#107 – Sanders Of The River, Edgar Wallace BOOK REVIEW

November 24, 2018

Sanders of the river

Bad ju-ju, yesterday

I would hazard a guess that one of the most well-documented and blindingly obvious conclusions in the social world is this: don’t let Africans into your country. Look at what it did to the United States. I’m pretty sure if Americans [1] realised just how much damage Africans would do to their country, they’d have picked their own cotton [2]. Britain was severely undermined by the Commonwealth immigration of the 1950s onward, and need I go into the raping/murdering/genital-mutilating recent wave of African savagery to sweep Europe?

So, keep the cunts out.

Don’t let the above tirade be misconstrued as some kind of anti-African sentiment. I’m very much in favour of letting Africans have Africa to themselves without any European meddling, and I think all those doctors, brain surgeons and engineers that the Soros NGOs tell us are in the migrant boats should stay home and Make Africa Great Again.

Anyway, this lead-in brings me to a debate currently raging inside my own head, that of the White Man’s Burden. To what extent does the white man owe his black fellow the benefit of his superior intellect, technology, long time-preference, high-trust organisation, and lack of cannibalism? To wit, civilisation. Is it a good or bad thing that Europe colonised Africa and severely meddled with their customs, law, economy, and borders?

I think we can immediately rule that in the case of Belgium and Germany, the European colonisation of Africa was a very bad thing for the natives. The Huns ran brutal concentration camps, tried to genocide Namibia, and were generally total cunts [3]. The Belgians ran the rubber trade out of Congo and committed the worst atrocities of the lot. I’m not much versed on how the French did in Africa. My guess is they just sat around eating onions and going “ohey ohey ohn”.

Britain did a really good job civilising the Caribbean and India, leaving both areas with a good infrastructure, rule of law, and a quashing of murderous ethnic conflicts. If you are to believe Edgar Wallace’s Sanders Of The River, we did much the same in Africa. So, the obvious question is are we to believe Edgar Wallace?

Well, this gets us into a rather deeper question of epistemology. Who are we to believe? How to we obtain our knowledge of the world?

Ayn Rand fans will immediately jump in and screech [4], “as first-handers!”, to mean we should strive to acquire our knowledge of the world through a direct personal experience of it. I’m inclined to agree. But sitting on my arse in a Macedonian restaurant in 2018 is not a firm base from which to directly experience Africa of the nineteenth century, is it? No, it is not. I must rely on other people’s experience. So, whose?

Lets ask ourselves first, what is the general consensus opinion of Britain’s colonisation of Africa? It’s mostly negative. The standard narrative is that the British Empire was a very bad thing both for its subjects in shithole countries the third world and for the poor working class lads sent overseas to enforce it. We brutalised the natives, plundered their resources, and set them up for misery such that we now thoroughly deserve their descendants invading Europe and raping all our white women. Or something.

That sounds awfully Marxist to me. Wherever you smell the foul odour of Marxism, you know it’s built on a foundation of lies. The popular narrative is pushed by the BBC, academia, and the mainstream media. Therefore we can safely conclude that whatever the truth of the British Empire is, it’s not that.

But who do we believe?

Edgar Wallace was sent out to Africa as an 18yr old reporter on the Second Boer War. He spend considerable time in the Belgian Congo reporting on King Leopold’s atrocities there, and then upon his return to Britain became a novelist. In this sense, Wallace was a first-hander of the British Empire in Africa. He didn’t learn about it from The Morning Star newspaper, or KGB-funded Oxford academics, or the BBC. He was there. He saw it.

Heroes should be tall and handsome, with flashing eyes; Sanders was not so tall, was yellow of face, moreover had grey hair. Heroes should also be of gentle address, full of soft phrases, for such tender women who come over their horizon; Sanders was a dispassionate man who swore on the slightest provocation, and had no use for women anyway.

That’s why Sanders Of The River is so fascinating. It’s a collection of fifteen anecdotes centred around a British administrator in West Africa as he deals with various palavers created by the simple-minded and nefariously mischievous savages under his dominion. He rules an area of 17 tribes of which most stories concern the wickedly warlike Akasava and the comically pacifist Ochori. Some game will be afoot in the jungle and then Sanders heads out in his steamboat (with two maxim guns and an escort of hussar riflemen) to sought it out through craft, force, and deep understanding of local cultures. It’s a surprisingly subtle work which could only have been written by a man with a deep personal experience of Africa.

