South Africa under ANC Rule Part 1 (of a 3 part series): The Mandela Era (1994 -1999)

This is a continuation on the geopolitical history of South Africa.  And it starts off with Nelson Mandela becoming South Africa’s first black President. The time is April 1994. To appease the white minority, a dual leadership ruled the country. Former President Klerk, and new President Mandela jointly ruled the country for a year.

 South Africa was on a honeymoon for a year after the elections, but reality soon intruded, and the country woke up to find itself suffering a severe hangover. The party was over, and the joyous honeymoon was now in serious danger of tearing itself apart, while the country was going down the tubes.

The Parasite

For the past 300 years, we find that whenever Jewish finance has political dominance of a country, one of the first things that they do is to abolish the death penalty. Why? Knowing what we know about the Jewish character, the answer should be fairly obvious. Since they are amongst the chief mischief-makers in the land, the abolishment of the death penalty is there to make sure that they do not have to exercise as much caution as they used to – in the “old days”.

Morally, the country has decayed since the birth of the “New South Africa”. Gambling is on the rise, pornography has become legal, and the conservatives are out, and the Jewish Liberals “, are in. The drug mafia –“Dope Inc” has moved into South Africa in a big way. The constitution has been amended, resulting in the restraint on the enforcement powers of the law and order capacity, and criminals are feeling much safer. And corruption amongst most sectors of the public service has exploded. All of this has resulted in a huge increase  in all types of crime.

 For the sake of peace, people are crying out for the return of the old order. More people are out of work than before. The gap between rich and poor has increased. The government’s election promises have turned out to be so much “hot-air” . People’s expectations have not been realized.

 Instead, the mass have been lulled into a fantasy land. And here, we must focus on the aspect of interest, usury – the parasite (bankers) and the host (society’s newest members –the black community.

 Prior to 1970, the only South Africans eligible for bank loans, house bonds, and the like, was the white minority. After 1970, the net was widened to include the Indian business community. It is a well-accepted fact that a parasite cannot for long feed on the same host – it needs to find ever-larger hosts to feed its habit (greed), and so by the late 1980s, the facility of credit, and instalment credit, was very slowly at first, extended to select urban blacks. Once it was found that they took to this concept like a duck takes to water, this principal was extended to ever larger segments of the black population. This was one of the underlying causes and factors that led to a black-ruled government in 1994.

 The reasoning went like this:

For many decades, the parasite could feed off a host population of 2 million whites. In 1970, the host base was increased by 50% by adding whites and coloreds. Then, 20 years later, by 1994, the host base was increased to 20 million, when the blacks were added. The possibilities for the parasite were mind-boggling. And this is precisely what happened. Today, even the “kitchen girls” have opened instalment credit accounts, as well as take out personal loans from the parasite. As a result, today, the parasite has a host population of around 30 million people – or slaves.

 With the ever-spreading cancer of usury in society, South Africa is heading for a new “dark ages”. This will lead to even more social ills, resulting in the total moral and financial bankruptcy  of many individuals and communities. This, in turn will lead to many social explosions by frustrated communities.

 The only clear winners are the two families, and their associates in South Africa. Let us now focus on some of the critical issues and events within the country, the ramifications of which very few were aware of.

The Mini-Nuke Conspiracy

There was close co-operation between South Africa and Israel in the fields of arms, nuclear and bio-warfare research and testing.  Both states were pariahs on the international political circuit. One area was the development of long-range artillery with a nuclear warhead attached. Tested successfully and used thereafter in the Angolan conflict, with mini-nukes attached. These nukes were coated with a substance called “red mercury”. This substance ensured that there was no radioactive fallout. Red Mercury-coated nukes will destroy a place and yet be clean enough that the target area can be occupied within a short while after the explosion.

 There have been many instances where this technology was used. Some were used in false-flag operations, and others were used in various conflicts around the world in these past two decades.

 During the period from 1979 on, the South African military developed a vast number of these mini nukes (coated with red mercury), and when a black government came to power in April 1994, certain right-wing groups in the military were still in control of these bombs. The military had built a total of 64 nuclear bombs, and the right-wing elements in the military got their hands on some of them.

They placed some of these bombs in black townships around Johannesburg and Pretoria, threatening to blow them up, unless a separate state was established for the Afrikaners. After some intense negotiations between Mandela, the Anglo Group, and Constand Viljoen, a deal was done. Control of most, but not all, of these bombs was handed over to the Mandela government, in return for their own homeland, a “Volkstaat”, in the northern Transvaal region.

