In her recent letter to the Mail & Guardian, the Democratic Alliance’s Helen Zille repeatedly mentions the “racial nationalist transformation” she believes is under way in South Africa at the hands of the African National Congress government. She attempts to defend the Democratic Party’s 1999 “fight back” campaign.
On the same page, the M&G’s editorial (“Don’t write off the right wing”, November 1) argues that in light of the recent bombing of Soweto, it is irresponsible for the opposition to “continue to beat the drums of negativity and convince white South Africans that this country is not working”.
While not wishing to suggest any connection between the DA and the blasts, there is certainly a case that the DA’s high-profile and paranoid campaigning finds fertile ground in the right wing. In a political climate where race relations exist in a precarious balance at best, Zille and her ilk are irresponsible to attempt to introduce the term “racial nationalism” into the political lexicon.
She states: “Those of us who oppose racial nationalism believe that unless we can transcend the politics of race, and racial mobilisation, we will never establish a non-racial democracy or a viable economy.” It is difficult to imagine how the politics of race will be transcended in the DA’s “merit society”, where those who suffered under apartheid education policies continue to lose out.
It is rich to accuse others of racial mobilisation when this was the DP’s strategy in 1999. This is all too apparent from the spate of defectors to the DP from traditionally conservative parties, the lily-whiteness of the DP’s candidate lists, the overwhelmingly white support base of the party and the concentration on election campaigning in “white”, and particularly conservative, Afrikaans areas.
The party’s Afro-pessimism is nothing less than a revision of the swartgevaar tactics of the old Nats. These tactics are deplorable in a society where racial tensions continue to simmer. –Gavin Davis, Cape Town
Nobody claims responsibility for the bombs. No hard evidence is presented linking them to any group. Two “white men” are apparently sighted near one of the bomb sites. On the basis of this overwhelming and enticing (in your reporters’ words) evidence, we are led to believe that the bombs are the work of right-wing (presumably white) extremists. Reporters delve into the murky depths of far-right conspiracies, cartoonists sketch menacing images of a Boer uprising and editorials pontificate about how the opposition parties’ negative criticism fuels right-wing terrorism.
Why are you are so sure that the right is responsible? Even if the two “white men” were linked to the bombs, does that make it certain they were members of a right-wing group? Are there no wit ous in any other organisation that might plant bombs? And how about the possibility that these explosions were economic sabotage? The transport industry has competing factions with a record of violence.
I don’t know who planted the bombs or why — but frankly nor do your reporters. Many people have an interest in whipping up race hatred and they are not all on the right.
What I find extremely scary, though, is that having whipped yourselves into a hysterical froth about the threat from the (white) right, you proceed to attack the opposition for its negativity. Governing parties with a penchant for repressive legislation often use an apparent terrorist threat to crush legitimate opposition. Your rash and irresponsible coverage of these outrages has handed the ruling party extra ammunition to stifle opposition and snuff out our fragile democracy. –Jason Penny, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge
In your editorial on the Soweto bombings, you write “that we have to find a way to permanently kill this virus”. Your cartoonist suggests Afrikanerdom belongs to a primeval age.
It is possible that the bombings are a symptom of the widespread discontent among Afrikaners with Anglicisation and assimilation policies.
In many government departments, people receive death threats when they dare speak or write Afrikaans. ANC policy has been to stop funding Afrikaner museums or other forms of heritage and remove Afrikaner paintings from public buildings. Afrikaners have borne the brunt of affirmative action in the civil service and parastatals.
Those subordinate to Afro-Saxon bureaucrats and Anglo-Saxon “consultants” are often treated with hostility. Add to this the vituperation of Afrikaner history by English pedants in new positions of influence at the SABC, and the stage is set for a full-on English-Afrikaans clash a century after the Anglo-Boer South African War. –Dan Roodt, Dainfern
‘It may not be their intention, but it is the environment of negativity that encourages extremists to fight back” (Editorial, November 1).
It’s very easy to co-opt other people’s slogans and misrepresent them. Don’t do it. (Krisjan Lemmer has special dispensation.) The DA condemns violence in any form, especially as a means to political gain.
Your implication seems to be that the people who support a liberal democracy with vigorous opposition are the same kind who support bombing campaigns and murder. –Mal Morrow, Cape Town
Your editorial states that “an inevitable consequence of our transition was that it resulted in some communities believing they had become casualties of change” and that they “were mostly those who parasitically fed off the apartheid system and could not survive without the privilege of being propped up by the state”.
Silly communities! Pardon my mirth, but the current regime happens to be propped up by the taxes of that vile species, the Afrikaner. In fact, apartheid provided our “freedom fighters” with the most prosperous state in Africa.
Does the ANC deserve the status the Afrikaners “did not deserve in the first place”? Does a bloody people’s war like the one the ANC waged confer the required status?
Lastly, I humbly ask your pardon for taking a dim view of our crime rate and other barbaric equivalents, but being Afrikaans presumably precludes one from appreciating the finer side of mayhem. –Karin Bredenkamp
In your editorial you referred to the bombings being due to the right wing. Exactly as the previous regime branded all dissidents as communists and terrorists, one could expect that the present one will brand any attempt by Afrikaners to gain their constitutional rights as right-wing extremism.
Never in history has one nation submitted so completely to the mercy of others as the Afrikaners since 1994. While it is all in the name of a democracy underpinned by a constitution, the survival of that nation is threatened. Every day its leaders are removed from power in every sphere of life; white Afrikaans managers are replaced by formerly disadvantaged incumbents, leaving the white workforce leaderless in an antagonistic job environment. Every day the Afrikaans language is threatened, now even in the courtrooms, while their most intimate cultural sanctum, their education system, is violated by an insensitive Anglicised administration.
