“If America Bans Me, I Will Rather Go To Zimbabwe For Healthy Food Like Mangai”, Says Julius Malema
Julius Malema has never tiptoed around global powers, and Trump’s visa politics proved no exception. When talk emerged of possible U.S. visa bans, the EFF leader responded with trademark defiance. His fiery response turned a diplomatic slight into an opportunity to preach African pride and self-reliance.
Defiant Response to Trump’s Visa Politics
Malema dismissed the supposed privilege of visiting America, insisting that Washington could keep its burgers and bright lights. Instead, he reminded supporters that Africa offers richer experiences than any fast-food queue in New York.
Even if America blocked him, he vowed to walk proudly through Zimbabwe, Botswana, Nigeria and beyond. As leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters, he thrives on confronting symbols of Western dominance.
Choosing African Food Over American Burgers
Malema contrasted greasy American burgers with Africa’s hearty dishes, praising Nigerian jollof rice and goat pepper soup. He argued that these meals nourish both body and pride, unlike diets that chase convenience over culture.
By choosing African kitchens over U.S. diners, he linked everyday food choices with political independence. He joked that American portions only inflate waistlines, whereas African plates strengthen communities and shared stories.
Africa First, Visas Later
Beyond the tasty soundbites, Malema framed Trump’s stance as proof of America’s discomfort with assertive African voices. He portrayed travel bans as political tools, not neutral security measures, designed to discipline outspoken leaders.
Therefore, refusing to beg for U.S. access became, for him, an act of continental solidarity. Malema’s remarks also challenged young Africans to rethink whose approval they chase, and whose tables they honour.
While critics dismissed his comments as grandstanding, supporters heard a rare celebration of African self-sufficiency. In that moment, burgers versus jollof symbolised something bigger than cuisine; it symbolised competing visions of power.
For Washington, such rhetoric complicates diplomatic engagement; for many Africans, it sounds refreshingly uncompromising.
