Tag Archives: expropriation

South Africa’s Troubled Land-ownership (1652 – 2019): Conclusions and a Dictum – Part 1 (18)

Title: South Africa’s Troubled Land-ownership (1652 – 2019): Conclusions and a Dictum – Part 1 (18)

Gabriel P Louw

iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093

Extraordinary Researcher, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Healthcare, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:

Prof. Dr GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PU for CHE), DPhil (PU for CHE), PhD (NWU)

Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: Background, discriminative, expropriation, injustice, myth, ownership, redistribution, revenge, troubled, unconstitutional.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 12: 1

1. Background

Do what is right, not what is easy nor what is popular.1

To implement South Africa’s proposed land expropriation (with or without compensation) is not going to be easy. It cannot and must not be a popular political solution. It should represent a righteous and a just outcome to all South Africans.

Is it possible for us to fulfil the above requirements? The prominent question is here, firstly: how did we arrive at this problematic situation, what story is there to tell regarding the present motivation to effect land expropriation in which the Whites and their current land holdings occupy a central position, and what is needed to launch the process of land expropriation?

Ela Gandhi2, a well-known South African activist and granddaughter of Mahatma Gandhi, provides to some extent an answer to these questions and what we need to do to rectify the mess, when she writes in the Sunday Times of the 18th March 20192:21:

I believe that we can only understand what is happening in South Africa if we acknowledge our racist history. Racist education and unbridled racial discrimination were entrenched in the various apartheid laws. Today, although most racist laws are rooted out, racist attitudes, prejudices, misconceptions and judgments remain with us.

We still use racial terms to describe South Africans. Almost all official documents require people to indicate their race. I understand the need for this – we still have a highly unequal society based on race, class and gender, and we need to know these demographics in order to bring about the needed changes. But hopefully there will be a day, sooner rather than later, when we can discard all these tags and be proudly South African.

We still have townships which are predominantly occupied by particular race groups, as was designated historically. Even though there is no law that entrenches these divisions, we are left with the separation legacies of apartheid days.

Schools have had to adjust to having children from different race groups, but racism is still encountered in schools, perhaps because not enough conscious effort has been made to train educators and the communities to think differently, to recognise and root out the racism within us.

Besides dividing South Africans into different race groups, apartheid discrimination impoverished black people by denying them occupational opportunities through job reservation policies and pass laws.

The 1913 Land Act and the Group Areas Act dispossessed many black people of their land and live hood.

We need to acknowledge the injustice and unfairness of apartheid, and we need to engage with the huge economic divide apartheid created between the rich, largely white, and the poor, largely black. A result of no acknowledgment and no sharing is that we have a large majority of people living in wealth and privileged access to resources. Racism is linked to this privilege.

There is a reluctance to rectify the injustices of the past through constructive programmes and voluntary sharing of wealth gained through apartheid privilege. Instead, there is agitation for the protection of individual rights and privileges at the expense of the common.

1.1. Introduction

The land redistribution matter — or land expropriation, as it has been many times announced to the public, in which the sensitive issue of compensation versus non-compensation features prominently — seems to have recently become a central way for the Ramaphosa regime of diverting attention away from its failure to deliver growth-boosting reforms, to curb its elite’s ongoing rent-seeking, their inability to clean up corruption and governance at state-owned enterprises and to do something to the dysfunctional state created by the ANC regime over 25 years. In this context of utter failure, Joffe3 writes3:2:

This was the year of the reality check. We began 2019 with forecasts that economic growth would lift to 1.7% and a state of the nation speech in which President Cyril  promised long-awited reforms to boost the economy and fix ailing state-owned enterprises, especially Eskom. We have ended the year flirting with recession and stage 6 load-shedding – to the “surprise and the shock” of Ramaphosa, whose economic reforms have been delivered excruciatingly slowly, if at all.

The latest GDP figures showed the economy turned negative in the third quarter; a week or more of load-shedding could see that repeated in the fourth quarter; and it’s now possible the full-year 2019 number will be negative — for the first time since 2009. SA had become a 1% economy over the past five years. Now it’s falling even below that; 2019 has driven home just how stuck we are in the low-growth trap and how hard it’s proving to get out of it, despite oft-repeated promises of reform.

The esteem and personal standing of the ANC, the Ramaphosa regime, Cyril Ramaphosa and Ace Magashule with the ordinary man on the street have never been as low as in December 2019. Ramaphosa and the ANC elite know well that they have not been ablot to generate wealth for the poor since 1994 and cannot do it post-2019. Their failed Marxist-Leninist model in economics does not allow for it. They are more and more forced to do something extraordinary to make themselves popular again. Secondly, they must find immediate wealth to get the economy going and to satisfy the poor people’s hunger and other needs to avoid unrest and revolution, and to receive support to be able to stay in power until 2024. Three clear outcomes are easily available for them to regain power and to get money on the table: land grabbing, the nationaliation of the Reserve Bank and looting the public and private pension funds. The easiest to launch and the most popular choice inside the ANC radicals’ RET (radical economic transformation) is land grabbing from Whites.3-9

The year 2020 seems to be the Year of Land Grabbing, especially because Ramaphosa must do something politically extraordinary to outlive the 2020 Mid-year Conference of the ANC. At this stage, inside South Africa’s troubled land ownership, some positive and constructive guidelines are needed to make the unavoidable, threatening land redistribution a reality and a success.

1.2. Aims of article 18

In this article (together with Article 19), the primary aim is to make conclusions, based on the arguments, opinions and viewpoints on the matter of land expropriation and to offer a dictum on whether it may be successfully be executed by the ANC regime as the present ruler or by another ruler post-2019.

This is the semi-final article in the series of nineteen articles on the matter of South African landownership. The previous seventeen articles of the series were published in the South African accredited journal Ensovoort [Volume 38 (2018), Number 12:1 to Volume 40 (2019), Number 11:7]. The short-titles of these seventeen published articles (numbered one to 17 in the series) are as follows:

  1. Who are colonists and who are indigenous people? (1);
  2. Perspectives on the background to the land ownership dispute (2);
  3. The dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime – Part 1 (3);
  4. The dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime – Part 2 (4);
  5. Age-old injustice and discriminative White political and socio-economic system – Part 1 (5);
  6. Age-old injustice and discriminative White political and socio-economic system – Part 2 – (6);
  7. Land ownership and grabbing in South Africa: King Solomon’s wisdom approach in myth and lies busting – Part 1 (7);
  8. 8. Land ownership and grabbing in South Africa: King Solomon’s wisdom approach in myth and lies busting – Part 2 (8);
  9. The EFF in perspective (9);
  10. The DA in perspective (10);
  11. The ANC in perspective (11);
  12. The ANC in perspective (12: Prosperity);
  13. The ANC in perspective (13: Violence and Crime);
  14. The ANC in perspective (14: Accountability);
  15. The ANC in perspective (15: Opportunism);
  16. The ANC in perspective (16: Outdated ANC);
  17. The ANC in perspective (17: ANC’s troubled leadership).

2. Method

The research has been done by means of a literature review. This method aims to construct a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach has been used in modern political-historical research where there is often not an established body of research, as is the case regarding the abilities of political parties to successfully execute land reform from 2019 onwards. The sources included articles from 2018, books for the period 1944 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2019. These sources were consulted to evaluate and to describe the facts that must guide us in the making of an evaluation on the suitability of the ANC as the ruler of South Africa in order to effect successful land reform from 2019 onwards.

The research findings are being presented in narrative format.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. South Africa’s troubled land ownership (1652 – 2019)

3.1.1. Overview (Articles 1 to 17)

The political dispensations of the Cape Colony of 1853 and 1872 and the Union of 1910 offered excellent opportunities to redistribute land and hand a justified part back to Blacks to create an open, just South African society. But White supremacy and its land-grabbing politics made it impossible. The later 1994 dispensation under the ANC failed again. Land redistribution from 2019 onwards will become a natural and unavoidable interference and intervention.

Land grabbing is an age-old custom in South Africa. It was practised by Blacks on Blacks as well as Whites on Blacks for more than three hundred years. It is thus of the utmost importance that this custom is not restarted again in 2019 and that a perfect solution to the present imbalance between White land ownership and Black land ownership is rapidly found, without falling back onto the past’s vicious circle of revenge and counter-revenge to erase the manifold injustices committed before 1994.

South Africa’s political history is far from completion. Also, there is an immense political history what needs to be retraced and to be rewritten, or at least to be corrected. It does not matter if we like it or not: it is a sine qua non.

For the antagonists (anti-land redistributors and mostly Whites), the period 1994 to 2019 under the ANC regime has been a dark period of criminality, state capture, confused violence, thuggery and race-baiting. It has gained a momentum that will not slow as long as the ANC is in power. The antagonists have an unshakable belief that the general public and the parliament itself will reject any change to the Constitution or would not allow land grabbing from Whites. They also believe that the South African courts, including the Constitutional Court, will denounce any illegal and unconstitutional actions by the ANC that could lead to a one-sided policy of land expropriation without full compensation. For the antagonists both Julius Malema and Cyril Ramaphosa are, as land redistributors of White land to the poor and landless Blacks, political bluffs that will soon disappear from the country’s politics.7,10-24

When comparing the arguments, opinions and viewpoints of the antagonists and the propagandists, some are based on sound foundations while others are emotionally laden and lacking in depth.7,10-24

Hereto is it clear for the propagandists (pro-land redistributors and mostly Blacks) that a mass of contaminating elements and role players, integrated and established during the age-old, unjust and discriminative White political and socio-economic system of South Africa, are obstructing any change to Section 25 of the Consitution that would enable land expropriation without compensation. The propagandists believe that myths and lies are prominent in the antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints. They believe the antagonists’ present obstruction of the land expropriation initiative is temporary, unfounded and doomed to failure. The change to Section 25, to effect land expropriation without compensation, is for the propagandists the only path to uplift the mass of Blacks from their inequality, landlessness, poverty and unemployment, and to reverse the immense land grabbing by Whites of non-Whites’ land, starting in 1652. The undoing of the historical trajectory of the age-old injustice and discriminative White political and socio-economic system of South African society is one of the biggest challenges for the present or any future government. The overwhelming interests of the mass of Black poor and landless people can no longer be ignored. The present exclusive structure of White land ownership and economic empowerment is a recipe for revolution.7,10-24

From a critical vantage point it must be noted that in general the perspective of the antagonists are not representative of the total White or Afrikaner population, but mostly of the contingent of White farm and land owners, White exclusive capitalist business groups with direct and indirect interests in agricultural economics, as well as self-appointed White “saviours and rescuers” that claim to fight unselfishly for the interests of the White farming community and for the Constitution and dispensation of 1994. (The total number of these self-appointed White “saviours and rescuers” is far lower than 300 000 of the White population of 5 milion, representing 6% of the White population).  For the propagandists it is time for the White population to purge itself of this group of 300 000 White individuals’ contamination with fallacies and racism. The other nearly 5 million Whites (outside the antagonists’ and the 35 000 White farmers’ self-interest), also have citizen interests but are side-lined and ignored by the antagonists. The antagonists are a minority group, estimated to represent less than 10% of the White population which, in reality, is another minority group, more or less 8% of the total South African population.7,10-24

For the propagandists the land-ownership matter has been well planned and blown up for a long time by ±35 000 White farmers (of which only between 5 000 and 7 000 farmers really contribute to the country’s essential daily food supply). The opportunistic group of the rest of the ±30 000 of White farmers represents less than 0.1% of the total South African population and less than 1% of the White population. This priority granted to 35 000 White farmers and their land has led to the interests of nearly 30 million poor and landless Blacks in the post-1994 Democracy being ignored. For the propagandists, it just cannot go on in this way.7,10-24

The imbalance in land ownership, together with the inequality in the country between White and Black (as well as between Black and Black) means that redistribution should occur, but it should not be offered as a panacea for poverty or be based on arguments about who is indigenous and who is not. Redistribution of land is a good symbolic act for emotional relief and political catharsis as to Apartheid’s transgressions, but the fact it that it is not going to change the lives of the poor immediately and drastically as falsely claimed by radical politicians. Land expropriation so far has been saturated with corruption and state capture in which the ANC elite has played a central role. It is only one aspect of the political and socioeconomic delinquency of the ANC. The comprehensive dysfunction of the political and socioeconomic system of South Africa since 1994, with its corrupted elements and role players, may activate a poisonous element with the ability to kill the innocent and to bring devastation to South Africa. It can only aggravate the matter further, given the ANC’s present-day politics of corruption, criminality and extreme racism, planned and executed by a strong sector within the ANC elite.7,10-24

The current problems around land redistribution are just too enormous for the current ANC political leadership to solve. When they do attend to the matter, they do it in an explosive and conflict-ridden way, creating more complex problems and crises. Indeed, the fact is that the radicals in the ANC and other political parties do not really know what they want to do with the expropriated land. They do not have a sound plan. There seems to be much revenge about the discriminative politics of the past and land grabbing, making Whites rightfully worried about their assets, as well as their personal future and safety in the country.

Land expropriation with reasonable compensation is a must that needs immediate implementation. But, where applicable, land expropriation without compensation should also be a tool to rearrange the South African scene regarding land ownership. In this the redistribution of state property should take a prominent position as the first stage of activating land expropriation. The mass of poverty, landlessness, indignity and inequality, which had become a lifestyle to nearly 30 million Blacks — people isolated from their social, economic and political rights as South Africans and exposed to immense delinquencies, that are equal to crimes against humanity — contains the potential for country-wide anarchy and revolution; which may ignite from 2020 if not fully addressed. This dangerous situation makes a just land expropriation an absolute priority.7,10-24

Land redistribution is unavoidable. It needs a solution. Whites, mostly the Afrikaners, own most of the land that the Blacks want. The prominent question is how the transfer will take place: Will it be another land grab; or will there be a reasoned, balanced and just land transfer and redistribution? The last option has been absent from all of South African political history, creating doubt if land redistribution by Whites will ever be freely and willingly allowed.

The counts awarded in terms of the bad-versus-good-classification on the Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018 25, is for the EFF a mere 8 points (9%) out of a possible maximum of 82 points (100%). This means that the EFF is an outright failure as a political institution of stature. It cannot be trusted in any way to be in charge of land expropriation. Moreover, they totally lack the experience to handle such a project.25

The DA was awarded 59 points (72%) out of the maximum 82 points.The DA reflects immense shortcomings in their experience regarding land reform — specifically on land expropriation without compensation. Where the issue of the land matter emerges in the DA’s politics, it seems to be determined and driven by White interests rather than the interests of the poor and landless Blacks. The DA is clearly a slave of exclusive capitalism and its principle of a “stretched democracy”. Since the May 2019 election the DA has shown a movement towards White right-wing politics, making just land redistribution essentially impossible and the party an improper and inappropriate ruler to effect land redistribution.The DA does not show the ability to immediately handle successful land reform.25

The awarding of 23 points (out of 82 points) to the ANC as a regime reflects that it is lacking capabilities and the general integrity as a skilled ruler. Indeed, the ANC failed the basic test to be the ruler of South Africa. Its Marxist-Leninist political ideology as to the economy, landownership and racism is outdated. Evidence is there that the ANC as a regime is going to run into trouble fast to fulfil its May 2019 election promises and to execute its basic duties to the voters. Under the ANC’s 25 years of rule most South Africans lost out on prosperity, while the the living environment of its people has become saturated with violence and crime. Its political leaders’ lifestyles are characterised by a lack of accountability and beset by extreme opportunism. The ANC is incompetent to honestly effect well-planned and balanced land redistribution, with or without compensation. Their intended plan to bring landownership to the mass of poor and landless Blacks will only create further state capture, poverty and anarchy, while a full-scale revolution becomes more and more of a reality.25

Looking at the evaluation of the three main political parties of South Africa in terms of the bad-versus-good-classification on the Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018, all three are absolutely incapable of successfully implementing balanced and justified land redistribution in the next five to ten years. To put in in even stronger terms: none of the three will ever be successful to do land redistribution in any way. The evidence is there that all three will be part of the country’s political history for the next five years.25

This leaves us with the prominent question at this stage: are there South African political parties or a political party that may fast-track the initiative of land expropriation with success into the future? This is very complex question to answer, seeing that popularity at the ballot box does not guarantee that a government of quality and ability comes to power, as the ANC regime of 25 years confirms. Defining the wrongs of our past and present politics and the immediate demand to plan and to fix our future, is the question: can land expropriation (with compensation or without compensation) be executed correctly and with justice after more than three hundred of years of failure?

3.1.2. Immediate and future negative outcomes and dangers
3.1.2.1. Unrest, anarchy and revolution

We already see from Article 13 (Violence and Crime) the extent to which chronic unrest has been established in the country. Looking critically at the uncontrollable murders in the Cape Town Area that necessitated the intervention of the SADF to curb the reign of criminal gangs, together with the burning of trucks on highways and the murder of truck drivers, South Africa has long ago moved from simple riots to chronic anarchy, bringing the country to the threshold of revolution. What is striking, is the hostility and aggressive behaviour of the mass of poor living in the growing shanty towns, also known as “informal settlements”. It initially started due to the lack of service delivery in these settlements, such as the absence of basic health care, education facilities, transport and security infrastructure, and basic accommodation. These shortcomings have been addressed in the past nor are they being tackled at the moment in any way by the ANC regime. The dramatic collapse of the economy since 2016 has led to an immense growth in unemployment, the influx of the poor from the rural areas into the cities, and a resulting lack of basic accommodation. A direct outcome of this migration, absent from the ANC elite’s as well as the broad public’s consciousness, is the significant presence of poverty among half of the South African population and the phenomenon of constant hunger experienced by the mass of poor.  In the past and worldwide, poverty and hunger have caused two opposing outcomes: Firstly, the start of revolution which has brought down regimes, leading to the large-scale killing of certain sectors of the population and radical long-term political changes within countries. Secondly, poverty and hunger in certain countries have brought a total collapse in the poor people’s intention and will to revolt against their tragic circumstances, causing them to lapse even futher and deeper into poverty and enslavement to a ruler’s oppression. We saw this negative enslavement outcome of passivity among the Black population in South Africa since 1652 and especially after 1910 with Apartheid. At the moment we are seeing it again in South Africa under the Black ANC regime, where the enslavement and oppression of the mass of poor Blacks is undoubtedly the highest ever since 1652 and where the mass of Blacks seemingly accept their poverty as their destiny. But actions cause reaction and we should not consider the ongoing unrest and anarchy as a chronic, permanent situation without any further serious outcomes. The truth is far from this, as the chronic ongoing unrest and anarchy in Algeria, Tunisia, Iraqi and Syria, which suddenly changed to deadly revolution, confirms. South Africa’s unrest and anarchy are starting to show the typical characteristics of the forerunners of a comprehensive revolution waiting to be enacted. The land-redistribution matter, together with unemployment, poverty and hunger, may be the imminent stimulant to set off revolution overnight.3-30

The advent of revolution after 2020 is a high possibility that needs to be discussed. It will be dishonest not to warn the public on the negative impact of revolution on their lives. Prominently at risk are the minority of Whites and surely the Black BBEEE-empowered businessmen and politicians such as Ramaphosa and his cronies as possible victims.3-30

Besides the element of revenge in revolution, it must be emphasised that revolution can activate blocked-up development that could not be reached normally inside the traditional political setup. The mass of Blacks (more than 30 million) stand to benefit from any South African revolution. On the virtue of revolution under certain circumstances, Mark Malloch-Brown27, a former UN Deputy Secretary-General and a minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK, in his book The Unfinished Global Revolution27 gives us a guideline when he posits:

Since the book calls for a more comprehensive global democracy where we all have more say over our local, national, and our global affairs, the Arab Spring is evidently a step in the right direction. The Arab Human Development Reports, which I had sponsored at UNDP, pointed out that of the world’s seven regions, the Arab countries had the lowest freedom scores.

The question is: if the Arab Spring was an essential outcome, why can a post-2019 South African revolution not be an essential outcome and a “step in the right direction” either?

The 1994 political dispensation was undoubtedly a revolution, but a passive revolution; one which did not bring an extreme re-balancing of South Africa’s wealth and economics. It was only a false political democracy, meaning much on paper but nothing in practice. It was a continuation of Apartheid, with all its evil. It was a planned revolution by the ANC top brass and the NP-AB top brass to suite their own interests. Features that characterise most active revolutions — actions such as land grabbing without compensation, the prosecution of the Apartheid penetrators for human-rights violations, the activation of inclusive capitalism and job creation — were totally absent. The critical evaluation of the reports of the ANC’s referees (see Articles 12 to 17 of this series), shows that this passive revolution, launched in 1994, was essentially an outright failure. Firstly, it brought more poverty to the mass of Blacks, demolished certain established facilities such as healthcare and education while the landlessness of the poor Blacks stayed unchanged. The second outcome was that a repressive pre-1994 political-economic-social regime was merely replaced with a comprehensively economically repressive post-1994 regime.3-24

The question is: if a radical, active revolution had indeed been implemented in 1994, would it have solved masse Black poverty, joblessness and their lack of landownership as we are experiencing now? The answers are a Yes as well as a No. These opposing two answers must be read in the political histories reflecting revolutions that have played out worldwide over many years. It would be foolish to say that revolution does not work and is an evil. It is not true. The Liberation War of the North American Colonies from Great Britain brought them, besides statutory independence, political, economic and social empowerment that have made the USA the most powerful nation in the world today. The French revolution brought for the lower and middle class, as well as the poor, emancipation from the domination of the rich aristocracy, but on the other hand it has left them to this day with a kind of political immaturity as reflected in their constant unrest which borders on anarchy. The Russian revolution also brought freedom to the poor, the lower and middle class from the domination of the nobility but led directly to the institution of another repressice regime, the Communists, with role players like Stalin up to Putin today. In Africa there were  many active revolutions, with essentially not a single one bringing long-term positive outcomes. Prominent examples in this regard are the Egyptian, Zimbabwean, and Ugandan revolutions.27

Mark Malloch-Brown27, on the phenomenon of positive revolutionary outcomes at certain times and in certain situations, bringing at last human rights to suppressed and discriminated-against people after centuries of suffering, gives good insight when he  writes27:250: “First, that the power of the people, when right is on their side, is always unstoppable.” Prominent stands the fact that the potentials for revolutions are mostly observable, reflecting to the insiders and outsiders that anything in political setups is possible and must be accepted. Mostly is this “incoming revolution” not only ignored, but see as impossible to can and will spring-up. Malloch-Brown27 emphasis that the Arab Spring revolution (to spring up in 2010-2011 in Tunisia and Egypt) was already observable in 2002 (eight years earlier), but ignored and laughed down as the impossible and not to be a serious concern by the authorities and experts. The corrupted leaders go on for nearly a decade to reign in Tunisia and Egypt before the social time bomb, that had been set over many years, had gone off.   But when a certain crisis hits – sometimes a small energy-stimulant is needed to activate it, like the Arab Spring — the surprise is great.27 Malloch-Brown27 writes272:45-246:

The Arab spring began with an auspicious, if tragic, start: the self-immolation of a Tunisian street seller, Mohammed Bouazizi [who could be as well a said Andile Zuzile in South Africa]. On December 18, 2010, he set himself alight because he felt threatened and ignored by corrupt, bullying local police officers [who had, because of their corrupted empowerment coming over years under a corrupted regime, fall into a state of thinking to do what they want and to do this for ever unchallenged].The power of  his protest came from the fact that his desperate frustration was shared by so many others [same as the present-day 30-million ignored impoverished and landless Blacks of South Africa]. His act lit the dry timber of latent anger against a line of corruption and privilege that stretched from the local female police constable, who ignored his complains, to President Ben Ali, his wife and his family. By the time Bouazizi died from his burns on January 4, 2011, the region was catching fire.

The act was auspicious because such apparent futility and weakness brought down an apparently all powerfully political order. And, indeed this David and Goliath theme of weakness confronting strength and prevailing was a steady part of the early months of the Arab spring. Peaceful protestors, drawing courage from the links to each other and the outside world… saw off heavily armed government forces. Yet it took only from December 18, Bouazizi’s burning, to February 11, 2011 for… Ben Ali to be driven from office.

Does the above situation of Mohammed Bouazizi differ from that of the unknown South African Black Andile Zuzile? No, it does not differ an inch. Does the Tunisian political, social and economic disorder under the regime of Ben Ali differ from the disorder under the ANC regime between 1994 and 2019? Again, no, it does not differ an inch. Is the said Andile Zuzile (as was Mohammed Bouazizi seemingly seen at the beginning of his action) the only sufferer and victim of the corrupt 1994 to 2019 regime in South Africa? No, apart from him there are 29, 900, 999 other Black sufferers and victims in South Africa. Are the dissatisfactions and demands of the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutionaries different from the mass of South African Blacks’ dissatisfactions and demands? No: it was also primarily about the price of bread, demands for jobs, as well as affordable goods and services, etc. And, most of all, a say in politics regarding one’s own affairs. It was not so much about differences in social classes, religions or races. Is the mentioned Andile Zuzile at this stage insignificant for the ANC elite? Yes. It is true that the Marxist-Leninist ANC regime sees Andile Zuzile as an insignificant role player in their political thinking, revealing the ANC elite’s lack of in-depth contact with the masses. In this context Redi Tlhabi30 refers to the book A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens in which he describes the circumstances of the poor and landless people which led to the French Revolution and the followeding reign of terror. She writes, comparing the two delinquent regimes and their leaderships30:20:

Die kloof tussen die wat dié wat lei en dié wat gelei word, word groter en groter.

Dit het in Suid-Afrika gebeur.

Ons kan dalk nie die presiese tydstip aandui toe die kloof gevorm is nie, maar daaglikse uitsprake, besluite en optredes laat ons met geen twyfel nie dat die ANC – die party wat gevorm is deur eerbiedige mans soos John Dube, Pixley ka Isaka Seme en Sol Plaatje – sy vinger van die pols van die nasie gehaal het nie.

Hulle [ANC-topleiers] is besig om mense te “ontdek” en te paradeer wat geraak is deur hul latenskap van onbekwaamheid, korrupsie, swak dienslewering en ja, onbetrokkenheid.

What A Tale of Two Cities30 also tells us is that when the fires of revolution start they are not easily stopped: in France it required a Napoleon Bonaparte, a blood-thirsty dictator, to remove the revolutionaries from politics and to clean up their mess. (This intervention must stand as a warning for revolutionaries such as Zuma, Magashule, Ramaphosa, Mabuza and Malema about a possible destiny awaiting them).

But, cautions Malloch-Brown27, revolution does not always immediately bring success. He writes27:244:

…the notion that the force of street protests that begins a revolution subsequently loses its way in the long, less glamorous, sequel of taking power will not be new. Indeed, in my experience, the completion of the shift from overthrow of the old to a more stable democratic order is on average a ten-year project. Much beyond the ballot box has to change. The old elite’s grip on absolute economic power has to be prized open, a culture of democratic openness and minority rights forged, a civil society given political oxygen to breathe and grow, a justice system people respect and trust established. Nearly always new governments struggle to make these changeas while also battling a legacy of economic failure and pent-up popular demands for job and basic services that they have inherited from their failed predecessors. In Egypt and Tunisia, all these conditions for a long, difficult journey to a “finished” revolution are present. Elsewhere the challenges are more difficult still.

It is significant that the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions, which started in 2010, are still in 2019  far from over. Moreover, true democratic stability has so far not been reached [in line with Malloch-Brown’s27 estimation that the growth from an old order to a more (hopeful)  stable democratic order is on average a ten-year project. Especially in Egypt, there has been little improvementin the country’s autocratic politics up to 2019. It is also a fact that South Africa’s passive revolution, with its duration stretching over 25 years, is also far from over.27

In South Africa the passive revolution, launched by the 1994 Political Dispensation, did not entail revenge on so-called Apartheid wrongdoers. There were some “emotional confessions” which were drowned in religious dogma offering the cleansing of the political sins of the culprits, mostly the Whites. Then there was the intended prosecution by the NPA of political wrongdoers, also mostly Whites. Again, a failure to fulfil the demands of revenge: jailing, confiscation of assets, the compensation of the Black sufferers under Apartheid. The “1994 revolution” was a soft revolution without real punishment of the obvious culprits: Whites. All that was realised was BBEEE as a punishment of Whites, and cadre deployment as a punishment of anti-ANC Blacks obstructing the ANC elite’s delinquencies.3-24

The most recent revolution in the world, where one autocratic regime was replaced by yet another (more extreme) autocracy, is Iran. Iran’s past political structure had the same kind of basis as that of South Africa and needs some elaboration. One of the prominent outcomes in Iran, as during the French revolution, was revenge on the previous ruling class: the nobles and elite. Not only were they eliminqted from regime structures and their ownership of assets dismantled, but they were also physically killed.

3.1.2.1.1. The 1978 Iranian revolution

To understand what a “real” revolution and a “real” revenge mean, it is needed to look at Iran’s revolution which started in 1978 and is still going on today in the guise of various forms of instability. At the same time it gives it us some criteria to compare post-1994 South Africa under the Marxist-Leninist ANC regime with some of the characteristics of the Iranian post-1978 religious-extremist regime. The post-1978 setup in the end did not bring improvements to the Iranians, not even for the first group of revolutionaries. The well-known international writer and world-traveller, the late Sir VS Naipaul31, gives us a good description of the post-1978 failed Iran in his book, entitled: Beyond Belief: Islamic excursions among the converted peoples.31

In Iran the regime was run from the 1930s by Reza Shah, who was succeeded by his son, the last Shah. Both of the two rulers’ regimes’ were autocratic, repressive and much hated. Especially the last Shah’s SAVAK (secret police) was cruel. The Iranian revolution of 1978 did not come as a surprise — all the characteristics needed for an uprising were there, such as repression, food scarcity, lack of freedom, etc. But the identity of the role players who took power in the end, ignoring the true revolutionaries’ dreams, was indeed a surprise. The main role player, the opportunist and madman Khomeini first arrived on the scene after the revolution’s beginning, heading from there into his precisely planned direction of evil and murder by hijacking the whole exercise with his exclusive religious group. He embarked on the next phase, a religious-cultural revolution, intertwined with a political revolution. This outcome elicited the following response from one of the initial revolutionaries31:183: “We may win the revolution, but culturally we will go back a thousand years”, and31:183: “You will never gain anything following theses religious people. We have known them. We have seen them. These are the people who didn’t let me [female] learn reading and writing.”  On the further outcomes of the revolution Naipaul31, quoting the experience of the mentioned Iranian Ali just after the start of the revolution, reports31:170:

Some people Ali knew, supporters of the revolution, turned against it after the first month. Ali thought he should give it a little more time. But then, about two months after the revolution, when the executions began, he had serious doubts. People who had done nothing were arrested and taken to jail. Many of them disappeared. Then they started charging into people’s houses, confiscating their properties. We had no security for our property our children or our wife.

Naipaul31 further recounts Ali’s experience31:201: “He had his doubts about the drift of the revolution, and soon things began to be bad. There were religious regulations. Women had to wear the chador and the full headdress; music and cultural events were banned. There were restrictions on the press. There was a “cultural revolution,” as it was called; all the universities were closed.” But this was only the beginning, as Ayatollah Khalkhalli in 1979 said31:201: “The mullahs are going to rule now [they still did in 2019]. We are going to have ten thousand years of the Islamic Republic. The Marxists [their initial partners in the revolution] are going to go on with their Lenin. We are going to go on in the way of Khomeini.” Inside Khalkhalli’s malcognition is to be found his own dream of blood, to equal what Stalin did in Russia. Naipaul31, quoting Khalkhalli, writes:31:201 “What he did in Russia we have to do in Iran. We too have to do a lot of killing. A lot.”

Ali’s31 testimony goes further31:173:

There was now, too, a constant harassment from the Revolutionary Guards [still fully governing Iran in 2019], jumping into the garden and looking through the windows to see whether anyone was looking at television or videos, or breaking into the house to search for alcohol or ham or women’s dresses or men’s neckties, all now forbidden things.

And if you were cleanly dressed, they didn’t like it. They would attack you. It was like Pol Pot, but not so extreme. Ten precent. It was a full revolution.

The reins of government went altogether out of the hands of government, out of control. It was anarchy and terror. The reason was Khomeini himself.

In this context Naipaul31 points out that, to make up for his lack of money to supply the mullahs’ immense needs, Khomeini31 said31:173: “Go to your own towns. Find the first man who is rich or the first man who has a factory or a huge farm. And force him to pay.”

On this order by Khomeini to the mullahs in which theft is presented as “honest” and “morally correct”, Ali31 reports31:175:

Khomeini has set a bad example. Every ayatollah now can claim necessity, as Khomeini often did, and break the law. And Iran was still living with his Islamic constitution, which gave him supreme power, and established the principle of leadership and obedience.

On the further consequences of Khomeini’s delinquency, Ali states31:174-175:

The majority [people] wanted to loot. So, he [Khomeini] made disorder in the country and let them loot. He did what they wanted.

When he [Khomeini] said “follow the law, it wasn’t the law of the country. It was his law, the law in his own mind. Before the revolution he said it was un-Islamic to pay taxes to the government. After, he said it was Islamic to pay taxes to the government. He wanted complete chaos. That day in his house I realized this man is not a man of government. He was still a revolutionary. He couldn’t control himself. Until the very last day he was making disorder.

He had an instinctive brain. He was instinctively intelligent, an instinctive, animal intelligence. Because of this he could command the people. He did not have an educational intelligence. He did’nt become emotional. He was very cool.

Looked at from the viewpoint of clinical psychology, it seems as if Khomeini’ s brain function was one of psychopathy. This is borne out by his and his cronies’ undermentioned killing spree.

On the killing spree between 1978 and 1979 (it went on for many years), Naipaul31 writes31:200:

When I went to Theran in August 1979, Ayatollah Khalkhalli, the hanging judge of the revolution, was a star. The Islamic Revolutionary Court [the shah’s old military court] in Shariati Street was sitting almost round the clock, as Ali had said. People were being killed all the time in Evin Prison and trucks were taking away the bodies through the blue gates at night.

There was nothing secretive or abashed about the killings. Some revolutionary official was keeping count, and regularly in the Theran Times there was an update. In the beginning the counting was to show how clement the revolution was; later, when the killing became too much, the counting stopped. In those early days official photographs were taken of people before they were killed and after they were killed — killed and, as it were, filed away, naked on the sliding mortuary slab, in the giant filing cabinet of the morgue. These pictures were on sale in the streets.

Ayatollah Khalkhalli, the ruler of the Islamic Revolutionary Court, was open to the press. He gave many boastful interviews.

Naipaul31 writes further31:188:

Khalkhalli, in an interview [August 1979]  with the Theran Times…said that he “probably” sentenced three to four hundred people to death [in less than one year]. On some nights, he said, the trucks had taken thirty or fourty bodies out of the prison.

Comparing the above description of the Khomeini regime and his cronies’ actions with the letters of the referees on the delinquent actions of the ANC top brass between 1994 and 2019 (see: Articles 11 to 17), and the ANC’s pre-1994 political history, there seem to be immense similarities. Remember: both regimes and their leaders were committed to the revolutionary ethos, of taking without creating, as well as extremism in politics. In both of the two organisations, some of the leaders had blood on their hands,  both constantly broke the law during their rule and engaged in state capture. It gives us a warning what could happen after 2019 if things went wrong for the ANC elite’s grip on power.

3.1.2.1.2. Death mostly for the initial revolutionist

Revolution mostly brings death to the initial revolutionist, however noble his intention was to better his country. The recalcitrant holding on to power and actions of the old class whose regimes are challenged, as well as their tendency to turn to extreme repression to staunch the revolutions and their revolutionaries, are reflected by the counter-actions of Bashar al-Assad in Syria over many years. Most revolutions have gone down fast, unknown many times to the outsider, because suppression of the masses has been efficiently kept out of the public eye. The murdering spree of Bashar Assad’s father in 1982 of up to 20 000 people in Syria on a single occasion, was kept out of the news for long.27

The question is here: was there a pre-1994 revolution by South African Blacks against their suffering? Yes, there was the 1960s Black Revolution which gradually, with the impact of other determinants, spelt the end of Apartheid and the elimination of the NP from political, emotional and cognitive mindsets (although only three decades later). In the 1960s South Africa’s Black Revolution (undoubtedly, in line with the same reasons why present-day unrest and anarchy are kept under wraps, but now possibly on a higher level of dissatisfaction and more broadly experienced), was kept away from the news, as well as the NP’s bloody actions to stamp out this revolution with its immense security force and the elimination of the Black revolutionaries.27,28 The rapid phasing out of the 1960s Black Revolution was directly attributable to the absolute suppression of the Blacks by the security forces of the NP. As Malloch-Brown27 writes27:243: “Yet revolution is not easily sparked in a world where rulers govern with an iron hand. The examples of successful revolution in the Arab world were few and far between.’

South Africa’s 1960s Black Revolution went the same way as that of the many failed revolutions at the time in extreme authoritarian states. But today the ANC is a Black government where a racial guideline for the murder of the Black masses (we hope) is less defined than during the period 1652 to 1994. In addition, the ANC regime is thankfully not armed and trained to the same high level as that of the NP military of the 1960s. For the current South African revolutionaries to be gobbled up by the ANC regime and its incapable securirity forces is impossible. Read herewith the unionisation of the security forces and the presence of Black tribalism in the security forces, any significant bloodletting of Blacks by Blacks in the ANC regime, to avoid a revolution, will not easily be put into action. Neither must it be expected that if a revolution started, it would be quickly and effectively curtailed.26

3.1.2.1.3. Extreme Islamic politics inside a South African revolution

But various African-Black revolutionary efforts since 1960s against the White NP regime and its forces were not the only attempted revolutions. The terrorist expert De Wet Potgieter29 points out that during Apartheid repression a small group of Islamic extremists exploited low-intensity urban warfare in South Africa, after which this Islamic extremism started to flourish with a growing intensity.There was in the Western Cape the Qibla Mass Movement (Qibla), based on Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini doctrine. This group emerged as a militant pro-Shiite one, modelled on the Iranian Revolution, with the objective of implementing and establishing strict Islamic principles in South Africa. [This organisation also went under the names Muslims-Against-Global-Oppression (MAGO) and Muslims-Against-Illegimate-Leaders (MAIL)]. It paved the way for a more violent organisation, writes Potgieter29, which came to the fore in 1996 as the violent organisation People against Gangsterism and Drugs (Pagad). Qibla was fast labelled as a terrorist organisation by the USA government. It had already started back then to send its members overseas for military training in Libya, later Pakistan, who were deployed in the 1990s to fight in South Libanon with Hezbollah. At the millennium more than 100 Qibla members were arrested for violence-related activities and murder in South Africa. Before that, in 1995, reports Potgieter, the Isamic Unity Convention emerged, representing more than 250 Muslim groups in South Africa. Qibla was the central body within the movement and before 9/11 Qibla had already crossed swords with the USA for its activities in that country.  After the 9/11 attack Qibla sent fighters to Afghanistan. Central to all of this, is a figure such as Achmad Cassiem, a radical Islamic cleric who joined the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) at the age of 15 years and was later sent to Robben Island after having been sentenced for terrorism, attempted murder and the possession of arms and ammunition.29

This build-up in the presence of Muslim revolutionists became clear in 1998 in South Africa with their attack on Planet Hollywood at the popular V&A Waterfront in Cape Town. This was after Pagad had started to target businesses in Cape Town, in response to the US retaliatory attacks in the Middle East after the 9/11 attack.29 Potgieter29 writes on this 1998 radical Muslim attack29:31:

South Africans would never in their wildest dreams have believed that terror would return to the country a mere four years after the newfound freedom of a democratic society under Mandela’s Rainbow Nation. Unfortunately, this false sense of a peaceful transition to a new life of freedom and peace was short-lived with the global terror reaching our shores at the southern tip of Africa.

The above sets out the basic presence of Islamic terrorists in South Africa. Included would be the presence of ISIS in the country, exposing South Africa today to the threat of international terrorism. The country’s liberal foreign policy towards the Middle East and the ANC regime’s anti-American position do not safeguard it from Islamic terrorism. So far, the ANC regime has openly tolerated the existence of Islamic terrorists in South Africa, even it seems blind to the presence of these groups training all over the country, as well as their movements up into Africa. This empathy and passivity of the ANC regime is to a great extent (besides its long-established brotherhood with terrorist regimes of countries in Africa and South America) due to a fear of Islamic counter-actions if they were arrested and prevented from pursuing their terrorism from here to the outside world.29 This fear and passivity of the ANC regime Potgieter29 describes as follows29:33:

The ‘war against terrorism’ is ultimately a chess game in which governments need to be aware that their actions will have consequences, and although counter-measures might be successful in the short term, that might not be the case in the medium to the long term. In other words: states, through their actions, might win a battle (the arrest or elimination of prominent suspects) but ultimately lose the war against terrorism — by driving individuals to extremism and terrorism.

This “unofficial peace agreement” of the ANC regime with the Islamic radicals does not assure a permanent outcome of brotherhood and peace, as well as the absence of attacks on the South Africa state and its system by the Islamic radicals. Especially not for the ultra-extremist Islamic terrorists who have since 1960s clearly wanted an Islamic state with all its principles established here, in contradistinction to the liberal Christian and exclusively capitalist setups that have been dominant since 1652. For the time being, the ANC regime’s sympathy and alliance with terrorism (extending to its pre-1994 years) fits the situation of the radical Islamics well here, while the present low profile and passivity of the radical Islamics within the ANC regime’s political, economic and cultural composition, is  also a temporary characteristic which can change overnight. In the aftermath of the Syrian and Iraq wars, their internal conflicts and political disfunction, the true role and planning of the radical Islamics for the first time emerged with a bloody capture of parts of the two countries. On the other hand, the so-called end of the ISIS caliphate does not spell the end of a theoretical ISIS Caliphate, the ideology of ISIS and the elimination of ISIS jihadists from geopolitics: they are permanent ‘war fixtures” in the world. The fact that many of these jihadists have returned to South Africa and to other Western countries, makes them nothing less as than “soldiers of fortune”. In this case there are many similarities with the “Christian Crusaders” who had fought under the banner of Christianity all over the Middle-East against Islam, and today’s Islamic jihadists. In both cases their self-enrichment and pursuit of power are prominent and their quest for new political, economic and cultural terrority, to which the politically unstable South Africa exposes itself for easy capturing.29

3.1.2.1.4. Political radicalism-in-waiting

It seems in 2019 that South Africans, in terms of the political instability and lawlessness created by the ANC regime and its leadership, are foolishly naive regarding political radicalism (which is often practised in the guise of radical religiousness). The radicalism in the ANC and the EFF is not so innocent as the political term “Black Nationalism” might suggest. Potgieter, in this context, postulates29:35: “Accepting that South African nationals might become involved in transnational terrorism is an unfortunate reality.” It is a fact that our borders have become lawless territories, ruled by marauding gangsters and human traffickers who allow the infiltration of well-trained and experienced jihadists. The issuing of South African identity and passport documents to international jihadists and allowing the stay of international jihadists, fleeing Western forces after the fall of their ISIS state, is an every-day fact. The use of South Africa as the springboard for Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists has become a prominent issue. The passivity of the ANC regime allowed that Al-Qaeda-linked small training camps had not only been established since 2010, but had started to spread all over the country, alleges Potgieter29. These small camps and their trained terrorists are waiting patiently to act when the time is right and the conditions in their favour.

The notion that the terrorists of Al Shabaab and Al-Qaeda or Boko Haram will not attack the South African state and its vulnerable political system because the ANC is an ex-terrorist organisation and is sympathic to the terrorists’ ideology, is foolish.  Potgieter29 writes on the Kenyan Hotel attack29:35:

Many will say that such groups have no reason to attack us. They will say that Kenya was attacked because its troops are in Somalia, where Al Shabaab operates. They are wrong.

Terror does not work that way. We are currently cooperating with the Kenyan authorities and a link as tenuous as that is enough to set off an attack on us.

Further, reason and logic are alien to such groups. Their tactics are to scare communities into submission. It does not matter who they attack. They seek  chaos and attention. They want to make a spectacle.

The patient waiting game by djihadists described above, seems to be in line with the more recent insurgency in Southern Africa — which the journalist Simon Allison32 describes as a” faceless insurgency”— that has started in October 2017 against a police station in the town of Mocimboa da Praia, Mozambique, to be followed in June 2018 by an attack in the Cabo Delgado province of northern Mozambique. Such attacks constitute a string of aimless assaults on the security forces and civilians without anyone claiming responsibility for it. In the June attack, 40 people were killed, some with extreme cruelty and at least 400 houses were burnt down, displacing more than 1 000 people. For such a significant conflict, out of the blue, there has been surprisingly little reliable information available, reports Allison.32 Until now, the situation has not changed, leaving the void as to information and understanding intact while the violence intensified in Mozambique. Allison32 reports there are now an average of two to three attacks a week while at least 120 persons have died. On this confusion and lack of knowledge regarding the assailants, Allison32 writes32:20:

Even local journalists can’t talk about it because the culture of intimidation is there. Yeah, it’s confusing. It’s really confusing. Even the government is confused. How can you negotiate with people when you don’t know who they are?

This same initial confusion as to “what is going on” and “who is behind the unrest” had struck the governments of Syrya and Iraq at the start of their wars, before ISIS with its unique ideology, took off its mask. The editor32 of the idependent online newspaper @Verdade in Mozambique, Erik Charas32, said32:20: “I have never come across something like this before. Never, not [even] during the Renamo war. It doesn’t even resemble the other Islamic State movements. This is completely different.”

There is no doubt that the South African djihadists’ début in politics will also take place in a unique way and possibly be associated with radicals in the EFF and the ANC who have already declared, in their intention to effect land grabbing from Whites, their participation in a revolution to come.

3.1.2.1.5. Political dissatisfaction-scoring  

To indicate how the dissatisfaction (during the Black Revolution) of the 1960s of the black masses under the white NP-regime compares with the 2019 dissatisfaction of the black masses under the black-ruled ANC-regime, is not easy, seeing that a kind of Malloch-Brown Arab Human Development Report27 is absent here to reflect scores. The Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018,25 can effectively be used in this instance to award, in terms of the bad-versus-good-classification, a single count of both South African regimes and executive political leadership between: a) 1652 and1994; and b) 1994 to 2019. The central hypothesis is that a low satisfaction rating (50% and lower) with their political rights for the periods: a) 1652 to 1994 and b) 1994 to 2019, respectively for all South African voters (as with the low Arab ratings on the existing freedoms reflect on their “readiness for revolution” by being regarded “as a step in the right direction”), will also reflect how ready South Africans are for “revolution as a step in the right direction.”25,33

For the period 1652 to 1994 on Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction, a score of 42 (51%) out of a possible 82 points, was awarded. This means there was an average dissatisfaction reflected by South Africans in pre-1994 South Africa. Revolutionary activities during that period contradict the opinion that pre-1994 South Africans had a strong tendency towards starting revolution. This low dissatisfaction score possibly also explains why the fomenting of a revolution in the 1960s was easily suppressed by the NP regime.25,33

The count awarded to the ANC and its leadership for the period 1994 to 2019 in terms of the bad-versus-good-classification of satisfaction on the Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018,25 out of a possible maximum of 82, is 23 (26%). This means there is serious dissatisfaction reflected by South Africans in the post-1994 South Africa. The hypothesis is confirmed that the mass of South Africans can see (as did the Arabs low scores on freedom reflect that the “doing of revolution” by them “as a step in the right direction”), post-2019 as the correct time of “revolution as a step in the right direction”.25,33

It is also important to reflect on General Jan Smuts’ words, now a true cliché after more than a century’s use, when he said that South Africa will never give it best but also never give its worst. As with many politicians and their statements, Smuts failed to offer a precise scale to ascertain his notions of “best” and “worst”, and thus the extremes of bad and good can be expected.34 In terms of the Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 201825 the challenge is to rate what Smuts34 tried to say in 1910 and how in some way a measurement of the concepts of the “best” and “worst” for the period 1910 up to 2019 should be designed in a suitable way. The classification of the information was done in terms of a Black political history, meaning how blacks had experienced their situation historically speaking. Firstly, in terms of the worst versus the best, categorising was done in terms of: 1) political dissatisfaction versus political satisfaction; 2) keenness to start a revolution versus reluctance to start a revolution; and 3) ability to launch a revolution versus inability to start a revolution. Secondly, each of the above categories allocated ten points to quantifying values on the 1 on the scale as absolute low versus the 10 on the scale as absolute high. Thirdly, the period 1910 to 2019 was divided into four time frames: 1910; 1948, 1994 and 2019. All the calculations were done in terms of these particular time frames.25,33

The scores were as follows25,33:

Political dissatisfaction: 1910: 6; 1948: 7; 1994: 9; 2019: 9.
Political satisfaction: 1910: 4; 1948: 3; 1994: 1; 2019: 1.

Keenness to start a revolution: 1910: 5; 1948: 7; 1994: 9; 2019: 9.
Reluctance to start a revolution: 1910: 5; 1948: 3; 1994: 1; 2019: 1.

Ability to launch a revolution: 1910: 3; 1948: 3; 1994: 5; 2019: 9.
Inability to launch a revolution: 1910: 7; 1948: 7; 1994: 5; 2019: 1.

From the above results it is clear that the political dissatisfaction of 1994 and 2019 are similar and has attained the highest level with a score of 9 (In contrast, political satisfaction for 1994 and 2019 attained the lowest count with a score of 1). The rating for keenness to start a revolution for 1994 and 2019 are at the highest level with a score of 9 (In contrast, the reluctance to start a revolution for 1994 and 2019 obtained the lowest level with a score of 1). The ability to launch a revolution in 1994 (possibly as a result of the NP’s strong and able security forces) was only 5 while in 2019 it has obtained a score of 9 (in a context in which blacks have become politically empowered and are actually manning the security forces, free from white dominance). It is obvious from the above outcome that 1994 was the year in which the Apartheid setup was experienced the most negatively since 1910 by blacks ( with a political dissatisfaction count: 9). In 1994, black rule and democracy were still absent. This explosive situation was one of the reasons why the NP regime had faced a strong push to “abdicate” or face a full-scale revolution in 1994. But also, as reflected in 2019, in a general climate in which blacks are supposed to be “free”, a score of 9 regarding political dissatisfaction has been registered. This result highlights the fact that the negative political outlook of blacks in 1994 has not not changed in any way in 2019, except that in 2019 the political scene has become far more volatile and potentially explosive than in 1994. It is confirmed by the ability of the masses of poor and landless people to foment revolution: Here the score of 9, is already four figures higher than 1994’s rating of 5.25,33

3.1.2.1.6. Post-2019 revolution-in-waiting

On the issue of a possible post-2019 revolution heading for South Africa, it is important to emphasize that the political differences between the group of revolutionaries that is able to steer the revolution and unit of the ANC elite who is currently governing the country (coming from pre-1994 and continuing after post-1994), is zero. They are all revolutionaries, born from the same pre-1994 terrorist organisation, the Marxist-Leninist ANC. They are mostly individuals who underwrite the same political ideology, which has been varying from classic to neo-Marxism. So why will they revolt against their own organisation? The answer is found in the existing two ANC liberator identities today: the unscrupulous ANC-elite versus the impoverished masses of black people (30-million plus), which include the ANC-members (less than a million) and the ANC followers (less than 10 million).

The author and political analyst Redi Tlhabi30 referred to the fact that although it has not been possible to identify the date of the above split, when the ANC-elite moved away from the South African people, the gap is enormous and is growing constantly.30 The editor35 of the Mail & Guardian, in an editorial in February 2019 under the heading35:32: “The sad fact is the state is ripe for picking”, pinpointed the date of the divorce exactly however: 1994. He refers to the book of the late Sampie Terreblanche, tittled: Lost in Transformation: South Africa’s Search for a New Future since 1986. Terreblanche,35 argues the editor35, clearly pinpointed that the ANC’s leadership (from Nelson Mandela) bartered away its revolutionary ideals for the pragmatism and acceptance of big business. There was only one intention for this leadership: its own self-enrichment and personal financial empowerment. This was one side and a secret decision by the ANC elite (which includes Cyril Ramaphosa as a writer of the Constitution and supporter of the 1994 Dispensation) with their acceptance of the dishonest 1994 Political Dispensation. In the meantime this leadership, without batting an eyelid, went on to send out and to propagate the false ideology of the pre-1994 ANC, namely that its primary aim and intention is to enrich and uplift the masses of black people caught in the scourge of inequality, poverty and landlessness. This false ideology, which has been repeated for twenty-five years, was and still is signalled to every ordinary ANC supporter. It has now been unmasked, but it was not done by the Zuma-Magashule-Mabuza-Ramaphosa clan of racketeers who are marketing themselves as revolutionaries to save, as they allege, the post-2019 ANC and the country. These four marketeers’ intention is not to save and to restructure the present “sick” ANC, but to worsen the plight of the masses of blacks, their chaotic position in 2019 South Africa to assure a Marxist-Leninist government under a powerful politburo. It is the grassroots of the ANC, especially the dissatisfied black jobless and poor youth, who are now taking on the task of liberation and revolution to advance the masses of black people.35

Reflecting the split in 1994 – and the ANC’s failure already then to rule with honesty and integrity to improve the lives the black masses – between the rich and the poor, which is based on the division between the ANC elite and the ANC’s ordinary members and followers, the editor35 of the Mail & Guardian quotes Terreblanche’s35 words35:32“While the ANC operated on the moral high ground during the anti-apartheid struggle, since 1994 they have slipped into a sleazy underworld where corruption, nepotism and money squandering are the order of the day, so that South Africa could become a neo-colonial satellite of the American-led neoliberal empire. Although the ANC has been the government of South Africa since 1994, we could allege that it is still not ‘ready to govern’.” 

This sustained failure and inability evident within the small circle of the ANC regime, coming from 1994, goes even deeper: it is a function of the ANC’s elite seemingly extraordinary ability to mesmerise the ANC party and its millions of unsuspecting supporters till today with their ideology and promises of liberating the black masses.30,35

The editorial35 of the Mail & Guardian is correct when it postulates that the sad fact is that the South African state is ripe for picking: For many this picking – or more precisely: this revolution-in-waiting – is merely a reappropriation by the masses of poor and landless blacks of the ANC as a party, and possibly also the capturing of the state. Here the notion of being black is a central theme. Helen Zille36 puts it in perspective on the 21st  April 2019 when she says36:9: “We are seeing the resurrection of racial nationalism in our country. It is highly retrogressive and I think it will take South Africa down a cul-de-sac. We will eventually come to realise that but the cost will be high. And I am very sad we are going to have to go down that path, very sad, before we achieve the vision of our Constitution.”

Malloch-Brown’s27 prerequisite for the activating of a revolution — and that such a happening can sometimes be a good event to better people’s tragic setup — fits well into the 2019 dysfunctional South Africa, and the seeming intention by the masses of blacks (ANC-supporters and non-supporters) to take back their so-called country from the mischievous ANC elite.  Tabane37, quoting Azapo president StrikeThokoane’s view, reports on the 21st April 2019, on this disenchantment of supporters with the present-day ANC37:9:

Azanian People’s Organisation (Azapo) president Strike Thokoane has an interesting analogy for explaining why many black people who supported the ANC for a long time are now turning to other parties 25 years since the dawn of democracy.

“I always liken this to a priest who tries to preach on Christmas Day or New Year eve when people are enjoying themselves at a party. He tries to say, ‘Jesus Christ saves’ but the noise of the entertainment is drowning him out.

But when they get sober, they want to go to the same person and say, ‘By the way, what were you saying about Jesus?”

He [Thokoane] says that, for a long time after 1994, black people were very complacent about democracy, thinking they had “arrived”.

“Our people were told that they have arrived and have nothing to do anymore. Everybody believed what they were told and promised. As a result , they were not even listening to the voice of Azapo. Others listened, but they thought we were rather too extreme and radical.”

The above view and the pleading of Strike Thokoane36, reflect again on Zille’s warning of the resurrection of racial nationalism and the coming of the collapse of the South African state. It goes beyond these issues in 2019 when he says that Azapo stands for the reversing of the betrayal of promises to by the ANC to the people.36,37 Tabane37 writes37:9:

We tell them, “Azapo stands for dignity of black people. Hence it is black consciousness roots. It is not anti white, but it is pro black. We love black people more.

The struggle had been sold. Black people have been sold for money and profit. Land has become fashionable but we have died for land. Our heroes have died for it. Land must be reconquered. So, we must repossess it so that we can redistribute it.

Unlike those who want to expropriate without compensation, we believe that, when you expropriate, you suggest it belongs to someone else and you are taking it by force. Repossession, however, means this belongs to us and we are taking it back.

Land needs to be possessed by black people after it was unlawfully stolen. We must reconquer.”

It must also be noted that there is the extreme radical standpoint of the Black First Land First (BLF) on land by its leader Andile Mngxitama38:4:

“…the BLF, unlike the ANC and the EFF, is serious on its stance on the land issue. The FFPlus knows that if we get into Parliament, we will not drag our feet on the matter. The ANC and the EFF make up more than two thirds of parliament; why do you think they have not amended the Constitution by now? They are in the pockets of these landowners and are protecting their interests.

…should the party be removed from the ballot paper [May 8], “we will be left with no choice but to take up arms and fight for our freedom”.

It is not a surprise, in light of this “revolution” declaration by the BLF,  that Bell39 refers with great reservation to the BLF’s leadership, as follows39:2: “…the self-appointed collective imbongi of North Korea, Andile Mngxitama’s Black First Land (BLF)…”.

It must be highlighted that unrest and chronic anarchy are today inherent to the South African society: The Provinces of the North-West and KwaZulu-Natal reflect this state of affairs extremely well with so-called daily “service-delivery unhappiness” which is characterised by residents burning down state property to40:8: “…announce to government that there is a protest going on…”; that40:8: “…we are going to do worse things”; and40:8: “We’re not benefiting from the advent of democracy. It’s as if we… residents are not South Africans. We are prepared to die to ensure we get basic services”. On the strength of this unrest-cum-anarchy, Lali,40 on the recent extreme violent protest in Khayelitsha in Cape Town (which is only one of a growing mass of violent protests countrywide) and which shows all the signs of a failure by the SAPS to master crime there, writes40:8: “Throughout the morning, the protesters blocked Japhta Masemola Road with burning tyres, various objects and a shipping container. The police tried unsuccessfully to disperse them, but they regrouped and set up more burning barricades, preventing traffic from moving along the normally busy roads.” 

Also, the preparation for unrest countrywide during the past May 2019 election and the ANC government’s decision to place the police and defense forces on readiness, reflect further the chronic presence of unrest-cum-anarchy in South Africa.  Van der Walt,41 quoting the minister of Police, Bheki Cele41, commented on the seriousness of this issue in May 201941:2: “Cele sê hoewel geweld in al nege provinsies moontlik is, hou Noordwes en KwaZulu-Natal die grootste gevaar in. Geweldadige betogings kom al die afgelope jaar gereeld in Noordwes voor, terwyl politieke moorde in KwaZulu-Natal nie ’n vreemde verskynsel is nie.” This unrest-cum-anarchy – representing the growing and broadening collapse of law and order in South Africa – to which Cele36 refers, is also confirmed by the Dipuo Letsatsi-Duba,41 the minister of State security. Van der Walt,41 on the past May election, writes41:2: “…inligting wat deur haar department ingesamel is, dui daarop dat daar ‘bedrywighede’ is wat moontlik ten doel het om die verkiesing in Noordwes en KwaZulu-Natal omver te werp.”

3.1.2.1.7. Political racism’s role in revolution

It must be clear that these are also problems waiting to muddy black versus white race relations, which can be opportunistically be shifted onto a revolutionary project.  It must therefore be acknowledged that a part of the leadership of the ANC seems also to start to reflect racism on the same basis as reflected by the leaders of the EFF, Azania and the BLF. The ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule ponders this in April 2019 when in Philippi in the Western Cape he alleged42:3: “to incite ANC supporters to exercise their vote in a racist way.” Maxon42 reports42:3: “Magashule told residents in Philippi that they must not vote for an umlungu (a white person).” In addition it should be noted that the ANC veterans immediately condemned his racial utterance, seeing it as a sign of irresponsible leadership: a racial and political misstep which demanded the intervention of Ramaphosa to punish Magashule (which unsurprisingly has so far not happened). But this kind of racial outburst from the ANC’s top brass could eventually become more prominent in the wake May 2019, depending on how Ramaphosa squares off against Magashule in a leadership battle.39,42

Maxon42 points out that this “mischievous” political behaviour of Magashule must be read in terms of the outcome of the Nasrec 2017 conference and the power play which has been an outcome of it.  Here his focus is on a contingent of old conservative ANC veterans (respecting the Freedom Charter as a prerequisite for non-racism), still clinging to their traditional Marxist-Leninist politics versus a new brigade of radical cadres (which Bell39 has  described as the “self-appointed collective imbongis of North Korea” and which could become numerous in the ANC if Magashule gets a proper grasp on power). In practice it seems not to be a pure asymmetric leadership feature in the ANC, but more of an outcome of clear groupings around the two big men of the ANC: Ramaphosa versus Magashule. The issue is not so much a political or an ideology renewal or an age-factor, as it is around the grasp on political power in which the Magashule politics is far more radical than the politics prescribed to ANC cadres in terms of the Freedom Charter. Inherent to this is the presence of radicalism which could trigger racially-inspired aggressive behaviour against whites in the advent of of revolution. Maxon42 is correct when he says the ANC’s soul is in peril (which spells danger for the political stability of South Africa after 2019). Yonela Dipko43 notices Magashule’s unflattering description of an umlungu (a white person) as the right of ANC cadres to call out specific white people who are alleged to be against the rights and interests of black persons (which seems in reality to be “ANC blacks”, and not “DA blacks”!). He clearly does not see white-listing by a black Magashule as racism as long as the black Magashule is categorical about a umlungu (white) who is, in his terms, a so-called “racist” particularly as defined by the ANC’s Diko43 and Magashule. At the same time Diko43 fails to describe the “characteristics and activities of the so-called 2019 White Western Cape racist” and falls back onto dangerous political clichés, which suggests taking revenge on and cleansing the opposition, which happens to be white too.39,42,43

Dipko43 reflects firstly on “soft politics”, the so-called “pity plea” by radical and dangerous blacks who, by their own misadventures and shortcomings, do not form part of able and skilled competitors, when he reflects43:3:

Integration is still a one-way street, blacks assimilating to whites. After 400 years, white people can’t pronounce our names, can’t speak our languages, can’t identify with black people’s challenges, such as a lack of spaces. So, black people find themselves having to assimilate. If your name is Tinyiko you must let then call call you “tiny”; you find your black self assimilating to their language, tastes and culture because you are a minority of one, at every board meeting, every restaurant, every school play. It’s disheartening.”

The above plea is obviously one-sided, biased and without serious consideration, while Diko43 also conveniently forgets who has ruled over South Africa since 2019: precisely the old garde and veterans of the ANC which have failed to give persons as Diko4 the required “spaces” and which have introduced English as the only “official” language, making the use of indigenous languages irrelevant. Furthermore, there are of course those who use colonial English first names willingly par excellence, ignoring their ethnic “black names”: the ANC top cadres are littered with such individuals such as Ace Magashule, Nelson Mandela  and Cyril Ramaphosa! It seems so far, from Diko’s43 rhetoric, that the possible presence of a poor self-esteem harboured by some blacks in ANC politics has been ignored, contrary to the public boast and much-touted 2019 “sound black self-esteem”.

But, on the “victim-identity” Diko43 quickly reveals his true intention (and unashamed racism) when he reveals his mindset regarding “hard politics”, as he writes43:3:

The Western Cape is a fiefdom of the abelungu and to contend that, in the name of non-racialism, in fact of a racist government, they must continue to be given governing power is offensive in the extreme, particular to the black majority.

Success here has a white face and it starts in the corridors of the provincial government. While Cape Town is 80% black, the divisional directors of the provincial government alone are 70% white. That then informs everything else, from government policy to the conceptualisation of programmes.

Most experiences are anecdotal, which is why someone such as Premier Helen Zille can deny racism exists in Cape Town. She has no personal encounter with it. Until a black government takes over the Western Cape, sensitivity with racial victimisation will not exist.

Looking carefully at Diko’s43 rhetoric, it seems to be an ANC creed, an organisation posing as a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing, especially as far as the last election is concerned. This is shown from the words used to describe the Western Cape and Cape Town (both basically the only governmental entities still functioning with qualified audits in the country) as a “racist government”, an “offensive governing power”, and “time that black government takes over Western Cape”, etc. Secondly, the fact that Diko43 is a spokesperson of the ANC in the Western Cape, quite evidently rhymes with Magashule’s anti-abelungu politics, bringing to the foreground the undercurrent of post-2019 racism (and more: racial and political extreminism) prevalent in the ANC: clearly discrimination against blacks, Coloureds and whites who dare to criticise the ANC for its misadvetures and who do not support the ANC’s nefarious politics. Diko’s43 opinions and thinking must be read as the same reflected in Sudan by the previous tyrant Omar al-Bashir specifically against women during his rule of 1998 to 2019.39,42,43

The Guardian44, as quoted by the Sunday Times, reflects44:15: “In the Bashir era, women faced being jailed and were even threatened with physical torture for a variety of offences, such as wearing trousers or behaving in a way that deemed inappropriate.” 

If, so far, no concerns were evident in the minds of many South Africans about their future, especially whites, Coloureds, Indians and non-black ANC cadres, it is now time to start worrying. Diko’s and Magashule’s rhetorics are in line with the racism of the radicals of the EFF, Azano and the PAC. It is political cliches that echo Hitler and the Nazis’ racial policies of highlighting the “differences and evil nature of Jews” in their scapegoating of them as racial, economic, social culprits and saboteurs, and created the foundation for the Nazis to allow the genocide of Jews. In 2019, the insight into the mindsets of the leadership of the ANC, help to differentiate what is really bad and what is really good. It spells danger for the lives of the 15 million voters (out of the 25 million total voting individuals) who did not vote for the ANC and thus for 37 million people (out of a total 57 million population) who do not necessarily support the ANC.39, 42,43

South Africans know well how a madman such as an Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir of Sudan came to power and could stay in power for 30 years with the aid of their brand of extremism, contributing to racial, ethnic and religious discrimination, and murderous rule. For South Africans this should be a timeous warning and an indication what they can expect if the post-2019 politics go wrong and political power falls into the hands of characters like Julius Malema, Ace Magashule, Jacob Zuma and David Mabuza. During Apartheid, where the blacks were the victims, but it is important to note that they were also the victims in Sudan. Things can turn nasty quickly, even for the ANC elite, such as Diko, Magashule, Mabuza and Ramaphosa if they as the top cadres lost their grip on South Africa. On the power grab of Bashir in 1989 by means of a military coup and his corrupt rule up to 2019, the Sunday Times45 of the 14th April 2019 notes as follows45:15:

Labour unions were liquidated and dissenters detained without trial and tortured.

Life got even worse after South Sudan, home to the majority of Christians, seceded in 2011. Churches were bulldozed and burnt. In 2012 Bashir warned non-Muslims: “Nothing will preserve your rights except for Islamic sharia”.

Sudan turned into a playground for Islamic terrorist groups. Its’ harboured Osama bin Laden in the early years of his jihad movement that led to the creation of al-Qaeda, landing Sudan a spot on the US list of countries backing terrorism.

Bashir exploited ethnic and tribal tensions to consolidate power, with bloody ethnically targeted wars in Darfur and other parts of the country earning him an ICC indictment for war crimes and genocide in 2009, and making Sudan’s name synonymous with ethnic cleansing.

Refugees described the horror of racially targeted atrocities. Attackers would shout “Kill the slaves, kill the slaves!” and “We have orders to kill the blacks”. One refugee reported a militia member boasting, “We kill all blacks and even kill cattle when they have black calves.

3.1.2.1.8. Role of the youth in revolution

An aspect missed by political analysts is the possible role that the South African youth can play in a forthcoming revolution. Firstly, it seems that the efforts by the government to register the young voters have failed. Statistics show that the 18 to 19 years olds on the voter lists for 2019 is 47% lower than in 2014, while for the age group 20 to 29 the number declined by 9%. This reflects that only 341 236 of South Africa’s present registered voters are younger than 20 years against 646 313 in 2014 (In 2009 the number was even higher on 669 241). In the age-group 20 to 29 there is at present 5 299 297 voters (against 5 759 297 in 2014). In practice means it that only 1.3% of the registered voters are 20 years and younger, while only 21.1% is 30 years and younger. For formal politics and thus the various political parties mean this a loss of voter support. Firstly, the fact that only 35% of eligible voters participated in the 2014 election shows that the youth’s present apathy not a new kind of phenomenon. What is telling is that as with the 1960s black “revolution” against the Apartheid regime, the growing involvement of the youth in unrests all over the country currently could equally have a huge impact on the status quo. Although the widespread lack of service delivery is often mentioned as the main source of the unrest, unemployment is fast developing into a stronger driver for the widespread riots. Increasingly, it seems to be political indifference that has been playing a role in fomenting the unrest, since many youths are politically well-informed and driven by a political interest with the focus on their personal interests and problems instead of on a political party and the elite’s interests. Many of these non-party youths associated with the “rebellion” politics of the EFF and BLF, take to the streets without necessarily joining these parties as members or as supporters. At most, they see party politics only as a vehicle for self-promotion.38, 46-49

The youth are no longer mesmerised by the ANC’s message of 47:36: “…you should remember what the ANC did for you.” For the present youth the ANC as a party and as a regime have done absolutely nothing and they know it very well. A vote for the ANC by a black youngster simply means47:36: “…to endorse the ANC’s position in power, while its members continue with corruption, the corporatisation of the state and unethical governance.”

They are willing to take on the ANC system, as #RhodesMustFall and the #FeesMustFall movements showed us. They are not shying away from the concept that democratic rule has mostly emerged through bloodshed, but are rather making it a second option.27,46,47

The youth could soon become the real power to drive a revolution, in fact, sooner than most political analysts understand. As in Tunisia and Egypt, their South African revolution could be ignited too, quite suddenly by a small flame. And the various small fires burning already are manifold among the youth: hunger, poverty, abuse, indignity, dominance, discrimination, exploitation, and more.  The advise of Bruce in April 2019 to Ramaphosa in which he repeated Winston Churchill’s famous “blood, toil, sweat and tears” speech in 1938 to the South African youth, is nothing else than a threat on the one side to the youth to toe the line or else, and on the other side a further exploitation of them. These kinds of admonishments by Ramaphosa directed at the youth in the future may just be the single fire to start the revolution. It does not matter if it turns out to be a South Africa Youth Spring, South Africa Youth Winter, South Africa Youth Summer or South Africa Youth Autumn, the revolution is waiting. Where the politicians, especially the black ones of the ANC, celebrate April 27 as their Freedom Day of a 25-year old so-called New South Africa, most of the black youths can’t celebrate along with them. There is good reason for it, and also why they not have registered to vote on May 8 2019 and why they are becoming primed for revolution. They have never tasted Nelson Mandela’s promises of democracy and freedom. Mandela has become a stranger to them, a blurred, bitter memory.27,47,50,51

A prominent example of the sudden explosion of violence by the youth, and that it is looming, ever-present in every-day life, was well-illustrated on the 8th April 2019 in Johannesburg. Here a peaceful march of hundreds of black pupils [all members of the ANC-aligned Congress of South African Students (Cosas) were so disillusioned by the failure of their political parent and mentor, the ANC, to stop violence at schools, that the whole march turned into violence and  looting. Their looting did not stop with the theft of only fruit, but included cellphones and alcohol. The young protesters left a trail of destruction and even injured a shopkeeper. It appears that the Number One of the ANC, Ace Magashule’s speech at Luthuli-house, failed to calm them down. This, it must be noted, can be the future awaiting South Africans exposed to an extreme and unpredictable violent uprising by these youths.52,53

The youth of Cosas’s behaviour must not only be read in the poor example set by their peers in the ANC, but in their powerless situation and deprivation as a result of ignoring their rights in terms of the Constitution, specifically by their own people and group, namely the ANC. It is not a surprise that the secretary of the Young Communist League, Kgabo Moriti54, viewed this with a critical eye, especially the turn of events in South African politics. He says54:12: “We must ask ourselves if we have begun our descent into chaos.”

The seriousness of the misdemeanor by present-day South Africa youths, also caught the attention of the editor53 of The Star forcing him to revisit the past of unrest, anarchy and violence, in order to make sense of our future. He posits53:12:

For a moment it felt like 2002, when Cosas, then led by Jilius Malema , unleashed chaos in the Joburg CBD, leading to loses by pedestrians, vendors and shopkeepers who were mugged and robbed during the rowdy illegal march.

It should not surprise us that high-school children use violence and looting as part of protest. South Africa has an endemic culture of violence and looting in protest. During the days of the Struggle against apartheid, some elements among the protesters used to trash shops and loot during marches.

An editorial50 of the Sunday Times (dated 21 April 2019) tells us the truth and more about the reality that awaits the country50:2:

However, people born in 1994 may not share our joy – mainly because many are unemployed. These 25-year-olds are at the centre of the single biggest challenge SA has faced since 1994: unemployment. According to StatsSA, the youth unemployment rate is higher than any other age group, irrespective of education levels: 52.2% of people aged 15-24, and 35.5%of those aged 25-34, are unemployed – and these figures exclude the young people who have given up looking for work and become a burden on their parents and siblings, or have simply turned to criminal activity.

This brings us back to the sudden start-up of revolutions, especially those of the youth and the single match that usually lights it. For the ANC government to keep up the comprehensive suppression of these outbursts of youth violence, the editor53 of The Star seemingly sees as a solution, the much-needed match to start up revolution, much more serious than the “Malema-2002-uprising” or the 1960s black revolt. He errs when he writes  10th April this year12: “Our government needs to seriously curb this culture, for many a time it undermines the rights to protest and deals a blow to issues that many concerned people protest over.”

He completely misses the point: since 1994, peaceful protests in the first place have brought only false promises given to the black youth from the ANC, as with Ace Magashule’s reassurance to them that55:15: “…their grievances are being given attention”. Secondly, as already indicated, their (and their parents who voted for the ANC) needs, demands and ultimatums are laughed at by the autocratic Marxist ANC-regime, as Magashule’s insincere reaction on the 8th April 2019 in Johannesburg confirms: ongoing empty promises to the youth.

The political analysts like Barney Mthombothi56 — although they despise unrest, riots and violence — understand and respect the drivers of unrest, riots and violence in terms of the mindset of the average South African. They contradict the false insight that South Africa’s psyche is stable after 25 years of “household abuse” by the ANC and that unrest, riots and violence, and thus revolution, is impossible. The “burning of things to show your anger as seemingly the last and only resort” for many are the staple of 2019 politics. The motto that there are no real winners in a strike, riot or revolution, don’t matter for the poor, deprived and rejected persons. Statistics that the South African growth for 2019 is expected only to be 1.3%, with a possible improvement in 2021 to 2%, are not part of their world, because when it was 6% plus, they didn’t benefit from economic growth either.26,50,52,53,56,57

It must be noted that there are other contaminating elements which could play a role in any youth revolution. Firstly, there are the radicals that instrumentalize the unhappiness of the black youths, as we see from the allegations that the ANC youth movement has been behind serious unrest since March-April 2019 in places as Alexandria, Hammanskraal, Orange Grove, Pretoria and Soshanguwe in Gauteng, Khayelitsha, Blackheath, Eersterivier and the Strand in the Western Cape. Here also it seems to be an influx of adult trouble-makers who steer and incite the uprising. This we see too at the April 2019 meeting of Ace Magashule in Parys where the ANC Youth League’s war drums were heard loudly and the ANC seniors sided with the youthful radicals. Julius Malema’s legal and constitutional privilege to declare: “…we will not kill the whites for now” is not so innocent when the planning of anarchy and revolution is the ultimate goal. It must be remembered that Malema publicly said he would take part in a revolution when the situation arises. In addition the war-talk of the BLF is another feature of the political landscape that stands out. Secondly, South Africa is not built on a singular black unity and a singular non-black unity: The black unity is compiled of a very unstable black tribal composition, created by Apartheid, wherein the Zulus and Xhosas are still today regarded as the “superior” tribes. Cyril Ramaphosa and Mtolanthe maybe “Soweto-born”, but they are not of the Zulu- or Xhosa-tribes:  they are from the so-called “Northern tribes”. This “classification” is also applicable to Julius Malema. (note: Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki are Xhosas and Jacob Zuma is a Zulu). Azapo’s creed: “we are pro-black”, is starting to become an insignificant slogan beyond the racial classification and discrimination of the old ethnic reality. Also, the ANC’s erasing of ethnicity and tribalism from its politics is something of the past. When revolution flares up, the tribal reality can steer it to regard the white “tribe” and other “non-black” tribes with equal animosity, but it could well change direction quite quickly to become an extreme black-on-black tribal-driven revolution, like in Rwanda or as during the “First and Second Black Colonisations” of South Africa reflect only too well. The instigators and propagators of revolution can, as during the French Revolution, also unexpectedly become the victims of their fervour.27,34,35,37,38,39,48,52,58-60

Malloch-Brown’s27 notions on the advantages and inevitability of revolution, makes sense. It also makes sense for present-day South Africa.  Most black youth know that under another ANC regime their situation will never improve: Post-2019 could for them become the opportunity to settle and rectify the matter.27

To think that a revolution can and will not ever happen in South Africa is wishful thinking. Above comprehensive and in-depth findings confirm that a post-2019 revolution is not far-fetched. Undoubtedly, the country stands on the brink of a revolution. It is ripe for picking, even overripe. It does not need not another Marikana to start up. And, as in Tunisia and Egypt, when it suddenly comes to an eruption,  will it not only cost the heads of the ANC top brass, but sadly thousands of other people, mostly innocent bystanders, who are unrelated to the 1994 to 2019 ANC’s and the 1948 to 1994 Apartheid regime. And such an outcome can be bloody and unstoppable as in Rwanda.27,35,36,37,39,42,43

3.1.2.1.9. Immense presence of crime, violence, gender-violence and xenophobia in today’s South Africa

When we speak of the presence of unrest and anarchy in the country, is it important to point out that the foundations of it happening have been laid already (See also Article 13). What is important to note in this setup is the absence of a consciousness which is able to differentiate the transgressions of the ordinary citizen (This absence of a consciousness within the ANC elite was already covered in an in-depth study in Articles 11 to 17).

The basically permanent slide of law and order being eroded all over the country — reflected by immense, uncontrollable crime and violence present on the Cape Flats, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth and many other places, as well as the presence of extreme highway and railway crime, violence and theft, together with gender- and xenophobic crimes and violence – show how near South Africa is on the path to a collapse into revolution. The basis for doing untold wrongs, as revolution and its murderous deeds often call for, is thus already well-established as a modus operandi with a large contingent of the population.61-73

3.1.2.2. The joker-surprises of history

Louw34 writes that history often brings about unexpected, even strange outcomes. He writes34:239:

The fortunes and misfortunes of nations have in some instances changed even after they had fled or failed, totally contradicting the rules of trustworthy predictions (and even sound thinking!). The impact of extreme world disasters, like earthquakes, pests, new wars, immense famine, new mass migrations, just to mention a few, have in the past had quick and profound impacts on the power of mighty empires or have caused undervalued, small nations’ fate to take a turn for the better.

The possibility remains that the political history of South Africa after 2019 can be one that we never have expected or anticipated, making the issue of land ownership insignificant or at least one eventually resulting in a very successful outcome.  Some determinants which can be roleplayers acting as jokers, need to be enlightened.74-82

3.1.2.2.1. Aids, mass illnesses and pests

The Christian Bible is full of stories of the sudden appearance of known and unknown illnesses and pests that killed off populations in large numbers. The outcomes were often that dynasties, despots and regimes collapsed under the weight of such events. Currently in Africa, Ebola is such a “pest” that, notwithstanding well-organised governmental and healthcare efforts to erase it, seems to have become an unstoppable plague.74,75,80,82

Aids is an illness that has been causing ongoing havoc but it seems it can not be contained, let alone totally erased.  In some countries it has registered a constant increase, notwithstanding healthcare education and medicine to combat it. South Africa unfortunately is caught in a downward Aids spiral. Data shows that in 2002  so much as 4.6 million South Africans were Aids-sufferers. The number 7.97 million was cited in 2019. This represents an increase of 3.37 million in 17 years. The 2019 Aids sufferers form nearly 15% of the country’s total population of 57 million. What is evident is that it is the youth  – who should constitute the base of the future work force and should fuel the growth in GDP, and who must assure the continuation of the nation’s population – has been the most vulnerable in contract the deadly virus.83

Illnesses such as Aids and others can dramatically change – when they become epidemics – a country’s socio-political and economic setup overnight with regard to the numbers of races and the traditional power that these numbers hold in terms of a majority-minority composition assured in a regime.

3.1.2.2.2. Impact of extreme poverty, unemployment and overpopulation

Many economic and political analysts and strategists underscore that there are more or less 30 million poor South Africans (out of a population of 58 million), while more than 17.5 million people, because of their utmost poverty and unemployment, are forced to live as beggars on social grants. This unfortunate poor contingent of people in need of social grants is constantly growing as a result of the growth in unemployment, rising living costs and population growth. The statistics reflect that social grants have grown from 2017 to 2018 by 8%, while the growth in cross tax revenue for the period was only 6%. It can be read from this growing poverty that for 2017/ 2018 there were officially 890 523 job seekers registered, but only 21 076 (2.3%) were placed in jobs or internships. Beyond this registered official jobless rate of 869 447 in 2018, is the mass of jobless people who are not registered. This social-economic chaos has been the result of the country’s high population growth of 1,43 % in 2019, worsening the already high unemployment and poverty.83-88

Growth in official unemployment is confirmed by the data for the first quarter of 2019 at 29% (with some sources putting it near 30%), with the indication that it can further deteriorate. Between 2001 and 2018 the primary sector recorded 484,000 job losses.  The impact of growing poverty, which indicates the presence of hunger for even those with some permanent work too, is pinpointed by Speckman89 when she writes89:3: “…the Pietermaritzburg Economic Justice & Dignity Group’s Household Affordability Index for 2019 showed that a general worker earning the national minimum wage at the 10% exemption level and working full for a 23 days earned  R3,312 per month. Transport and electricity costs accounted for 57% of the wage, leaving R1,425.48 for all other expenses, including food.

The direct impact of poverty, unemployment and overpopulation can bring about a total collapse of the South Africa economy on the one hand, but on the other hand a crisis of starvation and famine. Such outcomes with dire conditions is because of the total degradation that the poor population have to endure for the luxurious lifestyles of the ruler of the day in an effort to survive. An issue as land-ownership quickly becomes a non-starter for these impoverished masses.

3.1.2.2.3. South African climate changes and drought on food production, lifestyle viability and sustainability

The immense impact of climate change, such as extreme temperature fluctuations and droughts can firstly force the issue of land to become a vehicle to create a means of income; and secondly ignite the debate on the use of land to produce food but also question the viability of sustainable lifestyles. Both these issues could eventually lead to famine. The losing battle against hunger can already be read in the negative effect of the countrywide drought. Thus the importance of farm land per se as a means to sustain a living could become obsolete. This could result in waves of people from the rural population taking flight to cities for a living, bringing the need for urban land for homes into the bigger picture.90-96

If recurring droughts are taken into account, especially as a seemingly permanent, natural  phenomenon in South Africa, the arrival of a water scarcity crisis as far as human consumption, agriculture and industrial use is concerned, becomes a given. This can bring about a dramatic change in geopolitics, accompanied by a devastating impact on the already existing mass poverty and unemployment. For an overpopulated country such as South Africa the consequences could be enormous, leaving in its wake an impoverished nation, in which most of the population will be enslaved to the ruler for survival. A water crisis will replace the present political and emotional land-ownership matter and become the population’s foremost concern.90-96

The incoming drought has been confirmed by the SA Weather Service which indicates that the country has experienced drought since 2013 with a continuous uncertainty about when rains will fall. Patrick and Hosken95 write95:11 “This had put the jobs of about a million farm workers at risk, and made the country vulnerable to food and water insecurity, according to agricultural economists and farming associations”; and95:11: “AgriSA said in its 2018/2019 drought report that 31, 000 farming jobs had been lost since January 2018 in the drought hotspots of KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape, Western Cape, North West, Limpopo and the Northern Cape.”

Patrick and Hosken95 report further95:11: “Water restrictions are in force in some provinces. In the Northern Cape,  water is shut off overnight in its main town, while Eastern Cape premier Oscar Mabuyane this week declared the province a disaster area. Water restrictions are in force in its two metros, Nelson Mandela Bay and Buffalo City.”

The spokesperson of Water Affairs, Sputnik Ratau95, said95:11: “SA is water scarce, so the reality of less than world-average rainfall, rapid urbanisation, climate change, desertification — especially from the west — and rapid population growth cannot be ignored.”

Professor Johan Willemse95, on the effect of the 2019 drought in general on the country, especially on the cost of living which could worsen poverty and hunger, writes:95:11 “We could see a 50% increase in the importing costs of white maize, which will rise from R3,000 per ton to R4,500 per ton. This will cause major meat price increases”.

Also, Patrick and Hosken95, quoting Mervyn Abrahams95 of the Economic Justice and Dignity Group,  report on the rising cost of living as a result of the drought as follows95:11: “…drought was a factor in the cost of the household food basket. It increased by R146.14 (4.8%) from R3,038.50  in October 2018 to R3,184.63 this year.”

Makhosini Mgitywa97, the head of Communication at the Ministry of Human Settlements, Water & Sanitation, writes in the Sunday Times of the 22nd September 201997:26:

The situation is dire and unless we do not do something, as the government and citizens, we will be left with a water shortage situation that will affect  us all, and to an extent never seen before.

SA is among the driest countries in the world but we go on as if we are among the wettest. It’s estimated that in five years’ time we will experience physical water scarcity. Our own department’s projection is that at that time the demand for water will outstrip supply.

Satgar96 writes on the 15th December 2019 in the Sunday Times and Vavi and Lenferna write98 on the 15th September 2019 in the Sunday Times that the climate crisis is already established as fact in the country. It is reflected in the form of sudden flash floods: killing more than 70 people at once and displacing more than 1 500 people, bringing damage at the cost of R1-billion at a time; leaving communities without drinking water or water for agriculture and posing a widespread threat to food security.96,98

Vavi and Lenferna98 reflect98:20:

Studies show that as a result of human-case climate change, SA faces deepening inequality and is already 10%-20% poorer.

Climate change is worsening an already dire situation of deep inequality, poverty and unemployment. The outbreaks of xenophobia violence were the most recent expression of our multifaceted crisis.

The xenophobia attacks are also connected to the climate crisis, because increasing climate impacts are eroding traditional livelihoods and driving people from their homes and increasing migration.

Many wars and revolutions were started because of the need for the three basic resources: water, food and land. Also, on the other hand, it has collapsed wars and revolutions, together with empowering regimes. It has also erased nations from the international scene. Beyond that, the experience of hunger and shortages of water can dramatically change voters to blindly support their failed regime, while thirst and famine could directly lead to revolution.

3.1.2.2.4. Racial assimilation, miscegenation and dissolution

The assimilation and miscegenation of the various races, which started in the Cape in 1652 between whites, blacks, Malays, Indian and Khoi San people, are ongoing today. The 1994 dispensation and the freeing of blacks and Afrikaners from the Apartheid shackles, has  created the impetus for a much deeper assimilation between the South African races while miscegenation seems to be gaining ground. It is possible that full assimilation and miscegenation of races may occur in the next 10 to 20 years. The racial issue around the so-called colour of the land owner could become unimportant because of this miscegenation in which mixed families are created.34

The fact also that the present dominant land owners, namely the whites and specifically the Afrikaners, have been since 1989 in a process of dissolution, could result in them numbering at most 30 000 in a century, and make it unnecessary to pursue land expropriation in the long term, taking farms they own.34,76-78,83,85

3.1.2.2.5. The possible post-2020 democratising of the Electoral Act

For years the South African voters have been caught in an undemocratic voter system which gives the ANC’s party bosses and not the voters the right to select MPs and MPLs through an imbalanced proportional system. This resulted that at present the country is being governed by a very small minority, a powerful ANC clique.47, 99-103

Looting and the appointments of shady figures in municipalities have restarted and is a direct result of this flaw of political accountability demanded from councillors and officials by the electors. Mthombothi104 postulates104:19:

In fact, it’s not even correct to talk about elected officials in our system because we vote for the party, not the individual. This decides which of its members should be elevated to higher office.

The party is given a blank cheque that it uses as it sees fit. That needs to change. Anybody wielding power — from the lowest councillor, to the mayor, to president — should do so by virtue of direct election by the voters.

The private legal action which was started up in 2019 to reform the electoral system and to do away with the present favourable climate for the ANC elite through the election system by means of the court application brought by the New Nation Movement (NNM), a KhoiSan organisation, to change the Electoral Act (Act 73 of 1998) could make provision for the direct election of MPs and MPLs by voters, and if it is at the end successful, it could have a dramatic anti-ANC voter outcome in 2024. So far, the Ramapohosa regime has not shown much support for the change.47,99,101-108

3.1.2.2.6. Lingering impact of nineteen-million passive voters on the 2024-elections

The outcome of the past May 2019 elections highlighted only a participation on national level by 49% of the eligible voters in the elections, of which the ANC only received the votes of  28% of the eligible voters.47,102,109-111

The Institute of Security Studies shows further, comparing the outcomes of the 2014 elections with the 2019 elections, that the ANC is in a permanent downward spiral.  In this free fall must be noted that the ANC has less than a million inscribed members against a total of registered voter population of ±27-million and an eligible voters population of ±37-million.47,99,101-108,112-115

Further statistics show, that as a result of their passivity not to register as voters,  that the 18 to 19 years olds on the voter lists for 2019 is 47% lower than in 2014, while for the age group 20 to 29 the number declined with 9%. Clear dislike and aversion by the youth for the ANC have developed apace since 2014. The youth vote can be devastating for the ANC in 2024.47

The above shows that if a party or a group of integrity can mobilise the 51% of passive voters, the ANC, as well as the DA, can be totally erased in 2024 from the political scene. Mthombothi104, on this immensely positive outcome waiting to be implemented: That is to convince passive voters, writes104:19:

Throughout the turmoil there’s on crucial element that nobody seems even bothered about. The voter is the rock, the foundation on which democracy is built. Yet no-one is talking about him or her. It’s almost as though the voter doesn’t exist or is immaterial to the entire setup. This whole circus therefore brings to the fore the need for electoral reform.

3.1.3. South Africa’s Troubled Land-ownership (1652 – 2019): Conclusions and a Dictum – Part 2 (19)

The analysis and discussion of this article (see headings 3.1.1. to 3.1.2.) will continue in the final article (Article 19) of the series of 19 articles, titled: South Africa’s Troubled Land-ownership (1652 – 2019): Conclusions and a Dictum – Part 2 (19). The analysis and discussions of Article 19 will be done under the following heading and subheadings:

3.1.3. Advice and suggestions for a post-2019 effective government

3.1.3.1. ANC-DA intertwining
3.1.3.1.1. ANC
3.1.3.1.2. DA
3.1.3.1.3. Perspective on a failed ANC and DA

3.1.3.2. Cutting out the ANC and DA out as future rulers
3.1.3.2.1. The end of political innocence
3.1.3.2.2. Time for political renewal 
3.1.3.2.2.1. The simultaneous practice of autocracy and democracy inside the Constitution
3.1.3.2.2.1.1. The ANC-regime, the judiciary and the possibility of a care-taker administrator
3.1.3.2.3. Time for a new UDF 
3.1.3.2.3.1. Role and position of Whites in a new UDF
3.1.3.2.4. The steps, paths and process of sound future land redistribution 

4. Conclusions

The failed Marxist-Leninist politics of the ANC regime, together with the incompetent leadership of Cyril Ramaphosa, has brought South Africa to the brink of disaster. Its economy is in a shambles. A short-term escape route is needed by the Ramaphosa regime. Land grabs are currently the most attractive solution for this ANC regime to deliver some form of capital or money easily to the masses of poor people, as well to give the Ramaphosa elite some credibility again as revolutionaries who are still “freeing” the masses of poor blacks from the shackles of white dominance and from capitalists.

It is clear that not one of the political parties which are active in present-day South Africa, is capable and trustworthy enough to run the country effectively. It is basically impossible for any one of them to deliver on a just and balanced land-redistribution policy.

The troubled land-ownership matter fits well into the many dissatisfactions of the masses of poor and landless people. It holds the potential to motivate them to become involved in immense unrest and anarchy, even revolution, in the immediate future. Furthermore the unbalanced and unjust land-ownership matter in the country is the single best reason available to radicals in the ANC and other political parties, under the cover of revenge on white supremacy and capitalism, to activate a Marxist-Leninist coup. The fact that the ANC is losing its autocratic grip on the country fast and could be ousted in the 2024 elections, makes the probability of a coup a strong possibility in 2020 already.

It is clear that an acceptable solution to the land-ownership matter must be found not later than 2020.

In the final article (Article 19), titled: “South Africa’s Troubled Land-ownership (1652 – 2019): Conclusions and a Dictum – Part 2 (19)”, the land-ownership matter will further be analysed and discussed. An approach and guideline on how the land expropriation process can be activated and steered in an effort to solve the matter, will be offered.

