Unlike in South Africa and in his native Zimbabwe where hagiographies of deceased former president Robert Mugabe were the norm, London’s Daily Telegraph did not mince words. In a leading article published on 6 September 2019, the newspaper chose the headline: Robert Mugabe was a monster who destroyed his country.
The unsigned commentary went on to state:
“Robert Mugabe once said of his rule: “Only God who appointed me will remove me.” God has finally decided to call time. Mugabe died yesterday at the age of 95, two years after being ousted in a coup. He leaves behind one of the poorest countries in the world.
“When he came to power in 1980, Zimbabwe had tremendous potential as a farming nation, and there is no denying that Mugabe put money into clinics and schools. But his grip on power was cemented early on by ethnic cleansing in Matabeleland, and later he gave the green light to a war on white-owned farmland. White farmers were not the only targets: a slum-clearing programme, for example, left at least 750,000 homeless. Money-printing destroyed the economy and life expectancy plummeted from 61 to 45. Zimbabwe’s tragedy has become a regional crisis, as refugees have poured into South Africa, driving up social tensions.”
Julius Malema, leader of the radical EFF party in South Africa, tweeted:
I’m saddened by the passing of our martyr & giant of the African Revolution cde President Robert Mugabe. Let’s continue the fight & protect his legacy. We must not allow our enemies to tell us how to remember him; we know our heroes.
“Whatever fantasy Mugabe entertained of himself as a leader, by the end his greatest achievement was his ability to cling on to power through a mix of corruption, brute force and the lingering reputation as a revolutionary. Ultimately, it was his own cronies who took him down; at first there was hope of reform, but they have proved every bit as incompetent. Inflation stands at 175 per cent and around a third of the population requires humanitarian assistance.
“Change is impossible without democracy. Thirty years on from the collapse of the Berlin Wall, we have seen that those countries that expose their elites to scrutiny and fair elections enjoy the greatest development. Until Zimbabwe embraces human rights, this cycle of tyranny and poverty will continue.”
Zimbabawe’s President Robert Mugabe on Monday used his farewell speech, as outgoing chairperson of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), to rant against white liberals.
He used the podium at the opening of the annual SADC summit here on Monday, to take another stab at South Africa’s “non-racial” white population.
Speaking at the International Convention Centre in Gabarone, Mugabe recalled how Botswana helped him travel to the founding summit of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), now the African Union, in Ethiopia in 1963.
Mugabe, who was handing over the SADC chairpersonship to Khama, even elicited a smile from his usually stern-looking successor, when he recalled the history of his father, Seretse Khama, the first president of Botswana.
Relations between Mugabe and Khama have been strained by the latter’s occasional criticism of developments in the neighbouring country. He was the only SADC leader to question the credibility of Zimbabwe’s 2013 elections which Mugabe and his Zanu-PF won outright, ending the four-year-old dysfunctional unity government between Zanu PF and the two Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) parties.
Mugabe said Seretse Khama, together with Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere, Zambia’s Kenneth Kaunda, Mozambique’s Samora Machel, were some of the founders of the so-called “Frontline States”, the countries, now in SADC, which led the fight against apartheid and colonialism in the 1970s and 1980s.
“Many founders are now dearly departed, but I am glad that Seretse Khama, the father, could see Zimbabwe become independent,” he said.
Mugabe recalled how Khama senior lost his chieftainship because “like all young men, he fell in love”. His “sin”, however, was that it was with a white woman (Englishwoman Ruth Williams), which meant apartheid South Africa exerted pressure on Botswana.
Mugabe said things had changed for the better now, thanks to those who had fought for freedom.
“Look at us now. Look at South Africa. I think they were the most vehement, the whites there, against the marriage. But today it is as if, oh oh, they always were non-racial,” he said in a mock English accent to laughter from the audience.
“Nonsense. Don’t accept that. You see their treacherous behaviour. But I don’t say revenge, no.
“We are a free people, a free people, a loving people, humanitarian. Full of joy, the Africans are, laughing and dancing all the time. But let them not play the fool with us, then the devil in us will emerge.”
