Snuffing Out South African Identity

F. Roger Devlin, American Renaissance, September 5, 2014

The campaign against the Afrikaners.

Dan Roodt, Raiders of the Lost Empire: South Africa’s ‘English’ Identity,, 2014.

Available on the author’s website (Epub and Kindle) for $3.00 or at (Kindle) for $4.99.


It may surprise American readers to know that for most of South Africa’s history, the “race problem” referred to friction between the British and the Dutch/Afrikaners. AR contributor and conference speaker Dan Roodt’s new book describes how that older conflict paved the way for black rule, and how it now contributes to the campaign against the one authentic white identity in South Africa: that of the Afrikaners. Dr. Roodt, himself an Afrikaner, paints a haunting picture of a genuine white nation, with no home but Africa, under assault not only from blacks but from the entire English-speaking world.

Dan Roodt

Dan Roodt

The first Dutch emigrants settled near the Cape of Good Hope in 1652, and today’s Afrikaners are descended from about 40,000 Dutchmen, Germans and Frenchmen who were already established in South Africa by the 18th Century. By the time the British arrived in the 19th century, the earlier settlers had blended to form a nation with a unified consciousness and a language of their own that was already different from Dutch. To this day, for the majority of whites in South Africa, Afrikaans is the language of the heart, of memory, of the countryside, of their ancestors. Afrikaans was the operating language of the old South African Defense Forces, which associated the language with loyalty and sacrifice.

As Dr. Roodt explains, the English sent to colonize the Eastern Cape never became a nation:

Unaccustomed to the hardships of life in Africa, and subject to Xhosa aggression, many of these settlers either died or actually went back to Britain. Unlike in the USA, where a local identity did take root, while still expressed in English, South African English identity has remained amorphous and fleeting.

Today, of the 4.2 million or so whites in South Africa, about 60 percent (2.5 million) speak Afrikaans as their first language, while something under 40 percent (1.6 million) speak English. Dr. Roodt notes that of the latter number, many are:

anglicised Portuguese, Greeks and assimilated Afrikaners, not to forget about the Lithuanian Jews, so that there must be only a million or so ‘real English’ in South Africa. Being everybody’s second or third language, no one in South Africa speaks or writes English very well either. South African English is considerably creolised and ugly . . . sometimes mimicking black speech.

The 3.9 million black English-speakers greatly outnumber white English-speakers, and give the language a strongly African flavor. South African universities have made matters worse by eliminating the study of classic English literature in favor of recent “Black and African literature in English.”

Even many of the one million “real English” are recent arrivals with shallow roots in South Africa:

Many Britons fled Harold Wilson’s socialist Britain [in the 1960s]. Up to 500,000 of these economic refugees immigrated to South Africa . . . . Most of them were politically conservative, but the booming South African economy allowed their children to fully participate in the decadent Anglo-American hippie culture of the 1960s and 1970s. Many of them also went to our English universities where they were re-educated into the various strands of Marxism then en vogue, as well as Boerehaat [hatred of Boer-Afrikaners]. The English language bound the younger generation to the radical ideas emanating from the USA and the UK, despite the conservative notions of their parents. Some of them even became terrorists. They participated in protests and clamoured to be freed from the Afrikaner government that treated them more fairly than any English government has ever treated us, including having their own schools and their own universities in their own language where they were virtually free to do and say what they wanted, including calling for the overthrow of the government.

It was this generation of English-speaking South African leftists who worked from within to overthrow white rule and demonize Afrikaners, but they had important allies: 1) the Brits back home; 2) the Litvaks, or Lithuanian Jews; and 3) the “Afro-Saxons,” a term Dr. Roodt uses to describe anglophile Blacks.

England was an important center of the international anti-apartheid movement:

In the 1970s and 1980s, Britain harboured the terrorists who blew up our restaurants or who placed car bombs in our streets. Much of the terrorism perpetrated . . . by the ANC and the SACP was conceived and planned in London. Some individuals from England have told me to my face that we Afrikaners deserve to be tortured to death by blacks and our women to be raped, for having oppressed blacks in the past.

Many of our forebears had fought on the Allied side during the two world wars and in Korea, but we were simply thrown to the dogs! That includes patriotic English South Africans and Rhodesians. Britain’s betrayal of Ian Smith, an RAF pilot during the second world war, and its installation of a radical Africanist and Marxist-Leninist, Robert Mugabe, to rule that formerly successful state, shows us what madness Englishmen are capable of.

Many of the English in South Africa still do not understand what was done to Rhodesia:

I remember at university here in Johannesburg when the news was announced over the radio that the radical Mugabe had won, how all the English students raucously applauded, just [as] they are still lauding his ‘land reform’ and ethnic cleansing of white farmers.

As for the Litvaks, “eighty percent of South African Jews came from Lithuania, mostly in the 1890s right after gold was discovered.” Many of the most famous white anti-apartheid figures descend from this group, including Helen Suzman, novelist Nadine Gordiner, and Communist Party boss Joe Slovo. Dr. Roodt believes that Jews did not feel at home under Afrikaner rule–despite the close cooperation between Israel and the apartheid regime–and helping overthrow the government was a way to resolve their own identity crisis. Many, of course, found that the black government they got is not the black government they wished for.

