We, humans, tend to differentiate ourselves to the extent that we focus on differences rather than our commonalities.

There are many reasons for this, like identity, superiority and survival of our culture, religion and ideologies. However, differences are more often perceived than real. Stripped of race, religion, culture, wealth and gender, we are all pretty much the same.

History and circumstances have proved this time and time again. When stripped naked with no possessions we tend to see the world in a different light.

Our sociological structures tend to herd us into the differential corral, where we sometimes defend the indefensible. From a South African standpoint I would like to examine what it was that drove Africans and Europeans to have these differences.

Our history reminds us that competing groups, Europeans and Africans, stood on the battlefield of a piece of land we now call South Africa.

Those Europeans were mainly from Dutch, English and French origins. They brought with them some superior technologies, chiefly, "the gun".

Other than their weaponry, there was not much to differentiate them. They both had a culture, they both had a sociological structure, they both wanted to survive and they both wanted to live their lives in freedom.

Many Europeans had established good relationships with the African tribes. if it were not for "the gun" Europeans may not have survived. The indigenous people of this piece of land, the Koi and Bushmen were over run by numbers.

The Africans were competing tribes. They had different languages, cultural structures, beliefs and traditions, and they were also competing for this piece of land. The superiority of weaponry at that stage made little difference, but it would, later on, after "the big guns" were drawn.

Then diamonds were discovered in a place we now call Kimberley. This created little differences between Europeans and Africans because they joined together in digging the biggest man made hole on the planet.

This discovery however, drew the attention of the "big gun", Britain, and more specifically the monarchy, who were persuaded that the diamonds in Kimberley were "easy pickings".

So they sent their avaricious emissaries (a euphemism for spies) to observe and report back on what was going on.

As the hole got bigger and the diamonds kept coming, so the greedy eyes of the monarchy got wider.

So the monarchy established a well-drilled machine to siphon off the wealth of the diamonds in their usual enigmatic way. In the meantime, the Africans and Europeans got on pretty well, learning about each other and working pretty hard to survive.

Fortunately for the monarchy and unfortunately for the Europeans and Africans, Gold was discovered not many years later in a place that we now call the Witwatersrand.

This lead to the biggest "gold rush" the world has seen. So the monarchy in England sent more emissaries to South Africa, to ply their trade.

Organise, bully and siphon off as much of the wealth as possible.

Unfortunately, they met stern resistance from an obstinate old President of the Boer Republic, Paul Kruger. In the meantime, the Africans were becoming increasingly marginalised by this sophisticated game and gun playing.

There was this display of troops neatly dressed, organised and well armed who would bully their way around and create a frightful display of power. It mist have amused many Africans.

Then the monarchy in Britain decided to "beat up" on these poor pathetic boers and sent a "paltry" 10,000 troops to South Africa.

Needless to say, the Europeans (who were now called "boers", even though they were made up of both European and African people) considered this less of a challenge, and sent those troops packing with their tails between their legs.

Incensed the monarchy sent 30, 000 troops, with the same result.

The monarchy realising that the wealth to be obtained determined the cost, sent 450, 000 troops to South Africa.

The same result would have followed, except the monarchy's troops had been ordered to use a "scorched earth" policy, and destroy all the homes, fields and cattle of any "boers" or Africans. Many "boer" and African women and children would die as a result of this.

Eventually, the "boers" and Africans succumbed to this onslaught. and the monarchy was able to defeat them. The "big guns" had won the battle, but not the war. The monarchy was still faced with how to subdue these people.

They devised a cunning, but not altogether new, plot . "If you can organise these people ("boers" and Africans) into opposing camps, then you can defeat them quite easily by supporting one side, when it is convenient, or the other."

So they arranged something that they called the "Union of South Africa" in 1910. When this was instituted they made sure that there would be an increased marginalisation of Africans, and at their insistence they devised the "Land Act of 1913". What this did was deprive Africans of their right to own land in certain area's.

Fortunately, one young character called Sol Plaaitjies saw through this and arranged a congress of African people in Bloemfontein (of all places) which was latterly called the African National Congress (ANC).

This divisive tactic worked well for the monarchy for many, many years, while they plundered the wealth of South Africa.

At their behest the table turned, and they recognised the emergence of an immaculate African leader called Nelson Mandela.

He was the ideal spiritual and iconic leader and through this "window" South Africa could be changed (these "boers" were becoming petulant and influential because they realised they had a wealth of store under the ground).

Once Mr Mandela was installed as president, a new plan was set in motion. "There are no African leaders who can match Mandela, so let's set, together with our European allies, and devise a new plan. We will corrupt the ANC to the extent that they will lose all credibility.

We will offer their leaders riches they could not have dreamed of, and then we will watch as their democracy is destroyed and then we will step in and offer a solution to their problem"(That we created).

The solution? An economic recolonisation of South Africa.

South Africa is one of the richest countries in the world, but it's all under our feet. Minerals. The problem is we are so busy squabbling about what's above ground that we don't recognise the power we have below the ground.

The above-ground activities, politically speaking, is determined by others, not from South Africa. We conform to the “Queensbury Rules”, in order to win a fight that someone else wrote the rules for.

We need to establish our uniqueness as South Africans, and fight for each other, rather than against each other, no matter our colour, gender, culture, religion and creed.

Are we going to allow others to steal it again, or are we going to recognise our sovereignty? This game by the monarchy of Britain has been going on for a long, long time.

Remember that the monarchy established the Union of South Africa, they brought down the Nationalist government, they are going to bring down the ANC. Who will be left standing? Only the monarchy of Britain.

Come on my fellow South Africans. Time to join hands and say, "No more".

We must stand together; black, white, asian, in-between and even if you're an alien from outer space.

Time to stand up against this mass manipulation, that assumes that you have no voice.

Speak out against this madness.

Get Published!

UPLOAD

Click here
to upload
your article Click here
to upload
your photo Click here
to upload
your video