Wanna know where we're headed? Consider the experience of South Africa
This can be hugely informative--in part because lots of times similar circumstances will cause country A to experience some dire crisis ten or 20 years before country B. If you live in country B that might give you enough time to avoid the crisis--or at least reduce its impact--provided you 1) know what's happening in country A; and 2) you have a good idea of what they did that got 'em in trouble.
In this context, the situation in South Africa has chilling parallels for the U.S. under the emperor's rule.
South Africa was settled by whites from the Netherlands--the Boers, now called Afrikaners--and eventually South Africa became the largest and most successful economy in Africa. Then after decades of white rule (apartheid), blacks in the country--largely communist and strongly supported by the former Soviet Union--began pushing to end apartheid.
Of course since blacks outnumbered whites by something like 5 to 1 it was well known that opening voting to all would usher in black rule. Naturally most whites in SA were opposed but liberals in the both Europe and the U.S. totally supported this, along with many white residents of SA.
After years of guerilla warfare--in which whites, though heavily outnumbered, fared very well--a combination of international pressure, an arms and trade embargo by virtually every nation, and the help of liberals in the apartheid government led to the government agreeing to hold elections open to all in 1994. The result, of course, was a sweep by black candidates of the African National Congress, who have held power since that time.
But as you might have guessed, having the white government peacefully hand over power to them wasn't enough for the communists in the ANC, and soon gangs of blacks were attacking, torturing and killing white farm families. Being masters of propaganda, the ANC government took effective action: They quickly stopped keeping records of farm murders. But the whites know about every murder, and have kept their own records (click here). Here's another ghastly compilation.
The last number I recall seeing was 4,700 since 1994. That figure becomes even more ghastly when one realizes that the number of whites in SA is about 4.6 million. A corresponding number for the U.S. would be about 200,000 murdered.
Attackers murder even 3- or 4-year-old white children--and not just on rare occasions but often enough to form a pattern. And then you have charmers like the folks who posted this on Facebook (!):
If the screencap is too blurred to read, here's the content:
Nceba Sodo, May 25, 2010: "What can we do to protect our black babies from these future oppressors and racists?"
Mfundo Dlungwane: "We have no choice but to kill the white babies, simply because they are goin to grow and oppress our babies, so we kill the white babies...when the rite time comes we'll chop their heads off and they become headless little racist. In the Bible it says "the sins of the fathers will fall onto the next generation" we'll be not only liberating what belongs to us but als [sic] fulfilling prophecy you know what I'm sayin..."
Ncebo Sodo: "Well said. The seed of racism, hatred, colonialism and Apartheid was sown yesterday, and today is harvest time, so let the white infants/babies reap the harvest that their forefathers have planted. I fully agree with you: kill them before they grow and oppress our babies."
Mfundo: "One bullet, one white infant."
Ncebo: "One bullet, one white infant."
Of course there are insane people all over the world. Could all this murder and torture be the work of "lone wolf" nutters?
Well, not "lone" since they always attack in gangs. But maybe gangs of only slightly crazed males led by one deranged, angry nutter, possibly?
A couple of facts strongly refute that explanation, and instead point to a deliberate government policy: in a huge number of cases, killers have been identified by survivors and arrested, but an absurdly low bond is set and they're quickly released. And then...their cases mysteriously disappear.
Literally--government officials--all ANC members and all black--claim the case file can't be found. Asked to elaborate or answer questions they either refuse comment or claim they're mystified. After this happens the 100th time it suggests the government quietly approves of the murders.
Such a thing strikes westerners as shocking--about as unbelievable as the notion that the leading Democrat presidential candidate would conduct official business as Secretary of State using her own private email server for years without anyone in the Obozo administration ever noticing. It's just unbelievable. But to South Africans this is an everyday occurrence, since the president of the ANC--an open communist--has been caught on video singing two songs popular with the ANC: "Kill the Boers," and "One white, one bullet."
Okay, so South Africa has become a disaster. Hey, it happens, right? I mean, that's an entirely different country, so how could we possibly learn anything useful from their experience?
So glad you asked. The first thing we can learn is that if it can happen in South Africa the same can happen here. Hell, it IS here. Here's a black guy in the U.S. inciting blacks to kill white cops:
I hear liberals and Democrats saying we'll never be in that position because we have a decent economy and a good standard of living, or similar bullshit. But South Africa had the best economy on the whole continent. Just as Venezuela was the best economy and highest per-capita income in South America. Beirut, Lebanon was once called "the Paris of the middle east" until civil war destroyed it.
Anyone who thinks a great economy will prevent civil chaos is an idiot, determined not to see.
Second: When one group resents the wealth or achievements or power or status of another group, demagogs always appear, and proceed to gather support among the resentful by promising them that under the "new" order they'll be able to simply take what the well-off have. Yay, instant wealth! Reparations, right? Communists and socialists (so-called "social justice warriors") push this line every time--and predictably gain huge support by doing so.
Third: There are always lots of members of the successful group--always liberal chowderheads--who will join the communists and help them achieve Glorious Socialism, with its Wonderful Equality. The libs are unalterably convinced that by definition unequal wealth is unfair. Most of 'em have good hearts and grieve for the lack of wealth among the poor. And they seem to really believe that, say, a doctor shouldn't earn any more than a fast-food worker or a professor of womyns' studies, despite the first requiring far more effort to achieve than the other two.
It absolutely never crosses the mind of liberals that paying engineers the same as waiters will result in fewer people mastering the far more demanding coursework required to get an engineering degree. And they can never grasp that some people would simply rather not work, even if given a job, since it's so much easier to collect welfare or strong-arm weaker folks out of their cash. Because the fundamental premise of liberal chowderheads is that "We're all alike," even when that's been demonstrated--endlessly--to be false.
This is not to say we're not all valuable, or that street sweepers aren't every bit as necessary as engineers. It's just that the effort to become one of those two is a lot greater.
And in this particular assumption--as in most--liberals are unteachable. If they were assaulted, robbed and then stabbed to death they'd believe to their dying breath that it was their fault.
As a lot of people have noted, you can't fix stupid.
Now, one can't reasonably blame people who don't have much from wanting more--including anything you have. When you think about it, wanting better conditions is one helluva motivator for most people. It can light a fire under 'em and motivate 'em to build a company or create a service or write a book or whatever. But this motivator is totally removed when government gets into the act by giving people food and a home or apartment even if they don't work.
And communism doubles down on that, by telling people that the ONLY reason some other people have more is that they inherited their wealth, or they have "white privilege" or that some other fix is in.
So as you watch the steadily increasing number of murders and beatings and police abuse of whites here in the U.S. under Obama, remember the experience of South Africa under the ANC government, Tell us why you're absolutely sure things can't possibly get that bad here. Tell us how the emperor is doing everything possible to uphold the rule of law, and strengthen respect for our laws, and to help make everyone equal under the law, would ya?
But of course you can't. The evidence is overwhelming that Obama has bent or broken the law innumerable times, but Republicans in congress are afraid to defend the Constitution and the rule of law for fear of being called racists.
So lacking responsible representatives, and being too fucking nice to stand up a few dozen miniguns and sweep the streets clean, we will get the privilege of playing out our own version of South Africa.
But who knows--maybe a miracle will happen.
To answer the inevitable charge: The foregoing is not to indict all blacks. Obviously not all blacks--either here or in South Africa--think assaulting and/or killing whites is a good idea. Unfortunately this obviously hasn't stopped the assaults and killing. I strongly suspect that any black person who criticized black-on-white violence would be immediately attacked by fellow blacks as being an "Uncle Tom." And I further suspect not a single black person is willing to take that risk.
My guess is that the lure of reparations, and of getting revenge for injuries to one's ancestors, is simply too strong to prevent war between the races. Sad, because if that starts a lot of innocent people are gonna die.
As an aside: To get an idea about how corrupt the ANC, its president, Jacob Zuma, and its allies are, consider one small vignette: Zuma--whose organization runs the government at every level--has used taxpayer funds to lavishly expand his private compound. According to the country's "official ministerial handbook" a politician can tap the taxpayers for 100,000 Rand (about $8000) for a security systems or other improvements on their own property, but are required by law to personally pay any amounts above that.
Zuma's upgrades to his compound were quite a bit pricier: The current total is 246 Million Rand. In other words, he exceeded the legal limit by a mere 245,900,000 Rand (a mere $20 million or so).
This is brazen corruption--almost on a Clintonesque scale. So naturally a lot of South Africans wanted to know who approved the expense. Zuma stonewalled--blamed the architechts and the contractors. The case was referred to the Office of the Public Protector, one Thuli Madonsela. This worthy understandably seems to have had little interest in taking on the all-powerful president Zuma, and her report was amazingly ambiguous.
That was January of two years ago. Zuma is still stonewalling, and still president. He rules the country virtually by decree. Sound familiar? This is what happens when the "rule of law" is replaced by tribal rule--meaning the chief rules by decree.
Which is what we have here in the U.S. now.