Crime's mixed massage

Verashni Pillay's article on crime in Hillbrow ("Where cops do the work for drug lords", September 20) was a refreshingly different approach, with some insightful coverage of the very real challenges of the inner city.

Then there was Pillay's comment that the statistics were "susceptible to an unknown degree of massaging by a local police service", which left one wondering what was being massaged and by whom. The article did not provide any more details.

The focus by the South African Police Service on crime rates instead of the actual numbers of crimes has led some in the media to wonder whether there has been manipulation. The journalistic reluctance to ask a statistician to explain is well understood: working out a rate per 100 000 is a boringly normal international practice.

Further critical coverage has been about how the police source population data. For Johannesburg, the use of out-of-date population figures is a matter of concern: it means the crime rate is overstated (no, that's not a typo). This is especially true of the inner city, where the population has increased significantly.

It's true statistics can mislead. Arrest 200 street drug dealers and your success rate looks great. But there's no supply shortage of potential small-time dealers, so this has little impact on drugs in the community.  

Pillay recognises the general reduction of crime in Hillbrow, but there appears to be an unconscious urge to draw on negatives (we'll never get to 70% at this rate!). Yes, the year-on-year murder rate in Hillbrow went up last year, but a glance at the long-term figures shows Hillbrow's murder and attempted murder decreasing to 127 in 2012-2013 from 330 in 2003-2004. Throw in population increase and you would need a lot of massaging to rub that simple statistic away.  

For serious crime rates to come down further, it can't be left to the police. Violence and murder tend to happen in the extended family, which points to the need for a proactive multidisciplinary prevention approach. Research shows the strong link between serious sexual violence and alcohol and drug abuse.

That brings us back to Hillbrow. Pillay is not optimistic about anti-corruption measures. But there are positive signs: we know the fight against corruption is on everyone's lips and, if that includes community members, so much the better. More people are being arrested for corruption, including within the police force and, if there is a correlation between reduced crime and reduced corruption, however weak, we might allow that smile to get a little wider. – Keith Peacock, chairperson, Yeoville Community Police Forum

Nobel success has little to do with religion

Producing the largest number of Nobel laureates makes the United States the most intelligent country in the world. Christians are the most intelligent because they have won the majority of Nobel prizes in history. Or is it agnostics? Africa, Asia and South America must be considered home to the dumbest populations by virtue of not having produced any Nobel prize-winners outside of the fields of literature and peace. 

People of Indian descent in South Africa must be considered geniuses, considering the number of professionals they have produced relative to their population in the country. The Japanese and the Germans are unique in that they have produced economies that form part of the G8 after being completely devastated during World War II. Chinese children rank top in the US school tables and thus should be considered genetically intelligent. 

It is this kind of nonsense that results when one attempts to trumpet ethnic or religious identity as the cause of some phenomenon, as Mike Berger attempts to do ("Ask not who toils for Nobel prizes, ask where", Letters, October 18). Firstly, Jews are not a homogenous population; they certainly don't classify as a race. Secondly, most are of European origin. At best, they are a religious group.

Why does Berger then not break down his analysis of Jewish success even further and count the number of female Jewish Nobel prize-winners there are?

The point is that success is a result of a number of interrelated factors. To pin it down to some ethnic or religious identity is nonsense. In fact, many of these individuals may identify themselves differently to the way Berger does.

Moreover, to trumpet Jewish success as the basis for defending the actions of a violent, repressive and racist state – Israel – reveals the nonsense that results when the ethnic card is played. 

Israel is no miracle; it is the largest recipient of American aid in the world, receiving in excess of $4-billion a year, not counting that from other countries. Such moneys could help stimulate African economies, which need it more. 

Israel's success, like that of other colonising nations, is built on dispossession of land and wealth. – Sipho Gumede, Cape Town

If you don't like it, blame it on neoliberalism

It is common for left-wingers to bash "neoliberal economics" as the source of all evil in South Africa's economy ("Can SA survive one more bout of Gear?", September 20).

The removal and silencing of Mbekiites means there is no one now in government to point out that much of the criticism of the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (Gear) strategy and neoliberalism is made without any coherent economic knowledge of neoliberalism and to what extent it took root here.

Several government programmes are the antithesis of neoliberalism, all of them put in place at the same time as Gear. Many things are free: houses and healthcare for the poor, education for most children, basic water, refuse removal for the poor and basic electricity – and 30% of the population receive social grants.

Besides the overenthusiastic removal of tariffs that protected the clothing industry and a short-lived burst of privatisation, it is difficult to identify any other hard-core neoliberalism. 

Although the budget deficit during Gear was kept lower than Keynesians might like, during the 1990s state departments were unable to spend their budgets. We all lamented the unspent billions rolled over annually. 

In the United States, right-wingers label everything they don't like "socialist". In South Africa, if I don't like it, it must be neoliberal. The All Blacks are neoliberal. – Dave Martin, Nqileni