Pretoria is Pretoria

I don't particularly care what you want to call a street. All I know is each time the Pretoria municipality (I am uncertain of its name at this stage) tries to change names, they're upsetting enough people to such an extent that there is legal action.

Some Boer commando that apparently never happened in South Africa. Because we all know history in South Africa started with Apartheid, right?

Nation building my lillywhite ass

This cannot possibly be indicative of 'nation building' when the municipality alienates its own people to such an extent each time. Who cares what the road is called? A rose by any other name and all that. Fact remains service delivery has not exactly improved, and isn't this what we pay rates and taxes for after all?

It appears that the municipality is fighting the law of identity. Well, good luck to them.

On another note, a list of proposed Pretoria name changes indicates the following:

• Was Beatrix Street, now Steve Biko.
• Was Mears Street, now Steve Biko.
• Was Voortrekker Street, now Steve Biko.

All I can make of this is that there's a guy named Steve Biko who has to tie the shoes of the mayor every morning, because clearly sher is retarded (sher is my third-person, singular personal pronoun that indicates 'he or she', in case you were wondering).

What is the point of taking three distinct roads and naming them all the same name? What exactly is the point of taking another road and splitting it up into four different sections, each with its own name? Surely, you could've left that road in tact (or split it into Church and Steve Biko, for argument's sake) and then you could've named the three similar roads unique names? Goes to show, there's no rational thought behind the name changes. It's all about ideology or (idle-LOL-ogy).

Boer is beautiful too

Perhaps Steve was right: Black is beautiful. But Boer can be beautiful too, and just like people still refer to Istanbul as Constantinople colloquially, people are going to refer to Pretoria as Pretoria for centuries to come. Name changing to enforce your hegemony is not particularly effective, so why not focus on potholes and service delivery? You know, the reasons why we pay the municipality?

Sexual Violence against Women in South Africa

Regular readers would know by now that feminism is somewhat of a whipping boy for me. This is part of why my knee-jerk reaction to the sophistry that rape in South Africa is perpetuated by the usual suspects of patriarchy, men's sexist attitudes and the terrible Protestant capitalist upbringing forced upon us - not to mention that age old scapegoat The Media and its photoshopped princesses - is one of disbelief.

How sexist am I? Apparently somewhere between male and female hostile sexists, but less benevolently sexist than most people who participated in the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory questionnaire.

In the nature-versus-nurture debate, I put more stock in sociobiology than in the products of society theory. Putting the knee-jerk behind me, I decided to suspend judgement and look at the data before I chop off my genitals and become a nun (or a none?). As before, regardless of what most people would have you believe about feminists and their hysteria, and regardless of what most of them rationalise lies behind the serious issues, we do have a serious problem on our hands in South Africa. We need to do something about the fear that women in South Africa live with - a realistic fear of violence and particularly rape.

How do we know that our culture produces rapists?

This statement - widely believed by feminists (their labelling, not mine) - assumes several initial points:

1. South African cultures condone or promote rape.
2. Rapists are mostly socially constructed. That is, a rapist is someone whose actions are instigated and controlled to such an extent by his cultural milieu that committing rape is somewhat of an inevitability.
3. The prevalent attitude of South African men is sexist
4. There is a link between this generally sexist attitude of men and our high incidence of rape.

Unlike what one would expect from a cultural milieu that socially constructs beasts of sexual violence, most men in South Africa are not rapists. This presents a problem to the analysis that we're merely suffering from a patriarchy hangover. Paradoxically, this fact does not fill me with joy because it means solving the problem is far more difficult than handing baby boys Barbie dolls and Cosmopolitan magazines to play with in their formative years.

 

If not for sexism, why do South African women live in fear?

I don't believe that sexism is appreciated or condoned by our culture. Of course, there are so many cultures in South Africa that such a statement - and the statement that our culture produces rapists - is essentially meaningless. I only have anecdotal evidence to go by, but believe me telling a girl to knit you a sweater and make you a sandwich will not win you many friends of either gender in my circles.

However, the high incidence of rape in South Africa is somewhat worsened by culture. In particular, there are some superstitious beliefs that hold having sex with a virgin will cure you from AIDS. There are also cases of corrective rape, designed to cure unfortunate lesbians of their preference for women. Most rapists are likely to be male and between the ages of 20 and 40. Furthermore, alcohol and spousal abuse are factors that make your chances of getting raped more.

 

Is rape a gender issue?

Of course such a statement is anathema to me. There is a difference between sex (broadly male, female and other) and gender. Gender is tied with particular social and cultural roles. Suffice to say I am not familiar with a cultural practice in South Africa that condones rape - bar the mentioned voodoo sangoma witchdoctor cures for AIDS and lesbianism. Also bar the lip service that some establishments like the church pay to condemning rape while their servants get caught in the act of child abuse a little too often to lend much weight to their official dogma.

Culturally, the official dogma is still that rape is something that is frowned upon - to say the least. Plus, many men are raped in prison too. However, for the most part, rape victims are female (of any gender) and rape perpetrators are men (who don't deserve their gender bits). I do not believe that we live in a culture whereby men's attitudes are mostly sexist. Of course such attitudes exist, but not disproportionately to the rest of the world. The rest of the world doesn't have a rape problem of our proportions, which again contrasts to the expected situation if rape were merely a result of anachronistic gender attitudes and bias. Furthermore, I couldn't find a study that measured the gender attitudes of South African men. The only stats I could find refer to rape victims and their terrible ordeals.

