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 – IV

In my ‘The ANC and Ideology – I’ of 9^th September I pointed out how blind and unthinking ideology can completely negate the good intentions behind the framing of social, political and other systems of thought.

The ANC has shown itself to be particularly adept at this form of intellectual suicide. Many years after winning the fight with which it so exclusively identified itself, the ANC still has to make the transition from a ‘liberation’ movement to an effective and consistent party worthy of the role and responsibilities of national government and regional – even global – leadership in line with the economic infrastructures inherited from its former enemies.

Through a mix of plain old incompetence and a more sinister campaign of deliberate ‘blind-eye’ politics (for example, denial of the link between HIV and AIDS, denial of the scale and severity of runaway crime in South Africa, denial of the existence of a crisis in Zimbabwe and its impact upon South Africa, etc.), the ANC has deluded itself into believing that it need never change from the simplistic and authoritarian politics of the fear-inducing slogan and street marches which it believes fully and completely characterises the outlook and demeanour of the South African population.

Recent events on the South African political landscape (viz: the schism developing within the ANC) might be demonstrating to all and sundry that the ANC may well have been fooling itself for a little longer than many ordinary South Africans are prepared to accept.

However, this post is not about the splintering of the ANC (perhaps I shall indulge myself another time), but rather about the ANC’s language policies.

Much as it might desire to be otherwise, South Africa is very similar to the rest of the African continent in that, for very good historical, geographical and social reasons, it is hugely fragmented linguistically.

Spearpoint has no clear idea of how many different languages and dialects there are in South Africa, other than there are a lot. Most of these are fairly clearly defined geographically with plenty of overlap. The main exceptions are, of course, English and Afrikaans which, by and large, extend throughout the entire country (although there are still areas in South Africa where English is not known enough to enable ordinary conversation and Afrikaans is the fall-back – inconvenient for Spearpoint-types who, for one reason or another, cannot or will not speak what can be a baffling Creole tongue with apparently randomly variable grammar, syntax, spelling and pronunciation that oft-times appears to defy any logic known to Man).

No doubt with the initial intention of inspiring feelings of inclusiveness, the ANC, upon its donning the cloak of power in the mid-1990’s, decreed the policy of recognising fully eleven official languages (including English and Afrikaans) in South Africa.

However, Spearpoint would contend that the ANC, in adopting and promoting such a wide range of official languages, has seriously stepped on its own shoe laces in attempting to convince people that it was capable of giving everyone what they wanted.

Consider the implications.

An official language is one that has to be accommodated in all legal, parliamentary and commercial transactions.

In theory, any such language must be available, on demand, in any official literature, correspondence and dialogue. Translations must be produced; translators must be schooled, trained and paid; equipment and resources must be provided.

The cost implications – particularly for our emerging Third World economy – are staggering and, quite simply, unaffordable.

The entire system is also unwieldy, cumbersome and very time-consuming in the production of its end result. It is also prone to political manipulation.

However, these are not the main concerns.

What exercises Spearpoint regarding South Africa’s language policy is that it is doing nothing to prepare and equip ordinary South Africans for interaction with the rest of the world.

Notwithstanding considerations of national pride and the wishful thinking of the ANC, the lingua franca of the planet is the English language. Other important historical languages are French, Spanish and Portuguese but it is English that is predominant. Even Mandarin, spoken by a majority of the world’s population, is not foisted upon the world simply because it is too damned difficult to master sufficiently for even ordinary commercial and political intercourse. English, by comparison, is simple in its alphabet, grammar and logic whilst being fully capable of expressing the most intricate and complicated concepts yet devised by Man.

With this in mind – and from a practical standpoint – what then is the logic in educating our children in what are effectively local and parochial languages? School children and university students will never use, for example, Afrikaans, Zulu, Xhosa or iSotho outside of their villages and provinces. Commercial and political discourse beyond those places will never be in anything other than English or, less and less as time goes by, the other colonial tongues.

Spearpoint is not here advocating that local and indigenous languages should be allowed to wither and die – quite the contrary, in fact. Such languages are tremendously important in the identification and transmission of any number of cultures and perspectives. Let those languages be taught and studied – but not at the cost of mastery in the English language.

Keep in mind, also, that every local African (and non-African) language, once exposed to English, has adopted a host of English words and expressions as convenient shortcuts – some so much so that some tongues now resemble more Pidgin languages rather than the linguistics of their ancestral tongues.

Written and spoken fluency in English is one of the keys to the treasure box of international knowledge and skills so desperately needed in the Third World. Our children can never hope to have access to the myriad of international opportunities if they are unable to use and understand the written English language or if they are unable to speak it without some horrendous and caricatured dialect or accent.

The ANC fails its people when it actively works to promote indigenous languages at the expense of the lingua franca of the world. It denies ordinary people those tools which would be otherwise available to enable individuals to better fulfill themselves and it denies the economy of this emerging Third World country the expertise to venture, with confidence, into the wider world of education, commerce and politics. The ANC holds back its supposedly beloved South Africa by its insistence on what it perceives to be the only politically correct ideology of encouraging a legion of relatively unknown tongues to seek equality with the only language that is, to all intents and purposes, universal.

Given the character of the ANC leadership and the manner in which it understands, exercises and applies power, it is, perhaps, no great surprise that the ANC has chosen this excessive language policy. There is little appetite in the ANC for the intellectual empowerment of any group outside of the ANC elite – people tend to become troublesome and difficult to gull when they are overly educated and exposed to ideas and concepts not sanctioned by the ruling politburo; government then becomes difficult and more open to unwelcome scrutiny by those not sharing the benefits of being in charge and control of national resources. To divide, conquer and suppress one’s own constituency requires economic, geographical and intellectual isolation of whatever groupings may exist within one’s own borders – and, if the pronouncements and actions of the ANC over the past fifteen years or so are anything to go by, such isolation is the very bedrock of ANC theory and practice.

Spearpoint.

2nd November 2008

More on the US Presidential Election Race

Just a quickie on this fascinating presidential race…

Given my previous remarks regarding my profound doubts about John McCain (‘A Few Thoughts On The American Presidential Race’) I was very interested to read in the online ‘Rolling Stone’ a detailed and thorough expose of the man behind the self-publicising myth upon which McCain has created his public persona.

Of course, no-one attains the grand age of 72 without having accumulated a few skeletons and demons within one’s closets. I have, however, rarely before seen such brazenness in self-promotion in the face of direct and contradictory evidence.

You can see the ‘Rolling Stone’ article here. (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain/page/1). It is quite lengthy, but worthwhile.

I feel vindicated in my initial assessment of John McCain.

Spearpoint.

28^th October 2008

The ANC and Ideology – III

Although somewhat overshadowed by recent global economic events, the ANC saga continues apace.

Having staged a palace coup and removed the sitting President of South Africa without much apparent recourse to normal, accepted democratic norms and values, the ANC is now acting all upset and indignant at some of the criticism coming its way.

The vehement attacks by the ANC against those former ministers, Provincial Premier(s) and other previously fair-weather ANC fellow-travellers only serve to underscore the paucity of ANC thought and democratic fair-mindedness whilst, concurrently, further highlighting the unmitigated arrogance of the new order within the organisation.

The faceless and shadowy NEC of the ANC, together with its lapdogs in the form of COSATU and the ANCYL, is following its old Soviet-style totalitarian inheritance by trying to strong-arm and bully into submission those who would dare to challenge its self-appointed right to govern by decree. On the premise that those who are not for or with the ANC are, de rigueur, enemies of the ANC, the NEC seeks to discredit and disarm its critics – particularly those within the ANC – through the most sustained of attacks and vilifications.

What the ANC fails to grasp, of course, is that the dissatisfaction of a number of ANC members and the possible ‘divorce’ of some of those members from the party is due solely to the ANC itself and the behaviour of its leadership in recent months.

Had Jacob Zuma and his lackeys been less overt and more sophisticated in seeking to gain personal power on the back of the ANC, fewer people would have been offended, repelled and scared of these individuals and their naked lust for power and preferment.

Had the ANC and the NEC been more transparent in their handling of Thabo Mbeki more people would have felt confident that the ANC was, in fact, being true to its claim of being a democratic organisation. Even though Mbeki himself failed to put country before party by not forcing the ANC, Zuma, et al, to deal with the challenge to his position and authority in Parliament, the ANC then monumentally failed the country by itself not voluntarily placing the entire issue before the Assembly. The ANC shot itself in the foot; nothing would have been lost had there been a debate and subsequent vote in Parliament (which is but an ANC rubber-stamp) and the ANC would have gained some credibility for its claims to be democratic. But, as with all other totalitarian regimes in history, the ANC is extremely fearful of the general populace getting to know about the real nature and character of itself as an organisation and of its leaders. They fear people realising just how venal and incompetent they are, fabricating a web of deceit and illusion about their motives and abilities which is, at best, tissue thin.

Had the ANC been less secretive and clandestine there never would have been the opportunity for the ANC dissenters to criticise it and its methods. After all, had not those dissidents themselves been willing passengers upon the gravy train of ANC government for many years? Regardless of the merits or otherwise of the criticisms of the dissenters, the ANC has ceded the moral high ground to them and looks increasingly insecure with its objections to open public debate on a matter of national concern (viz: the leadership and governance of the entire country).

This is but another example of ideology blindly triumphing over rational thought, common sense and duty and service to the needs of the whole country and all of its people.

Even worse is the application of the ideology of never admitting error and never apologising in case it were to reveal weakness – such are the politics of fear and such are the politics of South Africa.

Spearpoint.

13^th October 2008

Spearpoint’s Cure For the Global Financial Crisis

So, global markets have decided that, having already received unbelievably vast amounts of public money to shore-up those financial institutions brutally raped and pillaged by grasping and greedy traders and speculators, they want even more free money to be pumped into their private little game and will not play anymore until they get what they want.

