Mbeki a popular leader
Mothusi Motlhabi (Letters, July 6) claims that Markinor surveys indicating popular support for President Thabo Mbeki seem little more than spin-doctoring.
He overlooks the fact that the 2004 general and 2006 local elections indicated overwhelming popular support for Mbeki's leadership of the country and the ANC. Whether we like it, he is a genuinely popular leader in South Africa and, indeed, Africa.
Attributing the devastating scale of the HIV/Aids epidemic to Mbeki's eccentric utterances on Aids, or the fact that he countenances denialists like David Rasnick, overlooks the fact that the epidemic has been just as horrific in Phakalitha Mosisili's Lesotho and Festus Mogae's Botswana.
We must recognise that public health issues, whether they involve observing personal hygiene, avoiding alcohol abuse, following a proper diet, avoiding reckless driving or avoiding the risks of HIV infection, are the primary responsibility of individual citizens. -- Wella Patrick Msimanga, Cape Town
Some may back leaders for position with good intentions, but an influential minority does so with the aim of to using them as puppets. Some leaders have been true to the calling of serving the masses and not the minority.
Often, those who backed them with selfish motives come to view them as traitors and then try to discredit them dictators and sell-outs.
A true leader should not be afraid to do what is right, even if this means taking decisions for the good of the country that do not favour his or her political party.
When Mbeki leaves the presidency, he will have represented the majority very well. He defied sexism and placed women in high positions in society. He led with respect, allowing countries to decide their fate and leadership. --Phumla Khanyile, Soshanguve
Motlhabi says that two years ago, Mbeki incurred widespread anger over his leadership on Zimbabwe, HIV/Aids and kicking Jacob Zuma out of the Cabinet. Two years ago South Africa's Aids policy was already the best in Africa, and has improved since.
The only thing that happened two years ago was the dismissal of Jacob Zuma, which is presumably what Motlhabi is really talking about.
However, neither Mbeki nor the ANC suffered great public anger over any of these issues. Most newspapers claimed Mbeki and the ANC had lost ground, but this was disproved when the ANC's share of the vote in the 2006 elections increased.
It is natural that Mbeki's popularity has increased. The economy is booming and wealth redistribution is going ahead (not that there shouldn't be more, of course).
In finding that the North West is the second-best performing province, Markinor obviously judged public opinion, not facts. Motlhabi attempts to refute this by saying there have been community protests in North West.
Much of the protest is on the West Rand, where the South African Communist Party has stirred up a lot of trouble for its own political reasons, and has little to do with actual performance. And the community protest is based in municipalities, which are a different tier of government to provinces which Markinor assessed. -- Mathew Blatchford, University of Fort Hare
In his article "Fit to stand down" (July 2) Rapule Tabane gives Mbeki too much credit for being able to choose his successors. Nowhere has it emerged that he can choose anyone in a bid to stop Jacob Zuma.
What the ANC said at its policy conference is that any member has a right to be elected. The president of the party is decided only by members at the national conference.
There is no automatic candidate to lead the ANC, and presidency of the party is no a guarantee of becoming president of South Africa.
The ANC doesn't resolve matters looking only at current challenges, but looks to the future. It does not adapt its principles to suit particular situations. -- Tembile Yako, Windsor East, Johannesburg
Will having different people as president of the ANC and president of the country really create "two centres of power"? Or will it lead to the decentralisation of the power of the presidency many ANC members and the tripartite alliance have been calling for?
The leadership succession issue has been complicated by Mbeki's purging of Zuma and some of his close associates from the government. Some complain that more power has been concentrated in the presidency of the country under Mbeki and that he tends not to consult other stakeholders when making crucial decisions.
If there was a balance of power, it would ensure consultation between the president of the country and the ruling party before any major decisions are taken, in the government or the party.
Of course, there can only be a real balance if the two leaders do not "ja baas" each other. -- Foster Dubula Mkhonto, Kgothatso Shai and Mompheleng Mphi Maphunye, Africa Institute of South Africa, Pretoria
I've just read Ronald Suresh Roberts's essay on our president. As one of the hand-puppets of "the dull drone of illiberal discourse"‚ I must take the burden of blame on my shoulders.
We racist‚ right-wing‚ colonialist Afrikaners in the former National Party did something terrible to Thabo Mbeki during the struggle. We didn't put him in jail! All ANC members worthy of note were locked up, following Nelson Mandela's example that politicians first go to jail, and then into politics. Except Comrade Thabo ...
The SAP wouldn't even chase him. He threw stones at them and they threw them back, thinking he was just a schoolboy with a pipe. And so he went into exile, spending over 30 years overseas, mainly in the UK.
This is the clue Roberts overlooks. Thabo Mbeki is not a native. He was educated by the British. That's why he's a racist -- he thinks like an Englishman.
This has nothing to do with native intelligence! It was Broederbond stupidity!
So apologies, Comrade President. You really didn't need to pay a theorist from the West Indies to make you feel better. My offer of bobotie and rooi wyn still stands. -- Evita Bezuidenhout, colonial gogo and presidential candidate for 2009, Darling
Media failed over strike
As a state doctor working in a hospital and clinics in greater Durban, I've spent the past week seeing patients who are casualties of the recent strike.
On the Monday after the strike ended, I saw a young woman at a clinic who had been sick at home with pneumonia for five days. Desperately ill, she died while we were waiting for an ambulance. She is just one of many.
The entire week I have seen diabetic, hypertensive and epileptic patients with uncontrolled symptoms, having been unable to get treatment for three weeks. The most seriously affected have been TB patients, many of whom have missed three weeks of essential treatment. Patients on ARVs have been similarly affected.
Before the strike, I thought I worked in an essential service. I now realise this is not so.
I've learnt three things: