[This is a brilliant article that was published by the excellent pro-White, truth-telling American magazine Liberty Bell in 1986. It seems the author of this was someone in Honeydew in Johannesburg South Africa. Sadly we don't know this person's name. But this person was way ahead of their time. I've been busy studying South African history, especially of the BroederBond who were the real power behind Apartheid and White Rule. In 1986, the Broederbond issued a secret document in their ranks saying that a Black President of South Africa is inevitable. I will revisit this topic. But here is the brilliant article published in Liberty Bell. Liberty Bell can be found at Tom Metzger's old site: Resist.com. Jan]

Vol. 12 No. 10 P.O. Box 830 -Honeydew 2040, South Africa

MYTHS THAT WILL DESTROY SOUTH AFRICA

"A lie travels round the world while Truth is putting on her
boots" – (C.H. Spurgeon : Truth and Fakehood)

South African voters have demonstrated, first by their votes
in a referendum, then in their "reforms", that they have been
convinced that they have no option but to surrender, to change
the political pattern of South Africa to suit their enemies. This
is a triumphant victory for those who wish us ill, a perfect
example of a successful psychological war.

For consider: South Africa has the best and the most experienced
anti-terrorist troops in theworld. They are undefeated
in battle, and are unlikely ever to be. We fight from the strong
position of interior lines of communication. South Africa has
ample supplies of food, enough to feed herself and yet leave a
large surplus for export. She has a large and powerful industrial
base. She has unbeHevable mineral wealth. In the White population
axe to be found enormous reserves of technical skill, of
expertise and of, energy. Yet South Africans have been led to
believe that they have no option but to yield to "world opinion"
and to introduce "reforms" dictated by and designed to help
their enemies.

How did our enemies bring about this incredible belief? They
did it by the constant, unwearying and incessant repetition of a
series of myths and half-truths, From every forum, from, every
channel of communication, from every important nonentity
who spoke on the subject. South Africans heard one or another
of the myths which will lead to our undoing. Ample money
and, in consequence, first-class brains are available to our foes.
To these must be added the ready and sympathetic assistance
of every form of communications medium and of our own

46 Liberty Bell

liberals. The myths are numerous. They are skilfully selected, so
that each may choose the one which appeals to him most. Like
a grenade thrown into a crowded room, there is something for
everyone.

Let us examine a few of the choicer myths which castrate
South Africans politically and psychologically.

THE MYTH OF THE AFRICAN GIANT

This myth tells us that we are opposed by about fifteen
million Blacks, aU implacably hostile. This being so, we must of
course surrender, mustn’t we? Let us examine the African
Giant a little more closely. But first, and in passing, let us note
that fifteen million zeros add up to zero. The first thing we
learn is that a million and a half of these Blacks are foreigners.
Only about 350 000 of them are here legally. If myths were
true this would mean that a imlUon and a half Blacks, all
allegedly hostile and hating us, have trekked for thousands of
miles to entfcr our country illegally in search of work. In spite
of the fact that they allegedly dislike us so, these illegal entrants
do their very best to avoid eviction. None of these
foreign Blacks wants the White man to surrender. On the contrary,
he is in deadly terror that we will surrender. The foreigner
knows that the local Blacks hate him and will turn on him if the
White man ever loses control. He is in fact anxious to support us
if we will let him.

Of the remaining Blacks, at least two-thirds must be women
and children: hardly a daunting obstacle. From the balance of
men remaining must be deducted the tens of thousands serving
in the Army, the Police and the central, local and homeland
governments. These all have a strong desire to see the White
man firmly in control and seem to bear him no ill-will. In
addition, there axe the vast numbers employed in commerce,
industry and domestic seiidce. Like the others, these only want
a quiet Hfe and the chance to get on with their lives. Suddenly
the African Giant begins to look deddely puny, not the all-
powerful colossus described by. the myth-makers. In fact, it is
not a giant at all, but merely a loud-mouthed, bad-mannered
and ill-tempered baby which cannot even feed itself.

October 1986

THE MYTH THAT SOUTH AFRICA IS BROKE

Economic arguments are weighty, so this is one of the more
popular myths. Let us begin by noting that very few people
know South Africa’s real financial position. It is their duty to
keep silent about what they know. Yet somehow everyone
knows that South Africa is broke. How do they know? We are
never told. It is true that the country is probably short of
money. If we will insist on running a welfare state for the
Blacks, keeping a large proportion of the Coloured population
on the dole, appointing, housing and paying completely unnecessary
Coloured and Asiatic Ministers of State while we
fight a terrorist war, then we will be short of money. The
remedy is obvious. This is a far cry from being insolvent. Yet
we know that our country produces vast amounts of food,
that we have the world’s biggest gold mines, that we turn out
huge amounts of manufactured goods. In addition to this, the
United States Commerce Department reports that South
Africa has 83.6 percent of the world’s chromium, 80^ percent
of all platinum, 70J8 percent of all manganese and 47.1 percent
of the world’s cobalt. Further, it processes or ships the cobalt
mined in Zakt and Zambia, which accounts for 31.5 percent
of the world’s resources.

All these immensely valuable products are exported all
over the world, and earn us vast wealth. So how are we broke?
Short of money due to political imprudence and governmental
waste, yes, perhaps. But broke? The idea is ridiculous.

THE MYTH THAT SOUTH AFRICA

HAS NO FOREIGN CURRENCY

This is another economic myth, very popular and enormously
effective in sapping our resolution. A moment’s reflection will
tell us that the amount of foreign currency available to South
Africa is known to the Treasury and to nobody else. Yet somehow
everybody knows that we have no foreign currency. How
do they know? They don’t! They repeat the myth because it
sounds reasonable.

It is certain that we are short of foreign currency: but so is
every other country in the world. Yet a glance at the advertise

rs Liberty Bell

ments and at the goods on display in shop windows will convince
anyone that we must have some of this precious currency,
because all sorts of foreign goods are available. This unwelcome
blast of common sense is always countered by the reply that, of
course, some currency must be allocated to sustain morale.
Whose morale, apart from that of the shop-keeper, is sustained,
and how? No answer!

Yet we know that from 1980 to 1983 South Africa supplied
the United States with 61 percent of its cobalt, 55 percent of its
chromium, 49 percent of its platinum, 44 percent of its vanadium
and 39 percent of its manganese. Yet we are said to have no
foreign currency. Would the myth-makers have us believe that
we sell these valuable commodities for cowrie-shells?

We are nevet.told why we must have foreign currency,
simply that we must have it. Yet our country does not need the
blessing of the international bankers to survive. Our country is,
as we reaUse if we pause to think about it and ignore the doom-
sayers, large enough and rich enough to be virtually self-generating
so far as capital is concerned. We can get along without
foreign investment. In fact we would probably be better off
with fewer international ties, not more.

We have foreign currency. It is true that we would like to
have more. So would every country in the world. The tale that
we have none is a myth, designed to destroy us.

THE MYTH OF WORLD OPINION

This myth tells us that there is sucTi a thing as "the world
community". This community, runs the myth, links in close
communion the Oxford don, the lately reformed cannibal in
Gabon and the Papuan head-hunter. All of these disparate
people,, say the myth, hold opinions in common. These add up
to form "world opinion" which, the myth assures us, is irresistible.
Once you have "world opinion" against you, say the myth-
makers, all you can do is surrender. South Africans apparently
think that this is true, judging from their political actions.

Yet to the dispassionate observer it is clear that world opinion
is hostile only when dealing with Whites. To Whites, and to
nobody else, "world opinion" is implacably hostile. Obviously,

October 1986

you cannot placate the implacable. In fact, it is their attempts
to do just this which have brought South Africans to their
present plight. Trying to placate the implacable led to Rhodesia
becoming Zimbabwe.

When two or more races live in one country, as in ours,
there is only a limited number of solutions to the problems
which arise. The solutions are three in number: complete
racial integration as in Britain, America and the former Portuguese
colonies: the South African solution of apartheid or
separate development of the races, and finally the wishy-washy
compromise which Rhodesia attempted before she collapsed.
There are no other solutions. All these solutions have been
tried. All are condemned by "world opinion". It seems reasonable
to conclude, therefore, that the attack is not on the institutions
of the White man but on the White man himself. No
other explanation fits the facts. This being so, if they wish to
survive South Africans have no choice but to ignore "world
opinion". They must treat it as the figment of the liberal
imagination which in fact it is, and act solely as their own
interests dictate. The complete impotence of "world opinion"
will then be amply plain.

In any event, it is not true that "world opinion" is universally
hostile to South Africa, or to the White man. The day after the
Rhodesian Declaration of Independence, Friends of Rhodesia
societies sprang up throughout the West. They were anxious
only to know what they could do to help the Rhodesian Whites.
Those forming the Friends of Rhodesia belonged to the "world
community". They still exist. Given the opportunity, they will
help us. All that we have to do is to convince them that we
mean to rule our country.

