In an interesting development of events, the “white genocide in South Africa” claim persisted as a group of 50 white South Africans arrived in the US under refugee status. This was interesting because it reflected a crack in the ideological looking glass, which is that political narratives can be weaponised and easily manipulated for political discourse – even by people who want to have a propensity towards truth. This crack in the ideological looking class, therefore, serves a reminder that truth is not inherent to ideological inclinations (meaning it is not inherent to conservatives or liberals, or libertarians). RATHER, truth is inherent to the Word of God – which is the only thing categorically defined as truth. And it is therefore, not one’s political ideology, but rather one’s placing a premium on the Word of God that determines how much they serve as a protagonist for truth. And so, today, we ought to revisit the alleged white genocide in South Africa, and shine light of the inadequacies of how this issue is represented and discussed.

THE CRUX OF THE DISCUSSION WITH SOUTH AFRICA IS SPIRITUAL, AND NOT POLITICAL

And now onto our main discussion, and we ought to begin with the point that many are either ignorant of or are blatantly choosing to ignore – which is that the crux of the developments in South Africa is the spiritual ramifications of decisions by leadership. More specifically, the South African government acted in error: instead of opposing the ills of a terrorist organisation shamelessly murdering Israeli citizens (along with its sponsors), it was influenced to vilify Israel under the pretentious guise of claiming that it was operating as an apartheid state. Now, the claim that Israel is an apartheid state only seems plausible to those ignorant of history. At best, when it comes to territorial disputes, Israel and Palestine are classic examples of what happens when varying colonial powers enforce an a-historical division of land, and further exit the formerly colonised territories in a destabilising manner, thus making the formerly colonised area susceptible to civil strife. History literally documents many of these cases.

Nevertheless, the South African government peddled this narrative, and it is largely said to be in part because some in the South African government were paid to do so. More specifically, the argument is that South Africa brought the genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in return for bribes from Iran. This argument is substantiated by the observation that the then ruling party, being the African National Congress (or simply the ANC) experienced a sudden financial turnaround after it launched the ICJ case. Furthermore, there were a series of meetings between ANC leaders and Iranian officials. For instance, days after October 7th, the then minister of international relations and ANC member Naledi Pandor flew to Tehran to meet her Iranian counterpart Hossein Amir-Abdolla-hian, to discuss what Pandor referred to as Israel’s “apartheid”. And all of this conveniently took place a few months before the South African national election in May 2024.

This exposes that there was a propensity for some in the South African government to act foolishly, and use corruption (not sincere concerns) to place the nation against Israel. And, unfortunately, the ramifications of foolish conduct from leadership are not only spiritual (especially when dealing with Israel, whom God has chosen as His timetable on earth through grace) – but the ramifications always affect the the people themselves, until the leaders come to repentance. We are taught this in the scriptures, especially observing what happened when David was moved by the devil to number Israel.

This is why there is a categorical imperative to pray for leaders and their nations. And not to just pray for a change in leadership, but to pray even for those that are already in power. To cut off the influence of those who whisper evil schemes to leaders (as we’ve done with Klaus Schwab), and also to declare that all evil and corrupting counsel is turned to foolishness. After all, the “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, [and] as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.” And this is established through our prayers.

THE PROBLEM IN SOUTH AFRICA IS CRIME, AND NOT RACIALISED CRIME

Which brings us to the second portion of our discussion, and here we have to make an important point of clarity. Those opposing the “white genocide” or “white farmer gencide” claim are not refuting the fact that caucasian people have lost their lives due to brutal murder in South Africa. What is being refuted is the claim that this is a problem exclusively experienced by caucasian people, or predominantly experienced by caucasian people in a manner that amounts to racially-driven genocide. In fact, there certainly are farm killings in South Africa. But, there are no reliable figures that suggest that white farmers are being targeted in particular or that they are at a disproportionate risk of being killed. Furthermore, farm attacks are part of a broader crime problem in South Africa and do not have a racial motivation.

Secondly, the murder of farmers and even murders that take place on farms (by farmers, interestingly enough) have long been an issue of interest and focus in South Africa. This has not been some silent racialised genocide that the government has tried to keep quiet from spectators. Rather, the phenomenon, and the extent to which it is politicised, has been the focus of a number of investigations. For instance, the 2003 Report of The Special Committee of Inquiry Into Farm Attacks by the SAPS found that most incidents were driven by a desire for material gain and that “very few cases have political overtones.”

There is also (unfortunately) insufficient data to reliably estimate a murder rate for South African farmers.The South African government’s data indicated between 58 and 74 murders on farms annually in the period 2015–2017; out of an annual murder count of 20,000 total murders in South Africa; these figures are broadly consistent with figures collected EVEN by the Transvaal Agricultural Union (TAU), which is a farmers’ union. And the one issue that was highlighted with that data is that due to the problems associated with counting the number of South African farmers and farm murders, it is unclear whether farmers are at greater risk of being murdered than other South Africans.

Furthermore, data released by the South African government in 2018 showed that the number of farm attacks had increased between 2012 and 2018, but that the number of murders on farms had decreased year by year during the period. During the same year farming organisation AgriSA reported on police statistics which suggested that the murder rate on farms had declined to the lowest level in 20 years, to a third of the level recorded in 1998

Then, more recently, in the Third Quarter of 2024-2025 Financial year (specifically looking at October 2024 to December 2024), the farm murders were reported to be on a decline, with a total of 5 farm murders. Afriforum, which is an Afrikaner lobby organisation, disputed those numbers. And when the police commissioner demanded they provide their evidence that would prove a contrary reality in February, well the matter escalated with the involvement of the US, and hence this discussion.

But, then finally, South Africa has a highly unequal society, and this has fueled a crime problem. This has also meant that the majority of crimes in South Africa are motivated by material gain. Therefore, this makes the problem of crime more broad in who it affects. Furthermore, contrary to depictions based on claims of gencode, criminal offenders (of even heinous and violent crimes) are also of a caucasian background. That includes four suspects arrested on the 25th of  February 2025, facing charges of trafficking in persons, illegal possession of drugs, illegal possession of the SANDF uniform, and illegal possession of firearms and ammunition. This also includes a teacher implicated in the rape of a primary school girl, while AfriForum refuses he submit to a buccal test. And of course, the two white farmers who killed a woman and fed her remains to pigs, and a male farmer who ran over a child for stealing an orange. What is aggravating about having to discuss these cases is that I have to use examples that otherwise do not reflect well on my country, but I do this not to try to justify crimes against caucasian people. Rather, it is to highlight that crime is an issue in South Africa period, and it is not primarily driven by racist inclination. But, what AfriForum and even the South African government has evidently missed is that the reason for the broad crime issue in South Africa also has a notable spiritual context of its own.

“KILL THE BOER”: ADDRESSING THE “EVIDENCE” BEHIND THE CLAIM OF A RACIALISED GENOCIDE

Once again, let’s address the “kill the boer” chant, because it remains the primary evidence behind the claim of systematic government-sactioned white genocide. This “kill the boer” chant-related issue is cherry picked by people who lack context of South Africa’s history as evidence of the systematised discrimination against and murder of white farmers. In fact an excerpt of Julius Malema on the chant was posted by conservative alternative media account “Libs of TikTok” and even reported by Elon Musk. Allow me to provide the missing links. “Kill the boer” is an atrocious chant” but it is NOT a policy statement.

Secondly, the atrocious chant that is “Kill the boer” is not a recently crafted phenomenon; rather, this was a chant sung by militant or insurgent groups comprising of people of colour, typically black South AFricans, during the apartheid era, when there would be violent exchanges with racist boers or apartheid officers at the time – who by the way, were literally killing black people without much retribution, in fact, during that time, brutalising black people was expected – which should not be a surprising considering the world’s collective understanding of the history of slavery, colonialism and the holocaust. In any case, today, “Kill the boer”  is a chant that if meant as a policy statement would amount to a racially motivated incitement of violence, which our constitution rejects (as the highest law of the republic).

I mention this because firstly, there are people who lack the context of what this means. Does it make it acceptable to chant “kill the boer” – emphatically no! In fact, this was a big discussion in South Africa after Julius Malema and the EFF party echoed the chant or song, and even had to stand in court in light of these remarks.

Secondly, people who invoke the “kill the boer” song conveniently leave out that a majority of South Africans have rejected the chant, on the basis that it does not fit in today’s society, and once again, this followed Julius Malema and the EFF party echoing the chant, “Kill the boer”. The concession is that, in a post-apartheid society, the chant (although not a policy statement) has the potential to invoke a sense of racial division and hatred, even though that is not necessarily the aim. In fact, this very issue has placed the EFF party (which was inclined to using the chant) at odds with South Africans, which was even made apparent with its significant loss of support in the recent elections in May 2024.

BUT… there is a hypocrisy that must not be missed. If we argue that the “kill the boer” chant represents a horrible portion of South Africa’s history, but does not amount to a policy statement; and merely serves as a reminder of one of the struggle songs that were sung during apartheid, then why is this used as evidence of a white farmer genocide when conservatives have used the same logic to defend keeping statues of the confederate leaders and the flying of the confederate flag. I ask this because I understand that logic: I do not think societies need to completely erase factual observations of history, just because they represent a horrible past. And so, if conservatives have defended raising the confederate flag, and confederate leader statues – why is this chant regarded as a policy statement? Despite South African law not allowing the incitement of violence against another group.

Now, personally, I would do away with vocalising the chant altogether (while accurately documenting in history books nad museums) because it is vile, BUT… conservatives need to clarify why the confederate flag and confederate leader statues are not racist or connoting a desire to enslave black people, if “kill the boer” is evidence of a white genocide.

MEANWHILE, WESTERN MEDIA (ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ISLE) REPORTS ON AFRICA IN IGNORANCE

Meanwhile,the Western media also has a loose grapes on the context in South Africa and it shows. While conservatives are adamant that a few videos of the EFF and BLF rallies constitute context, liberals are also just making up history in a while trying to use this development in South Africa to refute immigration law in the second Trump administration. Here’s an example.

So two responses to this. First, this white refugee case does not negate President Trump’s immigration policy; in fact, this policy remains justifiable on its own. First, it was Biden’s “open border” policies that created the unprecedented border crisis. On day one of becoming president, Biden announced an order to terminate former President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency concerning our southern border. Biden’s EO also paused the construction of the border wall and redirected the funds elsewhere. On day two, Biden suspended Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” program and ended the program formally six months later. The “Remain in Mexico” program kept in Mexico asylum-seekers from Central America and elsewhere until their immigration court hearings in the U.S. The program successfully returned an estimated 68,000 migrants to Mexico during the Trump presidency.

Furthermore, the Biden administration also relinquished its responsibility to enforce immigration law. According to a 2023 House Judiciary Committee report, “the Biden Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has failed to remove more than 99 percent of illegal immigrants through immigration court proceedings” between Jan. 20, 2021, and March 31, 2023. During this period, there were more than 5 million illegal alien encounters. The Biden administration reportedly “eased its scrutiny in reviewing asylum claims,” and “immigration judges have granted nearly 80% of claims in the last three years.” Fewer than 6,000 illegal immigrants were removed from the United States. In 2022, the Biden administration also introduced a parole program that has had significant consequences. This program allows up to 30,000 asylum-seekers from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to enter the U.S. each month. The program allowed the Biden administration to release nearly half a million “inadmissible immigrants” into the interior of the US, often with “little or no vetting, – all of which was discovered through the House Committee on Homeland Security’s latest fact sheet.

There was thus a categorical need to deport illegal immigrants, first because it resulted in increased crime, second because it resulted in a surge in human and child trafficking, and also to restore law and order in the immigration process. And this has been proven by various ills that Americans have had to endure during the Biden-Harris administration.

Secondly, there actually is no white genocide and so this dicussion should not be hinged on race.

IT’S IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THE LIES, SO WE BEGIN TO ADDRESS GENUINE ISSUES

What has been another bizarre development is the utter incapacity of Western Media to report adequately on the African continent, and its respective nations. This was always a problem, but in this age where we are moving away from the generic narratives and reports from the mainstream media, I genuinely expected that there would be people who dared to look at the story from more than one angle. Clearly, Western media still has an unqualified presumption of credibility – despite the overwhelming evidence of how media has for the longest time served as the fourth arm of the state. Even more disappointing is that this same unwillingness to do even basic critical analysis of the story beyond a single narrative is also done by alternative media – the people who are supposed to be better than the mainstream.

Meanwhile, it will not even take a lot to understand the historical and socio-political context of South Africa. It just takes one to ask about a different perspective on the matter. But, in a world where caucasian people have been associated with all manner of evil, it clearly has become very convenient for those who have been fighting this to capitalise on a narrative that portrays the victimisation of the caucasian race instead. Well, let me state categorically that we do not believe caucasian people are an inherent evil, at least certainly not here at LN24 International. We have investigated and reported on systematised discrimination against caucasian people where it took place, like the great replacement agenda in Europe and the Americas. In addition, we have also outlined the issues with the Expropriation Act in South Africa, and even engaged government officials on it.

However, what is intolerable is the blatant disregard for facts by the Western media, while having the audacity to pronounce judgement on the South African nation – without even understanding the state of the nation and its society. It is therefore critical to put aside the obvious misrepresentation of the affairs in South AFrica and deal with the broader dispossession agenda that has the potential to be effected through the Expropriation Act, while also addressing restitution of plundered land and property, and nullifying the war on food. In any case, as the book of Proverbs tells us in the 17th verse “He who states his case first seems right, until his rival comes and cross-examines him.”

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso