Editorial

Dear Readers,

If there was a worldwide Chinese Horoscope for 2009, it would probably consist of only one line: PREPARE FOR MASSIVE CHANGES. Across the continents, transformations in 2009 have been thick on the ground and South Africa is no exception.

The first big reverberation in South Africa came with the loss of revered political activist, Helen Suzman. South Africa will unquestionably feel the loss of such an inspiring pioneer for a long time to come Her bullish determination will remain in the political map of our country indefinitely.

Manifesto’s, campaign launches, court appeals and over rulings have filled up January with fervour thus far. The many possibilities opening up for the future of a better South African democracy in the form of COPE, the SCA and the NCP’s landmark moves ensure that excitement is mounting and hard to reign in, and judging by the focus of the Roots Republic feedback, that feeling is consistent among many.

Lastly, a massive thank you is owed to everyone who read and responded to our inaugural issue – we appreciate your time and effort more than we can say. As you can see the design of this newsletter is still very basic –rest assured that it is a work in progress. In the meantime, we would love for you to keep your critical eyes on the editorial, and please come back to us with any and all feedback you may have.

If you received this mail from a friend and are interested in regular updates, or have any feedback, please email us your name, surname and preferred email address and we will add you to our list. All personal details will be kept confidential.

Happy 2009!

The Roots Republic Team

Gourmet SA -

A Culinary Exploration

By: The Cobbler King

Introductions: I have had the privilege of eating in over 40 countries around the world, which may or may not qualify me as an expert. In most cases, I have been shaken and not stirred by these experiences and while memorable meals have been had at Ondines in Sausilito, The River Cottage in London, Konigshauf in Munich and Bergers in Paris, they are simply highlights in my somewhat barren gastronomic travels. In reply to these experiences, my purpose now is not to highlight the wonderful restaurants we have in South Africa, but rather to pass comment on our fodder in general – perhaps with the possibility of ill regarded comments on other countries national foodstuffs. Do not expect objectivity!

The fine print: I must, at the outset, declare myself: I love food. I particularly love food in South Africa. Not all of it, of course; the ubiquitous “Russian and chips”, koeksusters, the last pie at the garage at midnight, stamp mielies, airline food in general and Aromat are all abominations of the first order and should have long gone the way of the dodo, or George Bush. However, alongside the culinary atrocities, we have a wonderful eclectic mix of cooking styles emerging from our polyglot racial makeup encompassing Indian, Italian, Portuguese, Greek, Chinese, European and African variations. These styles – and all their ingredients – are readily available for all with any level of culinary skill. This is a category that euphemistically includes amateur cooks like myself, either in the classical manner or with some blending and adaptation (I think that the modern name for said blending up of food styles is called ‘fusion cooking’). I defy anybody to beat the enjoyment and satisfaction of a well timed peri-peri chicken dish, a piquant and spicy briyani or even a kleftiko lamb. Kleftiko, of course, means stolen and in our crime challenged country it is probably best that we keep to the Greek naming convention.

My children, who are all grown up now, have faced innumerable meals at home and in restaurants where the key conversation topics (after politics) related to what we were eating at the time, what we would be eating next and what we had eaten in the past. To their credit, they entered into the spirit of things and can hold their end up in any gathering of foodies; although my daughter’s weird vegetarianism is still a source of much disquiet between my wife and I. To further illustrate the point of family food adventurism, a few years ago I was cutting up some raw crayfish for a meal when my son - at the time aged about fourteen - asked what I was doing and before I could respond popped a piece of the crayfish into his mouth and pronounced it “cool”.

So what is the point that I am laboring towards? Do we, as South Africans, have the best food in the world? Well, yes, I do believe so and what is more I intend to prove it. Recently, we returned from a walking holiday in southern Tuscany - a holiday that was filled with everything important; friends, family, great scenery, wonderful conversations and of course lots of very good Italian food and wine. Much fuss was made of the wonderful cured meats, the fresh vegetables, wild boar, the breads and pastries, the ten year ageing of the Brunello wines and of course the pasta. Well, I have to tell you that I have no idea how the average Italian can afford to eat and drink at the prices they charge, but more pertinent to this discussion - we don’t have to take a step back at all. All the same ingredients are available here, at less than half the price and, from the appropriate suppliers, of the same or even better quality. You think I am joking? Just in my area of Johannesburg, I have access to a first class delicatessen at Goodmans, a great fish shop Fish Citi, and wonderful fresh vegetables from the Impala grocery store. I also have an excellent butcher, who will cut exactly what I want in the quantity that I want with an arrangement of well hung meats to beat anything I ever saw in my birth place of England.

Jody Schecter, erstwhile World motor racing world champion and, incidentally, a South African who now farms in England was rabitting on about our hormone enriched beef the other day. How does he expect us to stay world rugby champions without it I say? Perhaps, more to the point, have any of you had a steak in the US that is half as good as a sirloin from the Butcher Shop, or a piece of Welsh lamb that actually tastes of anything. Come to think of it, now that I have hit my stride, have you tasted a pan fried fish anywhere in the world that tastes as good as fresh rock cod or even a kabeljou fillet? That is if you can even get your hands on fresh fish abroad. I once ate a steak in Chicago that was a disturbing shade of blue, so soft you could cut it with a blunt spoon and enriched with absolutely no flavour - all taste of beef had been carefully eradicated! Mind you, I also ate at a restaurant in Malibu that had a 1kg hamburger on its menu – that was impressive, but not impressive enough to make up for the USA’s low standard of beef. However, about South African food, I could wax lyrical – Boerewors in the right hands can be an eternal thing of beauty and a joy, our Pieman’s Pantry Pies are unmatched, our olive oil from the Cape subliminal, our ostrich biltong!, our fresh snoek!, etc. etc.

To summarise … briefly: If you take the choice, the variety, the quality (and I have not even started on the Cape wines), the access to the correct ingredients and finally the relative cost of our produce you have to admit, nobody has it as good as we do here.

Behind the lines with Eddie Daniels
By: Jessica Farley

“It was difficult to align the popular decision with the right decision, but Nelson Mandela did it’, says Eddie Daniels. ‘On 11 February 1990, 6 hours after his release from Robben Island, he addressed the masses with no call for revenge or brutality. In doing that, he saved his country from disaster.”

It’s a cool English day next to the iconic Thames River in Twickenham. Eddie Daniels, an honoured comrade among his peers in the anti-Apartheid struggle, is expansive in his verbal time travel and comfortable in a front room of St. James School.

A soldier in the struggle for a free and democratic South Africa, Daniels spent fifteen years on Robben Island in the company of the freedom fighters who, alongside Daniels himself, created a democratic South Africa. A man of honour and stature, Daniels chose a life of struggle in a country that, for whatever inexplicable reasons they were following at the time, allowed Daniels to slip into the realm of the more ‘accepted’ coloured racial categorisation.

Meeting Daniels is like meeting the underclothes of South Africa’s history. We have all seen and read the same stories – the top hat and tails of the struggle. As the leader and figurehead of the fight for democracy, Nelson Mandela showed the world the truth about South Africa through his bravery and strength and infinitely forgiving manner. But, Nelson Mandela did not stand alone and while he has always praised the work of his comrades in arms, meeting one of them is grounding. So many nameless, faceless people gave their lives in the fight for democracy and every one of those stories is equally as poignant and as harrowing as the well known stories etched on our brains. Daniels likes to tell his story, and he has found a wiling audience.

Born in District Six in the Western Cape in 1928 to a British father and a South African mother, Daniels found politics on the streets of Athlone. Joining the Liberal Party after becoming enraged at the mindless oppression of his people, Daniels believed the party fulfilled the two major necessary criteria: being anti-government and non-racial.

From the moment Daniels found his home with the Liberal Party, his politics never swayed. During his time on Robben Island for terrorist attacks on the government, Daniel’s was the sole member of his party – falling into the ‘black’ category while his co-accused fell into the ‘white’ category – but he did his time cheerfully, all the while expounding his beliefs. In A Long Walk to Freedom, Nelson Mandela speaks of Daniel’s fondly: “We recall his loyalty and courage; his sense of humour and justice as well as total commitment to the struggle of the prisoners for the eradication of injustice and for the betterment of their conditions.”

