Posted on 08/28/2015 7:43:31 AM PDT by HomerBohn
After more than two decades of peddling disinformation and lies about its real agenda, the regime ruling South Africa, an alliance of the Communist Party (SACP) and the African National Congress (ANC), is finally dropping the mask. In a stunning policy document produced by the ANC's National General Council, the late Communist Party leader Nelson Mandela's successors praised Communist China's brutal dictatorship as a “guiding lodestar of our own struggle” toward government centralization and what the document celebrated as a “post-Western” “new world order.” The shocking document, which has been totally ignored in the Western press, also praises the regime of Russian strongman Vladimir Putin while criticizing the United States and the West for alleged “imperialism” against “progressive” values.
The pro-communist totalitarianism announcement by the ANC was presented in the party's recently released “policy discussion” document, which is expected to guide the upcoming ANC National General Council meeting scheduled for October. While some analysts expressed shock at the revelations, they should not have been surprised. Indeed, the intimate and expanding links between the ANC and the Communist Party of China have been obvious for years. In recent months, with the ANC and the SACP openly pushing for a Communist Chinese-style economy controlled by “state-owned enterprises” — not to mention the high-level political exchanges and the emergence of new alliances such as the “BRICS,” for example — the latest news was easy to predict.
Still, the bluntness of the document was surprising. “China economic development trajectory [sic] remains a leading example of the triumph of humanity over adversity,” the ANC's international relations leadership, which includes African Union boss Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, said in the official report. “The exemplary role of the collective leadership of the Communist Party of China in this regard should be a guiding lodestar of our own struggle.” The policy document also argued that the (Western-backed) rise of Communist China’s economy “has heralded a new dawn of hope for further possibilities of a new world order.” In fact, the ANC boasted, the regime in Beijing is even “gradually redefining the world towards a multi-polar order.” Advocates of the “multi-polar” new world order have been very clear about what it will look like, too: global tyranny.
The document goes on to claim, falsely, that the United States is pursuing a “destabilization strategy against China” waged on three fronts. “The US is bent on portraying China as the world’s worst polluter and a threat to the environment with the intention being to suggest that China is but a paper tiger whose economic rise is not sustainable,” the ANC document claimed without acknowledging that China is, in fact, the worst polluter by any objective measure. “The US, backed by its ideological apparatus, has tried a repeat of the Tiananmen [sic] Square against the Chinese government by parading to the world counter-revolution as a popular uprising and counter-revolutionaries as human rights activists.” The U.S. government is also “exploiting” Beijing's disputes with its neighbors to create an “anti-China alliance,” the ANC leaders claimed.
In the real world, of course, Western globalists, including those in Washington, D.C., have been key players in the rise of Communist China — starting from the calculated betrayal of Nationalist Chinese leader Chiang Kai-Shek all the way to the present day with the Obama administration training Communist Chinese military forces. Ironically, the ANC regime itself came to power with massive assistance from the West (and the communist world) during its murderous terror campaigns targeting innocent civilians — primarily fellow blacks, many thousands of whom were murdered in the most brutal ways imaginable. As The New American has documented extensively, even today, the rise of the “multi-polar” world order, with Beijing playing a starring role, is practically official policy even among many Western governments.
In other words, the ANC's leaders are either fundamentally misunderstanding geopolitical developments, or are intentionally aiding and abetting a global campaign of deception. Deceit is the most likely explanation.
If their policy paper does indeed represent their true beliefs, the ANC's leadership imagines that the U.S. government is engaged in some sort of giant global conspiracy to suppress “progressive” values and governments. “The South has been rising in a manner that promises to alter the international balance of power and offer opportunities for the emergence of a post-Western world order and Washington is in a fighting mood to ensure this does not happen,” the document claims. “Washington’s sponsored destabilization is not limited to Russia and China. We see it unfolding in the streets of Latin America including in Venezuela which the US has strangely declared a threat to its ‘national security,' in the Middle East and in African countries with the sole intention of toppling progressive democratically-elected governments.” It was not immediately clear which Middle-Eastern “progressive democratically-elected governments” the ANC had in mind.
Putin's regime in Russia is also an alleged target of this global anti-progressive conspiracy imagined by the ANC's leaders. “Russia has not been spared the wrath of US-led Western imperialism,” the paper argues. “As with China, the Russian leadership is constantly being portrayed in the Western media and official discourse as monsters abusing human rights. As with China, counter revolutionary demonstrations and marches are being staged and given huge publicity in the Western media in order to destabilize and provoke the Russian government.” Again, in the real world, as this magazine has documented extensively, the Obama administration and the Putin government are both pursuing what senior leaders refer to as a “New World Order” — and both visions are remarkably similar.
