Show your support by purchasing VDARE.com merchandise.
VDARE.com's Amazon connection has been restored! Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
With Amnesty International
having just issued a report
that calls the practice of torture in African
countries "routine" and with probably
hundreds of thousands of Africans living in the most
grotesque slavery,
African nations are cranking up a demand that Western
states should apologize and pay up for all the
wickedness they perpetrated on their continent in the
past. But for once, it seems that Western states are
not going to cave in to efforts to manipulate
obsessive white guilt--though not necessarily for the
right reasons.
Demands for
"reparations" are coming not only from American
blacks eager to get their hands on the modern-day
analogue to 40
acres and a mule, but also from the 53
African states that call themselves the
"African Group" taking part in a forthcoming
United Nations gala
in Durban, South Africa, the "World Conference
against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance." The conference will be yet
one more U.N. blabber-fest preaching global do-good
while trying to separate Western nations from as much
of their cash as possible.
What the African Group wants
specifically is for the wealthier and more powerful
(dare one say more civilized?) Western nations to fork
up the cash in the form of reparations for the
European and American slave trade of yore and also to
recognize slavery as a "crime against
humanity." The latter proposal also enjoys the
support of that paragon of humanitarianism, Fidel
Castro. Mary
Robinson, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights,
essentially agrees. She pronounces that "To deal
with the future, you have to close on the past."
She does not, of course, explain
why the past--the European slave trade ended about two
centuries ago--is not already closed, nor indeed why
Africa's quite gruesome present does not also need to
be closed. In 1993, the U.S. State Department
estimated that in North Africa alone, there were some
90,000 black slaves, and the Johannesburg Daily
Mail and Guardian not long ago offered a chilling
account of what present-day slavery in Africa is
really like:
"The slave raiders prefer
women and boys," the South African paper
explained. "In order to catch them, they kill the
men and burn down their villages. When the women and
children run into the bush, they are chased and
captured. They are made to carry the 'spoils' of the
raid, usually sacks of grain, to the north. They are
then sold to wealthy Arab families.
"Arab families with large
farms and plantations in the Arab areas immediately to
the north of Southern Sudan may buy between 50 and 100
slaves. Families buy women to be used as 'concubines'
who perform farm and household tasks in addition to
providing sexual services. If the women are young
enough, they are genitally mutilated as soon as they
reach puberty, so as to make them acceptable to their
Arab masters."
Since the countries of the
African Group are so disturbed by the historic evil of
European slavery, it might behoove them to do
something about the slavery that exists on their own
continent today--and which their own governments often
tolerate, practice and even participate in. In the
case of Sudan, government troops are known to have
taken part in the kidnapping and selling of slaves.
The Western states don't like
the idea of calling slavery a "crime against
humanity" (the last time they used that term, in
Nuremberg, they actually had to hang the Nazi leaders
convicted of such crimes, despite the inconvenient
legalism that the "crimes" had never been
formally outlawed), and they certainly don't much care
for the idea of having to dredge up real financial
reparations for what their ancestors did hundreds
of years ago. Of course, they lack the candor to say
so, and therefore what they do say is that they'd
rather use the Durban conference to promote what a
British official calls "something forward-looking
and practical, something that will reinvigorate
existing international mechanisms and promote
tolerance."
What that means, probably, is
that the Western nations would like to set up transnational
institutions that will effectively outlaw and
penalize "racism," "xenophobia,"
and "related intolerance," much as it has
already outlawed the crime of "genocide."
Doing so would involve adapting the internal laws of
sovereign states to the U.N. code, so that such quaint
usages as the First Amendment would be compromised and
troublesome dissidents who grouse about immigration,
hate crime laws and multiculturalism could be muzzled.
The African Group's hypocrisy
about Western sins against Africa in the past and its
brutish indifference to its own crimes against its own
people today is repellent enough. But for once, what
the Africans are demanding from the West might be less
harmful than the "forward-looking
and practical" repression that Western elites
want to create for their own peoples.
COPYRIGHT 2001 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
June 11, 2001