When a child tries to commit suicide but deliberately takes too few pills to succeed, that child is sending out a strong signal that should be heeded. A desperate child is capable of doing desperate things. — Johann Wingard, Warmbaths
Since reading the November 1 editorial I have decided to discontinue reading your rag.
Do you really believe that the Afrikaner is not being slowly strangled (and milked) in a campaign to return Africa to total African domination?
The Guardian sold its soul for a few coins and allowed the M&G to, in effect, cross the floor and transform itself from a truly independent newspaper to just another government mouthpiece.
The stench of political indoctrination, mixed with “a hear no evil see no evil” happy-clappy format, is not for me. –Claude Basson, Durban
Enough of the moans and groans
Although John Matshikiza was evidently trying to be positive in his article on National Be Positive Day (“Be postive, or else!”, November 1), he made a glaring error that needs correction.
His criticism of the International Marketing Council (IMC) was misplaced, as the council did not initiate the campaign, but simply circulated the material.
Matshikiza demands to know who are the “clowns running the government’s crack think-tank on the glories of the Rainbow Nation on our [South Africa’s] behalf”? In this instance the answer is: National Be Positive Day is run as an independent initiative in anattempt to shift attitudes and stop people from moaning.
So I am the “handbag-wielding Margaret Thatcher” type he refers to, delivering positive blows to the country’s shoddy self-esteem. I run this campaign virtually single-handedly and am not speaking for the government, nor am I paid by or affiliated to any agency that markets South Africa locally or internationally — or anyone else for that matter. In support of the sentiment of this campaign, the IMC simply offered me the use of its media portal.
Matshikiza accuses the document of containing mistakes and — granted — these are inexcusable. But these are not the mistakes of the IMC. For these I take full responsibility and apologise. But, unlike Matshikiza, I believe negativity has become such a chronic habit in the country that it has now reached endemic proportions. It has a powerful influence over our economy and inhibits our ability to address the remaining challenges we face.
Perhaps Matshikiza could have shown us what a big human being he is by adding to the list of reasons to celebrate South Africa rather than taking issue with whether Charlize Theron would or would not be seen dead in her native Benoni.
With the growing number of nay-sayers out there, there is a need to continue punting South Africa’s positive attributes. –Stephanie Vermeulen, National Be Positive Day campaign organiser
The IMC released Vermeulen’s one-woman national campaign under the following message: “The International Marketing Council of South Africa endeavours to draw the attention of South Africans to all the positive things that make us a great nation, with the vision of spreading the message about South Africa to the rest of the world.” Gallant as Vermeulen is in wishing to protect its good name, the IMC must surely assume joint responsibility for allowing this material to be distributed unchecked through its media portal. — Editor
Mr Asmal, the sums don’t add up
Minister of Education Kader Asmal must explain how his department plans to implement his Further Education and Training curriculum by 2004.
The plan, which comprises a reduction in the number of subjects from 124 to 35 and the introduction of compulsory maths or mathematical literacy and life orientation, requires massive retraining of teachers.
Will the department have trained enough teachers to manage this curriculum in 12 months? More than 6 800 maths teachers, double the number in the system, will be needed to cater for maths and mathematical literacy as compulsory subjects. Very few teachers are currently competent to handle life orientation as a subject.
It is not foregone that teachers whose subjects are to be phased out can become maths, mathematical literacy or life orientation teachers. Effective teaching is not merely an issue of grasping methodology, but also of subject knowledge.
Asmal is pushing ahead with ambitious plans, despite a lack of reliable data to inform his decision. With this fast-tracking of educational transformation, are we not gambling with the future of our children? –Richard Ntuli MP, Democratic Alliance
Wanderers
I’ve been a visitor to the Wanderers for years, but I’m ready to call it quits.
It’s a bit much to charge R8 for a can of beer, and a bit “mucher” to charge R4 for a plastic beaker that cost R2 last season. The insistence on the purchase of tokens to pay for beer savours more of a labour camp than a sports arena. A hot dog is a cold roll and a barely warm frankfurter.
Finally, why does the handsome new scoreboard fail to provide an item as central as extras?
The Gauteng Cricket Board bleats about poor attendances. Physician, heal thyself. –David Ludman, Bellevue
In brief
The e.tv interview with Ronnie Kasrils and Hagai Segal after John Pilger’s documentary on Palestine highlighted the stumbling block between Israelis and Palestinians — fundamentalist religion. Zionism is based on the belief that the Supreme Deity gave this sliver of land to a group of people. Among Muslim Palestinians, the belief in the hereafter and the holiness of the land is the focus of suicide bombers. The world cannot argue with such irrationality. We need to promote secular-minded peoples who do not belittle God by reducing him to a property dealer. — Faizal Ali Dashti, Cape Town
Much publicity has been given to Zena Mahlangu becoming King Mswati’s wife against her mother’s will (“A blow to women’s rights”, November 8). The word “abduction” has frequently been used. Culturally the king chooses a new wife following the Reed Dance ceremony. If this is what occurred, why is it alleged Mahlangu was “abducted”? Let this relationship be understood in its cultural context, even if it is not in keeping with Western-based values. — Professor Tuntufye S Mwamwenda, University of Natal
This week’s headlines told of a Pretoria man allegedly hijacked while thugs sped off with his baby. The baby was later found dead. The story has proved to be a deception. The man killed his child, faked the hijacking, depicting our nation as sick and uncaring. Who is left to correct the negative perceptions and the damage to the national psyche? Do we naturally expect the worse, so that we are quick to support and relay unproven hearsay? — Muzi Ndlovu, Bassonia
Please include your name and address. Letters must be received by 5pm Monday. Be as brief as possible. The editor reserves the right to edit letters and to withhold from publication any letter which he believes contains factual inaccuracies, or is based on misrepresentation.