This well-know South African painting of a battle in 1836 shows Boers battling some Negroes while using others as nurses. It is reproduced in the November-December, 2005, National Vanguard.




Hello and welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm your host, Shaun Walker.

Today I want to tell you about Koos van Wyk. Now, ordinarily, you would probably never have heard of this 62-year old Afrikaner who lives close to the eastern seaboard of South Africa. I say ordinarily, because our Jewish-controlled mass media has simply covered up the news about Koos. You see, Koos is a White Afrikaner farmer, one of those people who have been made out by the Jewish media as one of the most terrible Whites on earth. The only group that is deemed worse is, of course, those terrible Nazis. Anyway, that's how they would like you to think of them.

What did Koos do? Well, actually nothing, rather it was what was done to him. On Saturday, 8 April 2006, Koos and his wife, Martha, who is 56 year old, were at home. Martha was watching TV in the living room, while Koos was having a bath. It was 10:30pm. Suddenly, Martha heard the front door of their house being smashed open.

Now, I know that for us here in America, in the predominantly White areas at least, the thought of our front doors being smashed open at 10:30 at night would be almost unthinkable, but in South Africa, it is becoming increasingly common. Five armed Negroes stormed into Koos and Martha's house. Martha ran to her husband who was in the bathroom. The Negroes followed her and, threatening the elderly couple, took the equivalent of $40, some firearms, two sewing machines, a CD-player and Martha's wedding ring. They then forced the couple back to their bedroom.

This might well have been a nightmare for many listeners -- but the barbarity of the Negro attackers then took a new turn. Observing that Koos was still quite fit, and wanting to prevent him from following them, the Negroes then boiled some water, and plunged the elderly couple's feet into the boiling water, scalding them to blisters. Then, just to make sure, one of the Negroes pulled out a knife, and cut off the bare soles of Koos' feet. The police later found the cut-off soles in another part of the house.

Now White South Africans would say, "he was lucky." Not like we in America would understand it, though. But to be left like that in the South African context, it means that Koos was lucky they didn't kill him.

That same night, three other White farmers in South Africa were murdered, in a renewed plague of violence in that land of so much racially strife. Since the ANC came to power in 1994, some 2,000 White farmers in South Africa have been killed -- nearly six percent of the entire farming community in that country. Can you imagine what would happen here in America if gangs of Negroes murdered six percent of all American farmers? Well, given the anti-White nature of the media and the government, probably not much, but I am sure listeners understand the comparison. Now the really strange thing about these farm murders -- actually it should properly be called genocide -- is that the Negro government in South Africa claims that they are not racially motivated. Nope, they say it is just robbery.

Let's see now: let's say that gangs of White Afrikaners went around South Africa, murdering and torturing Negro shop owners in a sustained orgy of violence, and actually killed off six percent of all Negro shop owners. Would the South African government then still claim it wasn't racially motivated? You know they wouldn't: they, and their compliant Jewish-controlled media, would be screaming White racism from the rooftops. The UN would hold a special session.

Now all of this is bad, but as those of you who are subscribers to our National Vanguard magazine will know, this is not unexpected given the history of South Africa. For those of you who don't subscribe, you have missed an important article on South Africa in issue #129, titled "White South Africa, What Went Wrong?" It explains clearly why Apartheid failed. If you do not have this issue, go to our Web site, www.natvan.com, and get yourself a copy. You won't be sorry.

Once you have read that article, you will understand that what is happening in South Africa is the direct result of the Whites in South Africa trying to rule over the Negroes, instead of separating themselves from the non-Whites.

Incredible as it may sound to listeners in America and in Europe, the White South Africans were in fact not the "evil racists" that the world-wide media liked to make them out to be: fact is, they had more of a paternalistic approach to the Negroes. They looked on them as inferior childlike beings that had to have guardians in order for them to be orderly. In this way, the Afrikaners provided for their Negroes in the most generous ways: they built them schools, hospitals, universities, gave them clothing, housing, food and all the luxuries such as sporting facilities, entertainment centers and so on, all the while believing that they had somehow been sent by God himself to look after the Negroes.

Looking back into Afrikaner history, we can see this pattern being repeated over and over again: some of you will know that there was a movement called "The Great Trek" in South African history. This was an exploratory movement away from the southernmost settlements going north into what is today central South Africa. I suppose you could compare it to the Great Western Trails in North America. But here's the thing: the reason why the Afrikaners, or Boers as they were called then, went on this Great Trek was not the same as the early Americans went on the Great Western Trails. No sir, the Boers went on the Great Trek because the British, who had then just come into the possession of South Africa, had abolished slavery. This was the last straw for the Boers -- it meant that they could no longer have their supply of forced non-White labor, and would instead have to pay their non-White servants to work for them. This angered the Boers so much, that they packed their bags -- and their Negro servants -- and set off in ox-wagons to explore, and ultimately settle, the interior of the country. It is ironic in the extreme, that some of the earliest Negro settlers in the White regions of what then became the Boer Republics, were in fact brought there by the Boers themselves, as servants.

Students of Afrikaner history will know that there was a famous battle with Zulu Negroes in 1836, called the Battle of Blood River. It was called that because the Zulu army was defeated by a tiny White force alongside a river, and so many Zulus were killed that the river quite literally ran red with the blood of the Zulu dead. This battle became greatly celebrated in Afrikaner history, and even became a religious holiday in the old South Africa, where the Boers ascribed their victory against huge odds to divine intervention.

Yet the pattern of dependence on non-White labor and the guardianship approach to the non-Whites was present at the Battle of Blood River as well. The 451 Whites who fought at the battle, boasted some three-dozen Negro servants between them, who looked after the oxen while the Whites fought their fellow Negroes at the ox-wagon perimeter. It is just bizarre to think about it. What was the driving force behind this attitude?

Students of history have all pointed to the fact that the early Boers were an ultra-religious group -- much like our American Pilgrim Founding-Fathers -- but, the Boer attitude towards their natives was shaped more by an evangelical drive rather than a desire to squeeze them out of possession of the land. It is said that the Afrikaners went on the Great Trek with a gun in one had, and a Bible in the other -- and this is no exaggeration at all. The idea that a "good Negro" was first and foremost a "Christian" is something that one finds with depressing regularity in the writings of even staunchly nationalist Afrikaners, right to this very day.

This close relationship between the Whites in South Africa and their non-White servants continued right throughout history, and continues today. An interesting fact, which is little known, is that the old so-called "Apartheid" South African Army and Police, were, in the mid 1980s, majority Negro. Yes, you heard me correctly: the South African Army and Police, at the height of the so-called oppressive Apartheid era, were majority Black. You might ask: "How is this possible?" To answer that, you have to be able to understand the paternalistic attitude, which almost all Afrikaners still maintain towards Negroes. In return, a very large percentage --although of course, a minority in real terms -- returned this paternalistic attitude with one of subservience. Hence there were many hundreds of thousands of Negroes who worked for and served the Apartheid state, all under White guidance and supervision of course.

For example, the vast majority of White South African households still have non-White domestic servants and non-White gardeners. These non-White servants actually live on the White householder's premises, in something quaintly called "servant's quarters" in South African parlance. In fact, if you go house shopping in South Africa, the value of a house is directly affected by whether the residence has "servant's quarters" or not. Usually, these are rooms attached to the back of the parking garage, and have their own toilet and shower. The domestic servant actually lives in this room week in and week out, so that they can be on hand early in the morning till late at night to serve the White homeowners. Virtually every business -- large and small -- in South Africa uses non-White labor. All the buildings, all the roads, all the houses, all the workers in the factories, almost all the miners in that country's fabulously wealthy mining industry, all of them, all use non-Whites, by the millions as labor.

Now, you might think that this practice was limited, and that the hardcore Apartheid leaders didn't practice this policy. In that, you would be wrong: a biography of Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, the famous National Party prime minister who is widely regarded as the "father of Apartheid," recounts how he would draw cash from his bank account whenever he went home in-between parliamentary sessions, to give bonuses to his considerably large non-White domestic staff at his farm. I have it on good authority from a South African, that even today, when one visits what is widely regarded as the most pro-White, right-wing party still existing in that country, at their Pretoria head office, you are served tea -- in the middle of your meeting -- by Negro servants, who work full time in that party's building. It is a staggering thought.

In fact, most White farmers in South Africa -- just like Koos van Wyk -- have sometimes up to two hundred Negroes working for them on their farms. Then they have the wives and children of the Negroes as well. It is genuinely not uncommon to find a White farmer with 300 or more Negroes in all, living on a single farm. Of course, the White farmer would ensure that all the Black children had a school, went to Church, were fed and clothed -- all this as part of the employment contract with the Negro laborers. This, of course, allowed the Negroes to do what they are best at: reproduce, but this time, unlike in heir natural environment, their survival rate leaped dramatically. On average, a Negro woman in Africa has anywhere between six to 12 children each. In their natural -- that is, pre-White-influenced -- environment, the survival rate would cut these numbers to two or three at most.

