apartheid

Dear libtards, aren’t you attracted by Zimbabwe?

Dear libtards,

Every other week, someone of your persuasion, either a feminist or antiracist or a professor of whiteness studies or cultural Marxist writes an open letter starting with “Dear white people”, containing a blast of inanities.

This seems to be some kind of fashion or trend, probably copied from someone in the USA or Great Britain. It is not that you have any appreciation for the open letter or all those European philosophical treatises (or novels even) utilising the epistolary form. After all, libtardism starts where Westernism of Europeanism leaves off. As Jakes Gerwel, after whom a boulevard has just been renamed in Cape Town by the DA in all its politically correct fervour, once said: “We need an African renaissance. The only outcome of the European one was apartheid.”

Dante, Michelangelo, German Idealism, the French philosophes, Baroque art, Beethoven and Mozart, all of that stuff is quite worthless to you as you are dedicated precisely to putting an end not only to all white culture but to the white race itself. Reading the nonsensical obituaries to André Brink, or André P. Brink as he is known in Afrikaans, these last few days, I am struck by the fact that no-one had enquired why he had had, not only countless mistresses and six wives, but six white wives. Does that not, by definition — and from the libtard perspective — make him a racist? After all, there are tens of millions of women of colour in this country, of various sizes and shapes, not to mention nationalities. Surely, if he had been a sincere libtard himself, as he so often professed to be, he would have found at least one of them who struck his fancy? Instead, he stuck to his own race, the much-maligned white race, and committed marriage no less than six times with a woman that the American system labels “Caucasian”. Not Asian, Caucasian. And with a person of the opposite sex, whereas he might very well have married someone of his own sex, desire being polymorphously perverse as Freud and many of his more hip followers have stated so often.

That leads me to my first gripe with you libtards who insist on polluting the airwaves and the newspaper columns – you seem to have a complete monopoly on what is known as the MSM or “mainstream media” – with your righteous appeals for more affirmative action, more “transformation”, more equality, more censorship of dissident opinions, more punishment for the racists and the politically incorrect, and more lenient treatment of the criminals who terrorise us here in South Africa: why do you not practise what you preach? Why do all you libtards live in majority-white or middle-class areas with private security guards, armed response and all the unnecessary and “paranoid” accoutrements of “privatised apartheid” as many of you have called it? Why do you not live in all those interesting, colourful – not to forget “vibrant” – communities whose virtues you extol in all of your litanies against racism, sexism, patriarchy and whiteness? Places that go by the names of Soweto, Alexandra, Diepsloot, the same Diepsloot about which the “doyen of South African journalism, professor Anton Harber” wrote an eponymous eulogy in book form?

Or is hypocrisy, like “non-racialism”, “non-sexism”, “non-genderism” and all the other non-creeds you cite ad nauseam, a basic tenet of libtardism? For example, some American study found that 96% of liberal journalists lived in majority-white areas. I still remember that Mad Max du Preez, the renegade Afrikaner and fanatical libtard, exhorted all whites to go and live in the black townships about fifteen years ago in the Rapport. Alas, Max himself never set the example. So what is this, are all libtards… God forbid, racist? But don’t sell your house in Parkhurst or your equally cosy little flat in Sea Point yet, I have a much better idea which should become clearer in a moment.

Let’s admit it: South Africa is a divided country and getting more divided by the day. Compounding the already strong ethnic and linguistic divisions in South Africa, is the ideological division. It used to be Left-Right, but nowadays I would call it Libtard-Normal. I know, I know, I have read Michel Foucault, in French to boot, and a few of his American disciples, so I know that normality or being normalised is a very bad thing. Being a scizophrenic or a car hijacker is so much better than being an accountant with a nine-to-five job and firmly heterosexual tendencies. As some author said not so long ago on television in Paris: “I’m white, heterosexual and Catholic. How horrible!” Normality, middle-class values, conservatism, the nuclear family, of all that stuff, it’s nothing less than a disease. And the cure is libtardism or amoral fundamentalism, the constant din of proselytising near-hysteria screamed at us every day. Racist! Sexist! Apartheid nostalgist! And all the other epithets and insults you constantly hurl at us.

This is purely an aside and please do not take it seriously. (On the other hand, I know that you never take seriously anything said by anyone other than a fellow convert, someone of the faith, a coreligionist in libtardism.) But most religions, at least until now, have tried to get converts by being nice to people, giving them a free meal or helping the poor. In our crumbling state hospitals there are Muslim women wearing head scarves and handing out sandwiches to everyone as a sign of their faith and their values, for example. However, libtardism is the only creed I know of where its adherents try to win the heathen masses over by making them feel bad about themselves, by insulting them, slandering them, calling them stupid oafs, fascists, racists, and so on. So even if you are by some miracle making converts, you are making at least as many enemies and I can assure you that most of us normal people are starting to get really irritated with you. If only we were so cruel, reactionary and dangerous as you make us out to be, we would long ago have posted a few snipers outside the offices of your newspapers or hidden in the trees on your sidewalk and at least silenced some of the most strident and hysterical warmongers among you.

But we are tolerant, unlike you. Which is why South Africa is in the mess it is in. Because for too long the libtard in his position of power in the media or the academy or in the more ideological departments of Big Business, has been getting away with murder, sometimes literally. The libtard or the Marxist view of South African history with its simplistic notions of “stolen land”, “white evil” and the “apartheid holocaust” in itself leads to revenge and violence.

While most conservatives have to work for a living, you libtards spend your days in cafés or in luxury hotels where you may be seen typing away on your brand-new Apple Powerbook i7’s obligingly provided by some educational institution or NGO. That is another amazing characteristic of libtards: while they profess an abhorrence of capitalism, they are slaves to brands and look down upon us non-Apple-owning plebs who vulgarly buy PC components, including second-hand ones, to build our own no-name-brand machines, powered by open-source software that require right-wing skills such as a basic knowledge of Unix commands to operate. Libtards know something about the differentiations between Hegelian and structural Marxism, but have no notion whether their motherboards have Intel 1150 or 1155 sockets. Apart from PC slogans which you learn off by heart, ignorance is bliss in your libtard world.

Probably most people in this country would just like to get on with their lives, have a job, raise children, watch or play a bit of sport without racial quotas. But thanks to your zeal and fanaticism, no normal society in South Africa is possible anymore. Like in the former Soviet Union, Mao’s China or Castro’s Cuba, everything is now subject to social engineering, bureaucratic oversight, political correctness and control. The tragicomic demise of Zelda La Grange who had tried for years to speak and act like a libtard, carrying her white guilt on her sleeve, is a case in point. The soupçon of being politically incorrect in a Tweet sealed her fate and led to an outburst of libtard rage, exemplified by the usual shrieks of “racism”, “whiteness” and the two or three other concepts that libtardism deems to be sinful and evil. Sniffing out the impure ones is of course part of every revolution and in South Africa the process is getting more and more intense.

That is why South Africa is bound to end up on the scrapheap as just another African basket case, a Mozambique after Samora Machel’s Marxist-Leninist revolution or the post-Mobutu DRC. As I tweeted the other day to Helen Zille who has herself become a freedom fighter of libtardism, shooting her paint gun with the word “racist” appearing all around her as in some cartoon world, South African now runs on ideology. No matter what happens to Eskom, to the economy, to law and order, the price of food and energy, everything pales into insignificance next to the exigencies of revolution, transformation and egalitarianism.

