African liberation would collapse the West

You know, there was a book. George Friedman, the the geopolitical analyst, he wrote a book in the in the early two thousands called The Next One Hundred Years, where he tried to sort of forecast what the world might look like in the year, 2100. He began by talking about what the world looked like in the year, 1900, and then he goes sort of decade by decade, how radically everything changed between say 1900 and 1930, or 1930 to 1950, and so on. And it's truly astonishing how many drastic paradigm shifts took place. Empires fell, empires rose, world wars, on and on.

Really breathtaking global shifts. When you look at history that way, it's it's it's it's hard to wrap your head around how many changes can actually take place in a relatively short amount of time. Basically, within one person's lifetime, everything can change. You know, in 1900, like he says in his book, London was the center of the world. There was no communism, no Soviet Union, there was the Ottoman Empire, the Austro Hungarian Empire and so on.

The the Americans mostly stayed on their side of the Atlantic. And it seemed like this is how things would just be, you know, indefinitely. But just a a short forty years or so later, everything changed. England was demolished in the world war, the Ottomans were gone, the Soviets emerged, Germany took over France, on and on. Really radical unthinkable changes.

Then if you go ahead a few more decades to the nineteen eighties, again, it seems like a completely different world. And then on forward to the February, it's remarkable. Everything changed. And when you think about that, when you think about how many huge paradigmatic pendulum swings there have been, that that that have taken place and that do take place in just a matter of decades, it makes certain continuities even more astonishing. When you're able to maintain a constant amidst the radical changes that sweep over every other element of international relations, global power relationships, international relations, and so on, when you're able to actually keep something unchanged, it lets you know just how important, how paramount it is that this particular status quo remains intact.

How important it is to those who are keeping it intact. And I'm talking now about the West's relationship with Africa. Because the West's economic relationship with Africa has not fundamentally changed in over eight hundred years. This is absolutely stunning. If the drastic and rapid changes that can occur and have occurred within the West over just one or two decades, if that's breathtaking, well what about the fact that nothing has changed between the West and Africa in basically a millennium?

I mean the relationship was ruthlessly extractive eight hundred years ago, and it's ruthlessly extractive now. And you can't help but recognize that keeping things this way simply must not only be important to the West, but literally it must be the most important thing to the West. It's so important to them that they have always maintained this status quo no matter what else changes in the world. Wallahi, they're dedicated to the subjugation and the exploitation of Africa more than they're dedicated to anything else. Everything else is allowed to change except for this.

This must never change and it's not difficult to see why. I mean it's the subjugation and the exploitation of Africa that has enabled the West to impersonate a superior civilization. It's like a con man, you know, a drifter who tries to convince people that he's some sort of an aristocrat or a monarch or something. Well, he needs to have some kind of a display of a monarch's wealth in order to be convincing. And that's been the whole basis for what the West claims about itself being superior.

The whole basis has always been that they're materially successful. So okay, today you have iPhones and technology, you have a high standard of living and so forth. So that means that you must be better. You must be more intelligent. You must be more evolved.

You must be more civilized, more advanced than the rest of us. I mean, how nice their places are. See how much better their stuff is. Well, this is all reliant upon the vicious pillage and plunder of Africa. Without this subjugation, without this exploitation of Africa, Europe and the West would be nothing but crude emaciated serfs, barely producing enough to survive.

Their wealth was primarily derived from theft and plunder, from piracy and slavery, from mass murder and crime. This is just the historical reality. Because of the subjugation of Africa, first through chattel slavery, the extraction of Africa's human resources, and now through the extraction of natural resources, the West has been able to maintain this artificial unearned status as a so called civilization. Keeping Africa subject, subordinate, suppressed, and impoverished is an existential need for the West. It's the only way that they can keep up the pretense of their supremacy.

Because again, the pretense of their supremacy has never been based upon any actual advancement, any actual sophistication, any actual moral or intellectual development. It has always been based on the violent accumulation of wealth and resources, upon brute power, deceit, and conniving. And Africa, the the the subjugation of Africa is the most vital necessity for keeping this con going. I mean, now the trade relationship between the West and Africa is that something like 70% of exports to Africa from the West are manufactured goods, and imports from Africa are just the raw materials used to make those manufactured goods. So they're taking from Africa what is needed in order to produce goods that then Africa buys from the West made with their own raw materials.

And the West has done everything possible to try to impede Africa's ability to build its own manufacturing base so that they could potentially use their own raw materials, use their own raw minerals to produce their own goods. I mean the whole process should be done in house. It should all be done in Africa. That's what makes sense. You know, you have the materials, you have the minerals, you can make the products.

That's how it should be. Rather than giving your, raw natural resources to the West, for them to manufacture and refine and process and so on, Africa could do all of those things themselves. I mean, imagine the impact that would have. Where would that leave the West then? Well, they know that.

The West knows that. They're acutely aware of their actual total dependence upon Africa. If Africa manufactured, if they use their own resources, their own minerals, their own materials for their own industries, well, the entire economy of the West would collapse. And with the collapse of their economy, their whole so called civilization would collapse. Africa is the foundation upon which they build their house.

So they know this, and like I said, this is why no matter what else changes in the world, no matter how power dynamics shift in the world, the subjugation of Africa, has been maintained for over eight hundred years. There's literally nothing more important to them than this. And this is why there are very powerful factions in the West that want to destroy bricks, and why they fear monger about Chinese investment in Africa, and why America specifically is engaged in nonstop interference, covert operations, regime change, regime infiltration projects all across the continent. I mean, at South Africa, the ANC, either out of naivete or corruption, or naivete that devolved into corruption, or out of coercion, or some combination of all of these factors, the ANC collaborated with neoliberal programs for thirty years, I mean to one degree or another for the last thirty years. But as global power dynamics have been shifting and the creation and the ascendancy of bricks has been taking place, people have started to have aspirations.

And more importantly, they've started to have options, and those options have made their aspirations actually achievable. I'm talking about aspirations of political independence, aspirations of economic sovereignty, aspirations of getting out from under the yoke of the West. That's actually becoming achievable now. So the ANC was facing and they are facing severe criticism and opposition. They were being challenged, and they were being challenged by parties that do not accept neoliberalism, neoliberal colonialism, corporate colonization.

And The US knew that eventually they were gonna lose power. Eventually the ANC was gonna face the consequences of capitulation and collaboration and they were gonna be removed and replaced. And if The US didn't do something, then the replacement for the ANC was not going to be an obedient client. Because again, South Africa has the option now not to be an obedient client of the West. I mean, as long as there were no options, then it wasn't that risky for America.

Even if the ANC lost popularity, no matter who replaced them, they would have no choice but to capitulate to neoliberalism because there was no options, but there are options now. So you have The United States then backing the so called Democratic Alliance, the DA, which is an overtly neoliberal western aligned elitist political party of colonizer collaborators. So the unpopularity and the opposition to the ANC opened a space for the DA to move into the government in the last election. So now you have this so called GNU, the Government of National Unity, which is nothing but a neoliberalism light and a neoliberalism hardcore. It's a coalition of one party that was aligned with the West, the ANC, aligned with the West out of coercion or naivete or corruption, but which could have potentially been influenced by anti neoliberal popular sentiment if given a chance.

Now they've joined together with a party that is intensely committed to colonization, intensely committed to neoliberalism. Mean I they want to privatize everything. They want everything to be sold off to the private sector. They want to hollow out the government completely. And and you need this radical neoliberal colonizer faction to be there because as the new options have emerged, you've now had radical anti neoliberal positions being, advocated and and becoming viable.

I mean, you're actually having calls for the nationalization of industries rather than the, privatization of state enterprises. Well, the West can't have that. So they need something like the DA, the Democratic Alliance, to move in to try to avert the threat of South Africa actually becoming politically independent and economically sovereign. You know, they call it the GNU, but the n shouldn't stand for national. It's the government of neoliberal unity.

It's a coalition united against the people of South Africa, in my opinion, in service to the interests of the elite private sector of South Africa and to the global western private sector. The DA is a racist, Zionist, anti BRICS, pro western colonizer political party funded at least in part by the National Endowment for Democracy in The United States, which is nothing but a wing of the CIA whose sole mission is to advance American interests. So in South Africa, this was a regime infiltration project that was undertaken to actually avert regime change in South Africa, organic regime change. Because look, you can nationalize the mining sector in South Africa, you can. You can nationalize the banking sector.

You can nationalize the reserve bank. You can do all of these things and everyone knows it. It's not some kind of a mystery that these types of measures would be immensely empowering for South Africa. These aren't measures that we don't know, whether they're useful and beneficial or not. Obviously, they are and tremendously so.

And that's precisely why these types of policies, these types of measures have to be subverted. I mean, it's absolutely ludicrous for anyone in South Africa today to advocate neoliberal policies. When we have in front of our eyes the catastrophic failure of those policies, I mean nearly half the population is unemployed, over half the population among the youth. 75% of South Africans earn just the equivalent of $350 a month or less. In fact, roughly half of the population earn only $75 a month.

And you're still gonna advocate for the policies that got you here? No. Obviously. If you nationalize, it's it's it's better for you. Obviously.

I mean, the government with with those abundant resources instead of letting foreign companies seize those profits and transfer them out of the country. I mean, if those revenues are going to the state then the government will have the resources they need to better address the needs of the society. They can invest in SMEs, they can provide education, skills training, and so on, fund r and d. I mean, a no brainer, but you're scared of what the West will do. They tell you that if you nationalize, then there will be massive capital flight, investors will run away, and so on.

Well, think about that for a second. They're trying to scare you with consequences that they themselves will be imposing. They're warning you that if you do something that is in your country's best interest, they will punish you. This is very different, from telling you that the policy in and of itself is actually bad. They're telling you that they will make it a bad policy because of what they will do to you if you implement it.

You understand? These people are threatening you and then you're supposed to trust their advice. The advice of these neoliberal predators. You're supposed to listen to them and trust their advice when they are blatantly telling you that they will punish you if you do something to try to make things better, to try to change things. I mean, they couldn't make it more obvious.

Their their malice. They couldn't make their their malice more obvious. They couldn't make it any more obvious how against your best interests they are. How much they put their own private interests above the interests of their country. They're openly identifying themselves to you as your enemy.

You understand me? I mean they're not saying that nationalization doesn't work. They're not saying that it isn't beneficial. They're saying that they will do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't work. They're saying that they will sabotage nationalization for their own sake, for the sake of their own profit interest.

And still you let this type of people have a a a say in policy discourse, but that's humiliating. They hold you in contempt and they don't even hide it. I'm telling you everyone knows what should be done in a country like South Africa, what kind of economic policies they should they should implement. And it's the same thing that many global South countries should do. Everyone knows the obvious economic benefits of these types of policies.

And everyone knows that the only reason that you don't implement these policies is because parasitic predatory western colonizing private sector powers will try to punish you if you do. I mean, instance, the the the nationalization of key sectors in South Africa or in any other country such as mining, such as energy and finance. This is essential to try to break the stranglehold of foreign capital on your country, and to ensure that the country's resources are actually used for the benefit of the people, and for the benefit of the domestic economy. Land reform. The question of land reform in South Africa is critical.

This is a critical issue. There should be a comprehensive land reform program in South Africa that prioritizes the redistribution of land to the historically disadvantaged. This is basic, and it's incredibly obvious. And once you've boosted the state's resources through nationalization, there should be a comprehensive social welfare system that provides for the basic needs of all citizens, including health care, education and housing. This is again obvious.

And finally the government of course needs to pursue a policy of industrialization and job creation. A a policy that prioritizes the development of the domestic economy. And like I said before, the, prioritizes manufacturing of goods from their own raw materials, from their own raw minerals and their resources rather than the export of those minerals to western companies for them to use in their manufacturing. Honestly, none of this requires any particular brilliance to understand. These aren't radical policies, but they're only made to seem radical and they're treated as radical because everyone is living in fear of private sector tyrants who completely control the discourse.

So you're not allowed to talk about anything that isn't basically a policy genuflection to shareholders and to western supremacy, But everyone knows that these are good policies that would help South Africa. And that the only reason anyone would think that they might not be good for South Africa is because they know that doing a policy that's good for South Africa would prompt a hostile retaliatory response from the West. Well, like I said, that should show you what kind of a friend the West is. But look, South Africa and all the countries in Africa, all the countries in the global South in fact, they're in a position today to actually dictate the terms now. If westerners wanna pull out their capital, so say you nationalize.

Okay. If westerners wanna pull out their capital, they wanna withdraw their investments. Okay. Go ahead. Dig around in your own lands for the minerals you need to make your stuff, and good luck to you.

I mean, we have other investors anyway who can take your place. There's other companies that we can partner with. You're not the only ones. So the only question really is how much are you interested, in boosting the economies of China, the economy of Russia, the economy of The Gulf? How much do you wanna see the BRICS countries surpass you economically?

You know, BRICS already accounts for more of global GDP than the g seven. So if you wanna pull out your investments, you pull them out. Go ahead. You can only harm yourselves. No.

South Africa and the Muslim world and all the global South countries, it's time for them to break away from this paradigm. Break away from western domination and start implementing all of those policies that they know perfectly well will benefit them whether America likes it or not. I mean, you imagine if the Gulf countries didn't put their oil sector under government control? Where would they be now? But look at where they are now.

Look at the amount of capital they have now. While South Africa, could have and should have a comparably, massive sovereign wealth fund. There's no reason for them not to. No. This millennium long system of subjugation needs to come to an end, and it really doesn't matter if the road to liberation is a little bit rocky.

I'd rather be traversing a rocky road than be buried under the rubble, which is where the West has kept Africa for centuries. This is the richest and most important continent on the planet. And the West stole your riches, and they stole your importance, and they've been an impostor on the throne for far too long. It doesn't make any sense to be afraid of someone whose power is actually dependent upon you. That's that's a psychological power not an actual power.

They have a psychological power over you. But every element of their real power is completely derived from you yourselves. It's like your hand is on the tap that the hose is attached to that they use to waterboard you, and all you have to do is turn it off.