Category Archives: Secession

UPDATED (2/10): NEW COLUMN: What Americans Can Learn From F. W. de Klerk’s Great Betrayal Of South Africa

Africa, Democracy, Federalism, History, Iraq, Racism, Secession, South-Africa

NEW COLUMN IS “What Americans Can Learn From F. W. de Klerk’s Great Betrayal Of South Africa.” It’s on American Greatness NOW. The column also appeared on WND.COM and The Unz Review.

Excerpt:

In what should serve as a lesson for Americans today, recall that 30 years ago, on February 2, 1990, F. W. de Klerk, South Africa’s last white president, turned the screws on his constituents, betraying the confidence we had placed in him.

I say “we,” because, prior to becoming president in 1989, Mr. de Klerk was my representative, in the greater Vereeniging region of Southern Transvaal, where I resided. (Our family subsequently moved to Cape Town.)

A constellation of circumstances had aligned to catapult de Klerk to a position of great power. A severe stroke forced the “The Crocodile,” President P. W. Botha, from power in 1989. Nothing in the background of his successor, President, F. W. de Klerk, indicated the revolutionary policies he would pursue.

To a 1992 referendum asking white voters if they favored de Klerk’s proposed reforms, we returned a resounding “yes.” Sixty-eight percent of respondents said “yes” to the proposed reforms of a man who sold his constituents out for a chance to frolic on the world stage with Nelson Mandela.

For it was in surrendering South Africa to the ANC that de Klerk shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Mandela.

Why was de Klerk trusted to negotiate on behalf of a vulnerable racial minority? For good reason: De Klerk had made his views abundantly clear to constituents. “Negotiations would only be about power-sharing,” he promised. At the time, referendum respondents generally trusted de Klerk, who had specifically condemned crude majority rule. Such elections, in Africa, have traditionally amounted to one man, one vote, one time. Typically, elections across Africa have followed a familiar pattern: Radical black nationalist movements take power everywhere, then elections cease. Or, if they take place, they’re rigged.

Among much else, de Klerk’s loyal constituents agreed to his scrapping of the ban on the Communist-sympathizing ANC. Freeing Nelson Mandela from incarceration was also viewed as long overdue as was acceding to Namibia’s independence, and junking nuclear weapons. Botha, before de Klerk, had, by and large, already dismantled the most egregious aspects of apartheid.

What de Klerk’s constituents were not prepared for was to be legislated into a permanent position of political subordination. President de Klerk, the man entrusted to stand up for crucial structural liberties, went along with the great centralizers. He caved to ANC demands, forgoing all checks and balances for South Africa’s Boer, British and Zulu minorities.

By the time the average “yes” voter discerned the fact that de Klerk had no intention of maintaining this opposition when push came to shove, it was too late.

… READ THE REST. What Americans Can Learn From F. W. de Klerk’s Great Betrayal Of South Africa” is on American Greatness NOW. The column also appeared on WND.COM and The Unz Review.

* Image is of President F.W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela (Photo by © Louise Gubb/CORBIS SABA/Corbis via Getty Images)

UPDATE (2/10):  Nevertheless, we are honored to have a response from Jeffrey Sachs. It generated quite the thread.

My book is not “an attack on the end of apartheid,” @JeffDSachs. That’s a distortion. A principled critique of dominant-party rule in South Africa doesn’t amount to an approval of apartheid, of which the book offers a detailed critique, too.

Heck, I came out FOR Quebec’s secession (2000), @GerardHarbison & @JeffreyASachs . That’s the libertarian position. Political divorce is completely kosher, so long as individual rights are preserved.

 

 

A Brief Word On A Short-Lived Brexit

Britain, Conservatism, EU, Europe, Nationhood, Secession

By Sean Gabb

I suppose I should write a formal essay, only I’m presently too worn down by the pantomime to think again at any length about our failed departure from the European Union. So here is a comment I placed last night on FaceBook:

John Pate is right. There will be no Brexit. The parliamentary stalemate will continue into January, when everyone will agree to a deferral of the leaving date from March to December.

The stalemate will then continue until everyone “reluctantly” agrees to a new referendum. This time, the Sheeple will vote as told. This is the only likely outcome. No preparations have been made for leaving without a deal. Some degree of chaos is inevitable – inevitable because planned. The only deal on offer is worse than staying in. If asked, I will vote again to leave. But enough will vote to stay.

This is, I confess, a disappointing outcome. On the other hand, it is better than having lost the first referendum. Enough people will know we have been defrauded this time for the Conservative Party to be ripped apart. And that will be a reasonably positive outcome.

MORE from Sean Gabb.

Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Law, Left-Liberalism, Military, Neoconservatism, Secession, States' Rights

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act: It’s the excuse parroted by almost everybody, Republicans included, for lack of vigorous military action against invaders on the border.

It took Ann Coulter to point out the obvious: “You can’t shoot … AMERICANS. You can shoot invaders.”

What on earth is The US Army for?

In effect, what you’re being told is, there is no law that’ll defend American borders.’

Or, America doesn’t have borders. Therefore, there is no law that can defend a de facto and de jure borderless country. And certainly some laws even prohibit a defense of America’s borders.

In truth, and according to the Congressional Research Service, as relayed by the Military Times, the Act means that “the U.S. military is not used to control or defeat American citizens on U.S. soil.

The hordes amassed on the border with Mexico, rushing the port of entry in San Ysidro, Calif., are not Americans. They are not even very nice.

Posse Comitatus sets “limitation against active-duty U.S. forces conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil,” but watch how quickly military force will be used “to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority.”

Feeling free?

UPDATED (10/10/018): ‘Conservatives’ & Classical Liberals Can’t Help Contradicting Themselves

Classical Liberalism, Conservatism, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Race, Racism, Reason, Secession

Trying to play nice politically can result in a very confused message. Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet (he works with Alex Jones and InfoWars) has a list of what he’s for and against–a list intended to make him sound like a middle-of-the-road classical liberal.

Check out his list and tell me this: What about the right of ethnics to voluntarily form a collective? Classical liberalism is not in contradiction to nationalism (see David Conway’s work in this regard). Mr. Watson’s politically pleasing logic, below, makes difficult a vital, peaceful secessionist project like the Afrikaner Orania Movement, for instance.

Mercer Facebook readers explain the nuances of political theory:

Comments
Todd Frank
Todd Frank Who is Paul Joseph Watson and why should I care?
 
· Reply ·
Kerry Crowel
Kerry Crowel: He works with Alex Jones and InfoWars.
Todd Frank
Todd Frank Hmmmmm…k
Kerry Crowel
Kerry Crowel Todd Frank Politically, he’s a cross between Jordan Peterson and Dinesh D’Souza and he subscribes to the “Dems are the real racist” line of thinking.

 

UPDATE (10/10/018):