5. References

  1. Bennett, RD. Proverb.
  2. Gandhi E. It’s time we really get to know each other across the racial divide. Sunday Times. 2019 March 18; p. 21.
  3. Joffe H. How Ramaphosa’s reform ran into 2019’s big fat reality check. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Dec.15; p. 2.
  4. Barron C. Gwede ‘holding country hostage’. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Dec. 15; p. 9.
  5. Bruce P. We love our gloom, but be ready for a little cheer. Sunday Times(opinion). 2019 Dec. 15; p. 20.
  6. Mashaba H. Coalition government is the best way forward for SA. Sunday Times 2019 Oct. 27; p. 23.
  7. Mthombothi B.  Africa is being betrayed by its leaders – now it’s up to us to hold them to account. Sunday Times. 2018 June 3; p. 17.
  8. Naidoo L. Time for bold leadership to rid SA of the scourge of corruption. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 4; p. 21.
  9. Send us a sign that the government is serious about SA’s growth crisis. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 29; p. 18.
  10. Bruce P. A better way to reach for the promised land. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Mar. 4; p. 14.
  11. Deep in unbanked country, a sophisticated heist relies on political cover. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Oct. 14; p. 20.
  12. Derby R. ‘Sober’ ANC must step up if Cyril is to salvage SA’s fortunes. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Nov. 4; p. 2.
  13. Extreme measures for desperate times. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Nov. 11; p. 14.
  14. February J. Spektakelpolitici haal streke uit. Beeld (Kommentaar). 2018 Apr. 18; p. 16.
  15. Gordhan P. How to rescue a state that been pillaged by the corrupt and greedy. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 28; p. 5.
  16. Kgosana C. The struggle and all that jazz. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 10.
  17. Kgosana C, Hunter Q. VBS looting: ANC got R2m. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 28; pp. 1-2.
  18. Leon T. TV expropriation debate enters realm of Neverland. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 July 29; p. 20.
  19. Makgoba T. Community needs, not politicians, should lead the redistribution debate. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 23; p. 21.
  20. Mokone T. Maimane to move on Andile deal. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 4.
  21. Mthombothi B. The crises that confront Ramaphosa are also timely opportunities to clean house. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 14; p. 21.
  22. Mthombothi B. When MPs treat parliament as a shebeen, Cyril must remind them where they are – and lead. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov.11; p. 14.
  23. Munusamy R. The misreading of Trump led to his reactionary regime…might the same happen in SA, where dark forces hover over politics? Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Nov. 11; p. 16.
  24. Tabane OJJ. Calling the ANC’s dangerous bluff on land reform. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 June 3; p. 18.
  25. Louw GP. An appraisal of the executive political leaders and regimes of South Africa: 1652 to 2018. Part 4: A basic checklist for the appraisal of executive political leaders and regimes. Ensovoort, Volume 38(2018), number 7:2.
  26. Ka’Nkosi S. There are no real winners in a strike. The Star. 2019 April 10; p.18.
  27. Malloch-Brown M. The unfinished global revolution. New York: Penguin; 2011.
  28. McKaiser E. Rule of law requires our real respect. Mail & Guardian. 2019 April 26 to May 2; p. 27.
  29. Potgieter D. Is Al-Qaeda operating in South Africa? Black widow. White widow. Johannesburg: Penguin: 2014.
  30. Tlhabi R. ANC wys hoe ver hy van mense is. Beeld (By). 2019 Jan. 19; p. 20.
  31. Naipaul VS. Beyond Belief: Islamic excursions among the converted peoples.xxxxxx
  32. Allison S. Mozambique’s faceless insurgency. Mail & Guardian (Africa), 2019 April 26 to May 2; p. 20.
  33. Louw GP. An appraisal of the executive political leaders and regimes of the South African: 1652 to 2018. Part 5: Performance profiles of executive political leaders and regimes for the period 1652 to 1795 Ensovoort, Volume 38 (2018), number 7:3.
  34. Louw GP. The Crisis of the Afrikaners. Beau Bassin, Mauritius; Lap Lambert Academic Publishing; 2018.
  35. The sad fact is the state is ripe for picking. Mail & Guardian. 2019 Feb. 8 to14; p. 32.
  36. Cele S. Helen Zille. I am actually a softie. City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 9.
  37. Tabane R. We’re pro-black, not ant-white City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 9.
  38. Khumalo J. Black First Land will take up arms. City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 4.
  39. Bell T. Hold our parties to their promises. City Press (Business). 2019 April 21; p. 2.
  40. Lali V. Protesters burn clinic. Saturday Citizen. 2019 April 27; p. 8.
  41. Van der Walt S. Polisie reg vir geweld. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 May 3; p. 2.
  42. Maxon C. ANC’s soul in peril. City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 3.
  43. Diko Y. We are not a colour-blind nation. City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 3.
  44. Leading the revolution. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 April 14; p. 15.
  45. Bashir’s iron fist loses its grip. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 April 14; p. 15.
  46. BroughtonT. FeesMustFall-aktivis kry 3 jaar huisarres. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 Jan. 30; p. 4.
  47. Ndaba M. You can’t manipulate us into voting. Mail & Guardian. 2019 February 8 to 14; p. 36.
  48. Rooi J. ANC-jeuglede stook protes. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 April 14; p. 6.
  49. Shoba S. Malema will not gain mass support by picking on racial minorities. Sunday Times 2019 March 31; p. 19.
  50. Jobs for youth is unfulfilled promise made 25 years ago. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 April 21; p. 2.
  51. Bruce P. Come May 9, Ramaphosa will need a plan. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 April 14; p. 18.
  52. Khumalo S. Homeless blamed for Jo’burg CBD looting. The Star. 2019 April 10; p. 2.
  53. Looting away the future. The Star (Opinion). 2019 April 10; p. 12.
  54. Moriti K. Does Hani’s legacy live on? The Star (Opinion). 2019 April 10; p. 12.
  55. Mthombothi B. Imagine a system in which public representatives, and voters’ concerns, actually mattered. Sunday Times. 2019 April 12; p. 15.
  56. Mthombothi B. The irony of burning things to show your anger, then voting those you’re angry with back into power. Sunday Times. 2019 April 7; p. 19.
  57. Sono T. Ah Uhuru! How glorious our crackpot democracy is. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 April 7; p. 18.
  58. Eybers J. Rassistiese aanhangsel blý haatspraak Rapport (Nuus). 2019 April 21; p. 6.
  59. Rooi J. Die ANC sal nooit verander, beloof Ace in Parys. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 April 28; p. 2.
  60. Versluis. J. Hof moet sê oor MRK, ras. Rapport. 2019 April 21; p. 6
  61. Curb lawlessness or pay the price. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 12.
  62. Fokazi S. Cape Town mortuaries not coping with intake. Sowetan (News). 2019 July 10; p. 6.
  63. Hyman A. “World’s most dangerous city’. Sunday Times. 2019 June 30; pp. 1, 4.
  64. Hyman A. Like a prison camp for a city’s outcasts. Sunday Times (News). 2019 June 16; p. 6.
  65. Khumalo F. Foreigners not the real target of fires of fury. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 15
  66. Lockdown a little too late for deceased. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 July 9; p. 12.
  67. Makora M. More cops to beef up safety. Daily Sun. 2019 September 12; p. 8.
  68. Makhetha D, Marupeng P. Ivory Park one of the most dangerous places to live in. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 3.
  69. Makhetha T. Hundreds of murders committed by kids. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 3.
  70. McCauley R. Decisive action is essential. The Star. 2019 July 16; p. 6.
  71. Marupeng P. Femicide sentences not a deterrent. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 2.
  72. Munusamy R. Our abnormal society can change through rebellion or in a planned way, but no messiah can save us. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept 8; p. 20.
  73. Watson A. SANDF is off to Cape Flats. Saturday Citizen (News). 2019July 13; p. 4.
  74. Dalrymple W. From the Holy Mountain. London: Harper Perennial; 2005.
  75. Ferguson N. The War of the World. London: Penguin Books; 2007.
  76. Friedman B. Smuts. A reappraisal. Johannesburg: Hugh Cartland Publishers; 1975.
  77. Giliomee H. Afrikaner nationalism, 1870-2001. In: M Albeldas, A (eds.). A Question of Survival Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball; 1988.
  78. Pirow O. James Barry Munnik Hertzog. Cape Town: Howard Timmins; 1958.
  79. Palkhivala NA. We, the Nation. London: UBS Publishers; 1994.
  80. Roberts JM. The Penguin History of the World. London: Penguin; 1992.
  81. Ramaphosa C. Jong Afrikane moet die wêreld ‘koloniseer.’ Beeld. 2017 May 26; p. 2.
  82. Thubron C. In Siberia. London: Chatto & Windus; 1999.
  83. Smit F. As babas ‘n land knak. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 11.
  84. Ka Nkosi S. When ignorance turns into a disruptor of policy modernisation. Business Report (Focus). 2019 June 12; p. 16.
  85. Saunderson-Meyer W. Weaponised baby-making. Saturday Citizen. (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 10; p. 12.
  86. Smit S. Ministry to labour for job creation. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 June 7 to 13; p. 16.
  87. Willemse R. Jeug moeg vir fiksie oor werkskepping. Beeld (By). 2019 June 22; p. 3.
  88. Kesselman B. SA faced with hidden hunger. The Citizen (News). 2019 June 20; p. 8.
  89. Speckman A. Not working: jobs gloom grows. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct. 27; p. 3.
  90. Mashego P. Growing pains: it’s tough down on the farm. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Nov. 24; p.
  91. Mosamo S. ‘It’s a desperate situation’. Sunday times (Insight). 2019 Nov. 10; pp. 1-2
  92. C. A dry grey season. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 Oct. 6; p. 1.
  93. Patrick A. On the brink of humanitarian disaster. Sunday Times ((News). 2019 Oct. 27; p. 10.
  94. Patrick A. Farmers despair as drought takes toll. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Oct. 27; p.11.
  95. Patrick A, Hosken G. Our water going down the drain. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Oct. 27; p.11.
  96. Satgar V. The climate crisis is upon us, and South Africans need to act. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Dec. 15; p. 22.
  97. Mgitywa M. We are facing a water crisis that can and will be averted. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 26.
  98. Vavi Z, Lenferna A. It’s time to fight for climate justice. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 15; p. 20.
  99. Kok A. Kiesstelsel: Tyd vir hervorming. Beeld (Kommentaar). 2019 Jan. 31; p.16.
  100. Mthombothi B. If the people, and not parties, chose representatives, the ANC rot would never be returned to power. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 March 24; p.19.
  101. Munusamy R. We are stuck with the same old problems because we are stuck with the same old leaders in the same old electoral system. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 30; p. 22.
  102. Pithouse R. Exclusion will continue to fuel corruption. Mail & Guardian. 2019 February 8 to14; p. 31.
  103. Prince L. Onafhanklikes: Hof sê in April oor Kieswet. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 March 29; p.13.
  104. Mtombothi B. A tainted mayor takes over, the looters are back – and the voters ignored. Sunday Times. 2019 Dec. 8; p. 19.
  105. Electoral Act is questioned. The Citizen (News). 2019 Aug. 16; p. 6.
  106. Marx J. Onafhanklike kandidaat kry weer slae in hof. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 May 3; p. 6.
  107. Rooi J. Laat kiesers self oor die LP’s besluit! Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 March 31; p. 7.
  108. Wyngaard H. Wysiging van Kieswet kan uitkoms bied. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 March 31; p. 6.
  109. Essop P. Veral jonges registreer. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 Jan. 30; p. 2.
  110. People deserve at least the basics. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 June 20; p. 1.
  111. Smillie S. Zuma’s time to be grilled. Saturday Star. 2019 July 13; p. 1.
  112. ANC’s tenure at top under threat. Saturday Citizen (Opinion). 2019 March 16; p. 12.
  113. Bruce P. Would DA rather spar with Julius than work with Cyril. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 March 10; p. 18.
  114. Küsel A. E-tolskuld afgeskryf, sê Outa. Beeld 2019 March 28; p. 1.
  115. Marrian N. List’s scandal will haunt Ramaphosa. Guardian & Mail. 2019 March 15 to 21; p. 4

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned; External peer-reviewed.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa.

UNSUITABLE TERMS AND INAPPROPRIATE WORDS

Please note that I, the author, is aware that the words Creole, Bantu, Kaffir, Native, Hottentot and Bushman are no longer suitable terms and are inappropriate (even criminal) for use in general speech and writing in South Africa (Even the words non-White and White are becoming controversial in the South African context). The terms do appear in dated documents and are used or translated as such in this article for the sake of historical accuracy. Their use is unavoidable within this context. It is important to retain their use in this article to reflect the racist thought, speech and writings of as recently as sixty years ago. These names form part of a collection of degrading names commonly used in historical writings during the heyday of apartheid and the British imperial time. In reflecting on the leaders and regimes of the past, it is important to foreground the racism, dehumanization and distancing involved by showing the language used to suppress and oppress. It also helps us to place leaders and their sentiments on a continuum of racism. These negative names do not represent my views and I distance myself from the use of such language for speaking and writing. In my other research on the South African populations and political history, I use Blacks, Whites, Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaners, Coloureds, KhoiSan (Bushmen), KhoiKhoi (Hottentots) and Boers as applicable historically descriptive names.

 

 

Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (13: Violence and Crime)

Title: Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (13: Violence and Crime)

Gabriel P Louw

iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093

Extraordinary Researcher, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Healthcare, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:

Prof. Dr. GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PU for CHE), DPhil (PU for CHE), PhD (NWU)

Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: Analyst, confidence, desperate, expropriation, journalist, perspective, political party, traumatised, violence.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 11: 4

1. Background

In 1973 the American ex-Mafia boss Vincent Teresa1 revealed in his book: “My Life in the Mafia”, how the Mafia ruthlessly ‘whack out’ their enemies; how film stars and singers are snared by the mob; how the mob infiltrates big business; how the mob steals countless millions of dollars and makes millions of dollars through almost every conceivable crime; how to fix a horse race or corrupt a cop; how to be a top money-maker; how the mobsters live, and what their fatal weaknesses are; and how it is to live in hiding under constant armed guard with a half-million dollar price on your head from the mob for whistle-blowing by an ex-gangster. Citing the dangers and excesses of organised crime , from their numbers to their actions, etc., to serve as a warning that the same can happen anywhere else in the “good” outside world, is far too late for crime-stricken South Africa. Teresa states:1:295-296

Crime families can vary in size. In New York, Gambino had maybe a thousand made men; in our family in New England we had a hundred and fifty. Between New Jersey and New York you might have two thousand five hundred people. In the whole country [USA], there is probably six thousand five hundred. But these are just the made men, remember. There are another two hundred to three hundred thousand mob guys working for the made guys. Nothing gives the mob a bigger laugh than when some expert says the mob is nothing to worry about because there are only six thousand members. Hell, behind those six thousand you’ve got a whole army, not counting all the people who aren’t Italian but who work with the mob.

These Sicilian Mafiosi will run into a wall, put their head in a bucket of acid for you if they’re told to, not because they’re hungry but because they’re disciplined. They’ve been brought up from birth over there to show respect and honour, and that’s what these punks over here don’t have. Once they’re told to get someone, that person hasn’t a chance. They’ll get him if they have to bust into his house in the middle of the night, shoot him, bite him, eat him, suck the blood out of his throat. They’ll get him because they were told to do it.

The above scenario does not seem strange to South Africans living in informal settlements, neglected suburbs and other areas out of the ordinary public’s eyes, or those reading the daily newspapers or listening to the news on radio or following the many television broadcasts of the Zondo commission. Here, we have the same mafia behaviour and inclinations which have become ingrained in the actions of some of the ANC’s top leaders in committing serious crimes, varying from state capture, election manipulation, to murder. We see various kinds of uncontrolled crime, present all over the country, especially from 1994 with the advent of the so-called “first democracy” in South Africa. What differs between the USA and the SA crime scenes, making the situation here much worse than in the USA, is that the American prosecution authorities act constructively and are locking up crooks constantly. However, as the Zondo commission under the guidance of an excellent judge revealed, the many culprits that seem mostly to be part of the ANC’s inner circle are able to get away with their crimes and corruption as the prosecution authorities demonstrate an outright failure to bring these perpetrators to book.

The example of Teresa’s whistle-blowing in the USA presented us with an excellent outcome: 27 top-ranking Mafiosi were jailed in America, while many more had been indicted or charged. Teresa himself was jailed for twenty years for his criminal activities before being paroled. Here in South Africa whistle-blowers are harassed, taken to court for libel and slander by the crooks who committed crimes and who are still walking free under the ANC’s safety-net, while other whistle-blowers are being murdered. The ANC’s policy’s is that if you are not found guilty before a court and have not be sentenced for an alleged crime, you are free to serve in the ANC’s highest positions. That policy includes awaiting the outcome of an appeal so you are considered not guilty until the court comes to a final verdict and thus that you may stay on untouched and comfortable in your position as lawmaker. The ANC list of 22 tainted candidates for the May 2019 elections and the positioning of some of these tainted ANCs later to senior posts in Parliament, confirm this policy very well. Jacob Zuma has been staying out of jail now for years, based on appeal on appeal against his alleged crimes in the arms deal, while the ANC’s top structure was also let off and walking free by the now disgraced Sereti commission.2-5

In this article the presence of crime — especially violence, gangsterism and related phenomena — and how it has infiltrated society and even the statutory institutions under the mandate of the ANC, will be reflected, evaluated and described.

1.1. Introduction (Continued from Article 12)

Article 13 is a continuation of the previous article (Article 12, titled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (12: Prosperity)”. This article, with the focus on violence and crime, is in sequence with articles 11 (Introduction) and 12 (Prosperity) already published on the ANC. The intention is also to analyse and to discuss further the arguments, opinions and viewpoints on the integrity and the ability of the ANC to effect land expropriation successfully, as reflected by its CVs and Attestations.

1.2. Aims of article 13 (Continued from Article 12)

The primary intention of this project on the ANC) is to continue the reflection on the three main political parties by specifically describing the profile of the ANC on the same basis as was done with Article 9 on the EFF and Article 10 on the DA.

Once more, we aim to evaluate the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of the mandate as ruler it received during the election of 8 May 2019.

2. Method (Continued from Article 12)

The research has been done by means of a literature review. This method aims to construct a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach has been used in modern political-historical research where there is often not an established body of research, as is the case regarding the abilities of political parties to engage in successful land reform from 2019 onwards. The sources included articles from 2018, books for the period 1944 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2019. These sources have been consulted to assess and to describe the facts that must guide us in the making of an evaluation on the suitability of the ANC as the ruler of South Africa to effect successful land reform from 2019 onwards.

The research findings are being presented in narrative format.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Overview

The manifestos, self-descriptions and public referees of the ANC were already reflected, evaluated and described in Article 11 (Introduction). The public referees of the African National Congress will further be reflected, evaluated and described in the under-mentioned division 3.3: The African National Congress: Perspective 1994 to 2019.

3.2. Louw Appraisal Checklist

The Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018,6 will again be used for the quantitative classification and measuring of the political records of the ANC. The 82 selective items of the checklist on leaders and governments, quantified in terms of its bad-versus-good classification, were again applied to all information collected in the literature review of the party’s’ manifesto and  the writings of investigative journalists, political commentators and political analysts, and interpreted as the researcher sees fit.6

3.3 The African National Congress: Perspective 1994 to 2019 (Continued from article 12)

3.3.1. South African violence and related crimes

One of the criteria of a failed state is the inability of a regime to guarantee and assure prosperity. Another one of the criteria for a good regime is to guarantee the presence and maintenance of law and order for its people, and thus to assure a peaceful society free from any crime, especially violence.

Undoubtedly South Africa has become a crime-ridden country, especially over the last two decades. Crime, in its broadest form, is totally out of control. It is practised on the highest levels by some members of our so-called political elite. The various judicial commissions, prominently the Zondo commission, bring this reality under our attention daily where it is alleged that certain top ANCs and their cronies stole millions of rand from the state, where murder in the form of assassinations to silence whistle-blowers is a common phenomenon, and where there is an almost complete lack of an effective prosecution system to punish criminals and murders.

South Africa is today a country of crooks without a single cowboy and a sheriff. If there is any doubt about the present-day South Africa being a gangster state and thus a failed constitutional state, just read the books of Adriaan Basson2, Pieter du Toit2, Pieter Myburgh5 and Jacques Pauw7. Through the mass penetration of crime in their daily dealings some of the political elite have become the South African Mafiosi, counting today nearly as many as Teresa’s1 thousands of Mafiosi in America. Unlike in America, the Mafiosi here are only partly friends with the politicians: many a time they are the politicians themselves. With such an official example it must thus not be a surprise that the practise of crime by some factions of society has become a common lifestyle.1,2,5,7

Crime takes various forms, from common theft, stealing, embezzlement, up to the most extreme form that should be punishable by hanging: Violence. Violence is central today in South Africa as the creator of poverty, political instability, inequality, as well as social, emotional and psychological traumas and despondency. It also tells us why prosperity is absent here. It plays a signifcant role in our country’s service-delivery unrest and the unstoppable chronic anarchy. The immense presence of violence in South African is well indicated by Bawa8 when he writes8:17: “South Africa is one of the most violent countries in the world”. But this violence is not experienced or observed at the same level by all the citizens; meaning that the middle and higher socio-economic groups, living and working in the better-off areas with good security systems, are mostly spared the extreme experience of daily rape, murder, robbery, etc. Predominantly, most sufferers of violence are the poor Blacks living in temporary shelters in isolated areas and informal settlements engulfed by crime and violence, far away from the security of the SAPS safety-net. But today the intensity of crime is spreading also to more developed areas and the poorer suburbs.8-10

Furthermore, it is clear that the statistics on violence and crime are understated, making the violence experienced by the poor far more comprehensive and in-depth than the general public realises. Their living conditions reflect not prosperity but utter adversity and hardship. What makes this crime condition so devastating, as well as a political pressure cooker waiting to explode, is the hard fact that nearly 30 million South Africans are poor, lacking sufficient housing accommodation, healthcare, basic education, work, and most of all not knowing when they or their children are going to be robbed, assaulted or murdered. Visible policing is mostly absent in those poor areas that are sheltering people marred by devastating life conditions that they can neither control nor are responsible for. These unfortunate people have been the forgotten, faceless ones for many years. They are people who are sometimes not only the ones to be robbed, assaulted and murdered, but who have in time become themselves robbers, attackers and murderers to survive in their dark, criminalised world. Some have an uncle, a nephew or brother as a parliamentarian but these have unfortunately forgotten them and their own homeland-past long ago because most politicians become with time blind and deaf to the outside world:  they live their lives ensconced in luxury and abundance.8-10

South Africa’s crime and violence, also as a barometer of the ANC regime as a failed government, will in the various next subdivisions be comprehensively described and be evaluated.

3.3.1.1. Western Cape

Even a cursory glance at South African media, persuades one that gangsterism and other crime-related activities such as the drug trade, theft, unrest, serious violence like assault, rape and murder, have taken over the Cape Flats of the Western Cape. It is not a sudden phenomenon, but a gradual development that has been gaining momentum over the last decade or two. It clearly betrays the ANC national government’s failure to maintain primary governmental structures. Prominent among these failures, must be counted the progressive downward spiral as to the quality of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and its ability to ensure daily crime prevention. It portends a very negative future for especially the poor living in the informal settlements as well as the lower-level socio-economic suburbs. The main sufferers and victims are Blacks, including the Coloureds. The immense long-term criminality in the Cape Flats is well reflected by the entrenched establishment of well-armed gangs, such as the Destruction Boys, which have become “armies” in their their own right. Organised, as well as common crime, associated with a very high murder rate, forced the ANC-regime to order the return of the South African National Defence Force (SADF) to the Cape Flats in July 2019. During the so-called Operation Prosper, the SADF was supposed to render assistance to the failed SAPS in areas identified as crime-ridden hotspots on the Cape Flats. (The “Cape Flats” is the collective name for a poverty-stricken, gang-infested area of more or less 25km between east and west, stretching from Bellville in the north, Blue Downs in the east, Khayelitsha and Mitchells Plain in the south to Gugulethu. It totals 11 townships, including the places Lavender Hill, Bishop Lavis, the Steenberg district, Manenberg, Delft, Marcus Garvey, Elsiesrevier, Nyanga, Khayelitsha, Mfuleni, Philippi and Kraaifontein.9,11-17

But what is often overlooked, is that crimes such as gansterism and violence are permanent features of a society in peril and caught in social and economic instability, which is a direct result of South Africa’s poor governance over many years. The almost pathological conditions in the West Cape has seemingly been unknown to the ANC leadership since 1994. It is a situation of which the roots have so far never been addressed by government besides treating the symptoms so as to get the “fever down without healing the illness”. Four years ago the same kind of experiment in intervention was execited when the SADF was used in Operation Fiela, in cooperation with the SAPS, the South African Revenue Service (SARS), Home Affairs and a plethora of other state departments to raid, search and arrest anyone who did not have a reasonable explanation for anything in his/her possession. The immense criminality already established, and basically left untreated from 2014 to 2015, apart from ordinary law enforcement in 3 205 operations, is reflected by the official data in December 2015 when Operation Fiela began to be wrapped up. The data reflect: 41 000 arrests, the recovery of 737 vehicles, confiscation of 375 firearms and 10 homemade firearms. In 2018 Fiela Two was launched again, but seemingly without success. The present hopeless failure by the ANC regime to combat the immense criminality in the Western Cape and the need to activate the emerging use of the SADF, has forced the Police minister Bheki Cele to describe it as a “national effort to combat gangsterism in South Africa”. (This description applies one hundred present to the country’s gangsterism in general, but also specifically to its Parliament, its SAPS and many state enterprises where corruption is seemingly well entrenched).9,11-13,15-18

It seems that the SADF interventions since 2014, as well as the SAPS’s constant presence in the problematic Cape Flats since 1994, have never brought successes; the present ongoing criminal situation in the Western Cape confirms it. Although Fiela One did not bring much bloodshed on the side of the criminals, experts warn that the “Cape Criminality” is a deep-seated phenomenon that has developed over many years. It must be seen in terms of the active unrest and anarchy which have spread all over the country since 1994.  From a security perspective, it seems already to have moved into chronic anarchy, a phenomenon which the ANC regime either does not understand or ignores outright because they do not have the skills and ability to address it. This opinion is strengthened by the ANC’s poor fighting of criminality since 1994 and encouragement to engage in serious crime that the greater society may draw, given the bad example set by the ANC’s own law-makers, some of whom some were jailed for serious offences. Many other ANC law-makers and politicians are serious offenders too, but find themselves still outside jail because they have so far not been prosecuted by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).17,19

The fact that the ANC never took the Cape Flats crime issue seriously, is becoming more and more evident because it is a regime that still lives inside its old culture of lawlessness and disorder, coming from its pre-1994 days as a terrorist-revolutionary organisation. Ritchie19 aptly named it “real-politik at play”. Ritchie19 and Fokazi29 mention that, in light of the ANC’s neglect of the Cape Flats crime issue and their failure to do an in-depth analysis of the causes and to implement prevention and healing, the warning signs are there that Cape Town risks becoming the world’s most dangerous city.19,20

Hyman21 postulates that in reality Cape Town is already the world’s most dangerous city when he aligned its statistics with the world’s — until recently — most dangerous city: Caracas in Venezuela. The same author21 mentions that according to the Cape’s Citizen Council for Public Safety and Criminal Justice, which compiled a listing from official global statistics, Caracas was in 2017 the world’s murder capital with 3 387 murders. Hereto Cape Town’s death-by-murder rate rose from the 15th place in 2017 to the 11th place (with a growth of 15%) in 2018. Now, in 2019, if the body count is maintained in Cape Town with 3 900, Caracas is left far behind. Looking at the analysis of murders per 100 000 people, the rate for Cape Town of approximately 97.3 per 100 000 so far for the first four months of 2019, would propel it into the fourth place for 2018 on the global list where all the top cities in the top 10 are situated in Mexico, Venezuela and Brazil which are all at the centre of the international drug trade, reports Hyman21. A short analysis for 2019 for Cape Town by Hyman21 shows that the murders in the first four months of 2019 were 10.66 per day, while the number of murders between the three days of June 1 and June 3 were 62. The percentage rise in admissions of murdered victims to the Salt River mortuary so far this year has been 46%, while the projected murders for 2019 is 3 893 if the rate of killings continues.21

Other statistics are there to confirm Hyman’s21 labelling of Cape Town as the “World’s most dangerous city”. In May 2019 there were 331 murders in the Western Cape; in the month of June 2019 there were 448 murders in Cape Town (against the 344 murders of June 2018); in the first week of June 2019, 14 people were shot dead within 24 hours in Delft; on 5 July 2019 six women were shot and killed in the Marcus Garvey areas of Philippi in Cape Town, while on 6 July 2019 five men were also killed in the same area. On the weekend of 5 to 7 July 2019, 55 people were murdered in the greater Cape Town area. This year (over the last six months), 2 000 people have been killed so far in gang-related incidents in the Cape. Between January and June 2019 (six months) more than 44 people were killed in Bonteheuwel. The 2018/2019 SAPS report shows that in Nyanga, 289 people were murdered, followed by Delft with 247 murders and Khayelitsha with 221 murders.14,18-24

What the Cape Flats saga further reflects is the killing of persons under 30 years of age mainly, prompting Pinnock15 to call it “a war against young people”. What has been overlooked by the ANC’s bigwigs since their taking political power in 1994, is that most of the youth in the Cape Flats (as in most of the other socio-economically disturbed South African areas) grew up without supportive families, with poor education and no formal employment prospects (there are more or less 350 000 young people under 25 years outside education in the Cape). Many are adolescents who are victims of complex historical conditions, not of their own making, which are mixed into an inflammatory setup wherein Apartheid’s relocations, present-day migration and high levels of alcohol and drug abuse, play a prominent role.15

Looking at the monthly crime statistics, one finds that almost 1 300 murder victims arrived at the Cape Town mortuaries between January and April 2019, while between 1 November 2018 and 30 April 2019 (six months) a total of 1 875 people were murdered in the greater Western Cape. According to figures from Professor Lorna Martin20, head of forensic pathology in the Western Cape, by the end of April 2019 the city’s mortuaries in Tygerberg and Salt River handled 1 280 murder victims, with more than 50% having been shot. Martin20 states to Fokazi20 of the Sowetan that the region’s mortuaries (which can already not cope with the inflow of bodies — in such a way that bodies have to be stored in refrigerator shipping containers) are further overstretched by the storage of more incoming murdered bodies.14,19,20

Martin20, on the undercapacity of the mortuaries, responds as follows20:6: “Even though this is new [the R281-million Observatory mortuary] and we are moving in, it’s already not big enough. With the increase [in the amount of murders] that we’ve had lately, I don’t think we will cope.”

The names of Delft’s so-called “townships” (consisting in total of 500 000 residents), varying from “Blikkiesdorp”, “Tin-Can Town”, the “Hague” (the so-called “Bishopscourt” of Delft) to “Symphony Way” (where most of the evicted people find a “home”), reflect well the criminal and social disorder there. When Hyman25 writes as follows of “Symphony Way”, his description is fully applicable to all of the many “camps” around Cape Town where the city’s outcasts are forced to live and hope not to get murdered25:6:

It’s a place of constant waiting. An internment camp that represents the worst of apartheid’s legacy and the failure of the new governments to deal with it.

Pastor Ray McCauley26, president of the Rhema Family Churches and co-chair of the National Religious Leaders Council, put the situation as follows26:6: “Residents say enough is enough”. He said that 308 people were killed in June 2019 at the Cape of which 139 were shot and 118 stabbed.

In this regard, the editor18 of the Sowetan writes on the nonchalant attitude and lack of concern of South Africans as to what has happened concerning the number of murders at the Cape Flats over the last six months (with 1 875 murders) and the presence of immense crime and violence all over South Africa18:12:

That is a huge number of deaths in just six months but there was no outrage in SA, we carried on with our lives as if nothing had happened. This is the kind of news that would have made headlines every day in other countries until police were seen to be doing something to ensure the safety of innocent citizens.

The essentially permanent breakdown of law and order in the so-called “Cape Flats”, which Ritchie19 describes appositely as “a war zone run by crooks and murderers”, is primarily because the ANC regime failed to bring prosperity to the inhabitants in the form of good training, work opportunities and a safe environment. Instead, they have left the area on its own to struggle on haphazardly. This is a situation which Ritchie19 summarises as follows19:8: “What is happening in Cape Town, what has been allowed to develop on the forgotten and dumped communities of the Cape Flats, has to be a crime against humanity.” How much the ANC failed in the Cape Flats to bring prosperity to the citizens and how the present setup was allowed to deteriorate as a result of the ANC’s poor policing and law-enforcement, as well as corruption in the SAPS, is described by Watson17 as follows17:4: “Gangsters there are unafraid of fighting back as evidenced by the shooting of six police anti-gang unit members in June [2019].”

3.2.1.2. Violence is countrywide

But we must not be fooled to think that the Cape Flats represents an extraordinary, singular “bad” situation and place. Countrywide, crime has been created and maintained by the ANC regime’s poor governance since 1994. Just listen to Cyril Ramaphosa’s own confession in his speech during the state of the nation debate in June 2019 when he mentioned that the anti-gang unit was transferred to national control by police minister Bheki Cele because “hooliganism (gangsterism) is spreading across the country”.

McCauley26 describes the chaos of the constant murder-spree in South Africa at present well when he writes26:6:

The Western Cape is not the only province suffering from the violence. Throughout the country we are hearing of horrific stories where people are hijacked or robbed at gunpoint and their possessions taken.

According to the SAPS, there were 20 336 murders in South Africa, between April 2017 and March 2018, showing a 7% increase from the previous year.

This puts the country’s murder rate at close 36 people murdered per 100 000 of the population – with Cele [Minister of Police Bheki Cele] noting that 57 people are being murdered each day.

Crime in all its forms are indeed present and very active in the country, reflecting a country spinning out of control under the ANC regime. During its reign it has failed to improve the country’s infrastructure, economy and law and order, besides responding time after time by only implementing short-term crime interventions. The overview of Makhetha23 and Marupeng23 of an overwhelmingly crime-beset South Africa, based on the SAPS report for 2018/2019, is very informative, but shocking. They pinpointed Gauteng as a specific point of concern and write that the area of Ivory Park outside Tembisa remains one of the most dangerous areas in South Africa to live in: it recorded the highest number of house robberies with 373 (an increase of 52). The second was the Honeydew area (consisting of Northriding, Strydom Park and Randpark Ridge) with 329 house robberies (a decrease of 31), while Orange Farm (south of Johannesburg) reflects the highest number of rapes, 226. This statistic makes it the most dangerous area for women in the country. Regarding the number of murders committed, Johannesburg Central and its immediate surroundings areas remained the top murdering spot: 123 murders for 2019 against the 93 of 2018 (an increase of 30). In the second spot for high-murder areas are respectively Hillbrow and Jeppe with 111 cases each.23,24

The violent-crime behaviour and other disorders in the northern areas of Port Elizabeth which include Bethelsdorp, have been many years in the making. It has been, like most other crime-infected areas in the country, left essentially unattended by the ANC regime since 1994. In 2018, there was an SAPS intervention, but it was withdrawn later. On the prevalence of the uncontrolled murdering and other serious violent crimes in this area, Sain27 reports that with the SAPS intervention some results were obtained for a short while. Since May 2019 it has started to escalate again, leaving so far this year already 117 people murdered.27 This chaos, or lack of law and order, is well described by Sain27 when he writes27:8: “Impeccable sources say that in the last five months the Gelvandale Mortuary has recorded more than 100 gunshot wound related deaths.” The situation is now so serious that the inhabitants of the northern areas of Port Elizabeth have also started to plead for SADF intervention to safeguard them in some way.27

The presence of serious violent crimes countrywide is also reflected by the murder statistics showing the highest number of murders recorded at the top-30 police stations: Western Cape occupied 10 spots, Gauteng had eight spots and KwaZulu-Natal six spots.24

The 2018/2019 SAPS data28 reveal the following crime statistics countrywide: 21 022 murders (686 more than 2018 or a 3.4% increase), sexual offences increased by 4.6% (2 312 cases, bringing them to a total of 52 420), attempted murder increased by 4.1% (747cases) with 18 980 cases for 2019, common robbery increased by 2% to 51 765 reported cases and farm murders declined from 62 in 2018 to 47 in 2019.28

The latest SAPS statistics (2018/2019) reflects a rise in the reporting of crimes against women from 172 961 to 177 620, with a decline of 5.4% in the murders of women: 2 930 to 2 771. Regarding the reporting of crimes against children, the crimes decline from 43 842 to 43 540.  In this regard, 1 014 children were murdered, reflecting an increase from 985. The rate of sexual offences against women decreased by 0.4% to 36 597. There was an increase in sexual offences against children: 3.8%, to reflect 24 387 children affected. In total, general sexual offences has increased by 4.6 % to reach 52 420 offences (2 312 more). Sexual offences have reduced by over 10 000 cases since the 2009/2010 reporting year. On official rape-reporting stats, Gareth Newham30, head of the Justice and Violence Prevention programme at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), said that on average only one out of nine rape cases is reported, while in some communities it can be as low as one out of 22. Only between 4% and 8% of all rape reporting leads to sentencing).29-31

These SAPS statistics reports that children, affected by their daily lived environment of crime,  themselves joined the stream of murderers: out of 21 022 murders as many as 736 people were killed by children (Eastern Cape : 231, Western Cape: 170), while many of the children killed were victims of other children. In the same way, 4 196 common assaults were committed by  children.24,30,32

The ubiquitous presence of uncontrolled violent crime, intertwined with the constant growth of broad criminality in South Africa, is also evidenced by the call on 19 July 2019 by the DA for more specialised anti-gang units in the Gauteng Province. the presence of uncontrolled gang violence in the province was revealed in the research report of GIATOC, namely Ending the Cycles of Violence, which was focussed on the two areas, Westbury and Eldorado Park. John Moodley33 of the DA emphasised that the ANC regime’s general failure to ensure good law and order via the SAPS in Gauteng, engendered the same kind of chaos through gang violence as in the Cape Flats and had led directly to the undermining of job creation, schooling, youth and community development, further exacerbating the incidence of violent crimes.33

Violent crimes and the breakdown of law and order countrywide, including property crime, are doing one main thing: limiting the growth of prosperity. Until now, it does not seem to be a negative phenomenon for the ANC regime.

A specific category of violent crime which is growing countrywide is kidnapping. The Gauteng annual provincial crime statistics revealed that 125 cases of kidnapping were reported in Kempton Park, reflecting a 14.7% increase (making it the kidnapping capital of South Africa) for the period 2018/2019. In total there were 530 cases of kidnapping in Gauteng, with Free State 511, Eastern Cape 468 and Western Cape 458. Statistics revealed that the predominant motives for kidnappings were for robbery, rape or sexual assault, hijacking, domestic violence and for ransom.30,34

The 2018/2019 statistics show that another category of violent crime that reflects an increase is robbery. Robbery with aggravating circumstances has increased by 1.2% to 140 032 cases (meaning 1 668 more) countrywide. (In this category is included hijackings, cash-in-transit robberies and robberies at commercial and residential properties). Common robbery increased by 2% to 51 765 cases and arson by 5.5% to 4 083 cases (with an increase of 214). There were 113 089 cases of malicious damage to property, reflecting an increase of 1.4% (1 597 cases). In total the contact crimes with a violent element, as listed above, increased by 2.6%.30,34

Gareth Newham30, who made the shocking revelation about the 2018/2019 SAPS report, said that these statistics were almost six months out of date (closing on March 31, 2019) and did not reflect the current spate of high-profile violent crimes reported since 1 April in the media. This means the picture on all kinds of crimes, included violence, can be much worse.30

3.3.1.2.1. Highway violence

Another confirmation that the ANC regime’s maintenance of law and order collapsed, is the overtaking of violent gangsterism of the country’s roads and highways.35,36 On 9 June 2019 Hosken and Singh35 wrote in the Sunday Times35:2: “Motorists have been warned to stay off the N3 between Johannesburg and Durban after dark”.

Why this warning? Because the deadly attacks on foreign truck drivers, which started more than a year ago, are surging.

Hosken and Singh35 report that according to the Police 74 trucks were burnt and damaged, with 50 vehicles torched on the highway since April 2018. In the past year 213 truck drivers were killed of whom 12 were foreigners. The financial loss of cargo and trucks amounts to R1.2-billion. Towhat extent the government failed to protect not only the life of citizens, but the economy, is well described by the CEO of the Road Freight Association (RFA), Gavin Kelly35, when he says35:2: “If the government doesn’t act swiftly against this anarchy, which has increased over the past seven months, with 40 trucks torched in three weeks, RFA will consider taking action, including stopping deliveries across the country.”

How extensive these N2, N3, N7 and other road anarchies have become (in some way equal in seriousness to the chronic anarchy and lawlessness on the Cape Flats), is the control by gangs of the roads by blocking them for up to a day without any intervention by the security services. The ANC regime is utterly silent on the matter.35,37 Hosken and Singh35 report on these various occasions when gangsters took over the roads, as follows35:2:

Between Sunday and Tuesday [beginning of June 2019], gangs searching for foreign truck drivers besieged towns across KwaZulu-Natal  and Mpumalanga , pulling vehicles off the roads in Ermelo, Piet Retief, Newcastle, Amsterdam and Bethal. Foreign drivers were forced to surrender their cargo and vehicles.

An Ermelo truck-stop owner, who asked not to be named as he feared further attacks, said 500 trucks had been ‘held hostage’ at the stopover by the All Truck Drivers Association (ATDA).

Slabbert36 and others37 listed the other roads under attack and described as dangerous, besides the N3, as the R59, R550, R101, N1, N2 and N7.36,37

The permitted anarchic blockade of trucks on the highways without formal police intervention and interference is reflected by the fact that one of the blockades at Van Reenen Pass lasted undisturbed for 24 hours. This result has led with good reason to speculation and allegations of a conspiracy between the truck-blockers and the ANC regime and its law-enforcement institutions. The spread of anarchy as alleged to be perpetrated by the ATDA and other so-called anti-foreign-truck-drivers groups, with very little response to these events by the ANC regime still propagating its illusory policy of South African Prosperity, is further confirmed by Hestony’s managing director, Etuan van der Westhuizen35, who reported six trucks burnt at the beginning of June 2019 in Johannesburg and Cato Manor. Trucking company owner Barend Groenewald was in ICU at the Worcester Mediclinic after his truck was set alight in Touws River in the Western Cape in May 2019. More informative on this road anarchy is the testimony of Claudia Carvalho35, the owner of Hawkeye Trucker Association (HTA) which safeguards trucks on roads with armed escorts. Carvalho35 called it the “Wild West” and said35:2: “…it was ‘complete madness’ on the N3. ‘The situation, which began to develop a year ago, was largely ignored and is now totally out of control’.

Advocate Pria Hassan38, spokesperson of the Positive Freight Solutions Forum, who took a strong stand against the ongoing truck violence, was forced to take safety measures to guard her and her family after serious threats. She reports38:1:

Ons lewe nou elke dag in vrees. Dit is ‘n nuwe soort wetteloosheid wat kan oorspoel na ander bedrywe as die regering nie dringend en daadwerklik ingryp om dit te voorkom nie.

But this truck anarchy is at present going on, intensified and is spreading out westwards from the Cape to attacks on the N7 near Piketberg, Moorreesburg and Piekenierskloofpas, while an attack was recently reported on the N2 near the Strand too. The Cape provincial spokesperson Kenny Africa37 said on the ongoing and intensified truck anarchy which the ANC regime clearly failed to curb37:9: “This can’t keep happening. It’s bad at the moment”. A response or statement of action by the ANC regime’s Transport minister Fikile Mbalula still outstanding.37

Looking at the passive reaction of the ANC-regime on the road anarchy so far, which puts union interests first above those of the country (as enforced by the unions’ seat in the tripartite government alliance), it seems that the ANC regime wants to solve the matter solely as a workplace issue (wherein the appointment of foreign drivers, amounting to only 15% of the total drivers occupies a central position), rather than taking criminal steps against the perpetrators for robbery and murder. The rule of law seems to be placed second to the importance of ongoing anarchy, racism and ethnicity, taking at face value the words of the Police-ministerial spokesperson, Reneliwe Sereo35, when he says35:2: “A workplace joint inspection task team, which is coordinated by the labour department and which consists of various government departments including the police, has been established.”

The extent of anarchy on the roads against specifically foreign truck drivers (motivated by xenophobia, but which the ANC regime sees as criminality, free from racism or ethnicity), and the SAPS’s passivity in intervening, is well illustrated by Du Plessis38 when he writes38:1: “Die polisie het in die verlede magteloos toegekyk terwyl vragmotors beskadig word.”

Again, featuring prominently, is the lack of any official announcement of danger to the general public and anarchy lurking, or the assurance that drastic law enforcement and pertinent policing will be introduced, or the offering of NPA results in the arrest and punishment of the culprits concerned. There is no sign of the constructive cleansing of the criminals from the country’s roads. What is clear, however, is a regime not in control of the country; a regime which is allowing the murderers of  213 truck drivers and the crooks who burnt 74 trucks and did damages to the amount to R1.2-billion, to get off the hook, in the same as the perpetrators of state captue did not get punished and got away with their stolen billions of rand. Further confirming this open tolerance of anarchy, racism, ethnicity, xenophobia and murder by the ANC regime without punishing the criminals, and thus a further reaffirmation that South Africa has an impotent regime in Parliament, unable to safeguard its citizens’ rights and safety, is the arrogant and challenging utterance by the head of ATDA, Sipho Zungu35, when he allegedly said to Hosken and Singh35:2:

We have no problem with foreign trucks coming to SA, rather with foreigners driving for South African companies. South African drivers and their families are starving. Children cannot be sent to school. South Africans are losing jobs to foreigners, who don’t only take our jobs but also our rights to protect jobs.

Slabbert36 points out the “political empowerment” and hostility of ATDA, as reflected by their demand that in future only ATDA members should be appointed as drivers and that foreigners should be fired and that truck owners must pay R350 per month to ATDA for each of its members employed. Slabbert36 writes on the masked threat to companies which dare to “disobey” the ATDA’s demands and extortion36:8: “Maatskappye wat nie hieraan voldoen nie, word gedreig met weerwraak en dat hul voertuie aan die brand gesteek sal word.”

The endangering of the drivers’ lives went so far that a truck company was forced to obtain a court order on 31 May 2019 in the High Court of KwaZulu-Natal which forbade the ATDA to attack or threaten its members. But as the recent attacks at the beginning of September 2019 confirm, the violence is continuing, more intense than ever and spreading all over the country.36,37

The above kind of remarks against the truck drivers and their employers by unions reflect racism, ethnicity, xenophobia and the sanctioning of the murder against foreigners, as well as wreaking massive damage on trucking firms. They are remarks which should be brought under the attention of the Council for Human Rights, as well as the SAPS and the NPA for drastic action.  The passivity of the ANC regime can rightfully be seen as in some way allowing or even supporting such crimes.39

Secondly, in addition, we find the remark of the secretary general of the National Truck Drivers Federation, Siphesihle Muthwa35, to Hosken and Singh35 when he said35:2: “…the issue would go away if ‘employers did the right thing’.” This is undoubtedly an open threat to the lives and property of truck owners which again needs the attention of the SAPS and the NPA to enforce the law.35

The anarchy in the long-distance trucking industry has another aspect, confirming again the lack of a stable government to ensure law and order. This entails robbing trucks of their valuable loads, as well as open theft from trucks on our roads. Slabbert36 reports36:8: “…op die N2-hoofweg tussen Oos-Londen en Kokstad waar vragmotors weens die kronkelende en heuwelagtige paaie so stadig as soos 30km/h ry, spring misdadigers op die vragmotors, sny die seile wat die vrag bedek oop en gooi die vrag af; 36:8: “… in Beaufort-Wes gebeur dit [stropery] sommer by die verkeersligte”; en36:8: “Belhamels gooi rotse van brûe op voertuie om hul tot stilstand te dwing sodat hulle die vrag kan steel”.

The utter failure of the ANC to instill law and order on the roads and the comprehensiveness and seriousness of the problem which is simply being ignored by the ANC leaders is described by Ehlers40 as follows40:10: “The shocking statistics regarding trucks and cargoes burnt within the past 12 months should long ago have been addressed as a national problem bordering on civil war.”

Looking at the chaos and anarchy in the trucking industry created by crooks and murderers, it must be clear for Ehlers40 that we do not have a national government to combat the country’s massive crime, especially violence. We have again been captured by a new kind of “Zuptas of the road”.

3.3.1.2.2. Railway anarchy and violence

The above road anarchy and violence are echoed by the similar railway anarchy and violence. South Africa has suffered many arson attacks on the rail system over many years. It specifically started in the Western Cape and has spread gradually to become a countrywide phenomenon. It  cost the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) and Transnet  close to a billion rand, with 1 496 rail carriages destroyed. Virtually not a single arrest for the 2017/2018 financial year of the was made by the SAPS.41,42

Pijoos43 refers to the chaotic conditions pertaining to the country’s railway system, on which millions of the poor are dependent for their daily travel to work, schools, shops, hospitals, etc., as43:9: “Stranded commuters, lengthy delays, stolen railway tracks, deadly train crashes and burning coaches — this the state of the country’s railway system”.

Including in this failure is the railway infrastructure, which is itself broken. Besides arson, there is immense vandalism of railway property. A recent cellphone video showed the George Goch station in Johannesburg being stripped of copper cables, windows, doors and even the roof covering within two days during a strike of railway policement. It seems, as with all the other schemes of the ANC regime that have collapsed, that it does not have a long-term solution. On the whole, it does not seem as if the ANC regime cares about the deterioration of South Africa’s railway infrastructure. When it becomes a headache, the ANC-regime, through sporadic, insignificant efforts, addresses the chaos it created by means of a superficial short-term approach, treating the “symptoms without the underlying causes”. For instance, in an effort to “handle” the violence and arson on their trains, Prasa’s short-term solution was the launching of the so-called “railway enforcement unit” whereby about 100 officers were deployed to ensure the safety of trains in the Cape Town area. The input was insignificant and nothing else than political window-dressing: it was only a trickle to rescue the railways.43

How serious the situation is for Prasa (Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa), seen from an economic viewpoint, is reflected by its 2017-2018 annual report. Pijoos43, after studying the report, warns on 10 July 2019 that the long-distance passenger train service of Prasa was declining to lower than acceptable levels. Pijoos43 reflects on the Prasa-report as follows43:9:

Passengers have dropped from 2.8-million in 2009-2010 to 465,647 [19%] in 2017-2018, while trains run have dropped from 6,604 to 1,770 [30%]. Both trains run and passenger patronage have dropped drastically at a rate indicative of a service that has totally collapsed.

3.3.1.3. Extraordinary violent crimes

More recently two further forms of violent crime have broken out country-wide, namely 1) violence against women and children (gender violence); and 2) violent crime against foreigners (xenophobia). Because of the comprehensive attention offered by the media, the public and especially the Ramaphosa regime to it and the outright political opportunism around the two forms of violence, they need to be evaluated and discussed in depth. These two issues are indeed part of the greater crime culture, or better: the crime mentality of many South Africans. To understand it, will help us to understand better the already discussed violence in the Western Cape as well as the epidemic of violent crime in the whole country.

3.3.1.3.1. Gender violence

Regarding another recent tragic phenomenon connected to crime, is the alleged appalling and often brutal way men treat women and children in South Africa. This is being seen in some way as having triggered a nationwide uprising to combat the evil, and described by some in the media as one of the most tumultuous and emotional episodes in our country’s history, the editor44 of the Sunday Times wrote recently. Indeed, the seemingly sudden rise in gender-violent crimes invoked promises of punishment of the male culprits by the ANC’s top leadership, even a presidential promise which reads44:3:

I will propose to cabinet that all crimes against women and children should attract harsher minimum sentences. We agree with the women of the country that the state should oppose bail and parole for perpetrators of rape and murder against women and children.

The minister of justice, Ronald Lamola45, continued where Ramaphosa stopped by saying that the cabinet would consider requests for a referendum on the issue, while the president of the ANC Women’s League, Bathabile Dlamini45, asked for a law to forbid bail for persons accused of violence against women.45

Supporting these “ANC royals” in their “revenge seeking and taking” is the opinion and standpoint of the “Zulu royal”, King Goodwill Zwelithini46 whor recently during Umkhosi weLembe (Shaka Day), addressing hundreds of his subjects, said46:24:

…maybe it would be better if once a man was found to have rape, he should be handed to ‘men like us’ to cut off his manhood. This would end this thing(rape), this should be done in a way that would show the world that the Zulu nation does not tolerate this shame.

Palesa Lebitse47 also brings the present shocking state of rape and gender-based violence to our attention by pointing out that the chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng recently reflected on the complexity of  rape and gender-based violence by showing that we are not confronted here with a sudden pathological surge of evil-doing men, but a deep-rooted problem which has been a long time coming. For Lebitse47, the so-called “phenomenon” of gender-based violence in 2019 is due to the long-term neglect and the “untouchability” of the problem by the various authorities within the ANC government, specifically the Department of Women, the SAPS and the NPA.47,48

To argue, as do Ramaphosa44 and Lamola45 and others inside the ANC circle, that present legislation on gender violence is insufficient, reflect a lack of knowledge by them of the country’s battery of laws on this issue. Indeed, effective legislation exists to tackle and solve the problems.  What is missing is an effective government to govern and which is able to effectively use  the existing laws to address and solve the matters. We will hear for a long time in future horrifying stories of the maltreatment of women and children — as we are constantly hearing the ongoing shocking testimonies before the Zondo and other commissions on state corruption — but both approaches to the offering of “confessions” will bring nothing constructive in the end. Results such as prosecutions will stay absent. Regarding gender-based violence, short-term rhetoric by the ANC’s leaders are being heard daily, exclusively for the opportunistic gains of the ANC and support for the ANC’s calculated diverting of attention away from their regime’s corruption and dishonesty since 1994.31,49-51

The minister of Justice and Correctional Services, Ronald Lamola52, is treading water when he reflects on the recent prominence of gender violence by saying it52:2: “…remains a sore point and requires all of us to do our bit to curb this scourge”, and that52:2: “…establishing more sexual offences courts remained an important step in ‘their quest to eradicate gender-based violence and femicide’.” In this context he further states52:2: “…an additional 15 courts rooms were adapted in line with the sexual offences model and this brought the total number of courtrooms adapted to 90. We are planning a further 11 courtrooms in the current financial year”.

What Lamola52 did not say loudly was that these courts have gathered dust since there establishment, because they are under-used, primarily because the promulgated laws to curb these kinds of crimes are not effectively used and the NPA lacks capable staff while the SAPS fails the people in combatting crime. This makes all the loud talk of Lamola, together with that of Ramaphosa on their supposed fight against gender violence, just hot air, once more.39,53,54

How much Ramaphosa and his ministers are confused and uninformed about the established and appropriate legislation already in place to fight and punish all kinds of crimes against women and children — but also seemingly taken up emotionally by the present protests and apparently orientated to use the situation opportunistically — is evidenced by Versluis31. She writes31:6:

Die minimum vonnisse is reeds jare lank lewenslank vir moord met voorbedagte rade, verkragting wat met roof of aanranding gepaardgaan, ‘n verkragting van ‘n kind, groepverkragting of meer as een verkragting. Vir die meeste ander seksmisdade, roof met verswarende omstandighede, asook moord sonder voorbedagte rade is die minimum vonnis 15 jaar vir ‘n eerste oortreding.

A further contradiction in Ramaphosa and his ministers’ opportunistic power-play that the present crimes against women and children are abnormally high and increasing all over the country, is the evidence that although the total cases in 2019 stand at 52 420 sexual offences, the peak before 2019 was higher and the 2019 number represents a reduction of over 10 000 cases since 2010. The latest SAPS statistics (2018/2019) reflects a decline of 5.4% in the murders on women: 2 930 to 2 771, the crimes against children declined from 43 842 to 43 540 and sexual offences against women decreased by 0.4% to 36 597.29,31,55

In regard to Ramaphosa’s hypocrisy to “commit” the ANC regime to rectify the maltreatment of children that suddenly “emerged” in 2019, it is important to emphasise (on paper at least), that South African legislation already protects and cares for the country’s children through the Children Act which was promulgated by the ANC regime itself in 2005.56 Pearl Boshomane Tsotetsi56, a freelance writer, states that the Act demands that parents ensure their children are financially supported and taken care of, but it is clear for her that the socio-economics under the present regime nullifies the fulfilment of this parental duty, primarily because of the parents’ growing poverty, leaving them destitute and unable to afford the necessities of life for their children. She writes56:20:

…the problem is that ours isn’t a country that encourages poor parents to be self-sufficient, and in turn to effectively take care of their offspring. With such a high rate of unemployable people and the economy in the gutter, how are parents meant to financially support their children when they can’t even support themselves?

On the ANC regime’s failed economics, which are creating only poverty and unemployment for the country’s citizens, Tsotesti56 points out firstly that the R430-a-month social grant for a child is totally insufficient. Secondly, she shows the frightening numbers of the poor who are suffering of hunger, indicating that among pregnant woman aged 12 to 50 as much as 16.3% lived in households where children or adults suffered from hunger because there was not enough food, and that 35% were living in households that ran out of money to buy food for five or more days a month. In this context, there is the bleakness of poverty that makes it difficult for people to better themselves or to ever escape poverty. A permanent culture of poverty and despair plays a role in causing poor mental health and depression, which could have explained why a mother recently killed her four children with rat poison. It is clear that, notwithstanding how much the country, especially the leadership of the ANC-regime were “shocked” by the gender violence in 2019, there is a lack of focus by the media and the public on the specific role of the failed government in these kinds of tragedies around children, primarily because of its outright lack of financial support and provision of a mental help service for struggling mothers. At the moment, as with the “maltreatment of women issue”, the ANC regime of Ramaphosa is fleeing from its direct responsibility to children by their efforts to cast it as a non-political issue, while in reality they stand accused of the tragedies which their failed politics have caused in 2019.56 Tsotesti56 points to the ANC regime’s failure (and their present political opportunism)  when she writes56:20: “Lack of resources, lack of effective politicking and a lack of social workers (while thousands of social work graduates are unemployed) mean single mothers are left to fend for themselves in untenable situations that are not of their own making.

The poverty of women is strongly related to gender violence, especially those women who are single mothers and must care for children on their own. Busi Mavuso57, CEO of Business Leadership SA, points to the presence in the country of an all-over gender inequality which she believes contributes to engendering the suppression of the female and triggering gender violence. Mavuso said that there was a growing crisis in the social construction of the South African society: South African women who are permanently employed earn 22.7% less than men, and the country’s mothers, wives and daughters face a future where their work will be less remunerated than that of their male counterparts. There has been an entrenched lack of equality under the ANC regime since 1994 (for which they now cry foul as part of the mistreatment of women), placing the female in the traditional men’s world, together with female inequality inserted as part of a wider process whereby certain social and racial groups are neglected or discriminated against, the perpetuation of which the ANC regime makes itself guilty. Mavuso writes57:26:

The lack of equality in our own private rooms in a climate of low growth and confidence levels played itself out in a rising tide of femicide, which our country’s statistical agency calls the intentional killing of females because they are females.

The problems of patriarchy, some of whose norms and standards are inherited from our colonial past and some of which come from our different cultural influences, need to be addressed. All of us – the government, business and civil society – need to find common purpose on just how we start to deal with a system that goes against equality.

Professor William Gumede58 of the School of Governance, Wits University, offers Mavuso57 a clear picture of the many wrongs of cultural influences, inherent to the country’s patriarchy which is directly responsible for gender violence. For Gumede58 these aberrations must go first before the ANC regime may dare to speak further of a “sudden” rise in 2019 of gender violence and the “urgent need” for legislation to combat it. He writes58:26:

Patriarchy, which informs most South African cultural, social and religious traditions, is at the root of violence against women.  To end this scourge, any cultural belief, custom or practice that encourages inequality between men and women must be made illegal; all traditions and social practices must be democratised.

Gumede58 enumerates the following cultural beliefs, customs and practices, which have all been supported and maintained by the ANC regime since 1994, notwithstanding the party’s condemnation of gender violence, that should be abolished, erased and nullified58:26:

  • Customary law that made women defer to men and preclude them from inheriting property or becoming traditional leaders;
  • Initiation schools encourage patriarchy, aggressive masculinity and a violent response rejection;
  • Patriarchal traditions such as lobola;
  • The reed-dance ceremonies that objectivise women;
  • Religious practices which undermine the rights of women;
  • Improper school curriculum.

The editor59 of the Sunday Times also shoved the role of established cultural beliefs, customs and practices in triggering gender violence into the lime-light by pointing out our two-tier legal system which is forcing discrimination on the poor and rural Black women with little access to justice. Pertinent here is the ANC regime’s direct contribution to the abuse of the women in society over many years as “good”, which has now been re-established by the Traditional Courts Bill. This Bill was passed at the end of the fifth Parliament, supported by the majority of MPs during which the assenting votes by the ANC MPs including ANC women MPs, were prominent. These MPs also specifically voted to remove a crucial so-called “opt out” clause which would allow rural women to opt out of matters before the traditional courts in order to seek justice in statutory courts. There is further evidence that some women, appearing before traditional courts presided over by male traditional leaders, are sometimes not allowed to attend the proceedings simply because they are women. In other cases where they are allowed to attend, they are not allowed to speak, while the testimonies offered by women were belittled. The Bill, making Ramaphosa’s presidential promises that the ANC regime was going to fight the abuse of women simple hypocrisy, was passed despite a legal guideline that it was unconstitutional. It is now before the National Council of Provinces. [Note: Traditional courts are empowered to adjudicate matters including theft, malicious damage to property, burglary, crimen injuria and other matters in which women frequently experience forms of discrimination such as in a customary-law marriage, guardianship of children and inheritance matters].59

The criminologist, Professor Christian Bezuidenhout31 reflects on the chaos of the present social system in South Africa which the ANC now wants to solve bye means of a quick and easy solution in the form of new laws and new kinds of judicial punishments, notwithstanding the fact that the problem has been created and nurtured over 25 years of rule by the ANC itself.  He postulates31:6:

Dit spruit uit ’n komplekse wisselwerking tussen omgewingsfaktore en die genetiese material van die individu [geslagsgeweld is ‘n ekspressiewe misdaad met ‘n sterk emosionele motivering].

Die probleem in Suid-Afrika is dat kinders in ‘n groot deel van die samelewing konstant aan geweld blootgestel word.

In sommige gemeenskappe word geweld beskou as die medium tot sukses.

Dié tipe misdade is die moeilikste om af te skrik. Dit gebeur ook gewoonlik in die privaatheid van die huis.

Meer polisie of swaarder strawwe gaan nie help nie.

The opportunism of the Ramaphosa regime to misuse the issue of the current gender violence to score political points is proven over and over by supporting evidence. The extreme opportunism of the Department of Women — established as the sole, exclusive government vehicle to better and to safeguard the rights of women and children — is increasingly coming under the spotlight. The question strongly arises as to why the department has not executed on its mandate since its creation, already turning Ramaphosa’s recent presidential promise into reality? It can rightly be asked further which constructive legislation on the rights of women and children has it propagated and promulgated, and what evidence there is to reflect that it is engaged in a comprehensive team effort with the NPA and the SAPS to improve the life circumstances of women and children? Why has there been such a “sudden and immense” rise in crimes related to women and children over the last two years if the department had been doing its utmost to curtail such violence and violations of women’s and children’s rights?60,61

Most importantly, why has the Department of Women not taken the SAPS to the ConCourt on neglect of duty when women accused the SAPS that rape victims had to face uncaring cops who fobbed them off with callous remarks when the wanted to lay charges? Fokazi48 writes in a very focussed manner on these accusations against the SAPS, reflecting the description of the head of the Western Cape’s Thuthuzela Care Centre regarding some of the phrases women often hear when they try to report rape to police48:4:

  • Go home, don’t bathe or wash your underwear for the next few days, and come back on Monday.
  • He only used his finger to penetrate you, it’s no big deal.
  • This case is weak, do you really want to put yourself through this?

It is thus of great importance to consider the actions of the Department of Women to make an evaluation of the ANC regime’s intentions and actions since 1994 around women and child welfare and care. This can also give us an indication if Ramaphosa’s presidential promise on rectifying the affairs of women and children may be taken seriously, in the same vein as all of his political promises made in the May-2019 election and his many other post-May 2019 promises on job creation, an end to crime and invigorated economic growth. As a guideline for evaluating ANC policies on the importance of women and children, as represented by the Department of Women’s actions, one may consult Katharine Child’s61:4 recent article in the Sunday Times of the 8 September 2019, very descriptively entitles: “Plenty of pricey talk, no action”.

Child61 depicts a failed and incapable ANC Department of Women under the leadership of its ministers Bathabile Dlamini and Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, including many highly-paid officials, who were supposed to implement their official duty directive, which reads61:4: “…the custodian of the promotion and advancement of gender quality and the empowerment of women”. Child61 makes it very understandable why the publicly expressed outrage at the high rate of murder and rape of women takes place without the truth behind this chaos. Clichés by the department’s present minister, Mate Nkoana-Mashabane, have dealt with the “ideal man-woman relationship in South Africa”, and she has also said that61:4: “We [women] cannot continue to live lives that are constantly under siege and where we are not all enjoying the fruits of our constitutional democracy. Enough is enough, we need justice”. This is hypocrisy of the highest order. It is at the same time an excellent example of how the ANC’s leadership, specifically that of the Ramaphosa regime, directs the people’s attention away from the real culprits that have abandoned women and children since 1994 with their corrupt governance: the ANC leadership itself.61

It is by no means an exaggeration to say that the Department of Women has constantly failed to address gender-based violence. It has indeed itself acknowledged that it never meets its prescribed targets but “only held dialogues with women” with useless travelling around the country and the world to promote these so-called departmental dialogues to “better” the position of women and children. There were no constructive and concrete outcomes confirmed by the Department of Women in its annual performance indicator which requires true “interventions to enhance prevention and elimination of violence against women and children”. It is amid this chaos (mostly unknown to the public) that Ramaphosa is now shamelessly trying to capitalise on the gender-based violence issue with his sudden so-called “judicial intervention and interference in the acts of criminal men”, while he stays silent on his government’s failed Department of Women.60-62

Child61 gives an in-depth description of the Department of Women’s lack of fulfilling its annual performance indicator. She states that when the Parliamentary oversight committee listened to the Department of Women’s annual performance plan in July 2019, its members were unimpressed. Indeed, in a statement afterwards the committee said61:4: “…it could not understand the issues the department is working on as there is no visible community outreach and it did not see tangible achievements”, writes Child61. The parliamentary researcher Kashiefa Abrahams,61 after studying the most recent report of the Department of Women, describes the official explanations by the leadership of the Department about its “national dialogues” held, which allegedly were set up to discuss gender violence, as “incoherent”.61

To give insight into the failed performance of the Department of Women — confirming also the failed performance of the ANC-regime starting from 1994 and telling us in some way again of the immense state capture between 2008 and 2017 — it is of great value to read Child’s61 summary of the Department’s recent annual report.61 Child61:4 writes that of the department’s R244m budget in 2017/2018 about R80m was allocated to the Commission for Gender Equality, lacking a declaration for how and why the R80 million was used. Of the rest, the lion’s share — R72.4m — went to salaries for the 101 staff members. In addition to these salaries, R13m was spent on travel and subsistence, R11.5m on “property managers” and R6.3m on consultants [with R1.2m last year on consultants to investigate the distribution of free “sanitary dignity products”. This last-mentioned  project has after two years still not been finalised].61

Child61 also mentions that the report stated that staff members went on four official overseas trips (without reporting how many staff went on the trips) which the Department recorded as “achievement”! Of the R13m spent on travel, R4m was for overseas travel to destinations such as New York to attend the UN Commission on the Status of Women conference in 2017. Further there were a three-day meeting of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in Swaziland and a five-day AU meeting in Ethiopia. There was again a SADC meeting in Ethiopia to prepare for the next UN Commission on the Status of Women conference in New York in 2018. Moreover, under the category “achievements” listed in the report was attendance at a “moral regeneration movement” meeting in Kimberley in 2017, a Women’s Day celebration on 9 August last year in Kimberley, an interdenominational meeting on gender-based violence in Upington, a “cancer-awareness-raising imbizo”, the launch of the 16 days of activism campaign and a men’s meeting in Port Elizabeth. It also became clear that of the 101 staff 47 were in senior positions, with annual salaries averaging R1 million each. This “salary capture” prompted the IFP MP, Liezl van der Merwe61, to call the Department of Women in Parliament an “employment agency”, asking questions about the need for consultants [with a R6.3m budget] when most of its staff had seemingly high training as reflected by their high salaries.61

Another issue pointing to the failure of the Department of Women under Mate Nkoana-Mashabane to govern properly on behalf of the ANC cabinet the affairs of women and children, is the nonperformance by other ultra-motivated women’s rights fighters, such as  Dlamini, Goodwill Zwelithini, Cele, and other top executives of the ANC regime in addressing crimes against LGBTQ+ people. This passivity of specific politicians undoubtedly led thereto that in the first place there are blind spots in South African data on the crimes against the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer community, wrote Hlatshaneni63 recently. This makes SAPS data unreliable and sub-standard while the pending legislation on hate crimes initiated by the ANC regime is blocking data collection on LGBTQ+ crimes. There is not any official effort to calculate the true presence of gender-based violence by trying to establish the incidence of unreported gender violence. Lisa Vetten63, a gender activist and researcher reports that the last official report on the rate of unreported cases of gender-based violence was released 22 years ago.  But from the statistics (starting in 2009), emanating from nongovernmental organisations and their investigations of LGBTQ+ crimes, the presence of these crimes is high (profiled as unreported or unrecorded cases). It has shown a strong upwards trajectory from 2011, writes Vetten63. For a person who has declared him on the side of the victims of gender violence, Ramaphosa has shown ignorance of these LGBTQ+ crimes which may be seen as a selective escape from a kind of gender-based crime which is politically, socially, culturally and religiously controversial, as well as pertaining to a specific lifestyle not accepted by the greater society of patriarchy.57,58,63

The LGBTQ+ crimes are, as a part of gender violence and thus of the same importance, by and large totally ignored by the ANC regime. Ramaphosa’s silence here seems significant. Letsike63, director of Access Chapter 22, writes that LGBTQ+ crimes have occurred in South Africa for decades, forming an important element of gender-based violence, but are completely ignored by the ANC as not having any importance.  There are some shocking cases of SAPS discrimination when it comes such gender cases shocking, especially because it has been tolerated by the ANC regime during its failed crime-prevention programme to eliminate xenophobia and gender violence since 1994. Letsike63 reflects on the discriminatory behaviour of the SAPS against the LGBTQ+ gender group as follows63:2:

We have actually seen research that showed that 88% of crimes against the LGBTQ+ community go unreported or unrecorded.

One of the reasons for this is when investigating officers do not look at hate or bias as possible motive if the person’s gender identity or sexual orientation is known.

Letsiko63 elaborates further63:2:

Another reason the stories of hate crimes against this community went untold was that the criminal justice system still harboured bias against complainants from the LGBTQ+ community.

We still have a very high level of secondary victimisation where police themselves will victim-blame or intimidate a person for instance, and ask “are you a boy or a girl?” These are the things that discourage victims from reporting these cases”.

Lebitsi47 places the ANC’s outright failure over years to safeguard persons through its judicial arms, the SAPS and the NPA, against gender violence, prominently in focus. His analysis again confirms Ramaphosa and his regime’s opportunism in their misuse of the so-called “2019 gender violence”. Lebitsi writes47:13:

And in interrogating issues around cases involving sexual abuse and gender-based violence, I pondered about the National Prosecuting Authority and its role in ensuring that it too interrogates these issues.

I ended up asking myself: where is the national director of public prosecutions, Shamila Batohi, given the gravity of sexual abuse? But I remembered that Batohi has not even uttered a single word about the calamity of sexual abuse.

I did however remember how a friend of mine once told me about a joke at the NPA about certain rape cases: “at the tavern, to the tavern, from the tavern – no prosecution”.

The bottom line is that the way the NPA treats cases may be a major contributor to this national crisis and may also perpetuating rape myths that plague our society.

Giving us another glimpse into previous official promises by the ANC regime which were made to women and children, similar to the one of Ramaphosa, to “wipe out gender violence by the law” which never went further than mere utterances, is that of the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) a year ago. In June 2018 the newly appointed chairperson of Prasa, Khanyisile Kweyama64, promised to set aside women-and-children-only train carriages on Cape Town‘s Metrorail when she said64:7: “In Women’s month, we will assign terms of reference on how we are going to proceed to implement it”.

A month later in 2018 she apparently made the same commitment to the civil society group #UniteBehind, namely to personally oversee the implementation of the new carriages by August 2018. When #UniteBehind sent a letter with  updates to her in August, it received no response. Further enquiries at Prasa tell another story as to the initial promise of Kweyama: the excuse was that there were other more important issues than the women-and children-only train carriages. Prasa further states that there was a shortage of usable train carriages as well as a lack of security guards available to guard the women and children. So far, until September 2019, requests for updates from #UniteBehind were ignored by Prasa. The official Prasa promise stays just a promise, ignoring the safety of women and children on the Cape Town Metrorail, a negative situation which has now been continuing for years under the ANC regime.44,64

It seems as if the Department of Women is untouchable when it comes to being called to account inside the ANC regime which is characterised by ongoing poor performances and failure. This untouchability is well revealed by Child61,62 when she recounts that when she asked the Department to answer certain questions regarding its 2017/2018 annual report and actions, its spokesperson, Shalen Gajadhar’s only reaction was to send copies of seven speeches made by the Department’s staff! 61,62

It is important to consider, in terms of Ramaphosa’s promise to introduce “extreme laws” to punish men treating women “badly”, that he seemingly lacks an in-depth understanding that South Africa is not only a violent country for women, but also for men. Ramaphosa’s “women’s promise” fails as such to imply an improvement of our failed criminal justice system to serve both gender victims of violence, meaning also men. Moreover: Ramaphosa should have said that South Africa was a violent land for women and men, but he ignored the matter as his regime has been turning a blind eye since 1994 to the violent Western Cape. Lisa Vetten66 of Wits University states in this context that police murder statistics showed that a man was 5.6 times more likely to be murdered than a woman in South Africa. This avoidance in addressing violence against men again highlights the political opportunism of Ramaphosa with his “suddenly selecting and addressing” of the so-called “women’s issue”. He knows well that the chances at this moment of bringing lasting and comprehensive changes to the maltreatment of woman and children are zero. It is a tragic situation which has developed strongly after 1994 under the ANC regime. Evidence shows that the ANC regime can do nothing constructive to the matter. Promises like that of Ramaphosa are all that the ANC can offer South Africans.61,62,65,66 It is a standard part of the ANC’s well-known political practice, what Melody Emmett65;15 referred to as the phenomenon of “lies, lies and more lies” and Child describes as61:4: “Plenty of pricey talk, no action”.

Real evidence contradicts the apparent stereotyping by the ANC leadership of all men as beasts — the “exclusively male transgressors of gender violence” (excluding of course the ANC leadership!) who suddenly arrived in 2019 in South Africa. This profiling of all men as psychopathic characters reflects thankfully only one clear meaning after it was stripped of its emotional and political posturing: an utterly sick political opportunism in the mindset of the ANC.52,67 The author Azille Coetzee’s67 argues that all men are undoubtedly not bad and have not suddenly become perpetrators of gender violence. For her, there is a gender-violence problem, but it is a chronic problem, extending back in the post and in which the behaviour of the ANC and its members also stand accused.52,67

Finally, the question is why the so-called “appalling and often brutal way men treat women in South Africa” was only suddenly recognised in 2019, positioned, and undertaken to be addressed by the ANC regime’s leadership after 25 years of their failed governance. Never in the ANC’s previous elections promises was the matter brought up or recommendations made to rectify it. It is clear that the ANC’s 25 years of poor rule has discredited it on all the levels associated with good governance and excellent leadership. It is forcing Ramaphosa to misuse any emotional and political issue that distracts the attention from the ANC’s delinquent rule and which can easily be used to put him in the lime-light again as the so-called “good” leader after his presidency had started to falter from June 2019. Opportunism seems to be strongly present in the ANC regime nowadays60:4: “…sincerely striving to better the lives of women and children”.

The current one-sided, exclusive over-emphasis of the maltreating of women and children  by the pro-Ramaphosa media and the ANC itself, stands totally in contrast with their ignoring of gang and taxi violence where the gangsters and the taxi bosses and drivers are apparently above the law and the lot of the innocent, suffering people around them deemed insignificant. The ANC fails in this context to issue a similarly public “Ramaphosa empathy” at the individual level to citizens who have been flagrantly abused by public officials by successive ANC regimes. Gumede49 sees a syndrome of “little empathy of Ramaphosa for the mass of victims gripped and suffering in the observable political disorder of the country”. This obvious passivity, observable in the crisis on crimes committed against women, is similar to the passivity that the government shows on crime in general committed against the individual citizen, as well as the passivity recently showed during the crimes perpetrated against foreigners.68-71

The opportunistic effort by the ANC regime and Ramaphosa to reverse the ANC’s present political turmoil by misusing the maltreatment of women and children is wrong. Notwithstanding the tragedy around the abuse of women, children and foreigners, it is a secondary matter when viewed against the total criminal mess the country finds itself in. The main reason for these criminal outcomes is the crooked ANC which created and nurtured these crimes over the past 25 years. To eliminate these crimes, it is also needed to eliminate the ANC as a regime because it fails to practise law enforcement within the existing legal framework, besides their own political and legal transgressions, as well as their lack of taking responsibility for their extensive delinquencies. Pelser45 is very much here correct in emphasising the right of the innocent citizens (including the mass of innocent men) to defend their civil rights, when he writes45:6:

As ons gaan toelaat dat die demone van eiereg, wraaksug en growwe veralgemenings oor mans of buitelanders uit hul hokke kom, om van die soeke na nuwe sondebokke nie te praat nie, gaan ons problem as nasie vererger. Wetstoepassing is die sekerste manier vorentoe.

Hierdie regering gee die barbare in die samelewing al so lank vrypas om te steel en te verkrag en te moor, soms met opset en soms uit blote onbevoegdheid, dat niemand meer die staat se waarborge glo dat reg en orde weer afgedwing kan word nie.

Gumede72 brings a reality to the crimes against women, a matter which the ANC regime has carefully tried to sweep under the carpet for a long time in their frenzied political opportunism, when he writes72:22:

What appears to be a sudden alarming rise in violence against women is in fact the continuation of a rape culture that has been with us since the apartheid dispensation, but which has not been spoken about loudly before, the victims shamed or feared into silence or a stubborn denial of the enormity of the crisis.

What is new, though, is that the spells of silence about the extent of SA’s rape culture – rape, sexual harassment and violence – has finally been broken, and the scourge is now discussed in social, family and public spaces.

This culture has been normalised within social institutions, communities and families.

Even in the military camps of the ANC and PAC, rape culture was pervasive but cloaked in silence. And it also existed within the associated anti-apartheid civil society organisations, including the trade unions and student and youth movements.

It is important for the ANC leadership to own up to the sexual violence that happened within the liberation movement during the struggle against apartheid. Such a move would be an important act of acknowledgment to victims but may also help to bring about a culture change in our present time.

The tragedy was that, for the victims at that time, to accuse liberation leaders of sexual violence was seen as a “betrayal” of the liberation movement, undermining the cause of the struggle and strengthening the hand of the apartheid forces.

Because rape culture is so pervasive, an integrated strategy will be needed to tackle it, focusing on changing the cultural, social and political acceptance of what is “normal”.

3.3.1.3.2. Xenophobic violence

The outbreak of xenophobia is a matter that the ANC regime clearly tries hard to play down as general crime committed by some members of communities in their revenge taken on particular foreigners for their alleged criminal acts, either on their own or as part of local South African crime syndicates as well as foreigner syndicates against so-called “innocent” local South Africans. Another element is that those local South Africans, who are involved in vengeful attacks on foreigners, have been described by the ANC regime specifically as criminals who are attacking small groups of foreigners (on the same basis as if they were attacking  other South Africans) only for opportunistic and self-enriching reasons. The ANC regime does not discern any sign or intention of xenophobia in these attacks: as said, the same kind of attack by the local criminals is directed against other South Africans, as seemingly evidenced by the Western Cape violence. Ramaphosa too, has carefully avoided both the term and the subject of xenophobia in his responses to foreign governments. A case in point was his recent public statement to Nigeria’s envoy, Ahmed Rufal Abubakar, in an effort to calm down the recent conflict between Nigeria and South Africa around the attacks on the lives and property of Nigerians, that these attacks are not xenophobia, but solely the delinquent actions of local criminals against criminal Nigerians for their specific transgressions. Central to the South African-Nigerian conflict was the death of eight South Africans who had allegedly been killed by criminal Nigerians and thus sparked the reaction against  Nigerians which came to be known as xenophobia, worldwide . On the incidence of criminality as a characteristic of a certain group of Nigerians — isolating them as crooks but not as “foreigners”— it is reported that Ramaphosa, stating that South Africans were innocent of any discrimination against any Nigerians or harbouring any xenophobia against them, put forward “justified” actions by the locals to rid the country of crime and criminals (which seems in this case to be sometimes, accidentally, Nigerians!). On the existence of such foreign criminals in South Africa, igniting the recent violence, Ramaphosa even called on Nigeria to assist him with the deportation of some of its citizens who were committing crimes in South Africa and were in the country illegally.68-71

In response to Nigeria’s demand that South Africa compensates the losses of Nigerians here in the unrest (which the Nigerian government sees as xenophobia), South Africa took a hard line of not being guilty of any xenophobia or committing crime against any Nigerians and stated that it would only assist and compensate damaged Nigerian businesses here that where legitimately registered in the country and had their affairs in order with the South African Revenue Service, writes Hunter70. But Hunter70 reports that this “foreign-policy profile” projected on the ethnic unrest involving Nigerians in South Africa, differs from the ANC regime’s local “self-confession” on xenophobia. Hunter70, on the seeming arrogance and deception of Ramphosa in his double-talk with Abubakaro, writes70:1,7: “This was despite Ramaphosa’s acknowledgement of the existence of xenophobia in SA in his address to the nation on Tuesday evening [5th September] in which he condemned the violence and looting”.

That there is no doubt in most of the ANC’s leaders’ minds that xenophobia is real, is well confirmed by their orchestrated effort to lie about it to diplomats. Munusamy writes54:11:

The government has been flat-footed in countering the anti-SA sentiments. SA diplomats have been instructed to keep the line that the violence is as a result of criminality, not xenophobia.

Including in this denial of the presence of xenophobia was the violence against foreigners even relayed to so-called49:8: “conspiracy theories, claiming dark outside forces were ‘organising’ the xenophobic violence”, writes Gumede49. On the lack of an in-depth understanding of the true nature of xenophobia in the country by the ANC and thus to address it correctly, Gumede49 guides us well49:20: “Throughout all these crises, the ANC and government leadership appears to have been out of their depth, many not grasping the severity of the crisis the country is facing.4

It seems as if two ministers in the Ramaphosa regime accepted the reality of xenophobia, without saying it publicly or attributing it to the ANC’s failure to rule correctly and effectively. In avoiding the truth about the ANC’s direct role in the manifestation of xenophobia — as many members of the ANC’s elite mostly do when they are at the receiving end — they play the “blame game”. Other than Ramaphosa who confusingly blamed tribalism and nationalism as a possible reason, the Higher Education Minister Blade Nzimande blamed capitalism, while the International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor attributed it to Apartheid.71

An interesting contradiction arising from the alleged xenophobia phenomenon and Ramaphosa’s view that Nigerians were responsible for committing crime against locals, is that it militates against the ANC’s traditional denial of tribalism and ethnicity in favour of the class struggle and other Marxist concepts of sociology and history. In their statements on the attacks against Nigerians and other foreigners, both Ramaphosa and Magashule therefore acknowledged the existence of ethnicity, a phenomenon which is anathema to the ANC’s revolutionary ideology (besides racism against the Whites as European “colonists” and hence the ANC’s intention to grab their land without compensation).70,71

Saunderson-Meyer71 points out that not only does Ace Magashule reaffirm that xenophobia is based on ethnicity but that the presence of xenophobia is also based on racism (and in September 2019 puts on record the ANC’s most recent official standpoint on Whites). Saunderson-Meyer71 refers to Magashule’s racial and anti-White stand (which can be seen undoubtedly as the open instigation of racial violence), as follows71:12: “Last week Magashule had expressed regret that the violence was being directed at ‘people who have the same skin colour as us’, rather than those many others with a whitish colour’…[who] have never been attacked, because they are also so-called foreigners”. Pelser45 reports on this alleged White racism by Magashule as follows45:6: ““Ace Magashule, sekretaris-generaal  van die ANC, maan swart Suid-Afrikaners om hul woede nie uit te haal op swart mense nie — hulle moet liewer wit mense teiken”.

Also Munusamy50 shows that Julius Malema, the leader of the EFF, tried to refocus the violence against White people rather than foreign nationalists. Referring to this, Pelser45, quoting Malema, writes45:6: “‘Ons woede is op die verkeerde mense gerig. Soos ons almal, verkoop ons Afrika-broers en susters hul arbeid teen ‘n lae prys om te oorleef. Die eienaars van ons welvaart is witmonopoliekapitaal; hul weier om dit met ons te deel’.”

On Ramaphosa’s reaction on the involvement of Nigerians in the latest so-called “crimes” in South Africa and the specific background to it, Hunter45, aligning Ramaphosa’s acknowledgement of tribalism with that of crimes as xenophobia and thus indeed that xenophobia springs from tribalism.  Hunter reports as follows45:1,7: “The president reasserted his publicly held view that rising nationalism globally is affecting the rise of tribalism on the continent”.

In this context Saunderson-Meyer71, on the official standpoint of the ANC on tribalism and thus also indirectly xenophobia, states71:12: “…tribalism is not acknowledged to be the cause of anything, implying as it would, ethnic cleavages within the Black South African society” and71:12: “…xenophobia, the x-word, has joined the k-word as unutterable in SA”.

Magashule, in line with Ramaphosa’s confusion on seemingly what the violence, tribalism and the xenophobia definitions mean, also opened the can further when he referred to some of the violence in which foreigners were involved recently as “tribal battles,” which expressly means ethnicity and xenophobia. These ANC references to tribalism, positioned suddenly by Ramaphosa and Magashule, also brought to the foreground the extreme presence of South African violent crimes in certain communities, such as gangsterism in many so-called exclusively “Coloured” Western Cape areas in South Africa. (As already discussed, the SADF was forced to intervene on the Cape Flats in a crime-prevention role because the SAPS utterly failed to do their job.)  It seems then that some issues are indeed “tribal-orientated” for the ANC’s top managers and thus the reason why the ANC-regime since 1994 has taken such a passive stance on this “Coloured problem” and had left it in the cold.70

Saunderson-Meyer71, on the supposed ANC revolutionaries’ traditional blindness to xenophobia and tribalism, further writes71:12:

While Ace should expect a chiding from the ANC’s political commissars for the little slip, xenophobia and tribal denialism is prevalent among black nationalists. It is simply inconceivable to admit that there is, indeed, a deep-seated antipathy among many black South Africans to their black ‘brothers and sisters’, both here and abroad.

Saunderson-Meyer71 reports that Ace Magashule’s explanation of his rejection of xenophobia, goes this way71:12: “What I know …is that our presidents, the presidents of Africa [Nigeria, Zambia and Rwanda] are talking, and they have analysed this correctly. It is not acts of xenophobia, it’s acts of criminality”.

The editor73 of the Sowetan, in an article dated 13 September 2019, reflects on how the blackjacks in the 1960s, harassing Africans found in urban areas without so-called “dompasses” by going from door to door to pull-out those considered to be “too Black and too different to belong to the other Blacks”. He states that on Wednesday, September 11 2019, in the supposed free South Africa, Blacks again knocked on doors73:14: “Open the door, we want to see your ID. The k-word of the apartheid-era is replaced by an equally derogatory k-word that they reserve for foreigners. …the reality is that there are a significant number of our citizens who are — and are engaging in acts of violence against those they deem foreign”.

If the above editorial description, read together with the descriptions by various local Blacks on the reason why they are burning trucks and killing truck drivers, are not true examples of the presence of extreme xenophobia, what kind of example do we need to offer which would convince the ANC leaders of it?35,36,73

Secondly, contradicting Ramaphosa and his cronies’ standpoint in their overseas rhetoric that xenophobia is purely criminal violence, is the prominent presence of foreigners (legal and illegal) in South Africa as so-called “culprits” in the reasons for the deaths of 11 persons in Gauteng.74,75 Hosken74 refers in this context to the “culprit” foreigners as to be exclusively people who many Blacks classed as persons74:2: “…endangering Black South Africans’ work opportunities, and to be people peddling drugs and committing crimes”.

The reporting of Hosken and Germaner75 of the mobilising in August 2019 of Black communities by the Sisonke People’s Forum, which had spurred locals into action against so-called “delinquent foreigners”, is very informative. Hosken and Germaner75 quoted the Forum chairman Zwelie Ndabe who allegedly said75:2:

Since 2016 our pleas to government have been ignored. We are tired of our kids dying from drugs sold by foreigners, South African business employing foreigners, and of foreigners hijacking buildings for human trafficking and prostitution. That’s why we mobilised. We didn’t expect people to be this angry, and the violence disturbs us. But we won’t stop mobilising.

In 2008 the nationwide so-called xenophobic attacks had claimed the lives of 56, to be followed by regular flare-ups of similar incidents. The deaths of foreigners over the period, from 1994 up to 2019, withing the category of “xenophobia (which is disavowed by the ANC regime), reflect that the ANC regime has no strategy and possibly no intention to stop foreign ethnic hate. This apathy about others’ lives must be read together with the delinquent acst of the police force under the ANC regime in the 2012 Marikana massacre which led to the death of 34 Black miners — which lacks any response seven years later of  a single police officer having been prosecuted or that the recommendations of the Farlam commission have been implemented. The presence of hatred for foreigners, from speaking, intentions and actions, hold serious consequences for the more or less 4 million foreigners living in South African.44,75

But the growing anti-foreigner sentiment (seen by many White South Africans as a masked anti-foreign sentiment of them also as so-called “colonists”), is for political analysts a possible sign that the historical Black tribal infighting (and Black genocide) of the 1800s between the Xhosa, the Zulu, the Tswana, etc., might be restarted as the tribal right to land and resources in the increasingly collapsing economy, as well as the dissolution of the South African state (and nation), become a reality.75

On foreigners, specifically so-called “bad persons, thieves”, etc., it is important to reflect the official ANC and ANC associates’ negative characterisation of foreigners, to see how in-depth xenophobia has become rooted in the psyche of South Africans. Here the KwaZulu-Natal House of Traditional Leaders represents a worrying phenomenon regarding ethnicity and foreigners, much in line with Ndabe’s view above. The remarks of the House’s chairperson, Inkosi Phathisizwe Chiliza76, are a classic case of xenophobe when he responds76:5:

Many foreigners did not respect SA traditions. When you get to those levels, they will tell you they are taking our jobs, the problem is they are here in big numbers and they don’t respect our traditions, and that is what needs to be fixed.

Even ANC ministers of the Ramaphosa cabinet were fast to capitalise on the “not fitting” into South Africa of Black foreign nationals (while at the same time involuntarily revealing their own ethnic mindset and inclination to xenophobia). Pelser reports45:6: “Thulas Nxesi, minister van arbeid en werkskepping, sê xenofobiese geweld is als die ‘elitistiese vryemarkstelsel” se skuld, wat buitelanders toelaat om hul arbeid teen minder as die minimum loon te verkoop”,  en45:6: “Ook David Makhura , premier van Gauteng, reik na populisme toe hy sê buitelanders moet verbied word om ‘sekere tipe sakeondernemings’ in townships te bedryf”.

But this false and ethnic categorisation of foreigners as “crooks” did not stop with Nxesi and Makhura’s negativity. The Gauteng ANC’s community safety MEC, Faith Mazibuko77, ventured77:16: “…we can’t govern with criminals, especially foreign nationals who want to turn our country into a lawless banana republic”.

In this context of “separating” Black foreigners from the Black South African society because “they take our people’s jobs and opportunities” — and thus seemingly: “they were killed in the past, are killed at present and can be killed in future”  for “understandable” reasons — Tony Leon77 points out that the ANC regime’s present ministerial viewpoint and guidance may be of the same dangerous ethnic hostility as that of Zwelie Ndabe and Inkosi Phathisizwe77, when he writes77:16: “According to the minister of justice, Ronald Lamola, the government is ‘developing legislation that will bar foreign nationals from operating in certain sectors of the economy’.”

This view of Lamola makes Ramaphosa’s agreement with the Nigerian government of a guaranteed balanced and good treatment of foreigners (Nigerians) in the future null and void. At the same time it is an early warning of the possible advent of the extreme ethnic politics of Robert Mugabe that led to the death of more than 20 000 Black Zimbabweans because they did not fit into his exclusively “Black Zimbabwe”. More than this: it spells out an ethnocentric South African Black-BEE policy which excludes certain other Black persons.78,79,80-82

There seems to be an encircling as well as an intertwining of the definitions xenophobia, crime, violence, which describe in some way the recent so-called “spree” of xenophobia (remember: in terms of the ANC regime’s view there exists the alleged exploitation by Black foreigners of Black South Africans), Hosken83 gives an excellent overview of the whole process as general criminality, based on South Africans’ internalised, ongoing and actively delinquent acts. It is for him a process wherein the presence of foreigners is only used as an excuse or as a distraction from the real reasons: exclusively looting from the easiest and most defenceless group of people, namely foreigners by some South Africans whose own lives have been degraded in only 25 years into a general life of crime under an equally disorderly and crime-orientated regime. Hosken83 in this context sums up the situation well when he writes83:2:

Looters, armed with guns and self-made weapons, stormed through a 2km stretch of Jules Street burning cars, torching buildings, ransacking businesses and terrorising people on Sunday night and throughout the week. In Alexandra, Crosby, Slove Park, Coronationville, KwaThema and Katlehong, looters turned on foreign-owned shops.

For Henry Mathe, who lives in Crosby’s povertry-stricken Slovo Park informal settlement, the looting was justified. “They killed two of us. It was only right that we went to the Somali and Pakistan shops and took what was theirs.

We just wanted them out. We were not burning or stealing their stuff. They were just told to get out because Solve Park does not need foreigners here. We waited until the cops were gone. We took groceries, cold drinks and Red Bulls. We took revenge, not because we were hungry. They provoked us by killing our people”.

Mathe claims that Isaac Sebeka, a South African who was killed in Coronationville, was shot when he was caught looting.

Hosken83 also describes the reaction of the medical doctor Samir Saha83, a Bangladeshi national who has been living in South Africa for 24 years, of which the last 10 was in Johannesburg. He lost all his assets in the recent “foreigner bashing” and had to flee for his life. Saha’s story contradicts totally Ndabe’s perceptions of the delinquent acts of so-called foreigners as always being wrongdoers against local Blacks or to be job-stealers, when he says83:2:

I have never experienced anything like this before. I am a doctor. I don’t run a spaza or a barber shop and even if I did, how would me running such shops rob South Africans of jobs? Saying I steal South Africans’ jobs is madness. In fact it is the opposite. I employ two South Africans, one as a secretary and the other as my medical assistant.

The above various outcomes show that the execution of violence (undoubtedly driven by internalised aggression and hostility in their mindsets, as well as by the immense poverty of some Black South Africans), which had become focussed on foreigners, is now affecting not only the individual innocent foreigner, but also any innocent South African businessman who dares to employ a single foreigner. This tragic outcome is well confirmed by the already mentioned, recent attacks on South African companies’ transport trucks (which led directly to the murder of various foreign drivers) on our highways and other routes which employ foreigners.

Misago75, quoting the senior researcher Jean-Pierre of the Wits Centre for Migration, says South Africa is becoming a pariah state. Hosken and Germaner75 bring into focus the ANC’s failed crime-prevention capability as a regime and allowing uncontrolled crime to develop and to get internalised in a great part of the society’s mindset as a “normal” condition. Secondly, Hosken and Germaner75 show just how dysfunctional the ANC regime is, including the ANC’s ambivalent thinking on the foreigner issue and the regime’s failed intention and capacity to eliminate violence and crime or at least to handle it from day to day. Misago states75:2: “The situation is complicated by the lack of governance and the delayed reaction to violence. Despite repeated warnings of violence, police were seemingly slow to respond”.

In this context of failed police oversight and a descent by the ANC regime into disorder, crime and violence, the potential that the so-called xenophobia may be transformed into anarchy and even as part of the start of a people’s revolution, Misago75 reflects further75:2: “What happens when those attacks shift to universities, medical institutions and international agencies employing migrants? 

