In a sure sign that the era of Thabo Mbeki style high handed government might be on the wane, Provincial and Local Government Minister Sicelo Shiceka said yesterday that the government would initiate legislation to give effect to the will of the majority of the communities affected by boundary disputes,
About, bloody, high time, I would say. According to Business Day Shiceka said:
“Intensive executive action will be needed to smooth the transfer to Gauteng.” Shiceka said he intended to fast-track a process of consultation in the Moutse and surrounding areas and the work began last month .
“Government officials will engage with structures and stakeholders in the community. Thereafter, I and other senior officials will meet with representatives of community stakeholders and structures.
“The goal of these engagements will be to examine how best to accommodate the views of the majority of the affected communities.”
This is wonderful news. The way in which the cross-border municipality issue was handled by the Mbeki government was scandalous, to say the least. The expressed wishes of the people were ignored and they were merely told that they had to shut up – despite having been faithful supporters of the ANC in previous elections.
But suddenly everything has changed and now the will of the majority of these residents will prevail. What on earth could have changed?
First, there is a new Minister and a new President who seem less assured of their own all-encompassing wisdom to do what is right for the people – even when the people disagree with them. In the Mbeki years it was the President and his cabinet who told people what they wanted and needed and the people who had to follow. If the ungrateful sods dared to disagree with the wisdom of the Dear Annointed One, they were called names. Suddenly this kind of arrogance and disregard for the wishes of the people have been replaced with a far more inclusive and humble approach to governance.
Haleluja, is all I can say.
But there is of course a second rather important reason for this sudden change of heart and that reason is called COPE. Suddenly the votes of all these communities who are dissatisfied with the high-handed actions of an uncaring and arrogant government, are votes to be competed over.
Never mind that some of the COPE leaders actually pushed through these absurd and heartless changes. Come the next election COPE might have champoined the plight of these communities and might have gained a hundred or two hundred thousand extra votes.
This is why I think the formation of COPE might turn out to be a good thing for our democracy – even though I am rather sceptical about some of the leaders in charge of the new party.
Competition in politics is a good thing, but so far there has been very little real competition in our politics because of the disasterous way in which Tony Leon positioned the Democratic Alliance as a “fight b(l)ack(s)” party. Who on earth among the affected communities with more than two brain cells would have voted for the official opposition when that opposition was so clearly not going to act in the best interest of the poor and the marginalised?
And the ANC knew this all too well and thus often acted in a way that showed a callous disregard for the interest of those very same poor and marginalised voters.
But suddenly with the new kids on the block, there is a real danger that the ANC would actually lose votes if it acts in a stupid, arrogant and insensitive manner towards whole communities. And suddenly we hear these wonderful noises coming from ANC government Ministers. Some Ministers now even seem to care about the poor and one or two Ministers who were too busy becoming tired and emotional, stealing other people’s watches, or getting liver transplants have suddenly been fired or moved sideways.
For that reason alone I hope COPE does fairly well at the polls (my tentative prediction is that the party could get between 6-9% of the vote) even though the new party is filled with many of the same arrogant and insensitive people who often acted in such a callous way during the Mbeki years.
Democracy will be the winner and with it the poor and marginalised South Africans who cannot privatise services and actually rely on the state to deliver. Viva democracy!
A good post Prof, but allow me to disagree as to the second reason for the change of heart, it is not COPE especially as far as Khutsong’s people are concerned, remember when Lekota wanted to go there and invite invite them to his convention they, in no uncertain terms , promised him physical harm because of the arrogant manner he handled their plight,so they wont vote cope and Lekota!
Powerful and strong opposition not motivated by greed, like cope, is good for democracy. I say the DA may still do well in the forthcoming elections unlike this enigmatic cope that everyone knows its leader is motivated purely by Polokwane sour grapes and concomiattant greed!
I agree with the sentiment that competition breeds competence. However, competition also leads to short-termism and populism in the resolution of policy issues, hence the concomitant need for rational policy making. Case in point being Khutsong, where, inspite of sentiment, rational policy consideration dictates that the North West be responsible for administration thereof owing to Khutsong’s proximity thereto. If Khutsong remains part of Gauteng, well and good for those who desire this outcome, but the peoples of Khutsong must also accept that they will be last on the list for government disbursements (which will invariably favour areas with larger populations, visibility and therefore a better electoral reservoir, such as Soweto, etc). So much for rational governance!
