We are quick to invoke the language of crimes against humanity when suffering belongs safely to the apartheid past, yet we explain it away when that suffering is present in our midst. And journalists are banned from taking pictures of the suffering (in hospitals).
When an ANC MEC implies that sleeping on a floor is acceptable, temporary, or — most outrageously — a matter of “preference”, the statement is not merely insulting, it is anti-clinical. In a medical context, a bed is not a luxury; it is a basic medical device.
The distinction between a bed and a floor is not a matter of comfort; it is a matter of physiology. A bed insulates; a floor drains. A bed elevates the body to facilitate circulation; a hard surface defies it. When a person lies flat on a hard floor for long hours, blood pools at the pressure points —hips, shoulders, lower back, heels. This stasis restricts oxygen delivery and invites the formation of clots, a risk that turns lethal for the elderly, the pregnant, and the immobile.
This rhetoric about “preference” points to a deeper pathology in South African governance. Since 1994, a dominant feature of our political life has been the impulse to explain failure away rather than confront it. Denial has become a reflexive muscle. When that denial inevitably cracks under the weight of evidence, it leaks: contradictions multiply, justifications become labyrinthine, and responsibility is displaced.
The MEC’s response follows a weary, well-worn script:
- Stage 1: The problem does not exist.
- Stage 2: The problem exists but is exaggerated by “agendas.”
- Stage 3: The problem exists, but it is the patient’s choice or apartheid.
When those in power teach the public to doubt what is visible and distrust their own senses, governance crosses a dangerous line. To tell a person lying on a cold hospital floor that they are not, in fact, experiencing a systemic collapse of dignity is state-sponsored gaslighting.
We are no longer just fighting a shortage of equipment; we are fighting a dereliction of reality. If the state cannot acknowledge the floor for what it is — a health hazard — it can never be expected to provide the bed.
— Chris Kanyane, Pretoria
Gaza is not parallel to Iran
For much of his recent column, “South Africa Should Not Bend a Knee to Anyone”, Barney Mthombothi makes a case for the expelling of Israel’s chargé d’affaires that is balanced and well thought out (if not necessarily correct) but he then completely undermines his entire point by drawing a moral equivalence between Israel’s actions in Gaza and the Islamic Republic’s wholesale slaughter of Iranian civilians. There is no equivalence and to say there is, is either a gross misunderstanding of both situations or a wilful distortion of facts to suit a particularly pernicious narrative.
“Who’s worse is a matter of opinion?” Sorry Mr Mthombothi, it’s not.
Here are the facts. Israel did not start the war in Gaza. It was started by Hamas on October 7 2023 when the terror group, joined by numerous Palestinian civilians, invaded the south of Israel and tortured, raped, immolated and massacred 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals and abducted another 250 back into Gaza. Israel, as was its full legal and moral imperative, followed the fleeing terrorists back into Gaza with the intent of bringing the hostages home and defeating Hamas.
The question isn’t why we care about the Iranian people, but why so many who profess to be invested in the future of the Middle East don’t
— Ilan Preskovsky
Hamas, however, had built its entire terror network in, under, and through Gaza’s civilian infrastructure for the express, clearly stated purpose of ensuring maximum civilian deaths. It is now accepted by both Hamas and Israel that some 70,000 Palestinians died during the two years of war, approximately one-third of those were active combatants, and hundreds, perhaps even thousands more, were killed directly by Hamas.
What happened in Iran is much simpler. In response to mass protests by the Iranian people against the Islamic Republic for its obliteration of the economy by singularly focusing most of the country’s funds on destroying Israel, Ayatollah Khamenei and his cabal of theocratic thugs ordered the Iranian Republican Guard Corps to massacre protesters en masse and arrest whoever else was left.
It’s still unclear just how many have died overall, but it is the general consensus that some 30,000 Iranian civilians were killed over just two days in January. That’s about as many Gazan civilians that died during two years of war, with the crucial difference being that these protesters were not the tragic collateral damage of a fierce urban war, but the direct targets of a despotic regime.
As for why Israel and her supporters “give a fig” about Iran — yes, it’s true, the whole thing did show the gross moral hypocrisy of so many in the “pro-Palestinian” camp, but more importantly, Persians and Jews have a relationship that stretches back millennia and both Israel and the vast majority of Iranian people are currently fighting for their lives against the exact same threat: tyrannical, bigoted, murderous, radical Islamism.
The question isn’t why we care about the Iranian people, but why so many who profess to be invested in the future of the Middle East don’t.
— Ilan Preskovsky, freelance journalist/writer
How about an English name?
I, along, no doubt, with a great many civilised countrymen, am incensed by the intention to rename almost two dozen towns and cities. In particular, East London is to become the almost comically named KuGompo City. Who, one wonders, can possibly be responsible for such madness?
Surely the individuals in question have something better to do with their time than willy-nilly changing names across the country? Perhaps by doing so they are trying to justify their bloated sinecures while sipping their tea and eating their cake during their two-hour a day “working” week?
English is South Africa’s most widely spoken language. Is this not to be accorded some consideration when new names are attributed to towns and cities to which the populace has been accustomed for a great many years?
I suggest that we are warranted in crying enough is enough. For heaven’s sake, let sleeping dogs lie.
— John Spira, Johannesburg
A raw deal for retired civil servants
I am writing out of deep concern about the financial pressure that civil service pensioners are experiencing these days. The increase of only 2.9% in 2025 has not only proved inadequate, it has also sucked the last breath out of the budget for many.
These people, who have dedicated their adult lives to serving the country and its people, now find themselves in a struggle to maintain basic human dignity. Added to this is the additional challenge of medical fund contributions increasing by almost 10%.
Pensioners also express their dissatisfaction with the massive amounts that were written off in recent years by both the Government Employee Pension Fund (GEPF) and the directors of the Public Investment Corporation (PIC). The trustees of the GEPF and directors of the PIC stand in breach of their fiduciary duties. This is not just financial mismanagement, it is moral failure.
Pensioners are being forced to choose between food, medicine and dignity while the very fund meant to protect them is being plundered. The Public Servants Association also issued a statement condemning the increase, saying that “despite being in line with the November 2024 year-on-year Consumer Price Index and exceeding the 75% minimum required by the GEPF law and rules, it is completely inadequate in the face of the rising living costs. If the GEPF is financially sound, it should at least be able to match the 5.5% increase that the government is prepared to grant to public servants.”
The GEPF is financially stable and well-positioned to meet its current and future obligations to members and pensioners. The fund should therefore grant pension increases that are both affordable and sustainable, ensuring the long-term viability of the fund while providing the benefits promised to its members.
— Harmyn Mynhardt, Mossel Bay
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.