Whether you put stock in the whole patriarch equals rapist conjecture or not, the harsh reality is getting raped is not a realistic fear most men have to live with - not even in Cape Town's Pink Triangle. Even worse, most women in South Africa are living with a realistic fear that they could be raped. And yes, it does get worse: When women are raped, they are mostly too afraid and ashamed to report the crime to the authorities.

As ridiculous as most humanities subjects are to those of my Vulcan ilk, the concerns raised do not strike me as being ridiculous or based on hysteria. This judging by the testimony of those working in the field of sexual violence, dealing with rape victims on a daily basis, whether you buy into their ideology or not. 

 

What can we do to remedy the situation?

Even if rape in South Africa did result from our cultural milieu, fixing that requires a generation or two and it's impractical to construct a measure of the change or a measure of the results of such change. We would never know if we're socially constructing the right kinds of rape-free genders. We need something that we can do right now to make women feel safer in our society. While most men are not rapists, statistically, most of us should be familiar with a rapist. We cannot afford that rape is something other men do and we can do nothing about. Furthermore, most rape victims know their rapist fairly well. I think a good place to start is with ensuring that women who were raped are not afraid of reporting the crime and have some faith that they can talk to someone who will be able to help.

Another good place to start is to have a Designated Dave kind of character to help prevent rape. Just like Designated Dave takes care of the driving while you take care of the drinking, this character takes care of your drink when you go to the bathroom and generally ensures that whatever you get up to by means of sharing DNA samples is consensual.

What do you think?

Please feel free to leave me a comment so we can find a working solution. As someone who does not associate with feminism or any ideology except Incertitude, I would like to become familiar with working solutions. For the time being, the only such solution I have found is chemical castration.

Sources

I have linked to sources throughout the text. I did my best to sidestep the ideological landmines, but the best sources on rape I could find deserve another mention:

• Sexual Violence Research Initiative that focuses on the bigger picture of gathering data and the smaller picture of providing assistance to sexual violence victims.

• Understanding Prejudice, a site dedicated to the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. This is a questionnaire (survey to you Merkins) designed to determine how much you hate sex. I mean, gender.
• Violence against women, a World Health Organisation study of 2011. Yes, not something from the Middle Ages I'm afraid.

Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa, part 2

This is part 2 of a 2 part series. You may find the full series here:

1. Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa.


2. Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa, part 2.

Since my previous post, Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa, there's been a bull in the China shop. You can tell by the large amount of bull shit that has since gathered. Please consult the comment section of that post to get a firm idea of how we got here. This is a reply from Sentletse, who claims that We are not all Africans black people are!, to my post. I'll quote from him in bold and give my comments in plain text.


Neanderthals existed in Europe. If you say Homo Sapiens drove them to extinction, then you agree with me that it was Homo Sapiens that migrated from Africa, not Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Therefore the Out-Of-Africa theory is rendered invalid as it is premised on the view that it was Homo Sapiens Sapiens who migrated.

I'll see your multiregional model of the origin of modern humans and I'll raise you Mitochondrial Eve.


I don’t contest the notion that we all evolved from a common ancestor Homo Sapiens. My argument is that the evolution of Homo Sapiens to Homo Sapiens Sapiens and ultimately modern human beings didn’t occur in Africa. Therefore you can say that the origin of white people was in Africa. No white person evolved from Homo Sapiens in Africa. This all occurred outside the continent. Don’t confuse the origin of Homo Sapiens and the origin of modern human beings.

If Homo sapiens sapiens did not evolve in Africa, then Africans (of any ethnic or racial description) must have migrated back into Africa from somewhere else. Regardless, early human origins have no bearing on who may call themselves African. Suggest that the earliest homo sapiens remains are found in China. This would only suggest that Africans may have migrated here from China, but it is not necessarily so as most hominids of the time were too busy trying not to be eaten by sabre-tooth tigers to invent writing and leave detailed records of their family tree or even a fossil record of themselves. The bones of their oldest known grandfather doesn't make them Chinese, they're still African for the same reason that any other African is African: they were born in Africa.


The Lemba people originate from Judea. They’re not African. They may have dark skins, but they’re not African. Indians also have dark skins and they too are not African.


Hear that, Lemba dudes? Being Zimbabwean, speaking a Bantu language and being black are not enough to make you guys Africans. Sorry. That Judean holiday you took 2 500 years ago is paying dearly now.

If they are Homo sapiens with the same common ancestor as modern-day Africans, how did they get to Judea?

Being black, being on the African continent for 2 500 years and speaking a Bantu language are not sufficient to be classified as African by your standards?

Being Homo sapiens sapiens, that did supposedly not originate in Africa, but migrated to the African continent, only counts for some Africans to be classified as African if they have black skins and speak a Bantu language, but not if they took a scenic route by means of Judea?

But being born in the Caribbean, say in Jamaica, and being a black nationalist that adheres to the Roman Catholic faith like Marcus Garvey did, leaving most of your writing in English, and dying in London makes one more African?

OOA theory is widely accepted. But the presence of Homo Sapiens fossils in China certainly invalidates this theory. See this table on the link which confirms that Homo Sapies fossils were found in China.

That link merely shows a list of fossils found in China. It does not imply, nor tries to imply, that the fossils found there are the oldest known examples of such fossils. It is only a table that categorises fossils found in China according to species in the genus Homo.

The oldest known human fossil remains are from Ethiopia. I hope they weren't buried by a Rabbi, not even a black one, because that would make them un-African in your view?

