THE OPPENHEIMER EMPIRE (THE ‘HOLY’ FAMILY) IS HIJACKING SOUTH AFRICA’S DEMOCRATIC PROJECT THROUGH MONEY AND MANIPULATION AND WANTS TO STEAL THE 2024 ELECTIONS.
The Oppenheimers Empire, which is one of South Africa and Southern Africa’s richest families which has gained wealth through colonial conquest and racism is planning to hijack South Africa’s democratic project for narrow and selfish capitalist purposes.
In a manner excellently described by Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels in the Communist Manifesto in 1848, South Africa’s prime bourgeois (capitalist) family is directly using the ill-gotten wealth and riches gained through colonialism and consolidated under apartheid to continue holding tremendous political sway in South Africa. In 1848, Marx and Engels demonstrated the simple and irrefutable fact that, “the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representativeState, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie”.
The Oppenheimers’ relationship to the State has continuously been an embodiment of this correct philosophical and prophetic observation.
The reality is that since South African Parliament’s gullible promulgation of the Political Party Funding Act in 2018 that prescribes that all registered political parties must declare their funders, the Oppenheimers have captured and are funding political parties and projects.
This they are doing in order to ensure that political parties whose primary responsibility and obligation are the protection of South Africa’s capitalist status quo of massive wealth in the hands of few white people while the majority of our people live in absolute poverty, jobless and landless remains unchanged.
The political parties that are under the Oppenheimers direct control and sway are the Democratic Alliance (the official opposition), Action-SA, RISE Mzansi, and indirectly Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) due to present and historical ties.
Conveniently, these are political parties that constitute the core of the so called Multi Party Coalition, and some of these have declared the Economic Freedom Fighters, the most dependable weapon in the hands of the landless, jobless, and hopeless majority, as their number 1 enemy.
Thus far, the Oppenheimers Empire has made the following donations to the political parties and projects in their control:
On the 14th of May 2021, Mary Slack (Granddaughter of Ernest Oppenheimer) made a monetary donation of R15,000,000 to the Democratic Alliance.
On the 16th of September 2021, Rebecca Oppenheimer made a monetary donation of R3,333,333 to ACTION-SA.
On the 17th of September 2021, Victoria Freudenheim made a monetary donation of R3,333,334 to ACTION-SA.
On the 19th of September 2021, Jessica Slack Jell (granddaughter of Harry and Bridgit Oppenheimer) made a monetary donation of R3,333,33 to ACTION-SA.
On the 8th of October 2022, Nicolas Frank Oppenheimer made a monetary donation of R500,000 to the Democratic Alliance.
On the 7th of July 2022, Victoria Freudenheim made a monetary donation of R8,000,000 to ACTION-SA.
On the 18th of July 2022, Jessica Slack Jell made a monetary donation of R8,000,000 to ACTION-SA.
On the 18th of July 2022, Jessica Slack Jell made a monetary donation of R2,000,000 to the Democratic Alliance.
On the 3rd of August 2022, Mary Slack made a monetary donation of R10,000,000 to the Democratic Alliance.
On the 17th of January 2024, RISE-MZANSI announced that they had received R15 milliondonation from Rebecca Oppenheimer.
All these donations are Oppenheimer controlled donations and knowingly done because they stand no fear of victimisation which would be unleashed on other benefactors and donors to political parties and electoral politics.
Whilst there are no recently declared direct donations to the IFP, the party has historical ties to the Oppenheimer Empire through its founding President Mangosuthu Buthelezi who accepted a R5 million donation from Harry Oppenheimer in the 1970s to establish Mangosuthu Technikon, currently known as Mangosuthu University of Technology.
The proximity of the Oppenheimers to the IFP and Mangosuthu Buthelezi was demonstrated and evidenced during his funeral in Ulundi where the Oppenheimers were playing a visible and present role in his send off. In Parliament, the IFP consistently aligns with the DA, advocating for reforms that oppose the interests of black people and challenging progressive legislation at every opportunity.
This was evidently demonstrated through the IFP’s vote against the progressive and Oppenheimer aborted effort to amend section 25 of the Constitution which would have provided a constitutional basis and foundation for the redistribution of land to all the people of South Africa in a demographically representative manner.
