EMPIRE OF DUST – DOCUMENTARY FILM
If you’re building a road in Africa, remember to bring your own gravel. And fuel. And workers.
Empire of Dust is a 2011 Belgian documentary film directed by Bram Van Paesschen. The film provides a raw, observational look at the cultural and logistical clashes occurring during a massive infrastructure project in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Plot and Context
The documentary follows Lao Yang, a Chinese logistics manager for the China Railway Seventh Group (CREC), and Eddy, his Congolese interpreter. They are tasked with rebuilding a 300-kilometer road connecting Kolwezi to Lubumbashi in the Katanga province. The project is part of a “resources for infrastructure” deal where the Chinese government develops Congolese infrastructure in exchange for mineral rights.
The narrative focuses on the daily struggles of the pair as they attempt to procure local supplies—such as gravel and food—amidst failing government deliveries, local corruption, and unmotivated workers. The film highlights the friction between Chinese work ethics and the local Congolese way of life, often described as a tense culture clash free from folklore.
SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS AND BRITAIN
The disadvantages faced by low-IQ tribal peoples who live and think in packs continue when they move to Western countries and take on unskilled or even low-skilled jobs that still require a European mentality to carry out properly. That includes integrity, honesty, responsibility, courtesy, diligence, intellectual curiosity, a willingness to learn and better yourself, and all the other characteristics that we, as Europeans, try to instil in our children, but which are alien to the pack mentality of Africans.
BY SIMON ELMER ON X / READ AND SUBSCRIBE TO SIMON ELMER ON X
Simon Elmer is an author and member of Restore Britain who writes about the UN programme of replacement immigration and the Islamisation of Britain. His content examines racial IQ differences, pack mentality among certain immigrant groups, associated crime patterns, and how EDI policies enable fraud and erode native British institutions and culture. These analyses of deliberate demographic and institutional shifts as tools of societal change would resonate with views of the system operating as a psyop.
As the response to the suicide of Jason Arday has shown, African people are essentially pack animals. That’s not only because, in historical terms, they were the last race to enter into the modern world, but also because the vast majority of them still live in environments in which their safety depends on staying in packs, whether that’s the savannas of Africa or the streets of Baltimore.
“Following the awarding of his fraudulent academic credentials, Jason Arday was appointed to a bewildering succession of positions, including, in 2018, a senior lectureship at the University of Roehampton before he had published a single academic paper; an associate professorship, two years later, at the University of Durham; a professorship, in 2020, at the University of Glasgow; and, finally, a year later, in 2023, a professorship at the University of Cambridge. In a mere five years, therefore, Jason Arday went from an unpublished student to a Professor earning in excess of £100,000/per year at one of the highest-ranked universities in the world.”
Humans evolved to the top of the food chain by hunting in packs, which, along with the weapons they fashioned, allowed them to hunt and defend themselves against far larger and stronger animals. Even today, up to 57% of sub-Saharan Africans still live in rural areas; but the hunters they are threatened by now are less likely to be wild animals and far more likely to be other African tribes. Sub-Saharan Africa has over 3,000 different tribes across 49 countries, which means an average of 60 tribes per country. These have far greater influence on the allegiances of these tribes than ‘national’ identities that were created by Europeans in the late 19th Century.
Some of these tribes are very primitive indeed. The Hadza, for example, are a hunter-gatherer tribe whose ancestors have been living near Lake Eyasi in Northern Tanzania for over 50,000 years and which only made contact with the modern world in the late-19th Century. They communicate through a basic language of tongue clicks, have never developed writing, art, religion or agriculture, and their technology — bows and arrows for hunting and friction to start fires — remains in the Stone Age. The DNA of the Hadza is dominated by Haplogroup B-M60, which originated 100,000 years ago and is found in tribes across sub-Saharan Africa, with the highest frequences in the Hadza (72%) of Tanzania (where the average IQ is 74.95); the Baka tribe (63%) of Gabon and Cameroon (where the average IQ, respectively, is 62.97 and 67.76); the Nuer tribe (52-60%) of Southern Sudan (average IQ of 59.76); as well as in the Congo, Central Africa, Namibia, Tanzania, Cameroon, Gabon, South Africa, Eritrea, Rwanda and Zimbabwe. This should concern us, because these are all countries from which millions of African males are being imported to Britain and across Europe.
The IQ figures on sub-Saharan Africans are from a 2010 article reviewing the data and other studies on IQ, published in Intelligence, a peer-reviewed academic journal and the official organ of the International Society for Intelligence Research. But this data merely corroborates what we already know from our observation and experience of living among Africans. If someone disagrees with this data they should explain why they do and then produce alternative data corroborating their disagreement; but calling it racist because they don’t like what it reveals is not a scientific refutation. Indeed, it itself is characteristic of a low-IQ and inability to comprehend and reason, which is why the vast majority of Africans have responded to the exposure of Jason Arday by calling it racist. But reality cannot be racist, though it certainly can reveal the characteristics of race. The denial of the existence of race as anything more than a social construct by the acolytes of woke is just one example of that ideology’s denial of reality, which extends to the denial of genetic differences between the sexes and a myriad other tenets of woke.
If you think that such cripplingly low IQs are the exception and not the rule, you would be wrong. The average IQ across sub-Saharan Africa is 68. Out of 49 countries, 10 have average IQs below 60, indicating feeble-mindedness. 18 countries have average IQs between 60 and 69, indicative of what in the West is categorised as an intellectual disability. 15 are between 70 and 79, indicative of cognitive impairment, difficulty with learning and abstract thinking. The remaining countries have produced no data. Not one country has an average IQ above 80.
And if you think this disparity is entirely reducible to the radically different environmental conditions between sub-Saharan Africa and the rest of the world, let alone the Western world, once again you would be wrong. The gap continues even among Africans in Western countries, where even generations of improved health, medical, environmental and educational conditions have failed to raise their average IQ to anything approaching that of Europeans. In Europe, the USA and around the Western world, White people have an average IQ of about 100, while Africans in Western countries have an average IQ of about 85, only slightly above the highest average IQ in Africa. Even this is indicative of difficulty in learning skills or graduating from a secondary school or only doing so with low grades. Crucially, if we’re to understand the real cause of low intelligence in Africans, studies show that these racial differences show up before the age of 5 and, most importantly, they last a lifetime.
With such low IQs and the barriers this presents to developing social skills such as organisation, comprehension, communication and concentration on tasks, the safety of the pack becomes even more crucial to the survival of the individual. In contrast to European social structures, which have traditionally been built around the family, the community and the nation, the pack is led by and under the protection of its tribal chief, who in sub-Saharan Africa retains significant control and power, overseeing distribution of land to tribal members, resolving disputes and acting as advocates to national governments.
One of the results of this genetically-determined social structure is the pack mentality. This is different from the herd mentality, since humans are not herbivores but carnivores, and to survive they have to kill. That includes conquering and defending land from rival tribes. And contrary to the belief that men with some of the lowest average IQs in the world — from, for example, Ghana (average IQ of 58.16), Somalia (67.60), Yemen (68.49) or Nigeria (69.48) — magically gain 30-plus IQ points and transform into Europeans the instant they land in Britain, Africans bring their pack mentality with them.
We see this around us every day when we try to interact with Africans. The disadvantages faced by low-IQ tribal peoples who live and think in packs continue when they move to Western countries and take on unskilled or even low-skilled jobs that still require a European mentality to carry out properly. That includes integrity, honesty, responsibility, courtesy, diligence, intellectual curiosity, a willingness to learn and better yourself, and all the other characteristics that we, as Europeans, try to instil in our children, but which are alien to the pack mentality of Africans. For the African, the only way to better yourself is through crime, the violence that requires, and the material rewards it brings right up to the moment, usually in their teenage years, when they are arrested and put in jail.
We see this on the streets of Britain every day. It is rare to see African men, particularly young men, moving about in any smaller social grouping than a gang, which replicates the hunter packs of African tribes. Rarely, for instance, will you see two African men talking in a pub. The same applies to African women, who, if slightly less violent than their male counterparts, make up for it in their behaviour. The British nomenclature for this is ‘anti-social’, but it is more accurately described as the behaviour of pack animals.
Just as indicative of this pack mentality, when an African is forced to leave their home alone — for example, to a job, where they are forced to interact with Britons — they resort to the virtual pack that has been afforded them by modern technology. In the case of males this is the ubiquitous headphones that every African carries around their necks at all times. This allows them to dilute their consciousness of their environment into the primitive beats of their tribal music, which, as often as not, is played so loud that it is inflicted on the rest of us on public transport and every other public place in which we are forced to come into contact with them.
With African women it is the equally ubiquitous smartphone. The first thing an African woman does when she sits down on a bus or train is call a member of her tribe, to whom she speaks throughout the journey in a voice loud enough to be heard by everyone within a fifty-foot radius. And as Britons have been taught by endless repetition, anyone who asks her to speak quietly will be met with a tirade of verbal abuse and even physical violence: for living as she does under the constant threat of attack from rival African tribes, the female of the tribe will as readily attack anyone who threatens her tribal links as the male.
