On 12 March 2025, South Africa’s Finance Minister, Enoch Godongwana, delivered the national budget speech, outlining the government’s fiscal plans amidst economic challenges. A notable aspect of the budget was the proposed 0.5% increase in Value-Added Tax (VAT) from the current 15%, effective from 1 May 2025. Allocation of Funds in the 2025 Budget
The 2025 budget prioritises several key sectors to stimulate economic growth and address pressing social issues:
Education and Early Childhood Development:
Recognising the foundational importance of early education, the government has allocated funds to enhance early learning centres and improve literacy and numeracy among young children. This initiative aims to address the alarming statistic that over 80% of 10-year-olds in South Africa cannot read for meaning.
Electric Vehicle (EV) Production:
To transition the automotive industry towards sustainable energy, the government has committed R1 billion to support local production of electric vehicles, batteries, and related manufacturing projects. This investment is expected to attract significant private sector funding and position South Africa as a key player in the EV market.
Healthcare:
In response to ongoing public health challenges, the budget includes increased funding for healthcare services, aiming to improve infrastructure, access, and quality of care across the country.
Infrastructure Development:
Significant investments are planned for infrastructure projects, including transportation networks and energy supply, to bolster economic activity and create employment opportunities.
Impact of the 0.5% VAT Increase on Ordinary Citizens
The proposed VAT increase from 15% to 15.5% has sparked discussions regarding its potential impact on South African households:
• Cost of Living: A higher VAT rate will raise the cost of most goods and services, including essential items such as food, clothing, and transportation. This increase is particularly concerning for low- and middle-income households, who spend a larger proportion of their income on consumables.
• Inflationary Pressures: The VAT hike could contribute to inflation, further eroding purchasing power. Previous VAT increases have been associated with a rise in inflation, leading to higher interest rates and increased financial strain on consumers. • Economic Inequality: Critics argue that VAT is a regressive tax, disproportionately affecting the working class and the poor. Organisations like the South African Federation of Trade Unions (SAFTU) have expressed strong opposition to the increase, suggesting it will deepen existing inequalities and exacerbate economic hardships. In conclusion, while the 2025 budget aims to address critical areas such as education, sustainable energy, healthcare, and infrastructure, the proposed 0.5% VAT increase raises concerns about its impact on the cost of living and economic inequality.
As the government seeks to balance fiscal responsibility with social welfare, it faces the challenge of implementing policies that promote growth without disproportionately burdening vulnerable populations.
On Monday, 10th March 2025, the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, experienced multiple outages throughout the day, affecting tens of thousands of users worldwide. The disruptions began around 11:30 AM GMT, with a significant spike in outage reports peaking at approximately 2:00 PM GMT, as tracked by Downdetector.
Elon Musk, the owner of X, attributed these interruptions to a “massive cyberattack.” He suggested that the attack was executed with substantial resources, potentially implicating a large, coordinated group or even a nation-state. Musk stated, “We get attacked every day, but this was done with a lot of resources. Either a large, coordinated group and/or a country is involved.”
The outages affected both the X mobile application and its website, with users reporting issues such as the platform not loading, continuous buffering, and error messages indicating that posts were not loading. These technical difficulties persisted intermittently throughout the day, leading to significant disruptions in user access.
In response to the outages, many users turned to alternative social media platforms, such as Threads and BlueSky, to discuss and seek information about the situation.
As of the latest reports, X’s technical teams are actively investigating the source of the cyberattack and working to restore full functionality to the platform. Users are advised to stay updated through official channels for further information regarding the service status.
In one of the most harrowing humanitarian crises of our time, Israel has cut electricity and stopped the supply of food, water, and essential aid into Gaza, plunging over two million Palestinians into unimaginable suffering. This deliberate act of collective punishment is not just morally indefensible—it is a blatant violation of international law. Yet, despite the sheer horror unfolding before the world’s eyes, many Western governments, including the United States and the United Kingdom, continue to support Israel, making them complicit in this atrocity.
The Unfolding Humanitarian Catastrophe
Since Israel imposed a total siege on Gaza, conditions have rapidly deteriorated. With electricity cut off, hospitals are struggling to function, relying on dwindling fuel reserves to keep life-support machines running. Medical facilities are overwhelmed, unable to provide adequate care to the injured, sick, and vulnerable.
The blockade on food and water is pushing Gaza’s civilians—half of whom are children—toward mass starvation. With no fresh supplies entering, shelves are empty, and families are left scavenging for scraps. The lack of clean water has made the risk of disease outbreaks dangerously high, worsening an already dire situation.
This is not a mere byproduct of war; it is a calculated strategy to inflict maximum suffering on an entire population. Collective punishment is illegal under international law, yet Israel carries it out with impunity.
A Crime Against Humanity
The deliberate targeting of civilians by depriving them of basic necessities constitutes a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Cutting off electricity, blocking food, and preventing humanitarian aid from reaching desperate civilians are clear violations of human rights and international law.
Despite these blatant violations, Israel continues to justify its actions under the guise of self-defence. But there is no justification for starving an entire population, for depriving babies of milk, or for leaving hospitals to collapse under the weight of the wounded. These actions are not about security; they are about inflicting suffering, breaking the spirit of a people, and further entrenching a system of oppression.
The Shameful Complicity of Israel’s Allies
Perhaps even more disturbing than Israel’s actions is the unwavering support it receives from its Western allies. Countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany continue to provide military aid, diplomatic cover, and financial support, enabling Israel’s crimes to continue.
By supplying weapons and funding, these nations are directly contributing to the atrocities being committed against the Palestinian people. By blocking UN resolutions and silencing calls for justice, they shield Israel from accountability. Their inaction in the face of genocide speaks volumes: they are not just bystanders; they are active participants in this unfolding horror.
The Urgent Need for Action
The international community must demand an immediate end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Governments must stop arming and funding a regime that commits war crimes. The people of the world must rise in protest, refusing to allow their leaders to be complicit in this brutal oppression.
Humanitarian organisations must be granted unrestricted access to Gaza to deliver desperately needed aid. The siege must end, and those responsible must be held accountable for their crimes.
History will remember this moment. It will remember who stood up against injustice and who turned a blind eye to suffering. The world must act now—before it is too late.
South Africa, with its deep and painful history of apartheid, continues to grapple with the complexities of racial and economic inequality. While efforts have been made to redress historical injustices, certain organizations, such as AfriForum and Solidarity, have actively worked against these efforts, often promoting narratives that exacerbate racial divisions. These groups, which claim to advocate for minority rights, particularly those of Afrikaners, have been accused of emboldening far-right ideologies and resisting policies aimed at fostering economic transformation and social justice.
AfriForum and Solidarity: Who Are They?
AfriForum
AfriForum positions itself as a civil rights organization that defends the interests of Afrikaners. It often challenges affirmative action policies, land reform initiatives, and government decisions that prioritize black economic empowerment (BEE). While the group claims to advocate for minority rights, its activities frequently align with a broader right-wing agenda that seeks to preserve white economic dominance and undermine redress policies.
Solidarity
Solidarity, a historically Afrikaner trade union, similarly champions the interests of white workers, opposing affirmative action and transformation policies that aim to correct historical imbalances. The organization promotes alternative education and employment programs for white South Africans, reinforcing segregationist tendencies rather than contributing to an inclusive, integrated society.Promoting Right-Wing Narratives and Racial Division
Opposition to Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) and Affirmative Action
South Africa’s affirmative action policies, including BEE, are designed to bridge the economic gap created by apartheid, ensuring that black South Africans have access to employment, education, and business opportunities. However, AfriForum and Solidarity consistently challenge these measures, arguing that they amount to “reverse racism.”This narrative ignores the structural inequalities that persist due to centuries of white privilege. By portraying affirmative action as discriminatory against white South Africans, these groups fuel resentment among their supporters, creating a false sense of victimhood and further entrenching racial divisions.
Defending Apartheid-Era Figures and Policies
AfriForum has repeatedly whitewashed apartheid-era crimes. The organization has defended individuals associated with the oppressive regime, downplayed the severity of apartheid, and even engaged in revisionist history. For example, its leadership has suggested that apartheid was not a crime against humanity, a statement that directly contradicts international rulings and historical evidence.By sanitizing the past, AfriForum and similar organizations embolden right-wing extremists who seek to justify the systemic racism of apartheid, further polarizing South African society.
