society
Gayton McKenzie’s ‘Abahambe’ Doctrine: The Rise of a 21st Century Hitler in Africa”
“Gayton McKenzie’s ‘Abahambe’ Doctrine: The Rise of a 21st Century Hitler in Africa”
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
In an era when the world is striving toward global integration, mutual respect, and cross-cultural harmony, South Africa has produced a political figure whose rhetoric reeks of an ideology that should have died with Nazi Germany. Gayton McKenzie, a South African politician and current Mayor of the Central Karoo District Municipality, has positioned himself as a mouthpiece for division, hatred, and toxic nationalism. His populist “Abahambe” campaign, loosely translating to “Let them leave” in Zulu; has targeted African migrants, particularly Nigerians and Zimbabweans, as scapegoats for South Africa’s socioeconomic woes. This dangerous doctrine echoes the genocidal propaganda of Adolf Hitler, whose hatred of Jews led to the Holocaust, a crime against humanity that the world vowed would never happen again.
And yet, here we are.
McKenzie’s rhetoric, laced with venom and political ambition, is more than just populist noise. It is a direct threat to the very foundation of Pan-African unity and black solidarity that was built on the blood and sacrifices of anti-apartheid revolutionaries, including Nigeria’s pivotal role in freeing South Africa from white minority rule. To tolerate his ideology is to insult the memory of the African National Congress’s struggle and betray the hopes of a united and prosperous continent.
The Nazi Blueprint: Political Gain Through Hatred
History teaches us that when politicians cannot deliver prosperity, they manufacture enemies. Adolf Hitler did it in 1930s Germany, blaming Jews for economic depression and the Treaty of Versailles. Gayton McKenzie is deploying the same playbook in 21st-century Africa. He redirects anger away from South Africa’s endemic corruption, failing infrastructure, and mass unemployment, and channels it toward vulnerable African migrants.
This is not merely xenophobia; it is fascism with a South African accent.
The “Abahambe” campaign bears disturbing similarities to Nazi Germany’s anti-Semitic policies. Hitler’s propaganda machine dehumanized Jews, portraying them as parasites and threats to German purity. McKenzie refers to African migrants as invaders, criminals, and job-stealers. His party, the Patriotic Alliance, thrives on fear and exclusion, whipping up mob sentiments that have already led to deadly violence. What started as political rhetoric has turned into burning homes, looted shops, and murdered Africans.
How long before the camps come?
Nigeria’s Role in Ending Apartheid: A Debt South Africa Must Not Forget
It is both ironic and shameful that Nigerians are the prime targets of McKenzie’s campaign. Nigeria, perhaps more than any other African country, was instrumental in dismantling apartheid. Between 1960 and 1994, Nigeria spent over $61 billion (in today’s value) supporting the anti-apartheid struggle — funding the ANC, hosting exiles, training freedom fighters, and sacrificing trade relations with Western countries to uphold sanctions against the apartheid regime.
Nigerian students paid the “Mandela Tax” a levy deducted from their wages and tuition to fund South Africa’s liberation. Nigerian diplomats fought tirelessly at the United Nations to isolate the apartheid regime. The country led the campaign to suspend South Africa from the Commonwealth and boycotted international sporting events in solidarity. This legacy is etched in the moral consciousness of Africa and cannot be erased by the vulgarity of one politician.
As Nelson Mandela once stated, “The struggle is my life. I will continue fighting for freedom until the end of my days.” That struggle was not fought alone. Nigeria stood *SHOULDER-TO-SHOULDER* with the ANC in those dark days. That must not be forgotten.
Economic Interdependence: Nigeria and South Africa Need Each Other
Beyond history, the present-day economic ties between Nigeria and South Africa are too significant to be endangered by political buffoonery. South African corporations operate freely in Nigeria, generating billions in revenue. MTN Nigeria alone accounts for over a third of MTN Group’s global profits. Shoprite, Multichoice (DSTV), Stanbic IBTC, and countless other South African enterprises have flourished in Nigeria’s open market, a market that welcomed them without prejudice or nationalist paranoia.
Can McKenzie explain how South Africans benefit from torching the shops and homes of Nigerians whose country has hosted their businesses with dignity?
Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy, is not without options. Diplomatic retaliation, trade restrictions, and corporate boycotts would hurt South Africa more than Nigeria, especially given the fragile state of its post-pandemic economy. But Nigeria, under normal leadership, seeks diplomacy, not destruction. Unfortunately, if leaders like McKenzie continue fanning the flames of hatred, consequences, economic, political, and even security-based; will be inevitable.
As former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo once warned, “When we refuse to build bridges, we build graves instead.”
The Aftermath of Hatred: A Future Africa Cannot Afford
If McKenzie’s brand of politics is allowed to flourish, South Africa risks sliding into a pariah status within Africa; isolated, distrusted, and economically weakened. His hatred is not just directed at migrants, but at the very idea of African unity. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), Pan-African Parliament, and African Union integration initiatives all depend on mutual trust. McKenzie’s divisive narrative undermines this vision and sets back the clock on decades of progress.
Moreover, the violence spurred by his rhetoric threatens domestic stability in South Africa. Xenophobic attacks invite retaliatory violence, as seen during past flare-ups. In 2019, reprisal attacks occurred in Lagos and Abuja, forcing South African businesses to temporarily shut down. A cycle of vengeance benefits no one.
More devastating, however, is the psychological damage. When black Africans turn on one another, the ghosts of colonialism win. They divided us then—by tribe, by language, by artificial borders; and now we do their bidding by fracturing ourselves.
Pan-Africanist Thomas Sankara once said, “You cannot carry out fundamental change without a certain amount of madness. It takes the madman of yesterday for us to be able to act with extreme clarity today.” That clarity today demands a rejection of hatred, and a defense of African brotherhood.
Crimes Against Humanity: Holding McKenzie Accountable
The world cannot afford to ignore McKenzie’s rhetoric. Just as the United Nations and the International Criminal Court recognize apartheid, slavery, and racism as crimes against humanity, so too must systematic xenophobic incitement be treated with equal gravity. “Abahambe” is not a slogan. It is a call to ethnic cleansing. It is a crime in motion.
The African Union must rise beyond its impotence and condemn McKenzie in the strongest terms. Legal avenues should be pursued to classify his doctrine as hate speech and incitement to violence. South African civil society, religious leaders, intellectuals, and ordinary citizens must refuse to be accomplices through silence. Silence is complicity. And complicity is guilt.
The Way Forward: A Continental Reckoning
Africa’s youth from Lagos to Lusaka, from Johannesburg to Juba must reject the politics of hate and demand visionary leadership. Our future lies not in fences and firebombs but in knowledge, innovation, and trade. The continent’s prosperity depends on mobility, unity, and collaboration, not ghettos of fear and suspicion.
We need more Kwame Nkrumahs and fewer Gayton McKenzies.
As Nkrumah declared decades ago, “The forces that unite us are intrinsic and greater than the superimposed influences that keep us apart.”
We need leaders who build bridges, not walls; who echo unity, not ethnic cleansing; who see every African not as a foreigner, but as a brother.
Furthermore: Africa Must Choose
Gayton McKenzie is a test, a test of South Africa’s moral integrity and Africa’s collective will. If we allow this *HITLER-IN-THE-MAKING* to thrive, we will have learned nothing from Rwanda, from Sharpeville, from Auschwitz.
But if we confront him with truth, law, and unity, then perhaps Africa still has a chance at becoming what its founders dreamed, a bastion of freedom, dignity, and shared prosperity.
Let Gayton McKenzie be remembered, not as the man who divided Africa, but as the warning we heeded.
society
ODUDUWA INTEGRITY ASSOCIATION LAUNCHES TO RECLAIM YORUBA DIGNITY, DRIVE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EMANCIPATION
society
Destined For Greatness: RCCG Anounces May 2025 Holy Ghost Congress, South-West Workers Meeting
1914 Amalgamation: The Unseen Hand That Scripted Nigeria’s Identity Crisis
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
In the beginning, there was no “Nigeria.” There was no shared anthem, no common tongue, no unified sense of nationhood. Instead, there were sovereign ethnic nations; the Yoruba in the West, the Igbo in the East, the Hausa-Fulani in the North and over 250 other distinct ethnicities scattered across the landmass now known as Nigeria. Each group had its own system of governance, religion, language and worldview. What tied them together was not history or consent; but a single act of colonial convenience on January 1, 1914: the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates by the British colonial administration.
This unification, executed under the imperial direction of Lord Frederick Lugard and endorsed by the British Crown, was not an act of benevolence or foresight. It was an economic and administrative maneuver to cut costs and consolidate power. And in doing so, it laid the groundwork for over a century of conflict, suspicion and structural imbalance. The consequences of this act continue to haunt Nigeria like a recurring nightmare.
Over 110 years later, the fundamental question remains: Who signed the amalgamation on behalf of the Nigerian people?
The answer, quite disturbingly, is no one.
Let us look at the historical timeline.
Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, later the first President of Nigeria, was born in 1904. He was only 10 years old in 1914.
Chief Obafemi Awolowo, premier of the Western Region, was born in 1909; just 5 years old.
Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto and Premier of the Northern Region, was born in 1910; only 4 years old.
Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, was born in 1912; a mere toddler of 2 years.
Michael Okpara, premier of the Eastern Region, hadn’t even been born yet; he came into the world in 1920.
These men, hailed as Nigeria’s founding fathers, had no hand in the creation of Nigeria. The 1914 amalgamation was not a pact between equal peoples or a dialogue of nations. It was a colonial decree; signed in London, drawn on British maps, and executed on African soil without consent, consultation or compassion.
Herbert Macaulay, born in 1864 and often revered as the father of Nigerian nationalism, was alive at the time but held no official power or authority to challenge the imperial decree. His protests, although prescient, were brushed aside. The amalgamation, thus, was no democratic creation. It was not a union forged by love, common purpose or mutual benefit; but by British imperial fiat.
