Steve Hofmeyr: I voted yes for the new South Africa but it was a mistake

  • Thread starter Thread starter Newsday
  • Start date Start date
porchrat said:
There should have been a handover period with a particular focus on services being rolled out to those that were oppressed under Apartheid to elevate them
Click to expand...
Correction required. This assumes the "advantaged" got infrastructure/education for free. That would be wrong.

They *paid* for it. They paid for the maintenance as well.

The cANCer has convinced their voter base they *should* get this shiat for free because reasons.

That's precisely why we are where we are now. The average ZA voter will do anything to avoid paying toward maintenance or expansion of the very infrastructure they make use of.

Alongside the incompetence, ignorance, corruption and blatant thieving of the cANCer - this story ends one way and one way only.

Wakanda
 
porchrat said:
I was far too young to remember this period in SA's history.

As far as I understand it the vote was about whether or not negotiations should start around moving to a multi-racial society. If that's the case then YES was the moral vote to make in my opinion. Apartheid needed to end.

It ended in a really destructive way though.

You can't withhold education and social development from a whole group of people for so long and then just expect them to function like the group that got all the resources in a new democracy.

There should have been a handover period with a particular focus on services being rolled out to those that were oppressed under Apartheid to elevate them. Chucking people into the deep end, especially when it comes to actually running a country, was just never going to work.
Click to expand...
I barely remember it. I think my mother voted , my father couldn't as he was just a perm res vs citizen at the time. I remember more around the '94 election as the schools all had election driving etc. because of the historical event so we were simulating it in high school. My first election was only '99.
 
rustypup said:
Correction required. This assumes the "advantaged" got infrastructure/education for free. That would be wrong.

They *paid* for it. They paid for the maintenance as well.

The cANCer has convinced their voter base they *should* get this shiat for free because reasons.

That's precisely why we are where we are now. The average ZA voter will do anything to avoid paying toward maintenance or expansion of the very infrastructure they make use of.

Alongside the incompetence, ignorance, corruption and blatant thieving of the cANCer - this story ends one way and one way only.

Wakanda
Click to expand...
Upliftment in this case isn't talking about just getting things for free. The ANC's so poisoned the SA zeitgeist that this is immediately where people's thoughts go. I'm talking about real upliftment. The point is to elevate these people to the point where they're able to effectively contribute to the economy, not where they just get everything for free.
 
porchrat said:
I was far too young to remember this period in SA's history.

As far as I understand it the vote was about whether or not negotiations should start around moving to a multi-racial society. If that's the case then YES was the moral vote to make in my opinion. Apartheid needed to end.

It ended in a really destructive way though.

You can't withhold education and social development from a whole group of people for so long and then just expect them to function like the group that got all the resources in a new democracy.

There should have been a handover period with a particular focus on services being rolled out to those that were oppressed under Apartheid to elevate them. Chucking people into the deep end, especially when it comes to actually running a country, was just never going to work.
Click to expand...
Not sure if you're referring to the ANC slogan of education before liberation on the holding back education? As the government at the time didn't really do that, I mean Mandela was a lawyer.
I mean it wasn't great we all know that, but oddly enough there was some things in there that people are calling for now
en.wikipedia.org

Bantu Education Act, 1953 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
  1. A better effort should be made at the mass education of the Africans.
  2. The literature required to educate the African should be produced by the government in their individual languages and be related to what was needed for their function in life.
  3. The funding for African education was described as not being unlimited and would have to cover a wide area of the education system.
  4. That pupils should be instructed in their mother tongue, and the report took into account the future Bantustans and their future education policies


There was supposed to be a hand-over period, but you know the ANC and how they work and think.
 
rustypup said:
Correction required. This assumes the "advantaged" got infrastructure/education for free. That would be wrong.

They *paid* for it. They paid for the maintenance as well.

The cANCer has convinced their voter base they *should* get this shiat for free because reasons.

That's precisely why we are where we are now. The average ZA voter will do anything to avoid paying toward maintenance or expansion of the very infrastructure they make use of.

Alongside the incompetence, ignorance, corruption and blatant thieving of the cANCer - this story ends one way and one way only.

Wakanda
Click to expand...
You'd be wrong there, as per today there were no-fee schools, education is still free for most, same as healthcare... Problem is that the ANC stuffed up both.
 
WanderingMind said:
Yeah, but the yes vote and how the country was surrendered was absolutely dumb.

They should never have given the country to a terrorist group to begin with. That's the dumbest thing ever.

Point 1
Remove all race based laws. This would already probably removed sanctions.

Point 2
If they were so keen on actual democracy then people with 10 years of working experience and a degree should vote.

Or

Do democracy with a lottery system.

Democracy as done by the current system is just stupid.

Point 3
The constitution should have prevented any old or new forms of race laws.
Click to expand...
I was part of the media then and yes, I also advocated for a YES vote. Prior to that referendum there was another referendum where people had to decide whether they wanted a three-chamber Parliament that brought Indians and Coloureds into the government. In that one I advocated for a NO vote because I felt there should have been a fourth chamber for black people.

The fact of the matter was that the then President, F W de Klerk, appointed the wrong people to handle the negotiations. He had a lot of resistance from the older more established leaders in his party and he decided to pick a couple of young Turks (as they were described as at the time). This included Roelf Meyer who was totally overshadowed by Cyril Ramaphosa. Ramaphosa at the time was a seasoned labour negotiator who knew how to get what he wanted.

There is nothing wrong with our current democracy that cannot be rectified by getting rid of the ANC and their 1960's ideologies.

Whites had no choice but to vote yes. We could not continue denying citizens of this country a seat at the leadership table. We knew what could happen, after all, we saw what happened in the rest of Africa and the Homelands - especially Transkei and Ciskei. But, we thought that because at the time roughly 25 to 30% of the population were white, we would be able to help steer the country past the mistakes made in the rest of Africa.

Obviously, that did not happen and South Africa went from an advanced first world country to a typical African sh*thole.
 
porchrat said:
I was far too young to remember this period in SA's history.

As far as I understand it the vote was about whether or not negotiations should start around moving to a multi-racial society. If that's the case then YES was the moral vote to make in my opinion. Apartheid needed to end.

It ended in a really destructive way though.

You can't withhold education and social development from a whole group of people for so long and then just expect them to function like the group that got all the resources in a new democracy.

There should have been a handover period with a particular focus on services being rolled out to those that were oppressed under Apartheid to elevate them. Chucking people into the deep end, especially when it comes to actually running a country, was just never going to work.
Click to expand...
There was a handover period and plenty of mentoring, there was a GNU from 1994.
AA started in the early 1980’s
 
Lupus said:
Not sure if you're referring to the ANC slogan of education before liberation on the holding back education? As the government at the time didn't really do that, I mean Mandela was a lawyer.
I mean it wasn't great we all know that, but oddly enough there was some things in there that people are calling for now
en.wikipedia.org

Bantu Education Act, 1953 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
  1. A better effort should be made at the mass education of the Africans.
  2. The literature required to educate the African should be produced by the government in their individual languages and be related to what was needed for their function in life.
  3. The funding for African education was described as not being unlimited and would have to cover a wide area of the education system.
  4. That pupils should be instructed in their mother tongue, and the report took into account the future Bantustans and their future education policies


There was supposed to be a hand-over period, but you know the ANC and how they work and think.
Click to expand...
With respect to 2 and 4... Always a terrible idea. Just utterly stupid.

The world does not speak these languages. International trade and negotiation do not take place in these languages. International education does not happen in these languages.

Avoiding engaging with this reality was a mistake. Our bragging about "11 official languages" ignores the disaster this wrought.
 
porchrat said:
There should have been a handover period with a particular focus on services being rolled out to those that were oppressed under Apartheid to elevate them. Chucking people into the deep end, especially when it comes to actually running a country, was just never going to work.
Click to expand...

Sadly there were attempts to do it that way, but the ANC & co. rushed things with a firm hand.
 
rustypup said:
With respect to 2 and 4... Always a terrible idea. Just utterly stupid.

The world does not speak these languages. International trade and negotiation do not take place in these languages. International education does not happen in these languages.

Avoiding engaging with this reality was a mistake. Our bragging about "11 official languages" ignores the disaster this wrought.
Click to expand...
It actually makes perfect sense, learning in your own home tongue is far easier then having to learn another language first. I mean it's not like the Japanese teach in English, or the Chinese, Indian... You have English as a secondary language, like we have Afrikaans as one now in English schools and vice versa for Afrikaans schools back in the day.
 
Pegging said:
There was a handover period and plenty of mentoring, there was a GNU from 1994.
AA started in the early 1980’s
Click to expand...
There was no mentoring . New ANC ministers fired the DG's of their departments within days of them taking office. This left the civil service without experienced leadership and the rot started almost immediately.
 
Lupus said:
I mean it's not like the Japanese teach in English, or the Chinese, Indian.
Click to expand...
NOBODY trades/negotiates in any ZA language. Not even Afrikaans.

Japan, China and India all require English/German/French be present. For good reason. Ditto France, Germany, Spain.

For ZA, English should be primary with Home for secondary - because ALL our trading partners use English. Mandarin may make more sense soon.

Historical reasons for this state of affairs aside, avoiding the reality is not helping.
 
rustypup said:
NOBODY trades/negotiates in any ZA language. Not even Afrikaans.

Japan, China and India all require English/German/French be present. For good reason. Ditto France, Germany, Spain.

For ZA, English should be primary with Home for secondary - because ALL our trading partners use English. Mandarin may make more sense soon.

Historical reasons for this state of affairs aside, avoiding the reality is not helping.
Click to expand...
Sure... But guess what, their education is in their home languages, they are taught English and such separately. So you're basically making it a lot harder on the poor child cause now they need to learn an entirely new language + the subject.
If education was in their home languages, we might have better outcomes, imagine them actually understanding instead of trying to learn in a language they're still trying to learn as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X