The Road to Genocide Is Paved with Liberal Intentions

Selwyn Duke, American Thinker, December 14, 2013

With all the recent talk about Nelson Mandela the myth and the modicum of talk about Mandela the man, it’s a good opportunity to discuss another myth: that of apartheid. Oh, I know, modernist dogma dictates we behave not just as if the South African system Mandela so stridently fought was not only unsustainable, but also completely unfathomable. After all, the idea of second-class status for any group is anathema to Westerners (unless it happens to be non-Muslims in Islamic lands, of course).

I was just a teenager when world pressure to end apartheid started to reach a fever pitch. My immediate reaction was that the intended outcome–universal suffrage and black majority rule–was crazy. Don’t misunderstand me, as I believed that perpetuating apartheid was morally problematic and unrealistic. Yet I also said that the end result of the world’s little plan for SA would be the extermination of the whites. So I drew a logical conclusion: the country should be partitioned.

With the discrimination against and persecution and murder of SA whites worsening yearly–and with Genocide Watch warning that they’re imperiled by impending genocide–my youthful (and obvious) prediction seems vindicated. Yet most still don’t see the bloody writing on the wall. Worse still, some who do shamelessly shrug it off as the comeuppance due “oppressors.” So I’ll now do that most unfashionable of things: place apartheid in perspective.

Most people would never guess it, but the arrival of whites in SA dates back further than that of the ancestors of many of the nation’s blacks. The first Dutch settlers (who became known as “Boers” or “Afrikaners”) landed on Africa’s shores in 1652, while many blacks in SA arrived later. After all, since life in “racist” SA was vastly preferable to that in surrounding nations, it had long been attractive to black migrants. In fact, due to this factor and blacks’ higher birthrates, SA’s black demographic has increased 920 percent since 1913; this is the main reason the nation’s population increased from 6 million a century ago to 52 million today, as the white demographic increased only 3.3 million during that period.

The relevant point, however, is that the Dutch settlers found in southern Africa a vast and beautiful land with great wide-open spaces. They then did what Erik the Red did in Greenland, what countless groups have done throughout history: they set up shop–their own shop. Of course, there were Xhosa and Zulus about, but they did their own thing as the Europeans did theirs for the same reason why the Sioux and Cheyenne stayed separate in North America, the Lombards and Alans remained separate in barbarian Europe, or the Smith and Jones households live separately on their block: the default for different groups, with different values and cultures or even just different blood ties, is to live apart. They naturally, instinctively, reflexively maintain “apartness.”

This worked well and was unquestioned for a very long time. But then something happened.

Southern Africa started moving into modernity.

As the Afrikaners and British developed the region, a country known as “South Africa” emerged. And as the blacks were integrated into this European creation–being hired by whites, receiving at least some Western education and learning European languages–they, too, developed a sense of belonging to this “South Africa.”

This created an interesting situation. If the whites had maintained complete separation–if they would have and could have avoided all contact with the African tribes–there would have been no Nelson Mandelas (for the same reason why Amazonian natives who know of nothing beyond their forest canopy don’t lobby for voting rights). If, as occurred with the Japanese and their islands’ indigenous people, the Ainus, the SA whites came to outnumber and largely subsume the tribes, there would have been no one of note around to lobby for anything. But since SA is not an island and African migrants could easily cross the border in large numbers, this was a non-starter.

But neither of these things happened. Rather, SA blacks moved into modernity and became part of South Africa, a democracy–and outnumbered the whites 10 to 1. What were the whites to do? Granting the blacks full citizenship rights would usher in the whites’ political, and perhaps physical, destruction. Given this, is it surprising that what always ensured cultural preservation and group safety, that naturally ordained “apartness,” was replaced with the government-ordained policy of “apartheid?”

The point here isn’t to make any moral statement about segregation in general or SA’s version in particular. It is, rather, this: regardless of the extent to which white South Africans were inhuman–as all peoples can sometimes be–they did nothing unhuman. Their social policies were exactly what could be expected from any group of humans in their situation.

