Karakterisering van Amerikaanse swartes

Jared Taylor is aan Praag-lesers bekend as die outeur van White identity: racial consciousness in the 21st century (2011). Hy is ook die redakteur van die webtydskrif American Renaissance. Taylor skryf gesaghebbend oor rasse-aangeleenthede. Hy erken dat sy kennis grootliks op studeerkamerinligting gegrond is. Ten einde ‘n groter mate van balans te verskaf, bestaan sy jongste boek, Face to face with race (Oakton: New Century Foundation, 2014, 172p; Amazon Kindle $7.92), uit 14 essays wat voorheen in American Renaissance gepubliseer is. Daarin boekstaaf blanke Amerikaners hulle eerstehandse ervaring van veral swartes. Weens owerheidsmaatreëls en teistering voel die meeste outeurs verplig om skuilname te gebruik, gevolglik verwys ek dan bloot na “die outeur”.

Om die Amerikaanse opset te verstaan, is dit nodig om te besef dat daardie swartes demografies ‘n minderheid is (dikwels op 12% gestel), dus soortgelyk aan dié van blankes in Suid-Afrika. Swart Amerikaners geniet oordadige minderheidsregte, terwyl letterlik geen sodanige regte aan Suid-Afrikaanse blankes gegun word nie. Hierdie verskil in behandeling kan toegeskryf word aan die feit dat die meerderheid blanke Amerikaners gebreinspoel is om skuldig oor die destydse verslawing en segregasie van swartes te voel, terwyl die swart meerderheid in Suid-Afrika (en die klein groepie blankes wat mandaatloos namens al die blankes oorgegee het) geen grondwetlike erkenning gegee het aan die positiewe bydrae wat blankes oor eeue gelewer het nie.

Soos in Amerika word slawerny voortdurend in Suid-Afrika misbruik om blankes moreel te veroordeel, terwyl die voorouers van die plaaslike swartes in werklikheid nooit slawe was nie. Die era van kolonialisme, rasse-segregasie en apartheid word voorgestel asof dit net so erg, of erger, as slawerny was. Dat slawerny destyds ekonomies voordelig vir Amerika was, kan nie ontken word nie. Die hedendaagse swart Amerikaners is egter glad nie trots op die positiewe bydrae wat hulle voorouers destyds gelewer het nie. Hulle verwyt hedendaagse blankes vir die wyse waarop hulle wit voorouers destyds ledigheid by swartes bestry het en die swartes eis buitensporige vergoeding vir wat hulle voorouers glo destyds nie ontvang het nie.

Amerika het deesdae ‘n multi-etniese bevolking by uitnemendheid. Die blankes is ‘n vinnig krimpende meerderheid. Voor die middel van hierdie eeu sal die blankes ‘n minderheid in die Amerikaanse bevolking wees, “by replacing the founding stock of Europeans with an Afro-Asiatic-Mestizo mix” (Kindle 74). Dít vanweë “natuurlike” aanwas en die voorkeur wat aan nie-wit immigrante gegee word. In voorbereiding op blanke minderheidstatus word soveel moontlik regte aan etniese minderhede toegeken in die (ydele) hoop dat blankes vorentoe, wanneer nie-wittes in die meerderheid sal wees, ook so sagkens behandel sal word. Die voortreflikheid van die staatkundige bestel wat die Amerikaners wêreldwyd propageer, naamlik demokrasie (in die sin van een mens, een stem), met sy veronderstelling van gelykheid (bv dat alle mense ewe goed is), word steeds nie algemeen deur blanke Amerikaners bevraagteken nie.

In die Weste is die era waarin ons leef met liberalisme deurweek. Die skade wat swart Amerikaners in die samelewing aanrig (in hulle eie etniese groep en daar buite) word meesal nie net nie verreken nie, maar ingevolge politieke korrektheid doelbewus verdoesel. “The propaganda mill is always working to show things as they are not” (310). Op ‘n soortgelyke manier word die “vergrype” van kolonialisme beklemtoon, maar die weerslag van kolonialisme, naamlik die toestroming van immigrante uit die Derde Wêreld na veral Europa, met uiters destruktiewe gevolge vir Europese kultuur en beskawing, word grootliks verswyg. Van Amerika word gesê: “Popular music, movies, sports and television are largely black oriented” (225). In Suid-Afrika word dit duidelik in die massamedia weerspieël.