As Nobel Laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka aptly put it, “There was no basis for Nigeria’s amalgamation other than administrative convenience. The failure to revisit the terms of that amalgamation is what has fueled most of the crises we face today.”
You cannot mix red oil and engine oil and expect a stable solution. Similarly, you cannot merge ethnic nations with separate histories, economies, cultures and religions and expect unity without negotiation. This is the tragedy of Nigeria: a forced marriage in which no vows were exchanged and no love was pledged.
From that fateful moment in 1914, Nigeria became an experiment in nation-building without the essential ingredients of trust and consensus. The British justified the amalgamation on grounds of administrative efficiency; the North was financially unviable, while the South was economically productive. By merging the regions, the British were able to use the surplus from the South to fund the North; a model of exploitation that persists to this day through lopsided federal allocations and centralized revenue control.
As historian Dr. Usman Bugaje observed, “There was never any document signed by Nigerian representatives to validate the amalgamation. It remains one of the most arbitrary acts in our history; and it set us up for division, not unity.”
Despite more than a century of cohabitation, Nigeria remains a house divided. The fault lines of 1914 have deepened into canyons; tribalism, nepotism, ethnic militancy and religious extremism dominate the political landscape. Unity, where it exists, is often cosmetic and brittle, breaking under the slightest pressure. Mutual distrust has become national currency.
Why?
Because Nigeria was not born in the delivery room of dialogue, but in the operating theatre of imperial surgery. There was no referendum, no negotiation, no cultural reconciliation. There was only the sound of British pens on paper and silence from the people whose lives would be altered forever.
Even our revered leaders admitted the shallowness of this unity.
Chief Awolowo once declared that “Nigeria is not a nation. It is a mere geographical expression.”
Dr. Azikiwe called Nigeria “a political experiment.”
Tafawa Balewa, in a rare moment of candor, confessed: “Since the amalgamation of 1914, Nigeria has existed as one country only on paper.”
Political economist Prof. Pat Utomi underscores this truth: “You cannot build a nation on injustice and expect peace. The failure to renegotiate the Nigerian federation is why we are constantly at war with ourselves.”
Today, Nigeria struggles with poverty in the midst of wealth, hunger amid arable land and darkness despite abundant natural gas. We import toothpicks, fuel and even the pencils used in our classrooms. Our hospitals are death traps, our schools are underfunded, our security forces are underpaid and our brightest minds are fleeing the country. The Nigerian space agency cannot locate missing schoolgirls in Sambisa Forest, yet it claims to monitor satellites orbiting thousands of kilometers above Earth.
What has this forced union achieved?
Rather than build a federal system that respects diversity and autonomy, we cling to a centralized structure that mimics colonial rule. Our so-called federalism is a fraud; a unitary government masquerading as federalism. States go cap in hand to Abuja every month, begging for a share of oil revenues they do not control. Resource control remains a taboo topic, even though it is the bedrock of true federalism.
Legal scholar Prof. Itse Sagay lays it bare: “Nigeria’s constitutional order is a farce. True federalism was abandoned. What we now have is a unitary system dressed up in federal garb and it is unsustainable.”
We must ask uncomfortable questions:
Where is the amalgamation document?
Who signed it?
Why should a forced union be treated as divine revelation?
In a true democracy, unity is not forced, it is negotiated. Identity is not imposed, it is chosen. Nigeria must now revisit its foundations. If the original union was imposed without consent, then today’s citizens must have the right to renegotiate that union.
Let it be clear: this is not a call for secession. It is a call for truth, for justice and for constitutional clarity. If the foundation is cracked, then the building must be reinforced or rebuilt. We must return to the table; not as tribes seeking supremacy, but as peoples seeking coexistence.
As Prof. Jibrin Ibrahim explains, “The Nigerian state was constructed as an extractive colonial machine. Post-independence leaders merely inherited the apparatus and they never deconstructed it.”
The solution lies in genuine restructuring; a return to regional autonomy, fiscal federalism and constitutional renegotiation. Let each region manage its resources, govern its people and contribute to the national purse fairly. Let unity be rooted in equity, not in exploitation.
The British may have scripted Nigeria’s beginning, but we must now take charge of its future. The time has come to reclaim the pen, rewrite the narrative and correct the errors of 1914. As the saying goes, “When the foundation is destroyed, what can the righteous do?” The righteous must rebuild.
Let us remember: empires fall, nations rise, but only truth endures. Nigeria must confront its past to shape its destiny. Until then, we remain a country in search of itself, a union in search of meaning, an identity still unsigned.
Sylvester is a political analyst, he writes from South Africa
-
Business6 months agoComprehensive Media Audit Shows Flutterwave, MTN Nigeria, and Bolt Outpacing Competitors in Media Engagement
-
celebrity radar - gossips7 months agoHow Deji Adeyanju Secured The Release Of Speed Darlington
-
Politics7 months agoMy best is yet to come’ As Ambassador Adesina ‘Lanre Ogunsola affirmed at the APC APEX body, Obafemi Owode Local Government
-
Entertainment4 months agoAliu Gafar delivers stellar performance as Esusu in Femi Adebayo’s Seven Doors