingenuous twat. It laid there undiscovered. Once found out, the British, with their in-born greed, chose to freeze out the Africans. Furthermore, Africans historically had mined gold, so they clearly understood its value.

    “They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level.”

    Assuming that advanced technology is the definitive trait of what constitutes “proper” civilization.

    “An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don’t own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing.”

    Except that was not what happened in Africa. At first, white and blacks worked along the rivers where there had been a discovery in diamonds. They made their individual claims and drew up contracts stating that it was their property. Furthermore, the British were able to procure a “diamond zone” for themselves through political manipulation, leaving out the territorial considerations of the Orange Free State, the South African republic, and Tswana chiefs.

    “Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful.”

    You do not know that for certain. It wasn’t for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    “But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.”

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    "till whites came in." You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites. The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields. Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites.

    This is similar to the oil in the Middle East. The Arabs had been living above it for millenia, utterly unaware of its existence or value. Americans came in, discovered the oil and developed, produced and marketed it.

    Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.

    But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves, despite the fact that we had more than sufficient military power to keep it for outselves. This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed.

    In Africa, till recently, the locals were frozen out of the wealth generated by their land. But their "right" to it is, again, part of our cultural baggage, not their's.

    It wasn’t for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    Why not? Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be "fair" to the conquered? If you have examples of that, I'd love to see them.

    You can't even see the ethnocentrism inherent in your argument. You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. Those moral arguments are not universals.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Miro23 says:
    @Corvinus
    "There is no going back for whites in South Africa, because they were betrayed by stupid, naïve or evil (depending how charitably you choose to interpret their actions and motives) left-liberal whites around the world."

    Indeed, how dare those liberal whites and their black cronies insist that the shackles of apartheid be removed.

    "The lesson of South Africa is there for all to see, and eventually it will be seen and understood by enough men, despite the efforts of left-liberal antiracist liars like yourself, rationalising your denial and suppression of the truth with your evil lie that it’s “necessary for the greater good”.

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was "necessary for the greater good"?

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was “necessary for the greater good”?

    The problem is different races in the same country, and it’s a question of power.

    Historically, races have separated geographically, with for example the French in France and the Germans in Germany. The French have their own language and culture in France and the Germans have their own language and culture in Germany. There’s no illusion that French and German culture are the same.

    If different races happen to share the same country (usually an artificial sort of place) there’s always the question of power. In Belgium for example, about half the country are French speaking (and French culture) Walloons, and half are Dutch speaking (and Dutch culture) Flamands with something of a permanent cold war between them. If Belgium was entirely Walloon, the Walloons would be a lot happier, and if it was entirely Flemish, the Flemish would be a lot happier).

    Power needs to belong to the majority, and this is tricky in an evenly divided country like Belgium, They have to run an uncomfortable type of Democratic power-sharing. It would have been better for them to have a clear Walloon or Flemish majority, with the unquestioned dominant group under Democracy, respecting the rights and interests of the minority.

    The South African case was back to front.

    The majority are clearly Black Africans, and it is their country. The South African White settler minority happened to develop the country, and make it rich, at a time when Imperialism (inc. ideas of racial superiority – true or otherwise) was the fashion and quite acceptable, but still, they had no right to impose apartheid on the Blacks – although in the end it was Realpolitik – they knew that the Blacks couldn’t/wouldn’t run a Western style Democracy that would protect a rich White South African minority. They were right of course, and sadly they are now being chased out of Africa.

    The United States is a different situation.

    After the last spasms of Imperialism (the WW2 failure of the German Eastern, and Japanese Asian Imperialist projects) the US was left with a majority Anglo-European population with a legitimate right to power. The current problem, is that this right is being challenged by a rich and powerful Jewish minority, acting tribally, who themselves are only 2% of the population (with Democracy denying them power). The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by “Homeland Security”.

    It didn’t work in South Africa, and it probably isn’t going to work in the US, and if/when it fails, the critical question is going to be the attitude of Anglo-European Americans. Radical Jewish activists have led the movement for the mass immigration replacement of Whites, the demonization of Whites, the removal of Whites from positions of power in their own country, and the looting of the country to benefit Israel (plus the WMD and 9/11 deceptions).

    So will Jews eventually be chased out of the US (South African style), or will they return to being a minority under Democratic protection, with power corresponding to their 2% of the population. White Anglo-Europeans are not Black Africans , and they have a long Democratic tradition, so it’s an open question.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Key concept.:

    The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by “Homeland Security”.
     
    And as I think you suggest, color doesn't matter a bit. It's not so much about color as who gets to play master and who plays slave.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. EWM says:

    THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
    by Rudyard Kipling

    [MORE]

    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddently bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Are you aware this poem is a forgery?

    Kipling wrote no such thing. He wrote a poem called "The Beginnings," in which the refrain is "When the English began to hate."

    Racialists changed the English to Saxon, presumably to drive its setting into the distant past rather than WWI, which is what the poet was talking about. This allows the protagonist to be implied to be a generic white person rather than a specific nationality.

    http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_beginnings.htm

    Everybody is entitled to his own opinion. But not to poems written by someone else.
    , @daniel le mouche
    'They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait'

    Another fine summation of this abominable people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Logan says:
    @ThaboZulu
    They stole our land and we are taking it back the bloody way. Long may farm murders continue.

    Good luck with that. It’s worked out so well for Zimbabweans. As they have discovered, land of itself is simply not a source of wealth. It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth. The main effect of the “taking back”of land by Zimbabwean blacks has been a drastic drop in the wealth produced by that land. It seems that those who take it back capable of or much interested in the hard and intelligent work needed to make that land produce wealth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth.
     
    Properly?

    I bet the same claim could be made about human "resources." Now, get back to work. ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Logan says:
    @gustafus
    Goose stepping Nationalist ... REPORTING FOR DUTY

    I am a devoted racist. I sift my darkies as needed, with a healthy eye for intrinsic goodness. There are good reasons for enjoining some of them.

    That said - I'll never forget a flight over the Andes with a wealthy investor from a Colorado Ski town.... Our guide was a government rep extolling the virtues of modern day Chile -- assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous.... no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    AGAIN - I"m a committed racist - knowing the black and brown hordes of the 3rd world are charging the gates of Western Civilization ... with blood in their eyes.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    Somehow I think Chile will survive the exploding populations of Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.

    Your guide was, I suggest, more than a little confused about his history.

    While studies vary, it appears the “average” Chilean is something like 60% “white” and 40% “native American.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Chile#Indigenous_communities

    That’s based on genetic studies, not self-identification.

    The percentages are quite different on the other side of the Andes, where ancestry is generally 80% white.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2009/12/how-argentina-became-white/#.Wgg6WWi3zIU

    In the 19th century history of the area, Chile allied itself with the Indians of both sides of the mountains against the Argentinians, providing the Indians with refuge from reprisal by Argentina. To which Argentina eventually responded by pretty much exterminating their Indians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. Logan says:
    @Corvinus
    "This did indeed sometimes happen, mostly by the Spanish and Portuguese, though in both those cases with very negative side effects for the plunderers."

    It wasn't "sometimes", it was often. Furthermore, this plundering extended to the French, British, and Dutch.

    "But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing."

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    "Did the whites in question “take wealth away from” the natives? Nope, because they didn’t have any existing wealth to steal."

    The existing wealth was from the ground, you disingenuous twat. It laid there undiscovered. Once found out, the British, with their in-born greed, chose to freeze out the Africans. Furthermore, Africans historically had mined gold, so they clearly understood its value.

    "They existed at most at a rather low-level Iron Age level."

    Assuming that advanced technology is the definitive trait of what constitutes "proper" civilization.

    "An analogy: My family owns acres in CO. But we don’t own the mineral rights. An oil company buys up those rights and discovers frackable shale under our farm. They drill, frack and extract a lot of valuable oil. My family is paid nothing."

    Except that was not what happened in Africa. At first, white and blacks worked along the rivers where there had been a discovery in diamonds. They made their individual claims and drew up contracts stating that it was their property. Furthermore, the British were able to procure a "diamond zone" for themselves through political manipulation, leaving out the territorial considerations of the Orange Free State, the South African republic, and Tswana chiefs.

    "Of course not, though few of them probably would have been very successful."

    You do not know that for certain. It wasn't for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    “But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.”

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    “till whites came in.” You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites. The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields. Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites.

    This is similar to the oil in the Middle East. The Arabs had been living above it for millenia, utterly unaware of its existence or value. Americans came in, discovered the oil and developed, produced and marketed it.

    Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.

    But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves, despite the fact that we had more than sufficient military power to keep it for outselves. This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed.

    In Africa, till recently, the locals were frozen out of the wealth generated by their land. But their “right” to it is, again, part of our cultural baggage, not their’s.

    It wasn’t for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    Why not? Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be “fair” to the conquered? If you have examples of that, I’d love to see them.

    You can’t even see the ethnocentrism inherent in your argument. You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. Those moral arguments are not universals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
    " This is not , by the way, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed"

    Brilliant and rare observation, and in tune with the unspoken however implied rediculous leftist theory that had the Europeans been black and the Africans white, that all of the strife and bloodshed, plus slavery, would have never occured.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualified since 1973, airborne trained U S Army Vet, and pro jazz artist.
    , @Corvinus
    "“till whites came in.” You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites."

