Friday, December 6, 2013

Nelson Mandela, ‘The Che Guevara of Of Africa’

By Ilana Mercer

Former South African President Nelson Mandela has died at age 95. As a historic corrective, here are excerpts from "The Che Guevara of Of Africa," a chapter in my book, "Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa," devoted to correcting the myths about the man:

...To some extent, Mandela’s legend has been nourished—even created—by sentimental Westerners. The measure of the man whom Oprah Winfrey and supermodel Naomi Campbell have taken to calling “Madiba”—Mandela’s African honorific; Winfrey and Campbell’s African affectation—has been determined by the soggy sentimentality of our MTV-coated culture. “Madiba’s” TV smile has won out over his political philosophy, founded as it is on energetic income redistribution in the neo-Marxist tradition, on “land reform” in the same tradition, and on ethnic animosity toward the Afrikaner.

Guru and gadfly, sage and showman, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela is not the focus of this monograph. Boatloads of biographical stuffing can be found in the odes penned to the man. Concentrating on Mandela, moreover, in a narrative about South Africa today would be like focusing on Jimmy Carter in an account of America of 2010. Going against the trend of hagiography as we are, it must be conceded that, notwithstanding Mandela’s agreement with the “racial socialism” currently contributing to the destruction of South Africa, his present role in his country’s Zimbabwefication is more symbolic—symbolic such as his belated, tokenistic condemnation of Mugabe to an intellectually meaty crowd of “moody models, desperate divas and priapic ex-Presidents,” who convened to celebrate Nelson’s ninetieth. The focus of our attention is, then, not the aging leader but his legacy, the ANC. Or “The Scourge of the ANC,” to quote the title of the polemical essay by Dan Roodt.

The patrician Mandela certainly deserves the sobriquets heaped on him by the distinguished liberal historian Hermann Giliomee: “He had an imposing bearing and a physical presence, together with gravitas and charisma. He also had that rare, intangible quality best described by Seamus Heaney as ‘great transmission of grace.’” Undeniably and uniquely, Mandela combined “the style of a tribal chief and that of an instinctive democratic leader, accompanied by old-world courtesy.” But there’s more to Mandela than meets the proverbial eye.

Cut to the year 1992. The occasion was immortalized on YouTube in 2006. Mandela’s fist is clenched in a black power salute. Flanking him are members of the South African Communist Party, African National Congress leaders, and the ANC’s terrorist arm, the Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which Mandela led. The sweet sounds of the MK anthem mask the ditty’s murderous words:

Go safely mkhonto
Mkonto we Sizwe
We the members of the Umkhonto have pledged ourselves to kill them—kill the whites

The catchy chorus is repeated many times and finally sealed with the responsorial, “Amandla!” (“Power”); followed by “Awethu” (“to the People”). Mandela’s genial countenance is at odds with the blood-curdling hymn he is mouthing. The “kill the whites” rallying cry still inspires enthusiasm at funerals and at political gatherings across South Africa, and has been, in practice, a soundtrack for the epic murder campaign currently being waged—however seldom it is acknowledged—against the country’s Boers. This is a side of the revered leader the world seldom sees. Or, rather, has chosen to ignore. Indeed, it appears impossible to persuade the charmed circles of the West that their idol (Mandela) had a bloodthirsty side, that his country (South Africa) is far from a political idyll, and that these facts might conceivably be important in assessing him.

Thanks to the foreign press, an elusive aura has always surrounded Mandela. At the time of his capture in 1962 and trial in 1963 for terrorism, he was described as though in possession of Scarlet-Pimpernel-like qualities—materializing and dematerializing mysteriously for his spectacular cameos. The reality of his arrest and capture were, however, decidedly more prosaic. (At the time, the writer’s father had briefly sheltered the children of two Jewish fugitives involved with the ANC’s operations. The family home was ransacked, and the infant Ilana’s mattress shredded by the South African Police.) About the myth of Mandela as a disciplined freedom fighter, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review writes wryly:

[A]s a newly qualified attorney [Mandela] was known as a big spending ladies’ man rather than as a focused political activist. To the horror of his African National Congress (ANC) colleagues, he even fancied becoming a professional boxer, so some of the ANC sighed with relief when he went to jail.

Nor was the ANC very good at terrorism—it certainly had nothing on the ascetic, self-sacrificing Salafis who man al-Qaeda. “Without East European expertise and logistics, not to forget Swedish money, [the ANC] would never have managed to make and transport a single bomb across the South African border,” avers Roodt. There was certainly precious little that would have dampened Joseph Lelyveld’s enthusiasm for “The Struggle.” But when the former (aforementioned) New York Times editor went looking for his exiled ANC heroes all over Africa, he found nothing but monosyllabic, apathetic, oft-inebriated men whom he desperately tried to rouse with revolutionary rhetoric.

In any event, the sainted Mandela was caught plotting sabotage and conspiring to overthrow the government. “Mandela … freely admitted at his trial, ‘I do not deny that I planned sabotage. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation.’” Confirms Giliomee: “Under the leadership of Nelson Mandela, the armed wing of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe, embarked on a low-key campaign of sabotage.” For that he was incarcerated for life. In 1967, the U.S. had similarly incarcerated the Black Panther’s Huey Newton for committing murder and other “revolutionary” acts against “racist” America. The FBI under J. Edgar Hoover proceeded to hunt down his compatriots who were plotting sabotage and assassination. Were they wrong too? The South African government later offered to release Mandela if he foreswore violence. Mandela—heroically, at least as The New York Times saw it—refused to do any such thing; so he sat. At the time, the Pentagon had classified the ANC as a terrorist organization. Amnesty International concurred, in a manner; it never recognized Mandela as a prisoner of conscience due to his commitment to violence. In 2002, “ANC member Tokyo Sexwale …, was refused a visa to the United States as a result of his terrorist past.”

Mandela has not always embodied the “great transmission of grace.” The man who causes the Clintons, rocker Bono, Barbra Streisand, Richard Branson, and even Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands to fall about themselves, was rather ungracious to George W. Bush. In 2003, Bush had conferred on Mandela the nation’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom. Mandela greedily accepted the honor, but responded rudely by calling America “a power with a president who has no foresight and cannot think properly,” and “is now wanting to plunge the world into a holocaust … If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don’t care for human beings.” If the then eighty-five-year-old Mandela was referring to the invasion of Iraq, he must have forgotten in his dotage that he had invaded Lesotho in 1998. Pot. Kettle. Black.

Rebranding Socialism
History is being extremely kind to “Madiba.” Since he came to power in 1994, approximately 300,000 people have been murdered. The “Umkhonto we Sizwe” rallying cry is, indubitably, emblematic of the murderous reality that is the democratic South Africa. For having chosen not to implement the ANC’s radical agenda from the 1950s, Mandela incurred the contempt of oddball socialist scribes like the Canadian Naomi Klein. Were Ms. Klein—the author of No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies—more discerning, she’d have credited Mandela for brilliantly rebranding socialism.

His crafty Third-Way politics aside, Mandela has nevertheless remained as committed as his political predecessors to race-based social planning. An important element of our policy,” he said at the fiftieth ANC Conference, on December 16, 1997, “is the deracialisation of the economy to ensure that … in its ownership and management, this economy increasingly reflects the racial composition of our society … The situation cannot be sustained in which the future of humanity is surrendered to the so-called free market, with government denied the right to intervene … The evolution of the capitalist system in our country put on the highest pedestal the promotion of the material interests of the white minority.

Wrong, “Madiba.” If anything, capitalism undermined the country’s caste system; and capitalists had consistently defied apartheid’s race-based laws because of their “material interests.” Why, the “biggest industrial upheaval in South Africa’s history,” the miner’s strike of 1922, erupted because “the Chamber of Mines announced plans to extend the use of black labor. By 1920 the gold mines employed over twenty-one thousand whites … and nearly one hundred and eighty thousand blacks.” White miners were vastly more expensive than black miners, and not much more productive.

One of the mining chiefs, Sir Lionel Phillips, stated flatly that the wages paid to European miners put the economic existence of the mines in jeopardy. … Production costs were rising so the mining houses, entirely English owned and with no great sympathy for their increasingly Afrikaner workforce, proposed to abandon existing agreements with the white unions and open up for black workers…jobs previously reserved for whites.

A small war ensued. Bigotry led to bloodshed and martial law was declared. Although a defining event in the annals of South African labor, the General Strike exemplified the way South African capitalists worked against apartheid to maximize self-interest. Mandela clearly looks at business through the wrong end of a telescope.

Problematic too is Mandela’s Orwellian use of the world “deracialisation,” when what he was in fact describing and prescribing is racialization—a coerced state of affairs whereby the economy is forced, by hook or by crook, to reflect the country’s racial composition. Duly, the father of the Rainbow Nation also fathered the Employment Equity Act. It has seen the ANC assume partial ownership over business. Mandela’s comrade-in-arms, the late Joe Slovo, once dilated on the nature of ownership in the New South Africa. In an interview with a liberal newsman, this ANC and Communist Party leader suggested an alternative to nationalization which he dubbed ‘socialization.’” With a wink and a nod Slovo explained how the state would—and has since begun to—assume control of the economy “without ownership”:

The state could pass a law to give control without ownership—it can just do it. It can say the state has the right to take the following decisions in Anglo American [the great mining company]. You can have regulations and legislation like that, without ownership.

All of which is under way in South Africa. Mandela, moreover, has provided the intellectual seed-capital for this catastrophic “racial socialism.” (And who can forget how, in September of 1991, “Mr. Mandela threatened South African business with nationalization of mines and financial institutions unless business [came] up with an alternative option for the redistribution of wealth”?)

If the values that have guided Mandela’s governance can be discounted, then it is indeed possible to credit him with facilitating transition without revolution in South Africa. Unlike Mugabe, Mandela did not appoint himself Leader for Life, and has been the only head of state on the Continent to have ceded power voluntarily after a term in office. If not aping Africa’s ruling rogues is an achievement, then so be it.

Granted, Mandela has also attempted to mediate peace around Africa. But, “not long after he was released from prison,” notes The New Republic’s assistant editor James Kirchick, “Mr. Mandela began cavorting with the likes of Fidel Castro (‘Long live Comrade Fidel Castro!’ he said at a 1991 rally in Havana), Moammar Gaddafi (whom he visited in 1997, greeting the Libyan dictator as ‘my brother leader’), and Yasser Arafat (‘a comrade in arms’).” One has to wonder, though, why Mr. Kirchick feigns surprise at—and feels betrayed by—Mandela’s dalliances. Mandela and the ANC had never concealed that they were as tight as thieves with communists and terrorist regimes—Castro, Gaddafi, Arafat, North Korea and Iran’s cankered Khameneis. Nevertheless, and at the time, public intellectuals such as Mr. Kirchick thought nothing of delivering South Africa into the hands of professed radical Marxist terrorists. Any one suggesting such folly to the wise Margaret Thatcher risked taking a handbagging. The Iron Lady ventured that grooming the ANC as South Africa’s government-in-waiting was tantamount to “living in cloud-cuckoo land.”

In The Afrikaners, Giliomee also commends Mandela for his insight into Afrikaner nationalism. Mandela, Giliomee contends, considers Afrikaner nationalism “a legitimate indigenous movement, which, like African nationalism, had fought British colonialism.” This is unpersuasive. Forensic evidence against this romanticized view is still being recovered from the dying Afrikaner body politic. Judging by the ANC-led charge against the country’s Afrikaner history and heroes—landmarks and learning institutions—Mandela’s keen understanding of the Afrikaner was not transmitted to the political party he created. Of late, local and international establishment press has showered Mr. Mandela with more praise for serving as the mighty Springboks’ mascot.

The Springboks are the South African national rugby team, and the reigning world champions. Not that you’d guess it from the film “Invictus,” Clint Eastwood’s “over-reverent biopic,” but Mandela has never raised his authoritative voice against the ANC’s plans to force this traditionally Afrikaner game to become racially representative. Conversely, the absence of pale faces among the “Bafana Bafana,” South Africa’s equally celebrated national soccer team, has failed to similarly awaken the leader’s central-planning impulses. Has Mandela piped up about the ANC’s unremitting attacks on Afrikaans as the language of instruction in Afrikaner schools and universities? Or about the systematic culling of the white farming community? Has that paragon of virtue, Mandela, called publicly for a stop to these pogroms? Cancelled a birthday bash with “the hollow international jet set”—“ex-presidents, vacuous and egomaniacal politicians, starlets, coke-addled fashion models, intellectually challenged and morally strained musicians”? Called for a day of prayer instead (oops; he’s an ex-communist)? No, no, and no again.

Bit by barbaric bit, South Africa is being dismantled by official racial socialism, obscene levels of crime—organized and disorganized—AIDS, corruption, and an accreting kleptocracy. In response, people are “packing for Perth,” or as Mandela would say, the “traitors” pack for Perth. The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR) was suitably dismayed to discover that close to one million whites had already left the country; the white population shrank from 5,215,000 in 1995 to 4,374,000 in 2005 (nearly one-fifth of this demographic).

Chief among the reasons cited for the exodus are violent crime and affirmative action. Alas, as the flight from crime gathered steam, the government stopped collecting the necessary emigration statistics. (Correlation is not causation, but …) The same strategy was initially adopted to combat out-of-control crime: suppress the statistics. The exact numbers are, therefore, unknown. What is known is that most émigrés are skilled white men. Also on record is Mandela’s message to them: He has accused whites of betraying him and of being “traitors” and “cowards.” Had “Madiba” wrestled with these defining issues, perhaps he’d be deserving of the monstrous statues raised in his honor. These too are in the socialist realist aesthetic tradition.

Back to the original question: Why have the leaders of the most powerful country on the continent (Mandela and Mbeki) succored the leader of the most corrupt (Mugabe)? The luminaries of Western café society were not the only ones to have given Mugabe a pass. So did blacks. “When Mugabe slaughtered 20,000 black people in southern Zimbabwe in 1983,” observes columnist Andrew Kenny, “nobody outside Zimbabwe, including the ANC, paid it the slightest attention. Nor did they care when, after 2000, he drove thousands of black farm workers out of their livelihoods and committed countless atrocities against his black population. But when he killed a dozen white farmers and pushed others off their farms, it caused tremendous excitement.”

When he socked it to Whitey, Mugabe cemented his status as hero to black activists and their white sycophants in South Africa, the US, and England. “Whenever there is a South African radio phone-in programme [sic] on Zimbabwe, white South Africans and black Zimbabweans denounce Mugabe, and black South Africans applaud him. Therefore, one theory goes, Mbeki could not afford to criticise [sic] Mugabe,” who is revered, never reviled, by South African blacks.

Left-liberal journalist John Pilger and classical liberal columnist Andrew Kenny concur: bar Zimbabweans, blacks across Africa and beyond have a soft spot for Mugabe. While issuing the obligatory denunciations of the despot, Pilger makes clear that Mugabe is merely a cog in the real “silent war on Africa,” waged as it is by bourgeois, neo-colonial businessmen and their brokers in western governments. From his comfy perch in England, this Hugo Chávez supporter preaches against colonialism and capitalism. Writing in the Mail & Guardian Online, Pilger untangled the mystery of Mbeki and Mugabe’s cozy relationship: “When Robert Mugabe attended the ceremony to mark Thabo Mbeki’s second term as President of South Africa, the black crowd gave Zimbabwe’s dictator a standing ovation.” This is a “symbolic expression of appreciation for an African leader who, many poor blacks think, has given those greedy whites a long-delayed and just comeuppance.”

South Africa’s strongmen are saluting their Alpha Male Mugabe by implementing a slow-motion version of his program. One only need look at the present in Zimbabwe “if you want to see the future of South Africa,” ventures Kenny. When Mugabe took power in 1980, there were about 300,000 whites in Zimbabwe. Pursuant to the purges conducted by the leader and his people, fewer than 20,000 whites remain. Of these, only 200 are farmers, five percent of the total eight years ago.” Although most farmland in South Africa is still owned by whites, the government intends to change the landowner’s landscape by 2014. “Having so far acquired land on a ‘willing buyer, willing seller’ basis, officials have signaled that large-scale expropriations are on the cards.”

In South Africa, the main instrument of transformation is Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). This requires whites to hand over big chunks of the ownership of companies to blacks and to surrender top jobs to them. Almost all the blacks so enriched belong to a small elite connected to the ANC. BEE is already happening to mines, banks and factories. In other words, a peaceful Mugabe-like program is already in progress in South Africa. Except that it’s not so peaceful. South Africans are dying in droves, a reality the affable Mandela, the imperious Mbeki, and their successor Zuma have accepted without piety and pity.

Excerpted from “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa”(pages 140-151)

ILANA Mercer is a classical liberal writer, based in the United States. She pens WND's longest-standing paleolibertarian column.  ILANA is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies. She is the author of "Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa."  ILANA's website is . She blogs at

Copyright 2013 Ilana Mercer


  1. I'm glad he's dead. Good riddance!

    1. But we have been deprived his outstanding sense of irony. To wit:

      "In 2003, Bush had conferred on Mandela the nation’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom. Mandela greedily accepted the honor, but responded rudely by calling America 'a power with a president who has no foresight and cannot think properly' "

  2. Dear Ilana,

    You are a lovely lady with a brilliant mind. I admire you...
    Until you become dishonest about something, which I concede, is probably hard for you to see.
    But let me try.

    Mandela wasn't a socialist of the kind you are trying to make him out to be (Che).

    He spoke well of Zionism and Jews and learned his guerilla fighting from ISRAEL not Castro:-

    "Mandela’s memoirs are full of positive references to Jews and even Israel. He recalls that he learned about guerilla warfare not from Fidel Castro, but from Arthur Goldreich, a South African Jew who fought with the Palmach during Israel’s War of Independence. He relates the anecdote that the only airline willing to fly his friend, Walter Sisulu, to Europe without a passport was Israel’s own El Al. And the ultimate smoking gun—the equation of Israel’s democracy with apartheid—doesn’t exist."

    More importantly, Mandela was backed and instigated every step of the way by Jewish helpers like Joe Slovo (whom you don't mention) and the entire Jewish liberal elite (that you don't mention).
    Most importantly, he was also financed by Jewish billionaires, like Igor Ichikowitz ( whom you don't mention).

    You quietly ignore the fact that the African National Movement, like so many other "nationalist" movements, was instigated and manipulated by the globalist cartel, which is, to put it gently, not black, but rather closer to you.

    In fact, it is largely Jewish or Anglo-Jewish. Just as the black liberation movement in this country was instigated and helped by white liberals, whose funding can be traced back to foundations and trusts, run by Jews.

    But, if anyone points that out, you would suddenly call that anti-semitic, right?

    Meanwhile, dear lady, you also missed this:

    Electronic Intifada:

    "Yesterday I wrote a piece entitled “Israel’s House of Horrors” about the openly murderous statements of Israeli cabinet ministers. Just when I thought it couldn’t get worse, I read a news article on the website of The Jerusalem Post that Israel’s former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu — one of the most senior theocrats in the Jewish State “ruled that there was absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza aimed at stopping the rocket launchings” (“Eliyahu advocates carpet bombing Gaza,” The Jerusalem Post, 30 May, 2007).

    The Jerusalem Post reported that Mordechai made this ruling in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert citing biblical authority. The letter was published in a weekly journal distributed in synagogues throughout Israel. The report states that “According to Jewish war ethics, wrote Eliyahu, an entire city holds collective responsibility for the immoral behavior of individuals. In Gaza, the entire populace is responsible because they do nothing to stop the firing of Kassam rockets.”

    Eliayahu’s son, Shmuel Eliayhu, himself chief rabbi of Safad, amplified his father’s comments, stating: “If they don’t stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand.” He added, “And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don’t stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop.”

    This kind of genocidal hatred of Palestinians is not unusual in Israel."

    Again, Ilana, I think you're great and your defense of European culture is great.
    But, if we're going to be honest, let's really be honest.

    1. This comment deserves to be highlighted as an article in itself.

  3. More about the disingenuous propaganda of Ilana Mercer here:

    1. Pined for a eugencist and racist immigration law
    2. Misrepresented the numbers on leprosy to portray non white immigrants as diseased
    3. Misrepresented the nature of some of the targets of black killing in Africa -who were really
    violent white supremacists
    4. Expressed preference for white rule in a black country, S. Africa.

    Ilana Mercer is in denial or is ignorant about the globalist cartel, which is natural.
    But no one else needs to be.
    Racial violence in S Africa or in the US is the direct result of the activities of the cartel.

    1. Who would not prefer white rule in south africa? The country was better in *every* *possible* *way* under white rule.

    2. In "One More Media Matters Con Man" the lies above and the methods in which they were propagated are exposed.

      Terry Krepel authors a website called ConWebWatch. ...

      Krepel began his litany by accusing me, on June 12, 2011, of lionizing Eugene Terre'Blanche, the murdered leader of South Africa's Afrikaner Resistance Movement. This daughter of an anti-apartheid activist (me) also stands in the dock for "pining for the days of apartheid," and helping to hide Terre'Blanche's "group's history of violence and white supremacism."

      In the "War on White South Africa," I had reported on the manner in which the controversial 69-year-old Mr. Terre'Blanche was bludgeoned to a pulp with pangas and pipes by two black farmhands. The old Afrikaner had not threatened anyone.

      But Terry Krepel bays for the blood of Terre'Blanche, who "reaped what he sowed." Or so writes Krepel of Terre'Blanche's "violent life" and "violent death."

      What, then, of the many farming families who've met a similar fate?

      As my book, "Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa," documents, South Africa's farmland is a vast burial ground for thousands of farmers. How does Krepel dismiss their deaths? And why does Krepel conceal that the Terre'Blanche killing bore the telltale signs of a farm murder? Do these victims deserve the fate that befell Terre'Blanche?

      Pray tell us, Terry Krepel, if you believe that the indefatigable Dr. Gregory Stanton of Genocide Watch also harbors "racial ambitions," for expressly recognizing that innocent Anglo- and Afrikaner farmers, many of whom might have held racially impure thoughts, are being targeted? For some time now, Dr. Stanton has been warning about the systematic extermination of rural whites in South Africa.

      Alas, for failing to celebrate Terre'Blanche's murder, I am said to be a lionizer and a sympathizer. Contra Krepel—and without fear or favor—I sympathize with innocents murdered, no matter their political persuasion, a stand that I extend to Col Muammar Gaddafi's son and grandsons, who were eliminated by the proxies of President Barack Obama.

      As do I disavow democracy. The rights to life, liberty and property were not meant to be subject to the vagaries of majority rule. For this perfectly proper position, Krepel has implied that I'm racist.

      Ignored by Krepel is what every democratic theorist worth his salt knows: South Africa doesn't even qualify as a democracy. ..."

      The complete column refuting some of the repulsive libel of Anon is:

      As to the "leprosy" and other loopy accusations of "misrepresentation: LIES. Liberals lie. There are 800 plus end notes in my book, "Into the Cannibal's Pot." Nothing but the unpopular, sad truth.

  4. Well, THAT certainly threw some light on the Mandela narrative...

  5. "Che’s life is an inspiration for every human being who loves freedom, we will always honor his memory." — Nelson Mandela

    "Che is not only an intellectual, he was the most complete human being of our time, our eras most perfect man." — Jean Paul Sartre


    - Worked in a Leper colony and treated lepers (as seen in the excellent film ‘The Motorcycle Diaries’)

    - Was instrumental in teaching over 900,000 Cubans to read

    - Tended to thousands of sick campesinos

    - Helped construct dozens of schools throughout Cuba

    - Removed the Mafia and dictatorship of Batista from Cuba which had killed 20,000 Cubans and tortured thousands more

    - Desegregated the schools in Cuba before they were in the Southern US

    - Called out South Africa’s Apartheid in 1964, 30 years before the West!

    - Denounced the racism and KKK in America

    - Warned of the dangers of the IMF, 3 decades before most of the developing world realized they had been scammed into debt slavery

    - Left a bourgeoisie comfortable life of the upper class, a potential well compensated career as a medical doctor, and a high regarded governmental position, each time to slog through the jungle and fight guerrilla wars against impenetrable odds! ... In fact, near the end it took 1,800 rangers to bring down his 25 men.

    Che’s “CRIMES” were:

    ~ Stopping American companies from owning 70 % of the arable land in Cuba

    ~ Teaching peasants to read, by bringing the Cuban literacy rate from 60 to 97 %

    ~ Having the 200 or so War Criminals who killed 20,000 Cubans for Batista shot against a wall

    ~ Fighting white mercenaries in the African Congo with an all black army

    ~ Speaking out against US and eventually USSR Imperialism while demanding that the poor of the world be allowed to live a life of dignity
    'Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life' - by Jon Lee Anderson

    1. Our good man Che presided over this at La Cabana, and no doubt all of them deserved it (from

      In front of the wall, full of holes by the bullets, tied to posts, the agonizing corpses remained,
      soaked in blood and paralyzed in indescribable positions, spastic hands, painful expressions of shock, unhinged jaws, a hole where an eye used to be before. Some of the bodies had the skulls destroyed and exposed brains due to the last shot.

      Executions took place from Monday to Saturday, and each day about one to seven prisoners were executed, sometimes more. Death sentence cases had a blanket authorization of Fidel, Raul and Ché, and were decided by the Tribunal or by the Communist Party. Each member of the firing squad got fifteen pesos per execution. The officers got twenty five. In Oriente province summary sentences were profusely applied, but I don’t have reliable figures. Nevertheless, in La Cabaña, until June of 1959, about six hundred prisoners were executed, plus and indefinite number of prison sentences… all this after a revolutionary process in which about four thousand people lost their lives on both sides.

    2. Were the Catholic Youth, whom Che had shot en masse by firing squad, a bunch of "war criminals"? Yours is a typical Marxist defense of a dictator. You focus on stated intentions, not reality. Life under socialism is not "dignified." It is impoverished and unfree for all except men like Che, who reside at the top of the food chain.

    3. Regardless of whether you own the T-shirt, Che Guevarra was a mass murderer. Just because he fought against US imperialism doesn't excuse him from having killed hundreds or even thousands of innocents.

    4. Ah yes. Like little rats the apologists for a socialist terrorist come out. Fucking idiots.

  6. "The African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa was guided by two Communist Jews, Albie Sachs, "one of its foremost intellectuals"( London Sunday Times, August 29, 1993) and Yossel Mashel Slovo (Joe Slovo, 1926-1995).

