The song -- which is translated either as "Kill the Boer" or, more specifically, as "Shoot the Boer" -- encourages violence against the white population of South Africa. South African courts have previously ruled it is disciminatory, hateful, and inciting.

In 2011, the South Gauteng High Court ruled that the song was discriminatory, harmful, undermined the dignity of Afrikaners, and thereby constituted hate speech. The court ruled that Julius Malema, who was brought before the court for previously singing the song at rallies, was forbidden from singing it in the future. Following the ruling Malema changed the wording of the song to "Kiss the Boer" and sang that instead--however, it can be argued to still have the same psychological influence as the original, due to the well-known context for the altered lyrics. The following year, the African National Congress stated that they would not sing the song any more.

The song is being sung again in South Africa, as black radicals are expressly calling for a genocide against the white citizenry of the country. Not a fake "literal genocide" as leftwing trans activists are always shrieking about, but an actual government-blessed mass murder of whites.

South African MP and leader of the extreme-left Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), Julius Malema, stood before a huge crowd at a rally on Saturday, directly calling for the murder of the Boers, White descendants of Dutch settlers.
The Economic Freedom Fighters rose to prominence in South African politics following the end of the Apartheid regime. Malema started out as a youth leader in the African National Congress (ANC), which was once led by Nelson Mandela.

Malema has publicly called for violence against White South Africans on multiple occasions, singing the genocidal anti-apartheid struggle song 'Kill the Boer, the farmer'.

Notice they all are dancing with their hands making "finger-guns" and are adding the sounds of gunfire into the song.

This isn't a "metaphor." This is the actual call for mass violence -- shooting -- of whites.

With a rising party in South Africa calling for the majority black population to commit genocide against the white minority population, the New York Times decides that the real story isn't the militant black Nazis calling for the mass murder of whites -- no, the real story is the "backlash" against the song.

They also claim that "experts" tell us the song, sung with the sound of gunfire and hands mimicking shooting guns, must not be taken "literally."

As T. Becket Adams notes, the New York Times is the same organization which uses the Large Hadron Collider to smash Racist Atoms together to find every-tinier quarks of racial offense and electron-microaggressions.

But when a militant black party dances and cavorts making "bang pow" noises and mimicking firing guns while saying "Shoot the [White South Africans]," the New York Times wants you to know that this isn't offensive, dangerous, or racist at all.

It's just some lads singing an "anti-apartheid chant."

Also the New York Times: The OK sign is a white supremacy sign.

Also the New York Times: Drinking milk is racist.

At least there's something to that last story: After the leftwing went bananas claiming that the OK Sign was Actually a Secret White Supremacy Code-Sign, people at 4chan and similar troll sites wondered, "What can we convince leftwing lunatics is a racist sign next?"

They settled on the idea of claiming that drinking milk was the new White Supremacy fad. Because milk is white.

And the New York Times ran with it.

Oh, one more: Of course the New York Times did find people wearing actual Nazi signs and symbols.

The trouble was, it was their precious Ukrainians.

So the New York Times decided that wearing Double Lightning Bolts and swastikas was no longer a sign of support for Naziism.

No, wearing Nazi paraphrenalia was now merely -- if you're part of a group the NPC leftists at the NYT support -- exposing a "thorny issue of history."

Hey New York Times -- if me and 10,000 of my fellow conservatives start chanting "Shoot the Leftists 'Reporters,'" is that a metaphor? Or perhaps a "thorny issue of history?"

Or are you going to brand that hate speech and lethal incitement?