Inside South Africa

'Comrade' Mbeki's letter out in the open

2008-11-03T09:16:00.009+02:00

I've been away for two days, taking a break in nearby Alexandria Forest. Arriving back in cell phone coverage, and reconnected to my internet access, I discover that a couple of things have happened since my departure. Apparently Barack Obama has an 'illegal alien' connection in the US, oh my, and the ANC splinter group will probably call their new political party -to be launched in December- the South African Democratic Congress.

But the tidbit that most got my attention relates to the publishing of a 'private' letter former president Thabo Mbeki wrote to the president of the ANC, Jacob Zuma (see letter below). This is after the same ANC NEC that removed Mbeki as South African President, suddenly announced that Mbeki would be campaigning for them in the run up to next year's elections! The timing of that announcement is obviously tied to the above mentioned break-away movement by Terror Lekota and other present-former-suspended-stealth members of the ANC disillusioned by the manner of Mbeki's sacking and the perceived purge of his loyalists after 'Polokwane". While on one hand members of the ANC's NEC have been dismissive, in their typical arrogant manner, of the bad bad bad dissidents they, on the other hand, found no problem in suddenly brandishing Mbeki as trump card in dealing with what they claim to be a splinter group of no significance.

Make no mistake, Comrade Mbeki is not happy about this. Thus he fires of a stinging letter to Comrade Zuma. The letter is not published, initially, and is sent as a private communique. It shows Mbeki's discipline and in content once again displays his intellectual prowess (although in my opinion diluted by dated political ideology).

What is not clear, but which I can't help but suspect, is whether Mbeki knew what would happen next? Is this a case of 'give them enough rope and they will hang themselves'? The ink on his letter was barely dry when, with great arrogance, his letter was quoted in public -once again without his permission- to indicate that Mbeki would not run off with Lekota into a new political party. But the stinging criticism that made up a large part of the letter was conveniently left out of these public pronouncements. What happens next follows the script of political power play to the letter (no pun intended...). The poisonous letter is leaked to the press...

The letter makes for interesting reading. What I find of particular interest is Mbeki's attack on the 'cult of personality' and how this has become a feature of the Jacob Zuma brigade. He clearly infers that he will have no part in it - no surprise there off course. He is however very much involved with the 'cult of personality' in his dealings with the Zimbabwe crisis and its super cult-of-personality-characther Robert Mugabe...

The use of exclusive and polarising terms such as 'comrade' and 'national democratic revolution' are still alive and well amongst 'intellectuals' in the ANC . The latter term implies some positive values, such as the alleviation of poverty but is very worrisome in many other respects. For one thing it has become a trend to brand anyone who differs from the ruling party as an 'anti-revolutionary'. While Mbeki has not resorted to the latter, if memory serves me correctly, his tendency to think within the Africanist ideological box has probably had a lot to do with the polarisation which featured so strongly in his presidency.

The letter also leaves me with some sadness for Thabo Mbeki, the human being. How the mighty has fallen. It would have been so much better if he actually delivered on the promises he made and the lofty ideals he strived for. I posted on 'what could have been' in May of this year and I'm afraid what I wrote there represents what will probably be my lasting impression of Mbeki years from today.

Herewith then the much spoken about letter, as sourced from news24.com:

Comrade President, I imagine that these must be especially trying times for you as president of our movement, the ANC, as they are for many of us as ordinary members of our beloved movement, which we have strived to serve loyally for many decades.
I say this to apologise that I impose an additional burden on you by sending you this long letter.
I decided to write this letter after I was informed that two days ago, on October 7, the president of the ANC Youth League and you the following day, October 8, told the country, through the media, that you would require me to campaign for the ANC during the 2009 election campaign.
As you know, neither of you had discussed this with me prior to your announcements. Nobody in the ANC leadership - including you, the presidents of the ANC and ANCYL - has raised this matter with me since then.
To avoid controversy, I have declined all invitations publicly to indicate whether I intended to act as you indicated or otherwise.
In truth your announcements took me by surprise.
This is because earlier you had sent Comrades Kgalema Motlanthe and Gwede Mantashe to inform me that the ANC NEC and our movement in general had lost confidence in me as a cadre of our movement.
They informed me that for this reason you suggested that I should resign my position as president of the Republic, which I did.
I therefore could not understand how the same ANC which was so disenchanted with me could, within a fortnight, consider me such a dependable cadre as could be relied upon to promote the political fortunes of the very same movement, the ANC, which I had betrayed in such a grave and grevious manner as to require that I should be removed from the presidency of the Republic a mere six or seven months before the end of our term, as mandated by the masses of our people!
Your public announcements I have mentioned came exactly at the moment when Comrade Mosiuoa "Terror" Lekota and other ANC comrades publicly raised various matters about our movement of concern to them.
I have noted that some in our broad democratic movement have spoken publicly, unfortunately, and wrongly saying that Comrade Terror has acted as they have, driven by their loyalty to me as an individual.
During the decades we have worked together in the ANC, we have had the great fortune that our movement has consistently repudiated the highly noxious phenomenon of the "cult of personality", which we saw manifested in other countries.
It therefore came as a surprise to me that anybody within our revolutionary democratic movement could so much as suggest, and therefore insult somebody like Terror Lekota that he could act as he has, whether rightly or wrongly, driven by attachment to a personal cult!
In this context, given that I have worked longer with you than I have worked with Terror, I would be interested to know your view of any instance in our movement during which it fell victim to the noxious phenomenon of the personality cult, as a result of which it ceased to think, content to act in the manner of the "anointed personality", such as the late Kim Il-Sung determined to the people of North Korea!
Personally, I've been privileged to interact with such varied titans of our struggle such as Oliver Tambo, Moses Kotane, JB Marks, ZK Matthews, Yusuf Dadoo, Mark Shope, Leslie Massina, Duma Nokwe, Moses Mabhida, Frances Baard, Steve Dlamini, Lilian Ngoyi, Walter Sisulu, Gertrude Shope, Govan Mbeki, Julius Nyerere, Raymond Mhlaba, Kenneth Kaunda, Helen Joseph, Trevor Huddleston, Agostinho Neto, Robert Resha, Jack Simons, Seretse Khama, Ray Alexander, Ruth Matseoane, Sam Nujoma, Fish Keitsing, Kate Molale, Ahmed Kathrada, Nelson Mandela, Joshua Nkomo, Samora Machel, MB Yengwa, Ruth and Joe Slovo, Robert Mugabe, Mpho Motsamai, Bram and Molly Fischer, Mike Harmel, Brian and Sonia Bunting, Andrew Mlangeni, Liz Abrahams, Joe Modise, Florence Mophosho, Alfred Nzo, Beyers Naude, Albertina Sisulu, Thomas Nkobi, Sophie de Bruyn, Ellen Khuzwayo, Nomzamo Madikizela-Mandela, Wilton Mkwayi, Alfred Hutchinson, Rusty and Hilda Bernstein, Jack and Rita Hodgson, Cedric Mayson, Thomas Nkobi, Tiny Nokwe, Albert Nolan and many others.
All these, and many others I have not mentioned, were and are true heroines and heroes of our struggle.
I have omitted to mention others among these such as Albert Luthuli because I cannot claim truthfully that I have interacted with them in the context of the struggle.
I have mentioned the people I have to make essential and crucial points, central to the value system of our movement and struggle, that none of these heroes or heroines ever sought adulation in any manner that would turn them into cult figures.
They never did anything, nor did we act in any way as we grew up in the liberation movement, which would result in our movement being enslaved in the cult of the individual.
In this regard there were exceptional circumstances attached to Comrade Nelson Mandela, which were not of his making or will.
In the context of the global struggle for the release of political prisoners in our country, our movement took a deliberate decision to profile Nelson Mandela as the representative personality of these prisoners, and therefore to use his personal political biography, including the persecution of his then wife, Winnie Mandela, dramatically to present to the world and the South African community the brutality of the apartheid system.
The beginning and the end of this particular discourse is that both of us have grown up in a political atmosphere that we fully respected and honoured our leaders, heroes and heroines without reservation.
However, for me personally, at no point did this translate into "hero worship" and therefore the progression to the phenomenon of the "cult of personality".
I know this as a matter of fact that all the heroes and heroines I have mentioned would have opposed the emergence of such a cult with every fibre in their revolutionary bones!
For this reason I find it strange in the extreme that today cadres of our movement attach the label of a "cult of personality" to me, and indeed publicly declare a determination "to kill" to defend your own cause, the personal interests of "the personality", Jacob Zuma!
When we last met, on September 19 2008, at the Denel buildings adjacent to the Oliver Tambo International Airport, I restated to you the incontrovertible fact that you knew that our engagement in the struggle for the liberation of our people had never been informed by a striving for personal power, status or benefit.
In this context I told you that should the ANC NEC, which was meeting from that day, decide that I should no longer serve as president of the Republic, having been the ANC presidential candidate presented to the Second and Third democratic parliament in 2004, I would respect this decision and therefore resign.
I have been informed informally that you reported this to the ANC NEC at the conclusion of the discussion about this particular matter. I take this opportunity sincerely to thank you for communicating my views to the NEC in this regard.
I mention all this in the light of what I cited earlier - the statements made first by the president of the ANC Youth League and later yourself, concerning the role I would play in the forthcoming 2009 election campaign, which has not been discussed with me.
For some years now our movement has had to manage an immensely challenging and unprecedented situation, occasioned by the criminal charges preferred against you by the National Prosecuting Authority, and related matters.
I state this as a matter of fact with no comment about the merits or demerits of what may have been said and done by anybody or institution in this regard.
I also mention this fact in this letter because, despite our best efforts, many in our movement and our population at large have refused to believe the sincere message both of us strived to communicate, that there were and are no divisions between us, and that nobody should use our names to incite or perpetuate division in the ANC and the country.
When the December 2007 Polokwane ANC National Conference elected you president of the ANC, and responding to Comrade Kgalema Motlanthe's suggestion, I walked with you to the platform, publicly to demonstrate my acceptance of that outcome, as did other Comrades who had been defeated in the electoral process.
When, more recently, the ANC NEC decided that it no longer had confidence in me to serve as its preferred cadre to occupy the position of president of the Republic, I made it a point not to contest this decision, and therefore resigned.
When I addressed the nation on September 21 2008, announcing that I had tendered my resignation as president of the Republic, to the National Assembly as the elective body, I said that I have been a member of the ANC for 52 years.
There is absolutely nothing I have done through this half-a-century of struggle of which I am ashamed. Above all, I know of nothing I have done which, to my knowledge, constitutes a betrayal of the interests of the masses of our people and their confidence in the ANC.
Despite all this, I have taken note of the campaign that some in our ranks, supported by some in our media, have waged for many years focused on discrediting me in particular, given the senior positions I have occupied in the ANC, and the ANC in general.
I have constantly been acutely aware of the fact that this campaign has been based on outright lies and deliberate and malicious distortions.
For many years I have refused to stoop to a public debate driven by these fabrications, which would demean and destroy the dignity of the ANC, its leadership and me personally.
I must admit that this posture might have produced results we never intended, specifically as it might have suggested that we could not contest the lies that have been told.
I know that now there are some in our country and elsewhere in the world who appear on television programmes or contribute newspaper opinion columns as "experts" or "analysts", simply on the basis of their readiness to abandon all ethical considerations and self-respect, to propagate entirely fabricated and negative notions about what our national democratic revolution means to our country and people.
Because of the services some of these have rendered to the opponents of the national democratic revolution, the "experts" and "analysts" and others who market themselves as "intellectuals/academics" have been handsomely rewarded with material possessions as embedded opponents of the national democratic revolution.
Yet such is the malaise that has entrenched itself in our democracy, including our movement, that we do not ask the obvious question - how can such "intellectuals/academics" have come to accumulate such wealth?
Bearing in mind everything I have said, let me then address the immediate matters on the national agenda, which relate directly to me.
(1) Comrade Lekota and others have not engaged me in any of the actions they have taken, to secure my approval or otherwise.
(2) The ANC leadership has not engaged me in any of the responses it has taken in this regard, to secure my approval or otherwise.
(3) Informally, I have communicated my view to both these contending groups, members of the ANC, that they should address all matters that might be in contention.
(4) In my President's Political Report to the Polokwane 52nd National Conference of the ANC, presented as prescribed by the ANC constitution, I warned of the grave challenges our movement was facing. I suggested that the conference should discuss these. This was not done. Ten months after this report was presented, I still stand by what it said.
Following the developments of December 2007 and September 2008, relating to tasks I had been given by the ANC, I have considered carefully what I should do as a private South African and African citizen.
Currently I am working as speedily as I can to elaborate the substance of this work, which will ensure that whatever I do in no way involves me in the internal politics of the ANC or the functioning of the government of South Africa.
As the saying goes, I refuse absolutely to rule from the grave. History will judge whether what I did during my political life, until September 25 2008, is worth anything.
Given the December 2007 and September 2008 outcomes to which I have referred, I trust that you will take the necessary measures to:
Remind all comrades that everything we have done since 1994, to advance the national democratic revolution, has been based on collective decisions of our movement, without exceptions;
Encourage all Comrades honestly to confront the real problems, challenges and opportunities that the ANC, the broad democratic movement and our country face; and,
Convince these Comrades to desist from abandoning their revolutionary democratic obligations by falsely and dishonestly pretending that the goals of the national democratic revolution have been frustrated, if they have been, through the actions of one individual - Thabo Mbeki.
I would like to believe that you and I have devoted out adult lives to the victory of the national democratic revolution, and nothing else.
Similarly, I would like to believe that we have always understood that this revolution has as its principal focus the upliftment and empowerment of the millions of our working people, including women, who constitute the overwhelming majority of our people.
Accordingly, we have understood that this revolution has absolutely nothing to do with the personal fortunes of those who might, by virtue of historical accident, be its leaders at any particular moment.
I would like to believe that in this context we agree that the strategic and historic task facing the tried-and-tested leaders and cadres of our movement is to determine what needs to be done, next, to advance the goals of the national democratic revolution, focused on advancing the interests of the millions of the working masses.
In my view, with which you are free to disagree, the revolutionary tasks we confront are to:
Recognise the various factors that have militated against the achievement of the unity and cohesion of the ANC in the recent past;
Defeat the actions prevalent in our governance system, especially the provinces and municipalities, to remove from their positions Comrades who are perceived as belonging to factions different from those which currently serve as elected leaders in the current elected ANC structures;
Renew the democratic movement on the basis of:
opposition to the cult of personality
the defeat of careerism and opportunism;
the defeat of the use of violence in the ANC and the rest of the democratic movement to impose particular leadership cliques interested in winning government tenders for themselves and their friends;
the defeat of bureaucratic parasitic tendency leading to the abuse of state power for self-enrichment;
the rejection of the phenomenon of the emergence of a black compradore bourgeosie which, in the context of BBBEE, is ready to front both for the domestic white and international capitalists;
commitment to the implementation of a socio-economic programme focused on economic growth and development, the restructuring and development of our economy, reducing unemployment and poverty, and sharing the wealth of our country in terms of our national, class and gender categories.
Nobody, and I believe the leadership of the ANC above all others, can ignore the conclusion that today our country stands at a particular crossroad.
This means that the decisions we take today will impact on our country and the masses of our people for a considerable number of years.
I am confident that the decisions the leadership of the ANC will take in this regard, with you at its head, will indeed advance the goals of the national democratic revolution to which so many of us, led by the veterans of our movement, have dedicated our lives.
As a small plea in this regard, I appeal that nobody should abuse or cite my name falsely to promote their partisan cause, including how the 2009 ANC election campaign will be conducted.
Amandla! Matla!
Thabo Mbeki
- News24

Two excellent online Mandela & Apartheid multimedia resources

2008-07-07T12:05:00.011+02:00

I'm a great believer in the power of the internet. Yet, I'm often still surprised at the jewels it offers when I bump into some new resource - freely available to anyone with a (preferably broadband) internet connection. The latest are two excellent resources on Nelson Mandela and Apartheid. I'm sure there are many more.

Mandela: An Audio History

"A five-part radio series documenting the struggle against apartheid through rare sound recordings, the voice of Nelson Mandela himself, as well as those who fought with him, and against him.... An Audio History was originally broadcast on National Public Radio in the U.S. and SAfm in South Africa."

The Stories
I thoroughly enjoyed listening to the five episodes sorted under the heading "The Stories". It is a grand narrative, well organised and told through recordings of radio broadcasts, interviews with anti-apartheid activists / politicians and liberation songs - amongst others. If you're familiar with South African historical and contemporary figures, you'll recognise many of them. Speakers and/or broadcasts are not introduced but rather flow seamlessly into each other. The listener is taken on a 50-year journey from 1994-1994. As with all attempts to convey history, not all perspectives are catered for throughout. But be that as it may, this is an impressive effort.

The People
Here you will find short biographies on the persons interviewed in The Stories section above.

Audio Timeline
This section provides a graphical time line of the events covered in the five audio episodes of The Stories. Very helpful if you are unfamiliar with South Africa's apartheid history and that of Nelson Mandela. A great refresher course if you think you know the history!

Nelson Mandela Media Centre (News24.com)

This is a very slick, well packaged collection of information on Nelson Mandela. It is hosted on News24.com's site and I assume they put it together. It is in fact a work in progress as there seem to be more content on the way.

The speeches section provides transcripts for speeches by Mandela starting with an address to the ANC Youth League in 1951 up to an address by Mandela at the funeral of Adelaide Tambo in 2007. A very impressive collection indeed.

The video section mainly feature prominent South Africans sharing the impressions Mandela made on them through his life and personal encounters. Amongst others, it features Helen Suzman, George Bizos, Jay Naidoo, Ahmed Kathrada, Francois Pienaar and Penny Heyns. It also includes a couple of clips highlighting different aspects of Mandela's life and person.

As with the first site featured above, this one also features a very informative timeline of events in Mandela's life. The Biography section provides a summary of important fazes in his life. Finally a collection of audio slide shows rounds of News24's presentation. I hope that the current presentation is but a starting point for an even more comprehensive future library of information.

Stories that got my attention - 25 June 2008

2008-06-25T10:59:00.007+02:00

Here are a couple of interesting and/or noteworthy stories that caught my attention this morning:

Mhambi: Is Nelson Mandela's silence on Zimbabwe OK?

Much is currently being made in the British Press of Nelson Mandela's visit to the UK for the concert celebration of his 90th birthday.

Not because of the planned star studded line up mind you. But because Mandela has not condemned Robert Mugabe's government of late...

Constitutionally Speaking: What happens when 5 judges retire?

Next year five judges of the Constitutional Court will come to the end of their 15 year term and will have to retire. These are Chief Justice Pius Langa and Justices Kate O’Regan, Albie Sachs, Yvonne Mgoro and Tollie Madala. Justices O’Regan, Sachs and Mokgoro have been consistently the most progressive voices on the court and it is difficult not to worry about the direction the court will take with five fresh faces on its benches.
Although there are some safeguards built into the Constitution regarding the appointment of judges, the process of appointing Constitutional Court judges are potentially open to political manipulation...

south africa THE GOOD NEWS: SA ad agency wins Grand Prix at Cannes

South African advertising agency DDB (SA) won the Grand Prix award in the Press category at the 55th Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival held in Cannes, France this week.
From more than 7 400 global entries in the press category, DDB (SA) scooped the coveted premier award for their Energizer campaign...

south africa THE GOOD NEWS: SA documentary wins World TV Award

A South African film has won the best documentary award in the 2008 World TV Awards.
The documentary, entitled "The Letter", deals with the personal stories emerging from the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine. Through the story of a mother, who in search of closure and reconciliation, writes a letter to her son's killers, the film aims to increase public awareness around issues of diversity, tolerance and peace...

BBC News: US to ignore Zimbabwe poll result

The US will not recognise the outcome of Friday's presidential election run-off in Zimbabwe, a senior state department official has said.