And radical though they may have been, this Jewish group nurtured a surprising and paradoxical devotion to the British monarchy, and were bitterly disappointed when South Africa became a republic after Afrikaners passed a referendum in 1960 over strong opposition from Litvaks and English-speakers.

Dr. Roodt recalls that:

What ultimately pushed so many Johannesburg Jews such as Joe Slovo, Ronnie Kasrils and the accused of the Rivonia Trial [at which Nelson Mandela was convicted] into espousing terrorism and an intense hatred of Afrikaners, was not so much racial segregation to which few whites, including leftists, objected, but the loss of the British monarchy. Years ago, when I had my first date as a student with a Jewish girl in Houghton, Johannesburg, I half expected her mother to look askance at me for being a goy, but the first thing she told me in a vaguely accusatory manner was how much she loved the British monarchy, seeing in me a representative of the people that took it away from her!

Dr. Roodt believes that repudiating the British crown was also a great stimulus to the radical black movement, and was a far more powerful motivation even than Marxism, which, outside the four English universities and a few fringe publications, had little influence. He believes it was the proclamation of the republic in 1961 that led Joe Slovo, as well as Nelson Mandela, to embrace the urban terrorism that was known as “armed struggle.”

As for black Anglophilia, Dr. Roodt thinks that by 1970, and especially after the Soweto riots, blacks were convinced that the larger English-speaking world backed them and opposed the apartheid government. The Carter administration probably played an important role in this, but the British influence was paramount in convincing blacks that English was the language of liberation. Even today:

[T]hose revolutionary blacks who fulminate against ‘colonialism and capitalist exploitation’ are the first to adopt the outward trappings of what they imagine a British gentleman to be. They play golf and drive expensive cars. They also drink whisky, of the expensive ‘single malt’ kind, in copious amounts. Julius Malema, the radical black nationalist, is himself something of an Englishman, being a connoisseur of whisky and expensive cars. He dresses like a British soccer player, with flashy watches and brightly coloured polo shirts.

Even Nelson Mandela explains in his autobiography that:

The educated Englishman was our model; what we aspired to be were ‘black Englishmen,’ as we were sometimes derisively called. We were taught–and believed–that the best ideas were English ideas, the best government was English government, and the best men were Englishmen.

Of course, whatever opposition others mounted against the regime, Afrikaners were ultimately betrayed by their own leaders, who foolishly adopted the Anglo-American view of blacks. Dr. Roodt believes that 1961 to 1983 were the “golden years” of white solidarity, after which Swedish funding for radical black groups and the international campaign of vilification began to break the Afrikaner will. In his capitulation to black rule, F. W. de Klerk and his circle completely repudiated what Afrikaners–both experts and ordinary people–had thought and written about the racial problem for over a hundred years.

The black rule that has followed has been a great victory of English-speakers over Afrikaners. Dr. Roodt even goes so far as to write that today, English-speaking leftists are:

the most powerful tribe in South Africa . . . bred in the claustrophobic confines of the anglophone universities, nourished on their petty hatred and chauvinism against Afrikaners, and [now] distributed throughout the system, in the universities, naturally, but also in the media, the state and even the banks and big business. They are ‘the white hand in the black glove.’ Behind every black figurehead there is always some white handler or speechwriter who lays down policy or manages communication to the outside world.

And yet, this English elite feels only a contingent attachment to South Africa:

According to De Kock, [Leon de Kock, an anglicised Afrikaner and self-styled “critic”] local English authors are nowadays seeing themselves as sovereign individuals who no longer belong to any country but might as well write stories set in Seattle or Manchester, to appeal to a wider audience. Being born and raised in South Africa is an accident of history that they might as well do without.

Dr. Roodt writes that this combination of rootless Anglophilia and the poverty of African tradition means that to a remarkable degree, South Africa’s identity is now based on imitation:

South Africa, especially these days, is trying to decide whether we should emulate Idi Amin’s Uganda or some cargo cult on the island of Vanuatu. You could call the system here a ‘cargo-cult democracy’ and as long as we spend about a billion dollars or so every five years on an election, in between elections it’s anything goes. Anarchy, or close to it.

However, elections serve only to give the imprimatur of ‘democracy’ to a system in which power changes hands elsewhere: in the ruling party’s headquarters or in dark deals cut with whomever benefits from the system financially.

Speaking of Vanuatu, I first became aware of the existence of this island in the early nineties when I noticed the remarkable resemblance between ‘our’ flag and that of Vanuatu. If there were such a thing as plagiarism in flags, South Africa would be guilty of it. Yet, South Africanness, at least after the decline of Afrikaner influence, is proudly imitatory. The closer one gets in passing oneself off as British, the more ‘South African’ one becomes. Plagiarism at university, at both under- and postgraduate level, is absolutely rife as students ‘copy and paste’ the words and thoughts of others in order to obtain one of our increasingly worthless degrees.

In other societies a lack of authenticity, or ersatz, showing no originality, or being a copy of something else, a simulacrum, is frowned upon. Not so in South Africa. It is part of ‘our’ colonial heritage.

In this context, English speakers object to Afrikaner identity because it is authentic:

  1. Afrikaners have roots in South Africa.
  2. Afrikaners have a national identity, which from both an imperial and Marxist point of view is undesirable, even ‘fascist.’
  3. Afrikaans culture, both the earthy, rural culture of braaivleis [barbecued meat] and walking around in shorts and velskoene [leather shoes], and the high culture of literature, classical music and European-style intellectualism is authentic and not ersatz.
  4. To some extent Afrikaners are endogamous, preferring their own kind, which blasphemes against the Anglo-American ideal of multiculturalism.

Beneath all this, writes Dr. Roodt, is envy. The English-speakers have nothing like the Voortrekker Monument; their heritage contains nothing like the Battle of Blood River. Until recently, 90 percent of the monuments in South Africa had been erected by Afrikaners. The history of the land was the history of their people, and at some level, all non-Afrikaners know they have been mere spectators. Afrikaners have their own pop music, their own romance and detective novels set locally, their own movies, their own cuisine, their own folk dances and folk music; English-speakers have none of this.

Envy can be ugly. As Dr. Roodt notes, “Some years ago, would-be British movie critic and man-about-town, Barry Ronge, said that the Voortrekker Monument should be painted pink and turned into a gay disco.” Dr. Roodt writes that often it is only after they have fled the “new” South Africa they helped create that English-speakers look back with longing on the Boer culture they left behind.

For those committed to the “new” South Africa, the most obvious way to attack Afrikaners is to attack their language. When the Anglo-Litvak-Afro-Saxon elite took over South Africa in 1994, they gave South Africa eleven official languages, which amounts to no official language. In practice, English is exclusively promoted as the national language:

The ANC-SACP government, egged on by Anglo-Saxon imperialists within the system, has imposed English on all education in South Africa, especially the five Afrikaans universities, [which] were summarily merged with English-language institutions. All or most of the state’s resources are being used to promote English, in a bid to kill off Afrikaans completely. . . . The treatment of Afrikaans after 1994 flies in the face of all UN Covenants and treaties, as well as international norms, such as UNESCO’s Universal Declaration of Language Rights.

English is said to represent the future, progress, broad-mindedness, openness to the world and . . . money-making. “In post-revolutionary, anglicised South Africa,” writes Dr. Roodt, “we have been told ad nauseam that clinging to one’s own language or culture, one’s own cuisine or music or traditional dress, is utterly primitive and should be abandoned forthwith.”

Some English-speaking blacks even take this view of African tribal customs, and want blacks to become westernized, politically correct feminists. Zulus, who policed other blacks under apartheid and fought the ANC, are targets, but of course it is the Afrikaners who bear the brunt of this sort of hectoring. It is often said that Afrikaner devotion to a language unknown outside South Africa is not economically rational, and to those who think exclusively in economic terms, this is incomprehensible. But then, loyalty and sacrifice are incomprehensible to such people.

Some Afrikaners are at least outwardly turning their backs on their heritage. At universities and in the media, some change their names and pretend not to speak Afrikaans in order to keep their jobs. And at least a few have internalized their enemies’ views: Afrikaner novelist André Brink has gone so far as to proclaim that “my people do not deserve to exist and should disappear.”

Dr. Roodt is not hostile to the English language; he has an extensive knowledge of English literature which would put many native speakers to shame. What he opposes is English as a “killer language”–a term recently coined for “a language so dominant that it tends to wipe out all others.” Language is an important ingredient of identity for black and white South Africans alike, and Dr. Roodt believes that “killer English” is partly to blame for the:

lack of identity [which] drives the need for drugs, for drink, prostitution, gambling and the vast spectrum of vices consuming South Africa, at once the most decadent and the most criminal of countries in the world. The corollary of deracinated English is that there is a constant process of identity-seeking and whether one finds one’s identity in drugs, golf, adopting a ‘posh’ British accent, or radical politics, is a matter of choice or chance.

A weak sense of identity is usually destructive. Afrikaners, who often lived close to blacks and learned their languages, understood this, while “the Englishman has kept himself aloof, residing in all-white suburbs fulminating about ‘racism’.” Many years ago, Afrikaners were writing that “simply uprooting black Africans from their traditional culture and subjecting them to a superficial ‘Westernisation’ and anglicisation would lead to identity loss and ethnopsychological destabilisation [which] would in turn unleash intense violence and social decay.” Dr. Roodt quotes a warning written by Afrikaner anthropologist J. P. Bruwer in 1961:

No people, no community, no pattern of life, may maintain values unless they are supported by a system of conservative ideas, a positive attitude to life that is rooted in a lived culture. Precisely herein lies the danger of a destabilised people, a destabilised community and a destabilised cultural tradition. A people or peoples that have been deracinated and torn away from the substance of their civilisation must become bearers of ‘other value systems’ that will ultimately overwhelm the existing society in which they are essentially aliens.

The South Africans who are most deracinated, both in terms of race and language, are South Africa’s mixed-race population:

The population group in South Africa with the most social problems regarding crime, substance abuse, a high drop-out rate and lack of tertiary education, are the so-called Coloureds of the Western and Northern Cape. Forty percent of children among Northern Cape Coloureds suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome. In the Western Cape especially, Coloureds speak a shifting English-Afrikaans Creole, a tragicomic tongue expressing the travails of a hybrid people. Hybridity, which is so celebrated by left-liberals the world over, seems to lead to a tragic, dysfunctional society of violence, drug and alcohol abuse.

Needless to say, the new elite encourages the production of as many of these unfortunate people as possible:

Within the hurricane of platitudes and PC clichés spat out on a daily basis by the inane South African media, the notion of race-mixing is always held up as the ultimate ideal. Almost every billboard has some racially mixed couple or crowd [engaged in] a ritual of consumption.

As Nadine Gordimer declared, “White and Black must make Colored,” though she herself married fellow Litvak Jews–twice.

The Afrikaner people are clearly under attack from all sides: from blacks who resent them, from English-speakers who envy and despise them, and from the larger white world that will never forgive them for taking the measures they found necessary to build a European society in Africa. Their stark numerical disadvantage–they are perhaps 5 percent of South Africa’s population–means the stakes are higher and the crisis sharper for them than for other European peoples. But they are a heroic people, and if they rally to spokesmen like Dan Roodt, they will surely have a future.

Topics: , , , , , , , ,

Share This

F. Roger Devlin
Dr. Devlin is a contributing editor to The Occidental Quarterly and the author of Sexual Utopia in Power.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • james AZ

    wait till 2050………there will have appox 1,766,000,000 Africans………In 1950 it was about 221,000,000 Africans. COMPARE with north America

    • tancred guiscard

      I believe history shall note an important lesson for this century, namely that,more in some regions than others, the warnings of Malthus fell on deaf ears.

    • phorning

      Just because a population is currently growing at X% doesn’t mean it will continue to grow at that percentage in perpetuity. There simply isn’t enough food or medicine in the world for Africa’s population to get that large, especially since most Africans are either unwilling or unable to provide for their own basic needs.

      • african4

        Never underestimate mother nature with her culling through diseases.

        • IstvanIN

          Or the Whites man’s self-destructive charity to stop mother nature and her sensible agenda.

        • benvad

          We’re seeing evidence of this such as the Ebola epidemic. The problem with disease & famines is that whites interfere in these african natural cycles to our detriment.

          Bleeding heart musicians and billionaire computer geeks have to express their emotive natures by “saving” noble savages.

          I’d surely arm them and exacerbate local hatreds to usher in genocide & disease to slow their growth. As you may have noticed, between 6-7 million people were exterminated in the Congo basin during some conflict going on there. It hasn’t evidence put a slight dent into their population growth.

          It’s really going to be an uphill battle

        • TotallyPeeved

          Not with stupid whites jumping in to save the not worth saving. All that is going to happen is every continent will be a dark continent. N I G G E R S are worthless sub humans that should be left alone in africa and not allowed to immigrate, travel and NO AID GIVEN. Same with the koranimals in the middle east.

    • Garrett Brown

      Extremely terrifying.

    • SentryattheGate

      I have read 4 billion Africans; 1 billion in Nigeria alone! Here’s a UN article (notice highest fertility rates are in Africa):
      ref. http://www.un(DOT)org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=45165#.VCbiM_ldV7U

      ….“While there has been a rapid fall in the average number of children per woman in large developing countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Brazil and South Africa […] rapid growth is expected to continue over the next few decades in countries with high levels of fertility such as Nigeria, Niger, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia and Uganda but also Afghanistan and Timor-Leste, where there are more than five children per woman.”
      ….The report notes that India is expected to become the world’s largest country, passing China around 2028, when both countries will have populations of 1.45 billion. After that, India’s population will continue to grow and China’s is expected to start decreasing. Meanwhile, Nigeria’s population is expected to surpass that of the United States before 2050. (I add that Nigeria is expected to have ~1 billion people, in it’s area the size of Texas! No wonder Nigerians are expected to be a main source of immigration to the US! How lucky can we get????)

  • John R

    In other words, the Afrikaners have been in South Africa at least as long as most blacks have been in the Unites States. If the Afrikaners must leave South Africa, then the blacks should leave the United States.

    • Laager

      1607 – Jamestown Virginia founded
      1620 – Plymouth Mass founded by Pilgrim Fathers
      1652 – Cape Town founded by Dutch East Indian Co
      1788 – Sydney founded by British in Australia
      1814 – Hohi mission station established in New Zealand
      Why should White Afrikaners [=Africans] have to leave South Africa?
      They have been there 45 years less than White Americans have been in America, and 136 years longer than white Australians and 152 years longer than white New Zealanders have been in their respective countries.

      • John R

        ….and two hundred years longer than my family has been in America. Point taken.

      • Chris R

        Because they are not safe in South Africa. They should have a strategic retreat to Europe.

      • B.A_2014

        Radical muslims to this day lay claim to spain and portugal and plenty of other places. I like this mentality. As far as I’m concerned South africa, New Zealand, the Americas and Australia all belong to Europeans regardless of the liberal sob stories about genocides and the rest of it.

    • Sick of it

      The blacks should leave South Africa, as the Afrikaners were there first. Excluding a few relatively small tribes.

    • Gus Baker

      I’d go for a straight trade up.

    • kikz2

      if only…

  • Afrikaner:South Africa::Dixieron:USA

    • Laager

      With its Dutch roots and German influences Afrikaans speakers can understand and converse with Flemish and Dutch speakers quite easily. With German the links are not quite as easy.

  • Tim

    Nadine what ever her name looks like every shrew I ever knew, starting with Catholic school and ending with Applebee`s. She has validity only in me knowing instinctively she has no validity…Normally I don`t insult on here but got to go with my gut on this one…

    • Tim

      Paper covers rock but scarf doesn`t pretty up shrew…

    • benvad

      I hope she’s a victim of new South African home invasion.

  • TruthBeTold

    I have to say I haven’t read this piece. I’m going to have to work myself up to get through it.

    I fear it’s as bad as it might appear to be.

  • B.B.

    Nadine Gordiner

    It is Nadine Gordimer. You misspelled it twice.

    • Mahound

      As if it bloody matters how that wench spells her name.

    • Sick of it

      A Jew by any other name…shrieks just as loudly about racism.

  • test

  • Truthseeker

    This is one of the saddest things I’ve ever read. Anti-nationalism is truly an evil idea, and the danger is that it’s propagated by people who honestly believe they’re doing the right thing.

  • Rhialto

    The details are of interest and importance, but the main point is the disaster of White men fighting each other over issues that are no longer the major issues. The English monarchy is irrelevant; the language spoken in ZA is irrelevant. For their survival, White men must unite against their enemies.

    • benvad

      Same goes for Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland and Great Britain. I wish they’d put all the problems aside and that goes for every state all the way to Russia.

    • kikz2

      they can’t fight a continent… they’ll have to leave or die where they stand.

      • ThomasER916

        Wrong. They’re not “fighting a continent.” They’re simply resisting non-Whites. They can survive and thrive but they can’t do it as Libtards.

    • dukem1

      My sentiments exactly.

  • B.A_2014

    The astronomical increase in the african population is a global threst. Far more so than say global warming. When I speak with like minded individuals about this they always reply: but what are we gonna do, just let women and babies starve? I always answer emphatically: YES!

    • IstvanIN

      Letting them starve is the only humane thing to do. Allowing them to double their population every generation (or less) simply increases the suffering.

      • SentryattheGate

        Look at Haiti, for example; ~150,000 died in the big 2010 earthquake (Haiti, of course exaggerated the figures to get more foreign aid $$$), yet they have already produced more babies than that figure! Because many women and girls had to live in tents (and like most blacks, had kids but no husband)–they were vulnerable to rape. So, Haiti had a population explosion! Compare Haiti’s post-earthquake behavior to that of the Japanese after their big 2011 earthquake! Quite a difference, eh?

    • benvad

      Your right.

    • kikz2

      the only thing they do is survive long enough to breed more of themselves who need feeding.. it’s an illogic loop…

      it would appear that ebola is putting a snip in that loop.

  • KenelmDigby

    As the article above honestly notes, the arch-traitor, the man who really threw the Afrikaners to the wolves was FW De Klerk. De Klerk is neither ‘English’ or ‘Jewish’, as far as I know he is a real, true through and through Afrikaner.

    • Sick of it

      That’s all fine and good (like anyone has ever said that white people do not betray their own), but the red revolutionaries were Jewish, English, and black. The people murdering folks.

    • benvad

      Always a traitor in your must.

  • Focal Joker

    Thanks for the article. I always appreciate some insight into the Afrikaner people. It’s a shame they couldn’t get a leader to broker a deal to get an Afrikaner region in South Africa.

    It’s certainly a dangerous time to raise children there, but it’s the only way to keep it going.

    Every time I hear about this it just reminds me of what’s coming in the US and Europe. Hopefully there’s a peaceful wake up call beforehand, but most of us doubt it Rights seem to be won only on the battlefield, not in the board room.

  • Focal Joker

    It amazes me that genocidewatch recognizes the Afrikaner/White elimination in that country but not a peep from anyone. It’s like Roodt states in the article,

    “Some individuals from England have told me to my face that we Afrikaners deserve to be tortured to death by blacks and our women to be raped, for having oppressed blacks in the past.”

    And that’s how the English feel about themselves too, if you’re paying attention to the place at the moment.

    • OS-Q

      Lothrop Stoddard’s “French Revolution in San Domingo” showed the same attitude common among the French when Haitian Whites came asking for help back in the 1800s.

    • benvad

      Because they believe it’s justified and good that Afrikaners be killed.

    • SentryattheGate

      Then out spake brave Horatius,
      The Captain of the Gate:
      “To every man upon this earth
      Death cometh soon or late.
      And how can man die better
      Than facing fearful odds,
      For the ashes of his fathers,
      And the temples of his Gods.”[4]

      from: Lays of Ancient Rome is a collection of narrative poems, or lays, by Thomas Babington Macaulay.

  • AndrewInterrupted

    Gotta love those hypocritical Yids.

  • Stan D Mute

    As I’ve noted many times, we all owe an enormous debt of gratitude to the Afrikaners who had the wisdom to dismantle and destroy SA’s nuclear arsenal before they handed over the reins of control to the natives. What happens when a Muslim fanatic or an African with IQ of 65 finally gains control of a nuclear weapon (or entire arsenal) should keep us all awake at night.

