It seems that South Africa is full of political experts. Who knew? What a country, though. Who could forget when it was full of microbiologists and vaccinologists not so long ago? And then, just after that, specialists on the history and geopolitical situation in the ex-Soviet Republics and then the same for the Middle East.
That’s the sort of pivoting and agility management that you only find in this remarkable population.
Who knows to what we will turn our collective hands tomorrow?
Right now, it’s spin doctoring of the highest order:
Explaining why this party’s 0.3% is actually a better result than that party’s 22.3%. How that party winning this area doesn’t actually count for anything, because [stereotypical voter demographic] was always going to vote that way. Calling for the head of a party they don’t even care about, while studiously ignoring the fact that they outperformed everyone’s wildest predictions. Just making everyone aware that it’s someone else’s fault that the 68% of the population that support your single policy party’s single policy mysteriously morphed into 0.21% on election day.
Still, all this mental manoeuvering does at least distract us from the rather unpleasant thought of an ANC coalition with the EFF (ANC-lite) or MK (ANC-heavy), running what’s left of the country (into the ground).
And it’s also not leaving much space for wondering where local political phoenix has-been Patricia de Lille is going to emerge this time around. But then again, who cares?
If the whole “Tax cuts for pensioners” and “Bring back National Service” policies suggested by outgoing UK PM Rishi Sunak were (rightly) ridiculed as being pre-election desperation tactics, then what on earth are we to make of this?
At least Sunak’s promises were a month and bit away, even if they were clearly the last ditch attempts of a dying government to try and win a few more votes. This one above was announced literally 3½ hours before election day.
Next level stuff.
That’s the 4th major bill Ramaphosa has signed into law in the last 2 weeks. And while I’m not saying that those bills are necessarily good or bad (OK, I’m saying that the NHI bill is an absolute disaster, but still), it’s pretty sickening that after 30 years in power – 6 of them with him in the Big Chair – we’re suddenly seeing actual work being done, simply because the ANC is about to lose their overall majority, and – linked, but also not the same – they ANC is desperate for votes.
If these things were so right (not the NHI bill) and will be so beneficial for the country (again… not so much the NHI one), then why weren’t they signed into law weeks, months or even years ago?
It almost makes you think that the ruling party is simply desperate for voters to see them actually doing some actual work.
This one might go better, because out of all of the candidates that will be standing in all of those elections – only one man seems to have the right idea about delivering a solid, vote-winning policy:
For too long, political parties have happily stood by and watched as crime was legal. No-one has done anything about it.
Careful now, says Nick Delehanty. Down with this sort of thing.
It’s about time that someone raised their head above the parapet and stood for what’s right. Nick Delehanty has done that. Make Crime Illegal.
I’m not sure how many votes he got last time around, but with policies like this, on June 7th I can certainly see those numbers Dublin.
“You’re on social media, 6000. Aren’t you outraged?”
I am getting a lot of people asking if I am upset over the DA TV advert which in which they – and I hope you’re sitting down for this – depicted the SA flag being burned.
Well, they actually depicted a poorly-done CGI SA flag being burned. But same same, right?
Here’s the ad. I hope you’re ready.
Well, no. I’m not outraged, and I’m not outraged for many reasons.
First off, I don’t tend to get outraged about things anymore. You get to a stage in life when you realise that the energy you spend on being outraged is completely wasted. And the earlier you reach that stage in your life, the happier you will be. Sure, get irritated, annoyed, maybe even tinker with being briefly furious. But then drop it. Because expending more effort than that – especially publicly – on something you can’t change, makes you look like a buffoon. So much bluster, so little outcome.
Of course, it’s really easy to be outraged on social media, where we can all hide behind our profile pictures and pseudonyms and tell people how what they must think. But that’s even more pointless. Honestly, who is really going to listen to some nasty words formed from pixels?
And right there is the second reason. This isn’t a burning flag. It’s just some pixels. And if you’re willing to say that those pixels are the same thing as burning a real flag, then you should really be able to understand that the “burning flag” (pixels) here is merely a metaphor for the state of the country should the ANC go into a coalition with the EFF and the MK after the election. Is it an accurate metaphor? I don’t know, but that’s actually immaterial. The DA feel that it’s an accurate way to describe the consequences of that alliance, and this is their advert. And whether or not the advert is accurate or crap is also immaterial. The outrage here isn’t over the words or the sentiment. It’s all about the “burning flag”.
What it has done is fanned the flames (no pun intended) of the electoral fire (no pun intended). Has it influenced anyone either way? Probably very few. But probably also both ways. If it was meant to get people to watch it, it’s worked. If it was meant to rile the ANC, it’s also worked.
That statement by Zizi Kodwa, Minster for Sports, Arts and Culture, there. You may recognise him from such news stories as:
But oh no… someone did a nasty thing to the flag. Well, some pixels that looked like the flag.