 Although it had a huge military infrastructure in the area, along with the Afrikaner farmer block, through the Transvaal Agricultural Union, it lacked a seaport, airport, fuel or water. The solution was to gain access to these, and the idea of a special economic corridor to back up this “Volkstaat”resulted in what became known as “The Maputo Corridor “. The sovereign state would include part of the game-rich bushveld and Mozambique had agreed to the construction of a transportation corridor from Maputo to the Volkstaat, in return for monetary agreements.

 By the beginning of 1996, the Maputo Corridor became a reality. To date, some $5 billion has been invested in this project.

Image result for maputo corridor map

The South Africa Foundation or the SAF

The South Africa Foundation was founded in 1959, during a period when the fight over national economic policy was intense: a turning point in South Africa, just as the period 1995-96 was. The Cape wing of the National Part – and the doctrine of apartheid – had been brought to power with British help in 1948, to terminate a movement towards South Africa’s industrialization.

 In 1958, the Transvaal wing of the party took over, with Hendrik Vervoed as Prime Minister. Vervoed managed to bend apartheid to coexist with a new drive for dirigist industrialization, alarming the British. Hence, the founding of the SAF as a counter to the Vervoed government. Vervoed found that his new economic policies were being blocked by Anglo-American, and the Oppenheimers.

In 1966, Vervoed was going to table a bill in parliament to either break-up the Anglo/De Beers complex or nationalize it. Before he could do so, he was assassinated in Parliament. You can guess who benefitted from this. Anglo remained intact. From its inception, the SAF was to function as a shadow government, in which all the power centers of the economy participated, directed by British interests, namely the Rothschilds.

 Throughout its history, the SAF has been powerful and dirty. Although it has many powerful members of the local business community as its members, it is heavily influenced by the Oppenheimer/De Bers/Anglo complex. This family is in a category of its own, in terms of the British power they wield. The Oppenheimer complex dominates the economy of South Africa.

 The relative success of the industrialization policy boosted the economy, reduced its dependence on imported goods, and expanded heavy industry, built up production of heavy machinery and the defense industry. Employment increased. South Africa became a world leader in the use of surface water resources for irrigation.  Modern agriculture made the country self-sufficient in food production, and it became a net food importer. If extremely dry South Africa can feed its population, then almost anybody can – with the proper technology and skills.

 Yet, South Africa’s success came to a screeching halt in the mid-1980s, due to 2 reasons: the first was the toll on the economy brought on by the war in Angola, and the financial sanctions imposed on the country by David Rockefeller’s Chase Bank. Second, was when most South African economists began the shift to the “free-market “orientations. On the eve of the 1994 elections, South Africa sits with a 40% unemployment, mainly among blacks, who live in absolute poverty.

 Now that the 2 families have managed to put a black government into power, they were pushing for a change in economic policy that would favor them rather than the people of South Africa.  Britain began pushing for changes in policy.

 Shilowa and the leaders of the tripartite alliance were engaged in a policy battle against an unelected shadow government called the SAF, for control of national economic policy.

Sam Sholiwa, the head of the largest trade union group in the country- Cosatu, wanted to follow the same economic policies of Vervoed – which would have boosted the South African economy. Britain wanted another policy. Shilowa, the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the ANC had formed a tripartite alliance to push for a nationalist economic policy; the main points were lower interest rates for investment in the productive economy, direct government control of the now-independent Central Bank, the maintenance of capital controls, and a strong labor force.

 The National Institute for Economic Policy laid out the immediate task on hand: “ A well –developed social and political structure lays the basis for long-term economic development and growth. Our policy should be geared toward developing and expanding the market, so that we start producing for 42 million people, instead of the 8 million who comprise the market. Research shows that production for the domestic market in industrially advanced countries generates more jobs than the market for exports. South Africa has so much spare capacity that the country can produce for both the domestic and export markets simultaneously. But the present policy of attracting speculative money has resulted in very few jobs being created relative to the amount invested, and should be rejected. The new economic policy is not in the least suited to accomplish any of these goals. On the contrary, it will either thwart these goals or make it impossible to achieve them in our lifetime”.

Britain Counter-Attacks

In February 1996, the SAF and Old Mutual-the largest insurance company in the country, put out a document called Growth for All. It was a terrible document, but Deputy President Thabo Mbeki and the government accepted it. This document from the SAF insists that the ANC leadership has absolutely “no choice but to accept its prescriptions hook, line and sinker”. Some of the demands were :- eliminate 100,000 government jobs, eliminate all export subsidies and capital controls, reduce the power of labor and the unions, privatize all government-controlled business, sell of all the Industrial Development Corporation holdings, the rand should be devalued. Furthermore, government pension funds should be fully privatized.

 And the worst was to overhaul the Education Department. In this context, Britain pushed through the adoption of a policy called “Outward-based education”, or OBE. This policy was originally developed by the Rockefellers University of Chicago. OBE was adopted and put into practice in South Africa. A careful review would show that South Africa was the ONLY country in the world to adopt this OBE policy for its learners. It was rejected by governments all over the world, for this policy was dangerous for new generations, as OBE would NOT create smart learners. This OBE policy was used to “Dumb-Down” the future generations. Instead of producing scientists, engineers, doctors, intellectuals, it would produce future generations that would be a liability instead of an asset to their communities.

 The April issue of Foreign Affairs, publication of Rockefeller’s CFR in New York, published an article telling investors to move their money out of South Africa, they did. At the same time, the Rothschilds Union Bank in Zurich issued a similar letter to clients, and then the South African currency, the Rand, went into free fall and lost 25% of its value within weeks. A Rockefeller bank-Standard Bank pushed up its interest rate by 1%, increasing the pain on the economy.

 Short-term speculative monies left the JSE and the country. Both moves created capital shortages and liquidity dried up, devastating the retail and wholesale trade. This was “punishment” time from the 2 families.

 South Africa’s fragile stability rested on Mandela as the figure of national unity. But a plummeting economy, a drain on the country’s skilled labor power, and the destruction of the country’s productive economy, would mean the county’s demise. For the Rothschild-controlled mining interests in South Africa, their historical concern has only been extraction of raw materials.

 Shilowa began to be mercilessly targeted for removal from the scene. He was being blamed for the collapse of the currency and the economy by the SAF and its members. Nonetheless, his resistance proved futile and the SAF got its way, and the SAF’s policies became the economic policy of the ANC government under Thabo Mbeki, who went on to become the next President, in 1999, when Mandela retired.

 Sam Shilowa went on to become the premier of Gauteng province, the economic hub of the country. Retired as Premier, he joined politics for a while, eventually becoming a private citizen. He fared better than Chris Hani, who had the same ideas on economic policies.  He was the leader of the South African Communist Party and chief of staff of uMkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the African National Congress (ANC). He was a fierce opponent of the apartheid government, and was assassinated on 10 April 1993.

 Because of his influence, Britain feared him. When he insisted on nationalist and socialist economic policies to be enacted upon the ANC talking power in a new government, he was assassinated. Allegations were that Joe Modise- also a senior ANC figure was behind the hit, and that Modise was supported by Thabo Mbeki – a rival of Hani. God knows the truth.

Before the Mandela takeover, the British and its South African networks cultivated those of the ANC leadership in exile in Western countries, especially in London, where they studied British economics, in some cases getting graduate degrees from British universities, such as the University of Sussex and the London School of Economic, the LSE. Both are under heavy Rothschild influence, and they teach “voodoo economics “, not real economics, so that when these students go back to their countries and become leaders many years later, they are then in a position to guide economic policies detrimental to their countries, and favorable to international finance.

The SAF and all its tentacles targeted the ANC elite and attempted to “educate” them along lines of their own oligarchical model. Regular meetings between the two sides began in London in June 1986. Also, Clive Menell of the Anglovaal mining group, in 1986, brought into being an extensive training program for the ANC elite in Israel.

Related image

The Comprador Class

 A Comprador is a person who acts as an agent for foreign organizations engaged in investment, trade, or economic or political exploitation. The term comprador, is a Portuguese word that means buyer, derives from the Latin comparare, which means to procure. The original usage of the word in East Asia meant a native servant in European households in Guangzhou in southern China or the neighboring Portuguese colony at Macao who went to market to barter their employers’ wares. The term then evolved to mean the native contract suppliers who worked for foreign companies in East Asia or the native managers of firms in East Asia. Compradors held important positions in southern China buying and selling tea, silk, cotton and yarn for foreign corporations and working in foreign-owned banks. Robert Hotung, a late-nineteenth-century compradore of the British-owned trading conglomerate Jardine, Metheson & Co. was believed to be the richest man in Hong Kong by the age of 35.  Within a few decades, when the Communists took control of China, in 1949, most of these compradors fled to China. Among the most successful of these compradors was Li Ka Shing-Hong Kong’s wealthiest man – and who is firmly in London’s orbit, and a Rothschild ally.

In Marxism, the term comprador bourgeoisie was later applied to similar trading-class in regions outside of East Asia. The nationalist movements identified the new ruling class as bourgeois compradors allied with imperialists

With the emergence (or re-emergence) of globalization, the term comprador has reentered the lexicon to denote trading groups and classes in the developing world in subordinate but mutually advantageous relationships with metropolitan capital.

Likewise, in South Africa, after 1948, Ernest Oppenheimer, and his son Harry, did a similar thing. Harry O had a problem dealing with the Afrikaner government. In the corridors of power in Pretoria and Cape Town, his power and influence were not welcome at all, even though one neither could nor do without each other.  He was derisively known as “Hoggenheimer”, an insulting remark. What Harry O needed was someone who the government will listen to, some of their own ethnic group – an Afrikaner businessman – who has similar problems as the Anglo Group. A giant Afrikaner finance conglomerate, Sanlam, had a subsidiary called Federal Mynbou. In 1963, Federal Mynbou acquired control of the second largest mining group, general Mining and Finance Corp, resulting in a new company called federal Mynbou General Mining, eventually shortened to Gencor. This deal was engineered by Harry O, for the reasons stated above. He now had his “Trojan Horse” in Pretoria and Cape Town – the halls of Afrikaner power.

 The giants of the Afrikaner business world- not all of them – became Anglo’s “white diamonds”, and some of them rose to become Britain’s comprador class. A classic example of this is Anton Rupert, who started in the cigarette manufacturing business in 1940. And in the 1980s, merged his tobacco business into British American Tobacco, or BAT; a company controlled by Jacob Rothschild. Since then, the Rothschilds and Oppenheimers have backed many Afrikaner business groups, and have, since then, brought them into London’s way of thinking.
Related image

South Africa’s black compradors are a small handful. The most prominent among them are Patrice Motsepe and his two brothers-in-law – Jeff Radebe (a power in the ANC), and Cyril Ramaphosa- the new South African President. In addition, we have Tokyo Sexwale. These three are amongst the most prominent of Britain’s comprador class. There are other several small players, such as D.Zihlangu, Mike Tete, N Sowazi, S NkosiPhuthuma Nhleko, and Z Vincent Mhtambo.  And finally, we have Saki Macazoma who is Rockefeller’s Comprador in South Africa, through his chairmanship of Standard Bank.

 In the pictures above, we find Lord Renwick meeting with various South African leaders.  Lord Robin Renwick is the Rothschild liaison with South Africa’s political leaders.

 And, finally, we have the Black Diamonds, a group of newly-rich black businessmen, who made their money by association with key government officials and various white and black compradors.

Black Diamonds

Black Diamonds is a collective term that is used pejoratively in South Africa to refer to members of the new black middle class. The term was not originally derogatory. It was coined by TNS Research Surveys and the UCT Unilever Institute to refer to members of South Africa’s fast-growing, affluent and influential black community. However, the term evolved negative connotations and is now used almost exclusively as a pejorative term.

Colonial governments in South Africa reduced bushmen to an underclass, and the first generations of independent government entrenched racial segregation in a legal system known as apartheid which, amongst other things, effectively reserved skilled jobs for whites and forced blacks into unskilled labour. This resulted in a society where whites comprised the upper, middle and lower classes with blacks forming an underclass. However, between 1990 and 1994, the South African government led by F.W. de Klerk, under severe internal and international pressure, initiated a process that would culminate in a transition to non-racial democracy, popularly referred to as the “democratic dispensation”. In the first non-racial elections of 1994, the African National Congress (ANC) was voted into power and embarked on an affirmative action programme that, gradually over the course of the subsequent decades, brought a new black middle class into being. Many blacks who have benefitted from the affirmative action programmes have become involved in South Africa’s lucrative gold and diamond mining industries, a fact which contributed to the development of the term Black Diamonds.

The term Black Diamonds is used in a derogatory way because people who are referred to as Black Diamonds are viewed by others as gauche nouveau riche/new money and showing poor taste by dressing in a gaudy way, wearing clothes and accessories with conspicuous name-brands (like Gucci or Prada), driving specific cars (like Mercedes Benz or BMWs), going to specific nightclubs (like ZAR, Cubana and News Café) and indulging generally in conspicuous consumption activities without restraint. They are viewed as being an avaricious caste with little regard for philanthropy or benevolent, typically African, social precepts like Ubuntu. Many people who are considered Black Diamonds are hardworking black people. Black Diamonds is similar to the concept of the WaBenzi.

Mandela – Britain’s Great Hope

 Prior to the release of Mandela from jail, the Oppenheimer complex had reached out to him, and worked very hard to turn his policies for a post-apartheid government that would reflect economic  policies that would be socially just. Under immense pressure on Mandela and the ANC leadership (many of whom were already on the Oppenheimer payroll, Mandela caved. The alternative would have been economic and social chaos, and a strong possibility of a civil and racial war.

 Nelson Mandela was a great humanitarian, who staunchly defended the principles of right vs wrong. He was greatly admired by friends and foe alike.

 In 1993, the Rothschilds gave Mandela and de Klerk the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly to Nelson Mandela and FW de Klerk “for their work for the peaceful termination of the apartheid regime, and for laying the foundations for a new democratic South Africa.”

 Now why would this be?

Let’s do a background. The Nobel Foundation was started by the Nobel brothers of Sweden. In the late 19th century, Alfred Nobel invented dynamite. And later went into the arms business, then got involved in the oil business in Baku, around the 1880s. He eventually got bought out by the French Rothschilds, and his interests were absorbed into the Royal Dutch Shell oil company. Since Shell is a company within the Rothschild orbit, and the Nobel brothers did very well with their tie-up with the Rothschilds, they became even wealthier than ever. Soon, the Nobels were just one more dynasty allied to the Rothschilds. It was at the urging of Lionel Rothschild that Alfred Nobel left the major part of his estate to the creation of the Nobel Prizes.

 Mandela was given more than 250 awards in his lifetime. But, the Nobel award was a special gift from the Rothschilds. Whenever the Rothschilds want to reward someone for services rendered to the Rothschild Empire, then this happens in one of two ways. If the person is a British citizen, then he is made a Sir, or Lord. If he is not a British citizen, then he is given a Nobel award. Even Kissinger was given the Nobel Peace Prize! So, remember this the next time someone gets a Nobel award.

During his presidency, Mandela would do the Oppenheimers and their backers- the Rothschilds – a great favor. He allowed some of the most powerful companies on the JSE to move to London. These were the Anglo/De Beers Group, as well as Anglo’s move to London, by March 1999, is part of a South African trend. Gencor, the former General Mining Corporation, became Billiton P.L.C. and listed in London. Old Mutual and Liberty Life, two of South Africa’s biggest insurance companies, and South African Breweries, the world’s fourth-largest brewer, and Dimension Data have all listed in London by the early 2000s.

As part of the deal, Anglo said it would try to buy the stakes it does not already own in Anglo American Coal, the Anglo American Industrial Corporation and Anglo American Platinum. It will also buy DeBeers interests in Anglogold, the Mondi forestry and paper products holding company and Samancor, the world’s biggest chrome producer.

 What this means in a nutshell is that more of the assets in South Africa, owned by South African companies, and shareholders, will now become “foreign-owned”.

 Over a period of time, this will weaken South Africa Inc, as well as bleed the South African economy of vital foreign exchange, through the payment of dividends to “foreign” shareholders. In short, a financial disaster for the country.

 Of all the companies mentioned above, all are in the Oppenheimer/Rothschild stable. The lone exception is Liberty Life, which is a part of the Standard Bank Group, whose largest shareholder (since 1952) has been David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan Bank.

 So much for a “new free-independent” south Africa.

 We will expand more on this theme in our follow-up article, called “The Mbeki Era”.

2 thoughts on “South Africa under ANC Rule Part 1 (of a 3 part series): The Mandela Era (1994 -1999)

  1. Mr Parker can you please explain to me your own version on what really happened in SHELL HOUSE ( LUTHULI HOUSE ) MASSACRE

  2. I can’t find parts 2 and 3. Maybe you named them differently to part 1? It would be very helpful if further parts were hyperlinked. Also if the articles were listed by title as well as by month. Maybe include a search by title box? I am really enjoying learning geopolitics from this site and I find the style of writing easy to comprehend. I just wish that all the following parts were linked. Thank you for what you do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Posts by Month