The ANC, though, frames it all as a “new cold war” in which the “West” is facing off against the glorious “progressive” revolutionary autocrats enslaving much of the Third World. “The US does not appreciate the resurgence of China and Russia as dominant factors in the arena of international power relations,” the document continued. “It has instead declared a cold war against these two emerging world powers.” The paper goes on to quietly imply that the U.S. government is behind the “the scourge of terrorism we see in the world today,” which is only partly correct because it ignores the crucial roles of Moscow and other governments in fomenting terror to advance tyranny.
Critics of the latest policy screeds from the ANC were not amused. The primary, but largely powerless, South African opposition, dubbed the “Democratic Alliance,” was among the voices to speak out. “As things stand, Europe is still our biggest trading partner. It is simply not in our national interest to turn our back on the West, as we seem intent on doing,” complained DA leader Mmusi Maimane while outlining his proposed foreign-policy agenda at an event in Cape Town after the ANC document was released.
Dr. Frans Cronje, meanwhile, who leads the influential South African Institute for Race Relations (IRR), also slammed the ANC's positions. “What South Africa needs is a multipolar approach to foreign policy — as is the case for the majority of other emerging markets. Instead what we are getting is an unnecessary re-run of the Cold War with policy that is unflinchingly pro-Russia and China but vociferously anti-Western,” he said in a statement. “This is economically short-sighted as we are placing all our foreign policy economic eggs in the Sino/Russo economic basket at a time when the prospects for China’s economy are in doubt and Russia is in much economic trouble.”
“Our analysis is that ideological motivations on the part of the ruling party have allowed this situation to develop,” continued Cronje, who has long been sounding the alarm about the “Rooi Gevaar” (Red danger) that is not just back — “it is in control” in South Africa. “However, the complacency of Western diplomats and business leaders must also bear some of the blame. Persistence with current policy will undoubtedly harm relations with Western investors, which are already under threat from a range of government policies, and will in time undermine broader Western geostrategic interests in Africa.”
Even more alarming is what the policies mean for the people of South Africa. “This line of foreign policy will have grave implications for the sustainability of democratic institutions in South Africa, and the country’s future as a leading emerging market democracy,” Cronje concluded, putting it diplomatically.
But as The New American has been reporting since before the ANC took over in 1994, none of this should be surprising. And in recent years, with South Africa entering what its ruling class calls the “radical second phase” of the communist revolution, the handwriting has been on the wall for quite some time. The links with the brutal regime in China, too, have become clear, as has the ANC's affinity for the regime. Government schools in South Africa, for example, are set to start teaching the Chinese language starting next year. The ANC-SACP regime even denied a visa to the Dalai Lama to placate the Beijing regime, which has murdered more innocent people than any entity in human history.
In July, the ANC sent a high-level delegation including cabinet ministers, deputy ministers, ANC provincial secretaries, and more on a “political study” tour courtesy of the Chinese Communist Party. It was the sixth visit to the CPC's “China Executive Leadership Academy Pudong,” a “leadership and governance institution,” since 2008, according to news reports. “The tour taught me about the importance of the ruling party stamping its authority,” boasted ANC Limpopo Provincial Secretary Nocks Seabi. “Their decision is final and binding on the state. Once the communist party has taken a position, nobody in the state can change it; they must just implement.”
Last year, meanwhile, this magazine reported that the Communist Party of China was openly financing and building an ANC “leadership school” to raise up future communist zealots to rule South Africa in what Time magazine downplayed as “a burgeoning partnership of ruling parties on different continents.” The CPC has also worked closely on similar projects with the regime of mass-murdering Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, whose brutal autocracy stands accused of genocide and mass atrocities and is a close ally of the SACP-ANC regime in South Africa. Beijing also funded the new headquarters for the African Union, currently led by Mugabe, in Ethiopia.
The ANC's goals — total power over the population, indefinitely — are similar to Mugabe's and Beijing's as well. Polygamist South African President Jacob Zuma, who regularly sings songs advocating genocide of white South Africans, and whose defense in a rape trial was claiming that his victim's kanga was “quite short,” has vowed that the ANC he leads would stay in power “until Jesus comes.” In 2008, Zuma asked the CPC to provide “leadership training” to ANC bigwigs — presumably for exactly that reason. During the 24th Congress of the Socialist International, hosted by the ANC in 2012 amid a genocide alert implicating the ANC in genocidal preparations, a senior Communist Chinese official and socialists and communists from around the world all pushed for global socialism under the United Nations.
More recently, the ANC-SACP regime has also made clear its desire to impose a Chinese-style regime-controlled economy. “The [state-owned enterprises] made what is perhaps the singularly most important constitution in the impressive development of the Chinese economy,” said SACP boss and Higher Education Minister Blade Nzimande. “The PRC [Chinese government] did not follow the neoliberal prescripts of surrendering them to private companies.... Instead, it reformed and repositioned state-owned companies and mandated them to invest in a particular way that was to see the economy grow to unprecedented levels.”