How convenient.
Thirdly(?), It’s interesting to note that while there are several laws pertaining to the illegality of corruption in public office, there doesn’t appear to be anything saying whether you can or can’t burn the flag (which the DA didn’t do, anyway). Here’s Government Notice No. 510 of 8th June 2001 (Gazette no 22356) (catchy title, catchy contents):
The fourth thing is that outrage on social media is hugely selective. Polarised along racial, political, national, sports team or whatever other lines. Any opportunity to bash the other side is gleefully taken. People readily jump onto the bandwagon: there is comfort in numbers and camaraderie. There is admiration to be earned in being one of the people that was outraged at this or that thing that happened. But outrage is often also hypocritical. I’ve seen 100x more posts and tweets from people upset with the “burning flag” ad than I have over the actual footage of a government minister driving past shacks in his Mercedes G-Wagon, throwing ANC t-shirts onto the floor for poor people to pick up.
But do a bit of editing with a video of a flame and a CGI flag in Microsoft Moviemaker and… ah Jesus…
Of course, above all else, we should always remember that social media is not real life. Much as Jessica’s life isn’t one constant beach holiday, no matter what her Facebook feed might suggest, nor is anyone going to grab their torches and pitchforks and head to the DA HQ over this.
Well, I say that. They might, but if they do, much like the letter above, it will all be as a cunning stunt by one of the other allegedly outraged parties to try and score some points.
I guess what I am saying here is not to rush to be outraged by anything – especially in this election season. They’re absolutely out to get your emotions and people are falling for it every single time. You have nothing tangible to gain, and so much energy and effort to lose. Rather focus on the bigger picture and don’t be distracted. Look at the facts, examine the manifestos, check out the track records and consider the alternatives.
But don’t lose sleep over some pixels in an advert. Really.
Incoming from one of our crime correspondents back in the UK, this:
Knifes should BANNED!!
Claire’s gone in hard there. No messing around. No hesitancy. No doubting her feelings. Some question over what might be her home language, but that’s really beside the point.
Knifes should BANNED!!
Given that this is an emotive subject and looking her upfront, overt statement, it’s unsurprising that others might choose to voice their own opinions on this subject. And Top Fan Sharon is right there, not even bothering with even basic punctuation, feeling that the words speak for themselves.
Yes I agree but how .
They’re the staple of every kitchen
Knifes are indeed the staple of every kitchen. Knifes and other utensils. And also food. But you never hear of anyone being stabbed to death with a spatula or a Asian-style pork belly with ginger and lemongrass, now do you? It’s clearly knifes that are the problem and that’s why knifes should BANNED!!
And, in theory, this somewhat draconian, but well-meaning plan, whilst making basic cooking and eating rather difficult, would likely eradicate knife crime pretty quickly. But the yoof of todayTM aren’t foolish. If they can’t stab you with a knife, they’ll just turn to other means of… er… “protection”, like spatulas stones / rocks ! . And as Sharon points out:
Can’t ban those.
Not like knifes.
The world is made up of stones / rocks ! and if we were to ban stones / rocks ! , then we’d have nothing to stand on. Banning stones / rocks ! makes the whole knifes should BANNED!! idea seem like a walk in the park. Although not Mortomley Park, obviously. The police cordons are still in place there.
The fact is that there is actually a really good law banning kids (or anyone else) in the UK from carrying knifes, and there has been since 1988, when MPs debated the motion “knifes should BANNED!!” in Parliament and came up with the Criminal Justice Act in response.
So knifes should BANNED!! albeit at the expense of the culinary arts. And with stones / rocks ! seemingly impossible to restrict or control. It looks like we might be losing the war on juvenile crime. Still, at least they chose to go down the stones / rocks ! route and they haven’t turned to firearms.
Or have they? How on earth (still here, made of of stones / rocks ! – can’t ban those) are we supposed to deal with that situation?
Claire’s back to sort us out:
yeah also gun!
I’m sorry, what? Pray explain, Dawn?
gun need banned
What? All of it?
Like under the extensive, far-reaching, oft-updated Firearms Act of 1968, you mean?
I think that what these erstwhile ladies are missing is the fact that actually knifes are BANNED!! and also gun – gun are banned, too. Also, stabbing and shooting people are banned. Even with a spatula.
It’s almost as if the people carrying the knifes and the gun, and doing the stabbing and shooting, don’t really care about what the law says that they can or can’t do.
Why, I’d wager that they’d even throw stones / rocks ! at each other (and probably everyone else, lol) if it was illegal.
It was worth a try, but it does seem that your well-meaning, poorly expressed, grammatically disastrous comments aren’t actually going to help.
Because, to be honest, all this nastiness actually comes down to the people. But banning people is like stones / rocks ! – can’t ban those!
The only thing that could actually make this situation any better is some legislation about social media.
