You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

According to Genocide Watch, the political left in the West is engaged in genocide denial. Almost to a man, the Twitterati scramble to point out how, for some reason, the Boer is not really being exterminated in their own lands- or that they had it coming. Welcome to progressive victim blaming. Its fine, so long as the victims are White.

As pointed out by Jack Montgomery in Breitbart,

“If you look at the footage and read the stories, you hear the accounts, it’s a horrific circumstance they face,” (Australian Home Affairs minister) Dutton had said, arguing that South Africa’s farmers “deserve special attention”.

“I do think, on the information that I’ve seen, people do need help and they need help from a civilized country like ours,” he added — prompting furious demands for a retraction from the South African government.

But rather than welcoming the country’s white minority as refugees, as they would for almost any other group, left-liberal media outlets and pro-migration non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were quick to condemn Dutton, insisting the farmers should be left to their fate.

It is not just Australia- most leftist publications in the West have looked away from this humanitarian crisis. I will give credit where it is due, the Independent has published a relatively clear-eyed report, Newsweek is recognizing the problem for what it is, and RT is ready to report on Julius Malema "cutting the throat of whiteness.”

RT, it should be noted, were making videos about the looming threat of land expropriation in South Africa four years ago. We didn't listen then- but then RT is Russian state media so it was an obvious ploy to influence elections, or something.

The genocide denial from progressive activists is shameful.

Yassmin Abdel-Magied, who you may remember claims Islam is the most feminist religion, outright denies the South African Genocide and claims that Australia really should import more Muslims instead of skilled White people, because of course she does. She is an unrepentant activist for Islam, but wishes to deny all others the same courtesy for their own faith or ethnic group.

Apart from centuries of demonstrable farming skills passed from father to son by the Boers, sure. There is no benefit to preferencing skilled people over the unskilled, in Abdel-Magied's book. It is odd indeed that open border advocates like Yassmin suddenly want to build a wall, but with a door that only non-Whites have the key for. Similarly, it is a dishonest ploy to conflate centuries of religious and ethnic conflict in Asia with the genocide in South Africa.


It is not in doubt that the Rohingya are suffering in Myanmar, virtually without aid from neighboring Muslim nations.

Even so, it is strange indeed to advocate for Australian aid for a community defined by political allegiance rather than religious or ethnic grouping when that kind of politics has no connection with Australia. Yassmin draws the line around Islam, and concludes that as she and the Rohingya are both Muslim, that's her team. Fair enough, but this is not a simple case of racist persecution, these issues are deep-rooted. Simply moving the Rohingya to Australia is not a solution to Myanmar's refusal to recognize the Rohingya as citizens or to end the bloodshed. Is it racist for a White country to help White people with whom they share a history as the sons of colonialists? Abdel-Mageid may argue that would be the definition of racism, and to be quite frank I for one do not care, because she would have to own that racism herself.

Australia, a secular society based on Europeans and their Christian values, recognizes the plight of another European Christian descended society and wishes to help. Could not the neighbors of the Rohingya, Muslim countries all, help their co-religionists and provide them support? If we're honestly looking for solutions it is self-evident that people with common cultural, language and ethnic connections integrate into societies easier than those without. This should not be a controversial position, but apparently it is racism to recognize that people in the world are different- unless you are an intersectional leftist, in which case you can recognize differences in relation to White people, in order to leverage power.

It is racist to claim that Whites can be oppressed- despite this entire article existing as an exercise in highlighting the in-group preference that is exhibited by people of all races and faiths. If it is racist for White Australians to recognize their kinship with White South Africans, why is it not also anti-Kuffar bigotry for Yassmin Abdel-Magied to advocate for her own in-group? Can we not understand that having love and being an advocate for your own people does not necessitate hatred of the other? Abdel-Magied shows here that it is, as usual, group identity for the Muslim, but Christians- watch out. That's racism.


Apart from being such an egregious example of how not to make an argument, the leftist position is clear. If you are White and look at people who look like you being tortured and raped for their skin color with horror, it is you that is the racist. The implicit demand is "What about the non-Whites?" To which the reply should be- what race is more charitable, more willing to aid and more accomodating than those hated Whites? This is a sick ideology, and if it means that we are Alt-Right for opposing racist murderers, count us in. History remembers those who deny genocide.

What we are witnessing is the weaponization of ethnic cleansing in order to promulgate an open-borders and globalist agenda.

To put it mildly, this sticks in the craw. The idea that because the Australian government has been brave enough to recognize reality and try to help that this is somehow racist is not only insulting but exhibits the most appalling kind of anti-White bigotry.

Jon Rosenthal of The Economist, who is Jewish, will denounce all genocide except when it happens to Whites.

Australia is racist because Rosenthal disagrees with their immigration policy with regard to helping people flee a genocide- though of course, #NotAllAustralians, Jon. Rosenthal will go so far to argue with a Black South African racist about what a genocide is.

This is the double standard that is being exhibited to varying degrees across the planet, when it comes to relations between people of European descent and virtually all others. It has now become common to claim that there is no such thing as Whiteness when it comes to an identity, but Whiteness itself is toxic and must be deconstructed. That is the philosophical root in the West of our neo-Marxist political left.

This is the sharp end of the same ideology. This is the result of formented bigotry sanctioned by a state that wholeheartedly agrees that Whiteness itself is evil enough to be met with land expropriation, rape, torture and murder. Is this carnage really what the so-called progressives wish to advance? As we have repeatedly said in this magazine, this is what awaits Western nations, casually waiting for demographics to tilt the balance of power.

The rhetoric is the same as that parroted by the benign social justice advocates in your own town. The weepy students who wail about wanting safe spaces and segregated housing because of the evil Whites oppressing them will not speak out against this genocide. They deny it. They will not condemn the South African government, they will say, well the power dynamics are shifting and this is a good thing thanks to centuries of colonialism, and South Africa should belong to Black people. Apart from highlighting how the left really sees multiculturalism -as a weapon against Whites- this is dishonest, upstream thinking. The same thinking begat the extermination of the Kulaks with the Holodomor, but for some reason many leftists don't like to talk about that, either.

The South African Genocide is real. search #plaasmoorde on Twitter. Spread the word. Contact your local representative and demand action.

The Editor

by The Editor