While the establishment press in the West continues to ignore South Africa's downward spiral into socialist tyranny and potentially even genocide against European-descent South Africans, it is hardly for lack of evidence. Indeed, the facade is finally dropping, and the South African regime is proudly becoming exactly what sensible analysts predicted decades ago when the Western establishment and the communist world helped bring the ANC to power. There are many lessons to be learned from the whole saga.
It will just make them a much bigger Zimbabwe within a decade or so.
Nelson Mandela not only supported the communists, but was a terrorist to boot. He was not in jail for refusing to go to the back of the bus. He was in jail for a bombing campaign.
Actually, Marxist ideology has stages of development-true Communism, or the Communism state of development is a classless utopia where the state “withers away”. No “Communist” nation ever reached that level. All of them would say that they were really at the *Socialist* state of development. If you remember the old Soviet Union, you’d know that it’s full name was the Union of Soviet *Socialist* Republics. It’s not uncommon for Socialist countries to have mixed economies. Look at Nazi Germany, for instance, or for more Marxist versions, Tito’s Yugoslavia or even the Soviet Union under Lenin’s New Economic Policy.
Communism is just a form of organized crime. Surely you don't take communist's descriptions of communism at face value.
I think fascism is a better description of the examples you refer to - which is basically a more extreme and formalized version of “crony capitalism”, where politicos and corporatists coexist in a symbiotic relationship.
The Soviet Union was much closer to the ideal of communism where private ownership was essentially non-existent.
“There is also a sense in China from what happened a 100 years ago that if there is no strong central authority China becomes a collection of war lord ruled states.”
I agree - what’s keeping China whole is a very strong central government. If they were to become “democratic” I could see the place splintering into many states, given the various ethnic groups, languages and religions.
One has to give the rulers there a lot of credit for being wise enough to keep the masses reasonably happy and create pride in their country with the economic progress and, as a result, military and world influence that they’ve achieved. They’ve also given them a lot more freedom than they’ve had in the past.
It’s a pretty good facsimile of a benevolent dictatorship.
Of course people’s needs change, and there will come a time when their needs will include more direct say on how they’re governed. That will be the big challenge for the regime when the time comes.
Thought that was true of Tito and Yugoslavia, but as we saw, once Tito was gone from the scene, the leadership was incapable of keeping Yugoslavia together.
One world government is coming. It won’t be a representative republic.
“Thought that was true of Tito and Yugoslavia, but as we saw, once Tito was gone from the scene, the leadership was incapable of keeping Yugoslavia together.”
Yes, Yugoslavia stayed together because of a person, Tito. Once he was gone, Yugoslavia was gone.
The amazing thing with China is that it’s not based on a cult of a single person, post Mao. They’ve managed to keep it going for decades with different leaders - there is no cult of personality. I can’t even name who the current leader is.
The party has managed to institute a system for choosing leaders that maintains a continuity of policies, and keeps a leash on the president. I guess the elites of the party (central committee and politburo) maintain enough power in their hands to offset whatever power the president has, so that it doesn’t become a dictatorship of one person.
I’m not sure how all the levers of power are distributed, but so far one can’t argue with its success.
Good points all around - the diff between Yugoslavia and China is of course that China has been held together this way for centuries.
Maybe the world would be a better place if China was a dozen nations but the post imperial break up of China was not a pretty picture and before that we had the Taiping rebellion.
Here is a pretty accurate wiki article on China’s warlord era:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warlord_Era
So we should be careful in what we wish for in cheering a Chinese break up (which may happen as their bubble economy burts).
i suspect that the Chinese leadersip would probably say that they were at the Socialist state, rather than then Communist one, so they could afford to be economically pragmatic. But I digress.
I’ve heard it said that Marxist ideology states that human history runs in stages-Feudalism, Capitalism, Socialism and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, and finally Communism, which is supposedly a classless utopia where the state “withers away”, the one where there’s no private property. In any of the “Communist” nations, did the state ever show signs of “withering away”? I suspect that all “Communist” nations would say that they were actually at the Socialist stage of development, not the Communist one. After all, the Soviet Union was called the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics, not the Union of Soviet COMMUNIST Republics. The Chinese leadership, I suspect, may well say that they were at the Socialist state, and could thus afford to be pragmatic economically. But I digress.
It seems to me like China’s economy is basically a hybrid or combination of Socialism, and de facto Fascism. But that’s just my opinion.
Actually, Yugoslavia did hold together for a while following Tito’s death-mainly due to fears of a possible Soviet invasion should relations between Belgrade and Moscow deteriorate. When the Soviet Bloc ceases to be a possible threat, Yugoslavia ceased with it.
care to comment on this thread, Olog?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.