The president is public property

Julius Malema said that President Jacob Zuma is “our father”, I must admit, I half expected him to complete the statement by saying “who art in heaven”. Let’s face it, the president has never done anything wrong in the history of his existence according to the Youth League and the ANC. St Zuma is saintlier than Mandela. A man who repeatedly said he wasn’t a saint, let alone a messiah. Zuma on the other hand, very few see him as one, yet the ANC likes to present him as one. I know he has never claimed to be one. The ANC seems to have sanctified and raised him to the level of a deity. Maybe we should expect to see government offices adorned with his face in stained glass windows beaming upon us. He is infallible. Every indefensible action is defended. The public and the press are publicly ridiculed for questioning the questionable. He is beyond reproach. Again, not according to him but by those who surround him. The president has said nothing to refute implied sanctification.

When he married his third wife I did not see what the big deal was all about. Let the man have his three mothers-in-law I said. It was his democratic right. Some of us applauded him for his honesty, he sees a woman he likes, he marries her. That was admirable. That was until we found out that he had fathered a 20th child according to reports, out of wedlock. Many people have children out of wedlock. There are such people within my family.

Then the ANC tells us we are being disrespectful for asking questions. Excuse me? They tell us it is a private matter. This does not work for us. Since the taxpayers pay for his wives. When Abraham Lincoln was elected president of the United States and upon arriving in Washington before his inauguration, he said, “the truth is, I suppose I am now public property”. I know fully well that many will give the easy and lazy answer “this is not America”. Of course it’s not. The fact of the matter is that he was put in office by the public. The public foots his bills. The public pays for his spouses. Therefore the public has the right to know, especially considering what an expensive affair this will be for it. As much as the ANC would like to keep him an ANC matter, he is more than a simple ANC matter, he belongs to us, the public. Whether some of the public like him or not, he is theirs. He is a property of the state. We are concerned for his health, his well-being and how he represents us before the world’s stage.

According to News24: “The state will contribute an amount equal to 17% of his salary to a pension fund and will pay two thirds of his medical-aid contribution covering his family. He will also be insured by the state for accident and life cover. When he travels on official business, he may be accompanied by his spouses — (the handbook makes allowance for spouses in a polygamous marriage) and those dependent children who cannot remain at home are entitled to accommodation and subsistence at the expense of the state. The same arrangement applies to travel abroad.” If this is what we pay for then we have the right to know. There is nothing disrespectful about wanting find out what one is paying for.

Everyone celebrates when a child is born. It is a beautiful and good thing and adds incalculable joy to the parents. Having read the president’s statement I get the feeling that he is blaming us for having had unprotected sex with a woman who is not his wife. All of a sudden, if we talk about this issue we are questioning the right of the child to exist. Not at all, we are questioning the apology you made after the rape trial (in which he was exonerated) when you apologised for having had unprotected sex. Of course we appreciate the fact that he is taking responsibility for the child, but then again, he is supposed to take responsibility.

The birth of this child is only a reflection of a lot of men in South Africa. Men who are married and father children with other women. My own father fathered a child with another woman even though he was married to my mother. Clearly, the president is a reflection of what is happening within our society. One would expect that he would try to change this, if not, at least pretend to. Having unprotected sex with a woman who is not his wife is not sending out a positive signal to the rest of our men — particularly after he apologised a few years ago for even more dangerous behaviour, unprotected sex with a woman he knew was HIV-positive at the time. Unfortunately when it comes to his partners and sex this will follow him forever — just like Zapiro’s shower. He is a clear indication of what is wrong and broken with many men in our country. Young men have few positive role models and the president is not helping. By all intents and purposes, even though he has three wives, one can’t shake the feeling that he still cheats on his three wives. That’s what this implied.

It is a pity that we rarely debate policy positions. It’s as though he were a celebrity of sorts, not a head of state. One wonders if the press should be blamed or he should be blamed for putting himself in positions where he is treated like a celebrity. He is in danger of being a celebrity president, where his contribution to the liberation of the country is but a footnote in the books of history. Does the president want to be known for everything else other than the instrumental achievements before the 2000nds? Will he be asked about his child out of wedlock and having unprotected sex after he apologised for it when he is in Davos again? Why can’t the ANC demand discipline from the president?

The best thing about the ANC is the worst thing about it. Loyalty. Loyalty at all costs it seems. The ANC’s relativism when it comes to defending its leaders is disturbing. Senior leaders are always defended even though it is clear that they are in the wrong. I’m not suggesting that people should be thrown under the bus, recognise that something is wrong, correct it and move on. The sooner you do so in public the sooner the irrelevant headlines will disappear.

This begs the question, where does loyalty lie? Is it to party first, then to nation? Or is it because the party is so powerful that the perception is that the ANC is in fact the nation? If that is the view, doesn’t the party fall into the trap of arrogance and a sense that it can do no wrong because it is the sole party that is in fact looking after the needs of the people? The ANC needs to stop running like it is still in exile, still a banned organisation. The symptoms of a secret organisation are still alive.

The problem I have with ANC is the same one Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu had while Nelson Mandela was president. He’d said that the ANC had “stopped the gravy train long enough for it to get on it” a few months into the Mandela presidency. Madiba reprimanded him on TV for this. A few weeks later Tutu was on the phone with him and said “for goodness sake, how come you can shout at me like that in public”, Mandela laughed according to Tutu.

In conclusion, I would like to agree wholeheartedly with Tutu’s words when he said: “There are those of them who don’t actually recognise people who are basically on their side, who are critical, not because we want to see them fail. It is precisely the opposite. It is to say we want to see you succeed and that is why we mention these things … there are those who are becoming … I would say dangerously hypersensitive.”

South Africans, ah but your land is beautiful!

Posted On January 28, 2010

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped leave a response

I attempt to give an imaginary person who wants to visit South Africa an idea of what South Africa is like.

Thank you so much David from Uzbekistan for your questions about my country. I must say, your name is pretty normal, not that it wouldn’t be normal if it were Uzbekistani-sounding, not that I know what it sounds like. Let me stop while I’m behind. I am going to answer some of your questions. Here goes.

1: I live in the biggest city in this country, Johannesburg, otherwise known as eGoli, City of Gold. One of the only cities in the world that was built on gold. Literally. It also happens to be the world’s biggest man-made forest.

2: To answer your question: yes, there are many beautiful women in South Africa. Whenever I’ve left the country I always run into men talking about the beauty of South African women. I couldn’t agree with these people more, sometimes when I find myself walking around and see all the beautiful women we’ve been blessed with, I feel like I died and woke up in South Africa.

3: I love my country except for the days Julius Malema says something err … colourful.

4: The best thing about South Africa? Wow! How can you ask me that? There are so many best things about South Africa (including myself of course). I’d have to say besides the obvious things like the landscape, the wild life (some of my relatives could be mistaken for wild life by the way but don’t tell them). I’d have to say it’s the people. They are amazing. We have some of the friendliest people, so very nice. Some of them though are so nice and polite that they get too shy to ask you for stuff, so they might just take your wallet without asking you. It’s just that they are so very shy. Avoid those ones though.

5: The most interesting thing about this country is that its prisons have a propensity for creating greatness. How you may wonder. During the second Anglo-Boer War, the great Englishman Winston Churchill was arrested but escaped his captors, he would go on to write a successful book about his escapades. Then there was the Mahatma Gandhi who was also imprisoned in South Africa, incidentally he would go on to become a thorn in Winston Churchill’s side, but that’s a story for another day. And of course, our very own Madiba, Nelson Mandela. Our prisons do create greatness indeed. Oh, don’t start thinking that you should go steal a television or something. Things might not turn out so well for you. One thing’s for sure though, they certainly don’t make the same quality inmate as they did in the old days.

6: Oh yes, I do believe we will do extremely well in the World Cup. I know a lot of people are profoundly sceptical. We should get rid of this unattractive sense of pessimism when it comes to our national team. I am very pro-Bafana Bafana, (that would be the nickname of our team). Many worry that we don’t have a lot of strikers. They seem to overlook the fact that we have a lot of trade unions and they have a lot of strikers. Perhaps they should be deployed, so to speak, in the national team.

7: Oh, yes! We have produced many famous people! Some of them famous, some infamous. Our most famous citizen is Nelson Mandela. We have three living Noble Peace Prize winners, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and FW de Klerk. But we’ve had four in total, the other one being Chief Albert Luthuli. I think that this puts pressure on us to make sure that we don’t mess up and start attacking other countries. Let us not forget our Oscar-winning Charlize Theron and Lebo M who won a Grammy for composing music for The Lion King. We also have two Nobel winners for literature. I must stop now, the list is too long and I don’t have time to name our famous people.

All in all I don’t think there is any country in the world quite like ours. I remember seeing many years ago, when I was in high school, a book in a bookstore with the title: Ah, But Your Land is Beautiful by Alan Paton. Those words are so simple yet so elegantly describe this country. Ah but my land is beautiful. I wouldn’t exchange for all the gold in Fort Knox.

*This article originally appeared in Juice magazine, Mango airline’s in-flight magazine.

Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize speech

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:

I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations — that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.

And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize — Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela — my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women — some known, some obscure to all but those they help — to be far more deserving of this honor than I.

But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43 other countries — including Norway — in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict — filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.

Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a “just war” emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations — total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations — an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize — America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide and restrict the most dangerous weapons.

In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.

A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts, the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies and failed states have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today’s wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children scarred.

I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago: “Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates new and more complicated ones.” As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King’s life’s work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaidas leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the worlds sole military superpower.

Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions — not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other people’s children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another — that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldiers courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.

So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths — that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human folly. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. “Let us focus,” he said, “on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions.”

What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?

To begin with, I believe that all nations — strong and weak alike — must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I — like any head of state — reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards strengthens those who do, and isolates — and weakens — those who dont.

The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait — a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.

Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don’t, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the legitimacy of future intervention — no matter how justified.

This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

America’s commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.

The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries — and other friends and allies — demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali — we honor them not as makers of war, but as wagers of peace.

Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant — the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.

Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America’s commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.

I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.

First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior — for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure — and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.

One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia’s nuclear stockpiles.

But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.

The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo or repression in Burma — there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.

This brings me to a second point — the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.

It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.

And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation’s development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists — a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.

I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please, choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America’s interests — nor the worlds — are served by the denial of human aspirations.

So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope and history are on their side.

Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.

In light of the Cultural Revolution’s horrors, Nixon’s meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable — and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul’s engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan’s efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.

Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights — it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.

It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.

And that is why helping farmers feed their own people — or nations educate their children and care for the sick — is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action — it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.

Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying power, to complete this work without something more — and that is the continued expansion of our moral imagination, an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.

As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.

And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities — their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of one’s own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.

For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.

Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago: “I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the ‘isness’ of man’s present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal ‘oughtness’ that forever confronts him.”

So let us reach for the world that ought to be — that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he’s outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.

Africa, the motherland

We must not ridicule nor confuse genuine emotional responses with ignorance when African Americans first land here. The ignorant ones are those amongst us who so readily dismiss this response without a moment’s pause to consider or understand the reason for the reaction. (For a while, I was in this number. I too used to laugh. I am no better than the ones who still do.) Simply calling African Americans who do that when they get here is proof of our own ignorance. We who laugh are the ignorant ones. I don’t think we understand the overwhelming emotions that African Americans go through when they come to Africa. I was at the stadium last night when American songstress Keri Hilson said, “it’s good to be in the motherland”. There was much giggling, some even said they knew she’d pull the motherland line. That is said from a place of ignorance and a failure to empathise.

Instead of ridiculing people when they express this, we ought to feel nothing but humility, that we were blessed. It is a blessing that our ancestors were not removed by force to be sold as slaves. A form of slavery where men and women did not give birth to families, but instead bred slaves, much like one would breed cattle, where one’s children were nothing but a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder. Families and people from the same villages were separated so they could not pass on stories about their native land to one another. Clearly we don’t understand. We may never have been slaves, but our lack of empathy and lack of understanding might as well be slavery — of our own making and choosing.

In the 80s, when the late great American comedian Richard Pryor decided to leave it all behind for a while and live in Africa, he went to Zimbabwe. I remember watching (it was DVD obviously) him do stand-up about his experience. He said, I may not be quoting him word for word but he said something like, “I went to Zimbabwe. I know how white people feel in America now,” he paused, “relaxed”. We have no idea what it’s like to be black in America.

Yes the kissing of the ground and saying I’m in the motherland may be old. It may be so for us. But it’s not old for the person who steps out of a plane and lands here for the first time. For them, that feeling, that overwhelming emotion is new and needs to be vocalised. Let us criticise ourselves before we criticise.

I have had several conversations with African Americans and when they find out how developed Africa is they say: “American television never shows positive images of Africa. All we see are children with flies, wars, nothing positive.” Granted, some have admitted to me and beat themselves over the fact that they didn’t find out more for themselves about the state of the continent and not just rely on the media.

As much as some of us blame them for having this image of Africa, some of us have one of two images of the African American: the ghetto-living, hoochie mama with her projects, gangster boyfriend. Then there is the image of the high-living rapper, basketball player or football player. We don’t stop to think that there may be those who live in suburbs. This too for us has been the image of the African American. Let’s look at ourselves before we judge them.

In other words, they make assumptions about us, we make assumptions about them too. So neither side has the right to feel superior. We are all wrong for not trying to find out more.

We can either chose to live in our ignorance or try to understand why they feel the way they do when they get here. In fact I would suggest that not just African Americans should feel that way about the motherland. Everyone should. After all, this is where humanity started, if you believe in evolution that is. Some of the world’s oldest human fossils are found right here in Jozi in fact. They are right, this is the motherland. Now leave them alone.

Interesting facts about my city Johannesburg

How ‘cowardice’ helped Bolt become the fastest man in the world

We have to admit that Bolt is fast. I promise not to be lead into the temptation of cheap puns regarding his name, even expensive ones for that matter. He broke the world record. Again. His own. I couldn’t help wondering. I lie. I didn’t wonder because I am too lazy to, I am sure my laziness is the explanation for the noticeable midsection I seem to be developing lately. When examined closely one would think I was pregnant. Indeed the stomach is pregnant, with laziness.

How is it possible for a human being to be as fast as that man? 9.58? My golly! That is fast! Do you think he would sink if he attempted to run on water? I don’t think so. I suspect that he can’t fight to save his life. If you can’t fight them or beat them, run so fast that they can’t catch. I cannot see how else his career in running would have begun. This is the only way his speed makes any sense to me. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

I wish I could have been able to run as fast as a kid, instead I was forced to fend for myself and beat up numerous boys in the process (let’s pretend I was a hero here, this is good for my chance with the ladies) including a young fellow that was crippled by polio. Don’t judge me. That’s a story for another day.

While we’re still at it, Ferrari is in need of some serious help. Maybe now that Schumacher won’t be racing because of his neck, Ferrari should hire Bolt to run in his place. A friend of mine on twitter @anele twittered this gem before the race: “Okay so Bolt is about to run the 100 metres, escorted by seven guys.”

She couldn’t have predicted it better.

khayav@gmail.com

http://twitter.com/khayadlanga

Settling for imperfection*

The problem with imperfect people looking for perfect partners is that there is no such thing as a perfect person – only one that is perfect for you

Human nature is a funny thing. Not funny as in slap my thigh, ha ha ha – the kind of funny that causes you to shake your head in a mild sense of bemusement and disbelief. I’m sure you agree with me, because you too are an actor in this play called life. Some of us are involved in anyone of a certain class of romantic movies. Our relationships resemble a romantic comedy, a tragic romance or a dramatic comedy – the list is endless, but you get my drift.

Everyone wants an ideal relationship, but hardly anyone knows how to act when they get one. That is the conundrum of the human condition. We know what we want, but when we get it, we don’t want it. No one has taught us how to want what we wish for.  When God finally answers our passionate prayers, suddenly, we tell him it’s not what we were really asking for.

When you get what you want, you best want it when you get it. This is as true for love as it is for life. Want what you have.

Of course, wanting the ideal woman does not mean you should have unreasonable expectations. The ideal woman can never be ideal. You must know that she will not have everything you want. To get the perfect woman, you too must be a perfect man. And you know just as well as I do that you are far from it. In fact, some men aren’t even trying to be perfect, even though they are looking for Miss Perfect. Not that there is anything unusual about it – but it should be. People generally have higher standards for others than they do for themselves. The world would be in a much better shape if it were the other way round.

To quote from a song by the greatest entertainer to have graced this planet (and the moon), Michael Jackson: “I’m starting with the man in the mirror. I’m asking him to change his ways. And no message could’ve been any clearer. If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself, and then make a change.”

The great wordsmith William Shakespeare put it in timeless eloquence when he put the following words in Cassius’s lips, in his play Julius Caesar: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.” Can you imagine how much trouble we could save ourselves if we looked at every single problem with a person through that prism? Of course, there are people out there who are just wrong – take Bruno for example.

I digress.

Since this person is everything you want, we have to agree that there is nothing wrong with them. Then, if we find reason to fault them, we should question ourselves. What is wrong with me? What do I need to fix in me? “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

Maybe we don’t really want the perfect person. Think about the Michael Jackson lyrics. The mirror. What do we know about a mirror? A mirror is perfect. It reflects everything. Nothing is hidden. It shows everything for what it is. Perhaps that is the problem with getting what we want. The perfection. If you are not perfect, the mirror will tell you. Naturally some people will take the reflection in accordance to their level of maturity or insecurities. Those insecurities cause us to find wrong where there is none. What do I mean by this? Allow me: I have had conversations with women who have what they have always dreamed of in a man. “He is everything I want,” they say, and then the pregnant pause. We all know what the pause will give birth to – a “But.” How can there be a “but” if he is what you want? Perhaps it is reasonable to assume that the reason people say “but” is because they are not ready to get what they want. What they want might be too mature for them. Or they are not ready to learn about themselves, or to improve who they are. They are just satisfied with no personal internal progress. The greatest expression of love we can show is to be honest with ourselves.