Daniels tells his story like a narrator in a cops and robbers film; dangerous tales of arson and explosions follow attempted jail escapes, clandestine meetings and plotting to impact a government. The constant push and pull of SA politics – key to the renegade story line - caught Daniels on a tidal wave, which pushed him over the edge into conviction when a trusted friend turned state witness and gave evidence against him. “I was asked to be state witness three times,” says Daniels. “I said no and I had to wait 24 years to find out that that was the right decision.”

Of the man – Adrian - who turned against him? Daniels bears him no ill will. “He was very brave, used explosives and risked his life. He said he took it too far.” In his memoirs ‘There & Back’, Daniels published two letters between himself and Adrian, highlighting the end of an era and an inconceivable ability to forgive. “I hope that my release from prison will alleviate the terrible mental pressures that you have been suffering all these many years,” he writes. “You ask me if I would like to change the past. Both you and I know that we cannot change the past – but to indulge in some wishful thinking, I’ll say yes. I would like to change your role … why I wish this is because of the brave role you played in the organisation prior to your arrest. You were an outstanding organiser, leader and a person held in high respect by all.”

15 years spent in prison is an endless time to comprehend, specifically considering the political prisoners were held in the punishment unit in isolation for extended periods, were beaten for the smallest of incidents and humiliated and ridiculed by the guards at every turn. This was done in an effort to break their spirit - an effort which proved unsuccessful. Still, Daniels retains his positive ideals. “I can still look at it as a blessing in disguise,” says Daniels. “When I went into Robben Island, I only held a Standard 6 education. When I left, I left with two degrees – a BA and a BCom.”

The most astounding part of Daniels journey is that, although he had the option to leave jail early (under restrictions of course) he chose to ride out the sentence rather than fold to the National Party’s requirements. “I said to the judge – I’ll be sentencing my children and grandchildren to a life of slavery if I give in”. So he didn’t. 15 Years after his release, South Africa elected its first democratic government.

Today, we – as South Africans –are working toward a nation based on equality. The years of oppression and violence have left scars, but gradually the anger will melt away and we will stand, as we deserve to stand, as a monument to the persistence of the people. Eddie Daniels stood up and fought for that democracy and his story, like many others, is inspiring.

After the Starting Whistle
By Toni Parsons

The afterglow of the COPE launch was short lived in the wake of meeting disruptions, ANC manifesto and election campaign launches and most recently, the ongoing Zuma appeal saga.

The lack of ‘COPE’ headlines, however, is not to say that the new party hasn’t created a force field that is shifting South African democracy and colouring political events with a new hue.

The creation of a new party put all politically (perhaps previously un-) accountable bodies in the spotlight, and with a relatively short time frame to work in, everyone under scrutiny is putting in the effort for a stellar performance in the hopes of snaring or keeping a few extra votes in April.

The disruption of COPE meetings by people claiming to be ANC members was unfortunate for the ANC in that it came across as unsportsmanlike, and more importantly, unconstitutional. Denying that the factions responsible were ANC members did not seem to placate anyone and seemed to be more like shying away from responsibility than allowing members of the public to do as they felt politically obliged.

The launch of the ANC manifesto and its election campaign was accompanied by the prerequisite list of promises and statistics of what is to come. Click here to view the stats.

Little was mentioned about the, thus far, unfulfilled promises leftover from the last election or the numbers of people who have expressed deep dissatisfaction regarding the current running of affairs. Even a list of current positive statistics was a little blurry round the edges.

The ANC stood up and made a long list of promises they will fulfil should they be re-elected - none with a clear outline for implementation, funding or a time frame. COPE has highlighted a number of concerns and unmet promises on the part of the ANC that had previously gone largely without public address, but the ANC failed to address these.

On the other side of the fence, the DA has taken to the advent of COPE with aplomb. Helen Zille’s speech at the convention on the 1 November 2008, coupled with a subtle change in opposition policy notable in her address on 11 January, (click here for the full address) have indicated that COPE has initiated what looks to be the best shot South Africa has at democracy. Zille’s speech, while still highly critical of the ANC, put forward a number of positive changes on the part of the DA, that have opened up an increased propensity for dialogue between the ANC and the opposition parties. This is something that previously was difficult to attain when any criticism of the ANC by the DA came across as petty inter-party sniping.

COPE has, up until last weekend, gone about their business as is to be expected of a fledgling party. Through their campaigning for members and setting up branches, even when said activities were disrupted, COPE has behaved in an appropriate and dignified manner.

