A White Genocide Is Not the Right Genocide:
How Come There’s a “Genocide” Against Trannies, But Not Against Boers?

1,947 words

Watching Donald Trump’s recent meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on the BBC (Black Broadcasting Corporation), I was impressed to see a banner headline rolling across the bottom of the screen: TRUMP MAKES DISCREDITED GENOCIDE CLAIM. Wow, the BBC investigated that one quick! No sooner had Donald played Cyril a video of rows of white crosses purporting to show the burial sites of “over a thousand” murdered European-heritage farmers than the BBC’s journalists had immediately leapt into action and determined this was not a Boer mass-grave at all, but a mere symbolic representation of South Africa’s rural dead.

Except BBC employees had done no such thing. Instead, they had simply jumped to the automatic conclusion that no acts of white genocide had ever taken place in South Africa as, by definition, genocide is only ever something that can be perpetrated by white people against non-white ones. Even when extremist black South African politicians like Julius Malema sing songs and make speeches about the mass murder of white farmers and the expropriation of their land, this cannot possibly be considered as a precursor towards genocide, on a matter of purest journalistic principle.

So who’s right? It depends how you define the word “genocide”. If you literally mean “gassing people in death camps”, then no, there is no Boer genocide. But if you mean systematically persecuting, denigrating, dispossessing, and pushing the Boer out of the country, then maybe there is. To act as linguistic referees here, what we need is some skilled outside arbiter, a world-leading expert organization in defining the very concept of what genocide is and is not. Regrettably, the foremost body currently posing as such is the Lemkin Institute.

Hunting Boers

Raphael Lemkin (1900-59) was the man who coined the term “genocide” in the first place. A Polish-born Jewish jurist, he made the word up in 1944 to describe the Nazi Holocaust aimed at wiping out his people, a crime previously without a name. Lemkin successfully campaigned to establish the Genocide Convention signed up to by the UN in 1948.

The international body since set up in his memory, [1] the Lemkin Institute of Genocide Prevention (“2,926 days without a genocide”, says the big industrial safety signpost outside its offices) has devoted its resources towards maintaining as comprehensive a list of cases of genocide globally as is humanly possible.

With this in mind, I went and looked up on their website whether or not the Boers were indeed being “genocided”. Apparently not. The only reference I could find to the very idea was a reproduction of a brief BBC News report describing a February 2025 South African court ruling that all such claims are “clearly imagined” and “not real”.

Contrast this with the rather less critical material the site carries about a much more unambiguously “clearly imagined” and “not real” genocide, that supposedly perpetrated by the white settler government against “30,000 missing indigenous children” at Christian boarding schools across Canada.

In late 2021, the global media (including the BBC, who were somehow able to label Trump’s own assertions about South Africa a hoax within mere minutes) credulously proclaimed the ‘discovery’ of mass unmarked graves of indigenous Indian children all over Canada – mass graves which later turned out to have been unmarked largely because they didn’t actually exist.

As the fraud has now been definitively exposed, how come the Institute hasn’t yet corrected its misleading materials on this matter? Possibly because the entire organization could be argued to possess a barely concealed left-wing, anti-white, political outlook.

Death Camp For Cutie

Another imaginary (yet ideologically useful) genocide which the Lemkin Institute lies is occurring right now, even as we speak, is that supposedly being perpetrated against transgenderists all across America and Europe. This must be the most ineptly prosecuted genocide of all time, as the last ten years have seen the number of trannies grow at an unprecedented rate, largely driven by naïve teenagers’ mass grooming into such a state via the mainstream media and education systems. Aren’t genocides supposed to wipe people out, not artificially boost their numbers?

There is no trans genocide. The main activist sleight of hand used to claim there is one is to automatically claim every transgenderist who dies in a violent fashion has, by definition, been killed just for being trans, even when most have not. Transsexuals slain in ordinary robberies, or by drunk-drivers, are somehow classed as deliberate targets for death just because of their queerness. This is interesting, because the main argument advanced against there being any ongoing Boer genocide in South Africa is that all those white farmers tied up, tortured, raped and then shot or burned alive by blacks, are simply killed in ordinary robberies, whose motive is purely for profit, not for racial revenge. If a transsexual dies, it’s automatically a hate-crime. If a Boer dies, it automatically isn’t.

The definition of what counts as ‘genocide’ for trans people seems artificially high, for Boers artificially low. An excellent example occurred in Canada in 2023, when an English and Cultural Studies professor named Eugenia Zuroski withdrew her scheduled text, A Funny Thing: The Undisciplined Eighteenth Century, from publication by the UK’s prestigious Oxford University Press (OUP), on the grounds they were about to publish another book advocating acts of outright “genocidal fascism”.

In fact, this was just a text critical of transgenderism by a politically opposed Australian Political Philosophy professor, Holly Lawford-Smith, named Sex Matters: Essays in Gender-Critical Philosophy which, shockingly, “describes transgender women as ‘men’”. Apparently, this now counts as being a precursor to ‘genocide’, whereas vengeful black Marxists publicly chanting about how they are going to slaughter white people with machine-guns doesn’t.

