Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Is Malema the future of South Africa?

Julius Malema is South Africa's Mr Ominous.

He is a young star within the ruling party in South Africa, the ANC. He's the president of the youth league of the party and has been described by Jacob Zuma, the President of South Africa, as the "future leader" of the country.

He considers himself a Marxist and a son of the working classes, but he is already, at age 28, a very wealthy man, who clearly enjoys the trappings of an elite lifestyle.

In March of this year Malema visited a university and sang the line "shoot the Boer" from an ANC revolutionary song. A regional court then found that he had incited violence and ordered him to stop. But he once again sang the words when visiting Zimbabwe and claimed that the judges who found against him were "white males who were refusing to change". The ANC has appealed against the court's decision.

At a news conference this month, Malema did announce that the words "shoot the Boer" would be substituted in South Africa but he then sang another song about beating up white farmers.

It's a serious message in South Africa, where well over 1000 white farmers and family members have been murdered since 1994. There are 40,000 commercial farmers in the country so the murder rate amongst these farmers is extraordinarily high.

Malema is a big supporter of Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe. During his visit to Zimbabwe this year, Malema spoke out in support of Mugabe's seizure of farms and mines,

"In South Africa, we are just starting," said Malema. "Here you are already very far. We are very happy today that you can account for more than 300,000 new farmers, against the 4,000 who used to dominate agriculture.

We hear you are now going straight to the mines. That's what we are going to be doing in South Africa. We want the mines. They have been exploiting our minerals for a long time. Now it's our turn to also enjoy from these minerals. They are so bright, they are colourful, we refer to them as white people, maybe their colour came as a result of exploiting our minerals and perhaps if some of us can get opportunities in these minerals we can develop some nice colour like them."

Journalist Rian Malan finds these comments deeply troubling:

This is not a coldly scientific Marxist-Leninist. It's Pere Ubu or Idi Amin.

It could be that President Zuma has simply lost control of the ANC, or that Malema is the puppet he uses to mouth ideas too radical to emerge from the presidency. If you ask me, Malema is the point-man for a powerful ANC faction whose motive is greed...

The trouble is that this card trumps all others. Our underclass is huge, poorly educated and desperately poor. They know what happened in Zimbabwe, but even so, the prospect of loot is irresistible, and that's Malema's bait. Mandela gave them free houses. Mbeki gave them welfare grants, leading to a situation where five million taxpayers support 13 million indigents, with the total rising far more rapidly than our ability to pay. Now Malema and the faceless vultures behind him are offering them the rest. They are playing the death card ...

The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR) is also worried:

In order to shore up support in the black community the ANC increasingly appears to be seeking to shift the blame for its delivery failures onto the small white ethnic minority, which today comprises well under 10% of the total population of South Africa.

The SAIRR press release is blunt enough in its criticisms of the ANC. But the solution it puts forward is not really a happy one for the whites of South Africa. The whites are held to be valuable to South Africa largely for providing taxes and expertise for the economy:

... many minorities ... may simply get so fed up that those who can will pack up and go. Here they may take the advice of President Zuma to remain calm as they pack up their businesses and their families and calmly board aircraft for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and Great Britain. With the exodus will leave much of the tax and expertise base of the country.

... the ANC depends greatly on the tax income paid by white South Africans to balance South Africa’s books. Secondly, it depends entirely on the food produced by a small number of white farmers to feed the country. Thirdly, white South Africans still dominate the skills base of the country ...

While the ANC ... may even take drastic action to confiscate white commercial interests as they are currently doing in agriculture, these actions will be ruinous for the economy ...

Is that what's left to white South Africans? To be protected as the ones who keep the economic wheels spinning? It's a niche role that doesn't really express what nationhood is supposed to be about.


  1. Hi,

    I hate to jump in on an ongoing thread but I just saw Waleed Ali on the box talking about his book "What's Right?" which defines Conservatism and argues that the modern conservative parties aren't actually or really conservative. He made a lot of the points we make here, that free market liberalism is not a conservative position and that conservative's view of society is of an organic organistation and consequently gradual as opposed to radical or revolutionary change to society is desirable.

    He then said that once a change occurs to society it is the conservative position then to defend that change or try to incorporate or limit its downsides. That to try to go back to a period before the change is not a consevative but reactionary position. He used the example of the VFL's (Victorian Football League's) change to the AFL (Australian Football League). He was opposed to the change but said that it wouldn't be a conservative response to change it back.

    Additionally that, quoting Oakshott, conservatism was a disposition rather than an ideology, and so its focused on limiting or managing change rather than I suppose on a fixed view of society.

    This seems to me to be total madness. I would agree that conservatism involves a disposition to change, but this is only a part of the picture. Conservatives surely hold a view of what society should be. I don't think being lectured on what conservatism is by a young man (who showed up to the lecture in jeans and a t-shirt) and who's name is Ali, is a part of that view.

