Another White farmer in South Africa was murdered a few
days ago. He was 65-year-old Daniel Marais. His wife Maria
managed to escape from their farm near Bloemfontein and
run three miles with their grandchild to a neighboring farm,
after she had been assaulted by a Black. Mr. Marais however
was too badly wounded by the Black attacker to escape, and
he died on his farm.
Two weeks ago Blacks invaded the Van Niekerk farm near
Witbank. They beat 71-year-old Gerhardus Van Niekerk on
the face and head with a metal rod until they thought he
was dead, then shot him in the face. Van Niekirk lost a
lot of blood, but he survived the attack. He was one of
a lucky few. Most don't survive.
A few days before the Van Niekerk attack, a gang of Blacks
descended on the farm of 65-year-old Don Delafield and his
52-year-old wife Verina, 80 miles from Johannesburg. The
White farmer and his wife were tied up, tortured savagely,
and then butchered by the Blacks. A note left at the scene
identified the murderers as members of the Azanian Peoples
Liberation Army, the military wing of the Pan-Africanist
Twenty White farmers and members of their families have
been murdered in South Africa in the past six weeks. That's
about the same rate at which White farmers and their families
were murdered by Blacks in South Africa during 1997. If
that were happening to White farm families in the United
States at a proportional rate, it would be 100 farm families
a week being murdered -- a major problem indeed.
White farmers in South Africa are very alarmed about the
murders, of course, so they've sent several delegations
to Nelson Mandela and other government officials to demand
that something be done. They're not getting much satisfaction
from the government, however. The government says that its
hands already are full trying to deal with the crime situation
in South Africa, and that it can't spare any additional
policemen to investigate the attacks on White farms. Robbery,
rape, and murder have soared since the Whites of South Africa
voted to turn their country over to Black rule four years
White farmers are convinced that the attacks on them are
more than a simple matter of crime. If the Blacks attacking
their farms merely had robbery in mind, it would not be
necessary to torture and kill their White victims. The Whites
believe that the aim of the Black gangs is terrorism, and
the note left at the scene of the Delafield murders supports
their belief. The White farmers also note that the farmers
who have been murdered were in many cases those who had
been well known for their generosity to their Black workers.
They suspect that the aim of the murderers is to drive the
White farmers out of South Africa, and so the terrorists
are striking preferentially at the Whites who have good
relations with Blacks.
Mandela's government doesn't want the White farmers driven
out, because it would be an economic catastrophe for South
Africa. The White farmers produce nearly all of South Africa's
food and much of its foreign exchange. But many Blacks are
more concerned with grabbing White wealth now than they
are with the prosperity of the country later. In addition,
the idea of forcing the Whites out appeals to many Blacks
at an emotional level. Being dependent on the productivity
of White farmers is galling to Blacks, and they are more
inclined to kill the goose now than to continue collecting
the golden eggs.
If the murder of White farm families continues at the rate
of the past 18 months, the terrorists undoubtedly will succeed.
And there is little chance that the Mandela government or
any Black successor government will be able to stop the
killings; the government of South Africa becomes more chaotic,
corrupt, and inefficient by the month. If it can do nothing
to control the crime in Johannesburg, it is unlikely to
have much influence on terrorism in the countryside.
The really disappointing aspect to all of this is that
it should have been foreseen. The Whites of South Africa
voted themselves into their present situation, when they
agreed to let Blacks participate in their elections in 1994.
They folded up under the pressure of being called bad names
by the Jewish media and being told by their preachers that
Jesus was angry at them because of apartheid. They were
so eager to be in the good graces of Jesus, the Jews, and
the "international community" that they took leave
of their senses and handed their government over to Nelson
Mandela and his fellow Black terrorists on a silver platter.
They believed the assurances of the media and the bought
politicians that everything would work out for the best
if they let the Blacks run South Africa.
That's really incredible, considering what they knew about
Black behavior in the rest of Africa. Consider Kolwezi,
for example. Whites in America won't have heard of Kolwezi,
of course, because the Jewish media kept pretty quiet about
it over here. It's the sort of thing the Jews thought it
better for us not to hear about, and so after a few sketchy
news reports they blacked it out and never mentioned it
again. But they couldn't keep it from the South Africans,
who were much more attuned to what was happening in Africa
than we were.