The only flaw of the multi-regional hypotheses as widely recorded is that it is based on the assumption that evolution elsewhere was from Neanderthals and Homo Erectus. Genetic evidence disputes that. But we can update that hypotheses now to say that such evolution did occur outside Africa as well but that being evolution from Homo Sapiens not Homo Erectus.

There is no assumption that Homo sapiens sapiens evolved from Neanderthals. It is widely considered that Neanderthals died out, largely thanks to the appearance of Homo sapiens sapiens. For genetic evidence, see Mitochondrial Eve.

Homo sapiens and homo sapiens sapiens are effectively synonyms as these are the last remaining species of the genus Homo. It is a misnomer to suggest that the various species of the genus evolved from each other, as they are thought to be cousins stemming from the same common ancestor. There are also various speculations as to who the common ancestor is, but you'll find that Homo erectus is thought to be the common ancestor of Homo sapiens sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo heidelbergensis. These latter species are not considered to have evolved from one another (except perhaps neanderthalensis from heidelbergensis, which makes heidelbergensis the common ancestor of neanderthalensis and sapiens), they are all considered to have a common ancestor in Homo erectus.

By the way, the earliest known fossils of most of those, including Homo erectus, are all found in Africa. Like I said in my reply in the comments of my previous post, how far back is far enough? You'd like to trace African ancestry way back, but not far enough to include Homo erectus, which is thought to be the common ancestor of all Homo sapiens, and not recent enough to include Homo beings who went to Judea, learnt a thing or two from the Jews, learn to fear the God of Abraham, still speak a Bantu language and are as black as night, as Africans?


Whether the term “Africa” was invented by Romans is neither here nor there. We have the term, which is in specific reference to this continent.

Agreed. The term African refers to that which is of or related to Africa. Nothing more, nothing less. Which means it is not descriptive of a particular race, nationality or ethnicity.


That Mbeki referred to the Berber people as African doesn’t make that the gospel truth. He was wrong. The Berbers like the North African Arabs do not originate from Africa. They’re said to have reached North Africa around 2000 BC or so.

There was a study was done in respect of the origins of the Berber people. Here’s an excerpt:

"Looking at the relevant mutations in and around the lactase gene in human populations, we can gain insight into the origin(s) and spread of dairying. We genotyped the putatively causal allele for lactose tolerance (–13910T) and constructed haplotypes from several polymorphisms in and around the lactase gene (LCT) in three North African Berber populations and compared our results with previously published data. We found that the frequency of the –13910T allele predicts the frequency of lactose tolerance in several Eurasian and North African Berber populations but not in most sub-Saharan African populations. Our analyses suggest that contemporary Berber populations possess the genetic signature of a past migration of pastoralists from the Middle East and that they share a dairying origin with Europeans and Asians, but not with sub-Saharan Africans."

The fact that Berbers share genetic material with Europeans (who knows of which race) and Asians (who knows of which race) does not cast any light on their origins. It merely suggests that Berbers did not share their genetic material with other Africans. For all we know from your excerpt above, and the out-of-Africa theory, the Berbers in North Africa were the origins of the genetic material and the ancestors of the Europeans and Asians of similar milk loving ethnic groups came from Africa. Which suggests, once again, like you have admitted, being black and being African are not the same thing.


The African Diaspora is relevant. Here we’re not trying to prove who practiced slavery before who, but to demonstrate that the term “African” has always been used exclusively in reference to black people for the greater part of our history.


Marcus Garvey is African purely because he is black like a Lemba. Howewer, unlike most Lemba, Marcus wasn't born in Africa, did not speak a Bantu language as far as I know and died in London. Being black is not enough to make Lemba people African, but it's enough to make Marcus Garvey more African than Lemba people or some white devil who dares call himself African.

With the notable exception of the Lemba people, who are too black, who speak a Bantu language, but because they've only been African for 2 500 years and weren't shipped off to work on plantations overseas, can't be African.

And the notable exception of the Berbers, who are excluded because they like milk more than sub-Saharan Africans, they are not black enough, they have cousins in Europe and Asia and they don't speak Bantu-languages.

And the notable ignorance of the etymology of the word Africa and the native African Semitic people to whom it first applied.


That some lone white guy in 1707 called himself “African” doesn’t mean he is. Afrikaners are descendants of the Dutch, French and Germans. I’m not sure what makes them African there. That they created their own fanagalo doesn’t make their origins South African. You have a stronger argument to want Afrikaans at least be described as an African language than want Afrikaners described as African.

The fact that some lone white guy called himself African before some lone Zulus decided to call themselves Zulu, speaks a fanagalo that originated in Africa just like Zulu did, did not want to go somewhere else just like Zulus don't want to go anywhere else, managed to convince all his pale-faced, pink bottomed friends to speak the same fanagalo and call themselves after their native continent contradicts your statement that nobody who wasn't black (except the Berbers, who aren't African in your view) wanted to be called African before 1994.

I'm not sure what makes anyone African in your view, because being black doesn't cut it, speaking a Bantu-language doesn't cut it, being lactose tolerant doesn't cut it, being born in Africa doesn't cut it, sharing genetic material with milk lovers in the Middle East, Asia or Europe doesn't cut it, being in Africa since Paleolithic times doesn't cut it, but being born in Jamaica and starting a nationalist movement overseas does?

Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa

This is part 1 of a 2 part series. You may find the full series here:

1. Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa.


2. Defining race and ethnicity in South Africa, part 2.

This is shameless linkbaiting on my side. A recent troughleader post (We are not all Africans, black people are!) asserts that only black people can be truly African. I'll reserve judgement on whether this is true or not, but this post is such an easy target for a sadist like myself so I couldn't resist dishing out a few slaps on the wrist. What can I say? Give me a barrel of fish and a shotgun and I have a fun-filled afternoon.