Dr Franz Fanon84, a psychiatrist, who also turned political analyst, confronted us for the first time with one of the main reasons for unrest, crime, violence and xenophobia captured in the mindsets and actions of the poor and side-lined people of the slums, the informal settlements and lower socio-economical townships and parts of towns and cities: the utterly cold-blooded abuse and extremely opportunistic exploitation of the poor, mostly by their own race’s leaders (elite). The end result is violent reactions to all of those that seem to be better off than they the poor or who are assumed to be the cause for their chaotic lives. Fanon84 based his experience on the liberation of Algeria from France, specifically on the immediate outer and inner circle around the origin of violence as xenophobia. He shows that it is an international phenomenon which reflects extreme nationalism, driven by political opportunists without caring for the poor or the minority — essentially for anyone besides themselves. Violence against the foreigner is tacitly encouraged by the elite of the ruling party whose only interest is self-enrichment and political power to keep up their human exploitation. He precisely brought for us the story of South Africa’s economic, political and social failure under the extreme, Marxist-Leninist ANC. Moreover, Fanon84 tells us that our country is on the brink of collapse and why: Because of the ANC elite’s exploitation of Black politics by an exclusive but useless Black African nationalism for 25 years.84

This preaching of nationalism by the ANC’s elite was heard clearly around the xenophobia matter wherein the poor Black people’s violent behaviour against the vulnerable foreigners was justified, albeit in a masked manner. The South African mass of poor, absolutely unhappy and dissatisfied with their chaotic lifestyle, cannot take on their oppressor: the ANC’s elite. Here, as happens worldwide where the masses are exploited by their own people, they turn almost immediately their dissent into direct revenge, focussed on the easiest and most available target without fear for mass counter-revenge. Foreigners, migrants and other poor people stand out as targets because they are extremely vulnerable as a result of their isolation from their fatherland, poor political empowerment and a lack of recognition as a local. Only after the process of the elimination of the migrants is completed, will the poor masses turn with much effort to their real exploiters and oppressors. However, it will mostly be too late because of the immense power build-up by the regime to squash any revolt besides allowing chronic unrest and violence by the poor on the poor, and xenophobia. Buccus84, quoting Fanon84, writes as follows84:19:

Xenophobic violence, often tacitly encouraged by elite figures, has become an omnipresent reality.

Because the national elite “is preoccupied with filling its pocket as rapidly as possible…the country sinks all the more deeply into stagnation”. But, as “the people stagnate deplorably in unbearable poverty, slowly they awaken to the unutterable treason of their leaders”.

Fanon’s84 enlightening view of xenophobia as primarily a people’s unrest against the regime and not really the foreigner (which firstly must be read also in the presence of the immense violent crime in the Western Cape and other parts of the country, and secondly as a sign of a revolution from within) is supported in some way by seasoned local political analysts.

Fred Khumalo85, a seasoned journalist and political analyst writes in this context that inside the so-called xenophobia-violence-crime crisis there is far more negative energy to be read: the simple fact is that the country is teetering on the brink of an abyss because of the wrongdoing and failure of the ANC regime as result of its elite’s self-orientation. Removing the so-called (Black) foreigners will not solve the violence. Buccus84 too, points out that the xenophobic violence is the primary reaction of the mass caught up in poverty, which was solely a process activated by the ANC elite’s capturing of the country, its resources and richness for their self-enrichment and -empowerment and upheld through various manipulations. These manipulations include unleashing a false Black-African nationalism and fictitious anti-colonialism, and then, as the government of the ANC elite started to lose their power over the masses, slowly moving into a process of anti-democracy and the capturing and management of the political, social and economic empowerment of the mass of poor. At the end of this process, the poor will become conscious of their betrayal by their opportunistic revolutionary leaders, commencing in 1994 as the “fathers” of the Black nation. Unrest, crime, violence and pertinent xenophobia are the middle-stage behaviour of the poor masses.84,85

3.3.1.4. ANC as a failed regime inside a constitutional state

Many writings75,83-85 are loud and clear that there is such a thing as xenophobia in South Africa and that it can be practised because of some Black South Africans’ hostility against and hatred of foreign nationals. They also tell us that there are crimes as the ubiquitous violence in the country is channelled into xenophobia because of the internalisation over years of criminality in the psyche of some South Africans. The foreigner falls prey because of he/she has poor defence and is thus vulnerable. These writings tell us also that crimes such as xenophobic violence and other violent behaviour are often committed out of jealousy, for self-enrichment and the inability of poor, undeveloped locals to compete with other people who are seemingly successful or are favoured in some way by the socio-economic and political system. Moreover: the writings tell us that most of these crimes are focussed on other citizens as a way of compensation in not being able to directly engage in crimes such as violence, theft, murder, etc., against the ruler of the country who is basically solely responsible for the poor people’s chaotic lives. The present mixing of xenophobia-crime-violence is very much similar to the crime and violence reflected by the Black masses who had risen against Apartheid and its unjust racial, economic, social and personal discrimination which had denied Blacks their citizenship in the country of their birth and which had reduced them to beggars.75,83-85 Today, postulates Khumalo85, the masses are rising again because our current crooked rulers — many of whom were inside the Struggle of the 1970s and 1980s with the now suppressed and poor Blacks — have lost contact with their own past as well as who the masses of poor and landless Blacks really are. These rulers have become drunk on corruption, insensitivity and self-enrichment.75,83-85

At the root of the current social chaos is a failed political system wherein most of the people are not developed, but are left to plan for their own for survival inside a collapsed socio-economic and political system where there is no law and order and where the criminal has become untouchable by the society and the prosecution institutions. We see it well in the Western Cape’s uncontrolled crimes like extreme violence and murder, and the ANC regime’s inability as well as unwillingness to address it since 1994.

The poor are today venting their anger on each other and those less fortunate than themselves, including the foreigners. Xenophobia, like all violence, exists but is mostly part of organised crime and power plays which the mass poor by times cannot control, nor understand. Their way and method of venting their anger were largely acquired and internalised in the 1970s as the only solution to get attention: the burning of buildings, homes and the destruction of essential structures. They mostly got attention and their way from the previously White rulers. These actions are repeated today, although sometimes in other manifestations.85

On the current social conditions, Khumalo85 comments on the unobserved, ignored and neglected grievances of the mass poor and their present hostile reactions to it, in the following way85:15:

People have come to realise that if you want to have a conversation with the authorities, you burn something down.

What has been happening in pockets here and there seems like a replay from the 1980s. Except that the rulers are no longer arrogant white Afrikaners. They are black like the masses who are rising. Which makes it even more palpable.

The masses can’t help but wonder: how can these people, our own people, act like the oppressors of yore, if not even worse?

The warnings in commentaries66,75 of more evil to can come through “national” violence with its origin in poverty and inequality — issues which the ANC have so far left unattended in their 25 years of rule, and which have in reality nothing to do with “genuine” xenophobia and ethnicity — is further brought into the lime-light by Runji66 in emphasising the immense presence of inequality and poverty. The primary reason for this negative outcome is the fight for primary resources such as water, food, accommodation (which has led over ages to many wars in the world). Firstly, there is the prominent fear by the present economic middle class who are living in areas bordering on poor townships and informal settlements (and who themselves have moved up over the past 25 years from the poor lower economic class), to be dragged down again by any socio-economic instability and new competitors. Competition may lead thereto that they lose their assets, privileges and benefits. In this setup, it is true that the competitors from the present lower economic classes are gunning especially for the middle class’s privileges and benefits, while the middle class is doing anything to stop movements endangering their benefits. The outcome is immense hostility and violence. On the other side one finds the ambitions and often successes by the poor lower economic class (people who are mostly unwillingly “locked up” by their unfortunate conditions in poor townships and informal settlements that are thoroughly affected by mostly established “national” violence), leading to a class restructuring inside the poor townships and informal settlements themselves, which in itself causes a constant strife and even fighting for resources, rights, privileges and benefits there. Instead of growth and improvement, because of the lack of government intervention, the direct outcome is mostly the creation of more inequality, greater competition and hostility between the competing groupings in the poor lower class, which turn into daily behaviour tending to do harm to anyone seen as a competitor, regardless of being a local or a foreigner.66,75

The conflict between local poor Blacks from the shanty towns and informal settlements with the better-off middle class of the suburbs, with inequality the pivot, is at present more than a looming phenomenon. Evidence confirms that this hostility has already transformed into open clashes, for instance the clashes in July 2019 between the better-off middle-class homeowners and the neighbouring lower-class shack dwellers in Ennersdale, Lawley and Lenasia, Gauteng, during which four persons were wounded86. Wicks86 described it as an “all-out war brewing”. It is clearly an issue triggered by the financial inequality of the mass of poor, lower-class Blacks making it impossible for them to own land, and this group objecting violently to the rights, privileges and wealth of the middle class.  This outcome is a clear result of the ANC regime’s empty promises to eliminate inequality since 1994 and to better every citizen’s lifestyle. Wicks writes86:5:

The clashes are the latest chapter in SA’s heated land problems. They come after Alexandra township was effectively shut down in June due to similar issues, with residents facing off against “invaders”. Unabated illegal building had seen structures erected on pavements and in people’s gardens.

An established home-owner of Ennersdale, guarding his property, describes the violent conditions (which have also nurtured the so-called xenophobia for some time) very appositely when he says86:5:

I carry this [knobkerrie] when I patrol. I have to because the fight is coming here. The way these people [illegal shack dwellers] are doing things is uncalled-for, but they are doing it because our government has failed.

In this context Gilad Isaacs86 of the National Minimum Wage Research Initiative at Wits University says the problem is the state’s housing policy86:5: “Forceful occupation is no-one’s first choice, and we have to ask why there is vacant land owned by the provincial government in the first place.”

Runji66 comments on the country’s immense social inequality and the enormous insecurity present in the middle class — “cancerous metastasis” — which have been left untreated for 25 years by the present-day government and is boiling and exploding in various crimes, as for instance violence, xenophobia, etc. She writes66:13:

SA is not a nation at peace with itself. And that peace has been difficult to forge because the rights to life, dignity and liberty that are enshrined in the constitution have failed to find practical expression in the daily experience of millions across the country.

The reality is that many of those who have benefited from the opportunities of social mobility in the last 25 years, who form part of the new middle class, are precarious.

Their economic position hinges on them retaining their employment. As such they are a few pay checks away from falling of that prized middle class rung of the ladder.

They don’t only carry themselves and their picture-perfect families but they provide the remittances which many other relatives rely on to survive — the so-called black tax.

Misago75 traces all these different forms of serious crimes such as violence and specifically the so-called xenophobic attacks, to three origins (which are fully in line with the origins of the deadly violence in the Western Cape). He writes75:2: “Government must act before it’s too late. Government must target the root causes, which are unemployment and poverty”.

Specifically on the  presence of unemployment and poverty, which often serve as primary stimulants in doing violence and attacking other people’s lifestyles and possessions, and which unfortunately also engulf foreigners living in these areas, making them falsely troubled xenophobic areas, Pheto87 gives us in-depth insight when she argues that the unrest-troubled Alexandra has among the highest unemployment rates in the Gauteng province with between 4 979 and 8 758 jobless people per square kilometre.

Misago’s75 view of the incompetent ANC regime’s failed role in putting an end to the violence is supported by Alan Mukoki88, the CEO of the South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Sacci).  He prominently blames88:7: “…a lawless environment in which people feel they can do what they like with impunity. The government needs to show that it is serious about law and order”.

Barron88 conveys Mukoki’s88 counter-description of the so-called exclusively “South African xenophobia” when he writes that Mukoki88 is of the opinion that the vast majority of South Africans are not xenophobic and that a few hundred people, engaging in racial and ethnic delinquencies, undoubtedly do not represent 60 million good people. The opinion of Mukoki88 is clearly that it is misleading and dangerous to label the present-day violent outbreaks as xenophobia, but that it is rooted in the results of a failed ANC regime. Barron88 reflects Mukoki’s88 words as follows88:7:

We cannot afford to politicise crime, to say that when people are committing crime they’re xenophobic. Deal with it as crime. When people steal goods and burn property it is crime. Xenophobia is used as a cover to commit crime.

For trust and confidence in SA to be restored, the government needs to demonstrate that it has the capacity and the will to take decisive action to contain violent outbreaks “before they get completely out of control”.

To have any hope of restoring the trust that is vital to investment, business people need a very clear plan from government about what it intends to do to deal with this issue in a way that is decisive.

The best answer to so-called xenophobia…is the “enforcement of existing laws, proper policies, proper leadership, proper values, proper service delivery”.

Ron Derby89 is looking from another angle at the unwelcome current hostility and violence aimed at foreigners (as well as South Africans on South Africans which forms the overwhelming violence in the country) by also putting the ANC regime, together with the various pre-1994 White regimes, in the accused box regarding such violence. Most of the violence now associated with the bad behaviour of foreigners, represents for him the negative outcomes of poor Black townships, the joblessness and poverty there, as well as the isolation from the greater economy of these people, whereby poor, destitute foreigners (fleeing sometimes much more chaos at home) are also forced to survive in an unfavourable living environment. Notwithstanding that these foreigners are forced to survive under equally poor local conditions (sometimes worse) as the local poor Blacks in the making of a living, their adaptable, practical styles of surviving (like doing various forms of trade) are often seen as faults by the locals, even as exploitation of the locals. Many of the politicians and policy-makers inside present South African politics show ignorance of the deeper drivers of violence, crime and thus the so-called xenophobia to which they have personally contributed through their poor governance.89 Derby writes89:9:

We’ve been exposed to some terrible economic planning [which led surely to poor townships, contaminated by joblessness and poverty], and it goes back to land legislation passed more than a century ago and apartheid laws a few decades later, and through the unintended consequences of the many plans for SA post 1994.

Amid this, we have a flood of migrants trying to make a living without the support of our government or their own.

Those of them who are merchants have priced their goods at levels so low that the Shoprites won’t try to match them, operating on margins so narrow that few average South African families would try to survive on them.

In this frustrating low-growth economic environment, immigrants are the easiest targets to blame for everything, from taking jobs to violence and crime.

At the centre of the ongoing violent outburst, Dr Kenosi Mosalakae90 reminds us, is the ANC’s inbred culture of revolutionary politics, wherein the obstruction of order is central and wherein every one of the present-day ANC top leaders had participated en masse in making the pre-1994 functioning systems ungovernable. This has led to an immense outlet of delinquent energy which is still steering the ANC clan on a daily basis in most of their actions. Mosalakae states90:14: “We are where we are because we have never forgotten to ‘render the country ungovernable’, we continue to do so whenever we have a grievance”.

The above established revolutionary culture of the ANC, inbred in its post-1980s members and constantly internalised in its post-1994 generation’s mindsets, has led thereto that lawlessness has almost become the norm, writes Mthombothi91. According to him91:25:

No demonstration or protest seems complete without a spate of violence or looting. There’s a bonfire somewhere every day of the week with the people protesting about one thing or the other. It started with unions trashing towns and cities during labour strikes. The government looked the other way because they were its allies. The students burnt books and buildings, including libraries, and were hailed as latter-day revolutionaries.

Looking critically at the various ANC regimes’ unwillingness and inability to stop and to eliminate prominent mass murdering since 1994, for instance in the Western Cape, and their lack of concern for the murders there (with a massive upswing the last five years or so), it seems wishful thinking to believe that the present Ramaphosa regime is going to do anything constructive to the present crime spree of violence;  it does not matter if it is called xenophobia or plain criminality. The deaths of fewer than 20 people in the context of so-called xenophobia in Gauteng this year are just too insignificant for the ANC mindset: the thousands of deaths by murder on the Cape Flats were seemingly not a real issue, until three months ago, so why really about a few more, newer murders?66,88,89

The ANC since 1994 has been “flying blind” when it came to assuring good governance, basically because its leadership is contaminated with the crooked mentality of revolutionary politics. Ramaphosa’s present actions to “make up” for instance to Nigeria about its citizens’ poor treatment here, will again be limited to the doing of talking but lacking the walking as the surge of conflict between foreign nationals and the SAPS in Cape Town at the end of October 2019 confirms. Criminality has overwhelmed the ANC’s top leadership, as the state capture and their many tainted members in the Parliament reflect. As leaders they are unable to be rehabilitated: they are blind to social disorder, especially inequality in wealth, social and personal status, such as that of the poor caught in the chaos of informal settlements and townships. Here the immense chaos is not limited to one specific informal settlement and township, but extend to the many around the country. The question may be asked with good reason if the ANC regime understands what is really going on in the townships where the poor are mostly forcefully channelled into an unstable and conflicting society. Comparing these problematic informal settlements and townships’ residents’ behaviour with that of residents in middle-class residenatial areas who are mostly stable and happy, the inequalities in wealth and class status reveal a stark picture which is a recipe for violence.66,68,69

Runji66 gives us an insight into the indecisiveness of the Ramaphosa regime when it comes to doing something constructive to mitigate inequality and to defuse violence. Runji postulates66:13:

Research shows that unequal societies tend to be the most violent. Therefore, what will Ramaphosa do to get SA closer to be a nation at peace with itself. He should apply his mind and provide definitive responses to these questions.

The first 100 days of a leader in office is the sole guide to give an indication of what the legacy of his five years in office will be. Looking at the comprehensive criticism of what has gone wrong in these 100 days, the indicator classes Ramaphosa as a failed leader.66,88,89

An intimate view of the life of most of the many people in the informal settlements and neglected townships are given by three testimonies. In the first of the testimonies, under the title: “Top dogs need to feel pain of poor”, the author93 writes93:13:

Millions of my compatriots live in squalid and unsanitary conditions, without electricity, running water and toilets.

So the time has come for a united front made up of the President Cyril Ramaphosa, Mmusi Maimane …and Julius Malema to hold court with the poorest of the poor and feel the pain, the suffering, the hunger pangs, the joblessness.

But, most of all, to feel what it is like to rise from your slumber, and use a “long drop” for relief – 200m away from your shack.

It will be tough to leave their luxurious surroundings, but such a night will re-programme their moral compass.

The second author94 writes94:18:

In this morass, Ramaphsa and his mavens think it is possible for society to gravitate towards a social compact. When people are living with raw sewage flowing down their streets, digging in rubbish bins for food and getting arrested in a police dragnet because they ‘smell Ethiopian’, it is quite difficult to embrace fanciful ideas of nationhood.

The third author95, under the title: “President Ramaphosa is living in dream land”, concludes as follows95:13:

A new day and another addition from the wish list of Cyril Ramaphosa who made a request which turned out to be similar to his “I have a dream of future cities on the clouds and bullet trains”.

Now the president encourages the public “to use public transport to foster social cohesion”.

Has he ever tried to take a ride on public transport? Oh yes, he did once and a 20 minutes ride took him three hours as there was a breakdown and he was fuming.

Has he taken the Metrobus service that only operates between strikes or taken a ride on one of the overloaded killing machines called minibus taxis? Of course not.

It seems he still didn’t learn a lesson and so he dreams and pontificates.

Has he considered as well the crime and thieving and killings on some of the modes of our transport? Definitely not.

That’s why it’s a bit rich coming from him.

Which planet do he and the rest of the clowns in his government come from when they endanger everyone’s lives with their blue light convoys which are screaming through our roads, but encourage everyone else to take public transport?

The fact that the ANC regime over 25 years failed to understand, to respect and to rectify the poor people’s circumstances, is the basis of not only of gangsterism and murder, but also xenophobia. Inequality in its broadest context, notwithstanding the consequences, must first be addressed as it was required to be addressed correctly over the last 25 years. The EFF MP Yoliswa Yako96, reflecting her own negative experience — varying from hope and excitement in 1994 to disappointment and despair in 2019 on the failed 1994 democracy and the comprehensive negative outcomes — tells us of the ongoing, devastating inequality and its many injustices which are gobbling up the South African nation, when she writes96:13:

I was a jovial 11-year-old in 1994. I have fond memories of how my mother proudly spoke of new hope, that everyone would own decent houses and how their children would go to any school of their choice.

She said working conditions would be incredibly better and opportunities would be afforded to all, in particular the previously disadvantage, without racial prejudice.

But all this excitement quickly turned into disdain as I watched my mother continue to toil like before. She continued to work as hard while our lives remained the same. Not much chanced and I grew up and I realised that this new democracy did not deliver on all its promises.

The ANC top leaders in the persons of Cyril Ramaphosa and Ace Magashule are too engaged in their own fighting over power within the present South African regime, making them disconnected with reality and in constant flight from taking responsibility for the massive wrongdoing perpetrated by the ANC since 1994 in the country. Munusamy54 illustrated this well by pointing out the failure of the two to meet the press together in person at Luthuli House (the ANC headquarters in Johannesburg) on 10 September to brief them on the current state of affairs in the country regarding unrest, gangsterism and undoubtedly the economy. The fact is that the two would have had to face a barrage of deep-cutting questions from journalists that would probably not only have exposed their failed leadership, but their lack of response to the multiple crises on their watch. On the present so-called xenophobia, gender and other kinds of violence, Munusamy54 writes that Magashule timidly  took the lead above Ramaphosa alone at the meeting, but  side-stepped his responsibility to the nation (and that of Ramaphosa and the ANC) as the ANC’s secretary general, by simply issuing a statement calling on government’s justice, peace and security cluster54:11: “…to establish the immediate causes of the violence and to identify those involved in fuelling it”. This statement, as expected, was of course never respected.

Of the immense gangsters’ threat to South Africa’s political setup, together with other forms of organised crime, the Deputy State Security Minister, Zizi Kodwa97, said recently that it indeed poses a danger to the legitimacy and stability of the South African state, reported The Citizen97 on 19 July 2019. The acting director general of state security of the ANC regime, Loyiso Jafta97, concurred, saying that there were already signs of erosion of the state by entrenched gangsterism [referring to additional crime, outside the crimes of state capture]. The Citizen of 19 July 2019 reports that Jafta97 stated97:6:

The truth is, and we have already seen elements of this, it does displace the formal structures of the state and once it happens, those who are benefitting, like getting healthcare, education, etc, will have a diminished view of the state, but those who are standing outside of it will also see a very, very weak state and therefore the legitimacy and the integrity of the state will severely subtracted from.

But further to that, if you allow it to mature then it starts corrupting law enforcement authorities, it starts corrupting the judiciary, it start s corrupting the legislature and before you know it, you have a complete narcoleptic state and once that happens it is very, very difficult to reverse the effects of that.

The presence of gangsterism, corruption, theft, state capture, murder and immense wrongdoing inside the South African state go deeper than only the endangering of the legitimacy and the stability of the South African state: it represents a symbol of how the political leadership in the country is wholly ineffectual and disconnected from reality, writes Munusamy54.  This results in a bad economy and a totally insecure citizenship ready to riot, with serious consequences already on view. Munusamy posits54:11: “The state of the economy creates the sense that life in our country is a constant fight for survival and that we are at war with each other”. 

Supporting Munusamy’s54 postulation, Dr Saths Cooper54, president of the International Union for Psychological Science and previously a prominent Anti-Apartheid activist, states that the country’s people are54:11: …“living in a state of psychic emergency and the presence of a sense of ‘deep insecurity’ stemming from the demise of law and order”. Referring to the flaming-up of violence in the middle of July to 16 September period of 2019, especially gender and xenophobic violence, he states54:11:

I don’t think the leadership [ANC] fully appreciates where we are right now. The past two weeks have been the worst psychological moment the country has experienced post-democracy. It is really a new low.

People are living with conditions of imminent emergency, crisis and fear. It is an all-pervasive fear. People are afraid to go out and common spaces are deemed to be unsafe.

Munusamy54, quoting Cooper’s standpoint, writes that for Cooper54 the underlying problem is deep public distrust of officials, either elected or appointed. In this context, she writes54:11:

People have lost confidence in those in positions of authority and we do not have the calibre of leadership to rally the nation; and: : “It is unclear what it would take for government and the ANC to realise that SA is at war with itself and the rest of the continent. While the ANC is hoping that a government that is ‘in touch’ and ‘responsive’ conjures itself out of thin air, people continue to lose confidence and feel under siege.

The economist Thabi Leoka54 is of the opinion that the present chaos in the country, especially the devastating violence, can be laid before the door of the government’s inaction to govern appropriately and effectively. She writes54:11: “The violence is how the poor is responding to the failure of leadership. That is the essence of what is happening”. Leoka54 describes this failed ANC leadership as follows54:11: “The lack of leadership appears almost as if this [the xenophobic attacks] is encouraged by SA’s politicians”.

On the failed ANC regime and the empty utterances and promises of its leader Cyril Ramaphosa who has a bag full of goodies for every South African post-2019, Munusamy50 postulates50:20:

Still, his [Ramaphosa] words and those of other party leaders failed to provide solace and direction. We are beyond the point of promises to fix the bureaucracy.

In a week of turmoil and despair, it was apparent more than ever that our country is surely in need of leadership and change but that it could not come from the president.

Ramaphosa does not seem to have the mettle to lead the way in a time of deep crisis. He does not have a team around him that can read the room, and is therefore constantly on the back foot and fighting fires. The government has no money and does not implement the measures he announces.

On the high level of crime in present-day South Africa there is much warning in the words of Gareth Newham55 of ISS regarding the presence of an incurable crime culture when he writes55:3: “South Africa’s high level of violence is rooted in its violent past and continues across generations”.

Indeed, South Africa seems to be lawless, leaderless and spiralling into the Armageddon of a failed state, notwithstanding that Ramaphosa is president and the ANC in government. The hungers of violence and crime are insatiable; they are busy gobbling up South Africa.

4. Conclusions

There are no signs that the pre-May 2019 election promises of Cyril Ramaphosa and his ANC regime have so far in any way been realised. The many ills of South Africa have still not been healed and there are even more ills. The economy is still in a dire state, while the ANC’s politics is indecisive. The country can indeed be described as being in a state of disparity and despondency. The presence of the Chávez-Madura-elite is also palpable here and the feeling of another Venezuela in the making, may be true.

Our law-enforcement institutions are in disrepair; they just do not have the ability and keenness to combat violence and crime.

Crime, as well as prominent violence in various forms, is well anchored in the South African culture. It is not new, but a phenomenon traceable to pre-1994. The 1994 New Dispensation, with its assumed and preached democracy, peace and justice for everyone, was supposed to erase it, but the internalised revolutionary mentality to destroy within the ANC seems to have aggravated the situation, creating more violence and crime.

The present-day South Africa as a failed constitutional state, masterly captured inside a culture of extreme violence and crime by the Marxist-Leninist ANC, is well summed up by Saunderson-Meyer41 when he writes41:12:

There is virtually not an international comparator that SA has not sagged against. There is not a moral or ethical standard that we have not betrayed. The country is literally grinding to a halt.

In full support of Saunderson-Meyer’s41 opinion Scott98:13 states:

The more one looks at the ANC, the more one can come to no other conclusion than that the only purpose it has is to complete the destruction of the country it claims to love. Everything it touches is destroyed.

South Africa is, as Myburgh claims in his book, a gangster state.5

Within the ganster state, there flickers the vague red light of a planned political-military coup in the making. The fact that the ANC has been ruling undemocratically with only 28% of the eligible voters on its side, reflecting that it is losing power and may lose the next national election, makes its agenda very dangerous. Political unrest, anarchy, but especially revolution, may be seen as the ideal opportunity for the Magashule-Mabuza-Zuma clan to interfere and intervene, and thus to grab the daily government under the pretext of restoring political order and the ANC’s policy of Marxism-Leninism.99-102

To terminate violence and crime, more is asked than just the reform of the ANC as a regime. It would need a total obliteration of the ANC from the country’s politics. To hang on to the ANC as a regime and to try to reform the party will only aggravate further our already uncontrolled violence and crime: Its Marxist-Leninist intentions will put the country on fire. The warning of Majoko103 is clear and precise103:12:  

Political expediency is bad for the overall health of the republic. No matter how badly one wants to deal with a festering wound, amputation of the whole appendage because it’s quicker only creates a bigger long-term problem.

Post-2019 spells chaos for South Africans if the ANC stays in power. Justice Edwin Cameron104 gives the ordinary citizen a warning when he says104:12: “Tough times lie ahead for those who are committed to democracy, governance under law and to social justice for all people in our country — not the enrichment of the inside elite.”

In the next (Article 14), entitled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (14: Accountability)”, the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of its mandate as ruler it received from the 8 May 2019 election, will be further evaluated.

5. References

  1. Teresa V, Renner TC. My Life in the Mafia. Hart-Davis and MacGibbon, London. 1973.
  2. Basson A, Du Toit P. Enemy of the People. Cape Town: Jonathan Ball; 2017.
  3. Davis D, Mutemwa-Tumbo D. Guns, lies, politics: seeking a judicial inquiry into arms deal’s whitewash commission. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 16; p. 20.
  4. Gibson E. Wapens: ‘Ons kán geld terugkry’. Rapport (Nuus).  2019 Aug. 25; p. 8.
  5. Myburgh P. Gangster State. Cape Town: Penguin; 2019.
  6. Louw, GP. 2018. Ensovoort, 38 (2018): 7(2): 1-36:An appraisal of the executive political leaders and regimes of South Africa: 1652 to 2018. Part 4: A basic checklist for the appraisal of executive political leaders and regimes.
  7. Pauw J. President’s Keepers. Cape Town: Tafelberg; 2017.
  8. Bawa K. The Star (Opinion). 2019 June 11; p. 8.
  9. Police is failing, but there is a way to destroy Cape Town’s gangs’ recourse. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 30; p. 16.
  10. Bruce D. Focus on violent crime welcome but likely to lead to fiddling of figures. Sunday Times. 2019 June 30; p. 17.
  11. Jansen J, Du Toit E. ‘Julle sal ons wel sien op Vlakte’. Rapport (Nuus), 2019 July 14; p. 4.
  12. National effort to combat gangs. Sunday Times (News/Crime). 2019 July 14; p. 6.
  13. Nombembe P, Hyman A. The killing field. Sunday Times (News/Crime). 2019 July 14; p. 6.
  14. Nombembe P, Hyman A. Living and dying in Tin-Can Town. Sunday Times (News). 2019 June 16; p. 6.
  15. Pinnock D. Young people in the crosshairs as army moves into Cape townships. Sunday Times. 2019 July 28; p. 19.
  16. Vlakte se bloed aan regering se hande. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 July 14; p. 2.
  17. Watson A. SANDF is off to Cape Flats. Saturday Citizen (News). 2019July 13; p. 4.
  18. Lockdown a little too late for deceased. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 July 9; p. 12.
  19. Ritchie K. Bloodbath on Cape Flats should make us worried. Saturday Star (Opinion). 2019 July 13; p. 8.
  20. Fokazi S. Cape Town mortuaries not coping with intake. Sowetan (News). 2019 July 10; p. 6.
  21. Hyman A. “World’s most dangerous city’. Sunday Times. 2019 June 30; pp. 1, 4.
  22. Makora M. More cops to beef up safety. Daily Sun. 2019 September 12; p. 8.
  23. Makhetha D, Marupeng P. Ivory Park one of the most dangerous places to live in. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 3.
  24. Makhetha T. Hundreds of murders committed by kids. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 3.
  25. Hyman A. Like a prison camp for a city’s outcasts. Sunday Times (News). 2019 June 16; p. 6.
  26. McCauley R. Decisive action is essential. The Star. 2019 July 16; p. 6.
  27. Sain R. Body bags mount after Port Elizabeth’s fatal gunshot attacks. The Citizen (News). 2019 June 14; p. 8.
  28. Curb lawlessness or pay the price. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 12.
  29. Marupeng P. Femicide sentences not a deterrent. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 2.
  30. Okoye CJ. Crime focus must shift. The Citizen (Crime stats). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 3.
  31. Versluis JM. “Totale kopskuif’ moet kom. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 6.
  32. Two places where our police can start to improve right now. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 15; p. 18.
  33. Special anti-gang police units needed, says DA. The Citizen (News). 2019 July 29; p. 4.
  34. Makhetha T. Kempton Park kidnappings capital. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 13; p.2.
  35. Hosken G, Singh O. Motorist warned of N3 terror zone. Sunday Times (News Arson). 2019 June 9; p. 2.
  36. Slabbert A. Aanvalle op lorries eis 200 lewens. R1,2 mjd in 1jaar. Rapport (Nuus), 2019 June 9; p.8.
  37. Trucks bombed, set alight. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 11; p. 9.
  38. Du Plessis C. “Die geweld kan uitbrei, ander raak’. Beeld. 2019 June 10; p. 1.
  39. Marupeng P. Plans afoot to tackle violence in SA. Sowetan (News). 2019 Sept. 11; p. 7.
  40. Ehlers W. State apathy at truck violence inexcusable. Sunday Independent (Opinion). 2019 June 9; p. 10.
  41. 41. Saunderson-Meyer W. Optimism shrivels on vine. Saturday Citizen (Opinion). 2019 July 13; p. 12.
  42. Smit S. Prasa leaves guards in the cold. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 June 28 to July 4; p. 15.
  43. Pijoos I. Train services really off the rails. Sowetan (News). 2019 July 10; p. 9.
  44. Let’s not waste another chance to save SA. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 3.
  45. Pelser W. Ja, barbare is los, maar wraak sal ons nie red. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 6.
  46. Hans B. Castration would end the problem of rape, says King Zwelithini. The Star (Nation). 2019 Sept. 26; p. 24.
  47. Lebitse P. Mogoeng spot on about giving rape and gender-based violence special attention. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 13; p. 13.
  48. Fokazi S. After rape, victims still have to face uncaring cops. Sunday Times (News) 2019 Sept. 15; p. 4.
  49. Gumede W. Cyril must learn: a little empathy goes a long way. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 20.
  50. Munusamy R. Our abnormal society can change through rebellion or in a planned way, but no messiah can save us. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept 8; p. 20.
  51. Jansen J. Die gruwels teen vroue duur voort. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 6.
  52. Zulu M. Justice minister vows to go after transgressors. The Citizen (News). 2019 Oct. 17; p. 2.
  53. Nakedi Z. It’s time to take action against violence in SA. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 11; p. 12.
  54. Munusamy R. No leadership to undo damaging anti-SA sentiment. Sowetan (Analysis). 2019 Sept. 11; p. 11.
  55. Okoye CJ. Latest figures are based on pure speculation, says expert. The Citizen (Crime Stats). 2019 Sept.13; p. 3.
  56. Tsotesti PB. Tragedy amid neglect our mothers have to endure. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 29; p. 20.
  57. Mavuso B. Business cannot ignore the pleas of women who fears to walk down the street or in office corridors. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 26.
  58. Gumede W. Lobola, reed dance has to go as we root out patriarchy. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 26.
  59. Let us not forget the rights of poor and rural women with little access to justice. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 4; p. 18.
  60. Presidential promise. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 4.
  61. Child K. Plenty of pricey talk, no action. 2019 Sept. 8; p. 4.
  62. Child K. A violent land – for Women and men. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 4.
  63. Hlatshaneni S. Data collection ‘subpar’. The Citizen (Crime Stats). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 2.
  64. Wayland D, Gontsana MA. Women-only carriages derailed. Saturday Citizen (News). 2019 Sept. 21; p. 7.
  65. Emmett M. Lies, lies and more lies. Sunday Times (Lifestyle). 2019 Sept. 29; p. 15.
  66. Runji N. Cyril has to show nation what the legacy of his years in office will be. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 June 20; p. 13.
  67. Coetzee A. Waarom ek huiwer om alle mans ‘vuilgoed’ te noem. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Sept 22; pp. 4-5.
  68. Makhetha T. Police call for calm in Soweto after looting. Sowetan (News). 2019 Aug. 16; p. 2.
  69. Njilo N. Foreign nationalist close up shops and leave area. Sowetan (News). 2019 Aug. 16; p. 2.
  70. Hunter Q. SA pushes back against xenophobia fury. Sunday Times, 2019 Sept. 8; pp. 1,7.
  71. Saunderson-Meyer W. Don’t uses that dirty x-word. Saturday Citizen (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 14; p. 12.
  72. Gumede W. ANC leaders need to own up to past sexual violence. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Oct. 20; p. 22.
  73. Action now, not debate on attacks. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 12; p. 14.
  74. Hosken G. Gauteng’s death toll rises to 11. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 2.
  75. Hosken G, Germaner S. Warnings of xenophobic attacks ignored. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept 8; p. 2.
  76. SA’s apology ‘not a solution’. The Citizen (News). 2019 Oct. 3; p. 5.
  77. Raids and ugly rhetoric the wrong way to go. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 16.
  78. Comrade Bob to some…how SA leaders saw Mugabe. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 2.
  79. From democrat to despot. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 Sept. 8; pp.1-2.
  80. Leon T. Rap on the knuckles for the new nationalists. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 29; p. 20.
  81. Rooi J. Afrika eer Mugabe as held. Rapport (Sport). 2019 Sept 8; p. 9.
  82. Rooi J “Mugabe se dood verander niks” – Zim-uitgewekenes. Rapport (Sport). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 9.
  83. Hosken G. Provocation or sheer madness? Two sides of the tragedy. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 2.
  84. Buccus I. Ace and the gang are precisely the people Fanon warned us about. Sunday Times. 2019 Aug.4; p. 19.
  85. Khumalo F. Foreigners not the real target of fires of fury. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 15.
  86. Wicks J. Suburbs on edge as shanty towns grow. Sunday Times (News). 2019 July 28; p. 5.
  87. Pheto B. Down jobless street. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 6.
  88. Barron C. ‘Flying blind’ as lawlessness rules. Sunday Times (Business) 2019 Sept 8; p. 7.
  89. Derby R. Violence sprouts from broken plans. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 9.
  90. Mosalakae K. SA drifting from Biko, Sobukwe’s ideals. Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 14.
  91. Mthomboti B. Instead of groveling to foreign heads of state our government should apologise to us. Sunday Times. 2019 Sept. 22; p. 25.
  92. Mokgobu A. Bread theft ‘sparks looting’. The Citizen (News). 2019 Aug. 16; p. 5.
  93. Bachtis P. Top dogs need to feel pain of poor. The Citizen (Letters). 2019 Aug. 16; p.13.
  94. Munusamy R. A bare-knuckle fight rather than fanciful philosophies is what we need now to secure the future of our country. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 18.
  95. Michel J. President Ramaphosa is living in dream land. Saturday Citizen (Letters). 2019 Oct. 12; p. 13.
  96. Yako Y. Why people worship demigods who don’t serve them? Sowetan (Opinion). 2019 June 20; p. 13.
  97. Gangsters’ threat to state. The Citizen (News). 2019 July 19; p. 6.
  98. Scott C. ANC obviously out to destroy SA. The Citizen (Letters). 2019 Aug. 28; p. 13.
  99. Mirrian N. List scandal will haunt Ramaphosa. Mail & Guardian. 2019 March 15-21; p. 4.
  100. De Lange J. JZ-kamp kaap ANC se kieslys. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 March 17; p. 7.
  101. Gloves off in ANC turmoil. Business Times (Opinion). 2019 February 26; p. 8.
  102. Harper P. ANC applies the Ronaldo principle Mail & Guardian. 2019 March 15 -21; p, 31.
  103. Majoko S. Time for some introspection. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 July 23; p. 12.
  104. Sokutu B. Cameron’s parting shot. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 22; p. 12.

 

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned; External peer-reviewed.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa.

UNSUITABLE TERMS AND INAPPROPRIATE WORDS

Please note that I, the author, is aware that the words Creole, Bantu, Kaffir, Native, Hottentots and Bushman are no longer suitable terms and are inappropriate (even criminal) for use in general speech and writing in South Africa (Even the words non-White and White are becoming controversial in the South African context). The terms do appear in dated documents and are used or translated as such in this article for the sake of historical accuracy. Their use is unavoidable within this context. It is important to retain their use in this article to reflect the racist thought, speech and writings of as recently as sixty years ago. These names form part of a collection of degrading names commonly used in historical writings during the heyday of apartheid and the British imperial time. In reflecting on the leaders and regimes of the past, it is important to foreground the racism, dehumanization and distancing involved by showing the language used to suppress and oppress. It also helps us to place leaders and their sentiments on a continuum of racism. These negative names do not represent my views and I distance myself from the use of such language for speaking and writing. In my other research on the South African populations and political history, I use Blacks, Whites, Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaners, Coloureds, KhoiSan (Bushmen), KhoiKhoi (Hottentots) and Boers as applicable historically descriptive names

 

Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (12: Prosperity)

Title: Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (12: Prosperity)

Gabriel P Louw

iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093

Extraordinary Researcher, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Healthcare, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:

Prof. Dr. GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PU for CHE), DPhil (PU for CHE), PhD (NWU)

Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: Analyst, confidence, desperate, expropriation, journalist, perspective, political party, traumatised, violence.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 11: 3

1. Background

Many poor, marginalised and desperate black South Africans  regularly support leaders and parties whose policies and behaviour on the face of it run counter to their own interests, only worsening their poverty  and marginalisation.

Supporting populist leaders has been shown in many African countries, such as Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, to have caused more suffering for the poor because populist rhetoric, corrupt behaviour and inappropriate policies crash economies and lead to mass starvation, societal breakdown and violence.

In SA, a case in point is of course the desperate voters who elected leaders such as former president Jacob Zuma; they voted to continue their own poverty and underdevelopment.

The irony is, black poverty increases partly because of the actions of populist leaders, be they in the ANC or EFF, and because much of the support for such leaders comes from the poor, wider poverty means more votes for the populists, even though they act against the interests of their own supporters.1:18

1.1. Introduction (Continued from Article 11)

Article 12 is a continuation of the previous article (Article 11, entitled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (11: Introduction)”. The research forms part of a project consisting of 10 articles, offered in sequence which started with article 11 on the ANC. The intention of is to analyse and discuss further the arguments, opinions and viewpoints on the integrity and the ability of the ANC effect land expropriation successfully as reflected by its CVs and Attestations, starting with article 11 and to be continued in this article (12) and the next article.

1.2. Aims of article 12 (Continued from Article 11)

The primary intention of this project (Part 3 on the ANC) is to continue the reflection on the three main political parties by specifically describing the profile of the ANC on the same basis as was done with the previous two articles (Part One: Article 9 on the EFF and Part Two: Article 10 on the DA).

Our primary aim here is to evaluate the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of the empowerment as ruler it received from the 8 May 2019 election. The focus will be on the party’s leadership to detect poor personal and political integrity.

2. Method (Continued from Article 11)

The research has been done by means of a literature review. This method aims to construct a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach has been used in modern political-historical research where there is often not an established body of research, as is the case regarding the abilities of political parties to do successful land reform from 2019 onwards. The sources included articles from 2018, books for the period 1944 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2019. These sources have been consulted to evaluate and to describe the facts that must guide us in the making of an evaluation on the suitability of the ANC as the ruler of South Africa to effect successful land reform from 2019.

The research findings are being presented in narrative format.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Overview

The manifestos, self-descriptions and public referees of the ANC have already been partly reflected, evaluated and described in the previous article (Article 11), entitled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (11: Introduction).”

The public referees of the African National Congress will be reflected, evaluated and described in the under-mentioned division 3.3: The African National Congress: Perspective 1994 to 2019.

3.2. The Louw Appraisal Checklist

The Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018, will again be used for the quantitative classification and measuring of the political records of the ANC.2 The 82 selective items of the checklist on leaders and governments, quantified in terms of its bad-versus-good-classification, was again applied to all information collected in the literature review of the party’s manifesto and  the writings of investigative journalists, political commentators and political analysts and interpreted as the researcher sees applicable.2

3.3. The African National Congress: Perspective 1994 to 2019 (Continued from article 11)

3.3.1. South African prosperity

The concept prosperity, either in general or specifically, must and can only be read  within the context of the utmost political, economical and social stability. This approach to analysis and to describe prosperity is applicable to the country as a whole, as well as partial terms as to sub-regions, districts and provinces.

Prosperity does have clear markers in governance, such as the specific presence of good to excellent economics, education, law-abidingness, healthcare, governance, employment, financial sufficiency and independence, safe living and working environments, quality housing and service delivery, equal rights before the law, sufficient and safe public transport, an effective and working police force, an effective and working prosecuting and judicial system, a trustworthy and effective government, law-makers and state officials, equality in wealth and opportunities, the spreading of wealth to and the uplifting of the poor, the presence and promotion of a system of stable family life, etc. These markers, identifying good to excellent actions of a government, bring a clear differentiation between prosperity (goodness) and adversity the (badness). To evaluate and decide on a government’s political integrity, its accountability and responsibility to the voters and the citizens — and thus to evaluate and to decide on the basis of the Louw Appraisal Checklist if it can successfully implement land reform — requires an in-depth analysis of the regime’s daily workings; preferably to be studied over a period of ten years and more. In the case of the ANC, we have a comprehensive archive at our disposal, produced by a large contingent of able and skilled political analysts, political commentators, and investigative and crime journalists, published over 25 years and more.2

Reading the ANC’s and Ramaphosa’s May 2019 election manifestos, it may leave the impression in the average reader’s mind that South Africa is a prosperous state and that a predictable prosperity awaits us all in post-2019 South Africa. But, reading on the other hand the reflections of some critical political analysts and commentators, the contrary seems to be true. Prominent among their criticism is a picture that reflects an ANC characterised by poor integrity, lacking the intention to do “good” to all the people and to bring prosperity in all areas to South Africans, notwithstanding President Cyril Ramaphosa’s sincere promises and undertakings since 2017. Barney Mthombothi3, one of the most experienced senior political analysts in South Africa, sees the party rather than the man when he posits3:19: “We know what kind of animal or monster it is, even with Ramaphosa at the helm.”

On the supposed prosperity of present-day and future South Africa, Saunderson-Meyer quotes an anonymous Canadian journalist4:12:

A Canadian journalist friend used post-1994 to say that South Africans were the most absurdly optimistic people that she had ever met. That optimism is shrivelling, turning sour on the vine.

This negative opinion is supported by other political analysts. The post-2019 ANC, as the pre-2019 one, has become also for them an animal, a monster, an uncontrollable beast, which is going to gobble up the country, including even Ramaphosa, before the end of 2024. South Africa’s so-called post-2019 prosperity-in-waiting is a hoax to them.4-7

In light of the above negative reflection on present-day prosperity in South Africa under the ANC regime it is needed to look comprehensively at those businesses still successfully functioning, the status of the economy, the presence of crime, the state of law and order, the workings of government, in general and specifically, under the iron hand of ANC control, etc. This will be done in the following subsections.

3.3.1.1. Business, finance and economic perspective

Conflicting opinions by the business community on the ANC’s practice and management of the economy, as well as the status of the country’s finances, have been seen since the May 2019 election.

For instance, the international ratings agency Standard & Poor (S&P) believes that the win of the ANC and Ramaphosa in the May 2019 election has ensured growth and that it can be expected that a doubling of growth to 1,6% can follow already before the end of 2019. S&P is of the opinion that the Ramaphosa administration will continue with policy “reforms” and that the country is better off post-May with the so-called “reform-minded united majority ANC-party” than what rule by any of the other 47 parties which competed in the elections, could bring. The Bureau for Economic Research at the University of Stellenbosch underwrites in some way S&P’s view and also believes that the ANC will go on with reform.  Hereto Moody’s is more neutral and allows the ANC space to prove themselves during the rest of 2019.8

But the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is far more pessimistic and, other than for instance S&P, points out the ANC’s broad unclear political policy constantly brings uncertainty. The IMF has cut the country’s growth for 2019 from 1,4% to 1,2 % and classified the ANC as a “less stable” regime.8

On the growth prospects of South Africa, Moody’s Investors Service said in the June 2019 Global Macro Outlook report that South Africa’s economy could experience a technical recession in 2019, while Capital Economics cut the growth forecast for 2019 to 0,5%. Nedbank was likely to reduce its growth forecasts for 2019 from 07% to 0.6% or even 0.5%, writes Brown9:3. George Glynos10 of ETM Analytics reports that the long-term decline in the performance of the South African economy is stretching as far back as 10 years and that the contraction of the economy would likely mean that tax revenue would remain under pressure, while the budget deficit would expand from 4,5% to 5% of GDP.9,10  Mpiyakhe Dhlamini10:4 emphasises that in 2018 the South African economy grew only 0,8% (with the last growth of more than 3% in 2011).

One of the best indicators of a crawling economy and a lack of prosperity is the level and numbers of liquidations. Anderson11 states that the total number of liquidations recorded in the country skyrocketed: it went up by more than half in April 2019. Anderson11 shows that liquidations rose by 53,1%, following year-on-year declines of 12,6%, and 9,6% in February and March 2019 respectively. In this respect, the National Credit Bureau reported for the fourth quarter of 2018 a decline (as a percentage of the total number of credit-active consumers of good standing) of 1,9% quarter-on-quarter and 1% year-on-year, while the number of consumers with impaired records rose to 10,16-million during the quarter. Investec is expecting a GDP growth of about 1% in 2019 and 2% in 2020.11

In terms of the use debt (and getting into it) South Africans are indeed debt-enslaved. The October 2019 statistics of the National Credit Regulator (NCR) show South Africans are over-indebted, writes Ngalonkula.13:19 During the the first quarter (Q1) of 2019, new credits increased by more than 5% to over R134 billion in Q2. One million applications were received for more credit (with nearly 60% turned down). There are 25 million active credit consumers with 10,23 million (40%) behind with their payments. The account-average per customer is 3,5, with the impairment of at least one. There are 80 milion debt accounts in South Africa, with 21 million in arrears by three months or more. Of these customers 12,7% have adverse listings against their names, while 5,1% have judgments and administration orders against them, reports Ngoako Mabeba13 of NCR. Ngalonulu13 mentions that a 2019 financial-reality survey by Debt Safe indicated that 67% of the 1 020 participants were indebted due to the tough economic climate, preventing them from buying basic necessities, 38% were indebted due to education and school expenses for themselves, their children and other relatives, while 29% were indebted due to unforeseen circumstances.

The Ramaphosa-regime is clearly out of touch with ever-growing numbers of poor people in South Africa, currently at 30 million, because of the tough economic conditions which prevent them from buying basic necessities, as well as people saturated with debt which they cannot escape or pay back. It spells a warning that a greater and more devastating “New Marikana violence” awaits us soon. The editor of The Citizen14, commenting specifically on the present-day mass of indebted miners who are constantly sinking deeper into financial chaos with their families as a result of the ANC regime’s permanent, ongoing economic failures, writes14:23:

SA’s mining sector has been particularly hard hit.

Two-thirds of the industry’s 450 000 workers have had unsecured loans and spend an average of 48% of their wages paying off debt.

In 2012, miners’ extreme indebtedness was seen as a root cause for violent labour unrest that culminated in the massacre of 34 strikers at Marikana.

To understand the immense ill-distribution of life chances and the absolute lack of sufficient resources in our cities, suburbs, informal settlements, neglected townships and shanty towns (which have seemingly been missing since 1994 from the observation of the ANC elite), it is important to understand the “normal” lifestyles of many of the unfortunates there.  The comprehensive research and in-depth personal experience of Dr. Chris Jones16 of the Unity for Moral Leadership of the University of Stellenbosch, who lived and worked for a certain time in the neglected township of Lavender Hill on the Cape Flats area, offers an excellent lifestyle audit and description of the conditions there; conditions which require enormous long-term socio- economic, educational and personal uplifting and constructive spending (instead of a waste of money on the  4IR there which will make no impact or serve an immediate goal). This audit, with the specific focus on how the issues of chaos, poverty, extreme crime and social disorder — stretching over a very long period and that are still continuing — shows why the extraordinary remedies planned by the Ramaphosa regime there (as 4IR) are unaffordable, unavailable, inapplicable, unviable and unsustainable. Jones’s observations are worthwhile to quote because they tell us how the basis of revolutions has been laid many times. More than that: they convey to us the possibility of a coming revolution.15-17

Jones16, reflecting on these tragic conditions which involve thousands and thousands of people who cannot easily be socio-economically and emotionally rehabilitated in their lifetimes, writes16:8-9:

Ek het onder meer vir so 90 minute per dag by Farikhaan in sy hout-en-sink-aanmekaar getimmerde winkeltjie deurgebring. Mense kon staan daar met enkele (koper-) muntstukke in die hand. Hulle koop byvoorbeeld R1 se suiker, R2 se koffie, een aartappel, een ui, of een stukkie Weetbix. Hierdie blokkie Weetbix word gedeel tussen twee mense, gemeng met water, omdat hulle nie melk kan bekostig nie.

Ek het gesien hoe mense net vel en been in Lavender Hill rondloop, nie net van honger nie, maar ook van al die pyn wat hulle saamdra. Afgetakel in liggaam en gees. Oë dof van ellende. Vasgevang in ‘n afgryselike, benouende, stik-donker put van ellende en magteloosheid met sy seepgladde wande van armoede, werkloosheid en uitsigloosheid. Hoe gaan hierdie mense hulself ooit hieruit ophef? Hoe “maak” kinders dit wat hier grootword?

The lack of social stability and prosperity can be traced back to the presence of many negative elements in the South African economy and society, such as joblessness, population growth, poverty, poor education standards, unstable family life, gangsterism, crime, etc. The fact that the childhood of South Africa’s youth is described as “not easy” — conditions stretching back decades — must ring a bell of concern when politicians speak of South African prosperity in 2019. Saba18 writes in the Mail & Guardian of 7 June 2019 using the data of STATS SA 2018 [as compiled by the M&G Datadesk from STATS SA 2019 (using the 2018 Figures)] on the “no easy Childhood of SA’s youth” wherein the Black child stands out as the main sufferer. This research shows, profiling the state of family life for the total Republic in terms of the country’s averages, that for the category of “who children are living with”, only 33,8% children are living with both parents,  3,3% living with a father alone, 43,1% living with a mother alone and as many as 19,8% living without a parent. In the Eastern Cape the absence of both parents in the home is as high as 33,1%. It is only in the Western Cape and Gauteng that the presence of both parents is high, namely respectively 53,7% and 48,9%. Many of these instabilities are the outcomes of single-parent births, but many result from the need for the parents to generate an income far away from home as the Eastern Cape statistics reflect.18

Looking specifically at the economics around childcare in South Africa as one of the barometers of prosperity in the country, the writing of Absolom19, based on the South African Food Sovereignty Campaign’s finding, shows that 14 million people go to bed hungry daily, with 53% (29 million) of the nation’s inhabitants experiencing food insecurity, the absence of prosperity. Based specifically on reports published at the end of 2018, more than six million of South Africa’s children regularly go hungry. Shining a further light ont the chaos around the economics of childcare, is a report by the Pietermaritzburg Agency for Community Social Action which states that already in 2017 it cost R578,45 a month to feed a child aged between three and nine years a nutritionally complete diet. Although the government supports some children of unemployed parents by providing a support grant of R380 a month per child, this money is far too little to make up the R578,45 minimum needed. Moreover, not every unemployed parent qualifies for the grant and some of these grants are only temporary.19

Besides this collapse of stable family life due to the poor finances of the country, there is also the threatening implosion of state-run businesses such as Eskom,  as well as those of the private business sector and their ordinary customers. Many economists and analysts note that there is a lack of sincerity by the ANC regime to fix anything, especially the corrupted state-owned enterprises  (which already cost the taxpayers billions of rand and, notwithstanding this, are mostly on the brink of going bankrupt). Prominent in this regard, is the failure of the ANC regime to deliver basic, essential services to the poor.9, 20-26

At least one economic outcome of such disorderly governance, caused solely by the ANC regime in charge of the country, is the contraction of 13,2% in the first quarter of 2019 in agriculture, which has historically bolstered GDP growth. The South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s business confidence index for May 2019 reflected a slump across most major sectors, while for the same month the Absa-sponsored purchasing managers’ Index (PMI) fell to 45,4 index points (1,8 points down from April 2019). The IHS Markit PMI also shows that the private sector across the economy has slipped back into contraction territory, reports Speckman25:5. He further states that fixed investment, which already declined in the first quarter of 2019, is expected to show muted growth and that in most other sectors there was a “complete and utter” lack of confidence in the economy; essentially because the ANC regime apparently does not understand the principles of a sound economy and does not know what to do to create a stable economy.25

In line with the evidence of an all-over slump in business confidence, Dhlamini10:4 states that between 2008 and 2016 (eight years) the country’s position on the Fraser Institute World-index for Economic Freedom dropped from 82 to 110 (down 28 places; meaning a decline in total of 26% or 3% per annum), reflecting the curtailed economic policy of the ANC, which is more and more rooted in its Marxist-Leninist principles and further strongly and negatively driven by the radical trade unions.10

Tony Leon27:20 writes on 28 July 2019 on the failure of the Ramaphosa regime’s economic policy and vision. Instead of facing the immense economic, social and political crisis, Ramaphosa himself has acted aimlessly and without drive. This is essentially because he has been forced into a small corner, permanently subject to the ANC politburo’s overseeing of his actions in terms of the ANC’s democratic-centralism, and of course, being forced to support the ANC’s unity on broad politics, including economics. Leon states that at the end of July 2019 the IMF forecast a dismal growth rate of 0,7%, two thirds lower than the rosy Treasury forecast. Every indication is there that within five years our current unsustainable debt levels will reach stratospheric heights of around 70% in relation to our anaemic GDP. Notwithstanding the economic decline, no fundamentals of policy will be reviewed in the future by the ANC, such as reforming or dropping BEE. On the contrary, it will be intensified, ostensibly permanently, until the ANC’s music ends.27

3.3.1.2. Stagnant job market and growing unemployment

In line with a troubled economy, there is evidence that the job-market is moving further into a phase of devastating job cuts, as the June 2019 cuts at the major corporations confirm. For instance, the following lay-offs will take place (with the number of employees in brackets): sugar producer Tongaat-Hulett (5 000), miner Sibanye-Stillwater (3 450), pay-TV producer MultiChoice  (2194), miner Impala Platinum (1 500), bankers Standard Bank (1 200) and Absa (827), diamond miner Alexkor (238) and construction company Group Five (3 000).28,29

Many economic and political analysts and strategists are seemingly ignoring that the ANC has created chaos in the life styles and standards of the overwhelming part of the South African population, with the result that there are more than 30 million poor citizens (out of a population of 58 million), while more than 17,5-million people, because of their extreme poverty and unemployment, are forced to live as beggars on social grants. When comparing the 2018 total tax revenue of R1 216 464 000 with the social grants paid out for that year at R155 264 000, social grants represent a burden of 12% on gross income. (Then there are also further grants indirectly paid to provincial governments which are not included here). Moreover, this unfortunate and poor contingent of people in need of social grants is constantly growing as a result of the growth in unemployment, rise in living costs and population increase. The statistics reflect that social grants have grown from 2017 to 2018 by 8%, while the growth in gross tax revenue for the period was only 6%.31

The utter failure over 25 years to create jobs by the ANC regime and which directly causes joblessness and extreme poverty, has negatively impacted other outcomes, such as gangsterism, robberies, unrest, public violence, anarchy and other crimes. Another barometer in this context to identify prosperity or despondency is to look at the official statistics: for 2017 to 2018 there were officially 890 523 job seekers registered, but only 21 076 (2,3%) were placed in jobs or internships. This leaves nearly 100% of the applicants still in the cold. Excluded from those still registered jobless of 869 447 in 2018, are the mass of jobless people who are not registered and who have lost hope to ever obtain any kind of work, forget a decent permanent job.32

This failure of the ANC at job creation must be to some extent be attributed to its populist streak, which Makhanya33:2 says forces the ANC to “set unachievable targets and give false hope to the people”. On the other, dark side such outrageous promises may represent a planned, delinquent misleading of the voters, like for instance the regime’s promise in June 2019 to “reduce unemployment from 27.6% to 14% in the next five years”, notwithstanding an economy that is expected to grow an average of 1,3% in 2019, 1,8% in 2020 and to reach at most 2,4% in 2023. Reality is seemingly simple absent from some of the ANC elite’s minds. On the other hand, it seems as if some of the ANC leaders are just not able to deliver on their rosy forecasts, simply because they are incapable, irresponsible and lacking in accountability.33

Professor Hardus van Zyl28 of the University of Pretoria agrees on the failure of the ANC’s economic policy and that the country under the ANC-regime is reaching the end of the road, financially as well as socially. The present-day chaotic job market undoubtedly reflects an excellent example, not only as to the absence of prosperity, but also political instability. He writes on 28 June 201928:23: “The country’s job market is horrible. I am concerned about youth employment; that, for me is really going to nail us.” In this context of ongoing and growing chaos, he seriously warns: “The time to talk is over. If we do not start being reactive now, we are going to have a crisis of incredible proportions in the next two to three years — we are going to see socioeconomic chaos.”

The reality is that there are not enough jobs on all levels for the ordinary citizens outside cadre deployment and BEE intervention, because the economy planned and created by the ANC is in crisis. Van Zyl28 is adamant that the failed economics of the ANC is a direct result of the ANC’s own chaotic job planning and their dogmatic, uncreative politics. He is especially concerned about the fact that the country’s youth counts for almost 66% of the total number of unemployed people. Here, in establishing a cause for the ANC’s economic failure, he points out that the ANC regime28:23: …“is bloated and cannot create jobs”.

The ANC’s “intended” efforts to better South Africa for all its people — mostly built on empty promises — never realised in the past. This was well reflected by Ramaphosa’s failed Work Conference in 2018.  Raymond Willemse31, head of Beeld’s metro projects, refers to the ANC politicians’ many promises “of work to come in the future”, but at the same time “acknowledged themselves their absolute failure to create it in the past”. A jobs plan for the the youth (who represent 55,2% of the latest jobless statistics) to alleviate their growing poverty, is absent. Nor is there any strategy for those 9,4 million South Africans who are unemployed (against 16,3 million in work) out of 38,4 million people of working age between 15 and 64 who  in some way qualify to be employed but aren’t.31,34,35

Ramaphosa’s foolish dream in his Third Sona to save South Africa with a comprehensive effort of mass job creation, especially seen against his inability to bring prosperity to the youth, is well illustrated when he pathetically said on 16 June 2019, on Youth Day31:3: “Moenie hoop verloor nie en moenie dat die die son oor jul drome sak nie”. The fantasies of Ramaphosa and his twisted economic and political views are nothing else than a lot of “Ramaphosa pies in the sky”. The Black youth know it well after 25 years of ANC rule. They know just too well the ANC’s leadership’s “talking without the walking”.31

Referring to the tragedy of youth joblessness within a so-called “South African prosperity” – a prosperity which in real life is confined to those with exclusive capitalistic bonds to the regime and the legitimated favouring of fewer than 10 million South Africans living in a “totally other South Africa” than the one inhabited by more than 30 million poor Blacks, Willemse writes31:3:

…as ‘n mens die SSA [Statistiek Suid-Afrika] se syfers sien oor die groot persentasie jong mense wat ophou werk soek het, die skool verlaat het en nie juis enige planne het om verder te gaan studeur nie, is dit duidelik talle jong mense het reeds hoop verloor en ophou droom. Vir hulle het die son van geleenthede reeds gesak.

Dié realiteit kan waargeneem word in gemeenskappe waar jong mense sonder geleenthede op straat rondrentel. Werkloosheid bring voortdurend maatskaplike en sosiale probleme mee wat nie gaan help om misdaadsyfers te verlaag nie.

Dit is ook ‘n klad op Suid-Afrika se naam wanneer graduandi by verkeersligte met ‘n plakkaat en curriculum vitae in die hand staan op soek na werk.

It is thus understandable why as many as 6 million eligible voters under the age of thirty (forming part of a total of 9,8 million eligible registered voters) did not register for the May 2019 elections. It also explains why there are another 9,1 million registered voters who did not make an effort to vote. The answer is obvious: They have written off the ANC as a legitimate regime; one which is lacking the integrity to ever bring prosperity to greater South Africa.31

3.3.1.3. Fourth Industrial Revolution

Reflecting further on the need for job creation and the unemployment problem as to both youth and adults, it is important to note how the ANC regime tries to distract the attention from their failure to offer constructive solutions and actions on these two matters. It needs to be reflected on, because of the danger which these two populations pose for the country’s stability and greater economy.

It is significant how much the Ramaphosa regime’s leadership, specifically President Cyril Ramaphosa and his Vice President David Mabuza, are misusing unrelated phenomena and situations to cover up the ANC’s failures. One very contradictory strategem they have found is to blame unemployment on the advent of digital technology which is decimating traditional jobs; at the same time, however, they hold forth that the use of information technology and the internet will solve the unemployment problem as part of the “fourth industrial revolution”.28

Outstanding here is their earlier suggestion that the advent and the growth of digital technology is one of the reasons for joblessness. Their arguments are extremely opportunistic and holds no ground. Facts show that digital technology is not involved in the kind of work that most of the jobless people are doing or will be doing in the future. Neither did digital technology force the employed worker into unemployment. Most of the unemployed persons’ training and education simply do not make them part of the various technological job categories. It seems a false argument by Ramaphosa and Mabuza, well-used by them, to escape from the realities of joblessness and their incapacity as leaders to solve the matter. Professor Hardus van Zyl28, specifically on joblessness, said that the ANC-regime allowed two problems to develop: firstly28:23: “…a structural problem of unemployment where ‘we have a huge skills gab, underpinned by, on average, low productivity, which makes the country vulnerable to high unemployment”. A second problem is cyclical unemployment which is caused by an “economy that is not growing”, indicating the truth: South Africa’s economy is in chaos. Ben Scully of Wits agrees on the fallacious scape-goating of digital technology as one of the so-called “creators” of joblessness, making up the “Ramaphosa-Magashule-theory” which regards digital technology as one of the reasons for the present South African joblessness and contributing to the possible growth of joblessness in the near future.  Reflecting on these false arguments, pointing to the real reason for the growth in unemployment, he states28:23: “…it’s a popular sort of idea that a company can use as an explanation when business might not be doing well because of the economy.”

We have already commented that making digital technology a scapegoat as being the cause of the present South African joblessness, Ramaphosa — as happened with many of his other hot-air political statements and opinions — later contradicts his initial suggestion on digital technology.  Most recently, Ramahosa has propagated that digital technology is going to be the “cleaner” of the country’s unemployment problem and as such must be supported and be promoted by government, notwithstanding evidence that the unemployment problem will not be solved and that most of the jobless people will not benefit from the exercise. He insists that 4IR is a vehicle to bring prosperity to all South Africans. The false, ongoing rhetoric regarding 4IR’s benefits is so intense that it seems to have replaced the ANC’s Radical Economical Transformation (RET) as part of its radical political rhetoric. For the objective analyst, the propagating of 4IR is nothing but an opportunistic ruse par excellence to distract the public’s attention from the real issues around extreme poverty, namely poor education, inequality and the lack of opportunities. Moreover: these specific negative determinants are going to block the transfer of 4IR to the mass of poor people. Critically viewed, it is folly to present 4IR, which is part of the “Silicon Valley model”, as a reality that will occur in South Africa. The argument that the establishment of advanced innovation and technology are going to solve our unemployment or other socio-economic and political problems, represents arrogance in the extreme.15,28,36,37

The ANC’s “Silicon Valley plan” is inapplicable to present-day chaotic South Africa and tantamount to wishful thinking37:25: the country’s lack of good basic and high school education and training, together with a failing economy in which unemployment is central, makes it a delusional plan, writes Molopyane. 4IR should not be a current priority. What should be priorities are economic development, foreign investment, job creation, improved education and training. The lower level of the potential labour force must first be developed and empowered by basic skills and work opportunities before the advanced 4IR may be introduced. Within the current conditions, 4IR is going to benefit a very small, already well-educated, trained and economically stable group37.  Ramaphosa’s remark37:25 ,“The digital revolution is an opportunity to build an entrepreneurial state, where government’s own appetite for risk and innovation inspires large-scale entrepreneurship and unlocks economical potential”, is fake news par excellence and tends to mislead the public for political gain.

No-one doubts that 4IR is going to have an impact, but, as said, only on a small group of already advantaged socio-economic and political beneficiaries, leaving the mass of poor still in the doldrums. 4IR spells more poverty and inequality for the mass of poor Blacks.36-39

Rossouw17 shows that the sound existence of sustainable industrialisation (and thus 4IR) depends on the presence of two primary elements. Firstly, it needs the maintenance and further development of basic technology (the so-called “family-lines of rising development”). The start here is the creation of a much-needed basic technology foundation, to be improved and to be extended in complexity during the immediate next phase, followed by another phase of improvement and complexity17:7: “Jy kan nie digitale netwerke en tegnologieë suksesvol instel en bedryf sonder die voorafgaande tegnologie van elektrisitet nie”. Secondly, ongoing or sustainable industrialisation needs constantly rising levels of literacy and numeracy. 4IR requires the education of new generations to understand and use old and new technologies through a functioning teaching system, together with the maintenance of the existing levels of industrialisation. These two prescriptions are missing in present-day South Africa, simply because of the  ANC regime’s failure over 25 years to bring development to poor South Africans. In this context, Rossouw posits17:7:

Ongelukkig is nie een van laasgenoemde twee vandag in Suid-Afrika teenwoordig nie. Onder ‘n regering wat gefikseer is op verbruik pleks van vervaardiging is verskillende nywerheidsorganisaies aan ‘n orgie van plundering en aftakeling onderwerp. Eskom is die uitstaande voorbeeld onder vele meer.

Kortom, dit wat van industrialisering en die beheersing van simboliese stelsels in die land teenwoordig was, is die afgelope 20 jaar en meer stelselmatig afgetakel. Dieselfde mense wat die voorwaardes vir deelnae aan volgehoue industrialisering vernietig het en steeds vernietig, kom bak nou mooi broodjies oor hoe die land moet deelneem aan die “vierde nywerheidsomwenteling”.

Nullifying Ramaphosa’s views and propaganda (the transfer of so-called “facts” back to myths) on the advent and/or existence of 4IR, Roussouw writes17:7:

By nadere beskouing is die ‘vierde nywerheidsrevolusie’ eintlik niks anders nie as bloot nog ‘n fase in die industrialisering van die bewussyn (robotte, kunsmatige intelligensie) en gepaardgaande simboliese stelsels (die kodes onderliggend aan nano- en biotegnologie).

On how the foolish and misleading concept of “4IR” established itself overnight in the mindsets and speeches of many South African university managers and politicians — including ostensibly Ramaphosa — and has became extremely misused and propagated by certain spokespersons and leaders, Rossouw explains17:7:

Eenvoudig: Pres. Cyril Ramaphosa, wat die laaste jare gereeld Davos toe is om die krummels van die tafel van die neokoloniale meesters van die wêreld te eet, het sy meester, [Klaus Martin] Schwab, se papegaai geword [*Schwab, ‘n ingenieur en ekonoom, is die stigter van die Wêreld Ekonomiese Forum (WEF) en lid van die Bilderberg-groep (BG). Die WEF en die BG is hoogs omstrede en het ‘n groot aandeel aan die ekologiese krisis, ekonomiese ongelykheid en die huidige wêreldwye politieke onstabiliteit].

Nog voordat jy “Kophou” kon sê, het die term soos ‘n veldbrand versprei en net nog ‘n leë bestuurscliché geword. Dat politici wat die guns van die neokoloniale meesters soek hulle napraat, verras niemand nie, maar mens verwag meer van universiteitsbesture.

Aangesien Suid-Afrika se eie industriële organisasies en die bemeestering van simboliese stelsels die afgelope 20 jaar stelselmatig vernietig is, sal dit gek wees om hierdie tegnologieë nie met die grootste omsigtigheid te benader nie as ons ons nie bloot verder wil laat koloniseer om ons na die beeld van sinistere korporasies te misvorm nie.

The widespread presence of poverty and inequality in our current society is blocking and stifling any hope to create a comprehensive, inclusive digital economy. Angelo Fick36, the director of research at the Auwal Socio-economic Research Institute,  writes that technology is not necessarily the panacea it is made out to be36:21: “it is indeed de-skilling the under-skilled”. In this context he states that South Africans are suffering from skills deficits that are much more fundamental than the ones they are being urged to address ahead of the 4IR.36

Various authors write that histories of earlier industrial revolutions show that their outcomes were not associated with the interests of the working or under-classes, but were associated with the advancement of capitalism through the so-called “big class of technology”. This means that the 4IR’s outcomes will be the same for present-day South Africa: more poverty, more inequality, more ethnicity and racism, and more exploitation. The mass of the poor Blacks will be outsiders to the benefits of the 4IR and will be the victims because the new setup will exacerbate the existing social, economic and political inequalities, problems and conflicts. It will only, as the ANC’s cadre-employment and selective BEE-employment did, provide prosperity once more to the ANC elites (and possibly a state capture contract). The promotion and welcoming of the 4IR is again one of Ramaphosa’s distractions from the real problems responsible for the country’s backwardness, created and upheld by the ANC regime in many areas, such as education, job opportunities, etc.15,17,36,38

Both of the ANC regime’s two postulations, namely firstly that digital technology has led to people losing their jobs and thus that it creates unemployment, and secondly that 4IR is going to be a job creator and that it will remove the unemployment problem, are outright false.

South Africa’s jobless problem requires logical thinking, planning and doing. It needs the understanding of realities, and of course the acceptance of it. The basic fact, which Ramaphosa and his leadership missed, is that in order to accommodate at least 700 000 young people entering the job market on all levels every year, the country needs an annual growth rate of at least 10%. (In this respect the ANC regime could only manage a current growth rate of 1,5% for 2019, with at most 2,1% forecast for 2021!) Then, apart from this much-needed 10% growth for the more or less 700 000 youths coming onto the job market annually, there are the many other youths and adults already outside jobs because of the economic crisis.  These statistics, together with the mass of jobless, untrained and hungry people, confirm over and over the shameful failure of the ANC regime’s economic and population policies, nullifying the introduction of advanced programmes for digital technology and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) as a solution for the mostly under-skilled and undertrained poor. It will only, as the ANC’s cadre employment and selective BEE employment did, create prosperity for ANC insiders who constitute a small, selective group within the broader population. The promotion of 4IR by Ramaphosa, as a solution for unemployment, is again one of Ramaphosa’s distractions from the real problems regarding the country’s backwardness in many areas, such as education, work opportunities, poverty, etc., that were created by the failed ANC regime.15,17,36,38

3.3.1.4. Empty state coffers

Our state-owned enterprises’ financial health is in tatters (which is very much in line with the ANC’s general politics and their empty state coffers). There are the continuously failing Eskom, SAA, SABC, etc., as examples. How empty the ANC regime’s purse is, was well reflected in June 2019 by Denel’s announcement that it would not be paying full salaries at the end of the month. Although Pravin Gordan announced after this that a “lender” was found to pay Denel’s salaries, it the chaos within the South African economy and within a government whose day-to-day rule is characterised by constant borrowing.40

The extent to which the South African state under Ramaphosa is approaching financial bankruptcy and an empty treasury, is well illustrated by the recent jobs bloodbath wherein small business owners had to close shop, primarily because the state owes them a staggering R7,1 billion in unpaid invoices. (The amount was R0,6-billion on the national level and R 6,5 billion on the provincial level). The negative situation (and its serious consequences) was summed up by Statistics SA’s indication that unemployment in the labour force (private sector) had increased from 27,6% in the first quarter to 29% in the second quarter of 2019. This shocking figure was revealed by a Ramaphosa minister, the Small Business Development minister, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, in a written reply to Parliament. In this context, it was revealed that invoices of private providers for services rendered should be settled by the state within 30 days. Despite this official rule, the average age of outstanding official debt is several months. This has had serious consequences for the private firms and their employees, a situation which seemingly left the Ramaphosa regime unconcerned. Makinana and Umraw41 report on this chaos, created directly by the government, and its effects on employees and employers as well as their families and communities. They write41:4:

Small business owners who deal with the government have sad stories to tell about the unwillingness to pay them on time. An Eastern Cape based civil engineering firm owner said she had been sent from pillar to post for almost a year over outstanding invoices. ‘We are unable to pay our staff. There are outstanding salaries in our company for about six months. As a result, we are down to two staff members from 11’.

Ramaphosa too, in his parliamentary reply to his Third Sona, confirmed in some way the lack of money in the state coffers and the failure of the economy to generate cash under the present ANC regime. In an effort to escape the growing financial and economic fiasco — further showing up the ANC regime’s lack of business skills to restart the country’s collapsing economy by means of proper planning and management — Ramaphosa has gone on a second investment drive in 2019/2020 after his 2018 $100 billion investment drive was not a roaring success. Marrian40 describes Ramaphosa and Gordhan’s desperate borrowing spree to meet the state’s daily needs, like salaries (and thus to avoid more job cuts), as40:27: “…an illustration of the short-termism and lack of planning afflicting government.

As already shown in the above analysis, general economical stability and normality are lacking in South Africa. For big companies and capitalists, it does not meet the criteria of “prosperity”. It seems as if it is only the pro-Ramaphosa media and the ANC’s top brass who still “believe” in their own myth. Indeed, as already said, South Africa is on the brink of collapse. The unstable and deteriorating economic situation is contradicting the vestiges of South African prosperity. Our failed prosperity is debunked by the independent economist Thalbi Leoka.40 For Leoka40 the primarily reason for this chaos is apparently situated in the mindset of the ANC’s top elite at Luthuli House (which forms an important part of the ANC’s politburo). Luthuli House and the ANC’s politburo lack an understanding of the seriousness of the country’s economic situation: essentially they do not understand that there is such a thing as “good democratic capitalism” outside of the crooked socialism of their Marxist-Leninist convictions. In short: they fail to make a distinction between good and bad economic planning. As Leoka puts it40:4: “…the GDP figures indicate an economy in crisis, while the ANC seemingly speaks of prosperity”.

The CEO of Nedbank, Mike Brown42, also said in August 2019 that Ramaphosa and his regime are at a critical juncture and the country requires urgent action not to crash into an IMF bailout. In his outline of a failed economy, Brown also focussed on the ANC’s internal self-centred leadership struggle, leaving the affairs of the regime in tatters. On a question from the journalist Chris Barron42 if Brown42 believes Ramaphosa is capable of taking politically unpopular decisions which rectifying the business programme requires, Brown42, very tactfully responded42:6:

I’m not qualified to comment on the president’s ability to do these things. But we are left with no option other than to take these difficult decisions.

Immediate remedies to save South Africa’s twisted economy by means of South African private initiatives so as to rescue the country from a Venezuelan or Zimbabwean scenario, are being looked on skeptically for good reason. Any initiative where the ANC-regime is in a way involved to bring correction is doubted. The chaos, created over 25 years of ruling, is putting even an IMF-intervention and –interference, to can bring economical-correction, in doubt. The state-coffer is going to be for a long time on its emptiest ever.

In this context of private saviours coming in to “remodel” South Africa to regain economic and financial integrity, it is important to reflect on a public-private growth initiative project, announced in June 2019, ready for takeoff. The recent statement by the initiative that the first phase of 43 projects has been activated, as part of the so-called Public-private Growth Initiative, and which aims to inject R840 billion into the economy and create 155 000 jobs over the next five years, seems to be wishful thinking at this stage within the current South African politico-economic context. So far it only reveals a theoretical approach. It seems again to be part of the talking without walking politics of South Africa that has had the country  in its grip since 1994. The immense political failure over 25 years by the ANC and South Africa, has caused the international community to cool in its enthusiasm, other than in 1994 when they were eager to assist the ANC and South Africa after apartheid’s wrongdoing.  It seems foreign investors are leaving the ANC and South Africa on their own to see what next catastrophe will follow. Reflectin the difficulty to get foreign entities involved in present South Africa, the World Bank Index is a good place to start: where the country used to rank at number 32 out of 190 economies in those early days of ANC rule, it has now slipped to position number 82 (50 places, or nearly 30%, down).

De Lange43:4 states that the South African economy now may now be compared with the level where the country was in the 1980s when it had a large amount of debt.  South Africa under the ANC, writes Strydom46:3, is a shrinking economic entity in Africa and its growth prospects are much worse than the Reserve Bank’s forecast of expansion in GDP for this year (reflecting a paltry 0,6% against 2018’s equally insignificant 0,8%). In terms of its economic status in the world, South Africa has dropped from the 25th position in 1994 to more or less 35th position in 2018 (10 places down in 24 years). When comparing our economy with those of Poland, Israel, Ireland, Nigeria and Turkey, it has been left behind. Its ability to generate growth of more than 4% a year as was done from 2000 till 2007, is gone. Poor service delivery and constant unrest issues have broken the back of the country’s economy, making South Africa after 25 years of ANC economics “…no longer Africa’s largest economy, but hopefully only Africa’s most advanced economy”. Nothing more is present.17,43-46

3.3.1.5. Third State of the Nation Address (Sona)

An excellent example of the vacillation between political reality and unreality in the mind of Ramaphosa regarding present-day politics and economics was reflected by his State of the Nation Address (Sona). It was published in the public press on 23 June 2019 by Ramaphosa47 after he had delivered it on 20 June 2019. This reporting brings into perspective Cyril Ramaphosa the political talker-but-not-walker. It is based solely on the rhetoric of “we”, “us” and “our” in doing the walking, while there is a lack of “me” (Ramaphosa) to constructively drive the process until success is obtained. To understand the fantasy of the ANC politico-economics, and why the country is moving into collapse, the “Ramaphosa Sona” must be looked at. It reads as follows47:8:

As South Africa enters the next 25 years of democracy, let us proclaim a bold and ambitious goal, a unifying purpose, to which we dedicate all our resources and energies.

Let us agree as a nation and as a people united in our aspirations, that within the next 10 years we will have the South Africa we want.

  • No person in South Africa will go hungry
  • Our economy will grow at a much faster rate than our population
  • Two million more young people will be in employment
  • Every 10-year-old will be able to read for meaning
  • Violent crime will be halved

Let us make these commitments now, to ourselves and to each other, knowing that they will stretch our resources and capabilities, but understanding that if we achieve these 5 goals, we will have fundamentally transformed our society.

We set these ambitious goals not despite the severe difficulties of the present, but because of them.

We set these goals so that the decisions we take now are bolder and we act with great urgency.

Working together, there is nothing we cannot be, nothing we cannot do, and nothing we cannot achieve.

The ungrounded utterances — which frightens every wise investor, local or international — are very much in line with the foolish political utterances of the late President Hugo Chavez and the present President Nicolás Manduro of the failed Venezuela.

Political and investment analysts feel that Ramaphosa must be woken up from his Sona dreams when it comes to the practice of real economics and politics. It is plain foolish and nonsensical to speak and dream in the “last days of the South African economy” in the following manner47:8:

… the new city in the mist, high-speed trains to can travel the country from south to north and west to east, new employment for 2-million youths in a decade, tracking civil claims arising from investigation by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) of the state capturers, the doubling of the tourists to 21 million in ten years’ time.

The same awakening must be take place regarding his continuing empty promises, coming after the May 2019 elections, offering unrealistic economic growth as well as his fantastical halving of the crime rate!47-50

The editor49 of the Sunday Times reports on 23 June 2019 on this foolish mind-capturing of Ramaphosa, as follows49:20:

The problem, Mr President, is that South Africans are not living in 2030; they are living in the present. Their reality is one of extremely low employment, slow service delivery and dimmed economic prospects. A majority of our children go to schools that do not have the basics – no libraries, and with duplicated buildings. Some schools do not even have proper toilets or running water. Our public health system is in tatters; patients wait in long queues and are often treated by rude and uncaring staff. Crime levels are high. People do not feel safe outside their homes, or even inside them.

We are running out of patience, fast. How long must we wait for violent criminals to face justice? How long must we wait for proper roads to be built, for schools and hospitals to be fixed, for leadership that inspires economic growth so that we can start attracting investments and create jobs?

The editor48 of Rapport writes on the 23 June 201948:2:

‘n Mens moet groot droom, sê ons graag vir ons kinders. Maar die land se kiesers is nie kinders nie. Dis jammer dat ‘n president wat in sy kort tyd aan die stuur reeds só baie reggekry het die kluts in een toespraak so kan kwytraak.

Note that the Afrikaans phrase, “die kluts kwytraak”, means “losing one’s marbles”, which is quite a harsh judgment on Ramaphosa’s character and abilities.

Others have been equally scathing on Ramaphosa, the so-called “unique thinker and planner and great doer as statesman”, who has grabbed the minds of many South Africans since December 2017 because they believed he could bring salvation on his own. De Lange51 brings to us another, but strange dimension regarding the above extreme and visionary “dreaming” of Ramaphosa. He51 states it was not original, but a rehash of a much more comprehensive presentation made earlier by Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma at the ANC’s lekgotla in June at Irene.  More informatively, De Lange writes51:2:

Dlamini-Zuma het nie net gesê ons moet droom oor sneltreine nie, maar ook oor ‘n trein wat ‘binne twee uur’ die 2 000km van die Kaap na Musina kan aflê – wat ‘n snelheid van ‘n hele 1 000 km/h sal vereis [terwyl die wêreld se vinnigste trein in Sjanghai, China tans net 430 km/h haal]’.

The above leaves us with the worrying question: does Ramaphosa have any plan or vision of his own to better the stricken South Africa? This is a very important question after reading Heystek’s20 analysis of the negative Ramaphosa impact on the economy20:3:

Dis opmerklik dat die rand nou die afgelope 17 maande, sedert die verkiesing van pres. Cyril Ramaphosa as ANC-leier in Desember 2017 met bykans 33% teen die Amerikaanse dollar gedaal het. Dít tydens ‘n tydperk wat as ‘Ramaforie’ beskryf word.

3.3.1.6. Failed modern-day 1948 Marshall plan

Helen Zille52 considers the failure of the ANC regime’s economics since 1994, by comparing and contrasting it with the successful outcome of the 1948 Marshall Plan of the USA to rebuild 18 European countries’ economies after the devastating World War II. This financial assistance was $12 billion (more or less $100 billion or R1 507 billion in today’s money). The reasons for the success of the Marshall Plan were drivers that are outright missing in the ANC’s so-called South African economic reform. In this context Zille posits52:7:

Omdat dit goed deurdink en doeltreffend geïmplementeer is om lewensvatbare en volhoubare Europese ekonomieë te bou, eerder as om afhanklikheid te bevorder. En die institutionele meganismes (wat van nuts af herstel of herbou is) het ‘n verantwoordbare uitbetaling van fondsgeld verseker, wat enige moontlikheid verhoed dat ‘n klein invloedryke elite met politieke bande verryk word. Kan ons dieselfde doen? Ongelukkig het die resep ons tot dusver ontwyk.

On the financial input by countries outside Africa to the later “African Marshall Plan”, Zille52 writes on 9 June 201952:7:

Die jongste syfers wat ek kon opspoor, toon dat die top-tien lande wat amptelik ontwikkelingshulp aan Afrikalande verskaf in 2016 $50 miljard aan hulle oorbetaal het. Oor drie jaar gemeet (dieselfde tydperk as die Marshallplan) sal dit $150 miljard, die ekwivalent van een en ‘n half keer die Marshallplan, beloop.

In teenstelling met die Marshallplan is hulp en skuldverligting aan Afrika ‘n volgehoue en herhalende patron – nie ‘n eenmalige oordrag nie. Die totale hoeveelheid ontwikkelingshulp aan Afrika oor die afgelope drie dekades sou baie gekompliseerde Marshallplanne beloop.

On the failed economics of the ANC inside the “South African Marshall Plan”, Zille52 describes a shocking picture. She states52:7:

Sedert 1994 het ons $54 miljard van 21 lidlande van die Organisaie van Ekonomiese Samewerking en Ontwikkeling ontvang – meer as dubbeld die bedrag [$26 miljard in vandag se geld] wat die Marshallplan aan Brittanje (die grootste enkele begunstigde) gegee het en amper vyf keer meer as wat Wes-Duitsland [$11 miljard in vandag se geld] gekry het.

Per capita bereken, is die bedrag wat Suid-Afrika ontvang het selfs meer vrygewig in vergelyking met die Europese lande.

A prominent question is: why are there today at least 9,9 million jobless people against the 3,7 of 1994? This leads Zille52 to ask further52:7:

En hoe is dit moontlik dat ongelykheid binne ons swart bevolking nou net so groot is as tussen die rykste wit mense en die armste swart mense? Hoekom het al hierdie miljarde ons nie gehelp om ‘n inklusiewe ekonomie te bou nie, beleggings te lok en volhoubare groei te verseker nie?

The answer to our failed “South African Marshall plan”, coming since 1994, is quite clear toe Zille52:7:

Ons ken die antwoord: Beleidsonsekerheid, ‘n onbevoegde gekaapte staat, die amperse ineenstorting van ons strafregtelike regstelsel, ‘n swak openbare onderwysstelsel en die omvang van korrupsie en misdaad. Hierdie faktore, in kombinasie, vernietig die beleggingsvetroue wat nodig is vir volgehoue ekonomiese groei.

Matthys53 offers further insight into the issue of inequality referred to by  Zille above, particularly between members of the Black population. He reflects on our position in terms of the Gini coefficient and points out that South Africa is one of the world’s five most unequal countries. Moreover, South Africa is the number one most unequal country in the world with a coefficient of 63,4%! The other four most unequal countries are: Namibia (61,3%), Haiti (60,8%), Botswana (60.5%) and Suriname (57, 6%). This so-called “country association” of South Africa relative to the four under-developed countries referred to, clearly tells the story of how far gone our economic and social constitutions are at present [The Gini coefficient, the most commonly used measure of inequality, measures the statistical dispersion of the income or wealth distribution of a nation’s residents. A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality against a coefficient of one or 100% which expresses maximum inequality].53

3.3.1.7. South Africa’s failed 2012 to 2018 targets

The latest figures by the World Bank, Statistics SA, Trading Economics and CEIC,54 reflecting how South Africa is meeting its targets set for the period 2012 to 2030, show that the outcomes for the period 2012 to 2018 failed to reach any one of the set targets. The following summary shows it well54:4:

  1. Economic growth: 2012 – 2030 (4%) > 2012 – 2018 (1.5%)
  2. National savings rate: 2012 -2030 (25% of GDP) > 2012 – 2018 (14% in December 2018)
  3. Gini coefficient: 2012 – 2013 (0.6) > 2012 – 2018 (0.63 in 2014)
  4. Average income per person per year: R120 000 > 2012 -2018 (R88 000 in 2017)
  5. People with jobs: 2012 – 2030 (24-million) > 2012 – 2018 (16.3-million first quarter 2019)
  6. Unemployment: 2012 -2030 (6%) < 2012 – 2018 (27.6% first quarter 2019)
  7. Percentage of adults with jobs: 2012 -2030  (61%) > 2012 -2018 (42.6% first quarter 2018)
  8. Labour participation rate: 2012 – 2030 (65%) > 2012 -2018 (58.8% first quarter 2019).

Looking more closely at our missed targets for 2012 to 2018, it is clear that the ANC regime overlooked — or more correctly just blindly ignored — two of the primary factors creating poverty and unemployment: an oversized population, and the uncontrolled constant growth of the South African population.

It seems as if the ANC regime paid scant attention to the hard fact that the country’s population (the Black majority) had grown from 38,78 million in 1994 to 58,78 million in 2019 (representing a 50% growth or 20 million people). This indicatates that the country’s population is growing at 1,43% per annum against the world average of 1,08% per annum (or 850 000 more people per annum in South Africa). This population growth of 1,43% is more than double our present economic growth of ,.6% on a yearly basis.55,56 Saunderson-Meyer56 in this context reports56:12:

While the national fertility rate had dropped from 3,23 in 1996, to 2,67 in 2011 — above the replacement rate of 2.1 — it was particularly high among black Africans at 2,82 and coloureds at 2,57, while below replacement among Indians and whites (1,85 and 1,7).

The immediate implication of an oversized population is the overuse of our resources, high unemployment, a diminishing personal income and more people to feed in a shrinking economy. The end result is that South Africans have been getting poorer since 2014, as statistics show. Looking at our present annual population growth, it is estimated that the economy must grow by 6% yearly to successfully allow the more than 1 million new job-seekers into the labour market, as well as to erase in some way the already existing jobless numbers (note once more: our GDP growth is 0,6% at present). Part of these new-comers to the South African economy, directly and indirectly, is a strong contingent of children under the age of 15 years who lack proper nutrition. (These children are in addition to the fact that nearly 40% of the 58,78 million of population and six out of 10 in the age category under 35 are jobless). Undoubtedly this situation is fast overwhelming the government’s ability to meet the food needs of many children through social grants. Notwithstanding this growing crisis, the ANC regime has not tackled for the last five years any of adverse elements causing economic decline. The current promise of the ANC regime, that for instance the 29% unemployment will be halved in the next five years, is exactly the same unrealistic promise that the ANC made  in 2009 to fully eliminate informal settlements before 2014. The primary fact is that the GDP growth (and available state finance) has been trending downwards for years, while the country’s fertility rate shows a continuation above the average of what is considered the replacement rate.55,56

The ANC’s failed population-planning policy and practice is creating more and more chaos in the lifestyles and living standards of the overwhelming part of the South African population. The direct result is that there are more than 30 million poor citizens (out of a population of 58 million) while more than 17,5 million people, because of their extreme poverty, are forced to live as beggars on social grants. When comparing the 2018 total tax revenue of R1 216 464 000 with the social grants paid out for that year at R155 264 000, social grants stand out as a burden of 12% on the gross income. It must be noted that this unfortunate poor contingent in need of social grants is constantly growing: it grew from 2017 to 2018 by 8% while the growth in gross tax revenue for the period was only 6%.30,31

Smit55:11, in a short summary on the natural growth from 2004 to 2019 (births minus deaths), reports as follows:

2004: 409 2610;
2007: 509 974;
2010: 629 622;
2014: 639 791;
2019: 629 726.

He55 states categorically, based on the 2019 report of Statistics SA, that the population-growth tempo of South Africa increased from ±1% in 2002/2003 to 1,43% in 2019. This growth is strengthened by the decline in infantile deaths, the surge in immigrants from especially African countries, etc., making it clear that the growth is still to increase after 2019.55,56 The Whites, as Saunderson-Meyer56 points out, reached already in 1989 the replacement-border balance, with at the moment minus 0,4% growth (below the equilibrium level, meaning they are in the process of dying out.55,56

It is important to note that the ANC’s radical statutory policy, with its enforced BEE empowerment and other forms of affirmative action, etc., exclusively favouring a part of the Black population, prescribing that the demography of 80,7% Blacks, 8% Coloureds, 7,7% Whites and 2,1% Asians must be reflected in social life and in the workplace , has done enormous damage to the economy as well as race relations.55 The foolishness and irresponsibility around the use of racial quotas by politicians to rule South Africa because “they are our people” — notwithstanding that these quotas may bring famine, uncontrollable revolution and possibly death in the end — is well summed up by Smit when he writes55:11: “Die EFF-leier, Julius Malema, moedig swart vroue aan om meer kinders te hê ‘vir die revolusie’.” The ANC regime’s failure to decrease the above-average growth of the Black population since 1994 must be read in the same negative context as Malema’s utterances.

The prominent imbalance in numbers between South Africa’s racial groups referred to, read together with the various racial groups’ economic empowerment, spells conflict for the future and can be a driving factor for assets and land grabbing from Whites without compensation, as happened in Zimbabwe. There is also the hostility between Black and White, caused by the racial wealth-gap, which is growing because of the introduction of anti-white racism into politics by some political radicals in the ANC and the EFF. The often-ignored demography of South Africa may determine the fate of its various ethnic and racial groups in a future South Africa, either for the best or for the worst, writes Smit.55:11

One way to address the present poverty and joblessness (and undoubtedly the hunger of children), and thus to move the country upwards into at least a “low-level prosperity”, Saunderson-Meyer56 suggests in August 2019 that the ANC-regime become realistic, outside its futile politics, on the reproduction rate of its people. He writes56:12:

Government needs to do everything it can to grow the economy and slow population growth, even though the latter is likely to be a radically flammable issue.