Kolwezi was a mining town in the Shaba province of what
was known 20 years ago as Zaire. Before that it was known
as the Belgian Congo, and today, under the rule of its latest
African strongman it is known as the Democratic Republic
of the Congo. The Belgians had turned their colony over
to Black rule in 1960, as part of the general decolonization
process which accompanied the egalitarian craze following
the Second World War. A deranged Black Marxist ideologue,
Patrice Lumumba, presided over the transition to Black rule
of the Congo, and the killing and rape of Whites began almost
Most of the Whites in the Congo weren't natives, as in
South Africa. They were Belgian administrators and technicians
and mining engineers, along with a few Christian missionaries,
doctors, and nurses. Many of the longer-term White residents
had their families with them. In 1964, when one of the Black
factions struggling for control of the Congo captured Stanleyville,
an administrative center with a population of about 25,000
where more than 2,000 Whites were living, the rapes and
murders of Whites flared up again. Belgian paratroopers
had to capture Stanleyville in order to rescue the terrified
White survivors. Most Americans heard briefly about that
at the time, but the news certainly wasn't emphasized, and
so we quickly forgot about it. The South Africans didn't
Then in May 1978, while the Congo was temporarily going
by the name Zaire, a Black tribal faction that was at odds
with the central government moved into Kolwezi. Kolwezi,
a town of about 20,000 inhabitants at the time in the southeastern
part of the country, was a local center for the copper and
cobalt mining in the area, and a number of White engineers
and technicians were there, some with their wives and children.
The Blacks who were opposed to the central government saw
the White minority in Kolwezi as supporters of the central
government, because it was the Whites who were keeping the
mines running. Actually, the Whites were on neither side
of the conflict. They were there simply to do a job, and
they didn't concern themselves much with Black politics,
but the fact that their activity in operating the mines
was keeping the central government afloat was all the excuse
the Black rebels needed to kill them. And of course, the
Blacks went about killing the Whites in a typically Black
fashion, with lots of gang-raping and mutilation. White
women had their breasts hacked off with machetes. Little
White girls were literally raped to death by long lines
of grinning Blacks, while their parents were forced at gunpoint
to watch. Little White boys had their bellies slit open
and their entrails pulled out. Altogether 160 Whites were
butchered in Kolwezi. Even though that was in 1978, it made
enough of an impression on White South Africans that they
shouldn't have forgotten it by 1994.
And if Stanleyville and Kolwezi weren't enough, there were
plenty of other instructive examples for the White South
Africans. There was what happened in Angola in 1961, when
Portuguese colonists were butchered in a terror campaign
so terrible that I cannot discuss the details on this program.
It is perhaps more difficult to sympathize with the Portuguese
than with the Belgians, because many of the Portuguese had,
as we say, "gone native." They didn't keep themselves
separate enough from the Blacks around them. Some had even
taken Black wives and had mulatto children. Race-mixing
wasn't as abhorrent to the Portuguese as to other Europeans
in Africa. Nevertheless, what the Blacks did to the Portuguese,
even those with non-White family members, was as bloody
and cruel as anything done to other Europeans in Africa.
The Whites of Rhodesia, South Africa's neighbor, certainly
didn't mix with the Blacks in their country. The Whites
of Rhodesia not only maintained their dignity and pride
as Europeans, but they did a very creditable job of keeping
their Blacks under control. Even the Rhodesian farmers,
whose farms often were isolated and many miles from their
nearest neighbors, were quite successful at dealing with
Black terrorists. In Rhodesia the Blacks struck at the easiest
White targets, and these were the Christian missionary stations.
Various Christian churches had set up missionary stations
throughout Rhodesia for the purpose of converting the Blacks
to Christianity, and these stations usually had schools
and clinics associated with them. They were unarmed. When
Black terrorists would descend on one of these missionary
stations they would rape and butcher all of the Whites they
could get their hands on. This happened over and over again,
and the South Africans heard all of the grisly details every
Nevertheless, the White South African government betrayed
the White Rhodesians in 1976 by joining the United Nations
embargo against Rhodesia and cutting off Rhodesia's supply
of helicopters and other weapons. This move forced the Rhodesians
to capitulate to the Blacks, and their country, now called
Zimbabwe, is ruled by one of the former Black terrorist
leaders, who is now a de facto "president for life"
and has announced a plan to seize the land of the White
farmers who remain in the country.
The South Africans betrayed the Rhodesians in 1976 in part
because the Jews of South Africa always have had a strong
influence on the South African government through their
media control and their money. Harry Oppenheimer, with his
vast holdings in diamonds, gold, and other minerals, had
more money with which to corrupt politicians than anyone
else in South Africa. And the Jews, of course, were as implacably
hostile to the Whites of Rhodesia as they have been to other
Whites everywhere and at all times.
And in part the White South Africans betrayed the Rhodesians
because they thought that by throwing their White neighbors
to the wolves they could buy time for themselves. As it
turned out it wasn't much time: just 18 years. During those
18 years they really should have been paying more attention
to what was happening in other parts of Africa. The fact
that they learned nothing from the examples of Angola, Stanleyville,
Kolwezi, and the Christian missions in Rhodesia should be
instructive to us.
