The strategy I suggest to achieve this goal is separation of the non-black nations of South Africa from the black nations. This would make the country, or countries, more peaceful because it would prevent most of the inter-racial violence now occurring. Most of the remaining racial envy would not be an issue if the previously most advantaged and previously most disadvantaged were not competing for the same resources. This would allow for more self-determination, because the more homogeneous a country the more a consensus is achievable. Grouping the black nations together allows for a more unified black country, and grouping the Afrikaners and Coloureds together allows for a more unified Dutch-descended country. And it is a step towards smaller and less government for all, which means more freedom for all.
To achieve this, it is required to identify centres of gravity acting against a secession of parts of South Africa from one another. I have identified four:
- Black nationalism
- Demographic distribution
- Oppression narrative
- White guilt
Black nationalism in South Africa has a Weltanschauung which sees South Africa in terms of two groups: whites and non-whites, equivalent to oppressors and victims. The unifying ideology, which can be simplified to blaming the oppressors for all of the problems in the country, has two inherent problems. Firstly, it only unifies for as long as there are oppressors available to blame. With low birth rates and high emigration rates, the white oppressors will not be around much longer to unite the peoples of South Africa. Secondly, it doesn't actually address the true causes of the economic and crime problems in South Africa, nor does it allow for an orderly re-organisation around the other existing fault lines in society once the oppressors are gone. There are other fault lines already, and a sudden crack along them could be chaotic and unpleasant if they are simply ignored until it is too late. Besides the different nations, even within the currently united black race, there are already different economic classes amongst the non-whites. There are those with power and friends in government, and then there are those with nothing but the ability to protest and riot when the government doesn't deliver promised services.
To attack this centre of gravity, two options present themselves. The first is to change the narrative from white versus non-white, to black and (not versus) non-black. Instead of an adversarial world view, it should be seen as one family of related black peoples living as good neighbours alongside another family of related Dutch descendants. Forcing strangers to live in the same house leads to strife, but giving them each their own house with a clear border allows them to become friends. The second option must be done cautiously, as it has the potential to devolve into conflict if approached too swiftly. This is to highlight the natural fault lines in the black race which exist between tribes. This fault line was apparent before Zuma with the talk of a Xhosa mafia inside the ANC, and will become apparent again without an enemy to unify against. However, as part of a secession movement, federalising South Africa, before or after secession, along tribal lines and devolving power from the national government to the provincial or tribal level will empower the tribes without forcing them to compete for power over each other. If the federalising occurs before secession, it also opens up the possibility of one or more of the black tribes seceding as well. This can only strengthen the chances of secession succeeding.
The demographic distribution of peoples in South Africa is highly entropic. The only group with a fairly well defined territory is the Coloured nation. Whites live in pockets spread fairly evenly throughout the country, and there are significant numbers of blacks in the Coloured areas. To concentrate the Afrikaners and Coloureds, and presumptive English and Indian allies, it would be best to focus on an historically justifiable territory. The Cape Colony, with borders existing where the white settlers first encountered the black tribes, can be justified as an area to secede - and this is what the Cape Party proposes already. Two other problems reinforce this centre of gravity, and those are affirmative action and the white standard of living.
Affirmative action limits the concentration of whites in large companies. This means that to have constantly progressing careers in a world of large corporations, whites must diffuse throughout the country. The relatively high white standard of living means that in the main, they are reluctant to move to a different part of the country and start with nothing. Most would rather emigrate to a higher standard of living. This is natural and to be expected. A possible work around is to encourage the entrepreneurial spirit in whites, and have them game the system by keeping their company small enough to allow them to employ only whites and allied Coloureds and Indians. Of course, this would be best done in the already suggested territory. A big problem exists in two overlapping groups, those of white farmers and Afrikaner nationalists. The farmers will be often be unwilling to abandon their family's heritage and their livelihoods, and the nationalists will often be unwilling to abandon the land of their forefathers. The nationalists can perhaps be addressed by convincing them that the continued existence of their people is more important than where their nation lives. The farmers are more difficult, and I'm not sure I have any good solutions. Some may sell their farms to buy land in a different area to farm, and some may sell their farms to start businesses elsewhere. But boere are stubborn and have the desire to own and farm land in their genes - this is a challenge.
The oppression narrative is the other side of the coin from black nationalism. For blacks, it can be addressed in an Agree & Amplify method. Remove the oppressive white monopoly capital from the rest of the country, and segregate them in their own homeland. Do as the apartheid regime did, and put the non-blacks in the poor part of the country which is mostly just desert and mountain and forest fires. There are plenty of black people in South Africa, already spouting murderous hate speech, who would probably be delighted to talk about pushing whites to one side and cutting them off from the wealth produced in the rest of the country.
For whites, and other non-blacks, the best way to destroy the oppression narrative is probably to attack directly the fourth centre of gravity, white guilt.
White guilt is the tendency of whites to focus on only the past sins of their race and only the past good deeds of other races. It is almost certainly a genetic trait, but that doesn't mean it can't be suppressed in favour of more productive tendencies. So long as whites see themselves as the bad guy, they won't be able to unite and ally with other nations for their own good.
Northwest Europeans, of which Afrikaners and English South Africans are a diaspora sub-group, are highly individualistic. They tend to think of themselves as individuals, which allows them to disassociate themselves from the sinful white oppressors they descend from. The sins of apartheid are the dominant narrative, with no geopolitical context of the time and no comparison to violent crime and anti-white hate crime in the present day. Factually, white guilt can be attacked, but for it to have effect on the majority it must be couched in effective rhetoric. If civil society organisations, like Afriforum or the Institute of Race Relations, can be enlisted to assist, it may be possible to force the SAPS to report crime statistics by race. Judging by the statistics in the US, it is expected that the racial disparities will show whites as the victims more than as the criminals. The same should be done with the South African Human Rights Commission, to highlight the large numbers of black Penny Sparrows. This is all well and good as far as facts go, but spreading the information rhetorically is another issue altogether. I don't know how to achieve this one yet. Perhaps Born Free's - those born after the start of black rule in 1994 - could be enlisted as spokespeople. There are now 23 year olds who have known nothing but black government, who are discriminated against because of previous white governments. I leave this for now in the hands of the memelords.
On a personal level, woke whites can shame their friends and relatives who don't love their own kind. This is easier for Coloureds and Indians, as white guilt isn't a problem for them, only their tendency to view themselves as non-white instead of non-black. But nationalistic love of culture and people should be encouraged. This is already encouraged once a year by the government, on Heritage Day. Do it for another 364 days a year. Be proud of your own. But there is no reason to make it competitive, and indeed it can be counter-productive. Afrikaners celebrating their culture works towards the goal, and Zulus celebrating their culture also works towards the goal. Tribes and nations occur naturally, and so there is a natural gravitational pull of power from government to these natural polities. Encourage it. However, I see cultural appropriation of the braai as acceptable by all.
This is a working idea, so add to it or critique it or improve it.
