pFj0HdW2iDs

yF4ne-Ek4ko

Johannesburg - Anti-apartheid activist Allan Boesak accused the ruling party on Wednesday evening of entrenching racial hatred instead of preaching tolerance.

"The ANC has succumbed to the subtle but pernicious temptations of ethnic thinking, has brought back the language of ethnicity into the speech of the movement and has, as government, brought back the hated system of racial categorisation," Boesak told some 2 000 people at a memorial lecture in Cape Town.

For full story see:

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Politics/0,,2-7-12_2367414,00.htmll

This guy is a toffee and hasn't explained affirmative action properly at all. He just got incredibly defensive and that blows all manner of his credibility. I'm afraid he represents what South Africa lacks in many of its leaders - pragmatism and leadership that isn't ideology-based. This I think has translated into barely disguised racism, seen most notably in ANC spokesperson Jesse Duarte, who I think should be dismissed for some of the shocking comments she has made in the past.

Affirmative Action isn't meant to be a racist policy. It's meant to be an empowering exercise that integrates previously disadvantaged persons into the economy, in order to try balance out the inherent inequalities that exist in South Africa. And so it includes blacks, coloureds, Indians & South African-born Chinese - people who were denied opportunities due to laws that favoured whites in the past.

It is a race based policy, but the fact of the matter remains that South Africa faces inequality primarily along racial lines. By mandating quotas etc in law, you force institutions to go out of their comfort zones by extending their arms to people who - in practice - they previously would not have welcomed so easily. Change doesn't happen automatically, and the law needs to push those in power to empower others. If this isn't done, the vicious circle of inequality manifests itself further. AA isn't something unique to South Africa at all, and is used all over the world.

Whilst the policy has been abused in many ways by many South Africans, of all races, I think it has definitely contributed to the growing black middle class we find in the country today. This has, among other things, grown our consumer base significantly and contributed to the growth of the economy.

Also, black economic empowerment really is a misnomer. The correct term is broad based black economic empowerment, and is a lot more than simply favouring blacks instead of whites. Significantly, it mandates that businesses have a social responsibility to uplift the communities in which they operate, and covers things from consultation in mining activities, for instance, to investing in corporate social responsibility.

This guy is a toffee and hasn't explained affirmative action properly at all. He just got incredibly defensive and that blows all manner of his credibility. I'm afraid he represents what South Africa lacks in many of its leaders - pragmatism and leadership that isn't ideology-based. This I think has translated into barely disguised racism, seen most notably in ANC spokesperson Jesse Duarte, who I think should be dismissed for some of the shocking comments she has made in the past.

Affirmative Action isn't meant to be a racist policy. It's meant to be an empowering exercise that integrates previously disadvantaged persons into the economy, in order to try balance out the inherent inequalities that exist in South Africa. And so it includes blacks, coloureds, Indians & South African-born Chinese - people who were denied opportunities due to laws that favoured whites in the past.

It is a race based policy, but the fact of the matter remains that South Africa faces inequality primarily along racial lines. By mandating quotas etc in law, you force institutions to go out of their comfort zones by extending their arms to people who - in practice - they previously would not have welcomed so easily. Change doesn't happen automatically, and the law needs to push those in power to empower others. If this isn't done, the vicious circle of inequality manifests itself further. AA isn't something unique to South Africa at all, and is used all over the world.

Whilst the policy has been abused in many ways by many South Africans, of all races, I think it has definitely contributed to the growing black middle class we find in the country today. This has, among other things, grown our consumer base significantly and contributed to the growth of the economy.

Also, black economic empowerment really is a misnomer. The correct term is broad based black economic empowerment, and is a lot more than simply favouring blacks instead of whites. Significantly, it mandates that businesses have a social responsibility to uplift the communities in which they operate, and covers things from consultation in mining activities, for instance, to investing in corporate social responsibility.

Dream on.......

Affirmative Action isn't meant to be a racist policy.

Well, it effectively is a racist policy.