What Saunderson-Meyer56 seemingly suggests to the ANC regime is: don’t use baby-making as a political weapon to empower you with votes. In the end you take the food out of the poor’s mouths after they foolishly voted for you and your false promises. It is already costing you dearly at the moment and is going to cost you dearly in the future. The only other alternative to our over-population, in relation to our chaotic economics, is a constant annual GDP growth of five times the present rate, which is just impossible to obtain in the ANC’s parliamentary term from 2019 to 2024.55,56

3.3.1.8. South African a clone of Venezuela

Looking at the apparent start of South Africa’s death dance (dodedans), is is important to note the death dance of Venezuela, which is now, in slow-motion, coming to an end in comprehensive chaos in that country. What is most worrying, is the fact that some of the ANC elite, like the convicted Tony Yengeni and the previous minister of state-security Bongani Bongo, failed to notice the Venezuelas death dance after they went there in March 2019 on a so-called “fact-finding mission”, supposedly to inform and assure South Africans of the “benificence” of Chávez-Madura-type regimes. Yengeni and Bongo, in describing their visit afterwards, said they had adored Venezuela for its “all-over excellence”.57 John Endres57 of the IRR describes the two’s responses as follows57:4-5:

Volgens hulle (Yengeni en Bongo) het hulle hulle ‘n wonderlike tyd by ‘n straatkarnaval gehad, ‘n opelug-musiekfees bygewoon en op die strand gelê.

Moving away from Ramaphosa’s dreams and now seemingly also Yengeni and Bongo’s dreams, the evidence coming out of Venezuela tells another, much darker story. According to observers,  between January and June 2019, one million of its population fled Venezuela, making that a total of 4 million people (out of a population of 36 million) that are living outside the country to escape hunger and political instability. The base of this poverty is a direct outcome of Nicolás Maduro’s failed socialist economics, his nationalisation of private assets and land grabbing from the rich, as well as his printing of worthless money after he grabbed the country’s Reserve Bank, the useless spending of state money (obtained through the selling of oil) in terms of the Maduro regime’s socialist policies on senseless housing projects, feeding schemes, education and health programmes, while state money was further misused to support extremely radical movements and parties outside Venezuela.

Evidence shows further that more than 50% of children in five of the seven Venezuelan states, under the age of five, suffer from malnutrition and that the average citizen has lost 10 kilograms in weight. Venezuela is the only country in the world experiencing hyperinflation (in 2018 it was 80 000%, rising to 165 000% in 2019), while the country’s GDP sank by more or less 50%. The Chávez-Madura elite internally undermined the Venezuelans’ political and civil rights. The extreme corruption and state capture by the Chávez-Madura elite (in full swing since 1999) further drained the state’s coffers. The fall in the price of oil in 2013, from $97 to $35 per barrel, and the rise of mass poverty, led to the nationalisation of private assets, and an economy policy which sent the prices of all products, especially food, sky-high, with unemployment rocketing.57 This confirms the well-known principle of revolutionary governments: to grab from others but never to create oneself. Endres,57 in an effort to bring some understanding to South Africans of a “similar” Venezuelan-style South Africa that might be coming, writes very comprehensively and in-depth on 23 June 2019 on the Venezuelan death dance as follows57:4-5:

…voorbeelde wys dat byna al Venezuela se ekonomiese probleme tuisgemaak was: sosialistiese idees soos onteiening, nasionalisering, prysbeheer en statsinmenging in die ekonomie. Die dalende olieprys ($100 per vat in 2012 tot $35 in 2013) het net die situasie vererger.

Maduro en sy ondersteuners pak graag die skuld vir sy problem op die VSA en sanksies, maar die feit is dat sanksies hoogs gefokus is – op die binnekring van die regime en die staatsoliemaatskappy, PDVSA.

Die waarheid is dat dit ‘n rampspoedige ekonomiese beleid is wat die ineenstorting van dié land veroorsaak het. Suid-Afrika behoort dié les ter harte te neem.

That South Africa is in a crisis, an immense one, has so far been kept successfully away from the public’s eyes by the pro-Ramaphosa media and of course Cyril Ramaphosa’s presidential rhetoric, echoing the political style of the telling stories as does Nicolás Maduro. Also the use of the word prosperity has become something of a “hate-speech utterance”. But prosperity, crisis and despondency are tripartite partners. They need to be brought into the present-day context of our economy.

Khumalo23, in a broader context, relates the present lack of true prosperity directly to the existence of a comprehensive crisis created by the ANC, as was done by the regimes of Chávez and Madura in Venezuela, which has spread its tentacles since 1994 out to all levels of the South African people. Khumalo writes23:2:

For far too long we have been in denial about the nature of the crisis. The cosmetic changes implemented — a job summit, adding the word “employment” to the ministry of labour — have done little to address the structural issues underpinning our stagnant economy. In the deliberation phase, the nation at large needs to acknowledge that the prevailing paradigms under which such contraventions have been contained — primarily the tense alliance between business, labour and the state — are no longer fit for purpose.

The future cruel socio-economics and politics awaiting South Africa, possibly in the short time of three years, as stated euphemistically by Khumalo23 above, can be read in the political analyst and investigative journalist, Qaanitah Hunter’s50 in-depth article: “Searching for the real Venezuela”, published in the Sunday Times on 1 September 2019 after her visit to the country. Parts of her informative writing and observations are reflected underneath. She writes50:11:

I travelled to Venezuela on a whim last month, prompted by curiosity to see what has been touted by ANC and the EFF as a blueprint for what SA could become.

In SA, the Venezuelan model has been romanticised and vilified in equal measure.

…when I landed at Simón Bolivar International Airport, with its exposed vents and dour concrete, the words of Bonani Bongo ringing in my head. Bongo, an ANC MP, led the party’s fact-finding delegation to Venezuela, and returned with a statement that the country’s problems were caused by “Western imperialism”.

It was important to me not to be swayed by any argument for or against the socialist regime, to fairly observe the reality of life for ordinary people, and to avoid politics althogether,

On my first day in Caracas I understood the appeal. The model of socialism espoused by President  Nicolás Maduro is enormously seductive to someone from a country with a wealth gap such as ours.

On paper at least, there is universal equality, free electricity, housing, water. Health care and education, plus a box of free groceries per household each month. There is also a national minimum wage.

But as one drives out of the capital in the direction of real life in the country, the paper crumbles.

The free electricity comes from derelict generation infrastructure and the country’s grid hangs by a thread. Power outrages last between three and 10 hours. When the free electricity is out, so is the free water. Locals are disparaging about the free education, and some corrupt officials now sell the state-supplied groceries, that should be free, at a premium price — which those on the minimum wage cannot afford. The free health facilities have barely any medicines.

With nothing to sell, many stores were simply shut. Others had two aisles stocked with whatever items – from toilet paper to maize –they had managed to import.

Large department stores, however, were full of Turkish-made snacks and Chinese-made clothes. Shoppers told me that the situation was far better than it had been all year – at one store a 2l bottle of Coke cost $8 (R121) — but still the shelves were bare.

We stopped at a well-stocked convenience store just outside Caracas where more than half the items cost more than the national minimum wage.

A box of digestive biscuits cost the equivalent of about R45 – which is the weekly wage. This was probably why two armed soldiers stood guard over the “luxury” items, which in Venezuela are Coke and ice-cream.

Hearing analysts speak on international news channels about the hyperinflation (80, 000% in 2018) is something entirely different to actually seeing how a sliced bread and fresh milk are luxuries most Venezuelans could not dream of buying.

Butter, for example, is such a prized commodity that one can only physically handle it once one has paid for it. The caps on each bottle of fruit juice are fitted with a lock that can be opened only once the item has been bought.

The national conversation is dominated by how great things used to be, and how bad they now are. People I met asked if they could travel back with me to SA. Warned about crime, they said they would manage it — and they were only half joking.

For those Venezuelans who can afford to buy basic foodstuffs, chances are they will not have the physical cash to do so.

Because the country cannot afford to print its own banknotes, they are now a commodity on their own. In the cities, coffee shops accept bitcoin and other crypto currencies as payment, while informal traders rely on mobile money apps because cash is increasingly scarce.

Also, the social dream is now being eroded by corruption, which is evident almost everywhere.

There e-tolls don’t work — the toll booths are abandoned because nobody has the money to pay. The roads, however, are hardy worth paying for. Instead of potholes they have pot craters.

But the roads traverse a magnificent country, which just over a decade ago was the richest in Latin America, thanks to its massive oil reserves. Now it appears to be on the brink of ruin, thanks to bad politics.

In 2016, ANC policy guru Joel Netshitenzhe, when reflecting on state capture in SA  and comparing it with Latin America, said opportunists simply seize openings created by bad governments.

After 10 days in Venezuela, I now better understand the appeal for the ANC and the EFF. The state has a firm grip on all facets of its people’s lives – from where they live and what they eat to how much they earn.

Venezuela’s socialist model requires a utopia to work. We adopt it at our peril.

I said above that the Venezuela model might only reach us in three years; I was over-optimistic. Looking at the 30 million of our population trapped in poverty — nearly 20 million living on social grants, more than 10 million official jobless, 7,8 million South Africans caught in a debt trap of R225 billion of loans without collateral, our huge and ongoing crime wave, corruption and state capture, and most of all, our enormous inequality, making it well-nigh impossible for the mass of unemployed and poor in the shanty towns and other informal settlements, to merely buy their daily bread, get basic education and basic healthcare and survive — Venezuela is already inside our psyche, our children, our homes and our futures. Is it wrong to replace in Hunter’s article the name Venezuela with South Africa, Caracas with Cape Town and Johannesburg, President Nicolás Maduro with President Cyril Ramaphosa, and socialism with Marxist-Leninist radicalism, to make Hunter’s article applicable to describing present-day South Africa?50,58

3.3.1.9. Zimbabwe in perspective

If Endres’s57 warning of a possible “Venezuelan South Africa” is not enough, it is also important to note the editorial in the City Press of 23rd June 2019, describing the present economic chaos in Zimbabwe. A country devastated economically by the actions of a madman in the mold of Nicolás Maduro, the despotic Robert Mugabe, who was recently given a hero’s tribute by both Thabo Mkbeki and Cyril Ramaphosa at his funeral in September 2019. This tribute reminds us of the many hero’s tributes to the despotic and failed Hugo Chávez of Venezuela at his funeral in 2013.50,57

Speaking volums on the present chaotic Zimbabwean finances and the ongoing seizure of the country by means of corruption, theft, mismanaging and human-rights violations since Uhuru (which includes land and other assets grabbed from Whites), is the current Zimbabwean president’s confession in June 2019 when he said59:3: “I’ve been in government for 38 years as minister and I can’t remember when you ever had a budget surplus”.

Notwithstanding the financial and political mess create by the Mugabe-Mnangagwa regimes themselves, created over decades, the Mnangagwa-regime still shamelessly harbours the opportunistic hope to obtain financing in 2019/2020 from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). They even hope for a Eurobond offering to service their state debt and to restart their struggling economy. But, it must be noted that most of these moneys intended to be borrowed is not going for the development of a post-2019 Zimbabwe, but mostly for bridge financing to clear about $1,2-billion (R17,2-billion) of arrears to the World Bank, the African Development Bank and the European Investment Bank. In addition, the Mnangagwa regime is still thinking up plans to restructure debt owed to bilateral creditors! All this money that the Mnangagwa regime wants to borrow must again be paid back, while the country in the meantime should be running, forget about development!59

How little insight and understanding the current Mnangagwa regime have of applicable and sound state economics and proper financial, social and political management of their country, is well reflected by the Mnangagwa regime’s minister of finance, Mthuli Ncube59. His ignorance for instance of the seriousness of IMF finance, especially IMF debt responsibility,  the political, social and economic empowerment of citizens applicable to IMF loans, the strict IMF debt/funding programme which entails the monitoring of government economic progress, etc., are cast to the winds when he says59:3: “Why not? We can only ask, they can only say no. But if we can get funding from the IMF, that would be fantastic. Just additional support on our balance-of-payments position”.  [Sounds very much in line with the economic thinking of the ANC-regime!]

If South Africans are worrying of a Venezuela to come to its shores, it must worrying far more of a Zimbabwe in waiting, especially the Whites: the land and asset grabbing in Zimbabwe under mad Mugabe is a blueprint for land and asset grabbing here. Radical Economical Transformation (RET) is still a temptation for some insanely radical politicians here.

3.3.1.10. Ramaphosa’s economic saviour-partners

It is would be a mistake to ascribe the Ramaphoria which grabbed South Africans after December 2017 — and which was maintained for some time by Cyril Ramaphosa’s promised New Dawn to bring a mass of Christmas goodies — to the person of Ramaphosa as the saviour of South Africa alone. Two other saviours are central to Ramaphosa’s political power and his ability so far to survive the infighting within the greater ANC: Tito Mboweni and Pravin Gordhan. Without his partners’ upport and controversial manoeuvring around the finances and economics of the country, Ramaphosa would have been unseated long ago. Their actions and roles in the present-day politics of the ANC, especially in the demanding in-fights around the Marxist-Leninist economic policy of the ANC, must shortly be commented on.99,20-26

Tito Mboweni

It is important to note the role of Tito Mboweni in our catastrophic economy; a person who is seen and lionised, together with Pravin Gordhan, by the pro-Ramaphosa media and a sector of the White capitalists, as the economic saviour of South Africa. What is at stake is Tito Mboweni and the National Treasury’s so-called “dramatic” proposal of privatisation with their discussion paper entitled: “Economic transformation, inclusive growth and competitiveness: Towards an economic strategy for SA” which is presented by the pro-Ramaphosa faction as a new guideline on future economic development, starting privatisation of state assets and the introduction of private capital into our state-run enterprises. The Mboweni plan is presented as a drastic changer of our future economics. The reality, like most of the ANC’s misleading plans and schemes, reveals a continuation of the Marxist-Leninist economic model wherein the rights of the members of the radical trade unions occupy a central position. The document is nothing else than an effort to revive the failed economic idea of Thabo Mbeki in the 2000s, which had fizzled out at the time because it lacked constructive plans to steer the economy into growth. The Plan was strongly criticised by an important sector of the business community as incapable of creating economic reform, on the hand. On the other hand, the Plan was criticised by Cosatu and the SACP for its lack of kick-starting the economy by means a radical, revolutionary approach. Essentially the Mboweni plan may be described as “an incoherent, ill-thought out and ultimately chaotic intervention”, should it be implemented. Speckman refers to its poor business and political intentions as another “jaws drop” of the Ramaphosa regime.60

Gumede65 describes the “intentions” of the so-ccalled “Mboweni plan” as inappropriate “grand economic experiments”. It is clear that the ANC regime, with this Plan, is again avoiding “real politics”, such as the scrapping of BEE, the stopping of support for dictators in Africa, the blind partnering with China, as well as effecting constructive interventions in curtailing corruption, etc. Instead the plan clings to strategies focussing on so-called “politically easier issues” and thus maintenance the status quo of the ANC’s already failed political and economic policies within its Marxist-Leninist politics. Central to the Plan is keeping the peace with the political radicals, Cosatu and the SACP that are threatening to bring the ANC regime down if the ANC had to introduce any structural capitalism. In practice the plan is a window-dressing exercise in the hope of attracting especially foreign investors and to keep Moody’s and other ratings agencies from demolishing the international economic status of the country. The Plan will  make no difference to our economy, besides temporarily freeing the ANC government from the immense pressure to immediately reform its economic policy by the political opposition, the ordinary public and the greater business community to.61-66

The above outcome in the ANC’s economics is exactly what Khumalo23:2 called “cosmetic changes implemented”. Political opportunism and a misled public, well anchored in a plan that does not address the structural failures underpinning our stagnant economy.23

The foolish element in the Mboweni plan, initiated by the Ramaphosa regime, is further pointed out by Duma Gqubule60, director at the Centre for Economic Development and Transformation, when he said that the even if the privatisation of Eskom realised, it was not going to immediately wipe out its R450 billion debt which is currently smothering the economy, while the whole process of privatising Eskom is not a “one-day clean-up”. It can stretch up to 15 years of direct/indirect involvement of the state at a very high cost. Neither is the Plan’s broader intention to create a total of 142 000 jobs in three years (basically unattainable within the present GDP growth of 0,8% a year). Secondly, the whole Plan’s contribution to job creation is nullified because the demands from the job market is too high in the light of the fact that every year the number of job-seekers are growing by 700 000, leaving in three years a labour force of 2 million looking for work (versus the theoretical growth of a total of 142 000 jobs).  Elsewhere Ted Blom60, an energy analyst, has showed that the Plan is marred by some serious errors and assumptions.

Gqubule60 comments on the confusion created by the Mboweni plan and its so-called “correction” of the economy, bringing us back to political reality when he writes60:4:

But to be frank, I don’t think it’s going to happen. What I heard is that nobody has heard about this report. He [Mboweni] dropped it out of the blue like a record, like a new release. Like Beyoncé.

This is a free marketer’s wet dream. It’s just unbelievable. This is definitely the National Development Plan repackaged in a new bottle.

Pravin Gordhan

On the other economic saviour of the Ramaphosa regime, namely Pravin Gordhan, it is important to note how GDP contracted by 3,2% under his oversight. It confirms how much the country’s economy is already in decline, notwithstanding Ramahosa’s stimulation package in September 2019 of R50 billion and the decade of other comprehensive stimulatory spending by the ANC regime since 2008. But it also reflects back on the much-praised “extraordinary” abilities of the Ramaphosa regime’s cabinet. In this context Mpiyakhe Dhlamini10 lays this economic decline over a decade at the door of Pravin Gordhan. Dhlamini10 points out that under Gordhan’s economic stewardship, bankruptcies, liquidations and joblessness are escalating, while exports have shrunk by 26,4% and fixed capital formation declined by 4,5%. On the ongoing chaos within the economy, predominant under the ANC regime of Jacob Zuma and now repeated under the Ramaphosa regime, Dhlamini writes10:4:

Suid-Afrika ly op die oomblik onder die gevolge van vrot regeringsbesluite. Suid-Afrika het nog nie herstel van die resessie van 2009 nie.

Dhlamini10 considers the instability around South Africa’s current economic failures, that may be traced back to 2009, and blames the Ramaphosa regime’s present inner circle when he writes10:4:

Gordhan, toe minister van finansies, het ons toe geneem op ‘n pad wat daartoe gelei het dat regeringskuld toegeneem het van 22.6% van die BBP tot die huidige 55.6%. Pleks daarvan om die ekonomie te beskerm teen die ‘nege vermorste jare’ het die plunder en ekonomiese stagnasie onder dié minister se neus gebeur, en10:4: Nou asof dit nie erg genoeg is nie, is daar steeds geen tekens van hervormings nie. Die regering bly verbind tot beleid soos onteiening sonder vergoeding in ‘n omgewing waar private beleggings reeds daal.

Zille further high-lights the role of Gordhan in the country’s chaotic economics and ascribes the reason for the absence of prosperity in today’s South Africa to the unavoidable devastation of our economy in future because the ANC’s various disciples will maintain their Marxist-Leninist ideology under its politburo throughout Ramaphosa’s term in office. Zille67 hits the nail on the head when she writes67:7:

Tog het een van ons slimste politici, Pravin Gordhan, die man wat (saam met Ramaphosa) geskilder word as die een wat die land moet red van die magte van duisternis, so onlangs soos verlede week nog sy verbintenis tot die ondersteuning, konsolidering tot die ondersteuning en selfs die uitbreiding van staats beheerde ondernemings bevestig – om in die proses die “tweede fase van radikale sosio-ekonomiese transformasie” te bevorder.

Dit is ‘n duidelike onderskrywing van die doelwitte van die NDR [Nasionale Demokratiese Revolusie].

Solank as wat mense glo dat ons die toekoms van Suid-Afrika sal verseker indien die “goeie ouens” (soos Ramaphosa en Gordhan) die stryd om die siel van die ANC wen , so lank sal ons ‘n land bly wat langsaam misluk.

Die “goeie ouens” is ongetwyfeld minder korrup as die res. Maar dit maak nie die ANC se beleidsraamwerk voordelig of implementeerdbaar nie.

3.3.1.11. ANC’s infighting

The infighting in the greater ANC and between the regime’s leaders, especially their many hostile and contradictory messages, including their open opposition to each other, is seen by many economists as one of the main reasons why the economy has gone into a tail-spin since pre-June 2019. The infighting may have contributed to the GDP’s contraction, by 3,2%. This contraction was the biggest decline in 10 years and is raising the fear of a recession, already in 2019. The political and economic confusion characterising the regime’s policy declarations and executions seem to be created by Luthuli House’s various factions, as well by the leadership of the various ministries within the Ramaphosa regime. This governmental tumult we see, as with the recent announcement of the Mboweni plan, jeopardises the decision-making privileges and independent functioning of the different governmental ministries and sectors. Internally, on a high level, it is seen and experienced as the open sabotage of other governmental institutions’ aims, intentions and planning.9,20-26,63,66

The conflict within the ANC’s top leadership about which faction is to steer the regime and who is the paramount leader (a struggle in which Ramaphosa and Magashule are the central figures) is counterproductive. It is hobbling the South African economy and is also seriously obstructing the proper functioning of the government of the day with often deliberately different and contradictory policies and declarations. From a general point of view, the ordinary citizen discerns an outright lack of sincerity inside the ANC elite when it comes to fixing the impaired and malfunctioning state-owned enterprises or efforts to get the country and its economy functioning.9,20-26

Possibly the economist Iraj Abedian25 tries to tell us something when he states25:5:

SA seems to have moved from policy paralysis to policy sabotage. This is the surest way to push the economy into a prolonged recession. The country has to have one centre of policy-making. A governing party can’t contradict its own government.

How far down the road the ANC as an assumed 100% party and a 100% regime is in October 2019, is well summarised by Malala68, in his perspective on the present-day ANC and its leadership, when he writes68:21: “I believe Ramaphosa and his team have a 55% chance of succeeding and turning the country’s fortunes around”. On the chronic illness of infighting in the greater ANC, but specifically between Ramaphosa and Magashule for the paramount-chief post, Malala responds68:21:

It’s the areas of politics and economics that seem to have led to total despondency. As the leaders continue to tear at each others’ throats for power and pull in different directions on economic policy, many have wondered who, in fact, is driving this thing called SA. Is it Ramaphosa or is it the dreaded Ace Magashule of the Free State? Ramaphosa has seemed eager to please his comrades, allowing Magashule to pronounce naively on everything from quantitative easing [nationalising] (a subject he knows nothing about) to who should be running the country (a subject he knows nothing about).

Ramaphosa has let the insults and acts of insubordination slide. That has consequences: everyone is left wondering who, exactly, is driving this thing. Their confidence dwindles when they realise that it is not: “Safe Pair of Hands” Ramaphosa, but “What’s My Cut” Magashule.

The extent of damage to the economy by an unorganised and poorly unified party, is leading to an image of South Africa in the eyes of the public and of the world with a stigma attached, that of a country characterised by poor political and economic integrity. More precisely, it is pictured as a country with a seemingly disturbed political mindset, clouded by confusion and disorientation: a regime not always accountable for his actions.25,63,66

Khumalo23, like Abedian25, describes the dysfunctional and unconstructive ANC leadership as “engaged in a chaotic civil war”. Their internecine struggles have undoubtedly caused the ANC regime’s failure to come to terms with its own political traumas and crises, and thus its inability to put the party on the road with a map again to bring prosperity for South Africans. The party’s paralysis is an outcome of the present unstoppable infighting around the leadership and power between Ramaphosa and Magashule. The two are caught inside the party’s democratic-centralism and its Marxist-Leninist ideology (a political setup that many people seemingly either do not understand or is unfamiliar with). Khumalo23 reflects in some way on the role of this ANC substrate as follows23:2:

SA has found itself plunged into a chaotic civil war involving economics, statistics and politics. But rather than adopting a line of march aimed at assuring citizens that there is indeed an understanding of the issues, the government plunged itself into a civil war reminiscent of the ANC’s factional battles of 2017 when secretary-general Ace Magashule said an ANC lekgotla had resolved to nationalise the Reserve Bank, amend its mandate and initiate steps towards exploring quantitative easing.

For Cyril Ramaphosa, the problem is that he derives his political legitimacy from the ANC itself, so its resolutions – however impractical they may turn out to be – are regarded as key performance indicators by the party. Unilaterally disowning them is not on the cards for him.

This dilemma has led to a paralysis where his voice been absent from the discourse. The vacuum was filled by market speculation, incoherent press releases and contradictory tweets.

Derby22 pertinently describes, in terms of a retrospective analysis, the present politico-economic mess of the country under the ANC regime as an old, ongoing strife to preserve Marxist-Leninist politics as a22:8: “circus run by their political class in search of the enigma of radical economic transformation”. But in this case it means precisely the ugly face of Marxist-Leninist politics: the execution of radicalism in all the spheres of socio-economic, political and personal life, which is of course beginning to manifest itself more and more clearly in the ANC’s thinking, planning and actions since December 2017.22

In this respect, the editor21 of the Sunday Times, on their foolish destruction of prosperity by the ANC top brass, describes them more elegantly as21:18: “…financially ignorant power-players”.

The above “financial ignorance” referred to by the editor21 of the Sunday Times is undoubtedly the behaviour, mostly exemplified by irrational plans and actions,  by the different ANC top leaders in their various self-centred economic power-plays, lacking knowledge of what is going on at grassroots level, meaning how the ordinary South African perceives and thinks of the ANC’s leadership. Prominent is here, in response the growing unrest of the Black masses, the recent  confession by Magashule of his own ignorance — and that of Ramaphosa and his regime — of what is going on at grassroot levels, when he says24:11: “These latest events underline the need for a government that is in touch with the people and responsive to their needs”. 

The immense failures of the ANC so far to serve  the people and their inability to make specific or general constructive corrections, seems to be catching up with the ANC after their 25 years of delinquent government of the people. Some of the ANC elite seems be grasping the reality, at last. There is no doubt that the revolutionary ANC, since its enthronement by the National Party (NP) and the international world as the sole ruler of South Africa, has never, similarly to the politburos of communist and delinquently socialist regimes in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, etc., been really in touch with the mass of poor, landless Blacks. The ANC and its elite have been glorified since 1994 by the mass of poor Blacks South Africans as their saviours, primarily because they “were of us” and were against Apartheid, but not for what they truly did for the poor.  It is with honesty that the editor of the Sunday Times, together with Munusamy24, De Lange43 and Strydom46, can describe the ANC regime as a so-called “less successfull government”. The so-called “good” government of which Magashule above is speaking and dreaming of, can surely not be the ANC’s Ramaphosa regime!21,22,24,43,46

The hanky-panky in the present-day ANC is part of an ongoing, paralysing internecine conflict to crown a skilled Marxist-Leninist next year at the ANC’s national general council as paramount chief. Until then the country’s economy, as in the past 25 years, does not really count.

3.3.1.12. The IMF and Nationalisation

Notwithstanding the many indicators bearing out poor economics and politics, some financial analysts argue that an IMF bailout for South Africa is not needed or wise at this stage. For them, excluding the country from a place in the IMF basket is based on the recruiting of foreign investors, growing exports and the fact that South Africa’s balance of payments risk is safeguarded by its effective management of its balance of payments risk, which is buttressed by its $41 billion in foreign-currency reserves held by the South African Reserve Bank (which is equivalent to 5,8 months’ import coverage).19,69-74

It is important to remember that the ANC under Ramaphosa is desperate for money: preferably easy money without a risk of repayment if their “business” ventures go wrong (which has usually happened in the ANC regime’s history).  In this risk-taking to lend money to the ANC regime it is important to remember that an estimated R1 trillion from South African banks is already exposed to South African state entities and the public sector.72,75-81

The constant threat of the nationalisation of the Reserve Bank and other public and private assets, together with the country’s immensely growing debt and failed SOEs such as Eskom, SAA, SABC, DENEL, stagnant manufacturing and production, collapsing municipalities, a downturn in the world economy and an aversion by the West of the ANC’s politics, are increasingly undermining broad support here. Our constantly worsening governance, etc., can change the situation overnight for the worse. The loud drumming by a strong sector in the ANC who are hanging on to its Marxist-Leninist ideology as the only and primary economic solution for a future South Africa, together with the even louder revolutionary politics of the ANC tripartite alliance’s two partners, the SACP and Cosatu, has already shifted the country into an unreliable political state with an even more unreliable economico-political model.  The country’s post-1994 economics looks more and more gloomy, leaving a very, very small window open to escape International Monetary Fund (IMF) assistance, however much the pro-ANC and Ramaphosa prophets try to predict that such intervention would never occur.19,69-74

On the potential ending of the ANC’s much-heard “political music” (although the pro-Ramaphosas ignore the stuporous sounds and preach daily that South Africa is in a “perfect economic condition” and thus does not need IMF or any other intervention in the near future), Leon27 quotes Pieter du Toit27 who mentioned that Johann Rupert had said that South Africa would soon be knocking at the door of the IMF for a bailout, most likely within a year. (About the decline of the country, it is interesting to mention that Rupert recently said that all his children had already left the country because of its instability).  Efforts to discredit Rupert by some of the pro-Ramaphosa elements in the media about his warning, did not work. What it indeed confirms, is how strongly the pro-Ramaphosa clan has penetrated the media (as most communists, masked as “good” or as so-called “democratic socialists”, have done over the years) in their propaganda to falsely tell South Africans that their country’s dying economy is healthy. Indeed, it seems as if some of these pro-Ramphosas successfully mesmerised themselves to believe their own lies.27,42,74,82,83

To state that South Africa is far from IMF intervention and does not need it, is seen more and more as  part of the Ramamaphosa camp’s use of populism to obscure the reality. All the signs are there that the ANC regime will be forced within a year or three, if the economy continues to worsen, to knock on the doors of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for structural-adjustment programmes. Although some economists believe the IMF can bring intense socio-economic constraints for the citizens, other economists see such an intervention as a saving grace which should happen as soon as possible. All that can keep the IMF away is how easily the Ramaphosa clan can loot the private and public pension funds.72,84

The Reserve Bank governor, Lesetja Kganyago72, described in August 2019 the intervention impact of the IMF well when he said72:3: “The IMF is so terrible. They give the patient such terrible medication that the patient dies. Only if the patient ate the vegetables, they wouldn’t need to take the medication”.

The ANC, as a revolutionary regime, does clearly not want to eat the IMF vegetables nor drink the terrible IMF medicine. They are looking for soft, easy money targets to defraud the owners. As soft targets — as a new form of state and private capture — the private and public pensions are ideal (to cure their failed SOEs and other financial disasters) instead of going for a strict IMF intervention and the IMF’s constructive control of the Ramaphosa regime’s socio-economics. (It must be noted that the assets of public pension funds in South Africa amount to about R4,2 trillion with 40% of that belonging to the GEPF. In total there is more or less R6 trillion controlled by private and public assets managers).71,75,77-81

The real plan already being prepared by the Ramaphosa regime is to expropriate in some way the R6 trillion of pensions, as was recently clearly indicated by Enoch Godongwa72, the head of the ANC’s economic transformation subcommittee, when he said the asset management industry (which includes pension funds, insurers and other investors) is sitting on R6-trillion and72:3: “…should lend some of this to the state”. What the word “lend” means in the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist politics is only one thing: grabbing without compensation. This delinquent intention of the ANC is  making even the radical Cosatu worried about its own members’ pensions. It was with good reason that Cosatu reacted as follows72:3: “What we want to see is assurance that the money is going to be used for its intended purposes and not corruption, and there will be guaranteed returns”. For the critical political analyst it is a clear case of money never to be paid back as has happened with the millions and millions of rand stolen during the state capture by the ANC elite and their intimate cronies.

Kgosana and Speckman72, alert us to the reality of the ANC’s immediate intention to “overpower” the R6-trillion in the very near future, when they write72:3:

The ANC’s economic policy guru [Godongwa] has reiterated the party’s desire for the government to raid private and public pension funds to raise money to rescue ailing state-owned enterprises  (SOEs) and meet its obligations.

Quoting further Godongwa72, they write72:3:

Why would you go to the IMF and the World Bank and go and raise money when we have sufficient savings in the economy which you can borrow, probably far cheaper, and probably with little exchange rate risk?

Bruce61, in his sometimes practical and simple approaches to serious matters related to the ANC-regime’s delinquent activities and unpredictability, steers us to the “large black hole” of debt that is (hopefully) worrying the ANC regime daily and which makes the prospect of gobbling up both private and public pension funds all the more appealing when he compares interest on state debt to monthly payments on a car61:14:

Every day, officials at the National Treasury have to find around R1bn to repay the interest on our national debt. If it ever happened one day that they couldn’t manage, then we would be, as a country, what you and I would be if we missed a car payment. Buggered.

So while Treasury boffins are busy making sure policemen, teachers and nurses get paid every month by the broken government departments they work for, it’d  be pretty normal for them to wonder why this all has to be so difficult.

De Lange77:4 reports that prescriptions on asset allocation usually come in when something is not working in the economy of a country: in South Africa it is essentially the failed economic policy of the ANC which is causing chaos and therefore the main reason for a further misuse of the tax-payers’ money by imposing prescribed assets (to stave off IMF intervention for a while). The looting of the prescribed assets is unlikely to boost the economy in the long term. But one thing is clear: after the pensions are gobbled up in three years’ time, what other money will be left as cash heist for the Ramaphosa regime to balance its daily budget? Nothing will be left by an Eskom, an SABC and an SAA far down in a large black hole. Can this be prosperity?

Andrew Canter72, the CIO of Future Growth Asset Management, points out that there is only one solution for the ANC regime’s failed economical management since 1994 (a system which pension grabbing and nationalisation cannot solve)72:3:

“There is no magic bullet with prescription, there is no magic bullet with the IMF, there is no magic bullet from anywhere except to run the government better”.

3.3.1.13. Bad Donald Trump and bad USA

The foolishness of Ramaphosa’s Third Sona not only echoed his lack know-how when it comes to constructive political thinking, planning and action to bring economic and political solutions to a country still mired in the “bad” ANC’s politics of the past, but also demonstrated his many shortcomings as a supposed executive leader. This is well borne out by the controversial policy on international relations he has adopted and practices blindly. One issue that stands out is his inability to solve xenophobia inside the country as well as outside our borders. As in many African countries marred by a revolutionary government, he terminated any prospects to create prosperity for present-day South Africa.

His approach to our relations with the USA can only be described as a major mistake, exemplified by his gratuitous criticism levelled against Donald Trump and his Administration for their stance and handling of the USA-China-Huawei matter.24,85-88

This curious international political stumbling by Ramaphosa persuaded Douglas Gibson85, the veteran politician, to write85:6:

Has President Cyril Ramaphosa been studying at the Zindzi Mandela School of Diplomacy?

His recent gratuitous insults to the US and his sucking up to China makes no sense against the background of his overriding aim of the New Dawn: focusing on the economy, attracting foreign direct investment, fostering growth and thus creating jobs for our unemployed millions.

Ramaphosa seems to display gross ignorance of diplomacy, given that he twice confusedly made statements at a world forum that: 1) “…the US is jealous that a Chinese company called Huawei has outstripped it when it comes to 5G technology” (G20 Summit), and: 2) “… the US has been unable to imagine a better future which goes beyond 4-plus-1G (referring to 5G connectivity) at the 4IR-conference. Besides his ostensible lack of an understanding of possible communication manipulation and espionage by China via Huawei, he does not take into account the profound and hidden struggle for hegemony as the USA and China compete for power. He missed out on the benefits of being good friends with both.85-90

However much some pro-Ramaphosa economists try to minimise the impact of such statements with counter-arguments, e.g. that the AGOA agreement has been by untouched by Ramaphosa’s negative rhetoric, the future outcomes of Ramaphosa’s verbal attacks on the USA will only be learnt in time. Other arguments in support of Ramaphosa’s clumsy rhetoric have been advanced, such as88:1: “China’s economy is forecast to surpass the USA in size and that the Chinese are probably more committed in terms of investing in South Africa than the USA”, but are unrelated to the matter. Those are purely political and opportunistic postulations as to a situation far away in the future. The Chinese, on the contrary, have already shown caution regarding South Africa’s unstable politics. In addition, China is an astute investor in Africa, making sure that its own interests in obtaining raw materials are placed first, so that many African countries have already become disillusioned with apparent Chinese largesse when it comes to investments.85-88

Gibson and other political commentators show precisely how Ramaphosa (undoubtedly noticed too by his loyal and pro-Chinese economists in the media and in politics) is committing a major error in selecting the correct country as a future partner to improve our economy (and is making a fool of himself in the Western countries’ eyes). The fact that must basically only count in the making and the upkeep of international relationships, is the trade amount between countries. Data show out that the total RSA-USA-trade for 2018 was as much as $18,9 billion, while between January and October 2018 South Africa had a favourable trade surplus of around R7,9 billion with the USA. This means we sold more to them than they did to us. During the same period South Africa had a hugely unfavourable trade deficit of R96,85-billion with China, meaning we bought far more from China than that they bought from us. Regarding investments in South Africa, the fact is that American investmens in South Africa total R129 billion as against China’s R89,9-billion.86-89

Ramaphosa’s rash attack on the USA forced Gibson85 to put forward the question85:6: “Is there a benefit, other than the ideological satisfaction of poking Trump in the eye?” Thankfully the seasoned politician Gibson, in enlightening us on Ramaphosa’s behaviour, supplies us with a good answer85:6: “But then, there is scarcely a dictator in the world for whom the government does not have a warm feeling and scarcely a democratic Western country that the ANC really like.” The ANC regime’s intimate association with BRICS confirms Gibson’s statement.85

The editor91 of the Sunday Times of 7 June 2019, seemingly also perplexed about Ramaphosa’s rhetoric, asks91:16:

One wonders about the game Ramaphosa is playing, given that the US remains a significant trading partner with SA. Also curious is the extent to which Ramaphosa seemed to be at odds with his own trade & industry minister, Ebrahim Patel  who seems to have adopted a more cautious and even-handed approach in juggling SA’s relations with the worlds two economic superpowers.

Thankfully it seems as if Ramaphosa’s Minister Patel has some political tact and diplomacy, and most of all economic knowhow and political intelligence, when he said that South Africa needed every partner in the world in order to deal with our many economic ills like joblessness.91 Also Ramaphosa’s special envoy to attract foreign investments, Phumzile Langeni87, shows excellent economic skills in circumlocuting Ramaphosa’s mumble when he said that South Africa was continuing to court the USA aggressively.

What Ramaphosa further overlooked in his attack on Donald Trump and the USA, are the benefits that the current African Growth and Opportunity Act (ACOA) of the USA, bring to South Africa. It is indeed a lifeline for South Africa. Any negative political signals to the USA could and would trigger negative actions, which could be devastating for many of our sectors that are benefitting under AGOA. It can bring serious socio-economical consequences. Although AGOA expires in 2025, it does not mean that the Trump-administration, in its growing protectionist stance and isolation of hostile countries, cannot act immediately against hard-line culprits. It must be noted that SA’s exports in industry and agricultural produce to the US have increased threefold since the implementation of AGOA in 2000. It seems to have passed Ramaphosa by that South Africa’s wine-exporting industry, which is totally intertwined with our tourist industry, has enjoyed the largest export growth to the USA under AGOA. Last year AGOA is estimated to have directly contributed up to R32,7 billion of our GDP and that as many as 310 000 jobs of mostly unskilled and semi-skilled workers are dependent of it. The 2018 biennial report on the AGOA implementation shows that the treaty is in our favour, such as the export of transportation equipment to the US which rose from $76 miillion (R1,12-billion at today’s rate)  in 2001 to $1,3-billion in 2017 while it added more than 30 000 jobs here.

Regarding China, Wandile Sihloho, head of agribusiness research at the Agricultural Business Camber of SA, said that South Africa was indeed a small player in Chinese agricultural exports. Our exports, standing at R9,5-billion, was only a 0,5% share of the value of Chinese agricultural imports in 2018. Chances are also slim that our agricultural exports would be increased to China in the near future. In the absence of AGOA or any other agreement, South Africa’s exports would face reciprocal tariffs in the USA as laid down by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in the form of Most Favoured Nation tariffs, warned Professor Nhlanhla Mbatha of Unisa’s Graduate School of Business Leadership.86-88,91

It must thus be noted, with specific reference to Ramaphosa’s attacks on the USA’s policies, both in his personal and public capacity as state president, that AGOA’s benefits and outcomes depend almost entirely on decisions of the USA and that it could be quickly reviewed following on his anti-American rhetoric. Indeed, there has recently been a review of the USA’s African development programme after questions were raised on hostile countries active inside it. The following sub-Saharan African countries do not currently benefit from AGOA: Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea (graduated from GSP), Eritrea, Mauritania, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Zimbabwe.

Although Ramaphosa’s term as President may be short-lived, the loss of AGOA’s benefits to South Africa before 2025 could be devastating, as many of the ANC regime’s other foolish actions since 1994 had brought devastating outcomes.86,91

Although it is speculated that the egregious anti-American rhetoric by Ramaphosa will not affect the AGOA agreement and that the September 2019 so-called “draft plan between South Africa and the US to develop Ramaphosa’s so-called vision” will assure fruits in terms of AGOA and the US’s new Prosper Africa initiative, only time will show. The statement, as formulated by South Africa and the US after they held their tenth annual bilateral forum (ABF) in September, ran as follows92:6: “Both sides agreed to continue to nurture the relationship.” Such a terse statement is far from a declaration of sincere brotherhood and trust and an agreement of sole cooperation without making the Chinese a third bed-fellow for the ANC in this already “unhappy” relationship.92 Neither does there seem to be any sense in the pro-Ramaphosas’ argument that China was more important than the USA to South Africa because “China’s economy is forecast to surpass the USA in size and that the Chinese are probably more committed in terms of investing in South Africa than the USA”. This Ramaphosa assessment lacks soundness and can come at a price for South Africa.88

The short-sightedness of the Ramaphosa regime flows from its lack of sound business principles. But it goes deeper: It reflects an insidious brotherhood with China and revolutionary countries which has poisoned its economic thinking. Moreover, increasingly present in the ANC regime’s mindset is a hostile anti-Western stance. Its lack of influence within countries that form part of the Western sphere of influence is already reflected by the Ramaphosa regime’s less than successful effort in 2018 to secure $100 million of investments without strict conditions for South Africa in the Middle East, in countries such as Abu Dhabi, the United Emirates, etc., that are all pro-Western and pro-American.44

The billionaire Johann Rupert44, quoted by Pieter du Toit44, author of the book entitled “The Stellenbosch Mafia: Inside the Billionaire’s Club”, has some incisive opinions on the stubborn folly and revolutionary thinking of the ANC’s top brass, stretching back 107 years, which had not only led to their failed $100-million call for “good” investments in 2018, but reflects a financial-investment failure continuing to this day. Rupert states44:4-5:

Wat die Suid-Afrikaners nie verstaan het op hul beleggingstoer na die Golf nie, is dat Ramaphosa se regering sal sukkel om vriende te maak met die VAE en Saoedi-Arabië as hulle voortgaan om die VSA, Brittanje en Israel swart te smeer.

Sonder die VSA se beskerming is die VAE niks nie. Hulle weet dit. So werk hulle saam met Saoedi-Arabië, Israel en die VSA teen Iran.

En nou kom ons, hoed in die hand, om geld by hulle te vra, terwyl ons die VSA en Brittanje soos vuilgoed behandel?

The Chinese, on the contrary, already show signs of reaching saturation point with South Africa’s unstable politics, labour unrest and violent protests. As alluded to above, China is usually the winner when it comes to its investments in Africa, and not the African states where those investments take place.

Ramaphosa continues to side with the BRICS countries (as Jacob Zuma did), which may in the end cost the country dearly. Ramaphosa’s actions start to reveal how the ANC’s concept of constitutional democracy reminds one more and more of the one superficially adhered to by leaders of Soviet Russia and Communist China. Since 1994 in South Africa, it has also been the “party” that is the “state” and which rules through a manipulated and watered-down electoral system and an even autocratic democratic-centralism. Power is concentrated in its politburo from where the secretary general and president of the ANC as two members of the Top Six and the eighty members of the ANC NEC determine the policy and implementation of the state affairs outside Parliament. The main reason for the country’s currently failing economy and a make-believe instead of a real prosperity is directly rooted in a quasi-democratic system that has been corrupted from within.93

3.3.1.14. Bettering the ANC-regime

For the “government to be run better” by the ANC regime seems to be a political analyst’s dream, but a nightmare for a bank manager at risk of losing other people’s good money as “loans” to the ANC in an attempt to better it. Schuitema94 sees the chaotic economics to be seated in so-called “takers” by specifically naming South Africans as a “nation of takers” — an internalised cognitive tradition which is not easily erased from a nation’s mindset. The misused and under-used status of our people — of which the Apartheid regime and even more prominently the ANC have been guilty — led to poorly developed people, wealth disparities and structural imbalances, together with an economy that could easily become the host for a parasitical political elite inside a revolutionary regime which presented itself as the saviours of the suppressed Blacks of pre-1994. Inside the post-1994 pseudo-democracy, with its misleading, opportunistic political aims and intentions, self-gain has overtaken the minds of the elite as well as the poor. This debased cognition is growing, turning into looting and avarice that are negatively impacting economic management, as well as causing social and personal misbehaviour. Such entrenched negative elements cannot easily be rooted out, in an effort to improve the economy. The fact is that these entrenched elements are permanent parts of the ANC’s established Marxist-Leninist ideology, which is maintained and implemented daily by means of the ANC’s democratic-centralism that does not allow the individual to deviate from his prescribed path and ideology, and which makes a rehabilitation of the South African economy nearly impossible, as long as the ANC remains in power.94

Helen Zille67 too, after studying the political system and economics of the ANC, postulates that the reason why  true prosperity has not been reached since 1994 in South Africa and why there can never be such prosperity in the future if the ANC stays in power, is be found in the ANC’s democratic-centralism and Marxist-Leninist political ideology, together with its dogma of the National Democratic Revolution (NDR) which it inherited from its close association with the South African Communist Party (SACP). Sustaining this ANC political inclination is its pyramidal or hierarchical power structurue with the ANC’s politburo (based on its Marxist-Leninist-ideology) exclusively in charge (on top). The politburo, consisting of the autocratic and despotic Top Six, the eighty NEC members and the secretary general, is the only executive body that may set policies and take decisions in terms of the resolutions taken at the party’s national conferences (attended by more or less 4 000 delegates from all the ANC branches countrywide). This politburo controls and manages the ANC party and every member, and by extension the ANC regime and the South African state.67

South Africa’ economic problems are a product of the ANC politburo’s power structure and its obedience to Marxism-Leninism. Focussing on the supposed prosperity and the false future economic growth as propagated to innocent and uninformed South Africans by the ANC’s top brass (politburo) during their daily promises of rehabilitating the South African state post-May 2019, it must be noted that its Marxist-Leninist politics never means allocating prosperity to the individual citizen but only to its politburo and thus the ANC elite. The Marxist-Leninist ANC started state capture in 1994 under Nelson Mandela and it was refined by the Jacob Zuma regime. It is still current practice by the Ramaphosa regime and Ramaphosa’s economic gurus such as Gordhan, notwithstanding their so-called “political virtue” and sweet-sounding “democratisation speeches”.67

That the Ramaphosa regime is still subscribing today to the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist politics is well illustrated by the ongoing appointment of incomptetent ANC cadres and tainted ANC top cronies in executive positions as required and prescribed by its politburo, clearly not with the intention to heal the economy or to deliver prosperity or to bring clean government. The ANC’s Marxist-Leninist foundation will never allow its political system to be changed or to be improved. It did not change under Mbeki or Zuma and will not change under Ramaphosa the Good. His many commissions on state capture, his fingering of Jacob Zuma as a kind of political and economic culprit or his cornering of the public protector as the perpetrator of improper “prosecutions” of him and Gordhan, represent short-term window dressings to keep the Marxist-Leninist ANC on track to rule South Africa. The ANC leaders, deeply marinated in revolutionary politics, know all too well that an ANC without a Marxist-Leninist foundation would be dead and so would their own political careers.

Inside the Marxist-Leninist tradition of the ANC (as showed by the history of the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Cuba, etc.) we find the primary concept: he who controls the economy controls the politics; and he who controls the politics controls the economy. Mandela knew it, Mbeki knew it, Zuma knew it, Ramaphosa knows it, Magashule knows it, Mabuza knows it and Gordhan knows it. All Marxist-Leninist disciples know it. Intertwined “political economies” as Marxists fondly call them, are the ideal for nation-states presided over by autocrats and despotic emperors. The ANC has nearly perfected this ideal, their dream.67

Zille67 presents an excellent analysis of how successfully the ANC’s leaders since 1994 have masterfully upheld a public image of democracy, while at the same time nurturing Marxism-Leninism in order to unleash at any time a full national-democratic revolution on the country. Undoubtedly our presently failing economy and governance are a direct outcome of the ANC’s planned national-democratic revolution, making any constructive bettering of our economy at this stage far-fetched. Zille writes67:7:

Al die ondersoeke en kommissies sal uiteindelik ‘n mors van tyd en geld wees as hulle nie die fundamentele ontwerpfout, wat aan die kern van al ons problem lé, uitwys nie: die NDR.

Dit is egter omwaarskynlik dat dit ooit sal gebeur en daarom sal ons aanhou om langsamerhand te misluk.

Te veel Suid-Afrikaners is verblind deur die oortuiging dat die goeie ouens die wa deur die drif kan sleep — gegrond op ‘n beleidsraamwerk wat dit onmoontlik maak. Dit is soos om te glo dat ‘n bevoegde vlieërnier ‘n Boeing 737 Max in vryval kan red. Selfs die wêreld se beste vlieëniers kan nie ‘n vliegtuig met ‘n fundamentele ontwerpfout in die lug hou nie.

Two indicators, or rather truths, are clearly related to Zille’s67 opinion above. Firstly, South Africa experienced from day-one with Mandela’s presidency the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist politics which would activate at the right time its national-democratic revolution such as the grabbing of land and the nationalisation of the Reserve Bank, etc. The radicalism of the Freedom Charter was watered down tacitly for politically opportunistic reasons by Nelson Mandela in 1994. Certain pre-steps were first needed, creating a slow, well-disguised descent into autocracy and a systematic sabotage of the economy and the administration of the country, to prepare the political terrain. Secondly, the process to activate the ANC’s national Marxist-Leninist revolution came out of the closet in December 2017 with the arrival of the ambition-driven Ramaphosa and Magashule, as well as their ANC’s instruction to finally implement the radicalism of the Freedom Charter.4,95-97

The ANC’s Marxist-Leninist organisational structure, derived from Soviet Russia and Communist China’s politico- economic system, persuaded the political-veteran Douglas Gibson93 to refer to the existing South African system as a crypto-party dictatorship intentionally set up to make a Western-style democracy and economy fail, while the favoured politico-economic system of the Marxist-Leninist ANC leaders is kept in place.93

Jones95 evaluated the prosperity of a country from a similar viewpoint as Zille (and thus the possibility to improve its economy when adversely affected) in terms of the driving of the economy by a democratic party under a community leadership versus a crypto-party dictatorship. To be able to do this, is it firstly important to compare true democracies which mostly reflect real prosperity and sound economic policies, with semi-autocracies to full autocracies which seldom show prosperity — or as in present-day Venezuela — hold up “pretended” prosperity as a front. Secondly, included in this analysis, one should look at the political alliances of a country with other countries as a clear barometer to confirm prosperity versus economic chaos. As a measurement instrument Jones uses an evaluation guideline on democracies versus autocracies in 2019, and South Africa’s position in it. Although Jones writes that democracy worldwide still rules, his evaluation bears out that since 1994 as many as 75 countries worldwide have moved in the direction of autocratisation. In 2017 alone, 24 countries became autocracies. In comparision, there are only 24 countries in 2019 showing positive tendencies toward democratisation, while 53% of the world’s total countries still qualify as democracies.95

South Africa’s association with BRICS shows how we are slipping away from democracy (notwithstanding how much we try to praise our so-called “good” Constitution and democracy) and our decline into utter poverty and a lack of prosperity. Jones’s95 article refers to research by two Swedish political scientists who currently see a decline in democracy world-wide:

In their fascinating new academic study, two Swedish political scientists, Anna Lührmann and Staffan Lindberg, point out that we are in the sixth chapter of the world’s democratic history. A third wave of democratic decline has hit us — the largest to date.

Among the many countries that have autocratised (in other words, slipped away from democracy) over the past two to three decades are India, Russia and Venezuela. Brazil could also be included.

Because of South Africa’s association with BRICS and countries that seem to form part of increasing autocratisation, we should take it as a serious warning of our imminent decline to the extreme junk status of a Venezuela or a Zimbabwe. Not only are the outward signs of prosperity in South Africa chimeral, but we might be on a precipice of losing even those vestiges of prosperity we still have. Jones95 quotes Anna Lührmann and Staffan Lindberg who sound the following warning95:30:

About a third of all autocratisation episodes … started during a democratic dispensation. Almost all of the latter … led to the country turning into an autocracy. This should give us a great pause in the spectre of the current third wave of autocratisation. Very few episodes of autocratisation starting in democracies have ever been stopped before countries become autocracies.

The innocent voter is mostly misled by the so-called “credibility of elections, the independence of courts and the freedom enjoyed by the opposition parties”, but there is much more to the issue that is not noted correctly. The loss of political and economical freedom take mostly time and is well-planned by the autocrat. Jones informs us95:30:

This shift away from democracy to autocracy is sometimes hidden because it does not necessarily take place overnight as, for example, with a coup. Nowadays, countries are gradually moving in this direction — often in a way that appears to be democratic.

Jones’s95 description of autocracy, strongly in line with Zille’s67 view of a Marxist-Leninist ANC at present ruling South Africa, is confirmed by our imperfect electoral system and our law-makers’ elections that bear similarities to the election process in many autocracies. (Recall again that the ANC regime of today was chosen in May 2019 as ruler by only 28% of the eligible voters, with 51% of eligible voters withholding their votes). South Africa is undoubtedly not one of the 24 so-called true democracies and it seems that the country has moved since 1994, together with as many as 75 countries worldwide, in the direction of autocracy.

Noting the growing autocracy in South Africa, driven by Marxist-Leninist politics, and pointed out by Zille67, Gibson85,93 and Jones95, it is clear why the country’s economy is running into serious trouble after 25 years. On the other hand, it is also evident that this economic approach is favoured and consonant with ANC power because it fits into its political planning for a future South Africa. Bettering, done in terms of Western capitalist principles, may therefore be ruled out.

In light of the above, Munusamy98 and Taylor99 are correct in writing that there are no easy paths to rebuilding or bettering our broken state and to change divisive attitudes in our society. Indeed, those ANC delinquents who are fighting attempts to clean up the corrupted state and set it aright, are all people attempting to escape prosecution and to keep their ill-gotten gains within the protection offered by the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist political model. These political crooks know how to attack the pillars of good and true democracy. To better our economy would need more than “cultured” democracy, it needs an equally robust defence in order to rescue South Africa from its current morass. Munusamy puts it clearly98:18:

“There is no such thing as an idealistic revolution [or an idealistic bettered economy]. Real change takes strong leadership and a bare-knuckle fight [for a clean regime]”.

Taylor99 writes on the absolute requirement to effect constructive changes to the economy, like the implementation of austerity (which also includes changes to the personal, political and social lifestyle of every citizen and most of all the ANC elite), all of which form part of a reality that the ANC desperately avoids. Within the current politico-economic chaos, the ANC has no plan or intention to change, essentially because the regime’s elite does not want to put the nation’s interests before theirs. Political reality is manipulated by the government through personal attacks and baseless declarations, reflecting firstly that lies became the truth for them, and secondly that they cannot and will not do anything constructive to the economy that would contradict their Marxist-Leninist ideology. There is no silver bullet that can re-establish the country’s economy besides a new, better government.

Perhaps because of Scandinavian financial and logistical support for ANC during its terrorist phase prior to 1994, it seems to look at the “Scandinavian model” of marrying capitalism and socialism, otherwise known as “social economics”. The journalist and researcher Ivo Vegter83 very successfully unmasks the ANC politburo’s rejection of exclusive capitalism in favour of so-called inclusive capitalism (or more correctly: their communistic socialism which never ever worked in the long term, as evidenced by Zimbabwe, Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, Cambodia, etc.). Vegter points out that the so-called “social economics” of Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland) are far away from the ANC’s ideas. Scandinavian democratic socialism is just not in the ANC’s fabric. However much it tries, it just does not have the integrity to better itself in any way to be in the class of the Scandinavian countries.

Vegter83, referring to the findings of the Fraser Institute World-index for Economic Freedom, shows that the Scandinavian countries are at the top of the list of the world’s free countries because of their sound judicial and financial systems, protected property rights, balanced immigration and international trade policies, etc. (In comparison, on the Fraser Institute World-index, South Africa under the ANC dropped from 82nd place in 2008 to 110th place in 2016, confirming our impaired Marxist-Leninist economics).10,83

The “ideal” ANC socialist state (the model of the Scandinavian countries of which Ramaphosa undoubtedly dreamed many times in his Third Shona) is a sociopolitical model which the revolutionary and selfish ANC-regime never can or will master. Vegter points out in terms of the Fraser Institute’s report and guideline what it takes to top the list as the Scandinavian countries do, reporting as follows83:4-5:

Die verslag wys dat nasies in die boonste kwartiel van ekonomiese vryheid ‘n gemiddelde bruto binnelandse produk (BBP) per capita het wat ses keer groter is as dié van lande in die onderste kwart.  Die gemiddelde inkomste van die armste 10% van die bevolking in die vryste lande is sewe keer hoër as in die onvry lande s’n, en selfs hoër as die gemiddelde per capita-inkomste van die lande wat die minste ekonomiese vryheid het.

In die boonste kwart ervaar slegs 1,8% van die bevolking armoede, teenoor 27,2%  in die onderste kwart. In die vry lande sterf minder babas en leef mense langer. Politieke en burgerlike vryhede is meer in die ekonomiese vry lande as in die onvry lande. Geslagsgelykheid is groter. Mense is gelukkiger.

The question is thus: why is South Africa under the ANC not at the top of the list, most of its people poor, a government hijacked in so-called “state capture” and is the country waiting for its bankruptcy to be declared? Vegter gives us a clear, precise answer: Because these so-called socialist Scandinavian countries used their wealth constructively and with integrity to create and to establish comprehensive, healthy welfare-states that are functioning politically effectively and correctly.8

Dr. Frans Cronjé100, the head of the Institute of Racial Relations (IRR) attributes the significantly lower evaluation of South Africa by the Fraser Institute to the effects of one clear cause: the utterly bad leadership of the ANC that cannot by any means be improved. The Fraser Institute‘s ranking is simply confirming what we know already: the ANC’s appalling leadership, the evidence of its failed communist-style socialism, revolutionary, radical and delinquent thinking, planning and actions, as well as the dishonest inclination to self-enrichment by the ANC’s elite must lead to eventual economic decline. This entrenched delinquent mentality of the ANC  was again confirmed by the absolute praises sung by both Thabo Mbeki and Cyril Ramaphosa regarding the mass murderer, thief, and despot Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe at his funeral. They lionised him as a so-called good man, a man of integrity, a man who knew how to reign and a man who had benefited his people; notwithstanding undisputed evidence which contradicts and rejects such a view.83,100 The Fraser Institute knows the ANC regime and its post-1994 reign of South Africa just too well when it negatively evaluated it with the number 110 position on its list. As Cronjé muses100:6:

Dit is sekerlik nou vir selfs die grootmoedigste en redelikste waarnemers duidelik dat die ANC ‘n inherent bose organisaie is en dat dit die plig van alle ordentlike Suid-Afrikaners is om alles in hul vermoë te doen om hom van sy mag te ontneem.

Cronjé’s reference to the ANC as a so-called “inherently evil organisation”, redirects us to the many public and media requests that the ANC’s elite should improve the economy through better rule. But in this context the most basic question has so far not a single time been asked: is there a single soul in the ANC’s present leadership to better the ANC itself, let alone to better the economy of the country? If we are look at the failed presidential histories of Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma, the answer is no. Taking note of Cyril Ramaphosa’s indecisive presidential term so far, the popular narrative seems to be68:21: “…that the president is ineffective, isolated, out of touch and overwhelmed by the fightback in his party”. Taking into account the conclusion of Malala68 that reads68:21: “…Ramaphosa and his team have a 55% chance of suceeding and turning the country’s fortunes around”, it would be foolish to believe that the ANC can better itself, or the country. The ANC’s saviour, who should have a 100% rating, has only obtained more or less 50%. It means the last man standing, went down. There is no leadership in the present-day ANC to do good for itself or the nation. Above all, the reconstruction of the country should be a first demand and priority. Present arguments that it should be a requirement for the ANC regime to better the economy, because of its large parliamentary majority, are not persuasive72. The ANC is leaderless; its politics is too contaminated to let it loose in a future democracy. On the other hand, at this stage to oust the ANC from Parliament by a motion of no confidence or a coup is not feasible. But something must be done as soon as possible to create  a clean government to improve the country’s economy and the people’s quality of life, without a disturbance of the political and societal peace. For Professor William Gumede1 of Wits one of the best ways to install an effective and clean government which can guarantee prosperity, is to educate our voters with knowledge of their civil interests and rights and the mass empowerment they enjoy through their votes: meaning thus to vote the best lawmakers into Parliament and the best party to be the ruler.

Gumede1, on a “better government” that could improve the country’s economy and drag it out of its present despondency, indicates in some way how the mass of Black voters should change their behaviour in electing a government that would act in their interest, and not in the interest of the corrupt elite. What Gumede should have said to us is that the ANC is “irreparable”, a “misfit” as a political party and never intended to bring prosperity to the mass of poor anyway. There is no sense in trying to better it. All the pages and pages written on possibilities to “rehabilitate” the ANC, is inappropriate and inapplicable. There is only one solution to the matter: the voters must themselves reject the ANC at the ballot box. Only after that and under a new regime with integrity, can the process of bettering South Africa be started. Gumede writes1:18:

For the cycle of black poverty to end, poor blacks must stop voting for instance for independence movements and leaders just because of their past opposition to colonialism and apartheid or their current “radical” rhetoric, regardless of their record in government.

People will also have to stop supporting leaders purely because they are loudly against the hated “others”.

In the long term, quality mass education, societal opposition to false beliefs and better quality leaders and political parties are crucial.

Poor blacks should support black leaders because of their competence, behaviour and values. Within black communities, more imagination, maturity and forward-looking approaches are needed to tackle the enduring impact of the trauma of colonialism and apartheid, at both the individual and the societal level.

4. Conclusions

I flew into SA in the second week of spring. This time the new season did not herald hope and renewal. It was the spring of despondency. The country was plummeted into the foulest mood I had experienced among my fellow countrymen in decades. The crime statistics were horrendous. Economic indicators showed we are a country in crisis. The currency was plumbing new depths. — Justice Malala, Sunday Times, 20 October 2019

Studying prosperity in present-day South Africa, the mood reflected does not differ in any way from the one Malala met in September 2019 when he had arrived from the USA and had described it as despondency. All the indicators put forward in this article around the concept prosperity, varying from the availability of jobs, unemployment, business trust, political harmony, leadership, willingness to change, governmental international relations and alliances, etc., showed that South Africa was not going to get more prosperous. On the contrary, there are signs that current South African politics is mired in an autocratic political system whereby the ANC’s previously hidden Marxist-Leninist politics, is starting to steer its policies. The country’s economy has been subject to the ANC’s delinquent intentions as far back as in the days of Nelson Mandela. Here, as in Venzuela, the state is starting to have a firm grip on all facets of our people’s lives — from where we live and what we eat, to how much we earn. We are more in trouble than we think.

There are no signs that the pre-May 2019 election promises of Cyril Ramaphosa and his ANC regime have in any way rectified the ills of South Africa so far. The economy is still negatively impacted, while the ANC’s politics is indecisive. The country can indeed be described as being in a state of disarray, or better, as Malala described it, despondency. The presence of a Chávez-Madura-elite is here too, and the feeling of a Venezuela in the making, might be real.

In the forthcoming Article 13, entitled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective”(13)”, the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of the mandate as ruler it received in the 8 May 2019 election, will be further evaluated.

References

  1. Gumede W. Traumatised black voters perpetuate their own poverty. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 18.
  2. Louw, GP. 2018. Ensovoort, 38 (2018): 7(2): 1-36: An appraisal of the executive political leaders and regimes of South Africa: 1652 to 2018. Part 4: A basic checklist for the appraisal of executive political leaders and regimes.
  3. Mthombothi B. The irony of burning things to show your anger, then voting those you’re angry with back into power. Sunday Times. 2019 April 7; p. 19.
  4. Saunderson-Meyer W. South Africans’ optimism has shrivelled on the vine. Saturday Citizen (Opinion). 2019 July 13; p. 12.
  5. Hunter Q. ANC ‘worse than before Ramaphosa”. Sunday Times (News), 2019 March 31; p. 6.
  6. Mde V. Forget Sona, the main act is May. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 Febr. 8-14; p. 19.
  7. Mkokeli S. Fixation on one man risks a swift return to the Zuma years. Sunday Times. 2019 Apr.7; p. 19.
  8. Khumalo K. S&P: Ramaphosa victory will boost growth. The Star (Business Report). 2019 Apr. 10; p. 15.
  9. Brown J. Will South Africa avoid a recession? City Press. 2019 June 6; p. 3.
  10. Dhlamini M. BBP-syfer wys vrot besluite sit land op die verkeerde pad. Rapport (Sake). 2019 June 9; p. 4.
  11. Anderson A. Liquidations skyrocket as economy crawls. Business Day (National). 2019 May 28; p. 3.
  12. Gernetzky K. Junk status fears leave rand reeling. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 1.
  13. Ngalonkulu M. South Africans is debt slaves. The Citizen (Business). 2019 Oct.; p. 19.
  14. Millions caught in SA’s debt trap. The Citizen (Business). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 23.
  15. Gillward A. SA’s revolutionary distraction. The Citizen (News). 2019 Aug. 22; p. 10.
  16. Jones C. Wanneer die wolwe wen. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 July 21; pp. 8-9.
  17. Rossouw J. Dié revolusie is kolonisering. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 July 21; p. 7.
  18. Saba A. No easy childhood for SA’s youth. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 June 7 to 13; p.17.
  19. Absolom E. Feed the hunger disaster. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 7 to 13; p. 28.
  20. Heystek M. Is SA op die pad van Zim? Rapport (Sake). 2019 June 9; p. 3.
  21. Battle for the Bank is a power play by the financially ignorant. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 9; p. 18.
  22. Derby R. What’s behind the new Bank attack? Sunday Times (Business). 2019 June 9; p. 8.
  23. Khumalo A. Decisive moments at which Ramaphosa must not yield. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 June 9; p. 2.
  24. Munusamy R. No leadership to undo damaging anti-SA sentiment. Sowetan (Analysis). 2019 Sept. 11; p. 11.
  25. Speckman A. ‘From paralysis to sabotage’ – ANC infighting hobbles SA. Sunday Times (Business). 2919 June 9; p. 5.
  26. Strydom TJ. Rand dives, recession looms. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 June 9; p. 1.
  27. Leon T. Cyril should be as ruthless as Boris with his enemies. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 28; p. 20.
  28. Mathe T. Jobs won’t soar till the economy does. Mail & Guardian (Business). 2019 June 28 to July 4; p. 23.
  29. Speckman A. Rescue could cut 3,000 jobs at Group Five. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 June 23; p. 5.
  30. Kruger A. How government really spent tax. The Citizen (Business).2019 July 10; p. 22.
  31. Willemse R. Jeug moeg vir fiksie oor werkskepping. Beeld (By). 2019 June 22; p. 3.
  32. Smit S. Ministry to labour for job creation. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 June 7 to 13; p. 16.
  33. Makhanya M. Populists on your stoep. City Press (Voices). 2019 June 6; p. 2.
  34. Child K, Pheto B. No job, no money – who’s next. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Aug.11; p. 6.
  35. Pheto B. Down jobless street. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Aug.11; p. 6/31-Willemse R. Jeug moeg vir fiksie oor werkskepping. Beeld (By). 2019 June 22; p. 3.
  36. Fick A. Skills deficit undermines 4IR promises. Mail & Guardian (Comment & Analysis). 2019 Aug. 30 to Sept 5; p. 21.
  37. Molopyane M. SA’s plan may be delusional. The Citizen (Business). 2019 July 19; p. 25.
  38. Taylor T. If we don’t become the masters of our future, we’ll doomed to the salt mines of 2060. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Oct. 13; p. 20.
  39. Sokuto B. Technology holds key to Africa growth. The Citizen (News). 2019 Oct. 17; p. 4.
  40. Marrian N. President snaps out of dream. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 28 to July 4; p. 27.
  41. Makinana A, Umraw A. Spike in job losses blamed on state. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Aug.25; p. 4.
  42. Barron C. ‘Act or SA will fall over fiscal cliff’. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 6.
  43. De Lange R. Public-Private Growth initiative projects set for takeoff. City Press. 2019 June 30; p. 4.
  44. Du Toit P. ‘Wat SA regering nie kan begryp’. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 July 2; pp. 4-5.
  45. Peyper L. Steeds g’n plan vir Eskom-ontknoping. Rapport (Sake). 2019 Aug.25; p. 1.
  46. Strydom TJ. Look at our incredible shrinking country. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 July 28; p. 3.
  47. Ramaphosa C. Be part of building the South Africa we want. SundayTimes (News). 2019 June 23; p. 8.
  48. Ons wil droom van vis-en-tjips vir almal. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 June 23; p. 2.
  49. Time for dreaming is over, Mr President. There’s work to be done. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 23; p. 20.
  50. Hunter Q. Searching for the real Venezuela. Sunday Times (Insight). 2019 Sept. 1; p.11.
  51. De Lange J. NDZ het 1ste oor trein gedroom. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 June 23; p. 2.
  52. Zille H. Bepaal liefs self eie lot. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 June 9; p.7.
  53. Matthys D. China’s cash will boost Namibia’s economy City Press (Business). 2019 June 9; p. 4.
  54. NDP: Is South Africa meeting its targets? City Press. 2019 June 30; p. 4.
  55. Smit F. As babas ‘n land knak. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 11.
  56. Saunderson-Meyer W. Weaponised baby-making. Saturday Citizen. (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 10; p. 12.
  57. Endres J. ‘n Land se dodedans. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 June 23; pp. 4-5.
  58. Millions caught in SA’s debt trap. The Citizen (Business). 2019 Sept. 13; p. 23.
  59. Mnangagwa wants new currency, IMF loan. City Press. 2019 June; p. 3.
  60. Speckman A. Jaws drop at Tito’s privatisation plan. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Sept. 1; p. 4.
  61. Bruce P. Dare to bypass the Left and be waylaid by hypocrisy. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 1; p. 14.
  62. Davies K. Light at the end of Eskom tunnel? Mail & Guardian. 2019 Aug. 30 to Sept. 5; p. 3.
  63. De Lange J. Twis dreig oor Tito se plan. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 2.
  64. Joffe H, Speckman A. Economic panel to start work. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Sept 9; p. 1.
  65. Gumede W. This is no time for grand economic experiments. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 1; p. 16.
  66. Time to decide on Tito’s plan – and all those other plans. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 1; p. 14.
  67. Zille H. Suid-Afrika se ontwerpfout. Rapport (Weekliks) 2019 July 14; p. 7.
  68. Malala J. Don’t despair, Ramaphosa still represents hope. Sunday Time. 2019 Oct. 20; p. 21.
  69. Joffe H. Reserve Bank can do little about without structural reform. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct. 6; p. 2.
  70. Milapityana S. Is Nedlac the ideal forum to forge a new agenda for growth? Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Oct. 6; p. 20.
  71. Rakele R, January Y, Mukansi R. IMF bailout not wise – or needed. Mail & Guardian. (Business). 2019 Aug. 30 to Sept. 5; p.26.
  72. Kgosana C, Speckman A. ‘Divert pensions to stave off IMF. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 3.
  73. Speckman A. ‘Good governance means better GDP’. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct. 6; p. 3.
  74. Speckman A. Alarmist, but bailout might be a remedy. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 9.
  75. Peyper L. Staat het plan vir pensioene. Rapport (Sake). 2019 June 16; p. 1.
  76. Barron C. Peril looms for state pension fund. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Aug. 25; p. 7.
  77. De Lange R. Prescribed assets requirement may well hit pension savings. City Press. 2019 June 30; p. 4.
  78. Dis tyd vir besluite wat goed is vir more. Rapport (News). 2019 Aug. 25; p.2.
  79. Ka Nkosi S. When ignorance turns into a disruptor of policy modernisation. Business Report (Focus). 2019 June 12; p. 16.
  80. Kgosana C. Pension-grab plan ‘unjust and wrong’. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 5.
  81. Slabbert A. Pensioen: Cosatu sien ook rooi ligte. Rapport (News). 2019 Aug. 25; p. 4.
  82. Joffe H. Global indices and ratings agencies have got our number. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct. 13; p. 2.
  83. Vegter I. Verlief op ‘n gek idée. Rapport (Debat). 2019 Sept. 22; pp. 4-5.
  84. Joffe H. SA economy enters last chance saloon. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct. 13; p. 4.
  85. Gibson D. Be friends with most countries. The Star (Comments). 2019 July 9; p. 6.
  86. Mbatha NC. AGOA benefits of critical value for SA. The Star (Opinion). 2019 June 12; p. 8.
  87. Speckman A. SA juggles China, US interests in trade battle. Sunday Times (Business Times). 2019 July 7; p. 6.
  88. Speckman A. Cyril pans US, winks at China. Sunday Times (Business Times). 2019 July 7; p. 1.
  89. Eybers J. Trump en Huawei: ‘SA kan erg skade ly’. Rapport (Sake). 2019 July 21; p. 2.
  90. Hunter Q. Cyril backs China on Huawei. Sunday Times. 2019 June 30; pp. 1, 4.
  91. Goading the US to please China hardly seems the way for SA to grow trade. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 7; p. 16.
  92. Naki E. Cyril nets US support. Saturday Star (News). 2019 Sept. 28; p. 6.
  93. Gibson D. ANC is a liability. The Star (News). 2019 June 11; p. 19.
  94. Schuitema J. Crisis: Being a nation of ‘takers’ to blame. The Citizen (Business). 2019 Aug. 13; p. 24.
  95. Jones C. Democracy still rules – for now. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 21 to 27; p. 30.
  96. Marrian N. Fight against Magashule builds steam. Mail & Guardian (News). 2019 June 14 to 20; p. 6.
  97. Sokutu B. Cyril’s double-edged sword. The Citizen (Opinion). 2019 June 27; p. 12.
  98. Munusamy R. A bare-knuckle fight rather than fanciful philosophies is what we need now to secure the future of our country. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 18.
  99. Taylor T. Instead of politics we have endless attempts to manipulate political reality. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 18.
  100. Cronjé F. Met Mugabe-lof wys ANC hy is inherent boos. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 6.

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned; External peer-reviewed.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa.

UNSUITABLE TERMS AND INAPPROPRIATE WORDS

Please note that I, the author, am aware that the words Creole, Bantu, Kaffir, Native, Hottentot and Bushman are no longer suitable terms and are inappropriate (even criminal) for use in general speech and writing in South Africa (Even the words non-White and White are becoming controversial in the South African context). The terms do appear in dated documents and are used or translated as such in this article for the sake of historical accuracy. Their use is unavoidable within this context. It is important to retain their use in this article to reflect the racist thought, speech and writings of as recently as sixty years ago. These names form part of a collection of degrading names commonly used in historical writings during the heyday of apartheid and the British imperial time. In reflecting on the leaders and regimes of the past, it is important to foreground the racism, dehumanization and distancing involved by showing the language used to suppress and oppress. It also helps us to place leaders and their sentiments on a continuum of racism. These negative names do not represent my views and I distance myself from the use of such language for speaking and writing. In my other research on the South African populations and political history, I use Blacks, Whites, Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaners, Coloureds, KhoiSan (Bushmen), KhoiKhoi (Hottentots) and Boers as applicable historically descriptive names.

 

Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (11: Introduction)

Title: Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (11: Introduction)

Gabriel P Louw

iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093

Extraordinary Researcher, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Healthcare, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:

Prof. Dr. GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PU for CHE), DPhil (PU for CHE), PhD (NWU)

Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: Capability, desperate, evaluation, electorate, expropriation, journalism, marginalised, populist, probation, scenario, violence.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 11: 2

1. Background

During the post-May-2019-to-2024 parliamentary term of the ANC, certain political tendencies may be expected to emerge which would have a profound effect upon South Africa. Some may be described as positive, while others may be characterised as extremely negative with the inclination to produce unrest, anarchy and revolution. Post-May 2019 will not necessarily mean the beginning of a golden age in the South African republic, but neither does it mean that it would be impossible for the ANC to be rehabilitated. The installation of the new regime on 9 May 2019 portends two future periods under the ANC with clear outcomes that may bring dramatic changes in its policies and actions: the 2019-to-2022 period (from May 2019 until the national conference of the ANC in 2020), as well as the 2022-to-2024 period (national conference in 2020 until the next national elections in 2024).

The post-May 2019 period may turn out to be a kind of continuation of the pre-2019 system during which the ANC will again be the ruler with the same failures and misdemeanours of the pre-May-2019 period. But, there is the possibility of an emerging post-May political radicalism, such as land grabbing under the ANC (that may be effected together with the other radical parties like the EFF), which transform South Africa at last into the long-expected autocratic and failed country (which is far worst than a failed state) prophesied by conservative commentators. The period from 2019 to 2022 may be full of political intrigues, chaos and of power struggles between splinter groups of the ANC, further aggravated by radical small parties of the EFF calibre. Included herein would be the ongoing economic and social failures, problems with water and electricity, etc. And if this period does not have the potential to bring enough upheaval, unrest and revolution, there will follow the critical period from 2022 to 2024 during which new factions and political groupings may be formed inside and outside the ANC, which may vary from ultra-radicalism to ultra-conservatism. All of this may play out if the main problems of South Africa, such as comprehensive land reform, are not dealt with during the pre-2022 phase. Both these two periods and timeframes have their own uniqueness and may be intertwined, but, as mentioned, may also be seen as distinct and independent from each other. The denouement of each may steer South Africa into incapacity or success.

The line in South Africa between chaos, stability and order is thin. Justice Malala, a writer and commentator, tries hard to comfort South Africans in some way when he writes:

Politics is toxic everywhere in the world right now. The Democrats in the US are moving to impeach President Donald Trump. The UK is run by a buffoon whose ham-handed actions on Brexit continue to imperil Europe. Across the globe, politics are failing the citizenry. Nigerians do not trust President Muhammadu Buhari or the system he represents. South Africans are not the first people to be failed by politics and politicians and won’t be the last.1: 21

The successful execution of the post-2019 land-reform issue is undoubtedly dependent on the abilities, integrity and sound cognitive thinking, planning and implementation by a so-called “good” government, together with a “good” leadership in whom integrity and Solomon’s wisdom are essential characteristics. This means a regime that is not blindly on a path of “reaching the goal at any cost” but to effectively achieving an end-result regarding the matter, which would be a success. This requires a regime honestly serving the interests of all its people by following a well-drawn-up roadmap for an orderly land-reform initiative, and steering it into reality.

The essential question here is thus whether the ANC can be theoretically deemed a candidate or may be shortlisted and thus be considered to have the leadership potential to ensure the successful implementation and completion of the post-2019 plan on land expropriation.

The evaluation guidelines for political parties are:

  1.  Its general policies as well as specific positions on aspects such as respect for law and order, and the fighting of corruption, state capture, delinquent behaviour by its MPs and MPLs, including its top brass, as well as the party’s and its leaders’ views on land expropriation without compensation, etc., as put forward in its manifesto for the 2019 election;
  2. Public criticism for the period 1994 to 2019 in newspapers, etc., evaluated and expressed by political analysts, strategists and commentators on the party as a political organisation, its members’ and leaders’ behaviours and actions such as corruption, state capture, as well as the delinquency of MPs and MPLs, the leaders, their views on land expropriation without compensation, etc., as well as the party’s internal organisational conflicts, and controversial political, economic and social views and opinions.

1.1. Introduction

This study is a continuation of the previous article (Article 10, titled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 2—The DA in perspective (10)”.

The focus of Article 11 is on the ANC as the elected present-day regime. The article is part of a series of articles on the ANC, published under the title: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3 —The ANC in perspective”. It purports to analyse and further discuss the arguments, opinions and viewpoints on the integrity and the ability of the ANC to effect land expropriation successfully as reflected by its CVs and Attestations.

1.2. Aims of article 11

The primary intention of the publications on the ANC is to continue the reflection on the three main political parties by specifically describing the profile of the ANC on the same basis as was done in Article 9 on the EFF and Article 10 on the DA.

The aim is to evaluate the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of its empowerment as ruler received during the election of 8 May 2019. The focus will be on the party’s leadership to detect poor personal and political integrity. The intention of the researcher is thus to see if the ANC as a political party and the ANC’s MPS and MPLs, its top brass and chief executive, as well as other officials at state enterprises have the ability to successfully execute comprehensive land reform.

1.2.1. The exclusive use of newspaper articles and direct quotations in article 11

It must be noted that the emphasis in information collection for this research was on the use of mostly recent South African newspaper reports, seeing that the information was offered daily in describing (with analyses, comments, investigations and discussions) the prominent political, economic and social events. In totality these reports reflect a very comprehensive and in-depth picture of present-day South Africa’s political, judicial and economic life. On how South Africans trust, read and share news, research published by Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019, together with Isabella Maake and Graphics24, shows that printed newspapers are being used by 40% of the South African population to obtain information and insight. Most of the newspapers used in the research as references, may be described, for instance, in terms of their weekly percentage usage by the total population as follows:

Sunday Times: 25%;
Daily Sun: 21%;
Sowetan: 13%;
The Citizen: 12%;
City Press: 12%;
The Star: 10%.

In addition, local newspapers were also used (21%), while other newspapers (Afrikaans) like Beeld and Rapport (of which the percentage usage is unknown) were also consulted as they are being comprehensively used by the Afrikaans-speakers.2:14

On the extensive use in this research of South African journalistic reporting, it is important to note the following comment in the City Press of 23 June 2019, defining the absolute need for critical journalism to fight crime and political delinquency in South Africa. It reads3:13:

Going deep into the belly of governing circles in countries [African] where the majority of citizens are desperately poor, we discovered how local and international business partners assist presidents, ministers and governing party bureaucrats to convert political power, often via access to natural resources, into personal financial reserves and assets.

And:

Support for African investigative journalists as they continue to expose wrongdoing is once again noted as an important need.

That the country’s journalists are under immense strain, as well as physical and emotional attacks by delinquent politicians without any safeguard such as bodyguards, is reflected by the recent (but failed) action of the South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef) and five journalists to go to the Equality Court for an interdict to stop a specific political party from intimidating and threatening journalists and inciting violence against them. Munusamy4:18 writes:

And this matter goes beyond the realm of individual safety. Our industry is increasingly on the retreat as political attacks and vilifications intensify. Journalists and editors are already self-censoring to avoid being harangued by politicians and denigrated online. Social media is a toxic space where people can direct violent and misogynistic attacks, either themselves or through troll armies, without consequences.

She continues4:18:

The focus of the attacks is now shifting to the judiciary… Our society cannot claim not to see the warning signs of our democracy under attack. The challenge is whether we respond or watch impassively.

Any public utterance or writing by a civil person, another politician or an author pinpointing alleged wrongdoings by controversial politicians or state officials, are fast being taken to court as instances of slander and libel whereby amounts from R500 000 up to R35-million are being claimed as compensation! It must be noted that most of these public utterances and writings occurred with reference to the alleged state capture under the ANC regime, and are often anchored in the testimonies offered to the judicial commissions such as the Zondo one. In perspective, it seems to be many previously deeply-in-love ANC comrades and other cronies that are calling each other names such as liars, fraudsters, apartheid spies, known enemy agents, charlatans, EFF-sleepers, even “extraordinary k****r”. These “calling out” actions have also been observed between the ANC leaders and churches, as well as other parties’ politicians who try the court seemingly as a “money-spinner”. Most of the lawsuits are plain nonsense, juvenile and sorely reflect the poor quality of our law-makers. Furthermore, these revenge actions are wasting the valuable time of the court, while some seem indeed to generate money for the claimants. Critically observed, most of these civil actions seeking revenge or compensation for so-called libel and slander claims, are also attempts at outright distraction from the spotlight on the guilt of the claimants and threats towards those exposing them, in order to stop their investigations and writing on the culprits’ wrongdoing.5-17

It is clear that most of these cases of libel and slender are purely because the SAPS (South African Police Service) has so far done nothing to investigate the alleged law-breaking and the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) has not prosecuted, leaving crooks many times over untouchable and free in society to continue their crimes.

This research is not investigative, but purely to use existing newspaper articles that were already published and accepted as correct by the general public and critics, given that the persons named or alleged to have committed crimes or corruption, never objected to the articles’ contents nor did  they take action against the newspaper or its investigative journalists, political commentators and political analysts. As a researcher I am very thankful to the mass of investigative journalists, political commentators and political analysts for their information which formed the backbone of my research project on the ANC. It must further be noted that very little of the enormous reporting on testimonies before the various judicial commissions, like the Zondo one, were used in this research. It was just too much to include into the research. I am considering making it part of a future publication, namely: The phantom of the South African Parliament: the ANC 1994 to 2019.

My publications on the ANC are thus in principle a collation of published information and reflections from this gathered or archived information, on the ANC’s activities. Firstly, the preference for this “reflecting” approach follows from the immense amount of available information, just waiting to be collected and currently underused. Secondly, this published information has already been tested and published according to the criteria of “true news”, or as truth which has not been legally challenged as defamation or falsehoods. The publications quoted in this research were thus operating from within the ethics of good journalism, meaning right, trustworthy and credible, with which editors allowed journalists and authors to publish the information in their newspapers. Many of the cases reported on are still awaiting investigation by the South African Police Service (SAPS) and possible prosecution by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). For this reason the terms “alleged” and “alluded”, as used throughout in newspaper articles, are also used as here. The term alleged is applicable to every case reported here: even in cases were culprits were prosecuted and sentenced, these outcomes are treated as “alleged”, seeing that there can be still appeals to the courts. Directly reflecting the allegations made by political analysts, political commentators and investigative and crime journalists, compelled the large-scale use of quotations. This approach brings the reader directly into the picture of the ANC’s politics, while at the same time giving appropriate acknowledgment to the various authors for their hard work. These quotations tell an intimate story which is frequently lost through indirect references, descriptions and paraphrasing. The guideline of Ngwenya12 on good journalism occupies a central position throughout this research project. He writes12:8:

The reflective call in these tricky, dicey, trying times for journalists is to be independent. Sharpen no knives, grind no axes and dig no graves. If journalism is right, trustworthy and credible the dishonourable will feel the weight of public censure to fall on their sword in a grave they dug for themselves.

The descriptions of this subdivision, titled: 1.2.1.The exclusive use of newspaper articles and direct quotations in articles 11, is also fully applicable to all the articles which are following as part of this project on the ANC. Thus, they will not be repeated.

2. Method

The research has been done by means of a literature review. This method aims to construct a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach has been used in modern politico-historical research where there is often not an established body of research, as is the case regarding the abilities of political parties to effect successful land reform from 2019 onwards. The sources included articles from 2018, books for the period 1944 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2019. These sources have been consulted to evaluate and to describe the facts that must guide us in making an evaluation on the suitability of the ANC as the ruler of South Africa to achieve successful land reform as from 2019.

The research findings have been presented in narrative format.

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Absence of an Electorate-Parliamentarian-Employment Act and an Electorate-Parliamentarian Ethics Code

The serious question that is prominently being asked by political analysts is: how did South Africa end up in its present mess? Various answers are proffered, varying from it being the end-result of Apartheid, to the end-result of the ANC as a failed revolutionary party. Looking at the utter failure and constant economic decline, failed human uplifting and impoverishment of the mass of the people, the fact is clear that the ANC is the main culprit as a revolutionary that never creates, but takes only from the rich without giving—as the good thief Robin Hood would do—to the poor. Moreover, South Africa’s political setup of pre-1994 and its much-praised but in some ways failed Constitution, offered the ANC the opportunity to successfully establish its revolutionary culture of crookedness, mismanagement, state capture and autocracy, unobstructed over 25 years. Central to this power structure is the incapable ANC elite with their sole intention of self-enrichment and utmost power hunger. But the question remains: how was it possible for the ANC to be able to hijack the mass of poor Blacks’ votes and use the South African Parliament exclusively, from one administration to the other, to benefit them solely? One of the answers lies in the fact that there was the lack of a Basic Conditions Electorate-Parliamentarian-Employment Act [equal to the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCOEA)] to describe and enforce a mandate between voters and a regime, obliging the regime to govern a country and its people only with justice and rectitude.18,19

3.2 Chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng’s sincere warning and prayer for good governance

To assess and control an elected party during its term of five years (like the ANC again for the period 2019 to 2024, after it had already been ruling for 25 years since 1994), certain basic guidelines should be in place before the election and inauguration of a government (as an employee in service of the people.) There should be basic guidelines, such as to act all of the time while governing solely in terms of its promises made before the election to the voters (the employer, who takes the government as an employee in service). In South Africa such an act or code is absent. It is thus important to outline it here: firstly, to understand how good governance could have been attained from 1994 until now; and secondly, the absolute present need to promulgate such legislation to get rid of corrupted and failed governments. If such a piece of legislation were in place we would not be shamed by the need of the Chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, when he swore in ministers and their deputies at the Sefako Makgatho presidential guesthouse in Pretoria recently at the start of South Africa’s sixth Parliament, to give them a clear warning. In this context Hunter18:4 shows how Mogoeng digressed significantly from his traditional swearing-in speech to say to these public figures (mostly from the ANC) that “they should shiver if they even think of misspending public funds in their care, while he also warned elected public representatives to take their oath of office seriously and not to act as if the public owe them something”.

In this context he had undoubtedly referred to the totally failed government of the ANC since 1994. His warning was an attempt by him as a last resort to inculcate good employee habits into the mindsets of law-makers in the new Parliament after so many years of failure. Chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, specifically pointed to the status of law-makers as plain “public employees” and not, as some seemed to have been thinking and doing since 1994, as high-level mighty “employers” in charge of the voters and the public. Mogoeng said that he wanted to ensure that those who took the oath or affirmation know that18:4: “…power doesn’t belong to you, and the resources that come with that office don’t belong to you. You are a servant of the South African public and this is what you are promising those who have employed you. For you to suddenly begin to treat those who have privileged you with an opportunity to serve – especially at a high level – as if they owe you something and be insensitive, almost, to the dire circumstances they find themselves in [is wrong].”

In the context of Mogoeng Mogoeng’s “preaching”, he further read the so-called Riot Act to the law-makers (who in present-day South Africa seem more and more to be acting as schoolchildren going on a picnic), and emphasised that public officers must realise that people suffer the consequences of bad decisions18:4: “So we never forget, just the thought of giving somebody millions that they ought not to get, that are supposed to help elsewhere, should make you shiver. Just the thought of it should make you shiver.”

But it seems as if there was doubt in the Chief Justice’s heart that his verbal and written warning alone was not going to have an effect on the Ramaphosa cabinet and its officials. This is confirmed by the fact that the honourable justice had also included a prayer to those being sworn in, seemingly hoping in this way to impress his prescribed virtue on the minds of the ANC elite.18

From a practical and judicial viewpoint, as spelt out clearly by the Chief Justice above, the business of government and its proper execution, represents a mandate received by a regime to do certain work for the people in exchange for compensation. This means that the appointed ruler (employee) received his mandate from the voters (employers) in exchange for the pre-election promises, meaning that they will execute these agreed-upon actions and policies—neither more nor less. Looking back to the period 1994 to 2019, very few of the ruling party’s officials—from presidents to their most junior officials—had ever respected the voters or had “shivered” in Mogoeng’s sense when diverting funds to their own pockets. Jacob Zuma and the Parliament under the ANC laughed at both the judiciary and the public. Looking at Cyril Ramaphosa and his cronies, since coming to power in 2017, the alleged Phantom of the Parliament has not changed much of its act.

It is thus important to offer a guideline of what should be in position to assure good government for the sixth Parliament during the period 2019 to 2024.