I am less worried by an imminent ethnic conflict than by violence breaking out between libtards and normal people. The intolerance of you libtards toward dissent is stoking real tension. This is especially the case among Afrikaners. The last time there was a minor Boer civil war was in 1860 when forty people died in a shoot-out on the outskirts of Potchefstroom. The incident was to haunt Paul Kruger for years as he had to to give the order to return fire after the first shots were fired by the rebels. Afrikaans libtards are even worse than the anglophone variety: people like Adriaan Basson, Max du Preez and Piet Croucamp harbour such an intense hatred towards the conservative majority of Afrikaners that they are intent upon destroying the few remaining Afrikaans institutions, including schools and universities, that still enable Afrikaners to survive in a hostile, charged environment. Being the most dominated ethnic group in South Africa, the libtard-normal division there is at its most intense, exemplified by banning our most popular singer, Steve Hofmeyr, from arts festivals and the general imposition of censorship on dissidents, the suppression of their books and articles, attacks (including cyberattacks) on their websites, witchhunts at work, etc. So the prospect of an identity war among Afrikaners is not as far-fetched as it may sound, which might ultimately drag the rest of South Africa down with it.

At a certain level, you libtards hate South Africa. You have always hated our country and were happiest when you could call for boycotts against us and could plant car bombs in our streets or shrapnel bombs in our restaurants. So this kind of uneasy peace does not sit well with you. Little by little, you are realising that the country will never change, that people are set in their habits and cling to their traditions like you cling to your vacuous belief system.

Your ideal for South Africa is a kind of New York on the Vaal where everybody is a gay or transgender communist living off Scandinavian aid or World Bank loans and most of the economic activity consists of diversity workshops for which you libtards will claim fees big enough to drive Range Rover Sports. In this libtard utopia Marx and Engels will meet Goldman Sachs and everybody will live off zero-interest perpetual bonds and members of the nomenklatura will lord it over the equalised, non-racial, non-sexist masses who will be largely illiterate and believe everything you say.

It must be clear to you that this utopia is never going to happen. Public debts, like the body count due to the breakdown of law and order, are mounting. The middle class that you wanted to destroy is resisting by inventing their own virtual society on social media and the internet. Dare I remind you that large numbers of people are talking back to you, the sacerdotal class of the revolution, our lords whose wisdom we are not supposed to question?

A divided house cannot stand, as they say. If South Africa is to escape the current quagmire, something needs to happen. Either you should go the tried and trusted route of the left-wing revolutionary and commit genocide against us by rounding us all up, working us to death in gulags or simply shooting everyone suspected of questioning your precepts, or you should give up on the idea of “transforming” South Africa altogether. Given your libtard capacity for organisation and the current state of your military, if I were you, I would not opt for civil war against the millions of remaining conservatives, Afrikaners, traditional Africans and others who are still ideologically very impure, to the point of being racists, sexists or at least irredeemably politically incorrect.

However, a solution is at hand, I believe. There is one country in Southern Africa where the struggle for equality, non-racialism and non-sexism has been largely achieved: Zimbabwe. Comrade Robert Mugabe has indeed eradicated whiteness in most of its forms, literally by removing all white farmers and imposing a strict “indigenisation” policy. On the debit side, Zimbabwe is not exactly a model of enlightenment when it comes to “gender” and I doubt whether American-style “queer theory” is yet a compulsory subject at the University of Harare. But no society is perfect. The challenge for you libtards is to “move” the Zimbabwean transformation project “forward”, as you are wont to put it and “challenge the last vestiges of patriarchy” which may or may not remain in that otherwise “progressive” country.

“Thy hinterland lies there” as the inscription reads on the Rhodes statue in Rondebosch, next to the University of Cape Town where large numbers of fanatical libtards labour in the politically correct monasteries for a better world without race, sex or social hierarchy.

Soon Mr. Mugabe may pass the baton to his wife, Grace, which will in itself cheer the feminists of the world, including the South African ones who would be delighted to go and serve a female president. Why commit to an unlikely quest for utopia in the land of apartheid, gated communities, rugby, koeksisters, boerewors and Die Stem when you could experience the instant bliss of liberation in an already “postcolonial” society?

Ja, man, you must have noticed that one. As Saul Bellow says somewhere in his novel Herzog, “the word sensibility later made it big”. That was in the USA. Among South African libtards, “postcolonial” has made it big. I would say it is even compulsory to use it all the time, just like you have to be quick on the draw in crushing any dissent out there by shouting “racist” with a megaphone or preferably on the eight o’clock TV news.

Just imagine. If Bob had to go and meet his maker at last and Grace had to succumb to the charms of her own sex and perhaps become Zimbabwe’s first openly gay president, it could be libtard heaven. Sexism, racism and whiteness would all have been vanquished and the entire Zimbabwean economy could consist of transgender or postcolonial advocacy groups spreading the good news on a planetary scale. Sweden and Norway would provide most of the state budget and Oxfam would dish out free food, paid for by private British and other donors. Not to forget the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Everyone would drive around in black Range Rovers running on a Chinese energy subsidy as Harare would now be the intellectual capital of Africa, nay the world, with so many self-proclaimed libtard genii assembled in one city. In fact, many foreign governments would compete to donate money to Zimbabwe which would consist of one gigantic network of ultraliberal and Marxist NGOs, media and universities where all departments except Whiteness, Gender and Postcolonialism would be abolished.

No self-respecting libtard would want to share a country with Steve Hofmeyr anyway. This place is only worth boycotting or fleeing from, blighted as it is by 360 years of apartheid and colonialism. As Allister Sparks put it, he is “ashamed of his nationality”. Aren’t you?

Not only shall we at last enjoy some kind of social peace and no-one on crack cocaine would hoot at you in the morning traffic screaming “you racist, sexist bastard” anymore, but north of the Limpopo a truly new, exciting society will be flourishing. The UN will consecrate Harare as the permanent home of the World Conference Against Racism that last took place – ironically – in Durban, a city divided along race and class lines. Property prices will go through the roof as libtards from South Africa and all over the world will scramble to stake a claim in Harare like the hippies once descended on San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district.

South Africa would avoid the fate of Syria with a potential libtard-normal civil war breaking out and Zimbabwe would gain thousands of postcolonial, postracial, postgender, post-anything people with high self-esteem and global media connections.

Sounds like a win-win situation to me, don’t you think?

Follow @danroodt

French prime minister wants to heal ‘apartheid’ in his country

France’s prime minister is launching a new bid to heal what he called a nation fractured between haves and have-nots, after terrorist attacks exposed long-simmering discrimination and social and religious tensions.

Manuel Valls shocked many this week by referring to a “territorial, social, ethnic apartheid” in the suburbs, or “banlieues,” ringing France’s major cities, where neglected housing projects are home mainly to minorities with immigrant roots.

Valls is holding a special government meeting Thursday to address the problem. His proposals will not be the first.

France’s suburbs have haunted French leaders for at least 25 years. Long havens for drug-dealing and other crimes, they took on new visibility with the attacks this month by French Islamic radicals who had lived in such neighborhoods. Twenty people, including the gunmen, were killed.

Zuma reiterates that Eskom’s problems are the fault of whites and ‘apartheid’

President Jacob Zuma used the ANC’s January 8 birthday rally to absolve his government from responsibility of the energy crises gripping the country, according to reports from the ANC shindig in Cape Town.

Zuma told over 50 000 of ANC supporters gathered at the Green Point Stadium on Saturday that “the ANC government should not feel guilty for the lack of power in the country”.

“The energy problem is not our problem today. It is a problem of apartheid which we are resolving,” he said.

Zuma reaffirmed comments he made in the past that apartheid was responsible for the rolling blackouts affecting the country.

“The reality is that we are dealing with the legacy of apartheid, which was skewed to deal with the minority and not the majority,” the president said.