It's meant to be an empowering exercise that integrates previously disadvantaged persons into the economy, in order to try balance out the inherent inequalities that exist in South Africa.

The only way to integrate people into the economy is to grow the economy and create jobs. Certainly not by active discrimination based on skin colour or gender.

And so it includes blacks, coloureds, Indians & South African-born Chinese - people who were denied opportunities due to laws that favoured whites in the past.

What might "whites in the past" have to with an 18-year old white male job-seeker who is now actively discriminated against?

[/QUOTE]It is a race based policy...[/QUOTE]

Hy druk 'n drie!

...but the fact of the matter remains that South Africa faces inequality primarily along racial lines.

As does every nation which consists of multiple races

By mandating quotas etc in law, you force institutions to go out of their comfort zones by extending their arms to people who - in practice - they previously would not have welcomed so easily.

Why would they not have welcomed them so easily? If they are qualified and experienced then shouldn't they be able to compete for a position on merit?

Change doesn't happen automatically, and the law needs to push those in power to empower others.

Is who they choose to empower based on epidermal pigmentation by any chance?

If this isn't done, the vicious circle of inequality manifests itself further.

How?

AA isn't something unique to South Africa at all, and is used all over the world.

It's used mostly to promote minorities in the rest of the world actually (not that I completely agree with that either). It also worked out great in Sri Lanka.

Whilst the policy has been abused in many ways by many South Africans, of all races, I think it has definitely contributed to the growing black middle class we find in the country today.

The growth in the entire middle class would have been much greater if the focus had been on economic growth & job creation. Instead skilled and educated people have left the country in droves and those left behind have to pay more to educate & train replacements while positions lie vacant or are filled with muppets and people lacking the requisite skills and/or experience.

This has, among other things, grown our consumer base significantly and contributed to the growth of the economy.

Any growth that was achieved was in spite of AA, not as a result of it.

Also, black economic empowerment really is a misnomer.

I agree, BEE is simply government-sponsored corruption.

The correct term is broad based black economic empowerment, and is a lot more than simply favouring blacks instead of whites.

I would agree that it is "a lot more than simply favouring blacks instead of whites" since it actively discriminates against whites from top to bottom. AA on steroids -just what we needed!

Significantly, it mandates that businesses have a social responsibility to uplift the communities in which they operate, and covers things from consultation in mining activities, for instance, to investing in corporate social responsibility.

What does any of that have to do with colour of anyone's skin? Or can companies only invest in corporate social responsibility if the area is 'black' enough?

This is 'scandalous ANC racism'
05/09/2007 09:39 - (SA)

Cobus Claassen, Beeld (from: Mail & Guardian online newspaper)

Pretoria - The Tshwane metro council will in future refuse to do small business transactions with white businesses.

The council's internal purchase division received this order last week.

Kiba Kekana, the council's municipal manager, last month approved a report determining that no white businesses may in future be considered when the council purchased goods for less than R30 000. The same applied to tenders.

Beeld obtained a copy of the report which was approved by Kekana on August 6.

'This is no joke'

The changes were applicable from September 1.

According to the report, only small and medium-sized businesses "exclusively in the possession of black people" which were on the council's data basis would be considered.

Quotations must be obtained from at least three different service providers.

The report also suggested that delegation of power regarding the buying of goods must be recalled after the council's new alternative service delivery structure started on July 1.

A council official who wanted to remain anonymous for fear of losing his job, said white businesses were approved in the past if their quotations were cheaper.

"We were told last week to buy only from black businesses. I paid between R6 000 and R7 000 more for goods to comply with the new requirements.

"This is going to become an expensive order," he predicted.

The report indicated that an "alternative report" by Hamilton Hhlom, the executive director of acquisitions, must be approved when three quotations cannot be obtained and they were forced to make use of a white business's services.

The owner of a company who had been doing business with several departments of the council for the past 15 years, said he would have to close his company's doors immediately.

"At first I thought it was a joke when I heard the rumours. It's not a joke when you realise it is the end of you business. What must I tell my empoyees?"