I'll quote segments from the blog post in bold, and debunk them blow by blow:



A Neanderthal skull. Any species that had dentistry advanced enough to survive death for a couple of hundred thousand years is obviously superior to ours. Then again, our mammaries tend to be non-biodegradable so maybe we show potential.

Historical revisionism is generally a legitimate re-evaluation of existing understanding and knowledge of particular historical aspects in order to correct any distortions; but there are also those with deliberate motives to revise history in order to mislead or reflect them in favourable light.

Historical revisionism does not have a general status as either legitimate or illegitimate. Historians know that, as Winston Churchill once noted, victors are the writers of history. Revisionism is a term used to describe a process of historical speculation. In most cases, there is no objective means to determine which version of history is more accurate than another. The American Historical Association offers some illumination:

History is a continuing dialogue between the present and the past. Interpretations of the past are subject to change in response to new evidence, new questions asked of the evidence, new perspectives gained by the passage of time. There is no single, eternal, and immutable "truth" about past events and their meaning.

Historical revisionism is thus not a process that necessarily corrects distortions, it is the process of studying history and merely offers different viewpoints of an assumed history. History is a narrative, descriptive, humanist endeavour and should not be confused with science in the true sense of the word. History is not a quest for truth, but a quest for deeper understanding of human nature. It is largely the study of mythology, in the epic of evolution sense.


Historically, the term “African” never had any ambiguous meaning.

This is demonstrably false. The term Africa is considered to be a Latin term, given to Africa by Roman conquerors. One possible root of the word is aprica, which is Latin for sunny. Another possible root is Afer, which means of or related to Africa. During the time when Africa was baptised Africa by the Roman Empire, this term referred specifically to Carthage, or Phoenicia, in modern day Tunisia. The term Afri referred to several Semitic people who lived in the Northern parts of Africa during this time. Originally, then, the terms Africa and African have absolutely no bearing on black people, but referred to the Semitic natives of the African continent who dealt with the Roman Empire.

Historically, the term African is as ambiguous as it is today. It is thus a convenient blanket term for the Roman Empire to refer to that sunny continent, or a way to refer to the Semitic people who lived there.

The term originally did not describe a racial group or even a specific ethnic group. The term African merely described people of or related to Africa in some way.

This 'some way' is vague, as it originally referred to Semitic people who very much are Afro-Asiatic, depending on the historical revisionism you'd like to believe.

The fight against colonialism was to liberate Africans from the thuggery visited upon them by Europeans who had arrogated to themselves the power to rule with brute force and dominate vast territories of the African continent.

The history of slavery (or if Wikipedia is somehow a questionable source, try the BBC's History of Slavery), particularly in Nigeria, proves that thuggery was native to Africa long before European colonialism reared its head. In their case, European colonialism liberated the slaves and brought much more freedom to the populace than it discovered there. Colonialism is not the mainstay of the Caucasian race. Colonialism is very much native to Africa, as it is to the entire savage homo sapiens species since they obliterated the civilised Neanderthal species, historical revisionism besides.


Mbeki recognised and acknowledged that other cultures and the acquired knowledge of the history of various races had shaped his being and person as an African.

Before putting words in Thabo Mbeki's mouth, it is perhaps best to read the famous I am an African speech. Let Mbeki speak for himself:

I am formed of the migrants who left Europe to find a new home on our native land. Whatever their own actions, they remain still, part of me.
...
My mind and my knowledge of myself is formed by the victories that are the jewels in our African crown, the victories we earned from Isandhlwana to Khartoum, as Ethiopians and as the Ashanti of Ghana, as the Berbers of the desert.

We see thus that Mbeki very much includes any racial or ethnic group born in Africa - that is, native to Africa - as Africans, in much the same way that the original meaning of the word African means of or related to Africa (be it sunny skies or Semitic people, your choice).


Our historical revisionists who want to be reclassified as Africans and no longer as Europeans or white, tend to look north at Arab countries and claim, in their state of bewilderment, that Arabs are Africans, therefore, they too have the right to proclaim themselves African.

No white person who wants to be classified as African ever conflated the term African with being black. African and black are not synonyms and never were, given the ambiguity of both terms. The term African means of or related to Africa, while black may refer to a race or ethnic group with a dark complexion, sometimes with a Semitic genetic lineage like the Lemba.

It is thus a misconception that white people are trying to be black when they claim, like Thabo Mbeki did, that they too are African if they are of or related to Africa. The reason is obviously that African and black are two separate, ambiguous, emotionally loaded terms that means different things to different people.

Most white people in this debate claim that they are African purely because they are native born in Africa and nothing more.


Popular theory among whites has been that their ancient ancestors came from Africa. However, palaeontologists after an analysis of more than 5 000 ancient teeth, concluded that first Europeans were from Asia, not Africa.

The author does not provide any links to the palaeontology sources. What is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Neverteless, the Smithsonian Institute does not seem to buy the idea that homo sapiens evolved in China.


No white person can either through birth or naturalisation assume an identity of African. African is not and has never been a national identity.

This simply does not make sense, unless one decouples the terms African and black. As a race, no white person can either through birth or naturalisation change races any more than any other person can socially construct their genetic heritage. However, one person born in Africa and of Africa is just as African as the next, precisely because the term African is not and has never been a national identity - or a specific racial or ethnic identity.

