South Africa is repeating the mistakes that destroyed other economies. The \u201cSouth Africa for South Africans\u201d movement wants migrants expelled by June 30. It promises jobs and prosperity. It will deliver neither. Instead, it will produce more unemployment, economic decline and fewer services for the very people whose interests it claims to advance. Worse still, it mimics the logic of apartheid by drawing lines based on identity: on one side, people with rights; on the other, people with none. This movie has been seen before. The ending is known. It merits archiving, not reproducing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Islamic position<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Islam is clear on this issue. In Surah Al-Hujurat [49:13], Allah (SWT) says: \u201cO humanity, We created you from a male and female, and made you into peoples and tribes so that you may know one another.\u201d<\/em> That is the point. Allah created people differently, with wondrous variety and diversity. Knowledge of that variety is intended to cultivate marvel, appreciation and commonality, not enmity, exclusion and expulsion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Surah Al-Hashr [59:9], Allah describes the Ansar of Medina as those who \u201clove whoever immigrates to them, never having a desire in their hearts for whatever of the gains is given to the emigrants. They give the emigrants preference over themselves even though they may be in need.\u201d <\/em>That is the Islamic teaching: welcome migrants, prefer them even in hardship and give them safety and dignity. The South Africa for South Africans movement teaches the opposite: expel them, deny them and protect yourself by excluding them. This is not Islamic. It is contrary to the Qur\u2019an.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The apartheid parallel<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n South Africa knows about drawing lines based on who people are. The country paid for it in indignity, untold suffering and blood. Apartheid drew a line. On one side were people with rights. On the other were people without. It determined who belonged and who did not. For the \u201cother\u201d, it meted out misery and only allowed entry when it served the interests of those who \u201cbelonged\u201d. It was morally repugnant, merciless and unjust. It destroyed lives and damaged the economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The South Africa for South Africans movement uses the same logic. It draws the same line. It says migrants do not belong here. It uses state power to enforce exclusion. It denies rights based on where one is born. It uses \u201cnationality\u201d in precisely the same way Verwoerd and his cohorts used \u201crace\u201d. This time, it is African against African. That makes it worse, not better. South Africa fought apartheid because the country affirmed that all humans have equal dignity, regardless of who they are. This movement limits that truth to South Africans. That is a travesty and must be rejected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The evidence: A century of failure<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Principle aside, the strategy is completely misplaced. The evidence spans more than a century. Every time a country has tried something similar, the economic consequences have been devastating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Australia: 1901\u20131970s<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Australia enacted the White Australia Policy to keep \u201cnon-Europeans\u201d out. It used the same argument now advanced by the South Africa for South Africans movement: protect jobs and wages. It used the same method: false narratives designed to exclude foreigners. It failed. Even with the restrictions, Australia faced labour shortages and stagnation. By the 1940s, the economy was struggling so badly that the government began abandoning the policy. Exclusion did not protect workers. It stunted growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Japan: 1945\u20132010s<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Japan was restrictive for 60 years. There was little labour immigration. The country was determined to \u201cgo it alone\u201d. By 2010, Japan faced a paradox: high unemployment and severe labour shortages at the same time. Why? Because excluding workers does not eliminate the work. Construction sites lacked crews. Hospitals lacked nurses. Care homes lacked staff. The work simply did not get done. Services suffered. The economy stagnated. Living standards came under pressure. People worked more hours for little gain. Only in 2019 did Japan begin opening up its labour market. That was 60 years of lost growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Britain: 2016\u20132025<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2016, Britain voted for Brexit. The campaign bears a frightening resemblance to the South Africa for South Africans movement: migrants are stealing jobs, taking housing and burdening public services. Expel them and everything will improve. It did not. Nine years of data now exists. British jobs were lost, not for migrants, but for British workers. Unemployment rose despite the expulsions. Hospitals could not find nurses. Construction could not find workers. Care services struggled. Investment was eroded. GDP is lower than it would have been. Business investment is lower. The economy is smaller. The average British household is worse off annually.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is not theory. This is measured fact from the Cambridge Centre for Economic Policy Research, the Office for Budget Responsibility and Moody\u2019s Analytics. They all point to the same conclusion: closure and insulation damage economies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What will likely happen?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If the South Africa for South Africans movement succeeds, South Africa will in all likelihood follow the same disastrous path as Japan, Australia and Britain. First will come the expulsions. Migrants will be deported or will flee. Construction sites will lose workers. Hospitals will lose staff. Hotels will lose workers. Spaza shops will close. Informal businesses will collapse. For a few months, supporters may celebrate. South Africa will have \u201creclaimed\u201d itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/1nationmedia.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/AA-20260629-41822054-41822043-ANTIIMMIGRANT_DEMONSTRATIONS_CONTINUE_IN_SOUTH_AFRICA-1024x683.jpg\")