I talked with several South Africans before 1994. None
were in favor of surrendering their country to the Blacks,
but they had some very strange notions about what Black
rule would mean. They thought that because the Blacks of
South Africa had a standard of living so much higher than
Blacks anywhere else in Africa they wouldn't do anything
to jeopardize that. Blacks might engage in terrorism in
Angola and Zaire -- those are very primitive countries,
and the Blacks there are savages -- but the Blacks in South
Africa are better educated and better treated than elsewhere.
Blacks, these White South Africans told me, are like children.
They can't run a modern country like South Africa by themselves.
They need the Whites to keep things going for them, and
the Whites will be able to control them, just as they have
for the past 400 years.
These White South Africans that I spoke with were very
civilized, very comfortable people. They all had Black servants
back home. I think that they just couldn't deal with the
idea of a South Africa without Blacks: a South Africa in
which Whites would take care of their own children, clean
their own toilets, cook their own meals, cut their own grass,
take out their own garbage, and take in their belts enough
to cope with any economic pressure applied to them by the
rest of the world. It's too bad they weren't a little less
civilized and a little less comfortable. Perhaps they'd
still have their own country today. Perhaps they wouldn't
be reading in their newspapers every week about three or
four more White farm families butchered by Black terrorists.
Perhaps they wouldn't have to be wondering if there is anywhere
to immigrate to.
Perhaps I shouldn't be so hard on them. Certainly, they
did an enormously foolish and shameful thing in giving up
their country without a fight -- but are we Americans any
less foolish? Think how many White Americans there are who
believe that we'll all continue to live together as happy
consumers and television viewers, regardless of race, color,
or creed, when America has a non-White majority around the
middle of the next century. Our Blacks, they believe, are
much more civilized than those Blacks who are butchering
White farm families in South Africa.
Or rather, that's what they'd believe if the controlled
news media told them about what's happening in South Africa.
White Americans have never given any evidence of being more
intelligent, more independent minded, more courageous, or
more morally upright than South Africans, so why should
we expect Americans to make better use than the South Africans
did of the knowledge of what to expect under non-White rule,
if the Jewish media let them have that knowledge?
But three White farmers a week -- or 100 a week -- being
murdered by Black terrorists in South Africa isn't news
that fits. Much better to restrict the news from Africa
to scenes of Mr. Clinton hugging happy Blacks.
Perhaps we can learn from the example of the South Africans.
Of course, when I say "we" I don't mean White
Americans as a whole. Since White South Africans as a whole
didn't learn a thing from the example of the Portuguese,
the Belgians, and the Rhodesians, I don't expect Americans
to do any better. But perhaps some of us can learn a few
One of those things is that we really need to find a better
way than mass democracy for governing ourselves. We've been
fed a lot of egalitarian baloney about people all being
pretty much the same, and so we tend to assume that since
we can look at facts and make rational decisions, everyone
else can. But most people cannot. Most people are not rational
and can be manipulated by playing on their fears and desires,
the way the majority of South African Whites were manipulated
by the media and the churches in their country in 1994.
The South Africans didn't want the situation they have today,
but they let themselves be bullied, lied, and tricked into
it. If only hard-headed and rational South African Whites
had been permitted to vote in 1994, South Africa still would
be a White-ruled country today: perhaps even an all-White
The second thing we should learn from the South African
experience is that we cannot permit our mass media to remain
in the hands of the Jews or in the hands of those under
the influence of Jews. The foolish South Africans were manipulated,
and it was the mass media more than anything else which
The Jewish media in South Africa could not keep the news
of Black behavior in other parts of Africa away from White
South Africans, but they could and did play down that news.
They could and did berate South Africans non-stop about
the wickedness of apartheid and about how awful it was to
be unpopular among liberals in other countries, and they
could and did play on the feminine nature of the White masses
by telling them over and over, as seductively as possible,
how nice it would be to be loved by the international community
instead of being hated.
And the third thing we must learn from the experience of
Whites in Africa is that the only way for our people to
survive and flourish is to live among our own kind. Multiracial
societies do not work and cannot work. If we permit Whites
to become a minority in America in the next century as the
Clintonistas are planning, then we will suffer a fate similar
to that of Whites everywhere else that they have let themselves
become a minority. What we must do to avoid becoming a minority
may be extraordinarily hard, but we must do it to survive.
The extinction of our people is the alternative.
© 1998 National Vanguard Books · Box 330 ·
Hillsboro ·WV 24946 · USA
A cassette recording of this broadcast is available for
$12.95 including postage from:
National Vanguard Books
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946