If any question this, try a thought exercise. Imagine there was an African tribe that had a long history in a land, had turned that land into a nation, brought it into modernity and created its democracy, and had reason to believe that sharing power would lead to its own persecution. Would it surprise anyone if they took measures to ensure their safety, cultural integrity, and hold on power?

But we don’t have to theorize. There’s no shortage of African countries where one tribe dominated government–such as with the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda–and tribes have often spilled blood vying for power. One difference, though, is that the dominant group usually doesn’t rule democratically but autocratically; another is that they’re generally far more brutal than SA’s apartheid government. And there’s a third difference: whatever the persecutions, oh-so humanitarian Western moderns generally pay these countries little mind. So it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the real problem the West had with SA was that the ruling tribe happened to be the wrong color.

It should be added, however, that SA whites did do one thing no other group has. Is there any other instance in history in which a small minority built a country, had a long history within it, brought it into modernity and created its democracy, and then handed that democracy’s reins to a much larger group, even though reason informed that this would bring persecution? Call it magnanimity, call it stupidity, call it both, but it’s one thing for sure: strikingly unprecedented.

Whatever you call it, SA whites had a lot of help in crafting their suicide pact from a hypocritical Western world that saw a government more benevolent than most others on its continent, but nonetheless placed an undue onus on it because the rulers were the wrong race. SA was the George Zimmerman of the geopolitical stage: the white-on-black incident that got all the press while rampant black-on-black crime was ignored.

In truth, many of SA’s current troubles could have been avoided by a two-state solution, the kind of healthy “apartness” the West so easily saw the logic in upon the former Yugoslavia’s dissolution. And now, even though the West’s ending apartheid has led to impending genocide, it sees nothing. To the modern liberal, white is the new invisible.

Topics: , , ,

Share This

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.
  • Puggg

    This is proof that Yugoslavias don’t work. South Africa is trying to make a single country out of two different tribes of white people, Indians from India, and several tribes of black southern African people.


      And regrettably we’re busy importing our very own toxic mix right here in America. So that we too can experience all the glories of “A Rainbow Nation”, Viva La Raza!

      Suicide can be fun eh?

    • Erasmus

      This is further proof that the “Celebrate Diversity!” merde the multiculturalists have been pushing in the US will be its undoing, and, I’m certain, they know it will be its undoing.

      • Correct.

        The left has finally succeeded in deeply and probably irreversibly dividing the USA along class, racial and regional lines. With their capture of the election process now essentially complete, they are working hard on destroying the middle class by destroying the currency. They think that the result will pave the way for outright communism for the entire USA but I believe they are only partially right.

        I predict that after the inevitable financial collapse what’s going to happen instead is civil/race war followed by the breakup of the USA into several independent nations, with communism taking hold only in the residual USA, which I predict will be the USA east of the Missouri/Mississippi and north of the Mason-DIxon line.

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

      Actually this is proof that some people don’t know history and that even those that think they know the solution still don’t understand it.

      The boers didn’t let the africans in, because there were two groups of whites in South africa. Boers and british.
      The british lived near the coast and the boers further inland as farmers.
      What we think of as SA blacks didn’t live there at all, the only ones living there were the Khoi-Khoi, or “bushmen”.

      But then gold was discovered in South Africa, and the biggest empire the world has ever known became highly interested. The british.
      And that led to the boer wars, which the boers lost,

      And the british then began to bring blacks into the country to be used as miners.
      As well as to be used for the classical old tactic of “divide and conquer” (which is once again being repeated in white countries right now).

      Trying to split the nation into a white part and black part would only be a temporary solution, because that would only result in how SA was before blacks started welling in.
      In other words, it would only be a matter of time until the white part would once again have lots of blacks coming in over the border since white countries are just that much better to live in, even if they are under apartheid-policies. As evidenced with pre-1994 SA, which was the best african country to live in for blacks, despite the apartheid.
      Just as USA was the best place for blacks to live in even during Jim Crow laws and separation of whites and blacks.

      The only way to actually change this cycle is by taking a stand and not giving up land and instead expatriate these people back to where they came from BEFORE they become too many and too powerful.

  • Spartacus

    “Imagine there was an African tribe that had a long history in a land,
    had turned that land into a nation, brought it into modernity and
    created its democracy, and had reason to believe that sharing power
    would lead to its own persecution.”


    I really can’t imagine something like that. Probably because it never happened.

    • IstvanIN

      Actually that African tribe is the Boers.

      • Spartacus

        They’re still European, no matter where they live…

        • sbuffalonative

          Agree. An African American is African. European African is European.

        • IstvanIN

          They genetics began in Holland but their home, the nation they built, their language and customs are all Boer. They have evolved as a unique people of the European diaspora and should be respected as much as any other African tribe in SA especially since they were there first.

          • Strike_Team

            True. Truth be told, the black populations rose as the whites worked and created civilization where it hadn’t existed. The blacks poured in. Just like the browns pouring into what used to be the US, as the descendants of the monsters who opened the gates of Toledo for the Mohammedans hold the doors open for Latin America’s dreck, as well as keeping the doors open for any other non-white who wants to come in and enjoy a system set up to favor them from the start.

          • BonusGift

            Yes, one set of parasites has been and is very busy killing and enslaving as many Christians as possible in favor of their pet dusky parasites.

    • Fair Dinkum

      White South Africans gave up because the rest of the Western world turned their backs on them.

      • Sue

        And what are they doing now? Paying attention to the slaughter?

    • Whirlwinder

      This can and will never happen with a black people.

  • ncpride

    It’s sickening to listen to my son tell me what his Social Studies teacher has been telling the class about Mandela and South Africa. Believe me, she’ll be hearing from me on this issue if she insists on spreading her half-truths and blatant lies. I refuse to have my child being taught such nonsense… however, he KNOWS he’s being lied to because I talk to my kids about the White genocide and oppression in SA often. How dare she stand in front of that class and talk about how ‘wonderful’ the Rainbow nation is. Infuriating.

    • David Ashton

      How old is your son? Could he risk taking in photos of white and black victims of ANC atrocities?

      • ncpride

        Not old enough to do that, but I love the idea. Wouldn’t that be an eye opener? No, I’ll deal with this women on my own.

        • David Ashton

          Thanks. You could download & take in Mandela’s handwritten essay on being a good communist, and ask if she would discuss with her classes the statement about getting rid of opponents from the earth; also the Stompie case.

  • Extropico

    Partitioning of the nation is preferable to be ruled by people who haven’t invented the wheel yet.

  • Hal K

    The writers at American Thinker love to blame liberals and liberalism for every problem associated with race. It never occurs to them that they, as mainstream conservatives, are part of the problem because they keep explicit white identity politics out of the mainstream. Mainstream conservatism is one of the opiates of implicitly pro-white white people, and there are millions of them out there. They listen to Rush Limbaugh and read Ann Coulter, etc., and the message they keep getting is that liberals are the problem. That is wrong. Mainstream conservatism is the problem because it blocks explicitly pro-white identity politics.

    • Lord_Steven_Regal

      American Thinker regularly has articles on the Knockout Game, federal government preferences for blacks, and articles like the above. As far as mainstream Conservative sites go, Americsn Thinker publishes far more articles from a white perspective and discussing white persecution than other sites.

      • Pro_Whitey

        Done with the right intent – to unite whites into a powerful political coalition – such media are good. To the extent these media publish such articles to get white attention and excite them, while trying to suppress any coordinated action by whites, it’s just what the left calls it, a dog whistle, and it’s fraudulent. I can only hope the American Thinker and other non-leftist media types at least implicitly harbor the right intent.

        • BonusGift

          It doesn’t from what I’ve read. I got the distinct impression that it generally treats race as if it is some invisible make believe friend; in other words, it’s there only because children and crazy people notice it, otherwise politics drives all results. And if we could just rebrand and re-market ‘conservative’ ideas the ‘minorities’ would be going nuts over our politics and all would be well in the world, blah, blah, blah, … In short, like the tribe, it projects any hate or violence onto the victim and away from the perpetrator.

    • Dave4088

      Conservatives and libertarians think they just need to tailor and perfect their respective sales pitches to win the hearts and minds of non-whites. They, like the radical Marxists, believe the races are equal and interchangeable.

      • BonusGift

        As a general statement you are right on the money.

      • Hal K

        Different races have different group interests. The two most important group interests (that I can think of) are:
        1. The need for government assistance and racial preferences because of innate average differences in intelligence.
        2. Identification or lack thereof with foreigners who want to immigrate to white countries.

        These sorts of group interests cannot just be wished away and are about more than just outward appearances. They are about physical and biological reality: who lives where and who has what capabilities. It is whites who are really messed up in the head, not nonwhites. It is whites who deny themselves explicit racial solidarity.

    • Luca

      In the 1960’s, Liberalism began to grab hold and gain popular support for a number of reasons. I can trace this country’s problems directly to 1965 with the social engineering plans (or should I say Democratic voting plans) of LBJ to create the “Great Society” (for blacks only I presume) and the wanton Immigration plan of 1965 which opened the door to third-world chain migration. The icing on the cake was the war in Vietnam which created a groundswell of protest and an avante garde atmosphere for being anti-government and anti- (most any other traditional things).

      This movement was further fueled by too many liberal journalists and media personalities who jumped on the poplar liberal-anti-establishment bandwagon.

      The liberals in essence became anti-traditional which of course meant anti-conservative. Everyone was asked to reject tradition and “Turn on, tune in, drop out”.

      I find more sense in conservative values than I do with liberal values. Almost all conservative platforms are based on experience and proven tactics. Almost all liberal views are based on irrational Utopian theories destined for failure.

      There will never be an explicit pro-white identity political party in this country that has an chance at success. reality will not allow it.

      We are stuck with the lesser of two evils. That choice is clear.

      • BonusGift

        It does not follow from your first mostly factual comments that “there will never be an explicit pro-white identity political party in this country that has a chance at success. reality will not allow it.” I disagree, the only thing reality will allow is toward a natural tendency toward separation; the key questions revolve around how and when this happens, not if it happens; and, also, whether white people live to see the other side of it. In addition, saying something will never happen means with 100% assuredness, and that I truly doubt anyone believes.

        • Luca

          An explicitly pro-White political party will be likened to the KKK. Political party’s seek to include a majority membership for the sake of votes and power.

          If the party were to accept only WASP’s then it will be in a minority and there would be no point in running.

          A much better concept would be a political party based in part on meritocracy and social Darwinism, excluding no one by virtue of any identity marker.

          I stand corrected by using the word “never”, that is too strong a word, but in all probability it may never happen. The reality of modern culture, international affairs, economics and human nature does not allow it. White South Africa is the perfect example which makes my point.

      • Hal K

        There will never be an explicit pro-white identity political party in
        this country that has a chance at success. reality will not allow it.

        There is no cosmic principle which dictates that whites, of all races, can never have identity politics. We have mainstream identity politics for every race except whites in this country. Both major parties explicitly court nonwhite votes currently. This is the essence of group identity politics. They could do it for whites also if their elites weren’t standing in the way.

        This is the main disconnect behind all of the problems whites face: They are not allowed and do not allow themselves to explicitly think in terms of their own racial group interests. We have to force this issue somehow. It does not appear that you will be on board with this, so I consider you to be part of the mainstream and thus part of the problem.

  • Anon

    If you read the Bible carefully, it explains both supernaturally and pragmatically what the problem is. The history of David. Three things are made clear. One….if you are righteous, no matter how much more powerful your enemy seems, you will defeat them (David and Goliath). Two…God places a duty on good people to exterminate evil people (God’s demand on David to wipe out the Canaanites). And finally, loving, providing for, tolerating, feeding, breeding with etc. wicked people is such an intolerable sin that it will topple a civilization no matter how powerful it is (what happened to King Solomon and David’s line because David refused God’s demand to exterminate the Canaanites…..something for which, we personally are paying the price still, thousands of years later). David’s line still maintains its potential….through Christ, through the rise of modern civilization that resulted…through US. But the price is still one we refuse to pay. Evil cannot be tolerated. Refuse and your society dies. It’s starting to get old.

