Following on from the article published by NRO which made a call for creation of a city state to compete with Durban and declare independence from South Africa, I thought it would be interesting to game out potential scenarios in which such a development could come about and succeed, all of which assume the continuation of the current geopolitical structure ( so I am not factoring in complete world collapse which would alter things greatly.)

The first issue to me seems to be the lack of any big players in the international scene who would look favorably on Afrikaners taking such measures. By big players, I am really only talking about the USA, Russia and China. The USA being the center of all “we are the world” ethno-masochism science rejection would scream at the creation of such an entity unless it was a “rainbow” city. This is especially so given the current attempts by the USA to foist minority status on the European derived populations as a means to maintain the existence of the USA state. The entire elite of the USA would take such a move badly on emotional grounds, intellectual (In reality un-intellectual) grounds and any economic prospects for such a state would be bleak. International community pressure would be extreme, and only trade with “pariah” states such Iran and Russia would be really possible.

China would likely be more sympathetic to such a creation, especially if there was a manner in which it could be brought within the Chinese economic sphere, but the main stumbling block in the direction would the political ramifications on Chinese presence in black Africa which is extensive. Such a move would supply the USA with extremely useful leverage against Chinese influence. Of course, even at the height of the apartheid system South Africa had little problem engaging with black states, and even allying with a number on occasion – realpolitik always is central. The only real stumbling block would be the emotional and mass movement manipulation and chaos sowing of the international community and its weaponized media arm (aka the cathedral.)

This leaves Russia, which given the current trouble it is receiving in relation to Syria and the Ukraine, would not welcome another drain on resources, and would obtain almost no benefit from supporting such an endeavor.  In fact, Russia would probably be aggressively against such a move as it would be a massive publicity gift for the international community in its attempts to demonize Putin and the Russian government if it supported it. Russia also has little trade interest in this region (maybe some interest in the palladium/ plutonium market?)

Of course, there are always other state actors which may be sympathetic, but I am having trouble establishing who. There is no reason for Iran to assist, nor could they assist much. Israel would definitely not assist (despite the previous assistance between South Africa and Israel) as the current propaganda war being fought against Israel is bad enough.

Taking all of these potential patrons off the table, this leaves only two other alternatives, the first as put forward by the author of the article– DIY, the second would be sponsorship by the international community (I know I said they wouldn’t, but I will explain).

So, beginning with the first potential, how could this DIY city creation occur? Well, as I said at the beginning of this post, I am working on the basis that such a DIY creation was done in the jaws of the current extremely hostile geopolitical framework, which would require something extreme, it would require a decentralized, crowd-funded PMC/ ISIS style creation to take the required territory, hold it, and create the city state. The difficulties and dangers inherent in this are great.

The initial difficulty would be raising the funds required for the action. The proliferation of crypto currencies and other technological innovations would make this a lot easier than in past decades, but the difficulties are still there. The donors of the money would need to be donating in such a  ways as to be completely anonymous, or they would be subject to extreme legal persecution as a means of discouraging support. This is little likely hood of finding a small number of large donors to bankroll the activity in the way that oligarch have been doing in the Ukraine, so large numbers of smaller donation would be needed. I have previously raised the concept of a kickstarter for PMC, but the ability to host such a thing would be extremely difficult, and would again suffer from the difficulty of supplying anonymous donations. I’m sure a way could be found to do this, but all it would take would be a handful of examples to be made of donors which were caught to act as a major deterrence.

Of course, raising kickstarter funds from the public is only one way of raising funds, the others would be to either raise the funds through illegal activity, or via the capturing of economic resources, all of which John Robb has pointed out ISIS have done. Sticking with the examples of ISIS for a little while longer, it has seemed to me since they published their prospectus that we are seeing the first of a number of such organisation – distributed internet enabled entities which are capable of reshaping the structure of the world.

Beyond taking inspiration for the extra-state structure of ISIS, I am not sure there is too much else to take from them in the example of the creation of a city state in South Africa. Any city state would be extremely reliant on international trade, and engaging in the media posturing violence which is necessary for ISIS to survive would not be helpful. Of course this is only in the most positive scenario (one in which integration in the world trade system is expected to occur.) If it was clear that the international community would not allow the city state to engage in the world economy, than the ISIS direction would be on the table, and an acceptance of pariah status would be a requirement.

The city state would also be a non-starter in this eventuality, and expansion into South African territory would be needed to create a hinterland for the city state to survive. I would argue that without US subsidization, this would be the case with Israel now.

The other option for creation of a city state would be with the blessing of the international community. Such an enterprise would probably be done on the ticket of increasing economic activity etc and would probably get some serious support for the business sector (the profit potential would be high I would assume), and would likely be done so with the best of progressive intentions, however, if the city state was to function, it would need to control the human capital it brings in, and engage in brutal gentrification – this would make it very non-diverse. Of course, this route, while being the most likely, would be the least effective unless conducted with extreme intelligence. The UN and the international community would probably mandate an ethnic quota for the territory, and with the explosive growth of black African populations, would demand it act as an ATM machine for black uplift, black African fertility subsidization and the whole glut of delusional racial socialism that South Africa has been forced to swallow. This would put the city state back to South Africa square one – mass cuckoldry.

So, without a massive shift in the international structure (US meltdown) or the discovery of some major leverage that Afrikaners can use (some economic resource, or socially/ media acceptable form of violence leverage within the left wing paradigm), I am not too bullish on the Afrikaner city state idea – yet.