Jendayi Frazer told the BBC Robert Mugabe could not claim a legitimate victory amid the current campaign of violence against the opposition...

My comments: Will South Africa follow a similar approach? I wish, but I don't see any chance of that happening. It will probably also not achieve much. It's a little like putting your hands in front of your eyes and saying - you're not there, I won't acknowledge you. Who do you talk to in order to end the charade? But at least the US is indicating that it doesn't approve of the current madness. Could South Africa's Government at least convey that message in public - 'Bob, you're a naughty boy and we don't like it'?. Once again I don't see this happening. I'm still depressed about Zim.

BBC News: Landmark Florida Everglades deal

US conservationists are hailing a landmark agreement under which the state of Florida will buy a huge tract of land from a major sugar company.
The US Sugar Corp has tentatively agreed to close down and sell the 800sq km of land it owns in the Everglades to Florida for $1.75bn (£890m).
Florida's governor said the agreement was as important as the creation of America's first national park.
The swampy Everglades is one of America's most unusual ecosystems...

BBC News: Biofuel use 'increasing poverty'

The replacement of traditional fuels with biofuels has dragged more than 30 million people worldwide into poverty, an aid agency report says.
Oxfam says so-called green policies in developed countries are contributing to the world's soaring food prices, which hit the poor hardest.
The group also says biofuels will do nothing to combat climate change.
Its report urges the EU to scrap a target of making 10% of all transport run on renewable resources by 2020.
Oxfam estimates the EU's target could multiply carbon emissions 70-fold by 2020 by changing the use of land...

BBC News: Bill Clinton endorses Obama bid

Former US President Bill Clinton has announced for the first time his support of fellow Democrat Barack Obama's bid for the White House.

Mr Clinton's wife Hillary was Mr Obama's biggest rival for the party nomination, and he was often critical of Mr Obama on the campaign trail.
Mr Clinton's spokesman said he was committed to working for an Obama win.
Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton are to hold a joint rally on Friday, but Mr Clinton will be in Europe and will not attend...

BBC News: Record sale for Monet masterpiece

A Claude Monet painting, Le Bassin Aux Nympheas, has fetched a record £40.9m for the artist's work at auction.
The identity of the victorious bidder at Christie's, London, has not been made public. The painting had been expected to fetch £24m.
Painted in 1919 in Giverny in France it has been seen in public just once in the past 80 years.
Monet's 1873 Le Pont du chemin de fer a Argenteuil, which sold in May, had held the previous record of £20.9m...

BBC News: Children terrified by SA xenophobia

Ten-year-old Fortune watched a man being shot dead in front of him as he accompanied his mother to the grocer's store.
Another 10-year-old saw men armed with clubs and guns preparing for an attack.
"I was scared," he says, "so I prayed."
Both children have been receiving counselling after a wave of anti-immigrant attacks in South Africa last month.
Their school called in art therapist Michelle Booth when teachers realised that many pupils had been traumatised by violence - which they had either suffered directly or witnessed...

TIMESONLINE: Outrage over £200m UK investment in Zimbabwe

Anglo American, the London-based mining giant, is to make what is believed to be the largest foreign investment in Zimbabwe to date, just as the British Government puts pressure on companies to withdraw from the country.
Anglo will invest $400 million (£200 million) to build a platinum mine in Zimbabwe — a move that has raised concern among some of the company’s shareholders and been condemned by politicians.
The Foreign Office was investigating tonight whether the company’s investment breached sanctions against Zimbabwe. Anglo insisted that its involvement in the country did not break the law.
The decision, which was criticised roundly as likely to give succour — and possibly money — to the Mugabe regime, is in stark contrast to the policy of nearly all other main British corporations in Zimbabwe. They are either withdrawing from the country or waiting for Mr Mugabe to be deposed before expanding their businesses...

To BEE or not to BEE...

2008-06-24T21:03:00.005+02:00

Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is regarded as either holy or evil by South Africans, depending from which vantage point it's looked at. For non-South Africans who may not be in the know - BEE refers to affirmative action policies, which are driven first and foremost by Government through legislation, as well as through so-called BEE Charters agreed to between Government and Business (mostly by specific industry's, e.g. Tourism).

While race plays a major role in how BEE is perceived in South Africa, it would be a mistake to believe that all whites are against it and all blacks for it. BEE was always going to be a necessary evil at best and at worse reverse* discrimination (*against whites as opposed to previous discrimination against blacks). It can probably be argued that it will always be both... My own preference has been towards labelling it a 'necessary evil'. That is, BEE should be seen against the country's history of colonisation (±300 years) and formal Apartheid (±40 years), which robbed the black majority of opportunities for education and development. To address these past injustices, a degree of discrimination is needed in the present day (affirmative action).

However, about a decade of BEE has caused many to re-evaluate their stance on this thorny issue. To be fair many, myself included, had a lot of caveats regarding support for BEE / affirmative action to begin with. These now strongly come into play, given the history of BEE thus far. In short a smallish group of the (mostly) political well-connected have benefited hugely from BEE. Some black labourers benefit indirectly through union participation in BEE deals, although the empowerment effect thereof at ground roots level is questionable. The vast majority of black South Africans are not really in a stronger position to advance up the economic ladder - some even argue that most are in a worse position today.

There are a few aspects of the current BEE experience that troubles me greatly. These include:

The small number of people actually (disproportionally) empowered by BEE, as referred to above.
It seems that the main focus is on filling top, influential, highly paid positions, with black faces - i.e. following a top-down approach.
The previous point suggests that the only way to empower blacks is by getting rid of whites... That is, whites can't be trusted in playing a part in the great empowerment project. It has to be driven by blacks in high positions, by extension by driving out whites currently filling those positions. This is gross generalisation on my part, but it represents at the very least a worrying perception.
BEE in South Africa, in my view, is based too much on the redistribution of wealth rather than the creation of wealth. In other words cutting the proverbial economic pie in smaller pieces, so that everyone can get a bite - rather than baking a bigger pie. (Obviously the 'shareholding' in a bigger pie can remain in the same lily white hands, which won't help either.)
An experience which is bothering me more and more is listening to black commentators matter-of-factly stating that black South Africans must eventually dominate business, because of the demographics of our population. There is a culture of entitlement in these pronouncements that bugs me. If I as a white person build up a family business from scratch with years of blood and tears, am I required to simply hand over a majority stake to someone else, because of his black skin colour? Why can't a family business remain exactly that, irrespective of the family's race?

It would be naïve to expect that after 350 years of discrimination against blacks in this country an ANC Government would not opt for fast track empowerment, as they've done. But one would hope that this will be coupled with a similarly aggressive drive to empower blacks to compete on merit, not to be mere recipients of what virtually amounts to hand-outs? I fear this has generally not been the case.

The main failing of the ANC Government in my view has been the complete failure to deliver, or at least begin to deliver, quality education at (primary and secondary) school level. The fortunate black students that make it into universities (these days a very sizable portion of university populations) are either those who were able to get into historically white schools or the exceptional few who managed to reach the bar despite attending the average black township school (the average black township school being poor to useless).

At present universities attain their high percentage of black students not because of population demographics naturally leading to it. Rather, it is manipulated by setting different standards for different race groups. The bottom line is, if you're white you have to outperform black students by a clear margin in order to make it to university. Worse, if you're black a mediocre school performance will often do. The reason for this is not that black kids are lazy or have a lower intellectual capacity. It is rather that Government fails them - mostly in the poor execution of education policy -; school principals who are either unable to manage or don't care fail them; and ill qualified, poorly motivated and often totally uncommitted teachers fail them.

The baggage of school boycotts in the Apartheid era is also haunting us today. I'm amazed at how (black) school children still feature as cannon fodder in political struggles. Whether it be protests against poor service delivery by municipalities, provincial demarcation disputes or micro issues with particular education representatives the fact is that school children should be in classrooms being equipped for their futures - not out on the streets protesting. Parents and community leaders should ensure that children don't get dragged into these matters.

Yet, businesses are pressed continuously to promote black employees, often in preference of better qualified and experienced white co-workers. How can this be, if black schools are continuously allowed to sink further and further into the gutter? It all smacks of political expediency rather than a true commitment to empowering black South Africans. If you're serious about 'BEE' you need to empower black South Africans, first and foremost through dramatically improved school education, to compete.

The litmus test for BEE lies in abolishing affirmative action and then seeing whether you're doing enough for black school education to enable black children to naturally progress in big numbers into university and careers beyond. Blacks have the ability, as do any other race, to compete. They should be allowed to do so!

I didn't really have the stomach to wander into the above topic, but a talk by Moeletsi Mbeki (the brother of our infamous President...) got me fired up. While I've read about some of M Mbeki's opinions lately, I'm not able to vouch for his general positions, as they are mostly unknown to me. However, on this issue I think he's spot on. We need more (black) commentators who come out and address this important issue. I'm just hoping that enough do so to bring real change in BEE policies before my eldest child, born a decade after 1994 'democratic revolution', matriculates in about 2023... I'm not too hopeful though.

Below follows a report on Moeletsi Mbeki's talk as featured on News24.com:

'BEE no solution to poverty'
Johannesburg - Wealth redistribution is no solution to poverty, political analyst Moeletsi Mbeki told a conference on the world economy in Johannesburg on Tuesday.

"Redistribution can actually accentuate poverty and create social conflict," he said.

"I was one of the first to oppose Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), because if they're going to redistribute wealth, who is going to get what? Where are you going to get that wealth from?"

Broad Based BEE had only benefited top ANC leaders, Mbeki said.

"It benefits the people in power, but what about the poor? BEE is more of a problem than a solution."

He suggested that the government look at wealth creation rather than "fight the ghosts of the past. The ANC expends a lot of energy with BEE in an attempt to correct the past".

The only way to go bridge the gap between rich and poor was to sort out the education system and concentrate more on the development of small and medium businesses.

"BEE stops black from becoming entrepreneurs," Mbeki said.

"Black people are not necessarily against capitalism," he said, adding that it was only the model of capitalism that the apartheid National Party had promoted that blacks did not like.

He was however unsure if the ANC could market capitalism to the electorate.

"The ANC leaders are afraid of the unions - groups like Cosatu and the SACP - they think these groups deliver a huge constituency but they don't."

He said that the ANC had been "very good" at establishing a political system and the Constitution, but had not done well in economics.

"I never expected them to because they have never run a business."

He said that at least he and his brother, President Thabo Mbeki, had worked in the family's spaza shop as children.

"But when my brother gets kicked out as head of government, you won't have anyone there who has actually managed even a spaza shop."

A Monday morning Zim headache

2008-06-23T10:19:00.004+02:00

Oh my, oh my, oh my... Just when you think things in Zimbabwe can't possibly turn out any worse. they do.

I caught the news of MDC opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai's withdrawal from the Zimbabwe presidential race on my cell last night. How depressing, utterly depressing. Apparently the MDC is keeping open a back door - but I can't see anything happening that will allow them to use it. I don't believe this is brinkmanship, this is simply the end of the road.

While I understand the MDC's utter desperateness, considering the 'orgy of violence' (to quote Tsvangirai) that has been unleashed against them, I cannot help but think that withdrawing is a huge mistake. What about the scores of MDC activists and regular supporters who paid with their lives in the recent past, hoping that this was the death throes of the Mugabe regime? Were their deaths in vain? Why pull out now, less than a week before the runoff? Yes, the election would not be free and fair - there's no chance of it being, considering the events of the last month and Mugabe's tyrannical history. But what does this achieve? Does it not snuff out any hope for normal Zimbabweans to get rid of the tyrant?

This is probably it. Robert Mugabe gets a free ticket to continue his thievery and power abuse. Will the region stop him? Dream on. Oh my, oh my, how depressing, how utterly depressing...

ANC Youth League President puts his foot in it (his mouth)

2008-06-18T21:06:00.005+02:00

Stupid stupid speech!
Julius Malema, the by now (even more) controversial ANC Youth League President, is said to be on the defence after his inciting remarks in Thaba Nchu (Free State) at a Youth Day rally. The ANC President, Jacob Zuma, was in attendance and did not use his own speech later on to rebuke the young firebrand, but rather stuck to his prepared speech and ignored Malema's inexcusable utterings.

If you missed the news coverage on Malema's remarks, you can read about it here (The Times), but the following quote sums up the offending speech pretty well :

“Let us make it clear now: we are prepared to die for Zuma. Not only that, we are prepared to take up arms and kill for Zuma,”

This thoughtless inciting remark was apparently received with applause from the crowd... I don't think the above statement by Malema really requires any comment, it speaks for itself. Suffice to say that South Africa really needs better quality leaders with more common sense and respect for democracy and the rule of law.

The journalist and the war monger
A Times political reporter, Moipone Malefane, recorded an interview with Malema to get clarity on what he may have meant with his ill chosen rants. The audio interview follows at the end of this post. Instead of gracefully distancing him from his moment of foolishness he seems to only dive deeper into the murky waters of shallow, ideological, rhetoric. Malefane, on the other hand needs to be commended for not being thrown, but relentlessly asking piercing questions. She's clearly more of a print than broadcast journalist and is not very smooth in terms of presentation, but she zooms in mercilessly on the target!

- exactly who does the ANCYL want to kill?
Malefane pointedly asks him who 'they' are prepared to kill, perhaps the judiciary (in retaliation for the prosecution of Zuma on corruption charges)? Malema tries to skirt the issue vaguely stating that they (the ANCYL?) will kill those who try to undermine black majority rule. Malefane then points out that Zuma is being prosecuted under a black government. He then claims his comments is not related to the legal prosecution of Zuma but against the 'forces of darkness' who wish to portray the ANC leadership as 'the most corrupt people who will never lead any successful government' (cue Darth Vader breathing effect in the background here). Malefane: "Who are these forces?". In not answering her question Malema then uses a term that is fast becoming a pet hate of mine, claiming that he is talking about 'counter-revolutionary forces'. The latter term is becoming the preferred twin to labelling legitimate criticism of the Government or ANC as being racist.

- are you not inciting violence?
Interesting, in denying stoking up violence Malema employs another trick often used by politicians finding themselves in difficult corners of their own making. He starts using 'we' rather than 'I' or 'me'. Suddenly it is collective. 'No, no, we are not saying...'. Was Malema conveying official ANCYL policy, I hope not? I doubt it, although the Youth League of late is a strange animal.

And just as I'm thinking about the above, I press the play button for the rest of the interview and Malefane zooms in again with her next question:

- the statement that you made... ...did you canvas it within the ANC Youth League... ...is that what the ANC Youth League believe...?
Then Malema goes back to talking about the 'revolution' and that the ANCYL has always said that it will pay the highest price to defend it. Probably quite true in content, but he's clearly uncomfortable with the question.

- give me an example of what would cause the Youth League to take up arms?
Malema tries to avoid answering, he can't really... He mumbles about 'no need'.

- but you can't put out a statement if there's no need? ...is there a threat?
Malema is suddenly a little lame. The bravado is somewhat deflated now. In an almost apologetic tone he tries the old line: 'There's no threat... we are just saying to you... so committed to this revolution we can even die... and kill for it (sic)'. Now he's really burying himself, he actually said there is no threat! Why the great hooha?

- do you think your statement was responsible?
'Yes, very responsible...'. Sure. 'It's a revolutionary statement'. Oh, off course, now it all makes sense! Thank you comrade Malema, why didn't I see that all along!

At this point the interview meanders off into other topics. But Malefane is as sharp as before. When Malema claims they've put together a legal team that will approach the courts she wants to know if they have met with the team yet (they will be doing so on Thursday and will then announce the names). Further questions on the composition of the 'legal team' by Malefane leads to answers that leads a strong impression that the existence of such a team is somewhat questionable. The legal team will among other things try and convince the court that the case should be dropped because it may divide the country. That sounds like a strange legal argument to me, if enough people disapprove do we set aside the law for an individual?

And then, just as one thinks Melefane is going to say 'thank you and good bye' she pitches the clincher to a worn-down Malema:

- but Julius what happens in case this case is not dropped?
So what does 'Julius' say. We will attack the 'forces of the dark' and kill them? No, he says: "If the case is not dropped... ...it will go through the court, the president will appear...".

Well done Moipone Malefane! The audio file follows below:

Anton Harber on xenophobia coverage: The Star vs. The Daily Sun

2008-06-17T09:35:00.005+02:00

For those readers who don't know this, Anton Harber is a former editor of the Mail & Guardian. Presently he is a professor at Wits University (Johannesburg) and directs the Journalism and Media Studies Programme.

Harber has a very insightful blog, The Harbinger, dealing mostly with current events in relation to how different media houses and outlets approach these issues. On June 13th he posted on the contrasts in media coverage of the 'recent' xenophobic attacks in South Africa, as evident in comparing The Star and The Daily Sun's coverage. These are off course two very different publications, the former a broadsheet aimed primarily at the middle & upper classes and the latter a typical working class, sensationalist, tabloid.

...It is easy to say which of these newspaper treatments makes us feel better about ourselves. The Star holds out hope that those who respond to humanitiarian needs outnumber those who partook of the violence or stood aside as it happened. It is tougher to say which newspaper offers the more accurate depiction of our society. More likely, the contrast between these two highlights the different worlds occupied by South Africans of different classes, with very different understandings of what happened in those few days in May. The Star’s is the view from the suburbs, from those only indirectly affected; the Daily Sun’s is the view from the townships and often from the perpetrators themselves...

The article makes for very interesting reading, you'll find it here.

'SADC election observers should go to Zimbabwe immediately'

2008-06-12T10:27:00.007+02:00

Herewith, in full, a statement released on June 10 (2008) by the University of Pretoria Law Faculty's Centre for Human Rights.

Thanks to Pierre at Constitutionally Speaking from whom I picked up the story. It is encouraging that civil society is becoming more and more vocal in South Africa.

In all honesty, even if scores of observers are sent to Zimbabwe immediately it will be too late to provide the MDC with a reasonable chance to rally their supporters ahead of the presidential election scheduled for June 27, which is now only 15 days away. It may help to expose power abuses during the actual election and thereafter. But the bottom line is that South Africa and SADC have failed the people of Zimbabwe once again. One can only hope for a miracle come June 27...

SADC election observers should go to Zimbabwe immediately

Release date: 10 June 2008

The Centre for Human Rights, at the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, calls on President Mwanawasa, in his capacity as Chairperson of SADC, and on President Mbeki, in his capacity as SADC mediator on Zimbabwe, to take all possible measures to ensure the immediate and extensive deployment of SADC observers in Zimbabwe.

It is encouraging that President Mbeki has already voiced his support for the deployment of SADC observers, and that he reminded member states to make the necessary resources available for this purpose. However, these observers should not focus primarily on monitoring the polls on voting day, but should be put in place as soon as possible to cover the period leading up to the elections and a reasonable period thereafter. These observers should also be representative of SADC as a whole.

An election is a process, consisting of three main phases: (1) the pre-election period; (2) the voting day itself; and (3) the period between voting and the release of results. If election observers focus on what happens on voting day only, the important determinants of a free and fair election prior to and after voting day would not be taken into account. At the moment, there are clear indications that the pre-election conditions are not only making a free and fair election impossible, but are skewed in favour of the candidacy of President Mugabe. Even if people are allowed to go to the polls on voting day, free and fair elections are impossible due to the harassment, arrest, detention and even disappearance of activists and leaders; restrictions on the media; and fear and intimidation of the population and non-governmental organisations.

According to SADC’s own ‘Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections’, the SADC election observation mission should be deployed ‘at least two weeks before the voting day’ (para 4.1.10). Under the specific circumstances prevailing in Zimbabwe, the ‘normal’ period of two weeks should be increased as much as possible. It is imperative that all efforts should be made to get as many observers into place, covering as extensive an area as possible, as soon as possible. The elections, scheduled to take place on 27 June, is just 16 days away. Observers should be on the ground now, and should stay at least until election results are announced.

Observers should insist on the full compliance with the SADC Principles and Guidelines, which includes the following:

The government must safeguard the human rights and adequate security of all stakeholders and parties (para 7.4; 7.5).
The observers must have unimpeded and unrestricted access to all polling stations and counting centres (para 7.19).

Once deployed, SADC observers must submit regular reports, so that matters requiring urgent attention may be dealt with by the appropriate SADC organ.

To ensure a credible election, as many observers as possible should be allowed into the country. Presidents Mwanawasa and Mbeki should insist that Zimbabwe allows other observers, in line with the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights’ ‘Resolution on the Forthcoming Run-off Election in Zimbabwe’, adopted in May at its 43rd ordinary session. In this resolution, the African Commission requests that the Zimbabwean government allows ‘both national and international election observers to observe the entire electoral process, so as to enhance the credibility of the electoral process, and acceptance of the results of the elections by all contesting parties’.

The Centre for Human Rights further urges Presidents Mwanawasa and Mbeki to exert all possible pressure on President Mugabe to halt violence, intimidation, and selective use of to law stifle opposition, and to abide by the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections and the Zimbabwean Constitution and Electoral Act.

For more detail, please contact: Frans Viljoen, Director of the Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, frans.viljoen@up.ac.za; tel: 012 4203228; cell: 073 393 4181

NY Times Blogging Heads: Is Racism Over?

2008-06-09T11:34:00.009+02:00

I love the New York Times, although lately I've had very little time to indulge in it. On occasion I've noted a link to 'Bloggingheads', but 'till today never followed it. The Bloggingheads topic featured on the NY Times online edition today caught my attention and I took the leap. The format of Bloggingheads is mostly that of two participants, seen in a split video screen, discussing a topic via an internet video feed. It is non-moderated and free flowing.

(The Bloggingheads video follows lower down. The video may not be visible if you're reading this post outside of my blog).

Is Racism Over (in US Politics)?
In this 'edition' of Bloggingheads two (black) academics discuss the Obama-Clinton primary race, which has since concluded. In one or two of the states that Hillary Clinton took, race seemingly played a decisive issue in voters' minds. Simply put white voters voted for the white candidate. Does this support the notion that racism is still very much active in American politics or is there a more complex explanation? This kind of discussion can off-course be very gloomy and dark. However, the two academics paint a very interesting and nuanced picture. One which gives hope that non-racialism may have taken a few steps forward in the States.

Their discussion is also one which in my view looks at racism from different angles, not simply white on black. A very refreshing aspect, which is sorely lacking - although not totally absent - in South African deliberation on this very important matter. Their analysis goes where few discussions tend to, that is to a place where you also take a critical look at the validity of ideas which would normally be used to defend your own 'position'. I'm going to be keeping an eye out for these two guys, it's worth the trouble!

By the way, the 'two guys' are John McWhorter of the Manhattan Institute and Glenn Loury of Brown University.

Will the presidential election results reflect on racism in the US?
If Barack Obama gets elected as the next US President there will off-course be a very strong argument that America has indeed come a very long way in how it views race. His winning of the Democratic ticket is that already, although we are dealing with the more progressive of the two dominating political parties. One can also argue that in the popular vote, i.e. even more so than in the delegate count, things turned out very evenly for the two Democrats. Thus, for argument's sake, if virtually all Republicans and independents voted for McCain and a large portion of Clinton's supports did the same Obama will end up short by a country mile. That will off-course not automatically signal racist convictions amongst voters. It may be a genuine conviction amongst voters that McCain stands for better policy and is a better leader (not my conviction). A better explanation will probably be that America is still in the hold of politics of fear. But should Obama win the presidential race, and at this stage it seems there is no reason why he couldn't, surely it has to say something about a changing America - at least in as far as racism is concerned?

Obama on racism
It was unavoidable that the topic of race would surface somewhere in the primary race, as it did. Obama handled the issue, I believe, with exceptional well phrased candour and grace. If you missed THE speech on racism, by Obama, during the primaries read the post I wrote on it here (YouTube video of full speech included).

The Bloggingheads video
The very interesting section of the McWhorter & Loury discussion (approx. 6-min) featured on the NY Times' website follows directly below (you'll need a broadband link to watch this).

To view the full discussion, which I recommend, click here (It intro's with a bit of personal banter before diving into deep water - running time = approx. 45-min).

Slideshow: Soetwater 'refugee camp' (News24.com)

2008-05-29T10:56:00.004+02:00

News24.com posted an online slideshow (with audio commentary) on their website today. It features Soetwater 'refugee camp', a tent compound set up on Kommetjie's Soetwater Recreation Area (Cape Peninsula / Greater Cape Town). The camp currently houses 3000 refugees with more arriving. Most of the services at the camp are currently being provided by volunteers, with donations from the public being the main source of supplies. This may change as reports suggest Government may be gearing up to establish official refugee camps.

Click on the image to view the slideshow on News24.com's website.

Govt prepares for 14 camps: South Africa: Xenophobia: News24

2008-05-29T10:26:00.007+02:00

News24.com, an online news portal in the Naspers group of companies, posted the article below an hour ago (produced by Beeld). To read it in its original context, click on the article heading below.

This is a first for South Africa and has been called for by various groups since well before the current wave of xenophobia. In my opinion this is a major development, if it is confirmed officially off-course. I'll comment on it lower down...

Govt prepares for 14 camps
29/05/2008 08:24 - (SA)

Staff Reporters, Beeld

Cape Town - The government was to announce on Thursday that camps would be set up countrywide for the victims of xenophobic attacks.

However, the camps would not be referred to as refugee camps because of the negative connotations of such a name worldwide.
From what Beeld was able to gather, the Cabinet met until about 17:00 on Wednesday to discuss the proposed camps, among other things.

This came after a meeting on Monday between President Thabo Mbeki, the Cabinet committee which was established to deal with the matter, and provincial premiers.

Mbeki was to meet UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres in Japan on Thursday where the crisis would be discussed.
Exact details of the plan could not be confirmed officially on Wednesday, but Beeld was able to determine the following:

"Shelter camps" (perhaps with a more-acceptable name) would be announced which temporarily would provide foreigners with shelter and food in the interests of their safety, health and sanitation;
There would be up to 14 of these camps countrywide - seven large and seven small ones;
Foreigners would stay in the camps "for as long as necessary" - no timeframe was given;
It looked as if metro councils would be approached by provinces to cordon off areas for the camps.
Metro councils in Gauteng and the Western Cape - where the xenophobic attacks were the most widespread - would get camps, but not the metro councils in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal;
The number of foreigners in the country was estimated at about 51 000 on Wednesday night, of which about 28 000 were in Gauteng and 20 000 in the Western Cape; (((I assume this refers to the number of people displaced by the xenophobic violence as there are obviously many more foreigners in the country!)))
It seemed as if the national government was not in favour of the UN openly helping because it considered the country to be in a position to resolve the matter itself;
The Ekurhuleni metro would erect tented camps on the outskirts of Springs and Germiston, and possibly in the Kempton Park area too; and
The greater Johannesburg city council already was working on plans for camps, together with the national and provincial government.
At the time of going to press no comment could be obtained from the Tshwane metro council in Pretoria.

Years ago, as a student journalist, I was part of a church drama group that went to sing for FW & Marike de Klerk... :-). At the time he was still the president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela had been released from prison and negotiations for a new dispensation was well under way. We got to drink tea and enjoy snacks with the first couple in their official residence afterwards. A very strange experience! Being a young idealistic, aspiring, journalist I asked FW for his thoughts on the role of the media. He answered that he saw it as a necessary evil. I was slightly taken aback...

In the years since I've used the phrase quite often myself. It comes to mind again with the above breaking news. To spell it out: Setting up refugee camps (or whatever you elect to call them) in South Africa is a necessary evil at best. It is too late to avoid it. It is not good news.

I actually value the Government's stance up to now, i.e. that it is best for immigrants to integrate with society in general. However, it seems as if this policy was also an excuse to ignore the problem of illegal immigration. Best also not to create camps for Zimbabwe immigrants, how do you explain then some of the mind boggling claims by Thabo Mbeki that there's no crisis in Zimbabwe? For immigrants to integrate successfully into society they should have been officially recognised as immigrants or refugees. They should have been processed, i.e. given documents. This should have been done in a way that ensured local communities that foreigners living among them where there legally. And so one can go on. The list of shortcomings, policy failures, mismanagement, incompetence, corruption and neglect in regard to immigration by Government at all levels is a very very long one.

Where to from here? I fear incredible damage has been done in the last few weeks. While the occurrence of xenophobia is not entirely new in South Africa, the scale of the the recent events is such that it complicates the issue tremendously. In an ideal world politicians would talk to the relevant local communities and lay their fears to rest so that they can welcome back immigrants and they would live together happily ever after. Dream on...

We now have a bizarre new kind of Apartheid in South Africa. Us equals South Africans and them the 'illegal ones' or 'refugees'. In the short term pure humanitarian considerations dictate that camps be set up. But would you like to live in such a camp? Do you want your children to live in such a camp!? How much better would it be for these people to get out into society again and earn their keep through productive means. I suspect that the refugee-camps-by-another-name will also function as a first stop in the deportation chain ending somewhere north of our borders. While some of the deported will have doubts about returning to South Africa they will find exactly the same circumstances they fled in the first place - virtual dictatorship in Zimbabwe, anarchy in Somalia, etc. As before most of them will probably come back through the revolving door that is our borders. Deportation is not a viable long-term solution. They only kind of deportation that works is the kind that basically assists the limited amount of immigrants who want to return to their home countries in doing so.

I'm very curious to see how these camps will be managed. Will the inhabitants thereof have freedom of movement in and out of the camps? Will they be documented? Will they be assisted in finding alternative housing? Will permanent structures be built in the camps? Only time will tell, but what is sure is that South Africans cannot be critical enough in following future developments around this - it goes to the core of the values entrenched in our constitution.

BBC News (online) exposure for this blog - the good & 'the bad'

2008-05-22T17:05:00.010+02:00

I received a message from Mhambi yesterday informing me that comments by both of us on the xenophobia currently raging in parts of South Africa featured on BBC News' website. The BBC piece, headlined 'SA bloggers want end to violence', quoted from ten blogs by South Africans. Inside South Africa (Xenophobia - images of shocking hatred) and Mhambi were included in the pool.

For a list of all the blogs, and links to all of them, go to the article and you'll find it under the heading 'Related links' in the right-hand menu (you'll need to scroll down a bit).

I'm delighted! However, this elation is somewhat tempered and needs some qualification.

South Africa's "bad publicity"
Most people with any knowledge of public relations or journalism will be able to quote the mantra: "There's no such thing as bad publicity". While this is undoubtedly true in most respects, it certainly does not mean that anyone would crave such 'bad publicity'. In this particular case it saddens me that South Africa is, deservedly, getting a lot of bad publicity. While it is vital that the current events, and its underlying causes, get exposed and debated it is also true that it will result in lost investment and economic damage - in short diminished trust in South Africa. Yes, it may be a wake up call for Government and the ANC which may lead to concerted efforts to solve various pressing socio-economic and human rights issues. But should those gains materialise it comes at a cost. How much better would it have been if these issues received priority before this all blew up in our faces?

Article not that good
The second reason for my tempered enthusiasm at being included in the article is quite strange, considering what an impressive news organisation the BBC boasts. To be frank, I didn't find the quality of the particular article that good...

BBC's human angle
But let me rather focus on the good for a moment! I love the fact that the BBC goes to great lengths to get the human angle on stories in addition to their more 'hard-news', removed, 'objective', political and analytic reporting. Their stories very often end with an invite to people affected by a specific news story to relate their own experience of events. In the case of their coverage of the xenophobia incidents the standard invite resulted in a very insightful piece 'S African violence: Your stories'. A dimension of reality is added to a story when someone relates, in first person narrative, how a mob knocked on his door and the frantic scramble to get out of harm's way. It is because I appreciate that kind of angle that I included the aforementioned link in my post that was thereafter featured by the BBC.

BBC's sampling of bloggers' comments
Sampling bloggers' comments is another way to relate a more 'localised' and 'local' angle on a story. The strategy definitely has value. I put the two words in inverted commas because many of the writers are quite far removed from events. The 'local' or 'localised' element to sampling their views lies in their nationality (South African in this case), rather than their location. While nine of the bloggers seem to live in South Africa -it's difficult to be sure- I suspect that none of them has been affected directly by the violence at the time they posted their opinions (one is actually of English nationality, but living in Cape Town - as pointed out in the article). I believe, for instance, that none of them actually saw burning barricades, mobs roaming the streets and so on. That is, all of them provided opinions based on what they saw or read in the media (no different from anyone else). Furthermore labelling their opinions as representing 'local' opinion is obviously dangerous - as a sample of ten is by no means representative. But it is quite clear that they do indeed represent different 'local' schools of thought and as such relating their opinions have value.

Poor selection of blogs?
So where's the 'bad' in all of this? I'm disappointed with the quality of the BBC's selection (read 'the BBC employee's' / 'journalist's '...). Some of the blogs, such as 'Mhambi', 'Reggie' and 'In the news' seem to be of a good to excellent quality. However, a mere casual check of quality should, in my mind, have disqualified more than one of the selected blogs from inclusion in the article. I'm thinking of 'South Africa Sucks' and 'I love South Africa... but I hate my Government'. Both of these blogs feature explicit racism and clearly operate at the level of highly prejudiced propaganda.

I'm all for freedom of speech, in fact I'm passionate about it. But surely, when one seeks comments on developments in a country you look for people who at least represent a somewhat critical analysis of events? None of the ten blogs included in the article where dismissive of the extremely negative turn of events - rightly so. Thus I'm not arguing that the BBC should have looked for bloggers who sing the government's praises. In fact I don't believe any of the included blogs do that. However, the two mentioned blogs interpret virtually anything that happens in the country through thick racist lenses. As such any new development is not analysed or explained on merit and within a complex context. It is simply rolled out as 'evidence' to support a preconceived notion that 'everything is going down the drain in South Africa' because 'they (blacks) can only mess things up'.

To drive my point home, surely the BBC would not include 'The UK Sucks' or 'Keep the UK white' (fictional blog names) when sampling English bloggers' opinions on developments in the UK? Unless they're doing an expose on supremacist groups or the like, that is. At the very least they will probably qualify that these (fictionary) blogs represent an ultra-conservative viewpoint?

While the excerpts from the two blogs pointed out by me on their own don't necessarily relay overtly the racism prevalent on the blogs, they do include questionable statements. For example a quote in the BBC's article, attributed to Doberman on 'I luv South Africa... but I Hate my Government', reads:

"...for allowing millions of foreigners to invade our country illegally, to steal jobs, resources, to commit crime...".

I can't help but think that the mobs who are engaging in the sickening xenophobic violence will love this quote... It smacks of the prejudice that seems to be driving them. Note the use of the words 'invade' (not flee from economic hardship or oppressive governments), 'steal jobs' (sure) and 'commit crime'. Are we to believe that in our overflowing prisons foreigners vastly outnumber South Africans? Get real! I don't think this kind of rubbish should feature on a reputable news service's site, unless meant to illustrate prejudice.

On balance, the misgivings expressed above doesn't change the fact that I'm chuffed at the inclusion of this blog in the BBC's article. I'm thrilled! Hopefully, if in future the BBC is more circumspect about who's ramblings they quote this blog will still make the grade...

Xenophobia - images of shocking hatred

2008-05-19T16:46:00.012+02:00

For a news24.com photo presentation on the xenophobic violence raging in Gauteng at present, click on the image below.

I wish against all odds that the xenophobic madness currently under way in South Africa will abate overnight and that we can simply forget about it. But this will off-course not happen by some miracle. It will need commitment, firstly acknowledgement, and strong determined action from Government and all kinds of civic and political leaders.

The current orgy of hate and lawlessness cannot be ignored or dealt with by run of the mill press statements. Blaming it on 'criminal elements' is also ludicrous as it is as clear as daylight that these acts are being perpetrated by large sections of the particular communities - not just a few individuals. President Mbeki needs to address the nation via national TV and radio and make clear that the Government will not tolerate the evil of Xenophobia. He can gather the new ANC leadership (including Jacob Zuma) and other prominent leaders around him when making such a statement. Obviously this needs to be backed up by action. We don't have the convenience of avoiding the embarrassment of deploying the SANDF in our streets to restore order, it should have been done already. Civil society should also mobilise and reach out a hand to the foreigners at the receiving end of the violence.

Addressing the many failings that contributed to the current situation must receive urgent attention once the violence has been stemmed. But for now talk of poverty, crime, corruption and the like will not end the violence. What is needed is unqualified condemnation of this scourge at the highest level and forceful action.

Video

BBC online video on the violence here (external link)

News

news24.com - Mobs armed with petrol run amok
news24.com - SA shocked by violence
M&G online - Parties slam govt over xenophobic attacks
allAfrica.com - President Mbeki condemns Xenophobic attacks
CNN - 'Anti-foreigner' violence kills 22 in South Africa
The Times online edition (UK) - Thabo Mbeki's critics demand action not words
BBC online - Thousands flee S Africa attacks
New York Times - Anti-Immigrant Violence in S Africa

Opinion

Haigh & Hussein on iol.co.za - What fuels the hatred ?
Peter Fabricius on iol.co.za - Alex mayhem aggravated by shortcoming
Soweto - Readers' comment on the xenophobic violence
BBC online - S African violence: Your stories (reports from 'foreigners' on the receiving end of the current xenophobic attacks)
BBC online - Foreign attacks concern SA press (excerpts from mostly editorials)

Blogs

Mhambi - Time to call in the army?
Constitutionally Speaking - Xenophobia excused or explained?
thinking aloud - Xenophobia: It is us South Africans who should carry the blame
Somewhere in Africa - South Africa's foreigner problem
Comment is free - South Africa's hard truths

Thabo Mbeki - what could have been

2008-05-17T12:34:00.006+02:00

Pierre de Vos once again got me thinking on his blog Constitutionally Speaking today. In a post titled 'Those were the days...' he nostalgically thinks back to a time when Thabo Mbeki demanded respect with his intellectual discourse (see video clip lower down). A time when, at least for some of us, he made you sit back and take note. He could make you think again about, rethink, set ideas. But alas, HIV, Zimbabwe, Selebi and many other areas of denialism corrupted his legacy and did immense damage to South Africa. I need not elaborate on his short comings. It is painfully apparent in current public discourse - as it should be. Gains in housing and other areas such as water access fade into the background.

It reminded me about a post I wrote when PW Botha, Die Groot Krokodil, passed away (PW Botha 'defiant to the end') in 2006. I know it's a bit cruel to compare Mbeki to Botha, they presided over markedly different forms of government. In one human rights was severely curtailed and in another it is highly valued, at least in name. However, what a bitter irony that so much I wrote about Botha could also be applied to Mbeki. For the full context on what I said about Botha, follow the above link, but note how the excerpts below also applies to Mbeki:

...will mostly remembered for 'what could have been'. He is famous for an important speech he made, dubbed 'The Rubicon Speech' (((Mbeki - "I am an African")))...

...Sadly, he didn't follow through on the foundation that was laid... ...The challenge was huge though... ...South Africa ... its white population felt threatened from within and without... ...The rest of the world was viewed as simply being ignorant, as not grasping the complexities that was South Africa...

...However, all the potential was there for change...

...What was desperately needed was strong, visionary, leadership. ...was definitely a strong leader, as bold as they came... ...He showed promise of vision, but alas did not follow through on this...

I have no doubt that amidst all the damage, Mbeki also leaves a positive legacy - even if it is overshadowed by all the ills mentioned higher up. Below, with thanks to Pierre de Vos, follows a YouTube clip on Mbeki's famous speech as the then Vice President of South Africa in 1996 (not the full speech). For the full text of the speech go here. The clip was produced for South African Tourism and used in marketing South Africa. The campaign's punch line, still used today, is "South Africa - It's imPossible". The 'im' should be 'strike-through', i.e. a line should be drawn through it, but I haven't yet figured out how to do that in Blogger...

...if you're reading this post outside of my blog the YouTube video above may not be displayed - to remedy this visit my blog...

Finding (good & bad) memories online

2008-05-12T11:01:00.007+02:00

Former State President (of South Africa), PW Botha,
shakes hands with a Soweto youth - Aug 31, 1979.
(As displayed by Daylife and credited to "Beeld AP").

It's amazing what you can find on the internet, and mostly with very little effort. I followed a tag related to this blog as I was curious to see what I have posted about the particular subject ('Christian Faith'). It turned out that PW Botha's death in late 2006 was the unlikely topic of the post. In the posting titled PW Botha 'defiant to the end' I mentioned a signature photograph of Botha's historic visit to Soweto in 1979. I was nine years old at the time...

I went to Google Image Search and searched for "Soweto" and "PW Botha". The above picture was the second picture on the first page of results. Now if you were sitting in a newsroom in 1990, before the internet became what it is today, and had to find this picture you'd have your work cut out for you. I love the NET!

Constitutionally Speaking - Mbeki & Mugabe

2008-04-25T11:00:00.004+02:00

Pierre de Vos, the guy behind the blog Constitutionally Speaking, once again produced a very well thought through and articulated article - this time on Thabo Mbeki's much talked about political strategy of 'quiet diplomacy' towards Robert Mugabe's ongoing abuses in Zimbabwe.

The article, 'Zimbabwe: Why Mbeki is all carrot and not stick', lead to a rather long debate in the comments following below the article. It makes for interesting reading (in this case the comments) and is a good reflection on some of the different views present in South Africa on this issue. Once again many of the arguments is directly or indirectly race based - something that will sadly be with us for a long time to come...

Snippets from the article:

...Of course we have to remember that the two previous elections were declared credible and mostly free by South African observers (following the Mbeki line), despite the fact that these were conducted in an atmosphere of fear and violence and according to electoral rules that clearly allowed for the massaging of the results in favour of Mugabe. This suggests that the Mbeki ANC would have done and said almost anything to ensure that Mugabe was not humiliated or criticised in any way...

...There are at least two problems with these arguments.

First, South Africa is supposed to be a constitutional state based on the Rule of Law and a respect for human rights and the government police (sic) is supposedly to promote respect for human rights across Africa and to foster good governance in Africa through Nepad and the African Peer Review mechanism.

The failure of the government to forcefully criticise even the most flagrant human rights abuses and the stealing of two previous elections by Mugabe, suggests that South Africa is a silent or not so silent supporter of a tyrant and thus makes a mockery of the supposed leadership of our President and our country on human rights issues. This undermines our standing in the world and among right thinking people all across Africa. It is a matter of credibility: if one mollycoddles a tyrant it is hard to be taken seriously when making lofty statements about good governance and respect for human rights in other parts of Africa or the rest of the world (like in the USA or Iraq).

Our President has lost all credibility by holding hands with a person who has lost an election and now refuses to accept this reality and is using his military to terrorise the population who had the audacity to vote for the opposition.

Second, (and much worse) the South African governments’ silence (sold as quiet diplomacy) has actually helped to prop up Mugabe and thus helps him to stay in power... South Africa could place serious diplomatic and economic pressure on Mugabe to change but has failed to do so. This makes our government complicit in the murder and torture of thousands of Zimbawean citizens and the ruining of the economy in that country.

Thus South Africa’s actions have helped to support a tyrant in power and have made it potentially more (not less) difficult to get rid of him...

To read the full article & the interesting debate in the comments section go here.

I also touched on the subject in March of 2007 when I put the question - 'Robert Mugabe - credible partner for quiet diplomacy?'. That was after the leader of the opposition was detained and ended up in hospital.

Burt Glinn Retrospective (photographer & photojournalist)

2008-04-17T11:14:00.007+02:00

The New York Times' online edition ran a multimedia retrospective on Burt Glinn today. It includes twelve impressive black and white photo's covering a range of subjects. He died Wednesday in New York.

"Members of the Seattle Tubing Society in full float." - Burt Glinn / Magnum

Magnum Photo's - "Revolution". A fascinating multimedia slide show of great b&w photo's with commentary by the late Burt Glinn in which he tells the story of how he left overnight for Cuba to document Fidel Castro's victory march to Havana. He tells of how he first had to locate the revolution, how he tracked down Castro and how events unfolded thereafter.

Magnum Photos. Links to 25 major features by Burt Glinn.

"Bush's War" - Excellent PBS Frontline documentary available online

2008-04-10T14:59:00.009+02:00

An excellent documentary on the Iraq War was broadcast by PBS (USA) in March of this year (2008). As a South African I can't tune in on PBS, but found a New York Times article (7 April 2008) on the online popularity of the documentary earlier today. Bush's War is a two hour, two-part, documentary available online from the PBS website in a series of 10-minute streams. The release of the documentary coincides with the 5th anniversary of the War.

The documentary is impressive for many reasons. Amongst others it includes an incredible amount of factual information; is comprehensive; includes scores of interviews with cabinet insiders, political commentators, journalists and authors; features amazing video quality for an online streamed feed (PBS has it's own media player...) and utilises the advantages of online information dissemination by providing optional links to full interviews (often with transcripts), time lines, etc. It's refreshing to view a documentary that holds your attention without trying to entertain.

I have watched the first three 10-minute streams and plan to watch the rest over time (I do have a day job...). The documentary starts with 9/11 and shows, based on credible information, just how early Iraq was put on the table as a target.

It also revisits the conflict-ridden relationship between Colin Powell and the cabinet neo-cons - particularly Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. The rivalry between the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA is featured. It looks at the role played by John Yoo, then at the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in providing legal memo's which assisted the Bush Administration in pursuing what Dick Cheney referred to as 'working the dark side' - a questionable, unconventional, strategy in direct contravention of the Geneva Conventions, as well as America's own laws. The documentary continues in its very insightful, thorough, style to track the events and developments from 9/11 to where we are today.

In my view Bush's War represents a public broadcaster doing what it should be doing, informing and thus empowering the public. Now if only the SABC could generate this kind of material...

Additional information provided
Following the optional links to additional information that pops up throughout the documentary (online streamed version), and actually reading the linked articles, will take many hours. Some of the interesting information available in this remarkable feature by PBS, many from 'The Dark Side" - a previous PBS production that is utilised in Bush's War, are:

Opinions on 'working the dark side'

Exploring what Dick Cheney meant when he famously said that America would have to 'work the dark side' in its 'War on Terror'. Go here.
Office Politics & Other Anecdotes

"The tensions, conflicts, personality and politics that played out behind closed doors in the Bush administration, and in particular, during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq."

For this very interesting article, go here.
Interview with John Yoo. The legal memo guy from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Interview here.
Interview with Richard Clarke

"A counterterrorism expert, ...was a member of the White House National Security Council... and is the author of Against all Enemies, an insider account of the Bush administration's policy-making in the war on terror. As an intelligence analyst ... and later, a high-level policy maker, Clarke offers insights into the interplay between the two worlds and shares some thoughts on the heated intelligence wars during the lead-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003..."

Interview here.
Interview with Steve Coll

"...a New Yorker writer and the author of Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. His interview here offers an overview of George Tenet, his relationship with President Bush, his leadership of the CIA, and, in particular, his management of the intelligence community's assessment on Iraq's WMD programs -- an assessment that contributed to the case for war, but soon after was proven wrong."

Interview here.
Interview with John McLaughlin

"The deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2000 to 2004, and its acting director following George Tenet's resignation in July 2004, John McLaughlin has served 11 CIA directors. Here, he offers his perspective on some of the decisions and challenges during the months after 9/11 and then, the run-up to war in Iraq. He discusses the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that George Tenet backed, but which was soon proven wrong regarding Iraq's WMD capabilities. And he talks about the lessons the CIA learned from its intelligence failures and its involvement in the politicization of the intelligence process during this period."

Interview here.
Interview with Richard Kerr

"...served in the CIA from 1960 to 1992, including three years as deputy director for intelligence (1986-'89) as deputy director (1989-'92) and a few months as acting director in 1991. In 2003, at the suggestion of Donald Rumsfeld, a group was put together to review the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, and Kerr was asked to head it. ...His group ultimately published four reports (two of which remain classified): The first looked at pre-war intelligence on Iraq; the second evaluated the raw intelligence that went into the infamous National Intelligence Estimate; the third assessed the strengths and weaknesses of intelligence analysis; and the fourth suggested improvements. Here, Kerr discusses his findings; his thoughts on the proper role and the future of the CIA; and his impressions of Dick Cheney and George Tenet."

Interview here.

YouTube awards best videos of 2007

2008-03-22T11:39:00.014+02:00

If you are reading this post outside of my blog you may not be able to view the video clips, click here to go to InsideSouthAfrica.

A favourite online resource for South African news, news24.com, featured the inclusion of a Kruger Park wildlife video, shot by American tourists on 'safari', in YouTube's collection of what its users voted the best videos of 2007. More special and some not-so-special clips complete the selection of 12 video clips - each in its own category. My pick from amongst the winners follow below. To view all 12 the videos, click this post's heading above.

Eyewitness Category

(If the video above doesn't show, it may have been removed by copyright holders..., you can view it here.)

The Kruger video, winner in the 'Eyewitness' category is indeed very special. It clearly shows what remarkable sightings await visitors to South African wilderness destinations. Obviously very few people get to see sightings quite as remarkable as that portrayed in the video. However, having said that, what makes the video special to me is that it was shot from a safari vehicle not in an exclusive private game park, but in the gem of South Africa's (public) national parks - The Kruger National Park. In the video you catch glimpses of private vehicles whose occupants clearly had the wonderful opportunity to take in exactly the same spectacle. While you are more likely to see incredible wildlife sightings up close in one of the much more expensive private reserves, those on a tighter budget are not locked-out from experiencing the wilderness and its wildlife at its most special.

Adorable Category

I'm sure this video had a lot of parents of young babies and toddlers, a group that includes me, voting for it (although I did not partake in the voting). The scene is so familiar in showing how a young baby develops a very basic and strange sense of humour. What a special moment when you first get to connect with your child in this kind of way.

Short Film Category

This video is put together very cleverly and professionally. As a short film it is obviously a challenge to deal with sometimes difficult and complex topics in the space of a few minutes. The producer succeeds in this very well. He also hides the topic of the video and trusts that his viewers will be intelligent enough to figure it out for themselves. He doesn't lecture, but creates empathy and insight through the short film. I will not give away the topic which he is dealing with - have a look for yourself. Below follows his 'director's commentary' video in which he discusses his winning entry.

The background on the video, how it was put together and with what equipment. Very interesting.

Creative Category

Human Tetris. If you've ever played the game or been hooked on it, as I was at some point in the past, you have to watch this. It won in the 'Creative' section and deservedly so. Very enjoyable.

Inspirational Category - nominee

This is a very thought provoking video. It touches on how outdated modern teaching environments and methods are, as well as how technology both enhances and blocks the acquisition of knowledge. It includes some interesting statistics and perspectives. The website flashed at the end of the video, a collaborative blog by Kansas State University students and faculty, is worth a visit for those interested in technology - especially the internet => 'Digital Ethnography'. On completing the paragraph I realised that this video was actually a nominee in the 'inspirational' category and not a winner, but I thought it deserved a mention anyway!

Politics Category

The winner in the 'politics' section. Produced by a political activism website it is a poignant reminder of what unites different world cultures and religions, as opposed to what drives them apart. It especially focuses on the need for real efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. It points out that public opinion has the power to force political leaders to change course. In some respects the video is idealistic. But that is probably a necessary element in political or social activism - the believe that change is possible. The movement behind the video is based at Avaaz.org.

Instructional Category

The Rubik's Cube was invented in 1974 but entered pop culture in the early 80's. I must have been ±13 when it took South Africa by storm as well. I remember fondly how we challenged each other to see who could solve the puzzle in the shortest possible time. Somehow I've lost the urge in the 25 years since. A younger mind is much more prone to taking up such a challenge. Having watched the video above may just have given me enough inspiration to give it another go. I don't remember really worrying about 'algorithms' 25 years ago - but it's probably because one stops thinking about those once you reach the point of solving the puzzle in seconds rather than minutes... I can't really remember. I'll have to see whether we threw away all our Rubik's Cubes...

The video is very well put together, systematic in its approach and has a vibe that only a twenty-something (or younger?) presenter could generate :-).

Barack Obama impresses with bold speech addressing racism

2008-03-20T16:49:00.008+02:00

Barack Obama made a speech on Tuesday which should reverberate around South Africa, although most in the country is probably unaware of the drama playing itself out.

The eloquent speech on racism, with well balanced arguments was a tour de force in dealing with an issue which is as important in South Africa as it is in America. He very effectively addressed the fears and frustrations of peoples of various race groups. Obama managed to put forward arguments for addressing these by focusing on common problems rather than race, while at the same time acknowledging injustices of the past and present. His message is a unifying one, rather than the polarising style that has at times been a hallmark of our own President Mbeki, when dealing with issues of race.

It's a pity that more South Africans don't follow the American Presidential Election primaries. It is an impressive show of democracy in action. While it is most definitely prone to politics of personality rather than substance, its thoroughness eventually forces the latter to emerge. Although I still can't explain how such a system could lead to the election, and especially re-election of the current incumbent...

For a New York Times video with transcript of the speech scrolling next to it go here.
For a New York Times' editorial praising the speech go here.
For Maureen Dowd's opinion go here.
For Mhambi's take go here.
For an interesting note on the potentially changed perception of Obama see Attie Heunis' blog post here.

The Sowetan's (bad) dream

2007-04-30T09:34:00.000+02:00

In 1963 Martin Luther King gave his famous 'I have a dream' speech, a stirring vision of a day when freedom and liberation would reign in the then segregated United States.

With the celebration of Freedom Day in South Africa on April 27, The Sowetan, a newspaper mainly serving readers from Soweto, launched an ad campaign borrowing from King's speech. However, it deliberately twists the message into one of despair and black (no pun intended...) humor. Thus instead of dreaming of a day of freedom and liberation, it instead 'dreams' of dark days of murder, rape, racial injustice, crime and grime. The narrator in the ad uses the sermon-like style of Martin Luther King, with a hint of an American accent, but the dialogue and accent remains clearly recognizable as South-African. The punch line challenges the listener with a question:

"What have you done with your freedom South Africa? Don't let it go to waste. Cherish it"

Calling the ad brilliant is perhaps over the top. It's not the most original idea ever 'dreamt' up. But it is brave, a quality that one would like to associate with our news media.

So when the SABC banned the ad it just added to a growing discomfort with the public (state?) broadcaster. Surely the powers that be at the SABC have the brains and insight to understand that the Sowetan's ad does not amount to hate speech (as it implied)? What is the SABC doing to our freedom in South Africa? It seems more and more that for the SABC our freedom does not include the free flow of information?

Oh no, our big broadcasting brother will protect us against unsavory information. It is our good fortune that the SABC has a strong ideological base. It will protect all of us, who are not mature enough to do so for ourselves, against the bad bad bad (anti-revolutionary) ideas out there. Heil the SABC! Heil the ANC! Heil Mbeki! HEIL SNUKI*!

*Ok, I know Snuki wasn't necessarily involved this time round, but heil Snuki anyway...

Am I in fact FEmale?

2007-04-29T13:42:00.001+02:00

Last time I checked I was male, but the Gender Genie seems to think otherwise... I read about the Genie on Pierre de Vos' blog and in a moment of triviality decided to give it a try. First I submitted the text from my most recent post on this blog. The Genie pronounced me to be 'female', but it did indicate that the submitted text fell short of the ideal 500+ word count. I breathed a sigh of relief and promptly copied a longer piece of text (833 words) from a previous post on this blog. Oh dear, I'm still female! Should I be worried?

My female score = 1383 and male score = 1197. My, my...

To white or not to white, whitey?

2007-04-29T11:17:00.000+02:00

There are many issues in contemporary South Africa that are discussed, pondered, thought and fought about. As always the topics most heatedly debated are the negative ones - crime & corruption, aids, etc. For white South Africans an issue that is rarely spoken about by name, but which often lurks underneath the surface of discussions by another name, is identity. Being white and living in Africa can cause a bit of an identity crisis. Am I 'European', 'western', 'African', etc.? I do have some strong opinions in this regards, but won't touch on those in this post.

I noticed an opinion piece by Marianne Thamm on News.24 today, dealing with one aspect of the identity issue. My wife buys the Fair Lady from time to time and Marianne has a regular column in the Magazine. Whenever the Fair Lady makes its appearance in our house, I always page to her column first. She is an extremely sharp thinker and excellent writer. Her columns dealing with contemporary matters is always worth a read. She has a way of slaughtering holy cows with wit and sarcasm. I have seldom found myself differing from her opinions and when I did it was with some discomfort... may she be onto something here?

The News.24 column, it may have been published elsewhere first, is titled White Like Me. The title alone may be interpreted as a form of sarcastic social commentary. Black Like Me is a range of beauty care products launched in the 80's (I believe). Back then it was a statement in itself, proudly proclaiming that 'black is beautiful' in a time that Apartheid (white supremacy) was the order of the day. Sarcastically stating 'White Like Me' in present day South Africa packs quite a punch. What does it mean to be 'white like me', should it mean something?

That it is in fact an emotive issue is clear in the amount of comments the relatively short column drew. It represents a small sample of the way in which the identity question is dealt with in the larger (white) society. Read Thamm's article and contribute your 2-cent's worth if you feel like it.

"Questions we must start asking to bring SA back from the brink"

2007-03-23T10:12:00.000+02:00

A friend's blog, mhambi, mentioned an excellent article recently published in Business Day, 15 March 2007. Mhambi also posts a satirical take on the ANC's logo, have a look - it's really good.

In the article, titled rather ominously "Questions we must start asking to bring SA back from the brink", Xolela Mangcu provides a well reasoned and researched summary of how South Africa's present and past politics may be analyzed. Using a thorough intellectual approach he quotes from socio-political-philosophical works to raise interesting angles on the subject. Mangcu is executive chairman of the Platform for Public Deliberation, and a visiting scholar at the Public Intellectual Life Project at Wits University.

He quotes Alain Badiou:

"Badiou explains why political parties betray their people by first asking the question that has preoccupied many of us over the past few years: “We must ask the question that, without a doubt, constitutes the great enigma of the century. Why do the most heroic popular uprisings, the most persistent wars of liberation, the most indisputable mobilisations in the name of justice and liberty end in opaque statist constructions, wherein none of the factors that gave meaning and possibility to their historical genesis is decipherable?”

His answer is what he calls “political unbinding”. He says that political representation is a fiction through which politicians pretend to represent the interests of others."

Granted, Badiou's take is rather pessimistic. However, in South Africa we're still suffering a little from the so-called 'honeymoon syndrome'. That is there's still a lingering euphoria about our emergence from Apartheid, making criticism -especially stinging criticism- of the government seem a bit like treason. In the mean while the door is left open for corruption. Mangcu points out that Jean Francois Bayart & Co. refers to corruption as “the privatisation of public resources”. This reminds me of a recent article, mentioned in this blog, in the Financial Mail under the heading "ANC's soul for sale". What the latter article describes, a network of patronage on all levels of government, can very well be referred to as "the privatisation of public resources".

Mangcu also decries the government's stance on Zimbabwe, in which it acts very much in line with Badiou's perplexing question above. Pitched in our contemporary context Badiou could very well have asked how on earth the ANC, that fought (in effect) for human rights for all South Africa's citizens, can be so tame in it's response to Zimbabwe's atrocious treatment (including torture) of the political opposition? I touched on this in a recent post - "Robert Mugabe - credible partner for quiet diplomacy?".