Dr Zuroski released a public letter, ‘Walking Away From OUP’, complaining anti-trans legislation then being passed was all part of an “overtly fascist movement” aimed at pushing transgenderists out of public life right across the newly re-Nazified West. I would just quietly note here that 2023 was the very same year when political authorities in the real Nazis’ actual birth-place of Munich were busy organizing a Drag Queen Story Hour event in the city’s main library led by an out-and-proud deviant named Eric Big Clit aimed at children as young as four. Some genocide that is.

The biggest victim of Nazi genocide ever, Munich’s very own Eric Big Clit, “visionary” creator of the “House of Clits”.

Boering On

So where did Zuroski get her demonstrably inaccurate idea a trans genocide was occurring, then? Direct from the Lemkin Institute. For Zuroski, the “gender-critical movement” adhered to by Holly Lawford-Smith “advanced a genocidal agenda through tactics that include laundering fascist ideas as apolitical ‘philosophies’”, whilst the OUP’s publication of books saying simple things like chicks don’t have dicks “directly contributes to this agenda [of genocide] by granting it scholarly credibility.”

To prove it, Zurowski linked to a page on the Lemkin Institute website, which wibbled on like this:

The ideological constructions of transgender women promoted by gender-critical ideologues are particularly genocidal … Transgender women are represented as stealth border-crossers who seek to defile the purity of cisgender women, much [like] … Jewish men in Nazi anti-Semitism … The Lemkin Institute reminds readers that one of the first libraries to be burned under the National Socialists in Germany was the library and archive of Magnus Hirshfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science in Berlin, a groundbreaking research organization studying human sexuality and gender … While members of the gender-critical movement may argue that they do not seek to kill the physical bodies of transgender people, they do openly seek to eradicate transgender identity from the world … Once it becomes acceptable for one group of people to be criminalized for expressing their identity, then society becomes vulnerable to the genocidal targeting of other groups as well. In fact, anti-trans initiatives are closely tied to assaults on the rights of women, people of color, minority religious communities, and immigrants in the US and elsewhere. The criminalization and harassment of the trans community can serve as a rehearsal for more generalized targeting of unwanted groups within a genocidal ideological structure. There is no shutting the floodgates once states and societies acquiesce to the eradication of a specific people from the earth.

So, one minute appalled parents are trying to protect their toddlers from Eric Big Clit, the next minute they are pumping Zyklon B through the roof of their nearest mosque. The Institute’s website is full of such hyperbole. When, in 2022, a speaker at the annual conservative CPAC conference called transgenderism a “preposterous ideology” which “must be eradicated from public life entirely”, the Lemkin Institute ran a piece calling these “genocidal” comments, accompanied by an illustration seemingly showing Jewish inmates in a Nazi death-camp done up in the colors of the Trans Pride flag.

“Genocide could take place without a single person being killed,” the Institute here argued – blindly unaware this statement in itself completely undermines the simultaneous mainstream argument that no white genocide against the Boers is occurring just because the South African state isn’t physically murdering them all wholesale in Auschwitz-on-Limpopo.

Culture Vultures

Besides literal physical genocide, the Institute says that Raphael Lemkin also came up with the wider idea of “cultural genocide”, defined as follows:

Nor does genocide need to be a single event. It can also be a drawn-out process that unfolds slowly, incrementally, one small step at a time. This points to a crucial distinction between physical and cultural genocide. Whereas the former involves the physical destruction of some group … the latter aims to eliminate a social group by dismantling the cultural practices and systems that enable that group to exist. Some scholars have thus described cultural genocide as a more ‘subtle’ genocide, which, ‘in spite of not being bloody, engenders the same result as genocide’ in the physical sense. For example, laws might be passed for the purposes of forced assimilation, whereby certain people are compelled to alter their ‘lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, tradition, and beliefs’ until the social group to which they belong is no longer present on the cultural landscape … Yet, while cultural genocide is always a precursor to physical genocide, it could succeed in dismantling a group without any murders taking place. It might not even involve the group ceasing to exist entirely. Rather, according to Lemkin, a successful genocide might simply result in the group losing its life-force, so to speak … As one genocide expert writes, ‘plainly, Lemkin was as concerned with the loss of culture as with the loss of life.’

How is this not precisely what is happening to whites across the West – and in South Africa – right now? Today, we are continually hearing institutional demands for the systematic “dismantling of whiteness” all across North America, Europe and Australasia. On the Lemkin Institute’s own terms, that is clearly a process of cultural genocide. Yet that particular genocide, and that alone, is curiously never mentioned by them.

The Institute produces a handy Genocide-Spotters’ Guide, the initial “red flag” warning sign being as follows, in which the word “violence” is not necessarily meant physically:

Will you go and ask a Boer if they feel like that, or shall I? The guide ends with the following offer of help:

Taking this kind proposal at face value, I’ve walked around my hometown, taken pictures of all the suddenly imported blacks and Muslims shipped in to replace me, arranged them in a big photo-file named “LOCAL SETTLER COLONIALIST SIGHTINGS”, and e-mailed them in to the Lemkinites already. They haven’t yet replied, but when they do, I’ll be sure to let you know.

Notes

[1] Although named after him, the Institute is not authorized by Lemkin’s actual family, who object to its employees calling Israeli actions in Gaza genocide; it is not an explicitly Jewish body itself.