Whatever motivation President Jacob Zuma has in proposing a national dialogue on a moral code for the country, I think the idea is a splendid one and should be commended.
We should all try to participate in whichever way we can. Opposition parties have been quick to flay Zuma, saying his proposal smacks of opportunism in light of the recent spot of bother he has had in his own personal life. No matter. His proposal is a valid one and it’s churlish to be dismissive of it while the country seems adrift when it comes to values, morality, identity and social cohesion.
Some sceptics have said one can’t impose a moral order or code from above. Such behaviour, it is argued, is taught first in the home, at school, by community elders and in places of religious worship. For those who somehow bypass those lessons, it is often too late to hope that by initiating such a debate later on in life it might lead to behavioural change.
It may be ideal that morality begins at home but, as we know, many homes are broken and damaged and as a result guidance is sometimes lacking.
But I’m an eternal optimist and suggest we don’t just shrug our shoulders because we somehow believe it’s too late. Some of the basics simply need to be reinforced. Even though we come from eclectic cultures and backgrounds, there ought to be those common ties that bind us where we endeavour to treat one another with respect, integrity and dignity. We also want a government that is responsive and shows humility when it has erred. We want a public service that embodies these qualities but also understands that the public purse is not for its own nefarious gains.
We could start by defining what we deem as being acceptable language in public discourse. Our leaders across the political spectrum need to address us with respect.
At a press conference last week ANC Youth League president Julius Malema went on a visceral tirade blaming the left, the right, the media and opposition parties for weekend press reports that revealed his business interests and the sources of his bling lifestyle.
This seems to be an obvious ploy to deflect attention from the real issues to which Malema would not respond and for which he seemingly had no credible defence.
This time, however, he seemed to be scraping the bottom of the barrel. His school of thought tends to be: when at a loss about what to say, hurl abuse.
Malema is always robust in public debates and utterances. The freedom of expression we enjoy in this country allows him to do so — similarly it allows us to respond.
It was mostly his vexatious accusations against the media that caught my attention. He insinuated that some of the female journalists at the conference who dared to ask him questions were in fact sleeping with politicians and that’s how they got information from these sources.
This is just outrageous and an insult to all journalists. Implicit in this is a very toxic and backward notion that women cannot excel in whatever career they’ve chosen without resorting to using their feminine wiles to get ahead.
This is not the first time that Malema has cast such aspersions on women. You’ll remember his cantankerous accusations against Western Cape Premier Helen Zille that she was sleeping with her all-male cabinet.
Malema is not the only offender to articulate such sexist views. Last year former Anglo-American boss Graham Boustred spewed this gem about women in power:
“Do you know why it’s difficult to find a female CEO?
“It’s because most women are sexually frustrated. Men are not, because they can fall back on call girls, go to erectile dysfunction clinics. If you have a CEO who’s sexually frustrated she can’t act properly.”
We often pat ourselves on the back for the strides we’ve made in South Africa in ensuring equality between the sexes, but it’s clear from these utterances that much of it is in the books but not in our minds and hearts. So much of our discourse gets polluted by such bilious thoughts and corrosive ideas.
A national dialogue aimed at determining a moral code would present us with the perfect opportunity to flesh out these issues and decide what it is that we find disagreeable and what it is we should aspire to become as a nation.