The purpose of these articles is to counter the deliberate re-writing of history with those stubborn things called facts, and that wonderful thing called truth. "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil" (Isaiah 5:20)
I recently received the following e-mail from a woman who read my article, We All Know Someone Who has Been Murdered, about the murder of a farmer's wife who was known to my family and I. The article had been posted on the website of an American talk show host. Although she does not say so, it appears likely that she is from the United States herself. This was what she wrote:
"…and all I have to say is that Karma is a mother… isn't it? What goes around comes around. You imperialist —- [expletive deleted] tortured and oppressed the black majority for centuries, so I don't have an OUNCE of sympathy for you. What you put out into the universe will ultimately come back to you tenfold. Deal with it and quit whining like the cowards you are."
I could say a lot about her belief in "Karma", but I won't get into that right now. Sadly, she has fallen for this Hindu concept, which has been repackaged and sold to the West as "New Age". A soul-damning, demonic lie. But I will confine myself to her comment that white South Africans "tortured and oppressed the black majority for centuries." This poor woman has believed the lies of the liberal media. In the first place, there is really no such thing as a "black majority" in South Africa, because this implies that all blacks are united and one, which is simply not the case: there are a number of major black nations within the borders of South Africa, none of which enjoys an overwhelming majority. In the second place, apartheid itself only became official in 1948; so much, then, for the oft-repeated lie of "centuries of torture and oppression", even assuming (incorrectly) that such was widespread under apartheid. But in the third place, despite what the liberal media wants the world to believe, whites, even during the apartheid years, did not "torture the black majority." Torture certainly was used by some whites in positions of authority against some blacks. That is terrible and cannot be condoned, but it was not by any means unique to South Africa: there have been and are people in almost all countries of the world, who abuse their authority and torture others. Whites have tortured whites, and blacks have tortured blacks. And blacks have tortured whites too! And in the fourth place, whether whites "oppressed the black majority" would depend on how "oppression" is defined. The dictionary defines it as: "exercise of power in a tyrannical manner; cruel treatment of subjects, inferiors, etc.; the imposition of unjust burdens." Was white rule in South Africa tyrannical, as Hitler was tyrannical, or Stalin? Liberals, Reds, and many others love to compare South Africa under the policy of apartheid with Nazi Germany; but there is absolutely no comparison. The white government of South Africa did not send blacks to their deaths in concentration camps; it did not seek the annihilation of all black people; it did not kill for the sake of killing. It is true that there was "cruel treatment of (black) subjects", in that they were not permitted to live where they pleased, to vote, etc. But this form of oppression was by no means the same as that exercised by true tyrants the world over. The black Zulu warrior-king, Shaka, was a far greater tyrant than any white South African prime minister or president ever was! And so were numerous other black kings and chiefs. They oppressed their own people! Don't think it was only the European powers who engaged in slavery in Africa: so did the Arabs, and so did various black tribes as well! – capturing slaves from neighbouring tribes and selling them into slavery. Oppression has never been solely the sin of whites against blacks in Africa. The black people of Zimbabwe know what real oppression is, living under the murderous tyranny of black dictator Robert Mugabe. So do blacks in Angola, the DRC, Equatorial Guinea, Sierra Leone, and a whole host of other black African countries. Whites have played virtually no part in the leadership of these countries for decades now. And yet there is real oppression.
Black people living in South Africa when apartheid was official government policy were certainly not given the same rights and privileges as white people, and that was very wrong (again, though, not unique to SA by any means!); but life under white rule for the vast majority of blacks was far, far better than they would have enjoyed under any black tyrant of the past! During the apartheid period, blacks in South Africa enjoyed a standard of living far higher than blacks in any part of black-ruled Africa!
Some whites certainly treated blacks badly. Not all, and not even the majority. In fact, it is an undeniable fact that European rule in Africa brought far more benefits than not. For all its faults, it was the best thing that ever happened to Africa, speaking generally (there certainly were exceptions). It brought peace, prosperity, and the greatest advancement the black nations had ever experienced. European government of this continent resulted (apart from the greatest blessing of all, the arrival of missionaries and the spread of the Gospel of Christ) in the ending of inter-tribal wars that had plagued Africa for centuries; the social upliftment of millions of black people; the establishment of schools, hospitals, clinics, universities; better food production; the rapid increase in the populations of African tribes; etc., etc.
Today, with white rule now history throughout the continent, black Africa is reverting to savagery. Just a few days ago, the newspaper here carried the story of the widespread murder of children and others for the purpose of harvesting human body parts to be used in ritualistic magic potions. And parts severed from live victims are considered more potent because their screams supposedly awaken supernatural powers! Children's body parts are considered especially strong.
In Africa, rape is prescribed by so-called "traditional healers" (they used to be called witchdoctors, and still should be – it's a far more accurate term) for all kinds of problems one may have. Every 26 seconds a South African woman is raped. One in four girls faces the prospect of being raped before the age of sixteen. Child rape is increasing at a horrifying rate, with police statistics revealing that 58 babies are being raped every day. Interpol states that this figure could be doubled, as 50% of all rapes go unreported. Some of these infants are as young as nine months old. The youngest victim to date was just a week old. One nine-month-old baby girl survived a gang rape and underwent a full hysterectomy and other surgery to repair intestinal damage. And there is no getting away from it: the vast majority are black babies, raped by black men. The reason? It is believed by millions of blacks that sexual intercourse with a virgin, and especially with a baby, will cure AIDS.
All we hear these days, whenever SA's horrifying problems are listed, is that they are "a legacy of apartheid." Is it a "legacy of apartheid" to rape a baby girl? Is apartheid to blame for this? The blame must be laid squarely where it belongs: at the feet of the ruling party, the Marxist-dominated African National Congress of Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki, which has failed in the primary purpose of any government: the maintenance of law and order. It has abolished the death penalty, gone soft on crime, legalized pornography, released tens of thousands of hardened criminals onto the streets, made it virtually impossible for citizens to defend themselves or their families, encouraged witchcraft, raised witchdoctors to positions of virtual equality with real doctors, forced skilled white policemen to leave their jobs in droves and make way for men who have not been properly trained, and in general done nothing of any substance whatsoever to stem the crime wave that has engulfed SA since apartheid ended.