Undermining Land Reform and Racial Equity
Land reform is a crucial aspect of South Africa’s post-apartheid transformation. However, AfriForum has aggressively opposed government initiatives to redistribute land to black South Africans, often using fear-mongering tactics to claim that white farmers are being targeted in a so-called “white genocide.” This misleading narrative not only stokes racial tension but also distracts from the legitimate need to address land dispossession, a cornerstone of apartheid’s legacy. By resisting reform, AfriForum ensures the continued economic dominance of white South Africans while keeping the majority landless and economically disadvantaged.
Creating Parallel Institutions that Maintain Racial Segregation
Solidarity has established educational and economic institutions, such as Akademia (a private Afrikaans university) and Sol-Tech (a technical training college), which primarily cater to white students. While these institutions claim to provide opportunities for all, they operate in a way that reinforces racial separation, maintaining privilege within white communities instead of contributing to an integrated society.
Such initiatives demonstrate how these organizations prefer to build exclusive, racially homogenous spaces rather than support inclusive national efforts to uplift all South Africans.
Amplifying Far-Right Global Narratives
These organisations has engaged with right-wing groups and politicians abroad, lobbying against South Africa’s transformation policies and spreading alarmist rhetoric about the supposed marginalization of white South Africans. By aligning with conservative and far-right figures, these organizations import divisive ideologies from countries like the United States and Europe, further entrenching racial animosity within South Africa.
The Impact on South African Society
The actions of AfriForum and Solidarity have significant consequences for social cohesion in South Africa. By continuously challenging policies aimed at economic redress, these organizations hinder efforts to close the racial wealth gap. Their fear-based narratives fuel racial tensions, creating divisions instead of fostering unity.
Moreover, their opposition to transformation policies slows down economic progress by maintaining the status quo, where white South Africans still hold disproportionate economic power. This not only deepens inequality but also undermines long-term stability, as persistent economic disparities are a key driver of social unrest.
AfriForum and Solidarity present themselves as defenders of civil rights and cultural heritage, but their actions reveal a more troubling agenda—one that resists racial and economic transformation while emboldening right-wing narratives that reinforce white supremacy. By opposing affirmative action, undermining land reform, and fostering separatist institutions, these organizations contribute to South Africa’s ongoing racial divisions rather than working toward reconciliation and equity.
For true national unity and progress, it is essential to challenge these divisive tactics and support policies that promote economic justice for all South Africans. Only by acknowledging the country’s painful history and actively working toward inclusive development can South Africa move forward as a truly equal society.
McDonald’s and Old Mutual are donating Midesk foldable tables to students. These tables are large and must be carried daily. While this may seem generous, it primarily serves corporate advertising interests rather than students’ educational needs.
Midesk Tables Are Inconvenient for Students
Children already carry heavy school bags. Adding large, foldable desks increases their burden. Instead of helping, this donation creates inconvenience. The focus should be on providing permanent classroom desks, not promotional furniture students must transport.
Corporate Logos Prioritised Over Practical Solutions
The donated Midesk tables feature prominent corporate branding. Instead of discreet support, McDonald’s and Old Mutual use students as walking billboards. Their logos receive daily exposure while students struggle with impractical furniture.
Schools Need Permanent Infrastructure, Not Marketing Gimmicks
South African schools lack proper infrastructure. Many need desks, chairs, and classrooms. A real solution would be permanent furniture, not temporary fixes that benefit corporations more than students.
Corporations Should Contribute Without Self-Promotion
If McDonald’s and Old Mutual genuinely cared, they would fund proper classroom furniture. Instead, they prioritise brand visibility over meaningful change. True corporate responsibility means supporting education without exploiting students for advertising.
McDonald’s and Old Mutual’s Midesk donations are a marketing strategy disguised as generosity. Students deserve real support, not branded burdens. Corporations should invest in permanent solutions that truly benefit education. What is worse is the idea that the Department of Basic Education through the Minister Gwarube willfully endorsed this by advertising this. Many agencies are involved in this initiative with Midesk which then puts into context why this made sense in any way or fashion.
