Whereas only 50% of Afrikaners voted “yes” in 1992’s fateful referendum, English-speaking South Africans overwhelmingly supported the notion of negotiations, if not surrender, to the ANC. Since then many Afrikaners have become so disillusioned with their lack of language and cultural rights in the New South Africa, as well as land reform, crime and anti-white discrimination that probably the vast majority are opposed to the current system in which they have been stripped of all power and influence.It may be my imagination, but in recent times the same degree of disillusion appears to have crept into ESSA conversations and attitudes as can be readily found among Afrikaners. Over recent weeks, I have received several letters from ESSAs requesting my view on some future Afrikaner-English rapprochement. I recall having written such a piece a few years ago in Focus, the Helen Suzman Foundation’s mouthpiece which did not even cause a ripple.
Recently a gentleman from Natal, Chris Moore, wrote a letter to me in which he asked some forthright questions:
“You make a lot of sense in many of the things that you say on your website about the country and the ANC government.
I am just not sure I understand your ESSA attitude ? Do you not like English-speaking South Africans ?
If so WHY is this ?
Do you think that we do not have a place in SA ? Do we not feel ‘African’ any more or less than others ?
Will we not fight just as much as anybody else to retain our place in Africa ?
Do we not have as long and as hard a history in Southern Africa as anybody else ?
I would be interested to know why you and many other ‘Afrikaners’ have this idea of an exclusively ( and exclusive ) ‘Afrikaans’ national identity ?
Do you think that it makes any difference to the murdering , killing , raping , thieving perps whether you are English or Afrikaans-speaking?"
In my reply to Chris Moore, I made it clear that I did not have anything against English-speaking South Africans. Many of them are decent, law-abiding intelligent people who have also made a real contribution to this country. Perhaps my experience studying at Wits for a long time during the heyday of English radicalism in the late seventies and early eighties has something to do with it, but over the last few years I have increasingly sensed that there is no longer any form of white nation in this country, despite all the effort that was put into it from 1910-1994. Notwithstanding my piece for the Helen Suzman foundation in which I pleaded for some form of cooperation among white South Africans, given that we are all victims of violence and ANC race policies.
Some form of English mea culpa should, in my opinion, also be forthcoming before such cooperation could take place. English countries generally have distinguished themselves in never succumbing to totalitarianism of either the left-wing or the right-wing variety during the twentieth century, unlike Germany, Russia and others. Except South Africa where a significant part of the English-speaking elite like the academics, journalists and clerics first espoused some form of communism which they wanted to see implemented in South Africa and then a radical form of multiculturalism or Africanism that is in essence anti-white, anti-Western and especially anti-Afrikaans. Even the English business and advertising people have taken to this idea of Africanism and routinely portray whites and Afrikaners in particular as morally and intellectually inferior to blacks. Just watch some of the Vodacom advertisements on TV. Increasingly, our English-speakers seem to be taking over the worst of what is available in the rest of the anglophone world, such as the climate of intolerance and political correctness at American universities.
A lot of the propaganda and ideology put out by the ANC is written by English-speaking academics, some of them even from Britain. Without this sustained and intricate propaganda, creating an "alternative reality" in South Africa, most of the extremist transformation policies such as "land reform", "broad-based black economic empowerment", etc., would not have been possible. Of course, there are many Afrikaners also participating in this propaganda effort directed against the indigenous white population, but somehow they seem to have adopted this "English" world-view and have actually ceased to refer to themselves as Afrikaners even though they might still speak Afrikaans occasionally. An example would be Dirk du Toit, the deputy minister of agriculture, who is even more viciously disposed to our farmers than the Xhosas in the cabinet.
Of course, the English-speaking population of Natal where Chris Moore lives is different, being more conservative than the progressive or radical elites of Johannesburg and Cape Town. But on my various visits to Natal and especially Durban, I have always had the sense that they see themselves as different and with very little interest in the rest of South Africa and especially in us. I may be corrected, but Afrikaans was only introduced in Natal fairly late as far as I recall, probably under the National Party, and it never really took hold, unlike in the rest of the country where most English-speakers are bilingual or have at least a passive knowledge of Afrikaans.
A knowledge of English is naturally an advantage in international communication and probably many Afrikaners have benefited from exposure to English. However, there are several negatives as well. One is that the centres of English culture lie far outside South Africa so that no matter what our local reality, the English or American view of Africa and Africans will always predominate in English books, TV documentaries and so on. Some people are starting to compare American political correctness and sensitivity around racial issues with the climate that once held sway in the ex-Soviet Union where dissidents were considered a threat to society. The fairly innocuous remarks made last week by geneticist James Watson, a former Nobel prize-winner, is a case in point. His suggestion that Africans might not perform, on average, as well in IQ tests as whites (which is a proven scientific fact) elicited hysterical reactions in America, causing him to cancel his entire lecture tour in Britain. Everywhere we are surrounded with Hollywood poison portraying whites as weak or criminally-minded individuals and blacks as courageous, moral and intelligent, fit to govern or to be police chiefs over subordinate whites.
The absurd system that favours blacks over whites in South Africa is in fact nothing but the implementation of this Anglo-American world-view that we encounter almost every day in the media, in books and in the grovelling posture of British and American politicians whenever they are confronted with Africans. There are few sights more sickening than seeing a video or photo of Jack Straw in the company of some African politician or dictator. It is highly surprising that Gordon Brown does not want to share a conference with Mugabe, but then who else but Britain installed Mugabe in the then Rhodesia in the first place?
Following from the above, I would say that my feeling that Afrikaners should "go it alone" in this current struggle for survival is based on a number of considerations:
1. It is difficult enough to maintain one’s identity as a white African without having to compete with the images broadcast from the U.S. and Britain, exalting blacks, as well as the virtues of race-mixing and the multicultural society.
2. Similarly, there is a huge amount of distrust between Afrikaners themselves which will only be exacerbated by the presence of significant numbers of English-speakers in our movement.
3. Historically, the record of English-Afrikaans cooperation in SA is poor, having mostly been at loggerheads for the last 200 years. The old conscription system brought young white men together in the army and gave them something of a common identity, but that inchoate "South Africanism" did not survive even a few years of ANC rule.
4. Probably for English-speakers the major issues are security and economic survival in the face of anti-white legislation. Very few English-speakers, if any, have noticed the huge cultural and ideological changes that have taken place over the last few years and that may actually be more destructive regarding our long-term presence here than a few affirmative-action laws. The assault on the Afrikaans language and institutions has gone to the core of our being and everything our forefathers stood for and fought for. In this fight we can expect very little support from English-speakers.
5. Ultimately, we are not going to survive without political power and especially the ability to govern ourselves. We need to control at last some part of South Africa and stage a coherent national project there. Bilingual societies are invariably complex (compare Belgium and Canada) and under our circumstances probably unattainable. We would be lucky to gain some form of Afrikaner state in the near future, let alone a bilingual state for white people.
I may be wrong, but I am pessimistic about our ability to formulate common goals to strive for, let alone attain them. On the other hand, I can well see the possibility of international cooperation among Western peoples, be they English, French, German , Italian, Spanish or Dutch. But that kind of cooperation takes place at another level and without any impact on one’s local culture and identity.