South Africa versus Israel
Reaping the Whirlwind of “Anti-Semitism”

2,491 words

Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder impact than the desires and prejudices of the 700, 000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land. — Arthur Balfour, 1917

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) began hearing arguments in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel Thursday, setting off the most significant international challenge yet to Israel’s war in Gaza.[1] — Vox, January 12, 2024

Whatever the South African government’s ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), was up to with this, I’m thinking — it couldn’t have been good. Given that it’s Jewish bombs and Palestinian dead bodies that’s all the international attention of late, might there be some plucky Talmudist out there to explain what this is really about?

While waiting for him to appear and sort it all out, I have three lines of thought of my own about the subtexts in this theatrical performance on the international stage, with the leading actors reciting their predictable, well-rehearsed lines.

South Africa: “South Africa has . . . compared Israel’s policies regarding Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank with South Africa’s past apartheid regime of racial segregation.”

Israel: “Israel has stridently rejected the filing, calling it a ‘blood libel’ — a reference to a false accusation that originated in the Middle Ages that Jewish people would murder Christians and use their blood in rituals, and which was used as a justification for oppression of Jewish communities.”

Nothing shocking or particularly noteworthy about this tit-for-tat over who gets victimhood top billing: just blacks being black; Jews being Jews — “racism” versus “anti-Semitism” with, for the nth time, the “blood libel” trope being rolled out as a reminder of Christian guilt and Jewish immaculate innocence in perpetuity. (By the way, wasn’t it Christians — Arthur Balfour, et al. — who promised Palestine to the Jews in 1917?)

The first line of thought has to do with why South Africa has done this. The standard version peddled by Lefty scribblers such as those from Vox is solidarity with victims of apartheid, as noted above. We greybeards may recall those days of yore when the legions of the Western Left, confirming their moral bona fides, were bellowing out in unison a chorus of self-righteous fury toward the white South African apartheid regime. Those were the days before the Communist Nelson Mandela was turned out of his cell and, like our own Communist, Martin Luther King, Jr., went on to be deified as a god of racial healing.

The Vox authors pushed on, however, and I was a little surprised to see that they let the cat out of the bag with the real version, suitably euphemized:

Though South African solidarity with the Palestinian cause is a crucial part of its condemnation of Israel, there are domestic and foreign policy reasons to try to hold Israel to account on an international stage — one of those reasons being “legitimacy in the international system and being perceived as a major player,” Walsh [visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley] said. “I think there’s a perception that South Africa has really fallen in its stature on the international stage.”

Bingo! as they say. To cut to the chase, South Africa’s current ruling class is composed of thugs, and the ICJ caper was a cunning, opportunistic public relations maneuver, a combination of virtue-signaling and ass-covering on the part of the corrupt, incompetent ANC. They can get away with their pretended moral heroics because little attention is given in the mainstream Western media to the collapse of once-prosperous white-run South Africa and its replacement by a black slum where corruption oils all the gears of government and no one is safe from the predations of criminals.

As quoted in The Occidental Observer:

In 1994 the ANC [African National Congress] inherited the strongest economy in Africa, with excellent infrastructure, including cheap, reliable electricity. [By 2021] the ANC has wrecked it all. We have continual blackouts; the passenger railways are crumbling into ruin; most of the municipalities are dysfunctional, with appalling water supply and sewage running in the streets; South African Airways is bankrupt; the economy is crippled; deep poverty is widespread, and unemployment is at 43 per cent (including many who have given up looking for work). This tragedy has been caused by systematic corruption, a bloated government, ruinous racial laws and a relentless assault on private enterprise. Violent crime alarms the rich and terrifies the poor. (The real reasons for South Africa’s riots, The Spectator, 31st July 2021)

You can buy Stephen Paul Foster’s novel Fatal Friendship here.

The Vox article also cites South Africa’s refusal in 2015 to comply with International Criminal Court arrest warrants that were issued for Sudan’s ousted leader, Omar al-Bashir, after he was charged with war crimes and genocide.

“‘There’s been lots of pressure put on South Africa over the last couple of years to deal with individuals who have been accused of war crimes but who are clearly not on the Western side of the international political divide,ʼ Walsh said.” To translate: Black Africans don’t seem to care about holding black mass-murderers to account. To add: All the “pressure” in the world will not change that.