Having pushed their grubby and sticky hands as deeply as possible into the cookie jar of financial services, grabbing so much loot that their distended fists cannot now exit the neck of that jar of goodies, thereby blocking the legitimate movement of those goodies in and out of the jar, these traders and speculators are now refusing to let go enough of their ill-gotten gains to allow the movement of enough money to enable the rest of the planet to get on with earning a living.

Well, screw them.

Spearpoint has some suggestions for how this economic and financial crisis might be approached. Forget, for the moment, that what Spearpoint knows about economics and finances could easily be written – in three-foot high capital letters – on the back of a postage stamp. We need some common sense (albeit of the Spearpoint variety) rather than esoteric jargonised bulldust designed to maintain the vested interests and status quo of the present global economic system.

Firstly, a global economy (which, whether we like it or not, is what we have) requires a single, global currency. Remove the opportunity for speculation on a myriad of monetary units and the subsequent distortion of prices and values induced by the artificial and arbitrary determinations of one currency against another.

To all intents and purposes we have that universal currency now – the United States Dollar. So let goods and services be priced in Dollars. Let everyone be paid in Dollars, be they in America, South Africa, Pakistan, Argentina, France, Samoa, Russia or wherever. Let the price of, for example, a loaf of bread be the same everywhere in the world. Let one hour of a labourer’s work, (or a dentist’s, or a clerk’s, or a shop assistant’s) be equivalent worldwide in value according to skill, education and training.

If you don’t like the Dollar, then pick another name for it – or find something else to use as a currency.

Secondly, regulate, regulate, regulate. Make it difficult for selfish and unscrupulous individuals and companies to profiteer at the expense of others. If need be, restrict the number of trades permissible on any particular item or parcel being hawked. Similarly, restrict margins and commissions per trade. Let’s make it difficult for individual traders to make enough money to buy a C-class Mercedes on a single trade.

Thirdly, license every trader, every stockbroker and every trading house. Introduce stiff operating requirements and stiffer penalties for contraventions. Enforce those requirements and penalties and, for the purposes of audits, have every transaction fully recorded and signed off by the trader(s) in person.

Fourthly, in respect of the current crisis, issue blanket indictments against every trader, speculator, bank and trading house for investigation into unethical practices, recklessness, rank greed and potential fraud and/or criminal behaviour. Stop rewarding the rape and pillage of the system. Jail the bastards and seize their assets and those of their families and other beneficiaries.

Never mind about instilling confidence into the existing system – confidence which, strangely enough, was in plentiful supply up until a few weeks ago when every man and his dog in these banks, trading houses and bourses was happily screwing everyone else in sight. Rather set about instilling respect for ethical business behaviour and fear of the consequences of improper and reckless actions and mindsets. Confidence will follow as inevitably as the balls of the bull follow the ring in the nose of the beast.

Fifthly, operate the stock market system more along the lines of Lloyds Insurance – limit any one individual or company to trades that they can personally guarantee. If a trade goes wrong then the traders carry a personal liability to their investors and can lose their own assets to compensate their victims. Bankrupt the reckless and criminal thieves. Do this and watch sensible business caution permeate the world of trading.

Finally, and again in respect of the present crisis, close all stock markets for the next seven days. Then re-open them for four hours and gauge the response; if the traders resume their bad behaviour close the markets for another week – and continue doing so until the traders are prepared to play the game in an equitable and fair manner, sharing the bad risks with the victims of their excesses rather than only wanting to pocket profits without sharing the losses. The bulk of the global population will be no worse off than they are now (the markets are, essentially, shut owing to the actions of the banks and traders) and those banks and trading houses will risk being out of business in short order.

Simplistic? I have no doubt. But perhaps a start. Take the Golden Rule and work from there.

Spearpoint.

12^th October 2008

A Few Thoughts On The American Presidential Race

Some years ago in South Africa, when insomnia or rebelliousness took hold, one could while away the wee hours by watching the BBC or CNN on feeds provided by the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) after the SABC’s normal broadcasting hours. It wasn’t the most exciting television, but it gave night owls some quality viewing whilst also providing a bit of exposure to news and commentary beyond the narrow confines of South African political and social interests.

Then the SABC decided to get sophisticated and nationalistic, beginning to run late night local content rather than exposing the small number of after-midnight viewers to potentially subversive (that is, thought-provoking) programmes of news and opinion emanating from places considered to be colonialistic, imperialistic and capitalistic.

Thus it is that nowadays all we can get on the SABC after midnight is either SABC news (not bad but rather parochial), sport (limited usually to soccer or rugby – neither of which gets my juices pumping) or mindless and repetitive hip-hop type ‘music’ which, for a man of my age, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment for crimes uncommitted.

Even the SABC’s arch-rival, eTV, ever the populist ratings chaser, can only muster either repeats of programmes from earlier the same night or a truly dumbass and mindbendingly boring ‘game’ involving dirge-like monologues from a single presenter purportedly taking phone calls from supposed contestants trying to ‘win’ ridiculously small prizes.

On top of which, in a cunning conspiracy against Spearpoint, broadcast signals to my home from both the SABC and eTV are apparently scrambled as part of a shrewd plan to force me to subscribe to the local satellite TV carrier (DSTV). This wouldn’t be so bad if I could afford the lunatic sums required to be able to access those channels – such as the History channel, the Discovery channel, the BBC, CNN, a couple of cooking or travel channels, and so on – with some interesting content. But no, Spearpoint is financially limited to the most basic of satellite packages and which consist of the three SABC channels, eTV, al-jazeera English news (actually quite good if overly centred on southern Asia), a single sports channel, a poker channel (which I quite enjoy on occasion since there used to be a time in my dissolute youth when I used to make quite a bit of money and a few enemies playing the game) and a feed from Botswana Television.

Now Botswana TV (BTV) during normal viewing hours is pretty much the same as many African national television stations; very focused on its own affairs (although it sometimes carries good movies and documentaries). However, BTV after hours can be very interesting – as in recent weeks – when it doesn’t shut down its late night transmissions. Prompted, no doubt, by the Presidential race in the USA, BTV has recently been carrying a feed from the American TV station MSNBC.

Of course, the programmes transmitted are governed by the time difference between deepest, darkest Africa and the Eastern Seaboard of the USA, so the full range of what MSNBC offers is not available to us paupers here.

Nonetheless, what a joy!

For the first time in my life I have been able to follow, in some detail, the progress of an American Presidential campaign – from an American perspective rather than as edited by non-American anti-Americans in places outside the USA.

And even allowing for an apparent bias towards the Democratic Party by the hosts of those talk shows that I am able to watch, I have been greatly enlivened by the style and content of hosts such as Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and their stables of expert commentators. Thanks guys (you know what I mean, Rachel).

(I’m just praying that BTV hasn’t been pirating the feed from MSNBC, gets caught and has to shut it down. If that is the case then I’m praying, equally hard, that MSNBC doesn’t find out until well after November 4^th.)

Anyway, based (in part) upon MSNBC’s influence upon me, I humbly proffer the following Spearpoint-assessment of the Republican Party Presidential candidates as I understand them at this time. Justification for being so brazen as to offer opinion on an electoral process that is not mine is based upon the simple fact that, no matter what America does, how or to whom it does it, we in the Third World (and elsewhere) will be directly affected in some way, sooner or later.

To begin with, I have to say just how intriguing it is that, for what is probably the most advanced and sophisticated country on the planet, America and Americans appear to be so engrossed in the style and packaging of their Presidential candidates rather than the content of the policies being proposed.

This pre-occupation with presentation leaves Americans open to a number of dangers. Take, for example, the present incumbent, George Dubya.

Riding on the coat-tails of his father (who, it would seem, knew at least enough to be able to start and stop a just war without bankrupting both his own country and the rest of the planet), George Jr., although probably spoiled and indulged as a child and youth, exuded an apparent air of toughness during his campaign for the White House. The American public seemed to love it, with results that everyone on the planet will have to live with for generations. What was missed, unfortunately, was that the air of strength was, in fact, a rich kid’s petulance and poutiness backed up by daddy’s position in life. And, I suspect, an overindulgence in Tom Clancy novels.

Beyond that, and although supported by clever and ambitious political hitchhikers, George Dubya has proven to be an intellectual and moral lightweight with the attention span of a snowball in a blast furnace. Poor George always was in over his head.

It would seem that the great packaging flim-flam is again being perpetrated on the American public again with the Republican Party Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.

John McCain, to this outsider at least, appears to have made a political career based upon his earlier (and unfortunate) experiences as a POW in North Vietnam. His POW status looks as though it is the central plank of his definition of his service to the American nation and he seems never to tire of speaking about and referring to it. This, of course, falls in well with America’s apparent perception of any uniformed service (military, paramilitary or civilian) as being tantamount to semi-divine elevation.

Now Spearpoint has had the very real privilege of having known and worked with a fair number of ex-servicemen over the years. In all that time, most of those individuals known by me have always been so modest and reticent about their war time experiences as to be, at times, infuriating. But, if anything, their reluctance to speak of and to take advantage of their past glories (if one can use that term) only served to heighten their stature in the eyes of all those around them. I remember one with particular affection; a quadriplegic who, for some reason, seemed to take pleasure from sharing conversations and cigarettes in the sunshine with a young and callow Spearpoint, only ever conceding that his terrible wounds had been sustained at Gallipoli but never, never, referring to or otherwise speaking of his military experiences during the Great War. Or another, captured during the North African campaign in World War II and so savagely tortured by the Germans that his feet and legs carried the disfigurements and pain decades later. These were men to be revered and respected.

There was one, however, who reached field rank in a combat unit during the Burma campaign of World War II. In addition to insisting on the use of his military rank in civilian life, this man then calculatedly used his previous status to never cease talking of his (presumably real) experiences as he relentlessly carved out a commercially successful niche for himself and his business, forever trading on the natural awe and respect most people have for old warriors. His eventual reward was to be regarded with disdain, dislike, distrust and, in certain instances, with outright contempt.

None of the above comments is intended to take anything away from either John McCain or his experiences as a US serviceman. However, and at a personal level, Spearpoint will always be skeptical and suspicious of those who make self-glorified capital (of any kind) from past experiences that were, to a greater or lesser extent, shared by many, many thousands of others who survived those same types of experiences. It should not be forgotten that, aside from those who managed to make it back home, there were many thousands who, killed or missing in action, didn’t get home and whose stories and histories– perhaps more glorious than those of McCain – we shall never fully know. And, as is often the case in war, pure blind chance all too frequently determines survival, rather than skill, prowess or battlefield bravery.

It is also the experience of Spearpoint that, career soldiers/airmen/sailors aside, the main effect of military service – particularly when drafted against one’s will – was to provide the mettle in one’s character upon which could then be formed a better citizen in any of a thousand different ways. Most military experience is gained when one is very young, when one’s knowledge and experience of the world is extremely limited and when one tends to be most enthusiastic and unquestioningly accepting about one’s beliefs, norms and values. It is also the time in the lives of most individuals, before the advent of spouses, children, mortgages and a million other social responsibilities, when young people are adventurous and carefree, able and willing to embark upon reckless exploits before the true value of human life is properly comprehended by the participants. It is only in this way that wars have been such a permanent feature of human existence; the young are too stupid to understand the effects and costs of the jingoism being thrust before them and are, therefore, perfect cannon-fodder. Middle-aged men make for poor grunts since their age and general life experience tends to allow them greater powers of threat-recognition and subsequent circumspection.

The point here is that it is fallacious to base one’s entire persona and identification on just a couple or so years’ experience in very early adulthood. Especially when, as with John McCain, one is on the final, steep dip-slope of life. Because, surely, a person is – or should be – more than what they were for a few years as a youth or young adult, even if those early experiences lent or swayed them towards certain pre-dispositions.

Perhaps Spearpoint is being less than fair towards John McCain, in which case an apology is extended; I know little of the man beyond what I have seen on television and read in the press over the past few months. But Spearpoint is old and experienced in his own way, has no particular axe to grind, and has a history of being right much of the time about people and their motives – even at a remove. And Spearpoint has, at the moment, a firmly negative opinion of the man.

It is also unfortunate, perhaps, that John McCain presents himself as hugely competent and experienced whilst constantly appearing to be taken unawares when the unexpected happens. His willingness and propensity to prevaricate and then to attack from a position of weakness has, I think, been clearly demonstrated during this presidential campaign. Similarly, when caught out or under pressure he has a distressing tendency to look like a rabbit caught in a spotlight; gambler he might claim to be, but a poker player he is not. The body language is, somehow, not right.

And, speaking of body language, Spearpoint has noticed something about McCain when in the presence of and when talking about Sarah Palin, his Vice-Presidential running mate. The guy is distinctly uncomfortable – and Palin is equally discomfited.

The public embraces have been perfunctory and decidedly cool. No kisses on the cheeks have been seen to land. The arms in the embraces are stiff and defensive. There has been little eye-contact – Palin’s eyes sweep over McCain as if he is not there, whilst McCain’s eyes are everywhere except on Palin where there is any chance that she might notice.

When McCain speaks of Palin it is as if he suddenly switches to a ‘Palin sub-menu’ on his list of ‘correct-things-to-say-about-party-and-running-mate’. He flashes a stunningly insincere – and immediate – manufactured smile measured in milliseconds and then changes the subject as quickly as possible.

Spearpoint suspects that, (and despite other commentators suggesting that he is merely embarrassed at having inappropriate thoughts about his attractive running-mate – although have you noticed how fiddles with his wedding band when he stands behind Palin on the rally platforms?), John McCain does not like his Vice-Presidential candidate. Spearpoint further wonders whether John McCain had any say in the selection of Sarah Palin for the coming task – that, in other words, Palin was foisted on McCain against his better judgement. (Which, if true, would somewhat raise McCain in Spearpoint’s estimation).

There is little doubt in Spearpoint’s mind that Sarah Palin is reasonably smart and fanatically ambitious. There is equally little doubt that Palin is not averse to using her – at first glance – good looks to charm and sway those she would seek to influence and that she uses her sexual weaponry, together with her homey hockey/soccer mom image and populist and fundamentalist views and certainties of life, in place of any significant breadth of knowledge or interests beyond what she grew up with as a child. Palin has, I suspect, little room or use for the very real philosophical and existential uncertainties of life as experienced by the majority of the people of America and the rest of the world.

If that is, in fact, the case then one must feel not only very sad for America in terms of the quality of the leadership being offered by the Republicans, but also extremely fearful for the consequences of pitting a Palin against, for example, a Putin or a Medvedev – both of whom are just as ambitious but far, far more educated and worldly-wise; there is not much doubt in Spearpoint’s mind that both those gentlemen not only know by name the titles of their national newspapers and magazines, their editors and where they live but they also know, to the millimetre, the position of every one of their national borders.

To expect someone – even as photogenic and outwardly attractive as Sarah Palin – to somehow assimilate all of the necessary and basic information and background to the role she has been chosen by the Republican Party in a matter of days is clearly too much. The woman is, I believe, in her early forties, set in her ways and opinions and the task is simply beyond her; neither she nor America has the luxury of boundless time in which to improve and hone her brain.

Nor is it purely a matter of style. The job of Vice-President requires substance more than anything else – particularly when there is a very real and distinct possibility of an aged John McCain being unable to complete even his first term as President. Palin might be sufficient for Alaska and Alaskans (I don’t even want to think about what that might say about that State and its inhabitants), but it is manifestly clear that being an airhead (one might be tempted to go so far as to say a ‘bimbo’) is not heavyweight enough for the job of running the most powerful nation on the planet – unless, of course, one wishes to fulfill the prediction of the Iranians that the American empire is about to disappear. Look at the trouble George Dubya got us all into – and he grew up with smart parents in a political household.

The prospect of a further George Dubya administration under the title of ‘McCain and Palin’ does nothing to quicken Spearpoint. The likelihood of a Palin administration is just too terrible to contemplate.

The USA will lose tremendous credibility around the world if the McCain/Palin ticket wins in November.

The problem is, I suspect, that McCain will, true to form, stoop to whatever level he thinks fit in order to achieve his personal ambitions. I would be surprised, for example, if, come the vote in the House on the $700 billion ‘bailout’ package, McCain does not engineer an ‘intervention’ by himself so that he can claim that he – and he alone – managed to heroically sway the dissident Republican members sufficiently to agree the package and thus to save America and the world.

Spearpoint’s high regard for and respect of the United States of America cannot here be proven or demonstrated – but it is there. I just wish, now and then, that America would realise that, in selecting its own leaders, it is also selecting global leaders with a reach and impact far beyond your own shores. We outside America often dream of achieving what you have achieved and we are fearful of what it would mean to have an America no longer capable of not giving us not only wonderful science and technology but also the aspiration and standard of the love of freedom together with a chance to follow your example. Just please give us a good example.

Spearpoint.

2^nd October 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

The ANC and Ideology – I

It’s strange how even the best of intentions can produce results contrary to what was planned.

It’s also strange how the most meticulous planning and foresight can fail to predict outcomes at variance with what the planners had hoped to achieve.

Strange, too, is the fact that the more motivated and inspired the planner the more likely is the plan to go awry and the less likely the planner is to admit that the plan is not working.

The more ideologically pure is the plan then the more likely it is to come off the rails. The world is noted for its penchant to inject varying degrees of reality into the best thought-out and executed of Man’s schemes, dousing dreams with hefty sluices of ice-cold sanity. There are always those, however, who – regardless of the teeth-chattering shivers and goose bumps of the Arctic chills of real life – will persist in their cherished and cockeyed perceptions of the world as they believe it should be. Like the KFC advert in South Africa, showing two grown men sitting on a park bench in the depths of winter, both consuming some iced KFC confection and progressively shedding items of their warm winter clothes (down to their underwear), each seeking to show the other that he is not cold and is, in fact, quite warm, thank you very much, the ideologues and the proud will go to almost any lengths to deny the existence of the reality of the situation they find themselves in.

Recent South African history has more than its fair share of such idiocy.

The episodes earlier this year of xenophobic violence between different national, cultural, racial and economic groups within the townships and squatter camps of South Africa are but one example.

Having had the images and stories of the brutal black-on-black savagery that was perpetrated in the townships of South Africa flashed around the world – to the astonishment of the global population, given the previous propaganda of the ANC government that all was sweetness and light in the new ‘democratic’ and ‘egalitarian’ South Africa under the benevolence of the ANC – the government of South Africa was, initially, just as surprised as the rest of the world and failed to act in any meaningful way against the hatred and violence for a couple of weeks.

When, eventually, the government began, slowly and inadequately, to address the problem, the official line was merely that the attacks were merely spontaneous and random criminality – ignoring the widespread nature of the onslaught throughout much of the country.

As, finally, the scale of the problem began to be realised the government then turned to one of its old favourite lines of reasoning in times of crisis – viz; the attacks were said to be the result of the work of some unidentified and shadowy ‘third force’ (by implication, disaffected whites and their lackeys lusting after a return to the pre-1994 days of perceived power, privilege and glory) conspiring towards the destabilisation of the country and the overthrow of the ANC government. At which point, notably, the army was called in and troops were put on the streets in support of the police.

(Strikingly similar arguments had very quickly been produced by the ANC government when the country’s only commercial nuclear power station had been crippled by a technical failure, just prior to the realisation that the government and Eskom (the national parastatal solely responsible for the generation and distribution of electricity in South Africa) had blithely led the country into an economically disastrous power crisis. These politically bankrupt, inept and transparent arguments were quietly – and quickly – abandoned in the face of the incontrovertible evidence of the rank incompetence and stupidity of both Eskom and the government.)

Then, as the violence and xenophobia reached its height, the ANC government declared that, once the orgy of hatred had subsided, the victims of the attacks seeking refuge and safety in hastily set up tented camps away from the townships and squatter camps would, as a matter of government policy and ideology, be (forcibly, if need be) re-integrated back into the very same areas and neighbourhoods that had attacked, dispossessed and killed the poor bastards in the first place.

Such is the ideology and illusion of ANC thought and propaganda. The desperate need of the ANC to promote and defend its communist ideas of what, according to their cherished conceptualisations of the world, should be – rather than what actually is – drives them into a denial of reality. The sad part is that they then drag everybody else who is subject to their power into a world that does not exist – much to the discomfort and danger of those who do not share or enjoy the benefits and privileges of the ANC leadership and their ivory tower ideologues.

The concept of different tribes, races and socio-economic groups living peacefully side-by-side in joy and harmony is alluring. It should, perhaps, be an ultimate goal of mankind’s. But in the here and now of human social life on this planet opposites tend to repel and likes attract. It is a simple fact of human behaviour in this day and age, as well as throughout our history.

Elsewhere in Africa where refugees seek shelter from whatever political, military or economic storm they wish to avoid they are usually placed together in camps away from local populations where frictions could ensue. Even without coercive factors such as wars and famines to drive people away from their own homes, those fleeing less life-threatening situations have, historically, tended towards one another; the economic migrations of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in America and Australia saw Italians, Jews, Greeks, Poles, Germans, Chinese, Russians, Armenians and Slavs naturally coalescing into their own communities and neighbourhoods because that was what they felt most comfortable with and where they felt safest until, after a number of generations, they were able to assimilate enough of the predominant local culture to be able to venture out into that culture without undue threat.

So, the ANC and its government is intent upon farting against the thunder of human nature. Already many of those displaced during the xenophobic attacks have been returned to their previous abodes. (Others, seeing the writing on the wall, chose to return to their home countries, preferring the known evils and hazards of life in Zimbabwe, DRC, Mozambique, Somalia and Sudan to the uncertain hospitalities of South Africans.)

Already the rumblings in the townships and the squalid squatter camps have begun. Already the voices of dissent and despair over the re-integration have begun as mumbles of the ordinary people. Already have begun the not-so-quiet and subtle statements of local councilors that the ‘nkerekwere’ are not welcome – especially, for example, those Somali shopkeepers in the Western Cape townships who are seen to be too hard working and undercutting the prices of the local spaza store owners. It will only be a matter of time.

Criminality aside, it is only the ANC and its dogmatic and slavish adherence to its unrealistic and disgraced theories of a Marxist Utopia that is to blame for the initial outburst of xenophobic and genocide-intended violence and dispossession. It was the ANC and its inept and corrupt government that admitted millions of illegal migrants into the country and it was the same crowd that failed then to put in place the necessary social structures to police and care for those immigrants. And it is the ANC that, as with the Zimbabwean situation, continues to steadfastly maintain that no problem exists – as if ignoring or wishing away anything that is inconvenient to one’s perception of the world is really going to achieve something.

Nor is it any good to say that the USSR and the old Soviet bloc managed to keep racial and social peace in a wide-flung empire. That was only achieved at the point of a gun and under the constant threat – and utilisation – of ruthless repression from state organs such as the KGB and the Red Army. Despite recent talk from the ANC of instituting so-called ‘street committees’ as a means of doing what the South African Police Service clearly are unable to achieve – controlling and reducing crime – the ANC has neither the skills nor the stomach for such direct social repression, to say nothing of its lack of desire to admit to the world that only force could integrate a tribally diverse society and that its theories are valueless.

But such are the consequences of any system of political, social and economic control that is applied, willy-nilly, as a complete solution to the theoretical ills of mankind rather than as a set of aspirations and objectives which need to be realised within the context of the real world and the differing sets of circumstances in which different people find themselves from time to time. Such systems, applied without care and consideration, de-humanise and alienate those they are intended and theorised to more fully humanise and empower. Human beings are, first and foremost, individual beings within a social environment – not the other way around. And therein lies the danger of systems of thought in which people are primarily catagorised as, variously, (and by way of example) ‘the masses’, ‘serfs’, ‘consumers’, ‘the proletariat’, ‘peasants’, ‘communists’, ‘Democrats’, ‘Republicans’, ‘Tories’, and so on.

De-humanise humans for long enough and, eventually, they will behave as animals.

Spearpoint.

9^th 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

The ANC, The Arms Deal and Accountability

There has been some considerable advocacy recently towards granting amnesty towards those individuals and organisations suspected of having derived huge underhand and illegal benefits from the now notorious multi-billion Rand arms deal with which South Africa involved itself a few years ago – and which continues to haunt both South Africa and Europe.

Principal amongst the organisations said to have benefited have been the ANC of South Africa and a number of the defence contractors in Europe which supplied the South African government with items ranging from aircraft to frigates, submarines and much in between.

Individuals said to have derived illicit benefits from the deal are, famously, Jacob Zuma (President-in-waiting of South Africa), his former financial advisor and, much more recently, Thabo Mbeki himself. Such allegations have yet to be proven in a court of law – although, judging by the (so far legitimate) delaying actions of certain of the parties named by the National Prosecuting Authority, the presentation and answering of charges before a court is looking increasingly doubtful.

Spearpoint is, frankly, astonished that the names of more individuals have not – yet – been proposed for investigation and prosecution. Mutual back-scratching is far too endemic in Africa to permit a mere handful of individuals to escape the clutches and ‘protection’ of equally greedy and unscrupulous people eager to climb on the gravy train of government contract graft.

The calls for amnesty come from a couple of different sources.

Firstly, there is the ANC and its unelected (and thus unaccountable) allies, the Confederation of South African Trades Union (COSATU) and the South African Communist Party (SACP). This is, perhaps, understandable since there must be considerable trepidation being experienced within this tri-partite alliance that its propaganda of the last couple of decades is about to be revealed for the sham that it always has been and that the three organisations and many of its officials and hangers-on will be shown to be just as base and venal as those they strove to replace on the South African political scene.

Secondly, calls for amnesty have come from parts of the South African media on the basis of preventing the fragmentation and disruption of South African society resulting from the ANC and its allies trampling the entire country underfoot as they seek to dislodge from their backs the tick birds trying to remove the sources of sickness and debilitation from the body national.

Spearpoint can ignore the ANC’s desire for amnesty or (better still, from their perspective) dismissal of all charges as being the unforgivable but natural reaction of embarrassed people caught in a series of compromising situations despite their protestations of innocence and purity. Given the current stranglehold that the ANC and its officers have on this country, Spearpoint gloomily concludes that the ANC will prevail anyway and will find means (legitimate or otherwise) to escape the worst – or all – of the fallout from the arms deal and the alleged misconduct of its partners and/or officials.

Spearpoint cannot, however, ignore the non-ANC inspired calls for amnesty.

How short are the memories of those making this call. How misolfactionate are they that believe that sweeping the malodorous products of a government’s bad habits under the rug will result in the creation and maintenance of a hygienic and healthy national household.

In political management – as in household management – infestations and disease must be eradicated entirely and without delay, else the infection returns to cause ill-health, disruption and danger to life and limb. Very often such a return is then much harder to combat since, in the process of harbouring the germs of corruption, resistance to the more usual, tried and true, methods of prevention and control builds to the point of immunity and contempt. Fighting disease is never easy, comfortable or without risk. Likewise with fighting corruption and crime.

There are few parents who will refuse medical treatment for their loved ones (excepting for availability and cost) on the basis that the treatment will create too great a risk of the patient being uncomfortable or, even, losing their life. Few people fail to see the merit in visiting the dentist when experiencing toothache, even though the experience in the dentist’s chair can be unpleasant in the extreme.

Why, then, do otherwise rational people who love their country and its social structure actively promote a course of action that can only strengthen those who would break our laws and Constitution? These are the people who would prefer to avoid the short-term yet therapeutic pain of the dental drill over the longer-term costs of political caries and oral decay. The consequences of poor dental hygiene are similar to the consequences of poor national moral and ethical hygiene – the ability to masticate and ingest the food required by the whole body is reduced until, eventually, the body goes into decline and could, conceivably, die through lack of sustenance as well as through the onslaught of opportunistic infections and ailments.

Witness Uganda in the 1970’s. Witness Zimbabwe since 1999. Witness the attempts at appeasement with Germany in the 1930’s. There are lessons aplenty to be had – what makes anyone believe that South African politicians and politically well-placed criminals are any different from those of the rest of the world at different times throughout history?

Even the President of Pakistan today had the sense – and decency? – to step down in the face of mounting demands for greater probity within Pakistani society. And this was a man who had grabbed power through a coup and had ruled as a virtual dictator for nine years. This came about because his detractors were prepared to live with the possible discomfort of experiencing the unscheduled removal of a powerful, influential and wealthy leader who had been found wanting. Perhaps Pakistan will now go through a period of greater turmoil than it has been enduring of late – but Pakistanis have decided that even in that event the price will be better than continuing the personal regime of a man they have held to be unacceptable for Pakistani society.

Why, therefore, is South African society so open to the comforts of a quiet life at any cost? Are we so blasé as to accept any injustice and crime against ourselves just so that we can stay ensconced within our little zones of comfort? Are we so pragmatic as to accept any violation of our persons and dignity that we will suffer any debasement of our expressed ideals of social and political aspiration and ambition?

Clearly, this is a watershed in our young history. Failure now will result – in fairly rapid order – in a new Zimbabwe south of the Limpopo River – the consequences of which are obvious to almost everyone except Mugabe, Mbeki and their opportunistic cronies.

Spearpoint.

18^th August 2008