My only criticism on Mangcu's article is that I would have loved a few more pages of it, it's way too short! If I get the time I'm going to dig around and see if some of his academic papers are available online. It should make for very interesting reading (click on this post's heading to read his article).

6x6=36 as demonstrated by Gibbs

2007-03-18T21:56:00.000+02:00

The Cricket World Cup has started well for South Africa. We didn't impress much in the warm-up games but in our first official game the sparks flew. As far as South Africa's performance was concerned the match was an impressive affair with various individual's contributions worth noting. However, Herschelle Gibbs' six consecutive sixes in one over (six balls) was out of this world. He went from 32 at the start of the over to 68 at the end. Sure, the Netherlands is a minor force in world cricket and the field was relatively small. But six sixes in a row remains an incredible feat. While it is not impossible, I'd like to see any other batsman repeat that. If you haven't seen that incredible six shots, have a look below...

South Africa has been a strong contender leading up to world cups since our re-admission in 1992, after isolation brought about by Apartheid. Since that very first world cup we've been disappointed more times than I care to remember. Despite all this 2007 may just be the year. Yes, we've fizzled out many times before - but South Africans are die-hards. We will get there and this may very well be the year.

Just to emphasize why South Africa should never be underestimated I went on a nostalgic trip and unearthed two more gems from YouTube. The first is Jonty Rhodes' explosion onto the world stage in the 1992 World Cup and the second a snippet from South Africa's incredible feet in scoring 438/9 to eclipse Australia's world record score (they batted first) of 434/4 set just hours before (merely a year ago). That's a total of 872 runs in a single one day game. The video's quality is not great but it does capture the incredible tension towards the end of the game. My brother who very rarely attends games was in the stands at the invitation of a supplier at work. I'll be forever jealous of him for having missed out being there to witness that bit of history. The video starts of with Telemachus getting dismissed with the score at 423. All-rounder Andrew Hall is in the middle but the former's dismissal means that we've virtually run out of batsmen. Boucher walks onto the pitch, the perfect guy in this situation. But if another wicket falls only Ntini is left to bat, an incredible bowler but a true fast-bowler-batsman...

For more on the Wanderers game go to Wikipedia.

Robert Mugabe - credible partner for quiet diplomacy?

2007-03-14T14:09:00.000+02:00

South African and global media carried some horrible headlines in relation to Zimbabwe over the last 24-hours. Rumours that the Zimbabwean opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, and other leaders in the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has not only been detained during a protest meeting but also assaulted and tortured was bad enough. The brute reality of a headline that appeared earlier this morning, "Tsvangirai 'has cracked skull, in ICU'", is nauseating.

Zimbabwe is one of South Africa's neighbours to the north, but it could barely feel farther removed from our everyday reality. To be sure, we have some very serious challenges on our side of the 'fence'. However, democracy is firmly entrenched. Amongst other things we're a constitutional state where the constitution -as protected and interpreted by the Constitutional Court- is the highest authority in the land. While the government's often visible irritation with the news media is somewhat worrying, freedom of speech and the free flow of information is constitutionally guaranteed. We can struggle with real problems within the framework of a democracy.

In contrast it has long seemed that Zimbabwe is a democracy only in name. It goes through the motions of democratic processes, elections and the like - but in the final analysis it has a 'president for life' and supporting institutions. The latter includes the police and army. All the ingredients of a basket case dictatorial state. When the official opposition's leader is detained AND beaten for engaging in political protest -not criminal activities- one has to shake your head in disbelief.

I have limited sympathy for the South African Government's stance on 'the Zimbabwe problem'. Yes, I agree, we can't invade the country and topple the ruling Zanu-PF by military means. For such kind of action even more gruesome transgressions need to be committed or be imminent, let's pray it doesn't come to that, and international sanction needs to be obtained through a (relatively) credible organ such as the UN. Even then the chances of lasting success, barring a real groundswell in support among the broader Zimbabwean population, is remote. Iraq is a case in point, regardless of the demographic differences (societal/economic/religious).

If you can't go the military route, which should always be the absolute last option -to be avoided at all cost-, the only option left is resorting to various diplomatic strategies. Logic dictates that diplomacy that relies on incentives and support rather than threats should in the long term lead to the most sustainable results. Ridiculing the target of your diplomatic efforts can at best only lead to limited concessions, grudgingly conceded. If you can somehow manage to have the illusion of 'working with' the other party and actually achieve results, all should be well.

All of the above make sense and could be used in support of the South African Government's preference for 'quiet' (read non-offending) diplomacy. Also keep in mind that South Africa's ruling ANC was supported by Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu-PF during the former (then) liberation movement's long and arduous struggle against Apartheid and quiet diplomacy makes all the more sense.

But what if, after years of quiet diplomacy and various broken promises, you do not achieve meaningful results? What if, in your effort not to offend or ridicule your target for diplomacy, you end up being ridiculed as your well meant efforts are repeatedly nullified by new power abuses in Zimbabwe? What if your international credibility starts suffering from your negotiating partner's flabbergasting actions? What if the leader of the official opposition of that country is beaten up by Zimbabwean Police to the point of suffering a cracked skull? What if your negotiating partner, Robert Mugabe, is an 83-year old despot who seems incapable of changing his ways?

Sure, military action is still not an option. How about much harsher public rebukes? How about non-military options, e.g. freezing bank accounts, demanding time lines for reforms, sanctions against members of the oppressive government, material support for the opposition?

Moving to all of these immediately will off-course be foolish. Shutting the door on Zimbabwe won't help anyone. But perhaps a public rebuke and an insinuation that action may follow on words is at the order of the day? I think such a rebuke could be delivered by our ambassador on the front steps of the relevant hospital, after a 'courtesy' visit to Tsvangirai. If there is any Zimbabwe police around, I'm sure there will be, he may want to wear a helmet - just in case...

In my opinion, the South African Government needs to seriously consider whether its departure point for dealing with Robert Mugabe is based on respect for an admired (now corrupted) former freedom fighter or on respect for human rights and democracy. If it is the former, then perpetual quiet diplomacy, 'staying the course', is indeed the best approach. If its the latter, then it is clearly time to confront the old man more decisively...

'From Voëlvry to De La Rey: Popular music, Afrikaner Nationalism and lost irony'

2007-03-06T23:35:00.000+02:00

The De la Rey 'saga' (for background go here) has now reached the point where intellectuals are writing academic papers on it... Oh my! What's next?

I've expressed my irritation with the surprising momentum this whole circus is enjoying on this blog in the recent past. Yet, here I am mentioning it again. Guilty by association.

A 'draft' paper by Andries (Roof) Bezuidenhout has been published on LitNet - an Afrikaans socio-literary web space. "From Voëlvry to De La Rey: Popular music, Afrikaner Nationalism and lost irony" has apparently been presented at a seminar at the University of Pretoria's Sociology Department (Roof's alma mater). It does make for very interesting reading. For one thing I enjoy the fact that it puts the song (De la Rey) in perspective, within the context of a much larger body of work going back about two decades.

For those who followed or partook in the phenomenon that was the Voëlvry Toer and who experienced the 'alternative' Afrikaans rock scene in the early nineties, the paper will make for a nostalgic walk down memory lane. It is not intended to be nostalgic, everything but. However, it brought back good memories and a new appreciation for the substance of the movement. Bezuidenhout does dish out a fair amount of criticism regarding that particular era as well.

The more academic approach to the De la Rey saga, and placing it in a bigger context - thus removing the over emphasis placed on the song in recent times -, is a very welcome fresh breeze. I hope this is a first step towards a more considered thoughtful discussion around the underlying issues and a shift away from De la Rey...

Perlman rides off into a glorious sunset

2007-03-02T13:58:00.001+02:00

John Perlman, in the news the last few months in connection with the SABC blacklist saga, has tipped his hat and rode off into the proverbial sunset this morning (OK, it was a bit early in the day for the sunset image...)

I must say he played out his last month or so at the SABC with admirable grace. He must have been tempted to abuse his microphone to get a stab in at the national broadcaster. Instead he stood by his principles at the beginning of the whole saga, when he must have known it could be to his own detriment. He stood up to be counted by confronting the SABC (his employer) spokesperson with the fact that he himself has been instructed to avoid a number of commentators. He managed separating personal interest from public interest.

Defending and fighting for his position in the SABC would have elicited a lot of public sympathy, but was secondary to the principle of freedom of expression and the free flow of information. Thus he has sacrificed his position for the greater good. What a pity that the giant SABC seems not to have learned anything out of the whole saga. I can understand that Perlman decided 'to hang up his mike'. He's done everything that could be expected of him in standing up to the SABC's arrogant attitude as it ignores it's duty to inform the public with balanced and critical reporting.

I had the privilege of one or two brief encounters, never in person, with John Perlman in my past position as spokesperson for the University of Pretoria. I have experienced him as a courteous, knowledgeable and fair journalist. A journalist who could be tough, but not in a rude John Robbie sort of way.

Apparently he signed of by thanking listeners 'for having him', no last-minute stings. What does he plan to do next? (News24.com): "What I am going to do this weekend is go to the Drakensberg, then I am going to go to the Pilanesberg and then I am going to go to the Kruger National Park and I am going to think very carefully about what I do next,". How come I'm jealous?

I do hope he ends up in some kind of similar role, just with a different media entity. That's probably hoping for too much. I suspect that he'll end up in the private sector. I wait in suspense. In the mean while the SABC has an excellent replacement for Perlman in the person of veteran anchor Jeremy Maggs. The latter must feel slightly ill at easy in filling the shoes of a great media personality who was basically pushed out of the SABC for doing what is right. But one can off-course not put the blame on Maggs. It lies with the higher ups at the Corporation, and a certain Mr. Zikalala.

For previous coverage in this blog on this sorry saga, go here.

For some coverage of John Perlman, the former (damn!) SABC radio anchor, and his departure have a look at:

'De la Rey, De la Rey' featured in Big Apple and UK

2007-02-27T14:24:00.000+02:00

South African newspapers and blogs have been buzzing lately ad nauseum on the topic of Afrikaner identity and -nationalism (God forbid). All of this because of the incredible success of an Afrikaans rock ballad recalling the Anglo-Boer War and one General De la Rey. Personally I feel the song simply features a cool tune and catchy lyrics. All the other hocus pocus that came to the fore is in fact unrelated to the song. The latter is simply a convenient hook on which to 'hang' the more important issue.

I'll spend some time on addressing my imperfect views on Afrikaner identity soon.

For now I'm intrigued by the coverage the song has spawned. Initially within South Africa and now even globally. I picked up on a friend's blog (Mhambi) this morning that the Guardian (UK paper) covered the strange De la Rey phenomenon. On taking a peek at one of my favourite online sources, the New York Times, I was surprised to see De la Rey jumping off the 'front' page at me (online version). What the hell is going on!? Anyways, both papers deal very responsibly with the topic. Thankfully. I'm glad that global journalists, thus far, aren't predicting an up-rise by Afrikaners - a ridiculous notion.

I do believe an ongoing discussion on the identity and role of Afrikaans / Afrikaners is important. Especially in the context of the position of minorities within diverse societies. However, I think an ongoing debate on the role of the De la Rey song is ludicrous. It's a debate that ends up going in circles. I hope people will move on to a more meaningful discussion of the underlying issues.

If you somehow missed out on the De la Rey mania, I gladly include a Carte Blanche piece (source: YouTube) on the song and the hysteria around it. Amongst others, it features an old friend from my university days - Andries Bezuidenhout, better known as Roof Bezuidenhout. I very rarely get to see Andries these days, but I'm always interested to hear his views. He has played a big role in my own intellectual and political development as student. As can be expected a TV piece will always cut and edit interviews - thus resulting in excerpts which does not reflect the full complexity of arguments / views expressed in the original interview. I tried to include the actual music video as well but it would not show - I'll try and fix it when I have time...

Google Reader - quite a nifty blogaholic tool

2007-02-05T14:12:00.000+02:00

I followed a prompt in Blogger's Dashboard (central console in Blogger for bloggers) to find out more about Google's new 'Reader'. When I read that it was a new way to view all the blogs that you subscribe to in one place I wasn't too excited. A short introductory video clip explained that the idea was to be able to read blog postings, from blogs that you subscribe to, in a similar way that you would your e-mail. That is instead of going to check on Peter, Sue and Dick's blog sites to see whether they've posted, or on each blog's newsfeed, you can slimpy open your Google Reader.

My skepticism aside, I decided to give it a try. It works pretty well. You have account folders similar to those in your favourite e-mail client, i.e. one for each of the blogs that you follow. You can also move blog folders into subdirectories. In similar fashion to an e-mail reading client a blog folder that contains a new posting will appear in bold with inverted commas showing the number of new unread postings. Thus you can pick up on new posts, literarally with a single glance The default setting is for postings within folders to be sorted from the most recent to the oldest, which makes sense to me.

You can read the full post in your Reader, which once again makes sense, or you can go to the posts' original web page with a single click. The only exception is where a blog only provides a introductory paragraph with a 'read more' link for the rest of the post. In such a case you have to read the 'more' (rest of the post) in its original location. Perhaps something to remember for bloggers who want to force readers to read posts in their original context...

Posts within a blog folder can be viewed in either 'list view' or 'expanded view'. In list view you can expand a selected post with a single click and collapse it likewise.

In keeping with the community and sharing nature of the contemporary internet, you have the ability to 'share' selected posts with friends or netizens in general. A further extension of this feature is that bloggers can create an object on their blog sites to show a pre-selected number of posts from their shared folder in their own Google Reader account. This feature being just another inovative way to emply news feeder technology. I've added such an object to the menu on this blog (see 'Favourite recent posts by others' below 'Blog archive' on the right). You don't have much control over how it is presented but can at least select font type, font colour and the number of items to show.

In certain respects Google Reader still has a 'beta' feel to it. I don't know exactly how Google classifies it's projects but the full name for the new product is "Google Reader Labs", perhaps an indication that it is still under pre-release development. I've also had a look on Google's main site under 'more' and could not find Google Reader listed there before. However, after writing this paragraph I went back to Google > more > Labs and then found Google Reader as a new project close to the top... It is indeed a pre-release product not listed in its own right in the root menu of Google/more.

I'm mostly impressed by the product, even though I do have one or two gripes with it. For one thing the 'shared items' folder and news feed is automatically sorted according to when you added an item to the shared folder, rather than the date on which the post was originally published. As you move through a favourite blog's posts, beginning with the most recent at the top you may decide to activate 'share' on some postings as you go along. However, in the shared folder the selected posts appear in the exact opposite order as per your sequence of activating share and not the publish dates of the posts. A result of this is that some of the oldest posts I decided to share are now listed in my Google Reader object in this blog, even though there are much, much, more recent ones that I would prefer to show. A visitor to your blog has the option to view all of your shared posts by clicking the 'Read more' link, once again to find the posts listed in the order that you activated share on each - not by publish date.

My other main gripe is that I do like to read posts within the context of the feel of the particular blog, i.e. with layout, colour schemes, etc. in place. In Google Reader basic formatting is retained, but everything appears against a white background and devoid of any of the other links that may appear on the post's web page (links within the post, as well as embedded objects in the post -such as video clips- are retained). I'm afraid this will probably stay as is. It will interfere with Reader's functionality to do it in any other way.

Stripping the blog of its original packaging does beg the question: "What about Google's AdSense?". One of Google's myriad of strategies to increase add revenue is by offering bloggers the option of including a Google advertisement feed, AdSense, in their blogs (rewarding such bloggers for click-throughs). These are (presently) not included in the Google Reader posts... I think the programme's approach is in line with an age old media adage, which very simply states that 'content is king'. But I suspect Google will be dishing up ads with posts in the Reader as well. Reading your favourite posts in Google's own GUI may very well be a very effective strategy to open a backdoor for the company to slip in its ad feeds with blogs which wouldn't otherwise include such feeds... Exactly the same strategy by which ads are displayed together with your friends' e-mails in Gmail. I suspect some bloggers may very well view this as an infringement on intellectual property or freedom of expression (adding to and thus possibly altering their intent with a particular posting or their blog as a whole). Once again, if Google could conquer such sentiments regarding Gmail up to now, they will surely be able to do so in this case as well.

In my opinion Google Reader is going to be one of Google's success stories. It's an innovation that can save you a hell of a lot of time. It centralises content from potentially a vast collection of different sources (news feeds / blogs). As stated above I'm sure it will also include ad feeds, thus making it a sustainable service. Give it a try and let me know what your verdict is.

Snuki rides again

2007-02-01T14:48:00.000+02:00

In an opinion piece posted yesterday (excerpts and link below) Anton Harber addresses the newest twist in the SABC News blacklist saga on which I posted before (July & Oct 2006). The news media has reported in the last few days that John Perlman has resigned from the SABC. This morning I listened to John Perlman as he retorted to an on-air pest caller that he will indeed be leaving on March 2nd. It is a big blow to any hopes that the national broadcaster may be changing its ways in the near future. It must be said that Perlman has up to now refrained from making any statements on why he is resigning. However, the blacklist saga and the SABC's failure to act on it seems to be the obvious cause.

Anton Harber is a former editor of the excellent Mail & Guardian (South Africa) newspaper. He's a media expert of note. Anton currently serves as Professor at Wits University in Johannesburg where he directs the Journalism and Media Studies Programme. I've added his blog to my 'Other South African blogs' menu. I'm confident that his blog should make for very interesting reading, especially if you have an interest in the news media and the South African news media in particular.

Heads are rolling at the SABC … the wrong ones
January 31st, 2007

SABC chief executive Dali Mpofu said in the middle of last year’s SABC “blacklist” saga that “heads would roll” if an independent inquiry found that there had been wrongdoing...What we didn’t expect, however, was that these heads would belong to those who came out best in the inquiry report. Those found in the report to have breached the SABC charter repeatedly...still have their heads firmly attached to their shoulders...

...The most striking thing is that no-one has criticised the report...on the blacklisting affair. Nobody has given any substantial reason to question the evidence...or...conclusions.

They said Perlman had behaved professionally. They said that SABC and its representatives had been dishonest by omission in their response...They confirmed that there were indeed a number of people blocked from the airwaves...They described serious management problems in the SABC newsroom...

Mpofu was energetic in his response...In other words, he did everything except pursue the findings and recommendations of the report. And he did it with drive and passion...
The person who emerges strongest from all of this is the head of news, Dr Snuki Zikalala. He has shown twice now that he is more powerful than the CEO...Zikalala’s critics are leaving the building.

One can only look upon this with an overwhelming sense of sadness. The notion of a national broadcaster as a home for the highest quality, independent, public service journalism is being denigrated...
(Read the full piece here)

* This column first appeared in Business Day, January 31, 2007

Dick Cheney meets Darth Vader

2007-01-31T16:06:00.000+02:00

My sister, who works at the University of the Western Cape (UWC), recently told me about an excellent blog, constitutionally speaking. The guy behind it is a professor of law at UWC, Pierre de Vos. I've read a few of his posts and have found them most informative, well thought through and intellectually stimulating. His law expertise makes for intriguing angles on contemporary socio-political issues, especially from a constitutional viewpoint - from there the name of his blog, I suppose... His legal expertise, 'progressive' outlook (dangerous label...) and willingness to call a spade a spade makes his blog a must read in my opinion. I've added him to my list of 'other South African blogs' and subscribed to his news feed. Give his blog a look, I'm sure you may want to do the same...

In a rather trivial posting, relative to his average thought provoking entries, he yesterday featured a YouTube video that I found most entertaining (see below). One remark Pierre made in his latest posting does pack a lot of punch though. It deals with the fact that the political satire of the kind featured in the video below would be highly unusual in the current South African context. You may very well walk into a political minefield in South Africa if you did a similar piece of satire featuring a government minister, never mind the president or his deputy.

I have to admit that I felt uneasy at times watching the often hilarious clip. Some remnant of my Christian-nationalist upbringing protested at the fact that a vice-president could be ridiculed in this manner. My emotional gut reaction aside, I believe in the modern world of media spin by ruling parties the world over, this kind of satire may in fact be very necessary. The Apartheid Government got away with murder partly because of a blind respect for authority from Christian-nationalist supporters. Sadly the present government are often treated with kid gloves for the fear of being labeled unpatriotic, ant-revolutionary or -if you happen to be white- racist. We urgently need a mind shift in South Africa to realise that being outspoken in one's criticism of government is potentially more patriotic than keeping your mouth shut. In time the substance of your convictions will determine the value or otherwise of your utterances, not politically correct knee jerk reactions thereto.

Back to the video. To appreciate the video you need to be relatively up to date with American politics and more so regarding President Bush's neo-conservative ex-Halliburton-CEO Vice-President, Dick Cheney. If you're a bit ignorant on these matters have a look at the background below the video before watching it, without it you'll miss most of the humor.

UPDATE - OOPS - Comedy central pulled this clip from YouTube after my initial post. The content owners to Comedy Central's programming has forced YouTube through court action to remove all its content from the latter's servers. Thus, for the time being, this clip is inaccessible. I've tried unsuccessfully to locate the clip on Comedy Central's own website. Their site is terrible to navigate. I believe they actually got more exposure for their product on YouTube, granted minus the irritating ads... I'll try to sort this out soon!

Brief background on Dick Cheney
Dick Cheney, together with other hawkish neocons such as Donald Rumsfeld, was the main proponents of the 'case' to declare a pre-emptive war on Iraq. That is to attack Iraq, in the absence of an act of aggression from the later, based on their believe that it represented a 'clear and present danger' to American interests and lives - at least that is how they pitched it. Many of their non-American critics summed up their motives in one word: 'oil'. Others state that their model for spreading democracy through the barrel of a gun is naive and short sighted. Off-course conservative commentators hold a different view. As the war becomes ever more unpopular with the American public President George Bush relies heavily on his conservative deputy to talk up the 'progress' being made in the war. Cheney is the perfect candidate for this as he has no qualms in earnestly stating that the 'insurgency' is about to be defeated, while the majority of commentators believe that a de facto civil war is in fact raging out of control.

Cheney was involved in a hunting accident some time ago when he and some friends went duck hunting on one of the party's property. In what could only have been an 'honest to God' freak accident he managed to shoot his beloved friend in the face... Luckily the wound was not fatal or too damaging. However the American press had a field day after the White House Press Core did a very amateurish job of trying to keep the incident out of the national headlines. Accusations was made left and right - did the hunting party have the necessary hunting permits, did Cheney follow general hunting safety precautions, etc.

Cheney's daughter is a lesbian. Mary Cheney actively partakes in the organisation of her father's campaign work for the Republican Party leading up to elections. The Republican Party's take on homosexuality could probably be described as something between homophobia and intolerance. In the last two national election campaigns (presidential and mid-term) the status of especially homosexual unions ('same-sex marriages') was a big issue. One state in America, Massachusetts, recently started recognizing same-sex marriages. For a limited time gay couples streamed there to get legally married. The Party took a very strong view on the matter and President Bush even threatened to seek a constitutional amendment to bar the practice. I'm under the impression that for the time being same-sex marriages has been suspended in the state although I'm stand to be corrected on this. It is in this context that Cheney has been challenged on his daughter's sexual preference. The idea of challenging him on it makes my hair stand on end, as it smacks of homophobia. However in the above context, and in the absence of Cheney distancing himself from the Party line, I grudgingly concede that it probably a necessary action. John Stewart follows a very unapologetic approach to the matter and does so very effectively.

Cheney has a heart condition. Exactly what his heart ailment is I don't know. Suffice to say that it is a definite health issue. I honestly can't find a justification for satire on that specific topic. I suppose Jon Stewart has decided that anything goes...

President Bush introduced the phrase "axis of evil" in talking up war against Iraq, with Cheney's unconditional approval. Within the context of the current Administration's love affair with Christian-conservatives describing your target for occupation as 'evil' goes a long way to motivating your base for war. I suspect this is where Darth Vader enters the picture, a messenger from 'the dark side' (evil). If you're StarWars knowledge is slightly rusted, or non-existent, you can have a look at DV's bio here.

Financial Mail - (ANC's) SOUL FOR SALE

2007-01-29T16:26:00.000+02:00

The 19 January edition of the Financial Mail had an excellent feature dealing with the corruptive influence of relations between the African National Congress (ANC) and ANC-aligned business people (see link below). I'm afraid it's just another case of 'power corrupts', in this case it deals with the power to award state / municipal contracts.

I've previously referred to the encouraging rise of a black middle class in South Africa, helped along by Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). A corner stone of the latter is affirmative action. It is a necessary evil, which if managed poorly -as it often is- allows for the appointment of unqualified and inexperienced candidates. The pressure on companies to transform in a hurry, as well as dramatic staff changes (i.t.o. racial composition) in the civil service, have led to many such poor appointments. At its worst the incredible economic upward mobility of many affirmative action candidates has led to a culture of entitlement and crass materialism.

This culture of entitlement and materialism features strongly in the article below, although not necessarily described in those terms. Too many officials at national, provincial and municipal level seem to have adopted an ideology of the maximum-accumulation-of-wealth-at-any-cost. In its eagerness to advance BEE the top brass of both the government (cabinet and parliament) and the ANC seem to be reluctant to implement aggressive counter-corruption measures. In fact, most individuals on the ANC's National Executive Committee (NEC), cabinet ministers and their deputies have substantial business interests (personally or through their spouses), often in companies that deal with the state.

The article mentions instances where business people aligned to certain ANC officials have repeatedly won government contracts, with competing tender bids apparently locked out. Where municipalities have instituted 'independent' tender boards it has proven all too easy for politicians and officials to simply manipulate decisions by using proxies within those bodies.

In order to tackle our very serious crime problem in South Africa we need bold intervention on various levels. To my mind corruption in the civil service must be a top priority. Where financial benefit from political connections is not strictly illegal it should become so or be blocked by policy. However, many decision makers in government and the ANC probably has too much to lose.

One can only hope that the ANC's support base will in time become fed up with corruption and nepotism. In the long term I suspect that election shifts will be the most effective measure against corruption. That is, something similar to the recent US midterm election where voters punished the Republican Party not only for its conduct of the Iraq War, but also for corruption.

I'm not necessarily hoping that the ANC should be voted out of government, just sufficiently challenged for it to realise that it does not have carte blanche. As a government you ultimately have to answer to the citizens of your country - not your business buddies.

(Also see a recent posting by Mhambi: BAE and South African government corruption cuts deep)

Financial Mail - SOUL FOR SALE:

By Carol Paton

The African National Congress has traded ideals for influence as the party is corrupted by its members' lust for financial gain. The FM tracks the rot at the heart of SA's most powerful organisation.

It was a cool spring evening when an ambulance screeched to a halt outside the ANC's provincial office in Dutoitspan Road, Kimberley. Paramedics were rushing to the aid of the city's first citizen, mayor Patrick Lenyibi, who had been hit by flying teacups thrown during a brawl in the ANC offices. The first cup hit him on the head. The handle of a second lodged itself deep behind the ear after being smashed onto his head with greater force by a senior ANC member.

From several accounts, the fight, which took place in late 2005, was over a tender to supply coupons for pre paid electricity meters. The mayor is said to have implied that it would go to a group of ANC women, the member's mother included, who had already arranged to be trained to run the enterprise. But instead the tender was advertised, as it should have been, with conditions that cut his mother out of the running.

The blows were exchanged in the office of provincial secretary Neville Mompati, who strenuously denies that the argument was over a tender. Decisions over tenders should be made by neither the mayor nor the ANC but, according to the Municipal Finance Management Act, by officials in the city's tender committee. However, theory and practice are far apart.

Fights over who should get what contract are happening with growing frequency countrywide. It is a matter of embarrassment to the ANC, a party many members proudly think of in terms of its struggle legacy. That legacy is now being severely undermined, and the party seems paralysed.

The ANC, as the party in government, is centrally involved in dishing out tenders and contracts. The introduction of commercial interests is one factor that is undermining its proud political footing. Another is the "deployment" of ANC comrades to business.

This commercialisation has driven a profound change in the nature of the ANC. Once local ANC meetings were all about policies and strategies - the transformation of SA society according to the ideals the party championed for decades. Now these gatherings are frequently preoccupied with business opportunities and who should have access to them.

It's a transformation that wasn't expected. Rather than "transforming the state", as the party describes its goals in official rhetoric, the economy has transformed the ANC.

How did it begin? Trouble started for the ANC almost as soon as it took power, with squabbles over control of provincial structures. But it was only when politicians moved into the world of business that the competition for commercial opportunities began to dominate ANC dynamics. (For the complete article follow link above...)

PW Botha 'defiant to the end'

2006-11-01T09:33:00.001+02:00

Yes, sooner or later we all have to leave this world. PW Botha's passing, see article lower down, will be greeted with mixed reactions. He was the last stalwart of Apartheid, a fierce hawkish president who ruled while South African whites were caught in the grips of a border mentality - not unlike what America is experiencing at the moment. Granted modern America is a full democracy and South Africa was not - in the 1980's only whites had the vote.

Very few will feel sad about his death. However, in the shadow of the Truth and Reconciliation process that South Africa went through, the respect with which his death is being treated is remarkable. The ruling ANC, the erstwhile Apartheid government's biggest enemy, responded with a statement which wished Botha's family "strength and comfort in this difficult time".

Botha will mostly remembered for 'what could have been'. He is famous for an important speech he made, dubbed 'The Rubicorn Speech'. In the speech he declared that South Africa has crossed the Rubicorn, implying that the country was heading down the road of reforms for good. He drove through Soweto (South Africa's biggest 'black' township) waving at excited onlookers who waved back and ran alongside his cavalcade. The majority of whites never dared to enter a township. Those who did, mostly did so as conscripted soldiers sent in to 'enforce law and order'. A signature photograph showed only Botha's white hand visible through a partially open car window with the rest of his body hidden behind darkened (probably bullet-proof) glass. Yet, that awkward reserved gesture, on the back of his Rubicorn Speech, created huge expectations. (2008 update on a similar photograph available on the internet here).

Sadly, he didn't follow through on the foundation that was laid. It should be noted that the first contact with the then still imprisoned Nelson Mandela was made on his watch, with his approval. The challenge was huge though. South Africa was isolated and its white population felt threatened from within and without. It believed that it had the blessing of God in carrying the torch of civilization into darkest Africa. The rest of the world was viewed as simply being ignorant, as not grasping the complexities that was South Africa.

However, all the potential was there for change. The Afrikaner population (white Afrikaans speakers) has changed from a not-too-educated rural farming nation to a well-educated mostly urbanised group. The 'ship of knowledge cleaving through a sea of ignorance', the mantra of the HQ Administration Building at the University of Pretoria, was having it's effect on the Afrikaner nation. Increased 'knowledge' gained through much improved education was eroding the arguments at the foundation of Apartheid.

Segregation (separate development) was looking more and more like the pure discrimination it has always been and not the noble cause it was pitched as. The idea of human rights and liberty for all was making more and more sense. Importantly, the biggest of the religious Afrikaner's churches, the Dutch Reformed Church, issued a document in 1986 entitled "Church and Society" in which it retreated from it's previous support of Apartheid. It basically concluded that there was no basis in scripture for Apartheid and that as such the church has erred in providing religious backing for it (it's against this kind of background that intellectuals in South Africa balk at the current influence Evangelicals are having on American politics).

What was desperately needed was strong, visionary, leadership. Botha was definitely a strong leader, as bold as they came (once again the similarity with American President Bush in this respect is not comforting). Importantly in that time, as with all the Apartheid leaders, he publicly proclaimed his Christian faith. He thus met the religious requirements Afrikaners was looking for. He showed promise of vision, but alas did not follow through on this.

I was busy with my 'national military service' (compulsory for white young men at the time) as a 18 year old when Botha had a stroke. On Botha's return to office a leadership battle ensued, with FW de Klerk leading the protagonists. For a short tense time everyone in South Africa held their breath - white and black. For most it was clear that Botha was leading the country down a dead-end. I was heading home on a weekend pass from the Army when our bus stopped at a road-side 'one stop' (filling station, convenience and food store). There was no radio in the bus and I was curious as the crisis seemed to be heading to a conclusion, one way or the other. I approached a black family in their car, knocked on the driver's window, and politely asked the driver if there was any news on the Botha vs. De Klerk issue. Grinning from ear to ear the driver informed me that the 'groot krokodil' (big crocodile) has resigned and de Klerk has been sweared in as president. In a very unusual moment a young white Afrikaner (boy) in his army uniform and an adult voteless black man shared excitement of what the future may hold (neither of us probably realised just how big a change was waiting down the road...)

At the time I did not fully grasp the significance of de Klerk's leadership, most South Africans were simply relieved at Botha's departure. However, de Klerk picked up Botha's spilled opportunities and set to work making something of it. The rest, as they say, is history. He re-established contact with the imprisoned Nelson Mandela, unbanned various liberation movements (including the ANC), released political prisoners (including Mandela) abolished various apartheid laws and lead the government in negotiating a largely peaceful transition to a full democracy in which all of South Africa's citizens could cast their votes.

De Klerk's visionary role is today often disputed by some commentators. They argue that he had no choice and simply acted under huge international pressure. I believe the life of PW Botha shows how flawed this argument is. Apartheid South Africa, under the leadership of hawks such as Botha, could have survived for at least another few decades. There are many examples in the international world of undemocratic strongman regimes surviving despite our much more open global world. South Africa was in desperate need of a strong leader with vision, and de Klerk was the ideal person to fulfill that role. Elaborating on Nelson Mandela's incredible contribution to achieving a democratic South Africa and then steering it down the path of reconciliation will be addressed in this column sooner or later. But de Klerk should be given his due, the pretty picture of South Africa's transition to democracy would not have existed without him - period.

For now the Groot Krokodil has taken his final bow. He has been a mixed blessing for this country. Hamba Kahle PW!

PW Botha 'defiant to the end': "Johannesburg - PW Botha, who died on Tuesday, was a finger-wagging hawk who defied the world while ruling apartheid South Africa in the turbulent and violence-wracked 1980s.

Nicknamed the 'Groot Krokodil' for his tough-talk and uncompromising stance, the feisty 90-year-old Botha continued to cock a snook at critics and remained combative to the very end.

During an interview ahead of his 90th birthday this year, Botha said South Africa would have 'gone down the drain' if it had achieved liberation in the 1960s and 1970s.

In the same interview, he said he never regarded blacks as inferior because 'many blacks and coloureds (mixed race) cooperated with us'."

You'd like a coffee-coloured skin? White or black sir?

2006-10-23T10:49:00.000+02:00

I noticed the very interesting story below on a friend's blog (Attie Heunis says). In the article an evolutionary theorist speculates that the human race may split into two genetic classes, an elite class and a dim-witted lower genetic class. He also makes a couple of other predictions. I find the idea of the human race splitting in two over a period of 100 000 years quite viable, given current socio-economic disparities. Who knows, maybe us humans can start caring enough about each other to have the commitment to wipe out poverty and under-development in the next 100-1000 years, in which case we may just avoid this scenario?

In the shorter term he predicts that race will be ironed out through interbreeding creating a 'uniform race of coffee-coloured people'. I find this proposition quite attractive. I wouldn't mind a coffee-coloured skin. You won't have to do all of that sun tanning during summer holidays and will be less likely to burn (if you're a whitey as I am). It does sound quite attractive.

So maybe we, the human race, can avoid splitting in two but succeed in becoming a coffee-coloured single race? Sounds good to me...

I'm assuming that Dr. Curry's referring to the colour of 'white coffee' (with milk), or that of raw ground coffee? If you think about it, 'coffee-coloured' could mean anything from light-brown to pitch black. I suppose if everyone turns out the same colour, it wouldn't really matter which applies. It will become a non-issue. Now that will be truly welcome!

BBC NEWS UK Human species 'may split in two': "Human species 'may split in two'

Humanity may split into an elite and an underclass, says Dr Curry Humanity may split into two sub-species in 100,000 years' time as predicted by HG Wells, an expert has said.
Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge. The human race would peak in the year 3000, he said - before a decline due to dependence on technology.
People would become choosier about their sexual partners, causing humanity to divide into sub-species, he added. The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the 'underclass' humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures. "

Mboweni OK with his Afrikaners

2006-10-19T21:42:00.000+02:00

A recent edition of the printed FIN WEEK publication caught my attention. Tito Mboweni, ANC member and Governor of the South African Reserve Bank, graces the front page. The portrait photo of him is in photo-comic-book style. A text cloud emanating from his mouth contains the following words: "I'm OK with my Afrikaners. They stay and do the work, and become experts".

I'm sure the words was spoken in a humoristic fashion, but it remains an incredibly bold and non-PC statement all the same. Tito Mboweni was known for cold factual analysis well before he entered the all important Governor position that he's held for a couple of years now. His statement on Afrikaners is one that is sure to draw criticism from the ANC's left wing.

As the FIN Week article, below, points out statements like that uttered by a white South African will very likely be labeled as racist. Hopefully Mboweni will not be the last black intellectual to venture a brave opinion on this matter.

As a white Afrikaans male I very much appreciate his statement, even though it was phrased rather paternalistic. I entered the formal job market in 1994. Within a year or two the first black colleagues was appointed in our then Lilly white department. It was obviously long overdue. What was immediately apparent though, was that a very high turnover was going to be a feature of black appointees. Not only were they appointed at senior salary level, even though most had no relevant experience in the (marketing & PR) field, they did not stay long. I remember my silent astonishment when a black colleague left the department for a three-fold salary increase plus perks such as a luxury Audi. She spent less than a year in our department and had not yet had a chance to make any impact, let alone gain any meaningful experience.

If we did not have 40 years of formal Apartheid and 300 years of colonialism before that things may of course have been different. All the same, affirmative action is a necessary evil at best. It is something that most South African whites grudgingly accepted. But 10 years down the line serious misgivings about the continuation of affirmative action is starting to arise. I attended a seminar earlier in the week where a very dynamic coloured (mixed racial descendancy) speaker said in so many words that BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) is doomed to fail. His argument is not unique. The core thereof is that dividing the economic pie, if the pie stays the same size, will only cause everyone to loose. What you need is to grow the pie.

Of course making sure that an larger pie is fairly distributed will require at least limited government intervention. History has shown clearly that pure capitalism mostly favours the 'have's' and does little for the 'have not's'. The ideal is that this intervention is achieved through taxation, not social engineering. However, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) is under ever increasing pressure to deliver benefits to the poor masses.

One of the real tragedies of affirmative action is that the white population has shrunk by approximately. 800 000. Some sources put the figure at 1 million. That's from a population of approx. 6 million, a massive decrease. This decrease has been primarily driven by the 'brain drain'. Skilled whites who are pessimistic about their professional future in South Africa do as many other skilled individuals from across the world do in a globalised world, they go where they are appreciated. That is where they can obtain a challenging position on merit and receive the financial and other benefits associated with the particular position.

In South Africa the same person will often have to silently accept being passed over for promotion or appointment, in order for a black candidate to move up the ladder. Truth be told, white males over 50 were often already in senior positions at the time Apartheid ended. They may be frustrated at not being able to progress further while affirmative actions propels black candidates to the top. But they could have been stuck at the entry level where many 20-35 year old whites find themselves. Not surprisingly the majority of whites who have emigrated fall in this age bracket.

Another very interesting statistic is that 1 of 4 white males are now self-employed. That's a whopping 25% or a 4% increase in just 5 years. In the Apartheid South Africa in which I grew up only a very small number of whites were self-employed. Afrikaners were often referred to as the staatsdiens nasie ('government service nation'). These days if you attend a trade fair or see a group of business men (still mostly men) huddled around a coffee shop table, chances are fairly good that they're speaking Afrikaans. Compared to just ten years ago that's a truly surrealistic image - but it's very much reality today.

The positive angle of this is that Afrikaners (and English whites) are forced to apply their privileged education obtained under segregated Apartheid to start and build small enterprises. In the process jobs are created. I'm one of those newly converted entrepreneurs. However, the world of self-employment can be scary and shaky. Gone are the government house subsidies, medical aid, study allowances, unemployment insurance, etc... You're on your own boykie. By the way, if you make a success from all your sacrifice and 100 hour weeks the government will reward you by slapping taxing BEE requirements on your business - the irony...

Whichever way you look at it, loosing almost a million mostly highly skilled workers is something South Africa can ill afford. Sooner or later the ruling party will have to face the unpopular fact that making things uncomfortable for your most skilled citizens are going to cost you in the long run.

Many mostly black commentators bristle at the above debate. They retort that black South Africans can take up the slack, surely blacks aren't inferior or unable to perform as well as whites? If we haven't lived with colonialism and Apartheid for as long as we have that simplistic argument would have been very legitimate. However, the fact is that the majority of black South Africans, non-withstanding their equal potential, has lamented in pathetic schools and socio-economic conditions. The sad truth is that the majority of black citizens has simply not had the opportunity to develop their potential to the degree that they can make a meaningful contribution in the sphere of highly skilled workers. To disregard this is to bury your head in the sand. Worse, while privileged black kids now enjoy quality education in formerly whites-only schools, the majority of black kids still suffer incredibly poor education. Sooner or later the current government will have to start owing up to that, never mind how huge the challenge Apartheid and colonialism left it.

So what's the solution? I believe it lies in courageous bold leadership. The kind of leadership that will acknowledge that non-withstanding the sins of their fathers, whites who choose to stay in South Africa (very few don't want to) have a very valuable contribution to make to the welfare of the country. Downscale affirmative action, focus more on merit in appointments, BEEF UP EDUCATION and be patient. We need to grow that economic pie, at present it's way to small for 45 million people to share. The pie is only going to grow if nurtured, disregard the laws of intellectual capital and you risk making the future worse. The ANC's motto since the 1994 election has been 'A better life for all', indeed a noble cause. Social engineering could result in 'A worse life for all'...

I concede that it is probably too early to adopt a totally colour blind approach to fighting poverty in South Africa, thanks to our Apartheid past. But wouldn't it be nice if policies addressed poor, middle-class and wealthy South Africans - irrespective of race? Instead we're still stuck in racially based policies that provide or withhold opportunities based purely on race. Sooner or later that has got to change.

FIN24 : Empowering Financial Decisions: "Johannesburg - Any white male - more so if he's an Afrikaner - who says anything about affirmative action is now quickly relegated to being irrelevant, writes Finweek Editor Rikus Delport in this week's edition.

He writes: 'If you're someone who belonged to a previously privileged class your views don't count in the current debate.
'However, it's different if someone like the Governor of the SA Reserve Bank, a former Labour Minister and a respected figure in ANC circles, vents his views,
especially if he says something positive about whites in the workplace and -
believe it or not - about Afrikaners in particular.
'And that's precisely what happened when Governor Tito Mboweni spoke recently at a breakfast session in Johannesburg. When describing the dilemma the Bank is facing - black people who seek greener pastures shortly after being appointed and trained, his words were: 'I get so upset... I'm stopping this recruitment of black people. I'm okay with my Afrikaners. They stay and do the work and become experts.'
Must learn from experts
'However, what Mboweni said - probably in a joking and light-hearted manner - is what every company is experiencing but is afraid to say, and what blacks - with the exception of a few, such as Mboweni - aren't prepared to admit. Especially not in government circles. 'And that's to the detriment of SA's economy and empowerment. Because how can you empower a person if he can't learn from experts? And due to their previously privileged positions, it's the whites who have that expertise.'
Delport concedes that under the current government, SA has experienced unprecedented economic growth. And it's been said repeatedly that the economy has probably never been managed aas well as since 1994. "However, unless it's accepted that if all SA's people aren't set to work properly and don't use their skills correctly, then we won't reach the above-average growth levels government has targeted.
"To achieve that will necessarily mean that there must be equal opportunities for
all, that the unhealthy trend of putting people in positions just because they
belong to the right racial group or political party will have to stop and that skills must count above all else."
Time to drop the race issue
He says it's disturbing to learn that research shows that nearly 1m people, many of them experts, have left SA over the past 10 years - mainly due to affirmative action
and crime. "Especially if you remember that many of them had the potential to make a contribution to our economy and also create jobs." Delport points out that SA's current unemployment figure shows encouraging signs that the battle against that evil is slowly but surely being won.
"But it isn't happening fast enough, and politicians in particular should realise that people are becoming impatient at the slow progress. So why not use the expertise that we have at home to promote government's own aims?
"What Mboweni said is by implication applicable to most whites and not just Afrikaners: they're committed to the success of SA and they're prepared to work hard, even if opportunities for promotion are limited. But hasn't the time come for us to drop the race question?" "

Inside the SABC blacklist report : Mail & Guardian Online

2006-10-15T22:09:00.000+02:00

Oh my.... The way the SABC Board is handling the very important report on the enquiry into the rumored blacklisting by the SABC News head of commentators (critical of South African President Mbeki) makes for as much concern as the contents of the report itself. Less surprisingly, the way SABC News is reporting on the document smacks of willfully misleading the public.

I was driving in my car when a bulletin was broadcast on SABC Radio News stating that the report on the enquiry found no evidence of the rumored blacklisting. I only caught the end of the bulletin as the main news was recaptured. The shock and disbelief nearly caused me to leave the road. I decided though that the summary was perhaps unintentionally misleading and that if I heard the full report earlier in the bulletin I may have been treated to more balanced reporting. However, judging by the SABC's online news bulletin on this issue and reports in the general press, the SABC has indeed decided to whitewash the report and present a sanitised summary thereof to the public.

This is shocking. While it is never a very convincing exercise when any institution scrutinizes itself by means of an internal enquiry, the SABC's handling of this particular issue has cost it valuable public trust should it decide to have an internal enquiry on anything else in future. The irony is that the enquiry, and resulting report document, seem to have been well conducted and drafted. My impression is that it was carried out without favouring any one 'side'.

However, the SABC arrogantly decided that it could present it's own skewed representation thereof to the public and thus sidestep the painful but very necessary actions needed to rectify the situation. Alas, the news head stays on and the journalists at SABC News remains under pressure to play to his specific view of the world. Lucky us, Snuki Zikalala will make sure that the South African public is spoon fed with his particular medicine to fix how we see reality. Now we can keep on celebrating all the successes of our vibrant young democracy and ignore all the major challenges that face us. Rather than open debate on these issues, those who rely exclusively on SABC for their daily news -and there are many- can live in bliss ignorance. Snuki will see to it.

The commissioners who drafted the report rightly points out that the last thing the SABC as public broadcaster should be doing in our hard-won democracy is to repeat the practices of the old order (Apartheid South Africa). Thus disqualifying South Africans from democratic discourse and debate. In South Africa, the more informed, will often respond to a questionable statement or story with a sarcastic "Oh, did you read that in the Huisgenoot!" (English = "You"). The more ignorant will often try to bolster their story by pointing out that they read it in the Huisgenoot... The Huisgenoot being a sensationalist human interest weekly magazine featuring the stars, their marriages and babies as well as a guy who survived a crossbow shot through the head or something to that order. It's a glossy magazine version of cheap Sunday tabloid checkbook journalism. The way things are going now, the SABC is in danger of taking Huisgenoot's place in that expression.

Our saving grace at this time is that a lot of our newspapers still value proper journalism and a selected few still practice investigative journalism. Amongst them the Mail and Guardian has been a stalwart both in the old and new South Africa. While the SABC may accuse the newspaper of having stolen the report drafted after the enquiry, which the newspaper denies, I really don't give a damn. The newspaper should be commended for making the full document available to the public. It's a pity that most of the public will still not get to see it as their only access to information is through a politically correct public broadcaster. At least a fair number of people, those who have internet access, can now get their hands on it. You can find the full report, as provided on Mail and Guardian's website, here. For the newspaper's full reporting on the issue, click the link below. Make sure to read the then SABC's Pippa Green's letter of protest to her erstwhile colleague Zikalala. It's sad that someone with the courage of conviction that she shows in the aforementioned letter has been lost to the public broadcaster. I fear more are due to follow...

Inside the SABC blacklist report : Mail & Guardian Online: "The South African Broadcasting Corporation has violated the recommendations of the commission it appointed to probe a blacklist by releasing only a sanitised summary of its findings on Thursday.

(Read original SABC report - PDF, 200k)

Commissioners Gilbert Marcus and Zwelakhe Sisulu said that 'it would indeed be abhorrent, and at gross variance with the SABC's mandate and policies, if practices of the old order were being repeated in the new, with the effect of again disqualifying South Africans from democratic discourse and debate.

'For this reason, we are firmly of the view that this report should be released to the public after consideration by the board.'

The SABC issued a seven-page summary and statement about the commission."

Kevin Pietersen giving South African whiteys a bad name

2006-09-12T11:31:00.000+02:00

It's a sad fact that South Africa loose thousands of very talented and skilled citizens to emigration every year. This is partly due to globalization, which makes professionals and otherwise skilled individuals globally mobile. In South Africa's case other factors that play a role include crime, affirmative action, unwillingness to live under a black government (racism), etc.

Around the time of the fall of Apartheid (1994) the term "the Chicken Run" was coined. The Chicken Run basically referred to white South Africans who were scared out of their wits by the prospect of living under black rule. The writing was on the wall for Apartheid. This had definite implications for the advantaged life that whites have enjoyed for 300 years of colonialism (Dutch & British) and 40 years of Apartheid. Many wealthy and skilled whites hastily packed their bags. Most headed for Britain, as many English speaking South Africans still have British passports. Others headed for Australia ('packing for Perth'), New Zealand and the US. At one time a bumper sticker appeared reading: "Will the last person to leave the country please switch off the lights"...

Luckily many more whiteys decided to stay put. Many English speaking South Africans have no wish to leave the country of their birth and would love nothing more than to raise their kids on African soil. Afrikaans speaking whites (mostly referred to as 'Afrikaners') find themselves in a rather unique position. A large portion of them have been living in the country for over 300 years. In that time Afrikaans evolved from Dutch, German, French, Malay and other influences to a distinctively separate language. While it is still close to Dutch and Flemish it is a language in its own right. Afrikaans culture went through a similar process of evolution and is totally separate from the original Dutch culture, as well as others which influenced its development. The simple fact is that Afrikaners cannot easily assimilate into the Dutch culture as many may believe. I for one do not feel at home in the Netherlands at all. On visits there I do find the similarities in language intriguing, but the land could not feel more foreign. Thus, Afrikaners who joined the Chicken Run tend to stand out as immigrants with a strangely different culture wherever they choose to relocate to.

This is not to say that Afrikaners can't successfully start a life outside of South Africa. Most Afrikaners have enjoyed a privileged education. The Afrikaners also has a long history of rising above difficult circumstances. Thus many Afrikaners are able to succeed, even in difficult circumstances that may be foreign to them. The issue is rather whether they will feel at home anywhere else, but in South Africa? In my mind the answer in the majority of cases is a resounding NO WAYS.

In the end the vast majority of whites chose to remain in the country, most because they would never consider leaving anyway and some because they did not have the financial means to leave. Many whites in the country have developed a extremely strong 'new South Africa' patriotism. I believe most has no longing for the 'old' South Africa whatsoever. However, an uncomfortably large number of whites still view the country through thick racist spectacles. Crime is not only an unacceptable fact of life, it is simply 'proof that blacks can't manage anything' (sic). The same goes for, admittedly huge, problems regarding school education, the beleaguered struggle against Aids, way too much corruption, etc. This last racist grouping cannot talk about these serious scourges without race entering the picture, it's like a badly prepared gravy poured over your beef. Whether you like the beef as is or not, they can be trusted to always spoil the meal by pouring the gravy of race (blacks this and that) over your meal...

One of the ironies of present day South Africa is witnessing how national sports can unite not only different races in their mutual passion, but also racist and non-racist. Few things peeve white South Africans more than having their national teams face South African born opposition. We absolutely 'hate' the likes of Clive Rathbone and Kevin Pieterson. These guys are excellent sportsmen, but how on earth can they be playing for a team other than South Africa? This country gave them only love and tender care in their formative years. Rathbone played in, and celebrated with, the victorious (South African) under 21 world cup winning rugby team. Everyone was looking forward to seeing, among others, Rathbone move on to the senior squad (the Springbok rugby team). How on earth can he pull the Australian jersey over his head to face his former compatriots and not feel like a COMPLETE FAKE, dare we say - a traitor? To add insult to injury the other half of the centre-pair is South African born as well.

However, where South African sports lovers completely loose any sympathy, not that much is left to start with, is when these fools start bad-mouthing the country that raised them and nurtured their skills. Finally, if you then have the complete lack of style or brains to give a South African crowd the middle finger you should seriously consider never touring South Africa again - ever. If you then feel aggrieved getting boo-ed by capacity crowds whenever you do something on the sport field, good or bad, then all hope is lost. You've lost the plot mate.

Archie Henderson plays to these kind of feelings in his column in News 24 (excerpt and hyperlink below). I could not agree more with his final paragraph: "But good luck to KP ((Kevin Pieterson)). He is a rare talent, he is also a real 'windgat' ((blow hole)) - and he is good for the game. But he should just stop being such a cry baby. He gives the rest of us whiteys a bad name."

'Let your bat do the talking': "Archie Henderson.
Kevin Pietersen is a modern South African tragedy.
It has less to do with South Africa's perceived unrequited love for the man, or his alleged victimisation than with his attitude towards the land of his birth. "

Our hopes are being destroyed

2006-09-07T17:28:00.000+02:00

The article lower down (with hyperlink) refers. Tim Modise is a well respected talk-show host and current affairs anchor person. He made his appearance on the national broadcaster's English television channel in the last years of apartheid (early 90's), as the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) grudgingly started reflecting the change that was underway in the country. Modise has a pleasant persona and quickly gathered quite a following. After a few years at the Corporation he faced the typical dilemma that many popular talk-show hosts / anchor persons have to grapple with, how long do I want to do this? If you think about it, these kind of positions probably loose their appeal quite quickly. To a large extent you're a figure head. Yes, you have to be able to think on your feet and have good interviewing skills. But all the challenging preparation, digging, research, etc. is done by someone else.

Modise was then appointed as chairperson for the Proudly South African Campaign that got of the ground a couple of years ago.

I find his article (see link below) both encouraging and perplexing. The encouraging bit is that a prominent black individual is highlighting serious issues that faces not only black South Africans, but do impact hugely specifically on that section of our nation. He asks critical questions about (black) African culture. It is not a popular line to take and for that he must be commended. Modise points out in no uncertain terms that black males, in his view, have become the 'bogeymen' of their own people. In his guest column he deals mostly with the position of women and their victimisation through heinous crimes such as spousal abuse, rape and murder.

What I find perplexing is his proposed remedy. I find it strange that he focus exclusively on males when it comes to addressing the above scourges. In his column it seems to be the male population that has failed society and it is the same section of our society that is called upon to remedy the situation. All of this has merit. But what about women? Is a view of society / community that places power and responsibility exclusively in the hands of men not part of the problem? I would argue that elevating women in terms of their position in society is a crucial ingredient in all of this. If women are to be the powerless recipients of all things good, rather than taking control of their own destinies - can we realistically expect any improvement?

My view is that the hierarchal position that men is entitled to in traditional patriarchal African culture is a fundamental part of this problem. The patriarchal approach to society is of course not unique to (black) African culture. It is very much present in the Afrikaans community in which I was raised. However, traditional (black) African culture seems to trump everyone else in this respect. I assume that Modise has simply chosen to address black males in his article and does not necessarily exclude women from the issue. However, in the broader debate it is crucial that the emancipation of women should be placed centre stage.

Our hopes are being destroyed: "I deeply appreciate that I have been given this opportunity to reflect on developments in the public arena as well as on current affairs in general. I suppose this will give me an opportunity to reflect on what our society talks about on radio and television as I enjoy a sort of front row seat into the psyche of our nation.

I was approached to write this column during the month of August, a month when our country, correctly, commemorated the role played by women in the struggle for justice and freedom.

The usual but unflattering issues were again highlighted. Women living in abusive relationships. Women living in fear of violence and being raped. Women still not socially and economically empowered enough to determine power relations in the scary era of the rapacious HIV and Aids pandemic. The era where the dominant family structure is the single-parent-mother-headed home.

Fifty years before, women had marched for justice and freedom, yet they were still living in fear of, this time, their own brothers and fathers. They were now more terrified and angry with the very men who made it part of the democratic state's agenda to have women empowered and represented fully in all spheres of society.

These observations made me ask troubled questions. Why would the men who historically have been the custodians of the fate of the African people become the bogeymen of their own people? These are men who for centuries negotiated difficult and hostile environments to create communities and cultures that sustain up to today."

CO2: Humans to blame

2006-09-05T17:50:00.000+02:00

The caption above comes from an article posted in News24.com today. My reaction - what's new?

This is not because I'm skeptical of the whole global warming concept, quite the opposite. I'm in fact flabbergasted that some world leaders still bristle at acknowledging the fact of global warming, and the policy implications thereof. Of course, therein lies the rub (policy implications). I'm afraid when considering this issue, the US's President Bush comes to mind most prominently. Which big-business-serving-president in his right mind would seriously consider conservation-based policies that may make life slightly more complicated for some of his main constituents?

But will reality eventually enter the current White House Administration's decision making process on this issue, can one dare hope for that? Many commentators have ventured strategies on how Pres. Bush can secure a lasting positive legacy. They play this game in the context of perceived failures in engaging in, and the management of, the Iraq War; the questionable approach to the 'war on terror'; domestic policies; etc. I for one, would love to see President Bush opt for taking the lead with a bold, principled and fact-based approach to addressing the very real issue of climate change.

Don't get your hopes up... I cannot see an administration that is hell bent on defeating the opposition at every turn, politicking and media-spinning every issue, being interested in following sound logic when deciding on this very important issue. The problem is not only that the policy implications of climate change is difficult to face, it is also a pet subject of the opposition party - making it a very unattractive issue to embrace.

One possible glimmer of hope is the sprinkling of Christian religious leaders in the US that are starting to embrace the issue of global warming from a bible-based angle. In addition to big business, bible-belt-America is an important constituent for the Bush administration. However, it seems like too many American Christian (evangelical) congregations are still hung-up with casting the Iraq endeavor as a religious calling.

While politicians haggle and struggle to hang on to votes (and money) climate change will slowly but surely continue. When will it be too late? The problem is that while scientists are finding new sources to prove the existence of global warming, from every conceivable angle, no one can say for sure when the first domino will fall to indicate the proverbial point-of-no-return. When do we reach the point when climate change has affected so many different natural systems, wiped out so many species, that life as we know it is doomed? Even though that damnation may play out over multiple life times.

For me the obvious approach should be to avoid that point by all means possible. It requires radical and bold political leadership from world leaders. If we don't know when we'll reach this point, if we haven't already, why take the risk of crossing it? It is mind-boggling that humanity can act so passively in the face of such a major risk.

I did hear an interesting comment in a discussion on this issue recently. The speaker said that if global warming lead to an environmental catastrophe, eventually after a few millennia or longer, Earth will probably recover. However, humanity will not be around to witness the recovery.

In such a scenario I can imagine our planet being quite well off...

CO2: Humans to blame: "Norwich - Air from the oldest ice core confirms human activity has increased the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere to levels not seen for hundreds of thousands of years, scientists said on Monday.

Bubbles of air in the 800 000-year-old ice, drilled in the Antarctic, show levels of CO2 changing with the climate. But the present levels are out of the previous range.

'It is from air bubbles that we know for sure that carbon dioxide has increased by about 35% in the last 200 years,' said Dr Eric Wolff of the British Antarctic Survey and the leader of the science team for the 10-nation European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica.

'Before the last 200 years, which man has been influencing, it was pretty steady,' he added."

Crime, grime and chickens

2006-08-24T11:17:00.000+02:00

An interesting column by Georgina Guedes was posted on News24.com today (scroll down for excerpt and link). I agree with her, you see and experience as much as you choose to - unless you live in squalor in which case your choices are severely limited...

Furthermore, how you experience things are influenced by previous exposure to crime and grime - the effect thereof depending on whether you allow this exposure to enrich and deepen your insight or simply to irritate. Middle- and upper class South Africans, who choose to, are exposed to a lot of third world realities in their own back yard and are thus mostly well prepared for what awaits them in third world countries. That is if you define South Africa as a 'developing country' and not third world per se - which is not really in dispute. Most developing countries are home to the first and third world at once - which is definitely true of South Africa.

Yet there are many wealthy white South Africans who have never set foot in a township, never mind a 'squatter camp' - of which there are many. Most have however been affected by crime in one way or another. In the context of mass poverty in our society, 'wealthy' (whites) include middle-class white South Africans. Those black South Africans that escape a life of poverty, thankfully an increasing number, are still linked by family and friends to the townships and are thus well informed of the realities of poverty.

Strangely, from the perspective of someone who grew up in middle-class white South Africa..., many buppies (black up-and-coming professionals) seem to be involved in a new struggle - this time not against apartheid but a struggle to acquire material wealth. In the ten years of democracy since 1994, most economists agree, this spending spree by buppies has been a major contributor to South Africa's economic growth (building up scary levels of credit along the way). In that respect the spending spree helps to create jobs for the unemployed.

But in an ideal world, newly gained wealth would have flowed from buppies back to their extended families in the townships. In the process society at large would benefit - albeit slowly. According to the conservative (cynical) view of African culture, this would in fact hamper the progress of 'good blacks' (sic) who could prosper if not for the poor masses pulling them down - claiming their share of the loot... The irony and somewhat worrying fact is that many buppies, probably the majority, are proving very much adept at gaining personal wealth and looking after their own needs - rather than spreading the love around...

Anyways, I'm drifting away from the topic. An extract from the Georgina Guedes column follows below, click on the link for the complete version.

Crime, grime and chickens: "While travelling in South East Asia, my boyfriend Ter and I befriended a really nice Canadian couple.
They were clever, had senses of humour and even though they had come from somewhere as advanced, both in technology and social infrastructure, as Canada, they were having a wonderful time in the Third World.
One evening, we ended up discussing the differences between our expectations of the places that we had come to and what we had actually ended up experiencing.
The Canadian girl's mother, in particular, had been horrified by her daughter setting off for exactly the kind of environs that good Canadians had worked so hard to advance beyond.
She was further flummoxed by her daughter's seeming unwillingness to buckle up and speed along the career path that lay dazzling before her. But in the end, she was forced to acknowledge that however incomprehensible her daughter's wishes were, the adventure was going to be had, and there was very little she could do about it.
She managed to distil all her fears into one neurosis, and instructed her daughter to 'avoid all areas where birds might have been', in an attempt to thwart the bird flu virus that, in her mind, threatens to infect with every breath drawn in Asia. "

Reuters: Blow-ups 'make it safe'

2006-07-25T13:50:00.000+02:00

This short article appeared in today's News24.com. I can see something like this actually taking off in South Africa, with the number of car hijackings we have. It will make for great humour as well...

Blow-ups 'make it safe': "London - He fits in a car's glove box, appears at a flick of a switch and when a woman has finished using him, she can just pull the plug and he deflates.

He's the 'Buddy on Demand', a blow-up man launched on Tuesday with the aim of making solo female motorists feel less nervous about driving at night.

According to research by the inflatable friend's creator, insurer Sheilas' Wheels, 82% of women feel safer with someone sitting in the car beside them and nearly a half don't like driving alone in the dark.

'We're not saying that an inflatable man is the only answer but we do hope it will give women extra confidence and make journeys in the dark less fearful,' said Jacky Brown, the spokesperson for Sheilas' Wheels."

BBC NEWS: India bloggers angry at net ban

2006-07-19T21:56:00.000+02:00

The comments that follow relates to an article on the website of BBC News (online edition) today. The Indian blogging community is up in arms (a lot of Indian bloggers at least...) about the banning of a number of blogs by the Indian government, scroll down for excerpts and a link to the story.

I'm an avid reader of Time Magazine. It offers a limited amount of reading per issue, as opposed to some of its more weighty competitors, but tends to have interesting features in manageable portions. The first issue of July featured India. It had some really interesting comments in regard to the country's entrepreneurial spirit. Having noticed the article below on today's BBC News online edition, two elements of Time's feature comes to mind.

Time noted that much of India's economic boom is due to the entrepreneurial spirit of individuals, pursuing opportunities brought about by globalization and the internet - regardless of the government not coming to the party. The latter being stated in the context of bureaucracy, poor service delivery and generally poor infrastructure.

The Magazine also noted that India's economy was booming because it is a (the most populous) democracy. Within the unrestricted realms of a democracy, regardless of the government's poor performance, individuals have the opportunity to excel - only requiring drive, innovation and skills. Time contrasts India with China more than once, with the editorial staff's American bias for the former -because of its democratic nature- coming through quite strongly. It is argued that ultimately the Indian model is more viable, by virtue of being based on the freedom entailed in a democracy. In the long run it has to outperform the centrist, restricted and top-down Chinese model.

Although Time's coverage is peppered (or spiced?) with a good dose of American idealism, it does ring true. Especially if you prescribe to democratic values... It has to be said that major failures / challenges in Indian society (poverty, Aids, etc.) is not glossed over by the feature. Time also points out that the success of India's IT industry has lead to an increase in wages, moving some of India's IT giants to, ironically, look towards outsourcing some functions (read jobs).

Having read the above mentioned feature and having been quite impressed by India's promising future, the BBC article below comes as a bit of a disappointment. It could easily be blown out of proportion, I know. However, it is a worrying development. Freedom of speech should ideally have no barriers. Never mind how many people are offended by the contents of a particular blog. One can only hope that this is a trend that will die in its infancy and not be allowed to mature. The seemingly strong response from India's blogging community is a good start. I hope India will not start copying the bad habits of its nemesis China. Then who will the West bet on as its favoured emerging super power...?

(This story provide interesting similarities with an issue on which I blogged earlier this month, under the caption Citizens, bloggers & the 'Fourth Estate')

BBC NEWS South Asia India bloggers angry at net ban: "India's burgeoning blogging community is up in arms against a government directive that they say has led to the blocking of their web logs.

The country's 153 internet service providers (ISP) have blocked 17 websites since last week on federal government orders.

Some of these sites belong to Google's Blogspot, a leading international web log hosting service.

Indian bloggers say that the decision is an attack on freedom of speech...

...A federal government notification of July 2003 says it can ban websites in the interest of:
sovereignty or integrity of India
security of the state
friendly relations with foreign states and public order
preventing incitement to commissioning of any cognisable offences.
The sites that have been banned include ones with right-wing Hindu links and an anti-Communist one. At least four of them are on the Blogspot hosting service."

Johannesburg Rises Above Its Apartheid Past - New York Times

2006-07-18T17:04:00.000+02:00

I'm a great fan of the New York Times (NYT) - online edition. Their articles are often on the long side, but very informative. While some may be put off by the fact that the NYT definitely caters for Democrats (as in supporters of the USA's Democratic Party), it mostly provides ample exposure for various conflicting opinions on the same issue - where applicable.

As a South African, active in our tourism industry, I'm always very curious to read foreign perspectives on our product in general, or specific attractions / destinations within South Africa or the greater region (Southern Africa).

Sometimes, with some of the enquiries we get at Africa Deluxe Tours for South African tours, potential clients will clearly state that they want to avoid Johannesburg at all cost. This is due to their perceptions of it being a very dangerous destination, because of high crime levels.

Truth be told, it can indeed be a very dangerous place - especially if you don't know it. We normally recommend visitors to include Johannesburg in their itineraries (depending on what they want to get out of their travels of course), but that they make use of a reputable operator in doing so. Otherwise they may well run into trouble. The main reason for using a reputable operator, in this case, has to do with safety considerations. However, a tourist guide -if (s)he's worth his salt- will also add a lot of value in unlocking an unknown city for you. This is especially true of a destination like Soweto (part of Johannesburg), which features a culture and way of life alien to most non-African visitors.

Today's NYT includes a very well written, very comprehensive, article on visiting Johannesburg by Michael Wines. One irony in this article, is the recommended hotel at the end of it, taking into account what the writer had to say about Melrose Arch... The same goes for the Moyo Restaurant, also located in Melrose Arch. Having said that, I agree with his assessment of Melrose Arch - and at the same time agree that both the hotel and restaurant would make a worthwhile visit for most tourists. The hotel is a very funky, designer-type, establishment with off-the-wall humor in its room interiors. It will appeal to a hip crowd, definitely not your style if you prefer colonial establishments. The restaurant provides a vibey, fresh, African experience - often with live entertainment.

I agree with the author that tourists should venture out of the wealthy northern suburbs, which may feel quite familiar to western visitors. Venturing into the city centre and Soweto, once again in the company of a local tour operator / tourist guide, will provide much more unusual experiences and insights. However, don't shun the northern suburbs, as here to, there is much to learn about modern-day South Africa.

Excerpts and a link to the article follows below:

Johannesburg Rises Above Its Apartheid Past - New York Times: "TAKE the M1 freeway south, past the spas and high-end restaurants of Melrose Arch, through the leafy suburb of Houghton and past the nearby clubs and galleries of Melville. Go past all that, and past downtown's concrete towers and the booming Newtown cultural district, and get off at Rissik Street. Just a block away, in the shadow of the elevated freeway's pillars, there awaits the finest selection of porcupine skin and baboon entrails in all Africa...

...Yet many South Africans insist that it is the one city that no visitor should miss. At more than six million people, it is the biggest city in South Africa and the most transformed. Twenty years ago, much of Johannesburg was the preserve of South Africa's white minority. Today, it is a stewpot of colors and languages, the fruit not only of liberation but also of a huge influx of immigrants and refugees. Johannesburg is a place where purveyors of muti - the porcupine skins, ground herbs and baboon entrails touted as cure-alls for everything from flatulence to flagging love affairs - hawk their wares a few blocks from skyscrapers....
...A proper place to begin is the Apartheid Museum (http://www.apartheidmuseum.org/), near Soweto, a powerful series of exhibits and multimedia presentations documenting the last century's oppression. Visitors begin the journey with a pass arbitrarily labeling them white or nonwhite; inside, the concrete-and-steel space, with nooses hung from the ceiling and exhibits caged in wire or trapped behind bars, brings home apartheid's brutality with unusual force.
Soweto, a city of more than a million people, is rife with reminders of that brutality. The Hector Pieterson memorial and museum in the Orlando West neighborhood recounts the 1976 Soweto riots, the event that sounded apartheid's death knell. Orlando West is also the world's only neighborhood that housed two Nobel Peace Prize winners, Nelson Mandela and the Anglican bishop Desmond Tutu..."

Qwelane: " SABC's Snuki 'plain bad news' "

2006-07-03T15:48:00.000+02:00

Jon Qwelane is a columnist who, amongst other outlets, is published weekly on News24.com. In a column published today he takes up the topic of my previous post. Qwelane tends to be extremely outspoken and seems to like stoking a bit of controversy now and then. With most of his columns someone ends up being seriously unhappy. In this case, I believe, most readers would heartily support his views. Excerpt and link to the column follows below:

SABC's Snuki 'plain bad news': "The sticky pickle in which the SABC finds itself is one of its own making and, in my opinion, there is absolutely no need for an internal inquiry - which, I believe, lacks credibility anyway - but there still is a way out of the mess.

The solution is quite simple really: chief executive Dali Mpofu must fire his news executive head, Snuki Zikalala, immediately.

Zikalala is the reason some cynics are now derisively saying SABC is the abbreviation of Snuki African Broadcasting Circus, and I can see their dejected point of view quite clearly."

Citizens, bloggers & the 'Fourth Estate'

2006-07-01T23:20:00.000+02:00

On 30 June 2006 Lizette Rabe, head of the postgraduate Department of Journalism at the University of Stellenbosch, wrote in a News24.com article:

Become more media savvy: "It's not only a matter of being media literate, to be able to read between the lines, that enables us to understand any given news, whether in print, broadcast or new media.

It is also knowing about your rights as a citizen in terms of freedom of expression - and how it is or is not manipulated by those who think they have a right to decide what others may think and say."

Summarising and paraphrasing freely the article argues the following: South Africa's media freedom is largely dependent on citizen's appreciation of their constitutional right to freedom of expression. When 'apparatchiks' of the public broadcaster claim the right to manage how journalists cover the news, even indirectly, one has to be worried. While South Africa boasts a 'well-developed media infrastructure' we need 'media literacy campaigns' to create awareness of the important role of the Fourth Estate in a democracy. In protecting the Fourth Estate, an emerging "Fifth Estate" (bloggers) is sometimes mentioned as protector of the former - but this is not the solution. Members of the media have to fend for themselves by standing up to undue interference.

Her comments follow on two disturbing incidents in recent times. The one is a decision by the powers that be at the public broadcaster (SABC) to cancel, at the last moment, the broadcast of a 'un-authorised'-style documentary on President Thabo Mbeki. The other is the revelation that journalists at the SABC were instructed to avoid using a number of commentators in putting together news stories. What the blacklisted commentators seem to have in common is critical views of President Mbeki and the policies of the ruling ANC government. In both cases the SABC aggressively defended itself against accusations of censorship, but commentators and other sections of the media cried foul. The SABC at first flatly denied the blacklisting of some commentators, but reverted to an enquiry into the matter after a SAFM (English radio service) presenter confirmed on air that he in the past received instructions not to interview some commentators.

With accusations and counter-accusations flying around it's always difficult to form a clear picture of what's going on behind the scenes. However, to paraphrase an Afrikaans expression, where there's smoke there's a fire. That is, while the finer details may be disputed, it is clear that all is not right.

Is media freedom under threat in South Africa?
What was sorely missing in the whole saga, at least in the coverage that I was exposed to, is a strong and unequivocal statement from the SABC and the cabinet on the importance of, and their respect for, the media's freedom. Pleading ignorance and discrediting your accusers is not a satisfying answer to the core question - is media freedom under threat in present day South Africa? Truth be told, we have never before seen the impressive media freedom in South Africa, that has become a feature of our democracy since 1994.

Citizens of any country, including ours, cannot take this extremely important pillar of democracy for granted. If it crumbles, the whole democratic temple will follow suit. In the bigger picture of the South African media the two incidents that has caused so much discussion is in my view an exception, rather than being the rule. However, the way the SABC and cabinet responded to the accusations, is cause for concern. It suggests that in the case of the public broadcaster much more pressure needs to be applied to guard against the cancer of censorship.

I believe the privately owned media is at present more or less free from undue interference from their owners. Most definitely something to be thankful for.

Citizens' role in protecting media freedom?
But what to do about the SABC and its 'owner'? That journalists should have the courage of their conviction to stand up against even the mildest form of censorship, is a given. Where this does not happen all hope is lost. But what about the rest of society. Can we play a role?

The idealistic answer is 'hell yes!'. In practice it's not so simple. The management of the SABC is not elected and often not seen by the general public as their servants. This is off-course a misconception. In this sense Ms Rabe's contention that South Africa needs 'media literacy campaigns' makes a lot of sense. The media often performs well in informing, reminding and educating citizens on important events in the past. Programmes and content around Youth Day (commemorating the Soweto uprising of 1976), Sharpville, etc. come to mind. Sometimes the coverage of these events take on an almost religious element.

However, in taking a critical view of current affairs and policy implications for the future the same vigor is not always displayed - especially at the SABC. The South African public needs to reminded by the well covered events of the past, that if the Fourth Estate does not function freely the first three estates (government) is bound to get up to no good (think blacked-out sentences on the front page of South African newspapers in the 80's...). We as citizens should think about the dangers of any level of censorship today in those kind of terms. Even a government voted in by the kind of majority the ANC received in the last election should still continuously be put under the microscope. Being elected is a responsibility, not a chance to do as you please.

Blogging community
I was intrigued by Ms Rabe's mentioning of the Blogging community as the 'Fifth Estate'. Being new to the act of Blogging it creates the temptation in me of taking on an air of smug self-importance. Uh-hum, I'm looking out for your rights bro - I'm a blogger! However, she shoots down that notion in her very next sentence. I concur. The media's role is unique and cannot be substituted by blogging. In fact, the notion could be quite dangerous. Bloggers answer only to themselves and are notoriously subjective. While it is an obvious fact that no media outlet is fully objective, the profession of journalism is a well established and developed one. It does have checks and balances built into it and tend to be transparent. Blogging is all too often a bunch of ignorant hooligans who rant of subjective, untested and unbalanced arguments and statements. Often blogging is an act of activism, rather than empowering readers through information. Covering contradicting viewpoints in a fair and balanced manner is something I've seldom encountered in the bloggosphere.

Still, even though the medium is very much flawed, it does have an important role to play when it comes to civil liberties such as freedom of expression. In the ideal world we still mingle with the people in our street and know our neighbours by first name. In the real world we don't. Most of us are buried in work, we socialize and discuss issues with a small group of like-minded close friends or associates in our very limited spare time. This can be replicated on the Net off-course, but you can also choose to talk to strangers as much as you like.

In the world of blogging, as opposed to chat-rooms and news groups, you can get to know strangers intimately in terms of their thought processes. Something which normally takes weeks, months or years in the real world. Multiply this hundreds of times and a potentially life-enriching experience awaits you. It's like walking through a massive stadium where scores of people are huddled in small groups discussing interesting (or frivolous...) subjects. You are free to walk around and join or leave a discussion without being frowned upon. The guy who happens to be speaking can do so uninterrupted for as long as he/she likes.

If you walk around enough you will get to hear really smart people with interesting opinions or fascinating tales to tell. In short you can deepen you insight on just about any topic under the sun. You can do so by talking and listening to people who you would never meet in real life and may not feel comfortable meeting in the company of your like-minded real life friends. In a space like this, questioning and discussing at length the state of civil liberties can progress unhindered (unless you're living in China or the like...).

I suppose a difference between the (electronic & print) media and the bloggosphere is that the former speaks to millions at the same time while the latter speaks (potentially) to thousands or even millions on a personal level one at a time. Try to tell your breakfast programme presenter that his/her take on an event is totally skewed and shortsighted...

So how can blogging assist in protecting the Fourth Estate? One way is probably by making netizen-citizens used to exercising freedom of expression on the Net, unhindered. The idea of a state apparatchik censoring your blog or limiting which opinions you may quote in it is simply absurd. The extension of this to the journalist delivering your dose of daily news is obvious.

A new blog about to be born

2006-06-28T14:55:00.000+02:00

Hi all

I'm about to start this new blog. For now I'm just getting to know the ropes of what Blogger.com offers.

I'm a 36-year old city-boy currently living in the platteland (rural regions), on the coastline of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. I have a limited journalism background, spent a few years working as spokesperson for the University of Pretoria and have been the co-owner and managing director of Africa Deluxe Tours since 1998.

I have a keen interest in various aspects of my home country, the Southern Africa region and global issues. This blog will focus on my impressions, as a South African (based) individual on all things South(ern) African as well as insights on global issues as seen from this southern corner of the globe.

I'll be blogging away soon...

Mike