Congress of the People in the Mother City

Archive for September, 2009


Taking back the Cape?

In Editorials on September 30, 2009 at 1:42 pm

The ANC plans to take over the Western Cape Province are almost laughable. The party, especially in this province is operating from the edge of chaos. It has been destroyed by greed, power mongering, factionalism, patronage, fraudulent political campaigning where individuals with money buy and establish fly-by-night branches before conferences, without following proper protocol.

The current ANC leadership is outdated, and out of sync with the social spirit of the people of the province. Real innovation and creativity is not encouraged within the Liberation Movement (LM), and replaced by plotting and conniving. When they go to elective conferences positions of power are caucused. As the result you rarely find any real contestations, something that works to the advantage of power mongers and velvet kings of the new order.

The union federations have, in effect permanent secretaries, and other parties, like the SACP, have, in effect, permanent chairmen, who can only be removed by their own volition, when they wish ‘to move on’. It has been clear for sometime that the federated unions and the communist party have been losing membership support. But the machinery of its leadership elections is crafted in such a manner that only those of their affiliation climb the greasy pole to become a voting delegation. The kings and their men manufacture successors of their own choosing for almost every position. Hence you find only pusillanimous characters close to the kings, sucking up to get into their good books. What matters is being on the side of the right faction. It is what qualifies you for political nomination. There’s no contestation of ideas, or real democracy. That is the soviet style of doing things.

For a long time the ANC has relied on ‘Good Sales’ talk, speaking the language of the listener, and ideological ambiguity. This strategy has never really paid serious dividends in the Western Cape where people have never been readily gullible. The Western Cape is the first province in our country to call up the bluff of the ANC, to expose the party’s politics of double and empty sales talk. The LM, whatever its past merits, has now become little more than a careerist ladder and a vehicle to fleece government resources.

Take for instance how the public sector is looted, where failure a mediocrity seem to be rewarded by huge pay out. The CEO of Eskom, Jacob Maroga, was awarded a R5 million salary increment despite Eskom posting R9-billion in loss. The Armscor 2008/2009 annual report reveals that CEO Sipho Thomo received a total increase in remuneration from R1.7 million to R3.27 million (89%); this despite a long list of black marks against his name from formal grievances to decreasing surpluses. The former SABC CEO Dali Mpofu after a protracted ordeal of being paid while on suspended leave was on his exit from the public broadcaster given a R12 million handout, despite leaving the broadcaster with a R800 million loss. The former Chief Executive Officer Khaya Ngqula has recently been paid over R13-million on settlement even though under his management the airline made a R72 million loss, and despite the fact that he’s under investigation for ‘mismanagement, conflict of interest and procurement irregularities’.

One wonders where this intolerance for inefficiency and corruption the Jacob Zuma administration keeps talking about. What is still clear is that if in the LM you are under the auspices of a governing faction you are immune from any kind of prosecution. The good sales talk continue on this and in the strategy of taking back the Western Cape Province. Their strategy betrays something of an obsessive concern with power mongering than addressing issues of the people on the ground. They say next to nothing about efficient service delivery, fighting corruption, nepotism, incompetence. Nothing about desisting from the practice of political deployment to positions of civil service, which is the root of poor service delivery? Instead the talk is about vague terms like political education and mobilization, or advancing the so called National Democratic Revolution—whatever that means.

The real political attitude of the ANC can be ascertained in Membhathisi Mdladlana’s comment that “We cannot meekly accept being governed by today’s democrats who are yesterday’s oppressors.” This from a party who’s in cahoots with the New National Party and think the Freedom Front Plus, as the ANYL president will try to convince you, are the only real white Africans. In case it is not clear by now; what’s clearly happening here is that the nationalists have recognize themselves—by crook and by hook—as the birds of the same feather (sublime or radical racism) and are now flocking together. The LM’s lack of real commitment to values of non-racialism, accountability and democracy have become apparent, which is what the Western Cape people have caught on.

What has also become apparent is that the LM can no longer be regarded as a solid and rational force to manage the change needed to take us forward towards modern politics that are in line with our social spirit. LM is in a state of general moral decay and riddled with factionalist politics. It is up to the rest of true democrats to defend and advance the progressive spirit of this country by standing together against the fading dream and failing spirit of freedom. True democrats cannot be blackmailed by scars of the past and symbolic gestures of gone by day. As part of maturing freedom they are starting to break off even from the grip of nostalgia and receding liberation politics. This is what is happening in the Western Cape and none are as blind as those who won’t see it.

The people of the Western Cape are moving on, and the tide will not turn, instead more and more people from other provinces will join in this liberation of their psyche when the ambiguities and internal problems of the LM become too conspicuous to everyone. It is already translating into a crisis of confidence and credibility. The whole country will soon wake up to the double and good sales talk that hides the regressive incapacity, corruption, nepotism, careerism, and lack of integrity in the LM. Perhaps then our politics will learn to operate from a better moral and intellectual stand.


Exorcising the Fear to Critique

In Discussion on September 30, 2009 at 1:37 pm

You would ask yourself why in South African politics the succession debate always poses a problem of factionalism. The easy answer is the fact that South African politics in general have a leadership crisis. There are no genuine leaders who inspire independent thinking and self-determination on others. Instead what you find in South African politics are people who feel threatened by signs of vital intellectual capabilities of those they lead.

Independent thinking and the accompanying power for self-determination thrives only in an environment that is not afraid of constructive critique, and shuns sheepish loyalty. To achieve this political leadership must be able to empower others to understand complexities of modern human society without ulterior motives, like expectations of blind loyalty. South African political leaders should draw lessons and inspiration from the liberation theology that stimulated thinking for critique against especially a Christian tradition that had distorted ethical and moral standards of the Christian message. The liberation theology proponents went with boldness and assertiveness against a well established Roman church, and in the end their message prevailed with the church structure.

South African politics need to exorcise the demon of fear of internal critique, and learn to question the wrongs done either by leaders or political parties. We should reject the political psyche and tradition that makes citizens to be objects of abuse by those who are in the upper echelons of levers of power. We should empower citizens to be masters and mistresses of their fate, taking charge of their life and walking tall without being apologetic for constructively criticising those in power. Citizens should be liberated from ignorance that lead to fear of the other. We must inculcate the culture of self-assertiveness and confidence on our people. This process is termed enlightenment, and is a prerogative of any political party that calls itself progressive.

Enlightenment will not come over-night; it is a process that requires self-motivation and moral courage. Enlightened consciousness and the humanistic approach is the path a progressive party must take towards the restoration of moral uprightness within the profound of African ethos of Ubuntu. This is only way to restore a caring nation, fair and just society. Even criticism, no matter how assertive, must also be based on our Ubuntu philosophy, that “a person is a person through other persons”.

The first steps towards building this country is by liberating the psyche of our people from the psychological distortions the Liberation Movement that wants to exercise hegemony at the expense of the progressive social spirit of our nation. We need to liberate them from being slaves to fear and material gain that comes with following powerful forces within society.

Professor Prah put it very clear when in explaining the fall of the Soviet system he said:

…the emancipation of humanity can never be permanently halted. It can be temporarily, forcibly, or otherwise adjourned. But it can never be everlastingly arrested. Emancipation is the freeing of people from the covert or overt conditions of constraint, imposed by others, which limit the ability of people to develop their capacities and talents to the full, individually or collectively. It means equal status of individual citizens in relation to the state, equality before the law, regardless of religion, property, and other private characteristics of individual persons. Emancipation also carries in its meaning in tolerance and equality of otherness. For it to find its fuller scope it requires the acknowledgement and coexistence of difference, free association, social interpretation and above all equality.

South Africans are not free so long as they still fear to speak their minds without concerns of political retribution. As long as the ruling party speak the language of calling those with different political views by evil names. Our citizens in general need freshness and breathing space, and emancipation from fear to air differing viewpoints freely without intimidation. Citizens need peace of mind.

All this is in our power to guard against tendencies of dogmatising views, and accommodating only opinions that agree with us. South African politics need to develop a culture of respect and tolerance for varying views. Leaders who do not want to be criticised tend to be those who follow the path of endemic corruption, moral decay, break down of the rule of law, lagging behind of service and housing delivery. This in turn lead to a chaotic situation where frustrated citizens look like headless chickens, running around venting their anger in one name or the other, like the so called service delivery protests. Meantime government and political leaders opt to put their heads between legs.

Genuine leaders would channel the anger of the people to the right direction. But now in our case opposition parties fear to be labelled as counter-revolutionaries and so keep quiet. Those within the ruling party who like to speak are intimidated and closed up. Others are in comfort zones sitting in the middle not wishing to jeopardise their chances with a governing faction. If you talk (think loud) your career is in jeopardy, you may not get a job or prosper or get a tender from government, so many of these choose to let the status quo to remain.

In general the status quo violates the freedom of association enshrined in our democratic constitution? The political uncertainty is rife in South Africa and this has infected and affected the broader society. Most political leaders have ceased to think out of the box, the struggle is about securing the turf for the sake of comfort zone and all this is not sustainable.

Lindikhaya Bravis Maqhasha is Cope head of policy in the Western Cape province


“A Futurist’s perspective: Legacy Leadership and the Challenges faced”

In Speeches on September 24, 2009 at 8:32 am

SPEECH BY THABO MBEKI: ABSIP STUDENT CHAPTER: WITS UNIVERSITY,
JOHANNESBURG: SEPTEMBER 23, 2009.

Director of Ceremonies,
Vice Chancellor,
Ladies and gentlemen;
Friends:

First of all I would like to thank ABSIP, the Association of Black Securities and Investments Professionals, for inviting me to address the important issue of Challenges faced by Young Emerging Leaders. I am indeed very pleased that ABSIP focuses on this issue because in good measure what will happen to our country, our Continent and the rest of the world will be determined by the quality of the leadership we develop today.

That having been said, I must confess that it is quite unlikely that I will say anything today which you do not know already. It would seem to me that with the challenges having been identified, which I am certain you have, the critical issue becomes taking action on a sustained basis to address the challenges.

I am afraid the burden for this falls on the shoulders of the Young Emerging Leaders referred to in the subject of our discussion this afternoon. It also falls on the shoulders of such institutions as this important centre of learning, the University of Witwatersrand, which must play a central role in developing the kind of leaders we need.

To develop these leaders requires conscious and purposive interventions to empower individuals with the necessary capacity so that, depending on how they conduct themselves, they do indeed emerge as leaders.

There will be no certificate issued by anybody, saying “qualified to lead”, which will thus guarantee that the individuals concerned in fact become leaders. Nevertheless, given that this is a centre of learning, I will do what I can to respect this reality, understanding that you did not invite me to address a mass rally.

It is self-evident that as society develops, it becomes an ever-more complex organism. The traditional village, with no organic links even to the next village, is a relatively simple social formation that is similarly relatively easy to study and understand.

On the other hand, a large city like Johannesburg is internally a much more complex social formation, made even more complex by the fact that it has many links both with the rest of the country as well as the rest of the world. At the same time, the traditional village to which we have referred will be sustained by a system of social relations which will favour social cohesion, and therefore a value system that encourages a greater sense of human solidarity.

On the other hand, social relations in a city like Johannesburg would be characterised by competition among individuals, emphasising a value system based on the success of the individual rather than society as an integrated and cohesive social formation.

I have mentioned these two areas – the traditional village and the modern city – to make two observations I believe must constitute an important part of the development of the young emerging leaders.

One of these is that these leaders must be empowered to understand the complex phenomenon of modern human society. This understanding of objective reality is a vitally necessary part of the exercise of leadership.

The second of these observations is that despite its atomisation, because of competitive social relations, society must nevertheless also maintain a certain level of social cohesion precisely because the individual cannot succeed and thrive outside the framework of social interaction with other individuals.

While this is objectively true, it leaves unanswered the question of what should be done so to mediate the competitive relations that they do not effectively destroy the expression of human solidarity which we must protect and develop as a public good.

Accordingly, I am convinced that the leaders we must seek to build should, in addition to having the capacity to understand objective reality, be inspired by a value system driven by a world outlook of humanism, as represented, for instance, by what all of us understand as ubuntu.

Before we return to a more detailed discussion of these two matters, namely, the ability to understand objective reality and to act on the basis of a humanist value system, allow me to cite some observations made by the African-American academic, Professor Walter Earl Fluker, in his book, “Ethical Leadership” (2009).

Professor Fluker (p 40) writes: “In order for a just civil society to exist, persons in responsible leadership roles must make decisions based on ethical guides. For historically marginalised people, the relationship of spirituality, ethics, and leadership is most urgent. With the long-range economic, political, and social costs of war, a troubled world economy, and rapid advances (crusades) in technology, science, and globalisation, we now have the makings of a social anarchy that threatens the very foundations of our social purpose. The impending catastrophic fallout of the present situation will have far-reaching negative consequences for the least of these, those whom the late Samuel DeWitt Proctor called “the lost, the left out and left behind”. At a deeper level, however, there is a spiritual malaise, a nihilistic threat promoted by
the predominance of a utilitarian individualism that appeals endlessly to therapeutic remedies that begin and end with self. Who will lead in the twenty-first century? Better yet, how shall they lead? Who will go for us, and whom shall we send? For answers to these questions, it is instructive to inquire regarding fundamental assumptions of ethical theory and how these inhere in our construction of spirituality and leadership.”

I believe that Professor Fluker is correct in much of what he says especially when he draws attention to “a nihilistic threat promoted by the predominance of a utilitarian individualism that appeals endlessly to therapeutic remedies that begin and end with self”, rather than the community.

If indeed Professor Fluker is correct, this should alert the Young Emerging Leaders to the difficult challenge they face to respond to the observation he makes that, “In order for a just civil society to exist, persons in responsible leadership roles must make decisions based on ethical guides.”

I will revert to this important matter later. For now I would like to return to the point I made earlier concerning the need for the Young Emerging Leaders to understand what I referred to as the need to empower these leaders “to understand the complex phenomenon of modern human society”.

To discuss this matter, with your permission, I would like to reflect briefly on a matter that has been hotly debated by philosophers for a very long time. This is the matter referred to as ‘freedom and necessity’.

Put simply, this is a debate about how history is made – whether it results from the exercise of their “free will” by individuals or its causality derives from forces outside of and independent of human consciousness.

Reflecting on this, the Oxford English Dictionary defines freedom as “The quality of being free from the control of fate or necessity; the power of self-determination attributed to the will.”

For his part, in a discussion entitled “Freedom and Necessity”, the 20th century English philosopher, A.J. Ayer wrote: “If the postulate of determinism is valid, then the future can be explained in terms of the past: and this means that if one knew enough about the past one would be able to predict the future. But in that case, what will happen in the future is already decided. And how then can I be said to be free? What is going to happen is going to happen and nothing I do can prevent it. If the determinist is right, I am the helpless prisoner of fate.”

The 19th century German philosopher, Georg Hegel, had also addressed this issue and come to a conclusion which I believe provides a better guide as to how we should approach the issue of freedom and necessity. In this regard, Frederick Engels said: “Hegel was the first to state correctly the relation between freedom and necessity. To him, freedom is the appreciation of necessity. ‘Necessity is blind only in so far as it is not understood.’ Freedom does not consist in the dream of independence from natural laws, but in the knowledge of these laws, and in the possibility this gives of systematically making them work towards definite ends…Freedom of the will therefore means nothing but
the capacity to make decisions with knowledge of the subject. Therefore the freer a man’s judgement is in relation to a definite question, the greater is the necessity with which the content of this judgement will be determined…Freedom therefore consists in the control over ourselves and over external nature, a control founded on knowledge of natural necessity.”

More popularly, the views expressed by Hegel have been stated as – “Freedom is the recognition of necessity.” Simply put, this asserts that the more we know about the regularities that govern nature and the development of human society, the better able will we be to use our will to determine our future.

I would like to suggest that this makes eminent good sense and is an approach which our Young Emerging Leaders should take to heart and integrate within their response to the challenge of leadership. This means that the effective exercise of leadership must, in part, be based on as thorough an understanding as possible of objective reality.

The correctness of this view is confirmed by what happened which led to the current global economic recession and the various questions this has thrown up.

If nothing else, these developments should communicate the message forcefully certainly to the members of ABSIP present here as well as the trainee economists, that indeed, as Young Emerging Leaders, one of their tasks is properly to understand the contemporary global economy.

On September 6, 2009, the New York Times published an article by the Noble Laureate in Economics, Paul Krugman, entitled: How Did Economists Get It So Wrong? Among other things, Professor Krugman said: “It’s hard to believe now, but not long ago economists were congratulating themselves over the success of their field. Those successes — or so they believed — were both theoretical and practical, leading to a golden era for the profession…

“Few economists saw our current crisis coming, but this predictive failure was the least of the field’s problems. More important was the profession’s blindness to the very possibility of catastrophic failures in a market economy…And in the wake of the crisis, the fault lines in the economics profession have yawned wider than ever…

“As I see it, the economics profession went astray because economists, as a group, mistook beauty, clad in impressive-looking mathematics, for truth…Unfortunately, this romanticized and sanitized vision of the economy led most economists to ignore all the things that can go wrong…

“When it comes to the all-too-human problem of recessions and depressions, economists need to abandon the neat but wrong solution of assuming that everyone is rational and markets work perfectly. The vision that emerges as the profession rethinks its foundations may not be all that clear; it certainly won’t be neat; but we can hope that it
will have the virtue of being at least partly right.”

Professor Krugman had made the charge that because they failed to understand objective reality, the world’s economists failed to see the then impending global financial and economic crisis. Accordingly, they failed to provide the leadership which could have resulted in various interventions being made, which would have saved the world from a crisis that has resulted in the impoverishment of hundreds of millions and an alarming growth in levels of unemployment.

So extensive was this failure to understand objective reality that there was even massive trade in financial products which even the professional traders did not understand, with many proving to be nothing more than a worthless scraps of paper.

Speaking on April 14, 2009, the Chairperson of the US Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, said: “The financial industry designed securities that combined many individual loans in complex, hard-to-understand ways. These new securities later proved to involve substantial risks – risks that neither the investors nor the firms that designed the securities adequately understood at the outset.”

In this regard, on 13 March 2009, the outgoing Governor of the South African Reserve Bank, Tito Mboweni, went further to say: “The global financial system is a finite entity, and although risk can be passed around, it does not disappear. We had probably underestimated the inter-linkages of financial systems across the globe, and the extent to which globalisation had created a complicated network of circuits for the contagion of financial risk…

“The current crisis resulted from a specific combination of a number of causes. For years, liquidity in global financial markets was mispriced, and therefore generally taken for granted. Interest rates were low, and huge profits were locked in through carry trades where funding could be obtained at a minimal cost in overnight markets, and invested in high-yielding longer-term assets…”

These statements by two central bank governors emphasise precisely the point that even they failed to understand what was happening in the global financial markets and therefore did not provide the leadership that was necessary to avert the financial crisis which led to the current global recession.

In the aftermath of this recession, other important questions have arisen. These include:

• what should be done about companies that are “too big to fail”, and therefore the consequent challenge of what is called “moral hazard”?
• in a capitalist economy, is it possible so to limit the concentration and centralisation of capital to avoid the emergence of monopolies and oligopolies made up of companies that are “too big to fail”?
• is it possible to avoid the “socialisation of risk” such as would be assumed by private corporations: if not, what benefits should society derive from such “socialisation of private risk”? and,
• more generally, what role should the state play in the economy, with
regard both to the ownership of companies and the regulation of the
market?

I pose these questions without providing any answers, once again to underline the point that our Young Emerging Leaders will have to participate in the effort to answer them. For them to be helpful to society, those answers will have to be based on a profound understanding of the process of contemporary social development.

I have insisted on the critical necessity for our Young Emerging Leaders to be empowered to understand objective reality in part because it is self-evident that countries that have to undergo a process of fundamental social transformation, such as ours, need such empowered leaders.

In addition, our experience over the last fifteen years has said to me that in many instances many in our country have not fully understood the scale of the challenge contained in the words we have used very often – namely, the eradication of the legacy of colonialism and apartheid.

Precisely to ensure the achievement of this objective, in its Founding Provisions, our Constitution enjoins all of us to work so that our country achieves such objectives as:

• equality;
• non-racialism; and,
• non-sexism.

I am certain that there are very few South Africans, if any, who today would, for instance, question the need for us to transform ours into a non-racial country.

The reality however, is that because this objective, like the others mentioned in our Constitution, cannot be realised in a short time, the Young Emerging Leaders will still be faced with the task to lead the country as it continues to strive to implement the Constitutional prescription to build a non-racial society.

In this regard the Young Emerging Leaders will have to answer various questions for themselves, such as:

• what exactly do we mean by a non-racial society?
• what benchmarks should we set to measure the progress we are making in this regard?
• to the extent that the creation of such a non-racial society entails radical socio-economic change, as it must, what should this change be?
• what resources should and can our economy generate to finance this change? and,
• what should be done to nurture a sense of common patriotism, a shared national identity that would give meaning to the vision of non-racialism?

Unless we answer these and other questions, and similar ones about the equally important issues of equality and non-sexism, and communicate them to our people as a whole, so long will many among us entertain and express expectations that cannot be met. As all of us know, sometimes this can lead to social instability.

I trust that what I have said is sufficient to underline the importance of the need for our Young Emerging Leaders fully to respect the need for them to gain detailed mastery of the objective reality which they will be called upon to help transform.

As I said earlier, I would now like to return to the observation that Professor Fluker made about “a nihilistic threat promoted by the predominance of a utilitarian individualism that appeals endlessly to therapeutic remedies that begin and end with self”, rather than the community.

I am certain that, given the attention this has received from many intellectuals for at least two centuries, there is no need here to make a presentation about the connection between capitalism and the individualism to which Professor Fluker refers.

In this regard for instance, Ronald Takaki said in his book, “Iron Cages: Race and Culture in Nineteenth Century America”:

“The fusion of Protestant asceticism and republican theory provided the ideology for bourgeois acquisitiveness and modern capitalism in the United States…Eighteenth century republicanism accelerated this thrust toward commodity accumulation and the primacy of the marketplace, as it disintegrated the feudal order and freed men as individuals to prove their virtue in the pursuit of possessions.”

Members in this audience will recall that on previous occasions, in this context, I have cited what the financier George Soros had written in his article, “The Capitalist Threat”, published in the February 1997 edition of Atlantic Monthly. I beg your indulgence once more to cite what Soros said, as follows: “Insofar as there is a dominant belief in our society today, it is a belief in the magic of the marketplace. The doctrine of laissez-faire capitalism holds that the common good is best served by the uninhibited pursuit of self-interest. Unless it is tempered by the recognition of a common interest that ought to take precedence over particular interests, our present system — which, however imperfect, qualifies as an open society — is liable to break down…

“There has been an ongoing conflict between market values and other, more traditional value systems, which has aroused strong passions and antagonisms. As the market mechanism has extended its sway, the fiction that people act on the basis of a given set of non-market values has become progressively more difficult to maintain. Advertising, marketing, even packaging, aim at shaping people’s preferences rather than, as laissez-faire theory holds, merely
responding to them. Unsure of what they stand for, people increasingly rely on money as the criterion of value. What is more expensive is considered better. The value of a work of art can be judged by the price it fetches. People deserve respect and admiration because they are rich. What used to be a medium of exchange has usurped the place
of fundamental values, reversing the relationship postulated by economic theory. What used to be professions have turned into businesses. The cult of success has replaced a belief in principles. Society has lost its anchor.”

The fact of the matter is that ours is a capitalist society. Accordingly, it cannot be insulated from the processes described by Ronald Takaki and George Soros, which necessarily, seriously militate against the achievement of the important objective of social cohesion.

It was because he recognised this challenge in his own country, the United States, that Professor Fluker said that, “In order for a just civil society to exist, persons in responsible leadership roles must take decisions based on ethical guides.”
Clearly, we will fail to build “a just civil society” if we allow the view to dominate that, as Soros said, “The doctrine of laissez-faire capitalism holds that the common good is best served by the uninhibited pursuit of self-interest”, and therefore that “People deserve respect and admiration because they are rich…(because) What used to be a medium of exchange, (money), has usurped the place of fundamental values…”

As he said, in these circumstances, society would lose its anchor.

The point we are making is that the Young Emerging Leaders will also have to take on the difficult task of mediating the processes immanent to the capitalist system which Takaki and Soros described, exactly because it must be the central task of these Leaders to help build the “just civil society” to which Fulker referred.

To create this “just civil society”, Soros argued that the “uninhibited pursuit of self-interest” should be “tempered by the
recognition of a common interest that ought to take precedence over particular interests.” Unfortunately, this result cannot be achieved by decree, in much the same way that fundamental social change cannot be brought by decree.
Among others, it will entail both the judicious use of the social wage and a sustained political and ideological struggle to mobilise society not to fall victim precisely to the faulty reasoning which manifested itself among economists, which Professor Krugman repudiated, of a virtually theological belief in infallible markets.

The challenge of the renewal of our Continent, Africa, must continue to occupy a prominent place on our national agenda. I am certain there is no need to convince you of this. Our country is an inseparable part of our Continent. Its future cannot be decided outside the context of the destiny of Africa.

I remain convinced that the renaissance of Africa can and must be achieved. By its nature this is a long-term project requiring our sustained attention, side-by-side with all other Africans. You, our Young Emerging Leaders must therefore understand this that the task to achieve Africa’s renewal will inevitably be an important part of the agenda you will have to address.

In this regard it is critically important that our Young Emerging Leaders should familiarise themselves with such important policy documents of the African Union as the Constitutive Act, NEPAD and the various Conventions and Protocols that have been adopted by our Parliaments. Similarly, we have to make a serious effort to gain a better understanding of our Continent as a whole, going beyond such information as might be provided by the media.

In addition we must also act vigorously to build the necessary networks with other Young Emerging Leaders elsewhere on our Continent as part of the process of building the popular movement we need to promote the African renaissance.

As you know, during the advance towards the achievement of this objective, we will experience many defeats and reversals. However I would to urge you that you should never despair, and assure you that your peers throughout Africa remain inspired to engage in struggle to achieve the re-birth of their Continent.

With regard to everything we have said, and needless to say, you, our Young Emerging Leaders must understand that you are not mere technicians but leaders of people.

Thus to lead, means to engage the people in an honest and sustained manner to mobilise them so that they too play an active and conscious role in the process of fundamental social transformation rather than remain as immobilised spectators who expect government to “deliver”. It means learning the habit always to tell the truth and thus
cultivate the confidence of the people in you who will be their leaders.

Let me conclude by quoting yet another passage from the book, Ethical Leadership by Walter Fluker:

“In a world threatened by the onslaught of disease, poverty, and war, we need more than ever a new generation of leaders who will embrace the strangeness of compassion that creates a new language of community for America and the world. How strange would it be to see a new cadre of leaders who are spiritually alert and ethically centred, who dare
to make a track to the water’s edge? These leaders must take as their moral compass a renewed vigour in the struggle for justice and a heart filled with compassion for the stranger – the radically different other in whose face we see our own and the face of the new world that calls us. These are the leaders who stand at the intersections of character, civility, and community and dare to re-imagine the world.”

The question is – will our Young Emerging Leaders be such leaders who, having re-imagined the world, take steps to remake it in favour of the community made up of millions of ordinary people!

This question can only be answered by yourselves more through what you do rather than what you say.

As Frantz Fanon once said – “Every generation out of relative obscurity discovers its mission; it either fulfils it or betrays it.”

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PEOPLE ON THE SUSPENSION OF ANELE MDA

In News on September 22, 2009 at 4:48 pm

The Congress Working Committee (CWC) of the Congress of the People met in an extra-ordinary session on 21st September 20 09 to consider several organisational matters. Among the issues discussed was a complaint letter by comrade Deidre Carter, the Deputy General Secretary against Ms Anele Mda, the Convenor of the Congress of the People Youth Movement.

Having deliberated extensively the CWC concluded that the gravity of the matters raised were significantly important and contrary to what the Congress of the People stands for ,they merited immediate and decisive action on the part of the party. The CWC therefore decided that Ms Mda should be suspended from all leadership structures of the party i.e. as a member of the Congress National Committee (CNC), the Congress Working Committee (CWC) as well as from being the Convenor of the Youth Movement (COPE YM) pending a disciplinary process on the matter.

The CWC takes this opportunity to apologise, on behalf of the members of the Congress of the People, to the people of South Africa that such behaviour should even be alleged to have been committed by its member especially one who is in leadership. As COPE we re-iterate our commitment to a non-racial and non-se xist South Africa. We also re-iterate our belief in building a membership that is disciplined and respectful of our values as a democratic African country.

The CWC also regrets that, due to the need for it to give this matter serious consideration, it has taken longer than it would have liked to address this matter. On this note we call on our membership to respect this disciplinary process


Passive Revolution

In News on September 21, 2009 at 11:02 pm

Vote Cope

Vote Cope

What must Cope do?

The thing the Congress of the People (Cope) should be paying close attention to is finding the process of how to form genuine, democratic, progressive hegemony that’ll debunk the perception that it is concerned with prestige privileges at the expense of mainstream interests.

To achieve this its organic intellectuals (socially constituted individuals that constructively critique) have to expose the fakery of Liberation Movement (LM) rhetoric, and demonstrate, in believable terms, that anti-imperialism, post-colonialist, non racial democratic politics must involve meaningful participation of all the peoples of this country. It’s approach must pluralistic.

This would require a systematic critique of both vulgar Marxism and radical marketsim; and the rest of intolerant ideologies that resist societal progressive change and disrupt the possibility. It’d have to provide platform for cooperative rapport and collaboration between people of different backgrounds. Cope will have to expose and decisively reject politics of coercion; adopt those of democratic consent and concerted struggle against all forms of regressive hegemony emanating from our yesteryear bad habits and passé politics.

Cope will have to avoid dogmatism and formulas in forging the party’s philosophical praxis; stand for freedom with responsibility; human values that are based on liberty, and clearly elaborate its policies. In short it must brand itself as the vehicle for progressive politics in our country and an iron of political common sense. Cope must be more than a political into a social movement and a moral and ethical concept.

Critique of Cope

Therefore Cope will do well to follow Antonio Gramsci concept of hegemony, as opposed to the Leninist approach of the LM. As a modern political party Cope must have propensity to accept, and ability to generate, progressive ideas and values. In a way this position Cope already occupies by default, even if so far it has failed to leave up to expectations of the position it occupies. The reasons for this failure are myriad but chief among them is its leadership failure to grasp with visionary insight the spirit of social movement on the ground.

Taking its formation history (protesting against creeping anti-constitutionalism, erosion of democratic processes and institutions) Cope cannot afford to lapse into similar errors. This is why at the slightest shortfall it is vehemently criticised by the public at large. Cope was born with a promise to be better, and if it can’t what is the point of it, the people would rightfully prefer the devil they know.

Unfortunately, in recent experience, Cope has not been locked in the courage of its convictions; in fact it seems to be struggling to implement what it professes. But the difference and advantage it has over the LM (that incoherent, execrable repository of malcontent careerists who are concerned only with personal ambition) is that it still hangs on to its convictions even where it struggles to implement them. Despite its problems one still senses a genuine striving for sincere way and moral centre for conducting politics.

Strengths of Cope

The LM, which is not as dumb as some would like to believe, has rightly identified Cope as a grave threat. This because Cope was born as a vehicle of demand for political competence, legitimate forms of hegemony, exposure of “contradictory and discordant” aspects at the heart of LM political philosophy. When Cope’s widening vision reaches popular sectors of our population it’ll completely realign the politics of this country, and this is why the LM fears it so much.

The hurdle Cope need to skip is that of disposition, the habit of settling for a certain way of doing things by the general population of our country. For that matter it is incumbent upon the followers of Cope and other progressive political parties to make people aware what happens when people acquiesce to an unjust system due to despair. We’ve seen this attitude of haplessness settle slowly until it became defeatist and fatalistic in many countries in Africa, the recent one being our neighbours across the Limpopo.

Cope is the genuine last hope for this country if we are to afford the fate of countries like Zimbabwe, hence its message must spread in a bottom up democratic drive, a process of sedimentation that diffuses the contingent nature of society’s prevailing norms. Because of this the process would be a little slow since it needs to be internalised into becoming a new political culture.
The message must develop voluntarily and spontaneously in the natural environment, and diffuses by learning and teaching. It must consciously adopt an attitude of radical freedom against subalternate conditions imposed by the dominance of regressive hegemony. In short Cope members will be well advised to wean and distance itself from the LM straight jacket passé politics and Stalinist procedural politics, especially the lies of empty and populist rhetoric.

Cope and modern times

Another failure of Cope is in not emphasising enough on the problems it has identified as major issues in our country. Hence you find the ruling party making more of Cope Manifesto as a backdrop to the current administration’s implementation programme. The Zuma administration, to its credit, has realised that ANC manifesto is impractical, and has instead decided to pirate Cope’s one. You hear the ruling party talk about reopening Nursing Colleges, etc. This is an unintended complement to Cope, especially coming from President Zuma who makes no qualms about his disdain for Cope.

Unfortunately, the ruling party’s opportunism and usurpation is not driven by inner convictions, which is why the whole thing will end on the fur like a dog’s sweat. Cope must not be afraid to state the truth, no matter how out of fashion it might be at the present moment. Take the recent riots of Mandela Park backyard dwellers burning government built houses, because they were allocated less than expected number to occupy. This cannot be right.
To correct it the LM must desist from populist electioneering, of feeding people lies that are fodder to bad attitudes; like expecting the government to be Father Christmas, handing everything to everyone. The government is not a supplier but a facilitator of houses. This is the right attitude Cope should be taking from the start. People must learn to do things for themselves with the facilitation of basic services by the government.

Cope, if it wants to be a modern party, must not join the deafening silence on the issues interwoven problems of our era caused by population growth, climate change, sustainable supplies of food and water, and threats to biological diversity now threatening our existence on this planet. Its voice is not loud enough on need for convictions, morally and otherwise, in our politics, because, perhaps, its become wary of sounding moralistic. But the truth of the matter is that most of those who are loosing hope in the LM is due not only to its political failures and lack of conviction, but of moral values also.

African Fascism

About three years ago I wrote a friend an email intoning that Robert Mugabe is probably a founder of something, due to lack of proper term then, I called African fascism. He disagreed with and corrected me. Now I’ve this creeping feeling that perhaps I wasn’t that far off the mark. After all the Cambridge dictionary is clear enough on the meaning: Fascism noun/ˈfæʃ.ɪ.zəm/ n [U] a political system based on a very powerful leader, state control and being extremely proud of country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed. [Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary] I’m sure no want needs my further interpretation on that.

All regressive hegemonies lead to fascism which is what prompted Gramsci to look for a different kind of revolution, what he called “passive resistance” that would act as a “moral and intellectual reformation” on what he saw as a regressive society (dominance of Italian fascists, which eventually led to the Italian support for Hitler). We saw the seeds of Mugabesim during our last elections wherever the ruling party sensed a real threat to its hegemony. As that threat widens the chances are, the aggressive stance will intensify also, and will be left with two options, either fight fire with fire, or take the option of Gramsci’s “passive revolution”, which I favour.

Conclusion

How would we popularise the South African version of “passive revolution” is the task every Cope member (agent), and its success depends on the readiness of the South African population to accept the reality of our situation. What is a stake here is civilising the mind of a nation. By civilisation I don’t necessarily mean Western cultural chauvinism.
I mean a certain degree of political and economic development that allows for productive innovation and lead to material progress. I also mean the art of refined and tasteful living that comes as result of intellectual vitality and spiritual élan. I’m sure here at Gardens take easily to that sort of thing, we don’t even need to feel guilty about. What we need to do is create a space for someone in Philipi or Khayelitsha to be able to achieve the same goals and more, with motivation, hard work and our communal help.
We need not leave in fear of another, but rather promote an atmosphere of civil society, the building blocks of any country’s development and ability to educate itself.

Building a society that’ll be responsible for marrying material prosperity and prosperity of the soul is the greatest legacy Cope can offer this country. And teach its peoples how to avoid stunting creative development in reconstructing African heritage. What we’ll need to do is to bring quality of life and experience, the best of everything on offer in history so far, to the widest number of people.
We would have to follow Matthew Arnold advice: ‘The work of civilisation is to speak to the ordinary self of its longing to become the best version of itself.’ We must take from the best of each civilisation to make ourselves better. This means giving people not only the freedom, but incentive, to develop love for ideas, objects and other people.

Those of us who cut their political teeth in what in this country became known as Black Consciousness would recall what we took to be its revolutionary message were the demands this philosophy put on us, especially the black people, to excel and claim the right to stand within the family of nations, proud of who were and the legacy handed to us by those who came before us. The call to reconstruct the African legacy is not about putting black people on the comfort zone so they may hide behind the aggrieved past.

Reconstructing the legacy of Africa is a call to Africans (black and white) to put themselves at the cutting edge of the developmental combat of our era. That is the call, in the legacy left to us by the likes of Braham Fischer, Ruth First and Steve Biko who chose to die by their convictions than submit to a regressive hegemony.

Things have changed a little now; the lies are perpetrated in the name of the majority, instead of the minority; but the attitude is the same. South Africa will stand or fall because today, instead of hoping that things will turn out for the better, you, not your brother or your sister, or only those who are political inclined; but you, stand up to be counted!

Once again South Africa is in dire need for quality citizens that are ready to stand united for an even better future. If you think things were tough running against foot soldiers, how would you fare now that you must run against the horses. That’s the question God posed to the prophet Jeremiah, and now to you and I. Things have changed, changed utterly!


History and achievements of Africans includes relevance of African heritage, values and customs in today’s world

In Speeches on September 21, 2009 at 12:26 pm

Keynote address by
COPE Parliamentary Leader Dr. Mvume Dandala
17 September 2009, Cape Town to the Black Management Forum (Cape Towm)

Let me thank the organisers for this wonderful opportunity for us to share our thoughts on the important issues of the day. South Africa needs this kind of intervention where we must unpack the developments around us and answer the question; what is my contribution going to be in building a new society we so desperately need.

As we celebrate heritage month, it is important that we recognize that one of the most critical legacies that we can bequeath to generations to come is the legacy of African leadership. Such a legacy – at least in theory – is a leadership that is underpinned by that illusive concept of Ubuntu: The recognition that we only exist because of others. We are human because we have such humanity in relation to other human beings. For me this sums up Africa’s biggest message to the world – this sums up the essence of Africa’s heritage as well as its values.

Due to the ills that are often associated with the African story, little has ever been said in celebration of our continent’s leadership in the face of the most vicious onslaught of colonization. In many African countries it took men and women who were very brave to stand up against powerful forces including imperialists in order to overcome colonialisation and free their countries from dehumanizing occupation of their ancestral land.

The heroes of African liberation have bequeathed a legacy of self determination and liberation to future generations. These leaders were the last line of defence between the total desecration of African traditions, cultures and customs and whatever was left after years of oppression. For this, we must celebrate them. It is a major achievement that African religion and world view as well as African literature and arts survived the colonial onslaught in many countries.

The extent to which cultural practices relating to social power relations, music, arts and traditional dress still characterize many African societies can only be attributed to the resilience of such African Leadership. While it is my considered view that by and large Africa has defended its roots and therefore its future, I would equally submit that the future still demands a greater commitment from Africans to defend and claim the space for their heritage in the modern world.

In some instances however historians concur that the replacement of the colonial power with local oppressors, in a form of insensitive and often unelected governments or even military rulers, does not help matters when it comes to the next big challenge facing post liberation societies – Reconstruction.

Somebody once claimed that African governments have not merely failed to develop Africa, but in most cases such development was never even a goal in their plans. Rather, regimes have often committed to a spirit and programmes of patronage. It is true that a foreign hand with selfish interests can often be detected in most of our continent’s traumas. But we cannot afford to be complacent about this, for the success of such an invisible hand is judgement against vigilance of African Leadership.

The legacy of conflict, in some instances resulting in needless wars, civil strife and as we now painfully know in cases such as Rwanda’s, a horrible genocide, poses one of the clearest challenges that modern African leaders must overcome and transform.

In all these instances of the project of liberation gone wrong, the capacity of African leadership both in the individual countries and as a collective in the continent has been brought under huge scrutiny. The successes and the failures are a legacy we should learn from by analysing, understanding and correcting future trends as societies in transition. Such learning must be rooted in a commitment to rediscover and locate in the centre of our efforts, a recognition of what is best in Africa, and what good we can identify in the legacy of other nations to be relevantly appropriated for the best of Africa.

For purposes of our discussion tonight I would like to zone into the issue of African leadership as an anchor and vanguard of African legacy, its customs and traditions. I call for deliberate and conscious commitment to understanding the value of such legacy, as well as the role of our current leadership in making our heritage relevant to today’s contemporary challenges of our continent. I take this opportunity to salute Dr Phinda ka Madi for his gallant effort through his book, Leadership lessons from Emperor Shaka!

Firstly, the tendency of our leadership to fail to read the currency and relevance of their leadership roles. There continues to be a view, if not practice in our society that when Africans assume leadership, particularly that of major institutions they must prove that they have been adequately mentored and have mastered the white ways… ‘Bangabelungu abamnyama.’ We too succumb easily to this view. When one takes a contrary view that insists that Africans have much to give that is valid from their own experience, that is often taken with a pinch of salt.

Perhaps we are to blame for often presenting the African legacy in half cooked measures that do not allow it to stand the test. Hence my affirmation of efforts like those of Dr Madi that put the African right at the centre of today’s challenges and agendas. To call for an African agenda should never be an excuse for lowering standards. It should instead push us to greater heights of excellence and achievements that will stand ground anywhere and anytime.

One notes with sadness how a call for transformation from the racial past of our country is often misunderstood as an expression of a spirit of entitlement. Perhaps we may have acted ourselves in ways that lend evidence to this laxity of discipline and application. Those who have an understanding of the value of this call have got to accept the immensity of this call on their lives. It may even lead them to take positions that may not always be popular even with the Africans sometimes.

We talk about Black Consciousness and Steve Biko as something that is not only revolutionary, but also something that fills us with joy. But the fact is that this philosophy was not always celebrated in his lifetime, for it puts demands on black people to excel and claim the right to stand within the family of nations, proud of who they are and proud of their legacy. It was never an effort to carve a comfort zone for black people. This is equally true of the call to claim the African legacy. It is not an excuse to hide behind what Africans know and thus shy away from putting themselves at the cutting edge of competition and intellectual combat.

The Afro American scholar, Booker T. Washington chastised his fellow freed slaves when he felt that they were being weakened by the spirit of entitlement from all the suffering as slaves. In building Tuskegee College as a centre for their empowerment he uttered those words that have rung through the centuries… ‘No nation can be free until it learns that to till a field is as honourable as writing a poem!’ The hardwork that had been meant as a humiliation for the slaves, was yet the only way to their dignity. The spirit of entitlement that is foreign to the heroic legacy of the African people. It has to be rooted out in our lifetime. And it is only African leaders who can legitimately be champions of this campaign.

This tendency to entitlement expresses itself sometimes as a claim to leadership. Those who led Africa out of colonialism and oppression have been often found to be prone to be claiming for themselves the mantle of leadership irrespective of the value of their leadership to the greater populace. In some African countries this has even been illegitimately transferred to members of the families and/or fellow liberators in spite of them being totally unable to reinvent themselves to better respond to the challenges of reconstruction and development. Countries end up imploding first before they can take heed of the challenges to serve their people and lift them from poverty. This kind of leadership holds Africans as hostage and must be rejected in favour of robust democratic processes.

Indeed another trend that must worry us is the issue of complacency of our leaders once they are in power. A cursory glance of development trends reveals that most African nations have experienced a slump in development hardly a few years into liberation. A heightened sense of connection with the aspiration of our people disappears quickly, with leaders defining themselves and their reign with scandal, corruption and patronage rather than entrench a long lasting legacy of development intervention. I make this statement to accentuate the point that development, caring for people and lifting people out of poverty seems to rank low in the list of priorities for leaders once liberation is achieved.

It has therefore unfortunately become common cause that the struggle for economic emancipation hits a snag – even in the most visible of forms. Deteriorating and dilapidated infrastructure, disinvestment by foreign business interests and the collapse of basic services for our people. And this always follows like clockwork the enrichment of a strategically placed people. If we look at numerous capitals around the continent, very few will quarrel with the fact that most of them are shadows of their former selves.

In fact for some, the last major improvements to their economic backbone such as roads were last done before liberation. And yet even in these capitals the African customs, the arts and so on thrive, not because of the support from government but rather in spite of lack of such support. Anybody who recalls how African arts and culture provided the backbone of the struggle against colonial oppression, will also remain convinced that these will be yet again tools for the continuing liberation of Africans even from the sidelining by their own. To kill the resilience of the hope of Africans, one will have to kill their celebration of their legacy of arts and culture first. Because only where there is a dearth of arts and culture will the death of creativity certainly follow.

The apartheid regime was not being unimaginative when it focused itself on putting African cultural heritage on a stranglehold. They knew that cultural creativity is the fertile ground for lateral thinking, be this political or economic. It is not coincidental that the feeder for our own struggle internally and externally was our cultural and artistic heritage. Understanding African cultural gurus like Khabi Mngoma, who never touched an AK-47, suffered greatly at the hands of our tormenters for their recognition that one could never separate the future of a free South Africa from the cowhide Drums, as Oswald Mtshali would say. God forbid that our modern African leaders will be misled to sacrifice this legacy at the expedient altar of ‘modern technology’ as a primary pursuit.

The preservation of culture and norms of our continent will remain a delusion if there is no environment created where these can thrive. I can imagine that a country going through a civil war, where gun toting people roam the streets, using children as child soldiers and so on will not have the time for folklore and oral tradition where customs are taken from generations to generation.

Where there is no democracy development will also not thrive. It is important that we understand that the building block of our customs is the civil atmosphere through which these can be practiced. This includes the ability to educate the nation in a manner that is supported by good leadership.

What kind of leadership therefore does Africa need given all these flaws? What is the role of professionals like yourself both here and across the continent?

Allow me to submit that we need:
• A leadership that is rooted in communities, that celebrates and seeks to enrich the lives of our communities: This will ignite a partnership between community leaders and community members to shape the future together. Partnerships can only take off if leaders are not detached from communities.

• A visionary leadership: A leadership that can see beyond their current situation and their current term of office and will make it their business to promote African culture, customs and traditions and apply these in the modern context focusing on development.
• Compassionate leadership: Leadership that is empathetic to the needs of the people, their hopes and their future.
• Servant leadership: Leaders who understand that to lead is to serve, and not to seek to be served and gratified.
• Accountable leadership: Leaders, who will encourage accountability, stamp out corruption and promote a culture of excellence.

All of these qualities are underpinned by a respect for who we are as children of Africa. This is very relevant today as we remember leaders such as Biko who argued for a heightened sense of consciousness about a sense of respect for self and for others – a prerequisite of a successful African renaissance; the concept of Ubuntu underlined by fundamental care for others as well as the celebration of diversity. While we must hold up political leaders as a mirror of broader society we should be clear that these pointers apply equally to all leaders, be they corporate, religious and/or community leaders. The question is; how do we in our boardroom today make an impact that gets our companies to contribute to the affirmation of African existence?

We must commit to repositioning companies to respond to transformation challenges; to making the companies diverse, ensuring that difficult issues that require courage are faced, such as the acceleration of employment equity, the creation of opportunities for small and micro enterprises and the investment into communities that have an equal claim to being South African, even if they are poor. For me this is the most poignant way to apply the values of Ubuntu into our business environment. Lifting each other, making sure we all play our part in turning the legacy of African leadership into practical benefit for the economic emancipation of our people.

It is with this in mind that I call for leadership from amongst you that will be active in spreading the wealth of our country by empowering the young and the rural communities to be part of reaping the rewards of the stability that has been brought to our country through freedom. If we do not do this, all we are doing is to build up reservoirs of resentment amongst our people and reinforce chasms between the poor and the wealthy of our country. Such is a situation we do not desire but a situation that will not go away but for concerted common action spearheaded by courageous African leaders. If people amongst you do not take action we will not succeed.

South Africa needs a leadership that is long on action and short on promises.

*Dr. Mvume Dandala is Cope Paliamentary leader


Trade unions stifiling SA’s competitiveness

In Discussion on September 13, 2009 at 11:55 am

The World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report for 2009/2010 was released a few days ago and it reveals that South Africa has maintained its 45th spot among 133 countries assessed. It may be reason to feel rather chuffed with ourselves that despite the global economic turmoil, we have managed to retain our position among economies of nations and most importantly are the highest ranked African country.

Countries are assessed based on 12 pillars of competitiveness that are defined as “the set of institutions, policies and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country”. South Africa scored impressively in certain categories, particularly under “financial markets sophistication” where we are ranked 5th ahead of the leading global economic giants such as the US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Japan etc. However, there are categories where South Africa’s performance is dismal and disappointing and these are categories which explain the structural predicament the country finds itself in. Under “higher education and training” we came at 65th, 90th under “labour market efficiency” and a pathetic 125th under “health and primary education”.

I have heard on various occasions people mention “jobless economic growth” when lamenting the highly depressing level of unemployment. The concept of “jobless economic growth” is absolute nonsense. This is something created by politicians and trade unions with the primary purpose of shifting focus from the real causal factors of this problem of bloated unemployment. Unemployment according to its narrow definition has actually increased from 17.6% to about 23% since 1995 to date. The rate of unemployment in terms of the broad definition is too depressing to even mention.

Historically, the mining and agriculture sectors contributed significantly to the country’s GDP but over the years there has been a considerable shift towards the financial services sector, which now contributes to more than 65% of total GDP. The structure of the economy alone should be telling the measures required to address the socio-economic problems facing the country. The mining and agricultural sectors are largely biased towards unskilled and semi-skilled labour, which may explain the lower unemployment rate during the apartheid era as the majority of black people were and still remain predominantly in this category of labour pool.

Unfortunately, the structural change in the economy coupled with technological advancement ensured that the majority of those with no formal education and training remain on the periphery of economic activity. We should not then act all surprised that the higher rate of unemployment is among individuals with no formally recognised skills. The economic growth has resulted in creating job opportunities which unfortunately are biased towards skilled labour. The unemployment rate will remain at this insane level for as long as the majority of the population are without basic and higher education, as long as the education system continues to produce graduates whose skills are not suited to the demands of the economy.

The primary problem behind the perpetuation of this dire situation is the trade-union movement. Its misguided agenda is biased towards the so-called working class, which is predominantly unskilled and semi-skilled. Cosatu is vehemently pursuing a populist and socialist agenda that ultimately entrenches the structural faults in the economy through the promotion of counter-productive policies. The notion of promoting economic growth that is pro-poor is a bit preposterous because that seeks to suggest that job creation should be biased towards unskilled and semi-labour. This is in direct conflict with the structure of the economy, which is predisposed to skilled labour.

Does Cosatu want government and business to ignore the economic realities of the country, that sectors which are amiable to the “working class” contribute an insignificant proportion to the overall economic growth?

The pursuit of populist policies that are only meant to appease trade unionists and pseudo-communists would have devastating economic consequences because the financial services sector, which contributes enormously to economic growth, would be negatively impacted. The rigidity of the labour regulation has always remained a costly factor with regard to job creation. The lack of flexibility in hiring and firing workers as favoured by Cosatu is detrimental to those they purport to represent. If indeed Cosatu is seriously concerned about the high level of unemployment they should be promoting access to quality education instead of passing conference resolutions that demand a “living wage” and “decent work”.

In terms of the report “more competitive economies tend to be able to produce higher levels of income for their citizens”. This is the self-evident truth that Cosatu and the puppet masters from Luthuli House need to appreciate if they do have the interest of the country and our prosperity at heart. Economic populism cannot extricate the poor and the unemployed from their miserable circumstances. The obsession with immediate and politically expedient gains will not bring us sustainable prosperity and propel us forward to compete in the “Premier League” of nations, confident in the knowledge that the significant majority of our people would reap the fruits of this prosperity. Until reason prevails South Africa will continue to maintain the 45th position in the Global Competitiveness Report, or worse be overtaken by those who take the interests of their people seriously.


An Open Letter to the Minister of Basic Education

In Discussion on September 11, 2009 at 11:52 am

Dear Mme Angie,

I noticed that you waltzed in late in parliament when President Zuma visited the house last week and was speaking about the challenges facing our education system. I am sure you had a very good reason other than Prof Jonathan Jansen’s widely publicized and rather unfair remarks and totally unjustified conclusion that you are a lazy minister. One would have hoped that your discounted yet sporty Range Rover would have made sure you arrive on time for boring meeting such as a gathering of members of parliament.

Any way – I was further baffled that even after arriving late finding most MPs listening attentively to the President’s newly found revelations about what we have always known about our schooling system, you decided to arrive to a chit chat with your benchmate honourable ‘expensive wheels’ Nzimande, the Commissar General of the SACP oh and acting also as minister of higher education. Maybe you couldn’t wait for the President to finish stumbling through his answers before you could share with honourable Nzimande and update him about your top priority : to change the look and feel of the matric certificates.

Everyone has been grappling with the obvious question of how this simple act of brilliance from your side will improve the quality of the matriculants who Nzimande has to deal with in the higher education sector where Universities require more than just a pretty certificate to admit them into higher education. Who knows maybe Nzimande explained to you in that cosy moment why he recently suggested that infact matric is overrated and that universities make too much of that silly requirement of literacy. I can’t rule this out as it is in line with your often stated position that Julius Malema should not have sleepless nights because of a mere piece of paper called a matric certificated. The same piece of paper that you are ironically spending so much of your time worrying about its look and feel.

But so much has happened since that afternoon where the president shared with the nation that our teachers are lazy – teaching only 3 instead of 6 hours and spending too much time chasing after young girls instead of teaching them. Last week I am sure you aware the institute of race relations released the South African Survey that shows that only 21 percent of our schools have libraries. I am quite certain that in your punishing schedule of ensuring the printing of this beautiful matric certificate you will take some time to come up with a convincing project of how we are going to deal with this and what Dr Ellof said in parliament that the students your system is producing are literally illiterate.

One of the critical issues that you will have to deal with is the discipline amongst teachers. To show up and to arrive on time and concentrate on the work for which the tax payer is paying them. In this regard it will be more a case of do as I say and not as I do, given your penchant for arriving late as you did in parliament the other day, and your inability to concentrate while there. Of course we can turn a blind eye to that but the Mail and Guardian might make too much out of the issue, as they did about your terrible spelling mistakes in your budget speech. That also is something you may want teachers not to look up to you for. You have just acquired by a huge discount a luxury car you really don’t need. You have declared that we need to be grateful as you could have spent much more. Indeed we are. But more importantly the teachers who take away a few cents after deductions are also grateful. What baffles them is why you insist that schools that can afford to do so should not pay teachers more to retain them in some of the most appalling working conditions imaginable.

School principals are now frightened to raise private sector funds because departments of education in the provinces apparently view that with some scorn – and then cut off the budgets that were allocated to these schools from the fiscus. What’ll happen when the private sector eventually also runs out of steam – suffer little children. No laboratories, no library, no playground. As we speak there are thousands of mud schools and schools under trees. And so with all these tragic things facing our education system I sat in the parliamentary gallery and wonder when the representatives of the people are debating these issues for which you are responsible and handsomely rewarded where could you possibly have been. I was left wondering and sifting through options

• Maybe you visited the printers to personally see to the progress of the new matric certificates
• Maybe you visited the train station to see to the delivery of your range rover
• Or maybe you went to support Malema at the equality court
• Or a visit to the registration at the Adult Basic Education grammar and speech writing class

Anyway big up for Zuma for cracking the whip in your absence. I urge you to kindly request from handsard, a copy of what he said before you arrived. You will be pleased.

Yours Frankly,
Onkgopotse


Black diamonds or coal?

In Discussion on September 10, 2009 at 11:46 pm

I recall driving to work on Friday, 17 August 2007 following the Reserve Bank’s interest rate hike by 50 basis points, and subsequent increase by commercial banks to a prime lending rate of 13.5%, a billboard by The Star read: “Rate Hike to affect Black Diamonds.”

Upon reading the article by Tonny Mafu in the Business Report, I noted that the article reiterated that the so-called ‘Black Diamonds’ were the main culprits for “fuelling a strong consumer-led growth.” This therefore begs the question: Who and what is a Black Diamond? In addition, what has been their role in leading consumer growth?

In the same article, Professor Carel Van Ardt (UNISA) refers to results of a study that “shows that black people were generally more affected by the interest rate increases because, unlike their white and Indian peers, they were mostly buying houses and cars at the same time.” What is disturbing about such comments is that the Professor’s reference to the study did not elaborate on the research, its qualification, merits, de-merits and the basis on which it was conducted. This immediately brings the assumption (from certain quarters) that black people are regarded as irresponsible spenders with a desire to accumulate wealth in a short space of time to their detriment! What the article failed to mention though, is how our counterparts compare? In addition, how did they get to where they are? This then takes us to the old money versus new money debate. Will black people ever be worthy enough to acquire, own and invest without being branded as having a credit dependency syndrome?

Whilst it is a fact that black Africans were not previously exposed to the lifestyle they now enjoy (because of past economic discrimination and exclusion), it is my view that black people should not be judged on how they utilize the small portion of assets they have acquired (again, thanks to credit) and the manner in which they spend their hard earned money (considering the challenges black people face in the work place and the huge remuneration gap that still exists).

In a Sunday Times article (“Black elite must curb urge to splurge”) dated 22 July 2007, the BMF President, Jimmy Manyi made the following observation:

“I am not opposed to black people racking up debt to buy a car, house and other items – as long as they can afford to pay it back, but I have a problem with people who job hop and cash in their lump sums or pension funds just so they can buy a flashy car.”

This is the reality of the situation, and therefore amounts to positive criticism that looks to build rather than destroy. The comments create and encourage a friendly and conducive atmosphere for a healthy debate that seeks to contribute to finding credible and workable solutions. We also should be wary of allowing people to create negative perceptions aimed at demoralizing the very fibre that should be groomed to be at the forefront of the country’s economic revolution.

If we are to take part in the building of a non-racial, non-sexist South Africa, we need to undertake a self-introspection to determine where we went wrong, and rectify accordingly going forward. Jimmy Manyi’s comments outline the distinction between two types of individuals that “have debt in a high-inflation environment and acquire assets that are a long-term investment, as long as they can afford it” and those who “blow their money on conspicuous purchases”. The article did not seek to generalize by confining black people to the prescribed space they are expected to occupy as per the modus operandi, but in view, addresses obstacles facing black people, thereby providing a recipe for their constructive involvement in the mainstream economy.

The one positive aspect about Professor Van Ardt’s comment is that it confirms that 15 years after attaining democracy, stereotypes who (given half a chance) continue to paint all black people with the same paint brush that should have / and was confined to the archives of apartheid still exist with negative and destructive perceptions, one of which is the term developed by UCT/Unilever Institute of BLACK DIAMONDS! We have been commoditized to our detriment!

It is no secret that the market has been glorified as being conducive in order to attract black people who never had access to these resources, and as such, we have become the market’s main consumer target. We owe it to ourselves to be cautious about our approach to handling market stereotypes that seek to deliberately push to overextend ourselves. We should also however, be conscious of the direction our government is steering the country, and that is for the previously disadvantaged to become more involved, and ultimately take full ownership of the economy. In this regard, the Natiobnal Credit Act (NCA) has done a world of good to curb the impulsive behaviour of those who addicted to credit.

In his speech delivered to the national Assembly on 17 February 2005, former President Thabo Mbeki quoted the following from Professor Ben Turok:

“The market favours the strong, so the disadvantaged need supporting institutions. This is where there is a role for the state, and this is why we have broad based economic empowerment, policies on Labour intensive methods, new institutions for micro-credit, cooperatives and the rest of our new legislation. If we do not use these mechanisms we shall have white economic domination forever.”

In conclusion, it is imperative and of fundamental importance for our country’s young people to lead the debate on such imperative and grave matters. What is a Black Diamond? Should this term be generally acceptable?

The Jury is out and time for a robust debate must begin in earnest!


Don’t blame Canada

In Discussion on September 9, 2009 at 11:51 am

When Brandon Huntley is finally deported we should give him a Caster Semenya-size welcome at the airport. Hopefully with as many blacks as there were when Caster got her hero’s welcome. But I want a T-shirt that reads “Mug you later whitey” just for laughs. He must not be given the satisfaction of getting the hostile reception he expects and hopes.

Let’s face it, he hopes we are hostile to him when he gets back so that he can justify his actions. If we don’t succumb to emotionalism this will annoy him more than anything else in the world. It was Oscar Wilde who said “always forgive your enemies: nothing annoys them so much”. Not that he is an enemy. He is not worthy of being one. We should welcome him as the prodigal son. But then again, is he? When he arrives, will he make a repentant return? Somehow I doubt it.

I must admit, I never saw this one coming: A white guy uses the race card, and surprise, surprise, it works! Clearly Huntley had run out of ideas because he had been staying in Canada illegally for some time after his work permit expired. He stumbled upon a genius idea: apply for refugee status on racial grounds. And it worked. He reminds me of a murderer, who, after having killed his wife realises that he has no defence and the only defence that is available to him is to plead insanity and somehow, his plea wins.

A part of me believes that Huntley may just be an ass, not racist. Just your average, opportunistic general run-of-the-mill ass. He’s tried everything to stay in Canada, get a job, get married, the final trump card — seeking a refugee status. That speaks opportunism to me. But …

… then again I wonder if he really is racist. Why else would his case for refugee status hinge solely on race if he were not? This begs the question: what about the immigration tribunal that heard his case? If this tribunal (the word tribunal sounds so fascist) had any decent legal training I doubt they would have arrived at this decision. What bothers me about this is that fact it was a board. One can understand one person coming to such a conclusion, how did they all agree with him?

A lot of people seem to have missed the point. It was not the Canadian government that gave the famed and now much vilified Huntley refugee status. It was not a law passed by the Canadian parliament or their constitutional court. A tribunal that is given the authority to make these decisions on a case-by-case basis. Many of us are already doing our best to vilify and insult Canada. They did not do this. Just a group of ignorant citizens given too much power.

The people who made this finding have sealed the records of the hearing. The Canadian government is obviously embarrassed by this turn of events, which would explain why their lawyers are studying the controversial and short-sighted decision by the immigration board.

There is no doubt that there is a small section of white people who believe that crime affects white people a lot more than it does blacks. Mr Huntley probably falls under this category. It is also possible that he really wanted to stay in Canada, didn’t care what form of defence he used to stay and if it had to be race based, well he would use it. Maybe he is just an unscrupulous bastard. The kind of guy you’d want to vote off Survivor as quickly as possible.

One of the reason’s the decision was so outrageous is the fact that a lot more black people per one hundred are affected by crime than white. Of course this is not to make the crime problem OK, the government needs to work harder. White people are still much more likely to be employed than blacks. The rate of white unemployment is less than that in major Western powers. The rate of white unemployment is only 5%, so Mr Huntley can’t use that as an excuse for not getting a job. Would this tribunal now offer all blacks that live in Khayelitsha refugee status because of crime? As Mr Huntley stated, “he’s been attacked by blacks”. Well, so have the people in Khayelitsha! What about all the Colombians who are not protected by their government from cocaine lords? Will they too be afforded refugee status? Did they even think about the precedent a decision like the one they made would create? Obviously not. Maybe it was too cold for them to think that far.

According to news reports, Canadian Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney told the South African High Commissioner in Ottawa, Abraham Nkomo, that his government did not “necessarily” support the decision.

It looks like good ‘ol Brandon may have to contend with blacks sooner than he hoped. If he really is racist I hope what Chris Rock spoke of happens to him: “If you hate gay people your son will be gay. If you hate blacks, your daughter will marry a black man.”

There is no doubt that there are some who will see him as a hero. Hopefully Orania will welcome him with open arms. He has a bright future over there, I doubt any other country besides the one he turned his back on will ever welcome him.


Congress of the People on the role of interim leadership structures of the party

In Speeches on September 9, 2009 at 10:00 am

COPE is a newly formed organisation. As a result many of its structures are interim. In recent weeks there has been a tendency for some members of the party and of media commentators to question the legitimacy and powers of these structures and the decisions they make. In extreme cases, parallel structures have been set up. The CNC of COPE has discussed this issues and resolved as follows:

1-All interim structures of COPE provinces, regions and branches and of the Cope Youth Movement and COPE Womens Forum are the only legitimate structures of the party.

2-Any other structures set up parallel to these are not recognised
by the party and should be immediately disbanded.

3-Any dissaffected or unhappy COPE member has the right to raise any issue or concern thay have within COPE structures and to a higher structure if they are not satisfied with the response on their matter.
4-All members of COPE are reminded that they are not allowed to communicate to the media on any issue unless authorised to do so by the appropriately mandated structure.

COPE is committed to democracy, transparency and to disciplined behaviour by its membership. Any complaint by a member of the party will be attended to and addressed, as long as it is raised in the appropriate manner and through the proper structure.

Mosiuoa Lekota is the president of the Congress of the People

Subject for Discussion – 8 September 2009: Economic Recession

In News on September 8, 2009 at 4:40 pm

Statement

I’m sure we are clear by now what the impact of this recession have been in the world general, and on the Western Cape in particular:
• The retrenchments that escalates the rate of joblessness and sense of insecurity on the employed
• Large companies giving depression profit figures and stop filling vacancies
• Borrower’s default and banks tightening lending policies
• Prices of essential commodities shooting up
• Property and stock come down drastically with nobody buying
• The country’s GDP shrunk

There’s now talk about being on the recovery, but the reality on the ground still looks very bleak. Take the fishing industry, which affects this province directly. In Saldanha, a fishing company called Southern Seas recently retrenched about 900 hundred people. Its the similar story in St Helena Bay too where 553 workers at Sandy Point were retrenched.

In Lambrechts Bay a factory was forced to innovate through the acumen of business manager who decided to expand the business to include potato pealing, which saved a lot of jobs even if they were still forced to scale down. At Dworn Bay another fishing company closed down and the workers and community were resourceful enough to establish another jointly owned company to create work for themselves. So no one should say people are just waiting for handouts from the government. What is disturbing is that, in all this people’s plight and ventures the voice of government is deafeningly silent. One is tempted to think the government still considers only big business as real business.

What we are trying to say is that the signs of South Africa’s economic recovery are not yet visible in the ground. The economics promise us the worst is over, that banking institutions are starting to relax their lending policies. But the community of De Doors Bay knocked in vain on the doors of our banking institutions to buy the needed equipment for their new company. Instead of being coached on what they must do to get a loan they were taken from pillar to post. This is the kind of attitude that we need to change.

The problems of the capitalist system are not necessarily structural, but involve our lack of will to distribute its harvests as equitable and widely as possible. The financial markets have become what T.S. Eliot talked about in his poem[I quote]; They constantly try to escape / From the darkness outside and within / By dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good [close quote]

We need a system where it is us, the people who’ll be good. We are our brethren’s keepers. The attitude we must keep in mind is what Moeletsi Mbeki says in his book; Architects of Poverty: “The single most important factor determining the level of development of any country is the degree to which it is able to control its own political, economic and social space, and therefore its policies.” If we really mean our slogan of this province being a home for all, we must start showing it in a way we design policies with a pro poor bias. Because these are the people who’ve so far been marginalised, and are rightly starting to strain on the leash.

Thank you!
Onell De Beer, MP
Cope NCOP member
****

Debate

South Africa seem to have avoided the eye of the recession due to a combination of different things:
• strong economic and financial fundamentals
• strong regulation due to our less developed financial market than anything
• early developmental stage, which means our consumption is not heavily dependent on credit
• strong policy credibility
• also the 2010 world cup factor that has boosted our construction industry in particular

We would be foolish to try and meddle too much with where we’ve been successful. What we should be looking at and correcting is why the successes do not treacle down to the majority. We are told that the financial crisis might has reached its bottom, yet political frustration, as demonstrated by the so called service delivery protests, is growing. I think we all agree that the capitalist system as we know reached a low point of near collapse with this recession.

The failures of any system offer opportunity to promote dramatic change. That opportunity may have been missed already by our leading governments of our world. But it is in the power of provincial government, in this country, to implement fiscal stimulus (an infrastructure development programs) that can assist especially the worst hit by any economic recession, which is the poor.

In this country we have lower financial vulnerabilities, but not a large and stronger domestic market to sustain our domestic demand. This is why we don’t seem to be creating enough development to absorb our labour, especially the unskilled and semi-skilled. This speaks our shrinking manufacturing sector. We must ask ourselves how we can adopt policies that promote capital accumulation and investment in social capital, which is education, health, public housing and social peace.

It is clear that we need to intervene to promote our informal market business. We need to train our informal sector to improve their business skills. We need to provide them with accessible capital for business. This would also promote social peace by easing the current tensions in the township where you find local businessmen angry with Somali business people. The Somali business people are able to underprice the local business because they have a caste system that allows individuals to borrow against a clan accumulated capital in setting up and running their business. We need to educate and provide our people too with the structural support they require. It is also important to find means of regulating and teaching them about the importance of paying tax.

If truth be told, it is that the call for providing entrepreneurship programmes and apprenticeship have not been well received by our business sector. Ideally these would have been done on voluntary basis, but experience shows that this does not work, or else the government has yet provided enough carrot to entice the business rabbit. The government must give tax incentives for business to take mentoring, training and sharing of skills. But we’d urge it to compel our private sector to introduce compulsory apprentice training and mentoring programmes.

Naturally all these ventures will need capital and incentives to be effective. This is why we were impressed by the Premier on her recent visit to Germany when she raised the issue with foreign funders.

We encourage our provincial government to positively intervene to help develop our business, with special emphasis in our fishing industry. And something drastic is need to boost our manufacturing sector, especially where we have comparative advantage, like in boat building. Fiscal packages for infrastructure, as well as the tax breaks to struggling industries and capital goods sales, is not necessarily a bad thing, so long as they are part of support for the labour markets, and designed to expand our domestic production. What they must not be is mere bail outs. Business must be to account for them through investing back in social capital

As my colleague, the hon De Beer, indicated that as much as the capitalist system needs to be realigned, the attitude its proprietors need to radically change too. We hear a good talk by economist about how governments should be looking for ways to go beyond stimulation packages and bail outs to stimulate more sustainable growth. What none is not talking about are ways of preventing these recession cycles from happening again and again. We are here in danger of missing yet another historic opportunity as the Bangladeshi newspaper, The New Nation, said it best when it wrote last year [I quote]:

It’s very telling that trillions have already been spent to patch up leading world financial institutions, while out of the comparatively small sum of $12.3 billion pledged in Rome earlier this year, to offset the food crisis, only $1 billion has been delivered. The hope that at least extreme poverty can be eradicated by the end of 2015, as stipulated in the UN’s Millennium Development Goals, seems as unrealistic as ever, not due to lack of resources but a lack of true concern for the world’s poor. [end quote]

Real concern for the poor is what is lacking in the attitude of our leaders and financial institutions. The ‘macroeconomics’ that led to this crisis only makes analytical sense if examined within the framework of the political settlements and distributional outcomes in which it had operated. Hence we must take into perspective the critical social theories when examining it. It is the outcome of something much more systemic, namely an attempt to use radical marketsim as a new technology of power to help transform capitalism into a rentiers’ delight; that is a system that imposes only minimal pressures on big business agents to engage in competitive struggles in the real economy, while inflicting exactly the opposite fate on workers and small firms.

Our national government’s attitude of wanting to use the state as a major facilitator of the ever-increasing rent-seeking practices of oligopolistic capital is flawed also. We define oligopolistic capital as non productive capital that exist in parasitic relationship to state resources. We in recession because ‘markets’ took their inevitable revenge on the greed of rentiers by calling their bluff and rubbishing their the gambler’s attitude. Something similar can easily happen to oligopolistic activity if there’s nor real economic activity happening on the ground where the state derives its income. Oligopolistic capital produces only elites consumers who do not produce real income.

Thank you!
Mbulelo Ncedana, MPP
Cope Chief Whip

Interpellations

Mr. G.R. Strachan to ask Ms H. Zille, Premier

1) When and where will the Special Economic Zones referred to in the State of the Province Address of the Premier be implemented?

Editorial Background on Special Economic Zones

A Special Economic Zone (SEZ) is a geographical region that has economic laws that are more liberal than a country’s typical economic laws. The category ‘SEZ’ covers a broad range of more specific zone types, including Free Trade Zones (FTZ), Export Processing Zones (EPZ), Free Zones (FZ), Industrial Estates (IE), Free Ports, Urban Enterprise Zones and others. Usually the goal of a structure is to increase foreign direct investment by foreign investors, typically an international business or a multinational corporation (MNC).

It would have special laws protecting it, not have to pay customs duties on machinery or goods it imported or bought locally. It would be treated as a foreign territory doing business with various partners abroad. It would have liberal laws as far as labour and foreign investment was concerned. Apart from attractive tax and duty exemptions, it would be allowed to distribute its own gas, power and water and unique style of governance that would allow them to be economic drivers.

SEZs are often developed under a public-private partnership arrangement, in which the public sector provides some level of support (provision of off-site infrastructure, equity investment, soft loans, bond issues, etc) to enable a private sector developer to obtain a reasonable rate of return on the project (typically 10-20% depending on risk levels).
Cope’s input

Before embarking on the road of establishing Special Economic Zones (SEZs) we need to learn from global experience what to look out for and against;
• How would we ensure that the SEZs have people friendly projects that’ll not spin out of control by marginalizing a huge section of poor people?
• Will IT related software parks and technology hubs be part of our SEZs to take comparative advantage of our region, especially around the metro?
• We need to develop clear indications of how we plan them to assist the government in setting up of new infrastructure, help ancillary units sprout and create new substantial jobs
• Will the SEZs in the Western Cape have any particular sector focus?
• If so, will there be certain tax exemption enforced on a certain territory, involving cancellation of a profit tax and property tax?
• Won’t this end up taking too much needed revenue from the Finance Ministry?
• Will there be a multi-currency regime?
• If so how are we going to avoid them degenerating into money laundering region, or the risk of loosing our macro-economic stability and economic sovereignty?
• Will contingency plans be made to make sure that the SEZ’s will not be hijacked by developers who will, for instance, corner huge swathes of rich, agricultural land with a measly compensation handed over to farmers without resettlement and rehabilitation policy?
• Are plans in place to set aside land within SEZs for greenery, environmental friendly sewage and water treatment?

These questions we ask not to discourage innovative, but to make sure that every angle of thought has been envisaged about the possible consequences of SEZ. For if the SEZs prosperity does not trickle down to the rest of the population they’ll foster an impression that the government is setting them up to underline an ugly fact that even after 15 years of democracy, we still do not have the kind of decent infrastructure in the country that should have normally been the case.

That though services should have been available to all it could not be created and so now there’ll be special areas demarcated for special people, while others will continue to live without power, water, roads and green areas. There’s risk that SEZs will be seen as Islands of prosperity where the rich are ecologically subsidized, while the lesser mortals live on the fringes. This can only foster resentment among the have nots.

Tozama Bevu, MPP
Cope

To members of COPE

In News on September 7, 2009 at 6:02 pm

Statement by the Congress National Committee meeting of the Congress of the People, held over the 4, 5 and 6 September 2009 at COPE Headquarters.
The CNC met and held 3 full days of discussion and deliberation. The meeting took place a few days after the by-election victory in Tembisa. This victory and COPE’s performance in all the by-elections shows a huge groundswell in support for the party. The CNC discussed a political overview given by the President, Mosiuoa Lekota, received reports on the state of the organisation, including its finances and structures and discussed the performance of the various departments of the party and its public representatives. High on the agenda was the discussion on cooperation with other political parties.

The meeting concluded that;

• The political analysis that describes the challenges that our country faces is very clear in identifying the crisis in the ruling party as the source of many of the countries problems. This, along with the economic crisis, points to a serious threat to our democracy. COPE is determined to ensure that it mobilises all social forces in the country to defend our people from ongoing maladministration, corruption, the incessant interference in institutions such as the judiciary and the deteriorating conditions of the majority of our people.
• The discussion with other political parties is bearing fruit and will continue. COPE structures throughout the country will debate this issue to determine the final form of the cooperation between COPE and these parties.
• The state of the organisation report shows growth in the party, in spite of the many challenges and the CNC resolved to focus attention on those areas and structures where there are weaknesses to strengthen these. The CNC resolved that it will not tolerate or allow parallel structures to any of the existing COPE structures.
• The finance report delivered by the National Treasurer shows progress both in fundraising and in managing the party’s finances.
• The party is building important relationships internationally, particularly on the African continent and will prioritise these.
• The policy formulation process, COPE’s Carnival of Ideas, is up and running and details will be announced in due course of public participation opportunities.
• The CNC noted the increasing profile and activities of its MPs and MPLs.
• The CNC noted the UIF Party and New Vision Party decision to join COPE and welcomed these members.

The CNC also extended its heartfelt condolences to the Chief Justice, Pius Langa and his family on the passing of Mrs Langa.

For further information, please contact Phillip Dexter on 082-453 4088.


Architects of poverty: Book Review

In News on September 5, 2009 at 8:33 pm

architects-of-poverty1Much of what Mbeki says in his book, Architects of Poverty, we already know. What is enjoyable is its collection and aggregation. Mbeki uses fresh descriptions to argue a cogent thesis that runs through the book like a sewing needle with a thread making fine stitches. He’s undidactic and intelligent without being formulaic. Simply put Mbeki’s thesis can be captured as this:
• Africa, after its colonial past, has been governed by political elites who ended up copying qualities of colonialists in the name of African nationalism
• African elites are a non productive group, mostly black, who live in a symbiotic parasitic relation to the state’s resources through political connection; who blackmail capitalist oligarchies to give them economic profits windfalls, otherwise known as BEE
• Political elites have little to no original innovation (business wise) and have no control over productive economy; their thinking is largely controlled by foreign forces in the form of global corporations, capitalist oligarchs
• Models of solutions provided by institutions like World Bank or IMF have not been good for African development
• The rule of political elite in Africa has so far led to initial development after independence, but that petered out after few years, living behind deteriorating to collapsing infrastructure, massive brain drainage, and capital flight
• When threatened by the political forces of change the political elites suppress them, with violence if need be; and are not averse to using their political power to advance the tyranny of their big men rule to preserve the status quo of their power
• Or they make cosmetic changes, replacing one big man with the other that serves a different group of even greedier political elites
• The political elites see the state as essentially distributive rather than developmental

Mbeki puts this challenge to us: “Is a new middle class emerging in Africa that can provide the leadership required to drive the continent’s industrial and agrarian revolutions in the face of foreign interventions that foster the continent’s traditional role in the world economy as a source of raw materials and cheap labour?” Is his hope on the new emerging African middle class justified?
Sometimes when I see how the black middle class, especially, has fallen for the consumerist culture at the expense of real innovation and development I feel Mbeki’s hope is far fetched. But the good thing about middle class consumerism is that by default it demands innovation to keep up the demand and supply. So the question is whether we have what it takes to become a real productive class. There’s a certain mental attitude we should adopt to fulfil this challenge and liberty driven thinking is at the centre of it. Liberty is a revolutionary doctrine that sometimes develop through vaunting out regressive tradition.

Another fresh quality in Mbeki’s narrative—a scarce resource in African analysts who are forever looking over their shoulder to imagine how their argument will be understood in black political circles—is the manner by which he’s not afraid to venture to wherever logic leads him, and makes no apologies for it. “Many foreign business survived as best they could by corrupting the new elite or finding ways of ingratiating themselves with their new masters. In some Western countries companies got tax breaks if they were able to bribe African government officials.”

Mbeki says African elites foster the continent’s underdevelopment with their operations of diverting economic profits to ‘consumption and capital flight’ while assisting the axe of de-industrialisation by not investing in the manufacturing sector. Mbeki is not a rigorously analytical scribe. This does not necessary belittle the merits of his book, after all obsessive analysis can sometimes stupefy. But cogent as argument might be sometimes it feels rushed. The history of our country is certainly hushed and abridged, which is understandably for the book of such small length.

Mbeki helped at least one reader to understand the prevalence for socialist rhetoric to hide the vacuous capitalist consumerism in the Liberation Movement (LM). “The social democracy of black elites was, however, not influenced by the doctrines of socialism. Rather, it was based on statist economic models which its creators saw as a way of breaking the power of the white owned cooperations, thus creating the possibility of the black elite entering the business.” It is just another trick of the black elite.

