mangnitho mantsai
12.9K posts

mangnitho mantsai
@Mangnitho






It’s not even about reshuffling ministers. The issue is that the MK’s agenda is fundamentally unclear, which makes any meaningful alignment difficult. So why the constant insistence on MK when a DA-free government could’ve been achieved without them?

BREAKING NEWS | uMkhonto weSizwe Party removes Nhlamulo Ndhlela as party's national spokesperson.









JUST IN: Here is the Notice of Motion filed by the Helen Suzman Foundation in which it seeks to set aside the decision of the Speaker of the NA not to reconsider the suitability of Julius Malema to serve on the Judicial Services Commission. HSF wants Malema replaced on the JSC.
















During the Frank Dialogue Roundtable discussion with Prof JJ Tabane 2 days ago, Julius Malema fielded a bad-faith question from Mike Sham, a known reactionary agitator, who accuses the EFF of being "committed to killing farmers". Malema responded eloquently, making two critical points: 1. There is no such policy in the EFF. 2. The "Kill the Boer" chant is a struggle song and was never meant to be taken literally. The Constitutional Court and lower courts have affirmed this. But then, Malema doesn't stop talking, and this is where it falls apart. Instead of being brief, Malema moves to reassure Sham that he's not interested in killing anyone because he (Malema) is just like White people: "If you want to kill a farmer, start with me. I've got more cows than you. And more cows than many Whites. So don't think when we talk farmer, we talk White person. So you want to kill a farmer, start with me. The EFF will have to start with me. I'm a farmer myself. And therefore, why would I want to kill myself? Why would I want to commit suicide?" This is a rhetorical tool that Malema uses frequently, as we saw in the now-infamous interview with Jacaranda FM in 2014 (x.com/SizweLo/status…). Now, there's a common understanding by those in the know that the rich and powerful have more in common with each other than they do with ordinary people. In the context of political leaders, powerful people like Malema have more in common with the oppressor than with the people they purport to lead. This is just the nature of class relations. It appears that Malema doesn't want to miss an opportunity to remind White people of this. Once again, in this segment, we see a leader who champions the majority Black poor and marginalised, yet uses his own elite socio-economic status as a shield. The problem with this is that when Malema flexes his asset wealth to argue that he couldn't possibly support killing farmers because he himself is a major farmer, he is affirming his solidarity with the upper class. In case anyone thinks I'm stretching this, consider that by bragging about his massive cattle ownership, Malema is placing himself on the same side of the fence as the wealthy White landowners he frequently castigates. He is saying, "Don't worry, I am a member of the landed gentry now too. I have too much capital skin in the game to burn the system down". Malema goes even further when he says, "If I'm going to kill Whites, I will have to start with the friends of my kids..." This exposes the dissonance in his political messaging. When you read this alongside his "more cows than many Whites" flex, you see a masterclass in a political leader speaking out of both sides of his mouth. First, his followers hear a Black leader who refuses to be intimidated by White anxiety. He presents his personal integration into elite spaces, with his children attending elite schools with White friends and his massive farm ownership, as aspirational proof that the historically oppressed can conquer the spaces previously reserved for the White minority. But, second, when you strip away the aggressive posture and look at the actual substance of what he is saying, you see that it is deeply reassuring to the status quo. By invoking his own children's social reality through "the friends of my kids", Malema admits that his daily life is profoundly intertwined with the very demographic his base believes he politically targets. He is weaponising his elitist proximity to White people to neutralise accusations of radical intent. He is saying to what he frequently refers to as "Whiteness": "Relax. I am a wealthy father with capital assets and deep social ties inside your world. I am not a threat to your lives or your system because my own family's comfortable existence depends on the stability of this exact societal fabric". My point is that to maintain political power, Malema must continue to do two things: On one hand, he must continuously stoke radical, anti-systemic rhetoric. But then, on the other hand, to maintain his material status as part of the country's ultra-elite, he cannot afford to actually break the system. He can talk about it for sure, but that's a different thing altogether. So, by constantly reminding White people of his cows, his life in the suburbs, his farming prowess, and his children's White friends, he is working hard to balance on a tightrope by convincing the poor he is going to war for them, while reassuring the wealthy that he is far too heavily invested in the bourgeois lifestyle to ever pull that trigger. A majestic win-win for the CIC.


Sorry Bhakaniya 😂😭





