The Huffington Post published an article “Could It Be Time to Deny White Men the Franchise?” The original post, which has since been taken down, argued that South African whites are impeding progress and should be denied the franchise so that progress can continue untrammeled by white male resistance. The blog post was initially defended by the Huffington Post and was removed only when the post’s contributor, a woman purportedly from South Africa named Shelley Garland, appeared to be a fake identity. It turns out that Shelley Garland is in reality a man by the name of Marius Roodt who posted the blog entry to demonstrate the lack of fact-checking in South African journalism. After taking down the post the Huffington Post South Africa editor-in-chief issued a half-hearted apology. Three talking points deserve consideration when discussing this blog post. First, this post demonstrates the meaningless nature of PC sins like “racism.” Second, the post could also serve as a springboard to discussing ethnonationalism as an alternative to multiracial societies in which universal suffrage brings racial conflict to the forefront. Finally, this post invites us into a discussion of race realism in that we can see firsthand the consequences of black suffrage in South Africa and elsewhere.
The Hypocrisy of Leftist Concepts Like “Racism”
If it isn’t already obvious, the entirety of leftist morality is hypocritical in both its meaning and intended consequences. Combating “racism” has never been about unjust hatred, genuine oppression, or fairness. If justice means universal suffrage for everyone and this is denied to whites, then the only conclusion that we can reach is that “racism” has nothing to do with justice. Racism is actually about envy and hatred of white people and the elimination of white people and culture from the world. The Huffington Post isn’t some obscure internet blog, but a respectable mainstream publication with well-established leftist and egalitarian bona fides. That the Huffington Post is considered mainstream is significant, because their publication of this blog post is but one more example of how the established media has endorsed an explicitly anti-white narrative. This blog post would not have been published on the Huffington Post website or any mainstream journalistic outlet if it had suggested that anyone other than white males be denied the voting franchise. This can be used as just one more example of how cultural Marxist sins such as racism and sexism are arbitrary and hypocritical and should have no place in Christian ethical discourse.
Political Participation and Ethnic Similarity
Limiting suffrage according to ethnic identity is a legitimate topic for discussion. As ethnonationalists we advocate for separate nations in which participation in the body politic is limited to a certain ethnic group. The right of sub-Saharan Africans to maintain their distinct national identity is certainly legitimate. The same right applies to white Europeans and members of other races as well. This blog post can serve as a springboard to discussing the role that ethnic conflict can play in politics. In multi-ethnic countries, politics is inextricably linked to race and potential racial conflict. In ethnically homogeneous societies race is a political non-issue. Political decisions can be made for the benefit of the people as a whole without a racial axe to grind. Whatever solutions are proposed for the political problems of Africa must take this into account.
South Africa and Universal Suffrage
The assertion that a particular group of people might be denied the franchise in order to attain positive social progress is interesting. The argument that white men should be denied the vote in order to bring about leftward social change is borrowing from a right-wing and traditionalist worldview due to its non-egalitarian premise. In essence, what is being argued is that socially inferior white men must be restricted from political participation in order to achieve a more equal society. We can lay aside the underlying inconsistency in this argument and use this position as a starting point to discuss the nature of appropriate limitations on political participation in the body politic.
Blacks have destroyed South Africa since they have gained the franchise with the collapse of apartheid in 1994. Black-ruled South Africa has transitioned from a prosperous first-world nation to a third-world impoverished disaster on the brink of starvation. All of this has happened in a very short period of time, and directly corresponds to the genocide of whites in what used to be their own country. This story has repeated many times in the past. Wherever blacks become a majority, they destroy the infrastructure that they have inherited (or rather stolen). Whites need to grasp the lessons of South Africa, Haiti, Zimbabwe, and Detroit if we want to avert this disaster on a worldwide scale before it is too late. American whites need to ask whether we want to travel down the same path as South Africa, and the answer should unequivocally be no.
Our ancestors understood that their welfare and culture could be preserved only in countries in which they were the solid majority and in which they maintained a monopoly on power. The modern notion of universal suffrage is rooted in a false premise of equality. This blog post can serve as a teachable moment, demonstrating that limiting participation in the body politic to desirable voters and office-holders is necessary for maintaining civilization. This isn’t to say there is no hope for blacks ever achieving civilization in any capacity, but we must be realistic about what has happened in history as well as where things stand today. It is my hope that this blog post can be used for profitable discussion in persuading conservative Christians to consider the truth of ethnonationalism.