Excuses and Thoughts

Ole Spearpoint had been hoping to be a little more productive last month but certain things conspired against that intention.

The worst was a recurrence of malaria (originally picked up in Zambia some few years ago). This usually happens once a year and ordinarily involves a couple of days of sweating, shivering and general malaise.

Not this time. Holy cow! Over four weeks of bone-aching sweats, alternating with teeth-rattling and limb-quivering shivering attacks lasting for an hour or more, the worst nausea I have ever experienced, deep and bloody vomiting, and unpredictable ‘dire rear’ (read Terry Pratchett’s excellent, superb and unrivalled “Discworld” novels if you don’t understand the reference).

Poor Spearpoint really thought that he was about to cash in his chips at one point. You know the feeling – you start off worrying that you’re going to die, eventually worrying that you won’t die…

And although there has been the benefit of having lost at least five kilos (about 10 pounds to my American friends), thereby helping to partially alleviate my old man’s silhouette of distended gut, skinny shanks and drooping butt, there has been a major drawback in the old lifestyle department. The Spearpoint hepatic function suffered such punishment as to preclude, for the time being at least, the delights of dipsomania and the various benefits to be had from booze. My Colt .44 Magnum is, consequently, looking more attractive every day…

So, I was pretty crook, for a while.

But during this interesting period in my life (involving frequent conversations with God over the big white telephone), the rest of the world moved on without me.

Now I confess to being pretty pleased that Barack Obama won his Presidential campaign in America (congratulations, Sir), but I am equally pissed off that, once the more exciting elements of that campaign and its aftermath had died away, my buddies at Botswana Television (BTV) then decided to return to their more usual dull-as-ditchwater programming – the buggers have stopped (well, severely curtailed) their late night feed of MSNBC. Couple this with the end of American daylight savings time and the push back by one hour of those stimulating and addictive programmes and you can well imagine the negative effects on Spearpoint without his near daily doses of Olbermann, Matthews and Maddow.

Rx Colt beckons.

I have also been pleasantly surprised at some recent events on the political landscape here in South Africa.

Following on from some pretty disgusting behaviour on the part of the old ANC, some of its members and leading lights have jumped ship and formed a breakaway political party which, after some buggering around, seems to have settled on the name ‘Congress of the People’ (COPe).

The ANC has been, predictably, miffed and, whilst ostensibly appearing unfazed and tolerant of the new party, has been doing everything possible behind the scenes to disrupt, intimidate and ridicule the formation and function of the new boys on the block.

The formation of the new party can only be good for our democracy in South Africa. Personally, I wouldn’t vote for them since they are merely re-invented ANC cadres and whilst I am prepared to credit the ANC with much good that it has done since 1994 I cannot escape the sure knowledge that the ANC and its leadership has, overall, done more harm than not; if the leadership and new membership of COPe were so out of step with the ANC then why didn’t they decamp long ago?

However, Spearpoint wishes COPe well – if only to bring about a re-evaluation of the ANC and what it has achieved and, especially, if it results in a split of the previous ANC popular vote leading to the loss of the ANC’s two-thirds majority (permitting unilateral constitutional change) in parliament. Perhaps for the first time in South Africa’s history there is a real prospect of an Opposition strong enough to challenge the ruling party and to ensure accountability.

Have a look at the link below. The sentiments and reasoning are thought-provoking and valid.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=79&art_id=vn20081118053203503C766418&newslett=1&em=186722a6a20081201ah

The danger now, of course, is that the leadership of COPe, being ex-ANC and fellow gravy train travelers, will fall into their old ways of complacency and incompetence, thereby failing to offer anything new or radical enough to move this country forward – other than in splitting the ANC vote (in and of itself a substantial and sufficient step to the good).

We shall see.

Spearpoint.

1^st December 2008

The ANC and Ideology – II

Ye Gods!

I’m out of the country for a week, so busy that I didn’t have time to see a TV or newspaper, stuck with a lousy internet connection that wouldn’t allow me to send or receive emails, much less surf for any news of spawned mini black holes grazing on bits of France and Switzerland, and what do I find?

While my back has been turned the buggers have gone and changed the world!

Only after a thirteen-hour flight home to South Africa, my ears still whistling, mouth as dry as the Sahara, my brain sloshing around in my head and threatening to spill out through my nose and ears, my body relativistically strung out somewhere between the Mediterranean and Johannesburg, was I presented with news of the past week’s events. Trying to come to grips with momentous news at home and abroad while still prone to walking into trees and walls is not something to be recommended, believe me.

