Crime is a problem in many countries. In America, a superpower, they are struggling with school shootings and police brutality. Guns are freely available. There have already been two attempts on the life of their president. A few days ago, two diplomats were shot in cold blood. Four years ago, their current president instigated his followers to invade the Capitol. People were killed.
In our own country, crime is at unacceptable levels.
In this climate, the singing of an inciteful song by Julius Malema and his 10% party is counterproductive. Our courts decided it cannot be banned. This needs urgent attention. Unfortunately Donald Trump gave Malema exposure — exactly what he thrives on. I have been pleading for a long time that the media should not give him so much airtime.
We must not allow the deep divisions in the US to spill over into our country. Our people are deeply divided. Social networks have become slaughterhouses. Bridges are being broken.
I hope the long overdue national dialogue will materialise soon. Countrywide discussions across historic divides have become urgently necessary.
— Dawie Jacobs, Pretoria
Malema is a criminal
President Cyril Ramaphosa says we live in a multiparty democracy, but what other democracy permits a party to hold mass rallies where threats are made to murder innocent people? The rallying cry of “Kill the Boer” is the antithesis of what makes democracy possible: the right of one’s opponent to exist.
The EFF speaks with one voice in parliament and another at rallies. This duplicity has even managed to fool the Constitutional Court into endorsing “Kill the Boer” as harmless.
In the UK there is a crime of “incitement to race hatred” for which Malema would be guilty and sent to prison. This moral principle is clearly missing from the South African constitution and must be rectified. Malema is, by international standards, a criminal.
— Dave S Henley, via e-mail
One-man bands are risky
Your article about lawyers and Oceans Mall in Umhlanga (May 25) refers.
Mr Ahmed Amod will bring the number of legal practitioners under investigation for missing funds to about 519. Virtually everyone is — or was — a sole practitioner. And thus not subject to continual financial review by a colleague.
Anyone who entrusts RAF or property to a one-man band is taking a risk. The Legal Practice Council does pay out, but it's a long and expensive process. Far rather engage a medium-sized firm where every partner has unlimited liability for the acts of all partners.
— Charles Sebastian Gilbert, Sandton
BEE kills confidence
The much-punted “transformation” expressed through some laws is a red herring. The condition of Africans in South Africa after 30 years of transformation laws is proof that they have no effect.
Aspects of transformation such as BEE have succeeded only to kill self-confidence as well as the creative and innovative inclination of Africans. Many African entrepreneurs have been turned into hankerers for stakes in companies created by whites.
On paper, playing fields were levelled in 1994. But no brand has been created by Africans that has made anyone a billionaire. Instead, African billionaires have surfaced out of riding on what whites created, without taking any risk and providing no skills. People are called “businessmen” for receiving money from white enterprises.
There are also others who get contracts for jobs they have no capacity to do. On the other hand, most white billionaires who emerged just before and after 1994 are sitting on companies they created.
In essence, the “transformation” is conceived from a mind saturated with an inferiority complex. If you understand apartheid to have damaged Africans, the concern should be to transform Africans from their damaged state, not to lock them into dependency on white success.
Only when you believe that only white people can have companies that can employ people can you think of forcing them to give a stake of their company to (the unfortunate) African (because he cannot create his own). Similarly, you have to force him to employ Africans in senior positions.
Such mentality comes from being unaware that for most of the time the people at the top are those who created the business, thought it out, identified the market, took the risk — or inherited it from parents who went through the process.
It is the inferiority complex that has planted the notion that Africans are shut outside the economy, whereas in fact they are crucial participants, but only as consumers. They are blind to the fact that their buying power is what sustains some of the companies founded by white people.
— Dr Kenosi Mosalakae, via e-mail
Is R200m not enough?
The article by Gugu Lourie about Nkosana Makate's 25-year claim against Vodacom for the “Please Call Me ” innovation (May 25) leaves one bemused and astonished, but also irritated and sad.
How can a reasonable sentient being spend a quarter of a century rejecting a Supreme Court of Appeal judgment of almost R200m because it's “not enough”?
Sure, Vodacom made a packet. So what? A reward of a king’s ransom for Makate's few years' work at the company seems more than adequate. So, instead of enjoying a fabulous lifestyle, the young man rejects more money than most people could spend in a lifetime because, apparently, he feels entitled to more.
What would he do with “more”? Will human nature ever cease to amaze?
— L Steinhardt, Port Alfred
Trump's clarity deficit
“Clearly.” If I hear that term once more in analysis and conversation, its adverbial quality will lose all credibility for me. We all need to join the global dots and be stronger and wiser when dealing with Donald Trump's capacity to obfuscate potential and actual outcomes.
Trump has disrupted the flow of global economic and political discourse. Nothing is clear about his intentions. His latest incursion into laughable and embarrassingly obviously flawed misconceptions involved Cyril Ramaphosa's delegation to the Oval Office.
This important and iconic office became the platform for Trump to stage yet another coup. He used all the resources of his “intelligence” and civil service acolytes to concoct a video and printed material to constrain open discourse and attempt to lead those present to certain conclusions about South Africa.
Many would have been led to the view that those who are deemed to be “white” and of a particular subgroup called Afrikaners/farmers are being subjected to genocidal abuse. According to Trump, that abuse led to numerous —“maybe even thousands” — of deaths among these farmers, and a wish by them to emigrate. He in turn made a special provision for them to be offered refugee status.
If the journalists had done their homework and had the South African delegation adopted a more strategic approach to Trump's potential for rhetorical misinformation, the outcome would have been more palatable for us living in South Africa.
Nothing is clear about Trump's agenda, except for his obvious need to have his ego massaged ad nauseam.
— Dr John H Crowe, Fish Hoek
For opinion and analysis consideration, e-mail Opinions@timeslive.co.za
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.