3.1.2. The unborn Electorate-Parliamentarian Act
3.1.2.1. Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCOEA)

Regarding the ANC‘s many failed promises and wrongdoing, nearly bringing the South African state to a fall (thereby failing in its mandate as na employee), there is only one clear guideline to be used in order to fully understand and describe the ANC’s actions as a failed employee within a legal employee-employer relation, namely the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCOEA). A similar Electorate-Parliamentarian Act to the BCOEA should have be promulgated in 1994 to guide the rights of the employee (ANC-government) in its actions and those of the employer (voters) who want certain and specific work done via Parliament. Central to the BCOEA stands the legal concept of probation that needs to be highlighted and which the ANC regime failed to respect in its job contract via Parliament with the people of South Africa.18,20

To illustrate the need for an Electorate-Parliamentarian Act and the clause of probation for a party as a government and its law-makers as parliamentarians, the BCOEA will be made applicable as a voters-and-government agreement, equal to an employer-and-employee agreement and be discussed theoretically, to illustrate the ANC’s utter failure over 25 years and to show how a failed regime can be stopped dead in its tracks with the correct legislation. The basis will thus be to encapsulate the concept of good governance and the use of probation as a means to end the various ANC regimes’ mischief. This comparative discussion clearly shows what is missing with the present mandate of the government and why the ANC-government (the supposed subordinate employee to the voters) had spun out of control from 1994 to 2019, to engage in unobstructed state capture, failing to activate good services as to education and health, ignoring the Constitution, etc. It will also bear out how the voters were sidelined immediately after every new election of the Parliament, and how the MPs and MPLs became an untouchable force of employees after their election, leaving the employer (voters) powerless until the next election. In reality, it reflects a coup d’état by the law-makers, the moment after they were sworn in.20

Michael Bagraim20, a labour expert, writes excellently in The Star of 12 June 2019 on the matter of a failed employee versus the right of an employer to punish such an employee by requiring him to better himself, as opposed to being able to fire him with immediate effect. His clear writing makes it easy to adapt and compare the rules of the BCOEA to politics. Such a comparision enables one to characterise the ANC regime as a failed employee who should be kicked out and its contract terminated very early in its period of probation. It also makes it possible to obtain insight into the rights that would be awarded to the voters should such a voters’ regime agreement become a legal reality and had to have been thoroughly applied since 1994 to the regime and the law-makers of the South African Parliament. It also shows the specific legal obligations of the regime in terms of which the voters could and should have booked it in order to get rid of the regime when it failed. This would mean terminating the employment contract of the regime (employee), cancelling its stay in Parliament for the full term of five years if such a legal agreement existed.20

Bagraim20 writes that in terms of the BCOEA every employment relationship must have a written letter of appointment or contract of employment. (This agreement goes far further legally than the oath of office that law-makers pledged before the Chief Justice: the oath is essentially a plain promise that may, but does not need, to be respected as was born out by the Zuma regime.) One of the conditions of service is a probationary clause in writing which is prescribed for both the employer and the employee to know and understand that there would be an assessment period before the contract became permanent. Probation is a vehicle to assist an employer to possibly terminate the employment relationship if the employer feels the employment relationship is not a perfect fit or the employee is not performing in accordance with the contract of employment, posits Bagraim.20 In this context it means that if the probationary employee’s work does not meet the standards required by the employer, then the dismissal should be able to seen to be fair. The position of a probationary employee is different from that of a permanent employee and both the procedure and merits of that dismissal will be less onerous on the employer. In this context of the probationary period versus the permanent period, is it important to bear in mind that, besides that the probation clause may differ from employer to employer, the duration of the probation period may also differ in time: it will be longer if the position is one of a senior nature. Prominent in this context are the positions of MPs and MPLs on senior level that warrant a lengthy period of assessment. This reference clearly reflects two aspects relating to the status of a regime as an employee: firstly it needs a lengthy period of assessment stretching fully over the five years as elected representatives to Parliament. Secondly the employment of parliamentarians as employees of the people in terms of this constant assessment is limited to five years in duration which makes the employees’ right to permanent appointment zero (no reappointment of a party as regime without a new election). Implicitly, parliamentarians as representatives are supposed to be “permanently on probation” for their full term.20

The BCOEA has an inscribed clause that a probation period may be extended to erase short-comings and better the employees. In the case of law-makers their probationary period, as said, is supposed to be running for a full five years, excluding any shortening of the probation time. Any legal extension of the five years term is not allowed without another election. It means the re-election of a failed regime and its law-makers can indeed be seen as a willing extension of the probation by the voters, as was done for the ANC over six elections notwithstanding a poor record and performance by the regime.20

The BCOEA requires that the standards set by the employer must be fair and reasonable. The probationary clause provision is also intended to protect the employee who might wish to leave the employer because the position was not as the employee envisaged. Further, the standards set by the employer must be fair and reasonable. In the case of law-makers the writing and execution of these standards are totally handed over to Parliament in governing for the period of five years after the election, during which the law-makers are free to rewrite and set their own standards, totally ignoring the people’s wishes after their election.20

Looking at the fine print of the aim of assessment of the BCOEA, when you see it equal to a law-maker-voter agreement, one sees probation’s function of assessing the new employee (meaning in politics the two entities, namely Parliament and its law-makers) and his capacity for fitting into the organisation (meaning in politics the people’s/voters’ interests) and whether that employee is compatible with fellow employees and the immediate management of the employer. Probation is not only a period granted to the employer to assess the employee, but also to give feedback to the employee in order to ensure better performance and better compatibility which may include training and guidance. Firstly, parliamentarians are expected to be well trained, skilled, seasoned and experienced before they move into Parliament because it was during the pre-election exercise that they were selected and elected by the people for their ability to handle their mandate effectively. Secondly, the only feedback in response to parliamentarians and the ruling party’s performance (good or bad) at present available to the people/voters is to vote for the law-makers and the ruling party or to vote them out in the next election.20

Probation in contracts under the BCOEA is not compulsory. Often appointments are not subjected to probation because both parties are aware of the abilities of the employee. This erasure of the probationary period is presently built-in to the law-makers’ contacts because it is traditionally believed that they are highly qualified and of high integrity before making themselves available to stand for Parliament and thus do not need oversight and monitoring from outside by the voters. The only opportunity to moan about or to reject elected law-makers and a regime is, as mentioned, to not vote for them in the next election.20

The BCOEA further states that an employer must constantly monitor a probationary employee, keeping a record for feedback, keeping minutes of discussions and to see to it that the employee receive the necessary development, support and guidance for improvement. In the voters-versus-law-makers relationship the law-makers obtained the sole right to oversee themselves regarding the development and bettering of their training, experience and behaviour. The present setup regarding public oversight of the regime of the day and law-makers, reflects a process whereby there is very little monitoring of the quality and integrity of law-makers during their period of five years in Parliament, as became evident during the so-called Zupta saga.20

In light of the above, it is clear that Parliament’s management, with specific reference to the party which is also the regime in power, as well as the law-makers elected to Parliament, is totally uncontrolled. The Parliament and the mandated regime become independent powers to do as it and the law-makers “see fit”, leaving the individual citizen stripped of his citizen’s rights. The fact that the ANC received only 28% of the eligible voters’ support in the past election and that only 49% of the total eligible voters participated in the May 2019 election, render the ANC in post-2019 South Africa in practice a non-representative ruler, bordering on self-empowered autocracy. This kind of dangerous ruler-empowerment explains why and how the ANC as a regime has become an irresponsible autocratic ruler since 1994, ignoring the concerns of the majority (51%) of South Africans. Corruption, crookedness, state capture and mismanagement became the normal form of rule. In the end the criminal justice system had to deal with the depths of corruption and misrule, with courts and commissions of enquiry bringing to light the delinquent actions of Parliament and a number of its law-makers.19-21

However, thanks to ANC misrule, the criminal justice system is in itself broken, supporting the crooked law-makers, as was recently well illustrated by various testimonies before the Zondo commission. The ex-head of the KwaZulu-Natal Hawks, Johan Booysen22, testified that there existed a web of alleged corruption in the police, the Hawks and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and pointed out that such corruption culminated in those institutions “being subverted to ensure the shielding of certain individuals from criminal sanction”. A submission of 70 pages by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS,) dealing with the crooked relationship between the national executive and the criminal justice leadership, contains the following sentence22:13:

There can be no doubt that the abuse of executive authority in respect of criminal justice agencies has been central in allowing the current proliferation of corruption.

Gareth Newham, the head of justice and violence prevention at ISS said22:13:

There has to be a much broader political project to uncapture these institutions.

The overwhelming evidence of political and criminal-justice delinquency forced the chair of the Zondo commission, Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, to declare22:13:

If we do not have a proper law enforcement agency then we don’t have a country.

To curb the massive delinquency in the South African Parliament, it urgently needs an Electoral-Parliamentarian Act to be promulgated as a priority before the end of 2020. If the BCOEA had applied to Parliament’s law-makers and the ANC-regime specifically, all would have been fired long ago due to poor performance, incompatibility, poor training and experience, as well as misconduct. Moreover, looking at the way in which they are aggressively handling the land-reform matter by threatening the 30 million poor Blacks (a significant part of the population and in reality the ANC’s employer), the ANC regime is indeed victimising its own employer. Their dismissal would be justified in terms of all the criteria of dismissal.19-21

3.1.3. The  central roles of the ANC’s democratic-centralism and the electoral system in parliamentary abuse
3.1.3.1. The ANC’s democratic-centralism ideology

The ANC’s so-called democratic-centralism plays a prominent role in the failed political outcomes of their five post-1994 administrations and portends similar manifestations to be repeated during their sixth administration under Ramaphosa. This uniqueness of the ANC’s party organisation and its steering of the thinking, planning and actions of every one of its members, from the ordinary to its president, are overlooked by many, even political analysts, commentators and journalists.19-21

This ANC’s democratic-centralism and the established power structure of the ANC as a party, nullifies the claim that a specific ANC member, like its president, is the sole empowered person to act and decide on ANC matters (also making his/her authority as President of South Africa subordinate to the ANC’s power). The implication is thus that the interests of the ANC as a party are determined by its national conferences and must be strictly adhered to and be executed by every member. But this also means that the interests of the country, whether inside or outside Parliament, are subordinate to the interests of the ANC. It does not matter if these ANC interests are crooked deals, state capture, corruption, etc.19-21

The principle of the ANC’s interests first and the subordination of every one of its members to the decisions of its national conferences, is well described and acknowledged by Bishop Hangwai Maumela23 of the Lazarus Maumela Foundation. In his defence of the ANC’s so-called “democracy” and the ANC’s so-called “servicing the needs and right of every citizen”, when he swankily writes in the City Press of 30 June 2019 as follows23:4:“…members of the ANC who are in Parliament have been deployed by the ANC. There’s no member who is superior to another. They pay the same affiliation fee to the ANC. They have been allocated various portfolios – some as ministers, deputy ministers, chief whips and chairpersons of portfolio committees. All of them account to the ANC…”

Mthombothi24 also writes on the corrupt democratic-centralism of the ANC which makes all ANCs subordinate to the interests and decisions of the ANC and absolutely not subordinate to the country’s interests, together with the contaminated intertwining of the country’s direct and indirect appointments of parliamentary law-makers and a Parliament only accountable to itself in the Sunday Times24:15:

The men and women who’ll rock up after the elections to be sworn in as our “public representatives” in parliament play absolutely no role in this campaign. They’re insignificant and invisible. They will get their seats as a reward for loyalty to their party, not for their service to the voters or the community. And it has stench of bribery about it. Which is why all the skelms have made it into their party lists – to buy their silence. Choice, the basis of any democracy, is next to nonexistent. The sum total of what passes foe an election campaign is a smiling face on a poster hanging on every pole throughout the country. It’s almost as if the country has been reduced to a single village or community with the same needs, grievances and aspirations.”

Munusamy25, in this context, writes25:20:

Many people lined up by the main political parties to be our public representatives are an insult to our nation. They would not even be able to run a cake sale without eating the cake themselves- or peddling the backing process to their patronage networks.

If an individual has not come to a firm conclusion about the election, that individual will do more for their country/community by not voting, rather than making a mistake.

The clincher: “Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting evil”.

The Zondo commission has made me realise how farcical the political system is when corrupt business people are able to control the state by simply buying off politicians and key officials.

The reason there are so many hopeless people vying to be our public representatives is because the political system is closed off to credible, capable leaders who have the potential to modernise and reimaging our future.

We have to revert to the goals of the Freedom Charter, written in 1955, because nobody can think of fresh solutions to society’s current problems.

SA has many great minds who opt to remain on the sidelines or choose to look after their own financial wellbeing rather than the good of society. So it is difficult to invest in a system that is never going to attract or shape good leaders.

Democratic-centralism makes, as said, all the ANC members (from the Number One to the lowest ranked ones) subordinated to the ANC national conference’s decisions. These decisions are again based on the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist political ideology. The outcomes of these decisions are and must be overseen at all time by the top brass of the ANC, as mandated by its politburo as represented by its Top Six executives and NEC (National Executive Committee) of eighty members. Inside this practice of blanket democratic-centralism by the ANC, there is evidence that it has allowed the development of a strong top brass (its so-called Top Six), but that it has limited to some extent the development of an extreme African-leadership syndrome (until Jacob Zuma arrived in the presidency and became the ANC’s and South Africa’s untouchable paramount chief for a while).24,26

Mthombothi24 writes in this respect regarding the paramount chief of the ANC as being associated with the Nazis and the Fascists as well as South Africa’s tribal system24:15:

Everything is centred on the party leader. He’s the fount of all wisdom. This practice has engendered the sort of behaviour or attitude that’s been prevalent in Africa for so many years, of the leader as all-knowing and omnipotent — the so-called Big Man syndrome, often corrupt and autocratic. The Big Men stay too long in power and when they are done, choose their successor, often a member of the family. Which is what Jacob Zuma almost succeeded in doing.

There is more than enough evidence that all the ANC presidents — from Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Jacob Zuma, up to Cyril Ramaphosa — had challenged as far as their powers allowed according to the ANC’s principle of democratic-centralism in their pursuit of ambitions to become the paramount chief or the “emperor Julius Caesar”, but were politically destroyed in the end. It was specifically Jacob Zuma, through his open and well-planned corrupted self-empowerment, who had neutralised to a great extent and temporarily the ANC’s democratic-centralism and its exclusive parliamentary functioning and statutory empowerment through the ANC’s politburo (consisting of the ANC’s Top Six and NEC). As a result of Zuma’s internal party coup, it has made Parliament and the executive politics of the country extreme dysfunctional, continuing to this day under Ramaphosa. Moreover, it has created in some way the idea of a true democracy framed in a Constitution of excellence, driven and managed by an effective executive team and Parliament, all under an executive-empowered President who has been totally freed by the ANC’s politburo to do his own will: meaning to take independent decisions and actions and to steer the country as he alone thinks suitable. It seems as if the false belief of the ANC’s absolute “democracy” has become overwhelmingly rooted in most of the media and public’s mindsets too.24,29

The above is only theory as long as the ANC stays in power. The ANC’s own constitution — that became the mandated constitution for the president of the ANC and thus also of the State of South Africa since 1994 — essentially nullifies Sections 84(1) and 85(1) of the South African Constitution. It makes the ANC’s politburo directly and indirectly the “head of state and head of the national executive”, nominating their elected ANC president as South African state president while the secretary-general of the ANC in the background remains the real Number One who might “recall” the state president at any time, as happened to Mbeki. Although such secretarial power did not always exist in the past in the same manner and was not as openly exercised by previous secretaries-general such as Alfred Nzo, Kgalema Motlanthe or Gwede Mantashe, we now have a new contender in the form of Ace Magashule, whose strong hands in the politburo is ever-present in the management of the ANC’s appointed state president. The relationship between Ramaphosa and Magashule may be compared to that between Mandela and Mbeki, immediately after 1994. Nelson Mandela was at best a ceremonial president and his deputy Mbeki teh “unofficial” executive president, while both were subject to direct management by the politburo. The rogue rule is: the ANC comes first and South Africa second. This type of pseudo-democratic political culture has characterised the ANC’s modus operandi in the past and will also in future be part and parcel of the ANC’s radical way of governing, as cemented in its Marxist-Leninist ideology and conditioned by its so-called false “democratic-centralism” (which in reality means autocratic-centralism).26-29

A prominent side-stepping of the law by the post-Mandela ANC leaders and followers, when the ANC brass ran into trouble as during the present crisis of integrity in the ANC — mainly created by its democratic-centralism based on Marxist-Leninist ideology — is just to continue with delinquency, while calling at the same time on the late Mandela for forgiveness and salvation. Meaningless clichés are echoed by the pro-ANCs, absolving them from the bad consequences because they have not ruled the country with integrity. Dugmore30 formulates it thus30:20: “The democratic system in our country, so hard fought for by Mandela and his generation, and which involves all our political parties, is at risk if we do not address these urgent needs.” However, never is the question postulated as to what kind democracy is referred to and why democracy is now suddenly at risk while there was essentially an autocracy in place already back in 1994.

To understand how much subjectivity is present in today’s South African politics and the existence of the misconception of the ANC as “democratic” (including its leaders) with the intention to serve every citizen, it is again important to read Mthombothi’s31 claim that the nationalist-militant’s abandonment of democratic liberties leads to fascism, which may be associated with the EFF (otherwise, he once also referred to the ANC regime since 1994 as fascistic due to its “autocratic-centralism”).

Mthombothi31 writes in this context31:19:

There are as many definitions of fascism as there are experts on the subject, but a few characteristics stand out: intolerance, racism (including anti- Semitism), misogyny, militarism, a predilection for violence, with a cult of charismatic leadership which often demands blind and unquestioned loyalty.

The EFF exhibits almost all these traits in its behaviour. The organisation is obviously not yet in power and it is therefore impossible to know how it would behave if it were to hold the levers of power. But on current evidence, the signs aren’t very good. It is aggressively intolerant towards those who disagree with it both within and outside the party.

Mthombothi31 enlightened us further on fascism in profiling the EFF by quoting Robert Paxton’s31 The Anatomy of Fascism. Mthombothi describes31:19: “…fascism as ‘a form of political behaviour marked by obsessive preoccupation with the community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants…abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion’.”

The above view by Mthombothi31 may be true for the EFF and its leaders, but all of those elements are clearly associated with the politics of the ANC before and after 1994: all the traits and characteristics of fascism are emblematic of the traditional ANC. In addition, every one of its leaders as presidents have displayed those traits so far and not only Jacob Zuma. Its fascism became in some way latent immediately after the ANC took power in 1994 because the New Dispensation had forced them to “behave” until they were ready to fully assume political and economic power, which we have seen emerging since 2017 by openly adopting their “autocratic-centralism”. Land grabbing and the nationalisation of the Reserve and Land Banks, Apartheid victimhood, radicalised BEE and cadre deployment are only a few concrete examples of the ANC’s Marxist-Leninist politics awaiting South Africa from 2019 if it stays in power.31,32

The ANC’s unbreakable pre-1994 radical politics (which is now being well-directed by both Ramaphosa and Magashule, notwithstanding that they are locked in a leadership-ambition struggle inside the greater ANC), which the media seems to regard as something of the past, must be specifically compared to the rather meek advent of the fascists and the Nazis via so-called “good people or labour parties”, only to capture Italy and Germany in the end through autocratic-centralism. The two blueprints are being expertly used in post-2019 South Africa. Mthombothi31:19posits:

But of course fascism as an ideology cannot be wiped of the face of the earth. Only its manifestations can be curbed or conquered. But it continues to emerge in different guises and in different countries. Although fascism is identified as a right-wing ideology, there’s no doubt that the Left has contributed to its origin. Mussolini himself, however, was unconcerned about whether fascism was located on the right or the left of the political spectrum. “We don’t give a damn about these empty terminologies and we despise those who are terrorised by these words”, he said. But just as Mussolini, who founded fascism, is a child of the Left, so is Nazism. The Nazi Party is short for National Socialist German Workers’ Party: its precursor was the German Workers’ Party. The intention was to attract workers from left-wing parties. Nazism is short for National Socialism, which became opposed to – and hostile to – international socialism or any other creed of the Left.

The absolute striving towards self-centredness and empowerment of the ANC over South Africans (Black as well as Whites) is well described by Chilenga-Butao33 when he refers to the ANC national executive committee (NEC) lekgotla at the beginning of June 2019 where there was an effort to revive the democratic-centralist habit of the ANC’s politburo power structure against the onslaught by the “Big Man” Ramaphosa who may alone think, plan and do for the ANC. Referring to the ANC’s democratic-centralist framework, Chilenga-Butao33 pointed out that the ANC policy and resolutions, which are taken during conferences, are applicable to all its members, including the presently serving President of the country, Cyril Ramaphosa, as an ANC member.24,33

On the conflicting statements between Ramaphosa and Ace Magashule, the secretary general of the ANC and seemingly the Number One of the ANC in enforcing the post-May 2019 ANC politics directed by democratic-centralism, for example on the change of the Reserve Bank’s mandate as prescribed by its national conference in December 2017, Chilenga-Butao33:30 writes:

Thus democratic-centralism has dissipated and it has happened because the party is not putting South Africa first. The fact that these contradictory statements emerge shows that there are parts of the ANC that are trying to re-establish a form of democratic centralism by saying what they want to see happening in the country and in so doing, arm-wrestle the president into following suit. If they cannot secure democratic centralism in the party, they are hoping to turn their statements into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But these party members are also using issues such as the Reserve Bank as small battles in the ongoing war to secure their interests and power in the party and over the country. In this way democratic centralism could be used as a tactic in a much larger scheme.

Chilenga-Butao33:30continues: “…the secretary general’s statement contained the bold declaration that the ANC remains the centre of the country and policymaking” and: “This shows that the ANC comes first, especially if that means leading South Africans down the garden path of false hope”.

This ANC comes first was also confirmed when Ace Magashule contradicted Fikile Mbalula who credited Ramaphosa with the ANC’s election win by saying that the electorate did not vote for an individual like Ramaphosa but solely for the party.34,35

The above remarks by Chilenga-Butao33 and Magashule35 confirm our suspicion that the ANC comes first and the country and its people always second. This also brings the focus on the ANC’s capture of the ownership of Parliament since 1994 with its majority of votes obtained in the national elections which does not necessarily mean that the majority of eligible voters had voted for it. With the ANC’s eighty NECs and ANC Top Six’s placing of the ANC as a party and regime always first, Parliament became once more, after having been voted into government on 8 May 2019, their sole property to do with what they want, including its executive powers. The party’s interests come first with the ANC’s application of its democratic-centralism in the selection of its own MPs and MPLs and these law-makers’ sole responsibility to the ANC’s National Conference policies, even apart from the evil it wreaks via Parliament most of the time. There is no role or empowerment — or even the slightest say — for the country’s voters outside the Parliament where the ANC enjoys a vast majority. Or, in terms of the BCOEA, there is not the slightest trace of a kind of employer-employee contract to curb the ANC’s powers.33,35

Our electoral system — which as mentioned, determines that only a political party via the indirect mandate it received at the ballet box, decides and selects the persons who are going to Parliament to represent the party — fits perfectly into the ANC’s democratic-centralist style of government. This entwining of the faulty electoral system with the autocratic democratic-centralism of the ANC government, led directly to South Africa lapsing into a stupor of criminality, criminality and state capture due to the ANC system of cadre and crony-empowerment being employed, since 1994, but especially from 2009 onwards.24,36

In conclusion on the autocracy of the ANC’s democratic-centralism, it can be postulated with utter safety that it has given the ANC a monopoly on political power for 25 years, but at the same has made the ANC a failed regime and South Africa a failed state with the State President merely a figurehead inside its democratic-centralism, captured and controlled by the ANC’s Politburo.23,34

3.1.3.2. South Africa’s faulty electoral system

In the context of receiving a mandate by a political party (as the ANC has managed continuously since 1994) to rule South Africa, it must be noted that South African voters have been caught in an undemocratic voting system. It is a setup of which the ANC has taken full advantage. Ramaphosa himself seems reluctant to part from it and with good reason, because it enables the ANC through the imbalanced proportional system the power of directly selecting and appointing law-makers, without the voters or constituents having a say in who is to represent them, thereby opening the door of government to all of the ruling party’s crooked candidates. There is no opportunity for the ordinary voting public veto them except by waiting another five years and voting against them at the party level. Thus, the present proportional representation system means that MPs and MPLs are only accountable to party bosses (and are being appointed by party bosses on the party’s list) instead of by the electorate.37-40,42 Notable here is Mthombothi’s39 excellent description39:19: “…our MPs and MPLs are plain party representatives and not public representatives”.

The current system creates a total lack of public accountability by the MPs and MPLs, as evidenced many times over by the ANC’s delinquent MPS, MPLs, ministers and even a past President. This chaos, especially pronounced during the Zuma regime, seems to be a process that is going to continue under Ramaphosa.38-42

A private legal action was started in 2019 to reform the election system and to end the present skewed empowerment of the ANC through the electoral system through a court application of the New Nation Movement (NNM), a KhoiSan organisation, to change the Electoral Act (Act 73 of 1998) to make provision for the direct election of MPs and MPLs by voters. This court application was heard initially on 17 April 2019 by Judge Siraj Desai, but was rejected as not urgent. The appeal by the New Nation Movement, Chantal Revelle and the Mediation Foundation for Peace and Justice to the ConCourt was also unsuccessful. In this case Chantall Revelle of the Mediation Foundation said that at present the country was being ruled by a very small minority. Voters do not even know who are representing them in Parliament. Judge Edwin Cameron of the Concourt said on May 8, 2019 that the application was not urgent. For Cameron it was an important and prominent fact that it could take up to August 2019 to run the election if the court agreed with the applicants’ opinion and that already R36-million had been spent on the organisation of the May 8 election. The ConCourt heard the application on 15 August 2019. It must, to bring greater clarity regarding the case, also be stated that the ConCourt had already decided in terms of the financing of political parties, that every adult citizen had the right to stand as an independent candidate for municipal, provincial and national councils but that the present legislation forbade it.38-46

If legislation is promulgated to reform the Electorate Act it would mean the end of favouring the ANC in its ability to manipulate the voters and to continue its spree of looting by crooked candidates without the ordinary people having a say. Moreover, the indication is that this could bring the ANC down in the next election, if it would not have fallen in its own sword already in its governmental term from 2019 to 2024.38-46

In the context of our faulty electoral system, coming from before 1994, there is no doubt that it is keeping the autocratic ANC directly and indirectly in power. The country’s imbalanced and undemocratic electoral system, rooted in the ANC’s corrupt principle of “party interests first”, can, if not immediately corrected, benefit and advantage the Zuma-Magashule clan after 2024 and damage the Ramaphosa clan’s ascendancy immensely. It can play a primary role in the disorderly implementation of land grabbing and the activation of revolution. Our faulty electoral system of public representatives via Parliament is nothing less than the practice of autocracy inside democracy par excellence. This faulty system, together with the ANC’s revolutionary decision-making via mass opinion, had ensured that Mandela, up to Ramaphosa, and now possibly also Ace Magashule, had obtained the ability to maintain their corrupt political power via the “innocent” ballot box. It must be remembered that the controversial Faith Muthambi, Mosebenzi Zwane and Bathabile Dlamini and so on, prominent ANCs who are still in the post-May 2019 Ramaphosa regime because they have not so far been prosecuted for alleged wrongdoing (notwithstanding testimonies before the Zondo and Mpati commissions against them). They have so far avoided legal repercussions because of a well-planned avoidance scheme by the ANC’s top brass for its tainted officials to escape prosecution. Such corrupt figures are not just the face of the present-day ANC: they are, with Jacob Zuma, David Mabuza and Ace Magashule, the soul of the ANC. Democratic parties would not put the names of many of the tainted ANCs anywhere on a list, besides “wanted”. The listing of alleged crooks by the ANC for the May 2019 election and their reappointment as MPs and MPLs as well as in high-ranking parliamentary positions by the ANC, is an excellent example of how the South African political space, especially Parliament, has become toxic and dominated by the same unrepresentative and elderly politicians within the ANC elite and top brass, giving imbalanced dominance to it as a political party, writes Munusamy. It is also significant that the ruling party has less than one million members while there are as many as 37 million eligible voters outside the ANC members’ circle.23,33,34,38-42,47

Mothombothi’s39 writing is clear on the fact that if the people of South Africa could choose themselves their MPs and MPLs directly — as well as their vice-president and president — the ANC would not return to power after the May 2019 election. He writes39:19:

What would astound a visitor from Mars, for instance, would be to hear that the party responsible for these crimes and misdemeanours is set to be returned to power with a thumping majority. That doesn’t square with what democracy is supposed to be. In any other place, a party with that sort of record, especially one that blatantly steals from its people, would be consigned to the political wilderness, never to be returned in power again. And yet, instead of wearing sackcloth and covering himself in ashes as a mark of repentance, President Cyril Ramaphosa, we are told, is almost as popular as Nelson Mandela was at the top of his powers. Instead of embarking on an apology campaign, he’s already on what looks suspiciously like a lap of honour, certain that he’ll be given a mandate to rebuild what his party has wilfully destroyed.

To illustrate once more the imbalance of the Electoral Act, excluding the individual aspirant MP and MPL from becoming independent law-makers but favouring only a political party that fulfils certain prescribed regulations, we may quote the worrying remark of Judge Desai on his rejection of the initial application on 17 April 2019. Marx reports44:6: “Desai het die aansoek verwerp dat die Kieswet gewysig word om onafhanklike kandidate in te sluit en het gesê Revelle kan by ‘n politieke party aansluit of haar eie stig.”

The above remark can undoubtedly leave the view that Desai as a judge does not take an objective stance in relation to the imbalanced political advantage enjoyed by the present-day government by means of what many see as a defective electoral system out. It was and is still indeed the rejection by Revelle of the ongoing prescribed rule to be a member of a political party and to obtain a seat in Parliament through the proportional system that motivated his court application to Desai. Desai’s opinion and conclusion can in a certain context be seen as a confirmation of the constitutional correctness of the present Electoral Act. It can even be interpreted by some critics of the ANC regime and their abuse of the Electoral Act as supporting the ANC regime and Ramaphosa as president who had opposed the application by Revelle and others.38-46

For many antagonists of the current Electoral Act and the ANC’s parliamentary power, Desai’s remarks46:6: “Revelle kan by ‘n politieke party aansluit of haar eie stig”, revive memories of the old Apartheid ways of the judiciary where there was often a profound irritation with the will of the people, as well as fear by the judiciary that they could overreach by siding with the people against the politicians, risking a rejection of any judgement they did not like. Desai’s remarks could even be seen, rightly or wrongly, as a form of oppression. The individual KhoiSan and Kora citizen, who is at present without a direct say in the law-making of the country because the Electoral Act is not correctly phrased and the Constitution is incorrectly executed, may see the functioning of the electoral system and the insistance by the judiciary in defending the present Act, as political and even human oppression.38-46

Many persons, especially the minorities, who feel victimised and penalised by court verdicts, start to observe the statutory and judicial models of their country as incomplete or as a failure, paralysed by a weak chain of justice. Such outcomes can become engraved on the minds of these “physically and emotionally injured” citizens that their country’s law enforcement agencies are subjective and not fit to safeguard their citizen and group rights. Even pristine, good legal verdicts can sometimes have very bad consequences for the judicial system, essentially because they may seem to lack empathy and an insight independent from the regime’s politics.38-46 The “verdict” by Desai can set off such negative attitudes with his interpretation and order of46:6: “Revelle kan by ‘n politieke party aansluit of haar eie stig”. Revelle’s case — for her undoubtedly a case which should not be a legal failure at all — needs to be tested by the ConCourt as being correct or wrong (as the court is now in the process of doing). In South Africa’s confused politics such cardinal issues cannot be left to a single judge’s sole discretion. If Revelle’s appeal is successful, it will signal the end of a system favouring the ANC’s manipulation of the voters and their corruption spree by crooked candidates without the ordinary people having a say in who gets nominated.38-46 It seems as if the judiciary has forgotten what had happened in the past in South Africa (pre- and post-1994) when the judicial system failed to address issues affecting ordinary citizens. The editorial of the Sunday Times, dated 8 September 2019, appositely describes the ongoing series of failures since 1994, during which almost every state institution was grabbed and steered by the crooks for their sole benefit, casting even a cloud of suspicion over the judicial system’s integrity48:18:

The Zondo commission has become a permanent fixture in our lives – entertaining up to a point, but something of a pointless charade. The National Prosecuting Authority seems especially dormant at a time when we would have expected it to be in overdrive. And through all this, promises, fine words, ringing declarations. But little action.

As the situation now stands, our electoral system is a failure. It allowed a dishonest collection of MPs inside the Parliament and and time and again their crooked party managed to rule Parliament as the outcome of the May 2019 national election confirms. The words of Mthombothi49 must ring daily in eligible voters’ ears — as well as those of Desai — when he posits49:21:

Whichever way one looks at this matter, it is hard not to arrive at one conclusion: our system of government lacks proper and effective accountability. It is past time that our electoral system is reformed so that politicians are answerable directly to voters and not their parties.

It is indeed the duty of the judicial system to see to it that this happens.

3.1.4. The lack of Kantian enlightenment in a chaotic South Africa

To accuse Parliament and the rulers of 1994 to 2019 alone of being “political thieves and rapists of the statutory rights” belonging to individual South Africans is incorrect. Most of the individual South Africans were willing participants in this political orgy by shying away from applicable decision-making during elections, as the past 8 May elections confirm wherein 51% of the eligible voters stayed away from the ballot box. Moreover, they failed to vote out the ANC and enforcing the much-needed Electoral-Parliament Act. Pithouse19 relates this citizen’s passivity to Immanuel Kant’s thinking on the waking up versus the failure of self-thinking in the 1780s when Europe had been equally mesmerised.

It seems to a certain extent that in South Africa the “Kantian enlightenment” of human virtue and political empowerment that the 1994 democracy should have brought to the mass of poor and landless Blacks never emerged. Political immaturity, resulting from the so-called “laziness and cowardice” that prevent people from thinking for themselves and from engaging in constructive deeds under less favourable circumstances, prevailed for six parliamentary elections up to May 2019. It is plunging more and more of the Black supporters of the ANC deeper into anarchy, but more precisely, it is thrusting 72% of the voters outside the ANC-supporting voting population into an equal amount of chaos. This is a negative phenomenon, whereby the emergence of a newly-enfranchised class has very little effect on quality of life or levels op development but is rather exploited to further the interests of a new, revolutionary elite. This has been the case in the 1890s in Europe. The shift in power creates and strengthens the poverty, inequality and joblessness of the masses in favour of a small ruling class and group whose interests become paramount. In contemporary South Africa it manifests as well-nigh irreparable chaos.19 This condition was appositely defined by Kant when he said that the19:27: “…lack of property and the estate of direct labour, of concrete labour, form not so much an estate of civil society as the ground upon which its circles rest and move.”

The South African scenario plays out exactly as the European one did centuries ago in form of delinquent acts by the then European capitalists and their corrupt rule. The ANC elite’s organised effort to dominate the masses of poor people with its hijacking of Parliament as an exclusive ANC kingdom has parallels in bygone European class structures. Pithouse19, more precisely, writes19:27: “In other words, the bourgeois public sphere depends, materially, on the impoverishment of the people that it excludes from participation.” The European Enlightenment and its liberal idea that regards all human beings as fully or equally human, is absent in 2019 in the mindset of the ANC leadership. Pithouse19 indirectly brings Kant’s description into focus here regarding the so-called “right of the ANC to mismanage and misuse the mass of poor Blacks at the voting box and in Parliament” because the ANC alone (which is false) freed the people from Apartheid, when he writes further19:27: “In an essay published in 1793 he [Kant] insisted that property was a qualification for citizenship, and that the “domestic servant, the shop assistant, the labourer…are…unqualified to be citizens”.

To break the ANC’s so-called “anti-Kant politics of curtailment of the poor Blacks” does not seem easy. The ANC and its left-bourgeois mentality has been cemented into Parliament, something which will not be erased overnight. The ANC will not allow it, even if they need to carry out a coup d’état to stay in power. Here in South Africa – where the resistance that had led to the fall of the NP was strongly activated by the trade union movement with their Durban strikes in 1973, the community struggles that mobilised millions of people by the 1980s and their building of democracy from below in their focussed dismantling of White supremacy – that political power was hijacked from them in a deliberate way in 1994 by the already crooked ANC elite returning into the mainstream of politics. Shamelessly the ANC elite sent the true and original 1970s and 1980s fighters for democracy “back to the caves” as Pitman19:27 put it. From 1994 the ANC elite (politburo) started to exercise its dominant power “from above”, continuously via Parliament and the ballot box with false promises. This led to the maintenance of ANC political power through the misuse of its electoral vote, writes Pithouse. For Pithouse19, to reverse the present political contradictions brought about by ANC rule from 1994 to 2019, will require an immense counter-input, similarly to the one between 1973 and 1994 by the masses of Black poor. What is needed firstly, is breaking down the ANC’s power which has silenced the impoverished majority of poor Blacks for 25 years. Secondly, the ANC’s so-called legitimacy via Parliament needs to be erased, together with its many well-established cancerous roots in politics, economics and society. Only this will and can erase the ANC’s present-day misuse of Parliament.19

The lawlessness, corruption and dominance, freely appropriated by the ANC regime via Parliament over 25 years in the absence of an Electoral-Parliament Act, together with the lack of a Parliamentary Ethics Code included in the Act, thus forces three immediate questions upon us:

1) Does the ANC under Cyril Ramaphosa hav the ability to reform and to cleanse itself to serve the people of South Africa, their employer, who has appointed them?

2) May any of the promises in the ANC’s May 2019 manifesto be trusted?

3) Is the ANC able to successfully effect land expropriation with or without compensation between 2019 and 2024?

The 51% voters who stay away from the ballot box in May 2019 and the 28% of voters voting for the ANC in those same elections were willing partners in this political orgy by standing aloof from applicable decision-making during the May 2019 elections. The 72% of voters failed also, by choice, in enforcing or promoting anything like the much-needed Electoral-Parliament Act. Pithouse19 compares this passivity and failure with Immanuel Kant’s thinking on the awakening of self-thinking versus the failure of self-thinking in the 1780s. Pithouse writes19:27:

In 1784, Immanuel Kant argued that enlightenment is the emergence from the immaturity that results from the laziness and cowardice that prevents people from thinking for themselves. He asserted, against forces in the state and church, the imperative to respect ‘the freedom to use reason publicly in all matters’.

Kant’s enlightenment sorely escaped the attention of the mass of 30 million poor Blacks. They are strangers to the concept of freedom and individual self-determination: they are strangers because they are delinquently kept there by the ANC elite’s cunning and devious actions. Looking at the ANC’s continuous strengthening of their grip on power over 25 years, it seems the electorate is going to remain captured for many years to come. Given the absence of political reasoning and constructive public debate by the masses outside Parliament and their blind support for a hard-core ANC regime over six elections, one may have serious misgivings about the future of South African democracy. Voter apathy and blind support for the ANC will ensure the continuation of corrupt politics post-May 2019, together with the shameless misuse of Parliament.19,23

3.1.5. The much-needed “sifting mechanism” for political leaders

Kant’s enlightenment not only escaped the attention of the mass of 30 million poor Blacks, but seemingly also that of educated South Africans. What specicially stands out regarding the more learned section of the population, is their fixation with the Constitution as the only means of law-enforcement as regards political practice in country and how the President is selected and elected. The implications and impact of the Electoral Act on politics are disregarded. This Act and the Constitution of the ANC display a totally undemocratic process in the selection and election of the President, which goes against the grain of liberal democracy. It is not a new trend but a custom and policy that has been followed since 1994. It indeed shows that the Electoral Act must dramatically be revised together with the Constitution to make provision for a much-needed sifting mechanism in the selection and election of executive political leaders, meaning the process. The current politically-laden, undemocratic system in the selection of the President was well-illustrated by the tainted Jacob Zuma’s election in 2009 via the ANC’s national conference system which excluded the say of the majority of South Africa’s voters. The lack of understanding of the indirect, non-voters’ election of the President and the skewed process of his selection as leader, may be seen in the recent opinion by Taylor50 in which he defends the election of the President solely “in terms of our so-called liberal democracy as gestalt by the Constitution”. This postulation of Taylor50 is far from the truth and an utmost misunderstanding and a misleading view of our real politics. [The practice of the election in the selection of law-makers of the Parliament, as well as that of the vice-President and the President, was already fully described in the previous two subsections: ANC’s democratic-centralism ideology (See: 3.1.3.1.) and the South Africa’s faulty electoral system (See 3.1.3.2.) and will only shortly be referred to again].

On his so-called “direct democratic selection and election by the voters of the President in terms of their so-called assumed liberal democracy and Constitution”, Taylor50 writes as follows50:20:

The essence of a democracy is that political power flows from the people (the demos) and the people alone. We and no-one else get to decide who will be our president. Every five years parties give us their lists of candidates, we go to the polls and we elect our representatives on the basis of proportional representation. Any of us can put up our hands to be a representative, to be the president, and the demos will vote on our candidacies; there can be no other criteria, no other sifting mechanism. Anything else isn’t democratic.

The constitution has two primary philosophical functions. The first is that it provides the rules for how the temporary transfer of power from the people to representatives works: in other words elections, the structure of parliament, separation of powers and how, for example, the will of the people is realised in the choosing of a chief justice.

The second function is to place restrictions and obligations on how our representatives operate during their five years tenures. Traditionally, human rights serve as barriers against repressive state action. They are lines in the political sand: the state cannot restrict our speech, it cannot deprive us of life, deny our religious beliefs or force religious beliefs upon us, and it cannot prevent us from organising ourselves in unions, associations and political parties. We can hit the the streets and insult our “leaders”. Moreover, human rights ensure equality in law: that none of us is superior to another.

Looking critically at the last (third) paragraph of Taylor’s50 postulation, it is a pile of unrelated philosophical rhetoric which has nothing to do with obtaining and maintaining good executive political leadership. It must be ignored, together with the philosophical postulations of paragraph two. Only then may we focus on Taylor’s resistance to a sifting mechanism to select and elect the President, which boils down to the notion who sees himself fit for office may stand to be elected as President. Paragraph one contains a contradictory element where he praises the proportional representation system of the present Electoral Act, while he seems to be oblivious to the ANC’s policy of democratic-centralism. In the current setup the ANC’s delegates/representatives of less than 4 000 at its national conference select and elect the ANC leader who at the same time becomes the President of the RSA. Furthermore, it must be noted that the ANC has less than 1 million inscribed members out of a ±57 million population (representing less than a 2% ANC impact) and out of a ±35 million eligible-voters population (representing less than a 3% ANC impact). In the May 2019 elections, only 49% of the total eligible-voters population actually voted. Of this 49% only 28% voted ANC. What Taylor50 further missed, is that in many of the modern liberal democracies, as inscribed in their Constitutions, it is compulsory for all their eligible citizens to register and to vote in elections. This statutory shortcoming in our so-called “excellent” Constitution contributed to the fact that 51% of the eligible voters did not take part in the May elections. This absence of an established liberal democracy is part of the conundrum which has contributed to the ANC having been the sole ruling party since 1994 at the national level. The current President, Cyril Ramaphosa, cannot claim to be elected democratically, neither can the ANC pride themselves on being a democratically elected regime representing the total population.50

South Africa needs a sifting mechanism in the choosing of its executive political leaders on all levels written into the Constitution which states certain clear pre-requirements, for instance a minimum educational qualification and a clean integrity certification. The last-mentioned should include any alleged crimes and misdemeanours under investigation and of course a life-style audit. At the moment the ANC “clearing” rests on its so-called “integrity” committee’s decisions as well as the “approvals” of the Top Six and the NEC of the ANC (the so-called ANC politburo). The lists of candidates to which Taylor refers and where for instance the ANC put up their eligible candidates, were tainted by alleged criminals and even murderers. As many as 22 candidates were alleged to have been tainted and many went back to Parliament, not only to be law-makers, but were promoted into senior parliamentary positions. Jacob Zuma would not have qualified if an official sifting mechanism had been in place when he ousted Thabo Mbeki in 2009 to become President. Likewise, Cyril Ramaphosa would not stay a day on as President after the Public Protector’s finding that he misled Parliament about the R500 000 “gift to his election campaign” from the corrupt company, Bosasa. Central its policy of launching crooks into high-level political executive positions — at least for the ANC as a party and regime — is its “declaration” that “no-one is guilty before having been prosecuted and sentenced by a court of law”. The secretary-general of the ANC, Ace Magashule, via the decisions of the ANC Caucus’s Political Committee, the ANC’s General Council and the ANC’s Integrity Committee, made this standpoint clear in the ANC’s reappointments of tainted ANC-leaders in senior positions in the post-May 2019 government. Integrity only counts for the ANC top brass when they are locked up, an outcome that is not easily reachable when it comes to the ANC’s top leadership in post-1994 South Africa. The ANC’s top brass knows it well and rides the crooked judicial system. How crooked the leadership of the ANC has become but still qualifies today in terms of the proportional representation to be included on its tainted lists of parliamentary candidates, has been the subject of multifarious comments by various political analysts and commentators.50-53

Gumede51 identifies ten untouchable groups that must first be tackled before the rule of law and good politics may be restored. Such groups should be eliminated from the regime’s inner circle and positions of power and influence, which they owe precisely to the ANC’s democratic-centralism and our faulty electoral system that lacks a leadership-sifting mechanism. Here he identifies as the primary untouchable group the ANC’s own corrupt but senior politicians at national, provincial and local level, who flaunt their power and corruptly acquired assets and live ostentatiously on public resources.51

But this ideal outcome propagated by Gumede51 is easier said than done, because the ANC’s democratic-centralism and our faulty official electoral system has been rooted in the ANC’s politics and has been expertly used since 1994. It allows someone such as Ace Magashule to evade the law for his alleged delinquencies. Munusamy writes52:20:

ANC secretary-general ACE Magashule can claim to be a victim of a “fake news media conspiracy” because the National Prosecuting Authority has not been able to formulate a case against him despite myriad illegal activities during his term as Free State premier. The line between wrong and right is indistinct.

Gordhan57, referring to the crooked outcomes between 1994 and 2019 resulting from the ANC regime’s veto of any merit system when it comes to leadership appointments, posits57:19:

The past decade has been characterised by the paralysis of law enforcement agencies to act against corruption, the looting of state coffers, the catastrophic dismantling at the South African Revenue Service (Sars), and rise of a parallel security state targeting political opponents of the state capture project.

Gumede51 similarly comments on the state of lawlessness resulting from ANC cronyism and the lack of any mechanisms to select leaders of integrity by saying51:20:

Allowing political, criminal and business gangsters to remain seemingly untouchable, strutting around arrogantly while ordinary citizens live in fear and poverty gives the sense that SA is out of control, lawless and leaderless.

On 28 June 2019 Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng50 saw fit to allude to the anarchy surrounding so-called “state capture” and its concomitant corruption, as revealed by the Zondo and Mpati Commissions. In a speech to corporate South Africa at the Sunday Times Directors Event in Sandton, he posed the following pertinent questions50:20:

How do we choose leaders? Who qualifies to be a leader? Is there a sifting mechanism of sorts? Isn’t it desirable that, for starters, before you can become a president there are very stringent requirements to be met before you can even begin to run?

It is significant that Mogoeng50 too, is proposing the establishment of some kind of sifting mechanism for political leaders, not only internally by the political parties themselves, but also officially by the state. The power of politicians and rulers to shape the fate of the country is simply too great to leave to mere chance, and requires them to be at least morally “fit for office”. It is clear that South Africa’s so-called “liberal democracy” and its Constitution are not foolproof and is open for exploitation by dishonest politicians.50

Taylor’s50 subsequent reaction to the above questions by Mogoeng50 may be seen as not only inapplicable, but inappropriate. It borders on bad faith when he writes50:20: “What is a problem is that chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng doesn’t like our democracy.” In the same breath he continues his attack by addressing justice Mogoeng directly in an open letter as follows50:20:

Chief justice Mogoeng, you are a functionary of the people, not a paramount leader. Your function is to ensure that political power remains with the demos and that means, at the very least, that we are the “sifting mechanism”. We choose our representatives through the electoral process and they rule at our pleasure. Our vote is the most stringent criterion because, ultimately, political power belongs to us.

Looking critically at Taylor’s50 criticism of Mogoeng, it was exactly because of Mogoeng’s position as functionary of the people that he as a justice had put the questions. Taylor50 uncritically places his faith in the act of voting itself, forgetting that in many totalitarian states voters have for years voted in corrupt dictators, whether coerced or not.

Not anyone of us should have the automatic right to stand for political office: every aspirant candidate needs to be scrutinised for a lack of integrity and education. Without such a pre-selection, democracy is absent and freedom misused. It is important to note that for all statutory professions there are pre-requirements in terms of training and integrity to be able to register and practise for instance as a doctor, an attorney, etc. These registrations are further subject to compulsory renewal yearly as long as the practitioner wants to stay on the roll. Negligence and personal deviances/delinquencies may mean the removal of the professional practitioner’s name from the roll and the end of his ability to practise. In comparison, the careers of philosophers, etc. are not seen as statutory professions and anyone, without the slightest training, may practise it. The status of the self-styled philosopher or the well-learned philosopher does not differ very much from the status of the postdoctoral philosopher. Politicians, especially political leaders, are appointed to high-level positions as law-makers, which make them nothing less than statutory professionals. This makes an official sifting mechanism for politicians urgently needed in a future South African political system. If such a system had been in place since 1994, the Zondo and Mpati Commissions would not have been needed today.50

The above also has a direct bearing on Munusamy’s54 absolute need for lifestyle audits to expose corruption among those whom she called our all-too-easily-tempted-politicians [to which may be added: all-too-easily-elected-politicians]. The argument here is that there are always some politicians who want to live above their means and are therefore amenable to corruption, as well as narcissism, writes Munusamy54. More precisely, there are undoubtedly people directly and indirectly in politics using their positions to access additional sources of income, varying from crooked contracts, bribes, up to donations for election campaigns and the corruption around it, in order to enrich themselves, as well as to ensure their selection to positions of great political power. The best means of applying checks and balances to politicians is through official and rigorous lifestyle audits. It must be comprehensively applied not only to an aspirant politician, but also all of his/her associates such as for instance the companies, trusts and his/her secret donors who are giving to his/her election. The so-called Act on Privacy must not play a role in safeguarding crooked politicians from investigation and the state agency evaluating a candidate must have the right to use all means available, from the SAPS to the NPA and SSA, etc., to gather information in detail. The ANC itself has promised since 2016 to introduce lifestyle audits for ministers, government officials and leaders of public enterprises. Indeed, last year Cyril Ramaphosa pledged that everyone in the government including himself, would undergo them, reports Munusamy54.

Featuring prominently in Munusamy’s54 proposal, is the strict requirement that all MPs and MPLs should also be audited. So far, regarding the ANC’s talking the talk but not walking the walk, nothing has realised. Indeed, as previously said, if these law-makers’ audits had been done since 1994 (when persons with serious criminal records were allowed into Parliament because of their exoneration from doing “evil” as result of “Apartheid’s evil”), South Africa would have been saved the current need for running commissions on state capture and crooked VIPs. It would also have saved Ramaphosa the unnecessary and embarrassing attention of the Public Protector concerning his 2017 Nasrec election campaign. Moreover, it would have set in motion the much-needed evolution of the ANC’s economic policies, cemented as they have been in democratic-centralism which emanates from its pre-1994 years and its communist past. As a result of its iron grip on power in South Africa, 86 members serve in the ANC’s autocratic politburo (representing only 2% of the ANC-members) who have never had a lifestyle audit so far and of whom some are even regarded by the ANC’s Integrity Commission as seriously tainted.54,55

Regarding the findings of the ANC’s own integrity committee, these are often rejected in favour of keeping corrupt politicians in office. Commenting on this tendency, the political commentator Justice Malala writes96:

These leaders of the ANC past and present don’t believe they and a large chunk of the electorate are bound by the laws passed by its parliament and enforced by the organs of state: the police, the prosecutorial services and the judiciary.

It’s not just at national level. It cascades down through the entire ANC. Two weeks ago it was reported that the ANC in Gauteng had rejected its own integrity commission’s recommendations to remove several members, including two who are linked to the VBS Mutual Bank scandal.

The integrity commission in Gauteng, headed by Trevor Fowler, recommended that the mayors of Merafong and the West Rand be fired for their complicity in taking ratepayers’ money and unlawfully, despite clear legal advice, depositing it into VBS. They broke the law and they did so knowingly. Yet the ANC in Gauteng, which for the past 10 years many of us gullible fools have been calling “the enlightened ANC”, chose to defend them. As Mbete said, they see things differently in this ANC. They do not see the rule of law.

The above absence of an official sifting mechanism of politicians before being allowed into executive positions, such as lifestyle audits for the ANC politicians seeking parliamentary positions (besides the utter failure of the party’s integrity commission described by Malala), is deeply rooted in its strong democratic-centralism. Its primary aim and intention is the gobbling up of any challenger or opposition to its well established Marxist-Leninist model of power maximisation and permanent rule. As Feketha56, Munusamy54, Gordhan57 and Padayachee et al.55, already showed in some way, Professor William Gumede58 of the School of Governance at Wits takes further, in depth. Besides the ANC’s adherence to and continuing practice of its rigid pre-1994 revolutionary ideology to maintain undisturbed democratic-centralism, Gumede also points to the use by the ANC’s top leadership of racism and “Black victimhood” to secure their position of political power over the last 25 years. The intertwining of three insidious elements led directly to an ANC-sanctioned culture of state capture, corruption and mismanagement while constant, internalised malfeasance created a culture of unaccountability and irresponsibility. In fact, irresponsibility and unaccountability might be described as an insouciant “lifestyle” in its own right. This in turn makes the implementation of lifestyle audits impossible and the 2016 intention of Ramaphosa to introduce it, tantamount to hypocrisy: On the contrary, it became a topic for the top brass to avoid, because it endangers the established democratic-centralism (autocracy) of the ANC and thus will nullify the top brass’s autocratic rule over the greater party, Parliament and the country. Such autocracy is a revolutionary tradition, habit and custom, which has been internalised in the ANC mindset since its terrorist days. It is a system that Mandela, up to Ramaphosa, brilliantly uses when their power is endangered from within the ANC as well as from outside. The same strategy is applicable to Jacob Zuma, Ace Magashule and David Mabuza fighting at present in the ANC for the autocratic soul of the party.54-58

Gumede58 elaborates further on the functioning of the power structure within the current ANC58:16:

The ANC is guided by democratic centralism, where every member has to obey central decisions and where leaders vet even the lowest-level appointments. These are among the reasons why corruption flourished in a system where everyone must support the party leadership, no matter whether it is wrong, incompetent or corrupt. “Deployment” to government or to the private sector is based on loyalty and struggle “credentials”, rather than ability and competence.

There is the belief that the party laws are above those of the country, even above individual conscience. Many ANC members and supporters would rather follow the party line. They uncritically support party leaders. When corruption is exposed, the party faithful close ranks.

In a centralised party system, a small group can capture the party and wield power over life, careers and public resources.

They made centralised decisions that were accepted as edicts. They appointed loyalists to every level of the party and government. They were uncritically supported by the rank and file, under the rubric of loyalty.

The deputy-general of the SACP, Solly Mapaila, has argued that the use by the ANC’s politburo of democratic-centralism-cum-autocracy to develop a predatory state, has been well hidden inside their pretended implementation of Black economic empowerment over the years. This has led to disadvantage the Black majority while propping up a few politically connected politicians.56

On the intention of the ANC politburo to maintain at all times its policy of democratic centralism, rendering the introduction of an honest lifestyle audit, independent of the ANC’s corrupt party politics, impossible, Gumede58 shows how White racism (citing Apartheid going all the way back to 1652) is seen by the politburo as a danger to Black nationalism. He writes58:18:

Many ANC supporters often still back leaders, issues and politics almost exclusively on the basis of race. US scholar of race Cornel West, in a differing setting, warned about reducing every issue to “racial reasoning”. When an individual is corrupt, all one has to do is to claim racism, and people rally emotionally to that person. Misplaced black solidarity often demands closing ranks behind dubious personalities.

If a white person rightly criticises a corrupt black person, the corrupt person is embraced. Misplaced struggle solidarity has the same effect. If a non-ANC person, or an opposition party member or supporter criticises a corrupt ANC leader, the corrupt ANC leader is protected. If a black person is doing the criticism, he or she is a “puppet” of whites as “white monopoly capital” and “selling out” their race.

This organised racial politics of the ANC in assuring its corruption, etc., but most of all its’ politburo’s absolute autocracy, also streamed since 1994 out of its so-called democratic centralism into the cognition of “black victimhood”, sanctioned further the ANC’s politburo’s right to can do anything wrong because it “services the Black-nation”.

Gumede further enlightens us58:18:

Black victimhood also encourages corruption. It appears that almost every wrong government decision, failure and poor policy made by current leaders is blamed on apartheid, colonialism or conspiracies by the white elite or hostile Western countries.

Black leaders in government and the private sector are increasingly using colonialism, apartheid and Western “imperialism” to cover their incompetence, mismanagement and corruption. Many African leaders and government have cynically promoted the idea of Africans being victims. This easy option numbs creative thinking. It means that leaders and governments can shrink their responsibility to voters. It has also made it difficult to hold leaders and governments accountable for wrongdoing, lack of delivery of delivery and corruption.

The introduction of the much-needed “sifting mechanism” in the selection of ANC political leaders and the doing of a lifestyle audit on them as “preached” by Cyril Ramaphosa in 2016, will and can never be executed in terms of uncontaminated and responsible international evaluation criteria. When looking at the many tainted top ANC members in the present Ramaphosa regime “because they have not yet been found guilty in a court of law”, Ramaphosa’s own inexplicable and seemingly desperate efforts to keep the donors to his 2017 Nasrec leadership campaign secret at all costs via the court provides a prominent example. His use of the permanent, age-old, ingrained trick of “stretched values” in the selection of the ANC’s leaders, makes it clear that the testing of the concepts of goodness, integrity, honesty, responsibility and accountability has never been internalised in ANC political culture and will probably never be internalised in the future. They refuse to face accusations in public to prove their innocence. The abuse of the South African courts for civil cases to silence accusations has become the order of the day for many ANC leaders to ride out accusations and allegations. Prominent here is the court order obtained by the suspended chief financial officer (CFO) of the Sol Plaatje municipality, Lydia Mahloko, who had interdicted the Northern Cape’s local governance executive committee members (MEC) from tabling a damning investigation report which recommends that she be criminally charged for flouting supply-chain management processes during the procurement of a fleet, including the purchase of the mayoral vehicle. The mindset of the ANC politiburo is saturated with autocracy as guided and practised by means of democratic-centralism, racism and Black victimhood. Magashule, Zuma, Mabuza and Ramaphosa’s political activities reflect all the manifestations of these syndromes. If Ramaphosa already has a problem with the Public Protector’s elementary investigation of the donors and the “movement and end-allocation” of their so-called “sincere gift money” for his 2017 Nasrec election, what will his counter-attack look like when she launches a full lifestyle audit on him, starting in 1980, and scrutinising every cent he generated as well as from whom, for which service delivered?54,58,59

3.2. Evaluation guidelines for political parties

3.2.1. Overview

The successful execution of the post-2019 land-reform issue is undoubtedly dependent on the abilities, integrity and sound cognitive thinking, planning and implementation by a so-called “good” government, together with a “good” leadership in whom integrity and Solomon’s wisdom are essential characteristics. This means a regime that is not blindly on a path of “reaching the goal at any cost” but to effectively achieving an end-result regarding the matter, which would be a success. This requires a regime honestly serving the interests of all its people by following a well-drawn-up roadmap for an orderly land-reform initiative, and steering it into reality.

The essential question here is thus whether the ANC can be theoretically deemed a candidate or may be shortlisted and thus be considered to have the leadership potential to ensure the successful implementation and completion of the post-2019 plan on land expropriation.

The evaluation guidelines for political parties, as already used in the previous Articles 9 (EFF) and 10 (DA) will precisely be re-used to evaluate the ANC as national, provincial and municipal rulers. These guidelines on the ANC are:

  1. Its general policies as well as specific standpoints on issues such as respect for law and order, as well as the fighting of corruption, state capture, the behavioral delinquency of its MPs and MPLs, as well as its top leaders, in addition to the party’s and its leaders’ views on land expropriation without compensation, etc., as evidenced by its manifesto for the 2019 election;
  2. Public criticism for the period 1994 to 2019 in newspapers, etc., evaluated and reflected by political analysts, strategists and commentators on the party as a political organisation, its members’ and leaders’ behaviours and actions such as corruption, state capture, as well as the behaviour-delinquency of MPs and MPLs, top brass leaders, their views on land     expropriation without compensation, etc., as well as the party’s internal organisational conflicts, and controversial political, economic and social views and opinion.
3.2.1.1. The Louw Appraisal Checklist

For the quantitative classification and measuring of the political records of the ANC, the Louw Appraisal Checklist to Assess the Leadership Qualities of South Africa’s Executive Political Leaders and Regimes: 1652 to 2018 will again be used.60 The 82 selective items of the checklist on leaders and governments, quantified in terms of its bad-versus-good-classification, was again applied to all information collated in the literature review of the party’s manifesto and the writings of investigative journalists, political commentators and political analysts and interpreted as the researcher sees applicable. For guiding the gathering of the information on the ANC, the approach used with the EFF and DA, is again set out as follows for better understanding, namely:

1) The Curriculum Vitae (CV) to obtain insight into the candidates’ qualifications, experience, extraordinary skills, etc; and

2) The letters of the referees, the Attestations, to offer, firstly, further insight into the qualifications, experience, etc. of the candidate; and secondly, at the same time give us confidential insight into the good versus bad habits, customs, characteristics, etc., of the candidate, that are well-masked in, or absent from the CV. This referee-data mostly informs us well regarding the “goodness” or “badness” of a candidate, which can make him in the end a failure or a success in the handling of the responsibilities of the post.

In this research the manifesto and self-description offered by the ANC and its leaders will be seen as their CVs. Hereto the public reporting by journalists and other sources will be seen as the letters of referees/references or attestations. The account or verdict awarded to the ANC as a capable and skilled ruler able to successfully execute land reform, will only be calculated in terms of the Louw Appraisal Checklist60 at the end of the final article in the series (article 20).

3.3. African National Congress

3.3.1. Overview

The manifesto, self-descriptions and public referees of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF: Part 1) and the Democratic Alliance (DA: Part 2) have already been published in the previous two articles (9 and 10) under the title: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa”.

The manifesto, self-descriptions and public referees of the African National Congress (ANC: Part 3) will be published next, also under the above general title.

It is an open question if the ANC, “mandated” by the voters as the post-2019 government of South Africa, can truly drive the intended land expropriation as an enterprise with honesty and integrity, to bring it to a successful end? Issues that immediately come to mind are the skills, abilities, integrity and capabilities of the ANC as a regime and as a party, together with the skills, abilities, integrity and capabilities of its elite and leaders. Primary among these is the important question of integrity and whether they might be trusted by voters to exercise their mandate. Integrity is not limited to a single plane: it is comprehensive, including social, economic, personal and political trustworthiness and honesty. Looking at the ANC’s pre-2019 regime record, when comparing it with the prerequisites of Patricia De Lille’s61 list of the seven conditions (which she formulated in her Good Party manifesto for the 8 May elections) which a so-called good government must fulfil too, it clearly fails all of these seven conditions. (Notwithstanding this failure, De Lille joined as minister in Ramaphosa’s cabinet!) The problem here is that the ANC’s election manifesto and its 1994 to 2019 behaviour as a regime did not adhere to the cognitive mindset, the psyche, the culture, customs, traditions and habits or the ability to distinguish between good and bad government. It means that if pre-2019 ANC behaviour is repeated in post-2019 South Africa, good governance will stay an unattainable dream within ANC politics. A successful land expropriation plan thus equally unattainable.61-63

The general ANC manifesto can give us some clue as to what positive or negative elements may be expected from the regime for the period 2019 to 2024.

3.3.2. The general ANC manifesto

Regarding the ANC’s general manifesto for the May 2019 election, launched in January 2019, Derby62, Hunter64 and Kgosana63 point out that it was again saturated with a mass of empty promises of more and better work, better health and education, and contaminated with populism. Missing, however, was prudence. The manifesto further reflects some conflicting views, opinions and mostly, hostile commitments: a Ramaphosa version and a Magashule-Zuma–version, contrasting with each other on issues of cardinal importance such as nationalisation, etc. The coexistence of these two versions and a seemingly growing split in the ANC’s general as well as specific politics (which seems to be purely a leadership struggle rather than a true fight around political principles according to many analysts) are still continuing at the close of this article on 31 October 2019.62-64

Kgosana63 described the ANC’s general manifesto, after an in-depth analysis of it, together with a history of the regime as from 1994, as follows63:17:

The manifest failures of the ANC’s manifesto are all around us: The same bright, shiny, shameless promises are repeated each election, never to be actually met.

More specifically on the ANC’s manifesto, Kgosana writes63:17:

Yes, the ANC has done a lot since 1994. Building infrastructure, electrifying homes, connecting people to clean water, ensuring near universal access to basic education. But these achievements are negated by a bloated and uncaring bureaucratic system, corruption, incompetence and indifference. After the nightmare of the Zuma years, the ANC has to do a lot more than repeat empty promises.

Derby62 takes us closer to the “political darkness” inside the ANC soul, as reflected by its manifesto, when he comments62:2:

In a still-precarious position, there’s simply no room for the ANC — or, I’d add, any party looking to lead after this year’s polls — to veer far off a script that speaks of fiscal prudence. The party has blown the surplus position it had more than a decade ago; it has hired all the public servants it can hire and doled out all the political favours it possibly can. On the last one, we can only hope, right?

It will be interesting see what the manifestos still to come will offer as solutions to what’s now a stale tale of woe. And thereafter we‘ll have to wait for the “Naas Botha” commentary that follows to drum up uncertainty. A state, I am starting to believe, that is inescapable for any functional democracy.

Built into the ANC general manifesto for the May 2019 elections must be read the party’s poor track record coming from 1994, writes the editor of the Sunday Times on 10 February 2019. Specific stands here as reference President Ramaphosa’s Nation Address (Sona) in February 2019. Putting into perspective the many promises of Ramaphosa (which had seemingly become a habit with him still nearly six months after the elections) to improve education, accelerate the economy and return the country to the rule of law, etc., it was clear that neither Ramaphosa as a leader, nor the ANC as a party and regime, have what it takes to deliver from 2019 to 2024 what it has promised. South Africans have heard many promises from the ANC’s executive leaders from the same podium as the one that Ramaphosa used in February 2019. The editor of the Sunday Times in this context writes65:16:

Who can forget Zuma’s first promise in 2009 after his election as state president a few weeks earlier? At the heart of our worst recession, Zuma stood in front of the nation promising to create 500,000 jobs every year. He never delivered, despite repeating this promise of creating jobs every year of his nine years in office.

Ramaphosa’s reign has so far echoed Zuma’s failed actions, however much his clan wants to manipulate the truth in their stand-off with the Magashule-Zuma clan, which has now become a daily cry from the Ramaphosa camp to the public to take these myths and lies for the truth.65

Note what Jacob Zuma himself said in April 2019 around the hypocritical “virtue” of the ANC after 1994 — seemingly “anointed” and innocent as an angel just descended from Heaven — in his ANC May election roadshow promoting the ANC’s general manifesto by describing all the post-1994 wrongs under the ANC (wherein the ANC and its elite was the sole governing party) to be simply the after-effects of Apartheid. Cele66, in this context, reports66:8:

He lauds the party for being honest; admits that there had been some difficulties in fixing the wrongs made by the oppressors, saying that it cannot happen overnight. When you vote for the ANC, you vote for a car that is already en route, you don’t vote for a car whose road worthiness you are unsure of. There is no one who can say that the ANC has not worked for its people.

Zuma is not alone in this cloud of empty promises and dreams. The political figure Cyril Ramaphosa also stands out in his empty pre-election promises and undertakings, writes the labour-relations journalist Terry Bell67. Bell refers to these many promises as outlandishness, which he defines as meaning: looking or sounding bizarre. Specifically on the political, emotional and spoken manifestations, Bell writes67:2:

Extravagant – outlandish – promises are the stock of the political elite as they seek the votes to install them at the parliament trough.

Take the guarantee by President Cyril Ramaphosa that the ANC would build 1 million new houses in Johannesburg‘s Alexandra township within five years.

One million houses? For a population of anything up to 500 000 people living on 800 hectares of land, which, government admits, has the infrastructure to only cater for 70 000 residents? The mind boggles.

And older residents, among them trade unionists who were part of the militant Alex anti-apartheid resistance of the 1980s, have heard it all before.

As recently as 2001, former president Thabo Mbeki announced a R1.6 billion Alexandra renewal project that promised between 50 000 and 66 000 new homes within seven years. What happened to the money and the project is still being investigated.

This outright misleading and false information can already give us an indication of what to expect from 2019 to 2024 from the ANC in most of its endeavours of which addressing land ownership will be the most important. In this context the question is how can any person mislead himself so immensely as to accept his own lies as the truth? Political manipulation and empty promises may be part of the politician’s stock-in-trade, but the ANC has take it to a new level, comparable to some of the more outlandish, to use Bell’s term, promises and predictions made by African dictators such as Idi Amin or Mobutu Sese Seko.

Looking critically at the content of the ANC’s manifesto for the May 2019 election, much of it consisted of the recycling of old ideas, as well as failed outcomes disguised as doubtful successes: it says really nothing of constructing a future and bringing value to the people of South Africa. Looking more broadly at what the text of the manifesto tried to address — such as, for example, the erasing of poverty, inequality, unemployment and the maintenance of a capable state, etc. — these are indeed hackneyed themes during ANC rule from 1994 to 2019. These problems were mostly exacerbated by the ANC itself through its immense mismanagement, such as the theft of state money belonging to the poor by the ANC’s cronies. It was only repackaged for ANC propaganda during the May 2019 elections, not so much as to bring healing, but to present their failures as the results of Apartheid, deflecting from ANC wrongdoing. The political researcher, Thokozani Chilenga-Buta33, also sees the endless repetition of the ANC’s populist themes in the run-up to the May elections, when he writes33:30:

Though these are nice ideas, they are not new. They were punted in the National Development plan (NDP) which was endorsed by Parliament in 2013. At the time the ANC had the full support of Parliament, including opposition parties, to implement the ideals of the NDP.

These problems and failures created by the ANC regime, lacking as always a constructive effort to address and solve them at least in some way, were also reflected by the lekgotla of the ANC’s national executive committee (NEC) at the beginning of June 2019. Chilenga-Butao states33:30:

“That in 2019 the NEC lekgotla is propagating the same old rhetoric — without saying why it thought these ideas had failed to be implemented since 2013 — is a major deception.”

3.3.3. The Ramaphosa manifesto

Ostensibly in an effort to imprint his own powerful status upon the minds of both the ANC and the public, Cyril Ramaphosa also published his own pre-May 2019 manifesto. (This was clearly seen by some analysts, firstly as an attempt to undermine the ANC’s democratic-centralism wherein every member, including the President of the South African state, is subordinate to policy and resolutions taken during its conference, and secondly as a direct effort at that time by Ramaphosa to call attention to his saviour-status in his leadership conflict with Ace Magashule, the secretary general of the ANC).

The best reflection of a self-description (and of a CV) of the present-day ANC’s intentions to shamelessly mislead  the public and dishonestly recruit of voters after 25 years of corruption and failed governance, were the nine paragraphs below containing the ANC’s general political manifesto and its president’s seemingly politically confused mindset.33,72.73

This manifesto, emanating directly from Cyril Ramaphosa’s belief-system and political mindset, does not sound different from that of Jacob Zuma. Ramaphosa’s message to South Africans to vote for him and the ANC was published on 17 March 2019 in both the Rapport and the Sunday Times respectively. It reads72:9 and 73:2:

Mede-Suid-Afrikane/ Fellow South Africans

Die toekoms van ons land is in die hande van diegene wat die meeste daarvoor omgee. Jy, die stemgeregtigde/ The future of our country is in the hands of those who care about it the most. You, the Voter.

‘n Hernude gevoel van trots – en ‘n nasie vol verwagtinge – berus op die punt van die pen wat jy op 8 Mei 2019 sal gebruik om jou stem uit te bring/ A renewed sense of pride – and a nation bursting with expectations – sits squarely at the tip of the pen that will be using to make your mark on the 8th of May 2019.

Bring dus jou stem uit vir die party wat met dieselfde passie as jy in hernuwing glo/ So, make your mark for the party that believes in renewal with the same passion that you do.

Die party wat ons nasie se toekoms vooropstel in sy hart en ‘n regering wat ‘n gespesialiseerde teen korrupsie-eenheid gestig het/The party that has our nation’s future foremost in its heart and a government that has put in place a specialised anti-corruption unit.

Die party wat daarop aangedring het om die Zondo-kommissie te stig om staatsopname bloot te lê en te vernietig/ The party that insisted on setting up the Zondo Commission to expose and destroy state capture.

Die party wat die proses gelei het om weereens die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomstediens (SARS) gekry het om volgens wêreldgehalte te funksioneer/The party that has led the process of once again getting SARS working at its world class best.

Die party onder wie se leierskap, ‘n nuwe leierskap van die National Prosecuting Authority, daargestel het/The party under whose leadership, a new leadership of the National Prosecuting Authority has been put in place.

Die party wat die vermoë van die regering herstel het om dienste billik aan almal te verskaf./ The party that is restoring the ability of government to provide services fairly to all

Op 8 Mei 2019, maak ‘n onuitwisbare merk vir die toekoms van vernuwing wat Suid-Afrika verdien/. On the 8th of May 2019, make an indelible mark for the future of renewal that South Africa deserves.

Maak jou merk/ Make your mark.

Stem ANC/ Vote ANC.

Saam Sal Ons Suid-Afrika Laat Groei/ Let’s Grow South Africa Together.

[Signed] Cyril Ramaphosa

President van die ANC/ President of the ANC

3.3.3.1. Analysis of the Ramaphosa manifesto

The above message firstly needs to be analysed before the ANC may be considered as a potential ruler (an employee), mandated by the voters (as the employer within our scheme) effect land expropriation with or without compensation. The above nine paragraphs consist of at least eleven misleading items and untruths: it seems to be clear here that in Ramaphosa’s political mind, as  in that of most of the ANC’s top brass, myths have become truths after their 25 years of unfettered rule and extreme power.72:9

The use of the words “renewed, renewal and restoring” is striking, confirming that the ANC itself has recognised that its political integrity, actions and deliveries from 1994 to 2019 have been sorely lacking, apart from its corruption, negligence and mismanagement.72:9

Referring to a renewed feeling of pride, the “renewed” and “restoring” confirm that the period 1994 to 2019 was undoubtedly a period of constant despair and of loss, experienced by the nation exclusively at the hands of the ANC regime. His specific reference to the renewing of the ANC is an acknowledgement by him of his outright failure, as well as that of his party between 1994 and 2019 to fulfil their mandate of providing good government. Pertinent here is the literature which confirms that the ANC’s mindset and behaviour became totally focussed on internal matters with serious wrongdoing and a culture of delinquency.72:9

Ramaphosa’s reference to the repair of the ANC is again an admission of guilt that the ANC was in 2019 a failed party and a failed regime, overseen by equally failed leaders since 1994: A party that would not be trusted or allowed again as the post-2019 government if a sifting mechanism existed. Ramaphosa’s pleading for the rehabilitation of the ANC above reminds one of the empty words of a confirmed psychopathic criminal, asking for forgiveness for his bad actions to society and to be allowed back amongst them, knowing well he is just going to continue with his serious delinquencies, being conscious that his bad character cannot be changed for the better. To speak like Ramaphosa of his party who had put the nation first/foremost from 1994 to 2019, is an utter lie and a hoax. Firstly, the chaos in our economics, the extreme poverty of 30 million Blacks, criminality and corruption, etc., by the ANC elite and their cronies have long ago erased the concept of nation from most South Africans’ minds. The promise to restore the ability of the government to provide services to the citizens, who are the people (employer) who had appointed them, is nothing else than the acknowledgement that never after Apartheid had there again been any services of average standard offered by the ANC, or when sometimes offered, limited to short periods after 1994 and limited to the ANC’s favourites. Secondly, when Ramaphosa speaks of the concept of a nation, he, for vote-gathering, clearly deviated from his party’s previous classification of Whites as non-Africans and as colonists respectively and thus not part of the ANC’s nation concept.72:9

Ramaphosa’s bragging as to the establishment of a specialised corruption unit must let him feel giddy: Who was the ruler from 1994 to 2019 and who was vice-president under Jacob Zuma when the immense corruption, which Ramaphosa now “promises to erase”, started to develop and to reach a climax: the ANC and Cyril Ramaphosa. The founding of the specialised corruption unit is indeed meant to catch the ANC’s elite (although the prosecuting outcome is far from that). Ramaphosa’s specialised corruption unit failed so far at the closing of this research on 31October 2019 to bring to book a single one of the ANC’s top elite who had been identified by the Zondo or the Mpati commissions. With the establishment of the Zondo commission, notwithstanding the fact that it was conducted under the chair of an excellent justice with high integrity, Ramaphosa knows well that is toothless and a masked instrument to strengthen his position against the Zuma-Magashule clan in the hope of underminging their power in the ANC and within the party’s NEC after 2019. It is about his own power struggle and not improving the lot of the voters or that of the country.72:9

For instance, his so-called renewing of SARS means one thing: SARS (the South African Revenue Service) collapsed solely under ANC rule and is still struggling post-May 2019. Evidence suggests that SARS is miles away from rehabilitation and a positive restart. Also Ramaphosa’s stumbling with the NPA as renewed by the appointment of a new leader who has bettered it, is far from the truth: there is a new leader but so far no real high-ranking culprits identified by the Zondo and Mpati commissions, have been arrested.72:9

A further element in the above, is an effort to rehabilitate the ANC and its elite, after their disastrous rule of 25 years, through Ramaphosa’s plea of “please forgive the ANC top brass their failings”, a hint of despondency in Ramaphosa’s message, without saying it directly, that there had been an immense collapse in the ANC from 2009 onwards. The investigative literature offered by many journalists and political analysts prominently point to Jacob Zuma as the so-called “culprit”. This misleading thinking was also confirmed and promoted by the ANC’s head of elections, Fikile Mbalula74 (a prominent Ramaphosa fan), when he notably said74:4:

We have baggage from an era of a president who was not providing leadership but was associated with all the bad things. Literally everyone influential in the republic never believed in the leadership of former president Zuma,

and74:4:

Zuma affected our image because he was viewed in relation to state capture as the president of the country and the ANC, and that caused damage to the ANC”, as well as: “But now we have a new head of state who is doing good things because it is the new dawn, a strategic era that we are in.

Mbalula, as well as Ramaphosa know well it is not true: both Mbalula and Ramaphosa were prominent ANC leaders during the Zuma administration and did nothing constructive to stop Zuma and his cronies.72,74

In reaction to Mbalula and the Ramaphosa clan’s above political folly, all that can be said is that it seems as if Ramaphosa and the ANC were misleading the public with the Ramaphosa manifesto. Just read what Danny Titus75 writes about the ANC circus of fools and crooks — and possibly indirectly reflecting also on the Ramaphosa manifesto — when he posits75:19:

Die politici skud hul vere reg om straat toe te gaan met hul basuine: “Stem vir my, daai ander ouns is net ‘n klomp robbiese!” Enige erkenning oor korrupsie of hoe om dit op te los? Bloedweinig. Enige verwysings na korrupsie en die impak daarvan op doodgewone mense, die kiesers? Vergeet maar daarvan.

Titus75 refers to “election talk” and suggests that there are lies and subterfuge involved in propping up the ANC’s charade of a “free and democratic South Africa”75:19:

Konstrateer daarmee die vetgesmeerde katte van die politiek en die bedryfslewe, luister na die verkiesingspraatjies en dan sien ons die daaglikse leuens waarin in die vrye en demokratiese Suid-Afrika gelewe word.

It seems, reading the Ramaphosa manifesto (as well as the general ANC manifesto), as if even the President of the ANC and President of South Africa, does not understand the meaning of Titus’s specific pinpointing of the serious consequences of the ANC’s corruption between 1994 and 2019 and how the ANC regime cold-bloodedly crooked the innocent and most vulnerable citizens of South Africa over 25 years of their rule. Titus refers in this context to a United Nations report on the impact of corruption on basic human rights (which undoubtedly includes South African) that shows up the many contradictions in the Ramaphosa manifeste and the general ANC manifesto, as well as the illogical thinking of the ANC top brass on good governance. Titus75 states, regarding the devastating effects of corruption under ANC rule75:19:

Korrupsie is ‘n skending van menseregte, ‘n skending van ons Grondwet. Die reg op voedsel, huivesting, gesondheidsorg, die reg op lewe – dit word daagliks geskend deur munisipalteite, provinsiale en nationale regerings. Nie deur onbevoegdheid nie. Die skending vind daagliks plaas deur korrupsie wat ons land soos dryfsand ingesuig het. “Poorest of the poor; inequality; poverty and unemployment” – dié rympie hoor ons nou al jare. Deur volksverteenwoordigers wat willens en wetens hul kiesers belieg en bedreig.

How much the promises of the election manifestos of Ramaphosa and the ANC on the eve of the 8 May 2019 election were devoid of truth, was at last confirmed by Ramaphosa himself when he responded in June 2019 (after his inauguration as President) on the criticism levelled against his Third Sona and his unrealistic dreams by admitting that neither he nor the ANC regime could fix the country’s problems, mostly created by the ANC themselves, in the next five years, or even in ten or more years. He want so far as to admit that there were no shortcuts or quick fixes to solve the problems he had promised in his election manifesto to fix fast.76

Ramaphosa’s manifesto message is not worth the paper it is printed on: it is built on myths and deception. Contradicting the exclusive guilt of Jacob Zuma since 2009, is all the evidence that the ANC has been a failure from 1994 to this day during which Zuma was only one of a mass of corrupt ANC leaders. It is time that Ramaphosa obtained better insight into his “virtuous ANC”, as well as himself as a so-called beloved, good paramount-chief and as an extraordinary saviour to make post-2019 South Africa a success. Looking at his part in the Zuma regime, up to his present actions in the ANC, it is doubtful if he could ever obtain that insight.72

Ex-President Kgalema Motlanthe77 (who had served as interim president from September 2008 to May 2009 and who had also been secretary general from 1997 to 2007 and the party’s deputy president from 2007 to 2012), warned Ramaphosa in public on his foolish election campaign — specifically his promises, but seemingly without impact before the May elections. Firstly, he tells Ramaphosa that he is not the anointed politico-messiah to save the dying ANC, or to save the post-May 2019 South Africa. What Motlanthe77 apparently tried to say was that the ANC is terminally sick. Until the ANC will be finally deceased, the ANC and its leaders pose great dangers for post-May 2019 South Africa’s democracy, economics and the rights of its people. The ANC stayed an opportunistic revolutionary party to this day. The Ramaphosa manifesto confirms it in an exemplary way.77

3.3.4. The extravagance, outlandishness and bizarreness characteristic of some ANC politicians’ mindsets

The seeming extravagance, outlandishness and bizarreness characteristic of some politicians’ mindsets, which were reflected in the run-up to the May 2019 elections by some of the parties’ manifestos and which spell danger for the South African community post-May 2019, became in some way at last understandable when Siyahleba68 introduces us to the weird world of politics with his description of the origin of the naked ambition of politicians. Siyahleba writes68:2:

Delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities, such as genius, fame, omnipotence or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia.

Then Siyahleba68 goes on to describe a certain person in the ANC. But looking critically at the ANC’s elite’s delinquent actions in general, it seems as if Siyahleba’s68 formulation is also applicable to some of the ANC’s other leaders, as evidenced not only by their false promises to the voters, but also by their false behaviour in politics over the period 1994 to 2019.

These bizarre promises in reality extend wider as regards the ANC’s elite. Knowing for instance all too well that their Alexandra Renewal Project was a failure, primarily because of their maladministration as ruling party, intertwined with their corruption and theft of state funds. Moreover, the despair created by the ANC regime, commencing in 2006 as a result of their failed Alexandra Renewal Project, is in the process of being steered into serious and comprehensive civil unrests.69 It signifies an identity struggle inside the soul of the ANC. When evaluated in-depth, the ANC leader’s psyche reflects the confusion of a soul in peril, resulting from decades of changes and exposures to new constructive elements, far away from the old, unstable liberation and revolutionary elements. It seems to fit into Siyahleba’s68 theory of schizophrenia, psychotic or bipolar disorders, and dementia. The ANC top brass display more and more delusions of grandeur and faith in a make-believe world where their false promises become realities, good outcomes that are going to realise, that they are geniuses, and that they are the only anointed persons who can save the country and its people. The so-called “big man syndrome” but then in the form of elect saviours.70

The above shows how the strong or “big” men of the ANC have received the entitlement to rule, unobstructed as “anointed” leaders of the liberation party (“…and in a Zuma way, until Jesus comes back to the earth”, according to his famous dictum), cognitively unaware that they are not political geniuses and did not receive mandates for autocratic rule in terms of the extreme and dangerous mood-swings of their minds. These leaders see themselves as “keepers of the liberation heritage”, which they used first and foremost to ensure their own self-preservation as the party’s elites. The whole approach to stay in power is done by means of false propaganda to members, supporters, voters. They became messiahs whose false words and integrities no-one may dare to doubt, as the many political fallacies of Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Jacob Zuma and now apparently Cyril Ramaphosa adhere to in their self-confident belief in their own “good” leadership and their so-called “sincere love” for the population, reflect very well.70

Makhanya71 further unmasked this false liberation ideology offered by the ANC leadership in their political manifestos going as far back as 1994. Hereto the promises from pre-and post-May 2019 of the present ANC leader Ramaphosa are central – namely, as a good leader and still a keeper of the ANC’s liberation heritage, he could make promises in the May elections to voters notwithstanding the failure of the ANC’s liberation after 1994. Regarding the fallacious promises of the ANC and thus also Ramaphosa’s promises as its leader which will and cannot be realised after 8 May 2019, Makhanya informs us71:2:

…those who are drunk on Ramaphoria must wake up from the stupor and recognise that the work that must be done is arduous and that the messiah is someone who watched passively from inside the cockpit as Zuma willingly navigated the ship into stormy waters. The man may be our leader for the next five years but he will not be our saviour [especially not through his promises].

How the ANC’s leadership has projected itself during the May 2019 elections to its supporters and voters as “good” and assured the voters that in the past they have only been doing good and that they are going to do only good in the future for them, as well as being the keepers of the future democracy while at the same time in the ANC backroom contradictory thinking and corrupt actions were going on, is pointed out by Bell regarding the ANC’s silent promulgation of their “Bantustan Bill”. Here, in an effort to keep their rural supporters for at the expense of the poor rural Blacks, the ANC’s Traditional and Khoisan Leadership Bill as well as the Traditional Courts Bill (which were for obvious reasons were not a public part of the ANC’s “election promises” in their manifestos) are on the verge of being signed into law, writes Bell67. On the dangers that these two Bills are holding for the innocent and uniformed voters if they become laws – and thus after the ANC leadership’s glowing promises before 8 May, Bell reports67:2:

“Together, they reinforce the Bantustan Balkanisation of the country and remove from the general rule of law some 17 million people who live in what the apartheid state called ‘tribal homelands’.”

3.3.5. Past, present and future South African scenarios

Looking back critically at the 1994 to 2019 political history of the ANC, there are certain signs of growths, developments and actions which show constancy and which form the basis for being able to offer generalisations on the actions to be expected from the ANC post-May 2019. The outcomes flowing from these generalisations may be positive or negative in the end. But, as history’s Joker often does, he can make the post-May 2019 political scenario suddenly and unexpectedly look totally different from the pre-May 2019 scenario. Such an outcome may disturb South African politics dramatically and drastically. To a certain extent we must note it and make preparations for the future, even for “political joking” or unexpected developments in post-2019 South Africa. In the next subdivision a summary of past, present and future scenarios, offered by political analysts, is presented.

3.3.5.1. Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection’s Indlulamithi Scenarios for 2018 to 2030

Makhanya71 reports on the indicators of the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection’s Indlulamithi Scenarios for 2018 to 2030. These scenarios envisage three primary paths for what Makhanya in summary calls the post-Zuma-South-Africa. He writes71:2:

One was when the inequality grows and resentment spills into unprecedented protests and even a mini revolution.

The other envisaged a prospering ‘nation in step with itself’ where we returned to our core values of a caring and pro-poor constitutional state that could even achieve a 4.5% growth rate.

The third was the ‘floundering false dawn’ scenario, in which the promise of renewal in 2018/2019 becomes a mirage, leading to lost hope, social upheaval and state repression in the new decade.

Makhanya71 continues (and warns) on the above-mentioned third scenario’s outcome as follows71:2:

This scenario imagines that whatever new optimism you might find now turns out to be false optimism and instead what we discover is that the extent of corruption, mismanagement, nepotism and cronyism is deeply embedded at provincial and municipal level, further extending far beyond the echelons of government or the private sector.

Unless we act and stop looking for messiahs, this is the scenario that is scariest. Dashed hopes are ingredients for toxic recipes.

3.3.5.2. Bloomberg Misery Index

In line with the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection’s Indlulamithi Scenarios for 2018 to 2030 are the findings of the Bloomberg Misery Index also with a negative classification of South Africa.78

Focussing on the pre-2019 versus the post-2019 South Africa, according to the Bloomberg Misery Index (calculated as the sum of a country’s inflation and unemployment rates with its forecast as of 11 April 2019), South Africa joined Venezuela, Argentina, Turkey, Greece and Ukraine as the most miserable countries out of 62 countries worldwide. This marker shows that South Africa, with its high (negative) index of 32.4 against Thailand’s low (positive) index of 2.1 and Switzerland’s index of 3.1, displays the presence of intense economic stress and scant progress in taming price-growth and getting people back to work. Moreover, it confirms the chaotic politics of the country, which characterises unstable regimes such as those of Venezuela and Argentina where corruption, nepotism and dishonest are prominent daily phenomena.79

3.3.5.3. International Risk Report of the World Economical Forum (WEF)

The International Risk Report of the World Economic Forum (WEF) identified at its meeting in January 2019 in Davos ten possible negative outcomes (in line with Makhanya’s high political risks for South Africa after May 2019). Theo Venter78, a political analyst of the North West University, defined the following 10 negative attribues of sub-Saharan Africa78:17:

  1.     Werkloosheid;
  2.     Mislukking van nasionale regerings;
  3.     Energie-prysskokke;
  4.     Verval van kritieke infrastruktuur;
  5.     Fiskale krisse;
  6.     Mislukking van finansiële meganismes of instellings;
  7.     Mislukking van streekstrukture of instellings;
  8.     Waterkrisisse;
  9.     Voedselkrisisse; en
  10.     Onbeheerbare inflasie.

Essentially the ANC regime, up to 8 May 2019, had failed to get a clean audit on any one of the above ten markers. Venter shows that the biggest risks for South Africa post-2019, in terms of the International Risk Report, are the following: The failure to maintain the national, provincial and local government structures and the undermining of their functioning by ongoing state capture, nepotism, corruption, politicking, etc., meaning outright poor governance and a lack of political integrity. Confirming Venter’s78 warnings is the fact that only 18 metro (local) authorities, out of 257, received unqualified Treasury audits in 2019. Relevant here are the constant failures of the SAPS/NPA for a decade or more to curb corruption — forget about removing it from society and from the lifestyle of the ANC regime. Hand on hand with these, also goes the failure of the ANC regime’s police force to eliminate crime from daily life.78.80

The above analysis by Venter, done in terms of the findings of the International Risk Report, reflects the extreme social instability and the increasing collapse of critical infrastructure which are absolute needed on a daily basis for especially the poor and landless community to live and survive (such as the provision of water, electricity, roads, basic healthcare, basic education, etc.). There are indications of dissatisfaction turning into a possible physical reaction against the ANC regime. Prominent here is the countrywide evidence of unrest, acute anarchy and at times behaviour bordering on acute revolution. This present social chaos, that seems to grow instead of diminishing, confirms the status of a well-established, chronically dysfunctional regime that may trigger outright revolution.78

For example, confirming Venter’s78 analysis, is the evidence of how chaotic the provincial government of the ANC all over the country has become, failing the people who voted them into government. To cite but one instance: after the May 2019 election, storms tore through KwaZulu-Natal so that many villages in the southern-most part of the province still do not have access to clean water today. In response to this chaos, the DA’s councillor for Ward 2 in the Ugu area described this failure of delivery and maintenance to 175 000 inhabitants by the ANC-associated municipality as follows81:14-15:

We have a water crisis here but we don’t have a shortage of water. There is no drought. Other than this current crisis the production of water is fine. The real problem is a dereliction of maintenance and last-mile reticulation: getting water to people’s houses. This is a threat to our society and the people to blame for it are the Ugu council. It’s a failed entity — you can’t bleed R10-million a month and claim you are a going concern.

Reflecting this kind of in-depth failure under the ANC government oversight and rule, and the immense misuse of tax-payers’ money, is the fact that the Ugu municipality received a qualified audit from the auditor general for 2018-2019 over unauthorised expenditure amounting to R243 billion. For 2017-2018 the auditor gave Ugu a similarly negative rating because of the municipality’s inability to account for property and equipment valued at R4 billion. Harper and Verasamy81, as well as Harper82 consider this disaster as just one example of the many failures of the country’s ANC-ruled municipalities to get water to the people.81,82

Venter78, Harper and Verasamy81 further debunks the ANC’s claims when it comes to municipal government and providing “services to the people”81:14-15:

Government says that about 95% of people in South Africa have “access” to water. But, in the Ugu district, access only means that there is infrastructure. It does not mean that water flows out of taps and brings life. By its own admission, the national water department says that about a third of households don’t have regular clean water. That’s 20 million people.

Noting the fact that out of a total population of 57 million as many as 30 million South Africans are utterly poor, more or less 30 million of them are jobless, and more than 15 million are living solely on monthly social grants, the Ugu district chaos speaks volumes about the path of disaster onto which the 28% of the eligible voters, who thoughtlessly voted for the ANC in the May 2019 elections, had willingly placed themselves from 2019 to 2024, together with the other 72% of non-ANC and passive voters83-86.

3.3.5.4. Bawa reference

Khadija Bawa87, a researcher at the Social Justice Coalition in Khayelitsha, Cape Town points out the failure of effective policing in the country and the lack of policing to ensure the personal safety of the individual citizen. Her critical analysis shows that such conditions are often created by the ANC’s poor and failing management at the national level of essential services such as the South African Police Services, which spiral downwards into local mismanagement, thereby creating chaotic living and housing conditions in informal settlements. She recently stated87:8:

South Africa is one of the most violent countries in the world. That violence, however, is not experienced at the same level across the country. Year in and year out South Africa’s statistics reveal that poor, working-class, urban and semi-urban, and predominantly black police precincts carry the greatest burden of violent crime.

Why is it the case that in historically demarcated, still predominantly white areas police patrols are visible while in historically demarcated coloured and black areas they aren’t?

Bawa87 describes the siege of Coloured and Black living areas by crime further by showing the role of poverty and landlessness which had forced jobless Coloured and Black people to live in these informal crime-ridden settlements. The lay-out of these areas, lacking any national governmental support and infrastructure, further exacerbates the already sub-standard policing in such poor settlements. Again the failure of the pre-20019 ANC regime stands out, extending over a period of 25 years, to supply stable living spaces for these unfortunate poor and landless people and to ensure a permanent income for them as promised before elections. She writes87:8:

Even though the lack of visible policing can be blamed on the police service and local law enforcement, other governmental departments are failing these communities, and the police, by not delivering services. The lack of built environment interventions in areas of high informality, have a direct impact on the safety and security of residents.

3.3.5.5. Harvey reference

The political commentator and analyst, Ebrahim Harvey88, reflects specifically on the context of the present-day badly neglected mass of poor Black people in the country — going as far back as the then young people whose role in the so-called Black student uprising of 1976, together with the Black workers in the trade unions and members of various Black communities country-wide, had, through their anti-Apartheid actions, made a decisive impact on the liberation politics of pre-1994 South African and brought the ANC to power in 1994. However, after 1994 these groups were immediately sidelined by the ANC elite and are still today being excluded by the ANC inner circle from being uplifted in a supposedly bettered South Africa. Harvey writes as follows88:8:

Unfortunately, both these major constituencies of the ANC suffered most from the neoliberal policy regime the ANC adopted after 1994.

Harvey88 further elaborates on this post-1994 failure of the ANC — correctly described as “Black-on-Black discrimination and exploitation” — when he posits88:8:

We can see the negative effects of those policies in many areas of our society, but most notably in the very high unemployment rate among the black youth, the protracted problems in all spheres of education, and the serious lack of infrastructure and social justice in townships where by far most still reside.

A walk through most black townships in the country shows starkly the horrific extent of these problems.

Any study of the reasons why youth face these serious problems point to the effects of neoliberal policies, a related serious lack of funds, the incompetence of ANC members deployed to various sites of education, and an increasing corruption within all levels of government.

On the educational failure of the mass of poor Blacks by the ANC regime, specifically during the pre-2019 period and which is going hand-in-hand with the above suppressing and “crashing” of the development and empowerment of poor Blacks that have been advertised by the ANC regime since 1994, Harvey88 sees the role being played by some of the governing party’s affiliates88:8:

There is no doubt that the South African Democratic Teachers Union, strongly linked to the ANC, has in many respects done the youth at schools a huge disservice. Incompetence, corruption and irresponsibility in its ranks have had a blistering effect on our schools and learners.

Harvey investigates this contaminated political environment further and deeper in his writing when he hints that this failure has the potential to activate in these youths’ minds in the post-2019 politics of South Africa a vicious circle of mass obstruction, unrest, anarchy and passive revolution. The existence of dissatisfied, hostile and aggressive youth makes them potential candidates for recruitment by radical groups in South African politics, such as the EFF.

He refers specifically to th EFF’s hostility to racial minorities and its support for a radical land grab. The EFF seems to regard minorities as so powerless and numerically insignificant that they may be insulted or provoked at will. According to Harvey,

People from these “minorities”, which EFF leader Julius Malema in particular likes to attack in his speeches, are not going to always sit back and allow the EFF to attack and walk over them.88

However, there are radicals in the ANC too who share the Afro-Marxist ideology of the EFF. The same radicalism is openly reflected by the left-wing of the ANC, as evidenced by the Magashule-faction (in which the Zuma clan features prominently). Their use of racialised demographic statistics in inviting confrontation with minorities is similar. The possibility therefore exists that in post-2019 South Africa both the EFF and a faction within the ANC could unleash markedly racial confrontations in various social settings. Harvey writes88:8:

I often feel that this distinct danger is steadily gathering pace in many political and social settings. This country, given an immensely violent history and many unresolved social issues, is deep down a tinder box which can explode in their own hands at any time.