    The story begins with a 15 year-old white boy who discovered a 21-carat diamond, which led to a diamond rush by whites AND blacks.

    "The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields."

    Blacks were aware of gold deposits on their continent. See Mansa Musa. In South Africa, the mining camp that developed in 1886 as a result of a major discovery was primarily white, but there were black prospectors.

    "Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites."

    Initially discovered by a white person, with subsequent discoveries and claims by both whites and blacks.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    In the case of South Africa, the British set forth laws that denied blacks the opportunity to mine diamonds and gold if they found it on their own property. Furthermore, the natives had been taken over by force, against their own will, by outside influences, beginning in the 1870's, and had no say regarding their political or economic future. It is similar to the American colonists who demanded that they be able to sell goods on their own without being subject to imperial control.

    In the case of the Middle East, there had been at least a modicum of respect in that there were concessions negotiated with the Persian government by the British to search for oil in its territory. There was no such arrangement in South Africa.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    Had the deals been brought about in an equitable and transparent manner.

    "But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves..."

    That is patently false. Cecil Rhodes told the House of Assembly in Cape Town (1887) that “the native is to be treated as a child and denied the franchise. We must adopt a system of despotism in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa”. In less oratorical moments, he put it even more bluntly: “I prefer land to niggers.” He personally supervised the seizure of close to a million square miles of prime territory from its inhabitants, which included tracts that stored valuable mineral deposits. In 1896, his name was linked with the Jameson Raid, an illegal effort to annex territory held by the Boers, which was a primary factor for a war that began in 1899 and ended in 1902.

    "This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed."

    Indeed, the natives would have tried to keep what was considered to be their property from Europeans, but they lacked the maxim gun, so their efforts would have been for naught.

    "Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be “fair” to the conquered?"

    You just stated that "we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves." Do you realize the disconnect here? Indeed, the Europeans jackbooted the Africans, took the wealth for themselves, and left in their wake a post-colonial mess.

    "You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. "

    I am applying arguments that are based on universal moral standards.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Logan says:
    @EWM
    THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
    by Rudyard Kipling


    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy -- willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddently bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    Are you aware this poem is a forgery?

    Kipling wrote no such thing. He wrote a poem called “The Beginnings,” in which the refrain is “When the English began to hate.”

    Racialists changed the English to Saxon, presumably to drive its setting into the distant past rather than WWI, which is what the poet was talking about. This allows the protagonist to be implied to be a generic white person rather than a specific nationality.

    http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_beginnings.htm

    Everybody is entitled to his own opinion. But not to poems written by someone else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @gustafus
    Goose stepping Nationalist ... REPORTING FOR DUTY

    I am a devoted racist. I sift my darkies as needed, with a healthy eye for intrinsic goodness. There are good reasons for enjoining some of them.

    That said - I'll never forget a flight over the Andes with a wealthy investor from a Colorado Ski town.... Our guide was a government rep extolling the virtues of modern day Chile -- assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous.... no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    AGAIN - I"m a committed racist - knowing the black and brown hordes of the 3rd world are charging the gates of Western Civilization ... with blood in their eyes.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    Somehow I think Chile will survive the exploding populations of Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela.

    Maybe one in 10,000 comments contains some useful info. Of those, maybe 1 in 10,000 is stunning and useful, though not a bit surprising, and yours is one of them.

    …assuring us that white majority Chile exterminated pretty much all the troublesome indigenous…. no worries there.

    He reminded us that Chilean wealth was modeled on the Chicago School of Economics.

    There would be no problems with indigenous governments like Bolivia or Peru.

    But even I was stunned at his certitude that those draconian measures were necessary to Chilean development. And that they were part of the PITCH for investment.

    I find it interesting that lot of whites are in denial of both those facts and the fact that economically speaking, most whites may just as well be part of the off-white to black underclasses. In other words, our Lords are unlikely to give a damn about anyone outside their class whether white, black, purple or anything else, and all of us are probably disposable or worse, in the eyes of the plutocrats.

    The moral is plain, but will no doubt be denied until its too late.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @Hank Rearden
    If Zimbabweans don’t want whites back, then why does News24 and The Washington Post say they do want White farmers back? Fact is, the Bongo can't grow anything in the Congo, at least without the White Devil showing them how. This is no surprise, since sub-Saharan black Africans are "at the borderline of mental retardation".

    If Zimbabweans don’t want whites back, then why does News24 and The Washington Post say they do want White farmers back?

    On what basis do you find those to be credible sources? Do all of them want all whites back?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @Logan
    If white people have a confirmed desire and will to exterminate you all, what's stopping us?

    Surely you are aware that white people, if united in this desire, could accomplish it relatively easily from a technical POV.

    Some considerable difficulty taking out China, to be sure, but a combined Russia/US first strike nuclear attack would no doubt be successful, perhaps with some losses to counterstrikes.

    We would also run into challenges determining "who is white?" in Latin America, Middle East and elsewhere.

    But it's clear that the only thing preventing us from doing this is simply that few white people have any desire to do it.

    If white people have a confirmed desire and will to exterminate you all, what’s stopping us?

    Maybe we’re too busy killing off each other en masse as, for example, in the world wars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. @Logan
    Why again exactly are they European diseases? Most if not all originated in Asia.

    Europeans of the time were (somewhat) resistant to these diseases because they were descended from ancestors who had survived repeated similar virgin field epidemics over the previous millenia. The Indians had the bad luck to be exposed in a very short timespan to the accumulated pathogens developed over thousands of years in the Old World .

    Europeans of the time had no idea how disease of this type spread, nor of how to prevent it. The germ theory of disease wasn't really confirmed till the late 19th century and for the most part effective treatments didn't come along till quite some time later.

    The spread of disease wasn't the white man's "fault." The real cause was the merging of the Old and New World's disease ecosystems. Exactly the same depopulation would have happened in the New World had it been the one more advanced technologically and hence had "discovered" Europe.

    Driving the Indians west wasn't all that much of a problem for them. You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains, and they did. Even Oklahoma isn't too bad, with the eastern half not really all that different from their original homelands.

    That the treaties were shamefully broken by the US government I can't argue against. One of the most disappointing discoveries of my life was a discussion of Jefferson's Indian policies in a book about Lewis and Clark.

    T. Jefferson was cited extensively in his letters to various Indian agents negotiating treaties. He was entirely open about their being instructed to make treaties with the sole purpose of keeping the Indian quite for a few years until it became convenient to further dispossess them. IOW, the entire treaty process was not only eventually violated, it was conducted in bad faith from the beginning.

    This does not necessarily apply to every administration. Some (Washington, Adams, Grant) appear to have tried to deal justly and fairly with Indians, given the constraints they were under.

    You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains…

    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.

    Without herds of bison, or cheap oil and machinery, I’d like to see anyone survive there. Even today, with all the advantages, I’m amazed that people even live in the Western (short grass or no-grass prairie) Great Plains at least.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    Yeah, but at the time there were huge herds of bison. So they survived quite nicely. In fact, during the 17th and 18th centuries many tribes migrated out onto the Plains from surrounding areas as horses and then firearms made a nomadic buffalo-hunting way of life attractive.
    , @helena
    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.


    Not recommended?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. @Miro23

    So having a racial caste system in place, with one group deemed superior and another group deemed other inferior, was “necessary for the greater good”?
     
    The problem is different races in the same country, and it's a question of power.

    Historically, races have separated geographically, with for example the French in France and the Germans in Germany. The French have their own language and culture in France and the Germans have their own language and culture in Germany. There's no illusion that French and German culture are the same.

    If different races happen to share the same country (usually an artificial sort of place) there's always the question of power. In Belgium for example, about half the country are French speaking (and French culture) Walloons, and half are Dutch speaking (and Dutch culture) Flamands with something of a permanent cold war between them. If Belgium was entirely Walloon, the Walloons would be a lot happier, and if it was entirely Flemish, the Flemish would be a lot happier).

    Power needs to belong to the majority, and this is tricky in an evenly divided country like Belgium, They have to run an uncomfortable type of Democratic power-sharing. It would have been better for them to have a clear Walloon or Flemish majority, with the unquestioned dominant group under Democracy, respecting the rights and interests of the minority.

    The South African case was back to front.

    The majority are clearly Black Africans, and it is their country. The South African White settler minority happened to develop the country, and make it rich, at a time when Imperialism (inc. ideas of racial superiority - true or otherwise) was the fashion and quite acceptable, but still, they had no right to impose apartheid on the Blacks - although in the end it was Realpolitik - they knew that the Blacks couldn't/wouldn't run a Western style Democracy that would protect a rich White South African minority. They were right of course, and sadly they are now being chased out of Africa.

    The United States is a different situation.

    After the last spasms of Imperialism (the WW2 failure of the German Eastern, and Japanese Asian Imperialist projects) the US was left with a majority Anglo-European population with a legitimate right to power. The current problem, is that this right is being challenged by a rich and powerful Jewish minority, acting tribally, who themselves are only 2% of the population (with Democracy denying them power). The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by "Homeland Security".