    • Strichtplatte

      The Nuclear arsenal more than likely went to Isreal. If not the hardware then the data. The air blast they pulled off in the 1980’s down in the southern ocean was the last blast and could have been the Kike’s proofing bomb before they stole the rest. During the blockade of the South Afrikaner economy much product passed into and out of Isreal to be exported world wide. Leave it to the bacteria of the gordimers to infect and destroy a good thing except the gold, uranium, diamonds and all the other goodies stashed beneath the future graves of the Boers.

    • IstvanIN

      Does it really matter at this point?

      • Stan D Mute

        That’s a dark was of thinking about it. You mean “are we better going out like Channon Christian and Chris Newsom or like the residents of Nagasaki”?

        • IstvanIN


          • Stan D Mute

            It wasn’t the question. That’s a choice that answers itself. The comment was asking if that was what you meant with your remark – which is a very dim but perhaps accurate outlook.

          • IstvanIN

            If we are not to survive why should they inherit our achievements and civilization? As far as I am concerned if my decendents can not inherit my legacy then the whole shebang can go. Let the plants and animals retake the Earth.

          • Stan D Mute

            I agree fully. How depressing. I hadn’t really thought of it that way – I suppose I just assumed that when we’ve been exterminated everything will crumble into chaos anyway. Certainly neither the Africans nor the Amerindians can maintain our technology. Look how quickly even the 1960’s technology they inherited in Detroit crumbled under the weight of violent stupidity. And yet in that scenario, they merely revert to their natural state, perhaps building mounds atop the wreckage of a semiconductor fab plant. Why should we be ground into dust while they dance in orgiastic delight after feasting on a neighboring tribe?

            Nuke the super caldera at Yellowstone!

  • JohnEngelman

    The official story in the United States is that since the end of apartheid the people of South Africa have lived happily ever after. Can anyone tell me, using credible sources of data, how the end of Apartheid has effected the murder rate in South Africa, and the median income adjusted for inflation?

  • IstvanIN

    Yes, the Cape was empty. Most blacks are decended from black who immigrated to where the Afrikaners had settled.

    • TotallyPeeved

      TNB, n i g g e r s following whites to be parasitic, violent worthless shitskins. They want what whitey has the brains and drive to invent and build, but want whitey dead. Always too stupid to understand they can’t build or maintain more than a mud hut, starvation and a high rape and murder rate. I hate N I G G E R S in whatever country they are infesting.

      • lionel1130

        I thought the N word was forbidden on this site. I notice that you use the word a lot. I get it that you don’t want blacks to have a place of their own even in their own region of the world. Robert Mugabe would be a kindred soul on the other side of the question.

    • hobbes007

      The true indigenous people of South Africa, the Khoi and San, were there, but sparsely scattered and travelling around as nomadic hunter-gatherers. They were displaced by Black and White settlers. Their community is very small now, and a large proportion of the so-called Coloured community are descendent from them.

  • IstvanIN

    Envy can be ugly. Wow, a simple yet powerful and very true statement.

    • ThomasER916

      My brother told me that Envy is worse that Greed. He said that with Greed you seek to have more so if you’re a creator you will create more and establish controls so you don’t lose more than you create. With Envy you hate someone so much you’ll destroy what they have so no one will prosper.

      Envy is the driving force of anti-Whites.

  • IstvanIN

    Memphis: blacks go on the rampage at a Kroger’s market and beat a lone, young, White man. We live in Africa NOW.

  • Jon

    The one thing that nations never understand is to never trust England. Jefferson viewed England as the real enemy and threat to the America and if any nation want to survive then it must do what Japan did yrs ago and have total economic, cultural and ethnic protectionism. Also shows how allowing Jews into their country destabilized everything and allowing Marxism to flourished caused the chaos. Both S.A and Rhod are examples of black rule. If they want to keep their Identity then they must fight for it by force and teach their kids to have pride in it.

  • Ngati Pakeha

    Mention above of the late great Prime Minister of Rhodesia, Ian Smith. I was recently lucky enough to talk to a Rhodesian (now in NZ) retiree who became ramrod straight and with water in his eyes at the mere mention of “Smithy”. What struck me most was the fact that I can’t really think of one leader who I have ever lived under who would impart that feeling on me. Gone but never forgotten, Ian Douglas Smith.

  • Richard

    As one commentator has already pointed out a Malthusian outcome is, sadly, the most likely outcome.

  • kikz2

    once again.. cultural assault by jew… it just doesn’t end…..

  • kikz2

    i knew of an Afikaner family, they did speak good English, here in far N. Dallas burbs, they were importers..merchants..they opened and ran a very avant garde ‘cool’ shop…… they seem’d to have done well here in the late 90’s. i lost track of them though, as i moved farther north into the exoburbs….

  • Mary

    As a White American Southerner, I feel an affinity with the Afrikaner people.
    Although our situations are far from exactly parallel, there are a number of common elements. They truly have an uphill battle, and I wish them the best.

  • tabsa

    I’m an Afrikaner and I disagree with Dan Roodt. I don’t know why he feels the need to keep whining about what the English did and about how great the Afrikaans language is etc etc.

    With 2 million Afrikaans speaking people in the world and a billion English speaking people, our language is insignificant. It will die out. You won’t get anywhere in South Africa if you only speak Afrikaans and you definitely won’t get anywhere in the world if you only speak Afrikaans. Funny how he writes in English, huh? Because how many Afrikaans speaking people will visit his website or buy his books?

    He also has this idiotic idea of an Afrikaner homeland. I mean come on, who’s going to give us a viable piece of land in South Africa? Almost every province has either coal, diamonds, gold or platinum. Even the semi-desert Karoo is going to be fracked soon.

    Just like a psychologist or an Evangelist can’t preach about life because they don’t really live (they make a living out of telling other people how to live), Dan Roodt shouldn’t talk about life in South Africa as if he is a part of it. He’s just a commentator. If he got out and did business in South Africa, he’d realize that his narrow views are a bit stupid.

    Instead of creating a divide between the only whites in this shithole, maybe he should be trying to unite us against the real enemy.

    • Ward Kendall

      “I’m an Afrikaner and I disagree with Dan Roodt. I don’t know why he feels the need to keep whining…

      It looks as if the moderator did not like my previous comment, though it is beyond me as to why not. But “Tabsa” is correct: Roodt is a whiner. I’ve seen his tearful missives on countless other forums besides this one, lamenting how bad things are in South Africa and how NONE of it is the fault of the Afrikaner. In truth, MOST of it IS the fault of Roodt and his fellow Afrikaners, beginning with at least F.W. deKlerk. What he needs to understand is this: South Africa will remain in the hands of the kaffir unless he and his kind get down and dirty and do something about it. It’s that simple. But….it would be bloody. And THAT is the reason why I do not see South Africa ever being free again, unless it is liberated by white Americans, white Europeans, or white Australians.

  • Peter Connor

    South Africa is doomed; the Afrikaners need to find a place where they can survive the storm that is coming for English, African and Afrikaner alike.

  • Steven Barr

    So it’s all England’s fault. We may have put pressure on you but we
    didn’t force you to vote in the nineties to give your country away. You
    did that by yourselves. England has zero power in the world today. You
    sound just like the Indians or Black Africans when you imagine we are
    devilishly plotting world domination behind the scenes. We are a tiny
    island in the North Atlantic and that’s what we’ll always be. It’s time
    for the people of the former British Empire to take responsibility for
    themselves and stop blaming us for their misfortunes.

    • Partyforever

      Britain didn’t fight the Communist. Don’t lie. Britain did nothing. Didn’t even protest the treatment of whites anywhere in the world.

  • Paleoconn

    I admire the Afrikaners more than I do the SA English, and although the work of these traitorous Englishmen and liberal Jews ulitmately did in the Afrikaners, they should have never let blacks into their lands.

  • The Afrikaner culture and language should be cherished, preserved and strengthened. All this is fascinating and important background for understanding what is bringing about the doom of Whites the world over, Whites that must unite. Yes, many Whites are against us, but what is important are those who are racially aware. Surely there must be some people of English and other backgrounds in South Africa who do not want to end up dispossessed, raped and murdered. I hope Dr. Roodt is spending some of his time trying to build bridges to these people. I wouldn’t care if their second cousin was Queen Elizabeth and they only woke up to racial reality last Wednesday, I would welcome them to the front lines. The time remaining is not great. In fact South Africa is on the front lines of what the rest of the West is slated to become some version of someday. Instead of telling Afrikaners that they should give up and turn tail and run, we should respect whatever decision they may make and aid them with funds, moral support or however we can. We Whites are often happiest when we are battling each other, and that is how we are going to end up in ‘The Cannibal’s Pot.’ Thank you, Dr. Roodt, for seeing the truth way before many of us opened our eyes, and for continuing to fight the good fight that must be won, not just for Afrikaners–but for us all.

    • I agree with you! PW Botha (with whom I conducted some interviews not long before he died and will soon make available in digital form) used to refer to the “total onslaught” in the 1980’s. But today it is directed against Europeans all over the world. Whites will soon be between 5% and 7% of the global population with a median age of about 40. We are few and we are old.

      Regarding language, my view is that we all speak dialects of the same language. Or at least there are 2 main ones: Latin and Germanic. If you know one of them, you can easily learn most of the others: English, German, Dutch, Swedish, French, Italian, Spanish, etc. I am currently corresponding with people about Low German which was the main trading language in northern Europe between 1300 and 1600 during the time of the Hanseatic League which stretched from Russia in the East to England and Flanders in the West. In fact, Afrikaans is a kind of hybrid of 17th-century Dutch and Low German dialects that we have standardised and made into an amazing cultural, scientific and popular language in South Africa. The Danish kings in the 1300’s used Low German as their legal language for contracts. In the 1200’s there was a mystic poet called Hadewijch who lived in Antwerp or thereabouts and we can still understand what she wrote, so little has our language changed in 800 years!

      As I explain in my essay, most of the moderate to conservative English-speakers are actually on our side, even if they do not say it out loud. It is just that we are dominated by the left-wing cultural Marxists who have made an alliance with the radical, anti-white blacks and who will help them to ethnically cleanse us from South Africa.

      But this whole struggle is about identity: to be white and American, or white and Afrikaans is taboo and we are ridiculed as hillbillies or “uncool”, a bit like the “Appalachian” stereotype in the USA. All white people who reject the multicultural ideal are supposed to be “backward”. So it is very important to build on our pride, our past achievements, ancient history and also our dream of a better future where we won’t have to live in fear or suffer injustices and anti-white discrimination all the time.