Firstly, there was the abandonment of capitalistic principles by good-ole George Dubya (“Gee, I really wish I was Jack Ryan”) Bush and his buddies. Massive bailouts of various financial institutions in the US of A. Rewarding the greedy and reckless bastards on Wall Street (and their equally avaricious cohorts around the world) with a safety net and ‘Get-out-of-jail-free’ card. Saving the bacon of both the small-time and large institutional investors who, Gadarene-like, swarmed to get something for nothing based on the vacuous promises and beguiling words of so-called experts and analysts spouting get-rich-quick crap all over the airwaves, instead of working honestly for themselves and their local communities.

The price of instant, unprotected financial gratification is, very often, the economic equivalent of a hangover and a limp dick – the lessons and consequences of which must be learned in order to avoid future over-indulgence, subsequent pain and embarrassing oozings. Lessons which will be lost if the consequences are not felt – immediately and directly – by the gullible, the credulous and the reckless. Personal and corporate responsibility must be made real and applied. The expectation that the world owes everyone a living is false and dangerous – as is the expectation that Big Brother must always catch the careless and carefree when things go awry. Maybe a bit of financial and economic turmoil, painful as it would be, might not be a terrible thing for a while.

Secondly, and more germane to the subject of this post, South Africa – sans the benefit of an election – had an incumbent president removed from office by the faceless ANC politburo.

Such behaviour is, of course, the logical outcome of the constitutional and political system foisted upon this country by the victorious and arrogant ANC post-1994.

Spearpoint has had occasion, in previous posts, to point out the undemocratic and dictatorial nature of the ANC government of South Africa. The current situation in South Africa further reinforces my earlier position.

In most other democratic countries constituencies are contested by individuals representing either themselves (independents) or a political party. In the latter case the individual, broadly speaking, is on an almost equal footing with the party he or she is standing for, thereby permitting the electorate to judge both the person and the party on their merits. It also allows for the electorate to later judge the performance of both the party and the individual in that particular constituency. If either has failed to deliver on its promises or has not demonstrated publicly acceptable standards of behaviour and decorum, then the electorate has the opportunity (at a later election) to toss the miscreant out on his ear. Financial, sexual and other scandals are often the cause of elections whereby the electorate can pass judgement on their elected representatives.

This is not the case in South Africa. Here a vote in an election is only for one of the parties contesting the seat. In the case of the ANC, at least, the individual who is to represent the constituency is not chosen by the electorate but is assigned by the party winning that seat. The party is not required to field a candidate who has any inkling of politics, or who has any education beyond kindergarten, or who has any conception of the meaning of ‘public service’ beyond equating it with ‘self-service’.

In the case of the ANC there seem to be only two criteria for their candidates – minimal vital signs and membership of the ANC (and not necessarily in that order).

In South Africa we have some ANC Members of Parliament (as well as Provincial and local government councillors) who, seemingly at times, can barely read and write, balance a cheque account or button their shirts evenly. We have some MP’s, having been implicated in or, even, convicted of criminal activity who are still occupying Parliamentary seats.

Thus it is that South Africa, for all the razzamatazz of the past few years, has no acceptable model or hope of democratic, parliamentary governance. Under the carefully crafted and totally illusory guise of ‘collective responsibility’, the ANC has hoodwinked both the people of South Africa and the world at large into the belief and acceptance of a new dispensation which is democratic, fair and just – rather than the one-party state which it effectively is.

Personal responsibility of MP’s, ministers of government and ANC party members and officials is all but non-existent. A constituency – or, indeed, the public at large – is denied any mechanism to hold accountable any individual within the ANC or the government simply because the voters have neither a say in the choice of a candidate nor in the retention or otherwise of that candidate. Responsibility for the actions or omissions of any individual ANC member is referred back to the ANC itself – aloof, unreachable and beyond the ken of mortal man. God-like, (now there’s a bit of imagery to apply to an atheistic, rooted-in-communism political party!) the ANC is self-styled in omnipotence and omniscience; it doesn’t explain or apologise because it doesn’t have to do so. The politburo of the ANC (the ‘National Executive Committee’) is a shadowy, sinister body of nameless and faceless men and women who claim to speak on behalf of all the ANC’s members and – by the default of a dictatorship of the majority – the people of South Africa; because it is hidden in shadows it operates behind closed doors according to unrevealed processes and rules, issuing its edicts from its Olympian heights of disdain and hubris – thereby making it an almost impossible target for criticism and attack.

The ideology and structures of the ANC are monolithic, entrenched through the pseudo-legitimisation of a flawed electoral system and (although good in principle) constitution, propped up by the tacit approval of the Western world pursuing its own agenda and ever eager to partake of the platinum, gold, uranium and other resources of an emerging South Africa – despite the fact that it is governed by former paupers anxious to cut themselves a hefty slice of the cake.

The bankruptcy of the ANC’s ideology is most clearly seen in the recent shenanigans revolving around the person of Jacob Zuma and the factionalism engendered by his naked lust for personal power.

Notwithstanding the ANC’s outward appearance of adherence and subservience to the rule of law, the ANC will, it appears, forgive almost any transgression provided that fealty to the ANC is never, never abrogated. (In this it is maybe not so different from many other political organisations anywhere else in the world where, one suspects, the party in question is merely a convenient outer raiment to be utilised by those hungry for personal power. The nature and policies of the party are not necessarily descriptive of the individual’s personal credo but can serve as a handy vehicle to self advancement.) Thus, Zuma might be under suspicion of various criminal acts – he could even be a convicted felon – but the ANC will imitate Nelson (the English admiral, not Mandela) when viewing Zuma’s flaws as a politician and a man, just so long as he can be used by those faceless politburo members to further the aims of those members. Zuma is but a front-man who may not realise that he is just as vulnerable as Thabo Mbeki to the whims of the power brokers and king makers sitting behind the closed doors of the NEC of the ANC. Zuma (as with Mbeki), together with all the cabinet members and other ANC elite, are but song and dance performers gyrating to the tune of an unknown composer and choreographer; a false note, a misstep, any sign of trying to inject a bit of originality that clashes with the political puppet master’s conception of conformity can result in the abrupt and ignominious removal of even the star of the show.

True to its communist roots and ever fearful of losing its control and grip on power, the ANC is still profoundly centralist in its thinking and actions, both in terms of its internal organisation and its government and control of the country. Individual members and local party committees have very little real power and influence over the national central committee. And because patronage is the only real way for individuals to advance within the ANC the organisation has become one that is characterised by the display of (ANC) politically correct outward behaviour which, in turn, has led to the party being served by sycophants and yes-men.

As a result, therefore, within the ranks of the ANC allegiance and lip-service to the ANC far outweighs loyalty to South Africa. The needs and wishes of the ANC far outweigh the needs of the country despite the presence within the ANC of some (although not enough) genuinely sincere individuals who see their principal duty as being to the country rather than to the party.

This has been openly demonstrated in recent days with the removal by the ANC politburo of the sitting President without reference to the electorate. In his ‘resignation’ speech on national television, Mbeki referred to his loyalty and duty to follow the dictates of the party. He made little or no reference to the possible impact of his removal upon the country save to mention his compliance with the ANC edict was in the interests of unity and stability – but the inference was more to the stability and smooth transition of power for the ANC, rather than the country.

Herein lies another danger to South Africa. In the minds of the ANC and its members – and, sadly, far too many of the ordinary citizens of South Africa – the ANC and the Republic of South Africa are perceived and promoted as being one and the same thing. In such a mindset, therefore, the ANC is, almost by definition, solely capable of determining what is in the interests of South Africa and can do no wrong. Extension of this pattern of thought and peculiar logic leads inevitably to the conclusion that South Africa serves the ANC. The danger comes then from the actions and aspirations of what is, to all intents and purposes, an unaccountable central committee or politburo whose shadowy and anonymous members view and treat South Africa as their own private fiefdom to plunder and pillage at will – in short, becoming another Zimbabwe or similar banana republic: a view apparently shared on this matter by one as exalted and respected as Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

The flaws in our Constitution and our version of ‘democracy’ are now coming into stark relief as the bully boys and revenge politicians of South African politics and society now begin to shed their veneer of decorum and civility with increasing confidence as they begin to scent their ultimate and – as they see it – inevitable victory. Now within their grasp are the spoils of the internecine contest – personal power, great privilege (and consequent private wealth) and the annihilation of their political foes. South Africa is poised to repeat the abuses and horrors of Eastern Europe post-1945.

Perhaps Mbeki, if he is true to his claim of wishing to serve South Africa, should re-examine his blind loyalty to the ANC. Perhaps he should resign his membership of that organisation and create his own political party in order to provide the country with a foil to the ANC as it now stands. Only in that way (maybe), and at least until the vast majority of the people of South Africa have been educated into what democracy truly entails, can this country have any chance of an effective and credible opposition to the juggernaut that is the ANC today; existing opposition parties tend to be paper tigers owing to their small parliamentary numbers that result from the distressing tendency of the electorate in this country still to vote along mostly ethnic/racial lines.

Spearpoint.

23^rd September 2008

African Statesmanship

The recent death of Zambia’s President Levy Mwanawasa is a tragedy for not only Zambia but also for the entire African continent.

My understanding is that Zambia has prematurely lost a leader of exceptional calibre who was striving to make a genuine difference to the lives of Zambians, particularly in his determined fight against corruption.

Almost uniquely amongst world leaders, Mwanawasa publicly confronted and then prosecuted his predecessor Frederick Chiluba for corruption and fraud. Mwanawasa’s decision to do so cannot have been easy. Chiluba had, after all, been the one to groom and present Mwanawasa as his successor and there must have been some considerable pressure from within the ruling party not to rock the boat (thereby spilling the cash) and to spare Chiluba public humiliation – to say nothing of Chiluba’s underlings, hangers-on, presumed beneficiaries and possible co-conspirators.

Instead, Levy Mwanawasa chose to be a statesman, deciding – as far as possible in a political environment – to honour his promises to the electorate by adhering to the principles (oft-repeated but rarely practiced by the power hungry) of his country’s Constitution. In so doing he appears to have honoured himself and his country, as well as having set a worthy example to his constituency.

Although Spearpoint never had the opportunity to meet and know Levy Mwanawasa personally, the hope is that Zambia will allow Spearpoint to join (albeit remotely) in their mourning as a fellow African.

For the demise of Zambia’s Mwanawasa is a loss not only for Zambia but is also a loss for the whole of Africa – especially southern Africa.

As at home, Mwanawasa displayed the courage to stand up and be counted in the face of the prevailing antipathy in the southern African region towards corruption, fraud and dictatorship in the form of Robert Mugabe’s tyrannical and outright criminal regime in Zimbabwe.

With the tacit support of Ian Khama, the President of Botswana, Mwanawasa alone named and shamed Mugabe for what he is, what he represents and what he perpetrates against his own country and people.

In so doing Mwanawasa also implicitly named and shamed all those other African leaders who, despite mounting and convincing evidence, have given Mugabe political support and sustenance either directly and openly or through their failure to criticise and isolate Zimbabwe for its current policies and situation.

Principal amongst these has been South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki and his ANC government.

Appointed by SADC to mediate in the Zimbabwe crisis, Mbeki has epitomized the approach of many other African leaders: don’t rock the boat; don’t embarrass Mugabe; don’t expose Mugabe; don’t fracture the façade of imagined African so-called solidarity; don’t further reinforce the global perception of Africa’s inability to identify, address and remedy its own problems, including those of poverty, corruption, crime, ignorance and indolence.

Notwithstanding recent critical comments from Jacob Zuma (as President of the ANC) regarding Zimbabwe, the fact remains that South Africa continues to pussyfoot around the person of Mugabe and the crisis in Zimbabwe and refuses – publicly, at least – to acknowledge that a problem exists. In Mbeki’s own words on the subject, “There is no crisis”. Sentiments echoed by the Minister and the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The ANC must be living in gaga land.

It’s obviously not a crisis when a neighbour of South Africa destroys its economy (inflation admitted by the Zimbabwean government just this month to be running at not less than eleven million percent – that’s eleven followed by six zeroes, folks), and driving no less than four million of its own citizens into South Africa – mostly illegally – to escape starvation and political persecution (and who knows how many into other neighbouring countries).

And how can it be a crisis when even the great ANC, champion of the art of rule by smoke and mirrors, has been appointed (in the person of Thabo Mbeki) by SADC to mediate between Mugabe and the Zimbabwean Opposition.

Yet the appointment of a mediator implies conflict, dispute and actual or potential crisis. That much SADC has got right; where it went wrong was appointing Mbeki and his team as mediators. Not only do the mediators deny the existence of a situation which they have consciously agreed to fix, but they are unsuited and unqualified to carry out such a role since they have consistently and laughably maintained for many years now that within their own borders there are no crises in law enforcement, the judicial system, education, HIV, AIDS, TB and other health matters, housing, and so on.

SADC erred in appointing the ANC and Mbeki. It is patently clear that these guys couldn’t organise an orgy in a brothel, given their record of domestic service delivery and good governance.

The mediation between the parties in Zimbabwe has stalled. Naught has been achieved. Mugabe continues to do as he pleases – even to the extent of re-convening Zimbabwe’s parliament (which, according to Zimbabwe’s Constitution, should have occurred months ago) before there is any clarity and agreement on how power division and sharing will prevail in the new government.

Now, doesn’t that just speak volumes on the dedication and abilities of the so-called mediators?

Excepting Zambia and Botswana, no-one in SADC has had the courage to slap Mugabe silly and to tell him to stop behaving like a spoiled brat and to stop embarrassing all of Africa with his puerile behaviour. Mugabe’s arrogance and assumed impunity – watch his disjointed marionette-like swagger in public – has never been challenged by South Africa and its continental cronies.

Indeed, South Africa has shown great concern over Mugabe’s dignity and has been keen to protect that dubious quality. But at what price? Where is the dignity of those Zimbabweans, forever on the cusp of eviction, arrest and starvation, free-falling into the black hole of faster-than-light inflation who have had to separate from their families and homes in order to cross the borders of neighbours looking for some means of sustenance and to live in the additional and constant fear of deportation as illegal immigrants? Where, in South Africa, is the dignity for those South Africans already suffering under the laissez-faire incompetencies of the ANC dictatorship who now have to make room in already overcrowded cities, townships and squatter camps for swarms of desperate immigrants who also want a share of what is clearly an inadequate, mismanaged and ill-divided political and economic cake?

Does the ANC have no shame? Is it not ashamed that it continues its rhetoric and spin doctoring even though it clearly cannot do its job – either at home or around the table in Harare? Just what are the criteria against which it measures itself and which, obviously, allow it in its collective politburo mind to continue its rule?

Of course, shame and admission of error are not matters for easy admission by any politician even in the normal course of events, much less at any other time. Such is the nature of the beast. (Also, incidentally, such is the nature of those that look for and permit the politicians to rule; populations and electorates tend to be lazy in thinking for themselves and constantly seek the comfort of having someone else do their thinking for them. A contradiction of the human condition is that, of all the creatures on the planet, humans have the greatest ability to deal with change, challenge and chance yet are the most persistent in their – often unconscious and unspoken – drive for certainty and comfort.)

Admission of error in Africa is very difficult. Culturally the strong man must be seen to be strong, even if – especially if – wrong. The advent of colonial rule, with all the embarrassments that that brought, together with the displays of power and material goods by the colonial powers, then provided the need to display to the world that Africa and Africans could achieve the same themselves without outside intervention.

The loss of face when African nations screw things up is immense – far more so than the purported Oriental perceptions of face. This is why, for example, racism and colonialism are frequently used as catchphrases to divert attention away from the true reasons for African failure.

Mugabe blames the racism and imperialism of Britain and America for his devastation of the Zimbabwean economy and social structure. Mbeki and many of his colleagues blame racism in South Africa for the failure of many of the ANC’s policies and programmes. It is far less embarrassing and far easier to fix the blame rather than the problem – particularly where personal political careers and ambitions might be at stake. It’s an African pastime; it didn’t rain enough; it rained too much; we don’t have enough money; foreigners are taking our women and jobs; the Whites don’t share; the British conspire against our sovereignty; the Chinese steal our resources; the Indians are lazy and greedy; the Zulus cannot be trusted and steal everything not nailed down; the World Food Programme gave our starving people the wrong food; it goes on and on.

Spearpoint is not suggesting that there are not grains of truth and reality in some or all of the above excuses. But that is what they are – excuses. Fourteen years after shouldering aside the burdens of apartheid the ANC and its stalwarts still glibly trot out racism, colonialism and imperialism as reasons behind its failures in almost every arena of life in South Africa. They fail to see that history is history; it is past and passé. History is a guide for and to the future, not a Balkan-type motivation for perpetuating old horrors as justification for interminable inefficiencies and inadequacies.

Unfortunately, it is in the past that the ANC finds itself mired. Starting its existence as a protest and liberation movement the ANC has been unable to shrug off that mindset. Fourteen years into government the ANC is trapped in a time-warp, still slavishly employing the same slogans, gestures and thought patterns of its Communist Party origins and history dating back to the October Revolution and the Long March when those who were not for the movement were targetted as enemies and to be treated accordingly. Defunct ideology and the mindless mouthing of Cold War rhetoric serve little useful purpose when the living are here and now in a world that has moved on from what may or may not have happened centuries ago.

