I’m not against violent racial theft; I’m against illegal violent racial theft!
I trust that principled qualifier will confer the respectability required to secure a position at the Heritage Foundation. Therein this writer may opine dryly on the economic impact and deleterious trade disruptions resulting from a mass slaughter of dispossessed white South Africans. Why do we always have to make racial massacres about race? Let’s hold to our conservative values and focus on the state of that country’s free market.
That’s how I presume the mainstream conservative press, which is to say the two or three publications dying along with their octogenarian audience, will counsel we view the land seizures now underway in South Africa. Of course the mainstream liberal press will maintain an uncharacteristic stoicism, while their prog IDs on the Internet cheer the anguish of white children deliriously.
But as for the goobercons, it’s all about legality. And South African blacks have taken care to sow that up by constitutional amendment. So if it’s in the Constitution it’s copacetic. And if the majority changes the constitution to permit boiling Boers in oil? As long as Hawaiian judges have tweezed the penumbras, I suppose there’s no room to grumble.
It makes me wonder about other places, though. Places with constitutions. Constitutions that can be changed by a new demographic majority, or simply re-interpreted by a majority of nine lawyers. What if you happened to live in one of those places?
Obviously it would require many converging factors to envision a scenario where a legacy people were demographically swamped and then had the levers of their own institutions turned against them. You’d have to be able to imagine something like confederate statues being torn down on Southern campuses, for instance.
Though fundamentally, what would catalyze a new majority to pursue something so extravagant as mass expropriation from the country’s original architects? Really only two things: you have and they want. That may seem like a rare combination, but I assure you the elements convene more frequently than most realize.
Returning to South Africa specifically, I do hope the farmers there have stayed strategically leveraged to the hilt. All they can steal is your equity, and if that has been cashed out in a mortgage, I’d hand the marauding Africans the key on the way out and remind them what day the payment is due. Those farmers are surely prudent enough to have kept their wealth out of easily pilferable assets and preferably in foreign accounts.
Hedging aside, we all know how this tale unwinds. As per formerly beautiful Rhodesia, whites will be given the option of suitcase or coffin. And then the starving begins. After that comes the international begging. And the play will conclude with a flood of refugees.
I would love to imagine the West will tell them rot in hell and laugh while it does. But perhaps I’d eventually be moved by the tears of vapid actresses to charity. So in the midst of their disease and famine, I’d paradrop pallets of Tennessee Coates books into Johannesburg. I’ve been told black uplift is contingent on maintaining their high self-esteem, so surely those pages would provide succor. If not cellulose does make for a high fiber diet.
Ultimately this South African announcement was simply another worldview validation event for the dissident right. Throughout history incompatible people don’t live together in peace out of principle, but because they can presently do no more. Once they have the means to advance their position by force they routinely avail themselves of it. This used to be so well understood as to not bear mentioning. And I suppose it still is—as no one will mention it.
Though once the Dutch defenestration is underway, I do hope Europe will be as gentle to its Africans as Africa is to its Europeans.