      • All well said. Your writings have gone to the top of my reading list.

  • Ward Kendall

    Lovely. Dan Roodt writes an article for American Renaissance, an online magazine based in the English-colonized and founded USA – and then goes on to attack the English-speaking British (and by extension, English-speaking white Americans) as the cause of South Africa’s present decline. Lest he forget (or deliberately ignore) it was the Afrikaner F.W. deKlerk who sold out white South Africa. But, again and again, Roodt comes on to forums like this whining about how it’s all “someone else’s fault” instead of pinning the blame on people like himself. If Roodt or the rest of the Afrikaners had even an ounce of courage left in their veins they’d take up their guns and FIGHT for their country – or die trying to take it back.

    But no.

    They dare not do that. It just wouldn’t be…”civilized”. Okay, then accept rule by the kaffir, Mr. Roodt. Accept it and please stop whining. Because, quite frankly, you and your playing the “victim” is getting quite old indeed.

  • De Doc

    In my professional life I’ve met many South African ex-pats, mostly of Jewish extract. When asked about why they left their ‘beloved homeland’, the answers were always the same, namely little economic security/opportunity and that it was becoming increasingly unsafe to live there. How ironic, considering they were among the ones looking to do just the opposite by advocating Black take over as the ruling elite.

  • John R

    A-Holes? Hey, you try being White and live in a predominately black country and see what that does for YOUR personality.

  • DailyKenn

    I’m bothered by the over-generalization of ‘the English.’ Surely there were large numbers of Britons who objected to the abuse of white in Africa; Rhodesia in particular.

  • evilsandmich

    I think that article was (justifiably) far harder on Jews than most comments that get deleted…

  • SentryattheGate

    I read your enlightening article; thank you. I was a leftist hippie when the West was rallying against your South African people, but did not “buy in” to the argument. I felt we weren’t being given enough information. I am no longer a leftist. My husband was a late 1970’s Peace Corps volunteer in Liberia. He witnessed USAID money, meant for rural schools in Africa, get diverted by local African “bigwigs” instead buying weapons and luxury cars! They became the local warlords! The US gov’t. has a history of supporting Communists: Mandela, Mao ZeDong, Stalin, etc.and many in our own gov’t!

  • Raymond Kidwell

    Once we go past peak oil the price of everything will go up, global economies will collapse and the stress may trigger a world war. In this event the massive population increase that was largely triggerred by the advent of modern fertilizers, electricity and the use of oil will be corrected. A huge percentage of the global population will be eliminated. So the most important thing would be to gather a small community around yourself and survival prep. You may still have to deal with the government confiscating your preps to pay for war or welfare or whatever or perhaps being drafted to die in the front lines but you might be able to keep some semblance of a community intact.

    The main problem will probably be loss of jobs, food shortages, riots and crime where people kill each other in inner cities and high stress areas. Militaries will offer hopeless youths a paycheck and meals, only to see about a third of them or so slaughtered. It’s all population control. I think the global elite realize at this point that armageddon is coming so really don’t care about this Marxist BS. Watch the Jesse Ventura Conspiracy episode where they are building underground bunkers in the Ozarks while keeping quiet about it to the public.

    You need to understand world history as it is rather than propaganda in school books. Most wars are a result of limited resources and basically population control where mostly the poor die. World War 2 for instance was largely caused by economic disaster and people starving in central Europe (Germany). The Soviet and French revolutions also the same thing. Viking invasions of the middle ages- food shortages. Fall of Rome by Germanic invaders- largely related to food shortages. You have this long history of a population exploding like crazy and then a correction. Some will just not have children due to stress, some will die due to crime or the weak allowed to perish (such as the really old) many others will die in wars.

    I’d say Vietnam was also more or less a way for rich people to make money and to thin out the ranks of poor people. It’s interesting how they are always desperate for soldiers at times like that but those with college degrees are immune from the draft (or those with money).

    More or less though the focus should be on survival prepping and I’d say a lot of this nonsense is about to correct itself within the next 50-100 years.

    After peak oil we’ll still have cars and all the things we have today more or less but the cost of operating everything will go up drastically. So it might be economically desirable to own a horse even though there might be really expensive gas left or ethnol (which will cost a lot because modern ethanol is farmed using petroleum based farming methods) etc. etc.

  • ThomasER916

    Once Europeans can’t feed themselves the Negroes will suffer from mass starvation like in Ethiopia. In fact, if it wasn’t for the Christian and Post-Christian delusions of “charity” their population would have declined 50 years ago do to overpopulation and their inability to grow beyond hand-to-mouth living.

  • ThomasER916

    Why not?

    I live in America and it’s much more dangerous when White Liberals and Jews are arming the non-Whites than it is when non-Whites are left to their own devices.

  • ThomasER916

    “The prosperity of the Verwoerd administration did more for black…”

    And that was their betrayal. To help non-Whites is to hurt all Whites. To give to non-Whites is to steal from Whites. To save non-Whites is to kill Whites.

  • Partyforever

    Let the Western world slide into the abyss. Experience what we experienced.