These people will usually find fault in the other people, but never themselves. “We never fight. He calls me everyday. He gets me flowers. The lovemaking is great. He is honest. He makes me laugh.” The truth is, they are just not ready for what they want. Maybe it is the realisation that they might not deserve the person they are with, thus they find reasons to fault them for being everything they want. But who is to say who deserves who?

It reminds me of an episode of Californication where a young girl says to her mother about her dad: “Mom, love him for who he is, not for who he could be.” If your partner loves you with all your flaws, then you should be happy that you are loved for who you are, not who you could be.

We should not seek perfect people, because they don’t exist. If they do, we will find fault in them anyway. Let’s just find other imperfect people to be perfect with. If they accept you for who you are, even with your greater faults, then I suppose that makes them perfect. And if you accept them with all their faults, then I suppose that makes you perfect too.

*first appeared on destiny

SABC News was too scared to broadcast my response

Posted On July 30, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

Comments Dropped 3 responses

Many years ago when I lived in Cape Town I dabbled as a comedian. Don’t laugh, I’m not trying to be funny. I’m serious. To cut a long narrative short, Comedian Desmond Dube had a show on SABC 2. I forget what it was called, but I know that it was very popular. He created some controversy this one time (not at band camp) when he said in one of his sketches, “Shangaans are very ugly. In fact they’re so ugly it’s better to be a baboon than to be Shangaan.” I’m sure it was taken out of context too, but that is the phrase that was paraded around.

A storm broke out when a parliamentarian was so incensed that she raised the issue in parliament. Her angry speech made it on to the news. For reasons beyond my comprehension I got a call from SABC news, they wanted my opinion on the matter they said. I told them there were better comedians than me to comment on the matter. “Yes we tried them, but they’re not available,” came the reply from the line. Then I said, “Sure, come over.”

They went to my office and I was made to pretend I was tying something on my laptop, you know that shot they like. There’s another shot they like, they’ll ask you to walk towards your office while they shoot.

Two days later than they said they’d arrive, they finally arrived with their cameras (mind you, it was only my third day in my new job). The producer asked, “So what do you make of what Desmond Dube said the other day? And what do you make of the parliamentarian’s reaction?” I said, “Well, I know Desmond. He certainly didn’t mean what he said. There is no doubt in my mind about that. I mean how could he mean it? Just take a look at Desmond. He could be Shangaan.” The SABC was too chicken to broadcast that part of the interview. :-)

Excuse me while I blame apartheid*

By Khaya Dlanga

Many white people see no just cause in blacks blaming apartheid for anything. It ended almost 14 years already; get over it already, they say. Often it is said with indignation, if not irritation, as though to say, how dare they!

Those who insist we stop talking about it tell us it’s in the past, so we should forget about it. Perhaps it would be easy to forget if we didn’t bear the scars of the past. For some it’s not mere scars; some walk around with deep sores that are still healing — slowly. Every now and then, the sore is disturbed and the healing process is reversed.

It is easy for the “perpetrator” (I use that word liberally here) to say: “Forget about it,” because he does not want to be reminded of his sins. At the same time it is also too easy for the victim to keep playing the victim card instead of getting on with it. There is a middle ground somewhere between these conflicting feelings.

When we blame the legacy of apartheid, most white people take it as a personal attack on them for having benefited from the system. Or they accuse blacks of refusing to take responsibility for whatever is going wrong in the country. This is not the case. It is an attack on the system. We are not asking you to feel guilty. If anyone needs to get over anything, it is white people who walk around carrying guilt. This guilt might paralyse them, or even make them unwitting racists. Or, even worse, cause them to overcompensate, thus wiping away any sincerity in their efforts to balance the past.

To be honest, had I been white during the height of apartheid I don’t know if I would have had the moral fortitude to stand up against the National Party government. Perhaps I would have condemned it in the comfort and privacy of my mind.

The legacy of apartheid is very real. Let us not pretend that people don’t have a legitimate reason for blaming it for their current condition, as some excuse for their lack of progress. It is an undeniable fact that the vast majority of black people were denied a good education; some were even denied an education. The government of the day did not bother to build schools for them.

Where there is education, opportunity soon follows, and without it blacks were caught in a vicious cycle of stagnation. They saw no real progress for themselves. Instead of passing on wealth from generation to generation, their descendents inherited poverty and a very visible reality that they were not allowed to prosper in the land of their birth.

To dismiss these realities as mere laziness on the part of the black person is a clear lack of understanding of the position the formerly oppressed find themselves in today. The black person is still playing catch up.

We in the black community are lacking decent education, even with the new government. The teachers who teach most black students did not get a fantastic education themselves. With these steep hills to climb, it is a miracle that so many children who went through those schools have managed to extricate themselves from the web of hopelessness.

Jobless blacks in the townships and in the rural areas do not expect the government to do anything for them. What they want are opportunities so that they can improve their lives — not handouts. Many of them don’t see these opportunities, so they create some for themselves even in the bleak conditions in which find themselves. Young men create car-wash businesses and young women hair saloons, to name just the most obvious examples.

On the other hand, blacks look at white misbehaviour through the prism of race without seeing the core of the problem. When we only look at it that way, we don’t try to solve the issue.

The black community must not confuse with racism the young white man’s anger. He cannot understand why he has to be at the back of the queue when he seeks employment. Let’s say that he is too young even to remember apartheid. Shall we now punish him for benefiting from a system that was not of his choosing? Is it his fault that he just happened to have been born into it? Whether he would have grown up to be a perpetrator of the evils of the previous system or not is immaterial. What matters is that the system ended before he could be a conscious and active participant in it. What do we do now?

Having said all I have, I would like to point out that I am not as naive as to believe that racism does not exist. Sadly it is does. We saw manifestations of it recently at the University of the Free State.

Whether we admit it or not, we are all victims of apartheid. But we cannot be victims forever. We may have been victims, but we don’t have to think and act like them. The only way we can raise above it is when we first seek to understand. However, this must not excuse bad black or white behaviour.

*first published March 28 on thoughtleader.co.za

Why do skinny girls have fat friends?

My ex features in this video too.

Is Zuma weak or just being used? *

By Khaya Dlanga

I don’t know about you, but I prefer my leaders smart. I don’t want their intellectual capacity to be open for debate.

Even if a leader is a jackass, I want to be able to say: “Sure, he’s a jackass, but he sure is smart,” like many people thought of good ol’ Mbeki. I don’t want my leader to be making George Bush-like misstatements when he speaks in public. It fills me with a great deal of comfort when I know that my leader is significantly smarter and wiser than I am. I’ll be the first to admit that that bar is not very high, so I’m not asking for much.

I know that some people will think that I’m questioning Zuma’s intelligence. I would have to be an idiot (not that I am not) to think that he is on the slow side. You don’t become the second-most-powerful man in the land by being stupid.

I just get the sense that his top supporters don’t respect him. Or they just think that they are smarter than he is. All they respect is what they can get because of him. I can’t shake the feeling that they will discard him like used toilet paper; once they are rid of him, they will go on the hunt for some other poor soul who is hungry and desperate enough for power, for whatever reason. Unfortunately many will claim much love for him, but I suspect they would rather nurse their expensive Johnnie Walkers while he burns, since he would have achieved his purpose. For them.

I had a conversation with a former chairperson of a certain region of a certain trade union a few months ago. I will name this individual Mr Someone as he told me in no uncertain terms not to reveal his name when I told him that I was going to write a blog regarding our conversation.

It was not until I saw headlines with the Congress of South African Trade Unions contradicting statements made by Zuma that I paid attention to the conversation I had those months ago with Mr Someone.

Mr Someone shared with me the reason the leaders of the trade unions were so passionate about Zuma. He made a call to a regional chairperson, Mr Somebody, of a large trade union while he was with me. After their conversation ended, Mr Someone revealed to me that the reason the likes of Mr Somebody supported Zuma so passionately was because he was someone the trade unions could control. They did not have that luxury with Mbeki and they punished him for it. He trusted his intellect far too much for their liking.

At times I wonder who calls the shots in the ANC. Is it Phosa or Gwede? I never wonder if it’s Zuma. Perhaps he is too busy preparing for the trial. Since the conference I have never felt that Zuma is leading the ANC. I don’t buy the collective argument. My suspicion is that the leadership of the ANC does not think that he would make a good president. If anyone is a lame-duck president, it’s Jacob Zuma.

We see the lack of power in small humiliations, so small that they go unnoticed. In the future they might become more blatant. Time will tell. He is made to retract a statement here and another one there. He is forced to say he was misquoted. Can you imagine that happening to Mbeki?

If all this is true, then it fair to say that Jacob Zuma does not lead; he is being led.

Zuma is becoming a sad and tragic figure. No one can deny that he is a likable and charming man. These two virtues do not a leader make.

He fought so hard for power that when he got it, he discovered he had it in name only. He is told how to wield it. We know that he would argue and say he is a consensus leader. The truth is that Mandela was such a leader, but we knew he had power; we never doubted it. The same can be said about Tambo. Mbeki was a different story, apparently. If this is Zuma’s way of rebelling against Mbeki’s style of leadership, then he is taking it too far. He just seems weak. Perhaps that is what Mr Somebody meant when he said that Zuma is someone that can be controlled.

This is what I expect from my leader:

I want to know what my leader stands for. I don’t want to hear him say one thing today and the opposite tomorrow.

I don’t want a leader who stands just for his own survival. I want a leader who will make sure that I, along with 46-million odd South Africans, don’t just survive but thrive.

I don’t want a leader who follows the public mood, but one who shapes it.

I want a leader who will tell me what I need to hear, not what I want to hear.

I don’t want a leader who thinks that he can get away with answering tough questions by laughing. He should be arrogant enough to say, “I refuse to answer this question,” or, “This interview is over, Mr Journalist Person. Your question crossed the line.”

Zuma, man up! Be the president we know you can be. Stop trying to appease every interest group out there and take your power back!

*first published March 12th, on www.thoughtleader.co.za

Barack Obama answers my question, (Yes, I, Khaya Dlanga’s question)

Humbling response to my video

Coming out

coming out ain't easy

I quit smoking pot when I was 10

My Psycho Ex

South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki Fired/Resigns

Should Thabo Mbeki launch a new party? *

By Khaya Dlanga

I read an interesting yet short article by Karima Brown on Business Day online. The following paragraphs caught my eye:

“Could firebrand African National Congress Youth League president Julius Malema have an even bigger effect on South African politics than he dreams of?

“His demand that President Thabo Mbeki be stripped of his ANC membership could well be the Damascene moment that induces the birth of a powerful new opposition to the ANC. For months it has been whispered that Mbeki and his camp have been exploring the formation of a new party after his defeat by Jacob Zuma in Polokwane. Polls have been conducted, research commissioned, meetings held and stories spread.”

It would have been unwise and bordering on political and strategic retardation to strip Mbeki of his ANC membership. It would have been going very far — so far that it would have been beyond too far. ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe dismissed these calls as mere rumours while on the television programme Interface.

Had the rumours been true, it would have been the best thing to have happened to Mbeki because that would have given him carte blanche to form his own party. Many like-minded people would have flocked to him; many of them with money. His party wouldn’t have won a majority, but the ANC wouldn’t have gained a two-thirds majority either, nor would it even have received 50% of the vote.

They need him in the ANC: not for his sake, but for the sake of the party to make life easier for the organisation. An opposition led by the former president would give the ANC a rather impossible migraine.

Now he has to toe the party line, and show that he is a dedicated and loyal member of the ANC who will do anything asked of him. After Zuma is sworn in as president, what will happen to him? Will the ANC discard him because he has achieved for it what it wanted? Without Mbeki, the ANC’s majority will be greatly reduced.

The ANC needs him more than it is willing to admit. Is it possible that he does not need the party as much?

There was a part of me that hoped that the ANC would be foolish enough to strip him of his membership. Not because I was hoping that he would be humiliated — on the contrary, I thought that it would be a great idea for him to head up a powerful opposition to the current ANC, which I have started to see as quickly devolving into an anarchist organisation. Of course that was my immediate emotional reaction at the time of his dismissal. His address to the nation did much to calm this line of thinking. He said: “I remain a member of the ANC, and therefore respect its decision. It is for this reason that I have taken the decision to resign as president of the republic.”

He is far too loyal to the ANC to leave it.

There are some level-headed moderates within the leadership structures of the ANC: the likes of Kgalema Motlanthe, Pallo Jordan and others — unfortunately we never hear them. We only ever hear those who shout from the rooftops that they would kill for Zuma. Mind you, not in defence of their nation or an ideology, but for a mere man. I don’t think I’ve ever even heard someone say they’d kill for Mandela, and there is a man worth dying for.

I have mixed feelings about the whole series of unfortunate events that has led us to this point. This is a painful moment for our nation. People are emotional. They are hurting. Let the victors not gloat for they have led one of their own to the slaughter. And like a lamb, he willingly walked there.

The ANC insists that the firing of Mbeki is not revenge. I don’t think that the public buys that. This is all so transparent. The purpose of Mbeki’s removal is to pave a path for Jacob Zuma’s ascension to the pinnacle. Plain and simple. No sugar-coating necessary. When power speaks nonsense to us, we should reply with truth.

Mbeki is too much of a loyal ANC man even to consider starting a new political party. But should he remain loyal to a party that he thinks has lost its way?

On the one hand, one can argue that it is better for him to stay in the ANC and try to reform it from within. If he forms a new political party, he will be accused of sulking.

One thing we have learnt from the events since Polokwane is that the ANC is reformable. Just because people with a different ideology now overrun it does not mean that it will remain this way forever. Evolution will happen in time.

Now we have to wait and see. What will the new elites do with their newfound power? Will it make them drunk and cause them to do the very same things of which they have accused Mbeki? Are they going to try to block the possible prosecution of the ANC president, Jacob Zuma? Should we as the public (or, as those in power like to refer to us, the masses, as though we are some objectionable vile disease) turn a blind eye from that hypocrisy?

If the new elites decide to drop all charges, then we have to make the assumption that the new executive too is unjust. If this is the case, then the ANC deserves to be punished at the polls by reducing its majority. It goes without saying that the ANC will win the next election. By squashing the appeal, then, they will not give Zuma his day in court, as he had so frequently demanded in the past.

We can only sit back and admire the president’s supporters’ reactions. There have been no shouts of “There will be blood on the streets if Thabo Mbeki is removed from office.” No threats of mayhem or a revolution. No “100% Xhosa-boy” T-shirts. No effigies of Zuma burnt to ashes. No tyres burning on the roads. No shops looted. His response was dignified. Presidential. His supporters have respected the decision made by the ANC. He stepped down with humility and asked for unity. He addressed the nation. We listened. The nation was calm during a very uneasy period.

After Polokwane, the world’s top ratings agencies said: “South Africa’s prudent monetary policy framework would stay in place with room for some flexibility on spending. We do not see a sharp change in policies.”

If we have strong fundaments, then, to quote the guy that I’d like to leave me his estate when he dies, Warren Buffet: “You should invest in a business that even a fool can run, because someday a fool will.”

I think that is the important thing about South Africa. We should protect our institutions and the Constitution for this reason. They should be so strong that when and if a fool does take over at some point, we don’t fall apart. For now, I don’t think we will fall apart. There is too much at stake. The new leadership is not bent on destroying the country.

To quote the president as he announced his resignation to the nation: “Our strength as a people is not tested during the best of times. We should never be despondent because the weather is bad. Nor should we turn triumphalist because the sun is shining.”

The new comrade elites would serve themselves well to heed these words. Now that the sun is shining for them, what will they do?

Now is not the time for personal vendettas.

Mbeki was far from a perfect president, but he has been the best we have ever had. Can we do better than Mbeki? Yes, we can. That is what we always hope for, that each successive generation will give us better leaders. My only hope is that we get better leadership sooner rather than later.

South Africa is a better country than it has been for the past few years.

khayav@gmail.com

* Originally published on 22 September, www.thoughtleader.co.za/khayadlanga

Monday

Should Zuma give way for a Motlanthe presidency after the 2009 elections?*

If Zuma were to get up and address the nation and tell us that he has no intentions of running for the presidency of the country, he would do much to repair his chequered reputation. Such an announcement would probably be one of the single greatest acts of self-sacrifice this nation has ever seen. It would be a great turn around. He would redeem himself in many people’s eyes.

But then again, who am I kidding? Nothing of the sort would ever happen; not in a million years. If Jacob Zuma were to be asked today if he would be willing to stand down in the name of party unity he would give us the predictable rehearsed classic response, “I serve at the pleasure of the ANC. If the ANC says that they want me to serve as president of the country, I will serve. If it says it wants me to sweep the floors I will. It is not for me to say I don’t want to be president or I want that position.” I would bet a billion rand that’s what he would say if asked. Ok, maybe not those precise words but you get my drift.

It is my understanding that no one puts a gun against anyone’s head and forces someone to a position they don’t want in the ANC. Sometimes our leaders treat us as though we are idiots. We may be dumb, but we certainly aren’t as dumb as they think.

In a clever attempt to have it both ways, Zuma could also announce to the nation that he is making that consideration when in fact he isn’t. The Youth League, Cosatu and others would then shout from the rooftops and he would “cave”. He would then say that there are too many calls for him to run — he simply cannot ignore those calls; he has to serve the people. I expect that he would also point to the example set by Nelson Mandela who, before the elections, is reported to have told the NEC that he did not want to be president of the country because he felt he was too old. He also argued that there were younger and more capable hands to lead the country. The only difference is that there were no divisions within the ANC at the time. The ANC urged him to stand because the world trusted him and he would also ease any white fears. Basically, it was best for the country for him to be president.

Referring to the Mandela example, is it the best thing for the country to have a Zuma presidency? In fact, let me pose a less noble question. Is it the best thing for the ANC? I doubt that it is best for the ANC for him to run and these are my very unscientific reasons:

1. If he runs, the ANC will most certainly have a reduced majority at the polls next year as a direct result of the manner in which Thabo Mbeki has been treated. It was not the most politically astute move to make a few months before the general elections.

2. The DA will most certainly win the Western Cape thanks to the divisions in the ANC and the coloured vote going to the DA once again.

3. I am convinced that the UDM will see an increase in enthusiasm for it, particularly in the Eastern Cape. Personally, I believe Bantubonke Holomisa has been making sense for a very long time but nobody has been listening.

4. Much of the young, black middle class feels like political orphans at the moment and will either abandon the ANC and will not vote, or they will look for a new home.

Did the ANC really consider all of these possibilities before the ousting of Thabo Mbeki? Did they really have the interests of the ANC at heart or did they just have the interests of one man? Or were the Zumarites so drunk with victory after Judge Nicholson’s judgment that they threw reason out the window?

The advantage of having Kgalema Motlanthe as president is that he would be his own man. He owes no one. The ANC would remain largely intact if he were to run for the presidency. Most of those who feel like they are political orphans now that Thabo Mbeki has been fired would come back home. The ANC wouldn’t suffer as much in the elections next year.

Unfortunately the ANC is led by a group of hot heads who would never consider Kgalema Motlanthe as the option for party and country. They want what they want and they will do whatever it takes to get it. Get rid of the Scorpions, get rid of unwanted premiers, get rid of Thabo Mbeki and maybe the next thing is to drop all charges against Jacob Zuma. And finally, President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma.

If Zuma were to stand down it would probably be one of the greatest selfless acts we have ever witnessed as a nation. Not just because he would forego power, but he would forego a couple of extra pages in the history books as South Africa’s third democratically elected president.

If Zuma takes this course of action, he would also free himself from the political debts he owes. His creditors would tell him in no uncertain terms that a debtor cannot tell his creditors how he wants to pay them. He simply has to abide by the terms and conditions that have been set out before him, or there will be consequences. He might be forced to constantly make decisions he doesn’t want to make as president because he owes so many people. Zuma is between a rock and stainless steel.

To be fair, none of us know what it’s like to be Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma. We can only imagine the torments he goes through. Now he can see a light at the end of the tunnel. But once he emerges into the light, will he be his own master?

Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma both damaged the ANC. They should ride into the sunset and allow others to repair the mess they have created. I suspect both men believe the other is responsible for this mess. They should leave the stage for Kgalema Motlanthe.
The question is: is Zuma man enough to give up what no man would give up? Can he truly give up what he has been working towards for such a long time? Can he give it up when it is within reach? When he has it in the palm of his hand? If I were him I don’t know if I would be able to. And that is the truth. Perhaps we should understand why he wouldn’t give up. But I don’t think we should excuse him for not letting go.

*first published September 25 2008, www.thoughtleader.co.za/khayadlanga

Sarah Silverman tells Jewish kids to get their granparents to vote for Obama (amusing)

I’ve got an iPhone, the (bad) musical

Attraction

I’ve written this blog on my iPhone 3g

I decided to write a blog (as the title suggests) on my iPhone to see what it would be like. I must say it’s not as irritating as I thought it would be to use this keyboard. The cool thing is that it corrects your spelling as you go along in case you strike the wrong keys.

I don’t know how many wrong keys I’ve hit so (ok, that was irritating, as I was trying to write the “so” it kept writing “do”. But that was my fault because I kept hitting the wrong key) far.

But this is not bad if you want to write a short blog. It’s taken me 7 minutes to scribe this much. I’m sorry to tell you this but as I write, I’m on the toilet, pants on ankles. Not to worry kids, I always wash my hands.

What women should know

This is a cormmecial I worked on with a number of people who work at MetropolitanRepublic.

Khaya, the greatest man that ever lived

What Miss Teen South Carolina said about South Africa

Is the current ANC counter revolutionary?*

By Khaya Dlanga

There are some pretty uncomfortable questions we ought to ask of the African National Congress, for its own sake and ours as a nation. Regardless of what people think of the ANC, our fates are bound to it. It is for this reason that everyone must show interest in its dealings. We cannot follow sheepishly what the leadership tells us is gospel truth — especially when it is manufactured to suit those who seek to lead us. No one should hope for the implosion of the ANC, for its demise means we too shall perish. The perfect example is ZANUPF of Zimbabwe.

The desire to see a better African National Congress requires that we defend and criticise it when and if the need arises. It is a mistake to behave as though it is perfect — that its leaders can do no wrong. It is precisely because it is run by flesh and blood beings that it is imperfect, just like any organisation or company.

We have witnessed our leaders’ fallibilities time and time again, which explains why the people have become cynical of politics and have rightly lost faith in their leaders.

Whenever a shining light presents itself, all attempts to extinguish it are made. Like the voice of ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe. When he said that the judiciary should remain independent, ANCYL spokesperson Floyd Shivambu was quoted saying that Motlanthe’s “Going around affirming the independence of the criminal justice system on the case of the ANC president is worrisome.” How is affirming the independence of the judiciary worrisome? Does that statement even make sense? If the statement by the YL’s spokesperson were a joke, it would be a really fun one. Sadly, we are not laughing.

A member of the National Working Committee was quoted by the City Press as saying “Motlanthe creates the impression that all of us are a mad mob and that he is the only saviour, the sole voice of reason, and that he is better than all of us.” This says a lot about some people in there. They seem to recognise (with great reluctance I might add) that they are indeed a mob, and know that there is indeed a lone voice of reason. Instead of applauding it, the mob besieges it and tries to drown it out, not with logic, but with loud voices.

If I am not mistaken, rule 3.7 on the Character of the ANC in its constitution says the following: “The principles of freedom of speech and free circulation of ideas and information will operate within the ANC.”

When a senior member, the deputy president of the ANC, is dragged through the mud for exercising his rights as observed by the constitution, can we truly say that the principles of freedom of speech and the free circulation of ideas operate within the ANC? If this is contrary to what the ANC is meant to represent then can we not say that the ANC is losing its way?

Was it not the ANC that set in motion our constitution? Was it not the ANC that voted and made sure that we have an independent judiciary at the dawn of our democracy? Some have even said that we risk anarchy if Jacob Zuma goes to trial. It is better we have anarchy defending the independence of the judiciary than have a bench full of lackeys.

If Motlanthe’s goal is indeed the presidency, as some have claimed, then this would be a very bad way of playing his cards. He knows who will put him at the helm – the very people he is criticising. Perhaps he has come to realise that the country and the party are too important for him to remain silent while he watches people squabble over a leader — not ideology. He knows that voicing his true thoughts could cost him the presidency or influence should ANC President Jacob Zuma go to jail. It is for this reason that I applaud him for speaking out even though it is politically inconvenient for him. Lincoln once said, “Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.”

We have lost our appetite of fighting real battles. We have become accustomed to frivolity. And so, as we search for a meaning as a nation, we find meaning in money, getting drunk and getting laid. Sometimes people do all three at the same time. These are the examples that have been set before us by our leaders.

As much as I respect our leaders (some with great reluctance I have to admit), I respect what the ANC should be more. Since it is not what it should be and since it is further away from what it should be than it was five or even ten years ago, then we can say that it is inching away from its revolutionary mandate.

Our leaders have not lived up to their responsibilities to this great organisation.

We have become accustomed to the daily tragic comedy that has become a way of life for our politics. And we watch bemused, as though watching a very bad episode of Generations.

The ANC of Chief Albert Luthuli, Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu and Nelson Mandela was never about battling one another for power. Maybe they had bigger things to worry about than fight so publicly and so dirty amongst themselves. Maybe they were too busy fighting apartheid. Maybe they were too busy fighting for their freedom. Maybe they had higher ideals than to squabble about power, position and prestige.

Not all the current leaders are men of questionable character, reputation or intention. But just because a man’s character and his intentions don’t seem to be questionable does not mean he must not be questioned. This is to protect us from him and him from power. Because power, as we see every day, corrupts.

We should not and must not treat the ANC as though it were a perfect organisation, led by men and woman who are all perfect, and with nothing but perfect objectives. Some may have good intentions – for themselves. It is at this point that we need to make sure that members and leaders don’t confuse the good intentions they have for themselves as good intentions for the party or the state.

I suppose even questioning the current ANC leaders as counter revolutionary could be viewed as counter revolutionary. It is a never-ending cycle. It might be no different from a parishioner of the Roman Catholic Church calling the Pope and his Cardinals heretics.

The ANC seems to be at ease with its current disorderly conduct; it is time we made it uncomfortable so that we, the people, can be at ease with the future of nation. Right now, we are not. Our leaders are supposed to give us confidence for the future. So far they are failing. Dismally.

*first published on thoughtleader.co.za 2nd September 2008

YouTube responds to the debate

Could a crazed McCain supporter attempt to assassinate Obama?

I’m not telling you what they were reacting to. It’s disgusting that’s all I’ll say.

The Internet Knows, The musical

Fear, hypocrisy and the abuse of Mandela in the ANC*

I read a rather hypocritical article penned by former Limpopo premier Ngoako Ramatlhodi in the Sunday Times where he decried the treatment of former president Nelson Mandela during an ANC national executive committee (NEC) meeting in 2002.

Mr Ramatlhodi was present in that meeting. In the article he details how NEC members called Madiba divisive for having told the NEC that certain of its members had approached him to let him know that dissent was not allowed in the ANC. Madiba was then asked to name the people who made those claims. In his attempt to protect these individuals, he refused to name them — for this he was called a liar. Some even said he wanted to rule from the grave. He was taken to task for this, as we say in Xhosa, bakhwela bezehlela kuye.

Ramatlhodi details how speaker after speaker went after Madiba while Terror Lekota chaired the meeting. He was so insulted that that he never attended another NEC meeting, according to Ramatlhodi.

To quote Ramatlhodi: “The tragedy of the episode is that senior leaders, who today are vocal about the recall of Mbeki as president, were there when Madiba was being violated in the most brutal manner by junior leaders of the movement.

“None of them had the courage to stand up and defend an innocent old man, our former president and icon of our struggle. They must have been genuinely afraid of Mbeki, a president who has somehow turned out to be the ANC itself. He has become larger than the movement. They were scared; I was scared.

“It was, indeed, a very sad day for those of us who were unfortunate to be there as witnesses.”

Obviously, it was not sad enough six years ago for him to speak out; he only realised six years later how sad a day it was. Now that it is politically convenient to speak out, he does.

It’s easy to show courage when you are part of a majority and part of the winning team. True courage is standing for what you believe even when you know in your heart that you have a 100% chance of losing everything you’ve worked for. I have no respect for one who only speaks out when it is easy to do so. He should have spoken out when it wasn’t.

If Ramatlhodi was such a man of honour, why then was he silent? Why did he not stand up for Madiba then? We can only deduce that his silence meant that he agreed with every single word that was said to Madiba.

In his open letter to Terror Lekota, Minister Jeff Radebe savaged Lekota for having presided over that meeting and for having allowed Madiba to be treated in the manner he was. If Ramatlhodi and Jeff Radebe were so concerned at the treatment of Nelson Mandela, why did it take them six years to speak out?

Indeed, if Terror Lekota presided over a period in the ANC where dissent was not permitted, then why should we trust this new party? How different are they going to be from the ANC?

But back to Ramatlhodi: Should we suddenly applaud him for taking a moral stance now? We should all be equally appalled at the manner in which Madiba was verbally attacked by the NEC members. I don’t know who was at the meeting, but we know who the members were: Terror Lekota, Jacob Zuma, Trevor Manuel, Thabo Mbeki, Ngoako Ramatlhodi, Sam Shilowa and many more. None of them said a word in defence of Madiba. Not one according to Ramatlhodi. How dare now they use his name now to get what they want!

This whole saga clearly shows us that no one is innocent. No one has clean hands.

This is clearly an attempt by the ANC to use Nelson Mandela’s name in order to shore up support for itself. What can we make of these leaders who seem to have a moral compass of convenience?

There is no courage in speaking out when it is safe to do so. There is no honour in defending a man’s honour only when it benefits you. Ramatlhodi and Jeff Radebe should have demonstrated their moral fortitude when Madiba was viciously attacked in that meeting, precisely because it was not the politically safe thing to do then. Their political careers were more important than standing up for what was right apparently.

What I have never been able to understand was how Thabo Mbeki, as one man, was able to stifle debate. The men and women who were there, who sat and allowed that to happen from day one, can only blame their lack of courage.

What is the point of speaking out when the majority is speaking out? Courage is not when you speak out when it is safe or beneficial for you to do so.

We need to have leaders who are able to do so especially when it is unsafe to speak out. Right now they are in short supply.

khayav@gmail.com

* first published 20 October 2008 on thoughtleader.co.za/khayadlanga

Government fatcat falls off chair! LMAO

Please nice and kind people, do check out the rest of my blog. khayav.com

Hate it. Love it.

In one week, America will have it’s first black president elect …

By Khaya Dlanga, October 28 2008

… barring some unforeseen event or the Republicans doing what they know what to do best every four years – stealing an election. It’s easy to use the typical and lazy argument that black people support Obama simply because he is black. Naturally, blacks will be proud of him, just like women would have been of Hillary Clinton had she won the nomination instead of Obama. As were Catholics when JFK beat Nixon.

To claim that his skin colour is the only reason black people want him to be president is an insult. That statement assumes that blacks are an unthinking herd that is only governed and motivated by colour. Besides, this simplistic view omits the fact that 88% of black voters voted for John Kerry in 2004 and Al Gore got a whopping 90% in 2000. Blacks vote Democrat idiot! If they recall, before the Democratic primaries black people all over America were saying that Obama was not black enough. Of course now he is too black.

I like what Chris Rock says about people who say America can’t have a black president, “Why not? We just had a retarded one.” My second favourite quote about Obama’s candidacy is from comedian and talk show host, Bill Maher, the host of HBO’s Real Time (I watch the programme on the “internets”). He said, “Don’t lie and say you won’t vote for Obama; it’s because he’s smarter than you. That’s why you won’t vote for him. That’s why you voted for Bush twice!”

He will be the first American president in eight years I can say without doubt is smarter than I am. It doesn’t take a lot to be smarter than me. And I hope I can say the same thing about South Africa’s next president.

Obama overcame every single hurdle that has been put before him; sometimes they were not just mere hurdles, they were like the Great Wall of China. Let’s start with his name. Here is a man who has the “misfortune” of having his middle name as “Hussein” in the United States of all places. And he decided to run for president too with that name. As if that wasn’t bad enough, his surname sounds like Osama and his name is Barack. All very “un-American sounding.” Television reporters have often made the mistake of referring to him as “Democratic nominee Barack Osama” on live television. He had to overcome that. He has been accused of being Muslim. I suspect that being called a Muslim is code for terrorist in some parts of the US.

Of course had he been Muslim there should have been nothing wrong with that either. During his hard fought primaries against Hillary Clinton there was a poll that showed that 13% of Americans thought that he was Muslim and a whopping 80% of those said they wouldn’t vote for a Muslim.

When General Collin Powell, (former Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State) a Republican, broke ranks with his own party to endorse Barack Obama, a Democrat, he tackled the Muslim issue in a fashion that I hadn’t heard any major political figure address. He said that he was disturbed by what was permitted to be said by the Republicans. The lazy and anti-intellectual wing of the Republican Party said that Powell endorsed Obama because he is also black. (Interestingly, the ANC has been displaying some anti-intellectual signs of late.)

Powell gave the example of an elderly lady who said at a McCain rally during a Q&A session, “Well, you know that Obama is a Muslim?” McCain grabbed the microphone from the lady and said, “No ma’am, he’s an American.”

Powell said, “The correct answer is he is not a Muslim, he is a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim kid believing that he/she can be president?” Then he went on to admonish senior members of his party, the Republicans, for implying that Obama is a Muslim and might be associated with terrorists.

He went on to talk about a photo assay about soldiers that had died in Iraq. He mentioned a picture he saw of a mother in a cemetery; she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. The headstone had her son’s name and awards. “At the very top of the tombstone was not a Cross, or the Star of David, it had a Crescent and a Star of Islamic faith … he was an American.” No one has said that there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim and an American at the same time as Collin Powell. No one has refuted the silent bigotry that being Muslim is un-American with the same eloquence and intellectual fluidity as Collin Powell.

Then there is Reverend Jeremiah Wright who almost single-handedly sank Obama’s hopes. His sermons after 9/11 when he railed against America, which essentially said that America got what it deserved. “God bless America,” he said. “No, God damn America.” Suddenly Hillary saw a glimmer of hope; maybe she stood a chance after all. Instead of addressing the crisis in a typical politician’s manner – managing and spinning the crisis, he did the opposite. He decided to tackle the issue of race in the United States head on and spoke to Americans as if they were adults in his great speech, what I believe to be his greatest speech, “A more perfect union.” He survived that because he spoke about race in a way that had never been done before; he addressed white fears and black fears all at once.

Then there was Hillary Clinton. People forget how tough Obama is. They look at him and see the nice guy with an easy flashy smile; the ladies see a guy they’d introduce to their mothers. Obama is one tough SOB. This is the guy that defeated the most powerful political machine in American history. Hillary Clinton. I’m sorry, that should be a plural: the Clintons.

It is a miracle that he has gone this far. He is a black man, with a father from Africa. He has a Muslim middle name. His surname rhymes with Osama. His preacher almost sank his presidential aspirations. He can’t show emotion, because if he does then he will be seen as the typical, angry black man. He has little experience. He didn’t just run against one Clinton, he ran against two, and one a popular former president. The Republicans paint him as one who palls around with terrorists. The list is endless.

Barack Obama has destiny written all over him. He is one of those rare individuals whose mark of destiny is hard to miss. He knows it. We know it. He knows we know it. But we should not mark him as a great man yet. Because destiny must be fulfilled, for before it is, it is mere potential. And potential is nothing without results.

Because of his self-awareness, he is humble enough to poke fun at the Messianic expectations that have been set on him. Just two weeks ago at the Al Smith dinner (he was the first Catholic to run for the presidency of the United States) where both candidates were invited to poke fun at one another, Obama said of himself, “Contrary to the rumours you may have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton, sent here by my father Jo Ell to save the planet earth.” There was much laughter after this.

What a breath of fresh air he will be, God willing.

first published on www.thoughtleader.co.za on October 28 2008

Juluis Malema should shut the f*** up, maybe not.*

I am not one prone to the indiscriminate use of profanity. In fact, those who know me well will tell you that I rarely descend to this sort of level. But Julius’ ability to spew out the most outlandish statements has reduced my I.Q to levels I didn’t think possible. This is my excuse for the title of this blog. The problem with listening to some of the things that he says leaves one even stupider for having heard them. For that, he should not be forgiven. The things he says not only defy logic, but stupidity. He over compensates for his lack of intellectual curiosity with his bellicose statements, which he mistakes for coherence.

Once again, on 11 February 2009 Mr Malema did what he does best (perhaps the worst), he opened his mouth. He insulted the minister of education, Naledi Pandor, a member of his own political party, accusing her of having a fake accent. His statement could also be understood to mean that any black person who happens to have gone to a private school or a so-called Model C school all his life is using nothing but a fake accent. The only genuine accent apparently is the one he has.

Both the minister and the president of the ANCYL are eloquent individuals. However Malema is eloquent in buffoonery. As a supporter of COPE I hope and pray that he uses his substandard rhetorical abilities more frequently.

Last year he tried to insult COPE’s first deputy president, Mbhazima Shilowa, by calling him a security guard, recalling his humble beginnings. As though to say there is something wrong with being a security guard. To demonstrate his lack of foresight, he did not stop to think that his statement could be insulting to the very constituency his political party is meant to speak to. If I were a security guard why would I vote for a party that seemingly has no respect for my profession?

The sort of dangerous and frightening statements he is reported to have said on October 27, 2208 could lead this nation to genocide. To quote The Times on line, “Under Mbeki, the resources of the country were distributed to certain individuals and a certain tribe,” he said, alluding to Mbeki’s Xhosa heritage. “Not everyone benefited. But under [ANC president Jacob] Zuma we expect everyone to benefit.”

This sort of blanket statement said without an iota of evidence has the ability to incite the people of this nation into an unnecessary blood bath. Of all the things we have had the misfortune of hearing from Malema, this has to be the most dangerous, therefore it should be the most unacceptable. All senior members of the ANC should have condemned this incitement of tribalism in the strongest possible terms instead of closing ranks around him, which is their reflexive reaction.

If, as he so claimed, that only a certain tribe benefited when Thabo Mbeki was president, can he explain to us why the Eastern Cape is still the poorest province in the country? The richest black man in the country by his thinking should be from the Eastern Cape or the Western Cape for that matter. In fact, the wealthiest black people in this country should be from the Cape provinces.

If he is talking about the leadership within his party he should apply some logic, something he seems to be in short supply of. I shall help him along and give him a bit of a history lesson about his party.

Historically, the Eastern Cape is the ANC’s biggest province by membership, and has been for the longest time. (Of course COPE is changing the political landscape in leaps and bounds now.) Naturally, the vast majority of people elected into leadership positions would be from that part of the world by virtue of the Eastern Cape having the greatest number of the party’s supporters. Add the Western Cape to that number. For years, large sections of KwaZulu-Natal voted IFP. Thus the vote from that part of the world was split between the ANC and the IFP. The consequence of this is that the leadership has shown a slightly disproportionate Cape slant. One does not need to be a brain surgeon to make these deductions. In fact, one does not even need a matric.

No one has single-handedly driven young black intelligentsia from the ANC to COPE with greater ferocity than young Julius Malema. I don’t understand how and why he is allowed to carry on speaking (but as a COPE supporter I hope he is allowed to speak more often. He is our greatest election tool). The more Jacob Zuma, Matthew Phosa, Cyril Ramaphosa, Pallo Jordan and Gwede Mntashe allow him to speak, the more supporters COPE gets.

In October 2009, he was on Kaya FM. I was astonished by ANCYL president’s assertions that being a youth somehow earned him the right to be impetuous, belligerent and disrespectful. I must politely disagree (although I must admit I am tempted to disagree impolitely) with the man. Youth does not give one a free pass for foolhardiness, disrespect and impulsiveness just as maturity in years does not give one the automatic right to wisdom, level-headedness and patience.

The ANC has descended into anti intellectualism and ideological incoherence with the likes of Julius Malema. Every single young person in this country ought to be embarrassed by him. We should allow him to carry on speaking, and as young people we will speak at the ballots by voting COPE.

On behalf of COPE, I would strongly recommend that he continues to open his mouth.

*this was published last year but I deicided to updated it, thanks to Juluis’s latest outbusrst.

I want to marry a white woman

Obama, Mandela, MLK speech mash up

The ANC does not own liberation history

Allow me to make a bold claim: it was not the ANC that brought us liberation. It was a vehicle that the people used to bring themselves to freedom. Just like the newfound Cope cannot claim to be the defender of the Constitution. The people are merely using it as a vehicle to defend the constitution.

I have been somewhat disturbed by some things that I have heard from certain leaders of the ANC of late. Words such as: “Cope is stealing our history, it is stealing our leaders.”

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but does the history of the struggle for freedom not belong to all South Africans? To claim ownership is to belittle the contribution of those who belong not only to South African history textbooks, but also to the pages of world history. Freedom belongs to no party.

The moment the ANC feels that it has the right to the history of the struggle, it won’t be too long before it tells us that we, the citizens of this country owe it, and as a result must accept anything it does to the country because without it we would not be free. We cannot, and must not allow ourselves to be held hostage by the ANC. Or any party of that matter. Whatever we may owe as a people, we owe to the red, blue, black, white, green and yellow colours of the flag.

The people who contributed to the Freedom Charter were not necessarily ANC card-carrying members. They were South Africans from all walks of life who wanted to be free. Some even contributed despite their white privilege because they desired that all people enjoy the freedoms they also enjoyed.

When Nelson Mandela and others languished in prison for so many years, it was not just for members of the ANC, but for all South Africans. They did not only struggle for black South Africans, but for those white South Africans who were imprisoned by their own prejudices. Yes, they fought for the racists too.

If history belongs to a certain party then that means Oliver Thambo, Nelson Mandela, Chief Albert Luthuli, Beyers Naude, Walter Sisulu, Ruth First, Winnie Madikizela Mandela and many others should not be taught in schools, but rather to those whose parents belong to a certain party.

To allow people to carry on talking in this manner about the heroes of the struggle is to make them smaller than they are. Then we can say that the ANC does not appreciate what it helped bring. We shall all be eternally grateful to the ANC, and we cannot belittle what it did. However, by claiming ownership of the struggle, it belittles itself.

Robert Sobukwe does not belong to the PAC, nor does Steven Bantu Biko belong to the Black Consciousness Movement.

Therefore, the people of this nation have no loyalty to any party – owe no favours to anyone. But their allegiance belongs to the country that many bled and died for.

Once again, let us cherish the history of this nation by not making it belong to a group.

Nandos takes on ANC, hilarity ensues

Happiness. We all want it, but what is it?

Why I’m endorsing COPE*

As an official blogger and egomaniac I thought that it was incumbent upon me to make my position clear given the current state of our nation. The desire to write this endorsement is also driven by the false notion that people might take what I have to say seriously. As the title suggests, I fully endorse the Congress of the People (Cope).

I have defended the ANC on numerous occasions on the “internets” (George Bush thinks that the internet is the “internets”), particularly on the video-sharing website known as YouTube. My defence of the ANC and the government got me into some heated exchanges with some fellow South Africans. I have even taken heat from right wing racists. (I’ve always wondered why are there no left wing radical racists? Just a thought). I digress.

I have even gone as far as to say that if Jacob Zuma does become the president of the Republic it wouldn’t be the end of the world because the world’s leading ratings agencies like Moody’s and others said that there would be no major policy shifts if Zuma takes over. I said these things after Polokwane. As uncertain as I was of a Zuma presidency at the time, I thought it prudent to give the man and the new leadership a chance after his camp was elected into office.

I went on to quote Warren Buffet who once said, “You should invest in a business that even a fool can run, because someday a fool will.” I made the example that South Africa has a strong constitution and an independent judiciary. So even if a fool runs the country it will be fine because of the structures in place. I was also fully aware of the fact that some people would deliberately twist my words and imply that I called Jacob Zuma a fool.

I have even gone as far as to say that white people need to join the ANC and stop moaning so that they can change it if they don’t like it. If you complain from the sidelines, nothing will change I said. I was taken to task for making these suggestions. But these suggestions stimulated the kind of debate I had hoped they would on YouTube.

I said all those things because I believed them at time. Indeed the ANC will change to what it was meant to be, perhaps even better than what it was meant to be, but it won’t happen next year or tomorrow. The ANC won’t just change. When it finally decides to change it will be too late. It will be because it will be forced to. The most dynamic organisations are the ones that change before they have to.

The reason I endorse Cope is because of a Martin Luther King quote Barack Obama often used during his campaign. He would say, “I am running because of what Dr King referred to as ‘the fierce urgency of now.’” Obama never quoted the whole passage; he always quoted those five words, “the fierce urgency of now.”

Allow me to quote Dr King’s entire passage: “We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood-it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, “Too late.” There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect.”

I don’t want my generation to be in that invisible book that says we were not vigilant and that we were neglectful when we saw that we were headed towards a cliff.

As Dr King so eloquently put it, “There is such a thing as being too late.” Zimbabwe is a case in point. When the people of Zimbabwe decided to stand up, it was too late.

I believe that we cannot wait for another five years for the ANC to change. The world is in a global financial crisis. We cannot afford to wait when the poor get poorer. We cannot afford to wait another five years for justice to be served differently depending on one’s political standing. We cannot afford to wait another five years for the ruling party to remove the president from office at a whim. We cannot afford to have the entire machinery of the ruling party dedicated to making sure that an individual never gets his day in court. We cannot afford to wait when our judges are being called counter revolutionaries. We cannot afford to be too late.

I want to be able to say to my children that when the time came for me to stand up, I did. And not only did I stand, I walked and ran. Because standing is not enough; acting is what counts.

I support Cope’s call of having a president elected by the people. Right now, the people are under the impression that they elect a president when in fact it is parliament that does.

I endorse Cope because it will be accountable to the people. The leadership will not tell the people what to do; it is the people that will tell the leadership what to do. The people lead the movement.

I support Cope because it will be South Africa’s first truly diverse political party, where all members of our country will be represented in their numbers. The enthusiasm for Cope spans racial, religious and class lines.

One of the things that impressed me the most about Cope was when one of its youth leaders said something off colour about the president of the ruling party. An apology was issued. There were no excuses, no attempt to spin what had been said, there was no going to a laager to defend the indefensible. Cope did not wait for other political parties to speak out before an apology was issued. We cannot say the same thing of the ruling party. We waited for months for an apology for some of the statements that were made by its youth leader. Even the apology was a non-apology; they went on to blame the media. One of the things I’ve learnt is never ruin an apology with an excuse.

Cope is not perfect. No political party is. It would be a mistake to believe that there is. Even churches cannot claim that. But what I hope Cope will do, is at least to try to make this country move forward, look ahead and not backwards. I know that it will give the people of this nation hope that there are better days ahead for us as a nation.

I am not unmindful of the fact that some people will ask me how I can endorse an organisation that has no policies. Well, the people set the policies and I believe in the wisdom of South Africans. Who better than they that live the day to day to existence to set a policy than someone who no longer knows what it is like to live as an ordinary South African? They know better than any government official.

These are just some of the reasons I endorse Cope.

*first published December 3 on thoughtleader.co.za

Stay positive, a little message for this new year. Forward it to someone else.

I believe in you. A little message of positivety. This was my very first video on YouTube.

Obama’s Inauguration Speech 2009

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land – a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America – they will be met.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.

The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted – for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things – some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.

For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn. Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.

This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions – that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act – not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions – who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them – that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works – whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account – to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day – because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control – and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.

The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart – not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.

And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort – even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus – and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West – know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment – a moment that will define a generation – it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends – hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism – these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility – a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence – the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed – why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

“Let it be told to the future world…that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive…that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].”

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.

Barack Obama and the burden to be great

By Khaya Dlanga

Barack Obama expects to be great. Please allow me to digress before I delve into the reasons. Rarely has any American president inherited a country in such shambles. And so it is with great interest that the world looks at this defining moment in the history of America. Because, let’s face it, people generally have low expectations for blacks. The travesty is that many black people are guilty of being active participants in this low expectations disease. When then senator Barack Obama announced that he would be running for the presidency of the United States of America, finding a black person who believed that he could win was as difficult as finding a prostitute walking the streets of heaven.

I followed the American election in 2004 with great interest because I firmly believed that Americans would not make the same mistake twice. In my mind there was no way they would elect George Walker Bush twice. As I crawled the internet for news about the 2004 Democratic National Convention I read news reports singing the praises of this young black state senator from Illinois. I searched the internet for his speech. This was the BY era, Before YouTube.

When I found the speech I told myself that here stands a future American president. Of course I didn’t think he would be president in four years. Eight to twelve years seemed more realistic. It made sense. He was not yet a United States senator. He was a mere state senator for crying out loud.

But when he announced that he was running for the presidency early in 2007 I made an impassioned video on YouTube stating my excitement and belief that Obama would be America’s first black president. I got more abuse from African Americans than I anticipated. I couldn’t believe the low expectations.

The kind of comments I got were that White America still harboured a lot of racist feelings. They would never allow a black man to win the presidency. It was just in America’s nature to put the black man down. America has not changed. Of course there were far worse comments. I was told to go back to Africa, the irony of course was that I was in Africa. While these people were in the slumber of cynicism, they didn’t realise that America had and was changing. America still has the capacity to change. And to surprise.

Today, the very same people who did not believe he would win claim not to have had a single shred of doubt he would win. This reminds me of the great difficulty I have of finding a white person that actually voted for the National Party during the apartheid era.

Ironically now that he has won, he is not just expected to be a good president. Being good will be tantamount to being like George Walker Bush. He cannot be good. He must be great. The only modern American president to have expectations of greatness thrust upon him was John F Kennedy. But he did not live long enough.

As I wrote in one of my blogs a while back, and so to quote myself, “He is not unaware of his burden to be great. Just two weeks ago at the Al Smith (the first Catholic to run for the presidency of the United States) dinner where both candidates (Obama and McCain) were invited to poke fun at one another, Obama said of himself, “Contrary to the rumours you may have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton, sent here by my father Jo Ell to save the planet earth.” It’s an amusing take on what he knows and what everybody knows. Unlike Jesus he is not expected to walk on water, he is expected to levitate. People almost see him as some deity. But he is a mere man who has chosen to be extraordinary.

Well, he certainly expects to be great. Any president who can meet the challenges that America faces can only be great. Take a look at these lines from his inaugural address, “Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America – they will be met.” America – they will be met. He said those words with conviction and so we believed him.

Then later he goes on to say, “In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned.” He knows that he has to earn greatness. It is not a given because it is expected. From him who much is given, much is expected.

Obama’s confidence in his abilities cannot be understated. Back in 2004, the day he was due to deliver the speech that made him at the Democratic National Convention, Marty Nesbitt, a successful black businessman, says that Obama was calm. According to the New Yorker:

Obama has always had a healthy understanding of the reaction he elicits in others, and he learned to use it to his advantage a very long time ago. Marty Nesbitt remembers Obama’s utter calm the day he gave his celebrated speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, in Boston, which made him an international celebrity and a potential 2008 Presidential candidate. “We were walking down the street late in the afternoon,” Nesbitt told me. “And this crowd was building behind us, like it was Tiger Woods at the Masters.”

“Barack, man, you’re like a rock star,” Nesbitt said.

“Yeah, if you think it’s bad today, wait until tomorrow,” Obama replied.

“What do you mean?”

“My speech,” Obama said, “is pretty good.”

Some may call this arrogance, but I believe that he just sets very high standards for himself. Standards he expects to meet. Impossibly high standards he often meets.

Had he not demonstrated signs of greatness along his path to the presidency we might not have had as great expectations as we do as a people. The manner in which he dealt with the Reverend Wright saga was one such demonstrate of a man of extraordinary makings.

Of course he will disappoint here and there. How could he not? He is human.

In the same way that Bush’s failed presidency did not surprise many of us foreigners, Obama’s success will not be a surprise. It is expected.

Rarely has there been such a wide gap of expectation between two men who would assume the mantle of most powerful man in the world. When George Walker Bush, the 43rd president of the United States was elected, the peoples of the world had nothing but low expectations of him. We were wrong, he exceeded them beyond our imagination. He left office with two unfinished wars, an unprecedented deficit, an ailing global economy. At one point the price of oil was over $140 a barrel on his watch. He left a major US city to drown. Now there is Gaza too. The list of incompetence is endless. And he left a black man to clean up the mess. Ok, that was meant to be joke.

Barack Obama expects to be a great president too. He has often referred to Abraham Lincoln. He was sworn in, he placed his hand on the very same Bible that was used by Abraham Lincoln when he took the oath of office. He is the only president to have been sworn in on that Bible since Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps most presidents just didn’t want to set themselves up to such symbolic great expectations. He even announced his run for the presidency on the very same steps as Abe Lincoln did when announcing his presidency.

Lincoln was skinny, so is Obama. Lincoln had large ears. So does Obama. Except for one difference, Abe was not considered a good looking man. In fact he is said to have retorted to a senator who called him two-faced in the following manner, “If I were two faced, do you think I’d be wearing this one?”

The only president to have inherited a worse America must have been Abraham Lincoln. He had to prevent the union from being divided. If war was the only option to keeping a United States of America united, then he would make room for a civil war. It was just one crisis. Obama is facing several. And the world looks to him to lead it too.

As Obama stepped on the podium to deliver his inaugural address I saw a man carrying the great expectations on his shoulder. His shoulders seem strong enough to carry this burden. I don’t think he sees this as a burden. To quote someone else other than myself – Bono. When the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP)  awarded him the Chairman’s Award, he made an impassioned speech where he said the following words as he spoke about us as being the generation that could end extreme poverty, “This is not a burden. It’s an adventure.” I suspect that Obama does not see this as a burden at all.

From now on, blacks no longer have the excuse of setting low expectations for themselves. Thank you President Obama.

Should Mbeki publicly endorse Cope but remain an ANC member?

Imagine a scenario where former president Thabo Mbeki decides to announce his endorsement and intentions to vote for Cope but decides to remain a member of the ANC. I cannot imagine a situation that could rattle the feathers of some of the over inflated egos at Luthuli House more. Some of those egos are “too big, too wide, too strong, won’t fit they’re too much and they talk like this but they can’t even back it up.” “Quoting” Beyonce while discussing politics seems a tad out of place. Perhaps I should make a better analogy. Let me point to the most widely followed election in recent memory. The US elections.

(Just an aside here. I was commenting on someone’s status on Facebook about something they had said regarding the ANC. In my comment I quoted Dr Martin Luther King; someone then commented saying, “Trust Cope to quote Martin Luther King who, at the time, was speaking about equality during the 1960s. What relevance does Dr King have to our democracy,” as if there was something wrong with quoting people from other countries. I’m afraid if that person sees this blog post I will be taken to task for making references to America.)

Two weeks before the American general elections in 2008 a very well respected Republican sat before Tom Brokaw, the host of MSNBC’s much-respected Meet the Press TV programme. This particular Republican, according to opinion polls, had been the most respected American for years. In fact, had his wife not forbidden him from running in 2000, would most certainly have been the Republican nominee for president, meaning that he would have ended up president of the United States instead of George Walker (Dubya) Bush. He would have been America’s first black president.

This Republican gentleman and former National Security Advisor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of State, General Colin Luther Powell endorsed Barack Obama, a member of the Democratic Party, for the presidency of the United States. During his endorsement he mentioned that he was and still is a member of the Republican Party but felt that Obama would make a better president than his fellow party man, John McCain. Although he endorsed an individual, it was essentially an endorsement of the Democratic Party’s platform.

General Powell made that endorsement fully aware of the impact it might have on the fence sitters. Here was an established, highly respected man going out of his way to make known his intentions of voting for a member of a different party to that of his own. Although he allowed himself to be used to bring falsified evidence before the United Nations, which led to the invasion of Iraq, perhaps the endorsement was a way of correcting that error.

He was not hounded out of the Republican Party after his announcement. Of course they were not happy with the endorsement. It was his right to express his preferences. Some tried to spin it by saying he was only endorsing Obama because he is black. Maybe it is time our country matured enough to allow people to express their preferences without fear or favour.

Unfortunately I don’t see Luthuli House viewing Mbeki’s endorsement of Cope as his democratic right. He would most likely be called a traitor at first. Then names and a host of animals that can be found in a zoo. The endorsement would then be ridiculed. They would say that he wants to rule from the grave. They would accuse him of bitterness. They would say that people aren’t going to switch from the ANC and vote for Cope simply because Mbeki decided to do so. The funny thing is they would spend an awful lot of time telling us how insignificant the endorsement was. They would also appear on every SABC station telling us how it would not make a dent in the ANC’s support base, which would make you how wonder: is it really inconsequential? Fikile Mbalula would say that he was right all along; Mbeki was behind Cope all along. Then Julius would call for him to be disciplined or call for his expulsion.

I had the rare opportunity of seeing Julius Malema and Fikile Mbalula at a wedding I too had the privilege of attending some time last year. While all the guests were having tea before the reception, they stood together and talked, like two lonely figures. No one really walked up to them, to talk to them. Then later at the reception the master of ceremonies made the following pronouncement, “I see Mr Malema is also here.” There was much laughter. Make of the laughter what you will. But I digress, as usual. Excuse the ADD.

Should senior members of the ANC who might be sympathetic to Cope publicly announce their intentions to vote for Cope even though they remain members of the ANC? Should they come out and say that they are doing so in order to strengthen democracy and not necessarily weaken the ANC? Will a stronger opposition not in fact strengthen them? Maybe not in terms of numbers, but in strengthening the democratic processes within the party?

Members of the ANC should have the freedom to endorse and to state their intentions of voting for Cope even though they are still senior members of the ANC without the fear of being suspended.

If the rumours are true that the ANC is busy denying – President Motlanthe’s intentions of refusing the position of deputy president should Zuma become president, then it is difficult not to view his discomfort of serving as deputy to Zuma as a vote of no confidence in his presidency.

If, in the next few weeks and months, people decide to go public and announce that they will vote Cope but will remain members of the ANC, then the ruling party should understand one thing — these people do not love the ANC any less. It’s just that they love their country more.

Women and the Jesus excuse. Good Lord I hate it!

There is nothing more annoying than asking a girl out and she gives you the, “I’m sorry I can’t go out with you because I’ve found Jesus,” line. As if Jesus was lost. And now that she has found him, he needs her to look after him until he is nursed back to health. Worse, they say I’m trying to get my relationship with Jesus in order first. I think that an honest, “Dude, I don’t want to go out with you,” will do. It bruises the ego but at least it’s honest. Besides, the male ego is resilient and optimistic. It’s too big. It’s too wide. It’s too strong. It won’t fit. It’s too much. Basically a really big ego.

A friend of mine who shall remain Khaya (yes, laugh) once got the Jesus line. Being the eternal optimist he said to the dear lady, “At least I lost to a better man. He’s perfect, how can I compete?” So I, (I mean Khaya.) Let’s try this again. So Khaya didn’t take this as being turned down. But he knew he knew he had the wool pulled over his eyes. One day however, Khaya went back to her and told her to say what she didn’t want to say. He said, “You know what, I want you to say it because I’m not going to say it for you.” He didn’t want someone try to protect his feelings. (Not that he actually has any. OK, just kidding).

“You can do it.” He coached her. After much encouragement she eventually said it. “It’s not going to happen.” She said it like she didn’t want to say it. My dear friend Khaya leaped to his feet and said, “You see, it’s not so hard. I’m not dead, I’m not crying and Jesus still loves you!” He almost gave her gold star.

Ladies, stay away from using Jesus as an excuse. Sure he’ll forgive you but that line is worse than the favourite guy pick up line, “Don’t I know you from somewhere?” and that’s unforgivable.

Mandela’s endorsement and Tokyo’s hypocrisy

A friend (cyber friend might be more appropriate) of mine made an interesting comment on facebook about Tokyo Sexwale who accused COPE of using old people to get votes. I quote, “I thought Tokyo said they don’t use old people to win votes!”

A few days ago the ANC marched and paraded Nelson Mandela before a crowd, newspapers and television cameras crowing about his endorsement. Perhaps I should quote Tokyo’s criticism of Cope, “”Our mothers are taken, house to house, they are also paraded on TV, these people are performing witchcraft with our mothers… They are liars. You can’t have respect for people who use older people in that fashion.” Does this mean we shouldn’t have respect for the ANC for using an old man who couldn’t even read his own endorsement because he is so frail, weak and tired?

Madiba was well within his rights to endorse the ANC. There was nothing wrong or right with him endorsing the party of his choosing. He was excersing his right to do what he thought was right.

Of course when mamu Epainette Mbeki, the former president’s mother came out to endorse COPE, Tokyo said using old people to get votes was witchcraft. Naturally, he hasn’t called out Jacob Zuma or the ANC for that matter for using an old person to get votes. His silence as the self appointed defender of the elderly is of course not surprising.

Tokyo should not have higher standards for other parties than he has for his own. It is a sad day when we speak of our politicians and say, “What did you expect?” That is what many have come to expect of this once respected man. ANC members have whispered to me and called him an opportunist that can’t be trusted. They have said he will go with whatever side he believes will win. They no longer recognise the comrade they fought with in the 80’s and early 90’s. As his wealth has escalated, his character as a politician has diminished. No one doubts his business acumen, it is his political opportunism that leaves one wondering. Is this just a case of man gaining the world but losing his soul in process?

Should we embrace religion in our politics?

Many are of the opinion that religion has no place in politics. This is an understandable position to take considering the abuses that have been committed in the name of religion, whether it be Islam, Judaism or Christianity. We are too aware of how the Bible was used to justify racism right here in South Africa. None of us are blind to the atrocities that have been committed in the name of religion, especially that of Christianity. However there needs to be a distinction between religion and those who use it to attain power.

I will try (poorly) to defend religion from its very unflattering past. It is best that I use Christianity as an example since I am more familiar with it. In the interests of full disclosure, I must reveal that I am a practising Christian. I am not unmindful of the fact that this revelation may open me up to some derision. It’s almost unkosher to “come out” and admit this. Perhaps a few years from now we will have closet Christians “coming out” and making public declarations of their long held beliefs. Who knows, we might even have Christian Pride Parades along with the gays. (Is it even politically correct to say “gays” these days?) But I digress.

I submit that it is unfair to incriminate religion itself for any wrongs that have been and are being committed in its name. It would be incorrect to blame Islam for the September 11 attacks, just as it would be to level accusations at Christianity for the Spanish Inquisition. There is a vast difference between a religion and its deliberate distortion. People don’t seem to see a distinction between religion and its intentional corruption by power hungry egomaniacs that use it as a means to an end. That end is very often to achieve political power and dominion over people. Religion itself is always blameless — those who abused its teachings for personal gain are not.

We can no more blame Christianity than we can blame capitalism for the factory owners in China who force children to labour in their factories hour upon hour like slaves. In the instance of the factory owner we can blame greed, not capitalism. Just like we cannot point fingers at Stalin’s atheism or communism for his brutality. Only the lusts for power, greed or just good old madness are to blame.

I am by no means suggesting that a theocracy is the solution to our radar-less leadership. That would be last thing we need. Theocracies often end up being oppressive regimes in their noble but misguided intentions of providing some sort of moral compass for citizens. Simply stated, morality cannot be legislated, only one’s heart can do that. We can put laws against certain basic moral laws like murder and theft, but can we really put one in prison for telling a lie or for having sex before marriage? Obviously not.

If our leaders followed the precepts of the good books, I doubt our land would be in the state it is in. Of course I expect comments that will say what about the verses that call on us to stone sinners, since that too is a religious command. I would say that is the Old Testament. But this is not what I am writing about.

The laws that we put in place, including our highly regarded constitution, which was put in place by some of the brightest legal minds in our country, have no control over conscience — the conscience is the domain of the divine. It is that thing that causes us sleepless nights when we know we have done wrong, even if the written laws claim otherwise. Running away from one’s conscience is virtually impossible. This is where the moral code comes in.

Not to say that it is impossible to be moral while not practicing religion. I will be the first to admit that some areligious people are extremely moral, as some religious are not. In fact, one of my very best friends calls himself an atheist and he is nicer than I am. Much nicer.

Religion, if practiced as it ought to be, without selfish motivation, will mould better civil servants, leaders and by large a more humane society. The Bible warns against “them that make wicked laws: and when they write, write injustice; to rob the needy of justice, and to take what is right from the poor of my people, that widows maybe their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless.” Isaiah 10:1. Where there is corruption this is precisely what happens. It robs from the poor, the widows and the fatherless.

I am sure all major religions share the same basic tenets. In fact, these are the basic teachings of Ubuntu. If one believes that what one is doing is a higher calling than self-enrichment, then they will serve the people, not just a political party or a position. When their conscience calls them to speak out against an injustice they will, regardless of whom speaking out may offend. It is far better to offend a powerful person than it is to go against one’s conscience.

Recently, we have seen on the news that South Africa is suffering something of a moral crisis. This is where religion comes in. People don’t have faith in their leaders anymore; there is a general feeling that there is a moral deficit amongst our leaders. Our leaders lead by example. As much as we would like to think that we are not sheep, unfortunately the vast majority of people are, for it is far safer to follow without question.

The need to distance our politics from religion by any means necessary has created a chasm between governing and the morality of our leaders.

Many of our great leaders were motivated and sustained by their religious faith in their fight against injustice. The great late president of the African National Congress, Chief Albert Luthuli, was a man of the cloth, and I quote from the ANC website, “As a practising Christian, Chief Luthuli genuinely and sincerely believed in the well-being, happiness and dignity of all human beings. Because of his convictions, he sacrificed all prospects of personal gains and comforts and dedicated his life to the cause and service of his fellowmen.”

Oliver Tambo too was a religious man. He did not leave his religion at the door when he fought for his people. Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr amongst others were never shy to use religious language to argue the justness of their cause. Of course there are people who corrupt religious language to justify ill intent.

Gandhi too was a religious man, a Hindi that was also deeply influenced by the words of Christ.

A missionary who went by the name E. Stanley Jones once met with Gandhi and asked, “Mr. Gandhi, though you quote the words of Christ often, why is that you appear to so adamantly reject becoming his follower?”

Ghandi replied, “Oh, I don’t reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

This is the problem with our politics also. So many of our leaders proclaim to fight for a just and prosperous South Africa, but what we see instead are the very same leaders become prosperous while the rest of our countrymen become poorer. Their words are often noble and their actions questionable.

Perhaps, before we can cry out for better leaders, we ought to become better citizens. And that means we must abhor corruption where we see it, speak out against injustice, reject leaders that lead us astray for if we follow them we go over the cliff. The sad reality is that they never go off the cliff, the rest of us do.

Let us be great citizens, only then will we get great leaders.

I will end off with this quote from India’s Jawaharlal Nehru, “If you are to suffer, you should suffer in the interest of the country.”

Let’s debate.

African adopts white child (Credit crunch

The credit crunch has taken it’s toll on struggling bankers in America. Now Africans are adopting white kids from America.

Shilowa on intimidation of COPE members from Jobs

I think I’d be great friends with Julius Malema. Seriously.

And I mean it. I think he is a pretty pleasant and probably funny guy too. I can’t help but imagine exchanging slaps on the back and doubling back in laughter as we have chats about whatever it is that young men talk about. As much as I take issue with some of the things he has said and what he stands for politically, that does not mean that I wouldn’t or shouldn’t get along with him personally.

There is no doubt that some people might take issue with what I just said. Particularly those who see Malema as a fumbling idiot who does not know when to shut up. That would be understandable considering some of the things I have written about him. As people, we tend to have no separation between the public figure and the fact that he is also an average guy who likes to have a drink and talk about girls. Those of us who are not public figures all have friends we disagree with on almost everything – but we don’t stop being friends simply because we disagree. We need to be able to separate the personality from their politics.

I imagine some of my friends would give me odd looks if I told them that I went go-carting with Julius Malema and Jacob Zuma (not that I have, don’t start spreading rumours now).  “How could you hang out with them after all the things they have said?” Well, I would remind those people that in my friendship circles I have friends who are pastors and atheists, friends who are womanisers and friends who have had the same and only girlfriend for the past five years. In our dealings with the complexities of human engagement, we all have these contradictions in our friendship circles. Why then can we not have friends who hold differing political views without being enemies? But that does not mean we can’t be honest in our disagreements with them.

One’s political position does not define who they are; it defines what they stand for politically. We are not our politics. We are people before we have a political position.

Thabo Mbeki is probably not the easiest person in the world to get along with, but that does not mean that one should dislike his politics simply because one does not like him as a person. I imagine being a friend with him requires a lot of work, he must not see you as just a waste of his time if you are to be his friend. I also suspect that once he has brought you into his inner circle you would have great laughs, and probably an intellectually meaningful relationship.

We should not vote for people simply because we like them.  Nor should we not vote for them because we don’t like their personalities. Competence, character and ability seem to run a distant second when people vote, which is most unfortunate. How else can we justify the fact that most voters don’t trust Zuma but somehow he still garners more votes according to opinion polls? I understand that someone is going to comment and say that it’s not him, it’s because of the party.

Like I said, I’d have a drink with Julius, I’d tease him about his political views because I know he is set in his ways. I don’t see him changing them. He would probably tease me about mine too. Much hilarity would ensue I imagine. Naturally I’d have more to laugh about. I’d talk about showers and fake accents amongst other things. I don’t know, maybe I’m just idealistic.

There are many people I agree with on almost every issue yet I cannot stand. Just as there are people who agree with me but just cannot stand me. Understandably, if I were someone else I wouldn’t stand myself either.

Just to make things clear, I’m not ANCist or anything, some of my best friends are in the ANC. I think I’m beginning to sound like a Malema, Bush and Zuma apologist. Having said what I have, I am still voting COPE and I hope you all do.

If you disagree with me, know that you are an enemy

When I wrote the post about making friends with Julius Malema I was making a larger point on agreeing to disagree.
I am disturbed by the manner in which we conduct debate in this country. Disagreeing with a politician or someone in a powerful position earns one unflattering labels. When anybody raises views contrary to our own, we react emotionally and go on the attack. We don’t sit back to consider the possibility that the opposing view might have some value, even if we don’t agree with it. If you happen to work for a government institution and happen to support COPE for example, the days of your employment might be numbered. Our consciences are being bullied – the stomach is used as a weapon.

In our disagreements we are disagreeable. We seem to hold the view that he who disagrees with me must be an enemy. This is how COPE has been treated by the ruling party since it’s inception. And so we employ words most vile, demeaning and, if at all possible, humiliating. We saw examples of this when President Thabo Mbeki wrote his letters attacking the likes of Archbishop Desmond Tutu a few years ago. Of course the president had the best things to say about the archbishop as soon as they shared the view that Jacob Zuma could not be president. Those of you who have read any of my blogs know that I think highly of our former president, just because hold him in high regard ] does not mean I found everything he did or said agreeable.  As citizens we should not be afraid of criticizing our leaders, nor fail to praise them when it is deserved. Not only do you owe it to yourselves but your country and the ideals of democracy and free speech.

I am reminded of Abraham Lincoln, who said during his first inaugural address, perhaps addressing the man he defeated: “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection.” It is my hope that as we debate and comment on the state of the nation, we will be virtuous enough to heed Lincoln’s call for these bonds of affection that should not be broken in the heat of debate. The truth is many of those who left the ANC for COPE are friends with people in the ruling party. So I urge you, whatever side of the fence you are on, let not the bonds affection be broken by the pettiness of politics.

COPE’s presidential candidate Mvume Dandala put this very well during a radio interview when he said, “When you are building an alternative voice you are not trying to create enemies, but to get more people involved in making the country work better.” I hope the members of the ruling party understand this.

In politics, I have come to realize, the virtue of humility seems to have no place; it is seen as a weakness, and arrogance as a strength — how far off the truth that is. He who shouts the loudest is smartest and the strongest. It is sad indeed.

If we carry on this way, it won’t be long before we get to a point where questioning views held by those in leadership positions are regarded as unpatriotic. We have seen this happen in the United States; anyone who spoke up against the war in Iraq was called unpatriotic. We are coming dangerously close. Some comrades in the mass democratic movement have began to use the term “counter-revolutionary” with liberal ease in order to stifle debate. The possible firing of Dr Barney Pityana will set a dangerous precedent. Opposing views are not allowed, or you will be left in the wilderness – that seems to be the message.

As a consequence, men and women of this country will cease to heed their consciences, but rather worship at the altar of the state tender. A friend of mine who disagrees with the ruling party on almost every level cannot and will not admit this in public because he said, “My conscience will not feed me, tenders will.” His life depends on tenders. People like this support the ruling party without any sense of irony. The altar of the tender is that powerful. Can we blame him or judge him for this? We cannot. But what we should try to do to people like this is to convince them that “coming out” preserves the greater good.

Many of us are patriots who love this nation. We say what we think is wrong as one would tell someone one loves dearly, because love dictates that one doesn’t shut up if one thinks that the loved one is driving down a cliff at high speed — even at low speed, for that matter.

Unfortunately some of us have misguided ways of demonstrating their affection for this, the southern-most country on the African continent. It reminds me of an abusive husband who belittles his wife by telling her that she is nothing without him. The cruel lover says this in order to control her. (In our case control is in the form of government jobs and contracts.) When she does leave and manages to succeed, the jealous ex-husband has only unflattering things to say about her.

Since many of us profess to love South Africa, I want to know the following:

How would we treat her if she were a lover?

How would we help her reach her goals?

Would we gloat if she failed and say, ‘We knew you couldn’t do it’?

We need to ask ourselves: How would we treat South Africa if she happened to be our true love?

I am saddened that we strive to feed our obese egos instead of finding ways to improve debate. The more we focus on our fragile egos, the less we focus on how we can help improve the nation.

We have to look deep into ourselves. No one is innocent. Not COPE, not the ANC, or any of the other parties. Our hands aren’t clean. I am a sum of all who agree with me. Those who disagree with me build my character. They are the ones I have to thank for helping me think the way I do.

What will destroy this country is an army of uniformity when it comes to its thinkers. We will die a painful, intellectual death if people perpetuate a certain school of thought because they want to preserve jobs, or because they are too afraid that they might not be able to find employment because they might have expressed an opinion contrary to that of some powerful figure.

We have forgotten the principles on which the country was founded. Instead we spend our days fighting petty battles. We have become a nation of the petty and arrogant. We slice and dice one another. Our internal battles have become so intense that we are slowly forgetting that we are still trying to fight for our position in the global arena. We have become so inward-looking that we have forgotten that we are competing in a global field. Since president Thabo Mbeki left the scene, our global standing has shrunk at an incredible pace. To this day, AU still sends president Thabo Mbeki to the UN to represent it. Those outside our borders see his value. Jesus Christ was right, “Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown.”

Our inward-looking extends to the economy we’re trying to grow. We make it virtually impossible for foreigners to work here. One of the reasons America became such a force to be reckoned with is because it embraced immigrants with open arms. Immigrants come with different ideas. According to Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class, 25% off all high-tech businesses in the US and 50% of all venture-backed companies were started by immigrants.

Dubai is one of the world’s fastest-growing economies because it has no qualms about getting foreign skills. It knows that to be the best, one must get the best. In his book, Florida points out that economies that open up to diverse peoples, immigrants and the likes are much more likely to be innovative and grow because they embrace different ways of thinking.

I am not unmindful of the fact that some will call me idealistic in my thinking. That is the beauty of youth. I am not old enough to know my limits. The reason I have hope for this country is because there are many more young people than older people. We don’t see a reason why we should doubt and limit ourselves.

Please, you are welcome to disagree with me.

Agree to disagree

No means no

No means no

COPE: Andile Mazwai’s brilliant ANC analogy

Zuma: Mpshe and NPA show some balls!

Mr. Mpshe needs to be reminded of a little fact about South Africans this week – we are not a people born of cowards, nor men who place personal ambitions above what needs to be done for the people. We are born of men who stood up when it was more comfortable and beneficial to sit down. We are a people born of the same stuff that made Mandela sacrifice his freedom for 27 years; we are born of women who gave birth to Steve Biko who died bravely writing what he liked and what we have come to love. Biko showed the might of the nib of a pen facing off against the barrel of a gun. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword. We are born of the nameless heroes who died fighting so that we could be free one day. This is what we are made of. Men and women who sacrificed despite the immense power and pressures that could have persuaded lesser men and women to do otherwise.

According to news reports we have been told that the NPA (National Prosecutions Authority) will seek to have the corruption charges against the man who could be president, Jacob Zuma, dropped. One must understand the position and the pressures that face the director of the NPA, Mr. Mpshe. There is the easy way out, drop the charges. By dropping them all that will happen will be wide ranging condemnation from opposition parties, the press and civil society. That’s all. If he decides to go ahead he will be pressured by the ANC in every way imaginable. They might even find dirt on him. Now is not the time for cowardice.

History often calls on those in positions of responsibility to choose to do what’s difficult or unpopular. Allowing Zuma to walk will be a popular decision with the electorate. But is it the right thing to do? The men and women of the NPA have history knocking on their doors. What are they willing to do? Mr. Mpshe, in the words of former American vice president, Al Gore, “Sometimes you have to be willing … to pick the hard right over the easy wrong.” We are told that it is not in the national interests to have Jacob Zuma going to court. It is precisely because it is not in the interests of the nation that he should go to court, so that we can judge for ourselves.

What is the hard right? The hard right is to investigate both Zuma and Mbeki if there is reason to investigate the former president. To drop these charges without having these so called tapes heard in court cannot serve our democracy well. We are being told that the former president has done something wrong, yet he has not been afforded the opportunity to defend himself. By dropping them, by implication, that tells us that there is evidence of wrong doing on Mbeki’s part. Are they going to be charge him yet Zuma hasn’t had his day in court? If there is evidence of interference on Thabo Mbeki’s part that does not mean that there was no wrong doing on Zama’s part either. Investigate both I say.

I suggest that Mr. Mpshe read A Man for All Seasons, a play by Robert Bolt. In it, Sir Thomas More is led to the gallows for refusing to bend to King Henry VIII’s wish to divorce his wife because she could not bear him a son. This is a man who believed in himself and his conscience despite the “national interests” concerns of the king not having a son. In our case, the king is Zuma.

More is a strong advocate for the rule of law in the play, even if it leads to his own execution. When his future son-in-law implores him to arrest a man whose perjury will eventually lead to More’s path to the gallows. More tells him that the man has broken no laws, he even tells him that the devil himself deserves his chance before the courts, “And go he should if he were the Devil himself until he broke the law!” More’s son-in-law is shocked at the idea of affording the Devil the benefit of law, but More is unwavering.

Then he goes on to lecture his future son-in-law, “What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? … And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you – where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s, and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

So, do we really think we can stand upright in the winds that would blow the laws? The laws are there for our protection, that is why it should be and must be applied to all equally without fear or favour. To claim that we are not going to apply the laws because it is not in the “national interest” to do so is to show fear and favour. As the Devil should have his day in court to prove his innocence before his accusers, so must Jacob Zuma. Not forgetting that the law says innocent until proven guilty. The Devil in this case would be innocent excerpt before the eyes of the accusers who have evidence against him. Zuma too is innocent until proven guilty. But he must be afforded the opportunity to prove his innocence before his accusers.

Lest we forget, Jacob Zuma asked for his day in court, yet he has left no legal avenue unturned in order to avoid this day he has been screaming about. Let’s give it to him. He has threatened to spill the beans if he goes to court. Well, if he has bean to spill, let him spill them. And let those who are trained in the art of catching beans catch them. We want everyone responsible to be brought to book. The law should be applied without fear or favour. Mr Zuma, spill the beans! It is in the interests of the nation for you to do so. By saying nothing, you are still participating in the corruption of our government. It means you are aware of wrongdoing but have been willing to sit silently. You sir should not blackmail us.

How can the NPA accept as evidence, illegally obtained information? The wiretapping of a sitting president without the authorization of a judge? Where did these tapes come from? Who authorized the illegal wiretapping of a sitting president? Is that not treason? Why is there no outcry? If a president can be subjected to such blatant abuse of power, what chance do ordinary people like me have? We should have much fear for ourselves.

So far all we have are rumors, hearsay and we have no proof to judge whether the tapes are authentic or not. It is difficult to take these tapes seriously after the so-called “hoax emails” that made the rounds a while back that were wildly circulated amongst the Friends of Jacob Zuma. Then there was “proof” that Bulelani Ngcuka was an apartheid spy. There were no credible witnesses, no credible evidence and no credible facts to support a claim that was clearly designed to intimidate and pressure the former Director of Public Prosecutions. If there has been a conspiracy, it is the one that has been led against Bulelani Ngcuka. Marc Maharaj, and his friends failed to come up with any evidence proving that he was in fact a spy. Then the ANC misled the nation calling a press conference, assuring us, and fooling us into thinking that they were going to address an issue of national importance. National importance turned to be of national importance for the ANC to announce the defection of a little known Cope figure.

Granted, at times, especially in cases like the Zuma case – it is often difficult to tell the difference between prosecution and persecution. When one is prosecuted it is an easy and often necessary form of defense to shout persecution, painting oneself as a victim. Jacob Zuma is too powerful to persecute.

If there is a conspiracy against Zuma it should be proven in a court of law. The defense always states that conspiracies by nature are difficult to prove. Well, don’t make claims you can’t prove or defend. We don’t have any evidence, all we have are innuendos. If former president Thabo Mbeki is implicated, he must have his day in court, like Zuma. What are these national interests they speak of? Are Jacob Zuma’s and Shabir Schaiks interests now considered that highly? The arrogance of the ANC has taken an unprecedented step, where party and personal interests are dressed up as national interests. They can no longer distinguish what is of national interest, this is a clear indication that the ANC believes that it is South Africa. This country is not and does not belong to a political party. It is no wonder Thabo Mbeki was removed in the way he was.

Our nation cannot afford to have a prosecutions authority that is perceived to cave under political, powerful or from the pressures of the privileged. South Africa is becoming accustomed to the insulation of its elite from the law, yet leaves its ordinary down trodden citizenry, the very people it claims to represent to under representation by the law.

We cannot profess to be a truly democratic society when those who are sworn to protect it do everything in their power to subvert it for their own means.

By caving, Mr Mpshe, you are telling us, the children and future leaders, our brothers and sisters that it is acceptable to be a coward. I do not know what it is like to be in your position Mr Mpshe, nor do I wish to be. But you accepted it and you knew what you were getting yourself into, your country needs you, don’t choose the easy path.

To act as if there is nothing you and anyone else can do, as if this has been preordained, written in the stars, is not just giving up on yourself, you are giving up on your country, sir.

It is not written. It is not preordained that Zuma must walk away from these charges. To quote Cassius, in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves…” What happens to Zuma now is not in the stars. It is up to the facts before you Mr. Mpshe. It is your lips that will speak, your mind that will be applied – and it is your hand that will sign the document that decides this country’s fate. Just because you know that you are fighting a losing battle against the ANC does not mean you should cease to throw punches. Throwing in the towel is not an option. We are not a nation of quitters Mr. Mpshe.

The very notion that some individuals have more freedoms and liberties than others is not, should not and must not be accepted. Yet millions of us are willing to sit on our hands and applaud an insult to democracy, civil liberty and the basic tenant that “All are equal before the law.”

We have become victims of our liberation, hostages to our own freedom and slaves to those who think that we owe them for our liberation. I owe my liberty to man and no political party. It belongs to me. None of us owe it to anyone. This slavery to the ANC must come to an end.

We cannot profess to be a truly democratic country when the already, powerful, the already privileged have added privileges before the law. Nor can we boast to have the best constitution in the world when it is not honored. Mr. Mpshe, show us you have balls.

khayav.com
khayav@gmail.com

Zuma: Why people will still vote for the ANC

South Africans remind me of a girl with an abusive boyfriend. He beats (excuse my Xhosa) the shit out of her. Every now and then he tells her “I won’t beat you again, I love you”. They cuddle up and cosy up. Then he beats her up again. The girl knows the relationship is not ideal, it is not the best relationship but keeps making excuses for him and his behaviour. “But he loves me” she keeps telling her friends through broken teeth and ribs.

Then she says: “Anyway before I met him I was down and out and in the dumps. I had nothing. I was a nobody. He made me who I am. He took me in, helped me get a good job and a better education. He introduced me to celebrities, Moet, cigars and all the glitz and glamour. He cares for me even though he gave me a blue eye yesterday and will probably give me another tomorrow. To be fair I owe him.”

She believes in her heart of hearts that she cannot find anyone better. “I am used to him” she tells friends who tell her to get out of the relationship. “I don’t want to get used to someone new all over again.” Then she continues to stay in the abusive relationship where she used to be the significant other and is now the insignificant other. The many trips to the hospital do nothing to dissuade her. Like a perfect gentleman he goes to the hospital to pick her up when she leaves the hospital because he cares. She never lays charges. She is convinced that he still cares because he was sweet enough to pick her up from the hospital.

“He only beats me because he loves me” she tells her friends. Of course by the time she wakes up it’s too late. This is what’s happening to South Africa right now. But we can change this, we only need to want to change the situation bad enough.

How badly do you want to get out of this relationship with the ANC?

My friend the facebook novice

A friend of mine whom I happen to work with finally decided to join the real world – by registering on facebook a couple of months back. A number of us showed him the ropes around this new and wonderfully wonderful world.

One day he budges into my office, completely out of breath and foaming at the mouth. I am so startled that I spill coffee all over myself. Ok, not entirely true because I don’t drink coffee. The point is I would have had I been a coffee drinker. He can’t control his excitement at all. I tell him to take a moment to breath before he says what he has come to tell me. I even go to the water cooler to get him some water. He gulps the water and spills some of it all over himself. I realize that trying to calm him down is an exercise in futility.

He places his hands on my desk and leans over and opens his mouth, there is a hint of a smile. He bursts, “Facebook wants to know what I’m doing right now!” He tells me. Actually he doesn’t tell me, he shouts. He clearly thinks this is directed only at him. I try really hard not to laugh. But I do. Hard. And loud. A few months later I’m still laughing at the thought.

I beat up a cripple once

Posted On April 10, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped 3 responses

Does that make me evil? Before you judge me let me explain myself. The punk was asking for it and I gave it to him, reluctantly I might add.

I grew up in the rural areas kids, I’m sure you can tell by my lack of sophistication. Anyway, I had an altercation with a local village boy who was slightly older. I think he had polio because he wore leg braces and his right leg was a whole lot shorter than the other. As a result one of his shoes had a really thick and heavy sole. The weight on his right shoe caused him to drag it around. I never understood why the weaker and shorter leg had all that extra work to do than the perfectly healthy one. It is a metaphor for life I guess, the less fortunate carry all the load. It seemed like it was being punished for not being strong enough.

When he walked, he sort of half dragged his leg. With every step he took, he looked as if he was on the verge of tripping and falling because of the severity of the limp. I have to describe what he was like so you know that this was not a fight that should have happened.

As I have said, I don’t recall what the fight was about but it happened. I remember him walking towards me with clenched fists, limping severely. There was a group of say, 10 other boys my age. I kept saying to him, “Look, I can’t fight you and I don’t want to fight you.” But he kept coming after me. Well, I didn’t want to lose face in front of all these village boys, I knew that I would lose respect and I would be known as the boy who ran away from a cripple. The consequences of that is that every boy in the village would think he could take his chances with me.

So I stood my ground. He threw a fist at me and missed. It was easy to duck because, well, he was slow and his leg caused him to telegraph each swing of his fists. While I ducked I would say, “Dude,” (obviously in Xhosa) “I don’t want to fight you.” I got tired of ducking and diving. I decided to end this thing once and for all. I punched him in the face and he fell. I remember feeling so bad that I helped him up. He gets up and swings again, I swing back and he falls down again. I help him up again he still swings! The audacity! I punch him one more time and once again, he collapses into a heap and this time I don’t help him and I tell him I don’t want to fight him and then I walked away. Does this make me evil?

Breath

World record breath holder

World record breath holder

Why I’m a$king for a raise

A few years ago I wrote my then employers the following note asking for a raise (during a recession). I got it.

Before I go into the reasons I would like to thank you for taking time from your busy day to read these lines on this particularly trivial issue. Ok, it’s not as insignificant to me as I am making it seem, I’m sure you can tell by the mere fact that I have decided to write about it. Ha ha ha! Excuse me for laughing out of turn, I am a tad bit nervous. The second thing I would like to do is apologise for the uninspired headline. Please don’t start wondering why I think I should get a raise based on this poor display of what I am paid to do. This is just to convince you that giving me a raise is not such a bad idea.

Anyway, here goes.

1. I am still single. This situation it seems won’t change until I am mobile. Naturally a bulging wallet (which it is not at this point) will help rectify this situation.

2. I am short. Being short and car-less really puts me at an added disadvantage.

3. Having a car will go a long way in helping me achieve one of my goals, that of acquiring a wife. Did I say “acquire”? I’m sorry. I guess what I’m trying to say is that I need to acquire cows for you know what. These cows aren’t cheap these days you know. (For those of you who aren’t South African I need to explain the cow story. We pay cows, now it’s money, to brides parents. This is done in order to establish a relationship with the future in laws. It’s a long story)

4. I have also started to notice a rather disturbing trend. My sneakers are starting to wear out. Obviously this means I need to buy new ones. As you know, everywhere is within walking distance if you have the right shoes, ha ha ha! Oh boy, there goes that nervous laugh again!

5. Have you noticed the price of everything lately? Outrageous! Not only do we have to pay for the food but for the shopping bag as well!

6. I know what you are thinking. You think I am selfish, all I think about is myself. But I am not. I won’t be spending my larger cheque solely on myself. I will make sure that some of the loot goes to the taxman, tipping waitresses (particularly the pretty ones) and car guards (assuming of course this is made possible).

7. No, I will not give any to the street kids. I am not plagued by feelings of white guilt because I’m not! Instead I will give a generous percentage to charity. And there is one particular charitable organisation I have in mind, the National Lottery. They do a great job in distributing money to all sorts of charitable causes like turning ordinary Joe Soaps into millionaires. A truly noble cause.

8. Yes, it’s true, money can’t buy me happiness, but it will buy me a whole lot of shallow satisfaction!

I hope you will find my arguments compelling and persuasive enough to consider them and of course, to discuss the issue with me. Till we talk. Oh, by the way, I art directed this myself.

This message is brought to you by the Society for the Enrichment of Khaya.

Why I endorsed COPE

As an official egomaniac I thought that it was incumbent upon me to make my position clear given the current state of our nation. The desire to write this endorsement is also driven by the false notion that people might take what I have to say seriously. As the title suggests, I fully endorse the Congress of the People (Cope).

I have defended the ANC on numerous occasions on the “internets”, particularly on the video-sharing website known as YouTube. I defended it not because I always thought it was right, but because I felt that was my duty to defend the ruling party whenever I heard people misrepresent it and indirectly, the country. My defense of the ANC and the government got me into some heated exchanges with some fellow South Africans. I have even taken heat from right wing racists. (I’ve always wondered why are there no left wing radical racists? Just a thought). In fact, some racists would use the race card on me! They would call me racist because I chose to defend the African National Congress. I digress.

I have even gone as far as to say that if Jacob Zuma does become the president of the Republic it wouldn’t be the end of the world because the world’s leading ratings agencies like Moody’s and others said that there would be no major policy shifts if Zuma takes over. I said these things after Polokwane. As uncertain as I was of a Zuma presidency at the time, I thought it prudent to give the man and the new leadership a chance after his camp was elected into office.

I went on to quote Warren Buffet who once said, “You should invest in a business that even a fool can run, because someday a fool will.” I made the example that South Africa has a strong constitution and an independent judiciary. So even if a fool runs the country it will be fine because of the structures in place. I was also fully aware of the fact that some people would deliberately twist my words and imply that I called Jacob Zuma a fool.

I have even gone as far as to say that white people needed to join the ANC and stop moaning so that they can change it if they don’t like it. If you complain from the sidelines, nothing will change I said. I was taken to task for making these suggestions. But these suggestions stimulated the kind of debate I had hoped they would on YouTube.

I said all those things because I believed them at time. Indeed the ANC will change to what it was meant to be, perhaps even better than what it was meant to be, but it won’t happen next year or tomorrow. The ANC won’t just change. When it finally decides to change it will be too late. It will be because it will be forced to. The most dynamic organisations are the ones that change before they have to.

I joined the Youth League because I believed that it was better to be involved than to complain about Fikile Mbalula. If I was part of the YL then I could make my voice heard and ensure that the next Youth League president was of a better quality than him. It was my strong belief that being part of the ANC was the only way one could have a voice and change it from the direction I believed it was headed. Unfortunately this did not happen.

I will give an account of an ANCYL meeting I attended where the chairperson of my then branch opened up a discussion on some outlandish statement that Julius Malema had made. He asked if anyone had anything to say. As I was a new member I thought I’d wait until someone said something before I expressed my views. No hand went up for about a minute. “If no one has something to say I have something to say.” I said. I suggested that my branch write a letter to him and let it be known that we distance ourselves from what he had said, we thought it was unbecoming of a disciplined member of the organization. After I spoke all hands went up without hesitation. They did not agree with me because our branch would lose benefits, it would be targeted as an undesirable branch that goes against the president. What I found puzzling was that no one contradicted the merits of my case against Julius Malema, they were worried about the benefits the branch and the members stood to lose.

Only one other person stood up to agree with me. Then I stated that one of the key tenants of our branch was moral regeneration. How moral were we being if we agreed that Julius Malema was wrong but we are too worried about losing benefits? What is more moral I asked, the fear of losing benefits or standing for what we claim to believe in on paper? What is moral about giving in to fear I asked. I lost the battle.

Needless to say, this incident and others convinced me that people were afraid of disagreeing with the higher ups for fear of retribution. I could no longer be part of a political party that had sowed such fear amongst its own.

As you can imagine, it was with great pain and reluctance that I decided to leave.

The reason I endorse Cope is because of a Martin Luther King quote Barack Obama often used during his campaign. He would say, “I am running because of what Dr King referred to as ‘the fierce urgency of now.’” Obama never quoted the whole passage; he always quoted those five words, “the fierce urgency of now.”

Allow me to quote Dr King’s entire passage: “We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood-it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, “Too late.” There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect.”

I don’t want my generation to be in that invisible book that says we were not vigilant and that we were neglectful when we saw that we were headed towards a cliff.

As Dr King so eloquently put it, “There is such a thing as being too late.” Zimbabwe is a case in point. When the people of Zimbabwe decided to stand up, it was too late.

I believe that we cannot wait for another five years for the ANC to change. The world is in a global financial crisis. We cannot afford to wait when the poor get poorer. We cannot afford to wait another five years for justice to be served differently depending on one’s political standing. We cannot afford to wait another five years for the ruling party to remove the president from office at a whim. We cannot afford to have the entire machinery of the ruling party dedicated to making sure that an individual never gets his day in court. We cannot afford to wait when our judges are being called counter revolutionaries. We cannot afford to be too late.

Lest we forget that the future president of this country lacks judgment. He knowingly had sex with an HIV positive woman – without a condom. I cannot entrust the future of my country to someone who makes such reckless decisions, nor to men and women who decided that he should be the one to head the ANC. Make no mistake about it, I still think that he is a humble, likeable guy, but that is not enough for my vote. I have to be responsible with my mark on Wednesday.

Now, some of us have decided to vote for the ruling party because we know it will win. It’s human nature. No one wants to feel like a loser. Some are just voting for bragging rights so that, come Wednesday or Thursday, they can say they won. Again, it’s human nature, we can’t blame them for that. People by nature are followers we have a herd mentality. We want to feel like we are part of the winning team. But I would rather lose with a clear conscience than win with a guilty one.

I want to be able to say to my children that when the time came for me to stand up, I did. And not only did I stand, I walked and ran. Because standing is not enough; acting is what counts.

I support Cope’s call of having a president elected by the people. Right now, the people are under the impression that they elect a president when in fact it is parliament that does.

I endorse Cope because it will be accountable to the people. The leadership will not tell the people what to do; it is the people that will tell the leadership what to do. The people lead the movement.

I support Cope because of its instance that there should be a separation between party and state. We have seen that the ruling party sees itself as the state by how it has pressured the NPA into dropping charges against the president of the ruling party. This is the main reason that Cope has a separate presidential candidate and party president. The party president will go around the country making sure that those Cope leaders who are in parliament are actually delivering what they were sent there to do. It’ not just about being in touch with people when their vote is needed.

I support Cope because it believes that the highest of the high and the lowest of the low should get equal treatment before the law.

I support Cope because it believes in affirmative action without reservation. Cope wants to make sure that the policies written on paper are implemented more effectively. It believes that blacks should not just be filtered into junior positions, but should be mentored and equipped with skills so that they can fill senior management positions faster. It calls for the end of employing unqualified people for positions when there are many blacks who have the necessary skills for those jobs and to quote my friend Anele Mdoda, “This eliminates ‘oh you were hired, just because you black’ attitude that many face on daily basis when they actually are competent and excel at their jobs.”

I support Cope because it believes that a party that is truly interested in serving the people will not threaten them by saying that they will lose grants if they don’t vote for it.

I support Cope because it will be South Africa’s first truly diverse political party, where all members of our country will be represented in their numbers. The enthusiasm for Cope spans racial, religious and class lines.

One of the things that impressed me the most about Cope was when one of its youth leaders said something off colour about the president of the ruling party. An apology was issued. There were no excuses, no attempt to spin what had been said, there was no going to a laager to defend the indefensible. Cope did not wait for other political parties to speak out before an apology was issued. We cannot say the same thing of the ruling party. We waited for months for an apology for some of the statements that were made by its youth leader. Even the apology was a non-apology; they went on to blame the media. One of the things I’ve learnt is never ruin an apology with an excuse.

Cope is not perfect. No political party is. It would be a mistake to believe that there is. Even churches cannot claim that. But what I hope Cope will do, is at least to try to make this country move forward, look ahead and not backwards. I know that it will give the people of this nation hope that there are better days ahead for us as a nation.

These are just some of the reasons I endorse Cope.

http://twitter.com/khayadlanga

Funny t shirt. From Christ, Gandhi, Mandela to Zuma.

Christ, Gandhi, King, Mandela, Obama, Zuma Ouch!

I was out clubbing when I saw some guys wearing this.

My friend, the bad storyteller.

Posted On April 28, 2009

Filed under random

Comments Dropped 6 responses

I have a friend, let’s call him friend A. Yes, I know that comes to you as a surprise but I do have a friend. The fact that I have to pay him a fee to rent his friendship is besides the point, the point is I am like you. I have someone I call buddy.

Unfortunately there is one thing that troubles me about him. He is a horribly atrocious storyteller. I thought I was bad, but man, A sucks! If there were an Olympics for worst storyteller in the world he would win gold. No contest. Allow me to tell you one of his stories – word for word.

Once upon a time, my good friend A and another friend (who shall remain friend B for the purposes of this story) were chatting about random stuff. Anyway, to cut a long narrative short, A interrupts us and says, “Guys, did you watch the news last night?”
“No,” we say.
“Well, there is this rich guy in France.” Pause. “He’s in trouble.”
Silence.
More silence.
Even more silence.

I suddenly come to the realisation that that’s all there is to the story. “There is this rich guy in France. He is in trouble.” That’s it. No more.

“Is that it?!” I ask with incredulous irritations. He nods.

One thing I gotta give him though is that he sure tells a memorable pointless story. After all these years, six years to be precise, I still remember it. “There is this rich guy in France.” Pause. “He is in trouble.”

I promise, it’s his real name

Posted On April 28, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized
Tags:

Comments Dropped 5 responses

photo

I went to a restaurant some time last year. I saw one of the waiter’s name tags and I asked to take a pic of his name because I was afraid no one would believe me. So there.

Women want men to lie to them

I wrote this a while back for True Love Babe when they were still around. It was going to be a regular column (until they went defunct) based on a fictitious relationship between two fictitious characters I named Anonymous Boyfriend and Anonymous Girlfriend. All the columns would be written from the perspective of Anonymous Boyfriend

I feel it is my fundamental duty as a man to lie. Before you bite my head off allow me to explain myself.

I was sitting in front of my TV wishing I had a bigger one (bigger TV that is) with Anonymous Girlfriend a few days ago. She was leaning against my chest when she asked me a peculiar question. “Do you find other women attractive?” When I first heard the question I wasn’t sure whether it was an innocent question or not. And so I avoided answering it by saying, “Sure I find Beyonce attractive.” I knew that answer would not get me in trouble because she’d laugh. I was wrong. She didn’t laugh. Instead she leaned away from me and looked into my eyes and said, “You know what I mean.”

As soon as those words left her lips my mind went to the races. I wondered about many things. Was this a trap? If I say yes I find other women attractive will I be signing my own death warrant? And if I say no I don’t find other women attractive surely she will know that I am lying, mainly because Anonymous Girlfriend always knows when I am being economical with the truth. What to do, what do to do? I could only think of one man who could extricate himself from this position without getting into any sort of trouble. That man would be King Solomon. Unfortunately he is no longer with us, which meant that I could not consult him for desperately needed advice. It was at that point that I prayed and asked for guidance and wisdom from above in order to navigate this treacherous terrain.

“Lord,” I prayed, “won’t you grant me the wisdom to lie to Anonymous Girlfriend. Won’t you give me the strength to tell her that I don’t find other women attractive? I know that I shouldn’t be asking you to help me lie because well, you say in your book lying is a bad thing. Please, won’t you do me this favour just this one time? Won’t you help me by blinding her to my lie?” All this happened in my mind in about half a second. Perhaps she noticed my hesitation because she said, “Be honest. You don’t have to lie, being attracted to other people is perfectly normal.” I couldn’t believe my ears upon hearing that. I was free to tell truth. “Yes, I find other women attractive.” There was a brief silence. I became uncomfortable.

Then she asked me another question about her best friend, “Do you find Anonymous Best Friend attractive?”

Perhaps I should go into a bit more detail about Anonymous Girlfriend’s best friend. She is hot. Really, really hot. Did I say hot? I think I did. Since I had been given the freedom to tell the truth I felt comfortable. Now, don’t get me wrong, Anonymous Girlfriend is one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen. She is gorgeous. Since I had been given carte blanche I was honest. “Oh yes, I think she’s really hot.” I said trying to sound nonchalant but I think the words came out of my mouth more enthusiastically than I intended. To this day I have no idea what happened next because Anonymous Girlfriend let go off my hand, grabbed her bag, her car keys, opened the door, walked out. All I was left with was the sound of the door banging behind her. What the hell just happened I asked my puzzled self. I walked after her and told that she said to tell the truth. Silence.
“But you said it’s normal for people to find others attractive.” Silence.
She got into her car and drove off. She might have even tried to run me over. But I exaggerate. The point I’m making here is that she was upset.

As she drove off, it was at that point that I had a revelation from the depths of my spirit, “I should have lied. I should have said she is an ugly fat pig.” I thought to myself. Even if she had been able to tell that I lied perhaps that would have been the best thing for me to do. What Anonymous girlfriend failed to hear in her moment of irrationally (of which there are plenty) is that I never said that Anonymous Best Friend was more attractive than her. I just said that she was pretty.

I have come to the following conclusion then. Even when women say that they want us to tell them the truth about certain things, they don’t really want it. They hope we tell a lie. Even if they know. I have heard many dudes tell the same story I just told. They are implored to tell the truth only to be punished for saying, “Yes honey, I think those jeans do make you look fat” even though the girl in question had requested honesty. The common reply is, “So you’re calling me fat?” There is no winning.

If there are any men reading this right now I would like you to join with me and bow your head in prayer. Let us pray. “Give us strength and foresight; O Lord to know when we are asked tricked questions that might get us into unnecessary trouble. You know Lord we can’t lie on our own. So we ask that you grant us the skill of lying when the need arises. And finally Lord, I pray for myself now. Lord, in case Anonymous Girlfriend sees this won’t you make her believe me when I say someone else wrote this? Amen.”

This toilet sign seems cruel, but funny

photo2

I saw this very funny toilet sign at Design Quaters, Fourways a few months back. As I am prone to do, I took a pic. Looks like they are laughing at the disabled guy. Not nice guys. Why are you laughing the guy in a wheelchair? lol

Mandela and Hitler assume an uncanny identical pose

mandela-hitlre-2

I was at a friend’s house when I saw a book with Hitler on the cover. The first thing that struck me was how similar his pose was to Mandela’s when he went to visit is old cell on Robbin Island. I decided to combine the pictures in order to contrast what each one of them represents. Both men evoke strong emotions.

I know that some people may find it offensive that I’d put the two together in the same picture. The message I’m trying to bring here is that you can both be visionaries, but it all depends on whether that vision is to build bridges or to destroy them. We all know who wins.

My boss blows up my computer with a firecracker

Posted On May 7, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped leave a response

There used to be YOU in YouTube

YouTube used to be a community where people from across the world made videos and communicated. But big money came in and killed the community. It’s a bit a big chain store killing the small local shops that used to be in a community. I understand the need for YouTube to make money, but should it be at the expense of a community?

Polite friends

We were friends
Maybe not
Maybe more
Maybe less
Maybe between friendship and what would never be

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

Feelings lingered
Dangled
Unsaid
Unspoken
Obvious secrets

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

We smiled
Some secret
Invisible kisses
Never shared
But wished for

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

On Saturdays we saw movies
But really saw each other
We held hands
That were never held

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

“I adore you” we would say
Three polite words
Burying three bolder words
That would never be said

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

You sat on my desk
You wore my shades
You sent me poetry
You wrote me a poem

“I wear you like an etching in my blood
For you will always be with me”

Polite friends
With Polite feelings
And Polite words

I’ve become a born-again South African.

I have finally decided to break my self-imposed silence on our recent elections.

The first thing I would like to do is congratulate our new president, Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma. Whatever one thinks of the man, you have to admire how he managed to clear every single obstacle in his way. I know that many people have mixed feelings about him. Whatever you feel for the man, it is imperative we support him because if we don’t we won’t be able to solve the unemployment problem.

It is for this reason that I believe we need to look forward to his success as president. If he fails, we fail. If he is a disaster, we become one. If he succeeds, you succeed. Wishing him to fail will be counter-productive to the goals we have as a country. We have to put the country above whatever personal feelings we may have towards him. Our support does not mean we blindly follow every decision he makes.

As some of you may or may not know, and in the interests of full disclosure, I would like to point out that I campaigned for and voted for Cope.

It is a mistake for Cope supporters to wish that the president or his government fail. Our success as a party should not be built on the failures of the ANC but rather on our ability to communicate a superior message and an improved articulation of our positions. To wish that the government fails so that we can succeed is self-defeating. It puts party before country. We cannot afford that. When Barack Obama took over, one of America’s most famous conservative radio talk-show hosts, Rush Limbaugh, said he wanted Obama to fail. Of course, if Obama does fail Limbaugh will not suffer because he is a multi-millionaire but those people who lose their homes will feel the failure.

During these past few months I have become a born-again South African. We live in a truly beautiful, surprising, resilient country. My faith in this country was renewed by the debates I saw, the interest young people showed in politics for the first time. We live in a new South Africa again. It is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. But it is being perfected every day by those who know they have a responsibility to the country, by those who know their success depends on the political success of the country.

There is something remarkable about how the ANC achieved its overwhelming victory. And I am not talking about the huge percentage it got. I’m talking about the small percentage it did not.

Think about it. They needed less than 1% to achieve a two-thirds majority. So, what is so remarkable about that you may ask? They could have cheated so easily just to get that, yet they chose not to. That is evidence that we live in a true democracy. This small, yet great, temptation was resisted. This achievement must be commended. We just have to be grateful our votes weren’t counted by M-Net. On the flipside one can also say why congratulate them on doing the right thing? As Chris Rock once said: “Some men like to brag about never having been to jail. Well, you’re not supposed to go to jail!”

So what’s next? We cannot talk about what’s next before we have talked about what has been. The future is always connected to the past. We should not talk about the future while we forget about the past. It is often said, “forget the past”. “No,” I say. To remember the past is to pay tribute to the future. The past may shape us but we decide who we become. Maybe the real question is what kind of a people are we deciding to become? We are either shackled by the past or freed from it. We are either shaped by it or we use it to shape the future. The choice ladies and gentlemen is ours. First as individuals, then as a people. The destiny of this country is not written for us. We chose the kind of future we want. And the people chose a Zuma future.

As a people we need to realise that we come from different pasts but what we all want is the same future — a better one. I would like to drive through Khayelitsha without being assaulted by shacks all dressed up in poverty and nowhere to go. Many of the residents there see a bleak future for themselves, a vicious, poverty-stricken future, with no way to escape, except through crime, drugs and violence. The social consequences of this endemic poverty are too depressing to enumerate. We don’t want that to happen. We want to see all South Africans employed. And we as South Africans can have solutions to these problems, they are not going to take a generation to solve, but we can’t just close our eyes and pretend there is no problem.

If there is one man living in a shack, then I am not yet free. If there is a farm worker who still endures being called a “kaffir” by his bass on a daily basis then I am not yet free. If there is a white farmer killed simply because he is white then I am not yet free. We are not free. If I bribe a traffic officer for my freedom, then I am not free. All of us are still striving towards freedom.

We have to hold our government accountable. We must question them without fear or favour. We need a youthful, respectful academic militancy. We need to cultivate the celebration of intellectualism. There has been a rise of anti-intellectualism in our political discourse. Anti-intellectualism is something new, we cannot accept it and to abandon it is to insult the Sol Plaatjies, Oliver Tambos and Steve Bikos who celebrated intellect.

For us to turn this into an extraordinary country will take a few ordinary people to take ordinary steps. If we all do what we are supposed to do, what we must do, we can turn this into an extraordinary country. Small things like not jumping a red robot. Refusing to bribe a traffic officer, refusing to bribe that home affairs official, demanding good, not great, just good service at the restaurant. Doing our best at work. Starting a business instead of being employed. All these small ordinary actions will turn us into an extraordinary country. If we have high ethical standards for ourselves, then we have every right to have high expectations of our leaders. But as long as we continue to cut corners, lie, cheat and bribe, we deserve the leaders we get.

So, what is next? The truth is we don’t truly know what is next. None of us are prophets. The important thing is we all know what needs to be done. But what’s even more important is doing what needs to be done. What young people need to do is turn us into a generation that future South Africans will talk about, we should be a tribute to the 1976 generation that fought despite insurmountable odds. The odds we face today are nothing like the ones they did. Maybe we are not desperate enough to see a great South Africa. Maybe we are too comfortable to change anything. Maybe we are not restless enough. Natives of South Africa, be restless, the country needs you to be.

Old South African flag flag must be banned

As I celebrated the emphatic victory of the Blue Bulls over the Chiefs on Saturday, a bad taste was left in my mouth when I saw an old South African flag waving in stadium. That flag is right up there with the use of the word Kaffir as far as I’m concerned. If you wave that flag in front of me that’s what you are calling me. Having said that, I also know that not everyone who was there was glad that happened.

Did I enjoy the victory still? Yes. Did I celebrate? Yes. Was I proud of a South African team? Yes. But that does not take away from the fact that the flag dampened the mood over the occasion. In one second, it took us to the past. It has no future in the new South Africa.

The only place that flag must be in is a museum. I know that it still flies over the Castle of Good Hope in Cape Town, that is understandable, it is history. We cannot pretend that flag never existed, but we cannot hide the waving of the flag behind Freedom of Expression. Like any freedom we enjoy, Freedom of Expression has limits. A freedom with no limits leads to anarchy.

Chapter 2, section 16 on our Bill of Rights says the following about the Freedom of Expression:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes ­
1. freedom of the press and other media;
2. freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;
3. freedom of artistic creativity; and
4. academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

2. The right in subsection (1) does not extend to ­
1. propaganda for war;
2. incitement of imminent violence; or
3. advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.

That flag will incite violence in the right place and at the right time. It also advocates hatred based on race and ethnicity. Banning that flag does not only protect those who are subjected to what it advocates, but those who advocate the hate it symbolizes too. Imagine what would happen to that guy if he were to wave that flag in a Kaiser Chiefs VS Orlando Pirates match. I am all for Freedom of Expression, but it can’t go unchecked. It must have limits.

I believed then just as I do now that the people who were around the flag carrier should have removed it from whoever was waving it by force. Remaining silent and doing nothing about the flag might be viewed as an endorsement of what it represents even if those who were around the flag carrier were repulsed by the man’s actions. In the words of Martin Luther King Junior, “In order for evil to triumph, good people do nothing.” We all know what it stands for. It stands for the subhumanising of people of colour, racism, oppression, torture and everything that was wrong and immoral about the previous regime.

We could make the mistake of reacting out of emotion and claim that all white rugby supporters are racist and therefore supported the flag waver. The truth is we know better than that.

If the Germans can ban the waving of the Nazi flag I don’t understand why we cannot do the same.

President Obama kills fly (Obama is a Ninja)

If you thought he couldn’t hurt a fly, you have anther think coming.

Al Sharpton’s Speech at Michael Jackson Memorial

Paris Jackson cries at Michael Jackson memorial

Posted On July 7, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped leave a response

We had him, Dr Maya Angelou’s poem for Michael Jackson

Posted On July 7, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped leave a response

Beloveds, now we know that we know nothing
Now that our bright and shining star can slip away from our fingertips like a puff of summer wind
Without notice, our dear love can escape our doting embrace
Sing our songs among the stars and and walk our dances across the face of the moon
In the instant we learn that Michael is gone we know nothing
No clocks can tell our time and no oceans can rush our tides
With the abrupt absence of our treasure
Though we our many, each of us is achingly alone
Piercingly alone
Only when we confess our confusion can we remember that he was a gift to us and we did have him
He came to us from the Creator, trailing creativity in abundance
Despite the anguish of life he was sheathed in mother love and family love and survived and did not more than that
He thrived with passion and compassion, humor and style
We had him
Whether we knew who he was or did not know, he was our’s and we were his
We had him
Beautiful, delighting our eyes
He raked his hat slant over his brow and took a pose on his toes for all of us and we laughed and stomped our feet for him
We were enchanted with his passion because he held nothing
He gave us all he had been given
Today in Tokyo, beneath the Eiffel Tower, in Ghana’s Blackstar Square, in Johannesburg, in Pittsburgh, in Birmingham, Alabama and Birmingham England, we are missing Michael Jackson
But we do know that we had him
And we are the world.

Eternal Moonwalk

This has to be the best tribute to Michael Jackson at them moment. Loving it. All you have to do is post a video of yourself mooning walking  to www.eternalmoonwal.com and it will be joined to other vids.

If you can’t have a Louis Vuitton branded Bag, have Louis Vuitton branded house

Posted On July 14, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped 5 responses

-1

We live in a country. As one normaly does. But it is an interesting country. Not every country is. This person decided that if they can’t have a Louis Vuitton bag, then they will live in a Louis Vuitton branded house instead.  This is how an inaccessible brand becomes accessible. A Louis Vuitton bag probably costs more than this house. I love this.

The Terrible Love Triangle: Men, Women and Money*

Posted On July 28, 2009

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments Dropped 2 responses

Don’t blame her if she’s only interested in your money – not if you’re the one defining yourself by your possessions

Hey you, sitting in front of a computer. Yes, you. How did I know you were reading this on a computer? I’m psychic. Anyhow, moving right along to more important issues, like women. And money. More specifically, women, men and money. It’s a terrible triangle. You know how it is – a man will chase after money in order to chase women. Then he gets women who love his money, but just tolerate him. He can’t be jealous of his money, because money is an innate object that evokes all sorts of reactions from people. This reminds me of an ad that Samuel L. Jackson did for a bank – in it he talks about money, and asks: “Is money evil? If money was a chicken, would the chicken be evil?” Money is not evil – it is what we use it for that can be evil.

One of the great tragedies of life is that our first instinct is to refuse to listen to our instinct – instead we listen to our fragile and often limp egos (otherwise also known as the male genitalia). Any man who thinks with his you-know-what deserves whatever comes his way. Don’t get me wrong, there are times when it is appropriate to think with it, but 98% of the time men use it to think, it’s not.

Most of the time we deserve the kind of women we end up with. The messages we send out gets us who we end up with. Many guys will meet a beautiful girl in a club, wearing the shortest skirt, and think she must be easy. Meanwhile, she’s on the look out for a dude who will splash out the most money on her for the night.

If you think that by flashing your wallet you will get a great woman, the one you really need, then you have a broken wallet and heart coming. You will label all women as selfish, greedy female dogs (my mother taught me not to cuss). We get the women we deserve. Show her your brain, not your wallet. Your heart, not your credit card. If she can’t accept your brain, then she doesn’t deserve your wallet. That’s the way it should be. If you show her the wallet, then she is in love with it not you. If you get treated like an ATM machine, it’s not her fault, it’s yours for allowing your junior member below the belt to do all your thinking for you.

Once at a club that I shall not name, I met a gentleman by the bar – I will call him BEE Guy, because that’s what he looked like. BEE Guy was relatively young and well put together. He started a conversation with me, and told me about the obvious: all the beautiful women who were at the club. I agreed with him, and just nodded every now and then, because I couldn’t hear what he was saying over the loud music. At some point he lent closer and said: “You know, picking them up would be so much easier if we were allowed to drive in here in our cars.” I was shocked by what I heard. Obviously BEE Guy couldn’t count on his charms or charisma. All he could rely on was his money. What defined him was his stuff. Money. Car. And more stuff.

Allow me to quote the obscenely wealthy old white guy George Soros – he is someone who can speak on the subject of money and the importance we place upon it with far greater authority than I can. I quote: “Unsure of what they stand for, people increasingly rely on money as the criterion of value. What is more expensive is considered better … People deserve respect and admiration because they are rich. What used to be a medium of exchange has usurped the place of fundamental values, reversing the relationship postulated by economic theory. What used to be professions have turned into businesses. The cult of success has replaced a belief in principles. Society has lost its anchor.”

We define character by how much we have and the kind of cars we drive, in order to get a certain kind of woman, to impress people you don’t even like! What’s the point? If you lured a women with your wallet instead of your personality, if she likes your stuff more than she likes you, she not a … err … female dog, she’s doing what you taught her to do. A real man will be confident in who he is, not what he has. If he happens to have money, power and everything else, that’s a bonus.

*originally appeared on http://www.destinyman.com/blogs/khaya6239/archive/2009/07/07/the-terrible-love-triangle-men-women-and-money.aspx

The Bermuda Triangle of Christian generosity: Truth is indeed stranger than fiction

I don’t keep my skeletons in a closet, I keep them in a suitcase. It’s much easier to flee with a suitcase in hand when the authorities come. This way you can run away with your evidence. This is why I prefer suitcases.

When I lived in Cape Town, a friend of mine used to keep his condoms in his suitcase because he was too embarrassed to keep them anywhere near where his elderly cleaning lady would see them. From what he told me I gathered that she was too old to be the same age as his mother, but too young to be his grandmother’s age. She was that age in African culture that doesn’t permit you to tell her what to do, even though she works for you. I digress, as usual. I blame this on my short attention spa…

Mine, the suitcase that is, has a far more interesting story than condom storage. It had been stolen or lost and I found it under the most unbelievable circumstances — worthy of an episode of Ripley’s Believe It or Not.

The suitcase in question was my mother’s pride and joy. She was proud of a lot of things she had, but this suitcase was rarely used. It was used on special occasions, for special trips, much like the special cups, plates and cutlery that only ever saw the light of day when there were super-special visitors. When I left Mdantsane (a township just outside East London, famous for producing boxing champions, the likes of Welcome Ncitha, Bungu and others) many years ago to go study advertising in the bustling metropolis of Cape Town in the Western Cape, she gave it to me. There was no need to lecture me to look after it because I knew how she loved it.

Cut to two years later when I had to leave it in my church for safe keeping until I could find new accommodation.

One day, after many months I went back to the church to collect it from storage. It was not there. The rapture perhaps? I wondered. I was assured that no rapture had taken place. No one knew where it was. It had mysteriously vanished in the Bermuda Triangle of the church. I assumed it had either been stolen or had disappeared in the Bermuda Triangle of Christian generosity – with other people’s stuff. I figured someone saw a suitcase filled with clothes and decided to give it away. My heart sank. What would I tell my mother? I was not worried about the clothes. I was worried about the suitcase.

For the next year, whenever I went home my mother would ask me where it was. I would tell her it was in Cape Town, of course I never told her I didn’t know where in Cape Town. I think she knew something had happened to it.

It was a dark, stormy Saturday night. Seriously. It was a dark and stormy night the day before I found it under the most unbelievable circumstances, Steven Spielberg couldn’t come up with a story line like this. It was dark, because that tends to happen at night. Stormy though is not something that happens that often at night. The winds howled, branches snapped off trees, dogs whimpered in the unusual weather. Little did I know that when I woke up the next day I would find my long-lost suitcase.

As I was getting ready for church that Sunday morning I got an SMS informing myself along with all the members of my church that there would be no service that morning. There had been a tornado that had ripped people’s homes apart in Manenberg and Gugulethu. It was our duty as members of the church to help people move their belongings and give clothes to those who had lost everything. And so, I went to my wardrobe and put on my Sunday worst. I could foresee a lot of physical labour ahead. Off I went for my Christian duties.

To cut a long narrative short, after moving furniture and rubble from four affected homes I was summoned to a fifth house. It was in this house where I would find the long-lost suitcase. Perhaps I should narrate this part in the present tense.

I step into the typical township four-roomed RDP house with a sense of purpose, if not a little tired from the manual labour I had just endured. The first thing I see in this humble home, which had been humbled even further by nature’s unforgiving force, are three broken bricks on a dented wet stove. Where the roof used to be is a blue innocent sky, pleading not guilty. My eye sees something familiar in the bedroom. It is a bedspread. It looks remarkably like the one I used to have. What are the chances, I think to myself. But, right next to the bed is my mother’s suitcase. It is soaking from last night’s rain. I say nothing. I help move various items out of the house to an unscathed neighbour’s house. My mind starts working.

Dilemma. What do I do? These people have just lost their house, what do I do. I summon some courage and ask to speak to the owner of the house. Her face looks like it has aged in the hours after the tornado even though I’ve never seen her. As I speak to her she almost doesn’t even see me. All I see are the many questions on her numb face. Where am I going to sleep? Where will my children sleep? How am I going to repair my house? She turns to look at me with her heart-broken eyes. As I begin to speak to her I can feel my eyes well a little. How do I tell her I want the suitcase after she has just lost everything? I tell her that the duvet is mine and so are sheets and so is the brown suitcase. She looks at me, for the first time, she sees me. “My son got that suitcase and what’s in the suitcase,” she says.

I tell her calmly that it is my mother’s suitcase, I don’t mean anything bad by it. Her eyes accuse me of accusing her son of being a thief. Her son walks in. He is wearing my clothes. I don’t know how you got it and I don’t want to know, it is not something we can discuss now. I tell her she can keep everything all I want is the suitcase. She says fine, prove it’s yours. She is a tough woman even under these circumstances. I open a secret compartment within the case and extract photos of me and my family. She looks at me sheepishly and gives her son a look only a disapproving mother can give. I unpack whatever is in the suitcase and I take it with me. Guilt-ridden but at least I had my mother’s suitcase.

My mother still doesn’t know that it took a tornado for me to find her suitcase. I keep it in the closet now. It is the skeleton in my closet. I guess not any more now that it’s a blog.

Dr Maya Angelou, Still I Rise, Read on Nelson Mandela’s inauguration

by Maya Angelou

You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I’ll rise.
Does my sassiness upset you?
Why are you beset with gloom?
’Cause I walk like I’ve got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.
Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I’ll rise.
Did you want to see me broken?
Bowed head and lowered eyes?
Shoulders falling down like teardrops,
Weakened by my soulful cries?
Does my haughtiness offend you?
Don’t you take it awful hard
’Cause I laugh like I’ve got gold mines
Diggin’ in my own backyard.
You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I’ll rise.
Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I’ve got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?
Out of the huts of history’s shame
I rise
Up from a past that’s rooted in pain
I rise
I’m a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise
Into a daybreak that’s wondrously clear
I rise
Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.
Next Page »