Stockholm Syndrome and White Genocide
Colin Liddell
Stockholm Syndrome is the psychological phenomenon whereby captives bond with their captors even to the point of sympathizing with and defending them. It is thought to have its roots in our hunter-gatherer past, where the experience of being forcibly co-opted into a new band of hunter-gatherers was a not uncommon occurrence.
Usually it is viewed as an individual psychological condition, affecting those individuals who are kidnapped or held hostage, such as the hostages in the 1973 botched robbery in Stockholm that gave the phenomenon its name, but there is no reason why it can’t be extended to much larger groups if they appear to demonstrate the behavior specified by the condition.
The phenomenon is thought to be more common among women than men, for obvious reasons, but it is unclear whether it has a racial aspect, although this seems likely. To date the most famous examples — Patty Hearst, Jaycee Lee Dugard, etc. — have typically been young White women.
There is a certain rationale to Stockholm Syndrome. If a person is captured or abused in some way, and if he or she is essentially powerless to prevent this, then, the act of bonding with the captor or abuser will help to make an unbearable situation more psychologically bearable. It may also encourage the captor or abuser to be more sympathetic to the captive or abusee.
The Stockholm Syndrome also has its opposite, called the Lima Syndrome, in which the captors over-empathize with the captives. The most famous case involved the mainly Japanese hostages at the Japanese embassy in Lima, Peru, which was taken over in 1997 by the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement. Under an impulse of sympathy the captors soon started to release most of the hostages, including the most valuable ones.
If we view South Africa’s Whites as de facto hostages or captives of the Black majority, to whom they foolishly gave away all their political power in the early 1990s, then it is clear that South Africa is not undergoing a Lima situation. Genocidal attacks on Whites continue, while the President and his political cronies continue to chant “Kill the Boer” at public gatherings. Racist employment and redistributionist policies continue to proliferate; even where Whites try to peacefully form their own communities, or just naturally cluster together, they are threatened.
Recently, the ludicrously-named Tokyo Sexwale, the Human Settlements Minister, who is in the process of dumping his White wife of 20 years for a younger Indian model, stated that predominantly White suburbs should be “deracialized” by granting Blacks special loans to buy property there.
Every day it becomes clearer that White South Africans are living under an increasingly abusive system that aims ultimately at their extinction as a unique people and organic community. So, how are they reacting? Are they organizing? Are they developing solidarity? Are they fighting back?
On the available evidence, and with a few small exceptions, the answers are no, no, and no.
What makes this more remarkable is that we are talking here not about a historically slavish demographic, but about some of the toughest White people on the planet. There is no doubt that if South African Whites had the will they could seize control of the country tomorrow. So, what has happened to the proud Boers and even to the Anglophone Whites, who were always lukewarm supporters of Apartheid but who clearly don’t want to suffer the indignities that the Marxist-racist state has in store for them?
The only explanation is that Whites in South Africans are undergoing a collective Stockholm Syndrome, identifying with their abusers, sympathizing with their oppressors, in an attempt to make an unbearable situation slightly more bearable. (It might well be worth exploring in what strain of South Africa’s diverse European population this collective Stockholm Syndrome first appeared, as it may well have roots stretching back to earlier times and different places. In this context, the experience of South Africa’s Jews would be of particular interest.)
But whether Jew or non-Jew, in modern day South Africa, all Whites are viewed the same by Blacks, and their shared experience is one of gradually increasing humiliation. The other day the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ms. Maite Nkoana-Mashabane expressed deep concern over ethnically motivated killings in South Africa. Of course, she was not talking about Whites, who are being butchered and mutilated in their thousands, despite living lives dominated by security precautions. She was instead referring to a few Somalis who had been lynched by mobs of South African Blacks with their usual brutality.
Such humiliations are a direct threat to the ego of every White South African. Against such an attack there are a number of possible responses: (1) a silent resolve to resist and fight back, (2) a decision to flee, (3) pure and simple denial, and (4) an urge to identify with the powers that be, and to latch on to any crumbs of comfort. In the case of Nkoana-Mashabane’s statement these crumbs are not even being dispensed to Whites, but to another race regarded by the majority as outsiders.
This urge to identify and latch on to crumbs of comfort is how the “useful idiots” in the White community, who are still allowed some prominence in the media, greet such statements. But, as if to slap them in the face again, Nkoana-Mashabane made sure her statement included a reference to Apartheid and pan-African unity:
We recall the support and solidarity accorded to us during our fight against apartheid by African people, including Somalis, and wish to express our sincere gratitude. As South Africa, we value our close relations with our neighbours and the rest of the African Continent.
As I said above, there is a certain rationale to the Stockholm Syndrome. In our micro-political prehistoric past, when individuals were captured, enslaved or subdued, it was almost always by groups of similar racial and even ethnic backgrounds. Under such circumstances, showing a certain amount of empathy to the powerful would, given time, elicit a degree of sympathy or forbearance in return, leading ultimately to a more normalized relationship. But hoping for something similar in South Africa is an obvious absurdity as Black Africans show little tendency towards anything even resembling a Lima Syndrome as demonstrated by their brutality even towards other Africans.
As long as Whites are White they will be hated. Only by breeding into the greater population — by which is largely meant White women breeding with African males like the soon-to-be ex-Mrs. Sexwale — and by becoming a tiny unrecognizable strain in the Black races of South Africa will the hatred of Whites stop.
If White South Africans are to survive they will have to break the spell of the collective Stockholm Syndrome they have been living under for the last twenty years and find some way to resist.
