Herald Sandziso

Swazi🇸🇿

[Herald Sandziso @SandzisoX]

#EswatiniProtests 💔

[Gen Jean-Jacques Dessalines @MxolisiBob]

This volkstaat and "independent" Zulu state fantasy collapsed in 1909 and 1993.

You idiots don't READ and barely understand why South Africa is a unitary state , the only economically viable change will be a federal Southern Africa not the bullshit in your fantasies

[Sizwe SikaMusi @SizweLo]

If you want to understand why South Africa was always going to stagnate, you should pay attention to what Singapore’s founding Prime Minister said in 2009.

In his characteristically blunt style, Lee Kuan Yew argued that India’s greatest strengths on paper, which he said were its democracy, diversity and constitution, were also its greatest developmental obstacles.

India, he said, was too divided to act with unity, too democratic to plan long-term, too legalistic to move quickly and too caught up in procedure to ever become an industrially developed state like China, Germany, or even Singapore.

Now, if you replace “India” with “South Africa”, you land on a frighteningly accurate diagnosis of our post-Apartheid condition.

Like India, South Africa was reborn through law. The 1994 transition was not a revolution, it was a negotiated settlement, sealed by a highly legalistic, liberal constitution.

That constitution became a moral compass and a symbol of unity, yes, but also a developmental straightjacket as South Africa gave rights without building state capacity and committed to transformation without centralised power.

The result was gridlocked governance and an incapable state drowning in legalistic victories that would never translate into lived change.

Just like India, South Africa became a democracy where every action is contested and where procedural performance substitutes for developmental delivery. Here, anyone with the financial means can successfully mitigate against the most progressive pro-people policies.

This is what Lee Kuan Yew warned about: A system so entangled in judicial review and multi-stakeholder consensus that it cannot govern, plan, or reform.

In South Africa, land reform stalls because of legal ambiguity, endless public consultations and tender disputes, while state officials are paralysed, fearing litigation more than failure.

Every crisis turns into a commission of inquiry and every proposal becomes a court case, and when something does break through, like when a judge, a leader or a community forces the system to act in favour of the people, the system brutally punishes them.

A case in point: the ongoing tribunal against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge.

In 2022, Mbenenge, alongside Judge Gerald Bloem, ruled against Shell’s seismic blasting off the Wild Coast in the Eastern Cape. The judgment affirmed Indigenous and coastal communities’ environmental and cultural rights, blocked a multinational fossil fuel giant and undermined political elites aligned with extraction.

This was one of the very few moments the Constitution was used against capital and in defence of the marginalised. And what happened next was a disciplinary tribunal, a media campaign and a sudden legal focus on alleged WhatsApp misconduct.

However, what’s really on trial isn’t ethics, it’s ideological disobedience.

Mbenenge disrupted the unspoken rule: The law may speak of rights, but it must never block power, especially corporate power.

This is the core contradiction of South Africa’s post-Apartheid order that Lee Kuan Yew spoke about where a nation celebrates the Constitution as a vehicle of liberation, but uses its proceduralism and hyper-legalism to neutralise disruption and transformation.

Lee Kuan Yew’s warning wasn’t an endorsement of authoritarianism, it was just a realistic recognition that fragmented democracies and hyper-legalistic cultures tend to stagnate. South Africa is the case study.

SA has capable leaders in government, the opposition and the judiciary, yet it’s moving backwards on most development indicators. The common thread isn’t incompetence, it’s a system where every meaningful change gets bogged down in the very procedural safeguards that were supposed to protect transformation.

The uncomfortable truth is that you can’t have both extensive constitutional protections and rapid, directed development. South Africa chose the former and got the predictable result🥀

[Sizwe SikaMusi @SizweLo]

For decades, Africans have been told that corruption is the root of their problems. But this is not the full story. Not even close.

For many years, African states have been positioned as inherently corrupt, a perception reinforced by institutions like Transparency International, Western media, and global financial organisations.

Sadly, over time, this idea has deeply penetrated the psyche of many Africans, leading them to see corruption as the root cause of just about every problem in their societies.

This overwhelming focus on corruption—often without context or nuance—has had severe consequences. Now, many Africans distrust their own governments, blame the state for all societal failures, and even call for smaller government, which means handing over resources to the private sector.

Yet, history has shown that a weak state inevitably leads to worse governance, increased corporate exploitation, and deepened economic inequality.

This is no more evident than in Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Zambia.

In Kenya, for instance, corruption is blamed for everything—from poor infrastructure to unemployment—often with little consideration of other critical factors, like how Kenya’s public debt has soared due to borrowing from international financial institutions, including vulture funds. Most Kenyans, like Africans in general, have never even heard of vulture funds, even though they continue to pillage that country to the ground.

Meanwhile, the privatisation of key sectors, such as healthcare and education, has made services unaffordable for many citizens. Yet, instead of questioning the neoliberal policies that weakened public services, many Kenyans simply follow the mainstream narrative and blame corruption.

This blind following has fuelled calls for reducing government involvement in the economy, even when privatisation has historically led to worsening inequality. Kenyans are so serious about undermining their own state that they even have a “Privatisation Commission” created specifically to “formulate and implement the Privatisation Programme in a transparent, collaborative and competitive manner.” I guess people just don’t learn.

Nigeria, once Africa’s largest economy, has long been labelled as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, if not the most corrupt, and it probably is. This narrative has created widespread public cynicism toward the government, leading to support for policies that shrink the state’s role in the economy.

It’s true that the oil sector, which accounts for a significant portion of Nigeria’s GDP, is riddled with corruption. However, much of this corruption is by multinational corporations colluding and often coercing local elites. But instead of focusing on corporate complicity, many Nigerians blame government mismanagement alone, because it feels natural, it has become second nature.

If privatisation was going to work for Nigeria, there should have been at least some signs by now. The privatisation of the power sector in 2013, for example, was supposed to increase electricity access, yet power outages remain frequent, and costs have risen. Despite this, many Nigerians continue to see public-sector corruption as the main issue rather than the failures of privatisation itself.

This perception has led to further calls to minimise government involvement and expand market freedom even though what Nigeria needs is a larger and stronger regulatory state to hold corporations accountable.
Chomsky was right: “The costs and risks of the industrial economy were to be socialised, with eventual profits privatised.”

South Africa (obviously!), Africa’s largest economy, is another example where corruption is blamed for nearly every societal problem. In response, the South African government, under pressure from financial institutions and business elites, has, in recent years, implemented austerity measures that have cut funding for essential services. Public sector wages have been frozen, and investment in healthcare and education reduced.

Remember those thousands of unemployed doctors and how the Minister of Health outright said with a straight face that the reason they were not hiring doctors was austerity? There’s a straight line between that and the everything-must-be-corruption unwisdom.

Despite four decades of deindustrialisation, many South Africans remain in the intellectual slow lane and continue to believe that corruption—not austerity and financialisation—is the main reason for their neverending torment. This thinking fuels further demands for reducing government spending because “comrades will eat the money,” creating a vicious cycle where public services continue to deteriorate.

Meanwhile, multinational corporations operating in South Africa—particularly in the mining, health and finance sectors—continue to extract massive wealth while engaging in tax avoidance and exploitative practices. Yet, the focus remains on public-sector corruption rather than corporate misconduct.

I guess it was inevitable—sooner or later, even the densest of dimwits would figure out the golden rule: when in doubt, yell corruption and ye shall sound enlightened. After all, “the greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” Rebuking corruption makes even the most moronic imbecile sound credible.

Zambia provides another disappointing example of how the corruption narrative is used to justify economic policies that weaken state capacity. In recent years, the country has faced a debt crisis, leading to an IMF bailout in 2022. The conditions attached to this bailout included a freeze on public-sector hiring, despite high unemployment. Because the first thing you do when unemployment is high is to stop hiring people. That should fix everything.

Other loan conditions included reductions in fuel and agricultural subsidies, increasing the cost of living for ordinary Zambians.
These foul measures were justified by claims that Zambia’s financial woes were due to corruption and government inefficiencies, even though the deeper issue is the structural dependence on foreign loans and commodity exports.

However, many Zambians have internalised the idea that the government alone is to blame, leading to greater support for policies that shrink the state—even when those policies make life harder for ordinary citizens.

This overemphasis on corruption as the root cause of Africa’s challenges has led to a situation where Africans sincerely (and mostly naively) believe that because governments are corrupt, the private sector should take over key services—despite decades of failed privatisation experiments everywhere in the world.

Instead of demanding better governance and stronger state institutions, many citizens support policies that reduce government spending, worsening their problems, and by focusing almost exclusively on corruption in African governments, less attention is given to tax avoidance, illicit financial flows, unfair trade policies that drain Africa’s wealth, and the list goes on.

No one is saying there’s no corruption or that it’s not a problem, but it is not the only, or even the biggest issue facing African countries. The mindlessly repeated emphasis on corruption has served as a tool to delegitimise African states and justify economic policies that favour foreign interests.

Instead of calling for a smaller government, the focus should be on a better government capable of regulating corporations and foreign investors to ensure that Africa’s wealth benefits its people.
Emphasis should be on governments strong enough to negotiate better economic deals rather than being forced into unfavourable loans and trade agreements.

The endless drumbeat of “corruption, corruption, corruption” has convinced many Africans that their governments are beyond saving, nudging them toward economic fixes that do little more than hollow out state capacity. And yet—surprise!—history keeps reminding us that nations thrive not with weaker governments, but with stronger, accountable ones.

As Walter Rodney said, “The question as to who and what is responsible for African underdevelopment can be answered at two levels. Firstly, the answer is that the operation of the imperialist system bears major responsibility for African economic retardation by draining African wealth and by making it impossible to develop more rapidly the resources of the continent.”

Africans must resist narratives that focus solely on corruption while ignoring the global economic structures that perpetuate inequality. By shifting the conversation toward building effective, sovereign states, the continent can chart a path toward genuine economic independence and development.

Happy Sharpeville Day.

[Chetuya Chinagolum @Chetuyachinago]

People often argue that the decline of the nuclear family can be attributed to the economic independence of women rather than corporate propaganda.

First, the very concept of "economic independence" is largely an illusion under modern capitalism. No man or woman who falls into the working-class category today can ever truly claim to be economically independent, regardless of how deluded they pretend to be.

The more accurate terminology is that women were systematically integrated into the workforce, rather than being granted true economic independence. This distinction in phrasing is crucial because the mainstream narrative attempts to conceal the true motives behind corporate-backed feminist movements. The core objective was to force women into the labor pool, thereby inflating the supply of labor and consequently driving down wages, all to the ultimate benefit of global capitalism. In the same spirit, the nuclear family unit was rebranded as inherently oppressive to women. Again, this plays directly into the hands of corporate interests. When two people separate and live apart, they require two of everything. They are forced to pay two separate rent or mortgage bills, two utility bills, buy two cars, and purchase two sets of household appliances, all of which exponentially increases corporate profit margins.

The greatest irony, however, is the terminology used to market this integration into the labor force. It is often framed as "liberation," a framing that is quite frankly offensive. By definition, true liberation only makes sense if it directly improves a demographic's standard of living and mental well-being. The modern working-class woman was never liberated; if anything, she was condemned to work two full-time jobs. Caregiving, motherhood, and nurturing a household are integral aspects of human reproduction and society. Yet, mainstream corporate feminism completely ignored these defining characteristics and treated them as disposable. The glorious mission was simply to funnel women into the wage-labor market, but this change in occupational status did not magically erase human biology or the demands of raising children. So, even after women sit in corporate offices all day competing with men, the vast majority are forced to return home and work a second, unpaid job as mothers and homemakers. This dual burden is physically exhausting and mentally draining, yet it remains highly profitable for global capital. Mothers are now forced to spend whatever disposable income they earn on commercial daycares, nannies, processed foods, and domestic services, all just to maintain the very office jobs they were supposedly "liberated" to perform.

Naturally, this model is entirely unsustainable, especially at the upper echelons of the corporate ladder. To maintain this unnatural equilibrium, the pharmaceutical and medical industries have stepped in, offering egg-freezing procedures, fertility treatments, and an endless supply of antidepressants. These interventions exist primarily to keep women "liberated" just long enough to serve corporate interests during their prime reproductive years, often at the severe expense of their own biology and personhood.

Of course, no one is arguing that the old traditional system was perfect. In fact, it was deeply flawed, and it was undeniably unjust to isolate women from broader civic and intellectual participation in society. However, it was the very imperfections of that old system that were ruthlessly hijacked by corporate greed. Those historical flaws were weaponized as a pretext to collapse the nuclear family unit and force women into wage slavery, all under the deceptive guise of offering them freedom.

[Chetuya Chinagolum @Chetuyachinago]

Capitalism operates at peak efficiency when men and women are completely atomized and isolated, rather than living together as cohesive couples and building nuclear families.

For this reason, the modern gender war is designed to be a forever war, deliberately sustained by mainstream media narratives and weaponized social media algorithms.

This is why there will always be an endless supply of viral posts and videos depicting women as emotionally unstable, hypergamous, manipulative, and man-hating. On the flip side, there will always be an infinite supply of content engineered to paint men as dangerous predators, emotionally stunted, toxic, and inherently oppressive.

Combine this with corporate media narratives and state-sanctioned identity politics, and you get a perpetual conflict model that keeps men and women fundamentally divided. Instead of building unified households, they are pushed to exist as isolated individuals, "baby mamas," and "baby daddies." Consequently, they are forced into hyper-consumption: renting two separate apartments, buying separate sets of furniture and kitchen appliances, paying for double the utility bills and streaming subscriptions, and relying heavily on commercialized childcare and food delivery services to survive alone.

At the end of the day, mega-corporations double their consumer base and maximize their profits. Meanwhile, the psychiatric industry, pharmaceutical companies, and state welfare systems eagerly profit from the crushing depression, broken homes, and inevitable loneliness that awaits everyone trapped in this engineered orbit of madness.

[Sy Marcus Herve Traore @marcus_herve]

Remember when Musk laughed at BYD when they asked him if he saw them as a serious competitor? Well, here is now admitting that China 🇨🇳 at some point will be the leader in AI.

[Noluthando Ngcobo @LuthandoFuze]

Banks charge you a monthly fee for keeping your money with them then they charge you ATM fees for withdrawing it😭

[Gen Jean-Jacques Dessalines @MxolisiBob]

At some point we need deep introspection as Natives.

A state company from UAE buys a distribution network from Shell with this objective for 2028 and all we have to show is some obscure BEE company with no sizable operations to employ "Blacks" in large numbers

[Siv Ngesi @iamSivN]

That’s what DA would do if it was ANC!

[Pro Africans-EFF DR @ItuRebaone]

That's when @JJTabane knew he was interviewing an idiot

[Biggest Mack @Big_Mck]

Billionaires are the weapon fashioned against you.

You need to watch this to the end, especially if you are in Nigeria - the headquarters of billionaire worship.

[Economic Freedom Fighters @EFFSouthAfrica]

We must never forget.

[Sentletse 🇿🇦🇷🇺🇵🇸🇱🇧 @Sentletse]

The corrupt white media is trying its best to paint the DA’s Mark Burke and his company Kastelo as innocent, when they have in fact committed fraud in violation of exchange controls regulations.

Kastelo lodged a court application against the SARB to have the decision to block their funds reserved. The Court told them to voetsek.

Scums like @alechogg @Politicsweb @BizNewsCOM are trying to sanitise criminal activities because perpetrators are white.

Below are details of the Kastelo’s criminal activities:

[ANDILE MNGXITAMA (MP) @Mngxitama2]

Another report on the corruption white supremacist allegations

[Agent Nala @MainlandAfrica]

Who is the owner of the farm?

[Sentletse 🇿🇦🇷🇺🇵🇸🇱🇧 @Sentletse]

White media is always trying to sanitise criminal actions of their fellow whites

[Null @Vhoyde]

The same Absa that was involved in rand manipulation? The same Absa that inherited a free R200m (R1,8b in today's money) gift from the apartheid government? Okay.

[BlacksLikeMe @Xolani859243340]

Another gem from Miss 'OurWhites'

[BlacksLikeMe @Xolani859243340]

And then, they came here.

[Kgoshigadi TT 🇿🇦 @Kgoshigadi_TT]

Samora Machel knew bo Jacinta were coming