But whether it’s canned music or the endless smartphone conversation, the effect of both is to distract the African from their own thoughts — or, more accurately, from the vacuum where their thoughts should be. When was the last time you saw an African, on a bench, a train, a bus, a cafe, in any public place, who was alone with their thoughts? Like any pack animal separated from its tribe, the lone African feels threatened, isolated, frightened, and, since they have to operate in an alien environment in which they have not evolved and to which they cannot adapt, they take refuge in the distractions of new technologies. Like an idiot child, endless distraction from focus is the focal point of the African mentality.
There’s a by-now well-known documentary called Empire of Dust (2011), which follows the frustrations of a Chinese construction company trying to build a road in the African Republic of the Congo using African workers. The foreman, who reflects throughout the film on the untrustworthiness, laziness, lack of motivation, disregard for the future and drunkenness of the workers, observes that the Africans have well-developed physiques to make up for their underdeveloped brains. Not being indoctrinated by woke as his European counterpart would be, he explains this in terms we should listen to if we want to overcome such indoctrination. Whereas every other race has adapted their environment to their needs, Africans, he said, have adapted themselves to their environment, which in the case of Africa is a harsh and dangerous land populated by primitive tribes of low-IQ humans.
One of the results of this is that sub-Saharan Africa has some of the most violent countries in the world. Zimbabwe (6.76 murders per 100,000 in 2022) has nearly six times the homicide rate of the UK (1.148 per 100,000). Nigeria has nineteen times our homicide rate (21.741 per 100,000 in 2019), the 20th highest rate in the world. And as no-one who lives in London with its annual carnival of stabbing in Notting Hill will be surprised to hear, Jamaica’s homicide rate is a barely credible 46.5 times that of the UK (49.299 per 100,000), the highest in the world. The same differences apply to crime in general, with Zimbabwe at 60.7 per 100,000 (the 25th highest in the world), Nigeria 66.6 (the 11th highest), and Jamaica 67.4 (the 9th highest).
And just as with their pack mentality, Africans who have emigrated to Britain have brough these crime levels with them. In March, 2024, African prisoners made up 12% of prisoners in Britain, three times their 4% share of the population. Africans in the UK are 2.2 times as likely to be arrested as Britons, 2.4 times for African men over British men. In the year to March 2023, an astonishing 3.8 percent of African men (43,677 individuals) in Britain were arrested. This means that, out of every 105 African men in Britain, 4 were arrested in just one year. With the huge numbers of Africans let into the country every year since, these numbers can only have got worse.
But we can see the pack mentality of Africans in more than the crime statistics the UK Government has stopped publishing because they shone too bright a light on the African propensity for crime. X is awash, at the moment, with smartphone footage of British men and women either being attacked by Africans or fighting back against them. As has been widely pointed out, the Africans are invariably in packs, in which they attack individual White people, man or woman, boy or girl. One very rarely sees a single African attacking a single Briton. One could call this cowardice, and it is; but more accurately it derives from the environmental conditions in which the genetic code of Africans developed over millions of years, and which, as the Chinese foreman observed, has not adapted to the modern world.
What has been less noticed is that, on the rare occasion when the situation is reversed, and a group of British men have attacked a single African man, usually because he has been, for example, masturbating in front of British children, or sexually harassing or assaulting a British woman, or stealing food from a British shop, or snatching a handbag or phone from a British passerby, or riding his bicycle on its back wheel into British people — or any one of the hundreds of other primitive, anti-social, adolescent, pack mentality behaviours inflicted on us by Africans — any African man who passes by on the street or in the park, on the bus or train or wherever else, invariably comes to the rescue of his fellow African.
This is not always the case, and especially not among the more primitive youths who make up the African gangs in Britain, who are as likely to watch and film the fight on their smartphones or even to join in the beating. But among older Africans, males and females, they are likely to defend their fellow African. We see the same behaviour in, for example, a pack of hyenas who come to the rescue of an individual hyena that has been attacked by a lion. They do so because, if they do not, any one of them can be picked off and killed by the far stronger predator. And like the Africans in Britain, they only attack the animals on which they prey when there are far more of them.
In contrast to this pack mentality, British people — or, more accurately, White people in general — have lost this pack mentality. The benefit of this is that our average IQs are an astonishing 32 points higher than the average sub-Saharan African, and a still hugely significant 15 points higher than the African immigrants to Western countries. This means we don’t live in tribes in environmental conditions to which we have to adapt. Instead, we have developed art, religion, philosophy, science, culture, societies, law, technology, civilisation — everything that Africans, after 5,000 years of civilisation, have failed to create.
But there is a downside to this individuality. Under the policy of replacement migration designed to destroy our culture, civilisation and race, Britons, like all Europeans, indeed like the White race in all Western countries, no longer live in civilised societies. We live, instead, among pack animals who prey on us with a pack mentality. It is quite clear by now that our women and children have been sacrificed to the lusts of the packs of African men we have paid to bring here. Equally, our men are being immiserated and expropriated of everything our communities and nations built over thousands of years. And we are ill equipped to defend ourselves against the laughing hyenas who surround us on every side.