Once the penny drops that African and black race are not synonymous terms, it makes sense how one can be black but not African, and African but not black.


If this historical revisionism if to continue, soon whites would find the racial identity as African not enough, and proclaim themselves “black” and accuse those who refuse to recognise them as such to be racist and intolerant.

On the contrary, if one decouples the terms African and black with the aid of any dictionary, one realises that the two are not synonyms. Then it makes sense how one can be African regardless of ethnic or racial heritage, but not black. It also makes sense how one can be black but not African, as the people of Oceania and Australia with dark skins can be black but with no relation to Africa.

It would appear rather that the only historical revisionism that is racist and intolerant in this regard is on the side of those who would like to do a reverse pencil test to determine who is African and who is not (black or not).

Latest on the disgraced Media Tribunal

Since my last post, No Media Tribunal, over 500 followers have joined the fray to oppose the Media Tribunal. I didn't realise there were so many irate internet nerds in South Africa.


More than 500 South Africans are against the Media Tribunal. I know, I counted them all.

Prominent people oppose the Media Tribunal

Some of the sane people opposed to the Media Tribunal include Pick n Pay's CEO and the US Ambassador.

People at grassroots level oppose the Media Tribunal

This is ironic because according to Jacob Zuma, the Media Tribunal is designed to protect ordinary people who he thinks are too stupid to know about the ombudsman or who cannot afford court proceedings against the boogy man media.

Well, if us ordinary, grassroots level South Africans are such high flyers that we need a Media Tribunal that censors the press to protect our anonymous reputations then why do we feel this way about the proposed media tribunal?

• YES to Media FREEDOM. NO to Hitler's sentiments over the journos!


• Don't touch me on my media.


• I think someone once said something about history repeating itself. This farce is a bloody tragedy.


• Most certainly - it's the run up to the Fourth Reich - The African Chapter.


• This is exactly what the ANC fought against in the APARTHEID years, now THEY are simply re-branding it as DARKER APARTHEID!

These gems were taken from the comments on the No Media Tribunal twibbon page.

The ombudsman is jacked up

Smart, educated, experienced black people are the last kind of people the ANC wants. It's not so easy to sell them the revolutionary rhetoric of 'we're the liberation party, if you don't vote for us apartheid is coming back'. More like the libation party because they all seem drunk to me.

This is why the current press ombudsman, Joe Thloloe is having such a sweaty time in the hot seat. This is why Mzilikazi wa Afrika is having such a tough time to stay out of jail, and why convicted fraudsters like Schabir Shaik gets parole. Jackie Selebi will probably catch something like a near-lethal ingrown toenail soon. We need this Media Tribunal like a fish needs a bicycle.

It's up to you to guard our freedom!

Thank you so much to all those who have joined the debate and have voiced concern over the Media Tribunal. I know many of you felt patriotic when you stuck those retarded condom flags on your car mirrors and I laughed at you for turning your cars into twat mobiles. Now it's my turn to feel patriotic, not because of some liberation movement or some politician, but thanks to ordinary South Africans who realise that treating free speech you dislike with censorship is akin to treating dandruff by decapitation, like Saint Frank Zappa used to say.

Feel free to leave me a comment!

What does the Gini coefficient mean?

The Gini coefficient is often cited by politicians and other socialists to highlight income inequalities. Usually, it is meant to invoke a moral judgement concerning income gaps, thereby justifying government intervention in the economy in a Keynesian manner. This is exactly where the Gini coefficient is abused for ulterior motives.



Whatever you do, crush the infamous thing, and love those who love you. - Voltaire, who rocks and not just because he is a bust.

What is the Gini coefficient?

The Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality. There are two assumptions here with regards to income inequality, namely:

• Complete income equality is when everyone receives an equal income. This state lies on one end of the scale and is represented by a Gini coefficient of 0.


• Complete income inequality is when one person or entity receives all income, while the rest receives none. This state lies on the opposite end of the scale and is represented by a Gini coefficient of 1.

The Gini coefficient is obtained by plotting the Lorentz curve (representing actual income distribution) to the normal distribution line (representing the ideal income distribution where everyone receives the same amount of income).

This sounds confusing, but it isn't. The Gini coefficient is simply a measure of how far the actual income distribution is from the line of perfect income equality.

What moral implications does the Gini coefficient have?

None whatsoever. The Gini coefficient simply states things as they are, even though its value may be distorted to suit your particularly malignant political purpose. The reason why I claim that there cannot be any moral scrutiny forthcoming from the Gini coefficient becomes apparent when one looks at the list of countries by income inequality.

Some deductions from the list of countries by income inequality

The first observation is the slight difference between the UN figures and the CIA figures for the Gini index. The first 30 figures for the UN index have a median of 38, while the same first 30 figures for the CIA index have a median of 40,25. How is this possible? This discrepancy may be the result of the proportions of quantiles used to calculate the Gini coefficient.

Suggest that both the CIA and the UN had the same data sets. If the CIA used a lower granularity than the UN (in other words, less quantiles, or less squares on their grid), their Gini coefficient would usually be lower than the Gini coefficient of the UN. If you want to prove to your country that your economic policies are bringing about more income equality, you should use lower granularity.

Yet if the CIA used higher granularity than the UN (in other words more quantiles, or more squares on their grid), the Gini coefficient would typically be higher than that of the UN. If you were running a presidential campaign and you'd like to show your potential voters how the previous regime has failed, you could show them a Gini coefficient calculated with higher granularity.