Wat van swart Amerikaners gesê word, geld nie noodwendig Suid-Afrikaanse swartes nie, soos ek hierbo met verwysing na slawerny aangetoon het. Elke leser moet maar self besluit in hoeverre wat hier volg op plaaslike swartes van toepassing is. Die uiteensetting steun noodwendig op veralgemening. Alle swartes is nie sleg nie. Insgelyks is alle wittes nie goed nie. As iets wat negatief is deesdae van ‘n etniese groep (veral swartes) beweer word, word dit stereotipering genoem. Die waarheid wat onder oë gesien moet word, is dat sodanige veralgemening op ‘n beduidende getal gevalle kan berus en in daardie mate geldig is.

In Taylor se boek word beweer dat Amerikaanse swartes geneig is om bv meer luidrugtig, uittartend, aggressief, gewelddadig en misdadig as ander etiese groepe, soos blankes, Latynse Amerikaners (bv Meksikane), Asiate en Indiane, te wees. “Blacks are different by almost any measure to all other people. They cannot reason as well. They cannot communicate as well. They cannot control their impulses as well” (2011). “Blacks are, in many ways, childlike, and this is illustrated by the often superficial quality of their emotions. They are easily provoked into violence and mayhem” (2430). Al die nie-wit etniese groepe is geneig om dislojaal teenoor die Amerikaanse staat te wees.

Columbus Day word in nie-wit geledere geminag “because Columbus was a ‘genocidal racist’” (170), maar van alle Amerikaners word verwag om Martin Luther King Day te gedenk. Aan blanke Amerikaners word daar nie erkenning gegee of respek betoon nie. “I cannot remember even once being thanked or complimented by a black client” (1839). Daar word selfs op blankes gespoeg. Wittes het skynbaar ‘n besondere kapasiteit om uittarting en vernedering met passiwiteit te verduur. Swartes voel vere as hulle oortredings begaan en sal nie verskoning vra nie. Daar is by hulle geen skaamte nie. “They cannot view things from the perspective of others … They do not understand the pain they are inflicting on others” (1961). “It was never their fault” (1805). “It is aways someone else’s fault” (1843). Blankes word gehaat, “the hatred of those who blame the white race for every failure of their own race” (1624).

Blykbaar distansieer al die ander nie-wit groepe hulle van die swartes. Dit is eintlik net blankes wat swart-gedienstig is of aan hulle lippediens bewys. “I have seen whites go on their knees before blacks – and apologize for slavery, white privilege, blacks in prison, the poor state of black neighborhoods, AIDS, drugs in their community, etc” (162). “It seems that ‘white privilege’ is an extremely powerful concept that makes some people believe they deserve humiliation. It leads to a bizarre form of cultural suicide, and an inability to defend one’s own interests” (229). Blankes wat hulle in swart woongebiede begewe, kan in lewensgevaar wees, want swartes beskou dit as uitsluitlik hulle terrein. Baie swartes verkies segregasie: “Keep Harlem Black” (208). “Most blacks believed that segregation on equal terms was better than integration” (544).

Die outeurs van die essays was in baie gevalle aanvanklik polities verlig maar dure ondervinding het hulle gefrustreerd gemaak en tot ander insigte laat kom. In hierdie sin kan kritici beweer dat die boek ‘n eensydige beeld voorhou. Ek beperk my aandag tot ‘n aantal hoogte- of laagtepunte in Taylor se boek. Van die inligting, bv oor toestande in Amerikaanse tronke, is van so ‘n bedenklike aard dat ek nie kans sien om daaroor op ‘n openbare forum soos Praag te skryf nie. Wat nie algemeen besef word nie, is die mate waarin blanke Amerikaners daagliks (bv op straat) aan verbale rassisme deur swartes blootgestel word, terwyl blankes in Suid-Afrika dadelik van rassisme beskuldig word as hulle sekere benaminge vir swartes, bruines of Asiate gebruik. Daar is egter geen benaming vir blankes wat nie maar geuiter mag word nie. Dubbele standaarde geld nie net in Amerika nie, maar ook in Suid-Afrika.

Amerikaanse swartes word uitgebeeld as werksku. Hulle kom dikwels laat by die werk aan, verdwyn gedurende die dag of gaan vroeg huis toe. In werktyd word geëet, gesels, geraas, geslaap. “By their very presence, blacks upset the rhythm and flow of work” (728). “Then there are the guys who claim to have had deaths in the family, but who forget, and claim multiple deaths for the same person” (716). “For most of the blacks, work of any kind was an imposition to which they submitted as seldom as possible. They never took the slightest interest in it, and had no concept of taking pride in what they did. Their lack of concern for what might happen out in the ‘white man’s world’ was breathtaking” (423). Later verwys hierdie outeur na swartes se “God-given right not to work” (457). Die redes hiervoor is dat werk op ‘n raskwotastelsel aan swartes toegeken word en dit weens owerheidsmaatreëls uiters moeilik is om hulle te ontslaan. Sy gevolgtrekking: “So long as there are enough whites to maintain standards and set the tone, we can continue to be a First-World country despite a certain number of non-whites. But past the tipping point the jungle rushes in” (461).