What one also sees is that, on the rare occasions when British men stand up for themselves and discover some of the survival instinct that has been bred, indoctrinated and legislated out of us since the Second World War and physically defend our women and children, or even ourselves, from the African packs — as quickly as a passing African steps in to defend their fellow pack animal, a British man will step in to break up the fight. In contrast, a pack of Africans will happily and gleefully beat an unconscious British man to a bleeding pulp, leaping high into the air in order to land on his head with force sufficient to kill him. Just like a pack of hyenas around a lone lion.
Even worse than these British peacemakers are British women who invariably pull their husbands or boyfriends off a man who, as often as not, the man is defending her from. As we all know, the most degenerate form of this behaviour is in the British liberal women who exhibit far more sympathy for, and indeed sexual attraction to, Africans who, without the British men to defend them, would rape and murder them and think as little of it as the hyena does of the female gazelle he and his fellow hyenas hunts down and kills.
Why is this important? Well, at the last count, which is already out of date, there are around 675,000 Nigerians, 250,000 Somalis, 200,000 Ghanaians, 200,000 Zimbabweans, 50,000 Sudanese and thousands of other sub-Saharan Africans living, at our expense, in Britain, the vast majority of whom have come here since 2021. In addition, there are also 1.2 million Caribbeans who have been here for longer, but who retain the pack mentality of their African genetics and tribal cultures.
As we see in the daily fights on our streets and park between gangs of Jamaicans, Somalis, Zimbabweans and Nigerians armed with machetes and other weapons from their African tribal lands, and who are themselves divided by tribe and religion and other primitive divisions that should be of no concern to us but now are, the tribal mentality and the violence it brings is being imported into and spread across Britain. In other words, it is we, the British, who are having to adapt now to this primitive and violent environment, rather than they, the Africans, who do not know how to adapt to Western civilisation and have no intention of doing so. Indeed, they have been brought here not for the skills they do not have, the intelligence they lack or the education wasted on them, but for their propensity for violence, rape and murder, in which Africans, no matter what country they live in, lead the world. They have been brought here, in other words, to destroy Britain and its native population.
We would be wrong, therefore, in thinking that the generation or two that Caribbeans have lived in Britain has magically rid them of their pack mentality. This week, thousands of Africans in Britain have taken to social media or attended a farcical vigil in Trafalgar Square to accuse us, the native people of Britain, Europeans, White people in general, of killing their hero, Jason Arday. The fact that, like Chris Kaba or, in the USA, George Floyd and Rodney King, he was a criminal — a more sophisticated criminal, certainly, whose crimes were fraud rather than armed robbery and attempted murder, but still a criminal — hasn’t deterred the Africans in Britain from rushing to his defence.
Like the African passersby who defend their fellow African no matter whom they may have stabbed, stolen from or sexually assaulted, Africans, whether senior academics, lawyers and politicians or the endlessly offended talking heads in our media, have all, without exception, defended their fellow hyena. This has not been done on the basis of any reason that we, as Europeans, recognise, such as accountability for his crimes, or his responsibility for the children he defrauded of their money and education, or our rationality in considering the evidence for both, or equality of opportunity and justice regardless of race, or any of the other principles of European civilisation. The defence of yet another African criminal who has been turned into a hero and martyr by his fellow Africans has been launched on the primitive instincts of pack animals. Truth, for the pack animal, doesn’t exist: there is only ‘my truth’, that which defends the pack and kills its prey.
The more pack animals that we appoint, under Equity, Diversity and Inclusion criteria, to positions of influence and authority over us, as Jason Arday had over the students and journalists he threatened with the police for questioning his fraud, the more we will turn Britain, Europe and the West into countries ruled by the pack mentality of Africans. And as this pack mentality takes over Britain, more Britons will join with it. Indeed, far from African immigrants being integrated into and becoming civilised by British culture and society, we are becoming Africanised. The fact that there were almost as many Britons in Trafalgar Square as there were Africans, that it was a Briton who angrily proclaimed that White people should not speak or have any opinion because we are White, and that they joining in the defence of yet another African criminal for his crimes, is the appalling realisation of this programme of social cretinisation and racial degeneration for which Jason Arday was the poster boy.
Like the statues in Trafalgar Square, we are still, for the moment but only just, individual lions. But in Britain we have lost our pride, and the hyena packs are growing every day. Be in no doubt, when they outnumber us sufficiently, they will tear us to pieces. The vigil in Trafalgar Square is the proof and promise of that.