Sanders is under orders to diffuse war between tribes and suppress tribal practices of murder, sacrifice, and cannibalism. He mostly succeeds, though a few tribal chiefs need to have their necks stretched on nearby trees to ensure this [5].

True to his prearranged scheme, the chief began the inevitable bargaining over terms. The presents offered were too small. The girl was worth a hundred thousand rods – nay, a thousand bags of salt.
“You were mad,” said Sanders calmly; “no woman is worth a thousand bags of salt.”

The stories are all told as if the author was a correspondent relaying each anecdote back to a central authority, such as Wallace himself reporting to his wire service about Sander’s exploits. Tales include a rascal conman Bosambo of Monrovia who lies and schemes his way into becoming king of the Ochori, and Sanders tolerates it in return for Bosambo putting fighting spirit into the previously enfaggoted tribe. There’s a white doctor who goes rogue, running a witch-doctor service to help angry wives poison their husbands. Plus there’s the usual inter-tribal raids for goat- and women-stealing. It’s a colourful cast of characters and considerable variety between the stories.

Considering it was written in 1911, there’s not the slightest political correctness. See here:

Chiefest of the restrictions placed upon the black man by his white protector is that which prevents him, when his angry passions rise, from taking his enemy by the throat and carving him with a broad, curved blade of native make. Naturally, even the best behaved of the tribes chafe under this prohibition the British have made.

There’s lots of paternalism in that quote. But, then again, I used to live by Elephant & Castle so I know what Sanders had to deal with. I thoroughly enjoyed Sanders Of The River and will likely read the next of the eleven Sanders books. It’s so much more believable than all that noble savage nonsense.

If you haven’t yet reported me to the police for hate speech, you’re probably the type who will very much enjoy my memoir series and my daygame textbooks available here.

Sigma Wolf store

[1] And by that I mean actual Americans, i.e. the British, who created the country and everything good about it. Not the Fake Americans of questionable skin colour who carry papers declaring themselves American.
[2] Although the Atlantic slave trade was mostly a Jewish-run scam, so it baffles me why white people feel guilty about it. Or at least I think so. I haven’t bothered looking too deeply into it.
[3] Nothing new there, then.
[4] autistically
[5] A policy I strongly suggest we implement in migrant centres until we have deported them all.


  1. Dude, I missed your pretty face on my screen, lol

    Could you do a seminar, similar to The Womanizer’s Bible, which is all about the boxes you tick when approaching and dating women, and also about setting up the girls so what you want to happen happen? And if a bit more details on Brain Fry with some actual examples, rather than just theory like in Daygame Outlaw, that would make for a great 2019!

  2. Oh dear…

    German and Namibian born here. I guess you are entitled to your opinion about Germans, but I mean seriously.., But I digress. Adding only that the article by Mr Henning Melber comes from the Left that you so despise. Mr Melber chose to return to Europe while presuming to judge those who never will for lack of opportunity, and have to live in a country he chose not to make a home in but expects to heed his contribution to a reconciliation that does not exist and is not Government policy.

    While the Sanders books are humorous, they are dead on about many of the characteristics of the African psyche, to this day. For one: Africa is a violent continent. The South African murder rate is enough that SA in a time of “peace” would be the 5th most dangerous province in the American invasion of Iraq in 1984. Iraq has about 18 provinces, to put this in perspective.

    One profoundly African real life example of the attitude to white mans law and regulations as you quoted:

    My mother used to tell me the story of our garden boy, David, whom she caught running a brothel in the back room of our house for an extra income and who was not fazed in the least that “Miesies” (pronounced Meesees) was angry with him. She kept him on and forgave him. I still have the basket he wove for my mother as a present at my birth.

    The other incident I remember was when she met an old Herero who still remembered German rule and spoke fluent German. This would have been in the late 1950’s

    He told her: “Miesies, I liked the Germans. When I had done something that deserved punishment, such as getting drunk, I would appear in front of the Magistrate immeditately and get six of the best. Now, with the South Africans, if I get caught, they throw me in jail and fine me months later.”

    “He continued: “Miesies, BY THEN I HAVE LONG FORGOTTEN WHAT I DID”.

    So, while anybody reading these books may be tempted at times to think that this is impossible and unbelievable, well, he might not be exaggerating the african attitudes all that much.

