When Gill Marcus was appointed Governor of the Reserve Bank, newspapers reported that she was not unfamiliar to “the markets”. Her appointment was widely lauded by political parties and “market analysts”. This despite suggestions that Tito Mboweni was pushed from his job as Governor because Cosatu did not like his suits, his ties, his smile, or maybe his signature on our bank notes.
“Her appointment sends an encouraging message to business and the markets and will have a positive impact on business and investor confidence.” said Busa Chief Executive Officer Jerry Vilakazi.
“The markets” duly responded positively to her appointment and the JSE surged. Two things bother me about the way her appointment was received.
First, all this talk of “the markets” made me wonder again what exactly “the markets” might be. I have never seen “the markets” the analysts keep talking about and (unlike pornography) would not know it when I saw it. I somehow do not think one can buy pap and wors at “the markets”, nor can one have lunch with “the markets” or take it for a beer. “The markets” is a bit like that other canard, “the moral fabric of society”. (I have always wondered whether the “moral fabric” of society is something one uses to make wedding dresses from.)
These things are invisible and intangible, yet they have achieved a mythical status in our society and is often held up as the sum total of wisdom and what is good in our world.
I have a sneaky suspicion that “the markets” (like “the moral fabric”) is really a concept used to describe the prejudices, hidden assumptions and unexamined (but highly debatable) ideological commitments of a very specific group of people who make many of the decisions about stuff that affect our lives (or if they do not make the decisions, they try mightily to influence those decisions to their own best advantage).
“The markets”, so I suspect, is really just a term to describe a group of rich, mostly white, selfish capitalists who believe in a very specific economic system and control much of the levers of the economy and can thus act in often irresponsible ways to give vent to their prejudices to wreck the economy, allow the Rand to tank, or ruin the banking system. Similarly “the moral fabric of society” sometimes seems like the sum total of the prejudices, moral judgments and religiously inspired bigoted attitudes enforced on society by self-appointed moral leaders in that society.
Which leads me to my second point. Why were “the markets” so happy about the appointment of Gill Marcus? She was an ANC cadre in exile and on her return from exile took up a post in the ANC’s Department of Information and Publicity where she quickly became one of the ANC’s more prominent voices. As the ANC said in a recent announcement:
Prior to the 1994 elections she criss-crossed the country tirelessly, training ANC media workers and voter educators and accompanied President Mandela on his many forays into the provinces. Marcus played a leading role in determining media poicies for the ANC in the run up to the 1994 elections. Elected to parliament, Marcus quickly established a widely respected reputation for her efficient, effective and no nonsense approach to her position of chairperson of the parliamentary joint Finance committee. She held this position from June 1994 until June 1996 when she was appointed Deputy Minister of Finance.
The appointment of Marcus should therefore have been very worrying to “the markets”. Yet “the markets” have been very happy. Some have suggested the positive reaction of “the markets” and opposition political parties to her appointment can at least partly be blamed on racism. As S’Thembiso Msomi wrote in The Times this morning when he compared the different reaction to the appointment of Marcus and of the new Police Commissioner, Bheki Cele:
In fact, the almost universal acceptance of Marcus’s appointment is in sharp contrast to the negative reaction that followed Mboweni’s first appointment to the post in 1999. He, too, was an ANC loyalist but went on to become one of the most respected heads of the central bank this country has ever seen and those who opposed him initially went on to become some of his staunchest defenders.
In his case, the “cadre deployment” policy clearly yielded the right results for our country. There is a long list of other people whose appointments to various bodies were initially criticised, only for those individuals to later silence their critics by being diligent and fiercely independent in carrying out their assigned duties.
It would be easy, but not entirely correct, to blame the difference in reaction to these appointments to racial prejudices that still prevail in our society.
We live in South Africa, so chances are that Marcus’ race might well have played a role in the positive reaction to her appointment. But I suspect – like Msomi – that the issue is a bit more complex. The reason the appointment of Marcus was hailed by “the markets” and by opposition parties was because Marcus was viewed as a friend of “the markets”. (She must really be good at keeping people guessing, because Cosatu also thinks she will be its friend.) Because she is white, because she was the Chair of Absa Bank, because she does not dress like a gangster, because she can speak that oracle-like language that “the markets” so admired in Allan Greenspan, she was seen as a “safe” appointment. “One uf us,” the markets would say.
When we agree with the views of the person appointed, he or she is usually seen as a good appointment. When we think the person appointed is an idiot, a crook, a liar or a lazy sod, we will complain about the appointment. One of the (many) factors many people use to decide whether the appointee will be lazy, stupid and corrupt, might well be race, but it is seldom the only reason for their decision. (There are those idiots – both black and white – who use race as their only criteria to decide if an appointment is wise or not, but I would hope such people are in a small minority – even on the JSC.)
Of course, this phenomenon is not limited to white people. It also has a reverse effect. That is why some people actually really believe that John Hlophe would be a good Chief Justice – despite the fact that he is an ethically challenged liar. That is also why some people think Hansie Cronje was not a crook – despite the fact that he tearfully confessed to taking bribes on national television.
Pierre says: “The markets”, so I suspect, is really just a group of rich, mostly white, capitalists who believe in a very specific economic system and control much of the levers of the economy and can thus act in often irresponsible ways to give vent to their prejudices to wreck the economy and allow the Rand to tank.
While “the market” is technically the sum total of all economic exchanges, and so everyone’s actions are a part of it, for sure the rich have greater influence on the market than the poor. That’s pretty obvious, given that they have more money with which to make more exchanges.
There’s nothing special about them being white though. Some European cultures a while ago figured out how to use technology to beat up their neighbours, and did it better than anyone else. They were white, but if the Chinese had figured out how to optimise technology (they had iron and gunpowder long before the Europeans!), we’d all be speaking Mandarin moaning about how rich oriental folk owned all the levers. (Or, if Africa hadn’t fallen off the wagon – did you know that tribes in Africa entered the Iron Age several thousand years before Europe did? I’d love to know how they lost their formidable technological advantage!)
So if you assume that most rich people are white (although the richest, I suspect, aren’t, and are living it up in Kuwait and UAE), and you further assume that most people are racist, then yes, rich (white) people get to vent their prejudices on the poor (black) people through their actions in the marketplace. I’m not sure what you can do really to stop that, other than helping poor folk lift themselves out of poverty.
I didn’t actually know Gill Marcus’ ethnicity until I read this article. I can see foreign investors just seeing “worked for ABSA” and thinking “ah, one of our own”, though.
So while it’s tempting to chalk this all up to racism, perhaps we as South Africans just leap to that conclusion because racism is so ubiquitous here?
(As an aside, I cringe whenever I read about “rich white” and “poor black” – just because, as an accident of history, economic class and skin colour’s roughly aligned, doesn’t mean that, say, policies that benefit rich people at the expense of poor people are pro-white racist policies. Or that policies that encourage small enterprises are pro-black – they’re pro-poor!)
Professor, I would respectfully suggest that it may not be correct to regard the phrase ‘the market’ as being closely analogous to the phrase ‘society’s moral fabric’.
Before I seek to substantiate my view here, I would just say that I agree with much of what you have written. And my basic purpose for penning the present post is to draw what I respectfully see as being an appropriate distinction.
Whether something is acceptable to the market seems to be a comparatively accessible investigation when compared to trying to determine whether something accords with society’s moral fabric. For instance, if an appointment inspires the confidence of investors, can we not reliably say that such an appointment is, at least for the time being, one which the market would embrace? I tend to think so. Thus it seems we can identify at least one objectively ascertainable basis for concluding that something such as an appointment is something which the market would welcome.
The determination of society’s moral fabric is not so accessible an investigation – at least not in my opinion. It strikes me as being relatively challenging given that efforts to determine the content and texture of society’s moral fabric are more likely to disclose untested assumptions and prejudices (and conceivably little in the way of objectively determinable grounds) than similar efforts as to the market.
So let me just say that while I think you may be right insofar as ‘the market’ and ‘society’s moral fabric’ are both often mistakenly conceptualised as being tangible and often amount to little beyond bodies of hidden assumptions and prejudices, I think that this mistake is generally made more often as regards the latter.
I would also ask for some assistance from anyone with a background in economics, finance or a related discipline. My question is: how might one define ‘the market’? I am happy to admit that I would loosely define the market as being the broad context in which commercial transactions take place. And this definition seems to support the view that an investigation as to what ‘the market’ could happily receive or embrace can give itself to objective determination. That is, if it helps business, then it is probably going to be well received.
But I am no expert. And I would certainly welcome a more sophisticated definition of ‘the market’ than the one which I have proffered.
“the Markets”– oh, you mean George Soros.
I see various markets, and the appointment of important persons affects different markets in different ways eg
- Hlope as CJ will put the market of ideas on this blog into a frenzy, driving Pierre’s public profile way up
- Marcus as RBG will drive the price of big ethno dresses up as she smooths up for all those rate announcement appearances
- Cele will surely heat up the pantsula broek and hat market
- the appointment of committed commies (ie not our gucci crew) will crash the equity markets and drive up the gold price (when the shit hits the fan a few gold coins might be all that gets you outtahere)
etc
The market the commentators are referring to most is the currency market which reflects the global capitalist view of our future, and our ability to buy new weapons and 4x4s.
Frank, I agree with your comments, especially re the need to eschew the race consciousness that is so beloved of racial nationalists, and many liberals too.
See the article on Michael Hardt in The Weekender: A mixed group of anti-eviction campaigners in Durban marched to the slogan, “We are not The Blacks, we are not The Indians, we are The Poor.”
Here is a brand of ultra-leftism that could help us all.
Pierre, 10 uit 10 en 1 vir netheid. Dankie vir ‘n blog-inskrywing wat nie noodwendig “Constitutional Speaking” korrek is nie. Gaan lees die bloggers se insette. Heel nuwe fris windjie wat waai. Breek (sê) 1 keer per maand weg met nog sulke artikels. Dankie
I like how you add, the “signatures on the banknotes” rhetoric. That’s cool. I’ll see you.
Pierre:
1. What is so bad about allowing the Rand to “tank”? You, me, and others chatterers who enjoy imported books, chocolates, and foreign travel, love a strong rand. But many less fortunate people who work in manufacturing for export can do very well on a cheap Rand. (One of the persistent gripes the U.S. has had with China is that it keeps its currency artificially low to promote its exports; maybe we should follow that example)
2. Your suggestion that race is a component in the “markets’” embrace of GM is dubious. The markets would have been even happier with Trevor, who is less white than GM. And the markets would also have been quite happy with a black man who had GM’s (a) business experience and (b) reputation as a no-nonsense pragmatist. In fact, they might have been happier had someone with GM’s qualifications been black, because he could have lent fiscal conservatism a legitimacy that no white person could (see Tito Mboweni.)
Hi Pierre,
I think you should stick to the constitution. Does it describe markets?
I think that ‘the market’ responded positively means that the brokers, investors and banks did not all run to the ATM to withdraw their funds. Many of these brokers and investors are black and very competent (not at the beck and call of whites). So ‘the markets’ in this case means the people that directs where private funds are allocated. Say for instance, Mr. Malema was appointed instead. Perhaps in this instance, ‘the markets’ would have wondered whether their investments and returns would be safe, prompting them to rather invest their money elsewhere. So the sentiment of the markets is important for us normal people, as it tells us whether our house value will increase or decrease, and whether our retirement funds are invested carefully (by the markets).
Finally something that approximates my area of expertise….;)
As one who works in and interacts with the global market daily, the market is simply that – a place where where goods and services are exchanged for some form of tender, whether it be cash, kind, or whatever. The goods are obviously not necessarily tangible, but things like shares and derivative instruments are still goods.
As for Marcus’ appointment, my theory is that she was well received because she actually knows something about finance, including on a global / multi-national scale (being head of ABSA would do something like that). Given her understanding and experience, foreign investors who are holding foreign currency and South African shares and property for capital appreciation would have been reassured that there will be no immediate large shift in monetary policy, nor will exchange control regulations suddenly completely change. This is the inference when a competent (on paper, at least, for now) head of a country’s central bank is appointed, especially during what are currently very trying and uncertain times for investors (individuals and institutional alike).
When Mr Cele was appointed however, the reaction was predictably one of disappointment. I don’t know if this is because he is black so much as because he was appointed as head of the SAPS without ever having been a policeman…the reaction would have been the same had PdV, a white legal expert (but somebody who, with no offense intended Pierre, cannot even define “the market”), been appointed head of the Reserve Bank. It is difficult to imagine how Cele’s appointment will aid the improvememnt of service delivery by the police, and help increase morale – he simply does not know the ins and outs of the police, because he has never been there. He doesn’t even seem to understand s49, given his recent comments, and this is a critical section to the functioning of the police! This is the joy of being a loyal ANC cadre – the idea that you have to work your way up through experience to be the top dog is an afterthought.
Simply put – Marcus, Head of Reserve Bank, ex-head of ABSA, years of experience in the international finance arena. Makes sense. Cele, Head of Police, never been a policeman in any sense, makes no sense. The reactions will naturally be different.
As for the contention that the markets are controlled by white capitalists, that is doubtful in this day and age. The global market is made up of many other markets (like a country is made up of many towns and cities), and if you want to know who is pulling the strings in Africa, you should be looking East, not West…Europe and America are too concerned about human rights to get too heavily invested in most of Africa. Fortunately (for them), China and Dubai et al do not have the same concerns and are currently buying up large parts of the continent – both literally and figuratively (remember when we sold the Waterfront?). The markets are out to make money, be it off black, white, yellow or brown – the laws of supply and demand dictate market movements for the most part, not the skin colour of anybody.
Marcus was also a deputy in the Reserve Bank during the years the Rand tanked heavily. She’s been there and seen it and in the same way that our preferred choices for Chief Justice should be people with a proven track record for morally courageous and constitutionally correct decisions, she was rightly one of the candidates for the position of Governor.
She has that elusive asset – latent knowledge.
Pierre
This is a lot of hoo-ha to say that you don’t approve of Hlophe, but there are many interesting undertones in this piece.
I might add that racism is possibly a bigger mythological dragon than “the markets” and “the moral fabric of society” will ever be. Time will certainly tell.
Again with the racism!!!
My personal opinion is that the only people who seem to be obsessed with the race issue are the ANC and the Prof.
As The Big Slipper stated, the general reactions to the two appointments cited are based on competency. They have nothing to do with race or any other issue, although any form of dissension is invariably put down to being nothing more than race-based.
An example of this is the ANC’s new approach to the Western Cape and Northern Cape. Their analysis of their lack of performance in those two areas is that they did not have enough Coloured representation within the Provincial Executives. For some reason it completely escapes them that the issues are more about service delivery, than race.
Bheki Cele is not only lacking in critical experience to manage our police force, but is also now embroiled in a culpable homicide case, where his involvement appears to be somewhat peculiar. Gill Marcus, on the other hand, has a proven “financial” track record, has held high positions within her area of expertise and has not, to my knowledge, been implicated in or been accused of, any scandalous activities.
If both parties were white or both were black, nobody would question the dissenting voices between the two appointments.
Will there ever come a time in this country when we can engage in discourse logically and with reference to the “facts” of an issue, without resorting to the race card as a means of silencing dissenting viewpoints?
Sorry, just one other point.
The “markets” to which Pierre refers are not only local markets, but reflect the attitudes and financial “faith” of international investors and role-players.
These international investors do not have the same racial issues as South Africans and their attitudes to investment in South Africa are based on sound economic principles. Accordingly, the appointment of a white woman over a black person will have no bearing on their decision-making. What would affect their choices would be whether or not the person heading our Reserve Bank has the credibility, experience and competence to perform this function.
Prof, no offence but I think your out of your depth here. Perhaps you should stick to the issues you are well versed in
Prof. thanks for a good article the majority of whose contents I agree with, with the exception of the Honourable Justice Hlophe comments.If Hlophe doesn’t get CJship indeed SA will be the poorer and we will all regard him as the greatest CJ SA never had, as the attorney eloquently argued his case over the weekend on City Press.
Pierre, a very good and eye-opening reflection on the concepts “markets” and “moral fabric of society”!
Haai Pierre,
Laas in die middel 80s gesels op Stellenbosch, maar ek volg met genot jou daaglikse “wyshede”.
Rakende jou artikel oor “die markets” – ek stem saam met jou dat ons land altyd behep gaan wees met die hele rasisme ding, en dat alle hoë profiel aanstellings altyd tot ‘n mate deur ‘n rasisme-bril gesien gaan word. Een ding wat jou artikel egter nie in ag neem nie, is “track rekord”. Ek dink dit bepaal nie soseer of ‘n aanstelling vriendelik sal wees nie, maar gee ‘n indikasie van bekwaamheid asook gerusstelling aan markte dat sanity sal prevail wanneer dit nodig is. Ek voel maar net dis die een aspek wat jy nie aangespreek het nie, en wat die verskil tussen reaksies op Cele en Marcus se aantellings kan verklaar.
Samantha, I think you somewhat overstate the point by suggesting that racial perceptions have no bearing at all on international investor opinion. The “market” is not an uber-rational abstraction that can entirely transcend the prejudices of its participants. The aggregated racist tendencies of investors may well have the effect that African investments are undervalued. Therein lies the grain of truth in Pierre’s musings.
What Pierre does not appreciate is that by far the most powerful force in the markets is greed. As any Marxist could tell him, capitalist greed is the one imperative so strong that it can ultimately swamp racism. Hence, an undervalued African investment that yields spectacular returns will not remain under valued for very long.
Samantha, I enjoyed reading your post dated 6 August at 9:12am. Although I would say respectfully that I doubt the Professor is obsessed with race. To me it seems that the more accurate account of the Professor’s tendency towards discussing race is his fairly keen awareness of the unfortunate role that race plays in our society.
Now the general subject matter of your post has been discussed often enough on this blog. But yours strikes me as falling within a fairly small minority insofar as you seem sincerely concerned about the frequency with which people resort to race as means to silence dissenting or contrary views.
I would like to think that at least some people share your frustration given that the employment of the race card tends to obscure many of the true issues of the day and thus precludes us from making headway in some material respects.
Initially – and somewhat misguidedly – I thought to ask you what it might take to eradicate resort to the race card. But even a cursory look at that question reveals that it is overbroad.
So if you are interested, I would like to look at your views on a question which is narrower in that it is an inquiry which people could potentially use to benefit their own lives and which does not require vast material resources.
The question is: what might it take for an individual to earnestly confront his or her prejudices?
@ Michael,
Again, I respectfully disagree that investor confidence in African markets is racially-motivated. Simple economics would dictate that one is less positive about investing in the markets of a country that is politically unstable and/or financially unstable. African countries, unfortunately, to a large extent fall within this category.
South Africa, on the other hand, is perceived, internationally, to be the economic power-house of Africa. Thanks to the excellent guidance of Trevor Manual and Tito Mboweni, our economy is stable. And, another round of peaceful, fair and free elections this year supports international confidence of our stable political situation.
Accordingly, investor confidence in South Africa is relatively high.
This post was not about the African markets, but about those associated with South Africa and the reactions to a “white” appointment. My argument is that the colour of Gill Marcus’ skin will not be of any critical importance to foreign investors, especially given the fact that we have a “black” government, which in itself has not affected investor confidence.
As long as we continue to remain a financially and politically stable market, and appoint competent individuals in critical financial positions, investor confidence will remain high, irrespective of the colour of the skin of the Governor of the Reserve Bank.
Mdu
“If Hlophe doesn’t get CJship indeed SA will be the poorer and we will all regard him as the greatest CJ SA never had”
lmao ….hold on my sides are hurting i need to catch my breath here, Pierre thats gotta be the quote of the week.
@ Leigh,
Thank you for your post and your question.
I am on my way out to a meeting right now and would like to give your question the due regard it requires. I will respond to your question a little later, after I have given it real thought.
It is a tough one and I hope that I can give it the attention and response it deserves.
Samantha, thank you for your post. You would be doing me the service so take all the time you like. And I hope your meeting proves to be fruitful.
Samantha, I do not think you read my post very carefully. I did not say that investor attitudes to Africa were racially motivated. I suggested that racial prejudices might be a factor in overall perceptions, but that bigotry would tend to be swamped by more “rational” considerations of the type you mention. As you rightly suggest, history shows that you do not have to be a racist to be an, “Afro-Pessimist.”
Chris Mcdaniel, I really believe what I even if you poke fun at it!
Indeed Micheal, indeed, I am not a racist, but I cannot help to ask myself: “What if this appointment of Marcus is as good as it gets?”
Mdu, with respect I do not think anyone doubts your sincerity or passion. Indeed your ardour is quite obvious. What some people seem to doubt are your reasons.
I do not mean to level a personal attack at you. But apart from Mzo, I – and presumably many others too – have yet to engage with anyone who, while being fairly reluctant to condemn Hlophe, would seriously consider whether he deserves any of the disfavour that he bears.
So I would respectfully ask that you distinguish between zeal and rationale.
@ Leigh,
Thank you, my meeting was extremely fruitful. I was approached by some people in my town to join them in a community-based project which they have run for the past 8 years. To place this in perspective, as well as to provide some additional support for my answer to your question, let me provide you with the context within which this is such an exciting proposition for me, as well as our community.
I live in a small town to which we moved 8 months ago. I have never been involved in politics, but by February I had realized that there was no DA presence in our town, while the ANC and COPE were extremely active. To cut a long story short, I established a branch of the DA, of which I was elected Chairperson. As an aside, my branch is 80% Coloured, as is our Executive. The people who approached me today are two executive members of the ANC in our town. They are also both black males, while I, quite obviously, am a white female. They have asked me to become involved because they have identified me as somebody who has a genuine interest in community upliftment, despite my colour and my political affiliations. On a personal level, this is a huge compliment.
Within this context, let me attempt to give my answer to your question.
I believe that prejudice and racism are essentially elements of self-preservation. By maintaining an “us and them”, superiority mindset, we ensure that we are prevented from having to too closely examine ourselves, our ideas and our preconceptions. Furthermore, by using race as a separator, we can easily dismiss the opinions of others that differ from our own as racist, because our very separateness would enforce the idea that the dissension is based on our “otherness”. It is only when we begin to integrate with other people that we are forced to critically examine the essence of who we are and whether our opinions and ideas are the result of a true attempt at understanding other opinions and then dissenting, or merely as a result of insularity.
I speak only for myself in terms of answering your question, but my experience has been that by taking myself out of my comfort zone and dealing with people who are innately different from me, has allowed me to examine my own preconceptions, misconceptions and prejudices. What has emerged for me is that the nature of my prejudice is not what I thought it was. The core of my prejudice was intolerance – intolerance of what was different and of what I did not understand.
I believe that the only way we will overcome our own prejudices is to truly and genuinely attempt to understand each other. We need to interact as members of a community and not as adversaries. We need to find commonality with others upon which we can build real relationships. And most importantly, we need to help each other instead of continually trying to diminish others in our quest to maintain our own importance and separateness.
Leigh, I hope this goes some way to answering your question and I apologise for the length of my response.
PdV was wondering ‘.. what exactly “the markets” might be.’
The following analogy with an apparently less abstract physical system
might explain:
If you throw a bucket of water into a swimming pool, the ‘pile’ quickly
disperses to equalise the ‘level’, because each molecule of water moves
and ‘communicates’ with its neighbours — to equalise the ‘level’.
So too, when there is free exchange of information and ability to transact
[buy & sell] between parties, a market exists in any tradable entity/s.
As the water-molecules system seems to have its own life and intelligence,
so to, [annoying to some including PdV] the ‘market’ is spoken of as if
it had it’s own intelligence.
Re. law-people’s lack of knowledge of the functioning of the real world,
persons with scientific or accounting knowledge, might be astounded that
multiple law-people can’t see the obvious conclusions of the following
facts and law:–
=== FACTS ===
The municipal authorities have [admittedly] been billing the defendant
wrongly, eg. by a computer-error generated 10% extra per month. Simplified:-
Month, Bill, Correct Amnt owing
1 11 10
2 22 20
3 33 30
4 44 40
5 55 50
At month 1 the defendant notifies the MA that he is with-holding payment
until the false billing is fixed.
At month 2 the defendant receives a ‘notice of arrears’ that he will be
sued, if he does not pay the $22 [then claimed] owed.
At month 3 the MA contrives to issue a summons, which the defendant will
not receive, in order to later get a default judgment.
At month 4, the MA obtains a default judgment against the defendant.
At month 5, the defendant, unaware of the summons and default judgment,
writes to the MA:
“I now owe $50, which exceeds your claim for $22, so please accept my
enclosed spreadsheet detailing all calculations, so that I may settle; or
else provide argument that/why my calculations are wrong”.
At month 6, the defendant becomes aware of the default judgment and
initiates an application for the rescission of the default judgment.
=== APPLICABLE LAW ===
Default judgments can be applied to be rescinded/set-aside.
If the defendant admits the claim [eg. a debt] the rescission will be refused.
== Outcome from SA municipal-authority & Magistrate & WLD-appeal Courts ==
The Magistrate [who the record shows couldn't find the replying affidavit before the hearing] refused the rescission on [written] grounds that
“the defendant admitted owing [even more than] the claim”.
The WLD appeal judges acknowledged that the magistrate’s written grounds were
absurd: i.e. the admission concerned events which occurred AFTER the judgment;
by changing the grounds [to one not appearing in the papers, and hence
denied the self-represented litigant, due process] to: “Oh well, at time
of summons, your spreadsheet still shows that you ‘admitted owing more than
the claim’, so we refuse”. Which is also wrong because:-
*! THE claim !*, i.e. owing $22 or $20 for 2 months service is the issue,
and is rightly specified unambiguously in the summons.
The issue is *NOT*, what was owing AFTER the arrears notice.
— — —
Importantly, the applicable ordinance [17 of Tvl s49] unknown to the self
represented defendant, at the time of appeal, interprets to:-
“Before the council can sue they MUST send an arrears notice, and then
wait a further 6 weeks. And the action applies to the debt up to the
mandatory arrears notice.” I.e. charges incurred AFTER the arrears notice,
belong to a [possibly further] DIFFERENT matter.
This is logical since: the council’s debt is secured, since it has power
to veto the transfer of the property until all debts are paid.
— — —
The above events, represent the well documented [I've kept records, since
I deliberately 'setup' the MA] record of how my rental-property/pension
was confiscated by the SA incompetent local authorities and Courts.
But of course this is trivial compared to the Hlope & Zuma circuses.
Dear Pierre, the appointments of both Marcus and Gordhan are revealing and interesting precisely because “the left” and “the markets” were both delighted. ‘The market is’: “the global capital market; the ebb and flow of wealth and money and investment. …. it is not an organisation or a set of policy formulations. It is a system for aggregating the way people behave. It is immune to appeal or argument. It has no manifesto – except to favour security of ownership and the freedom of its own movement.”
You may be interested to see how I dealt with this identical question at http://nicborain.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/the-spirit-of-polokwane/
Please note that the joke in the headline is “original” and Zapiro was kind enough to acknowledge me in his Sunday Times cartoon that used the same gag. Excellent blog you run, thanks. Nic Borain
Oh, shoot !
This most inappropriate [compared to Usenet] web-based means of communication, distorts [by removing formatting spaces] the vital 3 column table. Perhaps that’s why law-people can’t understand even the kindergarden version, where at month 3, the bill is for $33, but the correct amount is $30….etc.
Imagine the absurdity of ‘denying the rescission’ because since the ‘defendant admits’; ‘there is no real issue to
be given due process to’. This despite the fact that the spreadsheet clearly asserts that there is a continual and hence accumulating error in dispute. And the Court’s logic is simply based on manipulating the comparison dates !
Samantha, thank you for your response. I am glad your meeting turned out to be fruitful as your endeavour strikes me as being noble indeed. Further, you need not worry about the relative length of your post. For a start, it seems mine will be at least as long. And secondly, it was a pleasure to look at your sincere and well-considered views.
I understood your views as follows: first, prejudice and racism are basically means of self-preservation insofar as they enable us to avoid interrogating our own ideas and prejudices. This means that we need not confront the fairly daunting possiblity that our deeply held and even foundational views may just be wrong or at least quite poorly conceived.
Secondly, you say that the root cause of your own prejudice was intolerance which you seem to link to the fear which one may well experience when having to confront one’s views.
And thirdly, the solution which you present runs as follows: we should try to understand each other.
I agree with your position. And if I may, I would respectfully propose to unpack the solution which you suggest. I think that a two-faceted approach may yield some positive results. The approach would involve (a) trying to regard differences between people as fairly superficial (although of course potentially quite difficult to negotiate) and (b), that at heart we are none of us all that different from ‘others’.
Finally, let me just say that I am glad that you and people in your community prove that, despite racial and political differences, tolerant and meaningful collaboration is possible.
Samantha,
I was heartened to hear about your involvement in your community which has attracted even the notice of the “opposition party” members. It is such a nice thing when people can put aside their differences for the good of the community.
I wish you all a productive working relationship to benefit your community in that project.
@ Leigh,
I do so enjoy your discourse!!
You have certainly summed up my viewpoint far more eloquently and succinctly than I was able to do.
In response to your “unpacking” of the solution with which I agree, let me, if I may just add an additional point. In order for people to move beyond the race issue, I believe that we need to confront our own insecurities. Racism is nothing more than bullying. By denouncing others based on purely superficial elements, racists are able to elevate themselves above those they denounce. As with a bully, the only way to feel “superior” is to make others “inferior”.
On the flip side of that, I believe, that the use of the race-card to silence criticism is merely a perpetuation of this. In other words, when somebody cries racism purely on the basis of them having been criticised, they do nothing more than reinforce a stereotype. For example, if someone is castigated for not doing their work properly and their response is that they are only being criticised because they are black, are they not reinforcing an idea that blacks are lazy? Just a thought.
Finally, I can assure you that the racial issues in our town are far from resolved. We have a club in town which is “whites only”. A number of us refuse to attend any function at the club and will not support it any way. We have also recently had a major confrontation between Blacks and Coloureds. There are a number of white people who have never been into either the Coloured or Black areas in our town and are horrified that I spend so much time there.
The only way that we can overcome racism in our town is to ignore it, and lead by example. You can’t change a person’s attitude with words. You can only change it through action and example.
@ Sne,
Thank you for that. I have been trying to convince everyone that until 2011, we need to shelve politics and work together for the good of our town. It seems pointless to me for us all to be working towards the same end goal, while working against each other.
I genuinely like the ANC leaders in our town and having worked together with them recently on a big Department of Social Development project, I believe that they have realised that we can achieve far more working together than apart.
They have even stopped trying to recruit me!!
Let’s write some stuff to test elink-with-forms ?
Samantha wrote:
<>
Wow !! You’re circular-logic-wise defining and denouncing ‘racism’
in one breath. Like asserting that bad-boys are evil !
Samantha, I very much agree with you that racism is about bullying with a view to avoiding insecurities. Indeed I think that this is an important insight. It certainly provides a convincing explanation as to why racism is so troublesome – although I am sure there are other reasons also.
So perhaps the following position will wash: to confront racism is to confront not only misguided ideas but also human weakness. And thus as you and I appear to agree, it is the racist himself that must make the greatest effort.
I am also saddened to hear that your town houses some very disconcerting racial divisions. But on rather a brighter note, I agree with your solution. Although I will say that while I certainly do agree that setting an example is the appropriate solution, it seems that such a wise approach could well require a fair bit of patience.
like a round circle or reversing backwards