    Slovo was born in a shtetl in Lithuania and grew up speaking Yiddish and studying the Talmud. He joined the ANC's terrorist wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe, in 1961 and eventually became its commander. He was named Secretary General of the South African Communist Party in 1986. ("Joe Slovo," Jewish Chronicle, January 13, 1995).

    Slovo had been the "planner of many of the ANC terrorist attacks, including the 1983 car bomb that killed 19 people and injured many others... Slovo, who had traveled to the Soviet Union many times, was awarded a Soviet medal on his 60th birthday...Slovo is a dedicated Communist, a Marxist Leninist without morality of any kind, for whom only victory counts, whatever the human cost, whatever the bloodshed...Slovo disputes little of his image as 'the Communist mastermind' behind the ANC's armed struggle.

    (Albie Sachs, left)

    'Revolutionary violence has created the inspirational impact that we had intended, and it has won for the ANC its leading position,' Slovo said." ("Rebel Strategist Seeks to End Apartheid," L.A. Times, Aug. 16, 1987, p. 14). When Nelson Mandela's ANC took over South Africa, Slovo was named Minister of Housing."

    Keep reading for South African housing conditions.


    Wrapped in bogus idealism, Jewish social & political activism largely serves the Illuminati's secret satanic agenda. Jewish activists are dupes or opportunists. The ANC, like Communism in general, deceived the masses into overthrowing the government and installing Illuminati puppets like Nelson Mandela.

    The plight of Blacks in South Africa is much worse under the "peoples' government." The number of people living on $1 a day doubled from two to four million. The unemployment rate doubled to 48% from 1991-2002. (It is 25.2% today.)

    huts.jpegIn 2006, only 5,000 of the more than 35 million black South Africans earned more than $60,000. A quarter of the entire population lived in shacks without running water or electricity. A quarter have no access to clean water. 40% have no telephone.

    The HIV/AIDS/TB infection rate is 20%. Life expectancy dropped by 13 years. 40% of schools have no electricity.

    Where is the ANC'S concern for the people? Obviously it was a ruse that enabled the bankers to gain control over South Africa's resources, just as they took over Russia's 70 years before . Source


    Terrorism is an instrument of the Illuminati Jewish central banking cartel based in London.

    Ninety five percent of the world's terror, including 9-11, can be traced to this source via the world's intelligence services, especially the CIA, Mossad and MI-6. They are funding the Taliban so Americans can waste their energy in endless war.

    We live in a society that is breathtaking in its hypocrisy. But that is the strategy, to pretend to be one thing while doing the opposite.

    Note: Ron alerted me to this: Mandela was MI-6 Agent

    SUNDAY HERALD, UK: Nelson Mandela is ... named as an MI6 agent who... allowed UK spying operations to be based in South Africa. Allegations of Mandela's recruitment by the British intelligence service ... revealed in a controversial new book, 'MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations,' by the acclaimed intelligence expert Stephen Dorril.

    Nelson Mandela Mocks Idea He Was MI-6 -- What do you expect? - See more at:

  7. I realize I'm repeating what Ms. Mercer said above but it bears repeating because it is an obvious lesson that no "progressive" will ever acknowledge:

    If anything, capitalism undermined the country’s caste system; and capitalists had consistently defied apartheid’s race-based laws because of their “material interests.” Why, the “biggest industrial upheaval in South Africa’s history,” the miner’s strike of 1922, erupted because “the Chamber of Mines announced plans to extend the use of black labor. By 1920 the gold mines employed over twenty-one thousand whites … and nearly one hundred and eighty thousand blacks.” White miners were vastly more expensive than black miners, and not much more productive.

    One of the mining chiefs, Sir Lionel Phillips, stated flatly that the wages paid to European miners put the economic existence of the mines in jeopardy. … Production costs were rising so the mining houses, entirely English owned and with no great sympathy for their increasingly Afrikaner workforce, proposed to abandon existing agreements with the white unions and open up for black workers…jobs previously reserved for whites.

    A small war ensued. Bigotry led to bloodshed and martial law was declared. Although a defining event in the annals of South African labor, the General Strike exemplified the way South African capitalists worked against apartheid to maximize self-interest. Mandela clearly looks at business through the wrong end of a telescope.

    It is "progressive" legal philosophy that permits the destruction of private property rights in the name of solving what is usually a non-existent problem all in the name of "doing good". The fact that big business or "privileged" whites might and quite often use these theories to crush minority rights always escapes the tiny "progressive" mind.