The quality that most distinguishes Mbeki’s writing is its clarity. It sparkles like pellucid water, running shallow and wide. You can see every pebble on its bed. He has investigative journalist’s talent for distilling scattered information, especially that of economy-historical milieu, into pithy passages and engaging soundbites. From his tone you can realise he disdains snobbery and has an affirmed broad affection for grassroots democratic processes, something obviously worrisome to the dysfunctional collective elitist schemers who climb the greasy pole of our politics.

Although not meticulously systematic, Mbeki’s book proceeds with the lucidity. His thinking is marked by a positive and objective looking self-consciousness. Take for instance how he speaks about aspects that directly involve his brother, the former president of the republic, Thabo Mbeki. There’s a dry emotive outpouring only a Mbeki is capable of; a loosening up of tension that is not mawkish, and is soon relieved to move beyond the personal instead of exploring it. He’s critical of him without condemning. Complementary without bias.

In the end what Moeletsi Mbeki favours is a capitalist economy that would generate economic growth and create a community of interests between the more and less prosperous. He wants to see more virtuous and well-educated South Africans, with a general respect for tradition and morality that underlay the economics and politics of a free society. A country develops when its able to harness the energies of its people and put them to productive use. That’s my favourite quote of the book. He makes suggestions on how to embark on this journey, but emphasises that innovation and competence is what’ll see us through, not, for instance, regulation against foreign competition.

Far too many people that should be artisans, technicians, professionals, engineers, scientists, managers, etc, end up falling through the cracks of our education system for one reason or the other. Part of the problem is our apartheid inheritance; but we cannot keep blaming apartheid for everything forever. We need to pull ourselves by our own boots. Expecting help from the outside is self-defeating. Even when not looking after its own vested interests foreign help stunts internal innovative capacity. We must be our own heroes, and the most secure and quickest way to develop ourselves is education, education, and more education. We must intensify drives that’ll produce qualified people we need to eliminate the artificial shortage of skilled labour, etc.

All these things can never succeed until we do some serious soul searching and change of especially our entitlement attitude. There is, for instance, a wrong notion that has taken root in most South African society that to be educated is to be elitist. You hear people praising uneducated people as if this automatically brings them closer to the people. This lack of aspiration for excellence is one of the things that stunts our development. There’s nothing wrong with being educated, especially if the fruits of that education are ploughed back into one’s community.

Instead of fearing democracy we should rather be concerned with symptoms that point to the fact that we are a civilization in decline, dominated by consumerist greed, given over to public vulgarity, and rapidly descending into collective barbarism, especially during the exercise of our right to protest. We should be teaching our people to be citizens; free individuals that are part of something bigger than themselves, which in this case happens to be a republic. Not only just citizens, but enlightened ones that’ll build a society that take form, character, from our collective experiences as the people of this country. Anything else is just hot air.


COPE and opposition cooperation

In Discussion on September 3, 2009 at 6:12 pm

In recent weeks there has been heightened interest and debate on whether COPE should cooperate with, and possibly even merge with other opposition parties. The arguments for and against these possibilities have either been couched in terms of a re-alignment of the South African political terrain, or in some cases, in anachronistic positions that really relate to the pre-COPE era of politics.

If it is to grow and to successfully challenge for power, COPE must co-operate with other parties, but it must do so on the basis of shared values, principles and policies.

There is no doubt that the launch of COPE changed the political terrain in our country. The formation of a progressive, left of centre party that could challenge the ANC, has inspired a new political enthusiasm in our country.

The demoralization of many people due to the dramatic debasement of the once proud liberation movement and its increasingly bad track record in terms of governance, was turned around by the emergence of COPE. COPE’s new agenda for hope and for change was successful in that respect.

The performance of COPE in the general election, while not enough to dislodge the ruling party, helped to ensure that the 2/3′s majority the ANC sought was not gained. But it is only combined with other parties that COPE can exercise this power. Cooperation is therefore a necessity.

It is true that parties such as the DA, the ACDP, the FF, the IFP and the UCDP have a history of policy positions that COPE would not have supported. But it became clear during the election that the manifestos of the DA, UDM and the ID had a lot in common with COPE. Among these were;

Defense of the constitution
Eradicating poverty
Rooting out corruption
Ensuring good service delivery in; health,
education, policing, local government and other
areas
Creating work and economic opportunities for all
people
Redressing past injustices perpetrated under
apartheid and colonialism

Some of the potential differences between these parties on how to achieve these common objectives revolve around views on the role of the state. There is also a perceived difference on BEE and Affirmative Action. In discussions between these parties it has become clear that these differences are not of a strategic nature.

COPE is committed to solving the problems that the people of our country face. It does not therefore stick to rigid policy positions such as nationalisation, but would consider the role of the state on a case by case basis. On broad-based black economic empowerment and affirmative action all these parties recognise the need for these measures but are clear that the ruling party has not implemented them properly, instead creating possibilities for corruption, nepotism and a culture of entitlement and mediocrity.

It is worth noting that realignment has happened before, leading to the formation of the DA, in the ANC leading to the formation of the UDM, the ID and recently COPE itself. The ANC cooperates with the FF+ and has with Azapo before today.

There is no impediment to cooperating with any parties if they share most of COPE’s vision, values and principles and there are no strategic or principled differences between COPE and them. Among the most important of these values and principles stated in COPE’s manifesto are that it will;

fearlessly defend the constitution and uphold the rule of law;
systematically eradicate poverty, grow the economy, create decent work and substantially reduce unemployment;
protect the environment and our natural resources for future generations
equip and educate our children to be globally competitive and ready to function in the knowledge economy and provide our people with opportunities to acquire the necessary skills to realise their full potential;
significantly improve the quality of health care and increase health literacy;
fight and reduce crime and provide better safety and security for all;
enhance the gains made in the empowerment of women to achieve gender equality;
empower and develop the youth to realise their full potential and play their rightful role in society;
strengthen families, family life and communities;
unite the nation to act together to build a truly non-racial South Africa; and, contribute to the development of Africa, strengthen South-South cooperation and build a more just world.

Discussions with other political parties have revealed that whatever differences there may have been in terms of their past policies, they have also shifted. In terms of values, there is a commitment to a shared vision, shared values and a shared agenda. It is therefore incumbent on COPE to enter into discussions with these parties to see where cooperation is possible. Not to do so would be to miss the historic opportunity that presents itself.

There is a danger that COPE members can be “left behind” in this debate and because of this, not support the process. This discussion must include the membership of COPE. It is important that such discussions are not premised on an “anti” agenda, but are rather based on the desire to forge a common vision based on shared values and principles. The process that COPE should follow is to;

Set out the discussions held to date and identify areas where agreement and disagreement are found,

Prepare a discussion document to take to all COPE members and structures to debate,

Once the debate has taken place and COPE structures and members have given their input to the party leadership a further meeting with the political parties it seeks to cooperate with and finalise a common platform or agenda should take place.

There is no doubt that this process will invigorate political debate and attract large numbers of people to once again participate in politics as active citizens. The fact that parties will have abandoned their historical positions will present the electorate with an opportunity to vote for a platform of policies and not have to vote defensively on racial grounds.

If this platform can be agreed upon, a formidable effort can be made to win local government elections in key districts, towns and cities. Such victories will lay the foundation for winning the national elections in 2014. A victory in the national election will be of huge significance to our country, the African continent and will have an impact globally.

COPE can be in power in 2014. We have proved that we could set up a party in record time and fight an election to win an important share of the vote. Winning power through growing our share of the vote is the key objective of the party. If cooperation with other parties assists in achieving this objective, then we must explore that option.

It is important to realise that COPE does not have to dissolve itself or merge with other parties to co-operate. For the immediate future, cooperation and a common platform are what is required. This is not to rule out the possibility of the formation of a united, alternative and progressive party. But this should develop out of the talks, joint action and a debate in our own ranks and the ranks of the other parties who wish to cooperate with COPE.

The electorate is crying out for change, if the protests at poor service delivery, the continuing strikes, the high emigration figures and other similar indicators are anything to go by. COPE was not formed to fail in its historic task. We should not be shy to say we can do it better with the help of other parties that share our vision, values and principles.

Phillip Dexter MP is the Head of Communications for the Congress of the People

Gauteng COPE legislature statement on bus attacks

In News on September 3, 2009 at 4:15 pm

The Congress of the People (COPE) is deeply upset with levels of moral decay in the society as demonstrated by the rampaging and gun- toting criminals who carried out unwarranted and unprovoked shootings on innocent bus commuters.

Yesterday (Wednesday) in a statement condemning the fire attacks, COPE MPL and legislative spokesperson for transport Ndzipho Kalipa said, “It is profoundly touching and hurting the worst to learn that family members lost their loved ones and breadwinners because some wicked interests of certain individuals were not satisfied. ”

If the attack on members of the civil society has been triggered by the launch of the newly -revamped bus system, our beloved country then is fast deteriorating into strips of “no go areas.” Then it means crime, corruption and filth within the society has indeed reached uncontrollable levels and manifest growing ungovernable tendencies, unbridled fights for power and resources.

Government’s failure to resolve differences with taxi associations on how to work together in rejuvenating the new transport network system is now beginning to haunt the country. It is not different to the appalling march that slipped into army revolt. It further corroborates, most seemingly the view that among multitudes of challenges facing our country, the fight for power, resources and status among different groups will always be our main concern if the law is not allowed to run its course.
We strongly denounce the brutal actions of these cold-blooded assassins and urge the police to track and nail them down to prison where they belong before more damage happened. Our prayers and thoughts are with the members of the deceased families.

COPE further insist on the national transport ministry to desist from promoting sectarian interests of other groups at the expense of others as alleged by disgruntled parties. It should begin to talk earnestly on the issues of developing a dedicated transport system in the country with all stakeholders involved in an honest and transparent manner in order to end bitter confrontations.

COPE WINS BY-ELECTION

In News on September 3, 2009 at 9:15 am

cope bannerIn a head to head showdown with the ANC, The Congress of the people (COPE) yesterday wrested power from the ANC in a municipal by election in ward 12 Ekurhuleni. The 2006 ANC majority of 87.21 % was slashed to 45.47%. .

The party also contested three further by elections showing growing strength with substantive gains at the expense of the ANC when it achieved 21.21 % in Lephalale (Ellisras) Limpopo, 21.39% in Upington, Northern Cape and 20.9% in Westonarea Gauteng.

These results confirm the inherent strength and potential of COPE as a viable alternative to the ANC. The new party, conceived only 9 months ago, is steadily building its organizational capacity throughout South Africa. COPE promises to be a major contender in the 2011 Municipal electrons as a forerunner to the 2014 general election when it plans to finally break down one party domination on its mission to consolidate democracy in South Africa.

The new era is dawning!


Comments on the SA “refugee” to Canada

In Discussion on September 2, 2009 at 11:06 pm

Ok after my frivolous link posted yesterday and removed, I will now give my thoughts around this subject. My first thought on hearing this story was “good this may force government to take a more serious look at violent crime in South Africa”. I myself have been mugged at knife point and it was a very scary experience.

On further thought however I do raise questions around this case. The man in question claims to have been attacked 7 times, 7 times is an almost unbelievable amount of incidents as my husband said he must have owed Nigerian drug lords money or something. I have also read that these incidents were not reported to the police, if this is true it does not make sense, even if we do not have much faith in the effectiveness of the police force surely you would still report the crime? When I was mugged I did and what’s more a week later a councelling service linked to the police phoned to ask if I would like to go for trauma councelling. I was impressed with this.

I also question the fact that he claims that these attacks were racially motivated, racisim does still exist in every race group here but as a rule this is not the motivation for crime, the motives are complex and have a lot more to do with poverty and a multitude of other factors. Law abiding blacks are victims of crime every day what are their rights, can they also claim refugee status?

Finally I am sceptical about his claim that he “sticks out like a sore thumb anywhere in SA” due to his race, that’s just bullshit, I could say that I stick out like a sore thumb in Boksburg because I’m english speaking which would also be complete rubbish.

That all said below is the COPE statment on the case.

Congress of the People statement on the granting of refugee status by the Canadian government to a South African citizen

The Congress of the People would like to go on record in stating that the refugee asylum status granted to Brandon Huntley by Canada, while a shocking decision, is symptomatic of the disillusionment rife across all colour lines in the ANC led South Africa.

This is unfortunately not only an unintended consequence of some ANC policies, but rather a result of the ANC’s cynical campaign to exploit the fears based on race of people in the country. Over the last year, populist and extremists in the ANC such as Julius Malema have been trying to whip the masses into a frenzy of anti-white, sentiment. “Wit Gevaar” is one of the watchwords of post Polokwane blameshifting tactics.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are unprecedented service delivery protests, with scenes reminiscent of the height of apartheid. While towns are burning, the ruling party are content to play a cynical game of gerrymandering and of blaming everyone else for the current , dismal state of affairs. The electorate they claim to serve are being left behind mere months after carrying them to success in the General Election.

The ANC have had 15 years to begin to make a dent in the legacy of racial disharmony and poor service delivery. That they have failed in their mandate of making South Africa a “home for all” is worrying. What is an even bigger worry is that they are using the tactic of “divide and conquer” to ensure that they continue to cling to power.

For more information contact Phillip Dexter on 082 453 4088 or Kiki Rwexana on 082 658 6914
Updated 8 hours ago · Comment · Like / Unlike · Report Note

These are few comments from friends

Wayne Hodgson

Well said Urs… there is definitely for and against… i’m more in favour of getting those that are quick to complain to take a stand and demand change… with 2011 local elections around the corner we need to ensure a renaissance of local non-governance by most municipalities … the ANC still think they won a competition but have no idea on how to effect good governance for the people… it’s time to stand up and say enough is enough and what can I do to make meaningful change for the benefit of all!!

Ribbink

I’m not gunning for you at all Sula but I’m a stickler for what really happened. He was given asylum, you don’t get that easily, he had to give evidence of his injuries so they most probably did happen. He says he didn’t report it and I can imagine why. I was shot by a kid with a pellet gun a couple of years back- My friends have been attacked, murdered, had relatives murdered and story after story is one of police neglect. There are some good stories of police trying hard, but not nearly enough. My brother in law stopped using the train in CPT twelve years ago. It became safer to travel by taxi!! You will get hurt on those trains. He may have been involved in drugs and lived on the wrong side of the tracks, that society also has little faith in the police. It would be interesting to get the full story. My key point of course was the overall picture of 20 000 murders PA. we are 2nd after Columbia with .496 per 1000 PA.

Derek Copp

I’m not familiar with this case, but if you knew what caliber of people that Canada allows in under the refugee program, your head would explode. Unless this guy is a total piece of s??t, he’s probaly one of the better ones, in my opinion.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/releases/2009/2009-07-13.asp

MEDIA STATEMENT- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

In News on September 2, 2009 at 8:32 pm

Dear friends

Congress of the people youth movement Eastern Cape

As the Congress of the people youth movement in the Province we held our meeting on the 22nd of August 2009, East London.

It is however unfortunate that the outcomes of our meeting have since been deliberately distorted by some for self serving reasons and would want to categorically communicate the true outcomes of our meeting.

• We noted and assessed the state of the organisation and therefore resolved that as the Congress of the people youth movement, we are an integral part of the Congress of the people (COPE) and as such we have a responsibility to continuously contribute towards it’s unity and cohesion
• We have a responsibility to better position ourselves to be able to earnestly build the structures of COPE and COPEYM
• We further affirmed that we would continuously work with Eastern Cape PILG as led by its chairperson Andile Nkuhlu. We understand very clearly that this is the only leadership that is legitimate and has the overall responsibility of leading the Congress of the people in the Eastern Cape.
• We further condemned the news of any other task team set-up by any individual/s who use the name of COPE in this fashion and proclaim themselves as leaders of this organisation
• We fully and unwaveringly aligned ourselves with the resolutions of the CNC that all legitimate structures of COPE would remain and continue with their work up until elective conferences are convened. This would include all sub-regions, regions, provinces and national structures including the National Steering Committee of the Youth movement as led by Anele Mda and Malusi Booi.

We condemn the opportunistic conduct by Mr. Nqaba Bhanga who saw it fit to misrepresent the views of our collective leadership. He has since been advised to discontinue any communication with the media on behalf of COPEYM pending the organisational internal processes which have been instituted against him. He has been placed on precautionary suspension pending his disciplinary hearing together with Mr. Lindile Mhlophe.
We hope and trust that this statement will go a long way in clarifying the true views of the COPEYM in the Eastern Cape Province; we would be available for any clarity that may arise from this communiqué.

Yours truly,

Mr. Odwa Voyi
Provincial Spokesperson (COPEYM)
Member of the provincial interim leadership group
083 249 1605
ovoyi@yahoo.com


“Wit Gevaar”

In Discussion on September 2, 2009 at 10:26 am

Phillip Dexter talks about the ANC’s assault on our common national consciousness

The Caster Semenya homecoming hijacking by the ANC was much more than an impromptu attempt at hogging the limelight. It was an attempt to steal a march on appropriating our common national consciousness, to take success and wrap it in ANC colours.

This is worrying, because our common national consciousness belongs to none of us and all of us simultaneously. It is the fabric of our identity as a nation and is forged by national icons and ordinary people alike over the period of many years. And the ANC now want to annex it.

Since the 1992 Cricket World Cup in Australia, sport has united South Africans. When rain washed away our hopes of beating England in our first attempt at a semi-final, leaving us 22 runs to get off 1 ball, it was very hard to not feel the injustice as a nation, and the pride of seeing the world commiserate with us as our players took a lap of honour.

Even before we had a new national flag, our national identity was being forged at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. We celebrated with Elana Meyer and our men’s tennis doubles team of Wayne Ferreira and Pietie Norval as they claimed silver medals.

But sport really started to unite us in the 1995 Rugby World Cup, and we all remember the moment; seeing Madiba don a number 6 shirt. This image inspired a sense of nationhood in a new South Africa and our subsequent successes have flowed from that very special moment.

This did not go unnoticed by the world. As you read this, a major Hollywood film about this subject, directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon, is currently in post-production, having been shot in South Africa.

So what’s changed since our glory days of World and African championship success?

The answer is simple; where sport (and national public holidays, for that matter) used to unite us, it is now being used to divide the people of South Africa, and a divided South Africa will always be controlled by the now increasingly chauvinistic ANC.

Julius Malema’s neat, but simplistic separation of the people of South Africa into parochial stereotypes is typical of a strategy of “divide and conquer”. You’re either an athletics fan (black) or a rugby fan (white). You are either with us (black), or against us (white). What Julius Malema conveniently chose to ignore is the fact that all South Africans, regardless of race or political affiliation, supported Caster Semanya. It is the one issue on which all South Africans united. This was an all too rare moment of post Polokwane unity among all South Africans. But for the revisionist sleight of hand by Julius Malema, it proved to be a missed opportunity to come together as a nation.

Malema’s playbook is not new. It is well worth noting that his rhetoric has alarming echoes of Joseph Goebbels circa 1936. His paranoia of “the white media” is reminiscent of the Nazi propaganda minister whipping the German nation up into a frenzy of anti-Semitism.

“The Big Lie”, the theory that the people will believe a lie if audacious enough, and if repeated often enough, was first cynically practised by the Nazis. Julius Malema is the latest in a long line of populist leaders to use this tool. His insistence on the looming threat of white people destabilising the revolution taps into the fears of black South Africans. Remember George Orwell’s “Animal Farm”? Remember how the caveat to all of Squealer’s speeches would always tap into the animals fear of the farmer returning? This is exactly the methodology behind Julius Malema’s public utterances.

It is of grave concern that the ANC have not disciplined Julius Malema for his hate speech. By logical extension, this means that the top leadership of the ruling party grant him their tacit approval to stoke the fires of division.

Julius Malema is the only person in South Africa who is allowed to engage in borderline hate speech because it serves the ruling party. Imagine if a white politician welcomed a triumphant South African rugby team home from their successful Tri-Nations campaign and asked “where are all the black people? If it were a soccer team coming home, there would be more black people here”. Charges of hate speech would be filed so fast that it would make even Usain Bolt say “wow, that was quick”.

As long as South Africans continue to vote along tribal and racial lines, the ANC will continue to hold sway over the electorate. Instead of speaking to the fears of the electorate, the Congress of the People have chosen to speak to their hope and aspirations. We hope to build a South Africa in which all her people have a common destiny.

While we may have come from a divided past, we have seen the power of a united South Africa. After all, is there really anything more inspiring than 60 000 people singing our new National Anthem in unison, the stadium awash with thousands of flags? It is only by uniting that we can defeat the challenges of poverty, unemployment, disease and crime. Perhaps the ruling party pays lip service to this, all the while keeping the masses in poverty and ignorance for the foreseeable future, while holding history to account and not taking any responsibility for the present. It would seem so, given the failure to hold Malema to account.

Phillip Dexter MP is the Head of Communications for the Congress of the People. This article first appeared in Afrikaans in Rapport newspaper.


A diagnosis of the South African malaise

In Editorials on September 1, 2009 at 7:52 pm

A review of Moeletsi Mbeki’s recent book, Architects of Poverty.

Much of what Moeletsi Mbeki says in his book, Architects of Poverty, we already know. What is enjoyable is its collection and aggregation. Mbeki uses fresh descriptions to argue a cogent thesis that runs through the book like a thread of fine stitches. He’s undidactic and intelligent without being formulaic. Simply put Mbeki’s thesis can be captured as this:

1) Africa, after its colonial past, has been governed by political elites who ended up copying qualities of colonialists in the name of African nationalism.

2) African elites, who are mostly black, are a non productive group, and live by a symbiotic parasitic relationship to state’s resources through political connection (they see the state as essentially distributive rather than developmental).

3) They blackmail capitalist oligarchies to give their profits windfalls, otherwise known as BEE.

4) Political elites have little to no original innovation (business wise) and have no control over productive economy; their thinking is largely controlled by foreign forces in the form of global corporations, or capitalist oligarchs.

5) Models of solutions provided by institutions like World Bank or IMF have not been good for African development
The rule of political elite in Africa has so far led to initial development after independence, but that petered away after a few years, living behind deteriorating to collapsing infrastructure, massive brain drainage, and capital flight.

6) When threatened by the political forces of change the political elites suppress them, with violence if need be; and are not averse to using their political power to advance the tyranny of their big men rule to preserve the status quo of their power.

7) Or they make cosmetic changes, replacing one big man with the other that serves a different group of even greedier political elites.

Mbeki thinks “Is a new middle class emerging in Africa that can provide the leadership required to drive the continent’s industrial and agrarian revolutions in the face of foreign interventions that foster the continent’s traditional role in the world economy as a source of raw materials and cheap labour?” Is his hope on the new emerging African middle class justified?

Sometimes when I see how the black middle class, especially, has fallen for the consumerist culture at the expense of real innovation and development, I feel Mbeki’s hope is far fetched. But the good thing about middle class consumerism is that, by default, it demands innovation to keep up the demand and supply.

So the question is whether we have what it takes to become a real productive class. There’s a certain mental attitude we should adopt to fulfil this challenge; liberty driven thinking is at the centre of it. Liberty is a revolutionary doctrine that sometimes develops through vaunting out regressive tradition.

Another fresh quality in Mbeki’s narrative-a scarce resource in African analysts who are forever looking over their shoulders to see how their argument will be understood in black political circles-is the manner by which he’s not afraid to venture to wherever logic leads him, and makes no apologies for it:
“Many foreign businesses survived as best they could by corrupting the new elite or finding ways of ingratiating themselves with their new masters. In some Western countries companies got tax breaks if they were able to bribe African government officials.”

Mbeki says African elites foster the continent’s underdevelopment with their operations of diverting economic profits to ‘consumption and capital flight’ while assisting the axe of de-industrialisation by not investing in the manufacturing sector.

Mbeki is not a rigorously analytical scribe. This does not necessary belittle the merits of his book, after all obsessive analysis can sometimes stupefy. But cogent as his argument might be sometimes it feels rushed. The history of our country is certainly hushed and abridged, which is understandable for the book of such small length.

Mbeki helped at least one reader to understand the prevalence for socialist rhetoric in disguise of vacuous capitalist consumerism within the Liberation Movement (LM) itself:
“The social democracy of black elites was, however, not influenced by the doctrines of socialism. Rather, it was based on statist economic models which its creators saw as a way of breaking the power of the white owned corporations, thus creating the possibility of the black elite entering the business.” It is just another trick of the black elite.

The quality that most distinguishes Mbeki’s writing is its clarity. It sparkles like pellucid water, running shallow and wide. You can see every pebble on its bed. He has investigative journalist’s talent for distilling scattered information, especially that of economy-historical milieu, into pithy passages and engaging sound bites. From his tone you can realise he disdains snobbery and has an affirmed broad affection for grassroots democratic processes, something obviously worrisome to the dysfunctional collective elitist schemers who climb the greasy pole of our politics.

Although not meticulously systematic, Mbeki’s book proceeds with the lucidity that characterizes a journalistic need for clarity. His thinking is marked by a positive and objective looking self-consciousness. Take for instance how he speaks about aspects that directly involve his brother, the former president of the republic, Thabo Mbeki. There’s a dry emotive outpouring only an Mbeki is capable of; a loosening up of tension that is not mawkish, and is soon relieved to move beyond the personal instead of exploring it. He’s critical of him without condemning; complimentary without bias.

In the end what Moeletsi Mbeki favours is a capitalist economy that would generate economic growth and create a community of interests between the more and less prosperous. He wants to see more virtuous and well-educated South Africans, with a general respect for tradition and morality that underlay the economics and politics of a free society:
“A country develops when its able to harness the energies of its people and put them to productive use.” That’s my favourite quote of the book. He makes suggestions on how to embark on this journey, but emphasises that innovation and competence is what’ll see us through, not, for instance, regulation against foreign competition, or wasting resources on impotent projects.

Far too many people that should be artisans, technicians, professionals, engineers, scientists, managers, etc, end up falling through the cracks of our education system for one reason or other. Part of the problem is our apartheid inheritance; but we cannot keep blaming apartheid for everything forever. We need to pull ourselves by our own boots straps.

Expecting help from the outside is self-defeating; even when not looking after its own vested interests foreign help stunts internal innovative capacity. We must be our own heroes, and the most secure and quickest way to develop ourselves is education, education, and more education. We must intensify drives that’ll produce qualified people we need to eliminate the artificial shortage of skilled labour, etc.

All these things can never succeed until we do some serious soul searching and change of especially our entitlement attitude. There is, for instance, a wrongheaded notion that has recently taken root in the Liberation Movement – that to be educated is to be elitist. You hear people praising uneducated people as if this automatically brings them closer to the people. This lack of aspiration for excellence is one of the things that stunt our development. There’s nothing wrong with being educated, especially if those fruits of that education are ploughed back into one’s community.

Instead of fearing excellence and democracy we should rather be concerned with symptoms that point to the fact that we are a civilization in decline, dominated by consumerist greed, given over to public vulgarity, and rapidly descending into collective barbarism, especially during the exercise of our right to protest. We should be teaching our people to be citizens; which is free individuals that are part of something bigger than themselves, in this case happens to be a republic. Not only just citizens, but enlightened ones that’ll build a society that take form, character, from our collective experiences as the people of this country. Anything else is just hot air.