The ANC has failed to heed its own ideological teachings and raison d’etre which were to grow, improve and develop. The ANC has fallen at the first hurdle of metamorphosing from a liberation movement into a credible political party and sustainable government. The eyes and thoughts of the ANC remain firmly fixed on the perceived glories of its past where, by virtue of the then prevailing circumstances, it was easy to exhibit and enjoy disciplined solidarity since the goals of the organisation were simple to define and explain and the enemy was easily identified. Now in government the aims and objectives are far fuzzier in the face of the need to be a responsible and credible representative of an entire and diverse population; the temptation for which the ANC has fallen has been that of remaining a lobby group for a narrow and specific segment of the populace. The ANC continues to view everything non-ANC as being ‘the enemy’ and has behaved and responded accordingly.

Thus, for example, ANC officials will blame ‘white mentality’ and resistant racism for poor results on the rugby pitch or athletics field where points are not awarded for ideological or racial purity but for excellence in performance. Excellence cannot be legislated or enforced. It must be scouted, nurtured and developed organically. A fat runner cannot be expected to be able to produce satisfactory results in the marathon, regardless of any racial or socio-economic origins from which the individual may have come; the athlete must be made fit and then trained in his discipline before adequate results can be reasonably expected. Likewise, a school leaver, unable to add, subtract and so on cannot become a computer technician or electrician until he has had the time and resources granted him to master sufficient of the basics to enable him to then progress on to more specialised (and better paid) areas of competence.

Similarly with the Zimbabwe situation. The ANC remains locked in its perennial ‘circle-the-wagons’ mentality of giving greater weight to old loyalties than to recognition of getting the job done and removing those who fail to produce results. The support given the ANC by Mugabe and Zimbabwe during the ANC’s years of opposition to the then South African regime are viewed by the ANC to be perpetual bonds of debt that far outweigh any consideration of the abilities and rationale of the creditor in that relationship. That Mugabe is an egomaniacal despot who has so alienated the people of both his own country and others around the world that the economic and political fabric of Zimbabwe now lies tattered and fallen appears to matter less to the ANC than the perceived debt owed to Mugabe by the ANC. Worse still, the negative impact upon South Africa and other SADC countries stemming from Mugabe’s depredations is clearly considered by the ANC to be of little import; it could be argued that what happens in Zimbabwe is their own affair and they should be allowed to get on with it, but the argument fails if the actions of Zimbabwe directly impact on South Africa. Would the ANC retain its present stance if the Zimbabwean army were to invade South Africa in order to seize assets no longer available in Zimbabwe? Or would the ANC turn a blind eye, again, and insist that no crisis existed?

As the governing party of South Africa the ANC’s prime responsibility is to the country and all the people of South Africa. The ANC’s responsibility to Zimbabwe (or any other country, for that matter) is secondary, at best. Get your own house in order. Only then – not before – and if there is something to spare, can you turn your charitable efforts elsewhere.

Hubris can be a terrible thing. It blinds one to failings and shortcomings which, if pride be briefly set aside, could be corrected with a minimum of fuss and damage. There is no shame or loss of self-esteem in saying “I don’t know” or “I don’t have the skills right now to correct this situation” and then turning to others who possess the requisite knowledge. Knowledge and skills know no skin colours – but where they are claimed when, in fact, they are absent then there is a real and severe humiliation when the deficit is finally revealed.

Levy Mwanawasa’s legacy – in part, at least – will be of declaring to the world that just because fellow black Africans now largely control their own destinies it is still not right or acceptable when laws and principles are broken and cast aside – just as it is unacceptable when ordinary people suffer because their leaders are too proud or ideologically blinkered to acknowledge that they are relatively new to the business of running their own affairs and to bring in the required expertise.

Spearpoint.

26^th August 2008

Would the last democrat leaving South Africa please turn out the lights…

 

 

So here we have it, at last. It has been a while coming, but come it has.

 

Not that it has been unexpected. It was bound to happen eventually, in one way or another.

 

Many very astute and able writers have been trying – for some considerable time – to show how South Africa has been slowly descending into the abyss. More recently Spearpoint has (with far less ability and effectiveness) added his own voice to the warnings that have been increasingly thronging the various media available to us in this country.

 

I fear that it will all be to no avail.

 

The pessimism, even despair, which has silently pervaded South African society over the last decade or so, is now gaining increasing momentum even amongst those who celebrated the most after the release of Nelson Mandela.

 

Now we begin to see the true colours of our Rainbow Nation; colours that were once purposefully and skillfully hidden behind shimmering nebulae of rhetoric and political razzle-dazzle are now being glimpsed more often as the perceived need for global political respectability is, more and more, discarded as the ANC and its puppet masters gain in confidence and arrogance.

 

Today, the legislation to disband the elite crime-fighting unit known as the Scorpions has been tabled in Parliament.

 

Modeled broadly on the FBI, the Scorpions have proven to be a formidable and largely untouchable crime-fighting force that has shown little or no favour and has appeared to be indefatigable in the pursuit of those who would place themselves above the law. They have been a very necessary foil to the poorly performing South African Police Service.

 

Why the ANC has bothered to involve Parliament escapes me. South Africa is a dictatorship of the elected majority party (the ANC), with absolutely no prospect of any realistic challenge to the current status quo being mounted through the ballot box anytime in the next couple of generations.

 

The ANC might as well come clean and rule by decree. It would save them and the rest of the world time, effort and embarrassment over the increasingly amateurish attempts to legitimise their fumbling realisations of their ambitions.

 

The signs have around for a long time.

 

• The selection of a party leader – soon to be the country’s President – who is awaiting trial on corruption and related charges investigated and brought by the Scorpions.
• The blatant and public protection by the current President of the country – with the tacit approval of the ANC – of the national Police Commissioner who faces serious charges investigated and brought by the Scorpions.
• The blatant and unashamed protection of numerous public officials and office holders who have either admitted or have been convicted of innumerable offences ranging from drunk driving through fraud, embezzlement and worse.
• The blasé and indifferent approach to, and acceptance of, crime levels unparalleled outside of war zones such as Iraq. (An example – it is generally accepted that a rape occurs in South Africa every 23 seconds. Do the math – 1.4 million rapes per annum in a population estimated at around 45-50 million people).
• The awesome drift from reality embodied in the continuing and, until very recently, unquestioning support of rogue and repressive states such as Zimbabwe and Burma – behaviour which has led to the ridicule and scorn of the rest of the world, to say nothing of the loss of life and liberty of those poor unfortunates living in those countries.

 

And these are but a very few of the straws that have been blowing in the wind in recent years.

 

The Scorpions are but a single example of the lengths to which the ANC, COSATU and the South African Communist Party (all members of the tri-partite alliance which rules South Africa but of which only the ANC presents itself for election before the people of the country) are prepared to go in order to exclude themselves from scrutiny by both the courts and the electorate.

 

When will the people of South Africa – as well as the rest of the world – awaken to the fact of the immense confidence trick being played upon them at their expense?

 

Do we have to wait for the raids on the newspapers and televisions stations to become more frequent? (It has already happened). Will we only realise our plight when the Internet and blogs are monitored, controlled and restricted? Will we have to wait for the situation in Zimbabwe to become a reality for South Africa (and so memorably and eloquently expressed by the unknown Zimbabwean who voiced it by saying “We have freedom of expression; we just don’t have freedom after expression”)? Will we wait until the cadres of the ANC and SACP are joined on their nightly dissent-suppression street patrols by armed MK war veterans? Will we wait for the type of bloodbath that surely lurks, Kenya-like, in Zimbabwe’s near future?

 

The writing is on the wall. We ignore it at our peril. We run the risk of a bovine-like acceptance of the denial and corruption of the hopes and aspirations of an entire country already brutalised in the not-too-distant past. Or, simultaneously, we run the risk of opening the door to hotheads and armed reactionaries eager to turn back the clock.

 

And as much as Spearpoint harbours hopes for this country and its people, it is very much my profound fear that already it is too late and that the time is nigh for the call to go out, “Would the last democrat leaving South Africa please turn out the lights”.

 

 

Spearpoint

13^th May 2008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dictatorship in South Africa

If there was one thing that was a sure-fire bet back in April 1994 it was that the ANC would win the first “universal suffrage” elections in the history of South Africa.

A copper-bottomed certainty – based purely upon the demographic make-up of the country. The identification of the bulk of the populace was squarely against the perceived – and, no doubt, very real – privileges of the primarily Afrikaaner whites at the time. Black people saw the opportunity to redress the balance and the most prominent group seen as best able to deliver on that opportunity was the ANC.

And because the ANC was always first and foremost – although not exclusively – a movement of the majority Khosa people the resultant government was, principally, a Khosa government.

 Well and good. A democratic election produced a government based upon the wishes of the majority of the population of the country.

It must be said that, in the years since 1994, the ANC government has, in general, done many, many good things for South Africa, its economy and its people.

But as time has passed it has also created a number of quite unnecessary problems which, in recent years, have become increasingly obvious and dangerous. Two examples:

1. In keeping with the promise to give land for housing to black people previously living in squatter camps (many of which, incidentally, still exist some 14 years later), the government allocated only tiny handkerchief-sized plots barely large enough to accommodate a one- or two-roomed house per family. As a short-term solution and realisation of promises made to the electorate there was benefit to be had by the recipients – of course, since the very same electorate had been led to believe that all of the country’s problems could and would be fixed in the very near future if the ANC were to be given power. (Politicians are alike all over the world). However, the government actually solved very little. The townships created were crowded and neighbours lived cheek-by-jowl. The small plots did not allow for expansion or extension of the houses and living space, particularly as families grew with time and urbanisational immigration to the towns and cities with little, if any, opportunity for the residents to move away to other, larger, houses as their needs and aspirations grew; the increased wealth and earning capacities of these poor black communities did not match the rising costs of land and houses away from the townships. Result: the government sowed the seeds of ghettos for their own staunchest supporters, the harvest of which is just now beginning to manifest itself and will grow further as time passes.
2. The implementation of affirmative action, whilst, no doubt, generating some benefits for some sectors of the black population in the short-term, has tended to alienate many of the whites who, until 1994 and shortly thereafter, had been the prime movers in the formal economy of the country. Many whites were actively displaced from their ordinary jobs with a resultant loss of skills to industry and government. Many white technicians and managers threatened by their perceptions of crime and economic revenge being exacted by the ANC politicians and hangers-on took the opportunity to take their skills and expertise away from South Africa to places elsewhere in the world where merit and willingness to work were valued more highly than one’s racial or cultural grouping and where crime levels did not threaten one’s achievements. Result: a country losing the battle to supply its own doctors, technicians, managers, actuaries and so on when, with a little more patience and less political haste a comfortable transition and re-balancing could have been organised so that the previous privileges of the white community could have been grown to encompass more and more of the previously disadvantage black community in a way that would have been economically sustainable and perceived to have been fair and just by all segments of society.

Other examples could be cited.

These and other problems have come about because, I suspect, the ANC, having acquired power by massive demographic default, began to believe that its policies were the only policies that would work and, through a combination of over-confidence, jubilation at its success and outright arrogance, failed to adapt and evolve its ideological articles of faith to engage with the real world.

The ANC was in an unnecessary hurry to impose its worldview on its newly conquered territory and, as so often in Africa, steamrollered its particular version of Utopia into existence. Then again, probably understandable, given the euphoria of victory and the prospect of being able to begin righting the wrongs of the past.

The ANC believed it was right. In its ideological heart it knew it was right. And it kept getting re-elected back into power with huge majorities so the electorate obviously agreed.

Yes, but those majorities were supplied by people who, largely as a result of various inequalities and injustices of the past, were not educated enough to sufficiently understand the ramifications and consequences of the wholesale social engineering that the ANC was undertaking. Even the ANC intelligentsia had no complete understanding of what they were embarking upon since the South African situation was unique in the world. And there was (and still is) no-one to temper their actions; there was no pressure to fully consider their intentions because there was no danger (nor is there likely to be in the foreseeable future) of serious electoral challenge – parliament would always have an ANC majority by virtue of the sheer numbers of the Khosa over other tribal and racial groups in the population.

The ANC is, therefore, a dictatorship. A dictatorship that has been elected, for sure. But there are no realistic or viable checks and balances upon the ruling party. There is no significant opposition in South Africa and the ANC can, at will, ignore any views contrary to its own simply by applying the Whip to any parliamentary vote it chooses.

The ANC has been in power long enough to know that it commands widespread popular support and that it has made a number of unnecessary errors during its governance. It also claims to be governing the country to the benefit of all South Africans.

That being the case, why, then, does the ANC not voluntarily give up a proportion of its parliamentary seats to the various opposition parties in order to create a parliamentary environment which will improve the quality and depth of debate?

Let the ANC keep a working majority. But let it be not be so large that, on contentious issues, the government would not risk losing a vote if sufficient of its own MP’s were to cross the floor on a particular issue. Allow the public to see parliament engage in debates with real value rather than those we have today where they are always seemingly tinged with the despair of knowing that the ANC is merely going through the politically correct motions and will do whatever it wants regardless of the merits of other people’s ideas and aspirations.

Such a move would require considerable political courage but neither the ANC nor the country as a whole would stand to lose anything.

Spearpoint.