Credit Image: © Jim Loscalzo – Pool Via Cnp/CNP via ZUMA Press Wire

According to ForeignAssistance.gov, the United States of America provided about $330 million in aid to South Africa in 2024, and $90 million so far in 2025. Because aid for both of these years is only partially reported, the real figures may well be higher. White South Africa fell not because of pressure from the African National Congress but because of sanctions from the West, especially the United States and the United Kingdom. Both of those countries ruthlessly betrayed a World War II and Cold War ally for no strategic gain. South Africa has routinely sided against the United States in international affairs and is a key member of the BRICS economic alliance, which seeks to disrupt American hegemony.

All of this suggests that South Africa has not been an American ally since the end of apartheid, nor a state that offers us anything useful. It is just another drain on the American taxpayer. It therefore is not too much to ask for the coddled one-party government in South Africa not to discriminate against the race shared by America’s majority population, let alone preside over violence against that race. White South Africans’ fate, after all, could easily be ours, and it was our actions that put the ANC in power. Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, a key ally of President Donald Trump, and probably the main reason we enjoy what free speech we still have, is also essentially a white refugee from South Africa. He says he is prevented from operating Starlink in the country of his birth because he is white.

Nonetheless, the media, in an expression of uniformity remarkable even for them, this week declared that President Trump launched an “ambush” against South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.

The farm murders in South Africa have been a major focus of American Renaissance’s coverage for nearly a decade. Confiscatory taxation, racial discrimination, and high urban crime also make life all but impossible for white South Africans in cities, unless they are very wealthy. South Africa is the closest thing we have to a simulation of what would happen if progressive ideas about race are taken to their logical conclusion. The former Rhodesia, Zimbabwe, is what happens if you let that simulation play out a little longer. The farm murders are so notorious that even mainstream documentaries such as Lauren Southern’s Farmlands (2018) went viral during a time with far more censorship. It is no exaggeration to say that we probably focus more attention on the plight of South African whites than on any other group of white people in the world.

Why is there such attention? Leftists may say that we want to lionize apartheid, white supremacy, and colonialism. Yet South Africa’s own history does not support such a reading. The Afrikaners were some of the most prominent victims of the British Empire, though that did not prevent them from fighting bravely for the Empire in World War II. The short-lived period of acceptance for countries such as South Africa and Rhodesia, exemplified by the career of statesman and general Jan Smuts, faded quickly in the postwar era.

It was not just white colonies but what must be considered white nations in Africa, from French Algeria to South Africa, that were betrayed by the “West.”

Such countries and peoples may have initially been products of empire, but they were ultimately its final victims. Successful white nations were sacrificed to an egalitarian ideological vision. Conservatives within South Africa and elsewhere accepted the handover because of promises that private property, legal systems, and other paper guarantees of normality would be respected. They were not.

South Africa matters because it is an almost perfect example of Why We Fight, and why we must fight whether we like it or not. Every major argument or excuse used to further the ideology of egalitarianism or integration has been used in South Africa. When leftists argue about “racial reconciliation,” “the legacy of slavery,” or the need to redefine our history to be “inclusive,” we can simply look to South Africa to see where that rhetoric leads. CNN host Ashley Allison praised South Africa as a model of the “racial reconciliation” the US has yet to undergo. Significantly, she said this when complaining about white Afrikaners being welcomed to the United States.

Just a few years before the soft cultural revolution of 2020 in the United States, South Africa underwent its own version, where remnants of the old regime were torn down. Statues were destroyed, white students on college campuses were terrorized, and politicians spoke openly about the need to “decolonize” a country that had not been under foreign domination for decades. I call this “state conquest,” where the institutions and formal arrangements of power within a state remain constant, but the purpose for which power is wielded is transformed. Few in South Africa seem to want the “rainbow nation” of liberal propaganda. Many non-whites want revenge.

The question is, revenge for what? South African whites voted to give away their country. They may have been tricked, outspent, and under threat, but the old South Africa was not conquered militarily. It surrendered morally. Just about every white country has done the same, though their demographics have not declined to the level of South Africa. South Africa was handed to blacks as a kind of “turnkey” country — a modern, functioning, industrialized state. Within a few years, it visibly disintegrated and is now on the brink of political dissolution.

This should have led to reflection throughout the Western world. Since World War II, the presumption behind integration, decolonization, and diversity has been that making a prosperous liberal democracy is simply a matter of removing discrimination and arranging institutional power carefully to avoid “authoritarianism” or a closed society. Yet the devastated cities of the American South, the ghettos of the North, the “no-go” zones of Europe, and the parallel societies of hostile non-whites that have taken root throughout the West have shown that premise was wrong. Constitutions, norms, and institutions do not make a nation. The inherent attributes of the ethnic stock form the nation. It is not true that race is a social construct. Instead, society is a racial construct.

Such an insight, though it may seem obvious to us and proven by recent history, threatens far too much ever to be accepted by the power structure in the West. After all, many people, including many whites (even in South Africa), profit from the status quo. The “Open Society” supplies the markets with cheap labor and a mass consumer base through large-scale immigration and promotes short-term consumption over long-term investment and thrift. It allows for the efficient harvesting of increasingly dysgenic human resources with a minimum of disruption. Philosophers and ideological arguments, from John Rawls’s “Veil of Ignorance” to the mythology of “anti-fascism,” might try to prop up our current system, but they are secondary to the concrete material interests that the system serves.

“The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people,” said Sam Francis, “nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people.” That statement arguably ended the career of the “Clausewitz of the Right” within the American conservative movement. This should not be surprising. The contention that human potential and the supposedly universal appeal of certain ideals are constrained by genetics is a profound challenge not just to leftism, but to liberalism. In some ways, it opens up the entire Enlightenment to challenge. Ricardo Duchesne was correct when he argued at the 2023 American Renaissance Conference that while liberalism is the source of the West’s strength, it is now leading us to destruction as it is taken to its logical conclusion.

Part of our job is offering the needed ideological critique and alternatives, but those will not matter to most people. What matters more is showing the real-world consequences of egalitarianism. Zimbabwe and South Africa are the one-two punch that proves white advocacy correct. Institutional safeguards, international support, well-developed infrastructure, and guarantees of “human rights” do not predict the success or failure of societies. Racial demographics do. Proof by example is probably the best way of making this large-scale argument to masses of people, just as showing double standards remains the best way of waking up whites to anti-white hatred.

In this worldwide struggle, each of us has a cause that is most important. For those in the American South, it may be defending monuments and the honor of the Lost Cause. For all Americans, it may be fighting for mass deportations. For Europeans, it could be remigration. However, for all of us, the frontline is South Africa. It is where we will all end up if we do not win. For that reason, the cause of the Afrikaners is and remains the cause of all whites.