    With South Africa, you CLEARLY see this pattern. White people maintain the supernatural and genetic ability to raise up mighty nations no matter how long the odds are against us. And that is exactly what several different types of white person did in South Africa in a patch of deserted wild land….at the time, considered the darkest, most dangerous, most uncivilized part of the world. The nation that resulted was richer than any in Europe. One of the first nuclear powers after the US. Their sin? They cared for and loved black people (something they refuse to give up even now that it is clear they’ve been slated for genocide). The result is inevitable…..death. A few retarded children toppled that mighty nation armed with nuclear weapons without fighting a shot.

    Something to think about. God demands FAR more of us than we simply wall ourselves off from the blacks and the liberals and “mind our own business”. Most of you don’t want that. I say, you have no choice. A Christian believer would understand it as the terms of the covenant we have with our God. But, even an atheist can understand the repeating historical pattern and put two and two together. What’s happening now has happened before, will happen again.

    • Talltrees

      “God places a duty on good people to exterminate evil people”

      Yes, and says He will help them defeat the enemy. But, it appears He decided to destroy the country instead since so many refuse to fight for it. But, who follows the Bible anymore…just look at your ratings. 2 disagree. 2 agree. It’s very sad.

  • Dave4088

    I doubt partition would have been the answer to SA’s troubles. If partition had occurred no doubt the whites would have allowed blacks to immigrate from the neighboring black portion of SA to use them as cheap factory labor, maids and farm hands. Then the black population would have exploded and outnumbered the original white inhabitants while clamoring and grasping for political power. Then a new Mandela would have emerged to capture the hearts and sympathy of the world. Eventually the white government would be forced to abdicate by the liberal, decadent white West and the usual suspects in the media.

    Whites never learn. Non-whites cannot be allowed in our living space. If small numbers must be allowed in then their fecundity must be checked through forcible birth control, vasectomy for males and operations for females. And they cannot be granted any political rights. Simple apartheid practices are not enough as history has proven time and again that non-whites always subsume us.

    • sbuffalonative

      Yes, partition would just make black Africans look like victims again. Their ‘side of the track’ would quickly turn into any black ghetto anywhere in the world and whites would be to blame.

    • BonusGift

      Ignoring the few who already know, it is not so much that we never learn as much as that we are mostly not allowed to learn. Look to the media and what is taught (or more specifically what is not taught), and even more importantly who controls those propaganda organs, today and realize that it is possible to wall ourselves off from the parasites that kill us but one must first admit to the problem first before actions can be taken to fix it. The first steps are always psychological before any physical actions can be taken, whether it be drug abuse or parasite induced genocide.

  • David Ashton

    I was a “foreign” supporter of adequate partition too; so were writers like Frank Giles, a previous Archbishop of Canterbury, and Field-Marshal Montgomery, and to some extent even “liberals” like Colin Legum and Patrick van Rensburg. If western engagement had helped to bring realisation to Verwoerd’s development of the Tomlinson proposals rather than act as a reluctant me-too to the Soviet/Third World boycott movement, things might have been more successful all round.

    The black population explosion, anti-apartheid propaganda, and the financial pressure for “integration” and cheap labour, proved too much, and grand “separate development” too late. Not too late, however, to protect the white democracies elsewhere, when the Mandela Mist has cleared.

  • Spartacus

    The casualty number is outdated, but the basic message is not :

  • IstvanIN

    In truth, many of SA’s current troubles could have been avoided by a
    two-state solution, the kind of healthy “apartness” the West so easily
    saw the logic in upon the former Yugoslavia’s dissolution.

    Interesting how it is always a good for White countries to be torn asunder but never for non-White countries.

    • David Ashton

      What about White Majority Rule?

      • IstvanIN

        Of course I am for that.

  • Dave4088

    Liberals have no qualms when non-whites are killing, persecuting or lording it over whites. Nor do they take issue with minority rule as with Obama and his coterie of radical blacks ruling a majority white nation.

    Liberals only get fits of idealism and principle when whites rule over non-whites or if whites are winning in a racial conflict with non-whites.

