9. The invisible spirit of Dutch colonial endeavours

The Dutch colonial endeavours globally would have been quite different from that of the English colonial enterprise in spirit and content. Moreover, I think Boers might have had enough and more of Germanic elements.

QUOTE 1: He says that when at the Zwartkops, he was overtaken by a Boer, an old German named Kock, who was on his way to this portion of Bushmanland, and who was well acquainted with the country and the manners of the natives.

QUOTE 2: During this early period the formidable character of the Koranas was augmented by the accession to their ranks of a powerful ally in the person of a fugitive or outlaw from the Cape Colony named Jan Bloem, variously described as a German and a fugitive Dutchman

END OF QUOTEs

See this QUOTE from Wikipedia: The Maritz Rebellion occurred in 1914 at the start of World War I, in which men who supported the re-creation of the old Boer republics rose up against the government of the Union of South Africa because they did not want to side with the British against Germany so soon after a long bloody war with the British.

Many Boers had German ancestry and many members of the government were themselves former Boer military leaders who had fought with the Maritz rebels against the British in the Second Boer War. END OF QUOTE

It is my gut feeling that the German language is slightly or even more feudal in its coding. I have mentioned this feeling in my ancient book: March of the Evil Empires: English versus the feudal languages.

I sort of got a lot of confirmatory signals from Adolf Hilter’s great book of Anglophila, Mein Kampf. In this book he has written a lot of ingenious disparagements about German social, military and political establishments, in between radiating a lot of hints that the German communication system is riddled with feudal language codes. Please check my book: MEIN KAMPF by Adolf Hitler - A demystification!

I also remember a few very interesting rejoinders that came upon my posts in a GB forum pages, way back in the 2004 - 05 period: I have quoted these lines in my book: My online writings 2004-07.

Rich (European Union)

QUOTE 1

I would say the Dutch are allot more allike to us than the Germans, having lived and travelled extensively through both countries. I speak both german and english, and I find it interesting that when I speak german in Holland I am ussually met with a certain amount of hostillity. The moment I start speaking english, smiles appear, and I instantly feel more accepted. Interesting how much difference a language makes. End of Quote

Rich(European Union)

QUOTE 2

The ideas you are putting forward are quite interesting. I would like to know how you came to the conclusions you did. Although I don’t know allot about them, I have always been interested in the orrigins of language. I find it interesting that what you infered is so accurate in real terms.

Germans (and this is a very general statement) are still a fairly insular poeple as far as I can tell. Where ever I visit I find German society based very heavily on connections. The idea is you’ll do fine if you know the local mayor, policeman and teacher. Not much thought is given to what goes on in the next Kreis (county) let allone in the country as a whole. This has probably got something to do with the fact that the Germans have been a group of fairly insular tribes, or dukedoms far longer than they have been a nation. The issue of nationallity is very low key. There is also a more relaxed attitude to obaying laws, and a general feeling that there is no point in voicing oppinions on a national scale, since no one ever listens anyway. End of Quote

Cricket

QUOTE 3

I think Ved has a point. I am not sure how I know that he may be correct, but I feel it. End of Quote

It may be mentioned that it is not possible to convey what I am saying to a native-English individual. Moreover, there is always the issue of misinterpreting my intentions by persons who have an innate competitive attitude to English. See this.

Welshman (Feudal Languages)

QUOTE 4

If you have no ‘real’ knowledge of language, how can you possibly dream up such a strange, unconnected theory of the origin and import of language? Unless it’s sole purpose is to try and justify a strange idea of racial superiority, such as was attepted by the nazi regime of Hitler prior to his losing the European war. End of Quote

When I speak about a certain quality of certain languages, it is akin to mentioning similar things about various software. Some of the features of a software might be good and some bad, in certain contexts. For instance, for a feudal language social system to function retaining the various oppressive and ennobling hierarchies, English is a misfit. In fact, English would act as a sort of virus in this set up.

At the same time, in a planar social system, feudal languages would act as a virus.

There is no contention that one is better than the other, or worse. Quality basically depends upon what it is used for. Creating a highly regimented social setup or a liberal one.

Why I wrote about these things is to convey the idea that the native-English do not understand much about the realities of the world. There is the issue of whether the native-English are superior or not. If the verbal codes are examined in detail, it would be seen that actually the English languages do not have any codes of human superiority. At the same time, if the codes inside feudal languages are checked, it would be seen that there are very specific codes that define and designate extreme superiority to certain individual and its exact opposite to others.

This absence of these superiority codes is what actually places the English speaking races superior to the others. Almost all their seeming superior attributes can be attributed to this lack of Superiority versus Pejorative codes inside pristine-English. I cannot go more into these things here, for this book is a commentary on another book connected to South Africa.