The white man’s burden redux: Trump, Musk, and the fabricated persecution of Afrikaners

With all the moral clarity of a man who once mused about injecting disinfectant to treat COVID; recently floated the idea of taking over Greenland; and reportedly thought nuclear weapons might be a fun tool for hurricane management, Donald Trump has now taken up the righteous cause of South Africa’s allegedly persecuted Afrikaner population. In his latest geopolitical fantasy, the Trump Doctrine — ignorance, self-aggrandisement and outright distortion in equal parts — dictates that South Africa is on a genocidal rampage against white farmers. His solution? Cancel all US aid to the country.

It would be an amusing episode of alternate history if it were not so transparently false. White South Africans, despite solemn laments of victimhood by some, continue to control the vast majority of arable land in South Africa, with estimates ranging between 70 and 80 per cent. The country’s economy, still deeply shaped by the structural advantages of apartheid, ensures that the vast majority of its top earners and corporate executives remain white. The notion that Afrikaners are being persecuted is about as plausible as the claim that Mar-a-Lago is a working-class refuge.

And who better to champion this delusion than Elon Musk, that intrepid poster child of apartheid privilege?

Musk, who often cosplays as an oppressed truth-teller while using his platform to amplify white supremacists in Britain, Germany and Italy, is now lending his considerable disinformation expertise to Trump’s latest narrative. Musk’s mother, whose family has well-documented Nazi sympathies, once prospered in apartheid South Africa’s racially engineered economic system, something that, given Musk’s recent political pivot, seems less a source of shame than a foundational ethos. And yet, despite the ample privileges that South Africa’s post-apartheid government has allowed its white citizens to maintain, Musk and Trump would have the world believe that white South Africans are the world’s most aggrieved minority.

To add an additional layer of irony, South Africa remains a model of constitutionalism and accountable governance, something that Trump, whose legal philosophy extends no further than “I alone can fix it,” might find alien. South Africa’s Constitutional Court, the highest guardian of its rule of law, has demonstrated repeatedly an unwavering commitment to legality. When former President Jacob Zuma attempted to flout court orders, he was held in contempt and sentenced to prison. South African courts have also routinely reviewed executive decisions under the principle of rationality, ensuring that presidential power is not an unchecked force for personal vendettas and whimsical decrees.

READ: South Africa ‘concerned’ over US ‘propaganda’ about land law

Moreover, South Africa’s expropriation laws, which Trump and his ilk portray as crude land grabs, are in fact deeply grounded in legal principles aimed at addressing historical injustices. The process is bound by constitutional provisions ensuring that expropriation is just, equitable and in the public interest. Compensation is determined based on a variety of factors, including the land’s current use and its acquisition history, ensuring that reform efforts align with constitutional imperatives rather than arbitrary confiscation. The legal framework guiding land redistribution in South Africa is a measured, deliberative response to centuries of dispossession, not the reckless seizure that Trump and Musk gleefully misrepresent.

Contrast this with the US, where Trump’s brand of executive impunity defines his administration. Targeting of political opponents? Check. Threatening prosecutions of critics? Check. Firing civil servants for not bending the knee? Check.

It’s a presidency shaped by the caprice of a man who views the Justice Department as his personal legal firm. Such antics would not survive judicial scrutiny in South Africa, where courts are bound by constitutional supremacy, not the erratic impulses of an aspiring autocrat.

Even more galling is Trump’s record on pardons, a grotesque perversion of executive clemency that saw war criminals, insurrectionists and political lackeys rewarded for their loyalty. In South Africa, by contrast, presidential pardons must withstand the test of legality, reasonableness and public interest. South African courts would never allow the likes of a Paul Manafort or a Roger Stone to be absolved simply because they kept their mouths shut. And unlike the United States, where Trump’s admiration for indicted war criminals like Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant knows no bounds, South Africa’s courts have demonstrated the courage to uphold international law. When Sudan’s Omar Al-Bashir, accused of genocide, set foot in South Africa, its judiciary ordered his arrest. Even Vladimir Putin was warned that an invitation to attend a BRICS summit in Johannesburg would come with handcuffs attached.

And therein lies the true motivation behind Trump’s latest attack on South Africa: the country’s steadfast commitment to international law. Its decision to take Israel before the International Court of Justice for its atrocities in Gaza has placed it on the receiving end of Washington’s ire. The United States, ever eager to shield its allies from accountability, has now drummed up yet another fabricated human rights crisis — this time, the imaginary plight of privileged white South Africans — as a convenient excuse to punish a country that dares to uphold justice.

READ: US ends aid to South Africa over land law, Israel stance

But perhaps the crowning absurdity of Trump’s posturing is his newfound humanitarianism in offering “refuge” to South African Afrikaners, a demographic still ensconced in economic power and generational wealth. This, from the same man who previously slashed refugee admissions and branded asylum seekers as invaders, and whose administration separated children from their parents at the border. So, to be clear: black and brown refugees fleeing war, persecution and famine? Not welcome. But white South Africans, still the most economically dominant group in their homeland? Come right in.

It is an outrage so naked in its racial preference that it barely needs stating.

For all the talk of “America First,” Trump’s policies have never been about national interest but rather about the consolidation of power through fear-mongering and race-baiting. South Africa, in its commitment to legal accountability, human rights and constitutional integrity, exposes precisely what Trump and his enablers despise: a legal order where power is constrained, the rule of law prevails, and privilege is not an eternal birthright. And for that, it must be punished.

History will not be kind to this farce, nor to those who propagate it. But then again, the perpetrators of apartheid were never particularly fond of history’s judgment either.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.