The reaction of the minorities may be much more severe in relation to the ANC as opposed to the EFF, given that the ANC is the sole ruler of the land, notwithstanding that it seems to be a very divided party. A blueprint has been laid since 1994 for anarchy and revolution. Anarchy and revolution are waiting to explode in post-2019 South Africa and this may be laid at the door of the ANC’s corrupted elite politics.88,89

3.3.5.6. Mohale reference

Bonang Mohale90 is the chief executive of Business Leadership South Africa (BLSA). He claims that post-2019 South Africa is politically and economically grinding to a political and economic halt. Positive growth seems to be absent, while transgression has become the rule of the country’s politics. He formulates it thus:

There is no doubt that collectively, we have not succeeded in eradicating the legacy of apartheid and the 350 years of colonialism; the economy is on its knees; young black graduates roam the streets hopelessly; inequality has widened; racism is at an all-time high; public schooling is broken; public schooling is broken; public hospitals fail the poor and vulnerable; crucial infrastructure is in decay; lawlessness is rife.90

The rhetorical question is: Why would the ANC change its delinquent and corrupt habits if has managed to obtain parliamentary majorities six times in a row while getting front-page cover for its succession of financial and other scandals from 1994 until now?

The alleged pervasive corruption of the ANC as a political party and as a regime, including many of its leaders, making them gangsters and serious delinquents, has become a feature of South African life. Closely associated with this is the imminent land grabbing, defined as “land expropriation without compensation”.89,90

3.3.5.7. Andrew reference

Andrew91 draws attention to the ANC’s chronic delinquency and corruption, starting from 1994. Similarly to many other political analysts, Ken Andrew, who also happens to be a seasoned politician, puts it clearly that the ANC’s rot did not start with Zuma: the country become mired in a culture of immense corruption, even post-1994, especially on the level of the ANC’s top leaders, which Zuma merely made bigger. The ANC’s rottenness is clearly identifiable from 1994 when it became the ruling party with its many delinquent actions such as theft, corruption and mismanagement around issues like Sarafina, the arms deal, the improper enrichment of the ANC’s front company, Chancellor House, and the dismantling of the Scorpions long before Zuma’s presidency.

The economy went into decline long before Zuma, directly because of poor policies and failed profile building with foreign countries, etc. Andrew also points out that the Eskom debacle was born before Zuma because the ANC lacked even back then a constructive electricity policy. The implementation of inappropriate affirmative action policies at Eskom by the ANC forced out able technical staff. State capture started officially in 1997 with the ANC National Conference’s decision in favour of the deployment of ANC cadres in all spheres of government and state institutions, including the judiciary. Other ANC actions undermining good governance, identified by Andrew91, are the introduction of bad educational policies such as outcomes-based education, the closing of teachers’ training colleges, the voluntary severance packages given to educationists in the late 1990s and the kowtowing to the South African Teachers Union via Cosatu as a partner in the ANC’s corruption and mismanagement.91

3.3.5.8. The Mthombothi view of an ANC permanently drunk from the alcohol of corruption

Mthombothi92 writes in July 2018 that the “ANC is drunk from the alcohol of corruption”. One outcome of chronic alcoholism is causing extreme mental confusion. In the ANC’s case it has clearly has severed its contact with political, social and personal decency and justice. But the ANC’s habitual corruption has not stopped after 8 May 2019. Mthombothi92 predicts that the ANC’s deviant behaviour, extending back to 1994, is going to spill over to post-2019 South Africa with serious consequences.92

The best evidence for the ANC’s condition as a failure and a drunkard through corruption, crooking and political mismanagement is the testimony in March 2019 on the contemporary ANC psyche by ex-President Kgalema Motlanthe77. For Motlanthe, the present-day political integrity of the ANC is the lowest it has ever been since it took power in 1994 and the leader Ramaphosa is unable to effect rehabilitation.74,77,93,94

Motlanthe77 traces the immense inability of the ANC to act as a competent and qualified ruler of post-May 2019 South Africa, back to its clear record of delinquency which stretches over 25 years of misgoverning and utter corruption. More damning on the ANC’s inability do good at any level of government in future after May 2019 and the immediate need for the ANC to disband in order to end its wrongdoing, Hunter77 conveys Motlanthe’s77 opinion on the chaos in the ANC as follows77:4:

[Motlanthe had said that]…he believed that the ANC could only change if it died in its current form and was reborn as a grassroots movement.

Fikile Mbalula, one of the current politburo members of the ANC and at present a minister in the Ramaphosa cabinet, himself admitted the immense mental and political pathology inside the ANC. On this deep-rooted crookedness in his own ANC, which Mbalula describes as an in-depth cancerous infection which needs an equally in-depth treatment, he said95:4: “… you can’t clean a sore without going deep into it — just dressing the wound won’t help”.

The ANC’s infected sore goes to the bottom. To be honest: it is advanced cancer; it is in its brain, body, stomach, its heart, its psyche, its soul. Many political analysts, together with Mbalula and Motlanthe, have put forward the question if the ANC can be rehabilitated, or if it has the potential to “rescue” itself from its own immense wrongdoing, let alone its promises to rescue South Africa! The evidence suggests there is no hope of rehabilitation for the ANC. The ANC became more than a habitual drunkard guility of serious delinquent behaviour; it became a habitual criminal.74,77,92-95

Note: The evaluation and discussion of this division (3.3 African National Congress) will be continued in article 12 under the subdivision: 3.3: The African National Congress: Perspective 1994 to 2019.

4. Conclusions

It is clear that the current South African political system, continuously run by the ANC regime for 25 years, has been captured by an autocratic ideology in which the party’s Marxist-Leninist leanings maintain and steer its democratic-centralism. The right of the individual voter counts minimally while the ANC politburo has consolidated most available power, making the ANC’s constitution more applicable to governing the country than the South African Constitution.

The pre-May 2019 election promises of the ANC, specifically those of Cyril Ramaphosa, to rectify all South Africa’s ills quickly and completely, more and more seem to be lies and myths. The scenarios, reflecting the immediate present, as well as the future awaiting South Africans, are coming across as very problematic, mostly portending a decline in economics, politics and social cohesion. It seems as if the fallacious belief in the ANC’s absolute “democracy” is overwhelming rooted in most of the media’s and public’s mindsets too.

The Code of Ethical Conduct and Disclosure of Members’ Interests to regulate dishonest conduct by law-makers is insufficient. Prominent is also the faulty Electoral Act, as well as the absence of an Electoral-Parliamentarian Employment Act and an Electoral-Parliamentarian Ethics Code as contributors to the establishment of the ANC as the sole regime over 25 years. These legal short-comings seem to be the primary causes of the ANC’s national election victory in May 2019 during which only 49% of the total eligible voters participated and the winning party received only 28% support of those eligible voters. The ANC’s re-election as ruler for a sixth term of another five years (2019 to 2024) was an immense error. It was tantamount to political fraud in the first class.

In the next (Article 12), titled: “Critical evaluation of the three main political parties’ capability to steer successful land expropriation in post-2019 South Africa: Part 3-The ANC in perspective (12: Prosperity)” the ability of the ANC to take care of the land expropriation matter in terms of its empowerment as ruler it received after the election of 8 May 2019, will be further evaluated.

5. References

  1. Malala J. Don’t despair, Ramaphosa still represents hope. Sunday Times. 2019 Oct. 20; p. 21.
  2. How SA trusts, reads and shares news. City Press (News). 2019 June 23; p. 14.
  3. African way. City Press. 2019 June 23; p. 13.
  4. Munusamy R. Intimidation of journalists and slurs against judges are unmistakable signs that our democracy is under attack. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Aug. 11; p. 18.
  5. Bell T. Ethics in media is vital for democracy. City Press (Business). 2019 June 30; p. 2.
  6. Boonzaaier D. Ace en ATM dreig met regstappe oor ‘laster’. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 July 7; p. 6.
  7. Deklerk A, Hunter Q. Ace muzzled after shooting mouth off on Hanekom. Sunday Times (News). 2019 July 2019;     p. 4.
  8. De Lange J. Ondersoek kan Ace sink. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 Sept. 22; p. 2.
  9. Laster. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 2.
  10. Mtshali S. ‘Leave tireless servant alone’. The Star (Nation). 2019 Aug. 21; p. 7.
  11. Nation will rejoice if Cyril acts against Ace’s unelected cabal. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 28; p.18.
  12. Ngwenya O. Tricky times for journalists to navigate. The Star (Opinion). 2019 July 9; p. 8.
  13. Rooi J. J. Politici staan tou om mekaar weens laster te dagvaar. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 Aug. 18; p. 8.
  14. Rooi J. Pauw ‘wag’ vir Fraser in die hof. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 June 23; p. 5.
  15. Speckman a. Survé goes to war with FSCA after raid on his headquarters. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Oct.     13; p. 5.
  16. Stone S, Rooi J. ANC-NUK praat glo oor OB en Hanekom. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 July 28; p.
  17. Survé to sue finance authorities for ‘unjust’ raid. Saturday Citizen (News). 2019 Oct. 12; p. 7.
  18. Hunter Q. Kneeling Mogoeng stands by his faith. Sunday Times (News). 2019 June 2; p.4.
  19. Pithouse R. ANC factions rely on silence from the poor. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 14 to 20; p. 27.
  20. Bagraim M. Probation is still applicable. The Star. 2019 May 12; p. 4.
  21. Victimising employees is risky practice. The Star. 2019 June 12; p. 21.
  22. Smit S. We’re ‘doomed’ if justice isn’t fixed. Mail and Guardian (News). 2019 June 21; p. 13.
  23. Maumela H. MPs have no agenda. City Press. 2019 June 30; p. 4.
  24. Mthombothi B. Imagine a system in which public representatives, and voters’ concerns, actually mattered. Sunday Times. 2019 April 21; p. 15.
  25. Munusamy R. To vote, or to give up on the political system, is the Sophie’s choice South Africans face in Wednesday’s elections. Sunday Time (Opinion). 2019 May 5; p. 20.
  26. Mthombothi B. Rogue Magashule has handed Ramaphosa a loaded gun. It’s time the president pulled the trigger. Sunday Times. 2019 June 9; p. 19.
  27. Battle for the Bank is a power play by the financially ignorant. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 9; p. 18.
  28. Munusami R. Talk to us Mr President or the lunatics will continue to dictate the discourse and sabotage our country. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 9; p. 20.
  29. Leon T. Cyril should be as ruthless as Boris with his enemies. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 28; p. 20.
  30. Dugmore C. DA refuses to join in the real effort to defeat crime in Cape Town. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019     July 28; p. 20.
  31. Mthombothi B. Nationalist militants abandoning democratic liberties? That would be fascists…or the EFF. Sunday Times. 2019 July 28; p. 19.
  32. Makhyanya M. Magswellus van een man. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 July 28; p. 7.
  33. Chilenga-Butao T. ANC should stop recycling old ideas. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 14-20; 30.
  34. Marrian N. Fight against Magashule builds steam. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 14-20; p. 6.
  35. Shoba S. Fightback? What fightback? Sunday Times (news) 2019 Sept. 8; p. 12.
  36. Pelser V. Waldimar Pelser gesels met Thabo Mbeki. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 April 28; p. 15.
  37. Kok A. Kiesstelsel: Tyd vir hervorming. Beeld (Kommentaar). 2019 Jan. 31; p. 16.
  38. Munusamy R. We are stuck with the same old problems because we are stuck with the same old leaders in the same old electoral system. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 30; p. 22.
  39. Mthombothi B. If the people, and not parties, chose representatives, the ANC rot would never be returned to power. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 March 24; p. 19.
  40. Ndaba M. You can’t manipulate us into voting. Mail & Guardian. 2019 February 8-14; p 36.
  41. Pithouse R. Exclusion will continue to fuel corruption. Mail & Guardian. 2019 February 8-14; p. 31.
  42. Prince L. Onafhanklikes: Hof sê in April oor Kieswet. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 March 29; p. 13.
  43. Electoral Act is questioned. The Citizen (News). 2019 Aug. 16; p. 6.
  44. Marx J. Onafhanklike kandidaat kry weer slae in hof. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 May 3; p. 6.
  45. Rooi J. Laat kiesers self oor die LP’s besluit! Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 March 31; p. 7.
  46. Wyngaard H. Wysiging van Kieswet kan uitkoms bied. Rapport (Weekliks). 2019 March 31; p. 6.
  47. Essop P. Veral jonges registreer. Beeld (Nuus). 2019 Jan. 30; p. 2.
  48. President must prove he cares, not have feet of clay. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Sept. 8; p. 18.
  49. Mthombothi B. ANC shows SA the middle finger in allowing Magashule room to roam where he doesn’t belong. Sunday Times. 2019 June 23; p. 21.
  50. Taylor T. Mogoeng’s ‘sifting mechanism’ is not appropriate for a democratic country. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 14; p. 20.
  51. Gumede W. Time to tackle the 10 groups of untouchables. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 14; p. 20.
  52. Munusamy R. Hold on to reality as Zuma and his legal team do everything they can to lead Zondo down the rabbit hole. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 14; p. 20.
  53. Ou gesigte. Beeld. 2019 June 22; p. 16.
  54. Munusamy R. Lifestyle audits rather than rummaging through trash will expose corruption among our all-too-easily tempted politicians. Sunday Times (opinion). 2019 July 7; p. 18.
  55. Padayachee V, Valodia I, Van Niekerk R. Evolution of ANC economic policy sheds light on row over central bank. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 7; p. 18.
  56. Feketha S. BEE ‘led to state capture’. The Star (Nation). 2019 June 27; p. 26.
  57. Gordhan P. Dirty politics are behind the public protector’s attempt to have me fired. Sunday Times. 2019 July 14; p. 19.
  58. Gumede W. Easy option of ‘black victimhood’ covers multiple sins. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 July 7; p. 16.
  59. Ntsaluba G. Interdict to stop report Saturday Citizen (News), 2019 July 9; p. 7.
  60. Louw, GP. 2018. Ensovoort,  38 (2018): 7(2): 1-36:   An appraisal of the executive political leaders and regimes of South Africa: 1652 to 2018. Part 4: A basic checklist for the appraisal of executive political leaders and regimes.
  61. De Lille P. Seven steps that a Good government will take to make for a better SA. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 March 3; p. 20.
  62. Derby R. Prudence, not populism, must rule in manifesto season. Sunday Times (Business). 2019 Jan. 20; p. 2.
  63. Kgosana C. The manifest failures of the ANC’s manifesto are all around us. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Jan. 20; p. 17.
  64. Hunter Q. Ace’s Reserve Bank ‘edit’ puts ANC in spin. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Jan. 20; p. 1.
  65. The cynics have a point, but let’s hope the president’s pledges come true. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 Febr. 10; p. 16.
  66. Cele A. ANC is a car that is already en route – Zuma. City Press (News). 2019 April 21; p. 8.
  67. Bell T. Hold our parties to their promises. City Press (Business). 2019 April 21; p. 2.
  68. Siyahleba B. The weird world of politics. Naked ambition. City Press (Voices). 2019 April 21; p. 2.
  69. Wicks J. Politics fuels despair and rage in Alex. Sunday Times (News). 2019 April 14; p. 6.
  70. Maxon C. ANC’s soul in peril. City Press. 2019 April 21; p. 3.
  71. Makhanya M. Dashed hopes = disaster. City Press (Voices). 2019 April 21; p. 2.
  72. ANC. A better life for all. #GrowSouthAfrica #Vote ANC. Rapport (Nuus). 2019 March 17; p. 9.
  73. ANC. A better life for all. #GrowSouthAfrica #Vote ANC. Sunday Times (News). 2019 March 17; p. 2.
  74. Mvumvu Z. Cyril more popular than ANC – poll. Sunday Times (News). 2019 Feb. 24; p. 4.
  75. Titus D. Korrupsie skend ons regte. Beeld (Middelblad). 2019 Jan. 30; p. 19.
  76. Naki E. SA has no quick fixes – president. The Citizen (News). 2019 June 27; p. 2.
  77. Hunter Q. ANC ‘worse than before Ramaphosa”. Sunday Times (News). 2019 March 31; p 4.
  78. Venter T. Risiko’s vir SA in 2019. Beeld (Middelblad). 2019 Jan. 31; p. 17.
  79. Ed- Miserable, yes, but not as bad as Venezuela. City Press. 2019 April 21; p. 3.
  80. Ramphosa must act on local government. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 June 30; p. 9.]
  81. Harper P, Verasamy D. Water supply is restored to some, the rest has to forage for theirs. Guardian & Mail. 2019 June 14 to June 20; pp. 14-15.
  82. Harper P. Thirst and rage on the South Coast. Mail & Guardian. 2019 June 14-20; p. 29.
  83. Election results announced. [Cited 2018 Apr. 10]. Available from  https://rekordeast.co.za/election-results-announced/
  84. Bigalke L. Twee ‘groot’ verloorders. Beeld (Middelblad). 2019 May 17; p. 11.
  85. Quick read of South Africa’s 2019 election numbers [Cited 2018 Apr. 10]. Available from https://Africacheck.org/reportd/quick-read-south-africas-2019-election-in     numbers/
  86. 2019 versus 2014: What the numbers tell us about the general elections. [Cited 2018 Apr. 10]. Available from https://www.news24com/elections/news/2019-vs-2014-what-the-numbers-tell-us-about-the-general-elections-2019512     /
  87. Bawa K. Visible policing marred by conditions. The Star (Opinion). 2019 June 11; p. 8.
  88. Harvey E. Black youth badly neglected. The Star (Opinion). 2019 June 11; p. 8.
  89. Ka’Nkosi S. When ignorance turns into a disruptor of policy modernisation. The Star (Focus). 2019 June 12; p. 16.
  90. Mohale B. SA is politically and economically grinding to a halt. The Star (Focus). 2019 June 12; p. 16.
  91. Andrew K. The rot didn’t start with Zuma — and giving the ANC your vote will only make it worse. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2019 March 31; p. 20.
  92. Mthombothi B. The ANC is drunk from the alcohol of corruption, and its growing support is bad news for South Africa. Sunday Times. 2018 July 22; p. 3.
  93. ANC’s tenure at top under threat. Saturday Citizen (Opinion).. 2019 March 16; p. 12.
  94. Mirriam N. List scandal will haunt Ramaphosa. Mail & Guardian. 2019 March 15-21; p. 4.
  95. Hunter Q, Shoba S. Cyril ‘should apologise’ before Zondo. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Dec. 9; p. 4.
  96. Justice Malala. Why the ANC is so corrupt. Business Day. 2019. November 17. https://www.businesslive.co.za/fm/opinion/home-and-abroad/2019-11-07-justice-malala-why-the-anc-is-so-corrupt/

 

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned; External peer-reviewed.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, South Africa.

UNSUITABLE TERMS AND INAPPROPRIATE WORDS

Please note that I, the author, am aware that the words Creole, Bantu, Kaffir, Native, Hottentot and Bushman are no longer suitable terms and are inappropriate (even criminal) for use in general speech and writing in South Africa (Even the words non-White and White are becoming controversial in the South African context). The terms do appear in dated documents and are used or translated as such in this article for the sake of historical accuracy. Their use is unavoidable within this context. It is important to retain their use in this article to reflect the racist thought, speech and writings of as recently as sixty years ago. These names form part of a collection of degrading names commonly used in historical writings during the heyday of apartheid and the British imperial time. In reflecting on the leaders and regimes of the past, it is important to foreground the racism, dehumanization and distancing involved by showing the language used to suppress and oppress. It also helps us to place leaders and their sentiments on a continuum of racism. These negative names do not represent my views and I distance myself from the use of such language for speaking and writing. In my other research on the South African populations and political history, I use Blacks, Whites, Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaners, Coloureds, KhoiSan (Bushmen), KhoiKhoi (Hottentots) and Boers as applicable historically descriptive names.

The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution (4)

Full title: The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible. Part 2: The dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime (4)

Gabriel P Louw
iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093
Research Associate, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Health, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:
Prof. Dr. GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PUCHE), DPhil (PUCHE), PhD (NWU)
Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: antagonists, opponents, compensation, contamination, crookery, custom, expropriation, land grabbing, land ownership, opposition, poverty, radicalism, redistribution, wealth.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 2: 2

1. Background

1.1. Introduction

The study of the previous article (Part One) on the antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints offer a broad identification of elements and role players present in the political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime. They each oppose the intended land grabbing of White land by the ANC regime to transfer it free to poor and landless Blacks. The antagonists see land grabbing as part of a greater international political and socioeconomic process through which the ANC regime is promoting its revolutionary and Marxist-socialist policy.

The primary aim of this article (Part Two) is to continue the reflection on these various elements and role players as already described in the previous article (Part One). It is only with such a comprehensive presentation that a picture can emerge of the antagonists’ civil right to uphold the Constitution in its present form. The presentation of the various elements and role players are divided into six subdivisions.

It is important to note how Chomsky’s1 points out that modern politics often hampers rational thought, allowing the practice of freedom, but limiting the pursuit of truth (creating ignorance among a large portion of South Africans on land ownership, indigenousness and what political and personal integrity means). This limited pursuit of truth limits the development of the critical role of leaders of integrity and independent thinking in skewed political systems. This vacuum causes a lack of responsibility to provide students, individuals, citizens, politicians, and the1:10 :“…wider public, the knowledge and skills they need to be able to learn how to think rigorously, to be self-reflective and to develop the capacity to govern rather than be governed”.

For Chomsky1 it goes much further1:10:

“… it is not enough to learn how to think critically. Engaged intellectuals must also develop an ethnical imagination and sense of social responsibility necessary to make power accountable and to deepen the possibilities for everyone to live dignified lives infused with freedom, liberty, decency, care and justice.”

In the view of the antagonists, Chomsky’s1 view is a reflection of how the ANC over time kept the South African public away from understanding the meaning of true justice, democracy and civil rights by limiting a non-racial intellectual leadership in the country’s politics. This is also how they successfully deprive Whites of dignified lives infused with freedom, liberty, decency, care and justice. The antagonists view the land process as something that is symptomatic of the ANC’s decay and as something that precludes Whites from a life of freedom. In this context of racism and isolation of groups, as experienced at presence by the South African Whites, Henry Giroux, professor at the McMaster University and distinguished visiting professor at Ryerson University, points to the correctness of Chomsky1 conclusion, namely that politics can only become emancipatory for a given group of people when these people speak out fearlessly and publically about their experience, like the antagonists are now doing in relation to land. Without such a political catharsis and public resistance against the government of the day by the suppressed antagonists, the criminal politicians of the ANC and their crooked politics will continue. The antagonists are deliberately being obstructed from the participation in politics by the ANC, and if they fail to force their identity into the total political setup, the can recede into obscurity. Challenging the ANC regime on the land issue is of absolute importance.1 Giroux writes in this regard1:11:

“Chomsky clearly connects with a need among the public for those intellectuals willing to make power visible, to offer an alternative understanding of the world, and to point to the hopes of a future that does not imitate the scurrilous present.”

Giroux further highlights1:11:

“Chomsky publicly argues against regimes of domination organized for the production of violence, and social and civil death. The force of his presence…offers up the possibility of dangerous memories, alternative ways of imagining society and the future, and the necessity of public criticism as one important element of individual and collective resistance”.

Chomsky’s1 advice on rectifying discrimination, exploitation and abuse of suppressed groups echoes the ideas of the antagonists in their present fight against the ANC’s planned amendment to Section 25 to make land grabbing possible.

Chomksky’s1 description of leaders with “poor political intelligence” fits the leadership crises of the ANC since 1994, from Nelson Mandela up to Cyril Ramaphosa, characterised by state capture, fraud and corruption. These leaders have failed to assure that everyone can live dignified lives infused with freedom, liberty, decency, care and justice in their countries. The antagonists as a group, opposing the ANC, know that the Whites are on their own in the ANC’s racist political reign and that they are an easy target for things like land grabbing.2

The antagonists see the ANC regime as one that lacks the political intelligence to be ethical and socially responsible and to be accountable so that everyone in South Africa could have dignified lives infused with freedom, liberty, decency, care and justice. They became a crooked autocracy, greatly biased against minorities like the Whites. As Mthombothi says2:3: “The ANC is drunk from the alcohol of corruption.” They have lost contact with political, social and personal decency and justice. The ANC’s deviant behaviour since 1994 is spilling over to the land issue, forcing the antagonists to take them on with some sound arguments. It is in this context that Articles 3 and 4 offer some insights.2

1.2. Research intentions

The research aim of this article is to evaluate and to describe what the antagonists believe about the dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of South Africa that supports and promotes land grabbing. Opposition to this dysfunctional system stands central in the antagonists’ perspective on changing of Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible.

This article forms the second and last part of the article titled: “The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints on changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible: Part 1”. This article, Part Two, reflects further on what the antagonists believe about dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime that supports and promotes land grabbing.

2. Method

The research was done by means of a literature review. This method has the aim of building a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach is used in modern political-historical research where there is a lack of an established body of research on the ownership of South African land for the period 1652 to 2018 in South Africa. The sources include books for the period 1947 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2018. These sources were consulted to evaluate and to describe the current perspective of the antagonists for the unchanged keeping of Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution and thus the continuation of the present land redistribution policy with compensation in place since 1994.

The research findings are presented in narrative form.

3. Discussion

As already indicated, the antagonists’ perspective reflects a broad array of elements and role players active in the political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime that they associate with the intended expropriation of White land without compensation by the ANC.

The presentation of the various elements and role players in this article is done in six subdivisions.

3.1. Political horrors, anarchy and revolution

3.1.1. Imitating the horrors of the Mao, Stalin and Mugabe regimes

The antagonists fear that the murderous events of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, the horrors of Stalin’s regime and, closer to home, Robert Mugabe’s implementation of the land grabbing in Zimbabwe, can be repeated in South Africa. In fact, they see the farm murders as proof that it is already starting. Opperheimer’s3 writing on the land issue is one of the few instances where antagonists tell the world of their deep-seated fears of a “post-2018 South African Uhuru”. However, the writing is symptomatic of a deeply entrenched idea of victimhood cemented into many White mindsets from 1652. Opperheimer3 almost writes as a lonesome White telling the world why he thinks the present political setup where land must be left untouched, must be upheld to assure Whites of a future economic and personal safe-heaven and as much power as the Blacks in South Africa. But it is also an outcry to the outside world to offer help to maintain the present political and economic model of South Africa if they want to not only to assure the stable and safe lives of Whites after 2018, but also the safeguarding of foreign economic and political interests here. There is undoubtedly a belief hidden under layers of arguments on the land-reform issue that if the present political and economic status quo can be upheld successfully, the present land ownership of White rights will be left unchanged. The flip side of that view is that land expropriation without compensation, with its many other conflicting disturbing rooting will open the floodgates for political instability and marginalisation of Whites.4-6

3.1.2. The Zimbabwe-South African environment of anarchy

When analysing the Zimbabwe-South African environment of anarchy, is it important to note that in Zimbabwe no horrors were initially committed against the Whites. Robert Mugabe suddenly steered land grabbing into action with his political radicalism and racism. This is very similar to the political radicalism and racism now awaking in South Africa. However, in reality there have not been any atrocities aimed at Whites at the hand of the ANC. The conflict situation has been limited to heated political debate (if one regards the farm murders as a matter of crime that is not linked to formal politics).3,5

The antagonists are quick to point out that in example cases, like Zimbabwe, violence emerged when the targeted group lost its military power. This could be why land expropriation was not an avenue in 1994: the White minority was still politically organised with a significant hold on the military. However, the numbers of the White South African have declined from 1994 (there are 2.7 million Afrikaners left, and the numbers are in constant decline). They have also become politically disorganised and disoriented. The antagonists believe that the radicals in the ANC, EFF and PAC think that the time is ripe to address the matters left untouched in 1994.6-8

The lack of Black land ownership is often blamed for the entire context of inequality, unemployment and poverty. Taking from Whites and the re-dividing it among the poor and landless have become an obvious rectifying step. The ANC regime sells the immediate implementation of land expropriation, even without compensation to owners, as a priority to avoid the tragic outcome of land grabbing in the form that it took in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe. The antagonists see this reasoning as a dishonest attempt to hide the ANC’s true motives. They feel that the current Black poverty and inequality primarily have their roots in the ANC regime’s substandard governance. Taking land from Whites cannot dramatically improve the country’s failing economy. Black poverty, unemployment and inequality will just continue.6-8

3.1.3. South African farm murders

The antagonists see the constant rise in farm murders where Whites are the prominent prey as an indication that Mugabe-like chaos is looming. This is a murder spree, they argue, that can also spread to urban areas and cities. The antagonists allege that the killing of Whites, especially Afrikaner farmers, have become a common phenomenon in South Africa since 1994 in an effort to drive Whites from their land.9,10

The antagonists also see poor governance as one of the main causes of the murders on White farmers as it has led to poor policing, a general lack of law enforcement, immense poverty and unemployment, social and personal isolation of races, uncontrolled gang activities, and the ANC regime openly denying farm murders as a problematic phenomenon. The ANC dismissing of farm murders as “Black danger” propaganda vestigial of the previous regime and false reporting by the antagonists, is seen by the antagonists as planned lies. The antagonists accuse the ANC government of very little effort to prevent it or to offer compensation, even to discuss the matter publically.9-11

The antagonists have two prominent concerns, namely 1) that Blacks are taking revenge on White-farmers for Apartheid; and 2) that there is a direct effort to drive Afrikaner farmers from their farms as was done by the Mai-Mai in Kenya, by Swapo in Namibia and by Mugabe’s supporters in Zimbabwe. They try to prove this with official data. They report that in 2016 70 White farmers were murdered in 345 farm attacks, meaning one farm murder every four days and one farm attack every day. They support their argument on the danger that farming holds for Whites in post-1994 South Africa, the antagonists further compared the murder averages of 2016 for South Africa with the 2016 data on global averages. In this comparison the world average is 7:100 000 versus South Africa’s average of 33:100 000 (the crime statistics for the financial year 2017 to 2018 reflects a rise to 36:100 000). South Africa’s problems with violent crime are also confirmed by the murder of members of the South African Police Service in 2017, namely 54:100 000. The antagonists claim that the murders of South African farmers came to a shocking 133:100 000 in 2016. In this context it is also reported that the SAPS data for the period 1991 to 2016 reflect the death of 14 589 farm dwellers with a ratio 60% Whites versus 40% Blacks.9,10

It is clear to the antagonists that White farmers are slowly, as in Zimbabwe, being driven from farms. They see the farm murders as focussed systematic ethnic cleansing, and the decline in commercial farmers from 65 000 to only 35 000 in 2017 serves as further evidence of a murder spree aimed at White farmers.9,10

Ian Cameron12, head of community safety for AfriForum, recently reported that there have been 300 farm attacks and 41 farm murders since the 1 January 2018 to March 2018. For the financial year 2017–2018 (1 March 2017 to 28 February 2018), AfriForum reports 70 farm murders. The official crime statistics released by parliament on 11 September 2018 for the same financial year reflects only 62 farm murders with six attempted murders, 33 farmhouse robberies and two rapes; an outcome that AfriForum dismisses as a gross misrepresentation, with good reason.10,13-15 Cameron12 claims that his organisation shares their statistics with the police on a regular basis and that the data should therefore correlate. The antagonists see the eight less farm murders reported by the SAPS as manipulation, as reflected by Cameron’s response12:12:

“I am scared to say it is deliberate, especially now with all this attention from the international community”.

3.1.4 South Africa’s general murder statistics

The antagonists point out that however much the SAPS and the ANC regime would like to dismiss Trump’s description of South Africa as the murder hotspot for White farmers, the country’s overall murder statistics are more than enough to confirm Trump’s worries. They feel that these numbers are indicative that the events brought on by Mao, Stalin and Mugabe is already part of the ANC’s efforts. This reflection also includes the presence of low-level anarchy in the country. For the financial year 1 March 2017 to 28 February 2018, parliament’s general crime statistics14, published on 12 September 2018, are terrifying. It greatly overshadows farm murders. It reflects that 20 336 people were killed, of whom 6 555 were shot and killed. Of the rest 4 866 were killed in knife attacks, 445 by the use of hands, 76 in axe attacks and 72 were beaten to death with a sjambok. The Minister of Police, Bheki Cele14 (National Police Commissioner from 2009 to 2012) said in reaction14: 1-2:

“It doesn’t matter what figures you put, but if you can’t deal and control the murder cases, you are not bringing any joy to the South African people. It doesn’t matter what else you reduce; if people die and when you look at the figures, there are 57 dying a day. It borders close to a war zone while there is peace; there is no war in South Africa.”

The DA spokesperson on police matters, Zakhele Mbhele14, pinpointed the root of these evils when he responsed14: 1-2:

“…the ANC had failed to keep ordinary citizens safe. The fact that the ANC spends an average of R9.1 million to protect one VIP but only R1 500 per South African resident reveals that their skewed priorities are crippling the fight against the unacceptably high levels of crime in the country.”

Japhet Ncube16, the editor of the Star, drove it home when he wrote16:2:

If you feel unsafe in your home and on the streets, you haven’t been imagining things. South Africa is one of the most unsafe places on Earth. More people are dying here than in many war zones across the world.

We are all just statistics waiting to happen. The criminals rule South Africa.

And if we bank on politicians to stop the killings, the criminals, who sometimes work with police officers, will be knocking on your door soon.

And you can’t do anything about it. The police are unable to do anything about it. The government is unable to do anything about it. The battle has been lost.

The police is currently short of 62 000 officers due to a lack of funding and mismanagement. In the same period billions of Rands went down the drain as a result of state capture. The size of the police force has decreased from 200 000 in 2010 to 191 000 in 2018, meaning a decline of 9 000 in eight years while the population is growing.17

The antagonists see many other indicators that point to the horrors of the regimes of Mao, Stalin and Mugabe. The annual GLOBAL Peace Index of the Institute for Economics and Peace gives us insight into the most dangerous countries in the world, ranking 163 independent countries on how peaceful they are (or, in contradiction: how dangerous they are), with the lowers scoring countries being those technically at war (like Syria, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Iraq, Somalia). These 163 countries were assessed using 23 indicators that were each scored on a scale of 1 to 5. The 163 countries cover more than 99.7% of the world’s population. South Africa came in at 39th, but this changed negatively after the September 2018 parliamentary report on crime compiled by the SAPS.9 The editor9 of The Star writes9:12:

“The stats paint a grim picture. They show why South Africa is in the league of countries as Belize, Honduras and Venezuela in the murder stakes.”

The antagonists therefore view inciting public remarks such as “We will not kill the Whites now” as gravely serious.9,15,18-20

3.1.5. Increasing anarchy and destruction
3.1.5.1. What is anarchy?

The antagonists’ belief that the horrors of the regimes of Mao, Stalin and Mugabe can also happen in South Africa, is based on the realities of upheavals in the country. There are many examples. There has been a wave of civil disobedience over the last ten years. Poor service delivery has resulted in protests and unrest. The shortage of jobs, accessible education and training, housing and medical care is resulting in full-scale anarchy, leaving the possibility of civil war and revolution before the end of 2019. The antagonists are not alone in this thinking. The South African veteran political analyst and journalist, Barney Mthombothi21, confirms this fear when he tries to convey what anarchy is and what it means to the ordinary citizens of South Africa21: 17:

Anarchy is defined in the Collins English Dictionary as: “General lawlessness and disorder, especially when thought to result from an absence or failure of government…the absence of any guiding or uniting principle; disorder; chaos”.

That could be our destination if we’re not careful.

Mthombothi21, a wise man, fine diplomat, true patriot and excellent journalist, avoids creating panic by saying that the country is already in anarchy. The political truth is that the country is in a constant low- to mid-level stage of anarchy; it is just waiting for the interference of the politically corrupt and opportunistic Zuptiods’ and intervention by the present South African government to explode into full-scale anarchy and its accompanying revolution and civil war. This may happen as soon as the 2019 election. All South Africans have been affected by injustice and have been dreaming of a broad socio-economic correction. Inequality, poverty, unemployment and landlessness are central. It is mostly the majority of poor and landless Blacks who had hoped that the election of 27 April 1994 would bring a new, improved life and who had placed the ANC into government to do exactly that, who are really suffering. They are now starting to make the country ungovernable with unrest and violence. The antagonists see an escalation in the scope, frequency and the severity of unrest and violence.21,22

Although Whites and land owners have thus far been largely unaffected, they are aware of this growing danger, not only in terms of their future right to own land, but also their personal safety. The tragedies of Belgian Congo, Rwanda, Somali, Sudan and Zimbabwe are burned into their minds, consciously and unconsciously. As much the Whites are confused about the most likely outcome, they are also confused about addressing the matter. Their public participation has mainly centred on 1) the legality of the 1994 regime change and upholding the Constitution, and 2) the use of the court of law to force order. They see land expropriation without compensation as a social injustice and a form of civil disorder. In their view it is a stop en route to anarchy and revolution to overthrow the present democracy of South Africa.21,22

3.1.5.2 The antagonists’ undeclared fears

The antagonists have thus far failed to address their own deep-seated fears constructively in public. Their public communication lack openness surrounding their fears about anarchy, both anarchy that could result from the populace’s growing frustration with the ANC government and the anarchy that could stem from the hostility against Whites that is built into the ANC’s radical statements on land expropriation and remarks such as “kill the Boers”, “the colonist Boers stole our land”, and “land possession by Whites is a sin”. This silence of some White South Africans is the result of a fear of reprisals from the poor and landless, of being labelled as non-Africans, colonists, or being associated with radical groups such as the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB). The antagonists feel that a dislike of any objection to Black wrongdoing has been cemented into the mindsets of the radicals in the ANC, EFF and PAC. This entrenched dislike of justified criticism is illustrated by the reactions to Donald Trump, who dared to publically acknowledge the problems South Africa has with land expropriation and the murders on White farmers (Can Trump be wrong to ask for an inquiry when facts show that in 2018 the average for murders per day was 57 persons in South Africa, which is six times more than the average number for the USA? The question posed to the ANC regime is: Who are these 57 murder victims and why and where did these murders happen?).14,15,21,22

The ANC regime’s growing loyalty to and association with anarchist elements are also forcing most Whites into passivity and silence, although they speak freely in private. They have to voice their concerns about a failed ANC regime, their view that expropriation without compensation amounts to theft and their doubt about Ramaphosa’s ability to serve their interests. Such a “confession” would open a conversation on land reform. It could put Donald Trump’s remark on South African land grabbing and the threat to White lives into perspective, away from the propaganda and cover-ups.12,14,15,21,22

3.1.5.3. Attitudes of apathy about criminal wrongdoing in society

Antagonists point out that the recent and current unrest and violence involve a mixed crowd of mostly Black youngsters and adults with a focus looting of shops and properties, torching vehicles and public and private buildings and occupying private or public land. In Cape Town, losses due to arson directed at the Metrorail train fleet, has topped R300 million since 2015. Just fighting off the arson and protecting passengers by means of a security team have cost Cape Town’s city council, the Cape provincial government and Prasa R48 million per annum. The police mostly stand by passively, leading to a culture of no prosecution as if they fear angering a powerful political group who may be their bosses in the near future (or as if these hooligans are already their political partners). This apathy towards criminal wrongdoing is a global phenomenon where anarchist forces are gaining control.21,23 The base of the wanton destruction is a direct outcome of the masses’ disillusionment with the ANC’s politics, elite and regime and their failed democracy.21,23

The direct outcome of the masses’ disillusionment is already clear, as Mthombothi21 writes21:17:

“We’re witnessing a level of destruction probably not seen in the country’s history, save in war”.

Indeed, in well-ordered countries with well-ordered regimes in place, this would not happen as here in South Africa where the criminals run the show and the people are left unprotected, as Mthombothi24 reflects24: 25:

“South Africa have become blasé about crime, especially the ANC’s mindset on the matter and the thousands of people’s murdering, rape and robbing every day went unnoticed, even became internalised as the normal.”

Above is an important remark by Mthombothi24, seeing that the ANC-IFP anarchy in KwaZulu-Natal in the 1990s was described as brutal and cold-blooded, at the time the most severe within the borders of post-1910 South Africa. In this context is it important for the antagonists to note that the present anarchy may have a strong racial and ethnic under build, namely Black-on White and, as in KwaZulu-Natal, Black-on-Black violence.25-27 Munusamy25 writes as follows about this forgotten history and the possible implications of a revolution for the country’s stability25:18:

“The history books reduce the violence to a bland narrative of events and statistics about the number of people killed. Articles you find online fail to adequately convey the horror of the time and the depth of human suffering in violence-ravaged parts of the province.”

Sibongakonke Shoba27, a political editor of the Sunday Times, brings us back to the murder scene in KwaZulu-Natal in the 1990s. Shoba’s warning is clear27:21:

It was not the first or last time that IFP impis raided the area. Due to KwaMashu’s proximity to Richmond Farm and Lindelani, IFP strongholds, the bloodthirsty warmongers often acted on their temptation to show off their shooting skills whenever they marched past the township.

But that Sunday they were craving more action.

We later learnt that our attackers had been bristling for action after being addressed by IFP leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi at a rally in Durban. They were still dressed in IFP regalia, mainly T-shirts emblazoned with Buthelezi’s beaming face.

3.2. Exclusion of the poor from the ANC

The political, social and economic disillusionment of the poor and landless Blacks has become deep-seated. It is no longer simply dissatisfaction with poor service delivery, corruption, political incompetence, poverty, landlessness and homelessness. It has become an “…immense feeling of exclusion from the ANC regime, party and elite”, writes Mthombothi.21:17 He continues by commenting on the ANC elite’s failure as responsible political leaders21:17:

While apartheid excluded people by virtue of colour, the new dispensation unfortunately has its own haves and have-nots. ANC members and those close to them are “deployed” to cushy jobs in the government, get handed state contracts, live in plush suburbs and drive fancy cars.

The poor, meanwhile, can only gawk in awe and amazement at the opulence that is at last so close and so visible, but that they can neither experience nor enjoy. While the government has failed to provide basic services to the poor, it has at the same time become a generous cash cow for the rich, the powerful and the connected. The contradiction is both stunning and maddening. It’s Animal Farm all over again. The pigs are having a great time.

But, the antagonists point out, during anarchy the “prosperous pigs on the animal farm are gobbled up by a beast with the head, mouth and teeth of a dragon”: total anarchy and full revolution. The description of illegal occupations below shows how far this process had progressed.

The final words of Fikile Mbhele28, who obstinately refused with 28 other families to vacate low cost houses that they occupied illegally of the eThekwini municipality since January 2018, became a common refrain among occupiers, reflecting a total disregard for law and order28:10: “We decided we had to come here and take these houses, and secure the houses from outsiders.” Occupiers argue that as individuals with constitutional rights, they are constantly being overlooked by the ANC municipalities. Instead unrelated people from outside their traditional areas were offered houses and even councillors have become involved in illegally selling houses. The legal steps taken by the Legal Resources Centre (LRC) against the eThekwini municipality to defend the occupiers’ right to occupy in view of the failure of the ANC’s local systems to serve the individual citizen’s rights are enlightening. There is no municipal housing beneficiary list, the housing administration is substandard, residents of the area are not consulted about placements, the municipality breached the Constitution and other pieces of legislation in the handling of this housing project, while other housing projects in the city in general also lack a housing allocation policy in line with current legislation.28

This not only provides insight into the human rights violations of the ANC regime since 1994, but confirms the correctness of Mthombothi’s21 postulation, namely21:17: “…that the ANC regime has failed to provide basic services to the poor and that the political system, from the top to the lower levels, has become a generous cash cow for the ANC’s rich, powerful and connected.”

Mthombothi’s21 direct reference of the ANC’s model as21:17: “… an animal farm wherein the pigs are having a great time”, is quite applicable and descriptive, but at the same time a serious point of concern for the future of South Africa.

Ramaphosa has thus far failed to act decisively by using the security forces to end anarchy in any form or even to condemn it. This reality is reflected by his skirting the issue of violence. Does he fear “…the hubris of Zuma’s 2014 prediction that the ANC will ‘run this government forever and ever…until Jesus come back’”? A racial and ethnic bloodbath can result from Ramaphosa’s land expropriation without compensation and labelling of Whites as colonial land thieves, argues the antagonists.29

The antagonists wonder if Ramaphosa is treading carefully around Black unrest and anarchy because of his poor positioning in the NEC of the ANC. His position means that he has to refrain from angering Jacob Zuma and his strong faction. Ramaphosa is insecure about his position in the unstable ANC at this stage of his presidency in 2019. Some political analysts and other hopefuls only see a future stable country in the distance with Ramaphosa in a doubtful future role, as Bruce30 reflects30:16:

“We ordinary folk are just going to have to get used to a little uncertainty. For my part I think the Zuma crowd will gradually fade away. Whether that means Ramaphosa succeeds is another question.”

Predicting the presence of leaders like Ramaphosa and Zuma in our future political history is foolishness, the future is just too unpredictable, but seasoned politicians, historians and futurists can offer the voters various considerations. At this stage of our history, the antagonists view both Ramaphosa and Zuma as risks and persons who do not belong in respected democratic governmental regimes. Chronic anarchy has sadly become part of their rule.21,29-31

Viewed from another perspective, the antagonists’ note, the people’s despair with the ANC regime’s failure to protect them has led to behaviour recent years that could be seen as chronic anarchy, but which is in reality pure self-defence and an expression of “normal” civilian rights to address their immediate danger. Mothombothi24 focused on these “legal” self-defence behaviours as follows24:25:

Society has lost faith in the government’s ability to protect its citizens, and as a result vigilantism is on the rise. People are taking the law into their own hands.

Police Minister Fikile Mbalula seemed to lay the blame for rampart crime at the door of the police. The police should obviously take the rap; but so should the minister. The buck stops with him. The police, for instance, had been without stable leadership since the departure of the hapless Riah Phiyega as national commissioner two years ago.

And of course the crime stats have a lot in common with the horrendous economic number laid bare in parliament a day later: two sides of the same coin. A thriving economy would create jobs and take people out of crime.

3.3. The impact of contaminated international alliances on South African land grabbing

Political commentators view land expropriation fashioned after the EFF’s fantasy of wholesale confiscation of private property and banks as misleading “fake news”. However, it is not so far-fetched when considering the rhetoric of the ANC elite, many other radicals, and Ramaphosa himself on the absolute need for immediate expropriation without compensation. The view of the retire politician, Tony Leon, touches on a nerve. He reflects on the ANC’s radical new land redistribution and the inclusion of Julius Malema and the EFF as part of the unstoppable future radical rulers of South Africa. He compares the resulting future of South Africa to that created by political leaders Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. Leon’s32 comments read as follows32:18:

He [Nicolás Maduro] and his late predecessor [Hugo Chávez] implemented an EFF-style programme of uncosted giveaways, at war with private production or even basic economics, reducing what was once the richest country in the hemisphere to beggary.

Inflation is recorded at 13 000%, the world’s highest, and prices of basic foods, mostly now imported, double every month. But eventually fact-free economics wearies the truest of believers, and very few bothered even to vote last weekend.

One fed-up Chavista, Carlos Gonzales, 64, who abstained, put a price on his disillusion. “My monthly pension is only enough to buy one frozen chicken…”

The radical propagandists have already decided on the outcome of the parliamentary hearings on possible land reform. There is only one outcome they find acceptable: extreme land reform. The antagonists feel that it clear that the radicals will force down radical land reform, whether or not it could end in revolution, rebellion, war or a second Rwanda.33 Malema33 himself stated publically on 22 July 2018 that if revolution breaks out33:3: “…the EFF will join in to empowers the previously oppressed to have access to the land”.

In the view of the antagonists, chronic anarchy is evident from the illegal land occupations all over South Africa. These occur outside the boundaries set by Section 25(2)(b) or any other legal interpretation of the Constitution. Examples include occupations in Alexandra, Klipfontein, Waterfall, Johannesburg, and Hermanus in the Western Cape. Ramaphosa spoke out against unlawful land occupation in March 2018 and called on the police to clamp down on it (like taking down 100 illegal structures at the end of March 2018 in Alexandra and arresting five persons). He also told MPs the adopted parliamentary resolution on expropriation without compensation is not a call for “a smash-and-grab-guideline”. However, the land grabbing is gaining momentum and Ramaphosa has become very quiet on the matter. Land-related incidents – resistance against evictions, land invasions and land protests – numbered 70 between 2013 and 2017. Of these 84% occurred in metros, with only 16% occurring in rural areas. However, a finding of the Institute for Security Studies that there has recently been a flare-up with 41 of these conflicts taking place in 2017. Of the 70 incidents, as many as 71% turned violent, with again the most in 2017. In KwaZulu-Natal, housing offices in Zwelihle, a library and a satellite police station were set on fire recently. Even farms in the historic Tea Estate area in Inanda, owned by Black small-scale farmers who farm on the land and hold deeds to it, have been targeted by Black occupiers. It is reported that in April 2018 some of the Black land invaders and grabbers near Durban flattened a sugar-cane crop to make way for their illegal houses.34-37

In his overview of the looming anarchy, Umraw38 reflects that the City of Cape Town reported a 74% increase in land invasions year on year; that in Gauteng one man was killed and four people injured in protests over land, while various property developments in KwaZulu-Natal were stopped due to illegal occupation of land by squatters.38

In the Free State about 100 inhabitants of the Monyakeng Township at Wesselsbron, started in August 2018 to erect plots on a farm, while the same happened in August on a Stellenbosch wine farm. In both cases the farmers alleged the efforts were well-organised and started after Ramaphosa’s announcement on expropriation. Jansen39 reports as follows on the Stellenbosch’s farmer’s reaction39:4:

“Things just happened to smooth and the structures are erected on an organised way. Here stands sometimes gleaming cars around. I understand the structures are being given at R350 each to the people and that prominent ANC-men are involved. He said that the police ignore the complaints or arrived hours later.” [Own translation].

Also, the Umkhonto weSizwe (MK) veterans joined the fight from in KwaZulu-Natal in April 2018 by illegally occupying units in the Masinge housing project in Margate, flats in Cornubia, Durban and the Aloe Ridge social housing complex in Pietermaritzburg, ignoring court orders. Nair reports that there are hundreds of members of the MK Military Veterans Association who have been illegally occupying housing developments across KwaZulu-Natal.34-37

Themba Mavundla37 shows how serious this has become when he, as the provincial chairman of the MK Military Veterans Association, reveals their aggressive and hostile intentions by saying37:4:

“They need the houses. This has been going on for years and nothing to do with land expropriation. We won’t back down.”

The initial fight for rural land has spilled over into urban areas between 2017 and 2018. Gift Maboke35, a community leader from Alexandra, paints a picture of this future of conflict outside the legal system35:4:

…none of the city’s vacant land [urban] was safe from occupation. ‘Any [vacant] land we see we are going to attack [regardless] if it is owned privately or by the city’; and

…the fight for land was shared by all poor and disenfranchised people across South Africa. ‘We are not talking about Alexandra [Johannesburg] only. It’s not us alone. We are talking about all townships and people who do not have land or accommodation. We are together’

In reaction to these illegal actions even Nomaindia Mfeketo, the Minister of Human Settlements, could not rule out more recently the possibility that the President’s (and the parliamentarians’) announcement about the land expropriation without compensation has been “misconstrued” by poor Black communities and sent an “incorrect message” to the poor. However much the ANC regime would like to argue, the antagonists point out that illegal land occupation has become an unstoppable movement.36,37 It is with good reason that Collins40 writes40:4:

“No vacant land in the city is safe from occupation”.

In the context of Ramaphosa’s possible indirect instigation of land grabbing,35,36 Mfeketo36 replies36:4:

“Well, that might be. Not only in Cape Town, Gugulethu, Khayelitsha and Waterfall – you’ve seen people who think they have arrived. ‘This is our opportunity to land-grab’.”

Mfeketo36 and Collins’s35 concerns about a troubled future South Africa relates to Ramaphosa’s public announcement on the night of 31 July 2018 at 22:00 on land grabbing. He claimed that Whites hold 87% of the land. He has promised to take it away without compensation, and there is no turn-around for him now without evoking revolution, as Julius Malema warned him.40 Consider Ramaphosa’s main argument of land expropriation in his speech to Black professionals at a September 2018 business breakfast in Pietermaritzburg41:4:

“Happen it shall, whether people like it or not; it is going to happen”.

He promised that the ANC regime only wanted41:4: “…an equal balance in land ownership because an alleged 87% of South Africa’s land had been given before 1994 to a minority population (Whites).”

However, the rest of the speech reveals confusion about what balance would entail41:4: “We are saying that the equation has to be balanced, and because we are balanced people and we are not mad, we are going to do it in a responsible manner, but we are not going to turn away from making sure it does happen.”

The antagonists read much (and not always positive) into Ramaphosa’s remark that: “…we are balanced people, we are not mad, we are going to do it in a responsible way”.41

The prominent question for the antagonists is: If Ramaphosa and his inner group are so balanced, why do they need an urgent change to Section 25 and why did Ramaphosa ignore the outcome of the parliamentary commission’s testing of the public’s opinion on the matter? The antagonists interpret this kind of autocratic behaviour by Ramaphosa as intentional invitation of revolutionary thinking and behaviour. His political revolutionary arrogance is visible when he says41:4:

Land expropriation without compensation is going to happen whether South Africans, US President Donald Trump and the UN General Assembly like it or not,

and:

I am going to explain it without any fear and I am going to say: ‘This is us. Take us or leave us’.

Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi42, the leader of the Inkhata Freedom Party (IFP), referred to the above remarks as an act of blunt disrespect for parliament, while the FW de Klerk foundation42 highlighted Ramaphosa’s abuse of the national broadcaster. He made the announcement as the leader of a political party (president of the ANC) but made it seem as if he was doing it as President of South Africa via the parliament. This reflects the different governmental setups of South Africa since 1994: 1) up to the end of Zuma’s reign there was a tripartite setup with a Zupta grouping under Zuma (highest), followed by Luthuli House (middle) and parliament (lowest), while now 2) the Ramaphosa government has a bipartite setup, driven at the highest level by Luthuli House’s ANC NEC, with the parliament powerless on the lowest level. This spells the presence of chronic anarchy, not only reflected by the delinquent behaviour of the poor and landless Blacks, but also the behaviour rooted in the power of the ANC elite.42

The antagonists point out that they have heard this kind of rhetoric of saying one thing and doing the opposite, from autocrats like Robert Mugabe, Idi Amin, Nicolás Maduro. Ramaphosa and his elite speak on behalf of the people, but they echo the autocratic and revolutionary speak of the pre-1994 ANC.27,42

The above, in the view of the antagonists, signals the arrival of the final, official stage of land grabbing. It reverts to the unruliness that characterised the ANC as a revolutionary organisation. Returning to symbolically speaking of the injustice of land ownership is impossible in 2018. ANC radicals like the MK veterans now want action. Ramaphosa’s36 early warning36:4: “We are not going to accept land grabs”, had become empty words as protesters (who belong to his group) not only said they are going to practice land grabbing, but did it36:4:

“We have taken our land. Don’t worry about building us houses, we will build our own. Just give as water”.

Most of all, Ramaphosa now promotes this behaviour with his latest public remarks on land grabbing. Any future efforts to stop the radical ideology of dramatic land reform have become impossible: he himself preaches it. The antagonists indicate that there are various other radical actions of the ANC regime that promote illegal land grabbing and that disempower White farmers on their own land. The Extension of Security of Tenure Act for instance works against White farmers. This Act specifically provides for security of tenure by regulating farm occupation. It describes the rights of farm dwellers when facing eviction and provides recourse when they are evicted by White farmers. The antagonists see this piece of legislation as another step towards forcing land redistribution by reducing the rights of the legal owner and making eviction costly. In many cases this poses a risk to the property and the life of the legal owner.43

The Ramaphosa regime finds itself, as the Chávez-Maduro brotherhood in Venezuela did, within a context of empowered autocrats, opportunists, psychopaths and crooks, as a journalist reports44:16:

“It was only a matter of time before the total disregard for the law and the constitution that was shown by our leaders in recent years trickled down to the masses. The media exposed countless allegations of wrongdoing – including the blatant looting by the Gupta family and their associates. But no one has been sent to prison.”

The antagonists feel that the foundations have been laid for anarchy and the destruction of the socio-economic and political order. Ramaphosa’s land expropriation only adds to the chaos.44

The current total disregard for the law and the Constitution has its origins in Zuma’s compromise of credible institutions of law enforcement. The editor45 of the Sunday Times wrote on 26 August 201845:20:

“The hawks were heavily compromised during the looting period, and led by buffoon. The same with the National Prosecuting Authority, led by a lame sheep who had no clue what it meant to use prosecutorial powers.”

The Zondo Commission of Inquiry has shown that there is more than enough to prosecute several looters of the state coffers, but the new Ramaphosa regime has taken no action.45

The uncontrollability of the masses is also reflected in the sudden resurgence (August 2018) of xenophobia (a reminiscent of the explosion of xenophobic violence in May 2008) in the trade sectors in Soweto and other Gauteng townships. It has led to at least four deaths and the looting of the shops of many foreign shopkeepers, forcing them to flee. What is worrying in this specific context is the murderous aggression directed at Black non-South Africans (an identity class that includes the Whites as so-called colonists) and the ANC regime’s failure to do something about these behaviours. The editorial46 of the Sunday Times reflects as follows46:24:

“Successfully prosecutions are few, as police stand idly by, often doing little more than helping shop owners escape the wrath of the mob. It is a blight on a democratic SA.”

The researcher Jean Pierre Misago47 of the African Centre for Migration and Society at Wits University’s conclusion on the base of these Soweto attacks is hair-raising47:12:

Communities find different reasons for attacks. They mobilise people by feeding them stories that are not necessarily correct.

This is a clear case of xenophobia violence. In previous instances WhatsApp messages calling for violence have originated from local business associations, whose members want to get rid of foreign competition.

For the antagonists Misago47 hits the spot with his identification of ethnic crimes and the bad intentions of people who have failed to compete and then fell back on anarchic behaviour, like land and asset grabbing. Consider the xenophobic remark directed at foreign Black shop owners by Rose Nkosi, the president of the South African Spaza and Tuckshop Association (SASTA), accusing them of “creaming our people”. Members of SASTA even marched to the office of Johannesburg mayor Herman Mashaba, demanding that he stop foreigners running spaza shops.47

A Somali, Abdi Sala48, whose shop was plundered for the fourth time in seven years in Soweto, cut the xenophobia of South Africa to the bone48:12:

“[Black] South Africans are spoilt. When the electricity goes off they loot, if they don’t have water they loot, [if they are unhappy about] no jobs then they rob the shops.”

The antagonists see the intended grabbing of White land by the ANC elite is just looting, equally to that of foreigners’ spaza shops. The ANC regime has become spoilt by the ease of their political self-enrichment since 1994.

The antagonists do not doubt that the same xenophobia awaits them if land grabbing under the guardianship of Ramaphosa is allowed to continue without direct and fierce resistance from the government.9,47 The editorial46 of the Sunday Times of 2 September is further very informative46:24:

“Looting is usually a sign of a society in an advanced state of social decay, suggesting rising public desperation and a breakdown in law and order.”

In this context the question of the antagonists is relevant: What are land grabbing other than looting and the destruction of law and order in South Africa? And what else is looting and the breakdown of law and order than anarchy?46

3.4. Mbeki’s ANC of 1994 versus Ramaphosa’s ANC of 2018

The arrival of Jacob Zuma and thereafter Cyril Ramaphosa as presidents of the ANC, making them at the same time also the presidents of the Republic of South Africa, introduced a new climate of political and judicial estrangement from the “old” ANC with leaders such as Thabo Mbeki. The radicalism that arrived after the ousting of the corrupted Jacob Zuma seems to be radiated by Luthuli House, which has almost become the only and highest policy- and decision-making body in the country. Former Jacob Zuma and his post-2018 ANC NEC are still quite central to this radicalism. The public often think of this radicalism as coming from the younger generation (with a root like Julius Malema), but this is not true. It is instigated and fuelled by the older, rigid ANC leadership who grew up in the old but now mostly outdated Russian political mentality of extreme Marxism (although it is now becoming more reminiscent of fascism). The present issue around land ownership reflects this radicalism. There is suddenly extreme discrimination against the Whites as a minority racial group, together with prominent fascistic behaviour reflected specifically by some of the ANC’s top leaders in the selective execution of this racism and discrimination. (This political ideology stands parallel to China’s extreme discriminative behaviours and manhandling of its various minority groups that the world comfortably ignores. Note here the intimate relationship between the ANC elite and the Chinese regime).46

Revolution and liberation, used to obtain political power and self-enrichment, are still central to the thinking of the likes of Jacob Zuma, as it was in the 1960s. The schizophrenic ANC cabinet of 2019 Ramaphosa’s constant efforts to please the older revolutionary ANC leaders in his NEC, makes the ANC of 2019 a totally different entity than the 1994 party that introduced democracy to all South Africans for the first time. Munusamy49 presents the antagonists with a good guideline in this context when she says49:22:

“We are stuck with the same old problems because we are stuck with the same old leaders in the same old electoral system”.

Land grabbing in this context is thus not a surprise, but the normal way of governing. Indeed, the antagonists postulate, it would have been the way some of the ANC leaders of 1994 went about if they had a free hand at the time.49

The following three subdivisions compare the ANC of 1994 with the ANC of 2019. The sections examine: 1) the schizophrenic ANC cabinet of 2019; 2) a farewell to the Freedom Charter of 1955; and 3) a new Ramaphosa and his new ANC.

3.4.1. The schizophrenic ANC cabinet of 2018-2019

Reflecting on Ramaphosa’s present aggressive and conflicting behaviour, specifically with reference to Whites and land expropriation, Munusamy49 takes the antagonists back into the past by reflecting the prominent role players who created a schism between the ANC’s present and past49:22:

“When Ramaphosa made changes to former president Jacob Zuma’s cabinet at the end of February [2018] he retained the configuration of portfolios and fired 10 ministers. He kept some of the worst-performing members, ostensibly to avoid causing too much turmoil within the ANC by purging the Zuma faction.”

But, in 2018 things became worse for the antagonists as the Zuma faction successfully reassembled with the controversial and politically stained Ace Magashule as ANC secretary-general. He quickly repositioned himself as a replacement for Ramaphosa, should the Zuma faction succeed with a campaign to re-establish Zuma and his cronies in the ANC. This is where good politics and sound economics stumble: the Zuma faction is still revolutionary and they target the masses with misleading and hostile political scripts. The Zuma faction at Luthuli House and in the Ramaphosa cabinet is using the country’s old electoral system to strengthen and to spread their outdated Marxist radical ideology and to re-profile the ANC as a liberation organisation for poor Blacks (while opportunistic enrich them selves at the coats of these poor) . Absolute loyalty to the ANC with the interest of the country in second place is a big part of this ideology.49 It makes the entry of honourable and patriotic leaders with progressive political and economic ideas very difficult, as Munusamy49 reflects49:22:

“There is little prospect of fresh, talented and upstanding leaders who are making strides in other sectors of society entering public office because the political space is so toxic and dominated by the same old faces.”

The end result, posit the antagonists, is that South African politics has become “hollow and acrimonious”, returning the same (many times corrupted and radical) people to parliament, over and over, to take the party on wrong political paths to fulfil these politicians’ opportunistic and delinquent aims and needs.49

The South African electoral system offers the ANC as a party and individual politicians the opportunity to stay on in leadership positions for any length of time. At the same time it offers them the opportunity to promote conflict and revolutionary ideas via an untouchable circle of deviant MPs and MPLs, as reflected by the untouchability of Jacob Zuma. The antagonists believe that if this system had been improved, the changes of the ANC to be in power in 2019 would have been zero. Leaders like Zuma, Ramaphosa or Magashule would never have been appointed in executive political positions. It is only the South African courts and judicial commissions that could break up many of these political evils resulting from the failed electoral system. However, the faulty electoral system is still with us, serving the Zuma faction (and the Ramaphosa faction) and their radicalism (and this will happen during and after the 2019 election), favouring a specific leader with specific cronies. This dilemma of political power within the ANC since 1994 is well illustrated for the antagonists by the intended land grabbing plan of the ANC elite. The radicals in favour of land grabbing are uncontrollable by the electorate from the outside. They can ignore their voters’ wishes and demands in terms of the present false democratic method of voting in parliament, seen as representatives of the people.49

Munusamy49 very precisely describes this failed system that led to the autocratic rule of South Africa since 1994 by a fascist ANC government49:22:

The country has not grappled with the prospect of electoral reform, even though the current system has proved inadequate in terms of public accountability. The proportional representation system means that MPs and MPLs are accountable to party bosses rather than to the electorate. The Zuma years showed how difficult it is to hold presidents accountable when they are protected by their party.

Mcebisi Jonas50, a former deputy finance minister, ANC member and a presidential investment envoy openly challenged the political ills of the ANC. “To save the South African democracy requires focus on its people and their interests and not the political party”, writes Jonas50:22. The presence of populism and revolutionism, as reflected by the Ramaphosa regime with its uncontrolled land grabbing policy, has the tendency to amplify a vicious cycle of declining legitimacy in governance, reduced investment, rising unemployment and increased social tension, says Jonas50. For him the present societal crisis in South Africa under the reign of the present ANC came about because the ANC lost its moral, ethical and political integrity. As an entity they need a positive turn-about, they should even be forced to such a turning by the public50:22:

“Civil society mass action and activism against corruption tended to be about fixing the ANC”.

Jonas50 posits further50:22:

“But we must also acknowledge that our nation has lost its way. SA is at a crossroads. One path follows current trends – rent-seeking, corruption, declining state legitimacy, reduced investment, economic stagnation, inequality band social tensions”.

Jonas50 says that when it comes to standing for the interests of citizens, democracy and the country against the interests of the party (which in many cases represents the masked agendas of corrupted leaders), the interests of the people should come first. The antagonists fully agree. Jonas’s guidelines for political correctness and warning of a growing decay of law and order, is clear50:22:

“We all have a responsibility to stabilize our democracy and chart a new economic path. This needs a new agenda and orientation in civil society, premised on the fact that in every revolution, the people are primary – everything else is secondary.”

This includes the false patriotism and false love for the people while the integrity of the leader in question is already compromised by a personal and political pathology of sole self-enrichment and -empowerment. The masked agendas behind the intended land expropriation without compensation are undoubtedly often anchored in personal and political pathology, making it unstoppable as the delinquent leader gains more power. The antagonists fear that it is no longer possible to save the democracy, especially given the ANC’s courting of China and Russia.50

Thabo Mbeki51 comments on the above dynamic in a 30-page covenant, denunciating land expropriation without compensation. The document is not only immensely informative about the present identity of the ANC, but is also shocking as it shows how the ANC as an initially progressive party for all South Africans has deteriorated in only a decade. It has become a racist party; corrupt to its core and focused on the progress a small group of Blacks (This political manoeuvre stripped the ANC of its hard-fought political integrity, putting it fully into the league of the despotic and racial National Party of pre-1994 South Africa). Mthombothi51 refers to these 30 pages offered by Mbeki as the Mbeki intervention on land grabbing.51 He writes as follows in this regard51:21:

“It’s almost as if he’s saying those in charge of the organization [ANC] neither know what they’re doing nor understand the implication of their actions”.

The antagonists are well aware of the possible impact of the plans of the schizophrenic ANC cabinet of 2019 on the future rights of Whites as land owners. The antagonists feel that they have much to fear.

3.4.2. A farewell to the Freedom Charter of 1955

Putting his arguments, opinions and viewpoint on the ANC’s current political delinquency in perspective, Thabo Mbeki51 charts the evolution of the ANC as an organisation from its founding in 1912 and reflects prominent events in its history. The drafting of the Freedom Charter in Kliptown in 1955 stands out, as do the breakaway of the Africanists in 1958 and the expulsion of the Gang of Eight in 1969, events that have shaped the ANC to unite all South Africans specific under a non-racial and non-discriminative policy as guided by the Freedom Charter. Mthombothi51 points out that Mbeki bases his view of the wrongness of the expropriation of land without compensation from Whites on two fundamental prescriptions in the Freedom Charter, namely 1) South Africa belongs to all who live in it, Black and White; and 2) that the land shall be shared among those who work it. With land grabbing, both these prescriptions will be violated. Mbeki responds51:21:

“If the ANC abandons these two principles and strategic positions”, he says: “…it must accept that it is turning its back on its historical position as ‘the parliament of the people’”.

In this context the expropriation of land from one national group without compensating them to redistribute it to another national group is a radical departure from the traditional ANC and its prescription to trustworthy policies, cemented into its culture over 105 years. Mthombothi51 reflects as follows on Ramaphosa’s policy on land ownership (in conflict with the Charter)51:21:

“SA belongs to all who live in it, black and white, except as this relates to land”, and “All national groups are equal before the law, except as this concerns land”.

The Freedom Charter’s land clause, dated 1955, is not the only guidance Mbeki had for his political arguments on racial freedom and race-free property ownership. The clear declaration of 1955 is also reaffirmed by an ANC document issued after the historic conference in Tanzania in 1969, making it clear that the ANC was cognisant that the redistribution of land would include all race groups, writes Tabane52:6:

“It makes bold to say that the restrictions of land ownership on a racial basis shall be ended and all lands shall be open to ownership and use by all people irrespective of race.”

Mbeki’s recent pamphlet is clear of the “second phase of transition” ideology that is driving the present Ramaphosa land grabbing initiative. The insecurity of the Ramaphosa faction is evident from the personal attack on Mbeki because he dared to doubt their lack of knowledge about the ANC’s history and principles and their lack of integrity. The infective language of the secretary-general of the ANC when he called on Mbeki “to shut up” shows where the ANC leadership is in 2019. Tabane brings us back to reality when he posits52:6:

“The current position is at best misguided and at worst a demonstration of the loss of its moral compass by the ANC – and the fact that it is purely fictional to consider the ANC a leader of society anymore.”

Looking closely at Mbeki’s pamphlet, it is clear for the antagonists that the current ANC’s character has changed, as did its mission at the recent 54th national conference. As a party it has transformed to where Jacob Zuma has long wanted it, namely an exclusively Black party, recognising it self that it does not represent all the people of South Africa anymore. Where the “old” ANC always regarded itself as the absolute opposite of the Apartheid NP that divided people along racial lines, there is now a “new” ANC that is dividing people along racial lines. There is no hope that the current ANC would change back to 1994, recalling its new 2018 policy on land grabbing. The ANC has changed permanently because the country’s political terrain has changed drastically. It has become radical, making it the home of selfish, opportunistic and political radicals who lack the conscience of the cadres of the “old” ANC. After testing the politics for 24 years, the ANC has become a Black NP that cannot recognise its own 1955 roots. It’s a new political party with a new vision and mission, the old name just remained. This outcome spells doom for Whites in general, and White land owners specifically, according to the antagonists.51,52

Mthomboth51 puts words to this state of affairs with his decisive conclusion on the “new” ANC51:21:

It’s now operating in a different setting. It is no longer waging a thankless liberation war away in the deserts of exile, but it’s now back home in the lap of luxury and in charge of the most sophisticated economy on the continent. It’s no longer led by the selfless, wise old men and women who sacrificed everything for the good of all, but it’s now controlled by BEE types, shysters, a thug or two and the odd murderer, all in it for a slice of the action. Greed now trumps selflessness.

Whites, the antagonists say, must note Mthombothi’s51 unwritten conclusion: they can expect much more political delinquency from Ramaphosa (or from Ace Magashule, if he and the Zuma faction successfully oust Ramaphosa in 2019 and redeploy Ramaphosa in a subordinate role to Luthuli House). Ramaphosa’s actions, especially with regard to land grabbing, can ultimately be much worse than Zuma’s endeavours.50-53

3.4.3. The new Ramaphosa and his new ANC

Munusamy’s51 description of what is wrong with the “new” ANC offers two warnings. Firstly, the expectations of the poor and landless Blacks will never be met. The leaders of the new ANC have other intentions with the land they want to confiscate. Secondly, it does not matter how failed and corrupted the whole exercise of land grabbing turns out, the antagonists should accept that land expropriation without compensation is here to stay as long as the “new” ANC rules. This can only change if the ANC loses at the ballot box. Munusamy49 is clear49:22:

How do we find the path to basic human decency and morality when we surrender our country to an endless cycle of power-drunk, greedy people who exploit our vulnerabilities and have no desire to help the people they serve?

In the cabinet, in parliament, in provincial government and in municipalities, there are too many people who see their positions as entitlement to wealth and perks.

Unless there is a complete overhaul of society and the political system, there is little chance of the deadwood being cast out and inspirational, resourceful and courageous leaders rising.

When the ANC radicalism is examined more closely, it is clear that their growing political relationship with autocratic Russia and China is a crucial element. These countries were the ANC’s best companions during Apartheid. Although the ANC leaders see South Africa as the opposite of China when it comes to human rights and the suppression of individual freedom and human engineering to suit communism, the ANC’s outdated version of communism and their autocratic behaviour, including land grabbing, make the two twins. The ANC masks this with false friendly and opportunistic contact with democracies like the US, Japan, Europe, in an effort to profile “democracy”. When Ramaphosa announced his land grabbing intention he first visited China to obtain “approval”, which he of course “received” indeed, while at the same time he dared South African Whites, the UN and Trump to test his right to make a radical decision on the matter. Since 1994 the ANC has slowly decreased contact with democracies like Europe, the US and Japan while they made friends with political radicals, not only China and Russia, but Zimbabwe, Venezuela and Brazil (and even Libya under the late Kaddafi).49-56

Under Ramaphosa China is, as under the Zuma regime, selectively respecting South Africa’s sovereignty in economic relations and interests. Munusamy and Mbeki are wrong to expect a positive overhaul of Ramaphosa politics. These politics were already “overhauled” by China and Russia into political, social and economic radicalism where the racial factor of the White man is central. Ramaphosa and his cronies indeed see a “White problem” that must be addressed. Julius Malema has found a comrade at last.49-56

The current South Africa of Cyril Ramaphosa and his cronies are not at ease with White rights, privileges, benefits and riches. Land expropriation without compensation ignores the ANC’s founding manifesto. The ANC has lost its golden past. This makes the ANC elders like Thabo Mbeki and most of the Whites strangers in South Africa.

The antagonists believe, as Mbeki illustrates, that the radical ANC under Ramaphosa and his followers will take the last pieces of land from the back pockets of Whites in the near future.

3.5. Lies and myths versus facts and truths

The antagonists see multiple facts, lies, myths and truths that surround the ANC elite’s rejection of the 1994 dispensation’s land redistribution programme. So far most of these lies and myths remain unchallenged. The ANC regime’s perspective and untested allegations to justify their right to take land should be addressed, evaluated and be put into perspective. This is done in the following eight subdivisions, namely: 1) the people’s dissatisfaction with the 1994–2018 dispensation’s land redistribution; 2) Blacks prefer land occupations above the option of financial compensation for land lost between 1913 and 1994; 3) a large group of aspiring Black farmers is waiting for rural land; 4) the ANC has a clear expropriation and redistribution plan for the greater Black South African community; 5) there is an urgent need to balance the racial demographics of the country’s land and home ownership by placing Blacks in traditionally White areas; 6) the ANC has since 1994 successfully guided poor Blacks to financial independence; 7) Blacks are indigenous South Africans and Whites are European settlers; and 8) the Tsar and Stalin’s collective farm projects in rural Russia were great successes.

3.5.1. The people’s dissatisfaction with the 1994–2019 dispensation’s land redistribution

The ANC has publically claimed that the 1994 to 2019 land redistribution programme was characterised by incompleteness and dissatisfaction and that the programme did not deliver on the promise of transferring the prescribed land to Blacks as agreed by the 1994 dispensation and the Constitution. In their view, this makes land grabbing an absolute need. However, Opperheimer3 offers evidence to the contrary. Opperheimer3 posits that according to the Institute of Race Relations (IRR), the Land Claims Court has resolved more than 95% of the claims that have arisen in the past 23 years in terms of the 1994 dispensation’s prescriptions. More than 1.8 million individuals have received compensation in the form of pay-outs or land.3,58 Omri van Zyl58, the executive director of Agri SA, puts the amount paid towards redistribution at R45 billion and the amount paid towards land reform at R43 billion.

According to Opperheimer3 fewer than 3 500 (out of 76 000) or 5% of the claims remain unresolved. This gives an average of 3 152 claims resolved per annum of the total 73 500 claims successfully addressed since 1994. The still 3 500 outstanding claims will take at most one or two more years to complete (more or less to be completed in 2020) if the present debacle around land expropriation without compensation doesn’t hinder the process. There is no evidence of any incompleteness or dissatisfaction around land transformation as run by the 1994–2019 governments. There is no urgent need or reason to address the remaining 5% of claims with such an “attack” on White land ownership without compensation. The land transformation agreed upon in 1994 has, in the view of the antagonists, basically been completed.3

What is most worrying for the antagonists, given the near completion of the process, is that the ANC suddenly wants to “enlarge the pie” of land ownership at cost of their initial partner, the Whites. This breach of contract by the ANC regime under Ramaphosa needs the attention of the Constitutional Court.3 It is clear for the antagonists that the ANC regime’s claim of dissatisfaction among “the people” in relation to the 1994–2019 dispensation’s land redistribution is without any base. The 1994 to 2019 land reform programme served the people well.

For the antagonists is it clear that the new ANC and its merry men will not be pacified easily. They are into stealing and doing harm to the White farmers. For the opponents the ANC elite’s present intention of land grabbing is only a smokescreen for other future trespasses against Whites.

3.5.2. Land occupation versus financial compensation

With reference to the ANC’s argument that the majority of Blacks prefer land to cash pay-outs, reports showed as early as 2013 that of the roughly 76 000 rural land restitution claims disposed in terms of the described programme as decided by the 1994 agreement, more than 70 000 (91.5%) of the claimants had chosen to take compensation in cash rather than reoccupy the land they had lost. This means that of the 95% cases resolved, the choice of compensation in the form of receiving land per se as a vehicle for compensation, only 8% of the beneficiaries chose to receive land.3

The antagonists’ counter-argument is that the ANC’s recent claim of an absolute need for land for the poor and landless Blacks and for farming per se, is false. This finding means that the 1994 agreement worked well. The antagonists suspect that the land issue is being put forward by the ANC to mask the motives of some Black political leaders and radicals in the ANC. Political delinquency seems central to the whole land expropriation issue. The fact that 92% of Black land claimants did not wish to take back their ancestral land serves as proof for the antagonists that there is no drive for land on the side of the masses.3

For the antagonists there is enough evidence that a transfer of White land to Blacks is not the dramatic political issue of the moment; nor is there evidence of great numbers of Black farmers in rural areas. The resolution of the remaining 5% of cases is almost insignificant and cannot be the reason for the supposed great disappointment with the 1994 to 2018 redistribution programme. The statement of the propagandists that claimants prefer land occupation over and above financial compensation for land lost between 1913 and 1994 can therefore be rejected.3

3.5.3. Aspiring Black farmers waiting for rural land

There is a specific argument that there is an immense need and opportunity for more commercial Black farmers in South Africa’s rural areas. This contradicts the experience of the White farming community and the organised and formal business sector. Their data on land redistribution is often more scientific and analytical, free of emotional rhetoric. The organised farming and formal business sectors fully support land redistribution and underwrite its urgency, but in an orderly manner.3,59,60

The antagonists also point to the fact that replacing White farmers with Black ones will only accommodate a fraction of the poor and landless Blacks, making the whole exercise a failure from day one. A disaster is looming if there is no large-scale job creation outside the agricultural sector for the rest of the 90% of poor and jobless Blacks, whether or not land redistribution comes into effect. The large contingent of unemployed and untrained Blacks is becoming a national disaster that could easily result in anarchy.3,59-61

Exacerbating the problem of the contingent of poor and landless Blacks is the hard fact of a negative growth in the agriculture sector as reflected in September 2018 (-24%). [In this context of negativity, the estimated growth for South Africa for 2018 is between 1.2% and 1.8%, meaning the ANC regime’s economy has stagnated and technically fallen into recession].3,59,60

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has reported in 2018 that Africa’s urban population will double within a generation, contradicting the point of masses of people wanting to occupy rural land. The fact is that Africa’s peasantry is dying off. This phenomenon, as already cited in this subdivision with tested facts, is also present in South Africa. Farming has become one of the less lucrative South Africa careers, and farming has become very expensive and time-consuming. The number of commercial farmers is already on the decrease due to problems such as the cash flow needed for mechanisation and the risks involved in farming.4,51,59,61

The ANC should in fact focus on more urban land for housing for Black working citizens. Ramphele4 points out this reality when she writes4:21:

“The fourth myth is that land restitution is mainly a rural and farming matter. Cape Town, the seat of parliament, exemplifies the cruelty of the failure to redress the spatial geography of apartheid cities.”

It is clear from the above evidence that there is not an immense group of aspiring Black farmers waiting for rural land. It is a false postulation and a myth. The evidence also reflects that even if there was truly a large group awaiting farmland, the farming environment lacks the potential to accommodate them.

3.5.4. The ANC’s plan

The antagonists point out that the ANC regime has failed to offer the public full legal and descriptive details on the land expropriation matter. The whole initiative is driven by and based on Malema and Ramaphosa’s rhetoric, while a simple basic plan on paper remains absent. If expropriation without compensation is really on the cards, how long will the process be? Who will hold the title deeds? How will Black beneficiaries be selected? Will new Black farmers receive funding or mentoring? How will viable and sustainable markets be created? How will the correct produce be selected? How will this affect the short- and long-term food security of the country and what would be the specific role of Black farmers in this regard?3,59-61

This vagueness is worrying, seeing that the ANC’s similar processes of BEE and AAA to uplift the “poor non-Whites” since 1994 could not attain true success and are still in running, seemingly indefinitely. The vagueness of the 1994 programme mostly favoured the ANC elite. The antagonists stress that Ramaphosa has thus far offered only empty emotional and political rhetoric, filled with aggression against Whites. The ANC regime’s knowledge on implementing such a system stops with its various spokespersons’ rhetoric, basically because they are “uneducated, untrained and inexperienced on the complicated processes around land expropriation”.3,59-61

The formal business sector has also requested a guideline and constructive plan from the ANC. Barron63 makes it clear that the political intention of expropriation is one thing, but successful implementation based on sound ethic, business, economic, judicial and cognitive principles, is something total different. Besides that, it can be very complicated and time-consuming, and can be devastating to economic and political stability if it goes awry. Just defining a theoretical framework (hopefully by outside experts) can take up to three years. Implement such a “sound” theoretical plan in practice can takes a further five to ten years. The programme implemented in 1994 has not been concluded after 24 years. This estimate does not even include rejection by the formal business sector or experts if the framework is developed by opportunistic, foolish and short-sighted law-makers and political radicals in the contaminated ANC, EFF and PAC. Verwoerd and his followers attempted similar folly in 1955 with the Tomlinson Commission, which recommended that the best political, social and economic solution for South Africa would be to dismantle Apartheid. The Tomlinson Commission predicted the current dilemma.3,59-61

Barron63 quotes the insights of Professor Mills63, head of the University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business on land redistribution63:9:

The government needs to spell out how expropriation without compensation will feed into the National Development Plan and contribute to the overall national development objectives of the country.

What is their priority? Is it land expropriation or creating jobs? Young people living in rural areas want to live in urban areas. They are not interested in farming or land, they want jobs. So what is expropriation without compensation going to do for them? How is it going to bring them jobs?

Hereto Makgoba64 also writes64:21:

“I have not heard anyone [ANC] spell out an overarching vision which takes all the complex practical and emotional factors into account. Nor have I heard a satisfactory answer to the fundamental question: expropriation to do what?”

Ramphele4 refers to the ANC regime failure to offer an appropriate plan of land redistribution as4:21: “…the lack of a national spatial plan due to the lack of political will at all levels of government to tackle land reform”.

The formal farming and business sectors view Ramaphosa’s62 talk of land redistribution (with or without compensation) as unclearly formulated. His guarantees that the outcome will not hurt the economy or foreign investment in the short or long term are unspecific and undoubtedly open to various political and judicial interpretations. The antagonists see either a lack of a sound understanding of basic economics, or the deliberate masking of radicalism. Indeed, Ramaphosa’s hesitation when it comes to making clear decisions and his growing vague rhetoric, signals possible ulterior motives in the view of the antagonists.65

The antagonists and formal business sector fear that land redistribution will hurt the economy, and the ANC’s nonchalance about this worries them. They also feel that it would destabilise racial relations in South Africa to the same extent that Apartheid did.65

3.5.5. Balancing the demography with land ownership

The ANC regime argues that the racial demography of South Africa’s land- and home-ownerships is imbalanced as result of the socioeconomic and political inequality between Whites and Blacks, which the ANC radicals allege is due to the richness and racial privilege of Whites. This wealth inequality is alleged by the ANC regime and propagandists to be responsible for the development of exclusive high-quality White areas and White farmers with better living standards and conditions than that of the Blacks working and living on the farms. The demographics of the country thus reflect a clear division between Blacks and Whites in terms of race and socio-economic classing. For the average Black it is just impossible, because of his/her immense poverty, to break out on his or her own from the impoverished living areas and circumstances and to penetrate the exclusive White areas. In this rich man–poor man model the issue of farmland became mixed up with urban land, making it one issue that could be solved by land expropriation.

In an effort overcome above imbalance of the racial demographics the ANC regime argues that land redistribution without compensation is essential. Free land is the ANC regime’s key to unlock this “White exclusiveness”.

In terms of the imbalanced racial demographics, Opperheimer3 offers counter-evidence. He states, based on research by the IRR, that in 2015 the various racial groups’ ownership of homes was almost perfectly proportional. This postulation by Opperheimer3 is supported by the government’s own recent land audit. Regarding the ownership of property (not farm land), this audit shows racial parity with 49% erven owned by Whites and 46% owned by Blacks. The audit reflects more or less the same ratio for sectional title ownership. This data, argues Opperheimer3, indicate that redistribution, when it includes home ownership per se as a focus point, is unsubstantiated. Opperheimer3 does not feel that the racial demographics of the country need immediate correction through land expropriation. The antagonists see the negative ANC propaganda on racial demographics as a well-planned social engineering initiative by the ANC leadership to support RET and RST, to limit the socioeconomic and political privileges, rights and positions of Whites in greater South Africa and to force the integration of Whites into the greater Black community.3,6

In this context, with the focus on the ANCs discrepancy between Black and White when it comes to ownership, the antagonists point out that although there is unhappiness and discontent with the new South Africa, only 18% of the population’s discontent is about poor accommodation. Opperheimer3 points out that research shows that less than 1% of South Africans were concerned with owing land. For South Africans of all the races there are much more worrying issues. There are indeed three serious matters worrying the public, namely unemployment (40%), lack of and poor service delivery (34%) and poor education (15%). These are all results of the failed ANC regime. For the antagonists it is clear that the ANC regime’s present attack on White “rich” lifestyles as reflected by White living standards, etc. and the ANC’s hostile plans to equalise the “imbalanced demographics between Blacks and Whites”, is nothing else than an effort to cover up their failure as a regime since 1994 to erase unemployment, poor service delivery in Black areas and to improve Black education. The present poverty, unemployment and inequality stem from the ANC regime’s failures and not from imbalanced racial demographics.3,6

In response to the so-called disturbed racial demographics of the country as alleged by the ANC regime and its radicals, the antagonists argue that such disturbed racial demographics is a misrepresentation of the truth for political gain. Opperheimer3 states that only 3% of South Africans are worried about the race factor. Race in relation to the present ownership of land and Black discontent with the general South African political, social and economic situation is insignificant and the ANC gives a false reflection.3

The IRR found that 71% of Blacks (and 74% of Whites) have no concerns about race per se in their daily life. This absence of a desire for land grabbing among ordinary Blacks is further supported by the findings of the Caro Institute in the USA. The main reasons why South Africans are the 5th most depressed and unhappiest people in the world are not racial conflict or racial hate, but unemployment, inflation and high interest rates. For the antagonists this reflect badly on the ANC regime and its elite.3

3.5.6. The ANC has since 1994 successfully guided poor Blacks to financial independence

The ANC has bragged that they have guided poor Blacks to independence, implying that the ANC regime has changed the lives of the poor and landless Blacks for the better since 1994 in terms of basic living standards.

The basic question for the antagonists is: does the ANC truly develop the poor so that become self-sufficient enough to buy daily food and to afford basic accommodation, schooling and medicine?

Victory Research’s recent report is very significant here. It reflects that a great number of South Africans (Black and White) feel that their basic needs are not fulfilled in any way by the ANC regime. They not only feel that certain basic services are lacking, but that it has become unaffordable for them to afford these services. Unemployment is prominent. This has led many poor Blacks (an estimate 29-million) not having food on the table or basic accommodation on most days.67

The respondents (seemingly from the middle class and thus less exposed to the extreme poverty and living conditions of poor and landless Blacks) who took part in Victory Research show that their top concerns and dissatisfaction (measured by percentage with satisfaction 0% and dissatisfaction 100%) with the ANC regime centres on unemployment (47%), crime and security (20%), corruption (18%), poor education (18%), accommodation (14%), basic service delivery (12%), poor healthcare (8%) and high living costs (7%).67 It is clear that there is not a White-Black issue here. If the middle class feels this negative about the ANC, how must the poorest feel?

When looking to research reflecting on the living conditions and “satisfaction” of the poor and landless Blacks, it contradicts the ANC regime’s view that they have empowered the Black community. This data make the ANC’s claim of “doing good” to the poor and landless Blacks seems absurd.68,69

Derby68 reflects that in 2018 the financial circumstances of most South African households, not only the poor, were worrying. Prominent is the fact that the percentage of households in South Africa that is receiving at least one form of a social grant, is in the high 40% region, or 17 million persons (with 55% South Africans living in abject poverty). This is a direct outcome of down-sizing mines and other industries, causing unemployment, as well as the overall unemployment culture of the country (officially nearly 30%, unofficially 50%–60%). The unemployment is so severe that many people with good training are left jobless. The ANC regime’s failure to develop entrepreneurship and SMEs to create new jobs, especially for the lower socioeconomic and less trained classes is a major cause. The fact is that the contingent of jobless (and thus mostly foodless) people is growing daily, forcing at least 40% of the total population into financial dependence, poverty and indirect begging from the state (who in reality should generate work opportunities and income to make these people independent citizens).68,69

The extent to which the absolute poverty is starting to overwhelm even the South African middle class is evident from the need for the National Credit Amendment Bill in terms of which consumers earning less than R7 000 a month and with unsecured debt up to R50 000 will be absolved of their debt if they are deemed highly indebted by the National Credit Regulator.68,69

The spreading lawlessness and disorder is proof that unemployment is pushing people to the edge. Theft of food and money to buy food has increased. Central to these many asocial and anti-social behaviours stands what perpetrators see as the ANC regime’s betrayal of their rightful (and which the ANC promised them at every election) claim to basic services such as clean water, medical services, work, basic housing, etc. Dissatisfaction is becoming evident from unrest around the country. The growth and intensity of the masse dissatisfaction with the ANC regime are observable in how the initial unrests changed from a clear focus on only poor service delivery, to serious unrest and protests with a focus also on a lack of education, crime and a lack of personal safety, healthcare, transport, the unavailability of plots/land to erect houses and other forms of accommodation. The protests are also increasing in violence.70

The evidence shows that the main focus of these angers is the failure of the ANC regime to deliver on its post-1994 promises and the ANC’s failure to use budgets to aid the landless poor. Angry protesters point who are been caught up in corruption, state capture and the self-enrichment to the ANC regime and its elite at the cost of the poor. Their view is that the ANC regime not only failed as a regime to offer accommodation and land within the boundaries of the 1994 land reform programme, but often just ignored the urgent needs of the poor and landless Blacks. It is important to look at some examples of the behaviour and reactions of people from the Black community on the ANC regime’s failure to take care of their interests. It indeed reflects an outright dislike for the ANC regime and its elite.68-70

The testimony of a tin shack dweller living in a sprawling Durban shantytown, a said Mrs Lindiswa Mhlanga70, about her fantasies “to live in a brick house with windows, walls, bedrooms and perhaps a garden for her children to play” like the ANC elite, is heart-breaking, not only because of the tragedy around it, but also because it most probably going to remain a fantasy. A despairing neighbour of hers, a said Mrs. Tembu Xulu70, gives a poignant description of her utmost despair about her living conditions since the new 1994 democracy when she said in 201870:14:

“I can’t live like this anymore. It’s been 11 years I’m here. We have one room and one bed that eight of us share. What life is this? We have snakes under the shack. I want a life of dignity.”

Blacks are responding on these failures of the ANC with a clear warning to the Ramaphosa regime. S’bu Zikode70, the founding president of the national organisation Abahlali (of which 16 leaders have been killed since 2009 under very suspicious circumstances) which has approximately 50 000 members who are fighting for the rights of the poor and landless in informal settlements, says70:14:

“Many of us have given up hope that there will ever be any change or delivery to our people. What makes us hopeless is that every year the government has a budget announcement and out of those billions, very few communities are benefiting. We know that as long as the ANC is in power, shack dwellers and black people are not going to benefit anything from the government.”

This despair goes deeper than the experience of hopelessness, bringing the unavoidable result of political self-empowerment and lawlessness to the foreground. It is possible that extreme violence directed at the ANC regime is in the making. The antagonists not only consider the failure of the ANC as a party to serve the interests of the poor and landless Blacks, but also the presence of criminal role players inside the ANC regime who trample on the dignity of their poor Black brothers. The poor and landless Black activists highlight the open misuse of the benefits meant for the Black poor by some ANC councillors, instead of helping the homeless Blacks to make them independent citizens who can live a normal life as a worker with an income and a house. Zikode70 is especially succinct in when he reports70:14:

“We believe that many of them eat the money meant for the people. Some of the councillors have told me straight to my face that I am disturbing them from eating. It is their turn to eat. They are there to enrich themselves and it’s obvious. We are reaching a stage where we are saying: ‘Could we accept that we don’t have a government?’”

It would be a mistake to think the hostility of the Black poor and homelessness is limited to speaking out on the matter: their discontent has already moved to militant thinking. We are in a stage of aggressiveness, bordering on militant actions. Zikode’s70 words are prominent as he puts the immediate political decision and destiny of the poor and homeless Blacks on the table against the ANC regime70:14:

If you listen to us carefully, we are no longer talking about homelessness, we are talking about landlessness, the reason being we have accepted that there is no money for housing.

That is why our focus is now on the land question. Can you rather release land for us to see what we can do?

From the onset promises were made and broken, lies were put before truth and money and business were put before human needs. We have been calling for land in our cities for a long time.

Of course we support the call for the expropriation of land without compensation, but it is what we have already doing – it’s what we call land occupation.

It’s really about the redistribution of land from below. People are taking back the land.

Most of the settlements that we have occupied have not been given on a silver plate. People have had to occupy vacant land, because nobody will ever give you land.

Which is why today there are hundreds of casualties.

If you were to ask where all these assassinations and death threats come from: two sources – the police and politicians.

But despite the death threats we are receiving, we will not be silenced.

For Zikode70 there is undoubtedly one immediate dangerous enemy of the poor Blacks in their struggle to survive as humans: the ANC and its favoured elite. This outcome is more than enough evidence that the notion that the ANC has developed the poor and landless Blacks into financially independent and functioning citizens is a lie and a myth.

3.5.7. Blacks are indigenous South Africans and Whites are European settlers

Who are the rightful franchisees of South African land? Which of the Black and White tribes deserve South African land ownership? The current argument of the ANC and EFF is that it is only the Blacks. Most of these statements are purely meant for political opportunism and emotional rhetoric. It also reveals political leaders’ lack of an understanding of the political history of South Africa.

It is thus of great importance to separate myths and lies from the truth to determine who counts as non-indigenous colonists (so called land predators), who counts as true indigenous people (natives) and who are indigenous colonists (foreigners who over time indigenised) to South Africa, writes Louw6. The claim of Blacks as indigenous South Africans and Whites as European settlers, making Blacks the rightful sole owners of the country’s land and the intended land redistribution without compensation by the Blacks justified, should be evaluated.

The pre-1900 South Africans can be divided into six broad racial and ethnic groups, namely the KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, the Black tribes, the White tribes, the Coloureds and the Asians/Indians/Malays. Louw6 shows that earlier inhabitants (settlers) of South Africa, before the Europeans and Blacks arrived, were undoubtedly the KhoiSan and the KhoiKhoi. The Cape Settlement was infused an Asian/Indian/Malay bloodline and this resulted in a new race in South Africa. It meant that two more peoples over time became indigenous to South Africa, namely the Coloureds and the Asian/Indians/Malay. This unique constellation of South Africa brings into focus the many political clichés of who are the rightfully franchisees of South African soil and who should have South African land ownership.6,71

3.5.7.1. KhoiSan

The KhoiSan were probably the first inhabitants of South Africa. It seems they migrated from central Southern Asia. It is theorised that their migrating resulted from a scarcity of food or as if they were driven out by other stronger races from Asia. The initial tribe split up in three sub-tribes: one group moving south-east to the Malaysian Peninsula, the Philippines and as far as Australia; the second group moving west as far as Spain and the third group moving into North Africa and from there constantly Southwards as result of attacks by the Hamites who were living around the Nile region. Other parts of this third group of KhoiSan moved downwards from the eastern part of Africa, to gather south of the Zambezi after the 1600s, ending up in the Southern African region as far South as the Cape. The KhoiSan are now only present in diminutive numbers, and they are politically and economically disempowerment. They have not made any direct claims to land ownership, although through inbreeding with the Blacks, Coloureds and KhoiKhoi, they can also lay claim to land ownership to a certain extent.6,71

3.5.7.2 KhoiKhoi

The KhoiKhoi probably have their origin as result of a mixture in Somaliland between KhoiSan and Hamites. It seems that they migrated Southwest down into Africa to the region of the Great Lakes, and, after staying several centuries, they moved further Southwards more or less around 600AC, to reach the Orange River where they initially established on the banks of the river and along the West Coast, from Walvis Bay to the Umtamvuna River. Later on they started to split up into smaller tribes, with each an individual name and customs, moving again further Southwards.6,71

Notwithstanding the fact that they were one of the first migrants to establish themselves in South Africa as an ethnic group, the KhoiKhoi have very little impact because of their small numbers and early political marginalisation. In terms of equality and justified human rights of the South African Constitution, they must, as the KhoiSan, be given the right to claim rightful ownership of the South African soil.6,71

3.5.7.3. Indians/Asians/Malays

Indians/Asians/Malays, although late-comers to South Africa as labour to Natal in 1860, have, like all the other races in South Africa, became indigenous to the country. Many of their forefathers or tribal associates were Asian/Indian/Malay female slaves who came to the Cape Refreshment Settlement between 1650 and 1670. Many of these women had children with Whites at the Cape, making the Indians/Asians/Malays rightful claimants together with the Whites to future land ownership. (The direct, first infusion of “non-White blood” into the White parent stock of today’s Afrikaners can be as high as 75%).6,71

It is clear that the Asians/Indians/Malays’ claim to South African land ownership as indigenous people is not limited to their South African identity, but also through their early inbreeding with the Whites and the Coloureds.6,71

3.5.7.4. Coloureds

The vertical biological development of a closed and outcast group of mixed people, mostly excluded from the White nucleus that formed the modern Afrikaners, is surely true as evidenced by the South African Coloureds and other mixed people of today. However, the superficial split between Coloureds and Whites is confirmed by historical evidence of an immense horizontal biological impact of “Coloured blood” on Afrikaners’ genes, contradicting earlier numbers of only 6% to 10.7% of mixed Afrikaner descendants and the separate vertical development of the Coloureds as a separate ethnic group. This brotherhood between White Afrikaners and Brown Afrikaners makes the claims of White Afrikaners on land ownership fully applicable to the Coloureds and vice versa. The further mixing of the Coloureds with KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi and Blacks makes these three groups’ claims on land ownership also fully applicable on the Coloureds and vice versa.6,71

Notwithstanding this birth right and the fact that the Coloureds are the second largest tribe in the country, they are still politically, economically and socially as deprived as in the pre-1994 dispensation.6,71

3.5.7.5. Blacks

The South African Blacks, like the South African Whites, are both comparative newcomers to Southern Africa. The South African Blacks’ probable initial home was Central Asia, from where the moved into Africa en masse, splitting in two: one group moving down to the middle of Africa and the second group moving along the East Coast to reach Sofala in the 10th century. When the Portuguese established themselves on the East Coast, these various East-bound Black groups reached Natal and in the 1650s the area around the Kei River. The middle group of Blacks also moved Southwards to establish themselves in the vicinity of the Vet and Caledon Rivers the 1750s.6,71

After the early First and Second Black Colonisation of South Africa between 1810 and 1840, Blacks become permanent settlers with time and obtained indigenous status (especially through land grabbing, war and the complete termination of their opponents).6,71

The constant reference of Black politicians to the Afrikaner as an “alien, murderous colonist” in South Africa, or to the Whites as the only colonist in South Africa, is false. Louw’s6 study shows that it is an undeniable fact that the current Black population are also foreign to South Africa and indeed in the same boat as the Afrikaners.

The South African Blacks have no more right to land ownership than the KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, Coloureds, Asian/Indians/Malays, Whites and Afrikaners. Land redistribution can only be executed in their favour in terms of their shared indigenousness with the KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, Coloureds, Asian/Indians/Malays, Whites and Afrikaners due to a time factor of living in South Africa. Their portion of land to be received in terms of the intended land expropriation project can only be calculated and determined based on the total South African population versus the ratio of the KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, Coloureds, Asian/Indians/Malays, Whites and Afrikaners. Their present claims to land and the intention of land redistribution without compensation, is land grabbing and terrorism, similar to what their forefathers did when they settled here as foreigners.6,71

3.5.7.6. Whites and the Afrikaner tribe

The popular view that the “Afrikaner” is a unique and “pure” White race that had its origins at the Cape Settlement in 1652 is wrong. Miscegenation and a multiracial component involving the South African Indians/Asians, Coloureds, KhoiKhoi and Blacks is a fact.6,71

The multiracialism of today’s Afrikaners makes their legal claims to land ownership of the South African soil equal to that of South Africa’s Asian/Indians, KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, Coloureds and Blacks. The Afrikaners have become indigenous, as did the Asian/Indians, KhoiSan, KhoiKhoi, Coloureds and Blacks, to South Africa.6,71

The radical Black politicians’ claim that Blacks are indigenous South Africans and that Whites are settlers, is false and misleading. Indians/Asians, Coloureds, KhoiKhoi, Blacks and Whites are all foreigners (migrants) to South Africa who became indigenous over time.

3.5.8. The claim that the Tsar and Stalin’s collectivist farming projects in rural Russia were great successes

The radicals in the ANC often argue that the communist countries’ form of land ownership could work here. This is especially true for Julius Malema of the EFF who believes in the full nationalisation of all South Africans assets. When one looks critically at the similarities between the present-day political intentions of the ANC elite of South Africa and that of the Russian regimes as reflected by the Russian political history between the 1860s and 1950s, the similarities are startling: the same political radicalism, masked agendas, misuse of the problem of poverty and landlessness for own political and personal enrichment by the elites, the intentional lack of a clear land reform plan, political revenge on the previous beneficiaries of the old regimes, disrespect for the civil rights of individuals and for humanity, and the outcome of an even worse political end results. In both cases the end result of the land ownership issue was either revolution(s) or the possibility of revolution.4,6

It is therefore important to the antagonists to test the notion that the Tsar and Stalin’s collectivist farming projects in rural Russia were great successes and interventions that could be applied to the land expropriation model of the ANC regime. The historian Professor Niall Ferguson73 gives us great insight into this matter with his comprehensive book on the world’s political history titled: The War of the World. Ferguson73 writes73:198:

In the summer of 1931, in his seventy-fifth year, the playwright George Bernard Shaw paid a nine-day visit to the Soviet Union. What he saw — or thought he saw — was a workers’ paradise under construction.

Here was a symbol of the apparently realizable dream of state socialism, and Western visitors like Shaw reacted ecstatically. They had seen the future, and — compared with the apparently defunct capitalist system — it seemed to work.

Granted an audience with Stalin himself, Shaw was ‘disarm[ed]… by a smile in which there is no malice but also no credulity… [He] would pass…for a romantically dark Georgian chieftain’. In an impromptu speech in Leningrad, Shaw declared enthusiastically: ‘If this great communistic experiment spreads over the whole world, we shall have a new era in history…If the future is the future as Lenin foresaw it, then we may all smile and look forward to the future without fear’. ‘Were I only 18 years of age,’ he told journalists on his way back to England, ‘I would settle in Moscow tomorrow.’

Shaw73 elaborated further in 1931, writes Ferguson73:198-199:

“Stalin has delivered the goods to an extent that seemed impossible ten years ago, he rhapsodized. ‘Jesus Christ has come down to earth. He is no longer an idol. People are gaining some sort of idea of what would happen if He lived now.”

But Shaw was not the only famous and important Brit who was mesmerised by the communists’ benevolence to the poor in the 1930s: with him on his “tour of believing” were also Nancy and Waldorf Astor, and the Marquis of Lothian, Philip Kerr.73

Shaw’s73 “goodness” that came to the peasants (the poor and landless Russians) in the countryside under Stalin is now also seemingly on the way for poor and landless Blacks in South Africa. However, it is important to note that a limited form of land redistribution already took place in Russia under the Tsar with his abolition of serfdom in the 1860s and the transfer of land by a form of land ownership to them.73

The bid by the Tsar to build a new class of “thrifty peasant proprietors” by means of a form of land redistribution, had limited success for various reasons. The specific belief that their “independence” from the rich and the mega-landowners and their own say in agriculture would transform the poor and landless Russians into successful commercial farmers overnight, failed. Although the peasants’ input with agricultural produce boosted the Russian economy, it just introduced another form of inequality. More or less 80% of ordinary Russians living in the countryside remained poor and deprived of benefits and dependent on the Tsar’s whims. Although the living standards of the peasants improved, they were still far from those living in towns and cities. The backlash of the Tsar’s abuse of the poor and landless under the mantle of their economic and political empowerment, upliftment and independence only to enrich his elite circle, doomed the project to a failure right from the start. In real life the masses of poor and landless Russians gained nothing.73 Ferguson writes73:14:

“The hope that they [80% of the population] would gain land as well as freedom among the peasants by the abolition of serfdom had been disappointed.”

What becomes clear is the absence of a definitive plan and the focused intention to uplift the poor and landless Russians to empower them and not only the doings of the corrupted Tsar-elite.73

The vagueness of Ramaphosa’s plan of who would receive land, the allocation of deeds and what would be expected from these individuals, seems to be conflict in the making. In the Russia of the 1860s there were also different (often opposing and discriminative) socio-economic groups (as in the present-day South Africa), aggravating the battle for land ownership. This not only laid the foundation for immediate political conflict in Russia, but also a revolution. Ferguson73 reflects on this infighting73:14-15:

“A disgruntled peasantry, a sclerotic aristocracy, a radicalized but impotent intelligentsia and a capital city with a large and volatile populace: these were precisely the combustible ingredients the historian Alexis de Tocqueville had identified in 1780 France [and its revolution]. A Russian revolution of rising expectations was in making…”

It is more than clear from the Russian tsar’s failed experiment that neither extreme land grabbing nor orderly land redistribution bring immediate socio-economic and financial solutions and satisfaction for the poor and landless, especially when their numbers are large and the liberation regime’s intentions with land expropriation is based on political delinquency.

The above Russian experiment on land expropriation did not stop with the later doomed Tsar regime. It was later continued by the dictator and political delinquent Josef Stalin as president of Russia.

Stalin73 lends another dimension to the presence of the peasantry and its grievances inside the greater Russian community in the 1930s. Described in a differences: the misuse of the peasants through their “grievances” (here in South Africa the antagonists refer to this Stalin opportunism in terms of Ramaphosa’s politicking as the “people wants, needs and demands”), to promote and to benefit exclusively Stalin’s elite’s interests and sick political visions.

As in South Africa at present, the politics of socialism all over Russia was Stalin’s solution to address the peasant problem and their upliftment via “land ownership and wealth”. But, “What Stalin meant by ‘socialism in one country’ was a new revolution – an economic revolution that he, the self-styled ‘man of steel’ would lead”, writes Ferguson73:199. The “public” outcome of Stalin was one of “promoting” the interests of the poor and landless peasants living in the countryside (filled with grievances about their living conditions from the time of the Tsar), while in reality he killed them off to promote solely his own self-interests through military force and the greater Russian economy needed for military power via the agricultural economics. His economic revolution of masse industrialisation, secondary to social transformation, offered Stalin the opportunity of misusing the peasantry as the new proletariat (especially in the urban areas) to keep him and his elite in power without really awarding them significant political and economic power. It also limited the political and economic empowerment and aspirations of the peasantry still living in the countryside, tilling the soil for the Stalin elite’s benefitting. Ferguson posits73:199:

“By forcing a huge transfer of manpower and the resources from the countryside into the cities, he aimed to enlarge at a stroke the Soviet proletariat on which the Revolution was supposedly based.”

At the same time Stalin attacked the surviving elements of the pre-revolutionary society – “…former capitalists, nobles, merchants, officials, priests and kulaks with all their class sympathies, anti-pathies, traditions, habits, opinions, world views and so on…”, who he saw as remaining threats to his regime, writes Ferguson.73:199 Stalin’s policy of collectivisation of the Russian agricultural sector and its people was only superficially an attempt to improve Soviet agrigulture73:199:

“Its true goal was the destruction of the class enemy – to be precise, ‘the liquidation of the kulaks as a class’”.

Ferguson73 brings us nearer to the above events when he points out73:200:

“Predictably, the consequence of the systematic annihilation of any farmer suspected of being a kulak was not economic growth but one of the greatest man-made famines in history. As Party functionaries descended on the countryside with orders to abolish private property and ‘liquidate’ anyone who had accumulated more than the average amount of capital, there was chaos”.

In reflecting here on the destiny of the private land owners and the rich of the countryside (equal to the White farmers of South Africa), Ferguson stipulates the following six criteria set out in 1927 (revised in 1929) by the Soviet Ministry of Finance in their doomed evaluation of wrongdoings of the rich Russians (as Apartheid’s wrongdoings also reflects)73:200:

  1. The hiring of two or more labourers;
  2. Ownership of three or more draught animals;
  3. Sown area of more than 10–16 desyatims (the threshold varied by region);
  4. Ownership of any kind of processing enterprise;
  5. Ownership of a trading establishment; or
  6. Ownership of one or more agricultural machines or of a considerable quantity of good-quality implements

Looking at the above extreme criteria makes it clear that the more or less 35 000 commercial farmers in South Africa would have qualified in 1927 to be liquidated, making their fear for the radicals inside the ANC elite with their extreme land transformation (and sometimes open hostility against Whites, especially the Afrikaners) understandable.3

To understand better the liquidation of anti-Stalin and anti-Soviet farmers (and seemingly rich farmers) by communistic Russia through their good land expropriation policy in the 1920s, Ferguson takes us on an in-depth journey with a clear warning about the political, social and personal madness of Stalin and his cronies [a similar warning the antagonists have tried to send out to the world (like the note to Donald Trump) of what can comes in South Africa if the ANC regime, besotted by its political madness, stays on after 2019, noting the ANC’s revolutionary foundation and Stalinist orientation]. Ferguson73 text is of such importance that it is fully mentioned here. Ferguson73 writes73:200-202:

Who exactly was a kulak? Those who had been better-off before the Revolution or those who had done well since? What exactly did it mean to ‘exploit’ other peasants? Lending them money when they were short of cash? Rather than see their cattle and pigs confiscated, many peasants preferred to slaughter and eat them, so that by 1935 total Soviet livestock was reduced to half of its 1929 level. But the brief orgy of eating was followed by a protracted, agonizing starvation. Without animals fertilizers, crop yields plummeted – grain output in 1932 was down by a fifth compared with 1930. Grain seizures to feed Russia’s cities left entire villages with literally nothing to eat. Starving people ate cats, dogs, field mice, birds, tree bark and even horse manure. Some went into the fields and ate half-ripe ears of corn. There were even cases of cannibalism. As in the 1920-21, typhus followed hard on the heels of dearth. Perhaps as many as eleven million people died in what was a wholly unnatural and unnecessary disaster. In addition, almost 400 00 households, or close to two million people, were deported as ‘special exiles’ to Siberia and Central Asia. Many of those who resisted collectivization were shot on the spot; perhaps as many as 3.5 million victims of ‘dekulakization’ subsequently died in labour camps. It was a crime the regime did its utmost to conceal from the world, confining foreign journalists to Moscow and restoring the Tsarist passport system to prevent famine victims fleeing to the cities for relief. Even the 1937 census was suppressed because it revealed a total population of just 156 million, when natural increase would have increased it to 186 million. Only a handful of Western reporters – notably Gareth Jones of the Daily Express, Malcolm Muggeridge of the Manchester Guardian, Pierre Berland of Le Tempe and William Chamberlin of the Christian Science Monitor – had the guts to publish accurate reports about the famine. The bulk of the press corps in Moscow, notably Walter Durancy of the New York Times, knowingly connived at the cover-up for fear of jeopardizing their access to the nomenklatura.

The notion of the propagandists that the Tsar and Stalin’s collectivist farming projects in rural Russia to uplift and empower the poor and landless Russians were great successes is false. Indeed, for antagonists the tragic political history of Russian land reform spells disaster for South Africa. The Mothlante Report points out that the 1994 to 2018 land redistribution under the auspices of the ANC regime failed, not so much because of poorly qualified farmers, but because of the stealing of politicians and officials of the money allocated to farmers. The question for the antagonists is why would this setup not replay itself now?73

3.6. The presidency of Cyril Ramaphosa in perspective

3.6.1. The impact of Ramaphosa’s political baggage

One of the strong critics against Ramaphosa is the conclusion of the antagonists that he is only going to bring further misery to South Africans in general and to Whites specifically, making him just another “political monster” and a leader unable to handle the land expropriation with true justice and political balance inside the ANC elite. This conclusion is based on the view of the antagonists that Ramaphosa is a Zuma collaborator per excellence. The antagonists are constantly pointing out his long “passive” presence as an ANC member and later as vice-president during the Zuma’s time of transgression. It is justified for the antagonists to bring this matter to the table in the now stormy hurricane which is called land expropriation and in which Ramaphosa stands central with the radicals of the ANC. Munusamy74,75 and Mthombothi76,77 put this “involvement reality” on paper when they point out that he was the deputy-president and has sat through cabinet meetings where Zuma and several of his crooked ministers tried to take action on instruction from the Guptas. Munusamy75,78 and Mthombothi76,77 emphasise that he, as the deputy-president, attended numerous of the ANC’s top-six and national executive committee meetings where state capture was contested. He was also a direct figure in cases where state capture was at least clear to the eye, like the attempted heist of the National Treasury by firing three anti-corruption ANC politicians, namely Nhlanhla Nene, Pravin Gordhan and Mcebisi Jonas by Jacob Zuma in March 2017. The critics also say that Ramaphosa has been influenced and steered by the politically uncontrolled Julius Malema, especially on the land issue.74-77,80,81

Some political analysts look critically at Ramaphosa’s rhetoric on land redistribution (which they see as similar to EFF politics) from another angle. Firstly, his immediate radical enthusiasm about a fast and decisive land expropriation programme is seen by the antagonists as simple opportunism to win power inside the ANC for support against the pro-Zuma and Zupta-derailing movements to oust him before or during the 2019 election. Secondly, to stay on as supreme leader of ANC, his primary priority at this stage is to save the ANC regime from defeat in 2019 by hook or by crook. Failure will mean his automatic defeat as a figure in the future politics of the country. It is speculated that he is trying to play the long game and that he will wait until after the elections to consolidate his power base to fit exclusively his opportunistic needs.74-77.80,81 Barron63 writes63:9:

“Right now it’s about self-preservation, it’s about winning the 2019 election, feeling threatened by the EFF, feeling vulnerable…”

The whole issue around White land has become an irritating affair for Ramaphosa that is unnecessarily being stalled by Whites. It is now limiting his strength as president and ambitions. The Whites’ enthusiasm about Ramaphosa as their saviour as he replaced Jacob Zuma’s hostility, seems misplaced: Ramaphosa’s political baggage is just too much for him to accommodate the Whites as a group with all their needs and demands: things can get worse for the Whites under Ramaphosa, antagonists feel.82,83

At present Ramaphosa’s impatience about a lack of progress on land redistribution and White resistance since 1994 is growing. President Donald Trump’s questions about the ANC’s land expropriation has aggravated him.63 In his political arena the Whites’ future interests are not important. This mindset makes him a very dangerous to the White community and their future, argue the antagonists. For the antagonists Ramaphosa shows signs of having lost contact with the bigger political picture of long-term economics and nation-building. Indeed, it seems as if the Zuma-scenario of hostility against Whites have not disappeared.84,85

The matter of land expropriation without compensation can become Ramaphosa’s Achilles heel as a president. The months up to the possible May-2019 election can be a bruising battle for the Ramaphosa camp. They can get any side of the coin, which can both have devastating outcomes in the end. Ramaphosa is accused by the antagonists of constant double-talk and of creating many unrealistic expectations among poor Blacks.48 Some antagonists see the present identification of Whites as exclusive land owners as nothing else than the misuse of an “itching political-racial matter” to draw away attention from the ANC regime as a party in crisis to get votes in the next election. It is reminiscent to the White regime’s misuse of an itching political-racial matter in the 1930s when they played of the “poor Afrikaner problem” against the “Black and English dangers” of that time to get Afrikaner votes in exchange for financial benefits to secure their reign of South Africa. The Carnegie Commission then not only revealed this misuse of insecure voters by the nationalist Afrikaner leaders to obtain Afrikaner votes, but also warned against it as a crooked way getting votes. Geen71 reported well in 1939 on this matter71: 201:

The Commission also drew attention to the danger of allowing people to retain the vote if they were in receipt of government aid, over and above the privileges that fall to all citizens. “There are signs that voting power and political influence are being abused to an increasing degree in order to obtain State assistance” was the unanimous view of the commissioners. The opinion has been expressed that those who accept government assistance should forfeit the valued right to vote.

This unethical and crooked way of getting votes is applicable to the 2019 land intentions of the ANC regime and party.71

Ramaphosa’s integrity as politician and as previous vice-president of the ANC regime is doubted by the antagonists and thus the White community. Mthombothi76 refuses to deviate from his initial question in this regard and puts it clearly that Ramaphosa should react to these concerns before he could be cleared as a clean outsider, truly unconnected to the Zuma and Gupta cronies. The antagonists argue that Ramaphosa’s anti-White behaviours since July 2018 further complicated his trustworthiness as president of South Africa. Mthombothi’s76 writing echoes the questions of many antagonists about Ramaphosa into the presidency through the front door. Mthombothi posits76:17:

And because Zuma, the villain of the piece, is gone, we’re now encouraged to wake up to a new dawn. It’s a confession of sorts. Dawn is preceded by darkness. The suggestion is that we’re emerging from a nightmarish, dark place into a glorious sunshine and that we should be grateful to our saviour.

But hang on a minute. Not so fast. To suggest that state capture is all Zuma’s doing is not only a lie but a complete cop-out. It’s akin to arguing that Hendrik Verwoerd alone was responsible for apartheid. That’s pulling the wool over our eyes. The entire party, especially the top leadership, is complicit.

What is missing – and what those who smugly sat in the inner sanctums of power with Zuma want to avoid — is full and honest disclosure. During the Watergate scandal in the US, a high-ranking Republican senator put this seminal question to Richard Nixon: what did the president know, and when did he know it? President Cyril Ramaphosa and his cohorts need to respond to such a question. What was their role in the state capture debacle and why did they choose to stay silent, which was itself a criminal dereliction of duty?

Ramaphosa needs to level with the public. He should take it into his confidence. Be honest with us. Opening up is not a sign of weakness. To the contrary, it may strengthen his position. Trust is an important component in leadership.

The ANC spurned numerous opportunities to remove Zuma. It stood by him. Those who called for his scalp were mocked and disparaged. Now they’ve made a U-turn and are urging everybody to join in their thuma Mina kumbaya.

A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

The antagonists need not look further than Cyril Ramaphosa’s83,86 inaugural speech as the ANC’s leader at the party’s 54th National Leaders Conference in December 2017 to see Ramaphosa’s blindness to Zuma’s “bad” lipstick while he was vice-president83:6:

Finally, I would like, on your behalf, to thank President Jacob Zuma for the 10 years he has spent as the president of our movement and for a lifetime of service to the people; or

We cannot close down the 54th national conference of the ANC without to bring tribute to your [Zuma] contributions over decades in the struggle for Freedom, democracy and development [Own translation].

Mthombothi’s76 diagnosis of a pig with lipstick is still a pig seems to fit Ramaphosa’s political actions after June 2018. For the antagonists there is only one of two solutions for the land expropriation matter: get rid of the pig or clean its lips of lipsticks! But this seems easier said than done in the ANC regime’s corrupted setup where there seems just too many “holy pigs” to handle.76

Gary Eisenberg79 and John Steenhuisen87 put into perspective the cloudy, one-sided and privileged politics of the pre-2019 top circle of the ANC. The ordinary people were held to a different (higher) standard of administrative justice than the ANC’s top leadership (a system in which Ramaphosa was a prominent member together with his boss Zuma and of which he must now be answerable to all South Africans).87,76 Like Mthombothi76, Eisenberg79 is also questioning this ANC integrity79:17:

How can a regime of law exist with integrity when access to administrative justice is only possible through a shadow decision-making authority outside of the rule of law?

This principle cannot be more poignantly articulated than in the celebrated words of US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: “If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy”.

Zuma and his regime became law-breakers and laws unto themselves, leading to immense anarchic outcomes. The question at this stage is where Ramaphosa stands in relation to personal and political honesty versus crooking. Any future perception of him as a puppet serving the ANC NEC under the Zuma-faction can be fatal to his credibility as leader Number One.79,87,88

The fact is, as indicated already, that the Guptas and top ANC leaders would not been in position to allow such constant state capture without the help and approval of other ANC-leaders in the top structure of the party and in the Zuma cabinet. Does a parallel Zuma regime still exist in the Ramaphosa regime? And, most of all, the honest question: Who are all the pigs with lipstick in the Ramaphosa cabinet and in his inner circle?76,79,84

The above questions of Mthombothi76, Steenhuisen87 and Eisenberg79 about Ramaphosa’s possible double role in the present South African politics are growing, also in the minds of the antagonists. It may be their single greatest worry.

Ramaphosa’s possible double role may be a factor in other events. Prominent here is the allegation of ongoing political terrorising and extortion of the Ramaphosa camp by Zuma and the Guptas. Is it a possibility that these alleged powers are making the Ramaphosa regime toothless to fire ministers and state officials from the Zuma regime and to kick out Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma from his inner circle? Is extortion making it impossible for Ramaphosa to depart fully from the established Zuma leftist and corrupted system, leading to his ongoing open support for crooked cadres? There is a die-hard suspicious rumour of a secret list (seemingly only known to Jacob Zuma, Oliver Tambo, Joe Nhlanhla and Nelson Mandela) of current prominent ANC members who are alleged to have been Apartheid spies and collaborators. It is now the time for Ramaphosa to address this matter with urgency. As with an open answer on his possible involvement or not in the Zuma regime’s wrongdoings, President Cyril Ramaphosa and his cohorts need also to respond with a clear answer about extortion by the Zupoids regarding their political and personal past. Ramaphosa has to level any possible dark past to the public. For the antagonists to trust Ramaphosa the question is prominent: Can Ramaphosa afford to respond publicly?82

The seasoned political and investigated journalist Barney Thombothi89 refuses to allow Ramaphosa to escape the present political reality in which he prominently positioned himself, seemingly washing his hands in innocence. Mthombothi89 takes justice further by postulating that accusing “uBaba” Jacob Zuma alone as the evil in state capture, fraud and stealing, is wrong and false. The truth, he writes, is89:21: “…uBaba’s ANC-party as a whole went along with him on his looting journey, making every step with well-planning with him”. This includes Ramaphosa as MP, member of the ANC NEC and vice-president. Ramaphosa’s present brain-washing of the ordinary man on the street with the appointment of various commission, investigations, inquiries, summits and conferences to investigate Zuma should not succeed. Ramaphosa is trying to steer the mess away from him self. It is only the inquiries of Raymond Zondo and Robert Nugent that seem to be of value thus far (but they did not lead to comprehensive criminal prosecutions by the NPA).19,89

The problem with the Zondo inquiry, as opposed to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of the 1990s, writes Mthombothi89:21, is that the perpetrators being investigated by the Zondo inquiry are still in power. Mthombothi89 points out this ANC contamination well89:21:

“They decided on its mandate, and it will be up to them to act on its recommendations, almost akin to an accused who has a remit to decide whether to abide by his sentence.”

The ANC elite’s effort to attribute all wrongdoing to Zuma is a failed strategy to escape responsibility: the fact is Zuma was appointed by the ANC out of their own free will and offered a free hand. He was no autocrat who grabbed the power directly. Indeed, he could have been stopped at any time by the ANC NEC. Mthombothi89 writes89:21:

“They were inside the tent with him cheering him as he plundered and looted with gay abandon. So they’re not simply complicit; they’re responsible for the awful mess the country’s in.”

The prominent question is why did Ramaphosa not testify so far to the Zondo inquiry: If he is not guilty of wrongdoing, why the avoidance? His contribution can be valuable and can open a door on the doings of the inner circle of the ANC from 1994 to 2018. Mthombothi89 is on the spot when he says89:21:

The Zondo commission gives Ramaphosa an opportunity to level with the public. As Zuma’s deputy, there is very little that could have escaped his attention. What did he know, and why didn’t he do anything about it? He should therefore be leading all ministers who served under Zuma to give evidence, mea culpas included, to the commission. These things took place under their noses. They must tell us what happened. We will be all ears.

With the above heavy baggage Ramaphosa is carrying, very few antagonists see Ramaphosa as an independent executive leader or futurist who is serving every citizen and community. Many see him as a person politically contaminated by his pre-1994 exposure to revolutionary “radiation”, still driven rigidly by this contaminated past.89 The inclination to misuse power and radical autocratic behaviour and disrespect for rules and traditions is well-illustrated by the fact that Ramaphosa openly ignored the parliament’s decision first to test the public’s sentiment on land expropriation without compensation. He started-up the process of land expropriation without official permission of the Parliament. Mthombothi89 reports on this as follows89:21:

It reduced the entire process to a sham: the currency was knocked off its stride and it’s continued its inexorable slide since.

Ramaphosa seems to be too contaminated to appear before the Zondo commission.

The request of the antagonists to the Ramaphosa regime is: Be honest with South Africans before the Zuptoids tell “their secrets” first to the outside-world.90,91,92 Look what happened with Nene after the Guptas “started to walk” again in daylight! Bruce90, like Mtombothi89, says90:12:

“Do it now, before the 2019 election. Opening up is not a sign of weakness. To the contrary, it may strengthen Ramaphosa’s and his intimate men’s positions. Trust is an important component in leadership. It can bring only confidence to the Ramaphosa regime, and most of all: to himself.”

Coming back to the failed and corrupted ANC period of reign between 1994 and 2019 and any constructive change possible to its reign in the near future, many political analysts rightly see very little change in the post-Zuma hundred days and more of Cyril Ramaphosa and that of Jacob Zuma. The antagonists describe it as an ongoing Zupta-ANC-NEC regime, which is still run direct and indirect by many controversial figures, the likes of Anoj Singh, Bruce Koloane, Mark Pamensky, Rajesh Naithani, Faith Muthambi, Fikile Mbalula, Lynne Brown, Daniel Mantsha, Des van Rooyen, Mosebenzi Zwane, Tom Moyane, Jonas Makwakwa, Supra Mahumapelo, Arthur Fraser, Shaun Abrahams, Brian (not Popo) Molefe, Matshela Koko, Malusi Gigaba, ACE Magashule, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, and others. Anti-Zuma and non-corrupt persons in the ANC of the calibre of Vusi Pikoli, Senzo Mchunu and Pravin Gordhan are just too few in number to assure a positive governmental overhaul and the taming or cleansing of the corrupted Zuma-ANC-NEC. The spooky networks of dirty tricks (Bell Pottinger), rogue spying (governmental) and propaganda (Infinity Media, The New Age, ANN7) are still too involved in the Ramaphosa reign.53,76,79,84,93-105

The antagonists see a shadow hanging over the heads of some of Ramaphosa’s intimate political cronies. In this regard Mthombothi2 writes2:3:

Let’s look at Ramaphosa’s own record. In David Mabuza, he has a deputy who, as premier of Mpumalanga, turned that province into a den of thieves, where whistle-blowers are killed with impunity. The ANC head office is headed by Ace Magashule, who’s left the Free State in a shambles and who’s personality involved in enabling the Guptas to benefit in the Estina scandal.

This week it emerged that an ABC employee at Luthuli House has been arrested for involvement in cash-in-transit heists. One ANC apparatchik was heard to express shock at this, but such delinquent behaviour is par for the course. There are many upstanding people in the ANC, but sometimes it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the party has become a criminal syndicate.

There was a devastating exposé in August 2018 in The New York Times (arguably the world’s most respected English newspaper) with specific reference to Ramaphosa’s deputy president David Mabuza’s alleged corrupt activities and mismanagement while he was Mpumalanga premier, write Imraan Buccus106 and Asha Speckman107. Buccus106 reflects on these controversies in the intimate Ramaphosa inner circle as follows106:17:

From this point on he will, at best, be seen as the head of a divided party and of a government that includes the worst dregs of the Jacob Zuma era.

On the international circuit any talk of a “New Dawn” or a “crackdown on corruption” will now be immediately followed by the question: “Yes, but what about Mabuza, and his ilk?

If Ramaphosa cannot remove Mabuza and others like him from the party and the government, his presidency will be paralysed.

The New York Times (NYT) foregrounds the incompetence and lack of insight on Ramaphosa side to involve persons with clean hands into his cabinet and into the ANC NEC, together with his lack of political insight to understand the consequences of land grabbing on the human and economic components of the country107:10: “…saying South Africa needed [looking seemingly to Ramaphosa, the failed statesman] another ‘enlightened leader like Nelson Mandela but keeps electing imitations of Robert Mugabe’.”

In this context the NYT clearly pinpoints Ramaphosa’s failure as an executive leader and tears his foolish argument that land restitution without compensation would unlock economic growth, into pieces. The fact is, as the antagonists also see it: the emperor is naked and sadly he does not know it.107

For the antagonists poor quality of political decisions, supported by other condemning evidence, seems to be cemented into the Ramaphosa regime from day one.2,53,57,76,79,84,93-100,102-105

The antagonists are more than justified to say that it seems more and more as if the ANC (and South Africa) and Ramaphosa are all still stuck in the Zuma syndrome of delinquency and that South Africa will be stuck with this negativity as long as the ANC forms the regime of the day.2,53,57,76,79,84,93-100,102-105

The propagandists’ argument that Ramaphosa’s way of governing by consensus and the use of tactics in negotiation the ANC internal politics, has required him to put some of his key opponents into powerful ANC positions, like the national spokesman Pule Mabe and secretary-general Ace Magashule, is laughable. These decisions are part of Ramaphosa’s radical political ideology. Even if the strategy approach to Ramaphosa was true, it is just a repeat of the earlier failed version in 1994 by Mandela with Ramaphosa as his adviser when they placed political opponents in the cabinet. As Ferial Haffajee108 puts it108:2: “It didn’t work then, and it’s not working now”. It just points to a lack of political insight.2,53,57,76,79,84,93-100,102-105

Ramaphosa’s political baggage is just too heavy, packed with old, stinky and infectious clothes and inadmissible goods. The antagonists are looking forward to what will happen in 2019 when he tries to make a border crossing.

3.6.2. A Ramaphosa utopia versus a Ramaphosa dystopia

Cyril Ramaphosa chooses his words carefully — very carefully. Certainly, he is genial and relaxed, but he is too good a politician to allow himself to get carried away in his pronouncements.

And so, like a skilled artist trying hard not to give away too much, he culls his words most adroitly while also managing to remain warm and engaging.109:15

Is the above a description of an interview with Cyril Ramaphosa after his election as the president at the 54th National Conference of the ANC in December 2017? No, the words were uttered by Ramaphosa 25 years earlier in 1994 in an interview with the former political editor of The Star, Kaizer Nyatsumba.109 In 2019 he is the same seasoned and unchanged politician with the same political enigma: encircled by unpredictable thinking and behaviour and mysterious agendas.

One thing is clear: Ramaphosa did not change his political disposition; it is still embedded in radical African liberation and ANC revolutionism, and still not political finessed. The only obvious change between 1994 and 2019 is that he was 43 years old in 1994 and is now 69 years in 2019!109

Cyril Ramaphosa, like FW de Klerk, entered as Number One as the man of the moment, but like De Klerk’s auk! (greatness), Ramaphosa’s aura also has started to wash out: just much faster. In Ramaphosa’s case it started after only 100 days. The antagonists point out that Ramaphosa made initially a dramatic impact on the ANC and the country’s politics. In retrospect, his actions are bathed in controversy, basically aimed at overcoming and outliving his insecurity and endangering as leader of the disorganised and disunited ANC. This negativity is spilling to his presidency. Two dramatic, suddenly outcomes (totally unexpected for Whites) are prominent: 1) his intention to change Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution to implement land expropriation without compensation, and 2) his intention to estrange the White part of the population from the Black community and the greater African community.110

Critics of the intended land reform initiative of Ramaphosa and all that surrounds it lay the problems at the door of the person and politician Cyril Ramaphosa himself. Analysts see the sudden political radicalism of Ramaphosa as a direct outcome of a politically impoverished president of the ANC party as well as the state South Africa. Ramaphosa may have won the ANC’s leadership battle in 2018, writes Mthombothi111, but he’s lost the ideological one. He came out of the Nasrec conference wearing the mantle of leadership, but burdened by the opinions of a divided top six and a national executive committee of 80 members, bodies crawling with his political enemies.111

Mthombothi111 enlightens us111:21:

Ramaphosa leads a party that’s pulling in different direction from where he wants to go. As one activist puts it, the head is cut off from the body. A bit extreme perhaps, but it will be interesting to see how Ramaphosa goes about stitching the two together”. To stitch the ANC-party together seem more and more impossible for the antagonists: the head is under witch-doctor’s care at Nklanda and the perfumed half-decayed body stored at Luthuli-house.

Firstly, as Mthombothi111 says, it is becoming a question in which direction Ramaphosa and the ANC elite want to go: A Western type of capitalist democracy or a combined African-styled Chinese-Venezuelan autocratic socialism. His land expropriation intentions reflect a combined African-styled Chinese-Venezuelan autocratic socialism.

Secondly, Ramaphosa as a president is hamstringed by the leftish Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and her radical cronies (as well as the spooky Jacob Zuma who is still looking at every decision of the ANC elite, regime and party), who is still well-established in the background. The intention to oust Ramaphosa before 2019 or after the election is seemingly part of the Zuma-faction’s plan. This insecurity makes Ramaphosa the powerless head of a divided and corrupted ANC. It has gotten so out of hand that Ramaphosa, as last resort, had to appeal (not demand!) at the end of September 2018 for unity in the ANC as a prerequisite to winning the coming election. His rebuke of party bosses regarding their independent conflicting messages was clearly not successful. The fact further that Ramaphosa’s seemingly intimate friend Gwede Mantashe is also arm-in-arm with Ace Magashule (who is undoubtedly not an intimate friend of Ramaphosa), makes his present position extremely difficult. This conflict and disempowerment of Ramaphosa refer back to Ramaphosa’s possible involvement in the Zuma wrongs, or his direct knowledge of it as vice-president.112 As Mthomboth112 puts it precise112:4:

“Mantashe‘s entanglement presents Ramaphosa with a challenge. It constrains his scope to act or confront allegations of corruption by the likes of Magashule and others. His chair and trusted ally is knee-deep in it. The plot thickens.”

The antagonists feel that the radical economic transformation (RET) narrative has won at Nasrec and that the Zuma group of the NEC is arm-in-arm with the EFF ideology (Economic Freedom Fighters). The ANC’s unexpected radical metamorphosis (undoubtedly a driver of Ramamania specifically) was described well by Mthombothi111 in March 2018111:21:

“Early last year the ANC in Parliament voted against an EFF motion to expropriate without compensation, but almost days later Zuma started campaigning for exactly the same thing. The call was taken up by many branches of the ruling party, especially those supporting Dlamini-Zuma.”

On Ramaphosa’s sudden pliancy to the Zuma and Dlamini-Zuma inclinations of land expropriation without compensation, Tabane113 writes113:6:

“It is fascinating that President Cyril Ramaphosa seems to be very much alive to the possible chasm that may be an unintended consequence of the wild and generalized approach to the issue. Earlier this year he even sought to assure the Afrikaner community that the constitution will not be amended.”

The belief of the antagonists is that the Zuma group of the ANC NEC’s radical classic Marxist view is becoming cemented into the ANC base. It is echoed more and more by Ramaphosa himself since July 2018 with his public declaration that “we” (ANC) are going to take land without compensation. This was followed by his very provocative challenge, although indirectly, to three specific role players, namely the South African Whites, Donald Trump and the UN to do something about his (Ramaphosa) intended land expropriation. For a leader like Ramaphosa, with a built-in segment of radical liberation coming from the old ANC, these kinds of announcements and decisions are not recallable outcomes. It’s a final decision by Ramaphosa, without deviating one inch from his old radical political ideology. This Black radicalism, antagonists argue, includes the belief that White monopoly capital captured the entire South African economy and that the only panacea for this is radical economic transformation (RET), which includes dramatic and radical land reform to cleanse the country of socio-economic apartheid and the presence of the inequality and poverty of Blacks solely at the costs of the Whites (who Ramaphosa identified as the sinners). The status of the Whites seems more and more to be second-class citizenship, stripped from its traditional common law rights.111

The opponents of land expropriation are of the opinion that although it initially seemed as if Ramaphosa does not subscribe to land grabbing from the Whites in his heart, he, in line with his liberator’s instinct, has become part and parcel of the “new” ANC’s radical view on the “colonists Whites” and their “stolen land”. This is a direct outcome of the Ramamania and Ramaforia that forced Ramaphosa to stay empowered inside the current ANC NEC and ANC regime.111

What makes Ramaphosa so dangerous in the minds of the antagonists is that it is seemingly important to Ramaphosa to hold the office of president by underwriting the mantra of the Zuma group in the NEC (and indirectly the Malema faction) at all cost, ignoring sound political justice and nationhood. Many of the antagonists doubted his half-hearted assurances that the ANC’s planned land seizure will happen in such a way that it does not jeopardise economic growth or food production from the start. The meaning and possibilities of this rhetoric is so wide that an ox wagon can turn in it! The antagonists see this kind of “presidential testimony” as just safeguarding the ANC regime’s “good” image. The same goes for Ramaphosa’s vague assurances that land reform does not mean full capture. For the antagonists the potential for extreme land grabbing is great. Ramaphosa is clearly not satisfied with the present land ownership and the favoured position of Whites.111

Ramaphosa showed his radicalism on White land in an interview with the journalist Kaizer Nyatsumba of The Star as far back as 1994 when he voiced his disagreement with the 1994 dispensation by pointing out that the major two challenges facing the ANC then were: 1) a clear future political strategy; and 2) the setting of tactics to prosecute the next phase of the struggle, like countering the favouring of White business communities at the expense of Blacks.86,109,111 Revolutionism has not diminished in his mindset, as his 2017 inaugural speech at Nasrec clearly confirms, where Ramaphosa86 said86:15:

“We serve them [principles of the ANC] because we [revolutionary democrats] have chosen, each one of us, to become selfless agents of revolutionary change.”

Antagonists view the present hamstringing of Ramaphosa as a president by the Jacob Zuma and Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma gang as a failure to get rid of the corrupted and crooked ministers and high-level officials of the Zuma government. Political analysts refer to this mustering of renewed power by Jacob Zuma against Ramaphosa as a very dangerous political rebirth, coming from KwaZulu-Natal, one which can intensify in 2019 just before the election. The journalist Ranjeni Munusamy114 describes it as114:22:

“War drums in the political battlefields of KwaZulu-Natal will echo throughout the ANC and the country”.

The “angst” that Ramaphosa showed after King Goodwill Zwelithini’s threat to take up arms if his trust land becomes part of land reform, is good evidence in this context. Is he in fear of his life, seeing that political murders are already a permanent fixture in KwaZulu-Natal? Are the various Zuma reappointments by Ramaphosa in other ministerial or governmental positions or in the ANC executive leadership part of this fear of Ramaphosa? His willingness to pay Zuma’s immense court costs from the state’s fund is not only absurd, it reveals his fear. (Note: Zuma’s estimated legal bill per day is R290 000; the number of fraud, corruption and racketeering charges against Zuma is 16; while the number of payments alleged to have been paid as bribes to Zuma is 783).115-118 Mthombothi referred to this financial support as82:21: “…dishonesty doing by Ramaphosa, written all over, if not being patently fraudulent”.

Mthombothi82 posits82:21:

“Ramaphosa’s explanation in parliament last week was evasive, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of Thuma Mina. It reeks of the very odour he claims to want to eradicate.”

The political misbehaviour of Ramaphosa as reflected by the Zwelithini land case and Ramaphosa’s blind disregard for the sound recommendations of the parliamentary High-level Panel Report of Motlanthe for a strict but justified land redistribution programme, spells doom, making Ramaphosa a political factor to be feared in the future.3,82,111,119-122

Munusamy75 warned in April 2018 as follows on Ramaphosa, the leader and his limitations and shortcomings75:22:

Ramaphosa might have great plans for South Africa’s recovery, but it would appear that his own organization is weighting him down.

Instead of focusing on stabilising the state and creating an optimum climate for the investment and economic growth that would hopefully result in job creation, he must fight the ANC’s internal problems
.
Meanwhile, other ANC leaders are ineffective, dogged by scandal or engaged in sideshows.

While Ramaphosa is able to send his lions on the hunt for investment, it is a pity he does not have beasts at his disposal to deal with the nuisances in the ANC.

Ramaphosa’s ongoing failures, specifically earlier in his capacity as vice-president for many years when he had to oversee the Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act to do justice to the poor, landless Blacks living on Black trust land are also prominent in the antagonists arguing. For the antagonists the question is that if he failed the Blacks, how can he been trusted to do good to Whites? The antagonists see him as a leader who underwrites a total pro-Black (radical) sentiment on land redistribution and rights.109,111,112

The negativity of critics about the planned land reform under the presidency of Ramaphosa is aggravated further by Ramaphosa’s contradicting and vague remarks on the land issue, which is seen more and more as an escape route he uses out of a situation he does not understand, nor knows to handle. 3,82,111,119-122

The ANC regime went down the drain from 1994 to 2019. Prominent is the rising national debt. Ramaphosa as vice-president was associated with the Zuma regime’s fraud, theft and corruption.3,82,111,119-122 Bruce73 indicates that the country’s debt rose from $20-billion with the start-up of the Zuma regime to more than $80-billion at the closing of the Zuma regime, with Ramaphosa as the vice-president. Bruce73:22 posits that by 2021 the interest to be paid by South Africans on the country’s debt will average more than R850 million per working day. This reflects not only failure by the ANC regime in general up to 2018 but also failure by Ramaphosa as vice-president and second-in-command of the South African state. The state capture during the Zuma regime and the failure of Black farming projects and other government enterprises were often the direct result of corruption, fraud and theft from inside the ANC elite and not so much always the inabilities or irresponsibility of Black farmers. The question for the antagonists is how Ramaphosa can improve the crooked and failed political system? Their answer is that he can’t, he is a crippled political leader. Under Ramaphosa South Africa has gone into a technical recession and so far, besides his political and emotional rhetoric, nothing constructive has happened.3,82,111,119-122

Ramaphosa’s41 naivety on the present recession is further reflected by his own emotional, foolish denial of its existence and seriousness when he said41:4: “We should not be fearful and think we are in a recession. We are not.” The ANC has failed to create income for many years, and the government simply does not have the funds for land redistribution. This dire financial situation means that the ANC has to trade confiscated White land in exchange for votes to stay in power.3,82,109,111,119-122

The political week of 11 to 18 November 2018, in the view of the antagonists, reflects the truth about the ongoing Zuma corruption inside the unpredictable Ramaphosa regime after Cyril Ramaphosa’s shocking admission that an amount of R500 000 was disclosed in parliament by DA leader Mmusi Maimane was in fact to help fund his campaign. It was not for work that his son Andile had done for the Bosasa logistics group (presently known as African Global Operations), which has been named as benefactor of several other high-profile ANC figures.123 Qaanitah Hunter writes123:1:

“President Cyril Ramaphosa’s ambitious drive to rescue the ANC and the country from the state-capture debacle is facing its sternest test yet. Today, the president has been forced onto the back foot after he admitted this week a R500,000 donations from the politically Watson family.”

This condemning situation must be read together with the under-mentioned series of condemning setbacks for his presidency, writes Hunter.123:1-2

In this context Hunter123 points out the shock resignation of finance minister Nhlanhla Nene after he was exposed as having lied about his visits to the Gupta compound, the resignation of Malusi Gigaba after the public protector found that he lied in court under oath, and the admission by public enterprises minister Pravin Gordhan that he met the Gupta family. There was also a slew of bad economic markers indicating that Ramaphosa’s economic remedy to fix South Africa in any way is a failure.123 Critics believe Ramaphosa knows about the donation and is not forthright when he responded by saying that he “just learn now of it”. DA leader Mmusi Maimane said123:2 “…this was no different to how the Guptas captured individuals in the government,” while the leader of the EFF Julius Malema said123:2: “Ramaphosa ‘must take full responsibility and admit that he lied to parliament, and he knows what happens to people who lie to parliament’”. The possibility that his presidency seems to be a short-lived one, is forcing him into irrational politics in an effort to outlive his enemies inside the ANC elite. This situation can make his future actions devastating, unpredictable and untrustworthy.3,82,111.119-123

Ramaphosa’s41declaration41:4: “…we are going to take land and when we take land we are going to take it without compensation’”, is not for the antagonists a myth or a lie, nor is it meaningless and aimless rhetoric. It is a hard fact, a final outcome and a guideline to understand Ramaphosa’s future extreme political intentions with Whites. His extreme decision has a momentum of its own, writes Corrigan110:22: “…it is not going to stop and anyone believing that Ramaphosa is going to back off from his land grabbing intentions of White-land is in for a surprise”. The antagonists now have Ramafear, a fear to go on, even after the Ramaflop at the end.110,124

The CEO of the Altron Group and a Yale World Fellow, Mteto Nyati125, puts the confusion in which the current ANC finds itself under Cyril Ramaphosa into words when he reflects on the abilities of the leader Ramaphosa125:9: “Everything but vision from Cyril”. Nyati125 points out the role of land expropriation from Whites in this political and moral besetting of Ramaphosa and his arrogance and ignorance to publicly rebuke the US President Donald Trump for his comments on the land issue, when he writes125:9: “…it was a strategy mistake on the president’s [Ramaphosa] part. We cannot talk about growth and ignore the US. Our national interests have to inform our choice of partners”, and: “The big threat to Ramaphosa’s turnaround strategy is the lack of a unifying and compelling vision. The vision that the president had was derailed by the land issue.”

For the antagonists the reality, which Nyati does not say, is that the ANC and Ramaphosa have a compelling vision: a vision that is based on live-long national Black radical liberation, one that cannot even be derailed by delinquency such as land grabbing and that makes it clear that South Africa does not belong to all who live in it.125

The antagonists find closure in the words of Mthombothi126 on Ramaphosa and his intimate ANC elites, when he concludes126:14:

“When he speaks, the words often sound as though they come from an empty space, devoid of emotions. He drones”,

and:

“Ramaphosa does not have it in his locker. His words have to be respected simply because they carry the stamp of his office.”

The antagonists’ respect for him and his elite as good leaders is long gone.

Munusamy127 helps to assure the antagonists that their disrespect (and fear) of the leadership of Ramaphosa and his cronies is correct when she posits127:16:

SA’s sixth democratic poll is just six months away yet there is no coherent discourse about leadership and major national issues. Anti-corruption should have been Ramaphosa’s flagship campaign issue but there are concentrated efforts to discredit the clean-up of the state and undermine investigation into corruption. Journalists are branded enemies. There are hidden forces, including criminal syndicates, impacting on our politics. A surprise outcome in the elections is not far-fetched as we might think.

Cyril Ramaphosa is a willing but an inapt president. As PW Botha was unfit to be the king of the modern Zulus due to his White supremacist views, so Ramaphosa with his Black supremacist views is unfit to be president of modern South Africans. For the antagonists South Africa is caught in Ramaphosa dystopia.

4. Conclusions

The many perspectives of the antagonists on any change to Section 25 and their rejection of expropriation of land without market-related prices as described in articles 3 and 4 provide an overview of the political scenario of South Africa, especially for the period 1994 to 2019. The antagonists show how land expropriation is symptomatic of a gradual change in the ANC. It therefore forms, with the manifold other elements, a political unity, linking the land issue with the ANC’s political and economic management as it is primarily guided and steered by the aims of Black liberation and revolutionary politics. The antagonists see delinquent elements and role players that aim to make the political and socioeconomic system of South Africa dysfunctional.

When aiming to understand the aim and intentions of the ANC elite with their land expropriation without compensation, it is crucial to describe and to understand the post-1994 politics of South Africa. This approach was followed in putting forward the many perspectives of the antagonists. Some of their arguments are based on sound foundations while others are emotionally laden and lack depth. In the end, the antagonists want to make their case against land expropriation without compensation as strongly as possible in an effort to secure a win. From a critical vantage point it must be noted that in general the perspective of the antagonists is not representative of the total White or Afrikaner population, but mostly of the contingent of White farm- and land owners, White capitalist business groups with direct and indirect interests in agricultural economics, as well as self-appoints White “saviours and rescuers” that claim to fight unselfishly for the interests of the White farming community and for the Constitution and dispensation of 1994. The antagonists are a minority group, estimated to represent less than 10% of the White population which in reality is another minority group, more or less 8% of the total South African population. They do have immense financial influence and interest in the country’s present economics and politics and its private land ownership model. They feel threatened by and fearful of any socioeconomic and political change away from exclusive democratic-capitalism.

The antagonists know very well that they have reached a watershed in the South Africa political history. They have become easy prey for the radicals inside the ANC, not only for political disempowerment, but also to be robbed of all their assets. Louw gives guidance in this regard6:175-176:

However, as said, criminal proceedings are not enough for many of the apartheid victims. Many of these victims want financial compensation from those who were directly involved in criminal actions, while others wish for compensation from the Afrikaner community and business sector as a whole as they have benefitted from favoured business deals, the many other interests and the jobs etc. that apartheid offered them. Prominent are certain Afrikaner and nationalist Afrikaner business leaders and magnates who benefitted greatly from the apartheid system. They were favoured for business deals, contracts and other benefits. The current battle regarding Radical Economic Transformation (RET), seen by many Blacks as the second leg (economic revolution) in continuation of the first leg of the 1994 dispensation (political revolution), are excellent indicators of the Black call for “pay-back” of White capital obtained from apartheid-incongruities.

For the antagonists the ANC is a politically bankrupt and dangerous political organisation. To say now, as some ANC elites do, like Vusi Mavimbela128 [who worked previously as adviser to Thabo Mbeki, as director of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and as director-general in the first presidency of Jacob Zuma]128:10: “The ANC delivered liberation. What happened subsequently is not what we wanted to see happening”, is a self-acquittal that can only be accepted from a derailed politician who lost his/her memory of the delinquent liberation and revolutionary energy unique to the ANC.128 It was on this liberation ticket that the ANC came to power in 1994 and continuously committed corruption, theft and mismanagement. Mavimbela128 himself admits the negative turn of the ANC in the Zuma days128:10: “Corruption was institutionalized, state institutions were decimated and the ruling alliance brought to the brink”.

The antagonists’ objections against a change to Section 25 hold merit, making their case a strong and well-reasoned one. They believe that a total land grab is outside the reach of the ANC. The party lacks the judicial power, but their unpredictable governing since 1994 is a threat.18,72,129-137

For the antagonists, the period 1994 to 2019 under the ANC regime has been a dark period of criminality, state capture, confused violence, thuggery and race-baiting. It is reminiscent of Apartheid, and it has a momentum that will not slow as long as the ANC is in power.126,127,138-149

The antagonists have an unshakable belief that the general public and the parliament itself will reject any change to the Constitution or would not allow land grabbing from Whites. They also believe that the South African courts, including the Constitutional Court, will denounce any illegal and unconstitutional actions by the ANC that could lead a one-sided policy of land expropriation without full compensation. They base this on the recent failures of the ANC and their failure to do anything about the salvation of the poor. Both Julius Malema and Cyril Ramaphosa are political bluffs that will disappear from the country’s politics.138, 127,139-150

The antagonists agree fully with Bruce151 when he describes this coming cleansing of the ANC from the South African politics, obliterating any remaining fears of land grabbing. He wrote on 16 December 2018151:18:

But wait until Moyane gets arrested and tried, until Julius Malema, Floyd Shivambu and the ANC’s Danny Msiza and a host of others implicated in the looting of VBS Mutual Bank are arrested and tried. Wait until Ace Magashule, Supra Mahumapelo and perhaps even DD Mabuza and Malusi Gigaba and, yes, Bathabile [Dlamini], are arrested and tried for corruption. Wait until the Gupta brothers are extradited and tried. Wait until the whole slimy dough of corruption is unearthed and put on display before disappearing into jail cells around the country. Add Markus Jooste, Brian Molefe and Ben Ngubane to this list.

The antagonists see South Africa as just another failed “liberated” African country, experimenting time after time with failed “visions” and driven by failed leaders.150

Mthombothi150 describes the failed ANC leaders well and calls them to book for their political and criminal delinquency150:17:

Africa is let down by its [Black] politicians. They’ve been an obstacle to its people’s progress. Whichever way one looks, whichever problem one may think of, whichever boulder or ditch that’s ever been a bar to its advancement, the politicians have in the main been responsible for it. They are the authors of our misfortune.

While Mandela sought a better and humane way for Africa, Thabo Mbeki, his successor, in his desire to be the spokesman for the continent and its diaspora, decided not to rock the boat. He turned a blind eye to its misconduct. And he would brook no criticism of its wrongdoings. One, however, suspects that he knew better.

Jacob Zuma had no time to either think or defend anybody else. He descended into some of worst corrupt practices of his fellow African leaders. And he dragged the country [South Africa] from the young and promising democracy that it was to one of probably the most corrupt countries on Earth. Quite an Achievement.

But it should begin with us: we should be brutally frank and intolerant of the misdeeds of our leaders.

The antagonists take this failed leadership of the present-day ANC, as identified by Mthombothi150, back to the founding of the Union of South Africa in 1910 and the White rulers categorising Blacks one-hundred and eighteen years ago as too incompetent and uncivilised to run the country South Africa. Prominent is the dooming testimonies of two well-known White politicians and leaders of that time who attended the Cape Convention in 1908 to design and to establish the Union Act.71 The historian MS Geen, in his book, The Making of the Union of South Africa. A brief history: 1487–1939, reflects71: 54,60:

1) General Christiaan de Wet of the Free State Colony71: 60:

Providence has drawn the line between Black and White and we must make that clear to the Natives and not instil into their minds false ideas of equality. To his mind, the greatest kindness and the greatest justice the Convention could do to the Blacks were to inform them that they are unequal to Whites.

2) Sir Frederick Moor of the Natal Colony71:54:

… White and Black races in South Africa could never be amalgamated. The history of the world proved that the Black man was incapable of civilization and the evidences were to be found throughout South Africa today. Almost every race in the world could point to its stages of civilization but what traces of Black civilization could South Africa produce though the Native people had been brought into contact with civilization for ages?…Sir Percy Fitz-Patrick has spoken of a test of civilization. What was a civilized man? Was it not a man who proved himself adaptable to a civilized community? The Native were incapable of civilization because they were incapable of sustained effort.

However inhumane these comments may seem within the modern context of human rights and political correctness, the events of the past year cause the antagonists to consider for a minute whether these persons were correct.71

The antagonists have two prominent questions at this stage:

  1. Can the ANC regime really erase the remnants of the Black-White struggle by taking revenge by means of land grabbing from Whites, in the process perpetrating the same crimes as their own oppressors?
  2. Can the ANC regime really better South Africa for all its people with land grabbing after they have mostly failed in every category of political, social and economic sphere from 1994 to 2018?

The pertinent question for an objective and seasoned judge will be if the arguments of the antagonists are well founded enough to be heard and to be considered. In considering this question, the counter arguments, opinions and viewpoints of the propagandists should first be considered.

The next two articles (5 and 6), titled: “The propagandists arguments, opinions and viewpoints on changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible: Parts 1 and 2”, examines the perspectives of the propagandists and their efforts to turn the public’s sympathy to win the case for the ANC regime to change Section 25(2)(b) to implement a policy of land grabbing without compensation.

5. References

1. Chomsky N. Because We Say So. London: Penguin; 2015.
2. Mthombothi B. The ANC is drunk from the alcohol of corruption, and its growing support is bad news for South Africa. Sunday Times. 2018 July 22; p. 3.
3. Opperheimer M. Six myths about land reform that show the folly of meddling with Bill of Rights. Sunday Times. 2018 May 13; p.18.
4. Mamphele R. Set aside these myths about land reform and let the healing begin. 2018 Mar. 11; p. 21.
5. Mtongana L. Black miners fear charter will fall short. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Mar. 25; p. 6.
6. Louw GP. The crisis of the Afrikaners. Beau Bassin, Mauritius: Lambert; 2018.
7. Ndlovu R. Harare scraps contentious ‘indigenisation’. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Mar. 25; p. 8.
8. Ndlovu R. It won’t be easy to clean up Bob’s mess. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 July 15; p. 3.
9. Halt descent to law of jungle. The Star (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 12; p.12.
10. Kok A. Lys: AfriForum het volste reg. Beeld (Kommentaar). 2018 Aug. 16; p.16.
11. Mthombothi B. Now that Zuma’s gone, if not forgotten, the red berets reveal their true colours. Sunday Times. 2018 July 29; p. 19.
12. Monama T. AfriForum slams farm murders stats. The Star. 2018 Sept. 12; p. 2.
13. Bruce P. Genocide on the farms? Show us the facts. Sunday Times (opinion). 2018 Mar. 25; p. 20.
14. Monama Ď, Mashaba S. We are a country under crime siege. The Star, 2018 Sept. 12; pp.1-2.
15. Monama T. Murder spree leaves SA reeling. The Star. 2018 Sept. 12; p. 3.
16. Ncube J. Editor’ Note. The Star. 2018 Sept. 12; p. 2.
17. Mkhwanazi S. Spotlight on funding as officer shortage tops 62 000.The Star. 2018 Sept 12; p. 11.
18. February J. Spektakelpolitici haal streke uit. Beeld (Kommentaar). 2018 Apr. 18; p. 16.
19. Put populism on hold in these dire economic times and make the hard choice. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 9; p. 20.
20. Du Plessis T. Anti-kamp kry só juis teendeel vermag. Rapport (Weekliks). 2018 Apr. 29; p. 6.
21. Mthombothi B. Failure to crack down on the wave of anarchy will let it swell to a flood that destroys democracy. Sunday Times. 2018 Apr. 29; p. 17.
22. Fuzile B. Soweto bomb threat to US over Trump tweet. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 6.
23. Nombembe P, Hyman A. Stumped as Cape trains go up in flames. Sunday Times (Insight). 2018 Aug. 5; p 20.
24. Speckman A. Gigaba budget averts ratings bust but fiscal cliff still looms. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Feb. 25; p. 4.
25. Munusamy R. No long-term game plan in SA’s handling of Israel’s attack on Gaza and contradicts our history of conflict mediation. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 May 20; p.18.
26. Buthelezi M. I never committed violence or sought amnesty – and it wasn’t an impi. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept.16; p. 18.
27. Shoba S. Honour the aged by all means, but let’s be frank about Buthelezi’s past. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 9; p. 21.
28. Savides M. Home occupiers hit back at city over housing allocation. Sunday Times (News). 2018 July 15; p. 10.
29. Schreiber L. Zuma and Jesus aside, the future does not belong to the ANC. Sunday Times. 2018 Apr. 29; p. 17.
30. Bruce P. Integrity and boldness must be Ramaphosa’s strategy. Sunday Times. (Opinion), 2018 Apr 29; p. 16.
31. We have waited long enough for Ramaphosa to axe Mahumapelo. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Apr. 29; p. 16.
32. Leon T. On expropriation, let’s not be glad to settle for half a loaf. Sunday Times. 2018 May 27; p. 18.
33. Malema J. Land restoration began five years ago with the birth of the EFF. Sunday Times. 2018 July 22; p. 3.
34. Fuzile B. Not yet the promised land for MK vets. Sunday Times (News). 2018 July 8: p. 6.
35. Collins F. ‘No vacant land in city is safe from occupation. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Apr. 1; p. 4.
36. Nombembe P. Cyril’s word seen as land grab go-ahead. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Apr. 1; p. 4.
37. Nair N. MK veterans arrested for South Coast house grab. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Apr. 1; p. 4.
38. Umraw A. True voice of the people on the land question is being drowned out by a politicachorus. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Aug. 12; p. 18.
39. Jansen J. ‘Besetting gebeur net te glad en gou’. Rapport (Nuus). 2018 Aug. 5; p. 4.
40. Umraw A. State identifies farms for expropriation test cases. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Aug. 5; p. 4.
41. Nair N. Take us or leave us – Cyril on land reform. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Sept. 9; p. 4.
42. Cele S, Rooi J. 139 plase op ANC-lys. Rapport (Nuus). 2018 Aug. 5; p. 2.
43. Hleko TM. Insecurity of tenure hinders farm productivity. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Aug. 26; p. 20.
44. Cele, and all the South Africans, must end this carte blanche for crime. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 May 20; p. 16.
45. Shocking revelations at Zondo inquiry must lead to prosecutions. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Aug. 26; p. 20.
46. Looting a disgrace in the nation or neighbourhood. Sunday Times Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 24.
47. Child K, Masweneng K. ‘Risky-food’ hysteria fuels looting. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 12.
48. Masweneng K. ‘Spoilt SA locals loot on any pretext’. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 12.
49. Munusamy R. We are stuck with the same old problems because we are stuck with the same old leaders in the same old electoral system. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 30; p. 22.
50. Jonas M. The work of saving democracy requires us to focus on the people, not the political party. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 30; p. 22.
51. Mthomboth B. Mbeki’s intervention on land collides head-on with the direction of the new greed ANC. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 30; p. 21.
52. Tabane OJJ. Mbeki’s take on land is a necessary provocation. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Oct. 7; p. 6.
53. Leon T. A sober, if small, voice amid the trumpeting herd. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 30; p. 22.
54. Van der Walt S. ‘Gwede se perk is nie rasioneel’. Beeld. 2018 Aug. 16; p. 1.
55. Botha R. SA regering se gevry na China is ‘n verleentheid. Rapport (Sake). 2018 Sept. 23; p. 4.
56. Cyril’s stimulus can help our economy – and our sovereignty. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 23; p. 20.
57. Galetti D. Mahlobo’s nuclear deal or Ramaphosa’s Deal: Let the delegates decide. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2017 Dec. 10; p. 22.
58. Van Zyl O. Grondhervorming in SA móét geprivatiseer word. Rapport (Weekliks). 2017 Dec. 24; pp. 8-9.
59. Bruce P. EFF’s Dr Charming pulls a fast one on TV. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 May 20; p. 16.
60. Speckman A. Little consumer relief in GDP data. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 3.
61. Tomlinson South Africa. Unie van Suid-Afrika. Samevatting van die verslag van die Kommissie vir die Sosio-Ekonomiese Ontwikkeling van die Bantoegebiede binne die Unie van Suid-Afrika. Pretoria: Government Press; 1955.
62. Joffe H. Urgency needed in fixing problems that fed into recession. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Sept. 9; p. 2.
63. Barron C. Tread carefully on new land reform. Sunday Times (Business) 2018 Aug. 26; p. 9.
64. Makgoba T. Community needs, not politicians, should lead the redistribution debate. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 23; p. 21.
65. Hafffajee F. Judging the ‘Cyril effect’ after 100 days. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 May 27; p. 8.
66. Haffajee F. Who owns the land? It’s not all black and white, audits reveal. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Aug. 12; p. 6.
67. Pelser W. EFF-steun verdubbel. Rapport. 2018 Sept. 23; pp. 1-2.
68. Derby R. Instead of swelling social grants, why not a basic income for all? Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 2.
69. Speckman A. Debtors’ free pass is hard for creditors to swallow. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 10.
70. Govender S. Paying in blood for a shack to call home. Sunday Times (Insight). 2018 June 3; p. 14. .
71. Geen MS. The Making of the Union of South Africa. A brief history: 1487-1939. New York: Longmans and Green; 1947.
72. Bruce P. With Zuma reduced, Ramaphosa needs to get cooking. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Apr.8, p. 18.
73. Ferguson N. The War of the World. London: Penguin; 2006.
74. Munusamy R. No further delay needed in bringing to book the state capture criminals who plundered with impunity. Sunday Times. 2018 May 27; p. 18.
75. Munusamy R. It’s a pity Ramaphosa’s “investment lions” can’t kill the destructive beast in his own party. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Apr. 22; p. 22.
76. Mthombothi B. Gupta heist was an inside job, but the insiders are about to get away with it. Sunday Times. 2018 May 20; p. 17.
77. Mthombothi B. Cyril needs a bit more swagger and a bit less schmoozing to put Julius in his place. Sunday Times. 2018 Apr. 22; p. 21.
78. Derby R. Black business bears brunt of the excesses of ruinous Zuma era. Sunday Times. 2018 Apr. 29; p. 2.
79. Eisenberg G. A shadow regime has hijacked control of SA’s borders. Sunday Times. 2018 May 20; p. 17.
80. Nyatsumba K. Patience is key as Ramaphosa plays by the rules before ousting the lazy and corrupt. Sunday Times. 2018 May 27; p. 18.
81. Shoba S. Alarm in ANC over possible 2019 disaster. Sunday Times. 2018 May 13; p 4.
82. Mthombothi B. Ramaphosa has sacked most of the lickspittles but Zuma himself will be harder to banish. Sunday Times 2018 Mar. 25; p. 21.
83. Ramaphosa C. Dit is wat Cyril gesê het. Beeld (Nuus). 2017 Dec. 22; p. 6.
84. ANC finally wakes up to the fact its grip on power is slipping. Sunday Times. (Opinion). 2018 May 13; p.16.
85. Mokone T, Makinana A & Deklerk A. Cyril takes over North West. Sunday Times (News). 2018 May 13; p. 2.
86. Ramaphosa C. ANC will serve the people. The Star (Inside). 2017 Dec. 22; p. 15.
87. Steenhuisen J. The ANC certainly has a case to answer on state capture. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Sept. 2; p. 24.
88. Maimane reasserting his leadership to steer his party on a new course. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 June 3; p. 16.
89. Mthombothi B. Jacob Zuma was no autocrat – the party went along with him on his looting spree. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 9; p. 21.
90. Bruce P. Careful moves as the endgame begins. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2017 Dec. 31; p. 12.
91. De Groot S. The politics of perspective and the power of dissent. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Apr. 15; p. 16.
92. Tshabalala M. Beware, the snake myth be dead but these who share its secrets can still bite. Sunday Times. 2018 Jan. 7; p. 13.
93. Haffajee F. Gordhan’s Gornado shakes up public enterprises. Sunday Times. 2018 May 27; p. 2.
94. How leaks foiled the king’s gambit. Sunday Times (News). 2017 Dec. 31; p. 4.
95. Deklerk A, Hunter Q. ANC moves to keep Supra in post. Sunday Time. (News). 2018 Apr. 15; p. 4.
96. De Lange R. Nog taks wink vir SA se rykstes. Rapport (Sake). 2018 Apr. 15; p. 1.
97. Henderson R, Anetos P. Moyane to answer for SARS decay. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 May 6; p. 1.
98. Hunter Q. Youth brass rap Maine for Gupta ‘confession’. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Apr. 15; p. 4.
99. Modak AR. ANC stuck in Zuma syndrome. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 May 13; p. 16.
100. Munusamy R. The Guptas may be heading for the dock, but there is other like them lying in wait. Sunday Times (Opinion).2018 Jan. 21; p.18.
101. Pauw J. Now is the time to clean the spy agency rot. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Apr. 22; p. 22.
102. Roodt D. Wat gedoen kan word aan ongelykheid in SA. Rapport. 2018 Apr. 29; p. 4.
103. Light is being shone in dark, festering places all over the country. Sunday Times. 2018 May 27; p. 16.
104. Chambers D, Jika T. SA set to put the moves on the Guptas. Sunday Times (News). 2017 Dec 31; p. 4.
105. Mthethwa B. State goes easy on Nklanda scapegoats. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Apr. 29; p. 2.
106. Buccus I. Only the Left can save us from crisis of EFF and Zuma populism. Sunday Times. 2018 Aug. 12; p. 17.
107. Speckman A. Business needs to wake up – and speak up. Sunday Times (Business) .2018 Aug. 12; p. 10.
108. Haffajee F. No more Mr Nice Guy, Cyril. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 July 15; p. 2.
109. Nyatsumba K. Ramaphosa reveals his thoughts in 1994. The Star (Inside). 2017 Dec. 22; p. 15.
110. Corrigan T. There’s madness in the land debate, but not in pointing out the risks. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Aug. 26; p. 22.
111. Mthombothi B. Ramaphosa may have won the leadership battle but he’s lost the ideological one. Sunday Times. 2018 Mar. 11; p. 21.
112. Mthombothi B. Plot thickens as Mantashe’s involvement presents Ramaphosa with a challenge. Sunday Times. 2018 Sept. 23; p. 21.
113. 113.Tabane OJJ. Mbeki’s take on land is a necessary provocation. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Oct. 7; p. 6.
114. Munusamy R. War drums in the political battlefields of Kwazulu-Natal will echo throughout the ANC and the country. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2017 Sept. 17; p. 22.
115. Matiwane Z. ANC’s predicament is to keep Zuma at arm’s length while embracing his supporters. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 July 29; p. 20.
116. Maughan K. Zuma hires top silks in spite of Cyril’s squeeze. Sunday Times (News). 2018 July 22; p. 4.
117. Mnguni L. ANC needs a political solution in KZN rather than a legal one. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2017 Sept. 17; p. 22.
118. Shoba S. Zuma’s hidden hand in ANC’s KwaZulu-Natal crisis. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2017 Sept. 17; p. 20.
119. Shoba S, Mthetwa B. Ramaphosa bends the knee to Zulu king on tense land issue. Sunday Times (News). 2018 July 2018; p. 4.
120. Cousins B. Your land rights may be trampled every day if you’re an ordinary black South African. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Mar. 11; p. 22.
121. Is Ramaphosa willing to sacrifice our rights to the Zulu king’s blackmail? Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 July 8; p. 22.
122. Munusamy R. Amid high theatre and spectacular blunders, it’s up to the Zondo inquiry to gauge the full extent of the rot. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Mar. 11; p. 22.
123. Hunter Q. Dodgy cash turns up heat on Cyril. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 18; pp. 1-2.
124. Kgosana C. ANC seeks China’s help to win votes. Sunday Times (News). 2018 July 29; p. 4.
125. Nyati M. Everything but vision from Cyril. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 9.
126. Mthombothi B. When MPs treat parliament as a shebeen, Cyril must remind them where they are – and lead. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 14.
127. Munusamy R. The misreading of Trump led to his reactionary regime…might the same happen in SA, where dark forces hover over politics? Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Nov. 11; p. 16.
128. Kgosana C. The struggle and all that jazz. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 10.
129. Tabane OJJ. Calling the ANC’s dangerous bluff on land reform. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 June 3; p. 18.
130. Deep in unbanked country, a sophisticated heist relies on political cover. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Oct. 14; p. 20.
131. Munusamy R. Despite VBS scandal, Malema will continue to fill the leadership vacuum and concoct bogeymen. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Oct. 14; p. 22.
132. Munusamy R, Kgosana C. NO, NO NENE! Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 7; pp. 1-2.
133. Stadler H, Malherbe P, Essop P, Selebano B. EFF rooi in die gesig. Beeld. 2018 Oct. 12; p. 1.
134. Leon T. TV expropriation debate enters realm of Neverland. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 July 29; p. 20.
135. Joshua 11:14, 11:16 and 11. 23; pp. 325-326. In: Life Application Bible. The living Bible. Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers; 1988.
136. Bruce P. A better way to reach for the promised land. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Mar. 4; p. 14.
137. Munusamy R. Cyril plays nice while Julius seizes moment to change game. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Mar. 4; p. 16.
138. Derby R. ‘Sober’ ANC must step up if Cyril is to salvage SA’s fortunes. Sunday Times (Business). 2018 Nov. 4; p. 2.
139. Don’t confuse violent thuggery and race-baiting with vibrant politics. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Nov. 11; p. 10.
140. Extreme measures for desperate times. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Nov. 11; p. 14.
141. Gordhan P. How to rescue a state that been pillaged by the corrupt and greedy. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 28; p. 5.
142. Hunter Q. ‘Not ill’ but Mabuza in Russia on sick leave. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 1.
143. Kgosana C. Big firearms to protect VBS looting kingpins. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Nov. 4; p. 6.
144. Kgosana C. Minister purges ‘slush fund’ spies. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; pp. 1, 4.
145. Kgosana C, Hunter Q. VBS looting: ANC got R2m. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 28; pp. 1-2.
146. Matiwane Z. Zuma cronies lobby against KZN chair. Sunday Times (News). 2018 Nov. 4; p. 4.
147. Mokone T. Maimane to move on Andile deal. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 11; p. 4.
148. Munusamy R. Bank honcho gloated over Treasury visit. Sunday Times. 2018 Oct. 28; pp. 1-2.
149. Naidoo L. Time for bold leadership to rid SA of the scourge of corruption. Sunday Times. 2018 Nov. 4; p. 21.
150. Mthombothi B. Africa is being betrayed by its leaders – now it’s up to us to hold them to account. Sunday Times. 2018 June 3; p. 17.
151. Bruce P. Due process, grinding slowly, will be exceedingly fine. Sunday Times (Opinion). 2018 Dec. 16; p. 18.

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned; Externally peer-reviewed.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University, South Africa.

UNSUITABLE TERMS AND INAPROPRIATE WORDS

Please note that I, the author, is aware that the words Creole, Bantu, Kaffir, Native, Hottentot and Bushman are no longer suitable terms and are inappropriate (even criminal) for use in general speech and writing in South Africa (Even the words non-White and White are becoming controversial in the South African context). The terms do appear in dated documents and are used or translated as such in this article for the sake of historical accuracy. Their use is unavoidable within this context. It is important to retain their use in this article to reflect the racist thought, speech and writings of as recently as sixty years ago. These names form part of a collection of degrading names commonly used in historical writings during the heyday of apartheid and the British imperial time. In reflecting on the leaders and regimes of the past, it is important to foreground the racism, dehumanization and distancing involved by showing the language used to suppress and oppress. It also helps us to place leaders and their sentiments on a continuum of racism. These negative names do not represent my views and I distance myself from the use of such language for speaking and writing. In my other research on the South African populations and political history, I use Blacks, Whites, Xhosa, Zulu, Afrikaners, Coloureds, KhoiSan (Bushmen), KhoiKhoi (Hottentots) and Boers as applicable historically descriptive names.

The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution (3)

Full title: The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible. Part 1: The dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime (3)

Gabriel P Louw

iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6190-8093

Research Associate, Focus Area Social Transformation, Faculty of Humanities, Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University, South Africa (Author and Researcher: Health, History and Politics).

Corresponding Author:

Prof. Dr. GP Louw; MA (UNISA), PhD (PUCHE), DPhil (PUCHE), PhD (NWU)

Email: profgplouw@gmail.com

Keywords: antagonists, opponents, compensation, contamination, crookery, custom, expropriation, land grabbing, land ownership, opposition, poverty, radicalism, redistribution, wealth.

Ensovoort, volume 40 (2019), number 2: 1

 

1. Background

1.1 Introduction

The EFF can’t tell you with a straight face how exactly the expropriation of land without compensation would work. It is time someone pointed out to it that, with 8% of the vote, it will not be able to implement it without the ANC’s say-so.

Everyone is in such euphoria over the long overdue airing of the land question that we have suspended our reasoning about how disastrous this policy could be.

Let’s be frank: the ANC is stringing along the EFF and those who believe it on the land question, lulling them into thinking that it is on the same page. The ANC cannot afford to hand over the land question on a platter to the EFF as an election tool. It has to take some credit for an impending land revolution – except that such a revolution is not near!

The ANC is bluffing.1:18

February2 agrees that Julius Malema, as a master manipulator of the media, is, like all populists, well-schooled in offering very simple solutions for very complex challenges and problems, ultimately leaving a bomb that can explode at any moment. Add to this the senseless utterances of Malema’s sidekick Floyd Shivambu, and land ownership is turning into a time bomb.2-7

February2 describes Malema as a dangerous rabble-rouser with his radical opinions of land ownership and reform. His reference to Malema’s naïve remark on farming, finance, citizenship and land ownership reveals Malema’s political foolishness and short-sightedness. February says that Malema’s message to his followers is in essence2:16: “You are here in large numbers because you are jobless. But if you had land you would be at home tilling your land” [Own translation].

The EFF’s Gauteng chairwoman, Mandisa Mashego8, has shown where she learned her flawed understanding of the economics and politics applicable to land management and ownership when she said on the eNCA TV show Let’s Have it Out, that the EFF–style expropriation without compensation is equal to that of the so-called Singaporean model of expropriation without compensation (which is actually done only in terms of market prices).8 The English proverb: A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing, seems quite applicable to many of the EFF leaders when it comes to serious politics.2-8

1.2 The land narrative in South Africa    

When Joshua conquered the entire Levant as Israeli territory, they “loot[ed] all the cattle, ravaging all the cities and killing all the inhabitants in the area”.9 A repeat in South Africa is unlikely, as indicated by the political journalist and commentator Onkgopotse Tabane1. He also does not see the “godly higher hand” and “a loud voice coming from heaven” that guided Moses and Joshua in their tremendous religiously, politically, economically, ethically and socially deviant land grabbing. Indeed, Tabane1 posits that the final outcome in South Africa after the 2019 election will be the opposite. Tabane1 believes that the whole Ramaphosa exercise of land expropriation will ultimately be toothless. He feels that the ANC elite is been playing a well-planned mind-game with the poor and landless Blacks. For Tabane1 the ANC regime is just continuing on the path of failing to empower the poor Black masses, as has been the case since 1994 with its ineffective implementation of Section 25 (2)(b) of the Constitution. The opinion is that the ANC party and its regime’s actions, like the testing of the public opinions with the submissions on the land issue, is only part of a manipulated and planned process of political window-dressing. It is seen as nothing else than a 2019 election trick to counter the EFF’s craziness and to optimize the DA’s passivity on the land issue, which the ANC themselves know they are also unable to solve, even if they remain in power for the next 24 years.1,9-11

In short: the argument of a strong faction of political analysts, which includes many prominent Black political thinkers, politicians, journalists and commentators, is that many of the smooth talkers in parliament will not make any change to Section 25(2)(b) or any other part of the Constitution. Tabane writes1:18: “The parliamentary process will not result in a constitutional change that will give the state any more power to expropriate land than was agreed to by Ramaphosa’s ANC at Codesa.” Section 25 as it stands at present is more than enough to bring effective land redistribution and, as said, the ANC’s process of land redistribution has failed to bring real change under its land reform minister Gugile Nkwinti over the last nine years.1,12

The simple questions in the minds of critics are therefore: What will more political and judicial power bring the ANC? Is it just more planned corruption and political delinquency, state capture and self-enrichment by the ANC elite? Is a masked corrupt Chinese deal with farmland in the making, like the doomed Zuma-Putin-Mahlobo nuclear deal that nearly wrecked South African security? Will South Africa become a subordinate Chinese province in extreme poverty with the Marxist suppression of the masses? What is really behind the ANC’s planned land expropriation without compensation?

The antagonists feel that South Africa has been knocking at the door of the Chinese state since 1994 under the corrupted ANC regime and its elite who is more than willing and ready to put its sovereignty on a silver platter for the taking. Land expropriation without compensation is only a small part of the ANC’s deception. Is this a far-fetched thought? No. Three Indians showed this with their crooked enslavement of some of the ANC elite.13-15 Mthombothi focuses partly on above questions when he says12:15:

The amendment wants to go further than current laws allow. If we are to right what President Cyril Ramaphosa calls an original sin, where do we start? Do we have full knowledge or understanding of the original lie of the land, as it were? And at the end of the process, will every black person be entitled to a piece of land or plot gratis? The Khoisan people will vehemently dispute the prevailing idea that Black people are the original owners of the land.

There are just too many imponderables.

Also, Archbishop Thabo Makgoba16 points out the bewilderment in the minds of many of the ANC elites on the land expropriation matter when he writes16:21: “I have not heard anyone spell out an overarching vision which takes all the complex practical and emotional factors into account. Nor have I heard a satisfactory answer to the fundamental question: expropriation to do what?”

Mthombothi is very specific when he writes about Ramaphosa17:19:

President Cyril Ramaphosa, having been blindsided by the ANC, have thought he could muddle through it. He’s now a convert who thinks he, like a magician, can grab private property without compensation and grow the economy at the same time.

He’ll squeeze water from a stone. It also remains to be seen how a scheme that targets taking land from one race group while leaving others untouched can pass constitutional muster.

Thabo Mbeki is also clear on this anomaly in the current ANC’s politics on land ownership with their prominent targeting of Whites and its immense long-term impact on the race relations of the country. Tabane writes18:6:

Amid the insults now emanating from the ANC [because Mbeki has blown the lid of the disorganized and unprincipled approach of the ANC on the land question], Mbeki underlines that it is sad that in the name of populism the ANC is willing to depart from its century-long commitment to non-racialism.

Makgoba16 elaborates further, putting into perspective another side of the lack of insight chief leaders of political parties, like Ramaphosa and Malema, have on the complexity of land expropriation16:21:

I do not think land reform will work if it is driven only from Tshwane or Cape Town, or only by business. We should decentralise the process by allowing people to work out local solutions backed by laws and policy provided by the government.

A fully developed policy of redistribution needs both to take into account that there is more demand for urban land than for rural land, including clear proposals for education and practical help for those who want to work the land. It should not be a political tool but a tool for real transformation, to address inequality of opportunity and unemployment.

1.3 Research intentions

The research aim of this article is to evaluate and describe how the antagonists see the dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of ANC regime that supports and promotes land grabbing. Opposing this dysfunctional system is central to the antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints on the amendment of Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution make land redistribution without compensation legal.

This article forms the first part of an article in two parts titled: The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible: Part One. The next article, titled: The antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints against changing Section 25 (2)(b) of the South African Constitution to make land redistribution without compensation possible: Part Two, reflects further on how the antagonists see the dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime that supports and promotes land grabbing.

2. Method

The research was done by means of a literature review. This method has the aim of building a viewpoint from the available evidence as the research develops. This approach is used in modern political-historical research where there is a lack of an established body of research on the topic, in this case ownership of South African land for the period 1652 to 2018 in South Africa. The sources include articles from 2017 to 2018, books for the period 2000 to 2018 and newspapers for the period 2017 to 2018. These sources were consulted to evaluate and to describe the current arguments, opinions and viewpoints of the antagonists in favour of keeping Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution as is and therefore the continuation of the present land redistribution policy with compensation in place since 1994.

The research findings are presented in narrative form.

3. Discussion

A study of the antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints reveals a broad range of elements and role players that affect the political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime. All these elements and role players either support and promote the intended land grabbing of White land by the ANC regime for transfer to poor and landless Blacks, or see land grabbing as an important part of a greater international political and socioeconomic process of the ANC regime as it benefits the party’s revolutionary and Marxist-socialist policy. Literature on the antagonists’ arguments, opinions and viewpoints on land expropriation reflect a variety of determinants that they believe directly and indirectly promote and steer the matter. They point out actions, politics and mindsets that they feel characterize the ANC regime and its elite. Examples include their so-called support for the corrupt business and political ideologies of BRICS and the Russian and Chinese Marxist imperialism; their tendency to be anti-West; anti-capitalist and anti-White; the presence of psychopathological politics; the tendency towards anarchy in their political practices; and revenge for Apartheid. These determinants and many others form part of the antagonists’ objections to the amendment of Section 25 and the land expropriation without compensation that accompanies it. Only a comprehensive study of the primary and secondary determinants can present the case of the antagonists so that it can be evaluated justly.

The primary aim of this article (Part One) and the next one (Part Two) is therefore to reflect in detail on the various elements and role players the antagonists perceive. It is only with such a comprehensive presentation that we can conjure a picture of the antagonists’ civil right to uphold the Constitution in its present form and of their legitimate efforts to oppose land grabbing.

The various elements and role players that enter the argument of the antagonists are presented below in six subdivisions. In the next article (Part Two) this presentation of the various elements and role players continue with another six subdivisions.

3.1. The Malema-Ramaphosa element

This section reflects on the role of the empowerment of the radicals in the ANC and the EFF with land grabbing as a central matter. The section divides into the following subsections: 1) The danger of Malemania and Ramamania, 2) The foolishness and similarity of Malemania and Ramamania and 3) The rise of a new ANC.

3.1.1. The danger of Malemania and Ramamania

It is a mistake to argue that the views of Malema and Ramaphosa (described in the media as Malemania and Ramamania) on land expropriation without compensation is mere propaganda. Notwithstanding the sound arguments of various seasoned political analysists1,10,12,17 that the present talk of land grabbing will ultimately be toothless, there is evidence to the contrary that the demands from Blacks for more legal ownership of South African land will increase after 2019. It won’t matter if Malema or Ramaphosa are still active in politics. The demand for land can become a driverless vehicle, speeding uncontrolled on a busy highway, taking out other cars and many lives, creating massive damage. Prominent in this whole argument is firstly a mass of poor and landless Blacks, hanging on to any kind of promise or solution for their poverty. These are often people who lack a basic understanding of politics, economics and risk-taking.12,17,19-29

The EFF’s ideology (now seemingly also part of the post-2019 ANC’s political ideology) includes a push for classical Marxist land ownership for South Africa, with the state as the sole owner of land, property and financial institutes. This radical inclination stands in total opposition to the intentions of some of the antagonists and propagandists who support a just land redistribution outcome, leaving all the players (Whites and Black) with sufficient land and an economy still reasonably stable.12,17,19-29

The EFF has a very small number of parliamentary seats, but they are exceptionally vocal. The reality is that Malema’s message of land grabbing is influencing the minds of many of the landless and poor Blacks. Malema’s openly hostile rhetoric on Whites as “illegal” citizen of South Africa and his support for radical land grabbing are red lights. The impact of the radicals, who are sometimes criminals or rogues in the EFF, ANC and PAC, must be seen as dangerous political markers with the potential to radically change the South African political, economic, social and judicial models. The political system seems to be restructuring very fast. The Whites, be they land owners or not, seem to be the target as “culprits”.12,17,19-29

Regarding the growing radicalism on land expropriation without compensation and the political delinquency reflected by some of its prominent role players, Bruce10 reflects as follows10: 14: “Over at the EFF, its leader, Julius Malema, insists that not only will White people lose their land, but all Black people too. He wants to nationalize all the land…”

3.1.2. The foolishness and similarity of Malemania and Ramamania

The former leader of the DA, Tony Leon8, writes that the EFF’s Mandisa Mashego equates the EFF’s land expropriation with the well-established Singaporean expropriation of land. However, Mashego deliberately refuses to acknowledge that the Singapore Academy of Law Journal already stated clearly in 2010 (eight years before the Ramaphosa-land grabbing initiative) that in the event of a forced Singapore expropriation, there would be compensation and that the compensation for land will be based on open market value. In practice, the Singaporean regulations are far clearer and it has more specific safeguards for land ownership than the current system in South Africa, even with the unchanged Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution. The lack of insight on the side of the EFF, ANC and PAC quickly emerges when they start arguing with seasoned opponents. Leon8 describes this kind of primitive reasoning of those in favour of radical land reform excellently8: 20: “If you ask what is 2+2 and your opponent says 5, you can still have a discussion: but if he answers 87 [the alleged percentage of White land ownership], you are on different planets. So this proved in our debate about land in South Africa. We were Venus and Mars”.

The EFF and the ANC’s increasingly racist rhetoric on the land matter is a serious point of concern.17 Mthombothi emphasizes17: 19: “It’s the sort of bigotry that comes straight out of Hendrik Verwoerd’s playbook, and to which, we had hoped, the new dispensation had dealt a fatal blow”. It seems as if the opposite happened with the EFF, and it is now also prominent in the ANC’s political psyche: the ANC is just preaching racism.

Bruce30 tries to give us some positive reassurance of the average individual and political goodwill of South Africans outside the extreme racial context of the ANC and the EFF.30 He writes30: 2: “I suspect very few people know how much trouble [financially and debt-ridden] South Africa is in. It’s not that we’re approaching a racial civil war. I think South Africans are far too sensible for that. They don’t want their country destroyed. They want a [justified, not stolen] stake in something with a future.”

But, objectively seen, Bruce’s guideline, although undoubtedly coming from a very wise man, is truly at this stage that of a very “lone voice in our political desert and wilderness”.30

The most important question still remains for the antagonists: who will curb the ongoing irresponsible war-mongering and the destructive and dangerous incitement of politicians like Julius Malema and Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma (and now also Cyril Ramaphosa) after the 2019 election, even if land grabbing from Whites is successfully implemented? It is common cause that the EFF thugs (and ANC radicals) are seeking new targets for their ongoing aggression against Whites. The only positive assurance in the face of “anti-Whites” like Malema and Dlamini-Zuma, is that the EFF seems unlikely to obtain more than 6% of the votes, leaving them politically castrated. It also seems as if Dlamini-Zuma is falling into disrepute among the broader base of ANC voters. They make false claims about the extent of their support.17,28,31

3.1.3. The rise of a new ANC

One of the most prominent current dangers for the antagonists is that the ANC has failed to discipline its radicals. The ANC itself remains a dangerous component in politics: the fact that predictions indicate that the ANC can obtain 60% or more of the votes in the 2019 election, which would give them a free hand, could make the practice of law and order more and more difficult. Thabo Mbeki18 recently voiced public concern on the bad racial intentions of the ANC in 2018, even suggesting that the current ANC has become a failed political entity.18

Mthombothi31 emphasizes that the ANC has become drunk from the “alcohol of corruption”. Indeed, corruption is the ANC’s lifeline and further power for them after the 2019 election spells doom for the country in the same way as the EFF’s intentions on land and citizens’ rights, argue also the antagonists. Mothombothi writes31: 3:

Having jettisoned non-racialism and with the paucity of its performance in power, what exactly does the ANC stand for now? What is its culture? By culture I mean its guiding principles, customs and social behaviours. Corruption seems to tower above all else. I’d therefore argue that corruption has become its abiding culture. It’s endemic, it’s systemic, it’s ingrained. In fact, corruption is the glue that holds the ANC together. To the ANC, corruption is like a drink to a drunkard who’s at an advanced stage of alcoholism. He has to keep drinking, or he dies.

