In South Africa, the white-right Bittereinders organisation was exposed as a Russian intelligence-supported front operation. In America, the storied Southern Poverty Law Centre was unmasked for funnelling vast sums of money to American white-right groups.

How much of this sort of thing goes on? The answer is probably quite a lot. The South African white-right Suidlanders group, which exclusively spread the white-genocide story in America, has also been exposed for having ties to the intelligence services. During the apartheid era this sort of thing happened a lot, especially on university campuses, where hard-left activist groups were often front organisations of the intelligence services.

Why does it happen? The reason is to cause division in society. A deeply divided society is vulnerable to the malevolent intent of third-party actors, both domestic and external. The vulnerability arises when the hate sparks populism and the populism overruns democratic controls and safeguards – from the courts, to the free media, to the most important of all: property rights. Just look how effectively the white genocide idea has been in causing divisions within South Africa and in diverting attention from the horrific extent to which all South Africans, and farmers in particular, both black and white, are victims of violent crime.

Why property rights? Because if the state cannot take your stuff, it holds no leverage over you other than by throwing you in prison. It cannot intimidate you into changing your behaviour or opinion or the support you offer to a political rival. That is why the “property rights protect privilege” argument is so dangerous and so widely circulated. Lose property rights and you lose every other civil right.

What is the antidote? It is a slippery slope to start banning groups. If they have broken the law, then they can be prosecuted of course. But bannings set a precedent that may later be turned against legitimate actors, and it is never a good idea to allow the state to decide what is legitimate and what is not. Hate groups sow division by cultivating apparent legitimacy and then sharing hate-fuelled information. The best thing to do is to counter them on both fronts. Expose them as front groups, as was done with the Bittereinders last week, and then share information on the actual state of relations between people and the actual state of the world.

The Common Sense publishes a lot of poll data and a lot of opinion arguing that South Africans get along well and want to work together to build a better future for exactly this reason. It also argues the case for the great improvements in living standards that South Africa experienced, especially in the decade after 1994, to counter the idea that democracy did no good for South Africa’s people. It further stresses the fact that the world is such a vastly better place today than at any point in human history, for the same reasons, to counter the doom-mongering that can so easily be turned to nefarious purposes.

It is, ironically, a good thing that nefarious foreign actors and their local intelligence proxies have to spend money in order to promote hate and racism and division. That must mean that they don’t think there is enough of that arising organically in society to divide people and wreck South Africa’s social fabric. Certainly all the data published on South African race and political relations remains measured and pragmatic.

But that it will remain so should not be taken for granted. It is not difficult in a deeply unequal society such as South Africa, with its very high unemployment rate, to stoke hate and later the kind of conflict that leads to populism that can sweep away much of the country’s democratic infrastructure. All the more reason to circulate information that shows that South Africans are largely committed to similar values, respect each other across lines of race and politics and class, and wish to work together to make the country a success.