Former U.S. President Donald Trump reignited controversy during a recent meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, questioning a political chant that has long sparked heated debate in South Africa.
The phrase in question — “Kill the Boer, kill the farmer” — was played by Trump in a video clip of opposition figure Julius Malema, sparking concerns over the safety of white farmers in the country. Trump suggested the chant supported violence, even going as far as questioning why Malema hadn’t been arrested — although he wrongly referred to Malema as part of the government.
President Ramaphosa, responding to these claims, clarified that the chant dates back to South Africa’s painful history under apartheid and is tied to the country’s liberation struggle — not a literal call to violence.
“It’s not meant to incite harm or provoke attacks,” Ramaphosa explained. “In our democracy, freedom of expression is foundational, and we rely on our courts to interpret these matters in context.”
Malema, who leads the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), continues to use the slogan in public, a move that frustrates many and has led to ongoing efforts to label it as hate speech. Still, legal attempts to ban the chant have met resistance due to the country’s broad protections for speech rooted in political and historical expression.
In the same video, Malema is also seen declaring intentions to take over land without approval — a statement that has added fuel to fears around land reform in South Africa.
Trump tied this rhetoric to changes in land ownership laws, particularly a clause that allows for “nil compensation” under specific circumstances. However, Ramaphosa emphasized that these reforms are being handled carefully through legal channels, with oversight from the courts to ensure fairness.
He explained that cases where no compensation might apply would involve unique situations — such as abandoned properties or land being reclaimed for public use, especially if the owner is unreachable or deeply in debt.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance, one of the key parties in South Africa’s coalition government, has raised concerns about the land bill in court. Their main worry is that the “nil compensation” clause could be misused.
As the debate continues, the issue of land ownership remains one of the most sensitive and complex legacies of South Africa’s past — and its future.