    Cripes no wonder we get beaten black and blue in the political arena.

  2. SingleFemale here (I'm going to start this as my moniker now!)

    This is what turned me a few years back. I read about South Africa after experiencing some very hairy moments in bad neighbhorhoods.

    If only South Africa Sucks was still around. That website educated so many people. For anyone interested, you may want to sign up for Springbok Club emails, or their newsletter.

    But as Dark Raven always said, there are A LOT of white people (women especially) that go along with the ANC. I've met those people!

    Some white people think so differently that I can't even fathom how their brains are wired. I think it boils down to them being out for themselves, if they aren't personally getting hurt (yet) why should they support people like me?

    Anyways, do any of you think Obama views the whites here in the US differently? We are only good for working to support these people, while the black/hispanic/myriad of others 'elites' like Obama sit as the kings.

    Hey for you Ozzies...VDARE.com is the best website out there on U.S. stuff. And I hate to say this...but www.theoccidentalobserver.net, if you want to go there...(I understand people are uncomfortable with that stuff, it is informative though on certain aspects of american neo-conservatism)

  3. SF here (I don't want to get a new google account)


    The reason why Conservatism is 'reactionary' is because we are no longer allowed to be who we are.

    Conservatism = White Christian Homogeneous Communities run either by Democracy/or Constitutional Monarchy

    The media has disallowed those words. We can no longer state what conservatism is and therefore we have been put on the defensive....and are losing.

    The media has banned certain words and phrases for a reason here in the U.S. It has worked!!!

  4. That's why the TEA Parties here in the U.S. are 100% white christian-y types.

    Only white christians can be conservative.

    No one on the entire planet is a conservative other than that group of people.

    It took me 3 years to come to terms with that fact.

    Put a group of 1 million white mainly christian (or christian respecting) people anywhere in the world and leave them completely alone...the society will be conservative. We may even be able to subdivide it into Anglo-Saxons. (I'm confused as to Finland and stuff, but social welfare programs work fine in high IQ settings of 5 million people or less who are all pretty much related)

  5. SF..

    Oh we're all fucked now...


  6. Jesse 7:

    Conservatism is about living rightly, not about a resistance to change.

  7. That's why the TEA Parties here in the U.S. are 100% white christian-y types.

    They're not. I saw plenty of blacks at various DC Tea Party protests (including the ones the weekend of the health care vote). I also saw plenty of signs of a libertarian bent, and those types are not generally Christians.

    Put a group of 1 million white mainly christian (or christian respecting) people anywhere in the world and leave them completely alone...the society will be conservative.

    Except liberalism was invented by Christians and enthusiastically endorsed in Europe back when Europe was much more Christian than today.

  8. Is that what's left to white South Africans? To be protected as the ones who keep the economic wheels spinning?

    It's quite reminiscent of how dhimmis are treated in Muslim countries. They're "protected" in same sense a Mafia don protects local storeowners, they won't be permitted to leave, and the ruinous taxes they pay are the lifeblood of the state.

  9. Thanks for the comments,

    "Conservatism is about living rightly, not about a resistance to change."


  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

  11. 93% of blacks voted Obama.

    A few blacks out of millions a trend does not make.

  12. Truthfully the libertarians I know in my real life have been worse than the liberals. :( But I have been unlucky on that front...

  13. And you know what this whole "liberalism by Christians" thing is a bunch of B.S. Sure some goody-two shoe Christian ministry types are pain in the arses....but like the black thing...they are still outnumbered.

    Whites who are Christian or respect Christianity (like me) are Overwhelmingly conservative.

    To say otherwise is to ignore basic Statistics.

  14. U know what Obama has taught me..

    You cannot make people think like you. You can only outbreed them.

  15. "Is that what's left to white South Africans? To be protected as the ones who keep the economic wheels spinning?"

    Mark -

    If the ANC runs true to the precedent of Zimbabwe and similar failed states, existence as a 'protected economic asset' for the wealth generating sectors will be increasingly eroded as the country descends further into chaos and the ruling cronies ever more desperately scramble to grab what assets they can line their offshore bank accounts with.

    For obvious reasons, white South Africans are the high profile target, and the departure of those whites willing and able to will be pivotal.

    Without doubt, the murder and ( official ) robbery will then focus on other successful groups like Indians and mixed-race sectors.

    When they are driven out or ruined, we can then expect the return of violence among indigenous tribes or ethnic groups.

    Hopefully, all nuclear weapons capability has been removed from post-apartheid RSA.

    Pity poor whites who cannot ever get out - their future looks grim.

  16. Merely keeping the whites around to "tax" them will not ensure the future prosperity of South Africa. This milk cow attitude will ensure that the white community will not prosper and no white people of standing will wish to remain.

    Of course the ANC are hardly interested in their nation's future prosperity.

  17. The Christianity issue isn't easy to resolve in brief comments such as these. But I'll throw in some observations of my own.

    On the one hand, I don't think that only Christians can be conservative. Let me give just one example. Liberals want women to be autonomous - to be independent of men. Therefore, they use the powers of the state to make it increasingly possible for women to raise children independently of men as a "right".

    It would be possible for a non-Christian to argue against the liberal policy. A non-Christian could attack the policy on philosophical grounds by questioning why autonomy should be declared the overriding good. A non-Christian could also attack the policy on practical grounds, by pointing to some of the negative social effects when fatherlessness becomes widespread in society.

    However, I do agree that in practice those who have a serious and consistent materialistic world view do find it more difficult to arrive at a principled conservatism.

    As for the connection between liberalism and Christianity, this too could be debated at length.

    I'll just point out for now that liberalism in the early modern period was largely associated with "philosophy" rather than "theology". It was carried along, in other words, mostly on a current of secular humanism, even if some (not all) of the philosophers continued to identify in some way as Christian.

  18. When the Dutch got to what we now call South Africa, it was virtually unihabited. The Khoisan lived in the Kalahai Desert but much of the rich land was available to the Europeans. Later, Bantu tribes expanded and moved South.

    Subsaharan cultures contain aspects that make them incompatible with Western civilization: Magical thinking, an imperitive to "save face" even in trivial matters and a tendency to blame other people or forces for when things don't go so well(related to the other 2.) This is what holds back the development of Africa. Hong Kong was once an "exploited" colony, too for example.

    Unless this culutaral outlook can change, there is no future for Westerners in Africa. Successful people will be blamed for the lack of success of others and accused of black magic and what not. It will seem, to those of a magical mindset, to be a moral crusade to kill the successful ones. There is no practical notion of "keep the hard working smart ones around so we can benefit via taxationa nd technology." They do not see it that way at all.

  19. Mark said:

    "However, I do agree that in practice those who have a serious and consistent materialistic world view do find it more difficult to arrive at a principled conservatism."

    Christianity used to dominate society. Then "scientism" took over and we were told we lived in a cold impersonal universe. You tell people that they are on their own, that what they do doesn't matter, that they are no better than animals and that any claim they may have to concepts of the good are actually self delusions, and they grow miserable and flag. The emotional advantages of total independence are weighed against a raft of disadvantages and society suffers.

    It is not in the human makeup to feel isolated, irrelevant, disconnected and at the same time happy, confident and content. Humans are not actually solely materialistic beings. We have emotion, psychology and longing for connection. Even hard leftists generally recoil at any excessive atheistic claims and when they do make them are usually motivated by mean spiritedness or a desire to shock rather than consistent commitment. Sure, they can attack the church all day but by and large these days they prefer to leave God, or the divine alone, and claim instead that they are simply agnostic or have a non traditional spirituality. They are also generally happy to let religion sneak back in newer forms, such as in modern environmental nature/”Gia” worship, (and there are many other types with which I am not adequately qualified to describe).

    Conservatism taps directly into the human desire to feel connected to society, and also more importantly I would argue to the cosmos. Order, stability, growth, connection, these are fundamental rules of nature, (I’d be happy to debate this with anyone who doubts it). Radical change, reinvention, atomistic division, these are the rules of mechanical engineering and though they are based to a degree on scientific views of nature do not actually feel to humans, when applied to society, as if they're "natural" or often appropriate for us rather than machines. Alternatively ideas of graspingness, the endless "me", or excessive rights based arguments, whilst based upon human desires and wishes, also do on reflection feel wrong, as they imperil our relations with others.

    Any Conservatism that cannot grasp these deeper aspects of humanity, that as was stated is excessively materialistic or pragmatic, will in fact be on very weak ground and will forever be behind both the left or liberalism. Both of which do appeal to deep aspects of humanity. For the left its the desire for moral, "social" government/society. For liberalism it’s for individual freedom.

    If conservatism can offer only a critique of leftist or liberal practices as they attempt to reach their aims, and in so doing adopt leftist/liberal assumptions, in my opinion it will be left on the fringe.

  20. got a tip for you Mark...


    Male and female brains very different according to this study.

  21. I think Jesse hit it

    "For the left its the desire for moral, "social" government/society. For liberalism it’s for individual freedom."

    U know what.....I posted my evil definition of conservatism in the latest post...I need to make an amend to that post...

    Liberalism is giving even the religious types a 'higher calling.'

  22. I think Jesse_7 hit it

    "For the left its the desire for moral, "social" government/society. For liberalism it’s for individual freedom."

    U know what.....I posted my evil definition of conservatism in the latest post...I need to make an amend to that post.....

    Liberalism is giving even the religious types a 'higher calling.'

    How do you fix this?