It's the 59th anniversary of Rhodesia's Independence from the British who were demanding their self-destruction in the name of mass democracy
But why did Rhodesia declare independence on the 11th of November, 1965?
Few actually seem to know, so it's time to explain in the 🧵👇
By 1965, Rhodesia had been independent from the British South Africa Company and self-governing for about 42 years
Over those four decades, it went from being unsettled, landlocked veldt into a hugely successful country, the country with the highest standard of living for blacks in the continent
Of course, Rhodesia didn't do that by singing kumbaya and embracing race communism
Rather, it avoided the apartheid of South Africa while also avoiding the communism of the East and mass liberal democracy of the West by embracing Western government circa 1830: propertied voting
For white and black alike, to vote on the A roll in the national elections, one had to have the modern equivalent of about $60,000 USD in Rhodesian property, such as a house, business, farm, etc.
In limiting the national franchise to such people, it screened out the incompetent, the wastrels, and so on, limiting stewardship of the nation to those who had shown their ability to earn or steward wealth
That was Rhodesia's limitation on then-modern Western government. There was freedom of speech, strong property rights, society-wide gun ownership, freedom of association, and so on. It was a free country
But the franchise was limited, so the egalitarian West despised it, and had for years
Particularly, America, then in the throes of the Civil Rights movement, and Britain, ruled by Harold Wilson the socialist, despised Rhodesia and wanted to destroy its form of government
That Western demand for Rhodesian destruction came from Britain's Harold Wilson and his demand for NIBMAR, or No Independence Before Majority Rule
Despite Rhodesia's lack of apartheid and color-blind application of voting qualification laws, he said that Rhodesia was racist because it limited the franchise to competent stewards of wealth
So, Wilson said that Britain wouldn't allow Rhodesia to become independent unless it went along with "majority rule," meaning one man, one vote, one time mass democracy
That was something the Rhodesians refused entirely to do because they saw it as essentially a demand for Rhodesia to destroy itself
In thinking NIBMAR was a demand for self-destruction of the worst sort, the Rhodesians had a fair point
Particularly, they could look north to the former Belgian Congo, independent since 1961, which was utterly ravaged by internecine violence
Particularly, at that point, the Congo was undergoing the Simba Rebellion, in which drugged-up rebels r*ped, murdered, and looted their way across the former jewel of colonial Africa, turning much of the formerly beautiful colony into a charred wreck in the process. They were only stopped thanks to Mike Hoare and his mercenaries, as recounted in "Congo Mercenary"
Many Belgians fled from the Congo to Rhodesia, where they described how the end of European rule brought with it atrocities that would have shocked the worst torturers of the Spanish Inquisition
The Rhodesians, by 1965 led by Ian Smith and the Rhodesian Front party, decided that such a path was unacceptable
Though despised by, in '65, all except the Portuguese and South Africans, the Rhodesians decided to fight rather than give in to such horrors peacefully, so they declared independence and went to war with the communist rebels who desired their destruction
They declared independence with their November 11, 1965 Unilateral Declaration of Independence from the British
Their UDI was deemed illegal by the UN, and sanctions were passed that isolated Rhodesia and its cash crops from the world
England's House of Lords tried to stop Wilson the communist Labourite from destroying Rhodesia with sanctions, but thanks to Churchill and Lloyd George's 1911 Parliament Bill, their veto was only for a year and after that Wilson destroyed Rhodesia with glee, even sending the Royal Navy to blockade Biera and stop the Rhodesians from importing oil
What followed was a decade-and-a-half-long war in which the Rhodesians, outnumbered and attacked by the whole world, put up a valiant fight for independence and achieved great feats in a probably unwinnable war against the communist rebels
Sadly, they fell by 1979, in no small part thanks to Jimmy Carter and his friend Andy Young, two decidedly evil men despite their current reputations
But while Rhodesia is now gone, its memory ought live on: it stands as a monument and memorial to the fight against global Zimbabweification, a fight against the communist-supported anarcho-tyranny that defines the present
RHODESIANS NEVER DIE!
And listen to the details about the egalitarian-driven roots of the West's betrayal and destruction of Rhodesia here, in which @Sargon_of_Akkad discusses my article for his Islander magazine on the subject:
NYC's communist is quoting Nelson Mandela, a communist terrorist known for murdering white civilians
As a reminder: Nelson Mandela was not a kindly leader as presented in Invictus. He did not want peace; he explicitly rejected it
A short 🧵on Mandela's terror campaign👇
For one, Mandela was in prison because he created a civilian-bombing terror group called "Spear of the Nation," and premised it on the success of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in Cuba
He then carried out dozens of bombings on civilian farms and infrastructure
MK was backed by the Soviet Union, co-led by a Lithuanian communist named Joe Slovo, and the Mandela-era leadership was convicted of trying to violently overthrow the state
This was after Mandela convinced the ANC, in the '50s, to request arms and support from the People's Republic of China
Once in prison, Mandela refused to renounce violence
In fact, the South African government offered to release him from prison if he would simply pledge to not engage in terrorism anymore. He refused
He then smuggled messages to MK's new leadership through his murderous wife Winnie, and those messages helped them plan their attacks and tactics in the terror bombing campaign of the '70s and '80s, which led to hundreds of white civilians killed and thousands wounded
*I typed this incorrectly. It was this percentage per generation, not per year. However, the same study estimates that around the same percentage died at the scene of the crime, in some form or another, or while awaiting trial, which would boost it to 1-2% per generation
So yes, not per year, per generation. Still a lot of people and enough for a eugenic effect over time
All you think you know about King Leopold II and the Belgian Congo is wrong
You were told it was a hellish land of cruel exploitation. That's a lie
In reality, Congo was a colonial jewel, the atrocities didn't occur, and the Belgian years were the only good rule it's had🧵👇
First, it's important to note what state of things existed in what became the Belgian Congo before King Leopold II became its ruler
That tale is best told by Henry Stanley in his book, How I Found Livingstone, his tale of searching for Dr. Livingstone in the heart of Darkness
In it, he describes hell on a grand scale. Arab slavers from Zanzibar pillaged the anarchic territory, taking gangs of fettered slaves back with them to be castrated and sold to the Arab slave market
The interior, when not being raided by Arabs, was in a state of horrid chaos. Random violence, cannibals, the ever-present threat of famine, and all the rest we think of when we think of pre-colonial Africa is what life was like in the Congo. Rotting vegetation, insect-infested huts, farms barely maintaining subsistence, and tribes raiding each other and explorers were the basic aspects of life in the pre-Belgian world
In short, life before the Belgians was like life in the Stone Age: nasty, brutish, and short, with the only law being the law of the jungle
Stanley and Livingstone did much to expose this state of things, and it was the greedy, exploitative traders who followed in their wake, before Leopold and the Belgians, that are recorded by Conrad in his The Heart of Darkness
It was about a decade and a half later that, during the Berlin Conference, King Leopold II was granted control of the area now knows as the Democratic Republic of the Congo
He controlled it through the Congo Free State, a private attempt he founded and fully owned, with the goal of colonizing and bring order to the anarchic territory
To do so, he started sending to the state Belgian officers and administrators. They, along with a bevy of monks, nuns, and traders, were the ones who set out to turn the anarchic Congo into a well-administered area that turned from animist paganism to Christianity while becoming prosperous and stable
The military/police arm of that rule was the Force Publique, which was mainly officered by Belgians but otherwise consisted of natives allied with the Congo Free State. They protected the nuns, protected the traders, kept out the Arab slavers from Zanzibar, and generally tried to first impose and then maintain order
South Africa is back in the news because of its anarcho-tyranny and Mugabe-style land expropriation
Missed is that this is Mandela's vision
The ANC's "National Democratic Revolution" concept—using liberalism to establish communism—is going exactly as he planned & hoped for🧵👇
"National Democratic Revolution" (NDR), is originally a Soviet concept that was adopted and built upon by the South African communists, particularly the ruling ANC regime, to suit their unique situation and goal
Their goal, as one might expect of an anti-colonial communist group, is race communism of the sort seen in Zimbabwe under Mugabe
Their unique situation, however, was that they had the world's sympathy and were expected to create the "Rainbow Nation" rather than just another nominally democratic hellhole
Hence, the NDR concept. By slowly boiling the frog, they could use the slogans and methods of liberalism to first establish socialism, and then, from ther,e move to communism
It's that final step we're seeing now, and they might not have boiled the frog slowly enough, as they're getting more resistance than was expected
Still, it's gotten them this far, so it's worth reviewing
The American left is embracing race communism of the sort that destroyed South Africa + Rhodesia
Here, e.g., the Chicago mayor admits to anti-white racism in permitting: “Every dime [blacks] were robbed of, I’ll make sure is returned two- or threefold”
Here's what's coming🧵👇
Mayor Johnson's spewed absurdities are, essentially, the same inane nonsense the African communists pushed before destroying their countries
In South Africa, Mandela's ANC has long insisted that the white farmers "stole" the land from blacks, and thus it needs to be "returned" to them
Much the same was true of Mugabe's thuggery in Zimbabwe, where he and his cronies insisted that "land reform" (farmland expropriation) was a necessity because the white farmers had "stolen" the land when they founded Rhodesia
In every case, it was absurd: the supposed "thieves" built everything that existed, they didn't steal it
South Africa is a great example. When the progenitors of the Afrikaners arrived in 1654, they found a nearly uninhabited land, and those few Khoisan there were roving pastoralists who had settled nothing. The Afrikaners then built South Africa from the ground up, turning an untamed wilderness into a thriving colony with hugely successful farms. They gradually marched to the north and west, settling the land as they went and eventually finding the Xhosa and Zulu, both of whom arrived in what's now South Africa from the north well after the Afrikaners did. Once again, it was the Afrikaners who built civilization, with their labor and hands, in that mostly untamed land. Over the mid-19th to mid-20th century, Anglo settlers and capital poured in as well, helping build civilization where none had formerly existed in South Africa
Rhodesia was much the same thing. The British South Africa Company did, admittedly, find the Matabele and Shona in what became Rhodesia when settling the territory began. But agriculture was limited. No cities, roads, railroads, or the like existed. Populations were limited and sparse. Anglos then poured in and settled it, turning veldt into farms, building cities on open land, and gradually raising civilization on land where little formerly existed. Further, what land the BSAC obtained, the land on which civilization was built, was bought from the Matabele, not "stolen."
Well, here's what prominent SA politicians say: "We will k*ll white women, we will k*ll white children, and we will even k*ll your pets"
Importantly, this violence is part of Mandela's legacy and happened because of American policy 🧵👇
This should be quite clear as the Afrikaner refugee situation heats up
For example, an ANC (Mandela's party, long aided by the Soviets) hack calling himself "Staling" released this statement about Trump's refugee program and demanded the Afrikaners stay so that they can face "accountability" for "historic privilege"
What does "accountablity" mean in this situation?
It means he wants them to be slain in some of the sickest, most horrific ways imaginable
This is what the farm murders and home invasions across South Africa are: aided by the government (the military, for example, provides them with signal jammers), thugs r*pe, m*rder, and k!ll Boers in their homes
The farm attacks are almost always black on white, almost always involve sexual assault, and frequently involve murder. The same is true of home invasions in urban zones, what few are left in the years after Mandela