You cannot fight for survival if you do not know who the enemy is.
Exactly who is hiding behind this iron curtain of secrecy, now protected by the weaponized word “Racism”? Why do they fair better than both the ‘racists’ and the ‘victims-of-racism’?
A courageous and thorough researcher, Stephen Mitford Goodson, the well known expelled insider of the Reserve Bank of South Africa, has produced a most revealing biography. Goodson has a rare ability in his books of pairing brevity with fact filled information which pours out of just 144 pages of his well-sourced book.
“HENDRIK FRENSCH VERWOERD: SOUTH AFRICA’S GREATEST PRIME MINISTER” 2nd ed. 2017, by Stephen Mitford Goodson, pp.122-124
Stephen Goodson’s survey will astonish most English-speaking South Africans. The English Press and the four main English language universities painted Dr Verwoerd as a petty racist. Even today, they remember him as the “architect of apartheid”, by which they mean that racism was his first principle of government – the protection of White people and disrespect for the aspirations of Black people.
Dr Verwoerd’s first principle of government, the author shows us, was that the highest levels of attainment in our society must be protected, so that those attainments can spread to others. Dr Verwoerd [born in Holland] warned that the Liberal principle of pretending that different levels of attainment were unimportant would destroy the quality of life in South Africa.
We see that he attended Milton High School in Bulawayo [Rhodesia], and won many prizes, including one for the best pupil in English literature in all the schools of Rhodesia. His successes continued at Stellenbosch University [South Africa], where he was among the leaders of the cultural life.
He was awarded his degree cum laude and was offered a Sir Abe Bailey scholarship to study at Oxford, but preferred to study in Europe. Aged 26, he was appointed Professor of Applied Psychology, Sociology and Social Science. Dr Verwoerd’s talents were a gift for South Africa and it is an ominous sign, in these days of no leadership from South Africa’s government, that his talents were so scorned.
Dr Verwoerd started a federation of cantons, aka homelands, Swiss style, preserving languages and traditions, and offering evolution by mutual help. Stephen Goodson writes that the border industries remedied the separation of families, a crippling scourge that now afflicts most South Africans:
“Bantu workers were able to commute daily to their place of work and live with their families, which was an important factor in promoting social stability. They were also able to spend a portion of their income in the homelands.”
Why was Dr Verwoerd’s vision attacked in the Press and the universities of the country’s most influential component, the White English-speaking South Africans? So thoroughly did the English language Press poison the minds of its readers against Dr Verwoerd that no record can be found of his ever having spoken at an English language university.
It was the Money Power at work, says Stephen Goodson, whose special interest is banking. The “winds of change” were not intended to liberate the people of Africa, but to replace one form of control which was honest with another form of power exercised dishonestly through puppet regimes.
“The colonial powers would save on the expense of having to subsidise and develop these colonies…while the international bankers led by the Rothschild syndicate would plunge these hapless territories into irredeemable and permanent debt. They would be ably assisted by the economic hit men of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.”
The faculties of Political Science and Economics at Witwatersrand University, which ought to have tried to understand accurately the plans of their country’s Prime Minister, were eclipsed by the Institute of International Relations, sited on the campus of Witwatersrand University in its own new building, “Jan Smuts House”. The building was rightly named, as the author has shown us, after one who sold himself to the International Money Power and betrayed his people.
Dr Verwoerd was an implacable foe of the Money Power, Stephen Goodson tells us, and wanted to achieve independence for South Africa. He commissioned the Hoek Report from Professor Piet Hoek of Pretoria University, and the report showed that the Anglo American Corporation controlled the English language newspapers and 70% of all companies in South Africa, while paying 10% of the tax.
The Anglo American Corporation also controlled the English Language universities. Its [Jewish] Chief Executive, Harry F. Oppenheimer, was chairman of the South African Institute of International Affairs, and his corporate subordinates occupied the Councils of the English language universities. Pretending to be an honest enterprise, the Institute promoted the interests of international corporations, and still does. The political message taught to the students was controlled by Oppenheimer and his associates.
Helen Suzman, the “lone voice in Parliament” of the Liberals, was in close communication with Harry Oppenheimer and both were counted as leaders in the English language universities.
“Is Dr Verwoerd sincere when he offers 13% of the land to 80% of the population?” Helen Suzman asked a hall full of laughing students at Witwatersrand University. “I am one of those who believes that Dr Verwoerd is sincere. Oh don’t get me wrong, a snake can be sincere.”
The value of land is not measured by hectares. The author shows that Dr Verwoerd’s apportionment to the Bantustans was generous, and included the world’s richest deposits of platinum [coveted by Anglo American Corp see above image]. His desire was to have prosperous neighbours by being a provider of knowledge, service and aid. The living standard of Blacks was rising at 5.4% per year against that of the Whites at 3.9% per year.
Dr Verwoerd’s Bantu Education was also ridiculed. How is education now, in the present unitary, multi-cultural state? The head of the Eastern Cape schools department, forced recently to supply evidence in a court case, has testified that his department is an utter failure, with no decision making capacity, no financial controls and unable to fill thousands of vacant posts for teachers. In another province, pupils received no text books, 5,000 of which were found dumped in an open field.
The author quotes a Black academic, Rabelani Dagada at the Wits School of Business:
“After 20 years of democracy, the education levels have plunged.” Of Black and Coloured students enlarging the classes at university level, only 5% finish. Of the 1.1 million Black children who were born in 1994 and later entered first grade, fewer than half made it to the final graduation exam. Of the moronic passing levels, the editor of South Africa’s Financial Mail magazine, Barney Mthombothi, writes:
“As long as the pass mark is 30% [for Blacks only, Whites require 51%] … we’re fooling nobody but ourselves.”
The standard of graduates from what were once the country’s best universities is revealed by the collapsed state of essential services in this country. The national economy depends on electricity, and yet 33% of the capacity that existed in 1994 [the year Black majority rule was acquired] has been lost. Economic growth, between 6 to 8% under Dr Verwoerd and the second highest in the world, is now 0.5%. In the rural areas, famine stalks the land.
The murder rate, 60 per annum under Dr Verwoerd, is [now] over 20,000 – twice that of the NATO war zone, Iraq. The author points to the collapse of government and unhindered plundering that has been the result of “independence” in Africa. He shows us Dr Verwoerd’s belief that South Africa could do a far better and quicker job than Britain of leading the Bantu people to independence and economic prosperity, and that Verwoerd’s opinion was shared by most South Africans.
Chief Kaiser Matanzima, chairman of the Transkeian Territorial Authority, spoke to British television about racial conflict between Black and White in Britain, the United States and Southern Rhodesia. He said that Dr Verwoerd was
“the greatest leader who has emerged among White South Africans”.
Dr Verwoerd received a standing ovation for his speech given on 12 December 1961 to the Council for Coloured Affairs in Cape Town. On 16 May 1962, Dr Verwoerd addressed 500 mainly English speaking prominent business men and economists at the Wanderers Club in Johannesburg and again received a a standing ovation.
Finding that support for Dr Verwoerd was established and unshakeable among most South Africans, the international bankers:
- Resorted to bringing a case against South Africa in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, alleging that South Africa had failed to promote the interests of South West Africa’s inhabitants. The case failed and,
- Six weeks later, the bankers resorted to violence. In August 1966, the first terrorist attack took place on the northern border of South West Africa, and
- A month after that, Dr Verwoerd was murdered.
The author describes a meeting at Harry Oppenheimer’s Brenthurst estate in Parktown. The Minister of Justice, B J Vorster, was asked to attend.
“Also present were Anton Rupert, Quintin Whyte, a Council on Foreign Relations member and CIA agent, as well as an unknown representative of MI6. At this meeting, which lasted two and a half hours, a plot to assassinate Dr Verwoerd was discussed.”
Vorster, a Freemason since his student days, was promised the premiership, conditional on his stealthily dismantling the apartheid structure and White leadership and handing (leadership) over to designated Black puppets.
There were two attacks on Dr Verwoerd’s life, and both attackers were connected to the same sinister figures, with Oppenheimer as their principal. B.J. Vorster succeeded as Prime Minister, the Hoek Report was stifled, and the South African Defence Force was withdrawn from helping to defend gradualism in Rhodesia and began the infiltration and destruction of our two neighbours, [Portuguese] Mozambique and Angola; all deeply significant historical factors that helped to neutralise White influence in Africa and usher in fundamentals there which are sought by the New World Order.
The choice in southern Africa was described at the time by an international lawyer, Anthony D’Amato, commenting on the South Africa case in The Hague:
either to apply “pressure for reforming the system bloodlessly so that eventually the vastly more populous “Natives” will achieve political supremacy but the “Whites” remain an important, propertied, and perhaps respected segment of the citizenry”, OR
“advocacy of immediate overthrow of ‘White’ supremacy [responsible government], disregarding the safety of the “Whites”.
Helen Suzman, supported by the Money Power on the Opposition side of Parliament, advocated immediate overthrow. On the Government side, Prime Minister B.J. Vorster, bribed by the money power, worked for the same end.
In her autobiography, Helen Suzman tells that B.J. Vorster afterwards suggested to her that she had been used, and she concedes that he might have been right. In March 2016 the Helen Suzman Foundation was robbed of its computers at gunpoint, and the indications are that the instigators were members of the Government, wishing to eliminate evidence.
On the 5th December 2015, speaking to celebrate his 44 years on the Zulu throne, King Goodwill Zwelethini kaBhekuzulu said,
“The National Party had built a powerful government with the strongest economy and army on the continent, but then came this ‘so-called democracy’ in which Black people started destroying the gains of the past.”
With cultures and languages still whole, who knows what progress the now destitute rural areas might have made over the past sixty years? Looking northwards, we see the Mediterranean Sea dotted with ‘refugees’. The defences of European civic institutions are corrupted, and ancient centres of achievement are throwing themselves open to invasion by immigrants, levelling themselves down – under the slogan,
“There are no nations, only people”.
Stephen Mitford Goodson’s examination of Dr Verwoerd’s leadership is more than South African history; it throws light on the same processes manipulating the rest of the world.
… [S]ome of the other facts revealed by Goodson include:
- The determination of the money empire to eliminate the beneficial ‘HOEK REPORT’, an investigation into the powerful Anglo American hegemony which report exposed the anti-national character of capitalism and recommended large scale state intervention in dealing with these corporations for the benefit of all the peoples of South Africa.
- Reveals the truth about the Sharpeville Riots – plutocratic interests based in the USA played a major role in undermining South Africa through the CIA front, the African American Institute using agents provocateurs to stoke up agitation as did the Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg, Bishop Ambrose Reeves, who later fled the country as a ‘persecuted Christian’.
- The Sharpeville Riot of 1960 in which 20,000 Blacks armed with machetes, guns and metal pipes approached a police station of just 150. An accidental discharge of a firearm occurred due to an understandably nervous policeman causing the angered crowd to storm forward. With the memory just 2 months prior when 4 White and 5 Black policemen were hacked to death, the police opened fire on the menacing crowd. In South African school history books today the Sharpeville Riot is inaccurately portrayed as 4,000 friendly and unarmed protesters.
- Reveals that [as well as introducing pornography and abortion] Mandela betrayed South Africans of all races by delivering South Africa to the privatisation and globalisation that Oppenheimer/Rupert/Rothschild sought.
“Those who want to understand the present and be empowered to shape the future, should read this work of Mr Goodson and, in fact, his other books as well. You cannot fight for survival if you do not know who the enemy is.”
Paul Kruger BA (Pretoria), BA (Hons) (UNISA), B Proc (Pretoria)
END NOTE: This review extract was posted with permission by Stephen Mitford Goodson. Images with text have been added by the editors of WearsWar, they are merely illustrative and do not imply any views held by either Stephen Mitford Goodson or John Wear.
A few days after posting this article we learned Stephen Mitford Goodson died. Goodson’s recent death and his distress in the day(s) prior to his untimely passing is mentioned in the first few minutes on this podcast: