Don't Count Your Chickens

It's been a long, hard battle, but he is finally gone. Jacob Zuma has been our most morally deficient President since die Groot Krokodil, and the most incompetent head of State we've ever had. He is replaced by an intelligent and thoughtful leader in Cyril Ramaphosa, a man who is not tainted by  corruption and other selfish and nefarious behaviours. But before we get carried away in our celebrations, let us remember that the end of Jacob Zuma is only respite, a milestone on the path to the actual goal: a free South Africa.

It is really a case of two steps forward, one step back. The end of Jacob Zuma is certainly something worth celebrating. In his almost nine-year tenure, economic growth has halted, unemployment has ballooned and criminals have run rampant. And these, only the results of neglect. We haven't even mentioned the proactive expansion of corruption and state capture. Ramaphosa will certainly put the brakes on the government's downward spiral, but he is unlikely to halt it. And I'll tell you why.

For a start, Ramaphosa supports several socially destructive policies, such as a minimum wage, free higher education and National Health Insurance. But this is not the worst of it.

As Mmusi Maimane said in his speech following Ramaphosa's election, the ANC that elected Ramaphosa, is the same ANC that elected Zuma and kept him in power through all the scandals. Remember that Ramaphosa only just won the ANC presidency and half the top 6 are or were Zuma supporters. The President does not make all decisions for himself. He is subject to the decisions of the top 6 and the NEC, as is clear from his recent cabinet announcement.Whilst many of the bad apples have been plucked away, some of the worst remain. And the most rotten of the lot has been added.

David Mabuza perfectly exemplifies the fact that even though Zuma is gone we are still in heaps of trouble. Mabuza is possibly worse than Zuma. In fact, is definitely worse than Zuma. For all his corruption and inefficiency, we've never heard of our former president killing his opponents. DD Mabuza has done so on several occasions. He is also tainted with corruption, specifically regarding the 2010 World Cup, but whistle-blowers never live to see the witness box. Click here for more on David Mabuza's scandals.

If Zuma were the beginning and end of our governance problems in South Africa the ANC would have got rid of him long ago. The truth is that the whole ANC is a problem. The loyalty to party above country is a problem. The commitment to unity over integrity is a problem. Ramaphosa can only do so much trying to serve God and Mammon. He cannot unite the ANC and simultaneously provide moral leadership. And the wheel will turn again and we will see the evil side of the ANC take over, in a period that could be worse than the Zuma years, unless we do to the whole ANC what has been done to Zuma.

SA is Not a Democracy part 1

Democracy is a loose term. It can mean different things to different people. It is a loaded word and has been used and abused to promote ideologies and organisations of all types. Heck, even North Korea considers itself a democracy!

The word democracy comes from Greek and means 'rule by the people.' See why it is a loose term? 'Rule by the people' can mean a variety of different things. Today when we speak about democracy we are usually referring to representative democracy, where we choose leaders in elections who are supposed to represent our interests. Great! So different groups of people with different interests elect leaders, so that everyone is represented in the government and those leaders sit and have big discussions so that the country is run in the way that is best for everyone.

Wrong!

The first problem is that here in South Africa government doesn't make decisions by discussion and compromise. It makes decisions by voting and the vote is won by a simple majority (excepting of course for amendments to the constitution.) So if a party has 51% of MPs, that party holds all the power. And since the number of MPs is proportional to the number of votes, 51% of the voters can effectively control the lives of the other 49%, given how much power the government has over individuals in our country.

The next problem is that only 16 million of our 55 million population votes, which effectively means that just over 8 million people can control the lives of the other 47 million. I'm sure most of you are starting to see a problem here.

Now the nature of our ruling party makes the above problem much worse. Most of the country votes blindly for the ANC. They are almost guaranteed to win the elections no matter what. The ANC has over 700 000 members, organised into about 5000 branches. There are about 500 other voting delegates at elective conferences, but for simplicity's sake we will assume there are 5000 branch delegates who vote to elect the ANC leadership and thus their MP's. Each delegate needs 51% of his branch vote, and each ANC leader needs 51% of the delegates' votes. This means, that in the extreme situation 26% of ANC members can choose the party's leadership,and thus the path the country will follow. Doing the maths, that's less than 200 000 people determining the destiny of more than 55 million.

These calculations are both rough and simplified, but they illustrate just how few people are making the decisions that we are supposed to be making as a nation. And even then, we are still assuming that these elected leaders act according to the will of the people who elected them.

I know this has been a bombardment of figures and statistics, so let me make a final point for those who don't really care for numbers. Our situation is summed up very well by looking at the times of greatest political change. With Jacob Zuma about to be ousted after years of controversial and morally bereft leadership, it is clear that more change in the country comes out of the ANC elective conference than any other occasion, including the national elections. That is not democracy.

Thus we see that in spite of the endless propaganda bragging about our democratic ideals, South Africa is not really a democracy at all. But then what is a true democracy? The Greeks didn't just give us the word democracy, they gave us the whole concept. In part 2 I will explain, referring to the ancient Greek model, how we can have a real democracy.

Opposition Wins Again

Cheers erupted from the ANC caucus in parliament as speaker Baleka Mbete read the results of the secret ballot vote of no confidence against Jacob Zuma. 177 for. 198 against. The irony is that this group of jubilant souls were only celebrating their own demise.

To say the opposition lost would be technically accurate, but not at all a fair reflection of the bigger picture. The vote of no confidence failed, but the opposition won. You see, this was always a win-win situation. The very idea of the no-confidence vote was to put the ANC between a rock and a hard place. That is why we have had 8 of them already. Each time the ANC votes to keep Jacob Zuma in power they tie themselves ever closer to their greatest liability and alienate those who "love the ANC but hate Zuma." Every time the ANC caucus puts their weight behind Zuma they lose seats in the 2019 election.

I'm sure most ANC MPs know this, but are more concerned about saving themselves from the whip of party discipline than saving the party from the wrath of the voters and the mire of immorality. Though sometimes I do wonder.

On the other hand, voting Zuma out would also be a dangerous road and additionally, it would be an unpredictable one. No one really knows what would have happened had the required 50 ANC MP's broken ranks and had the president removed. It is far from inconceivable that it would cause an irreparable rift and possibly a split in the party. Far less likely, it would have been the turning point for the ANC to course correct and repair its once honourable reputation. But those possibilities are just what-ifs now. The ruling party has chosen the slow poison.

The only way for the ANC to escape this trap would be to recall Zuma itself. This would allow them to show some semblance of morality while not bending to the will of the opposition, though at this point it may even be too late for such a move to still be considered a show of strength. But this hasn't yet and certainly will not happen until at least the electoral conference in December. There are too many people high up on his side who would go down with him.

The country needs Jacob Zuma gone. But Jacob Zuma is not the extent of the problem. The ANC is the problem. You cannot separate Zuma from the ANC, and the secret ballot vote proved that. Zuma is not unique, he is a representation of what is happening in the rest of his party. Most of the ANC are as morally decayed as Zuma. If it were not so, he would not be in power. The whole party needs to go.

So while the DA and the EFF publicly mourn the retaining of President Zuma, privately they will be celebrating another hole fired into the sinking ship of the ruling party, all while its hopeless crew drown, shackled to their own pride.

Just Us and Venezuela

As we approach the decade mark since the start of the great recession all countries are now in recovery, well, all but two that is: economically devastated Venezuela and yup, you guessed it, South Africa. As of, well now, along with Venezuela we are the only economy (out of more than 200!) in recession.

First off, this means that any excuses about a slow global economy for our our limited growth are null and void. Second, although they are major contributors, Zuma and the Guptas are not the sole cause.

I'm sure most people know that there is trouble in Venezuela, but probably not the extent. In 1998 Hugo Chavez and his United Socialist Party took over the government, and as with all socialist projects things were wonderful at first, with the poor suddenly having access to housing, healthcare and education amongst other things. But socialists live on borrowed time and things quickly turned south. In 2016 Venezeula's GDP dropped more that 18% and inflation rose to 500%. Today the people of the once most prosperous state in South America are starving. The shops are empty and when they do have food lines stretch for hundreds of metres outside the store and around the block. And to make matters worse, Chavez' successor, Nicolas Maduro just used a bogus election to take control of all branches of government to further oppress the people.

So now you're thinking, "But Venezuela is nothing like South Africa?" You'll be surprised at the similarities:

• Venezuela's economy is completely oil based, so when the oil price collapsed several years ago, so did their economy. Our economy is heavily reliant on the mining sector and so when there is trouble in the mining industry, as there has been in recent years, the whole economy suffers. Fortunately, unlike Venezuela, we are not completely a one-trick-pony.
• When oil prices were high the Venezuelan government used the money for extensive social spending. When the oil price dropped they decided to keep spending and so put themselves into a debt crisis. Our government also does an unhealthy amount of social spending and it is putting us in debt. Yes many people have a better quality of life courtesy of the government purse, but if you feed the people today with tomorrow's bread, tomorrow the people will starve.
• The United Socialist Party of Venezuela came to and maintains power not on sound policy and economic principles, but on populist rhetoric and Robin Hood economics. That is the same way the ANC maintains power. Free housing, free electricity, grants and government handouts: people are far more likely to believe according to what pleases the ear than what is true. They don't realise that the magic well of free stuff will eventually run dry.
• Finally, and most importantly, the power in Venezuela is too concentrated. The government does far more than it should ever need to do, even by mainstream centre-left standards today. This is the root of the crisis. In South Africa the government also does far more than it has the right to do. It can't handle all the responsibilities it has taken upon itself, but it is yet seeking more. And worse yet, power within the government is becoming more centralised, with the Zupta faction now controlling the national assembly, the NPA, the judiciary, the public protector and many other institutions. We are on dangerous ground.

I honestly don't think we will reach the point Venezuela has. Even though we are heading in the same direction we are going slower and have sharper breaks in the form of power and influential moderates, who stand up against wannabe dictators. But we can't sit back and relax. Our country is in deep trouble. Unlike Venezuela, we have diagnosed our problems (at least some of them) early. Now we must be quick to act as well.

A Symptom of Chronic Stupidity

Free Stuff!

That caught your attention, didn't it? The power of the word "free" is astounding. It always gets us excited even though our most basic intuitions tell us there must be catch. As South Africans we keep falling for this trap, free housing, free electricity, free education and now free health care. When will we realise that nothing is ever free?

Away from the State Capture vs White Monopoly Capital battle which is both capturing and monopolising the headlines, news regarding the progress of the NHI (National Health Insurance) has managed to attract some attention, though certainly not enough. For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, the ANC has big plans to create a national, single payer healthcare system similar to Obamacare, or the UK's NHS. The goal is for it to be implemented by 2025, but it has just popped up in the headlines because a couple of milestones in the planning stage have been hit.

This system spells disaster for our country. I know there are many who admire other countries' national healthcare systems and I know that there are many South Africans who are proponents of the NHI because they want to see universal access to quality health care. The foremost criticism of those who oppose the NHI is that they supposedly don't want such. I will say now that I am completely in favour of universal access to quality health care, and it is for that very reason that I oppose the NHI. I admire the intentions of those who expect it to be a great help to the poor, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and I am not interested in living in a socialist hell. The NHI is just another brick in that road.

My biggest concerns are the moral issues regarding a government-administered single-payer health system, but first let's look at the practicalities. In terms of affordability, well, it just isn't affordable. We already have a shrinking economy, too much debt and high taxes. There is simply nowhere to pull the R100 billion from without causing extensive damage to our fragile economy. The immediate response from the short-sighted is "Tax the rich!" but the more we tax tax the rich, the faster they are going to leave sunny, socialist South Africa for greener pastures overseas, further hampering our ability to provide access to quality healthcare. Then we have a problem with lack of resources. We have neither the infrastructure nor the human resources, i.e. doctors, to bring the healthcare standards for everyone up to the standards of the current private sector, so in spite of the huge price tag, the standard of health care will improve only marginally for poor, but take a massive nose-dive for the rich. And no, there is no opt-out option for the NHI. Everyone is part of it. So the net result of this legislation will be a mass exodus of educated, skilled middle-class systems, to countries where they can obtain their own affordable quality healthcare.

One of the reasons healthcare is so expensive is because the healthcare profession is like an exclusive club. There are many, many capable, aspiring doctors who cannot get into medical school because of arbitrary and meaningless selection processes and lack of space, all while Blade Nzimande brags about blocking the building of a private medical school, which could provide us with many more doctors. Then there are also all sorts of unnecessary government restrictions that make access to affordable medicine impossible. Government needs to cut a whole lot of red tape, and the cost of healthcare will come down significantly.

And now to the moral issue. The government simply does not have the right to interfere with private citizens choices regarding healthcare, health insurance or anything related. It does not have the right to steal from the rich to subsidize the poor in this regard. Health care is not a right. Health care is a service and one cannot have the right to the services of another person. A baker can expect to bake for whom he wants to bake and a painter can expect to paint for whom he wants to paint, but doctors and nurses, who invest thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of rands into their education must provide their services to whom the government dictates? We cannot make slaves of our healthcare professionals any more than we can make slaves of anyone else.

This post is already getting long and I have only just touched on some issues. Please comment if you want more information regarding any of points discussed. In conclusion, it is not more forceful redistribution that we need, but a growing economy, a free economy, that will allow people to access quality healthcare for themselves. Yes, I believe everyone should have access to quality healthcare, but it is not the governments responsibility to provide it.

Maimane's not so Big Moment

I am amazed, but not particularly surprised, that the Helen Zille tweet row has carried on for as long as it has, and that so few sensible voices have been prominent in the debate. I've had many thoughts on the issue since my post last week. These are a few.

First off, Zille needs berating for her own foolishness, not because what she said was wrong, but because someone with her experience in both politics and journalism should have foreseen the reaction to her tweets. She knows better than most how the racial propaganda war works in South Africa and has been a victim of it enough to have anticipated her moral lynching.

Zille's moment of naivety, however, by no means justifies the manufactured outrage from those who think only in terms of black and white. The dominant argument remains that Zille defended colonialism and thereby offended millions of South Africans who suffered because of it. It's even gotten to the point where the Black First Land First movement has decided to lay racism charges against her. I believe I sufficiently established the ridiculousness of these claims in my last article, but in case you were still in doubt I will further elaborate.

The now infamous tweet series started with a reference to how Singapore achieved major development by building off what the colonists left behind. The whole idea was how South Africa could emulate that, so the argument was never racial nor a defense of colonialism from the start, but merely about how to achieve development. One should not be surprised, however, at the racialist vultures who were hovering, waiting for any misrepresentable statement to cry racist over. Contrary to one popular argument, Zille did not say that there were good aspects of colonialism. She said that there were good aspects to the legacy of colonialism i.e. what we are left with because of colonialism. One can perfectly reasonably call colonialism abhorrent and evil and simultaneously suggest that there are consequences of colonialism that we can exploit to improve the lives of the people.

To sum it up in one question, Do you believe running water is a good thing, that written language is a good thing, democracy, electricity, modern travel? If yes, then you agree with Mrs Zille. The ANC agrees with her, the EFF, even Black First Land First agree with her. In fact, the ANC's own idea of the Developmental State is the same principle Zille was arguing.

Now, significantly, Zille's tweets are supposedly sufficient reason for her to be axed as premier of the Western Cape. We've already established why this is not the case, but let us try to convince Mmusi Maimane of this too. Apparently this is Maimane's chance to step out of Zille's shadow and show that he is the true leader of the DA by beheading his mentor and predecessor. Of course, this is a tempting opportunity, but it would cost him his integrity. Hopefully Mmusi will not fall into the trap baited by his enemies. So for many it is a question of whether Mmusi Maimane will man up and show that he is the true leader of the DA or stay in the shadow of Zille, but really the question is whether he will give up his integrity for cheap political points.