    It didn't work in South Africa, and it probably isn't going to work in the US, and if/when it fails, the critical question is going to be the attitude of Anglo-European Americans. Radical Jewish activists have led the movement for the mass immigration replacement of Whites, the demonization of Whites, the removal of Whites from positions of power in their own country, and the looting of the country to benefit Israel (plus the WMD and 9/11 deceptions).

    So will Jews eventually be chased out of the US (South African style), or will they return to being a minority under Democratic protection, with power corresponding to their 2% of the population. White Anglo-Europeans are not Black Africans , and they have a long Democratic tradition, so it's an open question.

    Key concept.:

    The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by “Homeland Security”.

    And as I think you suggest, color doesn’t matter a bit. It’s not so much about color as who gets to play master and who plays slave.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    And as I think you suggest, color doesn’t matter a bit. It’s not so much about color as who gets to play master and who plays slave.
     
    Yes, I see it as a search for tribal power. Jewish promoted mass immigration, SJW activism, BLM, White Guilt, Affirmative Action, Counter-Culture, LGBT, destruction of national and Christian symbols WMD, War on Terror etc. etc. are just tools to weaken and confuse the only potential challenge (Anglo-European) to Jewish power in the United States.

    The proof, is that exactly the same promoters, push opposite policies for Israel: Only Jewish immigration, an explicitly Jewish state, prohibited Jewish/Gentile marriage, and with no interest whatsoever in Blacks, refugees or banning Jewish religious symbols . Also regular False Flag deceptions to trick the US into destroying Middle East countries neighbouring Israel, looking the other way with regard to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, and an automatic veto on criticism of Israel at the UN.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. @Logan
    Good luck with that. It's worked out so well for Zimbabweans. As they have discovered, land of itself is simply not a source of wealth. It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth. The main effect of the "taking back"of land by Zimbabwean blacks has been a drastic drop in the wealth produced by that land. It seems that those who take it back capable of or much interested in the hard and intelligent work needed to make that land produce wealth.

    It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth.

    Properly?

    I bet the same claim could be made about human “resources.” Now, get back to work. ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    You bet. Human resources, like all others, are potential sources of wealth. Unless used properly, no wealth is produced.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. @Logan
    Well, of course. But the comment I was responding to implied that imperialist nations became wealthy by plundering the wealth of those they colonized. Which is not at all what happened.

    As you say, individuals and companies profited greatly. Nabobs of the East India Company and Caribbean planters of the 18th century first among them.

    But England, France, Germany not so much.

    The early days of colonialism, primarily by Netherlands, Spain and Portugal there was a good deal of
    outright plundering that went on. Making the home countries indeed more wealthy overall. But at least in Spain and Portugal this was a highly two-edged sword, damaging the imperialist powers perhaps more than the conquered.

    Right you are. And a similar thing happened in the South. Before the Civil War only a small minority of whites–about 25% of them–owned slaves, and about 80% of the slaves were owned by a mere 2% of the whites (the big plantation owners). Yet it is routinely alleged that all American whites everywhere–even in the states where slavery never existed, in fact, even in the states that did not yet exist when slavery was still practiced–are said to have somehow benefited from the peculiar institution (“white privilege”).

    The élites are very good at shifting blame, aren’t they!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. KenH says:
    @anonymous
    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of "Muslim rape," even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.

    Just one of those examples;

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41741615

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll
    BBC poll that consisted of more than 2,000 British adults found the majority of people said nothing when sexually assaulted, with 63 per cent of women and 79 per cent of men saying they had not reported the incident. Some women questioned in London said they were unlikely to make a formal complaint despite the viral #MeToo campaign.

    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of “Muslim rape,” even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.

    Muslim rape and sexual assault in the U.K and Europe is very real and you don’t have to look very far for evidence. But if you say it’s “hyperbolic deceit” then to be fair Abu Ghraib is hyperbolic deceit. You sound like a Muslim in denial which isn’t anything new.

    Concerning the rape/ho culture, you are terribly confused as I’m not black or Jewish. Blacks embrace and perpetuate that culture while Jews dominate the hardcore porn industry in America that cheapens and devalues women.

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll

    Fake news. And the BBC is an ultra liberal news organization. English men tend to be extremely restrained and gentlemanly towards their own women and women in general so if there is a harassment problem it’s likely being committed by third world men who have little concept of chivalry towards women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Semper Fidelis

    English men tend to be extremely restrained and gentlemanly towards their own women and women in general so if there is a harassment problem it’s likely being committed by third world men who have little concept of chivalry towards women.
     
    I'm afraid your concept of the British gentleman needs updating. Brits today are vastly different from the Brits of yore. I'm sure you've heard of the appalling child sex abuse cases at the BBC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_sexual_abuse_cases

    There's not even a half way respectable paper in England, all British papers are like tabloids, with a giant nude centerfold everyday. Whatever the Jews did to corrupt America with their moral relativism and cultural Marxism since the 60s, multiply that by 10 and set it back 20 years. That's how far gone the Brits are today in the hands of the hedonist Jews who've pretty much run their government, upper class, media and academia since the 1800s. The British aristocracy is every bit as depraved. The whole mess with Charles, Diana and Camilla Parker Bowles dragged the royal family to a new low. Prince Andrew and now Prince Harry's partying and philandering are well documented in the tabloids.

    When I think of a British "gentleman" today I think of Simon Cowell, Ricky Gervais, Pierce Morgan, Gordon Ramsay, Jamie Oliver, David Beckham, Hugh Grant, Elton John...more loud mouth cocky degenerates than David Nivens. A British "Lady" today is more in the image of Victoria Beckham or Bridget Jones than Queen Elizabeth, who've been reduced to an old relic picked on daily by the British tabloids. British actor Ed Westwick has just been accused of raping 2 of his co-stars in US TV show Gossip Girl. Even James Bond the quintessential British gentleman has received an image update courtesy of beefy Daniel Craig. Every British drama today involves adultery, single parenthood or homosexuality, the Jewish/leftist moral depravity in full force.

    Brits today are a country of lost souls mired in colonial guilt, to the point where they no longer even fight back when their country is being taken over by Muslim rape gangs who target their teenage girls.

    The British civilization reached its apex in the Victorian era(1837-1901), when they largely adhered to the "Victorian Morality" of sexual restraint, low tolerance for crime and a strict social code of conduct. Then the two world wars occurred and all hell broke lose. A once proud people who gave the world the Industrial Revolution and governed 25% of the earth's land mass are gradually reduced to a country full of depraved drunken hooligans thanks to leftist moral degeneracy and colonial guilt. This is what British teens are like today:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uCv7LLW868
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Miro23 says:
    @jacques sheete
    Key concept.:

    The Jewish tribal solution is to get non-Democratic locks on power ,the same as the Whites did in South Africa, with the ideal being an institutionalized system of Apartheid (the Deplorables as the new Blacks) run by “Homeland Security”.
     
    And as I think you suggest, color doesn't matter a bit. It's not so much about color as who gets to play master and who plays slave.

    And as I think you suggest, color doesn’t matter a bit. It’s not so much about color as who gets to play master and who plays slave.

    Yes, I see it as a search for tribal power. Jewish promoted mass immigration, SJW activism, BLM, White Guilt, Affirmative Action, Counter-Culture, LGBT, destruction of national and Christian symbols WMD, War on Terror etc. etc. are just tools to weaken and confuse the only potential challenge (Anglo-European) to Jewish power in the United States.

    The proof, is that exactly the same promoters, push opposite policies for Israel: Only Jewish immigration, an explicitly Jewish state, prohibited Jewish/Gentile marriage, and with no interest whatsoever in Blacks, refugees or banning Jewish religious symbols . Also regular False Flag deceptions to trick the US into destroying Middle East countries neighbouring Israel, looking the other way with regard to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, and an automatic veto on criticism of Israel at the UN.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @whoever
    I'll only make a brief comment about the Christian Delawares, since I am Brethren and my ancestors, both of European and American extraction, had some connection to these events. If you want to delve into first-hand accounts, or as near as we can get to that, of that era, the peoples and conflicts, may I suggest you start with Geschichte der Mission der Evangelischen Brüder unter den Indianern in Nordamerika. Although our people had been in British North America for generations by that time, we still wrote in German, but here is a contemporary English translation: History of the mission of the United Brethren among the Indians in North America.
    You may also find interesting A narrative of the mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians : from its commencement, in the year 1740, to the close of the year 1808 ; comprising all the remarkable incidents which took place at their missionary stations during that period ; interspersed with anecdotes, historical facts, speeches of Indians, and other interesting matter.
    While much of the conflict of those days was between Indians and "whites," a subset of the conflict was between the English and the Germans; the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.
    ....
    I had thought to write a long comment, but I've changed my mind. Suffice it to say that the ancestor who led directly to me, after the horrors of the year of the bloody sevens and subsequent events, had had enough of the English and traveled west until he fetched up at the Rocky Mountains, where he and his descendants remained until the Mexican-American War and ensuing events led to three decades of disaster. While not that many of of that branch of my family's ancestors were actually killed in fighting, half of all that population died of cholera in 1850, a disease hitherto unknown to them. Smallpox, chicken pox, scarlet fever, measles ... all took their toll in subsequent years, as well. There were massacres, combats with militias and soldiers, killing and killing until the final, abject surrender of the pitiful remnants.
    Was it a premeditated genocide -- or just what happens when two peoples fight for possession of the same land and the stronger wins? Does it matter? It was what it was.
    Had the victors, the white Americans, wanted to exterminate the pitiful survivors of the plains tribes, they could have done so with hardly any effort at all. But they didn't do that. Instead, they extended a helping hand, and offered to welcome them into their civilization, placing images of plains Indians on their coinage, teaching their young boys and girls Indian ways, as in this once-popular book: Indian scout talks; a guide for Boy scouts and Campfire girls.
    We should not forget all the bad that happened in the struggle for this continent. America is fought-for land. But we should also remember the magnanimity of the victors.