Of course, there are other Capitalists who are directly and indirectly funding political organisations and projects, and these include Michiel Le Roux, the founder of South Africa’s largest loan shark targeting vulnerable workers, masquerading as a bank, called CAPITEC, and Martin Moshal, a Zionist apologist of apartheid Israel who owns BETWAY gambling platforms at the centre of destruction of little safety net in the hands of black people.
Notably, Moshal is also a funder of the Democratic Alliance (DA), Build One South Africa, and the Inkatha Freedom Party. For this funding purpose, Moshal coerces the political parties he funds to side with apartheid Israel in their genocidal extinction of the Palestinian State and people.
It is evident that millions of rands by the Oppenheimers, are a means towards controlling and micromanaging South Africa’s democratic project therefore reducing South Africa electoral democracy into a transactional democracy.
The Oppenheimers are using money to control, manipulate and micromanage South Africa’s politics. This transactional democracy thrives on the exploitation of workers, the entrenchment of colonial and apartheid spatial planning, landlessness, and the continued exclusion of black people from meaningful economic participation, while simultaneously constructing white enclaves.
The Oppenheimers are in the middle of a treacherous transactional coup d’état underpinned by financial manipulation. This demonstrates the simple fact that they have zero respect for South African voters, whom they are buying out to protect their ill-gotten wealth and riches.
There is no doubt that to a greater extent, political parties with substantial financial resources are able to establish and keep high levels of visibility through highly expensive branding and advertisements, and also able to recruit and sustain political party volunteers who from time to time will need subsistence money to travel, buy food, buy gazebos and other electoral regalia, as well as airtime and all essentials needed for electoral progress and success.
Additionally, there is a litany of illustration that confirm that money is used as an instrument of capitalist control and has historically and continuously continue to influence electoral outcomes. The following proverbs and quotes reinforce the correct observation that money plays a central role in politics.
a) First is the proverb that says, “he who pays the piper calls the tune”, which literally translates into “those who pay for any project will have the ultimate say on what is to be done”, meaning that in South Africa, the Oppenheimers’ voice and interests will be dominant if their transactional political activities emerge victorious.
b) In the perspective titled “The Holy Family” (1844), Karl Marx correctly says. “Money does not vote, but it determines the votes”.
c) Nina Turner correctly said, “the overflow of big money in politics drowns out the voices of everyday people. That is part of the conundrum in America: The more money you have the more speech you have. That leaves everyday people out of the equation."
d) Bernie Sanders correctly said, "to my mind, if we do not get a handle on money in politics and the degree to which big money controls the political process in this country, nobody is going to
bring about the changes that is needed in this country for the middle class and working families."
e) Rebecca Goldstein if her modern reflection of Plato’s
f) philosophy, remarked that “It is an essential feature of the just state that the wealthy be kept away from political power and that the politically powerful be kept away from wealth.” This was
in recognition of the insidious role money plays in manipulating politics.
g) David Axelrod, who was Barack Obama’s adviser, made the following observation “If your party serves the powerful and well-funded interests, and there's no limit to what you can spend, you have a permanent, structural advantage.”
All these illustrate the simple fact observed by Lenin in State and Revolution (1917) that, “the oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class shall represent and repress them in parliament”. Without any doubt, the Oppenheimers are using their financial muscle to manipulate voters into deciding which particular representatives of the oppressing class shall represent and repress them in parliament.
The outcomes of the 2021 Local Government Elections in South Africa emboldened the Oppenheimers Empire to want to spend more money in buying South Africa’s elections in 2024.
The emergence of Action-SA in key metropolitan councils like the City of Johannesburg and City of Tshwane, where they contested elections and significantly influenced coalition governments, marks a pivotal shift in the political landscape.
In 2021 Local Government Elections, the Oppenheimers’ political projects succeeded in reducing the political parties they don’t have direct control over to below 50% in the Metropolitan Cities of Tshwane, Johannesburg, Cape Town, eThekwini, and Nelson Mandela Bay. This development underscores the investments made by the Oppenheimers to shape electoral outcomes and coalition formations in South Africa’s major urban centres.
Whilst this superior observation might appear one-dimensional, the reality is that the Oppenheimer Empire uses its financial muscle to play a central role in the stratification of South Africa’s politics with the sole purpose of breaking down the progressive forces that were beginning to coalesce around the expropriation of land without compensation as part of the redistribution imperative and historical justice. It is not a secret that the by-products of the 2016 Local Government Elections were two-fold and palatably contradictory.
In the first category, the defeat of the ANC in almost all major Metropolitan Municipalities in 2016 weakened Jacob Zuma’s stronghold in the ANC, therefore undermining the decoy state capture criminal syndicate that was associated with the Guptas.
In the second category, the ANC’s defeat in the 2016 Local Government Elections radicalised a section of the ANC, which resolved in the 2017 ANC National Conference on expropriation of land without compensation, nationalisation of the South African Reserve Bank and creation of a State Bank amongst other resolutions.
Nevertheless, and unlike the 1949 generation of the Congress Youth League which adopted radical resolutions and elected radical leadership to fulfil those resolutions, the 2017 generation adopted radical resolutions and elected reactionary collaborators and puppets of the capitalist establishment (including Cyril Ramaphosa who is an Oppenheimer protégé), who will never implement any of those resolutions.
The Oppenheimer Empire in South Africa is foundationally and continuously the personification of white dominance and the white capitalist domination, whose other side is black economic suppression and subjugation.
The Oppenheimers greatest fear and concern is the reality that as things stand (as per the 2019 general elections outcome and parliamentary composition), the political parties that have resolutions and ideological inclinations that might amend the Constitution to realise expropriation without compensation, nationalise the Central Bank and create a State Bank amount to more than two thirds majority in South Africa’s Parliament. The ANC’s electoral 57% and EFF’s 11% is adequate to amend South Africa’s Constitution and this will largely disrupt the early 1990s sell-out and reactionary compromises that transferred political power to the black majority and retained real economic power in the ownership and control of the white minority, whose wealth is as a result of decades of colonial barbarism and pillage of the territory named South Africa and all its resources.
To understand the Oppenheimers involvement in politics, it is perhaps important that we schematically present the time periods upon which they made direct or indirect political and economic interventions in society to protect their interests. The rapacious Oppenheimer empire and their predatory predecessors historically shaped and continue to shape South Africa’s capitalist accumulation path. Throughout South Africa’s history, the Oppenheimers intrinsically understood the seamless relationship between political power and economic domination.
In the 1800s, the exclusion of black people from economic ownership in South Africa was guaranteed by laws that forbade indigenous people from registering companies and listing them in the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. Indigenous peoples were coerced through laws such as the Glen Grey Act into supplying of cheap and easily disposable wage labour in South Africa’s mines and emerging industries. Lipton (1986) illustrates, this point clearly; “the mines, like the white farms, had immense difficulty securing sufficient labour at a price that it was economic for them to pay. Mine owners, like white farmers, therefore tried to find ways of forcing blacks to work for them, and of reducing the competition from higher urban wages. They supported restrictions on black land ownership, as well as taxes to force them to work for cash wages. Cecil Rhodes, leading mine owner and Premier of the Cape Colony, sponsored the 1894 Glen Grey Act ... its land tenure and tax provisions would, he said, act as a ‘gentle stimulant’ to blacks to work and ‘to remove them from the life of sloth and laziness... teach them the dignity of labour ... and make them give some return for our wise and good government” (Lipton, 1986: 119).
After the Afrikaner Nationalist Party wrestled political power from the British colonial administrators in 1948, it was the Oppenheimer empire that began the gradual integration of aspirant Afrikaner capitalists into real economic power and participation. Furthermore, the Oppenheimer empire and established English capitalist interests played a role in the establishment of Afrikaner capitalist corporations with the understanding that if they own and control large capitalist interests, the Afrikaners will assimilate into the capitalist edifice and defend its sustenance. In 1964, when Anglo American was a symbol of the dominant English business establishment operating under an Afrikaner government, the company sold its General Mining subsidiary to Afrikaner interests, partly as a counter to the Nationalist government’s critique of English dominance of the economy and partly as a method by the Oppenheimers to dilute the criticism that capitalist corporations are dominated and owned by English capitalist corporations (Lipton, 1986:310; Verhoef, 2010).
After the June 1976 Soweto Uprising which spread to many parts of South Africa, it was the Oppenheimer empire, then working with the Ruperts which began the co-option of the socalled black leaders into their agenda through the formation of the Urban Foundation. Perhaps the root of Capitalist interests’ joint action to end apartheid was the launch of the Urban Foundation after the 1976 uprisings in Soweto. Esterhuyse (2011) mentions that:
“The Urban Foundation, a brainchild of the business sector following the 1976 uprising in black communities, was formed with the inspiration of Harry Oppenheimer and Anton Rupert and Jan van der Horst from the Anglo American, Rembrandt and Old Mutual stables respectively. During this time, it was an important chisel that took on the granite rock of apartheid. The living conditions of urban black people, security of tenure and numerous other restrictive measures were on the agenda. The strategy was incremental reform, in other words, a focused reform of the cardinal aspects of the apartheid system; the intention was not to reform the ‘system’, but to replace it with another system over time by way of evolutionary process without jeopardising stability” (Esterhuyse, 2011).
Notably, the UF had representatives of the black majority, amongst who were Thato Montlana and Cyril Ramaphosa, coincidently the first Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, respectively, of a black-owned corporation to receive BEE stakes from a deal started by the Anglo-American Corporation post-apartheid. An important component of the Urban Foundation was also Clive Menell, who was the chairman of Anglo Transvaal Mines Consolidated, and was Chairperson of the Urban Foundation regional board. On the 25th of September 1978, Menell welcomed a new member of the UF Transvaal regional board, Cyril Ramaphosa (Butler, 2007: 90-91). The Menell family through the recommendation of Cyril Ramaphosa, provided primary residence to former President Nelson Mandela when he was resealed from the house in Cape Town.
Butler (2007) illustrates that Anglo American (Oppenheimers’ company) was a dominant force in the mining] industry and was directly responsible for 40% of all gold mining – and for perhaps 70% of if all Anglo-controlled and administered companies are included. Anglo was also responsible for more than 70% of uranium mining, and through its sister company De Beers it was the leading player in the international diamond business.
By the mid-1980s, Anglo employed more than a quarter of a million (250 000) people in gold mines, 25 000 in the diamonds industry, and perhaps 100 000 others in other mining sectors such as platinum and coal” (Butler, 2007: 116-117).
Furthermore, “By the mid-1980s, Anglo had 1,350 subsidiaries and associated companies with a variety of relationships to the present. It employed 140,000 workers in the food, beverage and retail industries and around 50,000 others in assorted enterprises within South Africa.
The consequence of the emergence of this giant was an economy with a curious structure. The broader Anglo empire was responsible for as much as a quarter of South African economic activity. It was therefore of almost equal economic stature to the state itself – to the sum of government departments, provincial administration, state arms manufacturers, railways, the iron and steel industry, chemicals giant Sasol, the post office, and the energy parastatals Eskom” (Butler, 2007: 117).
With such substantial control and ownership of capital, whose base was mining, the Anglo- American Corporation and other mining interests played a critical role in ending legislated apartheid, whilst safeguarding the key capitalist interests.
Currently, the Oppenheimer empire continues to directly and indirectly control material and intellectual wealth and discourse in society. It is not a mistake that they are the single biggest donors to political parties that safeguard their interests. In the past, the empire used to directly participate in elections, now they employ puppets and direct them on everything.
When the apartheid was globally condemned, lost legitimacy and compromised the global capitalist interests of the Oppenheimers, it was the Oppenheimer empire which initiated the negotiations between the whites only government and black political leaders. In 1985, the first delegation of Oppenheimers’ businessmen visited the ANC in Lusaka, and as Macmillan (2013) illustrates, “there had been a more significant visit to Zambia to meet the ANC by a group of South African businessmen and journalists led by Gavin Relly, chairman of Anglo American, in September 1985... Apart from Relly, the group included Zach De Beer; Tony Bloom, chief executive of Premier Milling an Anglo subsidiary; Peter Sorour, director of the South African Foundation (SAF); Hugh Murray; and two journalists. Tertius Myburgh, Editor of the Sunday Times, also an Anglo subsidiary, and Harald Pakendorf, editor of Die Vaderland” (Macmillan, 2013: 200).
In 1987, Clem Sunter, who held various positions in Anglo American and had proximity to one of the doyens of South African capitalism, Harry Oppenheimer wrote a book defining possible scenarios of South Africa’s transition from apartheid to a post-apartheid system and said that in the ultimate end “negotiation works. Rhetoric is dropped, reality prevails and in the end the companies concerned go on producing the minerals, goods and services” (Sunter, 1987).
This was in 1987, and the outcomes of the negotiations into what South Africa has now is a replica of the Oppenheimers’ plans.
After the release of former president Nelson Mandela, the real negotiations on what is to be done were initiated and hosted by the Oppenheimers. In the early 1990s, after his separation from Winnie Mandela, Mandela was hosted by the Menells, who had earlier played a critical role in the Synthesis group, whose primary aim was to safeguard a political transition which would safeguard capitalist interests.
The beginning of economic policy discussions between Mandela and Group of Business executives started from this, in what became known as the Brenthurst Group. The Brenthurst Group had the most decisive influence on the economic policy content of the transition and did everything in their power to ensure that their interests are secured. Professor Sampie Terreblanche (2012) illustrates that: “from 1990 Nelson Mandela and Harry Oppenheimer met regularly for lunch or dinner and from early in the 1990s the MEC [Minerals Energy Complex] met regularly with a leadership core of the ANC at Little Brenthurst, Oppenheimer’s Estate” (Terreblanche, 2012: 63).
Terreblanche further argues that the climax of these secret negotiations was the signing of the IMF agreement with the Transitional Executive Council in December 1993” (Terreblanche, 2012: 63).
These business corporate interests informed the negotiation strategy of the National Party, and in fact, the Normative Economic Model (NEM) published in 1993 sought to do three main things, namely; “firstly, the accommodating of blacks in a majoritarian democratic system, secondly, attaining high economic growth rates within the framework of an unrestrained free market capitalist system, marked by minimum State intervention and a neo-liberal and export oriented economic approach, and thirdly, avoiding an aggressive redistribution policy.” (Sampie Terreblanche, 2002) Post 1994, the mutation of the Democratic Party into Democratic Alliance, the failed experiments of puppet black leaders that occurred thereafter are all creations of the Oppenheimer empire. One of the DA’s failed experiments almost always confides that there is no political party called Democratic Alliance, but a political and electoral desk of the Oppenheimer empire, which instructs on what must happen, and when. The correct reports are that the daughters and granddaughters of the empire are actually very rude and have no respect for any of the DA leaders.
The institutional mechanism for the safeguarding of the Oppenheimer interests post- 1994 metamorphosed into the Brenthurst Foundation, established in 2004, and whose proclaimed interests are to facilitate policy conversations with governments across the continent. The Foundation proclaims that “We identify and share international best practice with governments, addressing not just what to do but how to do it. Our wide experience across different African countries affords us unique insights.” (Brenthurst Foundation website). In their 2022 report on possible scenarios for South Africa, titled “The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Scenarios for South Africa”, the Foundations laments South Africa’s criticism of western democracies and her close association with China and Russia, labelling these countries as ‘negligible economic partners’. The report also notes, with some sort of satisfying feeling of vindication, that the country is moving from a dominant party democracy to a coalition of parties. More fundamentally, the report labels a possible ANC-EFF coalition government as a populist alternative, and that this coalition arrangement would be the least preferred. (Brenthurst Foundation, 2022) It is evident now that the Oppenheimer empire’s most successful political project post 1994 is the splitting of their political forces into two liberal organisations they directly control—one called the DA, and the other called ACTION-SA, one as an instrument of white political power and the other to fragment the black vote. The success is defined by the fact that the two political formations, ANC and EFF who were most likely going to build consensus on expropriation of land without compensation no longer enjoy the joint two-thirds majority, and in some municipalities such as Tshwane cannot constitute municipal government, even when they vote together. It is not a surprise that the Oppenheimer empire funds both the DA and ACTION-SA. While none will ever win an outright majority, they will continue to play a role in the stratification of South Africa’s politics such that there is never ever a single political party or movement that will commonly call for expropriation of land without compensation. There is a huge possibility that political parties that agree on expropriation without compensation might not regain a two thirds majority in the foreseeable future.
The Oppenheimer empire is the biggest winner out of the 2021 local government elections because they have begun and are making progress in the stratification of political parties which were naturally and logically going to coalesce on the land question. Virtually all political projects the empire handled in history have safeguarded their interests.
With their increased funding to their political parties and projects and creation of puppet black political formations, the Oppenheimers are using money to influence the outcomes of the 2024 General Elections.
They are certainly riding on the fact that the ruling party, the ANC has lost support with majority of voters in South Africa as demonstrated in the 2021 Local Government Elections.
There currently exists a real possibility that the Oppenheimers might gain the transactional majority in Gauteng, KwaZulu Natal, Northern Cape, and North West and their not immediately possible aspiration to gain majority at national level. As illustrated above, the will of the people will be replaced with the will of money.
WHERE ARE WE AND WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
a) We need to pursue unity of black political parties at all costs and unite them on the agenda for total emancipation of black people.
In the face of systemic oppression and economic subjugation, the imperative to unite black political entities stands as our most potent weapon. This unity is not merely a strategic alliance but a fundamental necessity to disrupt and dismantle the structures of power that perpetuate inequality. By forging a united front, we can effectively challenge the status quo and champion the cause for total emancipation, ensuring that the political landscape is reflective of the will and aspirations of the black majority.
b) We should use legislation to prevent transactional democracy where billionaires use their financial muscle to buy political power.
The egregious practice of transactional democracy, where financial oligarchs manipulate the political sphere, demands urgent legislative intervention.
Enacting laws to curb the influence of billionaire donors is essential to restoring the integrity of our democracy.
This will ensure that political power is derived from the collective will of the people, rather than being auctioned to the highest bidder, preserving the sanctity of our electoral process.
c) We should demolish the economic domination of colonial forces personified in the Oppenheimer Empire.
The vestiges of colonialism and apartheid continue to echo through the economic domination wielded by entities like the Oppenheimer Empire. To dismantle this stronghold, we must actively challenge and disrupt the economic frameworks that sustain white capitalist supremacy. Through concerted efforts, we can pave the way for a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources, ensuring that economic power is reclaimed by the rightful owners of this land.
d) We are in deep crisis and white power is re-asserting its dominance:
The resurgence of white power poses a grave threat to our quest for justice and equality. In responding to this crisis, our resolve must be unwavering; we must wrestle power from the entrenched establishment. This struggle is not merely about political representation but about asserting our rightful place in the annals of history, undeterred by the forces that seek to maintain their grip on power.
e) We should wrestle power from the establishment:
The resurgence of white power poses a grave threat to our quest for justice and equality. In responding to this crisis, our resolve must be unwavering; we must wrestle power from the entrenched establishment. This struggle is not merely about political representation but about asserting our rightful place in the annals of history, undeterred by the forces that seek to maintain their grip on power.
f) We should foster a progressive revolutionary programme on the land:
The land question remains central to the liberation struggle. It is imperative that we foster a progressive, revolutionary programme to address this issue head-on.
The land belongs to the people, and our policies must reflect a commitment to redistributing it in a manner that rectifies historical injustices. This revolutionary programme will serve as the bedrock for true transformation and the realization of social and economic rights for all.
g) We should intensify the ultra-parliamentary struggles for economic benefits from huge multinational corporations and farms:
Beyond the halls of parliament, the struggle for economic emancipation continues. We must intensify our efforts to secure economic benefits from multinational corporations and farms.
Through strategic activism and mobilization, we can exert pressure on these entities, demanding fair practices and equitable sharing of resources. This struggle is essential to breaking the chains of exploitation and ensuring that wealth is distributed to those who labour for it.
h) We must build a strong dependable and ideologically steadfast movement:
The foundation of our struggle lies in the strength and ideological clarity of our movement. We must cultivate a cadre of fighters who are unwavering in their commitment to the cause.
Developing revolutionary fortitude among our ranks will ensure that we remain resolute in our quest for real transformation of society. This movement will be the vanguard in the fight against oppression, leading the charge towards a just and equitable future. The EFF is currently the only embodiment of these values.
i) Building a revolutionary tradition:
Central to our endeavour is forging a tradition steeped in a deep commitment to economic freedom, realized through a collective resolve and the strategic pursuit of justice. This tradition is defined by a steadfast dedication to the empowerment of the oppressed, aspiring for a radical overhaul of existing power structures to usher in a future where economic sovereignty is a reality for all.
j) Develop revolutionary fortitude to fight for real transformation of society:
The essence of our struggle requires more than just fleeting bravery; it demands the development of an unbreakable revolutionary fortitude. This fortitude is the backbone of our fight for real societal transformation. It's about cultivating a resilience that withstands setbacks, a determination that fuels our pursuit of justice, and a steadfastness that ensures we never waver from our path, no matter the obstacles we face.
If we don’t, the Oppenheimers will continue to do business as usual.
This article first appeared in the EFF journal The Radical Voice: For the Poor and Working Class, February 2024