    • Erasmus

      Then while liberals should demonstrate the courage of their convictions by living openly and unguarded among their pets. I’m sure when someone they love is offed they’ll celebrate, because one more from the white oppressor class has died.

      When you’re living on the 20th floor of a mid-town high rise, being “progressive” is cheap and easy.

      • BonusGift

        I agree wholeheartedly, but we know the tribe is disingenuous; it is only false propaganda to make their useful idiots feel good about themselves up to the moment when reality finally bites and they and their progeny are dead.

  • 48224

    Quote: “SA’s black demographic has increased 920 percent since 1913; this is the main reason the nation’s population increased from 6 million a century ago to 52 million today, as the white demographic increased only 3.3 million during that period.”
    And that boys and girls is what will bring the end of the world as we know it. Take a long hard look at Detroit, that is what is coming in the short run. In the long run….Haiti. I say we are eventually headed to a world that looks like Haiti because the only thing that keeps Detroit from being as bad as Haiti is all the state and federal dollars that pour into it.
    However, that money will eventually dry up, riots and blame will ensue. Liberals will blame conservatives and racist. Conservatives will blame moon spots, rainbows, unicorns or such because they will STILL BE AFRAID TO TELL THE TRUTH.

    • 1stworlder

      Everyone I knew that volunteered to help with Katrina went down there thinking blacks where equal and came back realists.

      • BonusGift

        Yes, blacks have that effect on some people, especially when their true nature is on display. Also, and given your name, I think that blacks should be given the title/name of say 5th worlders as 3rd worlders is way too civilized. That is, it puts them way too close to merely your standard violent groups unable to support anything remotely mimicking civilization as we would define it.

    • BonusGift


  • bigone4u

    Woulda, coulda, shoulda. OK, fine. The West screwed up. But what’s the most effective course of action NOW to save the lives of the whites in SA? I don’t care about the country. It’s lost forever. But the white persons there can NEVER be allowed to be exterminated by the black barbarians in shiny suits and lizard skin shoes, while spouting their Afro-babble.

    • “But what’s the most effective course of action NOW to save the lives of the whites in SA”

      They need to flee the country. It’s over for them — o. v. e. r. Nobody is going to come to their rescue — or are you planning to go there and fight on their behalf?

    • IstvanIN

      The West continues to screw up. And is now actively attempting to screw up Eastern Europe.

      • BonusGift

        I generally agree, but please try to identify more accurately who is pushing this genocide of white Christian countries. Hint, they control the mass media and finance overall, and they are not Christian.

    • tabsa

      “But what’s the most effective course of action NOW to save the lives of the whites in SA?”

      We can’t really go back to Europe because most of us can’t speak European languages, but we’re all fluent in English.

      As far as I’m concerned, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are our only options.

      Problem is, A LOT of us had to start our own businesses, myself included. And it’s very hard to prove that on paper. So we need employers to sponsor us to go to these countries.

      The engineers, doctors and plumbers who wanted to leave are all out of SA by now, but the ones without the right qualifications are just stuck here until we can find employers willing to sponsor us. And then we have to get through the endless rows of red tape.

      We have children and assets, we’re not the type of people who are going to cross the border illegally and live in fear in the US. We need to give our children stability. But when they come for us, we’re not going to have a choice.

  • Lord_Steven_Regal

    The road to genocide is paved by media manipulation. The fact that there have been countless articles about Santa not being white and millions of lemmings blindly parroting that Santa is not white and accusing anyone who disagrees of racism shows just how powerful the media is in forming opinion. Even if that opinion runs counter to fact and truth.

    • Zaporizhian Sich

      Indeed, we saw this in Germany against the Jews in the 1930’s, and again in Rawanda. It happened again in Eastern Europe before the Bolsheviks seized power.

      • Jason G.

        Except the Germans were telling the truth…

        • Zaporizhian Sich

          Of course they were, but that didn’t help them.

    • Dave4088

      Megyn Kelly, neo-conservatism, inc. and even a few posters on this site were saying the black Santa meme was silly and not worth addressing. But on Facebook over the weekend I was treated to one family member and a few friends posting links purportedly proving that Saint Nick was likely dark skinned.

      The madness never ends. But this is how the anti-white left fights and usually wins. They appeal to people’s emotions and imagination that something that clearly is not (Santa as dusky hued), actually is.

    • BonusGift

      Bingo, bingo, and bingo. As always, first admit and identify the cause.

  • Whirlwinder

    Separation is an excellent suggestion and possibly the only solution that will keep a genocide of the white South African people from occurring. Separation has been suggested for America and might protect the white European group of founding Americans from a similar fate.

    • Zaporizhian Sich

      Separation would protect whites, but only temporarily before the darkies locust like mentality leads to them invading our lands once again. This is a fight to the death, and only one or the other will be left standing.

  • “… I drew a logical conclusion: the country should be partitioned.”

    The same thing needs to happen in the USA, but won’t here either, not till after the inevitable financial collapse and civil/race war. Separation of the races is the only thing that can work.

  • Strike_Team

    Then I suggest you’d better start getting ready to fight. That is an option.

  • BonusGift

    Bingo. Also, what do people think the nation state is? Answer: It is, excuse my French, an f___ing partition! Of course portioning works, it only fails when you leave a significant segment of unassimilated co-ethnics in the f___ing partition!

  • BonusGift

    You are correct; it was truly a traitorous act.

  • BonusGift

    Bingo, bingo, and bingo; we have a winner!
    “To learn who rules you, find out who you can’t criticize.” Voltaire

  • Dave4088

    Please name at least one well known conservative or libertarian who disbelieves in universal human equality. Ron Paul, Limbaugh, Coulter, Ingraham have all sold out. Rand Paul has started a black outreach in Detroit.

    Pat Buchanan does not count since he often speaks out of both sides of his mouth and still clings to the belief that the melting pot can cure America’s racial discord which essentially means that be believes in racial equality.

  • Sue

    Perhaps I was misunderstood. They should have ignored the cold shoulder and continued as they were. Not one “leader” has the guts to say they were wrong, stop the senseless murders.

  • Hunter Morrow

    AmRen is 10? 10 looks pretty White to me, then. Maybe the 6 million deleted comments rate about a 10 when it comes to realism and healthy race ideas.

  • Hunter Morrow

    Ever the L word, never the J word, as if liberalism sprang from the heavens in the same way Minerva sprang from the mind of Jupiter.
    Why are people so Liberal? Why is society so Liberal? I guess White people really just want to kill themselves. No less a personage than Jared Taylor expounds that as his great lie and it is his great moral failing. For the more silly and religious and “Christian” here his factually incorrect pronunciations of a White suicide impulse is downright sinful.

    These people obsessed with “liberalism” and whose every word is mild-mannered quasi-invective for a paycheck are the very worst sort of collaborators. They are ever complaining of the method and not the man employing it, ever blaming the gun instead of the finger on the trigger and the knife in the back.
    How in the world could we put our 3 piece suits on and get paid by “White” people and land a fun appearance on a talk show with such intemperate and virulent truth?

  • Hal K

    This is a good article, but the problem with it is encapsulated by the last sentence:

    To the modern liberal, white is the new invisible.

    The author pretends that liberals are the problem. He thinks that there is some reasonable middle way where everyone is treated the same and in which case whites would be allowed to have a separate state. The problem with this is that whites will never be treated “equally” as long as they refuse to stand up for their racial group interests explicitly. I think most people commenting at AmRen realize this.

    I was thinking along similar lines to the author a few years ago. In the world view of mainstream conservative pundits, conservatives are the reasonable ones and liberals are mentally ill liars and psychopaths. This is a mistake, though. If you follow what the author, Selwyn Duke, writes over time, however, you will find that he treads a line and is careful not to step over it. This is why mainstream conservative pundits never take white conservatives where they need to go. Their conclusion is always that liberals are the problem, which means that you have to keep voting Republican, etc. This is the wrong conclusion. They think it is the role of white conservatives to set a good example for nonwhites by avoiding explicit racial solidarity. If whites stay on this road, however, they will end up an oppressed minority, like in South Africa.