Dear Olwethu Sipuka
Based on your article, I draw confidence on three things which I highlight below. Firstly you nicely use the tale told to you by your elders. Secondly you confirm that you are the member of the African National Congress ("ANC") who purports to know ANC's "Through the eye of the needle" document and this probably will make it easy for us to engage. By the way I am also a member of the ANC in good standing. Thirdly you apply your interpretation of this document in assessing the ANC President (Honourable J. G. Zuma) in a manner that suggests that you hold a monopoly understanding of what "leadership" means, even to an extent of denigrating the standing of the document itself.
Before I deal with the last one, let me first admit that it is even a matter of decency that we engage your distorted interpretation of this noble document (if this is what this document means, then Mr M Phosa must be suffering financial losses on his Afrikaans book which shares the sentiment with this document). Furthermore, you limit and confine your skewed interpretation of the document to your "apparent dislike" of the president.
Why do I think your interpretation of the document is skewed? Because (1) the section under which you selected the paragraphs you used in your article consists of 8 integrated paragraphs but you chose only 3 and (2) even the 3 you chose, you insisted on your subjective interpretation in order to try so hard to link it with what you want so as to justify your arguments.
1. Be that as it may and dealing with the last thing upon which I draw my confidence as I noted in first paragraph, you shamefully contend that the president is not listening to the people simply because of the "upgrades to his house"! What a deficit of reasoning ability! But it's ok. The South African Institute of Race Relation recently told the country (News 24, 11/09) that the ANC, ironically under the leadership of Zuma has (1) increased formal houses by 89.9%; (2) caused access to water and electricity in households to rise by 127.9% and 76.6% respectively; (3) caused service delivery successes to contribute to the number of South Africans living on less than US$2 (R16.44) a day declining from 12% in 1994 to 5% in 2012; and many more.
Now this is my understanding of "listening to people and being in touch" with them as well as accessible and flexible towards them. Of course I don't want to engage on whether or not it was wrong for Zuma to upgrade security in his house because I know both of us don't have full facts as yet. However, I know that the "daily cries of the people" is for you, Afriforum and the DA. I am fine, so don't worry.
2. You continued to quote from the document that "a leader should win the confidence of the people in her day-to-day work. Where the situation demands, she should be firm; and have the courage to explain and seek to convince others of the correctness of decisions taken by constitutional structures even if such decisions are unpopular. She should not seek to gain cheap popularity by avoiding difficult issues, making false promises or merely pandering to popular sentiment".
However, you provided no basis in this regard in terms of why the President shouldn't pass this document. Let me help you then. The President has most of the time won my confidence in his day-to-day work and his decision-making (including that of causing Julius Malema to be politically displaced right now). The deliverance of the services to our people is far better, he has fired many unwilling civil servants, given the alliance a greater hearing, etc. This is what I understand to be meant by this paragraph.
3. You are right about the seriousness which the President and the entire ANC leadership collective take education in this country despite his unfortunate inability to have accessed one while young. But I think your judgment lacks capacity to understand where to locate the blame and I am aware that it is at your best interest to look for anything, I mean anything in order to try and substantiate your skewed analysis towards the President.
If you want to be in the know of developments in this area, please ask for the report from the presidency or else lobby for the quick arrest of Julius who looted (with his friends) the province dry. For your information, the whole country got textbooks except grade 8 & 9 of Limpopo schools. For matric rates, bursaries to black kids, nutrition programmes at black schools, free tertiary education for black and poor kids, access to NSFAS, etc, please don't be allergic to requesting access to the following websites (dbe.gov.za & dhe.gov.za)
4. With regards to "Department of Justice", you see that is why I highlighted the decency in even engaging your poor analysis because the issue of Scorpions was as a resolution of Polokwane (what has Zuma got to do with it?) What is wrong with Mogoeng Mogoeng? Without sounding like a self appointed defender of the president, I am getting the feeling that you hold a very serious hatred of black successors and you are confusing the ANC's deployment committee's role with the President's prerogative (which sometimes he doesn't exercise out of consideration for ANC structures).
5. You continue to quote that "a leader should lead by example. He should be above reproach in his political and social conduct - as defined by our revolutionary morality. Through force of example, he should act as a role model to ANC members and non-members alike. Leading a life that reflects commitment to the strategic goals of the NDR includes not only being free of corrupt practices; it also means actively fighting against corruption".
Granted, but from where I am sitting as an African child, I have seen nothing wrong with the president's conduct (even for fear of being misinterpreted). We can open the debate on the President's conduct in African perspective for another day, save to say that politically, he has continued to unite the ANC and the alliance, the society and even the opposition. That is, for me a definition of leading by example.
6. Why are your analysis skewed once again? Because you selected and misinterpreted a few paragraphs for your convenience. Why did you leave others? Because you know that:
6.1. Zuma understands ANC policy and he is able to apply it under all conditions in which he finds himself (refer to Polokwane resolutions).
6.2. Zuma appreciates that there are no readymade leaders. Leaders evolve out of battles for social transformation like he did in Polokwane. In these battles, cadres will stumble and some will fall. But the abiding quality of leadership is to learn from mistakes, to appreciate one's weakness and correct them hence he always appologises when found in compromising positions
6.3. Unlike some, Zuma appreciates that "an individual with qualities of leadership does not seek to gain popularity by undermining those in positions of responsibility" hence he always remains humble no matter what the situation. "Where such a member has a view on how to improve things or correct mistakes, she should state those views in constitutional structures and seek to win others to her own thinking. She assist the movement as a whole to improve its work and not stand aside to claim perfection out of inactivity" hence he dealt with Julius's process in the ANC, multiply the membership numbers of the ANC; put SA on the world map; championed the African agenda; etc, and still remains as humble. This is the leader our movement wants.
So could you stand here and convince the nation that your deficit of reasoning, surplus of skewed analysis and injustice to this noble document can guide intelligent members of the society in understanding the leadership of the President? I consider it an insult to sober minded people.
Now thank God because such processes as those of assessing leadership are not done by individuals filled with hatred. Furthermore, no matter how deep the two of us can argue, the last arbiter of the ANC's leadership is branches.
Njabulo Duma is a Young South African working for the Financial Regulator in SA
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
