The National Front on Apartheid

Although you students must be bored to tears by the seemingly eternal torrent of tour/apartheid related propaganda pouring week by week out of Salient, we feel that the aforementioned topic must be presented once again, but this time with a broad minded, right thinking, and sensible approach. The decidedly non-conformist tenor of this article may cause among certain sections of the university population an outbreak of Russian Measles, characterized by inflamed and angry clusters of little red moles. But there is no cause for alarm, this disease will naturally be vigorously attacked by us wherever it occurs.

The world of the latter twentieth century is steadily dividing into two great armed camps. On one side is the communist East, on the other is the largely free West. Both sides are attempting to protect their existing interests and possessions naturally at each others expense. The East mainly under Russian hegemony, happens to be more unified in its agressive machinery and its world embracing goal; while the West with its multitude of more or less independent governments and wide spectrum of politics and philosophies is not as impervious to internal communist subversion as the East is to internal Western political influence. Therefore, wherever the Bolsheviks can divert the Western masses from within without the use of any armed force, they will certainly do so. Such a case of Russian diversionary tactics is evident only a short distance from our very own "safe" little country. This is the case of the Republic of South Africa.

"From what", you ask, "is Russia diverting our eyes from in this case?" Russia is dragging the eyes of the West away from the almost insurmountable internal problems that beset it and from which the West is all too willing to be diverted, and is focussing them, this time, on the trifling issue of apartheid in South Africa. Staring too long at one object will cause tunnel vision. This is what has happened to us. By pre-occupying ourselves with the lusty condemnation of apartheid and continuing to add to and magnify the "iniquity" of this system, we as so called humanitarian Westerners are being made blind to otherwise blatant facts and situations elsewhere.

For example, by the wholesale condemnation of apartheid the West (except for its fifth columnists: the Marxist toadies) fails to realize that in the great world conflict, the collapse of Africa's last White anti-communist nation will mean another great victory for the communists and the final Marxist domination of the whole Dark Continent. Proof? Mugabe, Isaacs, Ramsamy, Ordia: all black, all violently anti-apartheid, all Marxist.

Another factor in the South African situation foreign to most White Westerners is the continuing tribalism of African races. Tribalism, and not ideological adherence is the main motivation behind African people's interactions. It is an indisputable historical fact that wherever and whenever a While governing force withdraws its influence from over African people, the nation-state established by that power simply becomes lines on a map enclosing the bitter and brutal intrigues of warring native tribes, except now with a few Western trappings. South Africa has nine such tribes each with its own distinct language, culture, and history. The Whites have ensured the establishment of six independent nations and homelands for these peoples who are traditionally at enmity with one another. If the Whites with their powers of mass organization were to be driven out, the independence of the smaller, weaker tribal nations would certainly be jeopardized by the uninhibited presence of the stronger ones. As present proof of this one only has to impartially survey the African scene today and its legacy of Amins, Mugabes, and Bokassas.

What is probably the most significant fact in this debate is that the blacks have no rights whatsoever to land presently occupied by Europeans. Regions are White because they were first settled by Whites, and black because they were first settled by one of the nine black African racial tribes. Blacks are no more indigenous to South Africa than the Whites are, in fact, on the whole, they are less so. It sometimes astonishes, and often angers people who have been duped by liberalist communist lies, to know that the first isolated contacts between individual South African Whites and blacks took place in 1702 - fifty years after the first White settlement in Cape Town in 1652 - and that it was another fifty years before the main bodies of White and black migrants met at the Great Fish River in the north.

Therefore abstain from hypocrisy, keep your eyes open to everything, including the home front, and not just South Africa. Show that you are not a communist toady of the Bolsheviks by recognizing in the defeat of White South Africa another defeat for the West and added danger to New Zealand's freedom. If you are a true humanitarian you will support apartheid and recognize it as the protector and benefitter of all the South African races. Then you can support the 1981 Springbok tour of New Zealand and actively express your support for the brave struggle of our South African kith and kin against Bolshevism and your desire for the continued peace and prosperity of the black South African races.

Member of the National Front