No Rhodesia, No Brexit: The British Democracy Deception
Rhodesia’s Death, Britain’s Funeral! Divide & Conquer was the Name of the Game.
After the successive horrors of the 2nd Anglo Boer War, WWI and WWII the refrain “No More Brother Wars” should have been welded permanently into our Anglo hearts and minds. Instead a new cultural Marxist agenda turned ‘trench brothers’ against each other. This article considers the willful deception that turned the British public against their brothers in Rhodesia – to the detriment of their very own future.
“Even as late as the 1950s Rhodesia was still sending her men to assist Britain against the scourge of Communism in Malaya.”
Progressing from humble beginnings as recently as 1890, the development of Rhodesia’s flowering civilization slowed to a halt every time Rhodesia’s young men went to war for Britain, including the two world wars. Despite this sacrifice, Rhodesia was marked to became the new enemy of her Anglo brothers. The weapon of choice against this new enemy? The propaganda cry “One Man, One Vote, Now!”
Above: History repeating? From multi-racial to white exclusion, then ethnic cleansing, by deceptive ‘democracy’.
Britain Denies East Europeans a Democratic Vote
Prime Ministers Winston Churchill, Edward Heath and Tony Blair were notable for their flagrant disregard of the “One Man, One Vote” democracy they publicly applauded. They were also notable for being the winners of the Charlemagne Prize. Also known as the Kalergi Prize after the first recipient, the virulently anti-ethnic European Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi. This Charlemagne ‘Kalergi’ Prize, does not honour service to Britain, nor any sovereign state. Instead, it honours actions that destroy national sovereignty and independence in favour of a single integrated European state controlled by distant bureaucrats.
At the end of WWII, the so-called Good War, Churchill and FDR unilaterally denied eastern Europeans, some 100,000,000 people west of Russia, the right to vote on their future. Their nations were simply given to Stalin’s Communist Russia. Was this act of their forced “integration” into the USSR the real reason for Churchill receiving (see below) the Kalergi Prize in 1956?
British Governance By Deception: PM Heath Denies The British Public Their Vote
Britain in 1972 under the Conservative PM Edward Heath introduced for her citizens the “we’ll sign you up secretly, you can maybe vote later” version of “democracy”:
Just weeks before the 1970 general election which made him Prime Minister, Edward Heath declared that it would be wrong if any Government contemplating membership of the European Community were to take this step without `the full hearted consent of Parliament and people’.
However, when it came to it Heath didn’t have a referendum because opinion polls at the time (1972) showed that the British people were hugely opposed (by a margin of two to one) against joining the Common Market. Instead, Heath merely signed the documents that took us into what became the European Union on the basis that Parliament alone had passed the European Communities Bill of 1972… he used Parliament’s legal sovereignty to deny and permanently limit the political sovereignty of the electorate. Heath and Parliament changed the basic rules and they did not have the right (legal or moral) to do that. The 1972 European Communities Bill wasn’t just another Act of Parliament. Heath’s Bill used Parliament’s legal sovereignty, and status as representative of the electorate, to deny the fundamental rights of the electorate.
Britain’s entry into the Common Market (later to be transformed into the EU) was also illegal for another reason. The Prime Minister who signed the entry documents, Edward Heath, later confirmed that he had lied to the British people about the implications of the Treaty.
Heath told the electorate that signing the Treaty of Rome would lead to no essential loss of National Sovereignty but later admitted that this was a lie. Astonishingly, Heath said he lied because he knew that the British would not approve of him signing the Treaty if they knew the truth. Heath told voters that the EEC was merely a free trade association. But he was lying through his teeth. He knew that the original members of the EEC had a long-standing commitment to political union and the step by step creation of a European superstate.
Above: British PM Heath conducting his own version of ‘moral democracy’? In 1963 Heath, also known as “Mr Europe” (why not as Mr Britain?), was awarded the Kalergi Prize for his action promoting the loss of sovereignty for European integration. History has repeatedly proven that without deception and the rejection of the “one person, one vote” rule the integrated EU project would have collapsed.
Is the Kalergi Prize, a bribe to betray or a reward for betrayal?
In 1975 reinstated Labour PM (and communist Soviet agent) Harold Wilson consented to a “retrospective” referendum. Speaking with forked tongues and highly biased financiers with deep pockets, the British establishment and media [go to 5:49 min] went into overdrive to pursuade the British public that the decision condescendingly made for them had been a wise one. Britain thus chose to remain.
Britain Betrays & Excludes Rhodesias 700 Traditional Black Leaders
In Rhodesia the vote had been open equally to all races, whether white or black, since 1898. To ensure Responsible Government, the provision was that certain criterion relating to income and property ownership were met. The exception being that appointment as Chief or Headman was an automatic qualification.
