In his obituary Mr. J Elsegood refers to the late Colonel, a distinguished soldier, as:
“one of only two men to win the Van Riebeeck Decoration (DVR) – for distinguished service in the field against the enemy – and also the Southern Cross Decoration (SD)”.
Without any other qualifying awards stated and attributed to late Colonel to justify his statement, Mr Elsegood is patently incorrect. Three examples of historical fact demonstrate Mr Elsegood’s inaccurate missive and can be found on a simple source such as Wikipedia:
• Major Arthur Walker HCG and Bar, SM (February 1953 – 28 March 2016) was a South African Air Force helicopter pilot who was twice awarded the Honoris Crux Gold decoration during the South African Border War. The Honoris Crux Gold was the highest military award for bravery awarded to members of the South African Defence Force. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Walker_(Pilot)
• Andrew Frederick Weatherby (Anthony) Beauchamp- roctor, VC, DSO, MC & Bar, DFC (4 September 1894 – 21 June 1921) was a South African airman and a recipient of the Victoria Cross, the highest award for gallantry in the face of the enemy that can be awarded to British and Commonwealth forces. He was South Africa’s leading ace of the First World War, being credited with 54 aerial victories.
• Adolph Gysbert Malan, DSO & Bar, DFC & Bar (3 October 1910 – 17 September 1963), better known as Sailor Malan, was a South African fighter pilot and flying ace in the Royal Air Force (RAF) who led No. 74 Squadron RAF during the Battle of Britain.[1] He finished his fighter career in 1941 with twenty-seven destroyed, seven shared destroyed and two unconfirmed, three probables and sixteen damaged. At the time he was the RAF’s leading ace, and one of the highest scoring pilots to have served wholly with RAF Fighter Command during the Second World War.
All three were air war recipients.
So, to the publication by Mr. J. Elsegood – anyone can write what they like, yet if opining on historical fact, it may be prudent for a Wikipedia search, something that even a year one undergraduate student is advised not to use. Or he could just reference this site and an accurate source article on the highest and most decorated South Africans written by Peter Dickens – link as follows; South Africa’s top military medalists
No shortage of information out there!
Written for the Observation Post by Dr. Garth Benneyworth
Springbok Renegades: South Africans serving in the British Free Corps of the Waffen SS during the Second World War.
By Peter Albert Dickens
Introduction
In military history circles, there is an often asked question. How many South Africans served in Nazi Germany’s Armed Forces? This is usually followed by an enquiry on these “renegades” and if they were ever brought to book.
Because of all the publicity it generated many people are aware of Robey Leibbrandt – the firebrand Afrikaner insurgent who trained as a German Paratrooper and special forces operator, sent to South Africa to take over the Ossewabrandwag and direct a Afrikaner Nationalist revolt to topple Smuts. His capture and sentencing a well known aspect of Afrikaner Nationalist lore, so too his eventual pardon by the National Party in 1948.
Some are aware of Leutnant (Lt.) Heinz Werner Schmidt, who was one of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel’s personal aids in the North African conflict – and that’s because after the war he re-settled back in South Africa and published a book “With Rommel in the Desert”. As a standard Wermacht officer (Germany Army – Statutory force) with a dual national status (known as Volksdeutsche – a foreign national with German heritage) he was often just viewed with interest. There were also a small number of South West Africans (Namibians) who found their way into German forces because of their German national heritage – notably here is another member of Rommel’s staff, his driver Leutnant (Lt.) Hellmut von Liepzig.
But what of the rest? Surely there are more.
The truth is there are some more, not many mind – but there are more – known as ‘Renegades’ they can be found in all sorts of Nazi German military and propaganda structures. After the war some South Africans were arrested, some having served in the German Waffen SS, and they surrender to the Allied forces occupying Germany in 1945, to a man all claiming they were just fighting against the Communist onslaught of the Red Army. Theirs is an interesting story and also a complex one, as they do not volunteer to join Germany upfront, they all join the South African Army upfront, and they have no dual German nationality or stated German affinity – they are South African soldiers pure and applied – affectionately known at the time in South Africa as ‘Springboks’ – mid way through the war they change sides, put on German uniforms, and take up arms against their own country and its Allied forces – they all join the infamous Nazi German Waffen SS (the Nazi party and Hitler’s personal army) in a special ethnic unit set aside for ‘British’ renegades – but why this extraordinary ‘volte-face‘?
It’s a very complex question, to understand their motives for committing such an act of treason we need to understand the background as to Nazism and anti-Communism in both South Africa and the United Kingdom – and the political landscapes driving each.
The bedrock of Nazism and anti-Communism in South Africa
The background to South African Nationals joining the Nazi German Waffen SS, and other German forces for that matter, lies against the background and popularity of National Socialism and Fascism as ideologies prior to the Second World War in South Africa and in the United Kingdom respectively. Within this context we find a variety of home grown National Socialist and Fascist movements incorporating fierce anti-Communist and anti-Semitic ideologies. Even the mainstream opposition and governing political parties in South Africa and the United Kingdom had strong anti-Communist leanings. This socio-political dynamic forms the backdrop to understanding the motivations of British, South African, and other Commonwealth citizens joining the German forces during the war. In the Waffen SS, an overarching proposition put to foreign recruits, and to motivate them join, was to fight alongside Nazi Germany forces to prevent the onset of Bolshevism (Communism).
Prior to the Second World War, South Africa was governed by a Fusion party created between General James Barry Munnik Hertzog’s National Party (NP) and General Jan Christian (JC) Smuts’ South African Party (SAP) in 1933, this party came about to tackle the economic challenges of the Great Depression and also sought to maintain a Afrikaner led hegemony in the interests of South Africa’s white population.1 Hertzog led this fusion undertaking as Prime Minister with Smuts as his deputy. Known as the United South African National Party, or simply the “United Party”2 it contained within it a component of Afrikaner nationalists harbouring republican desires and a component within it of Afrikaners satisfied with Union and South Africa’s status as a British Dominion.
Afrikaner nationalists to the political far right of their colleagues who had now joined the United Party were unhappy with the idea of Fusion. Led by Dr. Daniël François (D.F.) Malan this grouping of dissatisfied nationalist broke away from Hertzog’s old National Party and reconstituted themselves as the ‘Purified’ National Party (PNP) in 1935.3 The ,central objective of the PNP was a complete break with Britain and the establishment of an independent oligarchy Republic under a white Afrikaner hegemony.4 Anglophobia was a critical ideology underpinning DF Malan’s PNP. This resulted from the scorched earth policy used during The South African War (1899-1902) by British forces, and Malan sought to exclude English speakers from the PNP completely.5 The Purified Nationalists became the official opposition after the General Election held on 18 May 1938.6
Since the Union of South Africa’s declaration of war against Imperial Germany in 1914, and the invasion and annexation of German South West Africa (GSWA) shortly thereafter, a bitter internal debate had raged amongst Afrikaner Nationalists across the political spectrum. The invasion of GSWA was led by General Louis Botha and General Jan Smuts and supported by the ruling party – the SAP. Primary motivations included supporting Britain and France’s war effort. However, another key objective for South Africa’s invasion of GSWA was a domestic one as the war presented an opportunity for South Africa’s own territorial ambitions. The 1909 Conference for a Closer Union and the establishment of the Union of South Africa in 1910 had within its construct the initial inclusion of GSWA in addition to Southern Rhodesia, Delagoa Bay, Bechuanaland, Lesotho and Swaziland in the Union.7
However, for cultural and historic grounds large swathes of the white Afrikaner community held sympathies for Germany. They believed Germany had supported them during the South African War and hence sought neutrality instead.
The resultant failed Afrikaner Rebellion of 1914, pitching Afrikaner against Afrikaner over the invasion of GSWA, left a long legacy of more bitterness and even deeper political polarisation. The country was further divided on racial fault lines with the majority of the black indigenous population groups on the political periphery, with little attention paid to their political aspirations and emancipation.
In the inter-war years (1918-1939), and with the rise of National Socialism in Germany and Fascism in Italy from the mid 1920s, many Afrikaner Nationalists increasingly came under the influence of Adolf Hitler and his specific brand of German National Socialism (Nazism). With this came their abhorrence for Communism. Oswald Pirow, Hertzog’s Minister of Defence (1933-1939), was one of the most influential Afrikaners to fall under Hitler’s spell. Pirow met with Hitler, Hermann Göring, Benito Mussolini and Francisco Franco8 as an envoy on behalf of the United Party government. Pirow received Germany’s feedback on GSWA and the ‘new order’ should Germany go to war with Britain and her allies. Pirow gambled his career on a Nazi Germany victory in what he saw as an inevitable war. On 25 September 1940, he founded the national socialist ‘New Order’ (NO) for South Africa. He positioned it as a study group within the reformulated National Party (HNP), and based it on Hitler’s new order plans for Africa.9 During the Second World War, Pirow also positioned the NO as a defender of whites in Africa against the threat of Communism.10In terms of the NO’s values, Pirow espoused Nazi ideals and advocated an authoritarian state.11
Oswald Pirow inspecting Nazi German Forces
In addition to Oswald Pirow’s NO, other leading and influential Afrikaner Nationalists were forming German National Socialist movements with distinctive antisemitic and anti-communist leanings in South Africa during the interwar period. As a committed antisemite, Louis Theodor Weichardt founded the South African Christian National Socialist Movement when he broke with the National Party on the 26 October 1933. This included a paramilitary ‘security’ or ‘body-guard’ section (modelled on Nazi Germany’s brown-shirted Sturmabteilung) called the “Gryshemde” or “Grey-shirts”. In May 1934, the paramilitary Grey-shirts officially merged with the South African Christian National Socialist Movement and formed a new enterprise called ‘The South African National Party’ (SANP). The SANP would continue wearing Grey-shirts as their identifying dress and would also make use of other Nazi iconography, including extensive use of the swastika.12 Overall, Weichardt saw democracy as an outdated system and an invention of British imperialism and Jews.13
Weichardt also pitched the SANP as a fully bilingual organisation appealing to both English and Afrikaans speakers, he found favour in some English speaking corners with hardened antisemites, however for the most part his organisation and its ideology appealed to Afrikaners.
Grey-shirt leadership outside the courts in Grahamstown. Left to Right – standing outside the courthouse in Grahamstown in full SANP dress is Johannes von Strauss Moltke, Harry Inch and David Olivier. Insert picture Louis Theodor Weichardt
Other neo-Nazi and fascist groupings either spun out of the SANP Grey-shirts, or mushroomed as National Socialists movements with the German model front and centre in their own right. Also included was Manie Wessels’ ‘South African National Democratic Movement’ (Nasionale Demokratiese Beweging) formed in Johannesburg. They became known as the “Black-shirts”, and operated in the Orange Free State and the Transvaal. The ‘Black-shirts’ form in opposition to the ‘Grey-shirts’ anti-democracy position and look to a more “purified” whites only democracy free of Jewish and Capitalist influence.14
The Black-shirts themselves would splinter into another Black-shirt movement called the ‘South African National People’s Movement’ (Suid Afrikaanse Nasionale Volksbeweging). Started by Chris Havemann and based in Johannesburg, these Black-shirts advanced a closer idea of National Socialism. By 1937 this Black-shirt splinter group boasted 265 branches mainly in the Transvaal. ‘The Swastika’ was their official mouthpiece.15
Another National Socialist movement known as the ‘African Gentile Organisation’ was also formed in Cape Town by HS Terblanche in September 1934, Dr AJ Bruwer formed the ‘National Workers Union’ (Bond van Nasionale Werkers) in Pretoria – also known as the “Brown-shirts”. Additionally, Frans Erasmus formed another national party militant group called the “Orange-shirts”.16
Two National Socialist movements broke away from the SANP Grey-shirts, when the SANP leader JHH de Waal resigned and formed the ‘Gentile Protection League’. Their sole aim was to fight the ‘Jewish menace in South Africa’.17 Johannes von Moltke, Weichardt’s right hand man, then broke away from the SANP along with most of his Eastern Cape constituency. They formed a new organisation called ‘The South African Fascists’ who wore Nazi iconography, blue trousers, and Grey-shirts.
Additionally, Manie Maritz, a veteran of the South African War and influential leader of the 1914 Afrikaner Rebellion, also admired German National Socialism. A converted antisemite, he even blamed the South African War on a Jewish conspiracy. He founded the anti-parliamentary, pro National Socialist, antisemitic ‘Volksparty’, in Pietersburg in July 1940.18 This evolved and merged into ‘Die Boerenasie’ (The Boer Nation), a party with National Socialist leanings originally led by JCC Lass (the first Commandant General of the Ossewabrandwag) but briefly taken over by Maritz until his accidental death in December 1940. Thereafter it was headed up by SK Rudman.19 Maritz would also detail his Antisemitic and National Socialist views in his autobiography ‘My Lewe en Strewe’ (My life and Aspiration) published in 1939 and modelled on Hitler’s own ‘Mein Kampf’. 20
Aside from all these various parties, the Ossewabrandwag (OB, the Ox-Wagon Sentinel) was the largest and most successful Afrikaner Nationalist organisation with pro-Nazi sympathies prior to and during the Second World War. The Ossewabrandwag was formed on the back of the 1938 Great Trek Centennial celebration – the centennial was planned under the directive of the “Afrikaner Broederbond” (Brotherhood) and championed by its Chairman, Henning Klopper. They sought to use the centenary anniversary of the 1828 Great Trek to unite the “Cape Afrikaners” and the “Boere Afrikaners” under the pioneering symbology of the Great Trek and to literally map a “path to a South African Republic” under a white Afrikaner hegemony. The trek re-enactment was very successful, and Klopper managed to realign white Afrikaner identity under the Broederbond’s Christian Nationalist ideology calling on providence and declaring it a ‘sacred happening’.21
The OB was tasked with spreading the Broederbond’s (and the PNP’s) ideology of Christian Nationalism like “wildfire” across the country (hence the name Ox wagon “Firewatch”’ or “Sentinel”). The OB’s national socialist leanings are seen in correlation with other world ideologies of the time, and specifically to that of Nazi Germany.22 Afrikaner Christian Nationalism, although grounded in “Krugerism” as an ideology, can be regarded as a derivative of German National Socialism and Italian Fascism and is identified as such by OB leaders like John Vorster in 1942.23 Earlier, the future leader of the OB, Dr Hans Van Rensburg, whilst a Union Defence Force officer, had met with Adolf Hitler and became an avowed admirer of both Hitler and Nazim. As leader of the OB, he then later infused the organisation with National Socialist ideology, whereafter the organisation took on a distinctive fascist appearance, with Nazi ritual, insignia, structure, oaths and salutes.
Ideologically speaking the OB adopted a number of Nazi characteristics: they opposed communism, and approved of antisemitism. The OB adopted the Nazi creed of “Blut und Boden” (Blood and Soil) in terms of both racial purity and an historical bond and rights to the land. They embraced the “Führer Principle” and the “anti-democratic” totalitarian state (rejecting “British” parliamentary democracy). They also used a derivative of the Nazi creed of “Kinder, Küche, Kirche” (Children, Kitchen, Church) as to the role of women and the role of the church in relation to state. In terms of economic policy, the OB also adopted a derivative of the Nazi German economic policy calling for the expropriation of “Jewish monopoly capital” without compensation and adding “British monopoly capital” to the mix.24
Ossewabrandwag dress and bearing
Although the OB never pitched itself as a National Socialist party, the OB is regarded as a Nazi-sympathising grouping.25By the early 1940’s the OB gained its own militaristic wing, called the “Stormjaers”, who countered the South African war effort through sabotage of infrastructure, targeting Jewish businesses and assassinations. The OB during the war also directly aided the Nazi war efforts aimed at sedition, espionage, spy smuggling, and collecting intelligence in the Union. The post-war Barrett Commission investigation into South African renegades even contains a personal confession ‘van Rensburg vs. Rex’ as to van Rensburg’s regular and treasonous collaboration with Nazi Germany over a set period of time during the war.26
By July 1939, the Black-shirts were formally incorporated into the OB and focussed on the recruiting of “Christian minded National Aryans” into the OB infusing it with more National Socialist “volkisch” Nationalism. This took the OB well beyond its original intention of functioning as a wholesome cultural organ of Afrikanerdom and the National Party.27
The bedrock of Fascism and anti-Communism in Britain
Following the Great Depression in the early 1930s, the United Kingdom and Europe too saw a spike in support for the ideals of fascism. Initially small, these early British fascists pointed to the success of emerging autocracies in Italy and Germany. They saw this mode of fascism as a solution to the economic ramifications of the Great Depression. In Britain, Oswald Mosley was a popular Labour Party Member of Parliament and he brought what may have remained an insignificant fascist voice to prominence.28
During the early 1930s, Mosley became convinced that this new fascist ideology offered the way forward for economic and political reform. The severe economic and unemployment crisis caused by the Great Depression in Britain led Mosely to believe in a centralised political power based on a Keynesian economic state, yet with a broader emphasis on deficit spending and socialism.29
Mosley resigned from the Labour Party in early 1931. On 28 February 1931 he formed the “New Party” and, based on his memorandum of economic reforms, this party in turn became increasingly influenced by fascism. In January 1932, Mosley met with Benito Mussolini in Italy.30 Mosley wrote a new manifesto “The Greater Britain”, which inspired him to fold the New Party and form the British Union of Fascists (BUF), on 1October 1932.31 By 1934, the BUF hit a very popular chord with a segment of the British public, and initially grew to around 40,000 members. Mosley had previously advocated for a corporate state, but rejected the essential Marxist tenet of class conflict and the BUF switched to an anti-Communist leaning.32 Mosely had also previously advocated that trade with the Soviet Union conflicted with his plans for a self-sufficient imperial economic system.33 The BUF followed the dictatorship principle, and Mosley’s system thus called for a powerful executive figure called “The Minister”.34 Mosley also adopted the Italian Fascist Corporate system, or “Corporativismo”, which allowed for capitalism, but where it failed, or worked against the state, then the state would intervene in economic production.35
Oswald Mosely and his British Black-shirts
However, his movement eventually became a haven for lunatic antisemites and far right-wing extremists from the fringes of British society. It was not Mosley’s carefully outlined fascist policies, nor his vision of an industrial and economic utopia, which came to represent the BUF. Instead, it was their reputation for violence and the forcible removal of hecklers at rallies by uniformed BUF strongmen also called “Black-shirts”. The general public began to perceive the BUF as little more than violent thugs on the fringe of society. By 1937 the BUF had further distanced itself from popular favour and moved from a benign, harmless curiosity, to a para-military menace. Mosley also increasingly embraced violent change and anti-Semitism. By the end of 1936, the general public associated the BUF and Mosley with German National Socialism and Hitler, and both he and the BUF became a hated national pariah on the fringe of British society.36
Such was the universal British hatred for Mosley’s movement on the home front that it initially turned the British public against Nazism and Fascism as ideologies, more so than Hitler or Mussolini. By the start of the Second World War in 1939, the BUF membership declined to about 20,000 members.37
Although Fascism was a fringe ideology in the United Kingdom, other Britons were also romanced by German National Socialism and Italian Fascism, the most significant individuals here are John Amery, Eric Pleasants, and William Brooke Joyce. American born Joyce was a member of the BUF whilst he lived in Britain, and later would infamously became known as ‘Lord Haw-Haw’ – a propagandist broadcasting from Nazi Germany during the war. All three would play a key role in the future “British Free Corps” (BFC) of the Waffen SS.