Everything was chugging along nicely until the Kwa-Zulu Natal leg of canvassing on the weekend of January 10, with Lekota’s chilling echo of Julias Malema’s much publicised call for bloodshed in June 2008. Malema was heavily criticised for his call for ‘killing for Zuma’, and, unfortunately, Lekota’s claim that the party will need those ‘willing to go to jail, willing to spill blood’ will have resonated with a number of people, and not in a way that would incite them to bumble off and sign up for COPE.

That glitch aside, all the big indicators and milestones of the past month have been beyond spectacular, However, the most important facet of the post COPE launch should not be overlooked. More than anything, the creation of COPE has reignited an interest and an active participation on the part of the largely disillusioned South African population. It has opened up the dialogue and fostered a feeling that, perhaps, the political landscape is not pre-ordained. I think Evita Bezuidenhout said it best in the latest Nando’s advertising campaign: you can’t just have A an’ C. Check it out ....

Teetering on a Two Thirds Majority
By: Gareth Hobbs

2009 will be an important political year for South Africa and two fairly notable events, which could change the face of the country, are set to happen. The first, which is guaranteed, is the national elections. The second - whether or not this occurs may very well depend on the outcome of the elections - is the continuation of the soap opera that is Jacob Zuma’s fraud and corruption trial, otherwise known as Zumagate.

Recently, the ANC launched their political campaign for the elections with Jacob Zuma named as their presidential delegate. At the same time, Jacob Zuma sued Zapiro and the Sunday Times for the cartoon that was run in 2008 depicting JZ and his cronies raping justice. I don’t understand why you would want to bring something back into the news that people had forgotten about. I guess the 7-million reasons that he’s suing for might have had something to do with it.

Following on from this, the result of the NPA appeal, which effectively allowed them (NPA) to reinstate the fraud and corruption charges against Zuma, on 12 January 2008 lead to a new, interesting possibility. We could find ourselves in a position where the president is being investigated for corruption, and perhaps even charged while in office. Or, if the ANC manages a two thirds majority, they could rewrite the constitution, to effectively give the president immunity. This would not really be a great statement in line with the anti-corruption stance the government has been trying to take.

Jacob Zuma has decided to appeal the recent finding, which begs the question: What does he have to hide? I don’t know about you, but if I was innocent I’d be trying to get the NPA to lay charges and take it to court as soon as possible, so I could be acquitted. The more the Zuma defence team delays the court case, the guiltier he begins to seem.

So, the question that needs to be answered by the elections is: will the ANC get the two thirds majority they need in order to change the constitution and grant Zuma immunity should he need it? There’s not much doubt about whether the elections will be won by the ANC. Even with the formation of a strong opposition party, COPE (and the credibility that they were given when the ANC persisted in treating them as a threat) the ANC is likely to win and win comfortably. But, will COPE draw enough of the vote away from the ANC to prevent the rewriting of the constitution?

While the election circus will probably not prove nearly as exciting as the recent show held in the USA, there are still ample opportunities for heroes, and villains to emerge in South Africa’s 2009 race. And, who knows, we might even see COPE become a giant killer and write their names into the history of South Africa.

What does the SCA ruling mean for Zuma and the ANC?

The Supreme Court Appeal (SCA) ruling on 12 January 2009, which put ANC presidential delegate Jacob Zuma back into the hot seat, has added a new dynamic to what is shaping up to be the most exciting election year since 1994.

Basically, beyond the rhetoric and the media excitement, the law and what it means can be a little bit confusing, so with the help of specialist criminal attorney Mike Trapido, we have looked at some of the possible outcomes.

1. If Jacob Zuma is on trial during the election campaign or at the time of the elections, can he still run for president?

If he is on trial he can run for president. He is not guilty merely charged.

2. If he is on trial during the campaign or elections, does the decision fall to the party to let him run for president simultaneously?

It is always within the party's power to withdraw him as a candidate. As we saw with Mbeki they can even recall a president.

3. Can the ANC withdraw their candidate at any time, and what are the conditions for this?

The parties candidates are listed with their number 1 choice the person they are submitting for president. Up until the person is confirmed as president in parliament they can be withdrawn by simply not nominating them as the candidate to be president. (Parliament votes on the nominees with the majority party's candidate getting the nod). Thereafter see Mbeki.


4. If he can run while on trial, and he is elected and found guilty, what will happen to the position of president?

If he is found guilty while he is president he can be removed by following the same procedures as adopted with Mbeki.



.

Roots Republic Have Your Say

The State of the Nation's Education

By: Paul Perton

Before the current government got its hands properly on the levers of power in 1994, it seems likely that much time and effort was dedicated to its plans for educating future generations of South Africans.


Certainly, since grabbing the political joystick, few would argue that the government has used its majority in parliament to implement some questionable legislation in this regard. A decade and a half on, many of the policies of the government look far from the beneficial acts intended to serve the needs of the majority in this country. Education is no exception.


Many peculiarities have emerged from the government’s legislative programmes over these years, but few as bizarre as those surrounding the teaching of our children.


My credentials to make such an observation? I am a taxpayer, businessman, parent and a committed South African. What I want to say here needs no qualification in the subject; everything you read here is in the public domain.


Despite the efforts of our leaders to have us believe otherwise, South Africa is a third world nation. We grow by our efforts and slide backwards when we let ourselves down. We aspire for high single digit growth which will put us in the vanguard amongst our emerging peers, yet we have an economy which is hamstrung inter alia by the lack of skilled manpower and worse: effective management.


Our education system is intended to fill those gaps of course. Delivering rounded, able and schooled individuals into each and every strata of the workplace is what an education system does.


Except that it doesn’t and our country, its economy and the population as a whole are suffering as a result. The bulk of the nation’s children leave school barely able to grasp history or geography outside our borders. Worse, these children have little numeracy beyond basic mathematics and few read.


There is now more than a complete generation of South African youth which has been educated in a system conceived and run by our majority government. It is hard, therefore, to imagine why the ongoing and poor educational results up to and including matriculation are still blamed on the former regime. The whining from the government about disadvantage remains; yet it’s way past time for those leaders to earn their fat salaries and shoulder responsibility for educating our children properly, no matter how heavy the mantle.


I can’t help but wonder how long it will be before these poor previously disadvantaged souls realise they have been further disadvantaged by the very government their parents chose to improve their lives. Could they one day band together and pursue the government in a kind of class action, seeking redress for wasting their education and ultimately, employment opportunities?


For now … back to the school leavers. Properly prepared or not, each and every one of these youngsters have been delivered full of anticipation and expectation to the doorstep of their future employers. All too many have been disappointed.


In times of economic growth, when our targets are within reach, employers can generally afford to be benign when they employ school and university leavers. They know that time on the job, mentorship programmes and the osmosis of skills will soon turn those callow youngsters into useful members of their respective teams.


When the economy is not faring so well, employers can afford to pick and choose. Applicants with only the median-driven education available to most will struggle to find meaningful and fulfilling employment, to say nothing of decent remuneration.


Sadly, this isn’t unique to South Africa. Many countries have opted for similar education systems as our own - if memory serves, we imported Outcomes Based Education (OBE) from New Zealand, where it has been moderately successful. In South Africa, we do not have an even slightly homogenous society, which is one of the great underpinnings of OBE. We have thousands of under-resourced schools, misappropriated funding, undelivered text books, drunk teachers, leaked matric papers, abuse and as a result, a propensity to burn down rather than build.


Outside of the (reasonably) structured urban centres, you could be forgiven for shrugging your shoulders and judging pre-matric education to be shambolic at best and non-existent at worst. What hope is there of these so-called centres of learning ever delivering a functional education?


And as if that weren’t enough, our universities have also been forced into an extended period of median-based education. These centres of higher learning have been driven by government into handing out degrees like confetti; lest the poor students commit hara-kiri or set fire to the place on hearing of their failure to attend lectures and/or succeed. More recently, sanity appears to prevail and realistic examinations and degree awards now seem to be a more predictable result.

In recent years, hundreds of thousands of young South Africans have emerged from our schools, colleges, universities and other institutions with little in the way of real world skills, beyond their own aptitude to succeed. And, if you were unfortunate enough to have grown up in a township, or been subjected to inner city poverty, chances are even the will to succeed might be missing in your personal make-up.


Recently left school? Just remember; it’s not your fault. The money and grandiose schemes to educate you have always been available. Just not where, properly managed or in the fashion you might have wanted.


We produce attorneys, doctors and dentists by the barrow load, but few technical trainees and fewer apprentices. A handful of engineers. Management training only commences at tertiary level. Trade schools have all but disappeared. Making the desperate shortage of skilled school and university leavers even more acute, the very fuels of success; competition and winning have also largely been eradicated.


The reason: failure is unthinkable for the psychological damage it might cause. In the UK, the government is so concerned that their poor little things shouldn’t be scarred for life by failure, that their lack of success is no longer noted as such. It is now called “deferred success”. That’ll make the little perishers feel better.


If the media is correct, South Africa will go to the polls in May this year. We can probably ill afford a change of government at this stage of our development, but the loss of some, or maybe most of the current government’s majority will perhaps sound some alarm bells in those hallowed halls. It might bring some change, including an end to the internal post-Polokwane pissing competition that has driven the current administration into a stasis that lasted through most of 2008.


The man in the street has a right to be angry at the waste, corruption and lack of delivery that is the hallmark of the current incumbents. Many who read this article will do so far from their families, homes and homeland; most as a result of rampant crime, poor employment opportunities and the myriad of issues that make-up life in South Africa today.


The thinking person takes action. Those less well equipped might not be able to. The cynics amongst us might point to the abysmal education delivered to most of the youth of our nation and see in it some kind of bizarre cause and effect.

Voting from the Far Side
By Toni Parsons

South Africans living around the world number well into the hundreds of thousands. London alone is so chock full that Wimbledon and Earlsfield have been colloquialised as Wimblefontein and Earlsveld. Australia, Canada and the US have surely been privy to a similar level of infestation by boerie eating sun lovers who flatten their vowels.

Reasons for leaving are as varied as the people who have gone. Misconceptions such as ‘he left for fear of the Swart Gevaar’ are perhaps not null and void, but certainly a little short of the truth in many cases. Moreover, there is a large proportion of expats who have a long term plan to return and invest money into the economy when they do and contribute to a positive future for the country.

Why, then, are South Africans with valid ID books or passports not allowed to vote if they do not reside permanently in SA?

Government employees (however long they plan to stay away) can vote from abroad, as can those who are temporarily absent. Voting happens at embassies, and the South Africans who staff the embassies (presumably) man the voting.

According to the constitution, all South Africans are entitled to a free and fair vote. However, subsequent to the Mbeki regime, said constitution was amended, employing the current restrictions. Reasons for these restrictions are not clear, other than for some - rather embittered - people hypothesising that it was a tactical measure by the ANC to ensure that it retained the majority rule. This assumes that all expats would be voting for a non-ANC party; an argument that falls into the bin with those who believe that leavers (a) are white and (b) did so because of a political distaste for the ANC. As I said, into the bin.

The most prevalent argument for the restrictions is that taxes paid by South Africans living at home should not be used to fund voting abroad. Those who stand to gain from the remote vote being instated will not have to live with whatever changes are put into effect as a result of the election, and who do not pay tax themselves.

However, since the election occurs overseas for government employees and temporary absentees, I fail to see how allowing others to vote would involve massive additional funds. Furthermore, despite being allowed a ‘free and fair’ election, I believe that expats would be more than happy to pay a nominal fee for the privilege of being able to vote from abroad, and would be more than happy to make the effort to do so at the same place that absentees and government employees do.

While this argument should not be swayed with numbers alone, it may be pertinent to mention that in the US elections in November, approximately three million Americans of voting age were abroad. They were permitted to either post their vote or cast it via an ‘e-vote’ system. If they dropped off their ballots at a US embassy, they did not have to pay the (on average $2) postage fee. Just over five hundred votes swung the 2004 American elections – three million votes clearly matter to the American idea of democracy.

In a democratic country smaller than some American states, a few hundred thousand votes are important. Along with that, the South Africans with no intention to return home and no interest in the country are unlikely to make the extra effort to register and to vote. Those with vested interests should be allowed the opportunity to have a say in the country they plan to return to. If South Africa has any interests at all in a ‘Homecoming Revolution’ in any shape or form, it would be wise to formally acknowledge the importance of South Africans, and give them the chance to feel as though they are involved. Getting people involved is far more likely to pull them home than casting aside their rights to vote.

Do you feel strongly about South Africans being given their constitutional right to vote from abroad?
Sign the petition along with other actively involved South Africans:
http://www.mypetition.co.za/index.php?page=sign_petition&petition_id=77

Legless language
By: Ross Farley

It is helpful that a country like South Africa, with its ongoing history of sensitive race relations and maturing politics, has such a colourful and accessible national lexicon. Great local words like “Mampara” or “snot-klap” are often used by people across the racial divide in a tenderly mocking yet harmless context. Such words or expressions are one of the simple yet over-looked links of people throughout the country. It is therefore searingly distressing that a selection of South Africa’s youth leaders began to adopt language in 2008 that, apart from being divisive, was unnecessarily combative. Through that language, they exhibited at best an ignorance and at worst a disdain for some of Africa’s harshest historical lessons.

The festivities began in June 2008, when ANC Youth League leader Julias Malema addressed a gathering of ANC youth league supporters in Bloemfontein. His statement “We are prepared to die for Zuma. We are prepared to take up arms and kill for Zuma” certainly caught the country's attention. The media swarmed over Malema like jackals to a carcass demanding an explanation and retraction. Malema initially justified his comments by stating that "My statements that I will kill for Zuma were meant to demonstrate our love and passion for Zuma”. Jeez buddy … I would’ve thought some soft music, your slinkiest pyjamas and a bubble bath would have achieved the same result. Perhaps Malema realised that Zuma has four wives with a fifth in the pipeline and that a more radical strategy was needed to capture Zuma’s affections.

Following the incident, Malema was warned by the South African Human Rights Commission to withdraw the comments under threat of litigation. He didn’t retract the statements, but a compromise was reached when Malema agreed to not use the word “kill” in public again. Shortly thereafter, Malema displayed the political nous pervasive in our youth leadership by dusting off his old thesaurus - last seen standing in as a standard one soccer goal post - and firing back with the statement: “We are prepared to eliminate for Jacob Zuma”. Eish!

The latter half of 2008 saw Jason Mkhwane, an ANC Youth League leader in the Vaal Sedibeng region, announce to the Al Jazeera news network that “People like Terror Lekota and these people who want to destroy the history of the organization (ANC) these people behave like cockroaches and must be destroyed”. In seeking an explanation of the use of the word “destroy” the media were advised by the Vaal Sedibeng branch secretary Themba Ndaba that “We must kill them.”

On further explanation it became clear that neither Mkhwane nor Ndaba actually meant the literal killing of the opposition, but were in fact referring to an electoral “killing”. Mkhwane further explained himself by stating that English is not his first language and that he should be forgiven for his inexperienced use of it … Mkhwane holds a degree in logistics form the Vaal University of Technology. Unless said degree is comprised of the study of textbooks with popup pictures and nice colouring-in areas, Mkhwane's explanation is about as shallow and poorly considered as his initial comments. South Africans would be far more amenable to threats to destroy Australian cricket commentators or the VIP protection units who speed dangerously down our emergency lanes while transporting important personnel such as the MEC for shoelaces.

The majority of the population, regardless of literacy or news access, are incredibly aware of how words like “cockroach” were cultivated and exploited in 1994 by the Rwandan Hutu rebels in their slaughter of over 400 000 Tutsis. That not just a leader, but an African leader, can be so insensitive to the machinery of language, which lead to one of the continents most shameful and acutely disturbing scars is unforgivable. If these youth leader’s ideas and vocabularies are so impoverished that they have to resort to language with such a painful frame of reference, then they should not be given any leadership role. Instead, they should be forced to sit and digest the images of the Rwandan genocide over and over again.

What’s most distressing about the unnecessary language used by the ANC Youth League is exactly that it’s unnecessary; the ANC have a majority in Parliament. In addition, they have achieved increased voter support in every election since 1994. There is no war to be fought and no enemy to be vanquished. We are a stable and successful democracy that has based itself on tolerance and the acceptance of ideas, regardless of whether those ideas support or oppose ones own. The ANC have indicated to the public that the Youth League is an independent body whose policies and ideas are their own. Surely, the ANC, as the senior body, must stem the tide of this combative rhetoric. If they are struggling to find the right words to temper their youth league, perhaps they should ask Julias to lend them his thesaurus.