    Coda:

    But my strong impression is that the whole notion of an Amerind “genocide” at the hands of American whites is basically just a modern PC hoax.
     
    Substitute "Jew" for "Amerind" and "German" for "American" in your statement: how does that make you feel? And do you care about arguing about absolute numbers of deaths or whether those who died perished from disease and starvation or were directly executed? Is not the very thought of contending about such things repulsive?

    ‘the Germans got along well with the Indians, the English, aside from Quakers and similar, did not, nor did they like the Germans.’

    That says it all, to my mind. The English, to this day, deserve only contempt and disgust–i.e. all that they are capable of giving. Yo English fuckers, what’s your fucking problem?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @ThaboZulu
    They stole our land and we are taking it back the bloody way. Long may farm murders continue.

    May your infinite relatives in Europe meet the same fate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @ThaboZulu
    Showing your primitive unevolved mind. I dont care about blacks in Europe or America I'm only concerned about extirpating whites in Africa.

    Yes, Kookamunga, I’m sure you’d beat my primitive mind in a debate on any subject other than jungle dancing, rape, weapons, and general moronic violence.
    Got out the ol thesaurus and found yourself a big word, extirpater? Or did plain curvilinear thinking get you there? (My guess is it was rapshite combined with the endless negroid hate videos on youtube)

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThaboZulu
    Incoherent babble again. The farm murders will continue and there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @EWM
    THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
    by Rudyard Kipling


    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy -- willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddently bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    ‘They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait’

    Another fine summation of this abominable people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Logan
    “But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.”

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    "till whites came in." You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites. The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields. Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites.

    This is similar to the oil in the Middle East. The Arabs had been living above it for millenia, utterly unaware of its existence or value. Americans came in, discovered the oil and developed, produced and marketed it.

    Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.

    But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves, despite the fact that we had more than sufficient military power to keep it for outselves. This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed.

    In Africa, till recently, the locals were frozen out of the wealth generated by their land. But their "right" to it is, again, part of our cultural baggage, not their's.

    It wasn’t for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    Why not? Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be "fair" to the conquered? If you have examples of that, I'd love to see them.

    You can't even see the ethnocentrism inherent in your argument. You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. Those moral arguments are not universals.

    ” This is not , by the way, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed”

    Brilliant and rare observation, and in tune with the unspoken however implied rediculous leftist theory that had the Europeans been black and the Africans white, that all of the strife and bloodshed, plus slavery, would have never occured.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained U S Army Vet, and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
    • Agree: joef
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. @KenH

    All this hyperbolic deceit (no surprises there) of “Muslim rape,” even as your cursed kind continues on with its decadent Rape\Ho culture, evidences of which pours in day after day.
     
    Muslim rape and sexual assault in the U.K and Europe is very real and you don't have to look very far for evidence. But if you say it's "hyperbolic deceit" then to be fair Abu Ghraib is hyperbolic deceit. You sound like a Muslim in denial which isn't anything new.

    Concerning the rape/ho culture, you are terribly confused as I'm not black or Jewish. Blacks embrace and perpetuate that culture while Jews dominate the hardcore porn industry in America that cheapens and devalues women.

    More than half British women sexually harassed at work but few report it: BBC poll
     
    Fake news. And the BBC is an ultra liberal news organization. English men tend to be extremely restrained and gentlemanly towards their own women and women in general so if there is a harassment problem it's likely being committed by third world men who have little concept of chivalry towards women.

    English men tend to be extremely restrained and gentlemanly towards their own women and women in general so if there is a harassment problem it’s likely being committed by third world men who have little concept of chivalry towards women.

    I’m afraid your concept of the British gentleman needs updating. Brits today are vastly different from the Brits of yore. I’m sure you’ve heard of the appalling child sex abuse cases at the BBC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_sexual_abuse_cases

    There’s not even a half way respectable paper in England, all British papers are like tabloids, with a giant nude centerfold everyday. Whatever the Jews did to corrupt America with their moral relativism and cultural Marxism since the 60s, multiply that by 10 and set it back 20 years. That’s how far gone the Brits are today in the hands of the hedonist Jews who’ve pretty much run their government, upper class, media and academia since the 1800s. The British aristocracy is every bit as depraved. The whole mess with Charles, Diana and Camilla Parker Bowles dragged the royal family to a new low. Prince Andrew and now Prince Harry’s partying and philandering are well documented in the tabloids.

    When I think of a British “gentleman” today I think of Simon Cowell, Ricky Gervais, Pierce Morgan, Gordon Ramsay, Jamie Oliver, David Beckham, Hugh Grant, Elton John…more loud mouth cocky degenerates than David Nivens. A British “Lady” today is more in the image of Victoria Beckham or Bridget Jones than Queen Elizabeth, who’ve been reduced to an old relic picked on daily by the British tabloids. British actor Ed Westwick has just been accused of raping 2 of his co-stars in US TV show Gossip Girl. Even James Bond the quintessential British gentleman has received an image update courtesy of beefy Daniel Craig. Every British drama today involves adultery, single parenthood or homosexuality, the Jewish/leftist moral depravity in full force.

    Brits today are a country of lost souls mired in colonial guilt, to the point where they no longer even fight back when their country is being taken over by Muslim rape gangs who target their teenage girls.

    The British civilization reached its apex in the Victorian era(1837-1901), when they largely adhered to the “Victorian Morality” of sexual restraint, low tolerance for crime and a strict social code of conduct. Then the two world wars occurred and all hell broke lose. A once proud people who gave the world the Industrial Revolution and governed 25% of the earth’s land mass are gradually reduced to a country full of depraved drunken hooligans thanks to leftist moral degeneracy and colonial guilt. This is what British teens are like today:

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    I’m afraid your concept of the British gentleman needs updating. Brits today are vastly different from the Brits of yore. I’m sure you’ve heard of the appalling child sex abuse cases at the BBC
     
    The link only concerns one man, Jimmy Neville and I hope he and any other native British pedophiles and pederasts are punished to the fullest extent of the law.

    The anonymous poster included a linked article claiming there was an epidemic of sexual harassment in the British work place and insinuating that British (i.e., white) men were responsible. I assume he did this to deflect attention away from Muslim grooming gangs in the U.K. and the sharp increase in sexual assaults since Muslims "refugees" arrived in Europe.

    Widespread sexual harassment in the U.K. workplace is not happening or other left wing media outlets, especially CNN and MSNBC, would pounce on it. White men in the workplace generally are not very aggressive towards women. That doesn't mean they aren't capable of harassing behavior but it's just not that common.

    Also, workplace sexual harassment has been defined down so far that it now includes formerly innocent behavior such as eye contact with a woman for three seconds, complimenting a female on her dress or telling a joke she finds unfunny. I know a guy who was accused of sexual harassment for momentarily placing his hand on a woman's shoulder, so there's a high probability that the "harassment" cited by the BBC would fall far short of what a reasonable and rational person would consider as harassment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. We ought to do a population swap with South Africa. There are 37 million blacks in the US today, and 4.5 million whites in South Africa. We send them all our blacks in exchange for all their whites. We will give the blacks $10,000 each as incentive, which will give us a one time cost of $370 billion. Sounds like a lot but that’s 37% of the $1 Trillion we spend on welfare each year between the federal, state and local governments.

    This way the blacks in either country no longer have to worry about mistreatment in the hands of racist whites. Everyone’s happy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    Bottom line, would you settle for a swap the other way?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. Logan says:
    @jacques sheete

    It is a resource that, properly used, can produce wealth.
     
    Properly?

    I bet the same claim could be made about human "resources." Now, get back to work. ;)

    You bet. Human resources, like all others, are potential sources of wealth. Unless used properly, no wealth is produced.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. Logan says:
    @jacques sheete

    You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains...
     
    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.

    Without herds of bison, or cheap oil and machinery, I'd like to see anyone survive there. Even today, with all the advantages, I'm amazed that people even live in the Western (short grass or no-grass prairie) Great Plains at least.

    Yeah, but at the time there were huge herds of bison. So they survived quite nicely. In fact, during the 17th and 18th centuries many tribes migrated out onto the Plains from surrounding areas as horses and then firearms made a nomadic buffalo-hunting way of life attractive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. chris m says:

    Crikey. so many comments on this article.

    And sad to hear that so many of the commenters of this article must refer to the authors religious affiliation (66 at last count).

    You always suspect that when people adopt certain tones that what follows next is going to be some sort of collective blame-game.

    it does makes me cringe.

    I read about case of Bokkie Potgieter
    Murdered, killer carts his body away in his victims truck, feet sticking out
    (well,if I was going to kill somebody, I would at least try to hide his body).
    I suppose that reflects the mentality of his killer (ie stupid).

    at least killer received some sort of justice (lynched/murdered by fellow black workers)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    What religious affiliation of the author?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @gT
    My father always used to tell me about how he and my uncle used to ride their donkeys to school in the morning. They would be wearing their school uniform and school shoes and would chew bubble gum on the way to school (back then we owned shops as well as farms). Once the bubble gum was devoid of any flavour they would spit the bubble gum out onto the ground and then white kids wearing only flour sacks with holes cut in for the head and arms would rush to grab the discarded bubble gum from the ground to put it into their mouths so that they could also experience some of the flavour of the bubble gum.

    This is what the majority of Afrikaners were like before Apartheid. Apartheid took them from poor whites to modern, educated citizens while at the same time reducing non-whites to a destitute existence.

    Even the famous cattle of the Afrikaners, also called the Afrikaner also by the way, is just an indigenous breed stolen from the Khoikhoi (Hottentots), one of Southern Africa's original inhabitants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaner_cattle

    The Bushmen / San are the original inhabitants of South Africa, the Whites and Blacks (Bantu) are just settlers here. The Whites arrived by sea onto the west coast and the Blacks migrated down the east coast.

    I therefor have to take with a heavy pinch of salt the story about the farm murders. It has often been observed that when a white person dies its a tragedy because a human being has lost his / her life, while when a non white kicks the bucket its not even a statistic. Methinks the crooks doth protest too much.

    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence. It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced. Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it. Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence."

    Tribes created their own civilizations that from a technological standpoint was not as advanced as the Europeans.

    "It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced."

    Assuming that being "modern, educated, and advanced" like the European was THE standard. Perhaps tribal groups were content with living their own life rather than be subject to the European created "Invade The World, Invite The World" philosophy. But Pandora's Box will never close now.

    "Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing"

    Again, from a Eurocentric point of view, but not from a Christian or humanity perspective.

    "and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it."

    Seriously, either you are stupid or extremely ignorant.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_I_of_Mali

    "Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts."

    So using YOUR own logic, today's Neo Cons are well within their liberty to promote their agenda at your expense. After all, the inferior peoples out there need our help because they cannot possible achieve anything on their own.

    You are really dense, man.
    , @Logan
    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence.

    Untrue.

    The Bushmen were hunter-gatherers. But most South African natives were farmers and pastoralists. Even the Hottentots had large herds of domestic animals, though they grew no crops.

    Most blacks were at an early Iron Age level of technology, making iron/steel spearheads, axes, knives, etc.
    , @gT
    There is an old tale which goes something like this 'When the White man came, he had the bible and we had the land. Then the White man said; close your eyes, let us pray. And when we opened our eyes we had the bible and he had the land". So was it worth while getting the bible (modernization, education and Christianity) while losing the land (gold, diamonds, etc).

    I cannot answer that, the benefits accruing to those who "shared"the bible seem to be unlimited and never ending. Surely the time period for benefits accruing on the patent for "sharing" the bible expired long time ago?

    And to go on with the theme of "spreading the word of God" gave unlimited and never ending benefits. That was in the past, these days there is a new gimmick. These days its spreading democracy which gives you unlimited and never ending benefits. Just look at the unlimited and never ending oil accruing to those who "spread democracy" to Libya and Iraq (and lets not mention the mega tons of gold both Gaddafi and Saddam had in their vaults).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @jbwilson24
    Yes, but it is deeper than that.

    Jews started interbreeding heavily with the English aristocracy during the industrial revolution. Sagging fortunes of noble families were oft revived by the happenstance marriage of a young Jewish woman to a son of the family. Check out the lineage of a lot of English nobles... it was so obvious that Americans were actually commenting on this back in the 1920s.

    The idea that there is a separation between the Jewish elite in England and the 'WASP' elite is not tenable giving the heavy interbreeding. It appears that Jews had the upper hand in the empire as well, given the crown jewels such as the south african diamond mines ended up in the hands of the latter.

    Jews aren’t always doing so well these days. Without daddies arranging the marriages of their doltish offspring, they can end up in bad positions. For example:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3585800/Why-18m-Rothschild-heiress-hooked-bad-boy-rappers-FEMAIL-explores-Kate-s-relationship-latest-beau.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    “But the SA gold and diamond wealth were entirely different. The native were entirely unaware of the wealth beneath their feet till whites came in, discovered the deposits, and organized their extraction and marketing.”

    No. The natives were acutely aware of its wealth, as my link clearly demonstrated. Why do you think the British passed laws to ensure that blacks would not be able to benefit from these riches themselves?

    "till whites came in." You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites. The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields. Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites.

    This is similar to the oil in the Middle East. The Arabs had been living above it for millenia, utterly unaware of its existence or value. Americans came in, discovered the oil and developed, produced and marketed it.

    Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.

    But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves, despite the fact that we had more than sufficient military power to keep it for outselves. This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed.

    In Africa, till recently, the locals were frozen out of the wealth generated by their land. But their "right" to it is, again, part of our cultural baggage, not their's.

    It wasn’t for the British to unilaterally make that decision.

    Why not? Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be "fair" to the conquered? If you have examples of that, I'd love to see them.

    You can't even see the ethnocentrism inherent in your argument. You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. Those moral arguments are not universals.

    ““till whites came in.” You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites.”

    The story begins with a 15 year-old white boy who discovered a 21-carat diamond, which led to a diamond rush by whites AND blacks.

    “The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields.”

    Blacks were aware of gold deposits on their continent. See Mansa Musa. In South Africa, the mining camp that developed in 1886 as a result of a major discovery was primarily white, but there were black prospectors.

    “Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites.”

    Initially discovered by a white person, with subsequent discoveries and claims by both whites and blacks.

    “Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.”

    In the case of South Africa, the British set forth laws that denied blacks the opportunity to mine diamonds and gold if they found it on their own property. Furthermore, the natives had been taken over by force, against their own will, by outside influences, beginning in the 1870′s, and had no say regarding their political or economic future. It is similar to the American colonists who demanded that they be able to sell goods on their own without being subject to imperial control.

    In the case of the Middle East, there had been at least a modicum of respect in that there were concessions negotiated with the Persian government by the British to search for oil in its territory. There was no such arrangement in South Africa.

    “Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it.”

    Had the deals been brought about in an equitable and transparent manner.

    “But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves…”

    That is patently false. Cecil Rhodes told the House of Assembly in Cape Town (1887) that “the native is to be treated as a child and denied the franchise. We must adopt a system of despotism in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa”. In less oratorical moments, he put it even more bluntly: “I prefer land to niggers.” He personally supervised the seizure of close to a million square miles of prime territory from its inhabitants, which included tracts that stored valuable mineral deposits. In 1896, his name was linked with the Jameson Raid, an illegal effort to annex territory held by the Boers, which was a primary factor for a war that began in 1899 and ended in 1902.

    “This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed.”

    Indeed, the natives would have tried to keep what was considered to be their property from Europeans, but they lacked the maxim gun, so their efforts would have been for naught.

    “Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be “fair” to the conquered?”

    You just stated that “we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves.” Do you realize the disconnect here? Indeed, the Europeans jackbooted the Africans, took the wealth for themselves, and left in their wake a post-colonial mess.

    “You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. ”

    I am applying arguments that are based on universal moral standards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Corvinus,

    Thanks for that info and the quotes. I had read up on Belgium in the Congo, which makes South Africa look mild, but was not aware of some of these things you are citing.

    It’s a really sad situation, I hope there are not White people oppressed in order to make “amends” for the past oppression of Blacks.

    Maybe a time for another reconciliation commission like they did after apartheid ended so they can figure out a just and equitable solution.

    Peace.
    , @Logan
    I think we've both expressed our opinions adequately.

    Readers are free to decide which makes more sense.

    Have a good one.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Talha says:
    @Corvinus
    "“till whites came in.” You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites."

    The story begins with a 15 year-old white boy who discovered a 21-carat diamond, which led to a diamond rush by whites AND blacks.

    "The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields."

    Blacks were aware of gold deposits on their continent. See Mansa Musa. In South Africa, the mining camp that developed in 1886 as a result of a major discovery was primarily white, but there were black prospectors.

    "Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites."

    Initially discovered by a white person, with subsequent discoveries and claims by both whites and blacks.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    In the case of South Africa, the British set forth laws that denied blacks the opportunity to mine diamonds and gold if they found it on their own property. Furthermore, the natives had been taken over by force, against their own will, by outside influences, beginning in the 1870's, and had no say regarding their political or economic future. It is similar to the American colonists who demanded that they be able to sell goods on their own without being subject to imperial control.

    In the case of the Middle East, there had been at least a modicum of respect in that there were concessions negotiated with the Persian government by the British to search for oil in its territory. There was no such arrangement in South Africa.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    Had the deals been brought about in an equitable and transparent manner.

    "But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves..."

    That is patently false. Cecil Rhodes told the House of Assembly in Cape Town (1887) that “the native is to be treated as a child and denied the franchise. We must adopt a system of despotism in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa”. In less oratorical moments, he put it even more bluntly: “I prefer land to niggers.” He personally supervised the seizure of close to a million square miles of prime territory from its inhabitants, which included tracts that stored valuable mineral deposits. In 1896, his name was linked with the Jameson Raid, an illegal effort to annex territory held by the Boers, which was a primary factor for a war that began in 1899 and ended in 1902.

    "This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed."

    Indeed, the natives would have tried to keep what was considered to be their property from Europeans, but they lacked the maxim gun, so their efforts would have been for naught.

    "Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be “fair” to the conquered?"

    You just stated that "we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves." Do you realize the disconnect here? Indeed, the Europeans jackbooted the Africans, took the wealth for themselves, and left in their wake a post-colonial mess.

    "You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. "

    I am applying arguments that are based on universal moral standards.

    Hey Corvinus,

    Thanks for that info and the quotes. I had read up on Belgium in the Congo, which makes South Africa look mild, but was not aware of some of these things you are citing.

    It’s a really sad situation, I hope there are not White people oppressed in order to make “amends” for the past oppression of Blacks.

    Maybe a time for another reconciliation commission like they did after apartheid ended so they can figure out a just and equitable solution.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. @chris m
    Crikey. so many comments on this article.

    And sad to hear that so many of the commenters of this article must refer to the authors religious affiliation (66 at last count).

    You always suspect that when people adopt certain tones that what follows next is going to be some sort of collective blame-game.

    it does makes me cringe.

    I read about case of Bokkie Potgieter
    Murdered, killer carts his body away in his victims truck, feet sticking out
    (well,if I was going to kill somebody, I would at least try to hide his body).
    I suppose that reflects the mentality of his killer (ie stupid).

    at least killer received some sort of justice (lynched/murdered by fellow black workers)

    What religious affiliation of the author?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. @joef
    The MSM, governments (census), academia, and American Blacks themselves identify with African American (afro american... or afro for short) as a distinct demographic group, so you are actually conflicting with them, not me.

    Listen I do not want to get into anymore circular arguments... you believe in preferable theory, and I believe in harsh reality... you seem to use statistical outliers as a refutation of any criticism against the afros (oh, Im sorry, African American). And you don't seem to acknowledge that statistics can be manipulated for preferred outcomes (you seem to believe that your favorite research authors on the subject are above reproach, and have no hidden political agendas).

    I am sorry, I am not looking to insult you, I just can't live in make believe fantasy island that you seem to be promoting. Again when professed research conflicts with my own, and many others, personal empirical experience, I go with the experience... not a confirmation bias that is equivalent to saying touching a hot stove is okay. Be safe and good luck (based on your opinions, you will need it more than me).

    Laughing and laughing very hard. The definition you are providing is completely different than the one you posed in our discussion on the topic of athletes. The definition that you provide above is standard for those blacks living in the US.

    An contrary to the unique definition you proferred previously would no unique link to the population you attempted to note in Africa, I think it was central Africa. I would go dig it up, but it wouldn’t be worth the hassle. But applying this definition makes you entire previous advance which you insisted was based on personal and professional experience even lesser in value that the Occam’s razor gymnastics you pressed.

    A I said previously, if nothing else you are entertaining. Let me know when you decide which definition of “Afro” you will decide to settle on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef
    If you noticed, I usually start my comments using ''afro american'' as the descriptor, then follow up later in the comment with "afro" for short (I guess I am lazy)... have to admit you also provide me with the same entertainment value... I actually admire the fact you are very well read, and very articulate. However (oh no here it comes), but people at your intellectual level sometimes have the ability to deceive yourselves with an impression of your own infallibility.

    I hope you never get hurt (physically), and I hope you do not have to learn things the hard way (like me, and others I know, who had too), where toughing up becomes a necessity, not an option, for personal survival... (I actually wished I was wrong, and that I never had to criticize an afro again; but I call it as I see it, especially when real consequences are involved). But you may find yourself in a situation that proves me correct, and maybe some of my experience, of what I told you, may save your skin someday (or may not).

    Be careful out there, because like the man who stares at the images in Plato's cave, I believe you are well meaning, but slightly misinformed (doesn't make you a bad person; but by following the acceptable contemporary academic thinking on the subject, it does make you unnecessarily vulnerable). Just because I recognize a wolf as potentially dangerous doesn't mean I hate wolves; I just exercise prudent caution in their proximity (I refuse to be a victim without a fight).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. ThaboZulu says:
    @daniel le mouche
    Yes, Kookamunga, I'm sure you'd beat my primitive mind in a debate on any subject other than jungle dancing, rape, weapons, and general moronic violence.
    Got out the ol thesaurus and found yourself a big word, extirpater? Or did plain curvilinear thinking get you there? (My guess is it was rapshite combined with the endless negroid hate videos on youtube)

    Incoherent babble again. The farm murders will continue and there is not a damn thing you can do about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Bro - to try to make reparations for the sins of others by sinning yourself - doesn't make you right, it makes you sinful also.

    There has got to be a reasonable accommodation that can be reached. Show people that you have more humanity when you have power than they did over you. South Africa is a place that a lot of people around the world have looked to since the fall of apartheid for a different narrative. Your people have the ability to make that a reality and I know you have it in you.

    Peace.
    , @daniel le mouche
    You must make your mother proud. (That coherent enough for your ape skull?)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. Logan says:
    @Corvinus
    "“till whites came in.” You are ignoring my actual words. The diamonds were discovered by whites."

    The story begins with a 15 year-old white boy who discovered a 21-carat diamond, which led to a diamond rush by whites AND blacks.

    "The blacks were utterly unaware of them before then. Same with the main gold fields."

    Blacks were aware of gold deposits on their continent. See Mansa Musa. In South Africa, the mining camp that developed in 1886 as a result of a major discovery was primarily white, but there were black prospectors.

    "Your links are all about what happened after the resources were discovered, by whites."

    Initially discovered by a white person, with subsequent discoveries and claims by both whites and blacks.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    In the case of South Africa, the British set forth laws that denied blacks the opportunity to mine diamonds and gold if they found it on their own property. Furthermore, the natives had been taken over by force, against their own will, by outside influences, beginning in the 1870's, and had no say regarding their political or economic future. It is similar to the American colonists who demanded that they be able to sell goods on their own without being subject to imperial control.

    In the case of the Middle East, there had been at least a modicum of respect in that there were concessions negotiated with the Persian government by the British to search for oil in its territory. There was no such arrangement in South Africa.

    "Which group, Americans or Arabs, had a greater moral right to the wealth thus produced? I would contend those who found it."

    Had the deals been brought about in an equitable and transparent manner.

    "But we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves..."

    That is patently false. Cecil Rhodes told the House of Assembly in Cape Town (1887) that “the native is to be treated as a child and denied the franchise. We must adopt a system of despotism in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa”. In less oratorical moments, he put it even more bluntly: “I prefer land to niggers.” He personally supervised the seizure of close to a million square miles of prime territory from its inhabitants, which included tracts that stored valuable mineral deposits. In 1896, his name was linked with the Jameson Raid, an illegal effort to annex territory held by the Boers, which was a primary factor for a war that began in 1899 and ended in 1902.

    "This is not, BTW, how the natives would have behaved were the situation reversed."

    Indeed, the natives would have tried to keep what was considered to be their property from Europeans, but they lacked the maxim gun, so their efforts would have been for naught.

    "Does African society have some legal tradition whereby conquerors deny themselves the fruits of their conquest in order to be “fair” to the conquered?"

    You just stated that "we followed our own legal principles and allowed the locals to claim the wealth, primarily, for themselves." Do you realize the disconnect here? Indeed, the Europeans jackbooted the Africans, took the wealth for themselves, and left in their wake a post-colonial mess.

    "You are applying moral arguments pretty much unique to western civilization to denounce western civilization. "

    I am applying arguments that are based on universal moral standards.

    I think we’ve both expressed our opinions adequately.

    Readers are free to decide which makes more sense.

    Have a good one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I think we’ve both expressed our opinions adequately."

    So just when it was getting interesting, you decide to run and cut bait.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Corvinus says:
    @Logan
    I think we've both expressed our opinions adequately.

    Readers are free to decide which makes more sense.

    Have a good one.

    “I think we’ve both expressed our opinions adequately.”

    So just when it was getting interesting, you decide to run and cut bait.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Corvinus,

    Let people disengage with honor. I've regretted it when I haven't. It might be an ego boost, but that's not what it's about. You might lose a willing ear that may have been ready to hear you out.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. Corvinus says:
    @Anon
    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence. It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced. Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it. Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.

    “Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence.”

    Tribes created their own civilizations that from a technological standpoint was not as advanced as the Europeans.

    “It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced.”

    Assuming that being “modern, educated, and advanced” like the European was THE standard. Perhaps tribal groups were content with living their own life rather than be subject to the European created “Invade The World, Invite The World” philosophy. But Pandora’s Box will never close now.

    “Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing”

    Again, from a Eurocentric point of view, but not from a Christian or humanity perspective.

    “and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it.”

    Seriously, either you are stupid or extremely ignorant.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_I_of_Mali

    “Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.”

    So using YOUR own logic, today’s Neo Cons are well within their liberty to promote their agenda at your expense. After all, the inferior peoples out there need our help because they cannot possible achieve anything on their own.

    You are really dense, man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Corvinus says:
    @Hank Rearden
    I too see a persistent belief in fairy tales, like the one anti-White zealot Ward Churchill concocted about super-villainous Whites who intentional infecting Indians with illnesses. Fact is...

    Churchill fabricated events that never occurred—namely the U.S. Army's alleged distribution of smallpox infested blankets to the Mandan Indians in 1837.

    Did the U.S. Army Distribute Smallpox Blankets to Indians? Fabrication and Falsification in Ward Churchill's Genocide Rhetoric
    Ann Arbor, MI: MPublishing, University of Michigan Library, 2006
    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.009/--did-the-us-army-distribute-smallpox-blankets-to-indians?rgn=main;view=fulltext
     
    Sure, many Injuns died of smallpox, but that's because they attacked a hospital that was treating smallpox victims, thus giving themselves the disease.

    Indians allied with the French ignored the terms of a surrender worked out between the British and the French, broke into the garrison hospital and killed and scalped a number of patients, some of them suffering from smallpox. The blankets and clothing the Indians looted from the patients in the hospital and corpses in the cemetery, carried back to their villages, reportedly touched off a smallpox epidemic....The dreadful epidemic of 1837–38 and smallpox in general did not come to American Indians through any scheme of the U.S. Army. The only documented attempt to infect Indians with smallpox was the dirty work of Swiss mercenaries serving the British crown before the United States’ founding as a constitutional republic. American Indians did indeed succumb in huge numbers to smallpox, measles, tuberculosis and influenza, due to contact with whites, the Indians’ own feeble immune systems and malnutrition once rounded up and sequestered on the reservations. That was a cultural catastrophe, a heart-rending tragedy—but it was not premeditated genocide.

    Smallpox in the Blankets
    Wild West Magazine, 2012
    http://www.historynet.com/smallpox-in-the-blankets.htm
     
    Ward Churchill is an anti-White liar. Don't repeat his nonsense.

    Ward Churchill is a liar about a particular event in American history. Adding this “anti-white” nonsense, however, undercuts your serious inquiry into this matter.

    Now, from your source was this nugget –> “The only documented attempt to infect Indians with smallpox was the dirty work of Swiss mercenaries serving the British crown before the United States’ founding as a constitutional republic.”

    Was it referencing to what happened at Fort Pitt and the reference made by William Trent? Because the source here makes no mention of the “dirty work of Swiss mercenaries”.

    http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring04/warfare.cfm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. Logan says:
    @Anon
    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence. It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced. Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it. Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.

    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence.

    Untrue.

    The Bushmen were hunter-gatherers. But most South African natives were farmers and pastoralists. Even the Hottentots had large herds of domestic animals, though they grew no crops.

    Most blacks were at an early Iron Age level of technology, making iron/steel spearheads, axes, knives, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Kipling did write "The Norman and the Saxon" or some such thing which is good if mildly silly reading. And this poem reminds me of "When the English grow polite" which I may be misquoting.

    I don't think Kipling saw much of a problem in projecting modern English traits on ancient peoples or even bees.

    There was also a good WWI poem which linked it to Bunyan. I think Kipling's WWI poems and his Indian poems are probably his best work of any kind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. The European created “Invade The World, Invite The World” philosophy stems from the divine mandate of the International Jew whom they worship.

    Therefore go and make disciples of all nations. (Matthew 29:19)

    To those with the mistaken notion that Europe isn’t Christian anymore, philosopher John Gray notes that liberal humanist values are merely a “hollowed-out version of a theistic myth.”

    There is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Magical Freaqualism. (Galatians 3:28)

    Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in Zir sight.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  234. Rurik says: • Website
    @Sollipsist
    The spectacle of savagery was enjoyed by all the Roman people, regardless of wealth and class. In fact, there were fewer ways for upcoming politicians to gain the approving popularity of the poor masses than by spending lavishly on "the games" (although subsidizing the grain dole always helped). This would not have been a consistently winning public relations strategy if it had only been the rich and powerful that were titillated by contests of suffering and death.

    if it had only been the rich and powerful that were titillated by contests of suffering and death.

    they set the tone

    the sheople will always be the sheople, no matter what region or tribe you’re speaking of

    we here at Unz are attempting a critique of the rich and powerful, so that someone holds a light up to their treachery and treason, evil and enormities

    hopefully as a way towards creating a better paradigm, and healing some of the enormous suffering that is caused directly by the evil and treachery of the rich and powerful, no?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sollipsist
    Is that what's being attempted at Unz? I'm actually here for relief from the kind of sites that typically push the rich=evil narrative.

    The assertion that the Roman upper classes somehow coerced the urban poor into an appreciation for gladiatorial combat is difficult to accept. That seems to me to be like saying our poor only watch pro football (or horror movies, or whatever modern analogy you like) because the rich do. I can't imagine how you'd make a case for that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. Rurik says: • Website
    @anonymous

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands
     
    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.

    It is so fucking simple! Really!

    But, will the cursed west follow such a strategy? ;)

    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands

    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.

    fair enough

    now, where do you want to draw the borders?

    you see the problem isn’t with rational people, but with the irrational elites who run globalism

    I’m sure you and I could agree that Europe should be allowed to say Europe, and Africa – Africa. Just as I’m sure we’d agree on most places. Perhaps divide the USA into regions where the blacks and whites and browns and reds and yellows could all have a region of their own, much like the “reds” (I don’t think that’s a pejorative is it?) have reservations that are theirs.

    I’d be happy to give the blacks large swaths of the South, and I bet most whites would happily agree if they too could be given regions of their own, perhaps in Appalachia or other, adjacent areas of the South. Just so long as they had their own and all trade and immigration was all consensual between all parties, as opposed to being imposed by the do-gooders in the fecal government. (agents of the Fiend)

    But the problem is the Fiend would never allow that. (think Catalonia right now, as the fiends in the Spanish government consider those people their perpetual slaves, unwilling serfs) It is (forced) proximity = diversity that = strife. And the Fiend verily thrives on strife, and hatred, and crime. That’s where it gets its spurious ‘authority’ (power) to dominate everyone, by creating enough strife and hatred and misery, that it can come in and tell everyone how much the Fiend’s goons are necessary to keep order.

    It’s a sad and tiresome strategy that goes back centuries.

    If we limited the conversation to say, the United States, would you be willing to grant white people a commiserate percentage of the land as their numbers represent today? Or would you insist that they all leave and hand over the land to the blacks and browns and yellows and reds, because whites are congenitally evil and should all return to Europe and stay there.

    Well, guess what… if it came down to that, I’d have to agree (not that they’re evil, obviously), but I’d rather see the whites of the planet all return to Europe and fortify its borders even if they had to give up Oceana and N. America and everywhere else, and let those people create whatever kind of societies suit them, so long as Europe and Russia and the historic lands of white folks could retain their respective character.

    But the Fiend would NEVER allow that. In million years, because the existence of white society, (Western civilization) with everything that means… – is the very thing that drives the Fiend (and all his armies of butt-hurt orcs and envious losers) insane with murderous hatred for the accomplishments and sublime beauty of white, Western civilization and its people. The Asians would tolerate it OK, because they too are quite capable, but the ((Fiend)) would grow apoplectic at such a development, and his head would explode.

    so in a way, the best defense for Western civilization, is a certain amount of offence, at least insofar as they demand to retain what they have today, even it they tell everyone else that they too are entitled to self-determination in their own lands.

    Britain for the British, Jamaica for Jamaicans’, and so forth. No?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    the ((Fiend)) would grow apoplectic at such a development, and his head would explode.
     
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41975277
    , @henry11
    Man you sure like treating these brown people well. The indians would starve in ten days without taking from the white man's taxes. Indians are not doing well, if you havent noticed. They drink like a fish and sleep in the street despite having a taxpayer funded home.

    Same thing with the blacks, and browns. They cannot survive in a competitive economy. If they gave up on freeloading, they could move to Kentucky, pool their money, and enjoy like at a slower pace on their own land. But they cant leave white people alone because they enjoy the finer things, and not working for them.

    They all need to go back home to Africa Asia and Latin America. There is only one group of people that are first world in this world, and they built America.

    Jamaicans for the Jamaicans? Enjoy the murder there. It would be interesting to see what happened, as chaos would explode with these new countries of black people, who had to return home to lower standards of living.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. Talha says:
    @ThaboZulu
    Incoherent babble again. The farm murders will continue and there is not a damn thing you can do about it.

    Bro – to try to make reparations for the sins of others by sinning yourself – doesn’t make you right, it makes you sinful also.

