What is “White genocide” and is it real? To answer that question let us first consult Rafael Lemkin, a Polish-Jewish writer who coined the term in his 1944 Axis Rule in Occupied Europe.
[G]enocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group.
Lemkin’s definition encompasses not only mass slaughters like the 1914-23 Armenian Genocide or the 1932-33 Ukrainian Holdomor. The “Indian schools” which tore Native American children away from their families were tools of genocide: so too are Chinese efforts to “re-educate” Tibetans and Uighurs. As Lemkin put it:
The world represents only so much culture and intellectual vigor as are created by its component national groups. Essentially the idea of a nation signifies constructive cooperation and original contributions, based upon genuine traditions, genuine culture, and well-developed national psychology. The destruction of a nation, therefore, results in the loss of its future contribution to the world.
At present there are no mass killings of White people in America, though there is a fair bit of interethnic violence that not infrequently takes on racial overtones. (A White American is 27 times more likely to be violently attacked by a Black person than the converse). The situation is quite different in South Africa, where Afrikaner farmers have been slaughtered in a lengthy and ongoing series of Plaasmoordes (Farm Murders). One of the ruling ANC party’s most popular fight songs is entitled Aw Dubul’ibhunu (shoot the Boer): Julius Malema, leader of the opposition party EFF, has stated “[W]e’ve not called for the killing of white people, at least for now. I can’t guarantee the future.”
It is unlikely that the media personalities who dismiss the plaasmoordes as racist conspiracy theories (or who celebrate them) will acknowledge a campaign of White genocide in America. Quite a few will even tell you that Whiteness is merely a social fiction created to prop up an oppressive system. Yet “White” has been associated with “people of European descent” since the Colonial era: many critics claiming “Whiteness doesn’t exist” insist that “White privilege” does. One is reminded of Golda Meir’s claim that “there is no such people [as Palestinians]” while her government was busy killing them.
When he proposed “Indian schools” in 1887, Richard H. Pratt hoped to “kill the Indian and save the man.” Toward that end, Indian children were removed from their parents, given new names, baptized as Christians and educated in vocational and technical schools: they were forbidden from speaking their indigenous languages under pain of beatings, and taught that their parents and ancestors were uneducated savages. Today Pratt’s ideas are decidedly unfashionable – but the idea of re-educating children to reject their parents’ ideologies is not.
American authorities aren’t taking White children away from their parents en masse (though parents who are too openly pro-White may find themselves dealing with Child Protective Services). But those parents who aren’t homeschooling may find their children being taught that our ancestors were genocidal slavers; that they should be ashamed, not proud, of their history; that they need to make amends for the evils which led to our Nation. (And if you manage to get them through high school without this indoctrination, good luck when they get to college!) Monuments to war heroes are torn down and desecrated as emblems of “White Supremacy.” And “anti-Racist” activists like Tim Wise announce proudly “[White people are] on the endangered list. And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving.” All this suggests at the very least a widespread hostility against White American culture.
In 1960 85% of America’s population was White: by 2050 it is estimated 47% of Americans will be White. Yet when White Americans voice concerns about these changing demographics, they are immediately silenced as “racists” and “haters.” We are told that diversity is our strength and that we must get used to a multicultural America where we are no longer in charge. And when we note the history of once-dominant minorities living amongst a resentful majority, we’re accused of promoting White Supremacist propaganda.
Is White Genocide “real”? There are many who will say “no.” In life as in method acting, it is wise to ask “what’s their motivation?” When you see people who are cheering the “browning of America” dismissing any pushback as “White fragility” and “White tears,” it’s hard not to suspect they have a hidden agenda. When you see governments covering up immigrant crimes you have to wonder why the needs of a foreign few outweigh the safety of the native many. And when you see that by 2060 the majority of English births will be non-White, you have to wonder when colonialism got repackaged as humanitarianism. And when you quit wondering, you have to start thinking about what to do to stop it.