    I wholeheartedly recommend these books for exactly the non PC element. [Nice comment. If you have any more good Namibia anecdotes, please share them. K.]

    • I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Nah, actually you will.

      Child slavery in Mauritania.

      Senegalese men fucking old European ladies just for money while spawning children with their Senegalese wives on the side AND not giving them any money. Children are for their mothers tehy say. Sow a coconut wherever you go and you’ll always have a place under the shade. The more coconuts you sow, the more shade will shelter you. Of course they meant having as many children as posible.

      I spoke with Lebanese bussinesmen in Gambia and they told me blacks are just like very big children but with monkey sex drive..and who actually fucked monkeys just to get by

      I ran into a French chef who worked in Gabon in a luxury hotel and he found out customers were complaining about drinks got to them always warm or even hot. What’s going on, the Frenchman wondered? Hotel employees wen to work (always late of course) on bycicle and they didn’t to get robbed by their coworkers, so they stored their bikes INSIDE the cold room. As they saw there wasn’t enough room for their bikes, they started to store the supplies OUTSIDE the cold room. Warm beer was placed under the hot tropical Sun. Mistery solved!

      My father also worked in Africa and in the Caribbean for years, he kept a diary. There are infinite tales like thesel, all them true

  3. testing testing…. ever since i got a wordpress account i’ve had trouble posting comments here 😦

    • i wrote a longer comment that’s not appearing here, and when i try to re-post i get a message “duplicate message detected”

  4. TRY AGAIN “” The standard narrative is that the British Empire was a very bad thing both for its subjects in shithole countries the third world and for the poor working class lads sent overseas to enforce it. We brutalised the natives, plundered their resources, and set them up for misery such that we now thoroughly deserve their descendants invading Europe and raping all our white women. Or something.

    That sounds awfully Marxist to me. Wherever you smell the foul odour of Marxism, you know it’s built on a foundation of lies. The popular narrative is pushed by the BBC, academia, and the mainstream media. “”

    • i’ve often heard this argument, that somehow europe “deserves” being overrun by migrant invaders because of some divine karma, retribution for the (myth of) plundering of third-world resources, and destruction through war. it’s “payback” and we somehow have a responsibility to all of these young men – “well, you bombed syria so you have to make up for it” or some such nonsense. if i ransack and burgle your house i don’t then go on to invite you into my house to eat my food and fuck my wife.
      and what no-one has been able to explain, though, is why it’s being allowed, encouraged, accelerated, while politicians put the fingers in their ears and close their eyes and go ” laa laa laa laa laa laa laa ” “religion of peace” immigration good” “nothing to see here carry on as normal” despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

      • you follow the evidence and go down the rabbit hole and you stumble upon kalergi, and barcelona declaration and so on and so on and it all comes together but nevertheless the question remains, why? how can they continue to insist that it’s for our good with these ridiculous claims, aging population needs replacing no one to do the menial jobs uhmmm what?? gotta take in more take in more take in more … anyone with eyes and ears and a fucking internet connection can see the damage being done by the mono-culturalism of dis-integration

        the world’s gone mad and the shire needs protecting from the invading orcs

      • so i have to post comments in smaller portions. longer comments don’t work. is this a problem just for me? thanks for understanding

  5. I lived in Walworth Rd for a brief time. People making trouble 9 out of 10 times? Black people. Yes, they can.

    Britain gets a bad rep for its Third World former colonies with no reason but to blame Britain for their own lack of will, discipline, know how, work ethic and success. Hey guys, you wanted to split, you managed somehow to do it with Soviet help…You’re on your own!

    The same goes for Spain*. Spain conquered by the sword the biggest part of America, cannibals and stupid cunts they were, the injuns didn’t know how to fight properly and Spaniards did. Then built universities, cathedrals, roads, ports, schools, strongholds, mines and so forth. Alexander Von Humboldt paid a visit to New Spain in 1798, he told it was “the merriest and happiest of all nations” he had seen. That seems a bening rule, right? They fought for their independences anyway and they won them 200 years ago.

    Guess who do South Americans blame for their own failures? Spain! And guess who feels gultiy? Spaniards!

    I answer always the same when Argentinean or Uruguayan girls raise the “you stole our gold” topic. No I didn’t, you’re white, pure Italian&Spaniard stock., your forefathers did and in case I had done it, get over it

    *Any other European country will do, Italy and Libya&Ethiopia, Portugal and Angola, etc, etc

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: