Having experienced three decades of the increasingly corrupt and failed implementation of the Marxist Freedom Charter begs the question as to what reader value there is in providing extensive space to the two-part series by one Gillian Schutte (The Mercury, July 16–17) decrying the policies of the GNU while advocating more Marxism as the panacea for our ills.
Although the likes of Schutte are entitled to their opinions, how does their blatant refusal to accept the conspicuous failure of Marxist ideology entitle them to media prominence? Yet it is unlikely that the same prominence would be afforded to someone advocating national socialism or apartheid — both failed ideologies.
Significantly, while Gillian Schutte’s thinking replicates that of Zuma’s MKP, nowhere in her ideological harangue does she account for the dystopia caused by Marxism in Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Mozambique under Machel and elsewhere. Yet she regards those states as “progressive” whilst demonising the policies of the GNU as “regressive” and constituting “recolonisation.”
While she trots out the standard Marxist charge of exploitation under colonialism, Schutte ignores the rampant exploitation and ownership of South Africa’s resources by foreigners, particularly China, under the ANC. If she removed her blinkers, she would observe that impoverishment is worse under the ANC compared to pre-1994.
Inevitably, in true Marxist form, Schutte sees race as the “predatory and insidious monster, selling the people hope while it sucks blood out of their existence.” Afflicted by race derangement syndrome, the likes of Schutte are incapable of recognising merit, regardless of race, because it would deprive them of one of the mainstays of their Marxist vocation.
The other risible aspect of Schutte’s ideology is that any policy to the right of Marxism is undemocratic and must be resisted. On May 29, the people spoke. Too bad Schutte rejects their democratic voice. Therefore, having long championed democracy, The Mercury’s publication of Marxist, anti-democratic diatribe is objectionable, particularly in terms of reader value for money.
Add Comment