In 1961 Rhodesia, publicly and openly, introduced a new Constitution permitting lower standards intended to progressively and gradually expand the limited franchise. This was done in cooperation with the British establishment and the Council of Chiefs who were the traditional and respected leaders of the black population of almost 4,000,000. There were more than 700 Chiefs recognized in the Rhodesian Council of Chiefs. For general comparison, the British House of Commons has only 650 elected members for a population of 55,500,00 in 1970 and approximately 65,000,000 today.
It should be pointed out that being white never automatically entitled a person to vote. In fact, even white men conscripted to the army during the Bush War could not vote if they did not meet the same income or property ownership criteria, yours truly’s family included!
However, a mere four years later the British establishment deemed the new Constitution obsolete, sparking Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence in 1965. Immediately Britain engaged in a propaganda war, implemented sanctions and even made plans for a British military offensive to invade Rhodesia with the cooperation of the American and Canadian military!
The same establishment and media mysteriously ignored the calls of the black representatives, the Tribal Chiefs in Rhodesia, to desist forthwith from being condescending to them and instead, supporting various disaffected youths groomed by Soviet and Chinese Communist forces. Consider the prior recognition and commendation by Britain of just two Tribal Chiefs being now dismissed. Chief Sigola and Chief Mzimuni:
The Tribal Chiefs themselves explicitly asked their customs be respected. Stephen Mitford Goodson writes, at a gathering of 700 Chiefs near Salisbury on 26 October 1964 their unanimous view was that Rhodesia (both its black and white people) should be independent of Britain. One Chief stated (emphasis added):
Now this is our custom. There is no such thing as one man one vote, casting your vote on a piece of paper. This is quite foreign to our way of life. By our custom, our method of voting is to discuss the matter openly as we are doing today in this hall. After a matter has been fully discussed anyone who has objections is invited to stand up and give his reasons for objecting. This is our traditional way of reaching unamity. We ask Government to respect our customs and way of life… How can anyone expect us to cast aside all our traditions and live like animals without any culture? European customs are unfamiliar to us. The European ways are very complicated when an African tries to adopt them…
Continuing, another Chief explained it:
There is only one important matter which is in dispute. The leaders of the British people, whom we have always trusted, have now turned around and accepted the views of some of our children [Joshua Nkomo and Ndabaningi Sithole (rivals of the then more junior Robert Mugabe)] and wish to ignore the traditional leaders of this country. It is quite clear that the British Government have accepted this because these people are now the marauding lions in our country of Rhodesia.
Our people are being burned in their houses [after the doors had been sealed with wire], their cattle killed and their children murdered. Dips are being burned and all a person’s property is being destroyed. If they see you have a lot of grain they burn it. These hooligans and thugs are not foreigners, they are our children whom we have fathered.
…The British way of doing things is completely incomprehensible to us. They carry on long, protracted discussions and cannot arrive at a decision. One minute the power is in the hands of this person, the next it is in the hands of that person; in the meantime murder is being done in our country. We are sick and tired of it. Let us have done with it, have our independence and end vacillation.
The terror was being waged by young men like Mugabe, who were not known, nor recognised as leaders by their own people. They were, however, selected, indoctrinated, trained and financed by Communist Soviets and Communist Chinese foreigners. These Communist-led terrorists were recognised and promoted in turn by the British establishment, which was supposedly waging war on Communism and its violently aggressive expansion!
Unlike other colonies that were controlled by Britain’s Colonial Office, Rhodesia had been self-ruled and self-supporting since its inception. However, the hasty ‘releasing’ of all Britain’s colonies, was crucial as a step toward ‘releasing’ Britain itself into the hands of the Europeans toward a European ‘super state’!
To give the reader an insight into the caliber of some of the most senior, pro-Western Chiefs, previously recognised and respected by Britain but now rejected and discarded in favor of extremist Marxist terrorist leaders:
From Colin Weyer: “Chief Sigola (64) from Umzingwane Tribal Trust Land in the Essexvale District. He was awarded the MBE in 1961 and also holds the Queen’s Medal for Chiefs and the Bledisloe Medal. Chief Sigola was a member of the British appointed Monckton Commission into the future of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, the Whaley Commission in 1967-68 into Rhodesia’s constitution and is a former member of the Tribal Trust Land Board and the Natural Resources Board. In 1965 he accompanied the Prime Minister, Mr. Ian Smith, to Britain to attend the funeral of Sir Winston Churchill. He has 10 children.”