Road to War
In South Africa and in the United Kingdom this fierce polarisation over Nazi Germany came to a head when Britain and France declared war against Nazi Germany on 3 September 1939. In Britain the activities of fringe fascists were relatively easily curtailed when on the 23 May 1940, Mosley and 740 other BUF members were interned under the Defence Regulation 18B. On 10 July 1940, the organisation was declared unlawful, whereupon it ceased to exist with no real resistance.
The South African case was an entirely different matter. The polarisation over Nazism and Germany was especially felt in the Afrikaner Nationalist community who, through the various neo-Nazi movements in the Union described above, had become enamoured and invested in Nazi Germany. When Britain declared war on Germany, the United Party found itself in a dilemma and a parliamentary three-way debate would take place almost immediately after Britain’s’ declaration. This debate, primarily between the two factions in the United Party (Hertzog’s cabal and Smut’s cabal) and the Purified Nationalists, was whether South Africa should go to war against Germany or remain neutral. As the United Party was loaded with Hertzog’s Nationalists, and there was also Malan’s Nationalists in opposition, Prime Minister Hertzog was very confident he had the majority to carry a motion of neutrality.
Hertzog would argue in his speech that Hitler’s invasion of Poland, and annexations of Austria and Czechoslovakia, was not an indication that the German leader aspired to world conquest, and that the Afrikaners well understood Germany’s right to struggle for their own self-determination against the hostility of the outside world. He also argued that Germany’s actions constituted no threat to South African security whatsoever, and that a policy of neutrality under these circumstances was the only logical policy to adopt. General Smuts would reply in his speech that since the fate of South West Africa would depend on the outcome of the war, South Africa’s interests were virtually involved. Furthermore, South Africa was part of the British Commonwealth whose fate now hung in the balance. To stand aside from the conflict would be to expose the whole “civilised” world to danger.38 Smuts’ amendment to Hertzog’s Motion of Neutrality was carried by 80 votes to 67 votes on the 4 September 1939, and as a result South Africa thus found itself at war against Nazi Germany. Surprised at the outcome, Hertzog promptly resigned and along with 36 of his supporters left the United Party, thereby leaving the South African Premiership and the leadership of the United Party to Smuts.39 The Union officially declared war on Nazi Germany on 6 September 1939.40 Later, on 10 June 1940, Italy declared war on France and Britain, and in response as an Allied country, South Africa declared war on Italy the next day.41
Hertzog moved to form a new party – the “Volksparty” and successfully reconciled with the “Malanites” in the PNP to then form the “Herenigde Nasionale Volksparty” (HNP)42 or Reunited National Party. However, on 5 November 1940 at the HNP’s Convention in Bloemfontein, Hertzog reaffirmed his position on English-speakers rights, and falling on deaf ears, he grabbed his hat and walked out of the National Party forever. In retirement and angered by his treatment at the hands of HNP and Malan, he performed a remarkable volte-face and issued a press release in October 1941 in which he championed National Socialism.43 In the release Hertzog excoriated “liberal capitalism” and the democratic party system, praised National Socialism as in keeping with the traditions of the Afrikaner, and argued that South Africa needed the oversight of a one-party state dictatorship.44
As happened in the United Kingdom, the Union instituted emergency regulations to the curtail Nazi sympathetic organisations and their leaders during the war – even imprisoning some. However unlike in Britain, this was met with home grown resistance in South Africa when pro-Nazi organisations like the SANP and OB moved into active and direct support of both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy’s war efforts. They did this either through espionage, sedition, or through armed actions and sabotage. On the political stage the HNP continued with its neutrality position whilst at the same time it tacitly supported Nazi Germany.
Approach to Recruitment – South Africa, Britain and Germany
With war declared, in South Africa attention was given to recruiting and bolstering South Africa’s statutory forces, which were undercapitalised and under resourced by the National Party during the inter-war years. On 14 March 1940, Smuts forced Pirow out of his position as Minister of Defence for mismanaging his parliamentary portfolio and his failed “bush cart strategy”.45 Smuts concluded that the re-bolstering and recruitment of the Union Defence Force (UDF) had to be done using volunteerism and not conscription – especially given the sensitivities of Afrikaners to both Germany and Great Britain. Using this strategy, Smuts was able to ultimately call up nearly a quarter of the white adult population for voluntary wartime service – half of which were Afrikaners. Their motivations and political dispositions for joining the Union’s war effort varied considerably. Some held indifferent views as to National Socialism, many held strong views as to anti-Communism, and many joined solely for economic reasons – mainly employment given the ‘poor white’ problem which had historically hobbled the white Afrikaans speaking community.46
South African recruitment poster and South Africans in action in north Africa – colour photo by Photo Redux
With war declared, in Britain the process of recruitment was somewhat different to South Africa. As with South Africa, the inter-war period and austerity measures had left Britain’s armed forces woefully unfit for purpose. Consequently, on 3 September 1939, Britain immediately turned to conscription. The day Britain declared war on Germany, Parliament passed The National Service (Armed Forces) Act and imposed conscription on all males aged between 18 and 41,47 regardless of their political affiliations and/or dispositions to Nazism, Fascism, or Communism.
With war declared and as the war progressed, Germany’s approach to resourcing its armed forces was also somewhat different. Conscription into military service into the statutory German armed forces (Wehrmacht) had begun as early as 16 March 1935, and it initially applied to all German men of “Aryan”’ classification aged between 18 and 45.
British propaganda poster and troops in action
In parallel to the Wehrmacht, the Schutzstaffel (SS) was born under the leadership of Heinrich Himmler, and was essentially a police force and not a military one. One arm of the SS, the SS Verfugungstruppe (SSVT), emerged as a paramilitary wing and, on 17 August 1938, prior to the infamous “Kristallnacht”, Hitler decreed that the SSVT was not purely that of a police force, nor of an army unit. Rather, it was a National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) political unit at his personal disposal.48 The SSVT would be the forerunner of the Waffen SS when it began to take on an increasingly military guise. On 19 August 1939, just before the invasion of Poland, on an order from Hitler, the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW), placed the SSVT under the commander-in-chief of the Army (Heer) to fight alongside the Wehrmacht.49
The formation of the Waffen SS and the British Free Corps
Broadly speaking, once the war was underway the SS had evolved into three groups – the Allgemeine SS (General SS), which was a general police force also enforcing Nazi racial policy; the Waffen SS, which consisted of militarised combat units with special allegiance to Hitler and the Nazi Party; and finally, the SS Totenkopf (Death Head) units that were in charge of concentration camps and the extermination of Jews and other undesirables according to Nazi philosophy.
The Waffen SS would grow from just 3 Regiments to a mammoth para-military army with 22 Corps, just over 38 Divisions, 16 Brigades and about 14 Foreign Legions during course of the war. Initially recruitment was limited to ethnic Germans of “Aryan ancestry”. Yet this was relaxed from 1940, and then widened again after Operation Barbarossa was launched in June 1941. After the invasion of the Soviet Union, the Waffen SS was pitched as a crusade against the onset of Bolshevism (Communism in effect). More foreign volunteers, and even eventually foreign conscripts, were raised from occupied countries and/or countries deemed as having population demographics which met with Nazi Aryan dogma. Many of these foreign national volunteers and conscripts joined the various ethically and culturally differentiated Waffen SS structures.
Waffen SS recruitment – colour of Waffen SS in action – image by Doug
One such Waffen SS unit focussed on British Commonwealth and Allied volunteers who displayed a positive disposition to National Socialism and anti-bolshevism, and met the Nazi “Aryan” recruitment ideals. The unit was originally conceived as the “Legion of St George” by John Amery. Amery was born into the British political elite, the son of Leo Amery, and older brother of Julian Amery, both of whom served as Tory (Conservative) Ministers of Parliament. John Amery was considered a troubled and difficult youngster and became a committed fascist and staunch anti-Communist. Moving to France after he was bankrupted, he was reputed to have joined Franco’s Nationalists during the Spanish Civil War in 1936, eventually returning to France, and was there when Germany occupied France in June 1940.50
John Amery travelled to Berlin in October 1942 and proposed to the “German English Committee” the formation of a British volunteer force to help fight bolshevism. Remaining in Germany, Amery made a series of pro-German and anti-Communist propaganda radio broadcasts to British listeners. After meeting Jacques Doriot in January 1943, Amery modelled his concept on the “Legion of French Volunteers against Bolshevism” – a German Wehrmacht unit consisting of French collaborators. Called the “Legion of St George”, Amery released a proclamation primarily targeting British and Commonwealth prisoners of war (POW), from which cohort he aimed to recruit about 100 members.
John Amery
In his proclamation Amery appealed to these POWs and warned that their wives and children at home are menaced by the invasion of the “Hordes of Bolshevik Barbarity” and the “Dragon of Asiatic and Jewish Bestiality”. He urged these POWs to join the Legion of St George to fight on the German-Finnish front alongside the German and Finnish people against the Soviet Union. He issued a mistruth, stating that hundreds of their countrymen had already joined his legion for the purposes of upholding the British Empire.51
Amery’s recruiting drive, despite persistence, did not yield the hundreds of volunteers as he had hoped, as his message simply did not resonate with the British, Commonwealth and Allied prisoners. However, he managed to prick the interest of a handful of POWs, notably Kenneth Berry – a young and impressionable British merchant mariner and William Charles Brittain, a British Royal Warwickshire Regiment member, captured in Crete in 1941. The first POW recruits were accommodated at what was pitched as a “holiday camp” in Genshagen, Berlin in August 1943.52 By November 1943, they were moved to a requisitioned café in the Pankow district of Berlin.53 Amery’s link to the unit ended in October 1943, after the Waffen SS decided they did not need his services. The unit subsequently officially become a military unit of the Waffen SS on 1 January 1944, and was re-named the “British Free Corps” (BFC).54
William Brittain in BFC uniform and BFC recruitment poster.
In addition to Amery, it is also noted that the infamous BUF stalwart, the American born Joyce was also in Germany at this time. He, like Amery, was also involved in Nazi propaganda radio broadcasts. Joyce and his wife Margaret became German citizens on 26 September 1940, and his reach expanded with script writing for a trio of stations: Radio Caledonia, Workers’ Challenge, and the New British Broadcasting Service. He also helped write propaganda to assist in the recruitment British POWs to enlist in the BFC and published a book, “Twilight Over England”, in which he contrasted the ideal of Nazi Germany versus the Jewish-dominated, capitalist enemy state.55
Resourcing the BFC
The first Commander of the BFC was Hauptsturmfurer SS Hans Werner Roepke, an English-speaking German.56 Continuing to recruit British and Commonwealth POWs to the BFC, the unit was equipped and repeatedly moved between Hanover and Dresden, and by 8 March 1945 they were billeted near Berlin.57 From its conception to the end of the war, a period of nearly fifteen months, the BUF could account on only 39 people who ultimately served in it.58
Initially only six men joined the BFC, and they became known as the “Big 6”: Thomas Cooper,59 a British born member of Mosley’s BUF with a German mother. He joined the Waffen SS as a Volksdeutsche (a foreign national with German heritage) and transferred to the BFC. Roy Courlander,60 a Lance Corporal with strong anti-Communist leanings serving with the New Zealand Armed Forces in their Intelligence Corps prior to his capture. Before joining the BFC, he was involved in broadcasting Nazi propaganda to his countrymen. Edwin Martin,61 a Private in the Canadian Army, who served in the Essex Scottish Regiment prior to his capture. Frank McLardy,62 another member of Mosley’s BUF and a Sergeant the Royal Army Medical Corps prior to capture. Alfred Minchin,63 a captured British merchant mariner who is accredited with selecting the name of the BFC.64 Finally, John Wilson, a British trooper serving with the Royal Marines No. 3 Commando prior to his capture.65
Roy Courlander in his BFC uniform and BFC recruitment poster
By February 1944, the BFC boasted only eight members, however, soon thereafter more recruitment of Allied POW took place and Robert Heights (British), Robert Lane (British), Norman Rose (British), Lionel Wood (Australian) and Thomas Freeman (British) joined the unit. Freeman, also a BUF member prior to the war, did so to sabotage the project. Freeman and Wilson recruited two Australians, Robert Chipchase and Albert Stokes, and then Theo Ellsmore – a Belgian who masqueraded as a South African. Chipchase only spent a couple of days in the BFC. Stokes was Freeman’s friend and he also initially intended to sabotage the project.66
Leading up to June 1944, William How (British), Ernest Nichols (British), Herbert Rowlands (British) – he had also been a BUF member before the war, and Roland Barker (an Australian, regarded as man of limited intelligence) all joined the BFC. In June two Britons, John Leister and Eric Pleasants (another former BUF member) joined the unit – both were convicted thieves serving time in France in a merchant navy POW camp.67
Other POW recruits over this period included Harry Dean Bachelor (British), Hugh Cowie (British), Roy Futcher (British), Frank Maton (British, also a BUF member before the war) and Tom Perkins – of this group only Maton stood out for his pro-Nazi convictions. In June 1944 the BFC total compliment reached 27 men.68
Eric Pleasants in BFC uniform and BFC recruitment poster
In June 1944, and after the D-Day landings and the commencement of Operation Overlord, the BFC was marred by mutiny. Freeman, Courlander, Maton, and Rowlands all escaped from the unit. Other members returned to and/or requested to be transferred back to the POW camps. Some of the troublesome members were transferred to isolation and labour camps. Some members joining the BFC complained about being blackmailed into it, while others were identified as being mentally unstable.69 A stable, conformist and homogeneous military unit, the BFC was not.
Enter the South Africans
By November 1944 the BFC stabilised somewhat, and some members even returned to it from their respective POW camps. During the summer of 1944/1945 new members started to arrive, and of importance at this time was a trio of South African Prisoners of War – Pieter Labuschagne, Lawrence Viljoen, and, of specific importance is Mardon, a South African with fierce Russophobia, attributed to the contact he had with Russian POWs.70 By the end of January 1945, the BFC reached its zenith in terms of numbers on the ground – 27 members,71 which is only about the size of a single platoon.
Other South Africans have been involved in the recruiting of BFC members, these include Sgt. F.W. Lochrenburg, Gnr B.J.F Brandsma and Pte. S.P.J. van Dyk, however they do not join the BFC and are instead used by the German and BFC authorities as stool pigeons to lure recruits to the BFC.
On the three South Africans that do join the BFC, all come from varying backgrounds:
Douglas Mardon was born in Durban on 22 May 1919, he’s of British heritage. He saw service as member of 2nd Transvaal Scottish and when war broke out he attested with the 1st Battalion of the Royal Durban Light Infantry in 1940, having had attained the rank of Lance Corporal. He is in North Africa fighting for his unit when he is captured during the Battle of Gazala on 6 June 1942. Initially in a POW camp in Italy and thereafter he is transferred to Museburg in Austria – it was here that he made contact with Russian POW whom he learned to detest. He was moved to Stalag 8B and discovered a pamphlet for the BFC inserted into a packet of cigarettes and it perked his interest in joining the BFC.72
Labuschagne is born 4 January 1922, of Afrikaans heritage from Zastron and attests with the President Steyn Regiment (later with Louw Wepener Regiment). Captured on 23 November 1941 at the Battle of Sidi Rezegh in North Africa. Initially in a POW camp in Italy, he is later transferred to Germany. He learns about the BFC from a distributed pamphlet which is left on his bed.73
Viljoen was listed as a Constable and attests as a Private in the 1st South African Police Battalion, Afrikaans by heritage, born on 19 June 1917. Viljoen is from Laingsburg and later lives in Worcester in the Western Cape.74
Mardon on 8 March 1945 received a promotion to Unterscharführer and was given command of a section of the BFC, the other two are given the rank of ‘SS Mann’ (the equivalent of a private).
On 13 February 1945, whilst the BFC was billeted in Dresden on their way to the Eastern Front, now outside Berlin, the city came under air attack by Allied bombers – during this attack Viljoen disappeared. His colleagues thought he was dead, but this turned out not to be the case.75
BFC Combat deployment
By March 1945, the BFC was deployed to Berlin for combat. At this stage, some of its members had already started to have second thoughts on the prospect of fighting a losing battle, which prompted some members to request to be returned to their POW camps or transferred to other non-combat units. With a corium of committed BFC members having volunteered to fight Communism on 15 March 1945 the BFC was deployed to Berlin and billeted on the eastern front alongside the III (Germanisches) SS-Panzer Korps. Under-resourced, they are not formally given ammunition, the BFC use initiative and secure limited stocks of ammunition.76
On 22 March 1945, the BFC was ordered to reinforce a reconnaissance battalion of the 11th SS Volunteer Panzergrenadier Division Nordland, which was regarded as one of the most multicultural divisions in the Waffen SS. The 11th SS Volunteer Panzergrenadier Division Nordland was commanded by Brigadefürer Joachim Ziegler and fell under the III (Germanisches) SS Panzer Corps under the overall command of Obergruppenführer Felix Steiner.
11th SS Volunteer Panzergrenadier Division Nordland in action and their insignia
Only one BFC combat engagement is found in contemporary accounts, and it is unclear as to the full role of the BFC. On 22 March whilst the BFC section under Mardon’s command was entrenching itself alongside the 3rd Company of SS-Panzer-Aufklärungs-Abteilung 11 “Nordland” – the reconnaissance battalion it was attached to. They were now situated in the village of Schoenburg near the west bank of the Oder Canal.77 This 3rd Company of the SS-Panzer-Aufklärungs-Abteilung 11 “Nordland” was partially overrun by an advance element of the Red Army who had blundered onto its position by accident. Although taken by surprise, the Waffen SS troopers launched a spirited counterattack driving off the Soviets. It is however unclear if any BFC members were involved in the fight and to what extent, as interviews with BFC members after the war point to minimal if any involvement in actual combat (although this reasoning was also used by BFC members as an excuse to evade charges of treason), according to court statements they were located in the second trench line behind the primary line on the Oder canal, and the second trench line never came under attack by the Red Army.78
Whilst the BFC was entrenched outside Schoenburg with the 3rd Company of the SS-Panzer-Aufklärungs-Abteilung 11 “Nordland”, Cooper managed to convince the Division’s Commander, Brigadefurer Joachim Ziegler, that the BFC was indeed unfit for combat and it was withdrawn from the line and sent to Tempin 79 on 16 April 1945 to join the transport company of Obergruppenführer Felix Steiner’s Headquarters staff (Kraftfahrstaffel StabSteiner).80 The BFC moved with the transport company to Neustrelitz whereupon on 29 April 1945 Obergruppenführer Steiner orders his Panzer Corps to break contact with the Soviets and to head west into Anglo-American captivity. By 2 May 1945, Cooper and the remnants of the BFC surrendered to the 121st Infantry Regiment of the United States of America near Schwerin.81
After the war ended, numerous commissions were instituted by the British and the Commonwealth countries to round up and interrogate all their nationals who aided any of the Axis powers by any means during the war. Those accused of High Treason were brought to justice. In the case of those who had joined the Waffen SS, and specifically those having joined or were associated to the BFC, the sentences and outcomes varied from acquittal, to time served, to fines, to various degrees of incarceration and hard labour, and even capital punishment. The gallows were a fate awaiting Amery, who hanged on 19 December 1945, as well as Joyce, who hanged on 3 January 1946, Cooper was also given the death sentence, but his execution was stayed at the last minute on 20 February 194682 and commuted to life in prison.
John Amery (top left) and William Joyce (bottom left) were both executed, Thomas Cooper (top right) had his death sentence commuted to life.
In the end they all fall onto the “wrong” side of history, and can be best summed up by John Amery’s epitaph written by his father Leo Amery (who by co-incidence also penned the Times history of the South African War 1899-1902):
‘At end of wayward days he found a cause – ’Twas not his Country’s – Only time can tell if that defiance of our ancient laws was as treason or foreknowledge. He sleeps well.‘
Communism – not our creed
As in Britain, in South Africa at the start of the war Communism is perfectly legal. It is however regarded with disdain by moderate and right wing white South Africans, however it does find a home in some white supporters of the Labour Party and in the small community of Jewish immigrants who are highly unionised (especially in the garment industry) and have liberal leanings. White South Africans in general are in support of the United Party and fearful of Communism and its growing support amongst aspirant and politicised Black South Africans.
As to the fear of Communism, the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany on 22 June 1941 causing the Soviet Union to side with the Allies proves a problematic and awkward question in South Africa. The ruling party, the United Party, as well as its primary opposition party, the Reformed National Party – are all principally anti-communist, in fact they are very vocally anti-Communist. General Jan Smuts would try and give reason to his and his country’s own anti-Communist sentiments and siding alongside the Soviet Union in July 1941 when he said:
‘Nobody can say we are now league with the Communists and fighting the battles of Communism. More fitly can the neutralists and the fence sitters be charged with fighting the battle of Nazism. If Hitler has driven Russia to fight in self-defence, we bless her all success, without for a moment identifying ourselves with her Communistic creed. Hitler has made Russia his enemy and not made us friendly to her creed’.83
The Soviet flag was raised over the Reichstag 30 April 1945 – insert letter from the Union of South Africa in support of the USSR.
What remains a truism throughout the war, is that although Communism is an anathema to the United Kingdom, United States and the South African Union’s mainstream and right wing politics, the Soviet Union remains a key supported ally, and inside South Africa the Red Cross raises support for the Soviet Union and Smuts’ United Party even expresses solidarity with the Soviet Union after a meeting held on 16 October 1942 and they notify the Consul General of the USSR in Pretoria of their unwavering support.84
South African Renegades – The Rein and Barrett Missions
After the end of the Second World War, all the Allied nations embarked on a Nazi hunt to prosecute war criminals. This included high profile war crimes, but it also included hunting all nationals who, by siding with Nazi Germany and the Axis forces, had committed an act of High Treason. South Africa’s post war hunt for its nationals assisting or joining Nazi Germany and other Axis forces remained relatively undocumented and under-researched, however this does not mean that South Africa did nothing to find and prosecute its war criminals.85
In December 1945, it was agreed that those South Africans who had committed treason as Union nationals, would be dealt with by the Department of Justice, whereas those who qualified as ex-Union Prisoners of War who joined German forces would be dealt with by the Union Defence Forces’ Military Disciplinarian Code.86 In February 1946 the Rein Mission left for Europe to work alongside British MI5 to identify South African War criminals, this opened the way to a more comprehensive mission, called the Barrett Mission aimed primarily at South Africans who whether directly or indirectly aided the German War effort.87 These South Africans were referred to by historian Ian van der Waag as ‘Hitler’s Springboks’ and they included Radio Zeesen Afrikaner broadcasters, stool pigeons, collaborators and members of the Waffen SS (and BFC).88
‘Hitler’s Springboks’ then constituted a small number of South African citizens in Nazi Germany who were swept up by Allied forces, having either caught up with them through various interrogations or them having surrendered to Allied Forces directly. Previously embargoed or restricted archival material, now in the Department of Justice archives indicates that by 21 July 1945 the Department of Military Intelligence of the Union Defence Force started formulating lists of South African Union Nationals in Nazi Germany during wartime and requesting the British MI5 Intelligence Service to supply more information on them and that they had to hold them for interrogation. These primarily included name lists of South African Nationals or German Nationals with South African heritage or background who had in some way played a role in influencing South African Prisoners of War (POW) in various POW camps in Germany. This was achieved either through propaganda, through printed media, and/or radio broadcasting with the expressed purposes of forwarding Nazi German war aims and trying to influence them to join Germany’s armed forces.89
Of interest here are the various Afrikaner broadcasters of Radio Zeesen, Eric Holm, Johannes Snoek, Michael Pienaar, Francois Schaefer, Betty Blackburn (Marshall), Isa Goos, Danie Michell, and Marjorie Sanna (Hofmeyr), along with three German academics with South African backgrounds – Onderfuehrer Becker, Professor Bruxmer and Captain Brauer who play a key role in trying to influence South African POWs at various POW camps in Germany. Also swept up in this request to MI5 are a handful South African Nationals with German heritage (Volksdeutsche) who had been in Germany at the start of the war and had joined standard German Wehrmacht units, notably Carl Johannes Hugo and Konrad Rust.90
The Justice Department meets on 19 March 1946 at the Ministry of Justice (including Barrett), whereby a decision is taken to issue Police dockets and prosecute through the Ministry all identified ‘High Treason’ Union Defence Force renegades who had served in German Armed Forces. Those Union renegades identified with lessor infractions of the military code of conduct would be prosecuted by the Union Defence Force.91
The Rein Mission and MI5 British Intelligence had forwarded their initial findings on South African Union renegades in BFC to the Union from their preliminary investigations to the South African Union’s Justice Department – these include 62 sworn affidavits and 53 police statements from 166 interviews to the Rein Mission.92 Identified British Free Corps (BFC) South African Union nationals who qualified as renegades having potentially committed High Treaso, they are – L/Cpl D.C. Mardon, Pte P.A.H. Labuschagne and Pte L.M. Viljoen.93
Other South African Union Defence Force (UDF) members are identified as having joined or having been recruited to the BFC, of these the notable members are; Sgt. F.W. Lochrenburg, Gnr B.J.F Brandsma and Pte. S.P.J. van Dyk, however the initial investigations indicate they acted as stool pigeons94 – In addition, the chaotic nature of the BFC, and their short flirtations with it, there is insufficient evidence. This compels the Justice Department to believe there is an insufficient case for High Treason and they leave their cases to the UDF to investigate under their disciplinary code.95
By 4 July 1946, the case against South African nationals who had been recruited and/or joined the British Free Corps (BFC) of the Waffen SS had been fully reviewed by the Barrett Mission. Mr. L.C. Barrett, acting as the Senior Professional Assistant for the Attorney General in Pretoria issues a relatively comprehensive report on the BFC, outlining its history and intent, the grounding of the founders in British Fascism, its recruitment procedures, leadership, and deployment. These findings gleaned primarily from British Intelligence and confessions of BFC members in the United Kingdom who had already been interrogated. On the issue of South African Union Defence Force members who had served in the BFC or had been stool-pigeons in the recruitment process for the BFC, he concludes that there is a certainly a case to be made of high treason for Mardon, Labuschagne and Viljoen back in the South African Union.96
On Trial for High Treason
After Mardon, Labuschagne and Viljoen were arrested and repatriated back to South Africa a decision had to made as to how the charges and trials against them would proceed, especially in light of the unique socio-political landscape in South Africa and Prime Minister Jan Smuts’ continual reconciliation and appeasement of the Afrikaner right in order to establish ‘racial harmony’ and reconciliation, an approach he had taken to this demographic which had its roots going back even as far back as the 1914 Maritz Revolt.97 An approach which had not changed much by the end of World War 2 given Smuts’ cautious approach taken to political opponents who had flirted with Nazism like Hans van Rensburg, the Commandant General of the Ossewabrandwag and the ever increasing case of high treason stacking up against him, so much so that ‘van Rensburg was indeed guilty of high treason’.98
In addition Smuts had taken a lenient approach to Robey Leibrandt, the leader of the National Socialist Rebels whose death sentence for high treason he commuted to life in prison instead, the underpinning reason – he had fought alongside Leibrandt’s father during the South African War (1899-1902, seeking harmony instead with this highly disgruntled anti-British demographic of Afrikanerdom.99
Given this background, the decision was taken to prosecute all renegade cases of high treason using a special court.
The charges against Mardon, Labuschagne and Viljoen broadly covered three areas of High Treason Firstly, that whilst members of the South African state’s statute forces, they joined the statute forces of the German state, whilst South Africa was in a state of war against Germany (the enemy). Secondly that they joined military structures controlled by the enemy German state. Thirdly that they wore the uniform of the enemy German State. Fourthly that they underwent military training offered by the enemy German State. Fifthly, they bore arms against an allied state of the Union of South Africa.100
Mardon in his defence insisted that his sole motivation was to fight against Bolshevism (Communism), which he saw as a threat to his homeland in South Africa as it would bring with it “black domination”. He also claimed he did not take the oath of allegiance to Nazi Germany and Hitler. The crown found that regardless, he had displayed “hostile intent” to both the Union of South Africa and her Allies by taking up arms and donning a German uniform – albeit with some adaptions showing a Union Flag on the sleeve and the British lions on the collar instead of the usual Waffen SS lightening bolts. The court did take into account that it was Mardon’s wish to only fight Communism and he wished no harm on his countryman and that he was true to this conviction having been assured by his German handlers that this was the sole purpose of his recruitment into the Waffen SS. As to anything unclear to what constituted ‘high treason’ the court found that any act which was designed to assist the enemy:
‘positively by giving help of any kind, or negatively by obstructing or weakening forces arrayed against (the enemy), is an act of high treason’. 101
In this key respect to this Mardon is found guilty of High Treason.
Oswald Pirow is one of the members of the renegades defence council, he applies for postponement of the verdict and withdraws when its refused. Barrett acts for the crown. The verdict is announced on 14 April 1947. On the charge of High Treason: Mardon is found guilty, he is given a fine of £75 or 9 months in prison.
In handing down a light sentence, Justice Ramsbottom finds mitigating factors in Mardon’s intentions to only fight against Communism and not the Union in his age and cites naivety of youth, he also considers the Prisoner of War position and the lack of uncensored ‘news’ available to persons in a POW camp and they been susceptible to enemy propaganda. Furthermore, he finds mitigation in the fact that the South African renegades only join the BFC late in the war, when the advancing Red Army is a well established fact, and their intentions were only to fight communism. Mardon’s time in prison of 3 months to date is also factored and the Judge looks to the case of another BFC member Kenneth Berry who is given a 9 months sentence by a British court as an appropriate benchmark for his verdict.
Noted here, Kenneth Berry’s case is a little unique in that does not advance in rank in the BFC and remains a ‘SS Man’ (a private) whereas Mardon is made a non-commissioned officer – a Unterscharführer and was given command of a section (10 men of the BFC). Berry receives what was considered at the time by Rebecca West to be the ‘lightest sentence conferred on any traitor’102 in the United Kingdom on account of his age. Berry is regarded by the Director of Public Prosecutions ‘as an irresponsible youth who was easily led.’103
Kenneth Berry has served his sentence by the time Mardon, Labuschagne and Viljoen are brought to trial, and he is brought to South Africa as a witness in their case, so too is William John Miller, another BFC member (British) who was a Royal Artillery Gunner prior to his capture – he was deemed so “useless” that Mardon refused to deploy him in a combat role.104 Harry Dean Batchelor, a British Royal Engineers sapper who joined the BFC also appears as a witness, so too does a German, Wilhelm August ‘Bob’ Rössler, a German Heer signaler, wounded he is attached to the BFC as an interpreter as his English was very good.105
Of interest is Kenneth Berry as a very wayward young man, he is positively disposed to the British Union of Fascists and John Amery, and even writes to Amery to give him a progress on how he is doing in the BFC and enjoying it.106 Berry spends much of his testimony on the difference between the German “Heer” (Statutory Army) and the Waffen SS, in addition to the differences in BFC insignia and that of other Waffen SS units.
Kenneth Berry (centre) in a propaganda photograph in his BFC uniform with SS-Sturmmann Alfred Minchin, an ex British Merchant sea-man talking to German officers, during a recruitment drive in Milag, April 1944. – the uniform and insignia of the BFC left.
In fact during the case, the issue of the British Union of Fascists (BUF) surfaces as there are so many members of the BFC who were BUF members – so much so it starts to take a strong BUF disposition and the unit’s leadership has to make it clear that it is not a ‘fascist’ undertaking but an anti-Communist undertaking so as to attract non-fascist and non-BUF British and Commonwealth Prisoners of War.107
Labuschagne’s charges follow the same as Mardon’s and he found guilty of High Treason on exactly the same terms as Mardon – that he joined an organisation controlled by the enemy (the BFC) for the purposes of fighting against the Soviet Union – an Ally of South Africa, that he was deployed in service of the enemy, that he donned the enemy’s uniform and that he underwent military training whilst in service of the enemy. In addition, Labuschagne is also found to have actively tried to recruit other South African Union POW to join the BFC. In all the court also concludes ‘hostile intent’. One difference is that Labuschagne at times uses the alias “Smith” however the court concludes that whilst this could be seen as a sinister move to cover his tracks, they also accept that he uses the alias as many of his British counterparts could not pronounce his surname.108
One key mitigating factor is brought up in Labuschagne’s case, when the BFC unit is been prepared for deployment to fight on the Berlin front, all the BFC members are called in and informed whether they have been selected to go, and although all of them have volunteered to go, Labuschagne is informed he has to stay behind at the base. The reason cited for this is Labuschagne is unliked by the men, especially Mardon who does not rate him and finds him to be a disrupter – so for the sake of maintaining a positive esprit de corps Labuschagne is removed from the line.109
Labuschagne’s is found guilty of High Treason, and his verdict is also announced on 14 April 1947. Like Mardon his sentence is also very light, and its in fact lighter than Mardon’s sentence – Labuschagne is given a fine of £40 or 4 months in prison.
Viljoen’s charges follow the same outline as Mardon and Labuschagne – that he joined an organisation controlled by the enemy (the BFC) for the purposes of fighting against the Soviet Union – an Ally of South Africa, that he was deployed in service of the enemy, that he donned the enemy’s uniform and that he underwent military training whilst in service of the enemy. Viljoen is however found to have absconded from the BFC during the Dresden Air Raid and was never really operationally deployed. His verdict, his charges are withdrawn and he’s acquitted.
The Oswalds
Of importance in also understanding the socio-political context of the treason trials of Mardon, Labuschagne and Viljoen, and that of other South African renegades, is the political disposition of their defence council. Oswald Pirow in almost all instances of the renegade defences acts as legal counsel, and Pirow has a special relationship with Oswald Mosley.
In terms of historic sweep, Pirow is a highly accredited advocate and counsellor, however, he is also the previous National Party Defence Minister under Hertzog and the founder of the National Socialist ‘New Order’ think tank within the National Party prior to the war. Oswald Mosley, on the other hand is the previous leader of the British Union of Fascists (BUF) which had played a significant role in influencing many of the British nationals to join the Waffen SS and the BFC. After the war (and his imprisonment) Mosley releases his book “The Alternative” in October 1947, which is a re-hashed National Socialist ‘New Order’.110 Prior to the war, Oswald Pirow and Oswald Mosely, even as early as 1938, have been in contact collaborating with one another. Just after defending the BFC South African renegades treason cases in April 1947, Pirow makes contact with Mosley again and they collaborate on a paper for a fascist and racially separated African order.111 They come up with the Mosley-Pirow Proposals, which were:
‘a natural development of General Hertzog’s Segregation Policy and was foreshadowed by (his) then cabinet colleagues 15 years earlier’.112
The proposals essentially divide Africa into a large southern ‘white’ state with its labour provided by separate ‘black’ vassal states on temporary work permits. The work foreshadows the Apartheid Bantustan program and influx control policies.113
The Oswalds collaborating – Oswald Pirow and Oswald Mosley right
This mutual political disposition and outlook between ‘the two Oswald’s’ is an interesting twist as it signals what sort of post war sentiment there is in many parts of South Africa, even years after the war is over. Mosley is regarded as ‘the most hated man in Great Britain’ and his writings that of the ‘loony’ right. Pirow on the other hand is taken a little more seriously in South Africa, he’s eventually appointed the State Prosecutor in the Treason Trial and these writings of his foreshadow some the National Party’s policies on Apartheid.