Mthombothi12 shows how the current ideas on land redistribution has resulted in resistance from White land owners (as individuals and as farmers’ associations) to the contravention of their land rights.12

Current media debates reveal that there is a possibility that dramatic outcomes, different from those postulated by Tabane1, February2, Mthombothi17 and Bruce10, can follow with the ANC’s revisiting of Section 25(2)(b) of the Constitution. It is argued that if these radical factions win, the outcome can and will change the South African political, racial and socioeconomic scene adversely forever.4,10,12.19-24,26,28-35

3.2. Political scenarios after 2019

Two clearly opposing possible outcomes await us after the 2019 election. Number one: A possibly moderate profile varying from a social-capitalist, but democratic state in which everyone will benefit financially, with an inflow of foreign capital and an improved governing style, leading to development and improvement of the country’s infrastructure, curbing of joblessness and poverty. This setup will to a great extent be an undisturbed continuation of the present status of a free market of land ownership as vested in hands of Whites or other persons (Blacks/Whites) who want to and/or have agreed to buy land at market-related prices. Number two: it reflects a hard-core communist state under autocratic/fascist rule, saturated with corruption, theft and political murders; a country ravaged by total poverty and lawlessness, leaving not only the present White land owners and White rich landless and penniless, but also the masses of other South Africans in the same devastating boat of poverty and distress. 4,10,12.19-24,26,28-35

When considering this, it is important to take into account the present pressure for a better land ownership model, which includes creating a comprehensive Black land ownership and a farming community. One should consider the legal claims by the majority of Blacks on land and the injustice locked into the South African political-historical setup, mostly responsible for the Blacks’ dire personal and group circumstances. But, most of all: it must be addressed in an orderly, accepted and representative way, outside our overwhelming contaminated politics. At the moment the arguments from the different sides are so emotional that it makes a reasonable and rational solution impossible.4,10,12.19-24,26,28-35

3.3. White initiatives to uplift the poor and landless Blacks

The various White initiatives to uplift poor Blacks are described in the following two sub-divisions, namely 1) the White farming sector’s initiatives and 2) White financial and business sector’s initiatives.

3.3.1. The White farming sector’s initiatives

The negative picture painted of the White farming sector as land-grabbing and racist colonists is not entirely accurate.36-38 Many individual farmers and farmers’ organizations have been involved in uplifting farm workers and rural communities since 1994. A good example (although extraordinary) is that of farmers David and Elaine Potter of the Nieuwe Sion Farm between Paarl and Franschoek, who built a R30 million village of 4ha named Lumière, consisting of 22 houses and a crèche, aftercare and entertainment centre for their staff. The cottages and the village became the property of the workers with the title deeds of the 22 cottages being transferred to them.36

There are various other good examples of upliftment by individual farmers and the organized White farming sector to establish commercial Black famers and to help poor Black farmers. One White farmers’ entity, the SA Varkvleis Produsent–organisasie (Savpo) had much success with training support and a financial development contribution of R5.8 million to incoming Black producing farmers in 2016 and 2017 in the North West province, KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and the Western and Eastern Cape provinces.37,38

Katoen SA supplied financial and other support in the period 2016 to 2017, including training through mentorship to 700 cotton farmers in Nkomazi, Mpumalanga, while they also organized financial support for 718 Black farmers to the value of R19.7 million by means of 18 cooperation projects.37

The SA Suikervereniging has helped 6 523 Black farmers in 2016 to 2017 with R124.8 million.37

From the wine industry’s side, Vinpro made a contribution of R2 million to 232 projects by 2017, including 9 588 Black farmers.37

Grain SA, the country’s biggest organization for grain producers, contributed R19.7 million to 718 Black farmers for 2016–2017. It is further involved with 3 800 small grain farmers countrywide in an assistance programme with the government.36, 37

Other White farming entities involved in training and giving financial support to Black farmers is the Wolkwekersvereniging with a contribution of R19.6 million to 330 Black communities and more than 10 000 Black farmers for the period 2016–2017. There was also a support programme for another 108 307 Black beneficiaries in 2016–2017, which includes 55 000 new Black farmers. 36, 37

Agri SA, for instance, is already engaged in upliftment projects with various Black farmers. In 2017 the body paid the guardianship of 22 Black farmers and the veterinary costs of these farmers. The body is also directly responsible for financing the four development farms for Blacks.36,37

3.3.1.1. Agri SA’s initiative

Agri SA under its president, Dan Kriek, has shown a willingness to work with the government to develop a collaborative approach to land restitution and reform right from the start. Agri SA and its affiliates are already very active with constructive contact with the ANC, for instance with their acceptance of the Expropriation Bill (which was unsuccessful before parliament in 2016) and a comprehensive plan that focused on agriculture, land reform and the rural development for Black farmers.39,40

Agri SA feels that the populist and emotional concepts tied to land ownership by the ANC will only endanger the country’s food security. They make it clear that the present demand for more land ownership by “African Blacks” and the annexation of the farming sector by the Ramaphosa regime is a direct result of how the ANC bungled the approved land reform scheme since 1994. Agri SA feels that the intended land grabbing will not solve the matter of enlarging the contingent of commercial Black farmers without a proper development plan: one with a focus on financing and training. The government’s present hostile and aggressive approach will only create more problems around land ownership and endanger the immediate food security of South Africa.39,40 Omri van Zyl, the CEO of Agri SA, puts it as follows39: 9:

The government can expropriate land without paying for it, but what then?

There’s no follow-on financial solution, or sustainable agric financing for the farmers they put on this land, as we have seen with the land reform projects which have failed.

A recent Agri SA land audit shows much of South Africa high-potential land is in government hands.

Government is sitting on multiple millions of hectares of agricultural land which has not been collateralized and is not productive.

If the aim is to chase after the goals of the National Development Plan and Operation Phakisa, then the lowest hanging fruit is obviously to look at government land and give title to farmers on that land.

The moment you do that, those farmers can go to the bank and collateralize it so they can borrow money to develop their farms.

There’s a massive amount of capital that can flow into that land.

On their part Agri SA believes that some kind of agricultural development agency based on a public-private partnership to provide capital for developing farmers must first be established. Their aim is to create a vehicle that offers a form of subsidized capital to circumvent the security of tenure issue. In light of the ANC’s constant failure to implement proper land reform since 1994, Agri SA is of the opinion that properly incentivized private sector involvement will speed up transformation very quickly and with great success without endangering the country’s food security.39

Van Zyl41 believes that there is very little difference between the government’s empowerment plan for Black farmers and that of Agri SA. He writes41: 4-5:

The White farmer community agrees that South Africa must have a much greater contingent of Black commercial farmers and not subsistence farming which is sentimental only and laden with aggressive and hostile politics. At the end these peasants will have to be feed from the country’s national account which is in reality tax-payers’ money. They feel their advice, inputs and various other contributions were so far totally ignored by the government on the creating of a community of Black commercial farmers. Much more they cannot do. Not even the fact that Pieter Mulder served as an adjunct-minister of agriculture under Zuma brings any bettering.

The efforts of White farmers are sincere and comprehensive. The government’s efforts to side-line them seem to be based on pure racism and Marxism.41,42

3.3.2. The initiatives of the White financial and business sectors

As with the White farming community, the ANC often also criticizes the South African financial and business sector for apathy towards the problems of the poor and landless Blacks. Prominent is the ANC’s criticism on the financial and business sector’s public stance on its intended land reform policy. These negativities of the ANC are contradicted by the evidence offered by their opponents.

3.3.2.1. The willingness of the business and financial sectors

The public declaration of the South African Top 100 Companies on 8 April 2018 shows the business sector’s willingness to get involved in a constructive way in erasing Black poverty, unemployment and inequality, as well as to initiate and finance various kinds of training and job appointments to get Blacks active in the labour market. What these companies clearly oppose is any government policy and initiative of land grabbing where the market-related compensation for land is absent. They are not in any way against the justified transference of land to the poor and landless Blacks and the promotion of commercial or small-scale Black farmers. Indeed, as in all well-planned and functioning business communities, they welcome a strong component of commercial Black farmers, especially in light of the decrease in the numbers of the Afrikaner and White populations, which could affect the country’s food security. They also underwrite sound and healthy business principles, which indicates that dramatic land reform means the impoverishment of the existing land owners, the damaging of the food chain and affordable food delivery to the masses, of which most are poor, as well as the creation of political, social and economic disorder, which would not only flatten the whole governmental setup of the country, but also the government’s international standing and trustworthiness. The business sector does not view land reform as money well spent.37, 39-42

The opponents of the ANC emphasize that the business sector seems to doubt if the ANC elite and its current leadership have a basic understanding to run a country by creating well-planned new enterprises, jobs, income and taxes by means of the constructive support of the private sector instead of the liberation thinking of taking from the rich to keep the poor alive. The calls of radicals in the ANC and EFF to nationalize the banking and other financial and business institutions, the mining industry, even the houses and assets of individual citizens and the assets of foreigners in South Africa, is a dangerous political inclination that will cause anarchy.37,39-42

The South African business sector has always been willing and able to bring financial improvement to the poor and landless Blacks without the ANC’s misplaced policy of land redistribution without compensation. The first constructive effort needed before the ANC can hope to better their business and financial record, is that they fix their relationship with the business sector and assure the business sector of their sincerity as a partner of integrity.39, 43-45

Barron39 quotes Soko in this regard39:9: “There need to be ‘honest, courageous, uncomfortable conversations’ between the government and business about what is causing the trust deficit and how it should be addressed”.

The constant failure of the ANC regime to deliver on promises and contracts after honest, courageous, uncomfortable conversationswith the business sector is evident from for instance the ANC’s New Growth Path, which articulates the Green Economy Accord that was signed by the government with great fanfare in 2011 with the organized labour and business sectors. The government has failed to make an inch of progress to advance a green economy.39,43-45

South Africa’s so-called 14-Point Plan and List of Structural Reforms, which Ramaphosa promised will increase the economic growth rate and bring more jobs, failed from day one in terms of the principles formulated by the business sector because these plans and lists lack action plans that detail targets or timeliness. Even the Treasury’s list of five reforms, estimated to raise the country’s potential growth rate from 1.5% to 4%, provides, as the 14-point list, little detail on what exactly these measures entail or when they will be implemented, making it a risky undertaking for the private sector to put private money into the endeavour. Moreover, for the opponents all these governmental “wonderful” lists and their promises still failed to stop South Africa from falling down the cliff into recession in September 2018.46

For the business and financial sector, political and business integrity must be a central principle in the ANC’s intended theoretical frameworks for land redistribution or poverty alleviation. The business sector finds Ramaphosa’s recent bragging that “if a referendum was held in 1994 on land redistribution the outcome would be a massive vote collection for land grabbing”, to be lacking evidence. The political views on capital ownership lack the business and political sense associated with democracy and capitalism. It spells doom for the private sector’s assets in which private citizens’ money is prominent.42,45

Soko’s39 view is that it is39:9: “…time for the South African business sector to open its wallet to support the ANC regime if last mentioned mends its delinquent ways”. Private initiatives have far more success and profitable outcomes than the intended job creation through land reform of the ANC can ever bring. In March 2018, Ramaphosa gained the support of the business section by launching the Youth Employment Service (YES). YES intends to link Black empowerment points to corporations that take young interns into one-year work opportunities with a salary. This has already brought into placement 40 000 interns (the intention is a placement of one million). The intent is to later expand the goodwill of the business sector to higher education entities.47,48

The formal business sector, as a primary generator of capital, economy and jobs, stands central: it is indeed the only sector that can steer the South African economy to functionality again.49,50

3.3.2.2. The increase in distrust

As with most antagonists (opponents) of drastic land expropriation, the South African private domestic business community’s distrust is caused by the ANC regime’s doubtful intentions and actions and the ANC’s intention to start RET (Radical Economic Transformation) and RST (Radical Social Transformation). This justified distrust is the primary reason why the formal business side does not promote domestic investments. This is clearly not an anti-ANC lobby per se, but plain a safeguard against losses of public moneys through the ANC’s irresponsible political, social and economic adventures.47, 48

The business sector’s level of distrust is quite clear from the R71 billion that is being invested elsewhere, such as in Ghana. This kind of money that is flowing around in the private sector is why Malema so badly wants to nationalize private banks and the other financial institutions. The recent massive looting of the VBS Mutual Bank and the earlier capturing at Transnet under its former CEO Siyabonga Gama are excellent examples of the many losses citizens have suffered to ANC “infrastructure development” and “upliftment”.46-48, 51-53

The business sector is concerned about the lack of understanding and insight in the ANC after 24 years of rule. They have done little that has been constructive and they still adhere to the belief that taking White capital will free the country from poverty. They have not helped Black citizens like the Afrikaners helped themselves on their own in the 1930s. The little penetration of Black business people into mining, for instance, occurred with the help of White-led companies and the BBBEE model. There are Black mines and other enterprises that have been and are successful, among others those of Cyril Ramaphosa and Tokyo Sexwale. There have also been Black enterprises that have failed, and in those cases it had nothing to do with a lack of support from the White business sector.54-57 Opponents of the ANC rightfully point out that the ANC has had enough power in the last 24 years to change the situation. Corruption is killing the positivity the business sector had about South Africa’s future. The antagonists eagerly want to support a future South African regime free from political evils and they want to lift the country’s economy out of the international rating agencies’ red listings.58

The former AngloGold CEO, Srinivasan Venkatakrishnan58, a prominent business leader who was involved in the Minerals Council SA and who was also a director of Business Leadership SA (BLSA)—a person well-known for his hard work behind the scenes to raise business voices against corruption in the post-1994 government—assures South Africa of a certain future if business speaks up when he says58: 2:

Corruption is like cancer. If you don’t catch it early on it spreads very, very quickly. You need to nip it in the bud. That corruption was happening here and was endemic across certain parts [is true].

Business is an important voice and it was lost in the wilderness before, and historically it sat on the side-lines, worrying about how speaking up would impact its business. We had to do introspection and see where we were at fault, make corrections and then move forward. This was all important for us. It was an absolutely critical moment where potentially SA was about to jump over a cliff and it had to be pulled back.58

On the question of whether Zuma’s corruption had been caught early enough and if the country’s economy and integrity can be mended, Venkatakrishnan says58:2: “Honestly, no, but better late than never. It should never happen in the first place. Here, it was probably caught a bit later but before it was too late. It can be reversed. It won’t be a walk in the park, but if there’s a will and co-operation of people saying, ‘not another time. We’ve nearly lost the country once and we won’t make that mistake again.”

3.3.2.3. The prominence of the banking sector

The banking sector seems to be regarded as an easy cow to milk by the likes of Black First Land First, SACP, Cosatu, EFF and the ANCYL. Jacob Zuma accused the banking sector in public of “thwarting the growth of Black business and as contributors to inequality.” The ANC regime’s radical liberation politics and ideology of taking from the one to give to others without generating anything constructive for the state’s coffer led to early resistance and counter-actions from the private financial and business sector. The sector put limitations on possible abuses of banks and other financial institutes, which created fertile grounds for ANC radicals to attack them.59

The CEO of First Rand Group, Johan Burger59, tried hard to teach ANC radicals about the realities of economics and finance and the basic principles of responsible financial management of other people’s assets.59,60 Burger posits59:10:

To the extent that the economy grows, to the extent that there’s capacity for people to take on debt, we will extend credit. It’s our business to extend credit.

To the extent that the economy struggles we will find it difficult to extend credit.

It’s not about whom we extend credit to. If there is no demand and no affordability, we cannot extend credit. This is not about small business or large business or about black entrepreneurs or white entrepreneurs. It’s just a fact of economic life.

At the end of the day, it’s about affordability. If the affordability is not there you can’t expect us to extend credit into that environment.

It needs to be understood that we’re dealing with other people’s money. We’re dealing with savers’ money. We have an enormous fiduciary duty to make sure that we extend credit in a responsible manner.

Banks rightfully oppose land grabbing in any form because they deal with other people’s money, as the CEO of First Rand Group61 clearly states. Expropriation without compensation can bring not only bankruptcy to banks, but also to their investing individuals. The direct impact of the intended land grabbing by the Ramaphosa regime is already affecting the banking system. Professor André Louw61, an agricultural economist of the University of Pretoria, reports that farmers are already experiencing the sudden cancellation of purchase contracts because of the intensifying uncertainty around land ownership. According to the statistics of the Bank Association of South Africa (BASA), banks’ exposure to bonds amount to more than R1 600 billion: Of this amount more or less R133 billion is for agricultural land and R1 068 billion for residential property only. [Their exposure to agricultural debts is around R80 billion, the cooperative banks carrying R9.3 billion and the Agricultural Bank R38 billion (of which 90% is to White farmers whose land is now under possible ANC and state capture)]. Land expropriation without compensation or semi-compensation will endanger the whole South African banking system.60,61

Pierre Venter,61 the manager for human settlements at BASA, gives us insight into the chaos that land grabbing has meant for bank systems when he writes61: 1: “Many banking crises worldwide started when property prices dropped and this negatively impacted on the trust of markets” [Own translation]. In South Africa this devastating phenomenon is beginning to manifest as markets are exasperated by for example the rhetoric of Olly Mlamleli, the ANC mayor of Mangaung, when he said that60: 4: “…the ANC is looking forward to redistribute grabbed farms and plots around Bloemfontein”.

3.3.2.4. ANC’s democratic and capitalist economics

It is an open question for the antagonists whether the ANC really understands the model of democratic and capitalist economics as compared to so-called “liberation” economics. In the view of the ANC’s opponents this “grabbing instinct” is the main reason why the ANC has failed as a responsible and creative regime since 1994 and why the formal business sector is shying away from them. It is far less risky to invest in Kenya, Nigeria and other African countries. The South African scene is dominated by a racial rhetoric that seeks retribution for past injustices.59,62,63

Bruce64 confirms64: 16:

The lesson in all of this for President Cyril Ramaphosa to learn and hold on to – is that the private sector can help (indeed it wants, still, to help) but the state has to be cautious with its money. Assuming Ramaphosa makes no (more) unnecessary gaffes on land expropriation without compensation, ensures that land invasions are resisted and begins to spell out and sell his vision of how an orderly process of expropriation might trigger an economic recovery, the private sector will probably stick to him.

However, if the Wall Street Journal publishes an editorial comparing Ramaphosa to Robert Mugabe and South Africa to Venezuela, Ramaphosa and the ANC must be in trouble. Impressions are sticky and hard to shift once they take hold, writes Bruce64: 16: “If Ramaphosa and the ANC could negotiate the death of Apartheid, why are they so foolishly besotted with poor economic thinking and doing like extreme land-reform, asks the business-sector.”

The question is whether the private business sector would still want to help Ramaphosa and his government in the future.

3.4. Basic questions of immediate interest around land ownership

When reading and listening to the rhetoric on land expropriation, certain questions arise. In some ways these questions have become forces that have to be addressed.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65,66

In short these questions on rightful land ownerships in South Africa and the legal integrity of land grabbing are the following:

  1.     Which of the many arguments, opinions and viewpoints are truly grounded in reality and facts? Which are emotional, naïve and even bizarre or outright political falsities and myths?
  2.     Who are the people with all these many contrary views, opinions and arguments and what are their agendas?
  3.     What are the direct and indirect interests of the many parties to land reform?
  4.     What does lawful land ownership really when referring to the claim of the individual     citizen?
  5.     Why this serious infighting between South Africans about a changed Constitution based on a single Section?
  6.     What is really meant with the concept “land hunger by the masse” and “poor and land     landless Blacks”:
    1. Is it rural land for farming that Tabane and others are referring to, or is it urban land for housing settlements, situated near industrial and business hubs?
    2. Is the issue of urban land for housing not really the main issue?
  7. In general, are persons like Tabane, Mothombothi and Bruce false prophets with their     promises of a prosperous and basically unchanged South Africa in the waiting?:
    1. Are these political writers and commentators visionaries who can really and truly read the South African future?
    2. Are they correct to think that the Ramaphosa regime will be successful in steering the landless and poor Blacks and the many extreme political militant propagandists in their demands for land in a constructive, non-violent direction?

The evidence for both sides in answer to the above questions is overwheliming.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65,66

3.5. The harsh reality of land reform in 2019

The current push in parliament to change the South African Constitution’s property clause [Section 25(2)(b)] to give the state the right to expropriate land without compensation is eliciting strong opposing arguments. Some of the crucial questions include:

  •     Is the view that Ramaphosa’s focus on land expropriation is purely political     accurate?
  •     Is it true that the desire for land is purely based on retribution and hate for Whites?
  •     Is it true that the ANC wants White land because those farms are successful?
  •     Is land expropriation up front because the ANC is still at heart a terrorist organization?
  •     Are the calls for land expropriation all unfounded?

The following sub-division presents the arguments of those who oppose land expropriation.

3.6. The dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of the ANC regime

For the antagonists opposing land expropriation without compensation, the current debate is intertwined with the dysfunctional political and socioeconomic system of South Africa in which the ANC stands central. It is crucial to take a look at the causes of the current state of affairs and the aims of the ANC if one wants to consider what went wrong since 1994 in the South African political setup.

The sections below provide a comprehensive overview of the direct and indirect elements, determinants and role players that brought us here, including political histories, economics, politics, the judiciary, etc.

3.6.1. The ANC’s drowning of the 1994 democracy

According to those who oppose land reform, the undermining of the South African democracy started in 1994 with the ANC taking power. Fascist thinking quickly formed a foundation for ANC action. It is illustrated by their present direct attack on the Constitution and their intended land expropriation without compensation. This makes the ANC a troubled regime and a direct danger to the civil and democratic rights of South Africans in the eyes of the antagonists. Their disregard for White rights to land ownership and their plans to specifically harm Whites financially, show how they are drowning democracy. The antagonists refer to five clear political outcomes when they make this argument: 1) the decline of the democracy, 2) the use of populism, 3) the still fragile South African democracy, 4) the uncertain economy in a fragile democracy, and 5) land grabbing as a fascist act.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65,66

3.6.1.1. The ongoing decline of the democracy

The antagonists see the land grabbing from Whites by the ANC regime as part of a dangerous democratic decline in South Africa. In the book State Capture in Africa by Melanie Meirotti and Grant Masterson, published by the Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa is identified with various other African countries to be under attack for state capture in various forms by private groups and individuals (as happened with the “Zupta” state capture). In this context the agendas and strategies of the political leaders are often masked and their personal needs are sold as that of the population (land expropriation without compensation is also being sold as something on behalf of the population who wants it urgently).4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65-67

John L Stremlau67, a visiting professor of international relations at the University of the Witwatersrand, describes the modus operandi of state capture when he writes67:11: “Dictators can do this at will. Those who are elected democratically face obstacles. They must subvert democratic norms and hollow out state institutions, all the while obscuring their real purposes, often exploiting populist fears and resentments.”

For the antagonists, land grabbing is one of the outcomes of how South African state institutions have been hollowed out from 1994, implying the subversion of democracy. Evidence is plentiful that many remnants of this delinquent model are still functioning inside the Ramaphosa regime. The Zuma-orientated ANC NEC still strongly reflects in the ANC government of 2019. 4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65-67

To stay in power, the ANC is gathering as many as possible votes from the masses, primarily by the exploiting populist fears and resentments.67 Land grabbing has also become a vehicle for secondary wrongdoings, like channelling riches to the ANC elite. They offer reasons such as Black empowerment, but in truth Luthuli house is steering the process as state capture has become entrenched in the post-Zuma regime. The way in which Ramaphosa addressed the nation “officially” only as president of the ANC with respect to the ANC’s decision on land expropriation and his disregard for parliament’s authority with his announcement of a policy on land expropriation decided on and approved by Luthuli house, reminded of an authoritarian regime and a fascist leadership.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65-67 The antagonists no longer feel as if they have any say in the matter.

3.6.1.2. The use of populism

Derby68 shows that populism is still a tantalising and easy option to use to mesmerize certain segments of society. As result of the failure of the ANC regime over two decades, its leadership is jumping on the revolutionary bandwagon of land to win votes.68

Derby warns68: 2: “Never believe a politician whose mission is draining the swamp”. This echoed for the antagonists’ one of the many reasons why the ANC, driven by their opportunistic and corrupted ANC leaders, has failed the country and why our democracy is in a process of drowning.

The former KwaZulu-Natal premier and a member of the ANC’s National Working Committee, Senzo Mchunu, clearly indicates the power Luthuli house has to override parliament in official decision-making and the execution of decrees regarding the land reform issue.69 Prominent is the public downplaying of the parliamentary Motlanthe Report by Ramaphosa himself as well as by the ANC NEC. Mchunu69 declared69: 4: “Comrade Kgalema has expressed a view, it shouldn’t be confused as the ANC having come to a conclusion”.

The un-parliamentarian and authoritarian ANC conclusion that led to the “official” implementation of land expropriation by the 80 members of the ANC NEC is seen by the antagonists as the final decision on land expropriation. But for the antagonists this is also a warning of how undemocratically the ANC will be ruling in future.69

The opponents note, with good reason, that the ANC, as the present ruling party that is losing its majority, can stay in power unconstitutionally by means of traditional dictatorial or authoritarian rule (well-known in post-colonial Africa). The present forcing of land grabbing reminds of these practices.67, 70-72

3.6.1.3. The still fragile South African democracy

Land expropriation could be the tip of the iceberg of retribution and revenge. Those who oppose it are all too aware that democracy is not a given, it is sustainable only in certain conditions.67 Stremlau67: 11 writes: “But no democracy is ever secure, even the US. That case study points to historic and current examples of how oligarchs masked as patriots and democrats, can exploit the fears and resentments of key constituencies to win elections, disarm democratic protections, and diver public resources to the privileged few.”

There are just too many old comrades in the “renewed” ANC. They parade as the saviours and rescuers of the poorest Blacks, fronting the White problem as reason for all ills. Mchunu’s69 following naïve remark reveals a lot about the word manipulation of the ANC leadership as they cover up their real intentions69: 4: “We are cautioning against unnecessary and inflammatory statements that are not conductive to peace. The land debate must move without any political populism of any kind.”

The good intentions of the ANC leaders are contradicted daily by their actions. The ANC elite reflects a lack of understanding of the concept of keeping peace and the enormous difference between expropriation with compensation and without compensation, as well as the difference between justice and injustice, reconciliation and revenge.69

The ANC may win the 2019 election (the sixth post-1994 general election) by jeopardising the country, but chances are good that they may lose soon after 2019 because of the bankruptcy of the country. This is basically because they lack sensible domestic policies, besides radicalism, to generate work opportunities and to create money to erase poverty and inequality: something that land grabbing cannot bring to the table. It only can aggravate the already chaotic situation.73,74

3.6.1.4. Uncertain economy of a fragile democracy

The antagonists believe that other constructive approaches and solutions are needed for South Africa’s many ills and crises. Bruce says73:22: “That leaves only one other route – sensible domestic policies that, even in the face of external events, can serve as a floor from which to build viable defences of our own.”

Prominent here is cutting government debt (it quadrupled in Zuma’s time to $80 billion) by cutting public sector jobs, selling off the SAA, SABC, Transnet and Eskom and training the masses. There is a clear choice and message for the ANC regime73:22: “…cut government’s debt and make money and stop exploiting through land grabbing and over-taxing the hard-working citizens of South Africa to make-up for your governmental impotence.”

If the ANC wants to persuade people to invest in their government and the country, they must first have the necessary potential and integrity to convince investors that they will make profits without risks73:22: “To prove it to them you put every piece of legislation you pass through just one stress test – will it attract or repel investors?”

The legislation on land expropriation will not pass this test. It not only repels investors, it is driving local and international investors’ away.73

3.6.1.5. ANC’s intent to grab land

Those who oppose land expropriation feel that the policy stems from a fascist seed.75, 76 The question is what is fascism? The former US politician, Madeleine Albright75, points out that it is in the first place difficult to define fascism75:11: “First of all, I don’t think fascism is an ideology. I think it is a method, it’s a system…a means of seizing and holding power.”

Albright75,76 brings us into the ANC elite’s state of mind: fascism and not so much communism is what drives the ANC elite. It tells us for the first time the reason why the ANC elite wants to seize power and how they hold power.75,76

One should understand fascism to understand the possible course of politics in South Africa after 2018. Land expropriation without compensation is only the tip a massive iceberg. It is useful to reflect Albright’s description of fascist leaders and their fascist systems. Albright 75:11 posits:

Fascism’s leaders have an “aptitude for spectacle”, a cult-like ability to establish emotional links to the mob and bring to the surface “deep and often ugly” feelings. Theirs is an intolerant, antidemocratic “doctrine of anger and fear”, marked by strong ethnic identification, as well as vilification and discrimination against non-members.

It often draws its energy from “a memory of humiliation” that percolates upwards from the general populace. The more painful the grounds for resentment, the easier it is for the fascist leader to build his following by “dangling prospects of renewal or vowing to take back what’s been stolen”.

It relies on intimidation and, often, violence. For it to succeed, the traditionally independent institutions of democracy, such as the police, the prosecutorial services, the judiciary, and civil service, all have to be brought under partisan control.

After reading the above, can anyone doubt who the ANC elite or what the ANC regime represents? Their opponents know very well that rooting out fascism is not easy: it is like cancer. Land grabbing is one of its most serious manifestations, the first of many other manifestations to come as the cancer penetrates the system. As long as the ANC is the ruler, land grabbing will thrive.

3.6.2. Land expropriation’s effects on the economy

Land grabbing is fully intertwined as a financial and economic generator within the South African economy. It does not matter to whom land belongs or who is producing what on it, it has intrinsic value. The income and the value of land of course depend on the sound political, socioeconomic and financial system of the country in which it functions. If it is functioning in an unstable political environment the income from and the value of land is mostly poor, leading to poverty, unemployment and inequality between urban and rural inhabitants. Land grabbing itself mostly generates distrust of the government, leading to a low foreign investment culture, seldom improving the situation of the poor and landless. If land grabbing is engineered in an already down-spiralling economy characterized by political instability, it can only spell economic and political disaster. It is in such an unfavourable socioeconomic and political environment that extreme land reform is planned in South Africa. Besides land grabbing as part of the ANC’s plan to improve the South African economy, they are planning various other schemes with which land expropriation is intertwined.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65-67

In this division the attention is on the following three subdivisions: 1) Ramaphosa’s Stimulus Package, 2) the devastating unemployment in South Africa, and 3) the constant decline politics and economics.

3.6.2.1. Ramaphosa’s “Stimulus package”

Antagonists see land grabbing as signs of a failed economy in which all kinds of escape routes from reality are being tried out by a government stripped of the ability make an economic turn-around. It is often started by regimes simultaneously with attempts at economic development and other so-called “bettering” of fiscal plans to distract negative attention from the grabbing process where mostly a certain prosperous group is harmed to benefit another less meritorious group. Other times it is used in an effort to offer some credibility to the particular regime’s continuously failing economic reforms and upliftment schemes to serve as a guarantee for the poor people and voters of a regime that has somewhere in the future a free assistance plan in place to help them.

At the moment is it old news that the Ramaphosa regime is in deep financial trouble, making drastic actions such as land grabbing, either as an attention distracter or, as Ramaphosa seemingly believes, a money generator, an unavoidable part of his many promises of dramatically reforming the South African economy. The present plans around land grabbing by Ramaphosa must be read together with his bigger stimulus plans as a supporting source of income or finance and voter recruiting. Ultimately this will do little good.4,10,12,19,20-24,26,28,29,32-35,65-67

Firstly, it is important to look to Ramaphosa’s various economic plans together with land grabbing, like his Stimulus Package with which he promises to invigorate the economy. In the context of the current economic stagnation of South Africa, Derby74 paints a very distressing picture, mentioning an economy bereft of any substantive investment over the past decade and a national psyche drenched in tales of corruption centred on the ruling party and the role of its former president. This failed governance of the ANC regime dented the confidence of consumer and business to levels last seen more than 30 years ago [during Apartheid]. Notwithstanding Ramaphosa’s various promises to the nation, especially to his electorate, there are negative realities that are overwhelming. In this failed economic state, land grabbing is undoubtedly becoming tempting, an excellent way to put some of the political and economic demands at rest, at least for the short term.74

Derby77 discusses the country’s present economic fiasco by looking at Ramaphosa’s much talked about Stimulus Package as presented during his economic address on Friday 21 September. He writes77: 2:

Finally, some sobriety. That is my take from this Friday’s economic address by President Cyril Ramaphosa and his team. There were no grand announcements of billions flooding into the economy from friends in Asia, no promises of the creation of millions of jobs in whatever catalogue of time frames politicians dust off the shelf. And importantly, it also wasn’t the matter-of-fact economy diagnosis that former finance minister Malusi Gigaba once delivered that sent everyone into a mad panic

What emerged most for me from the Ramaphosa “stimulus” announcement was this cabinet, or at least those members of it that are in his corner, have a grip on the reality of the situation.

Lumkile Mondi78, a senior lecturer in economics at Wits University, says that the Ramaphosa plan is simply a recovery package rather than a stimulus one. He concludes that South Africa has energy, water, transport healthcare and educational problems that need comprehensive fixing78: 8: “We have a huge infrastructure deficit that requires trillions of Rands to get it going for a modern economy. We don’t have capital at all. The money the IDC and others have is not enough for us to address the infrastructure deficit in our country.”

The above reflection is in line with the view of Joffe79, who also writes that Ramaphosa’s economic stimulus package is not a stimulus package at all, but the plain replay of a budget previously done79:2:

There is no new public money going into the economy, and that’s no bad thing given that the government doesn’t have the money to spend. The R400bn of public money that will go into the new SA Infrastructure Fund is simply the infrastructure spending – minus that of the state-owned companies – that government already had on the budget for the next three years. And the R50bn that’s going into new priorities such as black commercial farmers, township and rural economies and bedding for public hospital patients is being shifted somehow from other budgets.

Bruce80 describes it as a neither a negative nor a positive plan, but a fiscally neutral one, lacking any improvements to the chaotic economy of the country, while Khumalo81 says81: 10: “…that to everyone he spoke see it as negative” and that it was merely a reprioritization of money already in the coffer, and indeed no more than a reversal of bad policy decisions and fixing some obvious missteps by Jacob Zuma”.

For Khumalo81 the best description of the different analyses by commentators is 81:10: “…was once again the prophesying of an imminent Armageddon for the South African and its economy”. Khumalo81 him self, tactfully as a professional, describes it the best as follows81:10: “In layman’s terms, the president, in his capacity as the head of the home, told his family: “Hello guys. We are broke. There is no more money coming. I am not getting a raise. I am not getting a bonus. And I cannot borrow any more money from the bank”.”

The SA Infrastructure Fund is already a mess, writes Joffe79:2. It is unclear how the new fund will work and how it will be governed, but it seems to be intent only on re-collecting the billions rands already allocated to the government’s fragmented and ineffective infrastructure spending programme. It seems indeed a desperate last effort to steer the money budgeted more effectively and creatively, as well as a hopeful last effort to incorporate outside the fiscal other funds and skills to rehabilitate the economy. The private sector is interested in the recruitment of local private sector funding outside the fiscal, like the private sector’s pension funds and various other sources of private sector funding to improve the economy, but again, when considering the poor financial CV of the ANC regime and their poor relations with the South African private sector, the private sector will be hesitant in the coming three to five years if the ANC wins the 2019 election. The fact that national debt is nearing 60% of revenue (with the potential of growing) and the fiscal is also burdened with the immense liabilities of the SOES and financial collapse of more and more municipalities, makes Ramaphosa’s mission to turn around South Africa’s economy almost impossible. Recovery for South Africa, even under a new responsible and respected political party and government, is a long way off.74,77-79,82,84,85

In the economic and financial chaos it is understandable why it is tempting for Ramaphosa and his men – in an effort to lessen the people’s political and growing economic pressure on him to erase in some way their immense poverty – to execute an extreme land grabbing programme as fast as possible.74,77-79,82-85

Ramaphosa himself describes the outcome of the ANC’s political and economic actions as follows78: 8: “The state is unable to raise borrowing. SA has a debt-to-GDP ratio of about 53%”.

South Africa’s debt-to-GDP leven is 53%, and the general view is that for emerging market nations, the healthy debt-to-GDP level is about 40%. It is not advisable to go beyond this as South Africa has done. Ramaphosa’s planned Stimulus Package seems to be a long term dream and an ideal that can only be reached under an able and competent regime, requirements that the ANC does not meet in the eyes of the antagonists.74,77-79,82,84,85

Land expropriation with full compensation is totally outside the financial ability and reach of the ANC regime. However much the regime would have liked to do it (if it was politically correct), it lacks the capital to do so. In the current unstable South African economy, radical land expropriation is the only option.74

3.6.2.2. Unemployment in South Africa

Ramaphosa’s further admission that the country’s growing devastating unemployment is an immense problem is another condemning failure of the ANC. The ANC regime promised and undertook constantly from 1994, before every election, to rectify the unemployment. This constant promise of the ANC regime to rectify unemployment was again manifested in the Ramaphosa Stimulus Package. This promise of Ramaphosa failed dolefully before it started.74,77-7982,84,85 When presenting his Stimulus Package, reflecting wistfully on “bettering” the record of the present high unemployment that sits above 27%, Ramaphosa says74: 1: “Governments [as the ANC] are “… usually not very good at creating jobs…We do our little part’. Overall, we are not good at creating jobs. We should be at the top of our game when it comes to being an enabler and being a catalyst.”

With his admission of the ANC’s failure as a government with a specific mandate from its voters to offer them sufficient work opportunities and of their long term failure to run successful job creation programmes in over 24 years of rule, Ramaphosa offers insight into why land expropriation without compensation could be used as a vehicle to solve unemployment.

In this context of the present unemployment of the masses, it is important to mention that when Jacob Zuma came into office (with the support of Ramaphosa as vice-president), he promised to create 5 million jobs in 10 years (2 million per year). Of course, as with the most other ANC promises, this was not met, leading to a situation where the state ended up with a bloated and rather expensive public service instead (by offering jobs in state services to unemployed Blacks and in this way buying votes for the ANC through loyalists). Again, notwithstanding the failed unemployment record of the ANC (and the manifold empty promises), Ramaphosa is trying again to pull a rabbit out of his hat, knowing very well there is not a rabbit to grill for the poor and jobless Blacks. Another way must be found to offer the masses of poor and unemployed Blacks many fat rabbits to grill: land grabbing.74 For the antagonists there is clearly one specific outcome at their costs: more land grabbing to solve the hunger of Ramaphosa’s millions of unemployed persons.

For the antagonists South Africa has basically been bankrupted by the ANC and there is no other way for Ramaphosa and his cronies to find the immense capital needed to erase unemployment in their own funding model other than a free hand with land grabbing in the hope to keep in short term the unemployed and landless poor Blacks silent.

The unemployment crisis is central to the ANC’s constant failure with serious political matters and their failure to make a constructive correction away from the foolish and useless so-called 2018 Stimulus Package Plan. They are masking a far more disastrous future situation of an unofficial unemployment percentage of far higher that the reflected official 27%. It has the potential, in combination the other negative political and economic determinants, to derail the political state with anarchy and revolution in the near future. This negative set-up needs further reference. Firstly, to think that the recent control taking of economic structures by the presidency will be a cure to the country’s ineffective economy is wishful thinking. Secondly, the Ramaphosa regime’s belief that they will bring unemployment to zero (0%) in 2030 is laughable. Even lowering the percentage will be to 14% in a decade or two is just not possible in an ANC regime.74,77,78,81,86

These “fantasies” are part of the ANC’s political history, coming from 1994 with their: “we have a good story to tell”. The ANC’s political stories, like their political doings, lack trustworthiness for the antagonists. The ANC regime and its elite are in a mess.74,77,78,81,86

Bruce80 consolidates this present mess under the ANC regime well, especially the ANC elite’s constant excuses and proclaimed innocence of involvement in this mess that came with the 24 years of their reign80: 20: “On a more mundane level, we all make choices all the time. Most of us. One creature that never has to make choices is the ANC. It always manages to combine everything it wants into one choice. Come the next election, I guarantee you it will dream up a new list of Five Priorities, whatever they are”.

The next election is in 2019, meaning more new fantasies and promises come from the ANC! Ramaphosa himself is doing exactly what Bruce80 identifies as a failing politician80: 20: “…to put a list on top of his priorities instead of putting a priority on top of his list”. The ANC has become well-known for propagating falsities before elections and what has happened in reality is that unemployment (as well as crime, murder, state capture) has gotten out of control in ten years.74,77,78,81,86

Ann Bernstein87, the executive director of the Centre for Development and Enterprise, reports that the country’s unemployment crisis is the worst in the world. She reports there are 37.8 million work-age adults, of whom 11.9 million are not economically active (mostly students and school learners), reflecting an unemployment of more than 32%. Of the remaining 25.9 million people, as many as 9.6 million cannot find any work, making it almost two out of every five adults (40%). In terms of the 37.8 million work-age adults, these so-called “not economically active adults” of 11.9 million and the 9.6 million failing to find work, represents nearly 52% of unemployed adults. Seen from another angle, Bernstein87 shows that only 43% of adults work (while globally this number is 60%), meaning that 57% are out of work. The growing chaos into which the ANC regime has forced its people, is confirmed by the fact that between 2008 and 2018, the number of work-age adults has grown by 6.3 million, while only 1.9 million (30%) had been employed and 3.2 million stayed unemployed (thus more than 50%). The hard truth is that there is a daily increase of 900 unemployed people in the population. This has been the case for ten years, but Ramaphosa and his ANC elites are very quiet about this as they sit in their highly paid jobs.87

Bernstein87 delves deeper into the tragic realities created by the ANC since 1994 by reflecting that the position of young people is even worse. They have an unemployment rate of 50% and 400 000 fewer people were employed in 2018 than in 2008 (ten years earlier) despite that he number of young people increasing by 2 million between 2008 and 2018. She writes87: 21: “The 9.6-million unemployed mean that there are more people looking for work in SA than there are people living in seven out of nine provinces, and, if you wanted to reduce the unemployment by half, you would need to create industries that employ 11 times more people than are currently working in the entire mining sector.”

The reasons she offers for unemployment is comprehensive, like the prescription of relatively high minimum wages by the government, the considerable legal protection from dismissal, the failure of job creation projects, most only benefitting a small group of jobseekers, constraints on private firms when employing people, a lack of SMEs and a lack of constructive governmental support to generate such entities, etc.87

The writing of Sifiso Skenjana88, an investment and economic research specialist, describes Bernstein’s87 epitaph on South Africa further in an effort to give Ramaphosa a free diagnosis of the economic reasons for the looming death of the country. He writes that South Africa remains one of the most unequal societies globally in terms of income and wealth distribution. The bottom half of the local workforce receives a meagre 12% of all wages. In this context, he pinpoints that the Oxfam report88:9, “Reward Work, Not Wealth” reflects that the cost of supporting the needs of one person monthly in South Africa is about R6 460-00, while the minimum wage from the 1st May 2018 is R3 500-00 (reflecting a shortage of R3 000). Using the World Bank’s measure of SA’s Gini-coefficient, it is the highest in the world at 0.63. [Income inequality on the Gini ranges from 0 (excellent) to 1 (worst)]. Skenjana88 also shows that poverty levels are rising, quoting Stats SA’s recent report “Poverty Trends in South Africa”, which says that the poverty head count increased from 53.2% in 2011 to 55.5% in 2015. Taking into account that the down-spiral of the country is a constant feature (like the debt-to-GDP ratio accelerating from 32% in 1990/91 to 53% in 2017/18), there is no hope of a turn-around on any of these statistics, only a desperate hope to decrease some of this negative numbers.88

The above comprehensive profile on South Africa’s economic chaos brings us back to the “Ramaphosa solution” in which poverty, inequality and unemployment are seen as the same things that can and must be tackled simultaneously to be nullified. In his solution land grabbing is one of the main means and the easiest solution to better the ANC’s poor financial profile. White land grabbing offers an open door to get entrance to exclusive capital, to not only generate free capital without cost to the state so that they can satisfy the poor and landless’ growing needs and demands, but also to assure cohesion inside the ANC’s voter contingent. But, as with most of the ANC’s solutions for politics and economics, these radical ANC politicians lack the ability to reason and tell how they are going to do the land grabbing, writes Bruce80: 20. What these ANC politicians miss as a result of their lack of expertise, is that the causes of and the solution to unemployment, poverty and inequality differ immensely, making land grabbing as a solution to any one of these three problems, null and void. As a guideline for the Ramaphosa regime Bruce profers80: 20: “Poverty is caused by the absence of money or assets. Inequality results from the presence of money. Poverty is the first priority to fix [and must thus be on top of the list as a priority]. Unemployment is often caused by employers being deterred from hiring people”. This means to bring down unemployment there must be less rigid and senseless official employment rules inside the country’s unstable politics. Bruce80 writes further80: 20: “…but then politics makes an appearance, because to lighten the load on employees, or to make it worthwhile to be an employer, requires, to an extent, disempowering the trade unions and we can’t have that [because Cosatu and its affiliates are alliances of the ANC]. At the end the ANC has become his own prison warden”.

This emphasis on the mismanagement of the current South Africa points to Albright’s identification of the presence of fascism in the ANC’s government system so that the partisans’ (like the trade unions) obtain part or full control of the traditionally independent institutions of democracy, making the economics and democracy of the country a failure on the one hand, while on the other hand the capital and assets of the moderate to rich persons look attractive for grabbing. When the unions and the partisans come from the majority of the population and they also formed the radical government of the day, outcomes such as the ANC elite’s decision to do land grabbing become an obvious and a natural reaction in an uncontrolled and disorderly society under an uncontrolled and disorderly regime.75,76,80

The alliance with the workers and their primary (individual, citizen, worker and so-called false democratic) rights at the cost of the functional private business sector and individuals is closely linked to its economic failure. These distinctions are taking on a racist tone, with the minority group of Whites as the losers). In this context the ANC’s basic political and economic policies, thinking, planning and doing has become cemented in revolution and fascism via the unions. This explains the shying away of the private business sector and their fight to keep sustainable democracy and private capital out of reach of the ANC’s tentacles in South Africa. Prominent in this grabbing of Whites assets is Cosatu and its affiliates’ contaminated political roles and influences in the past inside the ANC alliance, together with their current continuation of foolish and outdated revolutionary political thinking and doing. It is many times more radical politically than the already politically and socioeconomically radical ANC. It is impossible for the ANC to end its relationship with the trade unions: they are instead forced to pamper their sacred partners because of the basic empowerment by the partisans of the ANC to stay in power after 2019.85,89

Khumalo’s89 question on the future of the labour unions is significant89:13: “…one couldn’t help but wonder whether Cosatu, and the trade unions in general, still have relevance to the workers of SA”. This irrelevance was erased by the indestructibility of the ANC’s dependence on the unions’ ongoing massive power at the voting boxes. The arrogant ideas and demands of the secretary-general of Nafcor, Monga Phaladi85, that billions in cash in the private sector must be made available to the public sector by means of a “social compact” is a good example of how the unions abuse their power.85,89

Phaladi85 seems to overlook the risk that private money would go down the drain, as happened with the state’s money when it was captured by the Zuptoids with this obligation he puts on the private business sector to service the needs of the unions by whatever means they think well. His suggestion85:13: “From corporations’ side, it would be an extremely good gesture if the CEOs of the top 40 on the JSE donated their 2019 increases to a fund run by a council of eminent South Africans to support good causes that have an economic impact”, shows a lack of understanding of sound business principles. Phaladi85 makes no reference to the ANC MPs and ANC ministers or of himself making the same kinds of contributions to his 2019-helpline. Or is this expected donation by the top 40 on the JSE in line with the ANC’s grab-and-run policy from its early revolutionary days that is echoed by their intended land expropriation?85

The closed-door politics of the private business sector and their immense fighting by all means behind the curtains of the political hooligans in the ANC and EFF on the nationalization of private assets and capital has made it impossible since 1994 for the radicals in the ANC to put their hands on the private funds in the private business sector. The White farming sector has less of a defence against the land expropriation attack of the radicals in the ANC because of the open door that the Apartheid history created. This situation makes land ownership ideal as a first step towards their greater project of nationalization of White assets. At the same time land expropriation as a mean of nationalization offers direct free capital/assets with which the ANC regime can solve the Black unemployment, Black poverty and inequality. Thirdly, land expropriation can become a political powerbase for the ANC regime to obtain voters’ support from the poor and landless Blacks in the 2019 election.

3.6.2.3 Constant decline of politics and economics

On inspection is it clear that the dire economic situation of South Africa will only continue to worsen, unless the ANC regime of 2019 can reform itself and stabilise its governing system, policies, vision, mission and short- and long-term aims to assure greater confidence so that they can get private support and capital by creating and promoting of a healthier environment for the business sector. The Ramaphosa regime has thus far failed on all the business and political markers to do a positive turn-around. It is significant that the Zuma regime’s crooks have not yet been purged from the system. In one of South Africa’s partners in BRICS there has been a cleansing of corrupted state servants. Until June 2018, 144 executives, bureaucrats and political actors had been sentenced to more than 1 464 years in jail, while the Gupta’s and Zuma specific are still all free and respected burghers.90

The antagonists believe that South Africa’s crisis of governance that started in 1994 has led to an economic crisis with time, bringing down democracy and its good rules. It is now at the point where it is making criminal behaviour in government possible. The ANC is turning to land-grabbing to distract the attention from the ANC regime’s manifold failures and unsolvable crises. They also offer the poor and landless false hope and financial solutions for the poverty, unemployment and inequality. Land expropriation without compensation from Whites is central to this false solutions.90 Davies pinpoints the only solution to these manifold crises very well with his short remark90: 3: “Until the politics are fixed, there is little vision for the economy”.

For the antagonist, the above proves that Ramaphosa and the ANC do not have the political ability and trustworthiness to be mandated rulers of South Africa. Nelson Mandela failed to turn Jacob Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa into good political heirs. The antagonists have started to publically questioning the continuation of the present Ramaphosa-ANC regime after analysing the recent insignificant Ramaphosa economic Stimulus Package and Ramaphosa’s many ongoing commissions of inquiry through which it seems he is walking a political path without a destination.74,77,78,91,92

Mthombothi91 rightfully describes the worrying aetiology of the many useless Ramaphosa commissions without a clear destinantion91:17: “We now have these commissions coming out of our ears. It seems our president can’t help himself”. Mthombothi91elaborates further91:17:

The commissions could end up tripping over each other though. We have the all-compassing state capture commission under Raymond Zondo and the Nugent inquiry into the devastation at Sars. This week Ramaphosa obliged with another, one that will investigate poor decisions and possible corruption at the PIC that could cost the country billions.”

Bruce92 elaborates on Ramaphosa’s use of commissions to indicate how it relates to his failing leadership92:16: “Now he is thinking about a parallel inquiry into the so-called “rogue unit” story at Sars, which led to the forced departures of some of its best managers”. (Note: these good managers departed not only under Zuma as president, but also under Ramaphosa as vice-president). Bruce92 pinpointed this leadership failure of Ramaphosa further with the reference92:16: “Ramaphosa has an inspired way of “not doing anything”. For the antagonists the question is essential: if there is not quality and sound leadership in the ANC at present, how can there be quality and sound economics? In this context the antagonists feel that the hard facts already show that there is no quality and sound economics at the moment in South Africa under the ANC and that the country is in a constant down spiral of politics and economics. The question is pertinent for the antagonists: What are awaiting South Africans in general and the Whites under attack specific because of their land ownership?

Mthombothi91 further reveals the current comprehensive political instability of the Ramaphosa-ANC regime. In addition, the ANC regime under the stumbling leadership of Ramaphosa has to cope also with a low-level civil war in parts of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), specifically among the ANC members. Mthombothi91, in reference to the status of the ANC leadership of Ramaphosa in KZN, reflects91:17: “[the] region where he is least popular is almost an understatement. He is reviled by some in his own party”. Mthombothi91 elaborates further91:17:

People are being butchered almost daily in townships and even small rural villages up and down the province. The country averts its eyes. It doesn’t want to know. AS KwaZulu-Natal premier Willies Mchunu noted when tabling the report [the Moerane commission of Inquiry into political killings in KwaZulu-Natal] before the legislature last month, these killings are taking place at local government level. And they continue unabated. Another councillor was gunned down in Umlazi, outside Durban, on Thursday night. No big deal. It’s when high-profile politicians, such as Sindiso Magaqa, the former secretary-general of the ANC Youth League, are killed that the country takes note. Violence has almost become our way of life.

The problem for KZN is that the police and its intelligence services have been compromised. They have found to be complicit in most of the murders, killing for one faction or the other, or simply turning a blind eye.

Bruce92 also reflects on the growing insufficient governing of the total South Africa by the Ramaphosa-ANC regime.

For the antagonists, two questions become pertinent when they look at the way the ANC regime has cranked the South African economy lifeless; their current senseless actions like land-grabbing to solve unsolvable economic problems; and their focussed attack on the racial unity created by Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki. Firstly, are these fatalistic actions of Ramaphosa and the ANC elite culminating of their political obituaries written in anticipation?74,77,78 Secondly, as it becomes more and more clear for the antagonists that the country is moving towards a total collapse fast due to the failure of the ANC as a democratic and effective regime, is there any sense to hang on to land ownership while their lives can be the first to be lost? The anarchy in the Black areas of KZN and the failure of the police and the intelligence services to safeguard even other Black lives in KZN is becoming a wake-up call for antagonists all over South Africa to think very, very deeply about their future in South Africa after 2019. Prominent, as said, is land ownership.91

What is prominent for the antagonists at this stage is that as the country’s economy becomes more lifeless, the more extreme land expropriation without compensation will be forced down on the Whites to draw every sent of their assets and to distract attention from messes of the politically ill ANC. Only a new political party can make a turn-around and even then it will take the new regime years to re-establish some form of stability and self-respect in the country’s psyche.

3.6.3. The ANC’s political and business models

The antagonists argue that the ANC regime’s business and political model with which to plan and to run large state enterprises with success from 1994 to 2019 is one enormous failure. This stems basically from the ANC party’s inability as a liberation organization to create and to add to the value of any existing enterprise under its jurisdiction (This inclination to fail is a world-wide phenomenon of most of liberation movements that came to power as governments). The ANC’s financial and managerial failures are aggravated by the corruption inherent to the system, which is reflected by the state capture on all the financial and political levels during its governance of South Africa.93-97

3.6.3.1. State enterprises

Steenhuisen98 points out when reflecting on the ANC’s various forms of financial delinquency, that in state-owned entities alone it has resulted in R161 -billion being wasted on bailouts, subsidies and capital injections since 2008, while at the South African Revenue Service, state-capture and mismanagement has gobbled up R140 billion in lost revenues. The known losses suffered are be more than R300 billion (22% of the national revenue budget for the period 2017/2018).98

What is of further concern for the antagonists is the financial mismanagement inside the civil service. The total turn-over of the state enterprises under the supervision of the Department of Public Enterprises for 2017 to 2018 was R284 billion, but in total they incurred a loss of R1.6 billion. (The total assets of these state enterprises are more than R1100 billion, with 124 616 employees). Some of these enterprises current financial functioning is so poor and substandard that many experience difficulty to pay their employees’ monthly salaries, while creditors are often not paid. Many of these enterprises are under strain just to stay viable in the short term, while long-term sustainability is a question. What makes it very problematic to obtain a full profile of the financial status of civil enterprises in the past regarding their loss and corruption/fraud count is the absence of legal leverage to force them to indicate illegal spending. Corruption also goes unpunished.99

Constant failures include the SABC, SAA, Denel, Transnet, Telkom, public education and healthcare, public universities, municipalities. Added to this there is the ANC regime’s inability to oversee and control private enterprises to safeguard the state and the public’s money as reflected by the fraud that characterized over a long period the VBS Mutual Bank, the African Bank and Steinhoff.100,101

The mismanagement of the municipalities where the ANC is mostly in charge shows a chaotic history of stealing, corruption, poor service delivery, etc. Prominent is the lack of water delivery to residents or the unlawful actions and lack of respect for democracy. Regarding the delinquent behaviour and actions of many ANC-run municipalities that cut off water to living areas, Phephelaphi Dube100, the director at the Centre for Constitutional Rights, said municipalities must in such a case provide alternative ways to provide residents with access to water. These kinds of delinquent behaviours are indeed juridical misdemeanours and should result in criminal prosecution, but there are never court cases.100 A said Kagiso Mere100 reports that the lack of water at his area forces him to take three hours off work every day to collect water for household use. The total chaos in which he must try to live every day, he describes in short but comprehensive100: 6: “My boss understands, because he’s also affected. The municipality has endangered our lives. There is s**t everywhere. They were meant to provide us with services, but instead they build themselves nice homes with tar roads to the mayor’s guesthouse”.

At Koster in the North West province, the mismanagement of the ANC mayor and her cronies lead to a situation where she and ten of her councillors had to flee for their lives and hide in “a safe place” in Rustenburg in June 2018, reports Hosken100: 6.

Municipal IQ economist Karen Heese101 reports that the situation for municipalities is very negative, specifically those situated in Limpopo, the Northern Cape and North West where the ANC is mostly in charge. It is mostly due to poor managerial capacity and substandard performances of officials and councillors representing the ANC. It started with a lack of provincial oversight of financial planning by the ANC regime. Only 40% of the municipalities have enough cash or cash equivalents to pay their creditors. It reflects the failure of the ANC regime’s local government business model. A critical analysis shows that only 7% of the country’s municipalities are classified as well functioning, 31% as reasonably functional, 31% as almost dysfunctional and 31% as dysfunctional or distressed.100,101

In most of these clear failures it seems that the ANC elite are often the prominent culprits who engage in money capture and fraud or through associated crooked enterprises. These excellent examples of the ANC elite’s inabilities and lack of skills to manage the country on middle level, further aggravated by their practice of corruption as a daily custom in their work capacities and responsibilities, are in the view of the antagonists also now present in their land reform initiative to create a so-called immense contingent of Black farmers in the future and to erase Black poverty and landlessness. The lack of integrity and honesty with regard to financial and political matters in the government, together with widespread corruption, nepotism and fraud, as well as the well-planned execution of state capture by the top brass of the ANC regime between 1994 and 2019, and their attitude of “don’t care” for the poor and landless Blacks, is seen as ominous for any form of land redistribution from 2019 and onwards. There is no safety net for corruption and misuse. This emphasizes failure of the ANC due to its liberator’s heritage.43,44,93-97,102

3.6.3.2. The Reserve and Land Banks under attack

With regard to business entities like the Reserve Bank and the Land Bank, these entities do their best to steer clear of direct conflicts with the ANC regime on the matter of land grabbing. The fact is that the Reserve Bank can with little effort be nationalized, seeing that only the Act on the Reserve Bank must be changed, which in practice can be done with a general majority decision in parliament. It will be more difficult for the ANC to attack the Reserve Bank’s mandate, seeing that is written into the Constitution and needs a 67% majority to activate change. Given how tempting this is for the ANC and EFF radicals, the Reserve Bank has warned the ANC regime that nationalization is an exercise of which the long-term consequences can be very expensive for the government.103,104

The Land Bank survived years of corruption, looting and maladministration to make a wonderful comeback to become South Africa’s only professional and profit-making state-owned running institution. The irresponsible land grabbing hunger and talks of persons like Ramaphosa and Malema forced its CEO, Tshokolo Nchocho103, to take a tactful stand by warning of the collapse of the Bank if the ANC fails to adhere to some economic sanity. The CEO pointed out the present ANC leadership’s failure to respect the constitution and their interest in using the Land Bank as another vehicle to promote land grabbing as well as state capture103: 9: “…the noise and the uncertainty make our work difficult as development bankers using commercial solutions and commercial resources to address social needs such as employment and enterprise creation”; and: “It is deeply regrettable that this kind of work gets contaminated in the dust of political rhetoric”.

It is clear for Nchocho103, as it is for the antagonists that in this dust of political rhetoric the ANC elite, including Ramaphosa, fails to sort out for themselves what they mean with an “explicit” policy on land expropriation. Even the previous finance minister, Nhlanhla Nene, who must know the results of land grabbing and nationalization well and must surely be well-informed on the matter after his intimate experience with the Guptas, seems to have, as the rest of the ANC’s radicals, limited insight on the matter if the following remark of Nchocho103 is true103:9: “Finance minister Nhlanhla Nene has now instructed the Land Bank to provide him with a risk assessment on what expropriation without compensation could mean for the bank”. For a seasoned senior minister, trusted with the keys of the money coffer of the country, to ask such a basic question, is seen by the antagonists as an indication that the nationalization of the Land Bank in the near future has become a reality (again, notes the Guptas in Nune’s earlier past). It emphasizes for the antagonists the blurred and troubled mindset into which the ANC leadership has drifted on human rights, racial doctrine and business ethics.103

To highlight why the Land Bank is a tempting vehicle to promote land grabbing, the following can be mentioned. Firstly, farmers owe the bank R49 billion while the bank itself has liabilities to the tune of R41 billion, meaning every sent will be at risk if farms are confiscated. The bank is completely dependent on outside funders like the Development Bank of Southern Africa, the local fund management industry, the European Investment Bank and the World Bank. These are strong role players in advocating for a good government and who can, if they pull the plug, or just partly back out for fear of land expropriation without compensation, erase the bank’s credit status, bringing fast bankruptcy. It is clear that any action that affects the credit quality of loans and endangering loan repayments will cause its funders to step back. What is the ANC radicals don’t see is the fact that the bank is already a crucial funder of commercial as well as emerging Black farmers. A substantial portion of its loans are production loans, meaning that a pullback by funders will affect agricultural productivity and food security, jobs and transformation of ownership to Black farmers.103,105 Nchocho pointed out the following103:9: “If expropriation without compensation is not handled carefully, the likely consequences don’t bear thinking about”; and: “…the worst-case scenario in the event of widespread expropriation and the removal of property rights is ‘the real destruction of the economic base of agriculture, as well as the economy of the entire country’”.

The plain fact is that bank loans are guaranteed by the National Treasury, and if it must make good on banks that default, it would cause a financial burden on the Treasury, which is already under strong financial pressure. Economic and financial chaos can follow fast.103 The risk for commercial banks in a mad exercise of land expropriation without compensation, whether or not it secures credit for farmers or not, can descend into a chaos in the country’s banking sector and specifically for the Reserve Bank as a pivot.103,105 Our weak economy means that the Reserve Bank cannot take a negative financial experience of this kind alone as Nortjè points out105:9: “There isn’t enough fat in the system for the Reserve Bank to bail out another bank [like African Bank].

3.6.3.3. Impact of the current rule

The chaotic outcome described above103,106,107, activated by the autocratic and blind man style of political thinking and rule of the ANC since 1994, is also well-illustrated by Kuseni Dlamini106, the chair of Aspen Pharmacare and Massmart Holdings, in his perspective on the 10th BRICS Summit of July 2018, by identifying three crucial shortcomings in the ANC regime’s (and now also Ramaphosa’s) reign since 1994106:9:

1) A lack of investors’ confidence and growth-enhancing structural reforms under the ANC. Prominent in this total context are the absence of fit-for-purpose state-owned enterprises as result of the ANC’s style of tolerance of mediocrity and corruption, lack of a culture of high performance, lack of accountability, and a lack of consequence management and leadership of integrity and quality. The question is: how can the country attract foreign investors as its local investors lack trust in the government;

2) The ANC’s aimless and confusing intention of land expropriation without compensation is a driver away of investors: they want to know precise the imbalance in land ownership is going to be executed. So far the ANC only reflects their outdated liberation instinct;

3) The ANC’s failed policy on the mining economy and its future ownership as result of the ongoing policy of uncertainty and unpredictability of the ANC regime on a clear and sound Mining Charter. The hard fact is that the South African mining-sector is a thin shadow of its past as a contributor to the country’s coffer or to employment. Where in the 1970s to 1980s every R100 made in the economy so much as R21 came from the mining, is it contributed now only R7 to the economy.

The ANC’s radicals who promote RST and RET, which includes land- and mine expropriation, don’t see the devastating effect on the upkeep of current employment when dead and dying gold- and other kinds of mining towns emerge and the sources of salaries, which assure the functioning of poor towns in Eastern Cape, stop. Add to this the food shortages that can follow after the land grabbing of White farms and the collapse of food production, as happened in Zimbabwe. This makes the antagonists fear a fourth industrial revolution. Again, in this present chaos of the country’s economics, Black poverty and joblessness, promising already only better lifestyles for a few fortunate ones, while unemployment among the untrained in the diminishing labour market will gear-up at high speed. It seems as if the radicals lack some constructive and responsible future and strategy on what economics, work availability (forget growth), society- and family stability are.103,106,108

The basic outcomes of above aimless political thinking, planning and actions by the ANC elite have led to a lack of trust and cooperation for the local business sector. This is a situation which is further aggravated by the government’s ignoring of the talents of the local business sector to bring know-how and solutions to the government’s (mostly self-created) problems. The local business sector should take a prominent position in policy-making to advance the greater society’s interests directly in government. It’s a setup which will mean balanced control of state affairs and the end of the ANC’s way of ruling. Instead the local business sector is made a permanent and sometimes a very hostile opposition.106

Indeed, distrust of the ANC regime as a governmental safe-keep of taxpayer money is very high amongst many South Africans, not only for the antagonists. An international 2016 study that tested the opinions of the citizens of various African countries as percentages indicates respectively the following trust counts: 73% for Namibia, 71% for Tanzania and 50% for Mozambique, while the count was only 40% for South Africa. This outcome offers strong support for the anti-land-transformers’ objections to any form of future land redistribution; basically because it is seen as another public enterprise failure: not only because the ANC regime lacks managerial ability and skills, but because it lacks most of all honesty on money-matters. The ANC regime is soaked in corruption and theft of state assets. These, again, are all actions, as already indicated, which seem to be driven by ANC’s liberator’s selfishness and opportunism and its aim to the exclusive enrichment of a few ANC elites.93-97

The antagonists associate what they think is a certain devastating “Zuma corruption outcome” of the ANC’s pending land redistribution as something that is cemented in most liberation organizations when they come to rule. Such organizations, notwithstanding many political face-lifts, never change their corrupted mindsets. Radical political thinking, planning and doing stay the centre of al liberation movements and it becomes clear when the regime starts to fail the country and its people’s interests. Extreme actions (like we are seeing in Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Sudan), ignoring the short- or long-term consequences to assure political and racial harmony and economic stabilities, follows and it takes years to repair. The way Angola went down-hill during the reign of José Eduardo dos Santos and the crooked Dos Santos family’s endemic corruption for the duration of his 38-year reign (only 14 years more than the ANC’s reign where a Jacob Zuma and his son Duduzane and daughter Duduzile were allegedly also busy with delinquent actions), could not be turned around by Joäo Lourenço since 2014. This is basically because, although the new president tried in public his best to remove members of the Dos Santos family from top government posts and charges were laid against crooked officials, the country leadership fails again because the new leader, Lourenço, was a contaminated member of the Dos Santos regime that he now tries to fight. As the leaders in current Zimbabwe after Mugabe, he is just continuing on another path of political sickness in a corrupted African liberation movement and it is devastating Angola’s economics and international integrity (although less openly as under José Eduardo dos Santosa.38,43,44,69,73,102,109–117

The above Angolan political delinquent path, the antagonists reflect, is fully in line with the ANC’s political delinquency since 1994 and a regime in which Ramaphosa as the new president was also a prominent role-player as parliamentarian and vice-president from day one. Political chaos and economic chaos go hand-in-hand in the future ANC regime. For the antagonists the IMF’s structural adjustment programme that Angola is now facing is not far away for the incurable South African political sickness. Note and remember the reality: The ANC is a prominent liberation-movement-cum-government: indeed, the oldest in Africa.38,43,44,69,73,102,109,111-117

Venezuela is very similar to the ANC’s foolish political reign since 1994. The antagonists point out that in Venezuela, where Nicolás Maduro at present reigns, the currency Bolivar was previously nearly a dozen times devalued by his predecessor Hogo Chávez (1999–2013); a process started for the first time by his predecessor president Luis Herrera Campins in 1983. Chávez himself chopped three zeroes off the currency a decade ago. In August 2018, Venezuela started with a currency devaluation of 95% under Maduro, taking the country further into hunger and hyperinflation. At present the country’s inflation is running over 100 000%. Food and medicine are scarce, while more than 3 million citizens have fled to neighbouring countries. Maduro’s economic plan, as Zuma’s and now it seems Ramaphosa’s, was marked by inconsistencies, lacking clear specifications on aims, developments and plans, and of course saturated by corruption and disrespect for the Venezuelans. Maduro is turning Venezuela into a basket case, far removed from its previous status as one of Latin America’s wealthiest countries. South Africa is moving in the same direction in the view of the antagonists.118

For the antagonists South Africa’s similar failure loomed with the technical recession in August 2018. Ramaphosa’s search for $100 billion in foreign investments will become a hollow call if his expropriation without compensation starts to run. Money can leave the country faster than it comes in. His attraction of foreign capital since he took the leadership based on “secured commitments of R464 billion worth of investment from China, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the UK”, is prominent in his political rhetoric. These “letters of intent” are something else than true investments: last is determined by political stability, not the instability in the class of Angola, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Sudan.43,44,119

The resistance by critics, especially the White land owners and capital holders, to the ANC’s intended land redistribution, is more than justified and understandable in the context of the ANC’s liberation and crooked inclinations and doings in this context since 1994. For the antagonists the present conflict around land ownership has one tragic outcome: There is going to be one winner: the ANC, and one loser: the White land owners.

3.6.4. The ANC’s economics viewed critically
3.6.4.1. The failure of the ANC’s economic plans since 1994

Current South African political and economic researchers are in agreement with Geen’s opinion of more than 80 years ago that a an improved economy and social functioning for South Africa can only be delivered by the job market of urban areas, and not an economy bound to the rural farming setup. The antagonists believe that this must be also the main aim and focus of the ANC regime. The current opportunistic and radical socioeconomic reform by the ANC regime, with their emphasis on a “back to the country” redeployment of masses of poor and landless Blacks on farmland to be expropriated exclusively from White farmers, needs evaluation and description. This planned socioeconomic engineering is reminiscent of the communist regimes in Russia under Stalin and China under Mao. As in the failed Russian-Chinese-experiment on land-reform and their redeployment of people to the countryside, “masses” of people are central in the planned Ramaphosa-ANC-back-to-the-country-scheme. In terms of South Africa’s population of between 50 and 55 million, “masses” means nothing less than the majority of people, which can be between 25 and 30 million persons. The rural placement of even 10% of the South African population (meaning 5 to 6 million of the population out of 50 to 55 million) for a successful living on the “to be expropriated” White farmland, is not in any way economically viable or sustainable. It is a doomed scheme. This dooming last resort by the ANC regime to address the country’s many seemingly unbridgeable economic ills and crises with radical actions like land grabbing, makes it prominent to ask the question what the ANC regime did so far in terms of other economic plans and initiatives since 1994 to better South Africa before they fell into despair.120-122

In light of above economic and financial negativity, is it important to reflect on the business plans and initiatives based on an urban-rural-orientation of the ANC regime since 1994. Firstly, the ANC’s must promote the National Development Plan (NDP) of job creation via small and medium enterprises (SME) as a successful policy intervention for upliftment the poor Blacks. A research project by the SBI (the old Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut) shows that the ANC misuses estimates that lack hard evidence in the reflection of their so-called SME-successes, writes Joffe.121The ANC regime has failed to create small enterprises, notwithstanding it’s NDP “caring policy”. This outcome of failure was reflected by the Indaba on small businesses held in July 2018, which pointed out the ANC’s failed economic policy to nurture small and medium enterprises. Indeed, the notion of the National Development Plan that SMEs will create most of South Africa’s growth and jobs (the vision of the sector is to create 90% of 11 million new jobs by 2030 and contribute 60% to 80% of the GDP growth), is “little more than a pipe dream”.120-122

Joffe121 shows, using the findings of the SBI, that the formal SME-sector (defined as firms registered for tax purposes and which employ fewer than 200 people) is much les than as the ANC’s rhetoric reflects (disarming their claims of a strong SME-sector). This group (classed as small- medium and micro-enterprises) represents only about a quarter of a million (250 000) enterprises with a contribution to employment to South Africa of only 28% job absorption (against a global of 60% to 70%), notwithstanding the fact that it forms 98.5% of all the registered firms in 2016. This finding is drastically lower than the estimated 1.2 million between 6 million postulates by the ANC regime in reflecting on their initiative to better the South African economy. Fifty-six per cent of jobs are provided by 1 000 larger enterprises, which includes the government as an employer (which is show to over-employs wherein political loyalty at the voting-box plays a strong role). A study by RED13X3 of the University of Cape Town reveals that the informal business sector, consisting of 1.4 million enterprises which are functioning outside the tax-net, provides only more or less 17% employment, mostly at a very low level of payment. Most formal SMEs are struggling in a very hostile business environment, varying from regulatory hurdles, red tape, as well as a lack of access to capital and skills development. Their contribution to the cross inland GDP is also relatively lower than previously reflected by the ANC regime in praising their false economic initiatives. Joffe121 also reports that more than 60% of them employ fewer than 10 people and that about 70% of them fail within the first two years of start-up.120-124

Research by the Small-business Institute, supported by data of South African Income Services(SAID), shows in short the following South African setup in 2016: 176 333 micro-enterprises (fewer than 10 workers, accommodating 5.1% workers), 68 494 SMEs (11 to 50 workers, accommodating 11% workers), and 17 397 middle-level enterprises (51 to 200 workers, accommodating 12% workers). In total SMEs accommodated 3 863 104 persons, or 29% of working South Africans.121,124

For the antagonists this failure by the ANC regime is a clear warning of an economy in decline, reflecting growing poverty and a failed ANC regime coming from 1994.121 In this regard is it important to note that in 2011 the South African economy was R5.7 trillion, while it retracted to R4.8 trillion in 2018.121,125

Exclusive land redistribution without compensation as a successful way to reform South Africa’s collapsing economy, racial inequality and Black poverty, is a failed option as Stalin’s Russia and Mao’s China already confirm and which the present radical land reform in Venezuela is in the process of confirming. Land redistribution without compensation will only contribute further to decrease and to degrade the South African economy. If the ANC’s economic plans and initiatives since 1994 could not move the country positively, how can land stealing do better?121-123,126

Speckman123 warning is pertinent when writes123: 5: “South Africa is on the brink of a fiscal cliff and unless the economy improves significantly the government could find itself in Washington, cap in the hand, begging a rescue package from the IMF.”

The technical recession that kicked in September 2018 can be the final straw breaking the ANC regime’s back. They have already started begging as its BRICS-partner, Brazil, is already doing.123

Derby125, with his eye on a seemingly unavoidable future IMF intervention in South Africa as a result of the ANC regime’s ongoing economic failures, notwithstanding their attempts, points out the origin of it in its revolutionary and radical economics foundation, spelling only doomed economic and political outcomes. This focuses the attention on the immense lack of economic and political talent of Ramaphosa and his men to bring a New Dawn to current South Africa, to be the result of “birds of the same feathers coming from the failed Zuma regime”; in the present political context only the “sound bites have changed”, like the absence of the term “radical”, when government officials and ANC politicians speak of economic transformation. Does this absence of political and economic radicalism now mean that the nationalization of banks and mines are dead? Derby’s125 answer in this context is sharp125:2: “The answer is quite simply no. It’s an argument that will live again, but, with the country closing in on possible IMF assistance (should the economy not move into high gear, and soon), it’s one that lies dormant. However, as an idea, it lives on and will be recycled some time in the future, when the state of plays allows.”

The ANC elite’s radicalism on land grabbing may also become dormant in 2019 in the ANC regime’s search for IMF assistance. It will become more aggressive in practice when the circumstances for ANC radicalism arise again. The safe-net of the Western economy, notwithstanding the “re-colonization” of South Africa after 1994 by the Chinese and Russians and the ANC’s hostile rhetoric against the West, especially the USA, can be the only rescuer of South Africa after 2019.125

For the antagonists the fact is there that the country is in a far worse position at present than when the ANC regime implemented their other economic plan, namely the five-year Growth, Employment, and Redistribution Strategy (Gear) in 1996. It was supposedly focused on privatization and the removal of exchange control, but it failed because of the revolutionary/liberation ideology that incorporated the radicalism of the trade unions and the communists on the ownership of land. Notwithstanding a short-term improvement in the economy with raw-material exports to China after 1994, this economic positivity was erased inside the ANC’s failed economic-political system, while the ANC’s failed policy brought constant economic uncertainty. This poor economic situation was further aggravated by the failure of the state-owned institutions to be free from corruption, mismanagement and state capture (while last-mentioned came down directly because of the ANC regime’s revolutionary/liberations ideology that had effected its integrity, political standards and ethics).123,127,128

South Africa’s debt-to-GDP, as well as the growing annual shortfall versus income, is another good example of the constant failure of the economic plans and initiatives of the ANC regime, which is bringing the country in economic disarray. From a 27.8% debt-to-GDP ratio in 2008 it has risen to record high of over 53% in 2017, moving upwards to the 60% notch now. The debt-to-GDP ratio forecast by the Treasury for the 2020–2023 financial year, is 56% (from the previous 60%). Although this number is far from the 180% of Greece, George Glynos warns, the MD of ETM Analytics, the movement to the 60% mark spells danger. It is important to note that the GDP has risen from 25% at the end of Trevor Manuel’s tenure as finance minister with a pick-up on the start-up of the Zuma presidency and the followed-up ministers to rise to 50%, before moving to 53%.123,127-129

With regard to the country’s income it is important to reflect that the National Treasury collected R71.34 billion for the 2017–2018 financial year and is predicting an additional R1.22 billion for 2018–2019, leaving shortfall of nearly R48 to R50 billion. This shortfall is pushed-up by Zuma’s feeble fee-free higher education and training scheme (accepted without obstruction by the ANC regime and its leaders like Ramaphosa), accepted in December 2017 and requiring a further R57 billion in new allocation over the next three years. This means a deficit of R28 billion and R57 billion (R85-billion) respectively for 2018–2019, funding that is only solvable by borrowing or by the rising tax, which has a domino effect on investment, consumption, standard of living, job creation and inequality. The severity of this domino effect of constant and growing shortfalls is confirmed by the paying of R180 billion this year alone in interest charges. For Khumalo the present failed ANC regime’s economics only spells chaos when he looks at the allocation of R85-billion against a mere R36-billion from tax increases in this year’s budget.123,127,128

It must also be noted, writes Speckman,129:4 that, notwithstanding a spending cut of R85 billion for 2018–2019 and the revising of the budget deficit over the next two years down to 3.6% from 4.3%, the total expenditure in reality for the coming year is R1.67 trillion, which negatively represents a 2% real growth in expenditure. David French, tax consulting director of Mazars, points out that South Africa has been steadily increasing its official spending levels for a number of years now, with negative consequences for the economics, as the technically recession starting in September 2018 confirms. This failed economic setup of the ANC regime makes the constant worry over the growing debt-to-GDP understandable. Inside this failed economic network it is also clear why the value of land deprecated with nearly 30% this year, even before land grabbing became a prominent and controversial issue.123,127-129

As were with Stalin and Mao in their ongoing failed political regimes (driven by a political system of Communism characterized by corruption, suppression, state-capture under autocracy), the present ANC regime and Ramaphosa need a drastic attention distraction from their ongoing failed economic policy to stay in power after 2019. Inside the context of distraction and political manipulation, the internalized characteristics of the ANC as a revolutionary movement, offers land expropriation without compensation, an excellent opportunity for the ANC regime to do the so-called “donkey’s carrot” kind of economic upliftment of its poor and landless Black supporters while costing the ANC regime basically nothing.123,127-129

For the antagonists the ANC regime with its total failure to create wealth through SME and to erase the debt-to-GDP, together with their intended land expropriation without compensation, is as a wantonly agent, not only to impoverish the land’s White agriculture sector, but to keep in place the syndrome of a masses of “poor and landless Blacks” as a “partisan powerbase” to overrule and limit the democratic statutory institutes and the Constitution. This crooked political setup that had kept the ANC in power since 1994 with its executive top-leader, was the basis of Jacob Zuma’s reign and is now spilling over to the Ramaphosa-reign. The main aim of this ANC political delinquency is to diminish and limited the development and presence of a strong Black middle class [leaving a small group of favoured and empowered crooked ANC elites at the top and a massive class of extremely poor people on the lower socioeconomically level; a group who mostly sees and accepts the ANC regime and its elite as their unquestionable saviours (many of this group have become financial and emotional dependence in their daily living of the ANC regime, as reflected that so much as 40% of them receives in one form at least a social grant)]. The Black middle class, who mostly oppose the autocratic and crooked politics of the ANC regime, underwrites democratic capitalism and are thus mostly anti-ANC. This group is essential to economic growth and to addressing inequality because they create jobs and stimulate a large economic umbrella to uplift the poor and landless Blacks, especially outside the agricultural sector.130,131

This ANC’s economic and governmental failings and their political short-sightedness and delinquency, not only drives away the Black middle class, but has also forced them into poverty. This outcome has a serious negative impact on the upholding of the economic initiative in the country.130,131

The loss of the Black middle class, together with the capitalist business sector and the labour sector, which has become anti-ANC due to the ANC’s corruption, is a prominent determinant in cutting the political size of the ANC, making it a dwarf of its past.132,133 Musyoka132 describes this diminishing of the ANC precisely132:18: “The emperor was left with no clothes, having lost support from three influential constituencies – capital, labour and the black middle class”

Regarding the Black middle class’ present economic empowerment and status, Musyoka132 shows that they as a group (forming 20% of the total population) contributes more than any other group to tax revenue, forming 40% of the labour force (although they tend to be a stagnant group of around eight to nine million), receives between 30% to 35% of the employment income, owns just under 10% of the country’s wealth and represent 85% of all that is spent in the country notwithstanding their 20% part of the population. They are being side-lined by the ANC regime and left under-developed to generate wealth for the country and to contribute to tax revenue.132,133

The current income of the middle class is shown by research of National Income Dynamics Study and Southern Africa Labour and Development Unit (SALDU) of the University of Cape Town at this stage to be much lower than the previous official estimates. From this data only one in five (20%) South Africans have a disposable income of at least R2 900 per month (earning gross around R 7000 per month) and are at all times open to falling into poverty. This 20% group is faced with financial obligations to jobless and poor family members, making them very sensitive to poverty status.133The presence of a burgeoning Black middle class is “a figment of the national imagination”, posits Professor Murray Leibbrand133:5, the director of SALDU.

The underdevelopment of the Black middle class are especially driven by the lack of an established SME sector, a lack of training and education, and the injustices done by BBBEE to enrich only a selective small group of Black elites. The ANC regime’s allegation that the lack of farmland and farming opportunities is a role player underdevelopment of Blacks are factors is false. This outcome confirms again the ANC’s failure to execute its’ promised economic plans and initiatives.132,133

The antagonists argue, as Geen134 did 80 years ago, that the cornerstone to erase Black poverty and landlessness is education to equip poor Blacks to fulfil to the demands and functions of highly paid jobs. This makes urbanization crucial. Land expropriation without compensation lacks the ability and pittance for the masses of poor Blacks to make a financial turn-around. The land matter serves only as a front to cover up the ANC’s manifold political failures, as reflected above by their inability to develop a successful SME sector and a flourishing Black middle class.132-134

The sudden A-h-a-experience of the ANC regime that the farming sector is one of the least transformed sectors and that through land expropriation without compensation the situation can and will be corrected is an untruth that shows the failure of ANC regime to understand the economy and where in the economic and business sectors the solutions lie. Tshandu108 points out that the retail sector of South Africa is the least transformed sector in terms of ownership, despite its 59.97% contribution to GDP through consumer spending. The Department of Trade and Industry’s rhetoric that White domination of the retail sector is not acceptable and that “new players should emerge, especially those owned by Black people”, is an empty promise to address the racial inclusivity of the retail sector, notwithstanding a strong Black labour union present in the sector to force change. Tshandu108 reports that according to Empowerdex’s 2017 Most Empowered Companies List, the grocery chain Spar Group has only Black ownership of 6.35%, while its female Black ownership stands on 2.35%. Africa’s largest retailer, Shoprite, has a Black ownership of 8.65% and a female Black ownership of 4.29%. The Black ownership of Clicks is 18.5% with a female Black ownership standing on 8.75%. The exception possibly Woolworths with a Black ownership of 37.2% and a female Black ownership standing on 16.02%.108,135,136 The answer to this failed transformation of the retail sector is described by Nomozamo Xaba108, an executive of Empowerdex, as follows108:10: “Customers such as you and me are unlikely to inquire about our supplier’s contribution to BBBEE before we buy bread and milk…and so there is little pressure for this sector to transform”.

In the above context the question is why the White farmers sector is the focus while less than 3 500 (10%) of farmers provide more than 90% of the country’s food? Why the pressure on the agricultural sector to transfer? As often reflected in this research, the antagonists believe there are more sinister reasons behind the land grabbing of the ANC regime that have nothing to do with sound economic plans and initiatives.108,135,136

This “passivity of customers in the retail trade” bring the antagonists back to the sudden positioning of the agriculture industry and land ownership in the mindsets of the post-Zuma leadership: Are White land ownership and the White-farmers’ contribution to BBBEE, besides their successful constant delivery of affordable food produce to customers, really a concern of the masses of Blacks of whom so much as 90% do not want to farm or to live on rural farmland as they have adopted a Western culture? For the antagonists a much more masked political agenda, driven fiercely by a segment of political radicals, is present: the presence of Whites in general. The White farmers are a first target, basically because of their political isolation and their vulnerability on isolated farms. In this context the opinion of some antagonists is that land redistribution without compensation is plain a lingering hate of some radical Blacks and their revenge on earlier White supremacy and wrongdoings. This is also an exercise driven by the ANC’s internalized culture of terrorism, which includes land terrorism and –grabbing to take the best (the good and developed farmland of Whites in 2018) for themselves without paying for it. This reminds one of the “Zupta” state capture.41,108,135,136

3.6.4.2. The ANC’s ongoing economic battles

As history always confirms when it comes to politicians and their antics: politicians never learn – they get into the same wars for the same reasons as hundreds before them, only to suffer the same endings. Sometimes they lose the battles but win the war; sometimes they win the battles but lose the war; and then sometimes they lose the battles and the war, leaving them with no hope or opportunity to return to their previous glory. It happened with the KhoiKhoi and KhoiSan who took on the migrating Blacks and Whites. They were wiped out of the South African politics.137,138

Now in 2019 we see it again with the foolishness of the ANC regime, supported by a segment of the landless and poor Blacks in exchange for their votes in the 2019 election. The antagonists view Ramaphosa’s view on land redistribution as a power game with the masses. 138,139

Viewing land redistribution as a financial comes at a heavy cost in the end. 26, 50-76 Land expropriation is political “adventure” that the ANC government cannot pay from the state’s coffer and normal taxes or from national/international loans because of their dubitable intentions.140 One easy and tempting way out of it, in terms of its political drive as a terroristic-cum-liberation-cum-democratic political party, is for the ANC to fall back on their basic political philosophy of grabbing and destroying, as Mthombothi140 reports140:17: “…to destroy stable economic systems because they were unable to run from 1994 a passable governments and must now fall back by the “redistribution” of the wealth of their “conquered” rich Whites through land grabbing and stealing from the minority and non-defendable individuals and groups.”

Khumalo141 roots the behaviour of the ANC well141:10: “At some point, especially with limited resources, we need to prioritise, or as young people say, ‘we need to pick a struggle’ ”.

This ANC’s “struggle-picking” is a long-standing culture, cemented into it a terrorist and liberation instinct to obtain without input, like their practices of RET and RST, where land-grabbing is now a primary element. The antagonists’ comments on the economic and judicial wrongdoings of the ANC are confirmed by the scepticism of the formal business sector that the ANC can create wealth in a honest way because of their lack of political integrity, business inability and bad political intentions. 26, 50-76

There are many negative realities related to land redistribution that must be spelled out all involved, from existing land owners to new land owners and banks, to prepare everyone involved and to handle it as applicably and practically as possible. One must remember that although the ANC’s ongoing losing economic battles will cost the country and the good South Africans enormously in personal and economic integrity and values. The ANC elite will be left untouched (as Jacob Zuma) for their manifold wrongdoings coming from 1994. The good South African must prepare him/her for this one-sided suffering. Derby142 brings these negative (and conflicting) realities well to the foreground and openness when he writes142:2:

But of course, as part of land reform, some farmers will find themselves having to carve up their lands; one can’t ignore our shared history.

Land reform comes with great upheaval as it involves taking land from those who have it and giving it to those who don’t. To unleash it, title deeds are necessary. Landowners, white farmers, the government and our chiefs and kings need to buy in so South Africa can reap the economic rewards.

The issue of land reform should not be left to political parties to use as a populist ticket either for or against. It’s necessary to fix the structural fault lines in the South African economy.

3.6.4.3. Killing the goose that lays the golden egg

The arguments, opinions and viewpoints offered by the ANC regime that drastic land reform is unavoidable to uplift the poor and landless Blacks financially to give them entrance to farming and the economy, together with their idea that the whole process of land expropriation will in no way affect South Africa’s economic status in general, is seen by antagonists as either a total ANC myth dissociated from any reality, or a well-masked plan of evil-doing to Whites. In this context, the criticism is specific that the ANC regime (and many of Black politicians, activists and radicals promoting land exportation) plainly lacks a sound understanding of the negative principles of economics: the comprehensive negative impact of nationalization of any private asset(s) is prominent. In the Ramamania it seems to be specific White assets. In terms of the antagonists’ argumentation it is propagated that forcible redistribution without compensation will have disastrous effects (not only for the rich Whites), but all over for the South African economy to include the masse of poor Blacks with time. It is argued that the ANC regime land expropriation scheme, even before it is in practice, will kill the goose that lays the golden egg. The outrage of big private enterprises is already significant and it foresees the coming loss in foreign investments that will make South Africa more and more a risk for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to rescue.143

The term golden egg refers to the broader South African economics in which the land expropriation issue can be seen as one link among many that form the chain of the current South African troubled economy and its many ills. To understand in the first place the three elements poverty, unemployment, inequality in relation to poor economic planning and policy, homelessness, economic aggression and conflict, racism etc., which all stand central to land expropriation, some economic role players, determinants and drivers are evaluated and described in this sub-division.

3.6.4.3.1. Poverty can devour all riches

If the ANC regime is hoping that the effects of land grabbing on the economics would be minimal when they do it as a once-off quick and hard cleansing by implementing land grabbing with absolute no changes thereafter, they are in for a surprise argue the antagonists. Also, to argue that such a fast, hard solution by the ANC regime of land grabbing will work because investors and individuals can accept and deal with losses fast and that they only dislike short-term uncertainties reflects a lack of understanding of the basic principles of economics. The loss of land ownership is a loss that is different from the individual shareholders of a company that went bankrupt (or is even nationalized). Farmers lose their much loved land, their source of income and their basic assets for their old age. Then there is the clear racism factor of political, social and economic discrimination because the losers are in the ANC’s case only Whites. They don’t even offer them sound evidence as to why they are losing their land versus the outcome as winners only Blacks without any reasons to show why they have to benefit.144

An all-out RET, of which land grabbing is a primary component, will still leave poor South Africans poverty-stricken. Fourie143 shows that if the total wealth of the approximately 38 500 millionaires of South Africa (which includes a significant number of Blacks) is paid out in cash to each South African citizen, the amount received by each citizen will be a single payment of R38 282.00. If this amount is wisely invested for 10% interest (tax-free), the monthly income would only be R319.00 per month, which is not much of an income if the current average monthly income of R7 750.00 for Black households is insufficient to take them out of poverty. For the antagonists it is clear that persons like Ramaphosa, Malema and their intimate cronies, besotted with land grabbing from Whites, do not really understand the basics of economy.143

Research shows that if the more or less 35 000 commercial farmers active in 2018 is halved, there will be only 17 500 farmers in the system. For these 17 500 farmers to be successful in terms of Western/White or even modern African lifestyles and standards and to be sufficient in own financial needs (which the 35 000 existing farmers are already struggling to do) without raping the present economic and farming system or directly or indirectly harming the livelihoods of others involved in the farming sector, is just not possible. The fact that farm labourers are some the lowest paid workers and some the poorest people in our country, have not changed when they moved from commercial White farms or subsistence Black farms. It is simply impossible to create new opportunities for more farmers and labourers in the agricultural sector in a decent compensation/payment-system when the whole setup goes broke.135,143

When the more or less 35 000 commercial farms today active in South Africa (and which as a total group currently contribute 95% of South Africa’s food output,) are each turned over to ten Black families, it will only create work for 6% of the South African jobless. In this kind of “informal” farming there will be an immense cost to produce, while the individual structures to upkeep farming will not be affordable given the income generated. It is postulated that this kind of subsistence farming model will not generate enough for a single family to live on, not even speaking of producing food for the country.143 The Ramaphosa myth of successful land expropriation and the establishment of a mass of successful Black farmers, is interpreted by the antagonists as just another failed African economic dream and a failed ANC experiment. It is wishful thinking, nothing more.135,136,143

The antagonists, look at the above facts, find it difficult to listen to the claim of Mamphele Ramphele38 of ReimagineSA during her promotion of land expropriation as a governmental instrument to return land to Blacks as a source of pride, wellbeing and for sustainable social stability to Blacks, as well as job-creation in the farming sector, null and void when she postulates38:21: “Why can’t the promotion of jobs and better education be part of more land restitution within a well-planned development process?”. Her much argued other postulations, offered with enthusiasm about the relevance of blind land expropriation as an absolute need for survival of the individual, turned out to be myths lacking economic intelligence. It is echoed by the failure of the experiment of socialism/Marxism in Venezuela by Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro.38,103,136,143

The potential and ability of Ramaphosa and his cronies to bring economic success to poor and landless Blacks and the country as a whole with land expropriation without compensation of White land, the anti-reformers reflect again on the ANC’s well-known continuing farming failures (The postulation here is that the ANC regime only obtained a 10% success in the placing new farmers from 1994 to 2018). Soko103 pinpointed these constant failures of the ANC, especially on farming103: 9: “That’s because it’s one thing to give land to people, but if you don’t give them adequate support and advice and so on, it’s not going to work”.

Glorifying the exclusive farming enterprises to absorb more Black workers and farm owners, like with the lone-standing macadamia-nut farming where the produce of just over 700 South African farmers gives the country a 34.4% of the world market in 2017 (against Australia’s 37%), is a false bravado to support land expropriation. Firstly, this kind of structured specialist farming is an expensive and long-term investment, but it does not need many workers. Secondly, this sector forms part of a very competitive world market. There is a lack of understanding (besides the presence of loads of aimless emotions in their propagation of the creation of a large contingent of farmers) by propagandists of land expropriation of the limitations South Africa’s geography puts on farming. The downsizing of expensive farming is well-illustrated by the effect of mechanising to side-line the high costs created for farming by regulation agricultural labour. To reinvigorate agriculture via land expropriation to offer the poor and landless Blacks richness, or even an affordable life-style, is only a fantasy of the ANC. Statistics confirms this over and ov