Fanatics, Zealots and antisemites

Taking a short break from my normal articles, I thought it would be fun to expose just how utterly deranged the more fanatical True Believers are, and to use some of their own crazed outbursts so to do. As regular readers of this blog will know, I have long thought that Defenders of the Myth have zero interest in actual history, and rather more in common with wide-eyed Religious Cultists.

It is perhaps no surprise, therefore, that those who passionately defend National Party myth come across as extremist lunatics, and these utter fools were recently out in force, attempting to shut down the estimable Peter Dickens. His ‘crime’ was daring to deal in historical reality while writing about the Battle of Blood River, and the trial of Jopie Fourie, rather than simply regurgitating the comforting Apartheid-era propaganda.

First out of the blocks was this fellow, who (using rather too many commas) threw in a bizarre reference to ‘anti-vaxxing’, along with his approval of Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine:

It is perhaps only to be expected that, someone who sees nothing wrong with Kruger’s invasion of British territory in 1899, also supports Putin’s similarly unprovoked invasion of his neighbour.

Hot on the heels of Van Landsberg’s insanity, came this:

Which essentially translates to:
Could the Boer-Basher get all of the Jopie Fourie trial’s records from the Oubaas [Jan Smuts], or is he making do with it? Here comes a book in which Piet Dickens’ Boer hatred is assessed.

By daring to challenge Apartheid-era fiction / Holy Writ, Mr Dickens is – apparently – guilty of ‘Boer Hatred’.

Mr Dickens’ blog article must have really upset the Faithful, as the insanity kept coming, this time with a very unpleasant dash of antisemitism:

Which translates as:
Makes me so angry to read your skewed biased articles. Deep in your heart you will always remain a Jew-lover and Libtard.

What delightful people the True Believers are.

The next one takes religious fanaticism to embarrassing levels:

It is remarkable that anyone in the 21^st Century would really be so blinded by zealotry that they truly believe ‘the covenant’ to have been anything other than a fairytale… does Mr Mostert really believe that ‘the Almighty’ won the Battle of Blood River for his (ahem) ‘Chosen People’? I guess that means he popped up again a few years later to help the British at Rorke’s Drift too? And, yet, somehow he was on the side of the Zulus the day before? Does the Good Lord struggle to make his mind up on such matters? And why didn’t he intervene when the Boers proved so totally incapable of capturing Ladysmith?

But at least Mr Mostert seems to realise that his argument is so weak, and his understanding of history so risible, that switching to block capitals is his only option.

Dickens’ research into the Battle of Blood River really seems to have set them off, as this wide-eyed fellow also popped up, keen to make an utter fool of himself:

Desperate to come up with a reason (however far-fetched) to pretend that the Boers were God’s Chosen People / the finest warriors in military history, poor old deluded Rudie declares there were 350,000 Zulus at Blood River – which is about 35 times the accepted number.

But, then again and as we know, these types have zero interest in historical reality. No wonder Dickens’ work gets under their skin the way it does.

Rudie was back again, keen to dismiss all Dickens’ research, simply on the strength of the university he attended:

It really is most entertaining for a True Believer to declare that ‘the Boervolk will never be told lies again about our history’, when keeping National Party lies alive is exactly what these types want to do. Indeed, their entire raison d’etre is to keep their comforting lies going a bit longer, which is exactly why they simply cannot stand someone like Peter Dickens exposing their nonsense.

Another equally deluded soul quickly chimed in, also keen to demonstrate his own brand of Bible-bashing lunacy:

Which translates as:
‘Why does this fucker write in English? Fuck off Satan’.

Yes, in the wacky world of Mr Kellermann, Mr Dickens is, would you believe, ‘Satan’ (yes, you read that correctly) for writing articles about South African history which don’t match Mr Kellermann’s apparent love of self-pitying (and self-serving) propaganda.

And speaking of Devil-Dodging lunacy, this one was also keen to spew out some nonsense:

In the sort of phrase I didn’t think anyone had used in the last 200 years, apparently those who do not blindly believe Apartheid-era propaganda will never ‘grasp the Boer and his God’. And as Johanitha seems to have some sort of special insight, perhaps she can explain why ‘their God’ let the Boers start a war against the British… and then lose? Not to mention the fact that South Africa is now run by the ANC.

And this one demonstrates another common theme for the Defenders of the Myth, their fervent belief that no one else is ‘allowed’ to write about South African history, other than ‘the Boere’:

Which translates as:
‘What do you English know about Boer history ???? Nothing to do with you’

Quite why True Believers love to use so many punctuation marks is yet to be explained, but such is their apparent desperation to close down anything that doesn’t support the National Party version. What other war in history, one wonders, does anyone think should only be ‘allowed’ to be studied / written about by one (self-appointed) group?

Presumably Mr Van Dyk also thinks that only the Japanese should be allowed to write about the Second World War, for example? Or is there a method they use, to decide which party of a conflict is ‘allowed’ to write about it?

This one takes a similar line, dismissing all Dickens’ research and writings on account of his surname:

Which translates as:
‘who the hell is Dickens? Sounds like a pommie. Nothing better to do but to cause division. What they’ve been doing for all these years. Lie and cheat. The best backstabbers.’

And when they have absolutely no way of countering what someone says, the True Believers can always fall back on simple, school yard (misspelt) abuse:

But when it comes to good old fashioned, sheer crayon-eating stupidity, this has to be my favourite of the lot (and from a ‘top contributor’, no less):

Yes folks: you heard it here first – Venetian Freemasons controlled the South African drug trade for more than 2000 years. And this was all ‘proven’ (ahem) by DNA evidence which was conveniently banned in 2016.

This is the depths of utter stupidity and delusion that the Defenders of the Myth have been forced to sink to.

Speaking of which, Mr Dickens was then treated to this bizarre rant:

Which translates as:
‘Our history deserves better. Our children deserve better. When are we going to get our OWN history book, that will give clarity on who did what … Where, how and why, what were the consequences . !!
Damn our people deserve better. Jan Smuts was a traitor who turned his back on his own people so the English and the Jews could get their claws deeper into our land …NOT THEIR LAND [Angry face! Angry face!] .. and the Afrikaner Boere of the next 100 years were only plundered, betrayed and humiliated !!!’

Leaving aside the fact that the Afrikaners managed to spin ‘their’ version of history for most of the 20^th Century (ie. the version the True Believers are so desperate to keep alive), it is remarkable to see a rant which manages to combine terrible punctuation, emojis and antisemitism.

And the seemingly-hysterical Salomé was soon back, this time trusting to full block capitals, and lots of exclamation marks, in lieu of having an actual point:

One presumes that the ‘CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY .!!!’ referred to is not the one in which Kruger’s racist and violently expansionist republic attacked and invaded his neighbours, and where the Boers looted and rampaged through northern Natal. Because, well, that’s perfectly OK (apparently).

While the others have an element of the madcap / closed-minded hilarity about them, this one is possibly the most unpleasant of the lot:

Which translates as:
‘You see now. Listen pal, I think you should rather go back to where your grandmother came from, because really, you are scratching open something you shouldn’t. Leave our history and meddle in your own. We showed the Zulu impis, and then you bunch of English, and the only way you could defeat us that time was to put women and children in camps. [yawn] Looks to me as though Hitler put too few of you in the camps. So leave us, or come ask me personally, and then I’ll show you the evidence’.

So, as well as faithfully parroting the utterly-discredited, yet still much-loved, Apartheid version of events, old Hendrik seems to assume Dickens is Jewish, and is essentially saying that Hitler did not kill enough of his people. It is mind-blowing that someone would be so blasé about posting such a disgusting comment on social media… but that’s the sort of folk we are dealing with.

Now, after all this personal abuse / antisemitic ranting, a reasonable person might think that the administrators of this Facebook Discussion Group would swiftly move to sanction some of these lunatics. But, no. Indeed, quite the opposite occurred, and instead the self-appointed Guardian of National Party Myth, the laughably ignorant Chris Pretorius[i], sided with the baying mob against Peter Dickens:

Clearly terrified that the actions / writings of his heroes – De Wet, Pakenham (whose name he cannot even spell), Smuts[ii] and Prof. Pretorius – won’t stand up to any sort of critical analysis, Chris Pretorius used his ‘admin privileges’ to block Mr Dickens’ access to the Discussion Group for two weeks. Yes, that’s right: antisemitic comments would seem to be perfectly acceptable, but no actual discussion is permitted in his ‘Discussion Group’. Claiming that Hitler did not kill enough Jews is fine, but anything that challenges NP myths, or threatens to snatch away the comfort blanket the Apartheid-regime provided to weak-minded extremists, simply will not be tolerated.

This should not be terribly surprising. Mr Pretorius has long been frightened of anything that challenges National Party propaganda, and my writing seems to unsettle him almost as much as Dickens’ does – as he recently demonstrated yet again:

Accepting he cannot dispute my research, Pretorius (what is it about that name?), instead resorts to telling a string of blatant lies to justify his panic-stricken response to my work.

Firstly, he claims (once again) that I am a ‘journalist’.
This is, quite simply, a lie. I am not, and never have been, a journalist.
So quite why Pretorius keeps lying about this is unclear, though I guess it is a rather pathetic and cowardly way of pretending he doesn’t have to address the facts that I raise (because he knows he cannot).

And having earlier dismissed the fact that my work was recommended by bestselling author / historian Andrew Roberts, Pretorius is then arrogant enough to dismiss the Royal Historical Society. Yes – Ash, Peter Dickens, Baron Roberts of Belgravia FRSL FRHistS, and even the Royal Historical Society itself, are all airily (and very conveniently) dismissed by Pretorius – anything to keep his much-cherished Apartheid-era myths sputtering on a bit longer.

He then lies again, and claims that his hero, Professor Pretorius, does not feature in my bibliographies. In fact, two of his books do. As does one by Albert Grundlingh. By resorting to more lies, Pretorius only makes it clear that he simply has no answer to my work, and hasn’t even read it[iii].

And he then claims he has ‘no need’ of my Atlas, as he has the ‘excellent’ work by Pieter G Cloete. This would be the (ahem) ‘excellent’ book in which the hapless Cloete declares that a British infantry brigade of the period was made up two ‘regiments’ (each commanded, in the parallel universe of Cloete, by a Colonel), and each comprising two battalions. Cloete’s ‘excellent’ work also shows he has zero understanding of British army rank structure, or even the names of various regiments:

https://www.chrisash.co.za/2019/02/01/how-to-get-a-glowing-review/

In short, Cloete is utterly clueless about the British army of the period. But, hey, he doesn’t challenge National Party myth, and thus – in the fevered mind of Pretorius[iv] – his work can only be ‘excellent’.

And to bring this cavalcade of True Believing stupidity and fanaticism to a close, let’s have a final laugh at another resolutely blinkered Defender of the Myth, a man who proudly states that he ‘doesn’t care’ about the awkward facts that the likes of Mr Dickens and myself dare to raise:

Yup – this fellow openly says he doesn’t care about facts (as if there were ever any doubt), and is clearly relieved to instead have grasped at some far-fetched excuse to be able to ignore my work, and all the inconvenient points I raise… all because he claims I ‘insulted’ someone. What a poor, delicate little soul Johan must be. That said, he doesn’t seem to be quite so worried about all the insults thrown at Mr Dickens – why would that be, I wonder?

Still, it was very kind of Johan to admit that Professor Pretorius – a man who is so entangled in the myths that he still ludicrously pretends Kruger’s invasion of Natal and the Cape was ‘defensive’[v] – will never be my equal.

So thanks for that.

NOTES:

[i] https://www.chrisash.co.za/2021/06/21/the-king-of-special-pleading/

[ii] It is unclear why Pretorius included Smuts in his list. From what I’ve read, Dickens is rather complimentary of Smuts, seeing him as a reformer after the Boer War. But perhaps when one, like Pretorius, is so used to dealing in lies, it gets difficult to ever bother tell the truth

[iii] To be fair, like a good sheep and proving he is incapable of independent thought, he is probably just mindlessly repeating the lies told by John Boje: https://www.chrisash.co.za/2018/09/17/frantically-trying-to-defend-the-myth/

[iv] And, indeed, the other Pretorius

[v] https://www.chrisash.co.za/2022/09/05/poor-old-prof-pretorius-embarrasses-himself-yet-again/