Verskeie van die outeurs verwys na swartes se onvermoë om toelatingseksamens te slaag. Daar word dan onderrigprogramme net vir hulle ingestel en selfs dan word die eksamen wat nie-swartes moet slaag, omseil. “The ironworkers test has been completely watered down” (749). Wat soms in die praktyk gedoen word, bv in die boubedryf en weermag, is om swartes in andersins nie-swart groepe te versprei. “With a mixed pair, the white or Indian guy has to do all the thinking and most of the work” (707). “Many of the blacks have a chip-on-the-shoulder attitude about the job and about whites. In my opinion, they strike a pose to hide the fact that they don’t have what it takes as a group to do the work. I can’t imagine what their day must be like, always walking around wondering if someone doesn’t like them, never able to lose themselves in the work. This work has so much to offer, but it’s up to each man to get out of it what he can” (758). Sy nogal optimistiese gevolgtrekking is: “People are fed up with all this nonsence and slowly they will first take back the workplace and then their society” (770).

“Affirmative action always has costs. Usually, they are lower standards, poor performance, bad morale, and lost profits” (773). Dit is ‘n geval van mense “hired and promoted beyond their capabilities” (790). “Diversity destroys trust” (1359). “Nearly every major problem, accident, or scandal I saw in the service had a black or Hispanic at the bottom of it” (1305).

In America word buite-huwelikse kinders “outside kids” genoem. “Black men are good at making children but not at supporting them, and this can be a terrible burden under laws written with white people in mind” (1856). “The average black client will not pay child support unless it is deducted from his paycheck. Many refuse to work, or leave a job to avoid paying. Job turnover is very high among blacks, and the court system has a hard time keeping up with them. Some blacks quit on purpose, and move to another job so as to keep one step ahead of the collections” (1865).

Naas die twee hoofstukke oor tronktoestande is die een oor New Orleans, toe die orkaan Katrina in 2005 daar skade aangerig het, die ontstellendste. Min mense besef dat twee-derdes van die inwoners van hierdie stad swart is. Namate sake-ondernemings en die huise van blankes ontruim is, is hulle gepunder. Swartes het hierdie natuurramp aangegryp as ‘n maklike misdaadgeleentheid. Hulle het ook die reddingspogings in die wiele gery deur brande te stig, skuilings af te breek en op reddingsvliegtuie en -bote te skiet.

Die laaste hoofstuk in die boek handel oor Suid-Afrika. Die outeur was 12 jare lank ‘n dosent aan universiteite in Papoea-Nieu-Guinee en swart Afrika voordat hy hom in Johannesburg gevestig het. Van swartes as individue sê hy: “I do not dislike them” (2344). Ongelukkig is hierdie essay reeds in 1998 gepubliseer. Die inligting is dus verouderd, want dit weerspieël toestande in die nuwe Suid-Afrika toe Nelson Mandela die president was, dus voor die groot inploffing plaasgevind het.

Die outeur vestig die aandag op die agteruitgang van die hospitale: “Prior to 1990 … they were vastly superior to anything you would find in black Africa” (2456). Ook: “The black schools under apartheid were infinitely better than the general chaos and mayhem that passes for ‘black education’ now” (2477). Die Universiteit van die Witwatersrand “has traditionally been the leading university in South Africa, and deservedly so. But the push, for at least the last ten years, has been to turn it into an African university, that is to say, one with no standards, very little teaching, no significant research, and that issues meaningless paper degrees. The paradox is striking. Blacks go to Wits because it is white. Yet these same students (or at least a very vocal minority among them) and the black government are doing their best to turn white universities black, which they cannot fail to know means their ruin. Indeed, one suspects that it is the very contrast between white success and black failure that they wish to eliminate” (2494).

Daar word gepoog “to manipulate (unjustified) white guilt” (2464). “Nelson Mandela recently told international investors that industrialized countries ‘owe us that support, not as a question of charity, but because we are entitled to it. Our region was subjected to the most brutal form of exploitation in the colonial era which robbed us of our recources’” (2469). Ek wei nie uit oor die ander sake waarmee alle Praag-lesers bekend is nie. Die outeur het waargeneem en tot hierdie gevolgtrekking gekom: “My own view is that South Africa will gradually sink towards the level of the rest of the continent, though it is unlikely to reach the same depths, given a continuing white presence” (2532). Hy wys op “the common black failure to understand the nature of wealth creation: To them it is just sitting there waiting to be taken, not something that requires sacrifice, hard work, discipline and foresight” (2549).

Die outeur haal ‘n swart Amerikaanse sielkundige soos volg aan:

“Black people are inclined to regard the white man as superior … they do indeed feel that the white man is intrinsically better” (2357). Die outeur skryf: “One discovery I made living in black Africa is that virtually all blacks unaffected by liberal egalitarian ideology not only recognize this inequality but are not in the least bothered by it!” (2362). “Perhaps because of this, among themselves, blacks often seem consumed by a need to feel superior and to achieve ‘status.’ From a black point of view, the best way to do this is to make someone else (feel) inferior to you, since if he is inferior you must be superior. This helps explain much of the callous and often brutal behavior of black[s] …When they find themselves in even the most petty positions of authority, many blacks lord it over their underlings in the most extravagant manner” (2366).

“Black criminal propensities were previously held in check by slavery, segregation, apartheid, and strict tribal custom. Remove these constraints and pathologies assert themselves” (2389). “Blacks have a sheep-like mentality, are overawed by authority, and are therefore easily cowed” (2426). “In general, Africans simply cannot manage. They are incapable of running any large establishment and lack the discipline, organization and cooperation necessary to control crime. Although this may sound harsh I believe they also lack the necessary morality. Police will obviously be more effective if they are morally outraged by crime and feel, viscerally, that it is bad. I would doubt there are many African police, at any level, who feel this way” (2397).

“South Africa should, of course, be a lesson for America. Both countries are making the same mistake, which is to assume that there is no such thing as racial differences. It is a mistaken assumption that prevents recognition of the fundamental paradox of black-white relations. Blacks want to live in white neighborhoods, go to white schools and hospitals because they are white. Yet these objects of their desire will remain desirable and superior only as long as they remain white. A few blacks can live in a white neighborhood or go to a white school without seriously affecting it, but as soon as their numbers approach predominance, the very things that made the blacks want to go there cease to exist and blacks find themselves in the very situation they sought to flee: black slums, broken-down black schools, hell-hole hospitals, etc. Blacks can enter into these white structures only if their numbers are controlled; but that is impossible so long as everyone assumes that the very idea of fundamental racial differences is somehow shameful and morally abhorrent” (2574).

As die outeur se hipotese, dat rasse (bv wittes en swartes) verskil, korrek is, hou dit in Amerika nie dadelik of gou sulke ernstige nadele in as in Suid-Afrika nie. Die nie-wittes sal oor sê drie dekades in die meerderheid in Amerika wees, maar die swartes sal steeds ‘n minderheid in daardie nie-wit komponent wees. In Suid-Afrika vorm die swartes reeds ‘n alles verswelgende en vinnig groeiende meerderheid. Weens die beleid van gedwonge integrasie en sosiale manipulasie, waarvolgens die demografie oral op elke gebied en iedere vlak weerspieël moet word, is daar geen moontlikheid dat enige entiteit, hetsy skool, universiteit, woonbuurt, sake-onderneming, ens, wesenlik wit mag wees nie. Die toekoms is dus swart, oftewel: Dit is nag. Dit is die prys wat Afrikaners betaal vir algemene, ongekwalifiseerde stemreg in ‘n eenheidstaat weens die verraad van ‘n klein groepie blanke Afrikaanssprekendes.

Laastens bespreek ek die mooiste opstel in die bundel. Denis Ruiz het in idilliese omstandighede grootgeword in die blanke woonbuurt Fairview Village in Jersey. Sedert die sestigerjare mag Amerikaanse woonbuurte nie uitsluitlik wit gehou word nie. Die regering subsidieer swartes om dit vir hulle moontlik te maak om daar te woon. Die resultaat is dat hierdie buurt 45% swart geword het. Saam daarmee het verval ingetree en is dit nie meer veilig om daar te woon nie. Eiendomswaardes het getuimel. “The neighborhood where I grew up is now a wasteland” (2045).

Oor die blanke inwoners sê Ruiz:

“They wanted to live among their own people. They wanted to live in a white community. Now, I see this as the highest form of self-determination: people defining their own community, deciding what comes into their collective lives, determining their own standards. It doesn’t matter if their standards don’t seem rational or moral to someone else. People have a right to decide who they will live with. This is not a matter of rationality or of morality. It is simply human. It’s not that they have ill will toward anyone; it’s just that they know what atmosphere they like” (2036).

Ruiz woon nou op ‘n ander plek. Toe hy daar ingetrek het, was dit ‘n blanke gebied. Sedertdien was daar transformasie en is hierdie omgewing ook geruïneer.

“I have to either stay and feel trapped or get out” (2083). Dan spreek hy tot die siel van Afrikaners: “I feel that I am all the time planting and that I am never going to get the harvest, that I am never going to live in a true community” (2087).