While countries issue their citizens with warnings of electrical grid outages, no water access and unrest in the streets.... ... South Africans be like: "Ah, Tuesday!"

Only in South Africa does the failure of government become the argument for expanding government.

Would you agree or disagree with the following statement: In South Africa, the pursuit of desirable social outcomes has become an open-ended justification for expanding government authority.

THE MO worldwide is clear. Once you see it, you can not unsee it. Overthrowing governments and stealing liberty is happening from within. The language of revolution is dead. It's too hostile. It has failed too many times, and people don't buy it. (EFF) So they changed it. They attack with socialism. Only they don't call it that. We now use words like inclusion, transformation, sustainability, equity, and global cooperation. Because who can be against that? Revolutions are violent. You won't score points there. But inclusion, sustainability, and equity? That is how they take power. The greater good. For the poor. For the workers. In the interest of all. Who could stand against it? The ANC's NDR was too hostile, but just because you lose dominance doesn't mean you lose the ideological battle. Parties are just local puppets. So you replace it with a GNU in which policies are advanced through a broader government that speaks the language of constitutional liberalism, economic reform, and international best practice. And the bleeding hearts just love the sound of that. Most of them even defend communism without knowing it. Sustainability just sounded too good. Notice how nothing changed under the GNU? That's because it doesn't matter who the president is. It was never about empowering people. It is about empowering the state to change society. And that society isn't the liberal one they're selling it to you as. I'll be covering this in depth in my next video. Link in bio.

South Africa is fully under communist threat. It's coming from every angle, and don't let them fool you about that. When you hear modern liberalism, you're hearing socialism that is being pushed through a political framework that speaks of equality, social justice, collective responsibility, and global cooperation. It's only the language and tactics that changed. In that pursuit of equality, they find justification for ever-expanding government authority and markets that are increasingly subordinated to political objectives. They took liberalism and turned it on you. When you hear globalism, you're hearing full-scale communism. Grow up. Power never presents itself as the villain. It offers itself as the solution. It's a very logical question IMO: If the goal is equality, but the requirement is greater centralization of power and giving up freedoms, at what point does the pursuit of equality destroy what made it meaningful to begin with? Modern liberalism grabs the best of what it can and rejects the worst. It's a tactic. It adopted all the ideas to make the expansion of state power easier to justify. They got you all fighting left vs. right. Capitalism vs. socialism. The biggest institution you're going to end up facing is the state. Communism has always promised to redistribute and share for the greater good, until it has all the power. And then it doesn't let go. "You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out" - unknown Ironically, that's why they also want your guns. The shift in South Africa's politics is from an explicitly transformative political project (NDR) to a more internationally aligned model of state intervention justified through development, inclusion, sustainability, and economic reform.. We are not ahead. We are behind.

I don't have words for these people... "A high number of people have been infected. But it is not an outbreak" What would you call it then? Well, when a government is responsible for giving people clean water, yet infects them all due to poor services they are taxed quite heavily for, I'd call it a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. Just listen to her speak. Then you'll understand why we are here.

We are, in many ways, one of the luckiest generations in human history. Most of us, anyway, if you consider what previous generations went through.... Very few people before us lived their lives without being touched by war. It would be naive to think that our generation is going to be any different, and I hope that at least some of your time went into investing in knowing how to play that game.

The World: "We're entering an arms race where AI can find weaknesses faster than humans can fix them, and governments, businesses, banks, and ordinary people are all potential targets." Also, the World: "Let's pump more money into this thing to see what it does next".

Too many governments are talking about "preparedness" Anyone else following?

Eugene de Kock undoubtedly has quite a bit to say. One would think that after 20 years in prison, after being handed two life sentences plus an additional 212 years' imprisonment, when those who ordered your actions came off scot-free, you'd be ready to sing like a canary. On both sides, everyone who was ordered to do the dirty work bit the bullet, while those giving the orders became "leaders" That will fuck you up after a few years in jail.

SARS: Remember that you need to submit your social media income. 🤠: Yeah I did, I had some X revenue payouts. SARS: Thanks for submitting that, but now you're a provisional taxpayer because it's an additional income to your salary / R30 000 then you're supposed to submit every six months. 🤠: Well, no - because I didn't know I'd be paid that. I had one viral post that pushed me over at the end of the tax year. SARS: Well, now you're a provisional taxpayer. 🤠: Well, no, because X ended the revenue sharing so I no longer receive anything. They aren't ready for half the stuff they want people to declare.

Jack Black has put together one hell of a stout. It's coffee beans to the max if you enjoy a stout . My order of favorite from darkest to light: @DarlingBrew Arrow Head (The GOAT) Jack Black Guinness

There is no "splitting the vote" if you choose a smaller party. I know some parties want you to believe that. They campaign on wanting you to surrender your political choices today because, apparently, that's the only way to preserve your political choices tomorrow. The "moonshot" to prevent "doomsday" Ask yourself one very simple question: Is the price of having democracy continually surrendering the freedom to choose? And if so, is that truly democracy? Then you have your answer.