I think the vast majority of South Africans have misconstrued the 1994 revolution as being a majoritaranian revolution for majoritaranian positions. A form of sovereignty by the voters in substitution of parliamentary sovereignty and in negation of the factual constitutional sovereignty that is the actual essence of this revolution. Hence the continued obsession and clamoring for some form of governance based on indications of popularity in accordance with polls. Therefore, regardless the imperatives of demarcation from a service delivery perspective, as driven by provincial administrations that have been legitimately elected (and who risk electoral loss because of an unpopular yet rational policy), we must follow self-defeating policies that are popular, in contravention of the constitutional imperative of government to act reasonably (and therefore rationally). Today, Khutsong, tomorrow the abolition of property rights, reintroduction of the death penalty, re-racialisation of policy, etc, because there’s a popular clamor?
I think this whole demarcations debate has been focused less on the actual issues than on the rather newsworthy images from the likes of Khutsong (amplified by a media and other stakeholders who refused to look at the greater debate because of their vested dislike of a specific regime). Hence, the majority of people who have formulated opinions on this matter know only the perspective of the peoples of Khutsong, etc, know that there was possibly issues with consultation, but do not know the rationale advanced by government and administrators for taking the politically brave and unpopular move to demarcate.
Lastly, it is a politically shrewd strategy that is being followed by the ANC to address the most unpopular policies that had been attributed to Mbeki (notwithstanding that, as admitted by inter alia Pallo Jordan, they were ANC policies). It is guaranteed to convince those with a weak aptitude of politics, policy formulation in the ANC, and a deep-seated hatred of Mbeki, that there has been a change within the ANC while those of us who participated in the structures of the ANC know very well that there is no such thing that has occurred.
Vuyo
Thanks for a well argued post but the fact remains people were not properly consulted and when they protested as a result Lekota promised them soldiers as he professed to be a benevolent dictator who knew what was good for them!
Mdu // Jan 6, 2009 at 11:46 am
I find it amazing that the response of the Mbeki administration to Khutsong is construed by you and Pierre as “arrogant”! The people of Khutsong participated in an electoral process that led to the election the ANC as their government in all levels of government. They entrusted the ANC with the good administration of their country, at all levels. After due consultation (read the CC judgment) the decision to demarcate was made and legislation to that effect passed. In response, and under the guidance of inter alia the YCL (who sought the chaos for purposes of Polokwane), the people of Khutsong decided to burn property, cause physical harm to peoples, murder, rape, pillage, intimidate, etc, all in defiance of the law of the land and the Constitution. They were in effect perpetrators of crime regardless the merits or demerits of their concerns! In addressing this matter government correctly and without even being given due praise (1) sent local councilors (who were evicted and some murdered, etc, (2) sent the security forces to check the overt offences perpetrated by the residents of Khutsong, who discharged their duties competently and with restraint, (3) sent a senior minister and leader of the ANC, who was threatened with violence. In other words, when government responded, it was met with pure and unjustifiable anarchy (whose apologists included SACP, YCL, the DA, media, etc).
Khutsong residence could have (1) approached the courts for a review, which they did, (2) mandated their local councilors to reject demarcation, (3) engaged political parties and other alliances to lobby against the demarcation, (4) waited for elections and voted out the ANC, (5) have used the opportunity to engage Lekota and voice their concerns, etc. They chose (1) anarchy, (2) Rape, (3) Pillage, (4) Destruction, (5) Death, all of which are unacceptable in terms of our constitution and in terms of their obligations as citizens! The ANC now intends to reward the citizens of Khutsong for breaking the law, therefore encouraging the notion that constitutional institutions and procedures ought to be ignored in favour of the brevity and satisfaction of rape and pillage. Those who opposed this notion, in a discharge of their responsibilities in terms of the constitution to condemn such a notion, are now being branded as arrogant! We are then surprised when those actions are conducted against foreigners when we have in fact legitimized similar acts in Khutsong as being “legitimate service deliver protests” by persons who are “not being listened to” by the government.
Khutsong and the demarcation debate in general were not about democracy, but were mere battlegrounds for political domination, by those in the “left” who sought to show the Mbeki led government as “anti-poor”, and for those in the opposition benches to show there’s been a failure of service delivery. To illustrate the foregoing, one must ask why have there been less “service delivery” protests in 2008 (with harsher economic conditions, and worse government delivery owing to “two centres of power”) than the six months pre-Polokwane (characterized by 10000 such protests and a crippling public sector strike and carnage by striking security guards)? Rather than submitting to general lawlessness, and sympathizing because the authors thereof are poor and marginalized, we ought to be praising those, like Mbeki and Lekota, who condemned the orchestrated destruction in Khutsong rather than peddle epithets like “arrogant”.
You made very good points Vuyo most of which I cannot dispute as you even refer to the CC judgment to demostrate how well versed you are with the matter,nonetheless I insist, as even Pres Mbeki was to admit in his speech in Polokwane “why didn’t somebody tell me” , that the ANC leadership prior to Polokwane was benevolent in its approach to governing as it self-righteously believe to know what is right for the masses regardless of the masses’ wishes,dissent from within was crushed, and Lekota was conspicous of thissycophantic style of leadership,deposed in Polokwane!