Pirow’s involvement as defence council in all the cases of South African renegades is interesting – be they people caught spying for Nazi Germany in South Africa, or be they members of Radio Zeesen broadcasting Nazi propaganda to South Africa or be it this case, the South Africans joining the Waffen SS. In all instances Pirow – as a previously committed and vocal Nazi and anti-Communist politician – is “protecting his own” and bringing his formidable legal and political skills to bear in doing this. His presence alone would give an atmosphere that Nazism and Fascism were normative and accepted practices in some communities in South Africa before and during the war, so too the deep seated hatred and fear of Communism. His open relationship with Mosely, and support of British fascism also gives a little gravitas to the British Union of Fascists (BUF) and all the BFC members who belonged to it.
Waffen SS Propaganda – Dutch and South African
An interesting facet of the Waffen SS and BFC story is the extreme hatred for Communism and the fear of the on-set of Bolshevism in Europe, the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. So how successful was Nazi Germany in recruiting Waffen SS members from foreign counties on the same premise of anti-bolshevism? On a cultural, language and historical basis (as its shared) the closest we can compare the recruitment of South Africans into the Waffen SS, especially Afrikaners, is to compare the appeal the German’s made to recruit the Dutch and its successes.
The appeal for Dutch recruits into the Waffen SS has a distinctive South African message. Hitler in 1940, is a firm fan of the Afrikaner Nationalist cause and shares the ‘politics of pain’ caused during the South African War with them. Hitler’s passion for Boer politics starts early and he states in his autobiography Mein Kampf:
‘The Boer War came, like a glow of lightning on the far horizon. Day after day I used to gaze intently at the newspapers … overjoyed to think that I could witness that heroic struggle.”114
On 30th January 1940 at the Sportspalast, during his speech, Hitler drives his pro-Afrikaner Nationalism positioning home when he makes two significant points, he says:
“They (Britain) waged war for gold mines and mastery over diamond mines.”115
Then later in the speech Hitler says:
‘When has England ever stopped at women and children? After all, this entire blockade warfare is nothing other than a war against women and children just as once was the case in the Boer War, a war on women and children. It was there (South Africa) that the concentration camps were invented, in an English brain this idea was born. We only had to look up the term in the dictionary and later copy it .. with only one difference, England locked up women and children in their camps. Over 20,000 Boer women (and children) died wretchedly at the time. So why would England fight differently today?’
Later Hitler would again engage his propaganda ministry to drive his opinion on the Boer War, Joseph Goebbels who on 19 April 1940, on Hitler’s birthday speech, would broadcast over Radio Zeesen (and others), and he said:
‘Get rid of the Führer or so-called Hitlerism … British plutocracy had tried to persuade the Boers during the South African war of the same thing. Britain was only fighting Krugerism. As is well known, that did not stop them from allowing countless thousands of women and children to starve in English concentration camps.’116
Ohm Krüger (Uncle Paul), a movie about the Boer War is released in 1941 – it’s Joseph Goebbels’ masterpiece on South Africa. Winner of the Reich Propaganda Ministry’s “Film of the Nation” rating (one of only 4). The movie is a propaganda masterstroke which would reach millions all across Europe, especially in the Netherlands and related territories. Directed by Hans Steinhoff the story is about Paul Kruger, the Transvaal Republic President, and the Boer War from a ‘Dutch’ (Boer) perspective and it climaxes with the massacre and starvation of Boer women and children in British concentration camps – it’s highly inaccurate and an historic fabrication, however it nevertheless strikes a chord with the Dutch, who supported the Boer cause during The South African War.
Hitler speaking at the Sportspalast, inserts Mein Kampf and Ohm Krüger movie poster.
Dr Erik Holm – the South African Afrikaans broadcaster for Radio Zeesen would recall Hitler’s open admiration for General Christiaan De Wet during the Boer War and his guerrilla tactics in flummoxing the British – from conversations he personally had with the Führer on the Boer War.117
The Nazi propaganda ministry and the Waffen SS used this very powerful affinity and memory to the South African War to appeal to the Dutch, playing on the sense of injustice done to their “Dutch” cousins in Africa by the British, bearing in mind the South African War still in living memory for many elderly Dutch and still a point of deep political outrage. At the same time the Germans cleverly conflate the call to action to fight against onset Bolshevism (Communism) with the political outrage of the South African War to drive Dutch volunteerism – especially to the ranks of the Waffen SS.
One wartime Waffen SS recruitment poster demonstrates this sentiment perfectly, it shows an image of the Transvaal Republic Boer Republic President – Paul Kruger in a mythical sense of memory, it has a famous period quote by the Orange Free State Boer Republic President Johannes Brand ‘Alles sal recht komen als elkeen zijn plicht doet’ or simply ‘Alles sal reg kom’ (all will be well) – and the main call to action in Dutch reads ‘Fights against Bolshevism in the Waffen SS.’
Dutch recruitment line and a South African themed Waffen SS poster to recruit them.
In targeting this Dutch and Flemish community which is historically and culturally very closely associated and linked to the Afrikaans community, we see some of Nazi Germany’s greatest success in recruiting for the Waffen SS. According to the Netherlands State Institute for War Documentation is estimated that between 20,000 to 25,000 Dutch volunteer to join the Waffen SS 118 (almost twice the number that join the Dutch Resistance). These Dutch Waffen SS all go on to demonstrate a high degree of fighting prowess, military discipline, strong battle order and an almost fanatical focus in their defence of Europe against the counter-attacking Soviet Red Army and its Allies.
The vast difference between the Dutch versus the South African recruits to the Waffen SS, on the same call to action and historical affinity, is seen statistically – in the numbers alone – 25,000 Dutchmen and only 3 South Africans, and this alone draws its own conclusion. The recruitment campaign for the BFC is statistically insignificant in comparison with just about every key ethnic formation in the Waffen SS, the BFC are numerically inconsequential.
A key difference to note here is that the threat of Bolshevism is seen in an entirely different way in Europe as opposed to the United Kingdom and its Commonwealth when it comes to propaganda and political rhetoric. In the United Kingdom and South Africa, both Winston Churchill and Jan Smuts position the Soviets as key allies first, as Smuts notes in his speech to both houses of the British Parliament in 1942, he refers to Russia’s ‘indomitable spirit’, having taken the hardest blows and made the ‘most appalling bloodletting necessary for Hitler’s defeat’ and because of this ‘they alone‘ can win the war.119 In general the Allied propaganda and messaging points to a prioritisation to defeating “Hitlerism” first as the greater of the two evils, a more imminent priority is to stand “Together” with the Soviet Union and defeat the common enemy. Examples of this propaganda and messaging are seen in the posters below:
Together with the Soviets propaganda
This propaganda is in sharp contrast to the German messaging when it comes to Europe defeating Communism and the prioritisation of this endeavour as the greater evil. This is especially apparent in Waffen SS posters and propaganda targeted at citizens of ‘Germanic regions and peoples’ – the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway where National Socialism prior to World War 2 is far more palatable as a social order for Western Europe than Communism.
Obergruppenführer Felix Steiner the III SS Panzer Corps Commander would note that the highly unstable socio-economic conditions in Europe in the 1930’s caused by the Great Depression impacted the youth of Europe and led to ‘intellectual despair’ which in turn contributed to Waffen SS recruitment. To Steiner, the European youth were so disillusioned by the apparent helplessness and instability of their own governments many began to search for an ideal that would give meaning to their lives and tended to regard developments in the Third Reich with ‘idealistic hopefulness.‘120 For these recruits, Communism and future uncertainty it offered is superseded by their adoration for the discipline and successes of Nazism and as a net result the Waffen SS recruitment for its “Nederland”, “Norland”, “Wiking” divisions and other Legions such as the “Flemish Legion” and “Walloon Legion” is highly successful.
Waffen SS anti-Bolshevism propaganda
This exceedingly low conversion rate of British, Canadian, New Zealand, Australian and South African POW to the Waffen SS is held up by the fact that in these servicemen by and large followed the prevailing call to action in their countries to fight as a collective to beat Hitlerism as a priority. These POW simply do not have the same frame of reference as the European youth, and it can be proposed that their loyalty to their country’s Casus Belli supersedes all else, especially in South Africa where all serving in Africa and Europe were volunteers.
Even militarily speaking, where the Norland and Wiking divisions of the Waffen SS, as well as other ethnic divisions and legions are renowned for almost fanatical battlefield prowess and highly disciplined battle order, the BFC is ineffectual as a fighting unit. Although the BFC is only a platoon size and although they spend a month in the combat theatre in earthen trenches with a sense of determination, they were fractured, ill-disciplined, inclined to desertion and highly compromised, as pointed out by Colonel S.T. Pretorius, a prosecutor during the trial of the South African Waffen SS members, had the Red Army attacked their position they would have run over them with ease. According to Pretorius:
… the BFC was a ‘dismal failure’, ‘never up to strength’, ‘the members could never agree amongst themselves’ and at times ‘the Germans did not know what to do with these men.’121
The fractured nature of the BFC and that it is no match for the Waffen SS Norland division it has been attached to also supports the notion that BFC simply did not share the moral convictions or values of their Waffen SS counter-parts and were simply not fit for purpose.
In Conclusion
In the United Kingdom, the British renegades joining the Waffen SS or involved in propaganda in support of British POW joining the Waffen SS received a broad range of sentencing, however in general those found to be in leadership positions – fully committed to fighting Bolshevism on behalf of Nazi Germany and serving in German uniform with ‘hostile intent’, as well as those at the heart of the propaganda initiatives received severe High Treason guilty sentences, some received the death sentence and others harsh sentences of lengthy imprisonment with hard labour. This has a lot to do with retribution and intolerance of Nazism in the post war environment in the United Kingdom.
The British ‘rank and file’ in the British Free Corps receive varying degrees of sentences, some prison time, time already served to acquittal, this has a lot to do with war weariness and the wish for new horizons, which are the grounding reasons underpinning the change in government in 1945 and would see Winston Churchill lose his premiership and his Conservative Party out of power, of which given his success in World War 2 Churchill was certain would be retained. The Labour Party’s emphasis on social reform clearly resonated with a war weary Britain and gave Labour a landslide victory at the polls and a clear mandate for change.122
In South Africa the matter is treated somewhat differently, the advent of the National Party to power in 1948 would see all South Africans involved in collaborating with Nazi Germany receive full amnesty, however even prior to that the High Treason cases are handled somewhat leniently in comparison to those in Britain, and this also has a lot to do with war weariness, a reconciliatory post war environment and Smuts’ continued appeasement of an irreconcilable Afrikaner Nationalist community in South Africa tolerant of Nazism and Nazi Germany.
The socio-political landscape in South Africa, prior to, during and after the war is substantially different to that of the United Kingdom – or any of the other Commonwealth countries. South Africa is the only country in the Allied mix where a significant majority did not fundamentally support going to war – although South Africa’s black population saw an opportunity to improve political emancipation, the support in joining the war effort was not broad in relation to population. In the white population, suitably enfranchised, a very significant swathe of whites were in antitheses to the call to war with Nazi Germany and in fact many in direct support of Nazi Germany.123
As with Churchill in the United Kingdom, Smuts in South Africa was buoyed by his strong electoral performance in 1943, mid way into the war, where he held a clear constitutional majority. Smuts, like Churchill, did not see his opposition, the Afrikaner Nationalists also take up the mantra of social reform at the end of the war, demanding change with a new reform policy called Apartheid, and it also held a high appeal to a war weary nation still bitterly divided over Smuts’ decision to go to war. In a surprise 1948 General Election result the Reunited National Party and its partners were able to sneak in on a single constitutional seat and oust Smuts. The new Minister of Justice C.R. Swart on 11 June 1948 issued a statement of general amnesty for individuals convicted of war crimes relating to treason, the statement read:
‘(The National Party) government (wanted) to relieve the people of the Union from the strain of the war years and to endeavour to end all the unpleasantness and rancour that flowed from it’124
By October, the majority of South African men who had sympathised with, or supported Nazi Germany directly were released, the South Africans who had served in the Waffen SS found themselves free of prosecution, their decision to support the Nazi state and fight Communism a favorable one in the eyes of the incoming nationalist government. A different matter entirely in Germany, from 20 November 1945 to 1 October 1946, the Nuremberg Trial takes place and exposes the full criminality of the Nazi Party regime and its ideology. The National Socialist dogma with its focus on the bogus “protocols of the elders of Zion”, which blamed all of Germany’s economic, social and political problems on Judaism, Freemasonry and Communism and was used to justify the holocaust and the massacre of soviet citizens and POW en masse along racial and political lines is exposed as willful genocide and deemed a crime against humanity.
Although Nazi ideology and dogma was no longer tolerant in the political sphere in South Africa after 1945, ‘no solid measures were put in place by the Smuts government to prevent it from flourishing. Afrikaner Nationalists entertaining strong National Socialist ideologies and having committed treason and sedition during the war, who in European countries would have been hanged for war crimes, landed up back in mainstream party politics under the banner of the National Party and many even ended their days in Parliament.’125
Written and Researched by Peter Dickens
Footnotes
D Harrison, The White Tribe of Africa: South Africa in Perspective (Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981), 99. ↩︎
‘Elections in South Africa’, African Elections Database, 10 November 2004. Accessed 8 August 2024 ↩︎
DB Katz, ‘General Jan Smuts and his First World War in Africa 1914–1917’ (Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers 2022), 34-35. ↩︎
Bunting, The Rise of the South African Reich, 57. ↩︎
FA Mouton, ‘Beyond the Pale’ Oswald Pirow, Sir Oswald Mosley, the ‘enemies of the Soviet Union’ and Apartheid 1948 – 1959, Journal for Contemporary History, 43, 2 (2018), 18. ↩︎
FL Monama, Wartime Propaganda in the Union of South Africa, 1939 – 1945 (Dissertation for the degree of history, University of Stellenbosch. Stellenbosch, 2014), 62. ↩︎
M Shain, ‘A Perfect Storm’, Antisemitism in South Africa 1930-1948, (Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers, 2015) , 55–58. ↩︎
W Bouwer, National Socialism and Nazism in South Africa: The case of L.T. Weichardt and his Greyshirt movements, 1933-1946. (MA Thesis, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 2021), 18. ↩︎
Harrison, The White Tribe of Africa, 103 – 106. ↩︎
DP Olivier, A special kind of colonist: An analytical and historical study of the Ossewa-Brandwag as an anti-colonial resistance movement (thesis, University of the North West, Potchefstroom 2021) ↩︎
Bunting, The Rise of the South African Reich, 98 ↩︎
Bunting, The Rise of the South African Reich, 92 – 93 ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Location 1948. ↩︎
Warfare History Network online. Nazi Propagandist William Joyce American-born Nazi radio propagandist William Joyce amused, and also terrorized, British listeners. 2017. By Blaine Taylor ↩︎
Weal, ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Locations 1998-1999. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Location 2342. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Locations 1968-1969 ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Locations 1968-1969. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. List of members – appendix 5. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’ ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. On-line summation reference ‘British Free Corps in SS Waffen – Myth and Historic Reality’. ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Locations 3077-3078 ↩︎
Weal, Adrian: ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994. Kindle (2014). Random House. Locations 3132 – 3141 ↩︎
British National Archives – Kew reference KV 2/254 Thomas Cooper ↩︎
Smuts, J.C. Jan Christian Smuts by his Son (London Cassell. 1952) 678-679 ↩︎
Kleynhans, Evert – Hitler’s Spies, Secret agents and the intelligence war in South Africa, 1939 to 1945. Jonathan Ball. 2021. Page 172 ↩︎
Kleynhans, Evert – Hitler’s Spies, Secret agents and the intelligence war in South Africa, 1939 to 1945. Jonathan Ball. 2021. Page 173 ↩︎
Visser, George C. OB: Traitors or Patriots. Macmillian. 1976. Pages 176-177 ↩︎
Kleynhans, Hitler’s Spies,179 – referencing Van der Waag, Ian. A military history of modern South Africa. ↩︎
Archive Box 1620 – Justice Department: 1-49-44 ‘War Criminals’ General File – Part 1 ↩︎
Archive Box 1620 – Justice Department: 1-49-44 ‘War Criminals’ General File – Part 1 ↩︎
Archive Box 1621 – Justice Department: 1-49-44 ‘War Criminals’ General File – Part 2 ↩︎
The National Archives, United Kingdom – Kew. Information about UK renegades from the Continent of Europe. Item number: 7212995 Catalogue reference: KV 2/3581 ↩︎
The National Archives, United Kingdom – Kew. Information about UK renegades from the Continent of Europe. Item number: 7212995 Catalogue reference: KV 2/3581 ↩︎
Archive Box 1621 – Justice Department: 1-49-44 ‘War Criminals’ General File – Part 2 ↩︎
Archive Box 1621 – Justice Department: 1-49-44 ‘War Criminals General File – Part 2 ↩︎
Katz, David. General Jan Smuts and his First World War in Africa, 1914–1917: Incorporating His German South West and East Africa Campaigns. Delta. 2022. Pages 83-88 ↩︎
Kleynhans, Evert – Hitler’s Spies, Secret agents and the intelligence war in South Africa, 1939 to 1945. Jonathan Ball. 2021. Page 199 ↩︎
Jan Visser, George C. OB: Traitors or Patriots. Macmillian. 1976, Nongqai magazine reference ↩︎
Special Criminal Courts Archive Reference 44 – High Treason Cases – Justice Department ↩︎
Mouton, F.A. 2018 ‘Beyond the Pale’ Oswald Pirow, Sir Oswald Mosley, the ‘enemies of the Soviet Union’ and Apartheid 1948 – 1959. UNISA, Journal for Contemporary History 2018. Page 23 ↩︎
Mouton, F.A. 2018 ‘Beyond the Pale’ Oswald Pirow, Sir Oswald Mosley, the ‘enemies of the Soviet Union’ and Apartheid 1948 – 1959. UNISA, Journal for Contemporary History 2018. Page 23 – 27 ↩︎
British National Archives – Kew reference 2/908, 12 April 1948 – Oswald Pirow Statement. ↩︎
British National Archives – Kew reference 2/908, 12 April 1948 – Oswald Pirow Statement. ↩︎
Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf (Ralph Manheim Translation), Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, 1925 original publication, translation published 1999. Page 158 ↩︎
Hitler, Adolf. Speech by the Fuehrer in the Sportpalast in Berlin, on 30 January 1940. English translation – Sons of Liberty, 1977 ↩︎
Goebbels, Joseph. Our Hitler,1940 Speech on Hitler’s Birthday, 20 April 1940. Reference: Goebbels, J. Die Zeit ohne BeispielDie Zeit ohne Beispiel (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP, 1941) ↩︎
Potgieter, De Wet & Lazarus, Jannie. Sunday Times – Page 2, Nazi Radio man took part in Hess Service: 30 August 1982 ↩︎
Netherlands State Institute for War Documentation, ‘De SS en Nederland Documenten uit SS-Archieven 1935-1945. Part 1 ↩︎
The offensive phase : the historic speech delivered by General Smuts to members of the two Houses of Parliament on Wednesday, October 21st 1942. ↩︎
Stein, George. The Waffen SS : Hitler’s elite guard at war, 1939-1945. Cornell University Press. 1984. Page 141 to 142 ↩︎
Furlong. Pro-Nazi Subversion in South Africa, 1939-1941 ↩︎
Bibliography and References
Books
Bunting, Brian. The Rise of the South African Reich. Penguin Books. 1964
Cawthorne, Nigel. The Waffen-SS: The Third Reich’s Most Infamous Military Organization.
Dorril, Stephen. Blackshirt: Sir Oswald Moseley and British Fascism. Penguin UK. 1999
Freedman, Morris. Fact and Object. Harper & Row. 1963
Giliomee, Hermann. The Afrikaners: Biography of a People. Cape Town: Tafelberg, 2003.
Goebbels, Joseph. Die Zeit ohne BeispielDie Zeit ohne Beispiel. Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP, 1941.
Harrison, David. The White Tribe of Africa: South Africa in Perspective. Macmillian Publishers. 1981
Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf (Ralph Manheim Translation), Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, 1925 original publication, translation published 1999.
Hitler, Adolf. Speech by the Fuehrer in the Sportpalast in Berlin, on 30 January 1940. English translation – Sons of Liberty, 1977
Katz, David Brock. General Jan Smuts and his First World War in Africa, 1914–1917: Incorporating His German South West and East Africa Campaigns. Delta. 2022.
Kleynhans, Evert – Hitler’s Spies, Secret agents and the intelligence war in South Africa, 1939 to 1945. Jonathan Ball. 2021
Landwehr, Richard. Britisches Freikorps: British Volunteers of the Waffen-SS 1943 to 1945. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. 2012
Milton, Shain. A Perfect Storm – Antisemitism in South Africa 1930-1948. Jonathan Ball. 2015
Mouton, F.A. The Opportunist: The Political Life of Oswald Pirow, 1915-1959. Pretoria: Protea Boekhuis. 2022
Pugh, M. ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts!’ – Fascists and Fascism in Britain Between the Wars. Pimlico. 2006
Roos, Neil. Ordinary Springboks: White Servicemen and Social Justice in South Africa,1939-1961 Ashgate: Aldershot 2005.
Seth, Ronald. Jackals of the Reich: the story of the British Free Corps. New English Library. 1973
Shirer, William. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. Simon and Schuster. 1974 edition.
Smuts, J.C. Jan Christian Smuts by his Son. London Cassell. 1952.
Stein, George. The Waffen SS : Hitler’s elite guard at war, 1939-1945. Cornell University Press. 1984.
Strydom, Hans. For Volk and Führer: Robey Leibbrandt & Operation Weissdorn. Jonathan Ball. 1982
Van Rensburg, Hans. Their Paths Crossed Mine: Memoirs of the Commandant-General of the Ossewa-Brandwag. Central News Agency. 1956.
Visser, George C. OB: Traitors or Patriots. Macmillian. 1976
Weal, Adrian. ‘Army of Evil: A History of the SS’. Penguin. 2012
Weal, Adrian. ‘Renegades: Hitler’s Englishmen’. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1994
Weal, Adrian. ‘Patriot Traitors: Roger Casement John Amery and the Real Meaning of Treason’. Viking. 2001
Weal, Adrian. Army of Evil: A History of the SS. International Edition. 2013
Weal, Adrian SS: A New History. International Edition. 2012
Wegner, Bernd. The Waffen-SS: Organization, Ideology and Function. First Edition. 1990.
Williamson, Gordon. The SS: Hitler’s Instrument of Terror. 2004
West, Rebecca. The Meaning of Treason. London: Macmillan & Co Ltd. 1949.
Thesis and Dissertations
Bloomberg, Charles. Christian Nationalism and the Rise of the Afrikaner Broederbond in South Africa, 1918 to 1948. Indiana University Press. 1989
Bouwer, Werner. National Socialism and Nazism in South Africa: The case of L.T. Weichardt and his Greyshirt movements, 1933-1946
Delport, Anri. Changing attitudes of South Africans towards Italy and its people during the Second World War, 1939 to 1945. Historia vol.58 n.1 Durban Jan. 2013
Fokkens, A.M. Afrikaner unrest within South Africa during the Second World War and the measures taken to supress it. Journal for Contemporary History 37/2. 2012
Furlong, Patrick J. Allies at War? Britain and the Southern African Front in the Second World War. South African Historical Journal 54/1. 2009
Furlong Patrick Jonathan – National Socialism, the National Party and the radical right in South Africa, 1933-1948 (D.Phil. Thesis, University of California, 1990
Furlong, Patrick J. Pro-Nazi Subversion in South Africa, 1939-1941. 1988. Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies, 16(1)
Grundlingh, Albert. ‘The King’s Afrikaners? Enlistment and Ethnic Identity in the Union of South Africa’s Defence Force during the Second World War 1939-45’. Journal of African History 40 (1999).
Hattingh, Isak. Nasionaal-Sosialisme en die Gryshemp-beweging in Suid-Afrika (D.Phil. Thesis, University of the Orange Free State, 1989)
Horn, Karen. ‘Researching South African Prisoners-of-War Experience During World War II : Historiography, Archives and Oral Testimony’. Journal for Contemporary History 39, no. 2 (2014).
Horn, Karen. ‘South African Prisoner- Prisoner -of-War Experience during and after World War II : 1939 – c . 1950’. Stellenbosch University, 2012.
Katz, David B. A Case of Arrested Development: The Historiography Relating to South Africa’s Participation in the Second World War. Scientia Militaria 40/3. 2012
Marx, Christoph. Ox wagon Sentinel: Radical Afrikaner Nationalism and the History of the Ossewabrandwag. South African University Press. 2008
Macklin, Graham. ‘Very Deeply Dyed in Black’ Sir Oswald Mosley and the Resurrection of British Fascism After 1945. Bloomsbury Academic. 2007
Monama, Frankie. Wartime Propaganda In the Union of South Africa, 1939 – 1945. Dissertation, University of Stellenbosch. 2014
Mouton, F.A. 2018 ‘Beyond the Pale’ Oswald Pirow, Sir Oswald Mosley, the ‘enemies of the Soviet Union’ and Apartheid 1948 – 1959. UNISA, Journal for Contemporary History 2018
Roos, Neil. ‘The Springbok and the Skunk: War Veterans and the Politics of Whiteness in South Africa during the 1940s and 1950s’. Journal of Southern African Studies 35, no. 3 (2009).
Sacks, Benjamin. Sir Oswald Mosley and British Fascism: 1937. New Mexico Quarterly. Volume 7, issue 4, Article 4.
Scher, David M. Echoes of David Irving – The Greyshirt Trial of 1934.
Thomas, M.J. The Waffen SS 1933-45 ‘Soldiers, just like the others’? Part 1. South African Military History Journal Vol 12 No 5 – June 2003.
Werner, Bouwer. National Socialism and Nazism in South Africa: The case of L.T. Weichardt and his Greyshirt movements, 1933-1946
Archives – United Kingdom
Information about UK renegades from the Continent of Europe. names and details of British and other renegades who worked for the German cause during the war, including membership of the British Free Corps. KV2/3581
National Archives, Kew: Disposal of non-German nationals who served in Wehrmacht or Waffen SS. WO 309/1424
National Archives, Kew: Department Inland II: Geheim: Recruitment of foreign-based Germans to the Waffen SS. GFM 33/2254/5239
National Archives, Kew: Renegades and Persons suspected or convicted of assisting the Enemy: COOPER, Thomas Heller, one-time member of the British Union; served in the Waffen SS. HO 45/25805
Private Paper Archives – UK
University of Birmingham: Oswald Mosley papers: Nicholas Moseley Collection, 19 Boxes. Reference OMN
Archives – South Africa
National Archives and Record Service of South Africa (Pretoria, South Africa). Public Records of Central Government since 1910.
Now, I’m not one to play my “disability card”, those who know me well enough will attest that I am the very last person to do it. But sometimes you see a comment about you come out in social media that:
Demands an answer and
Demonstrates the complete imbecilic arrogance of the person making the comment.
Such a comment was put out by Albert Blake, the Afrikaans author on a Boer War social media site run by John Elsegood, it’s an interesting one and one that needs a little time and space to explain – here’s Blake’s comment, and I’ll quote him:
‘The problem with the sloppy work of Dickens is the result of not complying with the accepted standards for historical scientific research of original material in the archives. He writes freely about the Ossewabrandwag without ever having visited he Ossewabrandwag (OB) Archives with its thousands of documents at the University of the North West.’
Wow, arrogance and misinformation is understatement and a little libel and character assassination thrown in for measure. Now, to assume I don’t use primary source material and archive material is just plain moronic, in my specialism and on my computer are a number of archive files – either digitised or photographed for me. I have extensive archive material on the Nazification of the Afrikaner right and the Torch Commando, including much on the Ossewabrandwag (OB). These files are located from archives in South Africa and in the United Kingdom. I also have a number of ‘secondary’ source books and university thesis and papers on the Ossewabrandwag, more than enough for my current requirements.
But here’s the fun thing – all these archive files on my PC are ‘digitised’ – in other words they are photographs of boxed papers or they are are scans. There’s a reason for that. Up until 5 years ago I was resident in the United Kingdom. Researching archive material in the UK is a doddle – its easy – the National Archives are fully digitised (MI5’s archive for example) and if you are unable to draw down the file directly from the net, you can order it – all done without physically visiting the said archives.
South Africa on the other hand is a different matter, the archives are for the most part not digitised, and to get into them you physically have to visit each one personally. There are services of ‘archive hounds’ a professional service which you can pay for and brief, but if extensively researching this is both costly and inefficient. Now, as you can appreciate it’s a bit difficult whilst running a commercial concern to just up sticks and fly to South Africa to hunt around the University of the North Wests’ OB archive for a couple of weeks, especially for a ‘free’ history website which is not monetised – as the Observation Post is.
That of course does not mean I did not intend to visit various archives in South Africa and get to the files I need, as said I moved to South Africa about 5 years ago to start a craft distillery with the object of shipping finished product to the UK and I bought a craft beer concern in South Africa for the purposes of licenses and other commercial considerations. Whilst busying myself with the beer and spirits industry, one thing I did not plan on was becoming one of only 5 people in South Africa to survive Covid with the amount of complications it brought on in my case.
Of all the other things I did not foresee in life was the ongoing attempt by the great architect of universe to give me the chop – now I know I’ve pushed it, at one stage my lifestyle choices of flying, the military and wreck diving earned me a no life insurance status, so I’ve given it a go, I really have.
My journey with Covid is also a unique one, mainly because I should not have survived it. Some say it’s a miracle, I put it down to the strength of my wife and discipline I learned in the army. I seldom talk about it, and never really “in full” but Mr Blake demands an answer so here’s just some of it.
Let me also kick the first question out the way, before falling ill with Covid in July 2021, I was a healthy 53-year-old man with no Comorbidity, on no medication of any sort and no history of hospitalisation. So here goes – Covid story for those who have not read it …
I’m not dead yet!
On the 24th July 2021, I started to experience extreme lethargic symptoms and noticed traces of blood in phlegm being coughed up, my sugar levels were elevated and concerned that I was going into diabetic shock (despite never having diabetes before), I was admitted into Hermanus’ Public Hospital’s isolated Covid general ward. Whilst in the ward, my SATS (Oxygen levels) gradually deteriorated, I picked up more secondary infections and became more lethargic.
On the 1st August 2021, applications of Oxygen proved fruitless and after a triage decision I was left to die. This triggered an intervention for Private Hospital care and I was moved from Hermanus Public Hospital to Hermanus’ Mediclinic to be intubated, placed on a ventilator and induced into a coma on the same day.
On the 1st September 2021, my infection markers and SATS levels had stabilised enough to be brought out of the induced coma. Considering I had been in a coma for nearly a full month it was a marked miracle that I had experienced no brain damage, nor any loss to short- or long-term memory.
Whilst undergoing recovery therapy from the coma bronchitis set in, then suddenly my left lung self-perforated and collapsed. This was followed a couple of days later by my right lung which also self-perforated and collapsed. Drains were applied to both lungs decreasing my survivability significantly. The bronchitis evolved into bronchial pneumonia and again I picked up external infections, including a deadly fungal infection.
Becoming more critical, I was “red-lighted” by private ambulance from Hermanus Mediclinic to Tygerberg Training Hospital in Cape Town on the 2nd October 2021 and admitted into a specialised Cardiac Thoracic Specialist – intensive care unit.
During my time in this unit, I have clear memory of dying one evening after basic nurse neglect not clearing my trachea regularly, after my SATS dropped the critical alarm bell went off, a passing medic noticed the commotion, and disregarding Covid regulations entered my isolation room and resurrected me back to life. I was also diagnosed with PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) after this and other incitements leading to it (with origin in my military experience as a commissioned officer in the South African Army). The remainder of my stay at Tygerberg now included psychological therapy.
I will say this about dying, its both scary and euphoric, scary in my case as elevated alarms kept sequencing upward for a long time and no aid was coming, no response to emergency buttons and as you have no voice on a ventilator you cannot call out, cognitively you realise you are in deep shit. Euphoric because you find yourself floating into a black tunnel – in my case to the tune of “goodbye cruel world” by Pink Floyd, being resuscitated is like someone reaching in and pulling you out.
A drain was re-set on my right lung, and I remained in ICU fighting off numerous infections and continued bouts of bronchitis. During this period, according to the attending Professor, I was ‘knocking on heaven’s door” virtually every-day, survivability in this unit over this period was placed at only 2 out of every 10 patients who would eventually survive the Covid pandemic. During this period I had more morphine induced out of body experiences than I can shake a stick at (never underestimate the benefits of morphine, its the repeated ‘cold turkey’ that sucks).
In a really ‘bad’ state
An x-ray taken of my chest on the 8th November 2021 marked a dim day as my lungs were diagnosed as “irrecoverable” and “irreplaceable” such was the damage and pulmonary fibrosis, no real ‘healthy’ tissue could be spotted and my heart was inflamed. The prognosis put my survivability at zero.
However, by Armistice Day – 11th November 2021, almost miraculously as all my limbs were still swollen from infection and I had no “A line” my vein structure non existent – things actually started to look up on my infection markers and Oxygen SATS. The artificial trachea was removed, my voice box re-attached, and I was finally moved from ICU into a ‘High Care’ ward (in all I had spent 110 days in Intensive Care Units), still on high flow Oxygen and very frail. However I was now off the ventilator – in all I hold the record at Tygerberg for being on a ventilator – a first prize I didn’t intend winning.
In High Care, the bronchitis continued, and I was unable to consume solid food. Still on a liquid diet I became immobile and an invalid – also I started to dramatically lose weight and muscle mass (in all I lost 50 Kg). The hygiene and nurse care standards in this section of Tygerberg Hospital were also inadequate and I began to deteriorate again so as to become life threatening again. An intervention was again required.
On the 23rd November 2021, I was ‘red-lighted’ by private ambulance from Tygerberg Hospital back to Hermanus (a two-hour high speed journey), in order to receive vital physical rehabilitation and specialised nutrition to arrest my now rapid physical deterioration. To do this I entered Spescare – a specialist facility.
Arriving at Spescare my condition immediately stated improving once undergoing intense physiotherapy and occupational therapy. My condition was so bad I had to even had to learn to simply take a shit in a toilet and even walk again. Basic stuff needed to be re-leaned, brushing teeth, shaving – even writing whilst I spent time getting in and out of bed using a hydraulic hoist.
Rehabilitation – Spescare
By early January 2022, I was weaned off diabetic medicines and by the end of January 2022, my health had returned sufficiently for me to continue my rehabilitation and physiotherapy sessions from home as a hospital ‘out-patient’. I rolled out of Spescare, still partially wheelchair bound and still supplemental Oxygen dependent on 6 February 2022. In all I had spent 198 days as a hospitalised patient (6.6 months).
Rehabilitation with an outsourced professional physiotherapist continued at home whilst I regained movement and strength, by July 2022, I became strong enough to discard my wheelchair and walking aids, muscle mass returned and my SATS became manageable.
By September 2023, over two years after contracting Covid, my lung damage plateaued out at 70% capacity, but only 48% ‘forced’ capacity – which is the rate of gas exchange. Less than one lung to live on – survivable, liveable but highly damaged and highly restricted.
Academia
As I could not physically get back into the beer and spirits business, my interests shifted to history writing on this blog and doing more academia. My work on Sailor Malan and Torch Commando took me onto a lecture circuit in 2023 and by early 2024 I enrolled on a postgraduate programme in history. As I already had a specialism on the Nazification of the Afrikaner Right and after drafting proposals I made arrangements to get to some of the archives in Pretoria for August 2024.
My beer company was taking part in the ‘Capital Craft’ beer festival and it presented an opportunity to get up there by vehicle – as I cannot fly due to the altitude partial pressure, so cannot breathe properly. That, and as I had support staff with me I could take Oxygen to deal with Pretoria and Johannesburg’s altitude and load shedding. It’s a little more complex moving me around, especially over thousands of kilometres – it requires logistics and support.
God’s not done
By late July 2024, just before the trip to Pretoria, a regular follow-up revealed concerns with Pulmonary Hypertension, an unusual swelling of the heart caused by strain and thickening blood. Another round in hospital, this time Worcester Public Hospital, indicated a low concern as to blood clogging but a return to Oxygen therapy to thin the blood and oxygenate it and a ‘take it easy’ policy – so no travelling to altitude.