    There has got to be a reasonable accommodation that can be reached. Show people that you have more humanity when you have power than they did over you. South Africa is a place that a lot of people around the world have looked to since the fall of apartheid for a different narrative. Your people have the ability to make that a reality and I know you have it in you.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Hey Talha,

    South Africa is a place that a lot of people around the world have looked to since the fall of apartheid
     
    we didn't need to

    we had Zimbabwe for a clear view into their (African blacks, ((olgarchs)) who run globalism) intentions

    this is a website run by a lady living in Zimbabwe. She's white but she doesn't' have a racist bone in her body.

    http://cathybuckle.com/index.php?id=241

    You can peruse her letters going back years to glimmer the tragedy

    here's a doozy from her October letter

    And finally, the last item in October’s hot madness came in the form of the debacle about the WHO appointment of President Mugabe as a Goodwill Ambassador (of non communicable diseases).
     
    does the World Health Organization even know who Mugabe even is?! Have then even heard of Zimbabwe?

    the British government cares not one whit for these ethnic Brits, and of course the West will not give them refugee status, as that would pervert the narrative, so they languish, or worse.


    http://www.davidcoltart.com/2015/03/tears-from-inside-documentary-gives-a-voice-to-victims-of-sexual-violence-in-zimbabwe/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. Talha says:
    @Corvinus
    "I think we’ve both expressed our opinions adequately."

    So just when it was getting interesting, you decide to run and cut bait.

    Hey Corvinus,

    Let people disengage with honor. I’ve regretted it when I haven’t. It might be an ego boost, but that’s not what it’s about. You might lose a willing ear that may have been ready to hear you out.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. gT says:
    @Anon
    Blacks before whites came to South Africa were tribes living a hunter-gather existence. It was mingling with whites that made them more modern, educated, and advanced. Yes, Apartheid introduced a caste-based system, but blacks were nothing and had no wealth in any western economic sense before whites came, and everybody knows it. Even living under Apartheid advanced blacks beyond what they could achieve under their own efforts.

    There is an old tale which goes something like this ‘When the White man came, he had the bible and we had the land. Then the White man said; close your eyes, let us pray. And when we opened our eyes we had the bible and he had the land”. So was it worth while getting the bible (modernization, education and Christianity) while losing the land (gold, diamonds, etc).

    I cannot answer that, the benefits accruing to those who “shared”the bible seem to be unlimited and never ending. Surely the time period for benefits accruing on the patent for “sharing” the bible expired long time ago?

    And to go on with the theme of “spreading the word of God” gave unlimited and never ending benefits. That was in the past, these days there is a new gimmick. These days its spreading democracy which gives you unlimited and never ending benefits. Just look at the unlimited and never ending oil accruing to those who “spread democracy” to Libya and Iraq (and lets not mention the mega tons of gold both Gaddafi and Saddam had in their vaults).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. gwynedd1 says:
    @jilles dykstra
    I see a persistent belief in fairy tales.
    There are two reasons for the almost complete disappearence of Indians from the present USA
    - the Indian immune system differs from the European one, Indians died from the bacteria and viruses the traders and colonists brought with them
    - the systematic driving west of the Indians, to areas where they could not live, killing them if they resisted to depart.
    There also was intentional infecting Indians with illnesses, such as smallpox, by giving them blankets from hospitals.
    At the first visit of Europeans to the what is now USA east coast, from Florida nothwards, the coast was inhabited.
    At the second visit European diseases had depopulated completely the coastal regions.
    That the USA violated all agreements with the Indians is beyond all doubt.

    So the Europeans gave blankets to the Indians?

    Don’t you find it strange that the Indians would accept gifts from their enemies? Perhaps you are suggesting that the relations were so good at the time that the ruse was so plausible? Do you have the historical reference for this act?

    The only historical record we have( historian Francis Parkman) was Indians suffering from small pox which was linked to looting the hospital after the siege of Fort William Henry.

    So you left out the element that the Indians were hostiles besieging the hospitals and it was infected loot extorted from the besieged.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. helena says:
    @jacques sheete

    You can survive quite nicely on the Great Plains...
     
    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.

    Without herds of bison, or cheap oil and machinery, I'd like to see anyone survive there. Even today, with all the advantages, I'm amazed that people even live in the Western (short grass or no-grass prairie) Great Plains at least.

    Yeh, if you like sagebrush or yer Pronghorn.

    Not recommended?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Rurik says: • Website
    @Talha
    Bro - to try to make reparations for the sins of others by sinning yourself - doesn't make you right, it makes you sinful also.

    There has got to be a reasonable accommodation that can be reached. Show people that you have more humanity when you have power than they did over you. South Africa is a place that a lot of people around the world have looked to since the fall of apartheid for a different narrative. Your people have the ability to make that a reality and I know you have it in you.

    Peace.

    Hey Talha,

    South Africa is a place that a lot of people around the world have looked to since the fall of apartheid

    we didn’t need to

    we had Zimbabwe for a clear view into their (African blacks, ((olgarchs)) who run globalism) intentions

    this is a website run by a lady living in Zimbabwe. She’s white but she doesn’t’ have a racist bone in her body.

    http://cathybuckle.com/index.php?id=241

    You can peruse her letters going back years to glimmer the tragedy

    here’s a doozy from her October letter

    And finally, the last item in October’s hot madness came in the form of the debacle about the WHO appointment of President Mugabe as a Goodwill Ambassador (of non communicable diseases).

    does the World Health Organization even know who Mugabe even is?! Have then even heard of Zimbabwe?

    the British government cares not one whit for these ethnic Brits, and of course the West will not give them refugee status, as that would pervert the narrative, so they languish, or worse.

    http://www.davidcoltart.com/2015/03/tears-from-inside-documentary-gives-a-voice-to-victims-of-sexual-violence-in-zimbabwe/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Rurik,

    That is why I am appealing to the core of the person - to that shared humanity. Unless you think someone is gone beyond any hope of reason and empathy.

    For me, the better approach is to say (especially because many of them are Christian); look, you're better than this, you don't need to sink to this level, you can conquer your lower-self and break this tragic cycle and I'm going to applaud and recognize your triumph over your lower-self and the naysayers when you do.

    That at least seems better than shouting at people and calling them animals and cursing them - how else do you think they'll react?

    You already said, there is likely no help coming - so what options are left?

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. helena says:
    @Semper Fidelis
    We ought to do a population swap with South Africa. There are 37 million blacks in the US today, and 4.5 million whites in South Africa. We send them all our blacks in exchange for all their whites. We will give the blacks $10,000 each as incentive, which will give us a one time cost of $370 billion. Sounds like a lot but that's 37% of the $1 Trillion we spend on welfare each year between the federal, state and local governments.

    This way the blacks in either country no longer have to worry about mistreatment in the hands of racist whites. Everyone's happy.

    Bottom line, would you settle for a swap the other way?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. Rurik says: • Website
    @Rurik


    The long term solution to these intractable problems are separation and a respect of each people’s self-determination in their own lands
     
    Exactly!

    By all means keep out those not like you, to any level you see fit, but keep your greedy psychopathic fucking hands off of others.
     
    fair enough

    now, where do you want to draw the borders?

    you see the problem isn't with rational people, but with the irrational elites who run globalism

    I'm sure you and I could agree that Europe should be allowed to say Europe, and Africa - Africa. Just as I'm sure we'd agree on most places. Perhaps divide the USA into regions where the blacks and whites and browns and reds and yellows could all have a region of their own, much like the "reds" (I don't think that's a pejorative is it?) have reservations that are theirs.

    I'd be happy to give the blacks large swaths of the South, and I bet most whites would happily agree if they too could be given regions of their own, perhaps in Appalachia or other, adjacent areas of the South. Just so long as they had their own and all trade and immigration was all consensual between all parties, as opposed to being imposed by the do-gooders in the fecal government. (agents of the Fiend)

    But the problem is the Fiend would never allow that. (think Catalonia right now, as the fiends in the Spanish government consider those people their perpetual slaves, unwilling serfs) It is (forced) proximity = diversity that = strife. And the Fiend verily thrives on strife, and hatred, and crime. That's where it gets its spurious 'authority' (power) to dominate everyone, by creating enough strife and hatred and misery, that it can come in and tell everyone how much the Fiend's goons are necessary to keep order.

    It's a sad and tiresome strategy that goes back centuries.

    If we limited the conversation to say, the United States, would you be willing to grant white people a commiserate percentage of the land as their numbers represent today? Or would you insist that they all leave and hand over the land to the blacks and browns and yellows and reds, because whites are congenitally evil and should all return to Europe and stay there.

    Well, guess what... if it came down to that, I'd have to agree (not that they're evil, obviously), but I'd rather see the whites of the planet all return to Europe and fortify its borders even if they had to give up Oceana and N. America and everywhere else, and let those people create whatever kind of societies suit them, so long as Europe and Russia and the historic lands of white folks could retain their respective character.

    But the Fiend would NEVER allow that. In million years, because the existence of white society, (Western civilization) with everything that means... - is the very thing that drives the Fiend (and all his armies of butt-hurt orcs and envious losers) insane with murderous hatred for the accomplishments and sublime beauty of white, Western civilization and its people. The Asians would tolerate it OK, because they too are quite capable, but the ((Fiend)) would grow apoplectic at such a development, and his head would explode.

    so in a way, the best defense for Western civilization, is a certain amount of offence, at least insofar as they demand to retain what they have today, even it they tell everyone else that they too are entitled to self-determination in their own lands.

    Britain for the British, Jamaica for Jamaicans', and so forth. No?

    the ((Fiend)) would grow apoplectic at such a development, and his head would explode.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41975277

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread