|
Was SA's Rainbow House built on a foundation of quicksand, or solid rock?
The following article documents the creeping corruption of Rainbow Nation South Africa. And it documents it reasonably well, in my opinion, except for a few, but one spectactular inacuracy. He states:In the corrupt state, immoral actions may indeed be legalised, or even enforced through law. In the corrupt state, corrupt laws and policies may be enacted with the pretence of seeking to achieve a specified objective, but in reality exercised to benefit the governing elite. The essence of the corruption could be found in the law or policy itself, or in its implementation, or in both.
The essential elements of corruption are always the abuse of power, and the benefit of the powerful. Corruption is invariably deceptive. It confuses cause and effect, and it erodes moral judgement.
He then fails to apply his understanding of corruption, to the founding TRC laws of his Rainbow Nation; that his Rainbow House was built on TRC corruption, i.e. quicksand. All in the name of political and corporate public relations (hypocrits value 'image' more than substance & reality) expediency it was given a plastic PR label of 'Truth and Reconciliation', truth and forgiveness were corrupted, and the TRC house was built on quicksand; not on a rock of sincere truth and forgiveness.
On this foundation of corrupted TRC quicksand, luminaries rushed to accept Nobel Peace Prizes, politicians world recognition and large financial handouts; citizens joined the Pied Piper herd rushing to declare themselves Proudly South African in stickers and slogans; all built on Truth and Reconciliation Hypocrisy; i.e. quicksand.
How many Proudly South African political, religious, academic, or media elite leaders or citizens do you know who can confirm for you: hand on the bible swear to God, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; that they 100% sincerely forgave Eugene Terre'Blanche, Eugene de Kock, and Robert McBride, during the TRC process; and wiped the slate clean?
I have not been able to find one member of SA's Proudly South African elite who can confirm for me, that s/he forgave just those three individuals who testified before the TRC. In fact I cannot find one Proudly South African member of the academic, political or corporate elite, who unequivocally endorse the rule of law, which is a far lower standard than the standard of sincere truth and forgiveness; then it is clear if they cannot meet the lower standard, they are incapable of meeting the higher standard. However if you know such a person, please let me know, so I can contact them to confirm their representation.
So, I am not confused why a people who built their house on the corruption of such noble ideals as truth and forgiveness; would practice the same type of corruption of the truth and sincerity in their walls, windows and roof; i.e. their race relations, corporate relations, academic relations, political relationships. Their entire Rainbow Nation is indeed a Rainbow: a Rainbow of Corrupt Relationships; of deception and manipulation for socio-economic or political gain.
 |
The author ends his article suggesting that South Africans need to renew their TRC vows; but he never enquires whether the original vows were sincere. If you never loved your wife, when you vowed you did; would renewing your vow of deception, provide any healing to a marriage that was founded on your original lie? No, you first need to take responsibility that the original vow was not sincere; was a lie, that you said it cause you wished to fraudulently benefit from sexual or other relations with her. Your vow was not founded on your love for her character and her personality and because you wanted to be with her, as your friend and soulmate, for the rest of your life; but for your own corrupt sexual or other benefit.
The essence of the TRC corruption can be found in the TRC law and policy itself, and in its implementation; as I said in my ‘TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt’ Amicus Curiae Argument to the Constitutional Court, in the case of Citizen vs. Robert McBride:[a] Only a sincere and serious specific, clear and unambiguous Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract (PDF), unequivocally understood and practiced by the common man can ever contribute to sincere and serious reconciliation and the reconstruction of South Africa’s violent ridden society; and
[b] Any legislation or jurisprudence which professes to advocate on behalf of human rights, peace and social justice, while ignoring their ecological basis – a stable human population at slightly less than the eco-systems carrying capacity – is endorsing and practicing legal dishonesty and hypocrisy; i.e fraud. It is legislation and jurisprudence that is deliberately indifferent to the laws of sustainability (PDF). It is legislation written by politicians and lawyers who ‘know the truth about the irresponsible planting of semen seeds in women’s wombs, and the resource war consequences of overpopulation colliding with scarce resources; but who cover up such information’, in their legislation.
The tipping point for the erosion of state?
How the roadmap to the New South Africa has been fundamentally corrupted.
Jack, Moneywebb
20 April 2010 01:38
|
Easter weekend 2010 was a particularly dark point in the history of the New South Africa. From the murder of Eugene Terre'Blanche emerged the ghosts of those tumultuous days that brought in its wake the promise of a new South Africa. Now, almost a generation since transition to an inclusive democracy started, those ghosts have reappeared to haunt us, imploring us to give account of how we have conducted our historic responsibilities to implement the constitution and to build the society it promised.
Some commentators have noted that we may have reached the tipping point. There is little point in continuing the pretence. In that we should all agree with ANC Youth League president, Mr Julius Malema. We are at a cross-road. As South Africans we need to renew our vows, or accept the inevitable slide down a rocky path that is frankly too ghastly to contemplate.
Indeed, the soap opera of Easter 2010, involved grotesque murder; Malema's visit to Zimbabwe where he endorsed the disastrous policies of president Robert Mugabe; and the award by the World Bank of a loan to fund an Eskom project from which the ruling ANC party stands to benefit corruptly to the tune of R1billion. These events had all the suggestion of a failing state; the breakdown of order; the whipping up of mindless racism and the polarisation of society; while a greedy and corrupt elite leverage the cracks as they lead us towards a kleptocracy.
Eugene Terre'Blanche had only little following at the height of his influence, and may be shown to have been deeply discredited towards the end of his life, but the nature of his death has brought into focus a picture of a failed (if not malicious) government, and the clear promise of a failed state unless drastic measures are taken. Most striking is the extent to which the core principles that were agreed on to guide us, towards a united rainbow nation, have been discarded and replaced with radical references to The Freedom Charter and other revolutionary positions. The resent film ‘Invictus' has been a painful reminder of the sentiments that brought us together under the great leadership of Nelson Mandela, only to wither away under the failed leadership of the subsequent ANC.
The nature of the weak leadership, after Mandela, is one where the ANC has managed to govern in a way that has facilitated the appearance of prudent economic policy, but in reality, facilitated the slow erosion of the state and its infrastructure. The ruling ANC government has however been successful in fraudulently transferring massive amounts of wealth to a small elite, while at the same time managing to accommodate radically opposing political views within the bounds of the party, and its alliance structure.
ANC Youth League president Mr Malema's behaviour during the past week, as seen against the backdrop of the Terre'Blanche murder, projects a clear picture that our worst fears may be coming to fruition.
Malema's praise for Robert Mugabe and his policies in Zimbabwe, particularly towards land grabs and his intentions to nationalise mines, was revealing. In his mind, these policies have been a huge success, not because they were just, or because they benefitted the country, but precisely because they benefitted the small politically entrenched elite. It is only in the enrichment of his small ruling elite that Robert Mugabe can be said to have been successful. And considering his lavish lifestyle in Sandton, this is Mr Malema's main concern. Like Mr Mugabe, Malema will happily promote racial hatred; undermine nation building; and destroy the economy; while he plots strategies that have the effect of centralising all power and enriching the small political elite, at the clear expense of the poor, in who's interest he claims to act.
Mr Malema shows no concern for the hunger and desperate poverty that Mugabe's policies had visited on his population. His interests are confined to the gratuitous wealth and power entrenched in the hands of the elite who hosted him in Zimbabwe.
This form of leadership, which is common in liberation politics in Africa, is of course essentially corrupt. The pretence of what it claims to do, (to act in the interests of the poor), acts in reality only as a smokescreen for the tangible effect, (to centralise power away from the populous and to siphon wealth to the political elite).
And while the president of the ANC has publicly sanctioned Malema, it is perhaps true to say that the difference between the positions expressed by Malema, and that emerging as the de facto policies of the ANC, are indeed separated more by nuance and degree, than by principle. Malema has been foolish in playing the cards that were not yet necessary to have been revealed. But make no mistake, the cards that Malema have been playing are the cards that the ANC has been discussing and holding close to its chest.
Corruption and the perversion of societal values
|
A visit to the World Bank website will reveal a plethora of articles on corruption and the World Bank's principled determination to fight the scourge of corruption, which they claim to be a major obstacle to development and a ubiquitous cause of poverty in the third world. The observation that corruption as a phenomena is difficult to define, but easy to identify, is frequent. That is precisely because corruption is usually subtle, in that it consists of transactions that are designed to appear unrelated, and are usually legal when viewed in isolation, but in reality are constructed to achieve an alternative effect which is indeed either immoral or illegal. Corruption does often attempt to make an immoral action appear moral or desirable, by either simulation or false representation.
In the corrupt state, immoral actions may indeed be legalised, or even enforced through law. In the corrupt state, corrupt laws and policies may be enacted with the pretence of seeking to achieve a specified objective, but in reality exercised to benefit the governing elite. The essence of the corruption could be found in the law or policy itself, or in its implementation, or in both.
The essential elements of corruption are always the abuse of power, and the benefit of the powerful.
Corruption is invariably deceptive. It confuses cause and effect, and it erodes moral judgement.
Indeed, Mr Malema's outbursts since his return from Zimbabwe have demonstrated, his preference for the totalitarian state where a cynical confluence is achieved between what is moral indefensible, but desirable to the elite, and what is legal. This is the basis of the criminal state model, where the interests of the elite are entrenched in law, policy and bureaucracy.
Just as Malema's lauding of Mugabe's policies, as a great success, is indicative of his value system, so the hunger for brazen power and ostentatious wealth, displayed by the new elite of the New South Africa, is translating into a callous disdain for the nation.
During the soap opera of Easter 2010, the world was exposed to various forms of corruption in South African society. Mr Malema and his politics of greed and ruin was perhaps the most brazen expression of the corruption of politics in South Africa, while the murder of Terre'Blanche highlighted, in fantastic graphics, the erosion of state and society. Terre'Blanche's murder also brought into question the corruption of the constitution and the project of building a non-racial New South Africa. And the debacle about how the ANC was benefitting from Eskom contracts highlighted the hijacking and corruption, by the political elite, of initiatives to empower the poor.
The corruption of society under the ANC
Is the ANC leadership partly to blame for the various dimensions of our failing state?
|
At a recent ANC press conference, Secretary-General Gwede Mantashe dismissed a question from a black journalist by hurling the insult that she was a coconut. The journalist, a black lady, had asked, "Why, after 16 years, is Julius still singing the song ‘kill the boer'?" Mantashe snapped back, "I don't know why Julius should be explaining that song ... I call that ‘a coconut approach', where you have a black face, but your interest is white."
A few days later, in a spectacle that was broadcast all over the world, ANC Youth League president Julius Malema dismissed a white BBC journalist with racially charged outrage, referring amongst other things to his "white attitudes" which include the "tendency" to "undermine black people where they work."
These are clearly not the leaders who are working towards a non-racial New South Africa, as envisaged by the reconciliation of 1994 ? Rather, their bigoted conception of a suitably divided nation is obvious, and one may argue that it is driven by base greed and the hunger for unadulterated power.
The murder of Eugene Terre'Blanche highlights the precarious crime situation in the country, and the obscene phenomena of farm murders, which is perhaps now approaching levels of genocide. The neglect of the first duty of the state, to establish order and protect its citizens, is then the principle indicator that we are marching perilously closer towards the spectre of the failed state.
Indeed, one may argue, as James Myburgh does, that the ANC may essentially be culpable of cultivating an environment in which white farmers are seen as legitimate targets for robbery and the phenomena of grotesque murder, for which Terre'Blanche's murder is now held as defining example. Far from the heady days of nation-building under the august leadership of Nelson Mandela, the presidencies of Mbeki, and now Zuma, have focussed on divisive policies, which are motivated by vindictive, and often racist, arguments. As Myburgh notes, it is difficult to see how Malema's rhetoric could not but provide a kind of moral green light to those thinking about targeting farmers.
It would not require too much of a stretch to similarly argue that the rhetoric and actions of the ANC leadership is at least partly to blame for the various dimensions of our failing state, which includes amongst other the general crime situation in the country, and the particularly violent nature of this crime; as well as incompetent state delivery and generalised corruption.
The culpability of the ANC leadership
 |
In taking the nation forward, it is incumbent upon the ruling party leadership to address the divisive policies of the past - past policies that clearly took us backwards. ANC liberation rhetoric often sought to undermine law and order, and was a dangerous strategy that served to erode the social fibre of the black community in particular. The ANC, as a liberation movement, was well known for slogans such as "We will make SA ungovernable"; "With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country"; "Liberation before Education"; "Kill the Boer - Kill the Farmer".
The wisdom of the strategy employed by the ANC, as implied by this kind of rhetoric, was never obvious, and clearly conferred on the ANC leadership after liberation, as the new ruling party, the duty and responsibility to manage the necessary societal interventions to reverse attitudes of lawlessness; political intolerance; payment boycotts; sentiments of legitimised lawlessness and murderous excess; the utility of disorder; and to provide the kind of leadership that would instil the constructive attitudes necessary to build a prosperous new South Africa.
The continuation of the liberation rhetoric, the singing of "Kill the Boer - Kill the Farmer" in particular, is difficult to reconcile with the historic duty of the ANC leadership to lead an historically divided nation to unity, purpose and towards peace and prosperity.
Neither is it clear from the response by Gwede Mantashe to the black lady journalist, accusing her of having "white attitudes," that the ANC has moved very far away from the politics of race based duress, previously encouraged by the grotesque burning alive of blacks who strayed too far from the ANC line.
Those who question the link between the Terre'Blanche murder, and the rhetoric of ANC leadership, will do well to observe the shocking response from the community from where the murders hail in Ventersdorp. Far from showing contrite remorse, the community responded with bizarre excuses, often seeking justification for these revolting crimes. Leaders in the community certainly did not effectively distance themselves or their communities from the crime. Significantly, the response from the black community was liberally laced with the rhetoric and slogans associated with the ANC's past liberation politics, albeit in the face of racially charged outrage from the rightwing AWB, which itself served to rekindle the passions of past conflict.
The response from the black community in Ventersdorp was shocking in its implicit acceptance of this vulgar murder as "part of life", and may be indicative of the social pathology of the killers.
However, civilised people all over the world viewed the nature of the butchery of Eugene Terre'Blanche, and the mutilation of his body, in horror and disgust. Such a crime would have driven any civilised society to urgent introspection, asking itself where it has gone wrong in breading the savages who could ever contemplate such a ghastly deed. In South Africa however, we are used to this kind of thing. What is considered unfortunate in South African society, is that some people remind us of these inconvenient details from time to time. These unfortunate remindors are said by the remindees to be indulgent wingers, and are often encouraged to emigrate. Moral fibre and security are unwelcome topics in South Africans society.
This response from the South African society, and its political core in particular, may be at least partly to blame for cultivating the context in which crime and barbaric murder flourishes in the country. If the youth of the black community in Ventersdorp fail to perceive clear condemnation of the murder of Terre'Blanche, from their elders, and if they were to perceive a subtle endorsement of the act from political leaders and from a significant part of society, a context would have been created for a certain continuation of crime and copycat murders in the country.
(It is perhaps reasonable to distinguish between the appropriate response on the part of the community from where the offenders hail, and allow for some leniency when evaluating the outrage on the part of the community that may feel aggrieved, taking due consideration of the racial divide, although some measure of agitation is clear in the response of the one towards the other.)
Rather than providing moral judgement, our media have sought to paint a picture of the murderers as victims, and have been quite colourful in casting sordid aspersions about the life and character of the slain Terre'Blanche.
What this demonstrates is another dimension of the pathology underpinning the phenomena of depravity, crime and savage murder in South Africa, being the culture of victimhood. This culture clearly includes an implied justification of arbitrary lawlessness and revenge - and it is anchored in a cultivated sense of entitlement and irrational expectation.
 |
Victimhood displaces accountability, while accountability is the foundation of civilised progressive society. But the culture of victimhood also extends to the basics of the accountability of citizens, and within the family, of parents towards their children. In mature societies, parents are held responsible for the wellbeing, and actions, of their children. Even in relatively wealthy families, the question of how many children can reasonably be afforded is a pressing issue. Yet society in South Africa thinks it is taboo to question the culpability of the one murderer's parents, apparently a 15-year old boy, who was employed as a herd boy by the victim. Rather, the boy's lawyer announces to great effect in the press, that the boy will not apply for bail, because he is enjoying the luxuries of incarceration so much -- since he now enjoys a bed and regular meals for the first time in his life. This is not seen as a reflection on the parents who failed him, or the credibility of his community, but serves to heap blame on the victim, who is said to have employed him as a minor - as a herd boy - even though all indications are that the boy presented himself as a 16-year old, and that his employment enjoyed the support of his mother. The culture of victimhood dictates that all accountability rests externally, usually projecting guilt onto a surrogate entity, often simplistically encapsulated as ‘the enemy'.
It would seem reasonable to argue that this pathology is explained, at least in part, by the rhetoric of the ANC's past struggle strategies, together with the more recent leadership failures, distracted as it is by the corrupting effect of access to uninhibited wealth and absolute power.
The evolution of a structure of unconstrained power and the incestuous dynamics of enrichment of the new politically connected elite, is emerging as the central question for those who still aspire to a better future for all in South Africa. The conclusive question is clearly whether the newly established elite, and the ruling ANC leadership, have the interest, or the will, to lead South Africa to prosperity?
The corruption of the process of political transformation
Where did we go wrong?
|
The political transition of '94 rests on an agreement by the diverse people of South Africa, to work towards a rather romantic conception of a non-racial future for the country, underpinned as it is by the constitution. The ruling ANC party necessarily became the custodians of that dream, and bear the responsibility to honour the true vision of that historic conciliation - and the difficult responsibility to lead all these groups, with historically opposing interests and views, towards the vision of a shared future.
The more recent rhetoric of Mr Malema, and his endorsement (and glorification) of the policies and outcomes in Zimbabwe over the past decade, would call into question the commitment of the ruling party to the principles of the '94 transition. Even if the ANC may officially sanction Malema and distance itself from his public statements and actions, it is hard to ignore the implications that there is widespread support for his views, even at the highest echelons of the ANC.
At the very least, it is difficult to find reassurance that the current ANC leadership has any guiding commitment to the core principles of the negotiated settlement that established the united New South Africa.
And the ANC President singing about machine guns does not help?
It is also difficult to avoid the conclusion that the ANC leadership is mischievously balancing radical sentiments in the party, with official policies that are seen to be more palatable within the current external environment. The ANC, with its alliance partners, are an amorphous coalition with little principled core leadership. They have increasingly tended to seek purpose in revolutionary notions and as they fail to deliver on promises to their constituencies, they have tended to revert to the need of a common enemy to keep them united in purpose. This tendency is clearly divisive and explains the regression back to liberation rhetoric. In any event, the ANC's commitment to the intentions and core principles of the transition seems more opportunistic than principled.
The notion of the Zimbawefication of South Africa is precisely the contrary of the principles underpinning the political transition of the country, and is effectively leveraged as a threat by the political elite to extract submissive acquiescence from the politically isolated minorities.
The corruption of the process of political transformation is the original sin of the New South Africa. This corruption finds manifestation in the structures of political power, state administration and in commerce, and in particular, through the policies meant for the empowerment of the poor and disadvantaged.
While the ANC has largely refrained from amending the constitution of the land, it is clear that the ANC has abandoned and eroded the rule of law, and therefore the competence of the constitution. Indeed, the erosion on the judiciary is far advanced, driven by the political elite's hunger for unadulterated power and its greed in self-enrichment. And as far as the legal system does not support the interests of the political elite, the elite is essentially immune to judicial sanction. The ANC government certainly ignores rulings of the courts at will, while it is impervious to the ubiquitous failing of the state machinery in terms of delivery, and audit reports by the Auditor General.
In addition, the ANC has continued to undermine society with its nefarious policy of ‘cadre deployment', although this practice has been struck down as illegal and unconstitutional, in an unchallenged decision of the Eastern Cape High Court. Through cadre deployment, the ANC seek to control the public service, state-owned enterprises, regulatory bodies and business activities of strategic value to the ANC and the political elite. As Paul Hoffman writes in an article in the Business Day, the constitution has subordinated all organs of state to a new regimen of openness and fair dealing with the public, and Judge Edwin Cameron reminds that "it is expected of organs of state that they behave honourably. Their decisions and their conduct must be informed by the values of our constitution."
In response, the ANC has merely moved to be more careful so as not to implicate itself criminally in its public statements relating to appointments, while the dictates of the ANC cadre deployment committees and the covert networks of duress continue unabated. This then is a significant part of the political machinery of corruption in South Africa today, and it is intricately linked to BEE and the impunity of the elite.
In this environment, the law is essentially applied arbitrarily. On the other hand, the political need for the empowerment and development of the disadvantaged has been hijacked by the political elite, and the mechanisms of the policies of Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) are leveraged for the arbitrary enrichment and entrenchment of the structures of the political elite.
The arbitrary application of rule of law effectively renders the state lawless, and the leveraging of political power to extract arbitrary transfer of wealth is essentially fraudulent.
To generalise: A state where power is applied arbitrarily is essential lawless. Arbitrary power is the shaky foundation of the criminal state.
We need to return to the ideals of a principled state, contained by the competent and fair application of the law.
Where did we go wrong?
But we first need to ask ourselves where we went wrong? It would appear that the first ANC administration, under the leadership of President Nelson Mandela, showed clear commitment to the implementation of the constitution and the construction of the state we longed for as a new nation in '94.
The first seeds of corruption that were sown did not have their origins in the ANC, or in African culture, but came from big business, who were the original architects of the notion of BEE and the subversive strategies of public-private partnerships, all designed to establish and entrench a new (multi-racial) elite.
While some of the original rhetoric on ‘empowerment' seemed legitimate at the time, the system that evolved has entrenched fraud and criminalised the state. The arbitrary nature of the empowerment structures originally established by (white) big business, served to create the embryonic seed structures around which has developed the kind of African neo-patrimonialism which can be shown to have led to the demise of several African states.
The nature of these neo-patrimonial structures in Africa is a form of governance in which power is centralised around a political elite and constitutes the blending of the public and the private sector, and where the machinery of state is mobilised for the benefit of this elite. In this system, all power derives from connection to the elite. It is essentially a corrupt system, even if it is not necessarily illegal.
It is easy to see how this system serves the interests of the political elite, and it is not difficult to see how the few who speak on behalf of ‘big business' would calculate it to be in their interest to create such a corrupt system.
Certainly, Big Business has been complicit in undermining the implementation of the constitution in various commercial dimensions, not least in putting substantial pressure on smaller mining companies to wave their mineral rights. These subversions of the constitution have culminated in the creeping corruption devouring our society and are coming back to haunt the nation.
The ANC and the political instrumentalisation of disorder
Which comes first for the ANC: the interests of the nation, or the narrow interests of the party?
|
At some level we need to ask ourselves the simple question: Is it in the interests of the business and political elites to honour the interests of the ordinary people who originally endorsed the political transformation of the country? In other words, is it in the interest of the elite to support and entrench true democracy and implement policies that will truly serve the interests of the population?
In the wake of Easter 2010: Is it in the interest of the emerging elite to build an ordered non-racial democracy, where its citizens are safe and content? Is it in their interest to enact policies that would see broad-based economic growth and prosperity? Is it in the interests of the political elite to create a true democracy where political office offers the opportunity to be a servant leader, for a limited term, rather than to leverage the power to permanently entrench its family in privilege?
Which comes first for the ANC: the best interests of the nation, or the narrow interests of the party?
Is racial harmony even in the interest of the political elite?
It is certainly not clear that Big Business have been true to the spirit of the transformation as it gathered momentum in the years leading up to the '94 elections. Big Business has been opportunistic in exercising its power and has shown little commitment to the principle duty to implement and entrench the constitution.
As far as the commitment of the (now corrupted) political elite to the creation of a prosperous orderly state is concerned, I am indebted to John Austin, a fellow member of the Moneyweb community, who referred in a post to the research of Chabal & Daloz, which indicates that chaos and disorder may indeed serve the rational interest of a corrupt political elite."The dynamics of the political instrumentalization of disorder are such as to limit the scope for reform in at least two ways. The first is that, where disorder has become a resource, there is no incentive to work for a more institutionalized ordering of society. The second is that in the absence of any other viable way of obtaining the means needed to sustain neo-patrimonialism, there is inevitably a tendency to link politics to realms of increased disorder, be it war or crime ".
The suggestion is that the situation will get worse, the "disorder" will grow. ...the govt will need to increase disorder so as to maintain power."
In an article published in the Business Day, veteran journalist Allister Sparks asks: As President Jacob Zuma has now pointed out, the Youth League is not an independent organisation but part of the ruling party. So why did the President not act long ago to stop Julius Malema poisoning our racial atmosphere, insulting people, disparaging our courts and our constitution and the role of opposition parties and the media in a democracy, or call him to order for flying his own policy kites in conflict with those of the Government, for interfering in a delicate foreign policy issue and publicly embracing a neigbouring tyrant?
"Why instead of doing any of that did Zuma actually praise Malema, describing him as a potential future leader of the ANC, thereby not only condoning his behaviour but emboldening him to become even more outrageous."
In his column, also in the Business Day, Aubrey Matshiqi notes that the ANC finds itself in the middle of a continuum of tensions that, in part, have been facilitated by a self-serving tolerance for rank indiscipline.
In their book, Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument, Chabal & Daloz analyze African realpolitik, and ask why most African countries have failed to develop, despite economic and political reforms tied to new aid infusions?"Chabal and Daloz conclude that the continent's informal but durable and culturally rooted "neopatrimonial" political systems do not depend on development in the Western sense -- and may even be threatened by it. As African leaders adapt to restrictions imposed by structural adjustment and declining law and order, they find ways to translate social disorder into patronage resources that shore up the loyalty of their client networks. "Modernization" is occurring, but not of the kind prescribed or anticipated by the West. It is an illusion, the authors contend, to believe that "civil society," opposition parties, or exhortations about better governance can undermine the viability of neopatrimonialism. As a system of maintaining power, however antithetical to the public interest, neopatrimonialism works."
It is therefore clear that there is a fundamental cultural context for the disintegration and corruption of state, as is becoming obvious in South Africa, and spectacularly demonstrated in Zimbabwe.
There is clear academic evidence that proves Malema is correct: neo-patrimonialism works - for the elite! The widespread chaos, conflict, deprivation and hunger in Africa, is however the flipside of the coin of the political economics of neo-patrimonialism.
To make it very clear, the interests of society should not be confused with the interests of the elite -- those two have often been in conflict in African.
These things will only surprise the most naive of liberals, but in truth, they were know knowns well before Eugene Terre'Blanche burst through the glass facade of the building in Kempton Park, where the CODESA negotiations were being held, to warn us of these threats in typically racist terms.
Nonetheless, South Africans of all colours and historic backgrounds came together to embark on a journey towards a third way, a road towards non-racialism, and a principled constitutional state, that allowed for an orderly market economy that would fairly accommodated the diverse people of the land.
To return to this ‘high-road', South Africans of all colours need to regain control from the elite, political and business, and return to parliament, people who will serve a democratic state according to the letter and spirit of our constitution.
The notion that the business elite speak for you and I, is as misplaced as the notion that the ANC elite act in the interest of our people.
And to get the country back on the road to social stability and sustainable growth, the central sin of Black Economic Empoerment (BEE) will need to be addressed. BEE has corrupted our elite and this cancer has spread to corrupt the very fibre of our society.
BEE has fundamentally distorted our economy. BEE has displaced sensible concepts of redistribution and judicious developmental policies, with the entrenchment of big business and the arbitrary enrichment of the elite.
This corruption however does not only manifest itself in the realm of financial enrichment, or the abuse of political power, but it is the cancer that attacks, as we have seen, the moral fibre of every aspect of our society.
The solution is to re-entrench the constitution and to work towards a mature political society, along the proven lines of successful democracies. And the redistribution of the massive waste of BEE funds, towards genuine upliftment and racially inclusive policies that would seek to help empower a broad middleclass, and help finance small and medium sized business development, will no doubt be an important step towards prosperity and broad based development.
But first we as South Africans need to renew our vows, and to reassert our commitments to the core principles that underpinned our initial steps on our journey towards the New South Africa.Comment by By Lara on 03 May 2010, 12:03
Some factual errors.
Good article for most part.
Jack's errors or inacurrate interpretations/conclusions:
1. The 'TRC' house was built on quicksand, not rock. Hence any house (including a political house) built on quicksand is going to sink as soon as it is confronted with a stiff wind, or slight earth tremor (Think Haiti). Compare to the TRC Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract of the Radical Honesty community, whose Truth and Forgiveness house is built on solid rock: the Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract.
2. Economic Growth Delusion: All industrial economy's require two things for 'economic growth': (i) Cheap Energy; (ii) Population Growth.
3. Peak Oil means: END OF CHEAP ENERGY; I.E. NO MORE ECONOMIC GROWTH for anyone, forever; unless God decides to give the EArth more Oil. Cornucopian economists don't appear to understand what Mr. Kenneth Deffeyes, geologist means with: “The economists all think that if you show up at the cashier’s cage with enough currency, God will put more oil in ground.”
4. Peak Ecological Carrying Capacity means NO MORE HUMANS CAN CONTRIBUTE TO ECONOMIC GROWTH, ONLY TO MISERY AND STARVATION. Ever heard of the Sex & War Misery Theorem: "If the only ultimate check on the growth of population is misery, then the population will grow until it is miserable enough to stop its growth."
5. Many SA Political, Academic and Media individuals are aware of aforementioned; but prefer the ostrich in the sand, and media/political/cororate corruption response thereto:
Media Corruption example: Aforementioned issues are dealt with in Amicus Curiae Application of Lara Johnstone and the Radical Honesty community currently before the Chief Justice of ConCourt in: Citizen vs. McBride.
Have you heard about it? Why not? Censored, not by the 'corrupt ANC' but by the 'corrupt SA media'!
» » » » [Moneyweb: One :: Two :: Three :: Four, via Pieter Oosthuizen]
No comments:
Post a Comment