Vuyo,
I find it bizarre that you can lump the DA and the media in with the SACP and YCL (who were among the causes of the violence) as “government apologists”.
Can you provide references?
Libdem // Jan 6, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Libdem, Suresh Roberts coined a term which I think best explains this bizarre scenario: “complicity of opposites”. To the SACP and YCL, service delivery protests are a manifestation of the ills of capitalism and the failure of the state’s “pro-market” macro-economic policy. Indeed, Marxist-Leninist theory dictates that vanguard movements (which they consider themselves to be) ought to utilize the anger and dissatisfaction which is a precondition of these protests in order to mobilize the electorate. This is not withstanding the actual origin of the anger or dissatisfaction (e.g. local socio-economic and political conflicts, criminal element, etc). The SACP and YCL, particularly pre-Polokwane, therefore publicized, promoted the protests and championed the propagators thereof, as it suited their political strategy vis-à-vis the Mbeki regime and their wish to delegitimize it as unpopular with the poor, in order to add weight to the call for this leaderships removal.
To the DA and other neo-liberal actors in our society, service delivery protests are a manifestation of bad policy and administration on the side of government. The issue is therefore promoted by the DA (and its media and NGO acolytes) as a national agenda , because of its stark presentational value, without a factual analysis of the cause (i.e. is it local conflicts, service delivery failures, crime, etc). Indeed government attempts at proper analysis are interpreted as a failure to address the issue! Note however that the DA did not actively promote these service protests and accompanying violence but merely used them for its own ideological purposes (although it was suggested by the ANC in 2006 that certain western based left-of-centre NGOs were financing the YCL for purposes encouraging theses protests, which suggestion was vehemently denied by the SACP. See the response of the SACP to the critique by the ANC of the SACP’s 2006 policy discussion document).
The interests of the Socialist left and the neo-liberal right, in attributing these protests to an actor whom they both despise, therefore coincide despite their respective ideological differences. Criminality, actual service delivery concerns, ethnic conflict, demarcations, local social tensions, etc, as causes, are ignored in favour of a blanket analysis that suits the respective ideologies of both these actors, both of whom have a vested interest. Hence a complicity of opposites!
You may be aware that a formal enquiry was to be held by government, pre-polokwane, jointly with actors such as IDASA and opposition parties, in order to assess the suggestion that these were orchestrated protests. It was soon quashed after Polokwane (partly because, upon the election of Zuma, most of these “protests” mysteriously ceased occurring in “thousands” to a few isolated incidences, save for the Xenophobia crisis!).
Regarding your request for references, I suggest that you read the IDASA report, ISS report, the YCL and SACP discussion documents regarding this matter, comments by government, and analysis by various NGOs in respect thereto, as well as the media reports and their stark coincidence with the political situation within the ANC. Note as well the correlation between Labour union violent activity and the progression of the race for the presidency of the ANC.
Note, lastly, that I refer to them as apologists of those participating in these protests rather than “government apologists” as stated in your posting.
RE: Prof
I am very sorry to say this Prof, but the blogs lately have been so anti-ANC that its hard to ignore this fact. Have u been poached by COPE? It is quite essential for academics such as youself to remain untainted, and reserve certain comments. I am aware of your rights to freedom of speech. But as the webmaster of this blog i think you should be more sensitive about how you pass information. If you would like to surface your own political agenda then you should do so by changing the name of the blog to begin with.
I have also realised that you are invited by the media quite often to share your knowlegde on various topics…if this deep seated hatred of yours against the ANC should be transfared to the average highly receptive, easily decieved south african citizen then you would be foolish indeed.
Thatha Vuyo Thatha!
Of late, I have come to identify Thabo Mbeki with the man at the centre of Francisco De Goya’s El Tris de Mayo 1814 painting.
The aggression that is shown by people like the owner of this blog is nothing shot of the firing squads behavior in that painting.
Only difference is, Mbeki is not on his knees. He is standing defiantly.
Vuyo // Jan 6, 2009 at 2:07 pm
With reference to your last first, thank you for the clarification. I am sure you can see how reading the final sentence of that particular paragraph I misunderstood your referring to apologists as being apologists for the actions of government, rather than apologists for the anarchy. Apologies
I do however, note that DA’s stance on this matter was that the residents of Khutsong and Merafong should exercise self-determination as to which province they should reside in (ttp://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=13&set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=nw20070717144845193C964126).
I don’t see criticism of the government as being “apologist” for the anarchy which arose from government action and inaction. I see it as the bona fide role of opposition political parties.
If I am missing something here, please enlighten me.
@Paul Brislin
What exactly is wrong with disliking the ANC? Or any political party for that matter? If you have a brain start using it to think critically about things, instead of just bleating the ANC’s praises regardless of what may be.
Secondly, the majority of our citizens, who you call “highly receptive” and “easily deceived” voted the ANC (which you love so much) into power, in spite of many very obvious and glaring shortcomings – this doesn’t say much in defense of your party, or its supporters if they are to be so easily “led astray”.
To the issue at hand, I hate election time. All these promises, houses getting built suddenly, people getting listened to, JZ telling each and every stakeholding group what they want to hear. Do you think the government really suddenly gives a damn about the will of the people? Of course not, its simply politically expedient to do so at present. If the government cared about the will of the people, it woulod pay attention to South Africans, regardless of political affiliation, skin colour, tribal origins, or whatever else you can think of. Instead, you need to be a card carrying ANC member before you can even begin to work your way up high enough for somebody of consequence to hear you.
Alternatively, you could become a cartoonist or an Archbishop, but beware – the ANC gets VERY upset if you hurt their feelings and they can’t shut you up using “internal processes” because you’re not actually a member.
The will of the people exists in fairy tales for the most part, in my cynical opinion.
“Never mind that some of the COPE leaders actually pushed through these absurd and heartless changes. Come the next election COPE might have champoined the plight of these communities and might have gained a hundred or two hundred thousand extra votes.’
Ja-nee, I almost chocked on my low calorie Banana smoothie there.
Khutsong was probably the beginning of the end for Terror Lekota, and really, with such popularity with the people who can blame him ?
“When Lekota arrived, the crowd hurled abuse at him, saying they were not going to vote, and that he must “voertsek”. They sang derogatory songs, among them that they would cut off his testicles. ”
( amadlandawonye.wikispaces.com/Khutsong+vs+Lekota,+The+Star )
Luckily they were not singing Umshini Wami yet.
The current ANC of JZ is simply cleaning the mess of TM and P. Lekota. This has nothing to do with DA-LIGHT lead by Lekota. I dont see how can this light DA be a threat to the ANC when the actual DA isn’t. In fact, with Terror so busy trying to please all the “Baas Koekemoers” of this country, they will get between, NOT 6-9%, but 0,6-O,9% from the DA not the ANC. Watch this space!
The Big Slipper – Your ‘cynical opinion’ is actually spot-on. I agree with your post in every respect.
Ozoneblue – Ooh that must have really frightened poor Trevor Llekota. But, can you think how such a song would threaten poor (virile) Jacob Zuma if he does not deliver? (And, between you and me, I don’t think he will, because he can’t.)
Spuy – Jou bitterheid gaan jou nog laat stik. But, even though I am on record for saying that I do not like or trust Lekota as a leader, you’re on. COPE is going to take much more than 9%. Has the ANC now decided on an election date? I want to plan my holliday and be sure that, even though I might be absent from this country on election day, that my vote counts. But, I hasten to add, I will not vote COPE or DA. (Hope I got you worried there.)
I agree with Prof. that the DA has positioned itself badly (and is still doing so now).
I just hope Cope gets a fraction more support than the DA and unseat Helen Zilly and her English Liberals as the “official” opposition.
Then a true opposition party can be grown. All the word salad about this-and-that is not essential in this debate.
An opposition is rarely born big and strong. It does not happen spontaneously. It has to be planned and build. Even with Cope as the leading minority party in South Africa, the true opposition will still not be among the fragmented 30% opposition voters spread between 20 parties.
There is no opposition to the ANC outside the ANC. And this is the reality of our democracy and situation here. That is why loud-hailing politics have little value.
The only anchor still remain our negotiated constitution and its values. Civil society needs to get its act together in claiming these values under the constitution.
And then we need to strengthen good governance and government. We need people who does not shrink at challenges and start loud-mouth tactics. We need doers and not talkers to assist in this process.
I chose to make government work better rather than making the lame opposition shout louder.
No leader should be trusted and allowed to usurp true people power. People and their organs should keep the leaders (also opposition) in check all the time. We do not need toe-licking or subserviant lapdogs, but true guardians of our democracy that will rise and tower above duminitive issues.
Giants do not follow in the footsteps of others. They leave their own trial.
Forge ahead, regardless of suspicions and people looking for excuses. Conspirators aside, leave your own mark, make your own mistakes and be true unto yourself.
anonymouse – “And, between you and me, I don’t think he will, because he can’t.”
Oh yes he can.
“I cannot say I am leading the party, but I am representing it. The party has the power to recall me if I don’t act according to its wishes. And so you have the same powers to recall elected ministers if you are unhappy with their performance.” http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=912291
This is what I want to hear an ANC president saying, Zuma is sounding more and more like Mandela and less and less like Mbeki.
Vuyo, no one has yet been able to explain why these territories had to be incorporated into North West etc. Yes, cross-border municipalities created difficulties but this could have been solved by incorproating the whole municipality into Gauteng etc. But arrogant apparachnicks decided what was best for the people (although the people knew all too well that this was not in their best interest). I call this arrogance: when you tell people what is good for them and deny them their own experiences with reference to some abstract principles.
Mr Brislin, please read these posts again: I am rather critical of some ANC leaders, yes, but also of COPE and the DA. As an academic it is my job to point out problems and be critical. I do not think anyone or any party is above criticism – not in a democracy at least. I hate no political party but will refuse to join any political party because I wish to remain independent. If that does not make me an ANC praise-singer, so be it.
Ozoneblue 9:51
Very selective hearing regarding Zuma’s utterances. What about the ‘rule till jesus comes’ statements? Remember this man peaches to the audience at hand. O, and does the machine gun song not make him sound less like Mbeki and more like a terrorist?
I don’t trust Cope at all. Remember, this is basically half the ANC that’s been rebranded. However, I do concede that Cope gives me hope because at least they’ll result in some power sharing at the top.
Politicians (all of them) are simply not trustworthy when it comes to wielding that much power.
Garg Unzola – “However, I do concede that Cope gives me hope because at least they’ll result in some power sharing at the top.”
Yeah – “Gi’me hope Johanna!”
Garg – Of course Eddie Grant, with his typical American twang, would probably have spelt it “Gimme hope Joanna!” But, even though “Johanna” might sound like Leon Schuster’s twist to the song, “Gee hom gas, Johanna!”, the above spelling is also correct on Google. “Johanna” in the song of course refers to “Johannesburg”, incorrectly assuming that was apartheid South Africa’s capitol city at the time. See http://www.travel-mediainfo.com/South-Africa/6841.htm Nevertheless, your concession that COPE gives you hope prompted me to recall this song.
I must not hide the fact that I am an ANC member and youth leader. We are accustomed to the ferocity with wich we are confronted by bloggers.
We cannot flinch but determined to only extract any good lessons which recide in the fiddlesticks advanced by some bloggers.
It is a view I hold that COPE will indeed become an opposition party. I cannot tell the percentage it will garner in the imminent elections. I hope that it unseat the DA. I strongly believe that we could experience constructive oppositional politics which are not interspersed by racial disunity.
We seem to agree with COPE on many grounds except for their stance on AA, unreasoned proposition that the ANC had jettisoned the Freedom Charter, which I argue is asserted in fundamental provisions of the Constitution and our policy imperatives.
I had an involved discussion with one prominent COPE leader in Limpopo who only demostrated his disquiet with the possibility of Zuma being President. He suggested that the ANC must push for Kgalema to be president. I indicated that we are obligated to abide by the resolution of the national congress on the issue of presidential candidacy.
I do believe that COPE will indeed receive some votes from the ANC, DA, IFP, ID. Paradoxically, in Limpopo we are already regaining membership of persons who had defected to cope out of the anger of the defeat at Polokwane.
The ANC has a great legacy which the ANC will strive to preserve which cope will also not want to rubbish.
On the issue of Khutsong Vuyo has some interesting views most of which I agree. I think we had initially undermined the feelings of the local community in favour of rationality. It was a stance the ANC adopted under the leadership of Mbeki. In the spirit of collectivity we must embrace the negativities as ours too. We cannot simply blame only Mbeki it will be very unfair. We have conceded to the voice of society in this regard. The masses stood their ground and we flinched! We were simply defeated! COPE has got nothing to do with that. I reckon the masses bargained during an opportune moment, elections! Parties are pliable during such a period.
South Africans want the death penalty. I do not know where constitutional experts will be as we strive to convince society that the death penalty is not a detterent to pervasive criminality.
If anybody has hope that COPE will destroy the ANC is up for a rude shock. Those are our comrades who were simply afficted by loss of lucrative opportunities. At heart they are ANC! They yearn for moments of robusts debates in the ANC. They hate Zuma. We love all of them including Zuma. The difference!
We are yet to see the sort of power sharing referred to here! PAul, I agree, the ANC is indeed overcriticised in the blog. We must live with it. Perhaps this is the deepest meaning of democracy and the kernel of intellectuality to do so for academicians, even if palpably irrelevant and unwarranted. At times I defend for the sake of it to stem the tide. I hope that is not undemocratic of me.
With the political solution, may they consider doing something about the lives of the young who were denied schooling while waging this Khutsong war!
THe government, parents and learners have a serious collective duty to design catch-up programmes in order to redress the adverse effect of the political campaign the community allowed to the peril of their future. The youth. The youth ought to have been allowed to go to school during that time. You have a point. We have to indicate that this class boycott was self-inflicted. Nonetheless, it does not entitle the State to drag its legs! That is the essence of Public Service!
Prof, wouldnt u agree that most of the people who use to get nightmares about the Zuma presidency, people like you I mean, have had enough time to pray, go to isangomas, consult psychiatrists/psychologists etc seeing that that issue (his presidency) has been a national topic for the past what? 3 years now. Surely you guys must be coming to terms with the fact that He Shall Be the all our president this year…some respect please guys! …to the office I mean!…you guys have sweared/cursed/insulted the man enough such that Lusifa has no stress of succesion plan seeing that he has so many potential candidates…Zuma will rule this country-you guys must unfortunately deal with it! In fact, you have had more than enough time now. Just accept it!
In fact, a day or so after Kgalema was elected president, I heared an obviously constitutionally empty white caller on SAFM asking why “Mr Zuma has not taken over from Mr M(a)beki SOMMER KLAAR seeing that 2009 is near!” He clearly had accepted by then that this(2009) would be a ZUMA year! …Goodboy! He accepted!
As an aside, remember when Jacob Zuma was charged with rape? Then, it was all innocent until proven guilty. Now, Terry Oliphant, a former ANC member and current Cope hopeful, faces charges of statutory rape and it’s suddenly seen in a very serious light.
Notice how the ANC did not take disciplinary steps against Zuma, yet they are against Oliphant. Shows you all animals are equal but some – like an Oliphant – are more equal.
mill – “and does the machine gun song not make him sound less like Mbeki and more like a terrorist?”
In fact I think it may also make him sound more like Mandela. Mbeki could never sing and when it came to the problematic issue of rhythm everybody knows that he was even stiffer than Tony Blair – even when the two attempted the tango together for BAE.
As I said before – I much prefer generic songs about machine guns that are open to interpretation than racist songs about genocide that featured high on the struggle hit parade only a few years ago.
de.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiePbTcAfY
How was that for Ronnie Kasrils flaunting his ignorance about the Xhosa language with his voice breaking up in the falsetto ?
garg
“Notice how the ANC did not take disciplinary steps against Zuma, yet they are against Oliphant. ”
Three years after the fact and “The programme showed how Oliphant made videos of himself having sex with under-aged girls, including a 15-year-old.”
I doubt very much if the circumstances are similar given that with Zuma there was no signs of violence, the alleged victim was a 31 year old women and the circumstantial evidence at the time seem to indicated that what transpired was in fact consensual sex.
ozoneblue et Garg – Note that it is NOT the ANC who has suspended Oliphant and vowed to take steps against him, it is COPE, of which he has now become an ordinary member. Do we see morals shining through here? Something the ANC never really had. Also note that, while Oliphant committed the alleged crimes, he was still a member of the ANC – as COPE did not exist by then.
Anonymouse,listen to the voice of reason as espoused by Ishmael Malale, Cope is comprised of our disgruntled comrades,some of whom are already rejoining the mother party. I am glad that you also appear to be on their (cope’s) side, may be you will also be joining the ANC soon, together with your new comrades!
And please also take note of Garg’s explanation of the different facts which obtained in Msholozi and Oliphants cases, and remember people conspired against Msholozi, a fact which the Honourable Justice Nicholson could not ignore, and which you as his protege should do well to heed!
Sorry, the different facts which obtained in Msholozi and Oliphants cases were elucidated by ozoneblue and definitely not by Garg!
Mdu // Jan 8, 2009 at 10:49 am
On the ANC’s red herring: “disgruntlement”!
It is my understanding that the ANC was formed by a group of individuals who were disgruntled of the state of affairs in South Africa. It is also my understanding that the COPE was, likewise, formed by a group of individuals who were disgruntled by the state of affairs in South Africa. Indeed, it is my understanding that the formation of any association is motivated by disgruntlement of one from or the other (whether political, social and even as mundane a reason as being bored!).I therefore find it amusing that there’s this continued association by the ANC of COPE with “disgruntlement”, as though it is a source of shame.
A free and democratic society is inter alia reflected by the (sometimes) ad nauseam free movement of individuals from one association/party, to another, to another, etc. Therefore the act of an individual joining COPE and then returning to the ANC should be of no more significance as their initial resignation from the ANC (i.e. in a true democracy). Therefore, individuals oughtn’t be feeling as though they have betrayed the Republic merely because of a vote against the ANC nor feel heinous because the vote was motivated by disgruntlement.
Ishmael Malale, as a member of your party, would you please indicate, in brief, what your president stands for? I cant help but find his contradictions very confusing. When answering please remember that I’m not asking your opinion.
ozoneblue // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:10 am
‘Mbeki could never sing’ – do you mean to the tune of the Zuma camp? And ‘generic songs about machine guns that are open to interpretation’ – may I ask how you interpret this song?
@Vuyo
Hear hear good fellow, spot on – the ANC whines about people being “disgruntled” and “couldn’t get their way so they formed a new party”, but we wouldn’t be where we are today if people hadn’t got disgruntled back in the day…the ANC really seems to think that if they do something it must be right, but if somebody else not in the ANC does exactly the same thing they must be wrong.
@Ishmael, you seem to be a reasonable voice, although still slightly skewed against the facts in support of the ANC. I find it interesting how you openly admit that the ANC ignored the will of a community, but say that the ANC now realises its wrong. While everyone will make mistakes, and those mistakes should be submitted, do you not find it annoying, patronising and superfluous when the ANC only admits mistakes every 5 years, right before they have to ask people to forget all the unfulfilled promises and vote for them again?
NOW the ANC made a mistake with Khutsong, NOW JZ says we must get tough on crime (where was his voice when South Africans were told to stop “whinging” or we can leave the country?), NOW the HIV/AIDS crisis is acknowledged (where were these voices during the Mbeki years?).
I would accept the ANC saying it was wrong if it occasionally did it at times when it had nothing material to gain, like votes. However, when it is sheer electioneering, while I am happy for the people of Merafong, I am annoyed that the ANC is apologising in an apparent attempt purely to garner votes, and this sudden mobilisation even now is purely because they were suprised by COPE’s sudden showing.
Ugh.
@ Vuyo
The cope, admit it as we all know, was formed by ANC members who campaigned vigorously for Mbeki’s Third term and were defeated, to avert dictatorship, and Lekota who had vilified Zuma became disgruntled and was quiet due to embarrassment and disbelief, as his Chief was ousted, still pondering his next move,which is cope.
Mbeki was recalled for his mismanagement and is still an ANC member.
So cope was formed by greedy individuals who lost for betting for a wrong,toohless and powerless horse, don’t try to fool us, it only happened yesterday. You can only fool wishful thinkers like bigslipper,as his name suggests!
Ishmael Malale
“It is a view I hold that COPE will indeed become an opposition party. I cannot tell the percentage it will garner in the imminent elections. I hope that it unseat the DA. I strongly believe that we could experience constructive oppositional politics which are not interspersed by racial disunity.”
Lol then start with the ANC then the ANC is aimed at black people. ANC cant get passed a liberation front infact I would like to See the ANC adapt and target white people. Where as the DA is adapted and targeting not only white but black and infact if i was ANC i would be very worried at a DA and Cope coalition cos that will represent the south africa of today blending racial divids your ANC cant do that. The ANC is for black people thats not very south african now is it what about indian, chines, white, colored?
Spuy
“In fact, a day or so after Kgalema was elected president, I heared an obviously constitutionally empty white caller on SAFM asking why “Mr Zuma has not taken over from Mr M(a)beki SOMMER KLAAR seeing that 2009 is near!” He clearly had accepted by then that this(2009) would be a ZUMA year! …Goodboy! He accepted!”
lol man do i like your version of democracy. just accept yip no questions ask just follow like sheep. BAAAAaaa
ozoneblue
“I doubt very much if the circumstances are similar given that with Zuma there was no signs of violence, the alleged victim was a 31 year old women and the circumstantial evidence at the time seem to indicated that what transpired was in fact consensual sex.”
my man its about morals he has how many wivies? yet he still cant seem to keep his little Umshini Wami in his pants. He is a dirty old man!
mdu
“Mbeki was recalled for his mismanagement and is still an ANC member.”
You do relise he was recalled cos of “so called state abuse and political interfering” into Zuma and now you do release that the Ginwala report does vindicate Mbeki in which the NPA will use to challenge Chris Nicholson’s judgement and u do realise that the ANC Zuma camp is going to look rather stupid if this happens?
Mdu
“Anonymouse,listen to the voice of reason as espoused by Ishmael Malale, Cope is comprised of our disgruntled comrades”
Gee I wonder why ??
@vuyo
A free and democratic society is inter alia reflected by the (sometimes) ad nauseam free movement of individuals from one association/party, to another, to another, etc. Therefore the act of an individual joining COPE and then returning to the ANC should be of no more significance as their initial resignation from the ANC (i.e. in a true democracy). Therefore, individuals oughtn’t be feeling as though they have betrayed the Republic merely because of a vote against the ANC nor feel heinous because the vote was motivated by disgruntlement
thank you someone who actually gets it!!
Ozoneblue
im gonna call u blue 52 from now on i love this statement of urs “This is what I want to hear an ANC president saying, Zuma is sounding more and more like Mandela and less and less like Mbeki.”
this made me laugh honestly 2009 has just started and that has got to be the statement of the year so far Zuma is like Mandela wow that gave me such warm chills. Hey mandela how does it feel like to be compared to a slut?
