This article is not written to back-up the ANC or Jacob Zuma.It is exploration of a deeper level of politics at work in South Africa in order to locate the real common enemy.
Over 50 years ago, the great Kwame Nkrumah explained to us how the forces of imperialism work; how the politic of Africa is undermined by what we used to call colonialism and now call neo colonialism. The forces at work in our African countries are malevolent and very cunning.They operate in secrecy and own and manipulate the media so that we only ever hear part of the truth, if anything. The forces at work are invisible.They work from the shadows and have agents in every level of society. This is how Kwame Nkrumah described the enemy all that time ago. What we must realize is nothing has changed. Africa is mired in poverty not because it has yet to become wealthy and developed but because Africa`s development was meant to happen over 50 years ago.There was never a need for all our wars, famines, poverty, disease and human suffering.
“The forces arrayed against us are, and I use the word most carefully, formidable. They are entrenched and powerful, they are, as I`ve taken some pains to explain, the forces of imperialism, acting through their instruments new colonialism and colonialism, ably assisted by the agents of the Cold War. They operate in worldwide combinations at all levels, political, economic, military, cultural, educational, social and trade. And (thats) not all, and through intelligence, cultural and information services (media). They operate from European and African centers using agents who I`m ashamed to say are open unpatriotic sons of Africa buying personal satisfactions with the betrayal of their country`s safety and integrity. They seduce leaders of the African political, trade union and peoples organizations; thus creating rifts and quarrels within the national front.
On the border fronts, they are amassing their forces in a determined effort to stay the advance of African liberation and the march of unity. It is not accidental that the countries of the European Common Market and those spear heading the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the imperialist powers who have brought in their vassals Spain and Portugal; Portugal in fact since the wars of the Spanish Succession, 1700-1714; being a protectorate of Britain, which has enjoyed special treaties and unnecessary rights in both Portugal and the Portuguese territories for over 200 years. It is not difficult to understand, therefore, why Britain has not raised her voice against atrocities in Angola and other protected Portuguese territories and naturally supported Portugal`s preposterous scheme at Goa in India which is an integral part of the multicultural continent.The arms and troops that are pouring into Angola cannot be regarded in isolation from the international organization of imperialism and the Cold War militarism with which they are most definitely linked. It is absurd to think that Portugal, one of the poorest countries in Europe, that`s a fact, could support so large an army, so well equipped as that which it defended her colonial acquisitions in Africa without the active aid she must be receiving from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. nor can we look upon the way in which South Africa is busily building up an armed force equal to any held by the nations of Europe without the international obligations which are obviously involved. She has , we hear a secret military pact with Portugal and the interlacustrine imperialist interests collected in the Congo and the Rhodesias, Angola and Mozambique which are also linked with the great mining and financial interests which are operating out of South Africa; created chain of allies which seriously threatens both the fight for extending African emancipation from colonialism and the independence of the new African states. Now that African independence has been achieved over a large part of the continent and the national consciousness of Africans from north to south, from east to west, is adding momentum to the struggle for independence; every kind of means is being used by the colonialists to arrest its progress and defeat its objective. They are attempting many methods some sinister, some beguiling to wreck our efforts. They strike antipathetic postures: on one side they perform acts calculated to strike fear, on the other they try to hood-wink us with fictitious gifts which superficially pander to our hopes and aspirations. They are the present attempts to deflect our purpose, to weaken our determination.” Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana,1960.
These forces are still at work in every African country. The ANC are being opposed, its leadership is being demonized. This is not difficult to do in the case of Jacob Zuma and many more within the ANC ruling party.But those opposing the ANC would behave no differently. The DA has morphed from the PFP and the PFP were a means by which White people in Apartheid South Africa, appeased their consciences if troubled. The PFP were a diversionary tactic to prolong Apartheid and its slave labor policies for industry.The miners today remain one of the cheapest labor forces in the world, the reason for the protests in 2012. But the Marikana police massacre has proven itself to be the beginning of the end for the ruling party.Today NUMSA, the Metal Workers Union is calling for regime change.But who exactly told the police to shoot ? How many miners were shot by police bullets and who stoked the miners into bearing arms? Was this a `special ops` event , who fired at the miners who had retreated to the kopje ? Whether Marikana was a set-up or not, this event is being used not to benefit the miners but to benefit a force that wants the ANC`s downfall. Many of us would like to see the ANC gone but what is the reason that the forces at work have, to destroy the ANC?
Jacob Zuma is spear-heading Africa`s position within the BRICS banking system.The BRICS banking system is NOT Chinese domination of Africa and it is NOT the next political ploy. it IS the most viable solution to African development, Africa`s industrialization and Africa`s departure from the modern-day version of the slave trade which is THE WORLD BANK and IMF policy. BRICS, Zuma and the ANC are also concentrating on developing South Africa`s nuclear power. There will be people who will tell you that nuclear power is evil and that the alternative green energy is the only future. This is a fallacy and a carefully constructed disinformation program that is being promulgated from London. ( more information and explanations on this in later articles).
So how is the ANC`s downfall being orchestrated? As the great Kwame Nkrumah told us it is being done ” at all levels , political, economic, military, cultural, educational, social and trade.” NUMSA are unwittingly part of this process. It is a long-standing tactic to use the Trade Unions to undermine government and the history of every country is full of such examples.In Britain, the Welsh coal miners were used by those who opposed the policy of the Thatcher government.It is neither here nor there if Thatcher`s government was good or bad; the issue is that the coal miners were misled by their trade union leaders into supporting strikes that appeared to be in favor of their working conditions. Those trade union leaders can now, with hindsight, clearly be seen as traitors to the miners and the outcome is that the coal mining industry, along with tens of thousands of jobs was destroyed. As the People we stand by the miners who were shot, as the People we stand in solidarity against de-humanizing policy, with the `down-trodden masses` and our voices are slowly subsumed by political `isms` that are laying in wait- socialism, communism. It is not these concepts that are the ploys but the agents who have been placed there to “deflect our purpose” as Nkrumah said.
In South Africa there are a number of individuals who appear to be heroes of `civil society`, heroes of socialism and the heroes of workers rights,heroes of an equal and fair society. These men and women in South Africa have more than just liberal views in common, they also, almost without exception, have doctorates or masters degrees from British Universities like Oxford and Cambridge. They, like this website (africanagenda.net) harp on about the evil rich and evil corporations. But what they never explain is that we are not currently experiencing `capitalism`, we are currently experiencing crony capitalism run by a brotherhood who operate from the City of London.
Here is a list of a few of such individuals – Eddie Webster, Rick Turner, Karl von Holdt, Michael Burawoy and Gene Sharp. Their main bodies of influence at present are SWOP which is a Wits University institute and NUMSA.The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend.
This information is from an American organization that has been seeking African and world liberation for the past 50 years, from the grip of the British Economic Empire – www.larouchepac.com . For the complete article visit www.larouchepub.com
No to British Regime Change in South Africa!
by David Cherry and Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane
Who’s Who in South Africa’s
Regime Change Network
Gene Sharp: Godfather of post-Cold War color revolutions worldwide, and author of the manual for color revolutions, From Dictatorship to Democracy (1993). Trained at Oxford. Sharp is an important figure for Anglo-American military and intelligence; he is funded by the neoliberal establishment; and operates from his Albert Einstein Institution (AEI) in
SWOP: Center of the color revolution apparatus in South Africa. An institute in the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits). Originally the Sociology of Work Project. Now called the Society, Work and Development Institute, but still known as SWOP.
Eddie Webster: South African sociologist/activist. Master’s degree from Balliol College, Oxford. Collaborated with Rick Turner in the 1970s. Founded SWOP, 1983. Connected SWOP to Sharp’s AEI, 1993.
Rick Turner: South African anti-apartheid political scientist. Author of the “bible” of the workerist movement, Eye of the Needle: A Guide to Participatory Democracy in South Africa (1972).
Karl von Holdt: Student of Webster, and now his successor as director of SWOP.
Michael Burawoy: British sociologist/activist at University of California, Berkeley. Globe-trotting promoter of color revolutions. Funded by neoliberal foundations. Close collaborator of Webster.
NUMSA: National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa. Called for “regime change” against the ANC government in late 2014, after years of imbibing the teachings of SWOP.
By color revolution the above does not imply race. It is a coding mechanism for intelligence networks and works like this :At all levels of society agents are placed to mold public opinion towards the desired outcome. As Nkrumah said these agents/elements are in the media, schools and universities,civil society organizations, trade unions and government.Many of these agents are unaware that they are being used because they believe the indoctrination/brainwashing they have been fed. This sneaky process has been in use for a very long time.It is a form of psychological warfare which schools, universities and the media are all part of.
The underlying method of the color revolutions is
the mass mobilization of mostly well-meaning people,
with a false promise—and false concept—of democracy.
It is not new. More than 200 years ago, Britain’s
Lord Shelburne guided intelligence chief Jeremy Bentham
in shaping the French Revolution of 1789 with
this method, using Finance Minister Jacques Necker.
France had contributed to the American Revolution
against the British Empire, and there was a danger (for
the Empire) of a revolution in France on the same admirable
principles. Shelburne and Bentham preempted it,
inducing a phony revolution that mobilized the masses
to install a reign of terror, and literally decapitate much
of France’s intelligentsia.
The African Background
In Africa, likewise, the color revolution method must be understood in the context of the history of the British Empire. There is an unbroken continuity of thought from Cecil Rhodes’ planning in 1877 for “the extension of British rule throughout the world” (in his
first will), to official British policy throughout the 20th Century and today. Indeed, the Rhodes Trust and its Rhodes Scholarships—to bring colonials (and Americans)
to Oxford—continues today, based on the same motive. The secretive Round Table organization created by Rhodes is also alive and well.When the traditional form of British imperial rule—with boots on the ground—was seen to have a doubtful future, the British prepared in advance to move to “indirect rule.” The original version of indirect rule, developed by the Round Table, involved using traditional African chiefs as agents of empire and excluding educated,urban Africans. That policy was worked out in the early
20th Century by Rhodes’ executor Lord Alfred Milner, and Lord Frederick Lugard.
During World War II, however, the Round Table sent Lord Malcolm Hailey to reassess conditions in Africa. Hailey concluded that it was necessary to promote and use educated Africans to guarantee imperial control. He also spoke (but did not write) of the need for
nominal “majority rule” for the same purpose. It was still a highly unpopular idea in the British establishment.
Hailey’s new version of indirect rule came into force in the first years after
World War II. Andrew Cohen, Africa division chief in the Colonial Office, carried
out the revolution in policy. The nominal “independence” of African
countries was no longer seen as a problem; it was instead actually necessary—
for British rule to continue by other means. Under neocolonialism, Africans
would be “educated” to rule Africa for the British. Cohen was rewarded with a
knighthood, and became known in the Colonial Office as “the King of Africa.”
Today, the British continue to use this approach into which the color revolution
method fits perfectly. In the story that follows, we see the centrality of the
British Empire—especially through Oxford University—in the preparation
of South Africans to act on behalf of British imperial interests out of their
own disoriented consciousness. We see the preparation of a potential for a color
revolution in South Africa.
That is not to say that there is no violence. When violence is necessary to
complete the process, violent political groups may be on hand, or special
forces may be quietly sent in, or both.But Sharp avoids mentioning the violent
factor in the equation. At the Third Moscow Conference on International Security, May 23,
2014, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu characterized the color
revolutions as a new form of warfare invented by Western governments
seeking to remove national governments in favor of those controlled by
the West. Shoigu pointed out that the consequences of color revolutions
are very different from the protest organizations’initial stated goals. Shoigu was referring
to the work of such figures as Gene Sharp, George Soros, and—as we shall see—Michael Burawoy. A detailed analysis—and a view of how to prevent color
revolutions—then appeared in Military Thought, journal of the Russian Defense Ministry
The South African Case
The leaderships of the Metalworkers and other smaller unions have been targeted for years by the Gene Sharp apparatus in South Africa, moving them increasingly into outraged opposition to the government and the ruling ANC. NUMSA General Secretary Irvin Jim has called the ANC gangsters and tsotsis (thugs). At a conference organized by NUMSA to form a“United Front for Socialism,” held December 13-14, 2014 in Boksburg, near Johannesburg, NUMSA reportedly declared that the United Front will bring the “democratic regime change” that South Africa needs to free its citizens from neoliberalism. NUMSA had been accused in November of seeking regime change. At least one public figure outside NUMSA had answered the accusation: Barney Pityana, Fellow, Kings College London, and rector of the Anglican College in South Africa, told a Dec. 4 meeting in Johannesburg,“Indeed we do want regime change, because that is what democracy is all about.”No, Reverend Pityana, you are lying. Regime change is all about trashing constitutions, laws, and elections. The Johannesburg meeting was convened by Democracy Works, an organization linked to the pernicious U.S. NED National Endowment for Democracy), one of Sharp’s funders.In South Africa, as elsewhere, “regime change” is a threat of much more than a change of regime. Consider the background: The British oligarchs—not the British people—had hoped for a race war as the outcome of the liberation struggle. Why? Prince Philip and the old families have no use for Africans in a world that has too many people for their comfort. In 2009, their Optimum Population Trust (populationmatters.org) released a study calling for reducing world population by 3 to 5 billion people by 2050. In 2013, Paul Ehrlich wrote in the Proceedings of the Royal Society that it “would take four or five more Earths” to support the existing world population of 7 billion at the level of U.S. living standards. In other words, according to Ehrlich, one Earth can support no more than 1.4 billion at an “appropriate”standard of living. Any plan for this level of killing through conflict and disease will target the most vulnerable, including Africans, early on. In the liberation struggle, the British had deeply penetrated all sides, and thought they owned Nelson Mandela. But Mandela defeated the race war plan in his talks with President F.W. De Klerk through his combination of nobility of soul and firmness, in the context of the stalemate of forces on the ground. The oligarchs, however, do not give up; for them, any mobilization based on popular rage is a new opportunity.The trigger for popular outrage leading to regime change could be an event like the massacre at Marikana. The massacre by police of platinum mineworkers on a wildcat strike against Lonmin, in which 34 were killed, on Aug. 16, 2012, enraged the nation. Such an event—engineered or not—could create enough instability to threaten South Africa with a downward spiral. (Videos of the Marikana massacre suggest manipulation of both miners and police, probably at the level of “special operations.”) The foregoing picture indicates some of the dimensions of the potential of the British imperialists to end South Africa’s commitment to the BRICS.
South Africa’s Color Revolution Apparatus
The color revolution network in South Africa is organized around the SWOP at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg (“Wits,”pronounced “Vits”) and
SWOP’s former director, sociologist and activist Eddie Webster.
Originally known as the Sociology of Work Project, SWOP currently describes its field
of study as “the making and unmaking of social order.” Webster is now professor emeritus, but is still a central figure in the color revolution network,whose members call themselves Marxists.
Webster and Glenn Adler describe SWOP’s relationship with Sharp’s AEI in the book Trade Unions and Democratization in South Africa, 1985-1997. They write that the project for the book “crystallized around labour’s role in [South Africa’s] transition [to black rule,] through our collaboration, since 1993, with the Albert Einstein Institution (AEI) of Cambridge, Massachusetts. AEI’s South Africa Program directed by Barbara
Harmel, and the Sociology of Work Unit (SWOP) at the University of the Witwatersrand, launched a project on trade unions and popular resistance in South Africa, derived from AEI’s interest in social movements’ use of nonviolent direct action in political change. This
collaboration helped us to conceptualize labour as an actor using its power strategically to resist apartheid and to reconstruct a new South Africa.”
Thus, Webster and Adler actually say that SWOP took direction from AEI to pursue “AEI’s interest in social movements’ use of nonviolent direct action in
political change.” AEI commissioned the papers that SWOP put together
in two books, Adler and Webster’s Trade Unions and Democratization (2000) (Adler was in SWOP at the time); and From Comrades to Citizens: The South African Civics Movement and the Transition to Democracy, edited by Adler and Jonny Steinberg (2000). Dr.Steinberg is a former Rhodes Scholar who, like Gene Sharp, did his doctorate in political theory at Oxford. He spent a year in New York City with Soros’s Open Society Institute; he is currently a lecturer in African studies at Oxford, and will soon return to Wits. In recent years, he has studied the South African police and the underworld. A significant contributor to this volume was Colin Bundy, vice chancellor and principal of Wits at the time. Then in 2001, Bundy was appointed Director of the University of London’s School of Oriental
and African Studies, one of the key institutions of British neocolonialism.
AEI has also funded Webster’s successor as director of SWOP, Karl von Holdt, supporting the research for his paper, “Social Movement Unionism: The Case of
South Africa.” Von Holdt, one of Webster’s students, has also analyzed workers’ use of ungovernability in the workplace, and the functions of corruption and violence in South African political life. Since 1993, therefore, Gene Sharp has been developing a fifth column in South Africa that was already nicely in place—a network that has expertise in the dynamics of the social fabric and could be called into action if the ANC began to deviate from its commitment to the British financial empire of neoliberalism. And now it has. But of course, SWOP was meant to be used as a fifth column from its founding in 1983.
excerpts in italics re-posted from Executive Intelligence Review —
No to British Regime Change in South Africa!
by David Cherry and Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane Jan 16, 2015 for more information visit www.larouchepub.com