The Case of Africa:
Who Is British Imperialism?
This article appears in the January 4, 2008 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Dispatches from the London Economist on the subject of the succession to South Africa's President Thabo Mbeki, warn us that Princess Diana's legacy still haunts British Africa policy today. The seemingly perpetual state of uncertainty, whether swindler Al Gore's choice, the current Prince of Wales, or a son of former Princess Diana, shall inherit the succession to the British throne, underscores the fact that a Queen, or even a King, may be the designated British monarch; but, the more essential fact remains, that it is the den of financial thieves represented by the Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier oligarchy which considers itself the real emperor of not only the British Empire as such, but the whole world, today.
The problem is that the recent decades, the current U.S. pre-presidential campaigns remind us, since the death of U.S. President Roosevelt and the assassination of President Kennedy, have been a span of increasing mediocrity in both our public and private life, now reaching that state of moral as much as intellectual imbecility and outright fraud typified by computer games and Wikipedia. So, it is asked: "What is happening in Africa?" instead of how rotten are the forces now dominating what is every part of the planet considered in the large.
There is presently, one crucial problem of this planet, for which what is crucially important in any part of this planet is only a reflection. That problem is typified by the profound moral and intellectual decay pervading the planet as a whole, as a result of a neo-malthusian pestilence of lying called "globalization."
So, for example, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier cartel behind the imperial practices of the BAE, are launching campaigns intended to spread genocide through maximizing available options for spreading the internal conflicts within Africa, among other places.
The British Establishment is
not happy with the strategic
role South Africa is playing on
the continent, and, through its
mouthpiece the Economist, is
attempting to divide the
African National Congress,
between President Thabo
Mbeki (left), and ex-Vice
President Jacob Zuma
So, in an editorial run before the recent leadership election of the African National Congress (ANC), the Dec. 15 London Economist stated that both candidates, South African President Thabo Mbeki, and ex-Vice President Jacob Zuma, were deeply flawed, and that neither should be running the ANC, or the country. "A split in the movement might be welcome," said the Economist, "because the country should be moving to a new era of pluralist democracy," and complained that many in the ANC do not see Mbeki's autocracy as bad. The Economist lamented that the favorite candidates of the British, Tokyo Sexwale and Cyril Ramaphosa (a lawyer, trade union organizer, and politician, before he turned to business) didn't have a chance because the ANC's authoritarian traditions prevented them from even being considered as candidates.
The British are not happy with the strategic role that South Africa has played in Africa. The latest example of this role was at the EU-African summit in Lisbon, where South African President Mbeki was widely recognized for playing a critical role in preventing the EU from getting African nations to agree to a free-trade agreement that would have opened them up to more looting. Peter Mandelson, the EU Trade Chief who is trying to force the free-trade agreement on the African nations, singled out Mbeki as one of the key opponents, who was influencing other African nations to oppose the EU plan. Mbeki's efforts to mediate the situation in Zimbabwe, as well as South Africa's peace-keeping interventions into other conflicts in Africa, are also not appreciated by the British and the EU more generally, as they are concerned by growing Chinese influence in Africa. If African countries are destabilized, it will be more difficult for China to increase its influence through aid to development projects, and trade.
South Africa's agreement, at the time of independence, to play by IMF rules, has now led to Mbeki's popularity falling because of continuing, or worsening poverty. Among the general population, Zuma is not so popular either. A poll cited by the Economist, indicates that half the population in the big cities in South Africa think a Zuma Presidency (of South Africa) would be disastrous. In this context, the British seem to be angling for one of their favorites, Sexwale or Ramaphosa, to become the next President of South Africa.