THE MYTH OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

It is a burning hatred by Blacks of racial discrimination, say
the myth-makers, which is the cause of political unrest in
South Africa. The spinner of myths never explains just how this
alleged hatred makes the terrorist maim and torture his own
people. This is one of the most dangerous of the many myths
devised for our destruction. It is a complete and utter lie.
Terrorists are terrorists, not because they hate racial discrimination,
but because being a terrorist is fun — until, of cowse, the
Police or the Army shoot him. Being a terrorist allows a Black

50 Liberty Bell

to commit treason, murder, arson, rape, theft, looting and to
indulge in the most inhuman cruelties. AH these activities appeal
strongly to the Black, and to many others too. This is the

< terrorist’s real motivation, not a hatred of racial discrimination
as he pretends. He daily, unthinkingly and very sensibly, practises
racial discrimination in his own society.

Terrorists act in the bestial way that they do not because
they hate discrimination, as their apologists and the myth-
makers tell us, but because they are Blacks acting like Blacks.

As regards discrimination, we may note that the inabiUty to
discriminate is one of the characteristic symptoms of feeblemindedness.
Ask any ahenist.

South Africans should by now have learned that in the view
of "world opinion" only the White man ever practises racial
discrimination. What in other races looks to us like racial discrimination
is in fact nothing of the sort. Ask any apologist,
myth-maker or social scientist. It is merely, they explain, a
perfectly natural "legitimate aspiration" or "the inevitable
result of years of colonial exploitation." But it is, of course,
never ever racial. Racialism is for the White man alone. Yet
knowing this the South African allows himself to be talked into
feeUng guilty about laws and attitudes which are vital to his
survival. The myth-maker hates South Africans for their honesty
and their admission of the inadmissible: that races differ,
that the differences are genetic and ineradicable, that free
men are not equal and that equal men are not free. It is this
hatred of the truth which lies behind the myth of racial discrimination.

THE MYTH THAT "REFORM"

AND "POWER-SHARING" CAN WORK

This myth assures that Blacks, Coloureds and Asiatics can
combine with Whites to form a government acceptable to White
men. The myth goes on to assure Whites that they will receive
fair and equal treatment from such a government. This is so,
they say, because ‘Vorld opinion" and a new and wonderful
constitution will ensure it. To expose this myth as the rubbish
which it is, one need only ask oneself precisely what punishment
wUl be inflicted, and by whom on a Black-ruled Azania
practising White genocide. For that matter, what punishment

October 1986

will be imposed, and by whom, on a Black^-uled Azania which
slaughters Asiatics or Coloureds, or indulges in tribal fighting?
The only rational and truthful answer is "None, by anyone."
The question is of more than academic interest, because this is
precisely what will happen if the White man loses control, or
hands over power.

Once South Africa has become Azania and has joined the
United Nations and the Organisation of African Unity, does
anyone seriously suppose that any sanctions at all will be
imposed on her as she "butchers the surviving Whites, Coloureds
and Asiatics? There will no doiibt be a few tut-tutting editorials
and speeches all redolent with tolerant understanding of the
"African vie\ypoint". AU will be quick to explain massacres of
the Whites as a natural reaction to coloniaMsm, but that is aU.
This wUI be cold comfort for the White South African who is
being hunted Uke a buck.

The myth that the "world community" will ensure respect
foj guarantees for minorities and for constitutions conveniently
ignores the fact that others before us have had guarantees.
They availed them nothing. In Kenya the guarantees lasted for
three months. In Zambia they lasted just twenty-four hours.
South Africa had American guarantees when she went into
Angola recently. Much good they did her, you will recall. But
if we hand our country over it will be different this time, runs
the siren song of the myth-maker. Judging by their political
actions, South Africans seem to beheve this myth. Some of
them probably, and with equally good reason, believe in the
Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy.

THE MYTH THAT WE CAN
HALT COMMUNISM IN AFRICA

This myth is popular with the pseudo-intellectual "global
thinker", the half-baked member of the intelligentsia who
sees himself as a poor man’s Bertrand Russell. He likes this
myth, because it lets him pontificate as one who thinks on a
world scale, not merely as a parochial South African. This
myth runs that, in some mysterious way, if we will but accept
Black rule we shall "halt the march of communism in Africa".
Because of this, though we are never told why, the myth says
that we must surrender. Yet a moment’s thought will show
that the place to halt communism is in Moscow, not Pretoria.

52 Liberty Bell

Another moment’s thought wUl tell us that only Britain and
, America can "halt communism". South Africa cannot do this.
We know that these two countries never have and never will do
anything to hinder, far less to harm communist Russia. It is
‘ obvious that behind the scenes those who rule the rulers of
Britain, America and Russia are the best of friends. We learn

‘ from the Economist newspaper that in 1985 Russia borrowed
an extra six bUUon pounds from Western banks; extra, that is,
to her normal borrowings from the West. This money was
borrowed from an allegedly hostile West.

The aims of Britain, America and Russia are identical: the
destruction of the White man in Africa. Britain and America
are not at odds with Russia. In fact, as the Zulu saying has it,
they are rock^bbits from the same kopje.

THE MYTH THAT WE CAN SHARE POWER

This myth, particularly popular with politicians and businessmen,
tells us that the White, the many Black races, the Coloureds,
the Muslims and the Hindus can between them rule South
Africa in a way acceptable to all. AU that is necessary, according
to the myth, is that there should be "democracy". By this is
meant that everyone must have a vote.

The myth-maker is undeterred by the fact that South Africa
contains at least a dozen Black tribes each of which detests the
others and is prevented from attacking them only by the White
man. Nor does it bother him that the Muslim dislikes the Hindu,
wno in turn hates him back. Both loathe the Coloured, who
despises Black, Muslim and Hindu. In the Cloud Cuckoo-
land of the myth-maker fifteen million Blacks, three milUon
Whites, and a few hundred thousand Coloureds and Asiatics
will be able, so long as each has a vote, to agree on a just solution
to any problem submitted to them, further, the mythrnaker
would tell us that this Utopian state would be attained
without any race imposing its views on or dominating another.
South Africans seem to believe this nonsense. At least they
Hsten to it without bursting into laughter.

Nor does it worry the myth^maker intent on power-sharing
that the relatively small White population generates almost all
the revenue of the State. A little is contributed by the Indians,

October 1986

the Coloureds cost more than they pay in taxes whUe the Black
man; is, as usual, incapable even of feeding himself.

As if enough difficulties had not yet been listed, the White
man tends to think and to plan in terms of about 25 years. The
Black, so far as he can plan at all, does so in terms of about
three months. The Coloured is generally notoriously feckless.
The mental processes of the Asiatics are, to adapt Churchill’s
phrase, an enigma wrapped in a mystery. None of these weighty
difficulties deters-the myth-maker intent on sharing power for

a. moment. Let power but be shared, he assures us, and all will
be well. White South Africans, to judge by their recent political
actions and by the fact that they have not thrown out their
present government intent on sharing power, agree with the
myth-makers. Lunacy could hardly go further.
THE MYTH THAT OTHER

RACES WISH TO SHARE POWER

The myth-maker tells us that one of the chief causes of our
troubles is that the White man will not accept the hand of
friendship allegedly extended by the Coloured, Asiatic and
Black communities. According to the siren song of the myth-
maker, all these people love us. It is we who stubbornly and
wrong-headedly refuse to love them back. So we are told. Yet
already the newly created Coloured and Asiatic Ministers,
together with their people, have shown that they have little-
liking for us. Certainly they feel no gratitude to the White man
for the concessions to them which he has made. In addition, it
is clear that there is no love lost between the three racial groups
mentioned. The Blacks loathe everyone, including the Whites.
Both the ANC and SWAPO have the firm support of the Organisation
of African Unity. This fact is of course well known to
our rulers and our myth-makers. In its published Programme of
.\ction, the OA..U. says inter alia: "We cannot compromise
with any White government, extreme or liberal, or agree to
multi-racial nonsense. We are determined to destroy all traces of
White GiviUsation. The rivers of the South are to run red with
the blood of the White tyrants and their children." You can’t
say that isn’t frank, can you? Our government, the governments
of Britain and America and of the USSR, to say nothing of the
myth-makers, know this Programme of Action well. They just
don’t tell us about it.

54 Liberty Bell

Sam Nujoma of SWAPO, beloved of the media and of our
own liberals, has several times quoted this passage publicly and
with approval. Contrary to what the myth^akers say, he does
not intend to create a multi-racial country, he intends to create
a Blatk one.

Another darling of the Left, of the media, of the "world
community" and of the South African businessman is Nelson
Mandela. He is rivalled in popularity with the media only by
his wife Winnie, a strong contender for the title of The World’s
Sweetheart. South Africans are endlessly told that they must
free Mandela, consult with him, include him in government "at
the highest level", Our big business men ask for his release and
for his acceptance by us as a Black leader.

Nelson Mandela is not the wise, tolerant and omniscient

father figure depicted by the media and the myth-maker. In

fact he is a communist who was sentenced to life imprison

ment for treason. He is committed to violence in the attain

ment of his political aims, as befits a Marxist-Leninist, and has

always refused to renounce the use of violence. At his trial he

said: "I have dedicated my Hfe to end White domination. It is

an idea I hope to Hve to see realised. It is also an idea for which

I am prepared to die." For the White to attempt to share power

with such a man would be utter lunacy. On his own admission

Mandela does not intend to share power with any other race

than his own. Yet the myth-maker insists that we must involve
. him in our "reforms", that he will help us in making a multiracial
society.

Another self-chosen Black leader who commands the almost

hysterical adulation of the Mberal, the White businessman and
the politicians is Bishop Desmond Tutu. It is almost obligatory
, to add after his name "Winner of the Nobel Prize". Tutu has
never concealed his overt support for violence in bringing down
i/White rule. The Bishop does not pretend that he intends that

• South Africa shall have a multi-racial society, as the myth-
maker pretends that he does. Bishop Tutu intends to create a
, Black society. The men named above all hate Whites. They
have said so. They do not intend to build a multi-tacial state in
South Africa. They intend to build a Black state in Azania.The
myth-maker knows this. Yet he presents them as supermen. In
spite of the known views and records of these men the Whites

October 1986

apparently accept the myths. Not for nothing are we v/amed
that those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.

THE MYTH THAT RACIAL EQUALITY
IS POSSIBLE IN SOUTH AFRICA

The myth-maker tells us, and we apparently beheve him,
that there can be "democracy" in our country on the basis of
"one man, one vote". A glance at the facts wHl show this up
for the He which it is.

The White population is about 4.8 rmlhon, of whom 1.9
million are English-speaking. The Indian population, both Muslim
and Hindu, totals 890 000. There are 2 J8 million Coloureds.
The Black population totals 24.1 milMon, of whom 13 mUUon
live in the White area.

Because he believes in the possibihty of a multi-racial society
and the mystic power of the ballot-box the myth-maker holds
that this racial mislwnash can, by use of the vote, solve all our
problems without oppression or the domination of one racial
group by another. Yet it is axiomatic that when a man is given a
vote he will use it as his own interests dictate. Can any White
in his senses imagine a Zulu, a Xhosa, a Coloured or an Asiatic
giving a single damn about the interests of the White? The
myth-maker can. He urges us to hand ourselves and, what is
more important, our wives and children over to the tender
mercies of people who make no secret of the fact that they
hate us. ‘ .

Traditional methods of rule, all based on racial characteristics,
differ widely. Muslims have always had an authoritarian system
of rule. The Hindu tends to devolve decision making to groups
of five elders. The African hfts always been ruled by his chiefs
and tribal eUers. None of these races traditionally choose or use
universal suffrage as a tool of government. Yet the myth-maker
would have us believe that if we will only give everyone a vot«
they will somehow be inspired to use it selflessly for the good
of all. It is not a view supported by the known facts. Yet the
White voters seem to think that it can be done and that it will
be so. Otherwise they wouW have drawn back from "reform",
kicked out the reformers and returned to the way set out for
them by such great men as Dr. Verwoerd. These men saw

LibeHy Bell

plainly that safety for the White lay only in racial separation.

•This is the way: walk ye in it."
THE MYTH OF INEVITABILITY

This is one of the myth-makers’ greatest successes. One
hears on all sides that: "It is inevitable," "It is too late," Things
have gone too far to stop," and so on. This myth has probably
done more than any other to sap the resolution of the White
man. Yet it is a myth, and nothing more. Black rule is NOT
inevitable. Only death is inevitable. Anything else depends on
you.

If the present gang of trucklers, time-servers and in many
cases, just plain traitors continue in power, then our defeat and
eventual Black rule are probably inevitable. Get rid of them,
and what becomes almost inevitable is not Black rule but White
survival and prosperity. This can only be achieved through the
electoral process. In our system of government Parliament is
supreme, not the myth^aker. To save the White man, two
things are needed: a Parliamentary majority of one man plus a
lot of resolution. Fifty percent of our Members of Parliament
plus one man will suffice to undo every "reform", to give us
back our country and to guarantee a future for our children.

A good start would be to banish frOm public life every
politician, academic and businessman who has ever referred to
"the South African problem." We have not problems to solve:
what we do have is a war to win. It will not be won by little
men who prate of "problems" when they should be thinking in
terms of racial survival. When the war is won, when a White
government ruHng with White interests in mind sits in Pretoria
we will find that most of our "problems" have vanished.

If the Whites wHl but rouse themselves, it is not yet "too
late". It has not yet "gone too far". It is not yet "inevitable".
We repeat: Only death is inevitable. Anything else is up to you.

October 1986