Now I can also clock up heart attack survivor to all the above. Yup on 21 August 2024 – I just survived one of those, and I’ve learned that sometimes the bastard likes to take its own sweet time – settles in and says to itself “hi, I’m a cardio attack … only kidding … no I’m not … kidding again … not!”
Turns out all the damage to the lungs from my Covid experience has scarred and hardened them – this is making my heart work extra hard to pump the blood around them – and my heart just said “fuck you I’m done” – so now I have to be nice to it. On the 22 August 2024 an Angiogram without a sedative or anaesthetic in an unheated theatre was completed and some arteries unblocked …. that was fun …. Not! By the wonders of modern medicine – and now I have a bucket load more, I’m good to go again, just have to evolve some limitations and take things a little more easier … and I’m not dead yet!
Angiogram time
How I’m expected to travel laden with oxygen canisters and a wheel chair to dig around the OB archives in places at high altitude is anyones guess, but rest assured I am working on rehabilitation and ‘Plan B’. Which brings me to my next point – the discrimination of someone with a disability in favour of a abled bodied person. It’s called Ableism.
Ableism
Two kinds of Ableism – one by people and one by institutions, like universities and museums. In the UK, the universities and museums like the Imperial War Museum have moved quickly to digitise archives for general access but also to enable disabled people to easily access information. In South Africa that is not the case, for whatever reason, usually funding and resources, our war museums and universities are very behind the digitising project.
The other form of ‘ableism’ is someone like Albert Blake, a person who assumes that as he is able-bodied enough to hunt around an archive, everyone else should be able to in addition. Believe it or not that is a form of discrimination.
It is also not as though he has done any form of due diligence, he could have found out my status, all very odd as he’s a lawyer and before pushing out an accusation should know to do some due diligence first – he’s on my Facebook and could have sent me a PM. In addition I’ve I published on my Covid story on my social media in the past – many people have been following my journey.
He also works in the same circle I do, and could easily have contacted either one of my overseeing academics – he’s friends with both. Or, as he is also on the Observation Post’s Facebook ‘scuttlebutt’ group he could have simply asked me the question directly – all this before going out in the media with an unhinged, inconsiderate and insulting comment in the hopes of pandering to some sort of ‘Boer War’ peanut gallery. Belittling my work, making assumptions and questioning my works validity without even conducting any form of investigation or analysis.
Oh, and as far as all the accusations Blake came up of ‘Boer Bashing’ go (see my previous article ‘Boer Bashing and other Bull’), as my wife is Afrikaans and most my friends are Afrikaans just about every intervening person in saving my life is a Afrikaner – all three of my attending Physicians, all three life saving Doctors in my story (true angels), all the Doctors, nurses and physios in my rehabilitation, almost every single one a ‘Afrikaner’. So, when I say that when various troglodytes venture out of Boer War appreciation groups on this assumption I’m a Boer Basher and start throwing stones at me, they really are prejudiced and both ignorant and uniformed.
Exiting rehabilitation with support team and wife
Now, I’m not the sort of person that feels sorry for myself, I’ve survived far greater adversity than any of these ‘Boer War’ hillbilly groups and their pundits can even contemplate. I do know this, my experience has taught me not to pander to fools, so I don’t ‘suffer fools gladly’ – I now just point out the odd ‘muppet’ and tell it like it is – Life’s too short and I’m not dead yet.
I was taken to task by a well known Afrikaner author, Albert Blake on Facebook pages and accused of ‘Boer Bashing’ on my website and social media and warned to keep my neck in. He even went as far to say he had included this in his new book on Jopie Fourie and to quote him he had investigated my:
‘deeper motives for (my) apparently predetermined “findings” (on Jopie Fourie) … and … the charges that were levelled against (me) in the past regarding severe “Boer/Afrikaner bashing”.’
All a bit rich, I don’t know Blake personally, I’ve never really interacted or debated anything with him, he’s never challenged or even opened a discussion with me in the past, and as to investigating anything, I’m in plain sight, we work in the same circle, he could have merely contacted me and asked the question, it would be the professional thing to do before willy-nilly publishing something that may or may not be libellous and slanderous. Bit odd considering he’s also a lawyer and nobody has “proven” any case of ‘Boer Bashing’ on anything I’ve ever written, nor has any alleged ‘bias’ been proven – ever! By being ‘Anti-Afrikaner’ or ‘Boer Bashing’ as he has alleged, he’s venturing into accusing me of ‘hate speech’ – and you better have some solid proof if you’re going to do that, let’s see, so far he’s provided nothing.
Not unusual that there is no evidence to back up Blake’s accusation and ‘investigation’. As to whenever this “Boer Bashing” accusation is levelled at me I’ve simply asked one question “prove it” and nobody has to date. I’ve also never belittled or insulted anyone on the basis of their ‘Afrikaner’ ethnicity, there is nothing in my media and it’s all ‘public’ – so feel to search my entire website and public social media pages … oh … and good luck.
I’ve even been accused of having an “anti-afrikaner bias” by a handful of detractors and a couple of social media trolls, when challenged they feel it just “comes across” that way, a sort of “out there” sense they have – that this is not a basis for argument or logic is lost on them.
Blake’s sudden assertion is all a bit of a surprise to me to be honest, I’m sure my very Afrikaans family must find it amusing to learn how much I hate them, it’s all rather counterintuitive and illogical – so, I’ll explain my position and I’ll do everyone a favour to stop any speculation, slander and other libellous conjecture right here – they can have it “straight from the horse’s mouth” so to speak.
Specialism
Now, many of my articles and almost all of my research revolves around one period in South African history. It started when I took to researching Nazi movements in South Africa prior and during the Second World War (1939 – 1945). I started researching and blogging on this about 10 years ago, and the response was surprising – many people wrote in to me say “I never knew this” and urged more research. This took me into the politics of returning South African servicemen from WW2 and their reaction to the Nazi enamoured Afrikaner nationalists who found themselves in power from 1948. This cumulated in a large research body on The Torch Commando and early South African political, civil, para-military and military reactions to Apartheid. This took my specialised research period from 1935 to 1955 – about 20 years of specialism as historic ‘scope’ goes.
During this period – 1935 to 1955, the right wing fringe of the Afrikaner Nationalist movement became highly Nazified. Nazi dogma, laws, and ideology started to enter the thinking of Afrikaner Nationalist leaders and heavily influence them – especially from 1935 to 1944 – it manifested itself in Christian Nationalism as an ideology, which grounded itself on ‘Krugerism’ – especially from 1938, it in turn became infused with a cocktail of Nazi purity and race laws, national socialism and weimar eugenics to eventually become “Apartheid” as we knew it from 1948 to 1994.
In terms of historic sweep, from the implementation of Apartheid in 1948, as a derivative of Nazism comes this idea of a police state to command and control a ‘whites only’ Afrikaner led hegemony over all South Africans – an oligarchy of minority rule with brutal state security apparatus, highly centralised government and a ‘command economy’ to maintain this status quo. This under-pinning Nazi philosophy eventually manifesting itself in various ‘Boerenasie’ and Afrikaner resistance movements (the AWB et al) starting in the mid 1980’s and its still lurking in South Africa to this day as a minority counter culture demanding a ‘Herrenvolk’ populated ‘Volkstaat‘ in places like Orania, and it can also still be found in various security services, political parties, cultural movements, historical reenactments and the internet. To illustrate the point, the Herstigte National Party still exists in South Africa, believe it or not, the extreme right wing party with its proto-Nazi origins everyone tries to forget. It has lost its ‘ticket’ but still exists and its stated mandate is the return of Verwoerdian Aparthied, and there are others like it.
AWB Protest circa 1993 and Vryburger movement protest 2022.
In researching this period (1935 to 1955) two distinctive groups of Afrikaners emerge. On the one side we find Afrikaners who embrace unity, seek reconciliation and are open to race relations to build a South Africa open to all. Many of these men are soldiers – military men, many having taken part in World War 2 fighting Nazism and all of them highly regarded, in terms of ‘history’, history treats them kindly for the most part. As a military veteran myself there is much in these men to like, actually for me it verges on complete admiration to be honest, but that’s a personal thing – they include the following Afrikaners:
Field Marshal Jan Smuts, Kommandant Dolf de la Rey, Group Captain Adolph “Sailor” Malan, General Daniel Pienaar, Group Captain Petrus “Dutch” Hugo, Mattheus Uys Krige, General Kenneth Reid van der Spuy, General George Brink, Major Jacob Pretorius, Lt (Dr) Jan Steytler, Pieter Beyleveld, Captain (Sir) Devilliers Graaff, Lt Harold Strachan, Major Pieter van der Byl, Colonel Danie Craven, Colonel Ernst Gideon Malherbe to name the leadership caucus of anti-Apartheid and ‘liberal’ or ‘libertarian’ Afrikaners during and post war.
On the other side in my research period, we find Afrikaners who embrace Nazism, either partly or in whole – they seek division and race hate as a political model, central to their philosophy is the ‘politics of pain’ – a ‘victimhood’ ethos and a deep seated Anglophobia alongside a heightened admiration of Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler. They either sit out of World War 2 and tacitly support Nazi Germany or they become directly involved in treason and sedition supporting the Nazi state – they include the following Afrikaners:
B.J. Vorster, Oswald Pirow, Dr. Johannes Van Rensburg, Hendrik van den Bergh, Johannes von Moltke, P.O. Sauer, Frans Erasmus, Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, C.R. Swart, P.W. Botha, Eric Louw, Dr Nico Diedericks, Jaap Marais, Dr Albert Hertzog, Louis Weichardt, Piet Meyer, ‘General’ Manie Maritz, ‘General’ Jan Kemp, Dr. Eben Dönges, J.G. Strydom, Koot Vorster – to name some of the far right Nationalist leadership caucus with overt Nazi leanings pre, during and/or post war.
Even the Nationalist leaders who took up a ‘neutral’ positioning as to the war, tacitly supported Nazi Germany and/or its dogma – both Dr. D.F. Malan and Prime Minister Barry Hertzog fall into the category, in fact Hertzog declared that National Socialism was the path for Afrikanerdom before he died, Malan also leaned heavily to anti-semitism and Völkisch nationalism.
Through their actions all these right wing Afrikaner Nationalists bring about the system of Apartheid, a system that is now regarded as a crime against humanity, and as such history does not treat them kindly. As historians, we try and contextualise and I’m pretty sure that out of Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Albert Speer, Martin Bormann, Hermann Goering, Joseph Goebbels, Rudolf Hess and Reinhard Heydrich, some were stand-up guys – polite, popular and sociable to family and friends. But history does spend too much time on this and instead as we move nearer to the centurion celebration of WW2 they are viewed in the context of sociopaths, megalomaniacs, deviants, murderers and psychopaths. As sure as the sun rises, the Afrikaners who came up with Apartheid will all eventually be viewed the same way – they are the “bad guys”. In this respect it is almost impossible to paint any of the Apartheid leadership in a benign, loveable and sympathetic way, you can “contextualise” them to a degree, be as honest as you can with them, but as they say in marketing “you can’t polish a turd” – it’s a complete waste of effort and in fact its impossible to make them “look good” – certainly without been called out as an “Apartheid apologist” or “Nazi sympathiser” – so there is a very fine line.
Nazification of the Afrikaner right – Grey-shirts, Black-shirts, Orange-shirts, New Order, National Socialist Rebels, Boerenasie and Ossewabrandwag
My research into the Nazification of the Afrikaner right is always going to show this far right segment on the rump of Afrikanerdom in a highly critical way, certainly to most modern readers in 2024 who understand ‘Nazism’ in hindsight, these people will automatically be viewed in a repulsive and repugnant light, it’s almost unavoidable. Once identifying an association and/or sympathy to Nazism, in any way, there is just no way anyone is going to come out of it smelling of roses and held up as the true disciples of Afrikanerdom, people with a benevolent Christian veneer and a mere love of all things German. If anything they are easily viewed as the vanquished incubus of Afrikanerdom, the Judas to their denomination and creed.
These Apartheid protagonist Afrikaner Nationalists are no different to the Nazi heroes they worshipped and modern South Africans are no different in the way they view Aparthied as the majority of German’s treat Nazism now. That’s just a truism, these Afrikaners committed a crime against humanity, they came into power on a ‘minority’ ticket, dominated South African politics for nearly 50 years and represented the rump end of an ethic minority – barely 4% and they “committed a crime” which impacted the majority, the other 96% of South Africans. In the process they took nearly “all” white South Africans along with them – nothing we can do about it, it’s not salvageable, it happened. However, to say a historian researching the Nazification of the Afrikaner right is “anti-Afrikaner” is the same as to say a historian researching Nazism is somehow “anti-German” – it’s just plain counterintuitive and deflective – its red herring argument, prejudiced and plainly untrue.
This majority – the 96% of the country – now feel very differently about the “Architects of Apartheid” to the odd small Afrikaner cultural grouping trying to hold onto redeeming qualities in them. It’s a herculean task just to educate a fraction of modern South Africans to be more tolerant of ‘white’ history in South Africa and it’s also sad that of this ‘majority’, a massive swathe blame “all white Afrikanerdom” for Apartheid, some even go as far as to say “all whites” – and that has manifested in deadly hatred in some instances, certainly if farm killings of ‘Boere’ are anything to go by. This is where ‘historical balance’ is necessary – to prove that not all ‘whites’ and not all ‘Afrikaners’ bought into the whole idea of Apartheid, that they even resisted it. It becomes very important to prove that Apartheid was an ideological conflict and not a race conflict – all races were affected by it, including many whites – and not just a handful, but large swathes of 100’s of thousands of whites actively resisted Apartheid, a ‘critical mass’ argument – and here’s the fun part, we can easily prove it and dispense with the ‘revolutionist’ history that is the current political narrative.
Considering my research area and span (1935 to 1955) by historical confluence and not by design there emerges a “good guys” versus “bad guys” argument on the Afrikaner front. It also has the numbers, the critical mass to dispense with this idea that all “whites” and especially all “Afrikaners” upheld their privilege and exploited and repressed all “blacks” by keeping the Afrikaner Nationalist Party in power. Numbers alone tell a story, the 1948 election win by the National Party was not a majority win … and by 1953 a massive voting bloc of 250,000 white people (i.e. 25% of an electorate of 1,000,000 odd whites) had joined The Torch Commando – a war veterans based anti-Apartheid mass movement – paid up members in almost equal balance of ‘Afrikaans’ and ‘English’ and all protesting Apartheid in massive rallies countrywide – some well over 50,000 strong, a campaign which lasted about 5 years until the Nationalists (as was their fashion) started to crush it with legislation.
This research vindicates many white Afrikaners of Apartheid – fact. It is far more helpful to understand their story, study this history, find out how and why it was repressed and manipulated by a radical Afrikaner far right and not try and promote an unattainable and factually impossible redemption for the radical Afrikaner far right. In fact, the reaction I got to this work by Afrikaners was intensely positive, many Afrikaans people have written to personally, to say “thank you” and things like “finally” I can talk about my family heritage, my ‘Ouman’ or ‘Oupa’ (even Ouma) was one of these hundreds of thousands of ‘Smutsmen’ – our history has been flattened out by decades of National Party propaganda and rhetoric, in fact the term often used is “repressed”. Devoid of a voice by historical circumstance for over 50 years of ‘Apartheid censorship’ this work has given it back to them.
Sailor Malan (left) and his opposite nemesis BJ Vorster (right) – both identified themselves as Afrikaners. The Nationalists regarded Sailor Malan as a “Afrikaner of another kind” – a traitor to his people.
How uplifting ‘redeemable’ Afrikaners, the ones in history who resisted Apartheid and whose history was ‘forgotten’ and ‘censored’, the ones who sought reconciliation and understanding and now we are finally bringing their politics and their stories to life, giving them a long lost platform, how that possibly constitutes an “Anti-Afrikaner” standpoint is simply beyond me, it defies logic and even common sense.
But somehow it does, this position does not detract from the odd troglodyte emerging, like Ludwig Rode who on social media made an unhinged, libellous and unsupported comment to support Albert Blake by way of a justification of my alleged ‘Boer-bashing’ and said:
“Dickens hates Boers … (he is) trying to put the British and Joiners and anyone left of the Boers or against their freedom aspirations on the moral high ground. No balance at all”.
So, by Mr Rode’s logic highlighting those ‘leftist’ Afrikaners who resisted Apartheid and “joined” Smuts’ ‘khakis’ as opposed to the ‘rightist’ Afrikaners – i.e. those right wingers whose aspirations for “freedom” meant flirting with Nazism and trampling on the rights, freedoms and emancipation of everyone else – especially Blacks, Coloureds, Indians, English South Africans and Jews, and subjugating them to jackboot Nazism and violent oppression instead – this to Mr Rode is a bad thing. Now, I thought ‘separating’ them and opening them up so we can see the difference between these two vastly different factions of Afrikanerdom was a good thing – it provides a far more ‘balanced’ and insightful argument. Clearly Mr Rode does not see it this way, not sure how he sees ‘balance’ – maybe I should tar all Afrikaners with his idea of jackboot “Freedom” – in any event his sheer prejudices and adherence to Apartheid period historical doctrine are plain to see in the language he uses.
‘Talking Jackboots’ – Torch Commando cartoon highlighting the Nazification of the National Party
Also, as to historic sweep, sorry to say this to Mr Rode, but as to a ‘moral high ground’, these ‘lefty’ Afrikaners I highlight are already on it – I didn’t ‘put them there’, and as to the far right ‘Nazi’ Afrikaners I highlight – as South Africans they are all in our collective memory’s rubbish bin – and I didn’t put them there either, they did that bit all by themselves – sad but true, I can ‘contextualise’ them, put them into their ‘period’, understand ‘Nazism’ in the context of historical popularism – but that’s about it. To find out more about how they landed up with all our modern day collective contempt for them – read the thousands, I mean thousands of history papers, books, essays, memoirs, manuscripts, reports and confessions written on the ills of Apartheid brought about by these individuals … Some ‘freedom’ he refers!
Also, as a specialism I write a lot about the subject of the Nazification of the Afrikaner right, its full on, so anything coming out from me can seem a little infatuated with Afrikaners and Nazism as the published articles are numerous and frequent – there’s “a lot” of it, it can even be a little overwhelming and over saturating – to the point that one chap wrote to me to say it’s all a ‘bit much’ – let ‘bygones be bygones’ and I should find something ‘new’, something he likes and thinks would be more agreeable … now that’s just plain daft and it reinforces my thinking that I have not yet written enough on this subject – its like a modern Italian saying to a historian specialising in Fascism and Mussolini that they don’t like the work, its not “nice”, there’s “too much” and he should focus on the evolution of professional football in Italy instead – much better, less controversial and far more agreeable. I honestly had to go back to this detractor to say I’m pretty happy with my specialism and won’t be changing it anytime soon.
Banner for an upcoming blog on Manie Maritz, a ‘Volks-Held’ and the Boer Rebellion leader, and his conversion to Nazism.
Sometimes this extends to a second category of person, one who does not like the conclusions reached as it does not suit their identity, culture or socialisation – any form of preconceived narrative really … their ‘bias’ in effect. These people (and even Albert Blake made this mistake) usually come back with “you can do better” – in other words keep re-writing your article until you come up with a conclusion I can agree with.
As to giving a platform to historic Afrikaner characters who have made positive contributions to the broader society in which they live, believe it or not, there is a group of Afrikaners who still just simply don’t “get it” – like Mr Rode they are still conditioned in this old Afrikaner nationalist ‘Völkisch’ idea of Afrikanerdom. They hand to heart believe that ‘liberal’ Afrikaners are traitors to the Afrikaner cause, and they sincerely believe that ‘Verwoerdian Aparthied’ will make a ‘Volkstaat’ comeback – a place in the sun for the ‘Herrenvolk’. This bit I like to call “bringing back porch-monkey.”
Porch Monkey 4 Life
‘I’m bringing back Porch-monkey” – this quote comes from a movie ‘Clerks 2’ and its a line from a complete idiot clerk with zero emotional IQ, he’s convinced that because the “old timers” like his Grandmother used terms like “Porch-monkey” (the American equivalent for a black ‘House-Boy’) it is perfectly acceptable language and not a racial slur – he makes it his life’s mission to “Bring Back Porch-monkey” and make it acceptable again – the scene is comic genius as he goes about insulting Black people with imbecilic oblivion. Obviously he’s on an offensive highway to nowhere, he’s an ingrained racist, he is moronically obtuse – and he still “doesn’t get it” even after he is challenged on racism by his best friend – he simply does not understand that he’s an utter idiot or even a racist – it makes for great comedy.
Clerks 2 scene – bringing back porch monkey.
I’ve met a couple of proponents of the idea of bringing back “Porch-monkey” – the one is an Afrikaner historian (actually he’s a choreographer of the Boer War) who went round the tree with me on social media for three days solid trying to convince the world that Dr. H.F. Verwoerd did not have any Nazi leanings or connections to Nazism whatsoever (despite a court case proving otherwise and his own actions and writings) and he was a virtuous and admirable man worthy of word-wide admiration for his ideas of ‘good neighbourliness’ and detente (how dare I even suggest otherwise) – that he is trying to bring back a true ‘porch-monkey’ is lost on him.
Another was a local councillor for the Freedom Front Plus, a man who has published two novels of fictional ‘Boer history’. He pulled me up after I highlighted an old ‘Citizen’ newspaper propaganda piece called ‘Call to Afrikaners by an Englishman’ written in 1990 by ‘anonymous’ – which he was plugging on his social media was well … erm … nothing more than a well known Nationalist government propaganda piece in a state sponsored rag and its ‘bringing back porch monkey’. So, before booting me off his social media he messaged me to say that I was ‘Boer Bashing’ as I only regarded Afrikaners “with British hearts” as acceptable, and that I should be grateful for the “thin white line” of protection that he provides against the riotous black hordes who live next door to me. His own ingrained sense of pomposity, misconstrued history, nationalist indoctrination and sheer prejudice lost completely on him.
Another chap was a fellow military veteran in a Veterans Association I chaired in the UK who figured that the Oranje, Blanje, Blou (the old “Aparthied” National Flag) had a bad rap and everyone in the old SADF should be proud of the “flag they fought under” so he planted it outside an African speciality shop in the middle of Peckham London (a suburb known for its ‘black’ multiculturalism – nearly half its population identifies as Black, Black British, Caribbean or African) … this sort of ‘bringing back porch monkey’ takes a special kind of determination and its no surprise to learn that after his SADF national service he joined Eugène Terre’Blanche’s special AWB bodyguard. That he planted a ‘porch monkey’ (whether we agree with it or not) was lost on him.
Now, I’m all for the correct demonstration of historic flags, from the “Vierkleur” to the OBB (same with statues and monuments), I’m also for ‘non-fiction’ and even ‘fiction’ based ‘Boer’ history if it’s grounded correctly and not grounded in identity politics and propaganda, and I’m all for chronologically recording Afrikaner history correctly – good and bad – warts and all. There is a careful balance to contextualising history and presenting it in an even-handed manner – and there’s also a point when you simply cannot bring back ‘porch monkey’.
Sweeping up the Boer Wars
Which brings me to the Voortrekkers and especially the “Boer Wars” as this is always a social media hot potato – all three of them, the Transvaal Revolt (1880 – 1881) the South African War (1899-1902) and the subsequent Afrikaner Rebellion (1914 – 1915). Hoo Boy!
Let me upfront say this, understanding the ‘Boer Wars’ is important to my preferred historic period on the Nazification of the Afrikaner right and the Torch Commando (1935 to 1955) because it provides for a back-drop, it’s in the “historical sweep” … without the Transvaal Revolt we don’t have “Krugerism” as an ideology … without “Krugerism” we don’t have The South African War and again the attempt to re-instate “Krugerism” is the object of the Afrikaner Rebellion. “Krugerism” – and the old ZAR constitution with its central 1860 racist tenet ‘The people are not prepared to allow any equality of the non-white with the white inhabitants, either in church or state’ is the adopted political philosophy by Hertzog’s breakaway National Party in 1914, and it is the epicentre on which the ideology of Aparthied is based. So, very important to the Nazification of the Afrikaner right and the anti-Aparthied Torch Commando.
Upfront I must also say this – the ‘Boer Wars’ are not my “specialism” but they are important for context and sweep, I generally leave the in’s and out’s of the Boer Wars to the historians who make these wars their “specialism”. However what the Boer Wars do provide is a lot of interest and “traffic” on my website. If there is conflict that is completely misunderstood in the historiography of the Afrikaner nation it’s the three Boer wars, and the reason for this is over five decades of Afrikaner nationalist propaganda and conditioning – “Half a Century” of propagandist history and Afrikaner identity politics, think about that, from the Centenary celebrations of the Great Trek in 1938 all the way to the democratic election of 1994.
The “Christian Nationalist” education agenda was spread through every avenue of social conditioning and socialisation, from Sunday School, to Primary School, to High School, to ‘Veld’ School, to University, to cultural clubs and youth movements, to National Service in the military, and to all state owned Television, Radio and Print media, even ‘SABC’ financed movies – Brug 14 (1976), Jopie Fourie (1979) and Gideon Scheepers (1982) etc. etc. It was on-going, relentless indoctrination and propaganda. The people pushing out all this ‘Christian Nationalism’ dogma were the Broederbond and everything they touched attempted to condition and convert every single ‘white’ person in South Africa, be they English or Afrikaans – even Jewish (strangely enough, they tried), to their particular brand of ‘nationalism’.
To do this top flight Broederbond members were placed everywhere – especially Education Boards and School Inspectors, government run ‘white’ Primary and High Schools in keynote positions like headmasters, ‘Afrikaans’ Universities – notably the University of Pretoria and RAU et al as Chancellors and academics, the South African Police (SAP), the South African Defence Force (SADF) especially after all the ‘Erasmus Reforms’, the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC), the Dutch Reformed Church, cultural organisations like FAK, and a number of other government SOE’s and security apparatus.
Broederbonders: HF Verwoerd would say “Brothers, the Broederbond must control all it lays its hands on, in every sphere of life in South Africa”
Also, this is not ‘conspiracy theory’ on my behalf, there are entire academic papers, thesis and books on this subject of Christian Nationalism and indoctrination thereof. So when Albert Blake and one of his acolytes Juan de Vries, called me out on overstating ‘Afrikaner Nationalist rhetoric’ just because the Afrikaner Rebellion (1914-1915) was never taught in a Christian National Education Curriculum ‘high school text-book during the Apartheid era’, really is a transparent attempt at gaslighting and a rather sloppy attempt at deflection given the scope of Broederbond’s activities and the stated factual history of it – that or Blake has not researched the subject enough, either way its a blatantly condescending and unscholarly remark.
As a net result of the Broederbond’s stated aims, the “Boer Wars” are arguably riddled with more “myths” than any South African wars before or after. So much so, that as to Boer War 2 (the main one), there is a vast gap between the histories and personal accounts written at the time (primary data or primary source) – Leo Amery, Jan Smuts, Deneys Reitz, Winston Churchill, Fredrick Maurice, Arthur Conan-Doyle, Clement Stott, Regimental histories etc. and those written almost 70 years after the fact by ‘Republican’ historians like Thomas Pakenham, Professor Hermann Gillomee, Professor Fransjohan Pretorius, Professor John Boje, Professor Burridge Spies etc, many of whom by their own admission were writing (and some still write) within the context of the “history of the Afrikaner” – and here I would even allocate Albert Blake as he only publishers in Afrikaans, writes on traditional ‘Afrikaans’ historical debates and he sells his work to a very specific and narrow Afrikaans audience. On a political scale for simplicity sake let’s call the first lot of historians the ‘Imperial School’ and the second lot the ‘Republican School’.
New School
There is however a third lot, another school on the Boer Wars, and it a relatively ‘new’ one – so let’s call it “New School” as it only really starts to come into its own after 1994, after South Africa’s universities are unhinged from towing an Afrikaner Nationalist ‘white’ history agenda, and ‘Black’, ‘Coloured’, Indian and even ‘English’ academics and their history’ is now pushed forward in order to ‘balance’ the history of the Boer Wars and incorporate the histories and ambitions of all South Africans – to make it universally relevant to everyone who took part in the Boer Wars. So much so they move to change the terminology and lexicon of the war at academic levels to the more universally accepted “The South African War (1899-1902)”.
This ‘New School’ consists of historians who seriously challenge – not only the ‘Imperial School’ but also the ‘Republican School’ narratives of the war and they have punched massive holes into it, especially the ‘Republican School’ as its still a contemporary school and its been busy with a lot of ‘revisionism’ – these ‘New School’ historians include: Dr. Garth Bennyworth, Professor Bill Nasson, Dr. Peter Warwick, Dr Elizabeth van Heyningen, Professor Elizabeth Stanley, Professor John Laband etc. and even British accredited ‘Boer War’ historians like Dr. Donal Lowry, Dr. Damian O’ Connor, Andrew Roberts FRSL FRHistS and Chris Ash FRGS FRHistS … all working to unravel this politically inspired mythology, navigate this quagmire of Afrikaner Nationalism surrounding the Boer Wars and get to the truth.
Imagine the complete train-smash when social media really took off from about 2005, and all these historians came out their musky libraries and people started sharing website links, blogs, vlogs etc. of their stuff on-line. Suddenly the ‘Republican School’ historians found themselves at odds with the ‘New School’ historians in public space, and social media platforms experienced ‘melt downs’ as two separate camps of enthusiasts went hammer and tongs at one another (they still do). The ‘English’ enthusiasts accusing the ‘Afrikaner’ enthusiasts of peddling Apartheid period (Republican School) propaganda and the Afrikaners accusing the ‘English’ of peddling a new form of ‘revisionist’ history (New School) and ‘jingoistic’ (Imperial School) history. The poor ‘administrators’ – most of them local ‘Republican School’ amateur enthusiasts with ingrained cultural and identity bias – all spinning endlessly as they are not professional historians, and they don’t know much outside their ‘Christian Nationalist’ upbringings – they just figured its a good idea to open a Facebook appreciation ‘group’ – and they are especially untrained to deal with all this historical revisionism as its all ‘new’ to them.
Now, it’ll come as no surprise to anyone that I am a BIG fan of “New School” historians, I like the old “Imperial School” – Smuts, Amery, Reitz etc. because they are closer to source, some are even classified as ‘primary source’ themselves which is what any good historian should reference first – its critical to writing history. I also like the ‘New School’ precisely because they have unraveled large bodies of the Republican histories, disproven much of it as politically driven rhetoric, and simply got on with ‘correcting’ the narrative.
“New School” – Stanley, Benneyworth and Laband
It may however come as surprise to some, but absolutely nothing I have written about the Boer Wars cannot be supported by a ‘New School’ historian. Not one single article I’ve written does not have grounding, and there is nothing I’ve said that’s new, everything I’ve said has already been published by a very accredited historian. That I believe the white concentration camps are highly nuanced and not ‘genocide’ is largely due to the work of Elizabeth van Heyningen, that I believe much Afrikaner identity had a flawed underpinning is due to David Harrison, Liz Stanley and Andrew Roberts, that I believe the Boers targeted civilians during sieges is due to Garth Benneyworth and his work, that I believe the NG Church and not the British invented Apartheid is because of the work of Herman Giliomee and Damian O’Connor, that I believe that causes belli of the war was about the ZAR’s suzerainty and not ‘stealing gold’ is because of historians like Bill Nasson and even Leo Amery.
It’s not ‘conspiracy theory’ – Tinus le Roux, the chap who colourises Boer War photos, accused me of peddling ‘conspiracies’ without remotely offering a rational or proof behind his accusation, unfortunately Mr Le Roux, everything I’ve ever posted on the Boer Wars is already grounded in solid history by top flight historians – and it can all be verified and validated. I don’t make conclusions of my own on the Boer Wars as simply put – its not my specialism – it is however the specialism of these historians – so I use them extensively. The only difference is that of all these ‘New School’ historians, I am the only one that uses a website and blog with trailed social media – twitter (x), Facebook and Instragram accounts – so my ‘reach’ and ‘medium’ brings their message to a much broader audience in snap sized, fast consumption, historical interest pieces.
To take what is already concluded by many accredited historians and then turn around and say by using their findings I’m somehow suddenly “Boer Bashing” is indicative on just how uneducated, ignorant and biased these detractors are – they are simply not ‘read’ and what’s driving their view is an emotional state and not a learned state. As to Tinus le Roux, he ignored references I gave him (Benneyworth’s ‘Magersfontein’ and Stott’s ‘Boer invasion of Natal’) and refused to change his view – he should really stick to colourising pictures and get a proper historian to caption his work before he commercialises it and completely embarrasses himself.
Fools rush in
This bit is important, it’s not just the ‘Facebook’ amateur enthusiasts, even heavy weight South African historians of the old ‘Republican School’ and the ‘New School’ give each other ‘both barrels’. A case in point is Professor Fransjohan Pretorius, the ‘go-to’ Afrikaner Boer War historian from the University of Pretoria, semi-retired now but still firing. Prof Pretorius gave both barrels to Dr Elizabeth van Heyningen at the University of Cape Town and Prof Liz Stanley, now at the University of Edinburgh, for their papers and books on the white Boer concentration camps of Boer War 2. Pretorius penning scathing criticism of both van Heyningen and Stanley in a paper titled ‘The white concentration camps of the Anglo Boer War: a debate without end.’ on the basis that they ignored Afrikaner political and cultural nuances, and their research and findings were therefore academically sloppy. Stanley ignored him, but van Heyningen would have none of it and responded to Pretorius and said his remarks reinforce and ‘demonstrate the continued power of myth making among ordinary Afrikaners’ in a very erudite academic reply on white Boer Concentration Camps titled ‘Fools rush in: writing a history of the concentration camps of South Africa’.
Fransjohan Pretorius and Elizabeth van Heyningen
This ‘bun-fight’ is not just between local ‘New School’ historians and Professor Fransjohan Pretorius, it extends to the overseas ‘British’ new school historians and Fellows of the Royal Historical Society, some of Britain’s leading historians. Prof. Pretorius recently went out in the media and claimed ‘many English-speaking South Africans at present, let alone Englishmen from England’ fail ‘to understand the presence, goals and effect of British imperialism’. This of course pricked the interest of ‘English’ historians who rightly questioned as to why only Afrikaners, like Prof. Pretorius – who studied at institutions heavily financially subsidised by the National Party regime and controlled by the Broederbond, are the only ones who are wise enough to truly understand British Imperialism. Not only the derogatory and disparaging language used, but the supreme arrogance to assume that the specialists in Victorian and British Empire history and the ‘English’ themselves are not adequately equipped to understand their own Imperialist history. Naturally the strong rebuttal from qualified ‘English’ historians to these remarks by Pretorius were quickly deleted by the website owner – litnet, an Afrikaans website geared to Afrikaner academia .
‘New School’ British historians, O’Connor, Ash and Roberts – all with diametrically opposite views to that of Prof. Fransjohan Pretorius.
This supreme sense of arrogance and bias was even expressed by Albert Blake when he said of me in social media:
‘Dickens by his own words has a problem mastering Afrikaans. If you cannot read Afrikaans you will never be able to properly understand the Afrikaans way of thinking. Dickens lack thereof is apparent in his work.’
Really? Does he honestly think a historian has to be fluent in a language before he can write its history – he’s just dismissed just about every historian on the planet. I’m sure the English historian Sir Antony Beevor FRSL, whose written highly acclaimed WW2 history books on Stalingrad and the Russian conflict is not fluent in Russian – nor is he born into a German or Spanish hertitage, yet he’s written some highly acclaimed military history books on them. I’m also pretty sure the English historian Sir Ian Kershaw FRHistS FBA is not fully conversant in Yiddish and Hebrew or a born a Jew, yet he wrote some compelling works on the Jewish Holocaust. Closer to home I’d hate to know what Blake thinks of Dr. David Katz, a friend of mine and published SA Military historian, now David’s grasp of Afrikaans is the same as mine, does that make him and his work somehow unqualified?
That’s the other thing, I told Blake that I had a ‘colloquial’ grasp of Afrikaans – I can certainly speak, read and write it and at one stage in my life as a SADF officer I not only commanded in Afrikaans I thought in the language. I also have a Afrikaner heritage (two Great Grandparents), I have a Afrikaans wife (married for over 30 years) and I have a Afrikaans family, and the net result of all that is most my friendship circle is Afrikaans – so how I don’t understand the nuances of Afrikanerdom, Afrikaners and Afrikaans is anyone’s guess (methinks he’s grabbing at straws in his efforts to play to a peanut gallery) – Blake is also being hypocritical, you can reverse his logic and argue that because he is not ‘English’ himself, so he cannot comment on British history just because he cannot really understand the ‘English peoples’.
There is only really one key bias driving people like Prof. Pretorius and Albert Blake, and it has nothing to do with a home ‘language’ and everything to do with a home ‘identity’ – it’s an ingrained “victim mentality” and some older Afrikaners generally still tend to have it – brought on by decades of Broederbond indoctrination that says because of the white Concentration Camps of the Boer War, only the Afrikaner can comment on Britain’s history in South Africa, their victimhood makes their self righteousness and Anglophobia perfectly understandable. If you took this idiotic logic one step further you could conclude that ‘Black’ South Africans are the only ones who can comment on Afrikaner history because they were the victims of Apartheid – that’s how disjointed and self serving this thinking is.
But what’s with all this ‘identity’ overriding logic? Funnily its the ‘Broederbond’ at the centre of it again and for this bit – I like refer to the American satirist PJ O’Rourke’s book on holidaying in South Africa during Apartheid in a chapter he called ‘in whitest Africa’.
In Whitest Africa
So here’s the history of Afrikaner ‘identity’ not many people know about. In 1938, Henning Klopper, then the chairman of the Broederbond (and later a National Party speaker) initiated the Great Trek millennial re-enactment, his mission to bring the ‘Cape Afrikaner’ together with the ‘Boer Afrikaner’ – which he called the two separate hearts of Afrikanerdom forced apart by the Boer War and a separate history. The idea was that they would both merge with the ‘Voortrekker’ iconography, identity and historiography and jointly ‘map a path’ to a future Afrikaner hegemony, an oligarchy state with strong Christian theological belief in separate worship and all desirous of implementing a ‘whites only’ Republican paramountcy.
Long and short – it worked, Klopper would step back from his success and call it providence, divine intervention …. to quote him – a “sacred happening”. The Ossewabrandwag would carry this new Afrikaner unification under its singular identity like a ‘flame torch’, spread it like ‘wildfire’ (hence the name) from the centenary celebrations into every Afrikaner cultural organisation. The Broederbond sat with the Ossewabrandwag (OB) and the National Party (NP) and agreed the ‘Cradock Agreement’ – the spreading of this Afrikaner nationalist identity on the ‘Cultural Front’ of Afrikanerdom would be the ambit of the OB, whereas on the ‘Political Front’ of Afrikanerdom – the National Party (and the Volks Party, Afrikaner Party as well as other political organs like the ‘Boerenasie’ and ‘New Order’) would carry this identity through – and they would carry it well past the 1948 National Party election win, the 1961 ‘forward to a white Republic’ plebiscite win, all the way through ‘Apartheid’ and it’s still prevalent in modern Afrikanerdom to this day.
Two separate Afrikaner ‘paths’ to South Africa, Henning Klopper’s Centennial Oxwagon and OB ‘path’ poster to a whites only republic and Jan Smuts’ ‘path’ poster – a call to arms for Allied support and Union. One pro-British and one pro Nazi Germany.
That this is a completely artificial construct, an ideological make-believe, a Jungian archetype – that it has nothing to do with the actual historiography of large swathes of the Afrikaner community is immaterial – only some can claim this all-white ‘Voortrekker’ identity but many (in fact most) can’t. However, a great deal of modern Afrikaners have just bought into this identity – 60 years of steady indoctrination will do this.
This ‘identity’ history is also not conspiracy theory – monuments and artefacts to the 1938 Voortrekker centennial litter nearly every single town in South Africa, even in towns which never saw a Voortrekker, hundreds of thousands of people took part and it cumulated in the laying of the cornerstone of the Voortrekker monument, manually hauled up the hill by teams of the faithful. Whole thesis, academic papers and even books have been written about the phenomenon that was this event and the identity and political philosophy it created.
A ‘Kappie Kommando’ in white purity during the Trek Centenary and Nationalist media highlighting specific Afrikaner leaders the ‘volks heroes’ who ascribed to division and a whites only hegemony and leaving off those who ascribed union and an integrated society.
Here’s the thing, as to the development of Afrikaner Christian Nationalism and the keynote authors of it, Henning Klopper was a mere child with a smattering of a memory of the Boer War, however he concluded the concentration camps were – to quote him – ‘organised murder‘. The mythology spun out from there by organisations like FAK (a Broederbond mouthpiece) amongst others – the British “stole” the gold and diamonds, the British “murdered” 28,000 Boer women and children, the British “raped” Boer women en-masse, the British committed systematic “genocide”, the British were the “warmongers” declaring the war and then the British invaded “sovereign” Boer Republics. The British “invented” the concentration camp and the “Nazis” followed their example. The British used Boer civilians – women and children as “hostage collateral” to win the war. The British were solely responsible for all the farm burnings and rural destruction. The British unfairly and illegally executed Boer commanders. The Boer War started the collapse of the British Empire. The Boers were “superior” fighters in every way but denied their victory by unscrupulous scorched earth tactics and overwhelming numbers – it goes on – it even ends with highly improbable claims – Boers inventing trench warfare, sniping, bush craft and camouflage.
Let alone all the ‘New School’ Boer War historians – just one ‘Imperial School’ book – Amery’s 7 volumes of official history of the Boer War as a starter will show that absolutely none of what I have written above is true – but this is immaterial, not one statement expressed above is historically proven, not even remotely correct, none of it factually supported – but no matter, let’s go with it – its political spin so it must be true.
Problem with writing modern South African military history is that very often you meet white Afrikaners who conflate this identity politics inspired by the Broederbond with the historiography of the Afrikaner nation. If you write any history which does not conform to the acquired belief structure or challenges it, there is a literal meltdown, they feel it is an assault on their world – their literal understanding of the way of things, their values, their personality, their language, their culture – there is a separation, cognitive dissonance takes hold and they get defensive, sometimes very irrationally so.
A case in point of conflagulated identity – Chris Pretorius, an administrator of large format Boer War Facebook group cannot compute analytical thought on any of his ‘Boer Heroes’. His stated claim is that he will not accept any criticism of General Christian de Wet for example, such heretic will be met with an immediate ban or a gag. To him, some of this ‘New School’ history is the result of “Ashism” – a concept he came up with to gag or ban anyone using ‘new school’ history and lumping them as a “disciple” of a “banned” Fellow of Royal Historical Society historian – Chris Ash – who consistently, and using sound factual support, sources and cross referencing, challenges Pretorius’ and his cabal’s very understanding of Boer War history (albeit abrasively so) – now Ash is his own historian, and I’ve seldom referenced him in the past, but no matter. These Boer War sites are truly like watching the Dunning Kruger effect in full fledge and its the reason I undertook to leave Pretorius’ media and others like it about nine months ago.
But that has not stopped some rather nasty individuals who really conflate identity with reality from cropping up, and almost all of them can be found in Facebook groups and pages run by the likes of Chris Pretorius, Tinus le Roux and John Elsegood. These individuals are so unhinged that they resort to criminal slander and even resort to sending me on-line threats, sometimes even directly – and it’s a lesson in open and brazen racism, prejudice and anti-Semitism. Everything the old ‘Afrikaner nationalists’ were about – alive and well and bubbling over in these Voortrekker and Boer War social media groups.
Amusing Fan Mail
Let’s get to the peanut gallery in these Boer War aligned social media platforms, these are some of the comments and social media mails sent to me – either directly or on my media platforms, they speak for themselves,I won’t go into all of it, but here’s some choice examples:
First out the blocks are people who because of my surname somehow think I’m British and only in South Africa at the behest of the Boere – just plain old prejudice and warped thinking. Earlier I said that as an officer in the SADF I became very astute as to Afrikaans and Afrikaners.
I recall when I entered the SADF at 5 SAI in Ladysmith as a conscript, there were a grouping of Afrikaner NCO’s with support of other Afrikaner troopies who took great delight in “bashing” (and at times literally bashing) the “English” guys accusing us of murdering their Great Grandmothers, stealing their country and their wealth – we were called everything under the sun from “Jingo’s” to “murderers” to “rooi-nek” to “soutie”. Much delight was taken when guys were singled out with “English” surnames – “Mason” and the like, and mine – “Dickens” came in for a lot of attention and slander.
That my family were Pretoria Loyalists – my Great Grandfather born there in 1877 and he a descendent of an 1820 settler meant nothing, they had all married into Afrikaner families, I have not one but two actual Voortrekkers which are blood relatives on my paternal line (that’s more Voortrekker heritage than most Afrikaners can point to) – but this meant nothing, not a jot, as far as they were concerned I was an “Uitlander” a “Jingo”. My “English” University (Rhodes) did not help either – because now I was also just lumped as a “fokkin Kommunis” in addition.
I can see these “clowns” coming a mile away – here’s some of them.
Then there are believers in ‘General’ Manie Maritz and his autobiography which promoted the anti-semitic and anti-masonic and highly discredited ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ to the Boer nation – these clowns are so unhinged that pure racism, prejudice and anti-semitism is perfectly acceptable in an on-line space when writing to me.
Then there’s these gems from Rudi Rousseau, I took on one of his acolytes in a Boer War group and the next minute a PM appeared in my mailbox. I maintained that Rousseau, who is a self appointed historian for “Boere media”, defaced the monument at Surrender Hill in the Free State when he cemented a granite plaque to it which called the surrendering Boere “verraaiers” (traitors) and absolved Christian de Wet of abandoning his command – his action really no dissimilar to any defacing of a war memorial and as unhinged. The next one relates to a Blood River post, and Rousseau is so conflated with mythology and the idea of a “super-Boer” that he honestly believes a handful of Boers fought off 350,000 Zulu at the Battle of Blood River in 1838 – as stated earlier this kind of thing is not unusual in some circles.
It’s not only the nut-jobs, racists and anti-semites – I’ve even received a threat from a Dominee in the NG Church, a senior member of one of their Synods. He took the time out to write to me and say my “Boer hate” will be exposed in a future book. The background to this is a Jopie Fourie discussion where I attested that Jan Smuts was not present in his house when the Malan contingent arrived and the rightful person as Prime Minister to receive such a contingent was Louis Botha. His reference is to a conspiracy he believes in – that Smuts burned the Fourie case court records. I’ve blanked out his surname and picture as if this sort of crap continues he will lose his job for ‘bearing false witness’ against me and good ‘ol basic libel and slander – and he happens to be on Albert Blake’s Facebook friend profile. If there is a link, the gloves in this matter will come off and some very public naming and shaming will follow.
On Blake again, he also went into social media with this prize comment – and its pure “hearsay”, surprising here for a lawyer again, its up there with Jeremy Clarkson on Top Gear and the famous “some say”:
….. “some say” he sleeps upside down, all we know is he’s called the Stig!
Blake said of me:
‘Dickens has been called “Jingo Dickens” and labelled a “Boer /Afrikaner basher” by others. He should seek the true reasons thereof. He clearly thrives on the sensational.’
Now, I’ve just posted the choice individuals who have called me a “jingo” in the past and I know the reasons, as anyone can see most of it is nut job slander and has no credibility whatsoever. As to hearsay and the “some say” principle, this would be like me going out on a public forum and saying of him:
‘… “some say” Blake is a Plagiarist, I’ve heard from others he’s known as “Copycat Al” and he should find out why.’
The Dam’s Geese
I will conclude this in a language Albert Blake will understand, and it’s a courtesy to him, as this cess-pool from which he is trying to “investigate” my alleged “Boer hate” is now open for him to review, and I say this to him in pure honesty:
‘Luister nou mooi makker, hierdie is nie ons dam se ganse. Meng jou met die semels, dan vreet die varke jou.’
The Observation Post will be taking the circuit lecture and talk on the history of the Torch Commando to Simonstown next. It will be hosted by the Naval Officers’ Association of Southern Africa at the Seven Seas Club in Simonstown. It is a closed session for members of the Seven Seas and Naval Officers’ fraternity, their partners and invited guests.
Peter Dickens – B Soc.Sc. (Rhodes) PG Dip (UNISA) – will be presenting the lecture on the Rise and Fall of the Torch Commando, he will be joined by fellow discussant Capt (SAN) Graeme Plint – MMM MMil. (Stell). Graeme’s 2021 Masters thesis “The influence of Second World War military service on prominent White South African veterans in opposition politics 1939 – 1961” will add significant gravitas to the discussion on The Torch Commando and Sailor Malan, the South African war-time Battle of Britain ace.
Titled ‘An inconvenient truth’ it is an in-depth look at The Torch Commando, South Africa’s first mass Anti-Apartheid protest movement and the politics of returning South African WW2 veterans.
Topics to be covered include:
The Nazification of the Afrikaner Right
TheReturning War Veterans Action Committee
SailorMalan
The Steel Commando
The rise and fall of The Torch Commando
The smoking gun to the ‘white’ struggle against Apartheid
Date: 14th May 2024
Venue: Seven Seas Club, Simonstown.
Time: 11:30 am start.
Who: Naval Officers’ Association members, their partners and invited guests.
The Observation Post will be ON at Swellendam on Thursday 18th January 2024 in conjunction with the Swellendam Heritage Association, Peter Dickens (B Soc.Sc. Rhodes PG Dip UNISA) will be presenting a lecture and discussion on The Torch Commando and Sailor Malan, the South African war-time Battle of Britain ace. Titled ‘An inconvenient truth’ it is an in-depth look at The Torch Commando, South Africa’s first mass Anti-Apartheid protest movement and the politics of returning South African WW2 veterans.
Topics to be covered include:
The Nazification of the Afrikaner Right
TheReturning War Veterans Action Committee
SailorMalan
The Steel Commando
The rise and fall of The Torch Commando
The smoking gun to the ‘white’ struggle against Apartheid
Places are filling up fast so please R.S.V.P. – details as follows:
Date: Thursday 18th January 2024
Venue: Swellendam Heritage Association, The Drostdy Schuur, Swellendam.
Time: 18:00
RSVP: p.bromley05@gmail.com by Monday 15 Jan 2024.
Lecture by Dr. Yvonne Malan with Peter Dickens from The Observation Post as a co-panelist.
If you are in Kimberley – don’t miss this! As many who follow the Observation Post know, I am currently researching The Torch Commando and Sailor Malan. I will be joining up with Dr. Yvonne Malan (a relation of Sailors’) for her “I fear no Man” The Life and Legacy of Sailor Malan memorial lecture. Details as follows:
Date: Saturday, 16 September 2023
Time: 11:00 am
Venue: Sol Plaatjie University – Auditorium 1, Humanities Building, Kimberley
RSVP
It is important to RSVP for this event: RSVP details as follows:
RSVP before 13th September 2023 with Felicity Msuthu – e-mail: felicity@museumsnc.co.za
Images: Sailor Malan the WW2 Battle of Britain Squadron Leader and Fighter Ace and Sailor Malan The Torch Commando Political Activist (colourising by Photo Redux)
Bio’s
Yvonne Malan DPhil (Oxon):
Yvonne Malan was born in South Africa and educated at New College, University of Oxford. Her research interests include post-conflict reconstruction and transitional justice. She is the founder of the prestigious Bram Fischer Memorial Lecture at the University of Oxford. A former Oxford ‘Blue’, she is a keen runner, cricketer and boxer.
Yvonne is active raising the profile of her relative, the late Group Captain Adolph Gysbert ‘Sailor’ Malan, DSO & Bar, DFC & Bar. ‘Sailor’ Malan was one of the most outstanding Spitfire pilots and leaders within the Royal Air Force during the Second World War (1939-1945) and a leading anti-apartheid campaigner and political activist as leader of The Torch Commando during the 1950’s.
Peter Dickens B SocSc, H Dip:
Peter Dickens works closely in South African military veterans affairs, in the United Kingdom he is the President of the South African Legion of Military Veterans – United Kingdom and Europe Branch and he is also the founding Chairman of the Royal British Legion – South African Branch. In South Africa he is the Old Bill of the Memorable Order of Tin Hats – Seagull Shellhole.
In terms of military experience, Peter served in the South African Army as an Operations Officer, a Convoy Commander and finally as a SSO3 in 15RCD – Gauteng Command, he holds the rank of Captain.
Peter has a B Soc Sc from Rhodes University in South Africa majoring in Economic History and Economics and a H Dip Marketing from UNISA. He has three broad passions – underwater wreck diving, flying light aircraft and military history.
Related links:
Sailor Malan is an exceptional South African, to learn a little more on this Military hero and Patriot – here are some links on the Observation Post to previous work:
Whoo-hoo … my blog, The Observation Post just hit the 1,000,000 views mark!
I started this blog after my father’s death around this time in Hermanus, South Africa – fondly known locally as ‘Prof Dickens’ to many locals, it was just three short years ago and in a way it is a homage to the library of military history books he left to me to reference, his passion for the subject and it was really set up in his memory.
In my small way I wanted to capture the joint passion for the subject we both felt, debated and endlessly discussed over a glass of whiskey – very often overlooking Schulphoek bay from his art gallery surrounded by all his military aviation and maritime artworks.
The work in essence was a cathartic experience for me at the difficult time of my Dad’s death as it gave vent to all the knowledge and nuggets of South Africa’s military history imparted to me or inspired by my Dad, and I’m extremely happy to share all his legacy, he would have been pleased as punch with it – there are now 323 stories published, 57 stories currently been ‘polished’ waiting to go and well over 200 more stories in basic draft pending.
Both my Dad and I were Marketing people in our time and The Observation Post can now be found in multimedia, it has a blog with an e-mail subscription, a linked Facebook ‘Page’ (just click like and click the prompts to follow it), a linked Twitter account and even a Facebook ‘Group’ discussion forum were you can interact with me directly and share your own interesting historical nuggets with like-minded people.
Aside from my Dad, ‘Thanks a Million’ to you, all the avid followers of the blog, the readers of the material, it’s your support which keeps it going and it’s your feedback that motivates me to bring more historical nuggets so often gleaned over, written out of the school history books and ignored for political expediency in South Africa.