From Colin Weyer: “Chief Mzimuni (60) is from Matshetshe Tribal Trust Land in Gwanda District. He was made a chief in 1934 and appointed to the Council of Chiefs on its inception in 1960. He holds the Queen’s Medal for Chiefs, the Coronation Medal, and the the Bledisloe Medal for Land Husbandry. He is chairman of Matshetshe African Council. Chief Mzimuni went on both overseas tours by Rhodesian chiefs in 1964 and 1965. During the Second World War his people raised money to contribute towards the cost of a Spitfire fighter aircraft for the Royal Air Force. In 1958 they gave 600 head of cattle to the new University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland [affiliated to the University of London]. He has four children.”
Understanding Development In ‘Young’ Rhodesia
While Britain does not have a Constitution it has the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights. Both were developed gradually over more than 800 years in a homogeneous Britain. In contrast Rhodesia was a fledgling nation, the wheel had only arrived 80 years earlier with the white pioneers. The various African languages struggled to find words for modernity and alien concepts such as the ancient Westminster system or ‘democracy’.
What was the urgency for unlimited franchise? There was no slavery in Rhodesia. No evidence of suffering in fact, the reverse! The black population rose from 400,000 to 4,000,000 in just 50 years. A third of that population explosion was due to blacks walking into Rhodesia from the surrounding lands, to improve their standard of living! All Rhodesians were working hard to build a nation as fast as the white men could create it (in-between serving British Wars). In fact black Rhodesians enjoyed the highest standard of living in Africa, second only to South Africa a nation 250 years older!
Rhodesia was roughly three times the size of England with a tiny fraction of her population, there was an abundance of land for all. The small white population of around 200,000 willingly and actively provided all of the technical support and most of the financing to develop the Tribal Trust Lands. Including, roads and electrical infrastructure, schools, sustainable farming techniques, clean reliable water and sewerage, housing and modern town developments. This was being achieved whilst the whites were also building their own farms from virgin land in remote, unpopulated regions in the bush long before roads or electricity was available to those farms. Many farmers had to provide their own electricity and roads.
The Tribal Trust lands were essential to end tribal wars over territory. The ethnic peoples, the SAN Bushman tribes (Asiatics not Bantu) had previously been defeated, marginalized and largely wiped out by the Shona settlers (Bantu migrants from Nigeria). Now the Shona were under constant attack by the more recent Matabele settlers (Bantus of Zulu extraction who settled in South Africa then migrated north after tribal wars) who invaded the land a mere 60 years before white man arrived. The Matabele regularly and violently plundered the Shona and demanded “tribute” taxes from them. Quite the reverse of the situation in Rhodesia a few decades later, where whites were paying taxes to develop Tribal Trust Lands for all black peoples!
The Tribal Trust Lands protected their traditional ways and culture were also protected and Whites were not allowed to settle or create businesses within these lands.
British ‘Democracy’: Why There Will Never Be A Brexit With An Exit!
Today almost every treaty or agreement white pioneers formed with non-whites is deemed ‘racist’ or done under duress or by deception, thus illegitimate regardless of the facts. One is tempted to loudly proclaim that this is “PROJECTION!” on the part of the British and EU establishment.
After significant political agitation over many years, on 23 June 2016 the British were finally “allowed” a referendum to decide whether to continue being part of the now massive and technocratic EU. They were asked:
” Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”
As we know the result was “Leave” and the British establishment and media went into what is now commonly referred to as ‘derangement syndrome’ when the people’s vote does not go their way.
Above: The EU, with its soulless grey glass parliament built to look like the Tower of Babel. The EU parliament is a vast and inscrutable bureaucracy headed by foreign rotating Presidents, all of who’s livelihoods depend on the EU. It cannot possibly hold the sovereignty, unique culture and traditions of each and every nation and its ethnic peoples close to heart. Begging the question yet again: ” How can anyone expect us to cast aside all our traditions and live like animals without any culture?“ Below: The historic British Palace of Westminster, or Houses of Parliament. A beautiful monument to the development and spread of Western Civilization and Democracy.
The challenge for the British people now is to see if they really do exit the EU. Since most Britons are unaware of how many treaties and agreements to which their politicians signed up and will be signing in the future, it is highly likely Britain’s “exit” will be a sham. For example:
Referendums rejecting the proposed European Constitution in the Netherlands and France were worked around by repackaging it as the so-called Reform Treaty, or Lisbon Treaty, amending the previous Maastricht Treaty and Treaty of Rome — and not putting it to the public in either country this time.
The Final Kalergi Prize Winning Prime Minister – Tony Blair
The third British PM to receive the Kalergi Prize in honour of serving Europe instead of Britain, was Tony Blair. Blair became the Prime Minister who opened Britain’s borders on an unprecedented scale to as many as 2.3 million migrants within a decade who were predominantly non-ethnic Europeans. Blair stifled debate and the right of the British people to have an explicit, open and democratic One Person, One Vote, to seek approval before their ethnic demographics were permanently altered.
In The Strange Death Of Europe, Douglas Murray investigates and documents the intentional deception by Tony Blair and his then, Immigration Minister, Barbara Roche in particular, about the volume and nature of new “immigrants” into Britain. Murray describes the actions they pursued as giving the appearance of a deliberate policy of societal transformation. Internal debate within the government was silenced by Roche calling dissenters racist and too white.
Mr Tom Bower interviewed more than 200 senior civil servants, ex-ministers and insiders and claims Mr Blair told officials and ministers:
“Don’t mention the advantages of immigration in public because they won’t even want that.”
Ten years later as ethnic-British people slide into becoming the clear minority they presently are in London, narcissistic Roche stated:
“I love the diversity of London,” she tells me. “I just feel comfortable.”
The British establishment and controlled media has consistently denied the majority of the British population a vote on trans-formative issues. Is that not what they accused Rhodesia of doing?
One Anglo Genocide Complete, A New One Begins In The Motherland
Of the 250,000 White Rhodesian population of the late 1970’s a mere 5,000 (mostly elderly, and many destitute) are estimated to remain in Zimbabwe Ruins. The few whites who arrived post-Rhodesia are not included in this figure. A 98% decline in any population is genocide.
The ‘justification’ to dehumanise, exclude, persecute and even diminish the outrageous acts of slaughter of the minority White Rhodesians was, and still is, promoted worldwide. Often it is portrayed as deserved karma.
This is a fallacious argument as it then must apply equally to the US, Britain, Israel, Australia, Canada, NZ, the Maori, the Chinese, the French, the Polish, the Indians, the Bolsheviks, the Zulus, the Shonas, the Matabele, the Congo cannibals, and in fact to every race and every nation with the exception of the original hunter gatherer San Bushmen.
It is of little surprise that Mugabe and the new President of the one-party state Zimbabwe Ruins will never be prosecuted for the torture and slaughter of well over 20,000 Matabele people. Nor for his and Mugabe’s Blood Diamond crimes. Dr Hammond writes:
Mugabe and his Marxists politburo have been enriching themselves with blood diamonds from the Marange diamond fields in South East Zimbabwe. The area has been declared a military zone and the area cleared of its local inhabitants. Many hundreds have been killed and the tribes which inhabited this area for generations have been chased away. The Chinese Peoples Liberation Army is supervising the diamond mining in Marange and Antanov cargo planes are transporting the diamonds exploited from Marange directly from the bush runway to China. The Marange diamond fields are believed to be one of the largest diamond fields in the world with a potential of up to a quarter of all diamonds mined around the globe. In return for the diamonds the Chinese military are supplying weapons and other essential materials to keep the unpopular Mugabe regime in power in Zimbabwe.
The establishments anti-pioneer narrative demands that black wars, invasions, conquests, crimes and savagery are ignored. This is to ensure that they are always the ‘victims’ whilst whites are always to be framed as the ‘victimizers’. The consequences of this narrative are now severely impacting on white British children, in particular poor and disadvantaged white children.
In 2016, Theresa May stated in her first speech as Prime Minister, “If you’re a white working-class boy, you’re less likely than anybody else in Britain to go to university”. In 2019, Sir Bryan told The Times:
“If Cambridge University can accept a much larger donation in support of black students, why cannot I do the same for under-privileged white British?
More shocking is that for decades the British establishment and controlled media have expended resources not on helping but on covering-up the industrial scale terror and sexual abuse inflicted on disadvantaged white girls. It is estimated one million, predominantly white, usually underage, girls were entrapped into rape, prostitution and abuse by predominantly ethnically Pakistani adult men. Those who have endeavored to expose this travesty have been vilified for being ‘racist’ and the victims mocked for being ‘white-trash’.
For example, MP Naz Shah “penned a comment piece for the Independent attacking fellow Labour MP Sarah Champion for writing an article stating ‘Britain had a problem with Pakistani men targeting vulnerable white girls’.” A few days later Shah (1) ‘liked’ and then (2) ‘shared’ on social media a post stating: ‘Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity.’
That white British children are already systematically being dehumanised, excluded and persecuted by broader society while Britain is majority white, is chilling. Will there be another white Anglo genocide, this time in the motherland?