From Cui Bono to controlled opposition – Part One “Cui bono” is one of the oldest and most important Latin phrases in history, second only to carpe diem. However, it is a phrase that seems to be largely unused today, especially when considering its relevance to current geopolitical events. As I wrote in my book Hani’s Assassin—which, in my view, exemplifies the principle of Cui bono more than any other event—President Franklin D. Roosevelt astutely observed, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” The anti-minority, and perhaps more specifically, the militant anti-white rhetoric coming from political figures like Julius Malema, Andile Mngxitama and to a slightly lesser extent Herman Mashaba, are what we now called ‘controlled opposition.’ The racist rantings and ravings by Julius and Andile, that have been amplified and exposed by @ElonMusk, @visegrad24, and others on X, exemplify the divide and conquer modus operandi of South African politicians. Controlled Opposition Vladimir Lenin famously said, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." In an article written by JD Hall in Insight to Incite, he observes that, “What Lenin had stumbled upon, which was a unique solution to the crisis of opposing ideas, would end up becoming a major advancement in psychological warfare and typify Soviet-era propaganda campaigns.” The Russians mastered the concept of Controlled Opposition, a tactic in which a government or prevailing authority orchestrates both sides of a conflict. On one side, you have the status quo authority, while on the other, you have those who are also under the control of the same authority. This creates the illusion of genuine opposition, but in truth, it eliminates any real dissent. What remains is a facade of opposition—one that falsely appears to challenge the system but actually suppresses true opposition. And nowhere has this been perfected and rolled out more successfully than South Africa, we have become the political double-blind trial of the century. The idea that Malema, Mngxitama, and Mashaba have embraced the roles of anti-white, pro-black, and pro-poor advocates out of some lofty sense of social justice is naïve and reveals a profound misunderstanding of politics, particularly the dynamics of experimental African politics. Hall goes onto to explain, “The benefits, are multiple. First, instead of the best and brightest leading the opposition, you can appoint the worst and dumbest. Secondly, giving the appearance of being legitimate opposition prevents angst and anger among the populace who otherwise would feel helpless and then attempt to topple the system that prevents opposition. So long as people feel they can oppose the status quo authorities within the accepted terms and guidelines, they won’t burn the system to the ground. And third, by controlling the opposition, you prevent legitimate opposition from landing any serious punches. All ideas that present a real threat to the status quo authorities, will be gate-kept by the leaders of the controlled opposition.” Now does this not explain what is happening in South Africa to a tee? The Democratic Alliance has now joined the GNU, and within just seven months, they've gone from outspoken opposition to mere yes-men. In response to one of my posts, @BarryPreto57623 humorously pointed out, "I sincerely hope that CR [Cyril Ramaphosa] doesn't stop too quickly, otherwise John [Steenhuisen] will go right up his arse." It's a bit crude, but there's some truth to it. Working together shouldn't mean abandoning all of your principles and policies. However, now that it's come to light that USAID has been funding both the ANC and the DA, it only strengthens the idea that opposition in South African politics is more of an illusion than reality. This issue extends beyond politics. Platforms like X and other social media, have been co-opted and effectively used to amplify white hatred and related propaganda. The accounts pushing the most divisive rhetoric are well compensated, of that I can assure you. To ease the pathway to domination, you create division and control the opposition. In Part Two we will explore more extensively who benefits from the divisive rhetoric and pumping of hatred. Elon Musk has called out Julius Malema's anti-white rantings - image courtesy of Joburg {etc}

From Cui Bono to controlled opposition – Part One “Cui bono” is one of the oldest and most important Latin phrases in history, second only to carpe diem. However, it is a phrase that seems to be largely unused today, especially when considering its relevance to current geopolitical events. As I wrote in my book Hani’s Assassin—which, in my view, exemplifies the principle of Cui bono more than any other event—President Franklin D. Roosevelt astutely observed, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” The anti-minority, and perhaps more specifically, the militant anti-white rhetoric coming from political figures like Julius Malema, Andile Mngxitama and to a slightly lesser extent Herman Mashaba, are what we now called ‘controlled opposition.’ The racist rantings and ravings by Julius and Andile, that have been amplified and exposed by @ElonMusk, @visegrad24, and others on X, exemplify the divide and conquer modus operandi of South African politicians. Controlled Opposition Vladimir Lenin famously said, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." In an article written by JD Hall in Insight to Incite, he observes that, “What Lenin had stumbled upon, which was a unique solution to the crisis of opposing ideas, would end up becoming a major advancement in psychological warfare and typify Soviet-era propaganda campaigns.” The Russians mastered the concept of Controlled Opposition, a tactic in which a government or prevailing authority orchestrates both sides of a conflict. On one side, you have the status quo authority, while on the other, you have those who are also under the control of the same authority. This creates the illusion of genuine opposition, but in truth, it eliminates any real dissent. What remains is a facade of opposition—one that falsely appears to challenge the system but actually suppresses true opposition. And nowhere has this been perfected and rolled out more successfully than South Africa, we have become the political double-blind trial of the century. The idea that Malema, Mngxitama, and Mashaba have embraced the roles of anti-white, pro-black, and pro-poor advocates out of some lofty sense of social justice is naïve and reveals a profound misunderstanding of politics, particularly the dynamics of experimental African politics. Hall goes onto to explain, “The benefits, are multiple. First, instead of the best and brightest leading the opposition, you can appoint the worst and dumbest. Secondly, giving the appearance of being legitimate opposition prevents angst and anger among the populace who otherwise would feel helpless and then attempt to topple the system that prevents opposition. So long as people feel they can oppose the status quo authorities within the accepted terms and guidelines, they won’t burn the system to the ground. And third, by controlling the opposition, you prevent legitimate opposition from landing any serious punches. All ideas that present a real threat to the status quo authorities, will be gate-kept by the leaders of the controlled opposition.” Now does this not explain what is happening in South Africa to a tee? The Democratic Alliance has now joined the GNU, and within just seven months, they've gone from outspoken opposition to mere yes-men. In response to one of my posts, @BarryPreto57623 humorously pointed out, "I sincerely hope that CR [Cyril Ramaphosa] doesn't stop too quickly, otherwise John [Steenhuisen] will go right up his arse." It's a bit crude, but there's some truth to it. Working together shouldn't mean abandoning all of your principles and policies. However, now that it's come to light that USAID has been funding both the ANC and the DA, it only strengthens the idea that opposition in South African politics is more of an illusion than reality. This issue extends beyond politics. Platforms like X and other social media, have been co-opted and effectively used to amplify white hatred and related propaganda. The accounts pushing the most divisive rhetoric are well compensated, of that I can assure you. To ease the pathway to domination, you create division and control the opposition. In Part Two we will explore more extensively who benefits from the divisive rhetoric and pumping of hatred. Elon Musk has called out Julius Malema's anti-white rantings - image courtesy of Joburg {etc}

From Cui Bono to controlled opposition – Part One “Cui bono” is one of the oldest and most important Latin phrases in history, second only to carpe diem. However, it is a phrase that seems to be largely unused today, especially when considering its relevance to current geopolitical events. As I wrote in my book Hani’s Assassin—which, in my view, exemplifies the principle of Cui bono more than any other event—President Franklin D. Roosevelt astutely observed, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” The anti-minority, and perhaps more specifically, the militant anti-white rhetoric coming from political figures like Julius Malema, Andile Mngxitama and to a slightly lesser extent Herman Mashaba, are what we now called ‘controlled opposition.’ The racist rantings and ravings by Julius and Andile, that have been amplified and exposed by @ElonMusk, @visegrad24, and others on X, exemplify the divide and conquer modus operandi of South African politicians. Controlled Opposition Vladimir Lenin famously said, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." In an article written by JD Hall in Insight to Incite, he observes that, “What Lenin had stumbled upon, which was a unique solution to the crisis of opposing ideas, would end up becoming a major advancement in psychological warfare and typify Soviet-era propaganda campaigns.” The Russians mastered the concept of Controlled Opposition, a tactic in which a government or prevailing authority orchestrates both sides of a conflict. On one side, you have the status quo authority, while on the other, you have those who are also under the control of the same authority. This creates the illusion of genuine opposition, but in truth, it eliminates any real dissent. What remains is a facade of opposition—one that falsely appears to challenge the system but actually suppresses true opposition. And nowhere has this been perfected and rolled out more successfully than South Africa, we have become the political double-blind trial of the century. The idea that Malema, Mngxitama, and Mashaba have embraced the roles of anti-white, pro-black, and pro-poor advocates out of some lofty sense of social justice is naïve and reveals a profound misunderstanding of politics, particularly the dynamics of experimental African politics. Hall goes onto to explain, “The benefits, are multiple. First, instead of the best and brightest leading the opposition, you can appoint the worst and dumbest. Secondly, giving the appearance of being legitimate opposition prevents angst and anger among the populace who otherwise would feel helpless and then attempt to topple the system that prevents opposition. So long as people feel they can oppose the status quo authorities within the accepted terms and guidelines, they won’t burn the system to the ground. And third, by controlling the opposition, you prevent legitimate opposition from landing any serious punches. All ideas that present a real threat to the status quo authorities, will be gate-kept by the leaders of the controlled opposition.” Now does this not explain what is happening in South Africa to a tee? The Democratic Alliance has now joined the GNU, and within just seven months, they've gone from outspoken opposition to mere yes-men. In response to one of my posts, @BarryPreto57623 humorously pointed out, "I sincerely hope that CR [Cyril Ramaphosa] doesn't stop too quickly, otherwise John [Steenhuisen] will go right up his arse." It's a bit crude, but there's some truth to it. Working together shouldn't mean abandoning all of your principles and policies. However, now that it's come to light that USAID has been funding both the ANC and the DA, it only strengthens the idea that opposition in South African politics is more of an illusion than reality. This issue extends beyond politics. Platforms like X and other social media, have been co-opted and effectively used to amplify white hatred and related propaganda. The accounts pushing the most divisive rhetoric are well compensated, of that I can assure you. To ease the pathway to domination, you create division and control the opposition. In Part Two we will explore more extensively who benefits from the divisive rhetoric and pumping of hatred. Elon Musk has called out Julius Malema's anti-white rantings - image courtesy of Joburg {etc}