Natasha Michael, the chief whip of the DA, said the party was shocked to find out about the report.

"The council is doing business with several black economic empowerment businesses. Years of experience will be ignored."

According to Michael it was not the national legislature's aim to isolate certain individuals on racist grounds.

"It's simply to set straight previous imbalances. The report will lead to new imbalances."

Conrad Beyers, FF+ council member, described the decision as scandalous ANC racism.

"The ANC are crossing all barriers of reasonability. It's all about ideologies and even people who earn their bread and butter suffer on the grounds of race."

The council did not react to enquiries made by Beeld for comment on the story.

Well put Tom, as an AA candidate I support it throughout and think that it has put this country in a better state than some would have thought. The practice have been critised by both camps wich sick change and those who doesn't but some critisism has been blank. Some rude measures have been exercised especially in the public sector because of resistance to change therefore to a certain extent resulting into job loses and loosing the skilled. Racism is rife in the work place and have resulted in most AA candidates having to jump ship from one company to the next. I agree that a person born 16 or 17 years ago shouldn't have qoutas affecting him or her but monitoring still need to be put in place as some would take advantage and hire more whites and still leave behind the AA candidates. We must remember that the AA qouta doesn't apply to all companies as the size is the determining factor. The failure of AA comes from both camps and I think all parties need to sit and discuss it further. The skilled who has lost jobs because of the wrong practise have been and are still being lured back into government parastals like Eskom but some fails to see the change taking place and focus on the negative only. White companies are still benefiting from large government projects and I would like to see those companies operating proper training institutions in townships and rural areas and the goverment need to implement strict measures to make sure that they to train our people. Banks need to come on board and assist the black majority in financing business initiatives.

Cape Town - Details of a second large transfer of prime residential land to national government by the Western Cape's former ANC-led administration were revealed.

"391.7 hectares of land owned by the provincial department of local government are to be transferred. The agreement was signed on April 20, and finalised on May 4, the second-last day it was legally possible for the outgoing (ANC) administration to sign off such documents.

"This was done to frustrate us, as the new administration, so we don't deliver services," Madikizela told journalists.

Full article can be read at:
http://www.news24.com/Content/SouthAfrica/Politics/1057/74b2eeaa602945bb9d2ec476e7652390/01-06-2009%2003-06/More_Cape_land_goes_to_ANC_govt

This sort of thing is what holds the country back. Racist agenda's are holding South Africa back once again from becoming a modern state, but this time from the ANC majority and not the old Apartheid.

Well put Tom, as an AA candidate I support it throughout and think that it has put this country in a better state than some would have thought.

Correction of an error at any level other than that of causation, can only end up in perpetuating the error albeit in a different form. In this case the supposed 'correction' has just bought about a 180 degree flip, and it is now obvious that nothing has been learned, resulting in nothing really changing. The only difference now is that by the tyranny of numbers, the situation is more 'tolerable' as there are less people complaining about it. There is a fundamental error at work here, and that is the belief that sheer numbers can somehow circumvent an unchangeable universal law and therein lies its madness. The fruits of this madness can clearly be seen by those who wish to see.

A rose remains a rose and and shall always obey the rules of its existence, no matter how many people rise up against this notion and wish it to be something else. It is sheer madness to call a rose by any other name and then believing that all has changed.

The ideals of addressing the wrongs of the past was very good and the fact that we had to strive to reflect the demographics of the country excellent.

But what happened:
1. 15 Years after the changeover to a democratic dispensation in companies that previously did not reflect the demographics, did about 5 years ago no longer reflect the demographics today. This is happening because still no white person can be appointed. - This now became a racist policy of excluding a group based on the colour of its skin and not trying to ensure that we reflect the demographics of the country.
2. Non-white immigrants into this country (arrived after 1994) are favoured because of the colour of their skin above skilled white South Africa born citizens - In my language this is now racist.
3. Look at the top management of many state owned enterprises and you will struggle to find white SA nationals in any of them. In Transnet after Maria Ramos run away not to face the consequences of all her short term decisions, no white South African national remains in a position of General Manager or higher. The white faces that you might see all carry British passports because of a deliberate policy to exclude White South African Nationals - This is racist and sound to me like what Hitler did to the Jews in Germany - Not just racism but Nazi Racism.
4. Many other countries had affirmative Action, but in all the cases it was to affirm the minority and not the majority. South Africa do have a problem where the children of Black ANC Billionaires born after 1990 will get preference to poor white or coloured children born in the same year - Racism
5. South Africa is slipping in the competitive index due its management ability - you find that too many people is just job hopping between positions to cimb the corporate ladder without any experience or contribution. In my view a person needs to be longer than 18 months in a position to really gather the experience from that position. But is SA people are "promoted" (read racially advanced) within 6 months of getting into a position. The same people are advanced over and over. This is unfair the the millions not getting any benefit from affirmative action. We need a policy to indicate that when a person got the benefit from Affirmative Action policies once, they must thereafter compete on an equal footing based on results and ability, not colour of their skin.

We need to get rid of the policies of race in this country. I am sure that Verwoerd would be proud of the ANC of today, no wonder why the old National Party merged with the ANC.

The problem is that many don't understand employment equity or affirmative action and end up living resentful lives. Some even go as far as comparing these policies to apartheid which shows the complete lack of understanding of apartheid, which socially, economically and otherwise excluded people entirely from life in South Africa.

Its not expected that everybody, white or non-white agrees with EE or AA and the way its implemented, but its simply a drop in the ocean. In my view, you choose your future, and if you're going to have the "I'm a white male, who can't get a job outlook" then you probably won't get one. My friends at WITS, UCT, UWC, Stellenbosch etc. who have completed their degrees have all found jobs regardless of their skin colour. If you have something to offer there is no doubt that you will find a job.

Unfortunately, government does not match its EE or AA aspirations with a strong education system. Many companies remain largely white owned or managed by mostly white managers, which I am perfectly fine with, because if the right people with the potential do not exist we should just be working harder to find people with the potential across all racial backgrounds.

We don't live in a world where the white unqualified son of a manager just walks into a job and "works" his way to the top. The challenges many find in searching for employment in some cases is simply a reflection of the tough job market, because if you believed the way some people described EE or AA you would swear that all white indviduals were losing their jobs and unable to find new jobs.

Hmmmmmm interesting topic...if you may indulge me i would like to bring the issue of; who owns most business in SA???? As the famous saying goes, there are "two sides to a coin"...also, there's no simple answer as to who is holding back development. 1stly there isnt enough research/studies on this specific topic to argue for or against this notion. 2ndly you have to take the proponents of AA (ANC) into account, their skills, knowledge and their leadership abilities to make it work. Under the leadership of the ANC, one would not be blamed for calling AA reverse racism, however i still believe that under better skills, knowledge and leadership (conditions) AA could be beneficial. Now i know there isn't enough historical evidence to prove me right, however we must also see that there have not been many countries that have a story "history" like SA.

Whats my point? although this is an interesting topic, it is baseless and too subjective in nature to facilitate a thorough debate. Is the ANC to blame for the poor implementation of AA in SA...a resounding yes! Is AA racist in nature???......only if administered appallingly. Should AA be abolished in SA???? considering our history, i think it is necessary.....could it be implemented in a better way....you bet your sweet asss it could.

We need to get rid of the policies of race in this country.


It will be good, but considering SA history? Not anytime soon. There are still too many fresh wounds around.

"Is Racism Keeping Development Back?"
- simply put: Yes, it has done so in the past and is certainly doing so now. Not only is it hampering development, it's destroying what's been good, ie ESCOM, SAA, SABC, general infrastructure, etc.
BEE is a farce. 'B' stands for black african despite it being an umbrella term to include coloured/indian/asian- unless one is an ANC lakay. I know several people who have failed do get government employment or who had to make way for black africans irrespective of their qualifications and skills. I myself, have applied for several government posts- having been up to Pretoria, where I was bluntly told that it's virtually impossible for a coloured male to get employment in Gauteng!