@ Ishmael
South Africans want the death penalty. I do not know where constitutional experts will be as we strive to convince society that the death penalty is not a detterent to pervasive criminality.
um I thought government was meant to obey the people of the Republic and not try convince us that it is wrong or think what is best for us. This is South Africa crime in south africa is rather out of control and some of the crime well lets just say is rather animalistic now isnt it? extrodanary crimes need extrodanary punishment? or extraodanary controls should be in place.
However the reason why the death penelty wont come back to south africa is rather simple – it has to be in accord with human rights, right? well leathal injection is rather costly and the death penelty would end up being a very costly affair and well if it came into place I highly doubt there would be alot of executions taking place anyway.
However my thought and solution and alternitive to the death penelty is – slavery hardcore slavery and best of all its free labour.
but the best solution really is provention is better than cure, so why is our crime out of control?
Since you are an ANC member and youth member you got a lot to answer for. Ish.
Ishmael
“We have conceded to the voice of society in this regard. The masses stood their ground and we flinched! We were simply defeated! ”
you make it sound like you are at war the people?? thought you were meant to be working for them not being defeated by them?
well just my thought but maybe thats just where the anc seems to be lossing the plot a bit hey?
@ chris mcdaniel
On second thought, I am not revering your aforementioned hogwash with a response!
Mdu – Mdu // Jan 8, 2009 at 10:49 am
The “voice of reason”, Ishmael Malale actually had the following to say, with which I agree:
“It is a view I hold that COPE will indeed become an opposition party. I cannot tell the percentage it will garner in the imminent elections. I hope that it unseat the DA. I strongly believe that we could experience constructive oppositional politics which are not interspersed by racial disunity.
We seem to agree with COPE on many grounds except for their stance on AA, unreasoned proposition that the ANC had jettisoned the Freedom Charter, which I argue is asserted in fundamental provisions of the Constitution and our policy imperatives.”
I don’t read anything about disgruntled comrades now in COPE having already rejoined ANC in that passage. I also read about major disagreements between COPE and the ANC, which is good for democracy. However, if you have done yourself the trouble of reading all m previous posts in this regard, you would have seen that I am not a COPE member, neither am I a COPE supprter. I just think that the opposition that they WILL muster would be good for democracy in this country, where the support of the leading party’s views is not only based on sycophantism.
As far as Garg’s remark is concered, I did not think it prudent to go into the “holrug-geryde” Zuma thing again. However, if I see what kind of people were first high-up memers of the ANC (Oliphant), and who joined COPE (from which he will now be jettisoned thanks to the quick response of COPE to what has been uncovered as clearly immoral) with a view to try and get a better deal (not that he got one, he just received the status of an ‘ordinary’ member), I kind of cannot but help to wonder about the morals of the ANC as movement. Or is it the ANC leaders’ morals that one must worry about, not the movement’s?
chris mcdaniel – “this made me laugh honestly 2009 has just started and that has got to be the statement of the year so far Zuma is like Mandela”
That would be kind of ironic if Mandela himself won the statement of the year for 2007.
“Former president Nelson Mandela has praised Jacob Zuma, the new leader of the African National Congress (ANC), as a man who could unify the divided party. In a message of congratulations, Mandela said: “Our experience of Comrade Zuma is of a person and leader who is inclusive in his approach, a unifier and one who values reconciliation and collective leadership.” “We have no doubt that he will bring those well-known characteristics to his task of leading our organisation,” he was quoted as saying by the Saturday Star. Mandela urged the divided ANC to rally behind Zuma.” (www.mg.co.za/article/2007-12-23-mandela-says-zuma-can-heal-the-anc)
Makes you think doesn’t it. A character endorsement from the great Madiba himself even AFTER all the accusations of corruption and even being called a rapist in the media. Yet our armchair liberals who live inside the Internet bubble just can’t understand why the people love him ?
the big slipper – “NOW the HIV/AIDS crisis is acknowledged (where were these voices during the Mbeki years?).”
Just show you how little you know. Seniors members of the ANC, including Zuma, started opposing Mbeki’s stance towards AIDs/Zimbabwe as early as 2001 – and started looking towards his deputy to replace him. Mbeki reacted like a typical African tyrant and the intense succession battle we have witnessed the past 7/8 years is a testimony to that. The fact is Lekota, mrs. Oilgate and friends are “disgruntled” because they backed Mbeki all the way against the wish of the people and like Mbeki have have lost democratic support, if they ever enjoyed much of it to start with. They are indeed “disgruntled” with the process and result of democracy.
I couldn’t have said it better.