The Soapbox » poverty

Zuma should venture down the road less taken

The Soapbox — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:07:49 +0000

BY LUNGELO MAGUBANE

Robert Frost wrote of two roads that diverged into the woods and how his opting for the one less taken made all the difference. As President Zuma applies the finishing touches to his State of the Nation speech, one hopes that he will use this opportunity to take the people of South Africa into his confidence and deliver something which accurately details the state of our nation without needless rhetoric and sugar-coating. It is not too late to change course and steer his government towards the light.

Even a cursory reading of documents such as the ANC’s 2009 Election Manifesto and its 8 January 2010 statement makes it clear that much has been done since 1994. In fact, a brief glance at any street in South Africa will attest to the fact that we have come far from where we once were; yet, juxtaposed against that, is the harsh reality that on that very same street you will find evidence of just how vast a distance still remains to be travelled. It is to the road ahead that we must focus, despite how tempting it may be to dwell on past achievements or failures.

Since his inauguration, Zuma’s performance can, at best, be described as symbolic. He has, among other things, flown on the national carrier, held mass meetings with police officers and school principals, stepped onto the scene of service delivery protests and ambushed a truant mayor, and he has set up a presidential call-centre –going so far as to take a call in person. His cabinet is rather large and some of the departments now sport new names – most notably the Ministry of Police in what he argues was an attempt to toughen the attack on crime. Most recently he has imposed night shift duty on Members of Parliament by deciding to deliver the State of the Nation address in the evening. But has all of this made a tangible or discernible difference in the way that services are delivered to South Africans? For let us not forget that amidst all the obfuscation, the core task of the State is to serve “the people”.

However, all is not lost – just as it never was in the darkest hours of despair during the negotiations towards the 1994 democratic election. The ruling party has correctly identified the pressing challenges that currently hinder our country, namely job creation, education, health, rural development and crime. What they have not done successfully is to defeat these challenges or at least present coherent strategies of how they intend to do so.

Whilst I do not personally presume to have all of the answers, there have been certain glaring errors made by the ruling party and their obstinate refusal to concede where they have erred or accept constructive criticism suggests that the interests of their voters (and other South Africans) are not always foremost in their minds.

The president may easily deliver a flaccid speech which promises everything but offers nothing, and take comfort in knowing that he has failed those who depend upon him the most by not giving the desirable leadership to ensure that civil servants raise their game.

Alternatively, he may break from convention and come out with his guns blazing in a manner that is unprecedented – after all, what is the point of having the power of being president if one doesn’t use it occasionally? Whichever route he elects to take, he cannot complain of having not known what is at stake.

Lungelo Magubane is a fourth year student in the Faculty of Law at the University of Kwa-Zulu Natal, Durban.

It’s enlightenment — not entitlement, brother

The Soapbox — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:31:12 +0000

BY JEAN-MARC VOGT

I attended the regenesys conference in early 2008. It was held at the Sandton Convention Centre; among some of the guests were Deepak Chopra and John Demartini. The course dealt with spiritual and emotional knowledge in relation to business leadership.

Dr J. Demartini was giving a mind blowing leadership speech and gave tips based on personal experience. It came time for a question-answer interaction. A number of questions were raised, including one from myself, and then a gentleman at the back raised his hand and began to speak.

He painted a pitiful picture of how his business had flopped; his wife had divorced him and made off with the kids, how he had to sell his car to pay debt and how he was on the verge of sequestration. To make matters worse, putting the icing on the cake, he asked Demartini, almost with arrogance; “What can tell me, how can YOU HELP ME, what can YOU GIVE ME?”

The audience turned to face the front, almost in disbelief.

There was a pregnant silence; no one knew what to say or how to react to such a blatant question. Dr Demartini took a deep breathe, relaxed his hands at his sides and looked coolly into the audience.

He cleared his throat authoritatively; he looked down and rocked on his feet. He began to stride slightly across the stage, his brows knitted, as if trying to piece together a response as politely as possible. He stopped and straightened his posture; the gentleman had already sat (vanishing in the anonymity of the hundreds of audience members).

“You know, what I’m about to say may piss a lot of people off.” He strode along the stage looking into the masses. “South Africa complains about having such a high crime rate.” He paused and stared in the general direction of the gentleman. “You’re complaining but you accept free handouts from other countries across the world”. He didn’t need to finish the sentence, the audience was stunned, and we shifted in our seats uncomfortably. The gentleman tried to interrupt. I think the gentleman tried to say something but Dr. Demartini just thrust out an arm and pointed “It’s enlightenment, not entitlement, brother!”

I had nearly forgotten about what he said but I’ve been reminded by the amount of homeless people in the streets. I don’t have a problem with the homeless and I’m sure they have very valid reasons why they are. There was s one instance, however, that angered me. There is a beggar on Empire Road and I’ve observed him since 2nd year at AFDA.

One day I had stopped at the robot where he begs. He came up to my window and asked for some money so that he could buy something to eat, all the while rubbing his “starved” belly. I had no cash in my wallet, just my student card, so I searched my car ashtray and found 3 5 cent coins. I picked the coins up and gave them to him remorsefully .“Sorry man.” I looked into my hand. “This is all I have”. The coins split into his hand. He looked down, almost in disgust, and gave them back to me disapprovingly.
I was so shocked that I didn’t even notice that the light had changed. In that infinite instant I remembered that gentleman in the conference centre: it was exactly the same entitlement, in his demeanour, that Demartini was criticizing. I changed gear and drove off the man suddenly threw the coins back as if they were rancid.

That happened a year ago; this year I catch a taxi and then walk to college. I find the act very calming and meditative; I collect my thoughts and prepare myself for the day ahead. Walking isn’t a chore — I work very hard and I love what I do and that isn’t a chore either.

“And if you cannot work with love but only with distaste, it is better that you should leave your work and sit at the gate of the temple and take alms of those who work with joy,” said Khalil Gibran, the prophet.

Some of these beggars also refuse work on the grounds that they would make far more on the side of the road. I often see this guy on the road; he is well shaved and relatively clean; now, if you were destitute, surely you wouldn’t be able to afford to shave, cut your hair or wear a new set of clothing everyday.

People really should respect each other and their possessions. People should respect and be enlightened by how much effort it has taken for that possession to be earned and not disrespectfully and effortlessly take it.

“Integrity: The clever man knows all the roads. The wise man knows the right one”.

The clever person knows all the ways to manipulate in order to get what they want.

The wise person, the integral person knows it takes effort: a long hard path must be taken.

The right path.

Jean-Marc Vogt believes we need to feel enlightned not entitled.

Why class is more important than race

The Soapbox — Mon, 11 May 2009 13:42:37 +0000

I recently had an idealism-demolishing experience participating in a debate on behalf of the DA Students’ Organisation (DASO) with other student politicians at the University of Pretoria. The topic: transformation. The reason: probably to stir up a bit of emotive politics among students just in time to remind them to “vote with their kind” in the upcoming general election. The facilitator: the SRC, which is ruled by a solid majority of the Freedom Front Plus (FF+), despite attempts by the university management to “depoliticise” its institutions.

A less sceptical observer might explain that the purpose of these debates is to give an outlet to the political thinking and contestation which has purportedly been banned in the “depoliticised” Tuks SRC. Whatever the particular motive of the SRC may have been in choosing the topic, on the whole the debates do represent one of the few opportunities for Tuks students to get exposure to politics.

But, alas, anyone who has ever attended a student debate at Tuks knows that the “political discourse” degrades fairly quickly into a racial zero-sum game between whites and blacks but mainly between Afrikaners and blacks, characterised by a good match of jeers, accusations and insults. One almost has empathy for the reluctance of Big Brother in the university management to let these renegade young politicos have their way in the SRC.

In fact the whole experience was sombre, if not completely depressing for a person who grew up with the idealism of 1994, the promise of a society which belongs to all who live in it and hope for a future in which nobody would be made to feel “lesser than” by anyone else.

Listening to diatribe after diatribe by speakers against Afrikaans and white students, eagerly encouraged by ANC and COPE ringleaders, one could easily have imagined that apartheid had never ended and that South Africa wasn’t being ruled by a party that proclaims itself the “vanguard of the African majority”. Afrikaners in turn, with the exception of a few DASO and FF+ supporters, hardly bothered to show up for the debate, probably avoiding being called to account for the sins of their fathers.

Aside from the ANC and COPE speakers, both of whom stopped short of chanting “down with Afrikaans and Afrikaners at Tuks”, a member of the audience launched into particularly hateful tirade, asking black students why they were busy “negotiating” with whites instead of “taking back” what rightfully belonged to them.

The DASO proposal that racial quotas be abolished at the university in favour of redress measures based on the socio-economic living conditions of students, although well received by the audience was rejected by the ANC and COPE, the latter being slightly more confused about its own position on the matter. The ANC speaker repeated the well-known mantra that racial quotas will last as long as colonialism and apartheid lasted.

The bizarre case for racial bean-counting – a policy sacrosanct to the ANC – is premised on the assumption that most whites at Universities like Tuks aren’t there because of their academic suitability, but because some sinister force of apartheid, probably University management, is acting on their behalf. If it were not for this force, so the young Comrades argue, the university would be 80% black and there would be no Afrikaans which, in the thinking of a racial turf warrior, advantages the “white cause”. (The truth is that only three degree courses at Tuks are still offered in Afrikaans from start to finish).

When the comrades are reminded of the fact that all students are admitted to university based on an “M score” (basically their academic performance in high school) they rightly point out that many rural and township schools are still plagued by the legacy of apartheid education which disadvantages a great many prospective black students.

What they of course don’t concede is that political power did in fact change hands in 1994, and that the people responsible for the dismal state of education aren’t the children of former apartheid beneficiaries who grew up under the new order, but the democratically elected ANC government with its parliamentary majority of 70%. Today, incompetent teachers, schools that lack adequate facilities and dismal matric pass rates aren’t so much consequences of apartheid than consequences of ANC rule.

But what I probably found most depressing about our debate at Tuks was the reductionist idea of so many attendees that what we were in fact engaging in was a competition for state resources and recognition between races. In the hearts of its proponents, racial quotas not only meant guaranteed racial preferment for “our own” but also just racial punishment of “the others”.

When I confronted a COPE speaker after the debate about the obvious contradictions between his own utterances and that of his party leadership about race, language and diversity, he responded that South Africa could not afford to be “held hostage” by a few Afrikaners. In the same vein the FF+ Youth Leader, Cornelius Janse van Rensburg, once angrily reminded the ANC at a similar campus debate that it was the tax money of whites and Afrikaners that kept the university as well as the country in business.

Neither of these respective sentiments, expressed in the heat of crowd-pleasing exchanges, offer to move the debate beyond our unchangeable past to our quite changeable future. Both these arguments are essentially self-indulgent, taking young South Africans back to a crude and callous politics preceding the Constitutional Compact of 1993 and 1996. Moreover, they aim to deceive, obfuscating the fact that the income disparity AMONG whites and AMONG blacks are today far greater than BETWEEN blacks and whites.

What is needed is a paradigm-shift (excuse the cliché) from that of racial competition to social cohesion. A cohesion-centred paradigm in our society, rooted in the Constitutional values of freedom, dignity and equality, can achieve so much more to channel the human and financial resources of the wealthy in aid of the poor than the ANC (and COPE) model of a racial tug-of-war. It will also force the government to face-up to its failures instead blaming everything by default on the past.

With a cooperation-centred paradigm comes the realisation that neither white nor black can benefit from the disadvantage of the other. If our universities shun some of the best medical students today, tomorrow we shouldn’t be surprised by a dire shortage of doctors in public hospitals, where most patients are black. Yet if today we take no measures to create opportunities for the poor, black or white, tomorrow we shouldn’t be surprised that many young people have opted for a life of crime.

We only have one nation with one future: it is our duty to shape this nation into one which where the rights and success of one contributes to the protection and opportunity of the whole. Here’s hoping 22 April 2009 moved South Africa farther from racial competition and closer to social cooperation and ultimate cohesion.

Cilliers Brink is DASO Branch Leader at the University of Pretoria.

How will Madiba’s children COPE in DA new “sosati”

The Soapbox — Mon, 04 May 2009 18:34:37 +0000

AskMen.com claims that over 80% of women achieve orgasm best by clitoral stimulation rather than deep penetration. But most interesting, is a fact unknown to some, that the prostrate is the male equivalent of a female’s g-spot. Exploring the area around their anus is for most men absolutely taboo; in fact it can be said with confidence that straight men abhor having anything stuck up their anus (perhaps that’s because some of them spend half their lives pretending that they do anyway). What this points to really would be that the male and female genitalia, as nature would have it, have almost no role to play in satisfying one’s significant other. Why would nature have it so if she intended for purely heterosexual relations to be the order of the day? In any case this was to be a rather conservative article focusing on conservative issues such as incest and homosexuality. I opted out… I loathe conservative issues, mostly because they have been exhausted to death. The burgeoning issue at the beginning of 2009 really is: how will Madiba’s children cope in the new society?

It might help to be on the same page as to which of Madiba’s children we are speaking of, because there are many. The term “Madiba’s children” is more often than not used to refer to the generation that started school in 1995. However, it is probably safe to apply it to those who started the school system from 1990 onwards. Being black or white was never about one’s colour. Being black or white has always referred to a way of life, a culture, a social identity. Perhaps it was merely consequential that those who owned this social identity could be collectively recognised by the colour of their skin: ‘black’ or ‘white’. But what happens when the colour of your skin no longer gives you entitlement to that social identity? One’s instinctive answer may be that well then we’ve attained the dream. Arguably the dream is at its most desirable when attained by all. When only a small minority have been elevated to the educated, fancy twang echelons of ‘sosati’ it places them at odds with those in ‘society’, and henceforth begins the struggle to be a member of both these elitist groups.

If Madiba’s reign was the marriage of this country to economic prosperity, political freedom and social justice, then the so called Black Diamonds are the legitimate offspring who can partake in a flourishing ‘sosati.’ But what of those who seem to have been born out of this holy matrimony, quite harshly put, what of Madiba’s bastards? Who live in poverty and for whom legislative equality has not been translated to anything tangible. For many blacks this is their social identity and the society within which they live. Both these groupings have their snobs who will not allow you into their circle unless you qualify. I am sure every well-to do black has had the experience of visiting not so well off relations who eye you up and down as though you have descended from another planet. If it is not your clothes that are different, or that your parents have a car, then it will certainly be that your vernacular seems to have been weathered by the elements because it certainly no longer sounds like theirs. And similarly because you cannot hold a lengthy conversation about Gossip Girl, Boston Legal or even about Machiavelli or Descartes entry on their part into your world is all but restricted.

I don’t deny that this is the kind of superficial analysis of social dynamics that a short article falls trap to. I have made the dividing lines almost too simple, they unfortunately do not run as straight as this article purports. The lines are jagged, at parts interwoven and at others marred. Nonetheless, as ironic as it seems the new South Africa has meant that it is the black youth who also have to, in the words of the Krokodil, ‘Adapt or Die.’ Being “in touch with your roots” is a popular phrase and the fight to be an educated black who can still chill with igenge ekasi/elokshini can be seen at its best in political circles where fraudulent accents find a home: “agreement” becomes “agriment” and “country” becomes “cowntry”. Oh these fraudsters know how to pronounce these words very well but unfortunately the more a part of sosati you are, the further one is from their roots. So it would seem.

What good will come of this is that more and more people will realize that being black was never about the colour of one’s skin. But for now while we are at a loss to the answer to this most burgeoning of questions, we can look to Facebook for answers where some seem to agree that you’re a Truly South African Darkie when…

1. You’ve remixed English with your vernacular countless times.
2. You’ve accidentally said something like “reach” instead of “rich” or “kettle” when you meant “cattle”.
3. You think BEE is the best thing that’s ever happened in this country =D.
4. Randoms always claim to be your cousins…
5. Whenever there’s a family occassion, you always meet or discover a random new family member… ALWAYS!
6.You know black people can’t swim ‘cos they ain’t streamlined enough!

Amanda Ngwenya is a Law student at the University of Cape Town.