Despite a decade-long career as a pro-White thought criminal, I know precious little about Eugene Terreblanche, the South African political figure (“White supremacist” per the MSM) who was beaten to death by two Blacks recently. To the media, he was an evil figure for opposing ceding power to Blacks in South Africa. They use the word “supremacist” at every opportunity in describing him.
Recently, on a chatboard where I spar with liberals and conservatives alike on the issue of race, a poster mockingly offered me condolences on the murder of Terreblanche. “You and your white-hooded buddies must be in mourning”, she said.
I responded with a post about Amy Biehl, the White Californian and Stanford student who traveled to South Africa as an anti-apartheid crusader. Biehl, as it happens, met the same fate as Terreblanche: she was brutally killed by Blacks.
Yet Biehl was at the opposite end of the spectrum, politically. She’d gone to South Africa to “help” Blacks. They returned the favor by beating her to death. Her father, in an act of thoroughgoing racial groveling typical of today’s White male, forgave her killers and shook their hands.
My point: whether a White person’s intentions toward Blacks are “good” or “bad”, it doesn’t matter. Whites end up dead either route. Whites imagine that Blacks distinguish between “good” and “bad” Whites, and that while a figure like Eugene Terreblanche might suffer a violent fate, a figure like Amy Biehl would be protected. Thus, to earn their protective coating, Whites strive to be politically correct, sensitive toward Blacks, and so forth. But Blacks aren’t thinking it through like this. And the more Whites capitulate to Blacks, the more Blacks seem emboldened to lash out.
Christopher Donovan is the pen name of an attorney and former journalist. Email him.