Jump to content

White separatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Adi Schlebusch (talk | contribs) at 18:52, 17 July 2008 (→‎Criticism and counterpoint). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

White separatism is a separatist political movement that seeks a homeland for white people. White separatists generally claim genetic affiliation with Anglo-Saxon cultures, Nordic cultures, or other white European cultures.

White separatists are often found among Christian Identity groups,[citation needed] some of whom refer to the United States as a "Zionist Occupation Government". As a result, many proposals have been submitted to create separate white homelands in locations such as the northwestern corner of the United States.[1]

White separatism is also often associated with paleoconservatism.

Origins

As European people colonized parts of Africa and North America, some white people desired to create new settlements of whites that could exist as nations similar to the nations of Europe. Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."[2]

At the dawn of the civil rights era, Abraham Lincoln, addressing the African American community, wrote:

For the sake of your race you should sacrifice something of your present comfort for the purpose of being as grand in that respect as the white people. ... The colony of Liberia has been in existence a long time. In a certain sense it is a success. ... They are not all American colonists or their descendants. Something less than 12,000 have been sent thither from this country. Many of the original settlers have died; yet, like people else-where, their offspring outnumber those deceased. The question is, if the colored people are persuaded to go anywhere, why not there?[3]

Criticism and counterpoint

Critics claim that contemporary white separatism is a public facade adopted by white supremacists.[4] Supporters of white separatism claim that describing white separatists as white supremacist is a media smear.[5] They claim that their desire to remove themselves from racially integrated society and to segregate based on race removes the possibility of subjugating other ethnicities, and thus has no relation to white supremacy. Kevin Alfred Strom, on the National Alliance's white separatist radio program American Dissident Voices, defined the difference between white separatism and supremacy this way:

A separatist may believe that his race is superior to other races in some or all characteristics, but this is not his essential belief. The separatist is defined by his wish for freedom and independence for his people. He wishes them to have their own society, to be led by their own kind, to have a government which looks out for their interests alone. The separatist does not wish to live in a multiracial society at all, so he naturally has no desire to rule over other races...[6]

White Separatism vs White Supremacy

Many white separatists assert racial separatism differs from supremacy in that separatists believe that all cultures are equal and all races and ethnic groups have the right to develop their own culture separately. No race should dominate another and no race is inherantly superior to another. Racial differences, however, should be respected and miscegenation is strongly opposed, because it is seen as a main threat to a specific group of people's culture. Likewise, it opposes racism and sees separation as the best way for the different racial groups to live in harmony with each other.[7]

Apartheid

Many White separatists claim that the system of Separate Development or Apartheid that was implemented in South Africa in the 19th century by the National Party, was not based on racial supremacy, but the desire to preserve the cultures of the different ethnic groups. Jann Schlebusch has often referred to the following historical facts to prove that Apartheid was not racist, but rather a separatist policy based on the principle of equality for all ethnicities:

  • The Voortrekker Manifesto stated the following concerning relations with other peoples: Everywhere we go, we shall maintain the principle of true freedom. We shall hold nobody in slavery. We shall make proper laws to suppress crime and to preserve proper relations between employer and employee. We leave the Cape in order to lead a more restful life. We shall not molest any volk and we shall take nobody’s property. If however, we are attacked, we shall defend ourselves and our property against any enemy. During the proceed of our trek and in the country of our settlement, we shall make our intentions clear to the natives and also our desire to live in peace and friendship with them. We leave the Colony with the knowledge that the British government can demand nothing more from us and will allow us to govern ourselves.
  • The white governments of the Boer Republics constantly imposed restrictions on white ownership in black terriories.
  • After South Africa became a union, the Union government (under British rule) made a law in 1913, prohibiting whites and blacks to buy property in each other’s territories. Again (contrary to the propaganda) this was almost exclusively to restrict the expansion of white ownership in black areas.
  • "Homelands" were not created by Apartheid, but was already recognized as separate countries by the British, during their rule of the Cape and Natal. The apartheid government merely proceeded to recognise the independence of these ethnic groups. Blacks also enjoyed full political rights in their homelands.
  • Opposition to apartheid by black people, was largely because of international pressure on blacks to oppose the white Christian government.
  • The Apartheid government built numerous schools, universities, hospitals and other infrastructure for blacks and by the 1970s the literacy rate among South African Blacks was by far the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa. Further they delegated agricultural officers to train and assist the blacks in commercial farming and also administrative officers to train the black government officials.


Supporters of Apartheid claim that, based on the above, it is clear that no ethnic group has ever before done as much for their neighbours as the Apartheid government did for the black people in South Africa.

Notable white separatists

See also

References