    Just yesterday, Tom Woods interviewed David Beito about fraternal aid societies and how white doctors in Mississippi successfully harassed a fraternal medical plan/system that aided poor blacks in the Mississippi delta.

    Of course, this is all the fault of capitalism, right?

    So we are now left with the "new" crime ridden South Africa quickly heading towards the Zimbabwe model thanks to leftist hipsters cheer-leading the end of private property.

  8. When everyone in the MSM worships someone, you know they are a complete SOB.

    1. My thoughts exactly! At a minumum, without knowing much about the man, I knew that Mandela must be a commie. The MSM loves commies.

    2. Bingo Tom. Bingo! The Leftist maggots will always praise Communist terrorists and murderers. Makes me sick.

  9. @Bob Roddis

    I wasn't defending socialism. I was pointing out that Mandela, while admiring of Che, was basing his tactics on Israeli tactics.

    And I was pointing out the behind the useful idiots who cheer for Che are huge family trusts and foundations representing the largest financial and business houses.

    L Rajiva

    1. Mandela was no friend of Israel. Israeli tactics? I confess to not having read Mandela's tedious books. But do quote chapter and verse of Mandela referring to his Israeli inspiration. I do not believe it. And since posters fail to provide proper citations, it's impossible to verify. What my book does document in detail is the close ties between Israel and South Africa, which Israel motivated using the language of ... America's Founders. Here is an excerpt (pages 192-194):

      "... Against the decree of the United States, Israel’s Labor and Likud governments alike chose barter over boycotts. In a 1986 speech in New York, Yitzhak Shamir, at the time Israel’s foreign minister, gave expression to the Jeffersonian notion that comity and commerce were far better catalysts for peaceful change than embargoes [or democracy delivered with daisy-cutters]. He told his “audience that Israel would not institute sanctions against South Africa.” Instead, Jerusalem would leave “entangling alliances” to the great powers and continue its “normal” relations with Pretoria. Perhaps inevitably, Israel was credibly accused in May of 2010 of offering to provide apartheid-era South Africa with nuclear warheads. The apartheid-era government would never have declassified the relevant documents published by Sasha Polakow-Suransky in "The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa"; the ANC did the declassifying. Among the unclassified documents was a letter dated November 22, 1974, and marked “Top Secret,” from Israel’s then Minister of Defense Shimon Peres to Eschel Rhoodie,
      Secretary of Information in the Vorster government. (Rhoodie briefly appeared earlier in this book, concerning his “Muldergate” role.) The missive alludes to the two countries’ shared determination to resist their enemies and to refuse to submit to the injustices against them. Peres signs off, “With warm personal regards, I am sincerely yours.”
      The sentiment found expression in a comprehensive bilateral agreement signed in 1976 by Prime Minister John Vorster during his visit to Israel. “Essentially, the two nations pledged themselves to each other’s survival and freedom from foreign interference.” Always game to discredit the still-extant Jewish state for its real or imagined indiscretions, the “international community” went into a frothing frenzy on receiving confirmation of the “open secret” status of the relationship between Israel and the pariah country said community helped extinguish.
      Older Afrikaners and Israelis have not forgotten this epoch in their shared history. Alas, while the Old South Africa reciprocated in kind—during the dismantling of its nuclear arsenal in 1993, under the watch of the International Atomic Energy Agency, South Africa was careful to protect the identity of its Israeli collaborators—..."

  10. Ms. Mercer,

    Thank you for your responses. It's certainly very possible that ConWatch has misrepresented your views. I will go back and look at it more closely.

    But you didn't respond to the links I posted showing the well-documented facts about Jewish promotion of Mandela,funding of him, induction of him into communism, instigation of violence against whites, and the dealings of Oppenheimer with Mandela, after he left jail. This was so obvious that African nationalists were demanding the expulsion of the communists from the movement.

    Just one link out of dozens:

  11. Also,

    While appreciating your bravery and honesty on many issues, I have raised this same issue once before on the Paul Deen issue:

  12. And while on the subject of the Mossad and its sponsorship of the ANC, here's another delightful project birthed by the Mossad - Tamil Eelam.
    You won't hear that in the MSM

    Until then, we dumb Tamils who lived through the Tiger terrorism daily, just called them terrorists and criminals.
    Now it turns out, thanks to the Tamil diaspora, Mossad and extortion, the Rothschild dream of fracturing the sub-continent at all sides is about the come to pass.

    Meanwhile, in the US, armchair theorists who have never seen a smidgeon of terrorism, war, or anything else, continue to prattle on with bogus theories and disingenuous special pleading.
    Human rights interventionism indeed.