"Maybe the British just want to finish what they started, and see the colonial nuisance that nearly bankrupted their colonial project taken out of the picture permanently."
The obvious double standards in this piece needn’t be rehashed, because I know what the politically correct response would be. I know there is no value in pointing out that there are hundreds of larger and entirely homogenous black communities throughout South Africa, or that Afrikaners are a minority trying to preserve a culture in the same way that native Americans wish for their reservations to remain ethnically native American enclaves within a state over which they will never have any demographic relevance. This is because liberals and the left will invariably say “yes well the context is different!”. So fine, I will play it your way. Rather than just nominally comparing the absurd double standards with which Western media approaches a tiny town of Afrikaners in an global ocean of ethnically homogenous villages, towns and even cities, how is this for context…
Around 200 years ago, a poor community of mainly, but not exclusively, European descent began speaking a common bastard language and united around it. This young and miniscule ethno-cultural nation would see itself at a tremendous disadvantage throughout the rest of its history, experiencing the worst of human experience time and time again.
They started as an oppressed, stateless group eking out an existence between colonial super-powers jostling for dominance in the South African cape, whose very language was defined by poverty and social exclusion. The next part of their existence amounted to several generations of being on the run from the British Empire, fleeing into hostile territory, encountering and trying to survive against a large expansionist Empire more bloodthirsty than that they were escaping, the Zulu.
Without any support from any colonial homeland, and being extremely outnumbered, indeed with all the odds against them, Afrikaners eventually conquered (by the same rules as everyone else) and briefly governed a few republics. They then suffered two disastrous invasions by Britain, which was first hungry for the gold under their farms, and then the diamonds under the farms they fled to. These invasions eventually culminated in Afrikaners losing a near existentially fatal percentage of their population in the first deployment of concentration camps in the modern world, which were successfully used by the British to lethal effect.
In reaction to near extermination, the Afrikaners achieved a brief 50 year period of dominance (apartheid) at the absolute worst time in history, when conquest and oppression by pale folk had become a taboo in the West (despite the West still maintaining a blind spot for the conquest and oppression of any other “non-white” groups).
Thus, because of their own political developments and attempts at exoneration for self-defined historical injustices, the Anglo-dominated Western world turned the brief (and relatively mild by most historical measures) political overreaction of a near exterminated Afrikaner people into a global stage drama for the battle between good and evil.
Within this earth-shattering production, actors like the United States, the United Kingdom, and hilariously, countries like Sweden, played their roles as heroic moral titans with simply no choice but to destroy the oppressive, racist, empire of the Afrikaner, truly a threat to the world. Yes indeed, they saw their generational task as to rid the last purveyor of evil and violence from the world which would surely usher in an age of global peace and prosperity. Within this play, the script designated the Afrikaner state, with no reference to its poverty and near extermination just a few decades earlier, the all powerful colonial, imperial opppresors. The heroes? A ragtag band of virtuous underdogs consisting of the two most powerful nations in the world the United States and Britain, the rest of the Western world, the Zulu people (who nearly exterminated their fellow black “allies” just a few generations before), and the smaller South African tribes whose very existence was likely owed to the Afrikaners for beating back the Zulus while fleeing the British.
After the "unlikely" success of the most powerful geo-political forces in the world and their regional allies against a tiny ethnic group nearly exterminated two generations prior, the great “struggle” against Afrikaner controlled South Africa culminated in the deification of figures like Nelson Mandela, while permanently disfiguring the public image of Afrikaners, who just two generations prior had their images tarred by a gold and diamond hungry British Empire depicting them simultaneously as both inhuman savages, and morally repugnant colonial oppressors.
Knowing themselves to soon become a demographically irrelevant minority in a new artificial “nation” whose hopeless demographic disadvantage would make their culture and political desires unheard their native land, Afrikaners began moving together to protect themselves. The good sense in doing this soon became apparent as they started becoming (still are) brutally attacked on their farms, experiencing a violent death of .... rate per 100 000 people worse than many modern wars. Their children started being prevented from gaining access to universities, despite often living in abject poverty, and those who do go to school are taught there that they are responsible for all the evils in the world and have a permanent guilt to bear. Even those Afrikaners who decide to go it alone and start their OWN company which becomes in any way successful, are not permitted to continue operations without the oversight of a black partner whose skin means he needs to be involved. Perhaps the dumb white Afrikaners just can’t be relied on to successfully run their own business. The English would agree.
In a world that hates them, a nation in which they are demographically irrelevant and still shrinking, on farms in which they are butchered yearly, squatter camps in which they die of disease, and yet remain strategically prevented from working their way out of poverty, Afrikaners remain non-violent. All they did to counteract this unenviable fate was join together in a town for mutual protection, and try to build themselves out of the mire in which their nation currently resides, as they had done throughout history.
This town is called Orania. This town, explicitly defined in cultural rather than ethnic terms, because to do the latter would lead to its outright destruction, not only does not draw on state resources like every other self-isolated racial and ethnic community in the same country, but it is a net contributor to national supplies of food and electricity. It is probably the safest town in the country and enjoys a relatively high standard of living, benefits obviously deriving from its homogeneity. All this with no assistance. Yet, it is regularly target by South African and international media who bring in yearly turnovers greater than the entire town could produce in a lifetime, and it is accused of perpetuating “privilege”, as well as all sorts of other terrible crimes against humanity.
In the example at the beginning of this post, the media taking a hit at Orania also happens to be the state media of a kingdom that nearly exterminated the Afrikaner people in the last century, having started with its women and children, before Afrikaner men finally surrendered. Yet the BBC assumes to have the moral high-ground, and the whole world buys into this disgusting hypocrisy.
In a country with millions of people who identify as “Zulu” and live in any number of towns and entire regions that are homogenously occupied by that group, the very notion of downtrodden Afrikaners enjoying the same opportunity produces righteous fury among liberals, leftists, and Western society the world over. For the crime of being productive, paying their way, wanting to be left alone with their ethnic and cultural kin, while being Afrikaners at the same time, Orania is regularly “exposed” as a hive of racism and hatred, and calls to destroy it continue to come in from around the world. These calls, as the BBC demonstrates, often come from the same geo-political entities that just last century called to conquer Afrikaners because of their backward barbarity and racial inferiority, nearly exterminating them in the process.
So in response to those liberals who would demand that I put Orania and its desire to remain ethnically homogenous within the “context” of South Africa, rather than just nominally compare it to the thousands of homogenous communities of Zulus, or Xhosa around the country, I would advise caution. The case for Orania is only strengthened by this. Native Americans have been granted huge tracts of land, at permanent state expense, in recompense for being a nearly exterminated minority that has a history of suffering racial oppression and poverty. All Afrikaners want is a tiny town, at no state expense, in which to survive. But I guess that is just too much for the BBC. Perhaps the British just want to finish what they started, and see the colonial nuisance that nearly bankrupted their imperial project taken out of the picture permanently.