What the Vox article scrupulously declines to mention is that the South African government itself is overseeing its own “final solution” for its white farmers. Expropriating the property of white farmers and murdering them has most likely been the ANC’s strategy since taking power. In 2017 the civil rights organization AfriForum wrote to then-Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa (now President), asking him to clarify the following statement attributed to him by the late Dr. Mario Oriani-Ambrosini in the latter’s memoirs:

In his brutal honesty, Ramaphosa told me of the ANC’s 25-year strategy to deal with the whites: it would be like boiling a frog alive, which is done by raising the temperature very slowly. Being cold-blooded, the frog does not notice the slow temperature increase, but if the temperature is raised suddenly, the frog will jump out of the water. He meant that the black majority would pass laws transferring wealth, land, and economic power from white to black slowly and incrementally, until the whites lost all they had gained in South Africa, but without taking too much from them at any given time to cause them to rebel or fight.

Someone in the British government took notice a while back of the ANC’s “boiling a frog alive” strategy for the dispossession and extermination of white farmers and submitted a petition to

Sanction South Africa for White Genocide

I call on the British people and government to raise strict trade sanctions against the South African government, the African National Congress (ANC) for its failure to protect White Farmers in South Africa. Dr. Gregory Stanton of GenocideWatch.org puts South Africa at level 5 Genocide (there are 8 levels). The numbers are currently in the thousands and are not stopping nor slowing down. The current President (Jacob Zuma) is known to sing songs of hatred against white people such as “Shoot/Kill the Boer (farmer)”. We need to take a stand and let the South African government know that this is wrong and will not be tolerated.

So far, the international blind eye seems to be turned toward the ANC thugs cleansing South Africa of its whites and turning it into another Zimbabwe where the remaining blacks will be very hungry. Thus, South Africa’s prosecution of Israel in the ICJ would appear to be an unseemly quarrel between genocidal blacks and genocidal Jews.

On to the second line of thought, which involves taking note of the undercurrents of changing black-Jewish political alliances below the surface of the face-off between South Africa and Israel in the ICJ. The huge irony that comes into view is the enormous role that South African Jews played in bringing down the apartheid system, particularly in their support for Nelson Mandela and their involvement with the ANC.

From Frank Adler, “South African Jews and Apartheid” (Macalester International, Vol. 9, Article 12):

[A]mong whites it was Jews who would offer Mandela the greatest support and encouragement; those who hid him when he was forced to go underground; those who, as lawyers, defended him at trial; those who, as journalists, supported the anti-apartheid cause; and those politicians, like Helen Suzman, who made it their mission to see that Mandela and other political prisoners received the best treatment possible from a legal and penal system structured to humiliate and degrade black prisoners. There were even relatively apolitical Jews like Nadine Gordimer who . . . secretly helped edit the famous speech Mandela gave in his defense at the Rivonia trial, and donated all the prize money from her 1991 Nobel Prize for Literature to the Congress of South African Writers, an organization aligned with the ANC. And Mandela’s relationship with Jews was by no means exceptional; the same can be said of other “historic” black ANC leaders, such as Walter Sisulu, Oliver Tambo, and Moses Kotane.

One might be tempted to say that the ANC owes the Jews a huge debt of gratitude for helping them overthrow the white government and installing them in power. Thus, the irony of this virtuous post-apartheid regime prosecuting the alleged apartheid Jewish state for doing to the Palestinians what, thanks to Jewish help, it is now doing to South African whites, albeit on a less spectacular scale.

This black ingratitude has caught the Talmudists off guard and put them in a high dudgeon:

“Hague schmague,” Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir posted on X after the [IJC] verdict was announced . . . “[T]he mere claim that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians is not only false, it’s outrageous, and the willingness of the court to even discuss this is a disgrace that will not be erased for generations,” Netanyahu said.

Got that? Even discussing the possibility of Jewish misconduct is strictly forbidden. Jews are forever and always beyond reproach. After all, they’re not like white people who are hard-wired for racial bigotry and hatred for people not like them.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s Toward a New Nationalism here.