However, with the White attitude of paternalism, Christianization and the provision of modern White technology and medicine, the Negroes' child death rate has dropped off considerably. Now, instead of just two or three children per Negro Woman, there are currently in excess of six to eight, on average. And it is the White people's fault, no one else's.

Now, we have to stand back and look at the situation objectively: is it any wonder that White farmers are attacked, robbed and beaten in the manner I described earlier? Can anyone be surprised? I can't think of a modern American White willingly living in a region where they were outnumbered by Negroes by 200 to one, or worse. In areas where there are lots of Negroes in America, the Whites have just moved out and gone to Whiter areas. White Flight has replaced baseball as our new national pastime.

For some reason, the White South Africans never understood the link between this use of non-White labor, their paternalistic attitude and the fact that they would be dispossessed in their country. They thought they could rule over millions and millions of Negroes, help their population growth rate along with White technology, medicine and education, provide them with jobs, money and housing and then still think that the exploding non-White numbers would not overwhelm them. It was a fantasy -- a pipe dream -- that we usually associate with Liberals, not staunch Christian Conservatives. So now the population explosion has come full circle: the Afrikaners -- who once possessed almost all the land -- quite literally bred up the Negro population to the point where the non-White numbers simply overwhelmed the White settlements. With hindsight, we can see that Apartheid turned out to be the most successful non-White breeding program in history.

And now the Whites in South Africa are reaping what the paternalism of their previous policies has sowed, they are quite literally, being slowly murdered out of existence. The official annual murder rate in South Africa is around 27,000 every year, of which it is estimated that about 3,000 are White. This means that about 250 Whites are murdered every month in that country -- at that rate, the White population is taking a battering from which it will not survive. Dr. William Pierce, writing in a 1982 edition of National Vanguard magazine, spelt it out. In an article on South Africa, he wrote: "Prosperity, however, has depended heavily on a large supply of inexpensive Black labor for the country's mines and mills, just as the comfortable life most White South Africans enjoy depends upon Black maids, janitors, cleaning women, cooks, dishwashers, garbage collectors, bus boys, nannies, and so on. As the economy has developed, more and more Black workers have been brought into the country, and the importance of their role in the economic life of South Africa has grown. They and their Jewish and Christian supporters are now using that role as leverage to pry concessions on Apartheid from a White public which seems much more concerned with the immediate condition of the economy than with the future complexion of South Africa's population. The whole country must eventually free itself of Black labor if Whites are to survive there."

Never were truer words written. All in all, it's quite a depressing scenario.

But it is not wasted: the pro-White movement in the rest of the world can learn a valuable lesson from the South African experiment. The most important thing that we can learn is that any policy -- which is not designed to physically separate the races -- is doomed to failure. As long as Whites share their living space with non-Whites, the temptation always arises to use non-Whites as so-called "cheap labor." Then, the non-White numbers start to grow -- aided by the prosperity -- which the White presence always creates, and slowly but surely, their numbers swamp the Whites.

Put another way: we cannot rely on any political solution to the racial question, which does not mean total, physical geographical separation of the races. Nothing less will ever be an option. This is a lesson the White South Africans will have to learn as well, if they want to survive. There will be no return to Apartheid, there will be no return to White rule over all of South Africa, I'm sorry to say. The only way that Whites will survive in South Africa is for large numbers of them to realize that they must get rid of their dependence on non-White labor. Only when they realize there is a direct correlation between their non-White domestic servants and their loss of political power, will they be able to grasp what it will take to regain political power over them. They have to get rid of their non-White laborers and start doing their own work. Once they start doing their own work, their own manual labor, will they be able to start claiming areas as their own once again. As the article in National Vanguard magazine #129 concludes: The only way, then, that Afrikaners can be spared the fate of all First World minorities in Africa, is for them to abandon their dependence on non-White labor, accept that their salvation lies in a smaller territory, and finally pack their bags and congregate in that smaller territory where they will form an outright demographic majority.

There is no other way: all else is chaff in the wind. History will tell if the Afrikaners have it within them to undertake this second Great Trek, or if they are doomed to go the way of every other all-White settlement in Africa: to be ploughed under as the Third World destroys them bit by bit.

This is Shaun Walker, and thank you for listening to me today.