Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Trump’s White-Centric Policy Threatens South Africa’s Hard-Won Racial Peace

Blog

Trump’s White-Centric Policy Threatens South Africa’s Hard-Won Racial Peace
Blog

Blog

Trump’s White-Centric Policy Threatens South Africa’s Hard-Won Racial Peace

2025-05-26 14:51 Last Updated At:14:51

Trump, sitting comfortably in the White House, set a trap just waiting for South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to take the bait. On the global stage, Trump tried to publicly shame a Black president. The two had barely sat down when Trump fired off, pulling up random screenshots from the internet claiming Blacks were massacring white farmers—Boers, British settlers, and other white landowners. The way he described it made you thought that South Africa’s situation was worse than Gaza’s, with more white deaths than Palestinians. According to him, South Africa is basically hell on earth, Gaza and South Africa share the same tragic fate.

But within a day, Reuters, the world-famous news agency, pushed back hard. Trump had actually taken photos the news agency shot during unrest in the Democratic Republic of Congo and falsely claimed they were from South Africa. That got Reuters accused of fake news. Trump and Elon Musk—yes, the South African-born Tesla guy—teamed up to smear South African Blacks. But Ramaphosa stayed cool and dignified. After listening, without changing a muscle, he just said, “No, we Blacks and Whites don’t hate each other, no unrest here. But we won’t go all the way to please you with a super Boeing, Mr Trump.”

Thinking back, I remember reading Mandela’s biography years ago. Mandela spent 27 years locked up under white colonial rule. When he came to power, South Africa embraced Whites, starting a republic based on racial integration and shared governance. Mandela’s story shows how much Black South Africans suffered, worse than Gaza’s Palestinians, and their tough road to coexistence. It really shows their amazing self-control. Without Mandela’s greatness—turning his own suffering under white oppression into love that united Blacks and Whites—democratic South Africa would never have happened.

The book also reveals how, back then, the Chinese Communist Party secretly sent massive arms to support the Black uprising in South Africa. Western intelligence fed info to white colonial officials, who, after weighing their options, realized defeat was inevitable and, scared stiff, turned to negotiate peace with Mandela. Mandela’s hardest job wasn’t just negotiating with Whites, it was convincing his own people not to seek revenge or massacre Whites. He preached love over hate, urging Blacks to share power with Whites without grabbing their wealth or land. Mandela’s legacy still shapes South Africa today—a peaceful country, not Gaza, not Ukraine, torn apart by war.

Mandela, South Africa’s founding father, and today’s president Ramaphosa prove that Blacks are no less smart or capable than anyone else. Mandela’s love lights up the world and the universe, all humanity and life. In his later years, hearing Hong Kong’s Wong Ka Kui, lead singer and composer of Beyond, sing a tribute to him, Mandela wept—because he stopped the massacres and protected all Whites in South Africa. Yet Elon Musk, born there, shows no gratitude. Instead, he works with Trump to set a trap against his own birthplace. Can a businessman really be without a homeland? Maybe South Africa isn’t his homeland but just a white colonial outpost.

Also, the Chinese Communist Party’s decades-old, no-strings-attached military support for the Black uprising—far worse than Gaza’s current plight—shows China backs justice without asking for anything in return. That’s a sharp contrast to the US, which exploits resources from countries like Ukraine and charges protection fees.

Trump talks a lot about making America great again, putting America first. But it’s clear now: he wants to make himself great, prioritizing white Americans. He’s calculated the votes—60% come from white voters—and tailors policies to favor them, hoping to secure a third term.

Trump has repeatedly kicked out journalists who criticize him to control the narrative. Now he’s shaking the nation’s foundation by targeting education—expelling foreign students from Harvard and saying this is just the first step, with other universities to follow. Former Hong Kong Economic Times editor-in-chief Mak Wah Cheung once said the French government gave him a scholarship to study in France, but it was really a way to groom global elites, embedding French culture and winning their intellectual loyalty.

Many African students who received French scholarships and studied in France later rose to high government positions. Thanks to their French education, their thinking aligns with France’s, influencing defense, infrastructure, electronics, even food and drink culture including red wine, white wine and brandy. As a result, African students prioritize French products.

America’s expulsion of international students undermines its cultural capital, blocking “Captain America” from expanding influence abroad and weakening its soft power. Countries once influenced by America will face a generational break, no longer following American cultural values. America’s ability to sway and subvert other nations will slowly fade—signaling its decline.




Xiao Qiang

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.

Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".

Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.

Trump's Colonial Playbook

On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.

Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."

Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.

America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.

The British Double Standard

Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.

The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.

Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.

Silence on Venezuela

After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.

Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."

The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.

Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.

The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.

Lo Wing-hung

Recommended Articles