Once upon a time, under National Party rule, South Africa had the cheapest power in the world, with excess production exported or sold at risible rates to aluminium smelters. Yet yesterday the country had to contend with a new round of “load shedding” as the state utility Eskom ran out of electricity again. The power utility said it was due to “high electricity demand and the unavailability” of some generating units. Stage one allows for up to 1 000MW of the national load to be shed, stage two for up to 2 000MW and stage three for up to 4 000MW.

Eskom has been fanatical about affirmative action and has laid off scores of white engineers, leaving the company without engineering and financial expertise but with high-salaried affirmative-action freeloaders.

“When commentators comment on energy they forget this (that apartheid was responsible for the lack of energy). They want to put the blame on the democratic government,” said Zuma.

The Mail & Guardian reported on Friday that Eskom would run out of money by the end of January.

However, Zuma refuses to shoulder any blame for the electricity mess in South Africa.

“The ANC government is accelerating the pace to bring the Medupi and Kusile power stations onto the grid and we are licensing independent power producers,” he said.

“We continue to evaluate options to maximise our energy mix including coal, gas, nuclear, solar and renewables,” he added.

A nuclear plan has also been announced by Zuma.

“The ANC is therefore putting energy as one of our apex priorities,” he said.

‘Monopoly capital’
Zuma’s speech focussed on the Freedom Charter, a Marxist document drawn up by Rusty Bernstein and others in 1955 and has since served as a central party manifesto to both the Communist Party and the ANC. He warned against monopoly capital:

“We must break the stranglehold of monopoly capital on our economic development. It is imperative that the Competitions Commission continues to address monopolistic, collusive and anti-competitive behaviour and become even bolder in their preventative and punitive measures.”

Zuma’s statements on the economy were warmly received by the Communist Party and its main trade union, Cosatu.

Cosatu President Sdumo Dlamini said he was “satisfied that the president raised the debate of racial transformation in the financial sector”.

“But it will remain a speech if there is no implementation,” he added.

Zuma wants banking to become more affordable too.

“Banking has become much more accessible to the majority of South Africans, but the excessive bank charges and fees mean that many people still cannot afford bank services,” he said.

The ANC is also preparing to implement a Zimbabwe-style “land reform” in South Africa, pushing white farmers off the land.

“We commit that the land will be returned to our people and the ANC calls on its government to act with the necessary speed to put the legislation in place, this year, to ensure that this happens.”

South African beaches more segregated than ever: claim

The South African Sunday Times has done a “snap survey” and found that “a quarter of a century after beach apartheid was scrapped, South Africa’s bathing spots are still mainly segregated”. The newspaper says that “most lovers still flock to beaches “assigned” to them during apartheid, when the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act decreed separate beaches for “whites” and “nonwhites”.

No whites enjoying the sea, sun and surf in Durban.

Self-segregation has now become the norm and whites, especially, carefully select their swimming spots so as to avoid other races. “I just don’t enjoy it when there are blacks or coloureds around,” said one beachgoer in Cape Town. “Too much noise, no manners, and even hygiene issues.”

Property values in the Strand, on the outskirts of Cape Town, have dropped because the beach is now perceived as a “coloured” (mixed-race) beach while it was previously frequently mainly by white Afrikaners.

In Cape Town, while Clifton’s trendy Clifton 3rd and 4th beaches remain largely white, beaches at Camps Bay, Muizenberg and Noordhoek are “well integrated”, according to the Sunday Times.

The VreesloosAfrikaans.com website last week posted a photograph on its Facebook page of a crowded Durban beach.

This picture was captioned with the hashtag #KryDieDoom (get the Doom), referring to the insecticide.

Comments under this photograph included Annemarie Booysen’s “Ek wens ek was ‘n haai! [I wish I were a shark].”

“Waar is ‘n tsunami as jy hom nodig het? [Where is a tsunami when you need it?]…. Lol,” wrote Janine Crous.

However, not all beachgoers believe South Africa is still mired in the past. Visits to several top beaches revealed a variety of opinions on the subject.

At Umhlanga Rocks north of Durban, Shelley Mzobe said people on the beach were “nicely mixed”.

“All the people are here, black, white, Indian and coloured. There are no problems. We are all having fun.”

A Phoenix resident on North Beach said: “You see different colours of people here. Fifty years ago, this wasn’t the case. We’ve come a long way.”

But while people of various race groups walked the promenade, a sun lover from Cato Manor said he preferred to visit beaches further out where there were fewer people. “If we go to the beach it’s mainly in Umhlanga or La Mercy because it’s cleaner. I don’t see much of a mix here [central Durban]. It feels very one-sided being here now. In the past it was the whites who came here, now it’s the blacks. We don’t fit in.”

At Clifton, one of the few black people soaking up the sun was Vusi Mkhatshwa from Mpumalanga. He said he chose Clifton because “it’s safe, there are no sharks and it’s not that busy”.

Conny Maphagela from Johannesburg was also happy with the beach, but said that she was the only black person.

“I’ve been to Dolphin beach at Blouberg [Table View]. I like it here. It’s mainly white, mainly men. But I don’t have a problem with it.”

Ebrahim Essop from Johannesburg said the beach was “a nice place to relax”, but there was not much diversity.

“I look around, and I’m the only person who looks like me. Durban is more mixed,” he said.

Whites also complain about lifeguards, where affirmative-action has seen to it that most lifeguards are now black. “They just sit around and do nothing. It isn’t like in the old days when lifeguards were constantly on the look-out for swimmers that might get into trouble, or who issued shark warnings when necessary,” said one Durbanite who “would not be caught dead going to the main beaches”.

Jim Scown, a lifeguard from the UK, who has been in Cape Town for four weeks, said the lack of diversity could be for economic reasons. “There are wealthy people here. And you’ve got the expensive property around. Most people here are tourists,” he said.

On the other side of the city, at Monwabisi beach on False Bay, Khayelitsha mother of three Sindi Pakade said she loved visiting the beach.

“It’s safe. There’s the pool for the kids. And it’s close by. Last week, I was in Muizenberg and there was no parking,” she said.

Khaya Nyenga said he chose Monwabisi for its convenience – it was closer to his home and had more parking.

But Monwabisi was mainly black, and he preferred the diversity at other beaches.

“In Strand there’s a big mix. That’s why I like it. You see different people. For me, that’s good.”

Nathi Sotsepo and friend Ruza Sasanti said they were happy with the diversity at Monwabisi.

“There are more blacks than coloureds. There’s no problem for us. It’s between the whites and the blacks that there’s a problem,” she said.

The City of Cape Town’s director of sports, recreation and amenities, Gert Bam, said the city was committed to connecting communities through a reliable, affordable and safe public transport system.

“Cape Town is home to over 240km of coastline, which means that most communities are situated in close proximity to beaches. However, it is important to consider the relative proximity to poorer communities of those beaches that boast amenities and enhanced service provision, such as lifesaving services,” Bam said.

Lifeguards were deployed at sites with the most beach users. “The city relies on aerial photography to gain a sense of which beaches are most popular and on which days,” Bam said.

South African Institute of Race Relations spokeswoman Mienke Steytler blamed continued segregation on apartheid spatial planning.

“When cities were developed back in the day when all these [apartheid] laws were in place, they were developed specifically to separate people,” she said.

“We are now sitting with the consequences.”

Apartheid will never die because the Left needs it

On New Year’s eve, the acrimonious tone of South African public debate seems to have become even more pronounced. Just yesterday another stereotypical cultural-Marxist piece by Professor Anton van Niekerk appeared in Afrikaans on the Netwerk24 site and already conservatives are up in arms regarding his defence of permanent affirmative action and half-truths about “apartheid”, with at least three substantial responses in less than 24 hours.

Even gracing the exchange of accusations, recriminations and the perennial whipping out of the race card in South Africa with the noble term, “debate”, represents a malapropism. Under left-wing, racially-obsessed government, South Africa has descended into witch hunts, invective and farce with even our venerable parliament that used to command respect in the old days now becoming a theatre of puerile, hysterical and often physical clashes. Whereas before South Africa was caricatured as a citadel of moral rectitude and Sunday observance, not to mention strict obedience to the law, it is now the most violent country in the world with at least 50 000 homicides taking place every year. Theft and robberies are so commonplace nowadays that they are no longer reported to the police, except where insurance companies require it for claims.

Whoever may be in charge in South Africa – and it is certainly not our incompetent, venal government mired in corruption scandals – must be desperate to defend un unworkable system. That is why the mantra of “apartheid” is being recited with ever greater fervour by the Marxist and liberal Left in this country. Apartheid, or “separate development” as the old government used to call it, is not only a divine or occult source of evil that perdures in the present but also a deus ex machina conveniently invoked to explain every instance of political failure. When the lights went off due to the incompetence of our state-owned electricity utility, financially plundered and abused by greedy, corrupt bureaucrats, the state president was quick to invoke “the legacy of apartheid”.

It gets worse. There is now such a thing as “apartheid denial”, of which both Steve Hofmeyr and I will soon be accused in a court of law, no less. Apartheid has another useful function: it justifies censorship and the suppression of facts about the present communist-inspired catastrophe known as the “New South Africa”. We all know what the “new” looks like after revolution, if we recall the French, Russian, Chinese, Cambodian and other revolutions. Apparently, a group of left-wing lawyers in Johannesburg from the firm Webber Wentzel have decided that no-one will be allowed to voice any opinion or cite any facts about history before 1994 without first putting it through the cultural-Marxist filter and making sure it embellishes their preposterous tale of pristine black innocence and white evil.

Helen Zille, the left-liberal leader of the “official opposition” in parliament – in South Africa you have a choice between voting liberal, Marxist or lunatic-Marxist – subtly blames whites for the post-1994 explosion of violence in South Africa when she says:

We must show the courage to challenge any social reinforcement for racist behaviour, because small acts of intolerance have the potential to manifest in more despicable acts of aggression and degradation as we see all too often.

When a blacks torture or hurt whites, even a baby as was recently reported by the Beeld newspaper, whites are to blame. That is the gist of Zille’s and cultural-Marxist discourse in South Africa. And if you question that dogma, as some of us are wont to do, you are an ogre, a racist, an “apartheid denialist” in the language of Webber Wentzel’s band of legal inquisitors.

What Zille understands under “challenge” is a euphemism for vilification, censorship and persecution. If you deviate from the cultural-Marxist canon of South African history, you will be fined, imprisoned or both. That is what is being planned for us and Zille’s “liberal” DA – which has of course as little to do with classical liberalism as Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge had to do with democracy – will support these draconian measures to suppress our free speech.

However, at least one or two liberals are starting to see that the cultural-Marxist insistence on a pervasive, ubiquitous notion of “metaphysical apartheid” may not ultimately serve their cause. About ten days ago in the Business Day newspaper, Hans Pienaar wrote that the overuse of the term “apartheid” by his fellow liberals and leftists has now become counter-productive:

But the fact is “apartheid” has become just another “big word”, a tool that is now too blunt and bent for useful analysis.

While it can still serve as a label for tourists and campaigners, it narrows the debate too much and its ambiguities allow all its beneficiaries, white and black, to get off the hook of their conscience.

Whatever that last phrase might mean. Perhaps it is an oblique reference to white guilt, but he seems to open the door to black guilt too, which would in itself constitute a heresy that could land him in the “apartheid denial” court with me and Steve Hofmeyr soon.

In my Afrikaans novel Moltrein the narrator remarks somewhere that the word “apartheid” has been emblazoned on the globe like a gargantuan graffito, which will forever disturb meanings in South Africa. In a way, Pienaar is vaguely – and belatedly – cottoning on to that calamitous inheritance of decades of leftist propaganda and stereotyping.

To analyse history and to cite certain unpalatable facts, e.g. that no-one ever “withheld education from blacks”, is to stand accused of Orwellian thoughtcrime and “apartheid denialism” that Webber Wentzel’s lawyers want to equate to “holocaust denial” which must be similarly banned by means of German-style legal punishments for the crime of “denialism”.

In Anton van Niekerk’s article, which was published in its longer form in a peer-reviewed journal, no less, he states:

While white people in right-wing circles fulminate about smart, white youngsters who may no longer obtain easy admission to fields of study like medicine, we forget far too quickly that until relatively late in the 20th century black people did not have access to any South Africa university, let alone medicine. (My translation from the original Afrikaans – DR)

This is, of course, an outright lie. But the cultural-Marxist myth of “apartheid” as pure white evil has been so well-established in the media and at the universities that few would dare to challenge such a statement. However, the mood of the “white man in the street” or especially the white in front of his keyboard has soured to such an extent that policing “apartheid denialism” is becoming a well-nigh impossible task, as evidenced by the myriad of irate responses to Van Niekerk’s article.

For example, writing on the commentary section of Afrikaans praag, Joseph Secrève, dug up the following article from the Johannesburg newspaper The Star, published on 21 June 1947:

“First Native Woman to Qualify as Doctor

Mary Susan Malahlele, a soft spoken, pleasant faced Bapedi woman, took the Hippocratic Oath at the University of the Witwatersrand to-day as the first Native woman doctor to qualify in the Union of South Africa.
[…]
Dr. Malahlele will spend a year as a house doctor at the McCord Mission Hospital in Durban, and then plans to practice in the Pretoria area.

Her parents, Mr. and Mrs. T.C. Malahlele, of Roodepoort, where Mr. Malahlele is principal of the Native Primary School said they were very proud of their daughter when a representative of The Star met them to-day at the Douglas Smit Hostel – the residence for non-European medical students of the university.”

A whole university with fine facilities, MEDUNSA (the Medical University of South Africa), was built by the previous white government to train black doctors, as well as the Natal Medical School, with thousands of black doctors also being trained at the multiracial Universities of the Witwatersrand and Cape Town at the time. The first university for blacks in South Africa, Fort Hare, was established in 1916! Among its alumni are to be found many of Africa’s radical and revolutionary leaders, such as Nelson Mandela, Robert Mugabe, communist leader Chris Hani and others (see Wikipedia article). If whites had sinned at all, it was in training and educating their future enemies in the mistaken belief that their generosity and benevolence would be repaid in kind.

In the very near future, even mentioning such historical facts which anyone may read on Wikipedia, may become punishable crimes in South Africa as leftist intolerance grows and “apartheid denial” is criminalised, either by parliament or the activist judges of the Constitutional Court that unilaterally abolished the death penalty for murder and legalised same-sex marriages, against the wishes of the majority of the South African population, be they white or black.

Another reason why white liberals/cultural Marxists needs to wave the straw man of apartheid in front of us, is because they are fast losing control of the ANC which is becoming an ethnically black and Zulu party. Hence too, the current verbal attack by the liberal Max du Preez on South African president Jacob Zuma. Ironically, the South African government has described Du Preez’s article as “racist”, a case of the pot calling the kettle black. After having made a complete mess of South Africa, white leftists need a scapegoat. Either it will be whites in general – especially conservative whites who are completely without political influence – or it will be the titular head of the one-party state that liberals had wanted for us in the first place, Jacob Zuma, the dancing Zulu.

Blaming whites and metaphysical apartheid will however take precedence, as usual.

Follow @danroodt

Eish, let’s fix Eskom’s apartheid by going shopping

Yebo, my friend, you’ve heard the bad news: Eskom is broken because of apartheid. It’s racial. Verwoerd made maths difficult and engineering even more so, hence you can blame it on apartheid. President Zoomer has just had his blindingly brilliant insight and all the libtard media dutifully conveyed this piece of anal-ysis to dem voting masses.

What else can you blame on apartheid? Well, Skoppensboer’s ingrowing toenails come to mind. Also, all the faeces in the Jukskei and the Vaal and all the other rivers may be attributed to apaaaatheid, I’m tellin’ ya, my good man. After all, who taught all these citizens to be so disposed as to not make proper use of the ablutions and the extant sewage facilities? The A factor, what else?

If some non-racial dude propels a chunk of concrete through your car window, as happened to Skoppensboer’s niece the other day, and grabs your handbag or your laptop, you can only blame it on apartheid. After all, said smash-and-grabber would not have been out there smashing and grabbing if it weren’t for apartheid. Like the devil, apartheid is everywhere, luring our upright, ethically pristine citizens into temptation.

Skoppensboer is just waiting for the day when the courts and the police stations and the prisons will give it all up, saying: “Apartheid makes them do it, so let’s set all these innocent victims of that crime against humanity free.” If you think about it, why did the Tukkie rapist, Samuel Msiza do the deed? Skoppensboer can already hear a whole mass choir of libtards, including Jaycup Zoomer, screaming: “Because of apartheid!” He could have stabbed his young, innocent victim once or just klapped her without raping her. But no, because of apartheid – even though he was born into this here beautiful democracy – he had to stab her 22 times and rape her while she was almost bleeding to death.

Why did South Africa’s 10 black serial killers (11 if you include one white drug addict) murder 205 people, if not because of apartheid? The fact that the rest of us do not serially kill or rape or lurk about street corners throwing stones at motorists constitutes no proof that apartheid is not to blame for everything that is going so dismally wrong in our once beautiful but presently soiled republic.

What is the solution to the lingering apartheid problem? As any libtard genius will tell you – all libtards are genii – we are already on our way to solving it by means of: affirmative action, BEE, as well as spending any budget that you can lay your hands on as if there’s no tomorrow. Ditto, when it comes to Eskom. The electricity utility just needs to get rid of any remaining white engineers who got degrees at some apartheid university prior to 1994 and ratchet up the salaries and the spending.

In short, Eskom’s employees need to get their act together over there in Megawatt Park and go shopping! As it is, Sandton City is not too far from Megawatt Park – hardly a ten-minute drive by Bentley – and there are any number of luxury-car dealerships in the vicinity where any soupçon of apartheid in the air might be assuaged by the smell of leather inside a brand-new Porsche, Merc, Bee-Em or Audi. Not to forget the Bentley which is, I am sure, one of the preferred brands for Eskom’s middle to upper management. Last time Skoppensboer looked, the Bentley dealership was also astutely situated within a radius of 10 km from Megawatt Park, in William Nicol Drive. So you need not joke anymore that BMW stands for “black man’s wheels” when, much more likely, Bentley is now the flagship affirmative automobile easily within reach of the average Eishkom exec.

Like the collapsing silo of the Majuba power station, Eskom’s problems will look after themselves while we address what every libtard is clamouring for and that is: “redress for the legacy of apartheid”. As the very existence of Eskom’s ugly power stations dotting the country attests to that legacy, it follows that we would be better off without them. We could all have little windmills or solar panels or cultivate electricity-producing bacteria in our bathtubs which would otherwise have been utilised for cold baths anyway.

Talking of cold baths and showers, Skoppensboer has noted that City Power in Johannesburg is threatening to “remotely turn off” the hot water geysers of its recalcitrant consumers in these times of energy scarcity. Caused by apartheid, needless to say.

So Big Brother has, apart from some luxury automotive toys, acquired the technology to punish us for having a quick morning shower while draining Eishkom’s power grid. Which has many more noble uses, such as supplying free electricity in those wards that invariably vote ANC or maybe some energy-intensive factory belonging to a black-empowerment company listed on the JSE.

Some of Skoppensboer’s more radical libtard friends, hanging around the universities where they have the pick of the choir boys and girls, as the saying goes, assure him that the Revolution has not gone far enough. Much more is on the way, and less is more, to quote some apartheid theorist.

Western civilisation is on the way out and we shall return to the pre-apartheid times when everybody was happy, living in huts made of mud and thatch. So Eskom will be a thing of the ugly past and we’ll be rubbing sticks together to make camp fires where we shall be roasting the last skinny rat caught after days of meandering in the veld as hunter-gatherers. Naturally, this will be post-land reform too and the land will have returned to a more desirable pre-apartheid state too.

The only thing that remains is for the University of Cape Town to award an honorary doctorate in political science to Jaycup Zoomer for seeing the missing link between Eskom and apartheid. Most of the cultural-Marxist professors at that august institution must gleefully agree with him and will no doubt support such a move.

We should not neglect transformation, even in the dark.

Zuma blames ‘apartheid’ for South Africa’s power crisis

South Africa’s energy problems were a product of apartheid and government was not to blame for the current blackouts, President Jacob Zuma said.

“The problem [is] the energy was structured racially to serve a particular race, not the majority,” Zuma told delegates at the Young Communist League’s congress in Cape Town.

He said the ANC had inherited the power utility from the previous regime which had only provided electricity to the white minority.

Twenty years into democracy, 11 million households had access to electricity, double the number in 1994, Zuma said in a speech prepared for delivery.

Government was taking action to address the energy situation.

The development of the Medupi and Kusile power stations was being accelerated in order to bring them on to the grid.

“Projects in the region with the potential to produce power in the short term are being assessed and we continue to evaluate options with the intention to maximise all sources of energy including coal, gas, nuclear, solar and renewable energy options, Zuma said.

White liberals are just racists

It is typical of the so-called white “liberals” in South Africa to pretend they “understand” white privilege, when in fact they strive to maintain it.

They always sugar coat the truth and feel uneasy when the black victims of apartheid start to tell it like it is.

When this happens, they use their money to sponsor conferences on “Social Cohesion” and studies on “National Reconciliation”, the objective being to continue to suffocate the voices of those who are still left out of the system.

White people in SA today are the beneficiaries of apartheid and the “white privileges” they enjoy today are as a result of apartheid.

The irritating thing about this is when they want to preserve these ill-gotten white privileges by opposing the redress measures aimed at the current imbalances caused by apartheid, and labeling them “racist”.

To me as a black person, those who still sponsor organisations like the The SA Institute of Race Relations,the Helen Suzman Foundation,the FW De Klerk Foundation and the Free Market Foundation, are no different to Pick and Pay and Land Rover sponsoring Hofmeyer.

These organisations still fight in a sophisticated manner to preserve their ill-gotten privileges.

The outcomes are the same, with some trying to package the same claptrap better.

S. Moloko

Apartheid for emoji characters

A new proposal drafted by the Unicode Consortium would introduce more “racial diversity”, apartheid actually, into the popular emoji characters used in messages on smartphones.

The proposal, edited by Google’s Mark Davis and Apple’s Peter Edberg, would bring skin tones, based on the Fitzpatrick scale for dermatology, to emoji characters in five hues ranging from a pale creme to a dark brown.

To use the new emoji, users would select the emoji person or character and then add a tone. On compatible phones, a single emoji image or glyph would be show up.

On phones that do not support the new font, users will likely see a standard emoji glyph and then a color swatch next to it indicating the skin tone.

The skin tone modifiers would work on all people-related characters, including those that depict couples. A possibility for emoji with couples would be to enter in the skin tone value for each person separately.

Right now, the proposal is still a draft and there is no timeline for implementation so we don’t know when it will reach your phones.

Source: TechCrunch

Open letter to Virginia Keppler

You’re not free, Virginia. Your white baas gave you a job. You use his language and you write what he tells you to write.

We take it whence it comes, your tirade against Steve Hofmeyr. The truth is sometimes brutal, but it remains the truth. Steve’s right of course – he knows his history (his people had the written word so things can be checked) while the “others” occupied this continent for millennia and did nothing, absolutely nothing except kill each other and plant a few mealies. No wheel, no written word, no towns, gardens, hospitals, railway lines, factories, shops or any other accoutrements of a civilization worth its salt. Just check out what the early English missionaries found when they ventured into the country’s interior in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. They had no political agenda and they wrote as they saw – they sketched primitive people with spears and loin cloths standing outside straw and mud houses. They wrote about their wars and their early deaths because of disease and internecine struggles. There were no title deeds then, so claiming land is now a bit hit and miss, given that there were no records of anything. The white man codified their languages (who else did it?) so being “oppressed” by whites is hardly the way it was.

There is no proof whatsoever that these Africans would have advanced one inch without white influence. Otherwise why didn’t they create a civilization of their own? They had the territory, they had the sun, the rain, the rivers, the green pastures. Oppressed? Give me a break! I would think they should go on their knees every day that the whites came to South Africa first. (What would have happened if the Chinese or the Arabs had got here first? You should shudder to think, Virginia.)

You talk about the black “owners” of this land. How can they prove they owned anything? They didn’t have the written word so no title deeds, no records, no nuttin’. Where’s the proof, Virginia? Aren’t you supposed to back up your journalistic integrity with facts? Or did your white baas tell you you can say what you like because you’re “previously disadvantaged”?

So let’s get down to the basics. Every single thing you own and consume was provided to you by the whites and their civilization. Tell me one thing – one single thing – that occurs in your life that is indigenous to black South Africa? Even your job is courtesy of a white man. The language you speak, the clothes you wear, the food you eat spring from a white civilization. The transport you use, the water from the tap, the electricity lighting your house are not indigenous to Africa. The fact that you are not standing on some dusty red earth watching the Ebola health workers take out your neighbours for burial can be attributed to the fact that you live in a developed South Africa, taking advantage of the solid, first-world health system whose foundations were laid down by the forefathers of the Steve Hofmeyrs of this world. For who else did it? The ANC? They are busy destroying it but that is in their DNA. They are destroyers by nature. Why don’t you fill your newspaper space criticizing them? (And by the way, why can’t Africa look after the Ebola outbreak itself? Why must the white people (and others) of this world rescue them from their cultural backwardness of not knowing how to wash their hands properly?)

You bleat about apartheid! Did you ever think what would have happened to this country without apartheid at the time? As the post-war hordes streamed into the cities looking for work (they can never create work, someone else must give them a job!), where would it have stopped? Our cities then would have become like our cities today, only fifty years earlier! We would have been sitting with a Kwame Nkrumah or a Jacob Zuma fifty years earlier, with all that this implies! Where did Eskom, Sasol, Iscor, our nuclear achievements and one of the world’s most vibrant economies have come from except under apartheid? Unshackled by the huge drain of a welfare state (as we have now), white creativity and entrepreneurship flourished. Did you know that the rand was worth more than the US dollar at that time, that investors streamed into our country because the non-Zumas were in charge? That millions of blacks to the north of us tried to get into the apartheid pariah country?

Like so many of your ilk, you call the truth racial hatred. Well, the whole world must be practising racial hatred because they do all in their power to keep blacks from Africa out of their countries. Why do you think the Australians won’t let aliens even touch their shores? Why are the Italians and the French and the Greeks complaining about too many blacks in their countries? Check out Israel’s policy towards blacks: they are deported en masse and attacked in the streets of Tel Aviv. Why is this?

There are reasons, Virginia and they can be found in the streets of our once pristine South African cities. The fact is that when the blacks move in, the whites move out and this happens all over the world. (Detroit is now filing for bankruptcy for this very reason).

I just loved your “we are twenty years into democracy, into freedom” platitude. Democracy? You’ve got to be kidding! When the country is run from Luthuli House, where not one parliamentarian is responsible to any constituent, and where the so-called government is the worst the country has ever had, there’s not much to be said for democracy. And freedom? Freedom to do what? Pee against someone’s wall? Throw rubbish into our once clean spruits? Murder someone for a cell phone? Live in crowded shacks in a squatter camp because you were “free” to come to a city with no job for you? So that’s freedom is it?

You’re not free, Virginia. Your white baas gave you a job. You use his language and you write what he tells you to write. The “verkrampte regses” are right. Democracy and freedom screwed up big time!

You ask Steve to “pak op en trek”. Why don’t you do this if you’re not happy with the white man’s legacy to this country? How about looking for a job in Zambia? Or Rwanda? Hey, what about Liberia, home of Ebola! This is the country comprising slaves repatriated from the United States. The country has been financed and supported by America ever since – the US couldn’t get them back to Africa fast enough! Liberia has freedom and democracy too, but they don’t even know how to wash their hands. There are no whites in Liberia, and that’s the difference. Why don’t you go there and you won’t have to put up with people like Steve?

You talk about being “onderdruk”. Yes, there was law and order and you couldn’t just go into a park and defecate and throw your papers all over the show and leave your takeaway mess under a seat. Which park do you take your children to now, Virginia? Remember Joubert Park in Johannesburg? Christmas was a wonderful time – the lights, the theatre shows, the decorations. Now it is home to Somali squatters who live there, and hang their washing over the trees and use the gutter as a toilet. Was it better under apartheid, or worse, Virginia? Now that the park is for everyone, who wants to go there? What was wrong with control under apartheid? Sweden for example didn’t have apartheid because it didn’t have third world hordes. Now our cities are ringed with squatter camps. (I bet you live in a gated community, or if not, your windows are barred and there’s plenty of “security”. Security against whom, Virginia? Whites? No my dear, security is against the “freedom of movement” you so like to punt.

Steve doesn’t “staan alleen in die land”. Not at all. Millions agree with him, millions. They just don’t say anything. But they curse as they drive through Sunnyside in Pretoria, once a pleasant flatland with parks and nice shops. Now the rubbish is on the streets, not in bins. The prostitutes roam from corner to corner, waste is tipped out from flat windows and no one in their right mind would be seen dead living there. The Sudanese and the Somalis have it all to themselves. So was apartheid so bad, or is this better? Better for whom?

And Hillbrow? It’s not called Little Lagos for nothing. If you feel free, just go and rent a flat there and then you’ll realize why there was apartheid. You say footpaths were only for whites? I never saw that. People could walk where they wanted in public places. There was no “one side for you, one side for me”. Where did you see that, Virginia?

You can’t have it all in South Africa, Virginia. You ask how it feels to experience this and that. Does it not worry you that we experience things that are a hundred times worse than not being able to go into someone’s restaurant? What about the vicious crime? What about the wanton killing and torturing of farmers? What about the unemployment and the terrible poverty, much worse than under apartheid?

What about the corruption in government? Who is stealing us blind? The whites or the ANC? Who has destroyed productive farms in their hundreds in order to prove a failed policy? Who is putting food security at risk? The whites? Who has turned our once world class health system into a third world disgrace where babies die and patients have to buy their own anaesthetics and medicines because the hospitals have run out? The whites? Who doesn’t answer the phone, doesn’t reply to letters and generally doesn’t give a rat’s backside for the people who pay their fancy salaries? The ANC’s comrades occupying jobs for which they are not qualified, or the Whites? Who are “deployed” somewhere else when they’re found with their hands in the cookie jar? White employees or the others?

Your freedom and democracy people can’t even run a post office, Virginia. They can’t keep the country in electricity, and they can’t run the Johannesburg Zoo, let alone protect our wildlife. They let their animals starve on farms they were given on a plate by their pals in the government. They are unable to produce books for school children. They steal from their own children’s school feeding schemes. They steal from the social grants (read welfare payments) destined for poor old people in the homelands who stand all day to get their money.

They talk nonsense with regularity. They promise the earth but do nothing. They are charlatans of the first order. They refuse to admit they are wrong. They are incompetent and useless. It’s always someone else’s fault – it’s the stolen cable, its apartheid, it’s the weather, its colonialism, its racism. This is why they are legal thieves under the guise of BEE. They need BEE because they can’t even start a spaza shop in the township. They rob and assault the Somalis and the Pakistanis who do start them. They are a disgrace and you would do well, Virginia, to concentrate on this cancer eating away at a once beautiful and prosperous country. Don’t worry about apartheid, Virginia, or Steve either. There’s much worse on the way to focus your mind. Concentrate on crime, and our window bars and our alarms and our palisade fences with the spikes on top. It’s amazing how many commentators say that crime affects the blacks “as well”. But when there were whites-only areas, there was hardly any crime. This is why there were no bars on windows, no townhouse complexes (for security!), no boom gates to keep who out? Whites? No, blacks dear Virginia. When they were not there, there was virtually no crime.

So put up or shut up. Concentrate on bringing to book the criminals (both government and freelance), and leave Steve alone. He’s telling it like it is, and so should you. Ask those venal creatures in the ANC to move to black residential areas, to send their kids to black schools, to use state hospitals, to go to black doctors and to buy their clothes in Soweto. The sins of apartheid are pisswilly compared to the wholesale pillaging of our country by the charlatans calling themselves the government of South Africa.

– Sic Transit Gloria, Gauteng

N.B. The editors are not responsible, nor do they necessarily agree with the opinions expressed by letter writers or columnists on this site.

CIA report: Israel will fall in 20 years

A study conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has cast doubt over Israel’s survival beyond the next 20 years.

The CIA report predicts “an inexorable movement away from a two-state to a one-state solution, as the most viable model based on democratic principles of full equality that sheds the looming specter of colonial Apartheid while allowing for the return of the 1947/1948 and 1967 refugees. The latter being the precondition for sustainable peace in the region.”

The study, which has been made available only to a certain number of individuals, further forecasts the return of all Palestinian refugees to the occupied territories, and the exodus of two million Israeli – who would move to the US in the next fifteen years.

“There is over 500,000 Israelis with American passports and more than 300,000 living in the area of just California,” International lawyer Franklin Lamb said in an interview with Press TV on Friday, adding that those who do not have American or western passport, have already applied for them.

“So I think the handwriting at least among the public in Israel is on the wall…[which] suggests history will reject the colonial enterprise sooner or later,” Lamb stressed.

He said CIA, in its report, alludes to the unexpectedly quick fall of the apartheid government in South Africa and recalls the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, suggesting the end to the dream of an ‘Israeli land’ would happen ‘way sooner’ than later.

The study further predicts the return of over one and a half million Israelis to Russia and other parts of Europe, and denotes a decline in Israeli births whereas a rise in the Palestinian population.

Lamb said given the Israeli conduct toward the Palestinians and the Gaza strip in particular, the American public — which has been voicing its protest against Tel Aviv’s measures in the last 25 years — may ‘not take it anymore’.

Some members of the US Senate Intelligence Committee have been informed of the report.

Source: MRS/MMN

How the Left lost control of South Africa

Not a day goes by without us here in South Africa being reminded of the “glorious revolution” of 1994, led by Nelson and Winnie Mandela, black fists held aloft. Perhaps “glorious revolution” is an apt term, borrowed from English history, although in our case an English king was not forced to abdicate. Rather, the “black Englishman” as Nelson Mandela once referred to himself, was crowned as a kind of global emperor of the politically correct.

The triumphalism of the once marginal South African Left, confined to the four English universities and a few fringe communist publications has been understandably boundless. A small band of exiled left-extremists managed to take over Africa’s only industrial state, immediately implementing their identity-destroying policies while pillaging the state coffers with a lust and zest also harking back to the days of Francis Drake and his merry band of pirates or “privateers”.

As I argue in my essay, Raiders of the lost Empire, Britain and especially the British media played a major role in the takeover of South Africa and re-imagining the country as a more extreme and politically correct version of the United Kingdom and the United States. The plan of turning South Africa into a de facto one-party state “ruled until Jesus comes” by the darling parties of the Anglo-Saxon media, the ANC and its Communist Party sibling, was prematurely fêted as a fait accompli. Through the manufactured consensus brought by an unfettered control of the mass media, the Left enjoyed an iron grip on the ANC/SACP and through that vehicle, over the majority-black voter. Voting districts were also drawn in such a way that the country’s ethnic minorities, especially whites and Afrikaners, were all but disenfranchised. One is allowed to vote for the opposition, as long as it does not really matter.

The plan was perfect, the spoils were rich. Entire state institutions, government departments and large municipalities were raided by the feasting socialist, anti-racist, “anti-apartheid” victors arriving in ostentatious German cars and Italian designer clothing, while flashing – like the infamous Julius Malema – one’s chunky Breitling watch.

Even muted criticism of the system, the much-vaunted “democracy” was met with guffaws of contempt and satisfied howls of Schadenfreude directed at the losers. Not to forget the usual blast of vilification about “apartheid nostalgia”, “white supremacism”, “fascism”, “Nazism”, “Hitlerism”, “racism”, “sexism” and all the other -isms that dumb left-wing ideologues have rattled off since time immemorial, from the camp commanders of Stalin’s gulag or Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge fanatics to Mao’s Red Guards or professors at the University of Cape Town.

However, the one thing that our masters of the universe had not foreseen, was that the ANC itself could change. Instead of being, like the SABC and the liberal media, a “toy telephone” for the thieving, venal oligarchy, Zuma’s ANC has become increasingly traditional, starting with the dancing, polygamous Zulu leader himself. The ANC is also shying away from full communism, including the confiscation of land in a remake of “death to the Kulaks”, as advocated by the Marxist crazies at Cape universities and various Johannesburg think-tanks funded by George Soros or the Ford Foundation. There is apparently some diffidence on the part of Zuma in hastening towards a full-on collectivisation programme à la Zimbabwe.

Among the effervescent, Marxist-jargon-spouting pundits lamenting that the revolution “has not gone far enough” or that “the whites are still in control” (even though they lack any form of power and are, in the words of Steve Hofmeyr, “being killed like flies”), there is horror at the return of some form of South Africanism. Not the imported, quasi-American, spanking “new South Africa”, but the hated South Africa of old, that combination of white industry, conservatism and black tribalism.

For the self-styled South African revolutionary, there is one thing worse than the present with its rampant crime, corruption and shortages of water and electricity, and that would be a return to tradition. Whites espousing heterosexual marriage and polite language without four-letter expletives, or singing Die Stem, on the one hand, and blacks embracing their African languages, customs and identity, on the other; that would be the ultimate horror, a “nightmare” come true.