Histroy has shown that racism always destroys the racist. Peace and love man... is forward thinking.

Those who are not in our shoes do not feel the pain that we as Africans feel. Our ability is still being questioned, meetings are still being held behind our backs and the incapable are still being appointed and as long as that continues, we will still report back to the government so as to tighten the rules further. Those who were puppets of the apartheid government left the country as their racist approach which which marginalised the major is not welcomed in the new SA. This country embrace those who are part of it, the hard workers and those with result driven approach.

Those who are not in our shoes do not feel the pain that we as Africans feel. Our ability is still being questioned, meetings are still being held behind our backs and the incapable are still being appointed and as long as that continues, we will still report back to the government so as to tighten the rules further. Those who were puppets of the apartheid government left the country as their racist approach which which marginalised the major is not welcomed in the new SA. This country embrace those who are part of it, the hard workers and those with result driven approach.

What in your mind is an African?

this is a stupid subject. either you like it cause you benefit from it, or you hate it cause you are marginalised by the policy.

i personally think is a load of hypocritical bull - and if there was a time and place for it, this has come and gone. SA has been a democracy long enough now. BEE creates the impression (for me), that many africans are appointed without merit, terrible i know, but with these policies in place how am i suppose to know that you are competent enough to be in your position.... and this creates a lack of trust in that persons ability until they produce the goods. jeezlike, i have seen some shocker BEE appointments, esp when i was still an auditor LOL... sad sad sad... make it stop!

Again, confusion with BEE,EE or AA.
One reason why we can't have a debate of this nature at SSC.

hi mo.
explain the diff in context of my post. i would to know the dif cause i dont.
thanks

I think a period of forced AA was absolutely necessary at the end of Apartheid. I really do not think in '95 that there were many black entrepreneurs / companies in a position to complete against white-owned companies with plenty of capital, credit and decades of experience and connections.

Black-owned startup companies would certainly have been at a major disadvantage, possibly for racist reasons, but also due to risk and a lack of a track record in going for tenders.

A similar period for employees would have been necessary - bringing in people of a completely different background, culture and native language would be a shock even if there was no race involved and I think in pure competition in the mid-90s it was unfairly tilted against non-whites.

So IMO a "grace" AA period was necessary. However 15 years has past. People who werent even in primary school in 94 could have left university by now; people who were leaving university are halfway through their careers by now, and there has been ample time for black employees and black-owned companies to get a significant share in the economy (which it seems they have done). Sure - distribution is not equal between the races, but that could take centuries to even out - or may never even out. Maintaining what is in effect a deliberate economic distortion for idealistic reasons is clearly harming the economy. Not only because companies and government pay more for services than necessary (ie wasting taxes and capital) but far more harmfully - it becomes common knowledge that political connections and window-dressing are more important than competance and efficiency. This is the path to a banana republic.

It is definitely high time for fair and non-racial competition for people and companies.

^^ you always give a balanced comment Clive and have noticed that you analyse the topic at hand before saying anything. But on another note, companies have not played the role they supposed to so that a move over AA. There is still a lot of marginalisation by most companies which still believe in white minority rule.

Thanks Pule. I am suprised you feel that most companies still believe in white minority rule. Surely everyone knows that white minority (political) rule is as dead as the dinosaurs? Even the most racist dreamer knows this will never happen.

I have no doubt that a large number of companies may still practice some kind of discrimination against black people, as I am quite sure many black companies do the same against whites.

But if companies are still REALLY practicing discrimination after all these years it will be very hard to change their minds and shackling the entire economy to an inefficient model for decades (when clearly it wont change) surely seems a worse option.

I believe the spending power of the black majority is already more than the white. This surely this has already tipped the balance in favour of black economic power. Companies supplying that market will naturally tend to involve a high proportion of black executives because of the nature of the business. Surely this change is happening...