White totalitarians continue fueling Black supremacy in South Africa

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) last week issued a statement on “Kill the Farmer, Kill the Boer”, a popular song among South African Black supremacists which calls for the murder of White farmers. Boer is a Dutch term that refers to White Afrikaners, a persecuted minority in South Africa.

Despite a South African court recently declaring the song hate speech, the ADL said it is merely an “historic protest song.”

“While it is a historic protest song that called for the dismantlement of the racist apartheid system in South Africa, its crude lyrics could be interpreted as a call for violence,” said the ADL. The organization then condemned anyone who suggests a White genocide is underway in South Africa as “right wing extremists” and “white supremacists.”

The statement was a begrudging one, issued only after billionaire Elon Musk drew attention to a video showing Economic Freedom Fighters President Julius Malema leading thousands of Black South Africans in singing “Kill the Boer”. The video shows the crowd miming shooting as they sing about killing Whites.

Malema has been urging Blacks to seize land from Whites, who comprise approximately 7.7% of the population.

“Victory will only be victory if the land is restored in the hands of rightful owners. And rightful owners unashamedly is black people. No white person is a rightful owner of the land here in South Africa and in the whole of the African continent. This is our continent, it belongs to us,” said Melema in a 2016 speech, then suggesting that Whites should be slaughtered at some point:

We, the rightful owners, our peace was disturbed by white man’s arrival here. They committed a black genocide. They killed our people during land dispossession. Today, we are told don’t disturb them, even when they disturbed our peace. They found peaceful Africans here. They killed them! They slaughtered them, like animals! We are not calling for the slaughtering of white people, at least for now.

Malema is a politician within the African National Congress (ANC), South Africa’s ruling faction. In May, as the country was in the throes of a deadly water shortage, the ANC proposed rationing water with race-based quotas.

Last month, South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa called for a “return to militancy” and a “revolution” as violence against White Afrikaner farmers increases monthly.

In June, there were twelve farm attacks and ten farm murders, an increase from ten farm attacks and four murders in May, following five farm attacks and one murder in April. According to a report by AfriForum, there were 333 reported attacks on Afrikaner farms last year and 50 murders. Only 33% of murder suspects are arrested and convicted.

In addition to murders, hundreds of thousands of destitute Boer Afrikaners who live in large squatter camps also face death from cholera and other diseases wrought by poor sanitation and water supply. Aid workers have blamed the disease-related deaths on intentional neglect by local government councils.  

Indeed, the persecution of South Africa’s Whites appears to have been intentional since before the ANC assumed power in 1994. In his memoirs, political veteran Mario Oriani-Ambrosini recalls a conversation he once had with South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa in the 1990s during negotiations for a new South African constitution:

In his brutal honesty, Ramaphosa told me of the ANC’s 25- year strategy to deal with the whites: it would be like boiling a frog alive, which is done by raising the temperature very slowly. Being cold-blooded, the frog does not notice the slow temperature increase, but if the temperature is raised suddenly, the frog will jump out of the water. He meant that the black majority would pass laws transferring wealth, land, and economic power from white to black slowly and incrementally, until the whites lost all they had gained in South Africa, but without taking too much from them at any given time to cause them to rebel or fight.

Ramaphosa’s “strategy,” however, only became possible after White operatives from other countries — such as billionaire George Soros — orchestrated the regime change.

Soros, who says he began his “philanthropy” operations in South Africa in 1979, also quietly helped launch the Institute for a Democratic Alternative for South Africa (IDASA), the organization which would play a key role in ending apartheid and installing the African National Congress. 

IDASA’s founders, Frederik van Zyl Slabbert and Alex Boraine, originally had trouble obtaining funding when they created the organization in 1986. They were assisted, however, by an operative at the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government-funded body described as a CIA front which has funded regime changes around the world. The NED operative connected Slabbert and Boraine with Soros, who wrote them a check for $75,000.

It was only after Soros’ donation that other backers followed: NED and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) — another US intelligence apparatus — began supporting IDASA, along with the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations. The Ford Foundation’s grant of $1.165 million was the largest given to any South African grantee to date. 

After IDASA successfully helped replace the regime in 1994, it continued to operate in South Africa under the name Institute for Democracy in South Africa.

Other organizations which helped change South Africa’s regime included the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), also funded by the Ford Foundation, USAID and NED. SAIRR remains part of The Center for International Private Enterprise network, one of NED’s four core institutes.

While Soros, US intelligence agencies and globalist foundations were operating within South Africa, they were helped from without by a powerful international divestment campaign.

It began with the United Nations, which started passing resolutions in the 1960s to economically isolate South Africa with boycotts and embargoes. But these resolutions were met with fierce resistance from governments, including the United States and the United Kingdom. South Africa had been an ally to Western governments during the Cold War and acted as a “regional policeman.”

One of the main objections from leaders like then-US President Ronald Reagan was that an economic boycott would not only harm South Africa’s large Black population, but would also be detrimental to Blacks in surrounding countries which relied heavily on trade with South Africa. Some landlocked African countries also relied on South Africa’s ports. Still, in 1985 Reagan banned imports of the krugerrand, South Africa’s bullion coin.

Many South African Blacks themselves opposed divestments and sanctions. Black leaders representing nearly 17 million Blacks fought against an economic withdrawal. A joint study by Cornell and Iowa Universities found that total withdrawal “had a disastrous impact on the Blacks.”

Nevertheless, the divestment and sanctions movement forged ahead successfully, spurred on by American universities. Beginning with University of California, Berkeley, students pressured their colleges to divest from companies operating in or trading with South Africa, without regard to how it would affect the large Black population economically. 

This divestment, along with widespread protests and activism by college students, brought international attention to the movement and increased the pressure on companies and politicians. Republican Iowa Senator Richard G. Lugar, for example, reportedly began supporting sanctions after complaining that he was unable to attend his children’s baseball games without being confronted about his stance on apartheid. 

Under such overwhelming pressure, Congress finally authorized sanctions against South Africa in 1986. IDASA, which became a main vehicle for US intelligence agencies to effect regime change, was founded that same year.

The divestment and sanctions campaign was so effective that it became the new strategy for regime changes. Israel was the next target, and the strategy was so precisely copied that South Africa came to be seen as merely a practice run.

In 2001, just seven years after the ANC took power, the World Conference Against Racism took place in South Africa, where Israel was declared an “apartheid state.” The conference, authorized by the United Nations, was seen as the origin of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which became a powerful weapon against Israel. Operatives around the world started boycotting corporations like Caterpillar because its bulldozers are sometimes used to demolish terrorists’ homes, though they are more often used to destroy whole Jewish villages.

American universities became hotbeds for the BDS movement, with institutions like UC Berkeley going as far as banning all pro-Israel speakers who support “the apartheid state.” Here, too, there has been little concern for the economic effect on “Palestinians.” Harvard University joined the BDS campaign against Israeli corporation SodaStream, which reportedly led to the company firing dozens of “Palestinian” workers. Ramallah BDS operative Mahmoud Nawajaa responded that Muslim unemployment is "part of the price that should be paid in the process of ending the occupation.”

The BDS movement also tried to create its own Nelson Mandela. Omar Barghouti, who sat in an Israeli jail for tax evasion, co-founded the BDS movement and was painted as a martyr after the Israel government placed a travel ban on Barghouti over his subversion. When the ban was lifted, he traveled to the US where he was awarded the Gandhi Peace Award at Yale University.

Barghouti himself has often encouraged comparisons between Israel and South Africa.

Soros has used his Open Societies Foundation he created in South Africa to fund subversive organizations both within and without Israel. Within Israel, Soros fuels political opposition groups such as B’Tselem, Adalah, Breaking the Silence, Yesh Din and others. Outside Israel, Soros heavily funds large anti-Israel organizations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, J Street, Media Matters and the Center for American Progress, all of which are significant global drivers of the BDS movement against Israel.

USAID, in the meantime, has awarded more than $1.2 million in funding to “pro-Palestinian” organizations.

The South Africa strategy is also being used to effect cultural regime changes like “climate change” and “diversity." Emira Woods, who organized protests and boycotts of South Africa at Columbia University in the 1980s, is now a trustee for Wallace Global Fund, which advocates for divestment from “fossil fuel” corporations.

“It was a very deliberate effort to connect the theory of change that had worked to bring about the end of apartheid and to connect that to the very real destruction of the planet, where Black and brown and Indigenous communities are at the forefront,” said Woods.

Desmond Tutu, the late South African bishop and figurehead of South Africa’s “anti-apartheid” movement, also advocated using the same strategy for “climate change.”

“People of conscience need to break their ties with corporations financing the injustice of climate change. We can, for instance, boycott events, sports teams and media programming sponsored by fossil-fuel energy companies,” Tutu wrote in 2014.

The climate narrative is part of an all-inclusive ideology called Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) which also demands compliance with anti-White mandates. ESG is enforced in a manner similar to the South Africa scheme, where companies are shunned and boycotted for noncompliance. Last year, for instance, the S&P 500 ESG Index excluded Tesla Inc. for “racial discrimination” despite the company being a major manufacturer of environmentally friendly vehicles.

The same actors who helped install the ANC — including Soros, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the UN, USAID and NED — are also using the South Africa blueprint to force gender ideology around the world, the largest regime change in history. Governments around the world hang the rainbow flag next to their own — even in contravention of their own laws — while dissenting politicians are removed from office. Some corporate giants see “transgenderism” as a militant branch of the US government. Children are forced to learn gender ideology in school under penalty of expulsion. Banks cancel the accounts of customers who criticize the ideology, and hospitals refuse care to patients who do the same. Citizens who speak against it are violently arrested. By applying the South Africa model, “transgenderism” has become the world’s first de-facto government. 

Since 1994, however, South Africa has fallen into a state of disrepair. The country’s water famine is being described as a “knock-on effect” from energy shortages. South Africans frequently experience “load-shedding” — controlled rolling blackouts — which can last up to 15 hours a day and are expected to extend beyond 2023. In 2022, South Africans faced electricity cuts 288 days out of the year.

Though the ANC was alerted on several occasions that the country was headed toward a future power crisis, the government decided not to invest in infrastructure, reportedly because it was considering privatizing the state-owned power utility company, Eskom.

In the end, instead of being privatized, Eskom became a “feeding trough” for corrupt government officials under former President Jacob Zuma, according to Eskom’s outgoing CEO André de Ruyter. Analysts say that de Ruyter’s accusations, for which he has been accused of treason by the ANC’s energy minister, reveal “a ruling party rotten with corruption.”

Another factor contributing to the water shortage is corruption and theft within municipal councils that are not investing in proper water maintenance. 

Citizens who have the means to do so drill their own wells, while those unable to do so are forced to survive on less water, though their water bills remain the same.