In his speech accepting the chairpersonship, Khama joked that over the last year when he was deputy SADC chair, the people in Botswana referred to him as “Mugabe’s deputy”.
He thanked Mugabe for his tenure and praised him for seeing that the region’s industrialisation strategy was adopted under his tenure – at a SADC summit in Harare in April.
The industrialisation strategy is expected to dominate talks at the summit about development in SADC, which reportedly has to find $500-million (R 6,4-billion) over the next five years to implement it.
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe laid the blame for xenophobic violence in South Africa on whites, because he said they still owned most of the land and had most of the opportunities.
“It is a matter of the whites keeping things to themselves and the political dispensation brought in by Mandela, (that) did not address the question of disparities between whites and blacks, and this is what must be addressed,” he said at a press conference after visiting the headquarters of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) secretariat here. Mugabe is the current chairperson of SADC.
Mugabe said he was satisfied with the South African government’s response to the attacks. But he added that unemployment in South Africa and white dominance of land ownership made the xenophobic attacks understandable.
“Most of the land is in the hands of the whites who are in a minority…They are not talking in their country of whites being unemployed. It is blacks who are unemployed, this is what they must address first and foremost,” said Mugabe, calling for a second liberation to redress these inequalities.
South Africa should be helped to overcome the problem that former oppressors were still occupying the old positions and the advantages that they allocated to themselves during colonialism.
Countries like Zimbabwe had overcome oppression and inequalities of land ownership.
“But if you go to SA it is a different story, we need to help them, they need another liberation,” he said.
Mugabe and SADC executive secretary Stergomena Tax, dismissed suggestions that his reception in Botswana was inadequate. Some local media put this down to the chilly relations between Mugabe and Botswana President Ian Khama, the deputy chairperson of SADC, who has in the past criticised the lack of democracy in Zimbabwe and differed from SADC when it declared the 2013 elections free and fair.
But Mugabe said he had not come on a state visit and so did not expect to be welcomed with much formal ceremony. He did have a private meeting with Khama over lunch and said relations between the two were friendly and that it was journalists who had created the idea that they were not friendly.
And he shrugged off Botswana’s opinion of the Zimbabwe elections, saying perhaps Botswana had seen certain incidents that others had not seen.
Mugabe had a dig at South Africa’s economic dominance of the region, and suggested Khama shared his view.
“Right now some of us are complaining about the bigness of SA, a giant establishing itself. That is what we discussed at the meeting, that if we are trying to establish our industries they are blocked.”
“For example, pharmaceuticals. We produce some drugs, and they are in demand. We want to send them to SA then those officials in trade say we will only receive them if they come by air. We say no it is much more costly to send them to SA by air, we have planes, yes, but the planes are expensive, we can send them by road, they say no. You see, that is contrary to our free trade principles, there are lots of things we still have to discuss amongst us.”
He also noted that there was a one-way trade of South African beer into other SADC countries.
An announcement from President Robert Mugabe’s government that it will soon start collecting land rentals from new black farmers to help compensate white farmers whose land was taken from them could be “very good”, the director of the Commercial Farmers’ Union (CFU) said on Saturday.
Hendrik Olivier told News24: “If there is a concrete realisation from the government that they want to sit around the table with white farmers [and discuss compensation], this would be very good and would boost the confidence of the farmers.”
The decision to extract rentals from the new farmers, almost certainly an effort to restore confidence in Zimbabwe internationally and encourage desperately-needed foreign investment, was announced by Lands and Rural Resettlement Minister Douglas Mombeshora on Thursday, the state-controlled Herald newspaper reported on Saturday.
The minister said the move was approved by Mugabe’s cabinet last week.
Olivier said that there were “lots of figures floating around” as to the total amount of compensation owed to white farmers who have lost their land under Mugabe’s controversial land reforms, which were launched in 2000. He agreed that it was “most probably” around $10bn, a figure that has been previously cited.
The CFU director said some dispossessed white farmers needed “very much” to be paid back.
Zimbabwe, ruled by the despotic Robert Mugabe installed as leader by Great Britain in 1980, is still experiencing food shortages, mainly as a result of its anti-white policies which saw most white commercial farmers ethnically cleansed from the country.
According to Famine Early Warning Systems Network, an NGO, “food security is expected to deteriorate to Crisis and Emergency levels between October 2015 and March 2016 in the southern region. Outcomes will be significantly better if typical assistance is delivered, though Crisis and Stressed food security would still be likely due to the above-average retail maize prices expected in the southern cereal-deficit areas”.
While lauded for his anti-white policies by liberals and leftists all over the world, Robert Mugabe has plunged his own country into prolonged famine and disorder. According to the World Food Programme, “One third of Zimbabwe’s children are stunted, or short for their age.” The international agency also states on its website:
Rural poverty has increased from 63 percent in 2003 to 76 percent in 2014. Most households in the rural areas are net food buyers: they do not (for a number of reasons) produce enough food to meet their needs through to the next harvest season. Consequently, they rely on markets and other non-farm sources such as casual labour to bridge the food gap to the next season. As such, a number of people in rural areas will struggle to meet their daily food needs.
The state-run Herald is reporting that the country needs to import at least 700,000 tonnes of maize between now and the next harvest early next year to avert a food crisis.
Zimbabwe also receives electricity from South Africa, where years of neglect by the radical ANC regime has equally led to power cuts and shortages.
Zimbabwean President for Life, Robert Mugabe told a crowd of media and spectators on Thursday while visiting Hector Pietersen Memorial in Soweto, “I don’t want to see a white face”.
Mugabe delivered his latest sneer in his usual affected British colonial accent, flashing some cuff-links and tailor-made arrogance, once again highlighting how utterly risible the post-colonial Afro-Saxon circus has become.
An SABC reporter recorded the incident as Mugabe exited the museum, and walked past a female black television journalist who asked whether the tour had evoked any emotion.
The Memorial, incidentally, is a race-baiting cheap thrill of the post-1994 kind, where lies about ‘white oppression and brutality’ are exhibited as fact. The poor Hector was shot by black thugs, but the real story would not have had the same impact.
When Mugabe saw a white journalist behind her, he pushed the microphone away and wearily said: “I don’t want to see a white face,” as impervious as ever to his farcical contradictory attitude.
Mugabe’s comment can be heard in this video which has been posted on the SABC’s YouTube channel:
The deplorable state of Zimbabwe accurately reflects the more than three decades of the old Marxist tyrant’s misrule, despite his class-conscious accent.
The embarrassingly liberal nonagenarian puppet who “freed blacks from the colonial shackles of an oppressive and racist white regime” has not only failed to improve the lot of the majority of blacks but has actually worsened their plight considerably, presiding over what might be the most rapid disintegration yet of a modern nation state and the genocide of 22 000 Ndebele.
Not only has Mugabe’s regime failed to maintain the white infrastructure that was put in place by the Smith regime, but millions of literally starving Zimbabweans have fled to South Africa’s white cosmopolitan centres. They voted in their anti-white champion, only to abscond to the “racists” down south who would offer all the low-paid jobs as cleaners, gardeners and waiters in cafés and restaurants. Although, to be fair, many of the economic refugees to South Africa belonged to the minority Ndebele tribe, targeted by Mugabe.
It has become de rigueur for journalists, politicians and academics to offer what has become a near-universal analysis: Mugabe was a promising leader who became corrupted over time by power.
This meme was popularized after Mugabe began seizing white-owned farms in 2000. But this conception of Mugabe, propagated by the liberals who championed him in the 1970s and 1980s, is obviously a cover-up for their initial admiration.
From the beginning of his political career Mugabe outshone more moderate Marxists, openly stating his racist and authoritarian intentions to cheering liberals.
A similar scene is being played out at the University of Cape Town, where the ultra-left white principal Max Price is advancing a black racist and authoritarian discourse, succumbing to radical pressures to remove statues of whites, soon to be followed by the removal of white academics.
Mugabe certainly did not morph into a caricature of the Marxist stooge. By 1978 already he had displayed a particular ruthlessness that ought to have indicated what was to follow.
After four black moderates announced that they had reached an “internal settlement” with the Smith government, paving the way for democratic elections, one of these leaders, Ndabaningi Sithole, dispatched 39 envoys to meet representatives of Mugabe. The envoys were captured, murdered and, according to Time magazine, “their bodies were then laid out by the guerrillas in a grisly line at the side of the road as a warning to local tribespeople.”
The following year, in protest of an open election Mugabe’s organization released a death list naming 50 “Zimbabwean black bourgeoisie, traitors, fellow-travelers and puppets of the Ian Smith regime, opportunistic running-dogs and other capitalist vultures.” Mugabe’s henchmen then killed scores of black civilians who attempted to vote.
According to the despot “the multiparty system . . . is a luxury” and that if Zimbabweans did not like Marxism, “then we will have to re-educate them.”
Yet, in 1986, the University of Massachusetts Amherst bestowed an honorary doctorate on him just as he was completing his genocide against the Ndebele. In 1984, the University of Edinburgh awarded Mugabe an honorary doctorate and in 1994, Mugabe was inexplicably given an honorary knighthood by Queen Elizabeth II.
Today Zimbabwe suffers the highest inflation and lowest life-expectancy rates in the world.
President Jacob Zuma was defended from an unexpected quarter on Wednesday, when visiting Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe urged the South African media to “stop tarnishing him”.
“You can tarnish me – I don’t care,” he said at a media conference after he had met Zuma for official talks on his first state visit to South Africa since 1994.
“We are Africans. We don’t tarnish our leaders,” he said, adding that while political opponents could have disagreements, they should support national unity.
Though Mugabe sniped at his old enemies such as former British prime minister Tony Blair and Western governments more generally, he also showed flashes of surprising humility.
He and his ministers had exchanged some very harsh words when Zuma was trying to mediate an agreement between Mugabe’s Zanu-PF and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) a few years ago. But on Wednesday he was full of praise for Zuma, congratulating him for his government’s efforts to resolve the recent political dispute in Lesotho and for its peacekeeping work in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
He also thanked Pretoria for its tolerance of illegal Zimbabwean immigrants, “as our people have really offended… by jumping the border and disturbing your social systems.”
He said this problem had been discussed in the talks on Wednesday, “and we said we must find ways of controlling the movement of people which have not been sanctioned”.
And he referred to South Africa as Zimbabwe’s “elder brother” economically, appealing to it to help Zimbabwe add value to its extensive natural resources.
South Africa rolled out the red carpet for Mugabe, receiving him with full honours on only his second state visit, and raising diplomatic relations to the highest level.
In his long and rambling speech at the media conference, Mugabe also ironically thanked South African journalists for giving him so much publicity “as a real dictator”.
But he insisted that he wasn’t such a dictator after all, citing the way he had let his old enemy, the late Ian Smith, who was the prime minister of the former Rhodesia, keep not only his own farm, but also his father’s farm.
Zimbabwean youths were stopped yesterday from digging up the remains of Cecil Rhodes from his grave in the Matopos Hills, just outside Bulawayo.
The Zanu-PF youths assembled at the party’s Bulawayo offices, from which they intended to go to the hills. They apparently planned to exhume Rhodes’s remains so they could be repatriated to Britain.
But a directive from Zanu-PF headquarters in Harare put an end to their plan.
Zweli Malinga, a Zanu-PF youth activist from Masotsha Ndlovu district, where Rhodes is buried, reportedly told NewZimbabwe online: ”We cannot stand seeing whites coming from abroad every day to honour and conduct rituals before their ancestor who is here buried on our own land. The sooner they take [Rhodes] to their own land the better. If they do not we will do it ourselves.”
Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe in 2012 blocked attempts by “war veterans” to exhume Rhodes’ remains.
A member of the Zanu-PF politburo, Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, said: “We decided to preserve it after independence for historical [reasons].”
The deputy head of communication at the British High Commission in Pretoria, Isabel Potgieter, said it was up to South Africans and Zimbabweans how they handled the Rhodes saga.
“It is not for us to comment. It is for stakeholders in the countries to decide,” she said.
The Rhodes Must Fall campaign has spread from UCT to Kimberley, with calls for a statue of him there to be removed.
Comment boards placed next to the Rhodes statue at UCT were removed after being covered in racist remarks prompting vice-chancellor Max Price to whine about “hate speech”, something he somehow finds perfectly in order when directed against Afrikaners.
Zimbabwe has intensified its war against white farmers. The land grab has already sparked severe food shortages and has contributed to massive inflation.
The country’s lands and resettlement minister Douglas Mombeshora wants at least 163 white commercial farmers in Mashonaland East evicted with no compensation.
This follows after President Robert Mugabe recent vows to expel the country’s last remaining white farmers from their land.
“We don’t need a white man to continue to guide us. No. We are now equipped with skills,” Mugabe was quoted as saying during a party to celebrate his 91st birthday in Victoria Falls last Saturday.
The land grabs were set to continue despite Mugabe publicly admitting earlier that ill-equipped black “war veterans”, have laid to waste vast tracts of farmland seized from whites under his controversial land reforms.
But Mugabe nevertheless continues to reward his party cronies and political allies with farms confiscated from whites.
According to New Zimbabwe.com, more than 160 white commercial farmers in Mashonaland East province will soon be removed from their properties as the government says they are occupying the land “illegally”.
Meanwhile, News Day reported on Thursday that the European Union had warned Mugabe over his threat for more land grabs saying the move could ruin business re-engagement efforts between Zimbabwe and the EU block.
The EU recently lifted restrictions on most government officials, but retained Mugabe and his wife Grace on the sanctions list.
“Whites will never own land in Zimbabwe”
Mugabe and his ruling Zanu-PF party launched the land reforms in 2000, taking over white-owned farms to resettle only black Shona peasants belonging to his own tribe, to “correct colonial land ownership imbalances”.
At least 4 000 white commercial farmers were evicted from their farms, together with black Ndebele peasants. Mugabe launched an ethnic cleansing campaign after independence in which 20 000 black Ndebeles were massacred by his ruling tribe.
The land seizures have often been violent, claiming the lives of several white farmers, but despite losing ownership, many have survived unlike their white South African counterparts.
Some “war veterans” from Zimbabwe’s 1970s liberation struggle claiming land, are teenagers or in their twenties, adding to the sad farce.
I can’t imagine that anyone in his right mind would actually want to go to the 91st birthday party of Robert Gabriel Mugabe which takes place this Saturday.
It promises to be an event of truly spectacular moral ugliness. While his people are starving, the ancient despot will convoke 20,000 cronies at a kind of golf club-cum-safari lodge near the Victoria Falls. In scenes reminiscent of the more disgusting and luxurious behaviour of the emperor Commodus, he will cause various exotic beasts to be slaughtered for the feast.
Five impalas will be roasted, two sables, two buffaloes – and then, to the ululations of his drunken Zanu-PF supporters, there will be a series of culinary climaxes, each more revolting than the last. A local farmer has procured two elephants, and after these rare and majestic creatures have been butchered for the delectation of the semi-deified Mugabe, there will be one more type of meat to come – an animal that you might think was semi-sacred, whose killing should be taboo, a creature that people would never normally dream of eating. Yes, a lion, the king of the animal kingdom, will lay down its life before the meat-maddened mob and have the honour of surrendering its mortal flesh to the palsied gullet of the man who still calls himself the “Hitler of Africa”.
And then, at last, the cake will appear, predicted to weigh 200lb, and in the most depraved and demoralising vignette of all, this crowd of brainwashed Zimbabweans will sweetly sing Happy Birthday to the man who has impoverished their country. This birthday party is predicted to cost $1 million at a time when Zimbabweans are living on 35 cents a day. Teachers across the country have been forced to contribute $10 each to put on the show.
The whole exercise is utterly nauseating – and my only question, as I say, is who on earth would want to be there?
Who is going to be toasting Mugabe in champagne and Tusker lager? Who is going to feature in the photo spread in the Zimbabwean equivalent of Hello! or OK!? I doubt that Britain will be represented at all – but by rights there is one man who damn well should be there, one man who should be down on the dance floor with Mugabe’s buxom assistants, and flashing his familiar glistering smile at the gathering.
If there were any justice in the world, that man would break off from giving advice to sundry other dubious regimes and help old Bob with the job of blowing out his candles. And that man, naturally, is Tony Blair.
Zimbabwe is now the second poorest nation on earth – beaten only by Congo for overall grimness. The people are so badly malnourished that one in three children is physically stunted, according to the UN. If you go there you see the ravages of HIV, the emaciated figures standing listlessly on street corners. Companies are constantly going to the wall.
But it is vital to recognise that Zimbabwe was not always like this, and did not have to be like this. This Mugabe tyranny is no accident – and Britain played a shameful part in the disaster. Readers will remember the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement, by which Margaret Thatcher granted independence to Rhodesia. At that time the country was a breadbasket, a flourishing agricultural producer, with about 6,000 commercial farmers. The only trouble with those farmers was that the most successful of them were white – and Mugabe’s long reign has been characterised by one overwhelming objective: to exterminate the last vestiges of white power, whether political or economic.
As he has said: “The white man is here as a second citizen. The only man you can trust is a dead white man.” So it was crucial that the Lancaster House Agreement protected the interests of these white farmers. They could, of course, be bought out, but their land could not be simply seized. There had to be a “willing buyer, willing seller”. The British government agreed to fund the arrangement, compensating the former colonial farmers for land that they gave up. Under that arrangement the white farmers were able to survive – more or less; Zimbabwe remained economically viable – more or less.
And then in 1997, along came Tony Blair and New Labour, and in a fit of avowed anti-colonialist fervour they unilaterally scrapped the arrangement. The overseas development minister, Clare Short, made it clear that neither she nor Blair gave a stuff about the former colonial farmers. As she put it at the time: “I should make it clear that we do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new government from diverse backgrounds, without links to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and, as you know, we were colonised not colonisers.”
It was that betrayal of Lancaster House that gave Mugabe his pretext to launch his pogroms against the whites. I remember going to a place called Mazowe, not far from Harare, where Mugabe now has one of his vast personal ranches. I met an old ex-Rhodesian couple whose family came from near London, whose kitchen dresser bore the medals their relatives had won fighting for this country. I remember them physically trembling with fear of the Zanu-PF thugs who were waiting at the gate to their farm; and it wasn’t long before they were gone – driven out by sheer intimidation. They died not long afterwards.
The Labour government enlisted this country in all sorts of wars around the world, some more disastrous than others. British soldiers went to fight and die in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in the Balkans. Here we had people with close relatives in our own country – yes, our own kith and kin – and we did absolutely nothing. We turned our backs on the very people who were actually indispensable to the economic well-being of Zimbabwe, and Labour essentially allowed Mugabe to launch a racist tyranny.
The two criminals, Blair and Bob enjoying a moment together
It was Labour’s betrayal of the Lancaster House Agreement – driven by political correctness and cowardice – that gave Mugabe the pretext for the despotic confiscations by which he has rewarded his supporters. And that is why Blair should be there: to mark Labour’s special contribution to the tyrant’s longevity in office.
Boris Johnson is the Lord Mayor of London and a former journalist. This article is from the Telegraph newspaper.
The secret to a long life, says Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, who has just turned 91, is “not filling my stomach”.
His country has been struggling with food shortages since his drive to chase white farmers from their properties.
In an interview televised this week ahead of a huge birthday party in Victoria Falls, Mugabe said: “I do certain things that I believe sustain life.
“I eat well, not filling my stomach, eating foodstuffs that I believe sustain one most. You must eat well, and really not go for food because it’s attractive and feed yourself until your tummy is full,” the longtime Zimbabwean leader said.
At least 20 000 guests will attend the bash at the golf course of a luxury hotel this weekend to feast on elephant, buffalo, donated cattle and a gigantic birthday cake.
Mugabe’s half sister, Regina Gata, recently said that he neither smokes nor drinks.
The Zimbabwe leader has made several trips to the Far East in recent years for medical check-ups, officially on his eyes.
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.
Buy Dan Roodt’s book on this site
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?
Most of Zimbabwe’s white farmers were stripped of their land in often violent evictions that started in 2000. Now the remaining white farmers are on edge because of threats of new evictions linked to the country’s long-running political turmoil.
Mandi Chimene, a newly appointed provincial governor for Manicaland province, said at a rally this past weekend that she had evicted white farmers from 12 farms in the Headlands district alone, claiming they were being protected by the former vice president’s faction. Joice Mujuru was ousted from the ruling party congress in December after falling out of favor with the president and his wife.
Another newly appointed governor, Joe Biggie Matiza of Mashonaland East province, said he will take similar action by the end of this month.
However, human rights advocate and political analyst Gabriel Shumba said that linking the evictions to the Mujuru faction “is just political expediency by those seeking to evict them.” Shumba said, “White farmers are caught up because they are in possession of an asset that is in demand.”
The Commercial Farmers Union, which represents mostly white farmers in Zimbabwe, has sought a meeting with the lands minister over the evictions, said spokesman Hendricks Olivier. “The eviction of both black and white farmers is not good for the sector,” Olivier told The Associated Press. “We need a clear policy.”
Douglas Mombeshora, the lands minister, recently said black farmers can enter into joint venture with partners of other races. But vice president Emmerson Mnangagwa later delivered a conflicting message, warning of more evictions of white farmers. President Robert Mugabe has often spoken against joint farming partnerships between blacks and whites.
There are fewer than 300 white farmers out of the original total of 4,500, according to the Commercial Farmers Union. The land eviction program that targeted white farmers starting in 2000 was defended by Mugabe as necessary to correct land imbalances dating from the era of white rule, though the upheaval was blamed for mismanagement of Zimbabwe’s once rich agricultural economy.
The European Union lifted trade sanctions against Zimbabwe on Thursday and will resume development and finance cooperation with the country.
EU ambassador to Zimbabwe Philippe Van Damme told journalists on Thursday that direct aid will resume this weekend, when part of the sanctions imposed on the Zimbabwean government over alleged rights abuses expire.
“The EU Council confirms that appropriate measures will indeed be lifted this weekend,” he said, adding that the EU’s development aid will target health, agriculture and governance.
“We have reached a very important stage in the normalisation of our relations with Zimbabwe,” Van Damme said.
“We can now fully engage on development policies of this government. We have to find ways to rebuild trust. Let’s move forward towards normalisation of relations,” he said, while warning that change will not happen overnight.
“It will take time to rebuild trust.”
The EU, however, kept sanctions against President Mugabe, his wife Grace and several members of his party and service chiefs.
Meanwhile the president on Thursday defended his wife’s nomination to lead the powerful women’s wing of the ruling Zanu-PF, as the campaign to succeed him intensifies ahead of a crucial party congress.
“Why are some people so much opposed to it?” said Mugabe to hundreds of supporters who had gathered at the party’s headquarters to back him and his wife.
His wife has shaken up the race to succeed her husband, who has ruled Zimbabwe for close to 34 years since independence, by hinting she could run for higher office and lashing out at possible rivals.
“In the constitution of the party there is no where where it is written that the president’s wife cannot be a leader in the party,” Mugabe said.
The 90-year-old president said he was puzzled that some party supporters were opposed to Grace’s nomination when his late first wife Sally once held the same position in the 1980s.
Source: Fin24/AFP
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