Not for nothing did a certain Nomboniso Gasa of the University of Cape Town express her misgivings about the approach to the system of tribal chiefs or “traditional leadership” taken by the ANC. She writes in Business Day this week:

Thus, in December 2003, the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act was enacted. It reproduced apartheid spatial design down to the finest details of Bantustan boundaries and ascribed identities. It also entrenched those ascribed identities, based on spatial design and ethnic affiliation… Whatever the reasons, this does not augur well for common citizenship in SA. It is a mind-blowing departure from the approach of one nation, one law.

Elsewhere in her article she refers to “the smokescreen of ‘culture’ and ‘custom'” and a spurious sensitivity around “these issues”. What does she mean by that? As a black person and an African, surely it could not be sensitive for her to talk about her own culture? However, given the enthusiasm with which her article was subsequently tweeted and retweeted among the white-liberal and cultural-Marxist set, it looks as if the “sensitivity” she is referring to has more to do with the current predicament of the Great White (and English) Left in South Africa that sees control of the revolution slipping from its grasp… After all, to a mob whose intellectual mainstay is accusing other whites of being “racist” or “sexist”, it would hardly do to start denouncing black culture and traditions in the name of, as Jean-Paul Sartre defined the great Karl, “a German intellectual who lived in London during the nineteenth century”.

In short, despite the violence and mayhem plaguing us, South Africa is going through a “reality check”, with the country’s ethnic, cultural and ethnic diversity – mocked at, sneered at, and even denied for so long by the Left – finally emerging from the alcoholic haze of the mythical “one-beer nation” (for those who have read my essay referred to above).

For the Left, there would be one thing worse than whites clamouring for a return to “apartheid” or ethnic federation in South Africa and that would be blacks demanding the same! Any sign of blacks reasserting their tribal rights within defined geographical areas is therefore anathema, to say the least. In a final adieu to the system that it had created, apparently the former National Party in 1994 handed over control of the Ngonyama Trust to the Zulu nation. Currently the land holdings of the trust constitute three million hectares, controlled by a board chaired by the Zulu king.

According to Nomboniso Gasa, there are “16-million citizens who live in these former Bantustans”. That may be an underestimation, given that the population growth rate in those largely rural areas is so much higher than in metropolitan, urbanised South Africa.

At a more fundamental level, South African blacks are not embracing American-style multiculturalism and its ready-made racial identity and consciousness with as much alacrity as the cultural Marxists have hoped. It is highly significant that many TV soap operas in black languages, watched by millions of people, revolve around quintessentially tribal and ethnic issues, such as marrying outside one’s tribe, the influence of the ancestors in one’s life or being obedient to one’s rural chief even while living in the city.

In South Africa, the official dogma is that race, ethnicity and identity do not exist. At best they are “relics of our apartheid past”. The reality, however, is quite different. Leftist colonialism, the attempt to turn South African blacks into carbon copies of politically-correct, “non-racial”, “non-sexist” Anglo-Americans, has failed dismally.

The ironic comment that South Africa, given its many casinos and the proliferation of African kitsch, “has become a big Bantustan”, possesses another corollary in that more autocratic forms of tribal rule will increasingly assert themselves, as has been the case in most other African countries.

Whether that is good or bad depends on one’s point of view. The fact is that the imported clichés and petty socialist doctrines of the South African Left prevented it from predicting this development. Even the most lowly Afrikaner bureaucrat serving in the department of Bantu administration during the 1960s would have been able to predict the resurgence of ethnic identity and its geographic expression in South Africa, simply on the basis of his greater knowledge and understanding of the people inhabiting this land.

Liberals and Marxists are mostly indistinguishable in South Africa, having mostly the same opinions, and collectively constitute the all-conquering Left. They have also gluttonously fed at the trough of government corruption for the last twenty years, and will no doubt fight to regain control of the party and the masses voting for it. Despite ruling the roost in the media and the universities, our Left, to use an appositely proletarian idiom, “has its work cut out for it”.

If you liked this column, you will be completely ecstatic about this excerpt from Raiders of the lost Empire.

Follow @danroodt

‘92% of South African whites are racist’

I read the previous column by Jonny Steinberg on Oscar Pistorius. In my view that article was too general and gave an incorrect view on the opinions of blacks.

Though I now stay in an upmarket suburb, I spend lots of my time in the townships. In those circles, the majority of people I have spoken to are not really concerned about Oscar but are concerned about the judgment itself. It really confused them. It created more doubts than certainty about the legal system in our country and the interpretation of laws. In a nutshell, most middle-class and informed Africans were embarrassed by it. They are even reluctant to talk about it. However, the most fortunate part of our judicial system is its corrective mechanisms. To err is human.

On the current article I wish to remind Mr Steinberg that not all whites still live in the past. Maybe, about 92% of them still do. It is expecting too much from the 92% (this figure is an estimate) of white people to embrace reconciliation and not be racist. Why would they now do that? They have failed to do so in the past 600 years of the history of mankind. During those years most white people have enforced and supported slavery, racism, colonialism, apartheid and other forms of prejudices against blacks, and Africans in particular.

In my view reconciliation is too abstract a concept to embrace or even attempt to “enforce”. The best way would be for government to, among other things, enforce and implement laws that would make economic growth possible, make equitable economic redistribution possible, expedite cultural emancipation for Africans and outlaw any form of racism and/or prejudice in this country.

It is unfortunate that most of my fellow countrymen cannot define what racism is ( or other forms of prejudices such as tribalism, sexism ). It has become the most abused term; especially by the majority of white South Africans. Maybe it’s because they have never experienced racism. – Thulani Ngcobo Midrand (Originally published as a letter in Business Day)

IBM, Ford not liable for ‘apartheid claims’ – US court

A Manhattan federal judge has dismissed a 12-year-old lawsuit accusing Ford Motor and IBM of encouraging human rights abuses in apartheid-era SA, reluctantly concluding the case does not belong in US courts.

US district judge Shira Scheindlin said last week the black South Africans who brought the case did not show “relevant conduct” by Ford and IBM within the US to justify holding the companies liable.

The plaintiffs had accused Ford, IBM and other companies of having between the 1970s and early 1990s aided SA’s former apartheid government in abuses such as killings and torture, by having made military vehicles and computers for government security forces.

“That these plaintiffs are left without relief in an American court is regrettable,” Scheindlin wrote. “But I am bound to follow [legal precedent], no matter what my personal view of the law may be.”

The case had been brought under the Alien Tort Statute, a 1789 law that lets non-US citizens pursue some cases in US courts over alleged violations of international law.

In April 2013, the US Supreme Court said that law was presumed to cover only violations in the United States, or violations elsewhere that “touch and concern” US territory “with sufficient force”.

Four months later, the federal appeals court in Manhattan applied that holding, and said the Ford and IBM cases should be dismissed altogether.

In April, Scheindlin nonetheless gave the plaintiffs one more chance, to meet the new standards imposed by those higher courts.

But in Thursday’s decision, she said the bar proved too high, and that any alleged international law violations were by Ford’s and IBM’s South African units, and occurred abroad.

“It has been 12 years. We’re really disappointed, devastated by the decision,” said Diane Sammons, a partner at Nagel Rice in Roseland, New Jersey, who represents some plaintiffs.

“The end result of the ruling is that corporations can act abroad with impunity, even if they’re totally controlling the activities of their foreign subsidiaries,” she added. “I don’t think the Supreme Court’s decision was that narrowly defined.”

She said the plaintiffs had not decided whether to appeal.

Jonathan Hacker, an O’Melveny & Myers partner who represents Ford, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Keith Hummel, a Cravath, Swaine & Moore partner who represents IBM, did not immediately respond to similar requests.

Germany’s Daimler and Rheinmetall were dismissed as defendants in December. – Reuters