What, then, to make of this black hostility toward Israel as evidenced in the South African ICJ prosecution and the outpouring of non-white protests in the United States and Western Europe against what the Israelis are doing to the Gazans?

It seems that some of the deep thinkers from the ranks of the chosen people are starting to wonder: Gee, maybe we got a little too carried away with stirring up the schvartzes against the goyim. Things have gotten out of hand, and they are starting to treat us like racist whites — the cheek of it after all we’ve done for them. Now it looks like we fanned the winds of racism and are now reaping the whirlwind of anti-Semitism.

Here is how Jonathan S. Tobin from Jewish News Syndicate puts it:

How Jewish support for ‘anti-racism’ empowered anti-Semitism: Two years after the moral panic set off by the death of George Floyd, American Jews need to confront the way the BLM movement and the ideologies that underpin it enable hatred of Jews. . . .

Major groups like the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the Anti-Defamation League, as well as some of the major religious denominations, were also willing to lend support to a Black Lives Matter movement that had gone mainstream after spending its first years as a marginalized radical force.

The worldwide expression of horror at Israel’s response to the 10/7 Gaza attack has got Mr. Tobin to thinking that the Jewish-Black Lives Matter hot romance and the ensuing “moral panic,” not to mention the legions of rioters and arsonists, set off by the death of George Floyd was a big mistake — for the Jews.

This wasn’t just a serious lapse in judgment on the part of those [uh, Jews] who claim to speak for American Jews. They have largely failed to directly address the way that the BLM movement has legitimized the ideas most closely associated with it, such as critical race theory, intersectionality and white privilege. Since these concepts label Jews and Israel as privileged and treat those who call for the destruction of the one Jewish state on the planet — a racist project if ever there was one — as oppressed victims deserving of support, they essentially grant a permission slip for [drumroll . . .] anti-Semitism. That helps explain the way the most vicious anti-Israel invective has gone mainstream in ways that might have been considered unimaginable prior to 2020.

“That helps explain . . .”? Is this a masterpiece of gaslighting, or not? It bears a distinctive Talmudic methodology, a maze of non sequiturs, equivocations, and whoppers that build to the conclusion of exploding moral outrage attached to the mantra of Jewish “privilege” enforced by Jewish (AIPAC) dollars: No one gets to criticize Israel! The buried premise in this brazen subterfuge is: We’re unique — “the one Jewish state on the planet” — and special, and we get to play by a different set of rules that only we get to change whenever it suits us.

Finally, the third line of thought is to go out on a limb and suggest that the comparison of Israel and South Africa (pre-1994) as “apartheid states” is really quite misleading and goes a long way toward muddling perceptions of the realities of the current conflict in the Middle East.

The role of apartheid in Zionist ideology, I believe, was always as a temporary means to a final goal, which was the extinction of the Arab and Christian population of the region of the world that was Palestine at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Hamas attack of 10/7 was a world-historical event that would give closure to Arthur Balfour’s Declaration — his permission slip for the armed Zionist invasion 100 years ago. In its aftermath, Israel has pulled out all the stops. With the whole world looking on, it is now conducting a systematic massacre of a two-million-plus civilian population. The final goal of a pure Jewish state, purged of the previously occupying Untermenschen, is within reach. Thanks, Arthur — mission nearly accomplished.

By contrast, apartheid for South Africa was a racially-segregated caste system, its premise being that multi-racial societies work better when the races remain apart — peaceful but separate coexistence. Though it greatly offended the moral sensibilities of many observers in the West’s multiracial societies, unlike Zionist planning it did not envision an end-state with the planned extinction or elimination of “the other.”

In contemplating South African white rule, the Western powers were choking on feelings of white guilt stimulated in large part by radical Jews using the cudgel of “racism” as the original sin of European civilization. The West would not tolerate the existence of a white-ruled state that defied the Rousseauist ideology of “equality.” Its fate was sealed.

At some point in the future, when South Africa has moved completely back to a Hobbesian “state of nature” where life is “nasty, brutish and short,” perhaps a few of those who still remember the horrors of apartheid might stop and reflect: “Well, maybe it wasn’t so bad.”

Note

[1] The ICJ, to no one’s surprise, has subsequently ruled against Israel.