EFF policies go against Constitution

A POINT our fledgling nation urgently needs to understand is that the EFF’s policies are squarely underpinned by a desire to discriminate against whites (to deprive them of their property and drive them, if needs be, back to Europe, which according to the EFF is where people with white skins belong).

As such, the EFF is in direct opposition to our Constitution (which prohibits discrimination) and is eerily similar to the Nazi Party, which under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, encouraged its citizens to believe that Jews had too much economic power and did not really belong in Germany.

The question therefore arises as to whether it is incumbent upon a democracy to allow its bitterest enemies to participate in elections.

The answer to this question is, in the opinion of the writer, a resounding “No”.

The Independent Electoral Commission would not tolerate a party that advocated the reintroduction of slavery or the reintroduction of apartheid and should not be tolerating the EFF (which advocates revolution).

On this point, one notes that Hitler in the early 1930s made no mention of his desire to exterminate Jews and at times seemed like a reasonable fellow to the leaders of many influential nations.

Consequently, there is perilously little solace to be found in the fact that the EFF’s power-hungry commander-in-chief, Julius Malema, is sometimes a little vague on the topic of what should happen to whites if “his” demands are not met.

He and his fellow revolutionaries do not belong in Parliament.

A failure to heed this warning could result in a bloodbath.

TERENCE GRANT

Cape Town