Straight Shootin’ Info: The History of US Gun Rights/Gun Control by Pam Dewey

Gun and Constitution

Straight Shootin’ Info: The History of US Gun Rights/Gun Control


Pam Dewey

This three-part series by author, blogger and master videographer Pam Dewey explores the historical tension between gun rights and gun control in the United States. I highly recommend it. JEL

Part 1 – Setting the Stage: Pre-History of the 2nd Amendment & Early History of the NRA

Part 2 – “Collision Course: 2nd Amendment, the First 2 Centuries & The NRA, the Second Century”

Part 3: “A Nation Divided: Examining the Modern Battle Lines & Looking for Common Ground”  



Great Exhibition London 1851

Illustration of the Great Exhibition, London, 1851



Pam Dewey

Episode 1 – “Fair Enough: The “Great Exhibition,” London, 1851

Episode 2 – “Yankee Doodle Palace: The New York World’s Fair, 1853-1854”

Episode 3 – “The ‘Happy Birthday’ World’s Fair: Visiting the Centennial Exhibition of 1876”

Episode 4 – “1893 Chicago World’s Fair, Part 1: Uncle Sam Welcomes the World”

This four-part presentation on world fairs by author, blogger and master videographer Pam Dewey is an outstanding exposé on the visual and material display of nations and cultures. Here is Pam’s description of her production contained in the YouTube posting of Episode 1:

“This is an introductory video to a DocuCommentary series entitled “WORLD’S FAIRS EXPOSed,” which focuses primarily on the World’s Fairs held in the United States since 1853. The London Great Exhibition of 1851 was the first ever World’s Fair, and led directly to the establishment of periodic World’s Fairs as a feature of American history for the next century and more. Each video in the series first provides an informative and entertaining overview of a specific fair from the point of view of the visitors of the era. Then it explores behind the scenes, to consider how the fair both reflected, and AFFECTED, the social, cultural, economic, political, and philosophical aspects of the America of its time. It also considers what long-lasting influence what particular fairs may have had on the future of the country up to the 21st century.”

While watching each episode, in the back of my mind, I kept trying to tie fairs, of all kinds, to culture. That is, culture as an anthropological concept.

The fairs, all of them touched on generally and specifically by Dewey, especially beginning in 1851, attempt to show material manifestations and representations of the beliefs, values, methods and products (the culture) of nations. Each seems to do so to various ends – education, national pride, internationalism, and others. Notable, I think, was the American omission of slavery in its exhibit at the 1851 fair in London.

But fairs also seem to have a role in enculturation, the learning of one’s culture, that parenting, schools, books, various media, anthropology monographs don’t. They are highly sensory and experiential. They also have a generalizing, unifying societal goal to them, a goal that is usually achieved to one degree or another in every fair goer. Fairs also seem to have an astonishingly strong and deep impact on individuals who attend them. I seldom think of culture, cultures or societies displayed on grand unifying scales as they are at fairs.

I guess on one hand unifying a people, a nation or society, or even the world for that matter, at least for a short time ever few years through fairs, is a good thing. Well, if not a good thing then it is clearly not a bad thing. On the other hand, unless it contributes to ethnocentrism, jingoism, uber-nationalism, racism, militancy, etc.

For me, the best fairs are those that stress cosmopolitanism, globalism, and the accomplishments, shortcomings and noble unifying goals of Humankind as whole. In this regard consider the teachings of the Bahá’í, “the earth is one country, and mankind its citizens;” or Socrates who said “I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world;” and later, similarly, Diogenes declared he too was “a citizen of the world.”

I think national and world fairs are of better to service to Humankind as a whole than those that give priority to national pride boosterism and sci-tech accomplishments. That said, I’ve attended a number of trade fairs in Africa over the years that to some degree contributed to national pride and showcased the use and availability of science and technology as means of national and local community development.

I’m like many others. I like going to a fair ever so often but always come away a bit confused as to what impact they have had on me – awe, new knowledge, excitement, patriotism, propaganda. The purposes of fairs are as various as the people and institutions that stage them; and reactions are as varied as the people who attend them.

I like fairs yet feel a little manipulated or indoctrinated by them. That’s a good thing. They unsettle me and that is usually a good state of mind for me to do some learning, and growing.




Knowledge is Power?

Logos Tallis 03

Humankind has allowed itself to be ‘progressed’ into a cul de sac of inhumanity and enslavement. Collectively, we have acquired lots of material stuff and knowledge, but little personal wisdom, empowerment, and contentment.

This path was laid out for us long ago in the Middle East by our very first rich and powerful elites. That is, the kings who took power beginning when Humankind transitioned from nomadic hunting and gathering and pastoralism, to settled agriculture and urban living.

Very soon humans had wealth (food) surpluses for the first time. That contributed to a perceived need to take strong control of such wealth, and the land and people that produced it, through laws, money, and corporeal and supernatural enforcement.

This was quickly followed by the tactical and strategic use of power against neighboring lands and peoples. And this, in turn, lead to an unquenchable desire among the new ruling elites for ever more wealth, land and power. This was the beginning of actual and threatened inter-state warfare and exploitation, methods elites have relied on above all other options up to the present.

It also marked the beginning of the decline of personal freedom, equality and brother/sisterhood. The early autocratic state collectives, and their often self-proclaimed divine elites, were given our allegiance; a shifting of our focus, our primal personal bonds, away from each other.

Thus began a tilting of the natural human balance between individualism and collectivism toward various forms of ever-stronger and irreversible state-centered collectivism. We had embarked on the road to what we would later call ‘modernity.’ Learn more about the evolution of individualism, collectivism and modernity here and here.

The European Renaissance and its successor the Enlightenment offered a lifeline to recover our surrendered humanity; that is, a vision of a sustainable balance between individualism and collectivism.

We grasped it but lost our grip because the powerful current of industrial and state-controlled living that soon followed was too strong, and later the tempting comforts of consumerism were beyond our ability to resist. For more on this see my essay “Enlightenment Lost.”

The corral, the trap, where the flickering embers of our humanity, our forsaken good balance between individual freedom and collective direction, would eventually go to die was built by the controlling industrial-political elite, and stocked with the enticing addictive bait of consumer goods that flowed from the Industrial Revolution.

These early 20th Century manufactured goods were redefined, through the gushing, language-massaging mass media, from desirables for those who could afford them to necessities for the masses who would be allowed to buy them on credit. The Age of Consumerism was born.

Man, were we living then! We individuals were really something special! Thus advised Edward Bernays and the multimedia mass advertising industry he started. Why, it was only right to excel, we were told. In fact, it was ‘natural,’ to shoulder above, out-compete, outshine our fellows in terms of possessions and appearances. Darwin himself said so, we thought.

Eisenhower on Military-Industrial Complex

During the rest of the 20th Century the gate to that human corral was locked and the manacles of law and social expectation applied to our bodies and minds by the wealthy and powerful controllers of the military-industrial complex. We came to tolerate our neighbors but sought meaning and purpose for our daily living mostly through the elite-controlled media, consumer goods, and the elite’s myths of progress, exceptionalism and eternal life.

So here we are now, entrapped in the kraal of our corporate masters and their political cronies. Enslaved by comfortable but, for most of us, unbreakable chains – sated, filled with myths of racial-tribal supremacy, hope and prosperity, inspired by patriotism, and praying for Heavens to come; yet, when we think honestly about it, truly powerless and sadly longing for deep personal meaning, purpose and contentment in our lives, but finding little.

Our neighbors are still there. But, most often, we don’t look to them for meaning and purpose. We’ve forgotten how to find personal meaning and purpose in the lives of neighbors and our local communities. Most of us only seriously engage others through institutions and the media. It’s the only way we know, the way we’ve been taught. But it’s not working for us, personally. The promise of modern goods, institutions and the media have failed us. We don’t know what else to do. We don’t trust the basic humanity of our neighbors enough to meaningful engage them because many of them have been led to worldviews and habits we don’t share and fear. And they don’t trust us.

Meanwhile, a climate emergency and economic fragility threaten. Yet the band plays on featuring the elite’s and now the mass’s favorite tune, We Can Work It Out (Through Science, Technology And Politics As Usual).

Humans are occasionally ‘unleashed’ in their corral but only for the purpose of making more knowledge, consumer goods, and evermore powerful tools and weapons; and to serve as cannon fodder in never ending wars. Or we slip the leash when we can, and rebel and run off by ourselves on a long solitary walk in nature to think, to listen. And we do that alone, not with a neighbor.

Walking Away

English MD, neurologist, and philosopher Raymond Tallis, someone whose books I’ve learned much from and referred to often on my blog, Being Human, has a fairly new book with some insights and suggestions that may be useful for our current personal and global predicament.

Here are two excerpts from a good review of Tallis’s latest book Logos: The Mystery of How We Make Sense of the World (2018):

“We are sometimes slow to recognize any downside to our modern age’s mad enthusiasm for scientific achievement, technological advancement, globalization, bureaucratic rationalization and the proliferation of information. But philosophers have highlighted the paradox of the proportional diminishment of the human: knowledge is increased, but the genuinely human recedes. Measurement replaces mere human judgment. General theories are established by the elimination of the particular, the exceptional. Globalization eliminates key markers of individual identity: ethnicity, nationality, locality. Government institutions render communal action redundant. Technological innovation replaces the body. We are more powerful, but less personal. The paradox is that for knowledge to count as knowledge at all, it must be processed in an individual consciousness. From the one who makes the discovery to the community of persons who recognize and implement it, to the person ultimately receiving the knowledge, the entire process is shot through with the participation of particular human beings. Therefore, any reduction of the role of people in the production and  circulation of knowledge is not a step in the direction of wisdom: rather, it is evidence of a kind of amnesia about what we’re doing. If today we fail to marvel at the world, this is only a signal of how far our loss of self-awareness has progressed.”

“For Tallis, the key is that knowledge is a relational property. There is both a real reality ‘out there’ and a genuine knower ‘in here’. Eliminate one, and you’ve stultified human knowledge. Knowledge is not the one-sided material disposition of the human cranium, nor is it a mere figment of the imagination of a ghost inside a phantom machine. Rather, it is a kind of dance, a production of the constant dynamic of human consciousness moving between the internal world of experience and the real, resistant, physical world. The imperfections and challenges of this process, far from being signals of failure or any reason to abandon hope, are actually the indispensable preconditions of human knowledge. Moreover, there’s a community of knowers ‘out there’ too; and we cannot reckon without them: individually, we will only ever know partly, imperfectly, incompletely, no matter how full the stock of human knowledge grows. Essentially, then, Tallis calls for an end to the unfruitful antagonism perceived to exist between the human dimension of knowledge and the hard facts of objective reality. It is only by accepting the reality of both, and by paying more attention to the dynamic interplay between them, that we are able to make sense of things.”

~ ~ ~

This review may sound unorthodox and obscure but I am going to read the book anyway because conventional mainstream thinking isn’t offering me much hope for a survivable, sustainable way forward for Humankind.

Maybe a little unorthodox philosophy will offer some hope and insight that current politics and economics, least of all the theories and methods of political ‘science’ and economic ‘science,’ are not.

Maybe we’ll one day return to valuing that very personal “inner world of experience,” that appreciation for individual agency and dignity, Tallis writes about.

Colonies 04

Colonies 03

The Colonies, The Handmaid’s Tale, Hulu TV

Hopefully it will not become necessary to look for it while staggering among the smoldering rubble of what’s left of the environment, and the remains of our halls of power, banks, and factories. Or in the toxic, militia-patrolled ‘wild’ areas between gated, armed and bunkered communities.

Answers: Extinction RebellionGreen New DealDemocratic Socialism. Education.

Review of Tallis’s book:


Suffering and Injustice Revisited

Leopoldo Mendez Print

Print by Leopoldo Mendéz

Here’s something I wrote in 2014, two years before Trump was elected:

‘Suffering and Injustice – Whose Awe, Truth, and Hope Will Prevail?

Trump and what has now become his Republican Party epitomize the very defiance of Humankind’s ‘cultural human nature’ I was writing about five years ago.

But, as the saying goes, the band plays on. After all, who reads, much less heeds, the run-on sentences of an agnostic-atheist philosophical ethnographer? Much less one not affiliated with a major university, think tank, or political party. An old retired guy who happily spent most of his working life in Trump’s so-called ‘shithole’ countries. A language blessed/cursed primate whose every thought and written word is not peer-reviewed or influenced by a craving for academic tenure and book deals? An unorthodox emotional guy, a sometimes loose cannon?


When politics in a society, that of the US in particular, becomes as it is now, bent irretrievably to the will of those seeking racial and religious supremacy, absolute power, and obscene wealth accumulation to such a degree that the social system is legally and morally unaccountable and unreformable, it may just be the time for unorthodoxy, emotion and letting cannons roll on decks. Arrr! Avast and stand to shipmates, the cannons may at times point at thee!

White Supremacy

If such people as Trump and the current incarnation of the GOP continue in power and the path Humankind is now on to capitalist and ecological collapse remains irreversible, as many far more knowledgeable and wiser than me believe it will, our descendants in the US are very likely to live in a theocratic totalitarian society similar to that depicted in Hulu TV’s take on Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale novel, or worse.

There are good, evidence-supported arguments by eminent academics and on many credible Internet sites saying that the US may very likely be headed toward such a Gileadian society.

If you think that’s too far fetched try and recall the certainty you felt in early-mid 2016 that Trump had no chance of winning the presidency. Then, the numb disbelief, fear and dread you felt the day after his victory, and have felt to a greater or lesser degree every day since. Those feelings will be nothing compared to the hysteria, panic and criminality each of us will see in others and experience ourselves if/when the global economy and ecology collapse.

The 2020 US election will be a crucial turning point for the US and likely, in turn, for all of Humankind – a survival-sustainability or extinction-planet death fork in the evolutionary road of Homo sapiens and Earth.

All humanistic and true freedom and justice-committed Americans, regardless of their political and religious affiliations or leanings, must resist, as a moral and ecological duty, efforts to take us further down the road to catastrophe and totalitarianism we are currently on.

Mankind Luckovich

Resistance must begin now, simultaneously on at least four fronts:

1) take nonviolent action to disrupt all actions of all those, in the private and public sectors, who refuse to immediately and fully address the current catastrophic economic and ecological threat to Humankind and Earth;

2) take political action at all levels to oppose, not nominate and electorally defeat all political facilitators of the current emergency regardless of their party affiliation;

3) support all science, technology and governance efforts to reverse all current harmful ecological and economic actions through a Green New Deal;

4) support all media, activist organizations and education efforts that are committed to 1-3 through financial support and/or active participation.

As one Extinction Rebellion banner in Atlanta recently put it: ‘We’re F***ed, Fight Anyway.’ I agree.


Suffering and Injustice Original Image

“Imagine the Earth populated by humans who cannot or will not reason; whose knowledge is not informed by objective truth; and who have no capacity for compassion beyond that for their own kind. All who eschew or misuse reason, reject or misrepresent objective truth, restrict their compassion to the like-minded, and lead or force others along this path, live in defiance of Human Nature. When they do so in order to advance their privilege, power, religion, ideology, or nation above that of all others, they subvert the freedom of every member of Humankind to pursue an awe, truth, and hope different from their own.”

“It is our ability to communicate about the consequences of our behavior in the past and potential behavior in the future, and the collective, protective covenant we entered into with each other at the dawn of humanity hundreds of thousands of years ago, that still distinguish us and represent, so far, our species’ greatest achievements. The core principle of that covenant is acceptance of the need to agree and act upon standards related to the avoidance and alleviation of suffering and those of fairness and justice, writ large. This, in the face of threatening events in the ever-challenging, ever-changing physical and social environments, is indispensable to our humanity, to enlightened, civilized life.”


Major Fault Line in Jonathan Haidt’s “Moral Foundation Theory” of Human Evolution

Human Nature

The Well-Meaning Bad Ideas Spoiling a Generation

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt on politics, morality, and the coddling of the American mind.

Brian Gallagher


March 7, 2019

Above is an interview of Jonathan Haidt. It’s pretty good on some things like his latest book The Coddling of the American Mind. I think he may be better on this topic than “human nature” and things such as the evolutionary emergence of human morality, values he contends we are hard-wired for and therefore compelled to express.

The following excerpted statement of his from the interview caught my attention in that it is revealing in terms of my critique of his book, The Righteous Mind. He’s asked to account for the now Trumpian Republican Party. Haidt’s response raises this question: If his moral foundation theory is as powerful and useful as he leads us to believe in his book, how could one election and one president, Trump, in effect debunk it?

JH: “Trump has shifted a lot of things around. The Republican Party is no longer the social conservative party. I believe, in other research I’ve published with Karen Stenner, a political scientist in Australia, Trump is appealing to more authoritarian tendencies. It’s very hard to see how Donald Trump is a conservative. So the psychology that I just described a moment ago [moral foundation theory] no longer quite applies. [Italics mine.] The Republican Party, I don’t know what’s happening to it [shouldn’t his moral foundation theory provide some answers?], but it is bringing in elements that are overtly racist. It is bringing in desires for rapid change, which is not a conservative virtue, generally.”

Haidt hitching his moral foundation theory to evolutionary human nature remains a problem for me.

Equally unsatisfactory is his claim in his The Righteous Mind that Democrats are less loyal and less patriotic than Republicans just doesn’t hold water. Since Trump’s election who, really, is proving to be the greater patriot, Nancy Pelosi or Mitch McConnell? I’ve gone over these two main points and others here:

Critique: The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion

and here:

The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt: Critique Postscript

I think a good theory of cultural evolution, one I’m working on, would tell us a lot more about how humans became what we are and why we behave as we do than Haidt’s moral foundation theory.


Nature vs. Nurture in the 20th Century

Genetic Determinism Image 01

The Monkey in the Machine and the Machine in the Monkey

I watched this documentary and found it informative about the early 20th Century history of the idea of human genetic determinism.

Although the film is fairly objective in its approach and what it presents, it regrettably tells only part of the 20th Century nature vs. nurture story. The film is missing the subsequent responses to these early theories of human genetic determinism, including those of supporters and more importantly those of their detractors.

To its credit the film does contain some accurate though horrific truths about 20th Century European and American political and scientific intrusion in Africa. For its educational value alone the documentary is worth watching.

In terms of the early 20th Century thinkers who promoted the notion of human genetic determinism the film focuses mostly on William Hamilton, George Price, and later thinkers such as Richard Dawkins who were influenced by them.

It gives no mention of scientists and authors such as Sigmund Freud, B.F. Skinner, Nikolass Tinbergen, Konrad Lorenz, Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Desmond Morris, Robert Ardrey, E. O. Wilson, Richard Herrnstein, Charles Murray, James Watson, Jonathan Haidt, and others, particularly many science writers and neuroscientists during the 1990s. The foregoing have, to greater and lesser degrees, also contributed to the biologizing of human behavior. They have done so by insisting that genetics and neurophysiology are more powerful than, in fact override, culture and learning in determining what humans think and do.

Here are other related topics:

The Gay Gene

The God Gene

The Y Chromosome and Violence

Preconscious Brain Decisions

If you are like many in the U.S., you are not sure if nature trumps nurture in determining human behavior, or vice versa. Or, you think there is probably a balance between the influences of genetics and learning.

The idea of human genetic determinism has had a strong and lasting influence on the Western public despite its harmfulness to individual wellbeing and human relations. If you want to fully understand where the idea of human genetic determinism came from, go to the links of the above named persons. While there, give attention to the criticisms of their research and findings.

You can also read on. First, biologist and philosopher Massimo Pigliucci has this to say:

“[W]hile there are fixed elements to our being, we are not fixed beings, since we are (or ought to be) free to choose our projects. Neither biology nor natural obstacles limit our futures to a great extent, and how we live out our human nature will vary because we give different meanings to our facticities. An authentic life is about acknowledging these differences, and stretching ourselves into an open future. It does not follow that this openness is unlimited or unconstrained. We are limited, but mostly by our own imagination.”

For more but not a full course on the nature-nurture debate try the following, my two takes on these ill-founded, unsupported and harmful notions of human neuro-genetic determinism:

“Neuroeconomics? – Neuroscience No Panacea for Understanding Humankind”


“Critique – The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt”


The Myth of White South African Genocide

Ramaphosa Condemns Killings

The Myth of White Genocide

An Unfinished Civil War Inspires a Global Delusion

James Pogue


March 2019

Numbers from the article:

  • 56million people in South Africa
  • 8% are white, own 72% of the rural land
  • 7million are Afrikaners (of Dutch descent)
  • 81% are black, own 4% of rural land
  • 5million squatters
  • 14million live in extreme poverty
  • 13,310 are white living in squatter camps
  • 2017: 20,000 killed, 62 were white

Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF)

  • Black dominated political party championing land redistribution
  • Hold 25 of 400 National Assembly Seats
  • Leader Says: Have more black children as a political weapon.

ANC-Led Government of South Africa (GOSA)

  • Averse to Nationalizing Land
  • ANC Charter: “The Land Shall Be Shared Among Those Who Work It!”
  • 1994, Whites Would Not Sell Land at Fair Market Prices
  • Zimbabwe and Mozambique Land Redistribution Models Unacceptable
  • Government of South Africa Prefers Individual Ownership, Direct State Ownership, Trusts, Communal Land Custodianship. But, doesn’t know how to get there without international outcry or shedding white blood. The latter of which would take the matter away from being about reaching economic reconciliation and equality and force the Western dominated world media to portray it as white genocide. A most unenviable position for GOSA.

Principles, Key Factors:

  • Democracy
  • Rule of Law
  • Reconciliation
  • 25% of Total Population Live in Extreme Poverty

Flooded Street Lawley Township, RSA

Township Images: From Harper’s

Diepsloot Township, RSA

~ ~ ~

Just looking at the numbers above and comparing them to the principles below them, I don’t see how South African society can remain as it is indefinitely.

There can be no real or sustainable democracy, rule of law or reconciliation until matters of the unequal distribution of wealth, including land ownership, are resolved. Something must give.

Land Seizure Meeting

Democracy cannot go on if unequal wealth and land distribution continues. To make things more equitable may require autocratic means.

Rule of law cannot be maintained if 25% of the population remains in extreme poverty.

Reconciliation has to mean doing something about inequality.


An American friend, a long-time expatriate resident in South Africa, reacts to the Harper’s article as follows:

The African and European elites probably are colour-blind. The only colour they’ve learned to recognize is the colour of money. But down at the bottom of the scale, people translate money into racial politics – it’s more emotional.

Perhaps the difficulties of establishing genuine democracy also lead back to what I call the Vacuum Law throughout Africa. In the whole continent majorities are not really represented, and small minorities in country after country take over in various forms of dictatorship. Indeed, South Africa is probably the country that comes a bit closer nowadays to tapping that majority view point in a democratic dispensation, and so reconciliation and rational progress figure high in most peoples’ agendas, when they are sober.

When I listen to my white neighbours, ‘reconciliation’ is hardly what they voice.  They voice hatred. But people in crowds and social occasions are likely to voice such dramatic poses. When attitudes are measured more subtly, as done by the above Institute, a much more moderate picture emerges. The same goes for the black community.

In modern times, generally, the pursuit of wealth and power is usually pursued by any means legal. Then, when that fail illegal means are legalized or taken up outside of the law. In this pursuit the top and bottom of society do not hesitate to use racial, tribal politics – emotion trumps reason especially among the long-suffering, severely impoverished at the bottom.

I may be wrong and my friend’s take is correct. But I can’t help wondering if he is, in fact, wishfully, hopefully exaggerating the notion that “when attitudes are measured subtly (as done by the South African Institute on Race Relations), a much more moderate picture emerges. The same goes for the black community.”  That his “mixture of loyalties” is less the case than is a trembling gunpowder keg of emotion, especially among impoverished and relatively powerless blacks. I hope my friend’s notion of a continuation of reason, deliberation, moderation and patience will carry the day.

Simon Roche

Simon Roche

Whites will not take the initiative to precipitate the last stand, if there is to be one as some white supremacists call it.  That is, to “fight it out, and let’s die like men” as white South African reactionary Simon Roche puts it. The whites have guns and passion but not enough bodies to survive a war of attrition.

Blacks have already taken a stand, come up with a strategy, and begun the battle. That is, just as they did in ousting apartheid – organize, mobilize, then slowly, deliberatively, one open patch of land, one farm, one act of violent protest or sabotage at a time.

The period from the National Party’s implementation of apartheid in 1948 to Independence in 1994 covered 46 years. It’s been 25 years since Independence. Black South Africans have time on their side and they know it.

The ANC-dominated GOSA, for the time being, has no choice but relegate itself the role of the good-faith face of the black majority. When enough of the black insurgency measures mentioned achieve a critical mass of carnage and/or economic decline, the government will be forced to step in. In doing so they will try and take credit as the peace maker, ‘saving’ the whites from annihilation and declaring blacks the winners. It will then position itself as the guiding force and administrator for restructuring and redirecting the society, probably through some scheme of land ownership reform.

Now, all that said, s*** can happen. Events and circumstances can emerge that defy reason and circumvent GOSA contingency planning. Donald Rumsfeld called such unexpected factors “unknown unknowns”:

A combination of factors and circumstances may come into being that push GOSA to take immediate, autocratic action. Either side, black or white, could precipitate such a situation of urgency, such as suddenly emerging and dire social or economic conditions they think are favorable to their cause.  Or, such circumstances could just come together seemingly on their own and force the government’s hand. Such forced autocratic methods would be the worst possible scenario and all bets would be off.

Arriving at a turning point seems to be inevitable. GOSA cannot put off some form of intervention, be it autocratic or parliamentary. Their hand, like the hand of the white apartheid government in 1993-1994 before them, will likely be forced by the black majority’s strategy. Then, true democracy, rule of law and, most important of all, reconciliation will be within reach.