Trump says ANC must denounce 'kill the Boer'
Dr Corné Mulder, Freedom Front Plus leader, and member of the government of national unity, convened the delegation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
11 hours ago
- The Citizen
Tshwane faces backlash from Afrikaner community
Tshwane's urgent court application against Kleinfontein has angered residents, who claim the city is targeting the Afrikaner settlement. The Kleinfontein informal settlement has accused the City of Tshwane of wanting to get rid of the Afrikaner community after the city lodged an urgent application in the High Court in Pretoria. This move was to order Kleinfontein, east of Pretoria, to stop any form of construction, developing, advertising, allocating or selling of shares or stands at the informal settlement, and to supplement its application in terms of older legislation pending since 2013. Republican Conference of Tshwane councillor Lex Middelberg said it wasn't true the city wanted to get rid of Afrikaners. Not true that Tshwane wants to get rid of Afrikaners – Republican Conference of Tshwane 'They've got it twisted,' he said. Political analyst Piet Croucamp said while Kleinfontein was a society that does not share the values of South Africa and its constitution, the question remains: was it legal or illegal in terms of the constitution? 'The values of the constitution are one thing, but the rules and regulations of the constitution were another,' he said. ALSO READ: Kleinfontein is not an illegal township, maintains CEO Croucamp said he had no doubt that municipal officials would act in a way that was more spiteful than effective and efficient when they are confronted with a phenomenon such as this. Kleinfontein board CEO Stefan Wiese said they were disappointed by Tshwane's move to get rid of the Afrikaner community. 'Kleinfontein has been served with a notice of motion on 12 August, where Tshwane is taking the Afrikaner community to court,' he said. Kleinfontein served notice of motion 'The community has made several attempts to resolve the long-standing and still pending rezoning and formalisation application dating back to 2013. 'Several undertakings by Tshwane to fast-track the application have been made over the years and Kleinfontein engaged with no less than five mayors to attempt to resolve the situation.' Wiese said then mayor Kgosientso Ramokgopa, who is now electricity and energy minister, committed to prioritising the formalisation of Kleinfontein in a 2013 statement during his tenure. ALSO READ: FF Plus defends Afrikaner-only enclaves Orania and Kleinfontein, accuses EFF of being the real threat 'This sentiment was echoed by subsequent mayors,' he said. 'It is disturbing that Tshwane is choosing to approach the courts when Kleinfontein, in 2024, has presented Tshwane with a proposal that would have seen a task team from both parties finalise the application in good order. Double standards 'Despite correspondence from Tshwane as recently as May 2024, Tshwane now seems to argue that Kleinfontein's completed Integrated Development Plan township application can no longer be processed and has to be replaced by a Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act.' Wiese said the clear double standards applied by Tshwane were utterly disappointing.
The Citizen
14 hours ago
- The Citizen
Cartoon of the day: 19 August 2025
The government has been accused of trying to control the process around the National Dialogue. The National Dialogue has been criticised after the ANC was accused of hijacking what was supposed to be a process led by civil society. Six legacy foundations, as well as the DA and Freedom Front Plus, pulled out of the National Dialogue after complaining that the government was trying to control the process. Before the National Dialogue properly got underway, the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, Steve Biko Foundation, FW de Klerk Foundation, Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation, Oliver & Adelaide Tambo Foundation and Desmond & Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation all pulled out. President Cyril Ramaphosa, however, brushed off their absence, saying that he has to be 'allowed to be the president'. READ NEXT: National Dialogue has big gaps in it
Eyewitness News
a day ago
- Eyewitness News
Trump's performance politics and the cost to South Africa
Charles Matseke 15 August 2025 | 11:31 Donald Trump Racism Foreign policy FILE: US President Donald Trump Donald Trump's political fabric has always been woven with threads of populist theatrics, racial grievance politics, and an impulse-driven approach to governance. Nowhere is this more evident than in his treatment or lack thereof of South Africa. From the start of his presidency, Trump displayed neither a coherent foreign policy for Africa nor an appreciation of South Africa's strategic role on the his engagement was dominated by misinformation and disinformation, most notably his amplification of the so-called 'white genocide' narrative raising the question: was this ignorance, calculated malice, or simply a lack of diplomatic interest?For Trump, foreign policy toward Africa has never been a matter of strategic planning but rather a stage for identity politics and symbolic gestures aimed at his domestic base. His failure to engage meaningfully with President Cyril Ramaphosa particularly during the controversy over farm killings was not just a scheduling oversight. It was a symptom of a deeper perception problem: Trump does not see African leaders as equal political counterparts deserving of diplomatic caution or respect. This mindset reflects his white nationalist worldview, where Black-majority nations are viewed not as strategic partners but as geopolitical traditional U.S. foreign policy, South Africa occupies a vital position as the gateway to African markets, a regional security partner, and a voice within multilateral forums such as BRICS, the African Union, and the G20. Under Trump, however, this relationship shifted from engagement to neglect. His administration largely abandoned Africa-focused policy frameworks in favor of ad-hoc interventions, driven more by ideological posturing than geopolitical calculus. The 'Prosper Africa' initiative ostensibly aimed at boosting U.S. trade and investment barely touched South Africa meaningfully, while Trump's transactional worldview reduced diplomacy to short-term deals, ignoring long-term strategic vacuum allowed domestic and foreign actors to weaponize disinformation. Afrikaner nationalist groups such as AfriForum, with strong networks in the U.S. conservative ecosystem, saw Trump's impulsiveness as a strategic opportunity. Drawing from Melissa Steyn's analysis in Whiteness Just Isn't What It Used to Be, these groups have long grappled with the erosion of white political dominance in post-apartheid South Africa. The 'white genocide' narrative provided them with an emotional hook appealing to Trump's base and bypassing nuanced diplomatic understand why such narratives find resonance, one must examine the historical architecture of Afrikaner nationalism. As T. Dunbar Moodie argues in The Rise of Afrikanerdom, Afrikaner nationalism was more than a political movement it was a quasi-religious civil religion, sanctifying racial separation as divine mandate and framing political dominance as a sacred duty. This belief system provided the moral and ideological scaffolding for apartheid and still echoes today in pockets of Afrikaner society, where victimhood narratives are deployed as political capital. Similarly, Dan O'Meara in Forty Lost Years shows how the National Party meticulously engineered a political order that consolidated Afrikaner economic and cultural power from 1948 to 1994. While apartheid's political edifice collapsed, the psychological and institutional residues of this power-seeking ideology survived. The mobilization of the 'white genocide' discourse in U.S. conservative circles is not a spontaneous phenomenon, it is a strategic continuation of this long tradition of using fear, identity, and international lobbying to protect white minority while Trump amplified the plight of white farmers, he never once addressed the existence of Orania, a whites-only enclave in South Africa, a relic of apartheid's ideology of 'separate development.' Orania is the physical embodiment of white privilege and autonomy in a Black-majority democracy, yet it escapes both U.S. diplomatic scrutiny and international condemnation. That such a place exists without sustained challenge from Washington underscores the selective outrage in U.S. foreign policy where white victimhood narratives are amplified, while systemic racial privilege is 'white genocide' discourse is not merely rhetorical it aligns with potential economic objectives. By casting South Africa as a country hostile to white farmers and foreign investors, it creates diplomatic pressure to dilute Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policies, opening the door for U.S. linked tech and infrastructure projects tied to white economic networks. One cannot ignore that projects like Starlink championed in conservative U.S. circles could benefit from a South African policy environment stripped of its transformation South Africa, the Trump era offers sobering lessons. First, the U.S. even as a self-styled global moral leader is not immune to racialized foreign policy. Second, populist leaders will readily sacrifice diplomatic consistency for domestic political theater, especially when racial narratives resonate with their base. Third, foreign disinformation campaigns, particularly from well-organized minority interest groups, can gain traction when amplified by a superpower's head of response must be more assertive. It should challenge the weaponization of racial narratives by foreign actors and call out selective U.S. outrage. Domestically, it must engage Afrikaner nationalist organizations both at home and abroad on the reality that South Africa is a constitutional democracy belonging 'to all who live in it,' and those seeking preferential treatment on the basis of race have no legitimate diplomatic disregard for South Africa is not simply an extension of domestic U.S. polarization, it is a demonstration of how identity politics now shapes global diplomacy. In this paradigm, facts are subordinate to ideology, and policy is subordinate to populist performance. For South Africa, engaging with such a superpower requires both strategic communication and an unflinching commitment to safeguarding its sovereignty against racialized policy interference. Trump's South Africa 'policy' was never about policy at all it was about politics. And in that theatre, the truth was not a casualty of war; it was an afterthought in a performance aimed not at Pretoria, but at Pennsylvania, Texas, and Florida. Charles Matseke (MPhil in Politics and International Relations) is a researcher and writer with a keen interest in contemporary political dynamics. His research focuses on electoral politics, foreign policy analysis, and international relations, with a particular emphasis on the Global South and Africa's role in global affairs.