Note that the same data set here could give widely different figures, while the actual income distribution has not changed one bit. This is why a Gini coefficient cited without describing the proportions of the quantiles used is a meaningless number that is better than a thumb suck number at a ratio of 1 to 0,999....

The second observation is less apparent, but it is obtained by comparing the Gini coefficients with the United Nations Human Development Index. Note that the Gini coefficient data I used here are from various years, while the Human Development Index data is from 2007. Regardless, there is no correlation between the level of human development and the Gini coefficient.

It becomes clear that the Gini coefficient is not a reliable measure to use when one is trying to give an impression of the current state of affairs of the general household in a given population. What then is the use of the Gini coefficient?

What is the use of the Gini coefficient?

Having a state of affairs where a brain surgeon, a rocket scientist and a waiter all receive the same wage is not a desirable one. This is because transporting beverages does not really require the amount of mental strain, education, training and strong character that is required to obtain a PhD in physics or medicine.

Naturally, the opposite side of the spectrum, where one institute enjoys all the income while nobody else shares in the spoils of the gravy train is a kleptocracy. This is not a desirable state of affairs either. The safest road is usually in the middle. Intuitively, we deduce that a Gini index of around 0,5 is the most equal in that it is fair towards brain surgeons, rocket scientists and waiters, all things being equal.

Economic development and how it relates to the Gini coefficient

Simon Kuznet discovered that - contrary to the interpretation often cited by hysterical politicians - a developing country often shows a decline in Gini coefficient index. This makes perfect sense because some people would start earning more while others would still earn the same, or less. This is a good sign, as it means development is taking place. Furthermore, Kuznet claims that the Gini coefficient reaches a maximum, after which the income inequality begins to decrease as more people work themselves into higher income groups.

Thus, citing a high Gini coefficient for a country like South Africa, and noting that it has increased since 1994, is actually good news as it shows that the country is developing. A high Gini coefficient could thus be good news or bad news, depending on the current level of development in the cited population. Once again we see that a Gini coefficient by itself is nothing but a number.

What is the ideal Gini coefficient?

According to econometrics, the ideal Gini coefficient lies between 0,25 and 0,40. This is because at a level where brain surgeons, rocket scientists and waiters all receive the same wage, there is no financial incentive to study physics or neuroscience. Similarly, at levels where income inequality is too high, the ownership disputes and social incoherence affect development negatively. Private property and other human rights cannot be guaranteed to last where a government can decide to say, nationalise mines and disrupt productive farms after sniffing too many beer farts in a shebeen.

South Africa had a Gini index of 0,65 in 2005, according to the CIA. Instead of requiring the government to act to bring this Gini coefficient down for its own sake, it is perhaps a better idea to start focussing on the implications of such a high Gini coefficient, namely:

• Incentive traps: who gets the incentive from FIFA and Eskom's new power stations? Wouldn't it aid development - and by implication our high Gini coefficient - more positively if South Africa sidestepped the government in these matters entirely?


• Erosion of social cohesion: The ongoing genocide of white South Africans is still largely being ignored by the South African government and the media. Kill the Boer and other struggles against reality songs are not aiding in creating social cohesion in South Africa. The longer the government pussyfoots with dealing with these hate speech instances, the more murky the social cohesion becomes.


• Social conflicts: Black economic empowerment has failed because it is a racist employment policy. Getting rid of double standards such as BEE would go far further to bringing down the Gini coefficient of South Africa than more government intervention in the economy ever could.


• Uncertain property rights: South Africans should insist on unequivocal and very real support of its constitution by our government. There cannot even be a debate about nationalisation of our mines or land grabs Zimbabwe style because these matters bring about uncertainty about property rights. In return, those with resources are not going to invest in South Africa simply because their property rights here are uncertain. If there were certainty regarding property rights, the Gini coefficient would come down as more resources would flow into South Africa and more would stay here!

Conclusion

Next time you read a Gini coefficient thrown around like an absolute, simply enquire as to the granularity of the quantiles. If the author or speaker cannot answer you, chances are they read about a terribly high Gini coefficient on Wikipedia and are trying to create their own moral panic. It is imperative that a Gini coefficient be contextualised properly before it has any meaning whatsoever, as a number by itself is nothing but a number. A high Gini coefficient could be a very good thing, or a very bad thing, but it does not correlate with a desirable state of human development or with economic development.

Further reading

• The Wikipedia page on economic inequality.


• The Wikipedia page on the Gini coefficient.


• The Wikipedia page on Kuznet's curve, explaining why a Gini coefficient needs to be contextualised.

Blogs 4 Free Press

Apparently the ANCYL (whose members are all rather old to be in the YOUTH league) are trying to censor the press. It is thanks to the press, you see, that we know about their dodgy dealings with mining conglomerates and all the grey cats that Jacob Zuma likes to tickle in the dark. The obvious solution here is not to fix the problems, but to prevent us from knowing about the problems. Well, there's just one thorn in the side of this solution:

The Bill of Rights

The section on freedom of speech:

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes

1. freedom of the press and other media;


2. freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;


3. freedom of artistic creativity; and


4. academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

That's all there is to it, really. So please join me in saying fuck the ANCYL while we are still allowed to say it.

For more information, see Chris Roper's blog.
Also see Sipho Hlongwane's blog.

Note that I put the image on the far left. That's just a coincidence, honest.

Meteor shower sighted in Gauteng

Last night a few friends and I were having a much deserved party after finishing this year's studies. We were sitting outside on the stoep smoking hubbly and having a few drinks. At approximately 11 pm, the sky lit up, becoming almost as bright as daylight. I turned around, having observed the light as coming from behind me, and saw a bulb on the horizon. The bulb was a bright light, with the rest of the sky glowing in blue and green colours, almost as big as the ass of Jennifer Lopez. Astonishing!


This is not what it looked like at all. We could not observe any particles, only a very bright glow in the entire sky. This picture is from the BBC article to give you an idea of what it was.

A few girls were at the opposite end of the building. They came running around, asking if we'd seen the UFO. Apparently they also observed a bulb on the horizon, with the exception that the glow had been red and orange instead of our green and blue.

Naturally, we were curious to find out what this UFO is. We knew it couldn't be ESKOM's doing because they don't have that kind of power. Some party-goers suggested that it's time to go to church, but I pointed out that this would raise more questions than it could provide answers. What is the nature of the UFO?

The Leonids Meteor Shower

It appears that we were fortunate enough to witness the Leonids. The Leonids get their name from the constellation Leo, from which their stream of meteors appears to originate at roughly 17 November each year. The Leonids are a result of the comet Tempel-Tuttle. Tempel-Tuttle is a comet that passes the earth each 33 years. Tempel-Tuttle last passed the earth in 1998. The Leonids are debris in the trail of the comet. Every time the earth passes through the trail, we get a meteor shower.

We thought it could be the end of the world. Naturally this made the beer taste better and forced me to stop giving the other people a chance at Tekken 6. Yes, the Mash Master showed no mercy.

Further Information About the Tempel-Tuttle Comet

• Latest World Wide Meteor/Meteorite News on a blog.


• Leonid Mac information from NASA.


• Meteor lights up Gauteng from Times Live.


• Star Gazers Hoping for Clear Sky from the BBC.

Bile of Man free mp3 download promotion

Bile of Man is a South African death metal band I've had the pleasure of seeing once or twice. I also included them among my best bands on myspace list. They are currently giving away free mp3s as part of a promotion.



You may download the mp3s here:
Bile of Man promo tracks.

To the real geeks, the tracks are also available in ogg format.

Descendant of Desecration

The first aspect of Bile of Man that kicks you in the face is the strong Dying Fetus influence. The second aspect is the foundation of some fine sound. The guitars are still a little raw, but for the most part the production serves to build a wall of sound, with some interesting stereo effects and a few disembowelling bass parts. Oh, and they can keep time, which is something of a novelty for most South African bands.

Wrath of the Stillborn

Descendant of Desecration has a few risky tempo changes, but Wrath of the Stillborn is the better of the two tracks in my opinion. It kicks off with some arsenic blast beats that flow into even more putrid blasts. Then, some awesome diabolus in musica riffs, followed by an orgy of chaotic chromatic riffs that reminds of Cryptopsy before they became Coretopsy. For the grand finale, you get some blasphemous pinch harmonics that would get Zakk Wylde fired from Ozzy Osbourne's band.

Popular South African author S.A. Partridge interviews me

S.A. Partridge is a South African author. Her novel, The Goblet Club, is "a Gothic novel with distinctly South African features set in a mysterious boarding school somewhere on the South African Platteland. When Mark and his friends discover the dark secrets of St Matthews their thoughts turn to murder." The Goblet Club achieved top honours in the English category of Human & Rousseau’s I'm a Writer competition. This competition is held in conjunction with You, Huisgenoot and Drum magazines, SABC Education and Radio Sonder Grense (RSG). The Goblet Club also won the MER Youth prize at the 2008 Via Afrika awards in Cape Town.

What on heaven or earth or beyond could possibly compel an author of this mettle to interview me? I've lain awoke at night pondering such a question, and the only logical conclusion I arrived at involved both my handsomely hirsute appendage and my rugged, boyish charm. That, or my irrepressible modesty.

If you want to stalk S.A.Partridge and the fact that her initials and that of the South African Police are one and the same does not deter you either, then you can carpool with me. You will need a Groucho Marx disguise, an oversized raincoat (if you don't know the kind, don't bother applying), a case of fine red wine (if you don't know several kinds, don't bother applying), a smorgasbord of exotic cheese and a preference for the likes of Deicide, Morbid Angel, Nevermore or perhaps Le'Rue Delashay.



You should also do your homework by researching S.A. Partridge at the following online locations:

1. The blog of S.A. Partridge at book.co.za


2. The Goblet Cub Myspace page


3. The Goblet Club on Bookfinder. No, you can't read it during stakeout. You have to pour wine, you ludicrous gimp.

S.A.Partridge: Do you have a motto?

Necro Files: "Women should be obscene and not heard" - Groucho Marx.

S.A.Partridge: I take it Groucho Marx died a single, lonely man?

Necro Files: Not quite, he was reputedly a womaniser.

S.A.Partridge: Womanisers. What do women see in them?

Necro Files: Must be the facial hair. I have this theory that bearded women are responsible for lesbianism. In the olden days, bearded women were plentiful.

S.A.Partridge: Bearded women? They were?

Necro Files: Yes. It's only after practices like the wicker man that their numbers considerably declined. Today, you can only find bearded women in Greece and Portugal, indicating that they must have fled there from the mainland. The wicker man is thus a plausible explanation.

S.A.Partridge: :o

Necro Files: So a girl sees another girl, but thinks it's a womaniser with facial hair and lesbianism blooms. Let's face it, once you snogged a girl you don't want to go back.

S.A.Partridge: It's a stretch. :/

Necro Files: Of epic Baron von Münchhausen proportions.

S.A.Partridge: Did they burn freaks in wicker men?

Necro Files: Well, wicker men were like the church's inquisition. So yes, freaks. Anybody who disagreed with the druids, anybody who were deemed unsavoury characters were burnt.

S.A.Partridge: You only really have Caesar's word for it that the wicker man ever existed.

Necro Files: And the lack of bearded women, obviously. When can we expect your next book?

S.A.Partridge: My next book is coming out in May.

Necro Files: I see. Will it also be in the teen fetish genre?

S.A.Partridge: No, I don't write teen fetish. I'm not Anne Rice.

Necro Files: Does it feature any bearded women?

S.A.Partridge: I hate you.

Charming lady. Buy the Goblet Club now!

Devildriver shows postponed due to Christian bigotry

Devildriver, those groove growlers from the embers of Coal Chamber, had a full tour booked to South Africa. In typical South African fashion, the entire framework was in place to ensure success. In typical South African fashion, some cretins just had to ruin it for everybody.

One of the gigs were scheduled to take place at Oppidam, a venue near Hartbeespoortdam. This scenic resort is ideally equipped for rock concerts and has hosted many of them in the past – including weekend long festivals.

Thornrose Productions is a rising productions company. In South Africa, production companies are few and far between. Like most industries in South Africa, there are a few monopolies who maintain a comfortable oligarchy. The event organising companies are usually in cahoots with abhorrent radio personalities from another epoch – or perhaps even another dimension. A new independent addition to the largely controlled events organisation market is thus certainly welcome.

Thornrose booked a Devildriver gig at Oppidam, only to have the local Christian community petition against the occurrence of such an event on the allegations that the band is Satanic. One would think that trivial bum fluff like this would go largely unnoticed, especially when there are less trivial matters like the reputation of Oppidam, the profits and the reputation of their client, Thornrose, at stake. Alas, Oppidam, in their oblivious wisdom, decided that they agreed with the local troglodytes and cancelled the Devildriver gig after Thornose already had a contract with dry ink. Apparently Christian money has a different value than secular money.

Now being a metalhead, I'm no Devildriver fan, but I'm no fan of censorship either. The fact that Devildriver isn't remotely a Satanic band is a huge factor in my low regard of them. Heavy metal is about the taboos in society. Traditionally, metal lyrical themes revolve around sex, violence and the occult. Tales of sobriety, abstinence and praise and worship are simply not good copy. Even the Bible is laced with tales of sodomy, incest, rape, genocide, debauchery and more vengeful gods than Lovecraft could concoct in three opium induced trances. This is no accident, as nobody would read a book that is ten commandments and a zombie Jew thick. No, it had to be even thicker than that.



Devildriver sings groovy songs about their maker's hand, that's how dark and Satanic they are. I feel that if you were really compelled to play in a death metal fanboy band, at least do it like Bloodbath or Death Metal All Stars do it. Nevertheless, for the slow readers out there, I concocted this highly scientific table of correspondence to move the subject closer to the light.



Don't you just love highly scientific presentations? They make it seem so official.

I do however realise that comprehension – even with the aid of illustration – might take a couple of repetitions. Usually, for the kind of troglodyte who spends most of his time finding Satan in the doings of others, only a couple of beatings can truly aid comprehension. To be frank, what kind of Christian can you possibly be if you can't find Jesus in the doings of others? How is it that you can find Satan under every rock, but you can't find Jesus there? Surely, being Christian means you should be obsessed with Jesus as opposed to being obsessed with the fun guy?

If, like me, you are utterly disgusted at the neglected tact on behalf of Oppidam, feel free to contact them and express your disgust:

You can contact Oppidam to complain about the gig getting cancelled by emailing them or by calling them.

This is their email address:
zelda@oppidam.co.za

This is their phone number:
012 259 1585

Cthulhu Ftaghn!

Stop violence against women in South Africa

It is no secret that I have a pet hate for feminists. A bunch of women could have no equals in mastering hysteria. Some sources of my amusement for feminists are rooted in their irrational actions.

Learning your As, Bs and Cs

Feminists trashed bras to protest against beauty pageants. They saw brassieres as symbols of oppression. These 'instruments of torture' were interpreted as symbols of enforced femininity. This is irrational because the modern brassiere was invented, developed and patented by a woman. Mary Phelps Jacob, the mother of the melons, registered a patent for the first open back brassiere in 1910.


The first brassiere as we know it. You did this to yourselves, ladies!

Ida Rosenthal (with the reluctant help of her husband – yeah right, about as reluctant as Hugh Heffner to find a new Playmate) noticed that not all lumps of love where equal. Funny that no man is an island yet each person is as deep as the ocean and just as unequal. Ida devised a way for this instrument of torture to hug and cuddle each breast with the endearment it deserved by inventing a standard for different cup sizes.

Before Ida, men and women had a largely androgynous look. Strange how androgyny always comes about when we are about to embark on one of Toffler's ages. Ida is responsible for turning women from Boyishform Flappers into Maidenhood stunners who caused as many cases of blindness by poking as they did horse cart accidents.

Even the name bra was coined by women, for women. Mary registered the name, although the word brassiere is a French word which refers to military armour designed to protect the arms. I can fathom how a set of double Ds can protect your arms in combat – not just a fancy double barrel slingshot. I can also understand how waging a full scale carpet bombing invasion could be equated with the brave deed of motherhood. I wonder if you would then be permitted to call a French soldier without a bra unarmed? No wonder they couldn't take Russia.

Burning bras to rebel against enforced femininity is as rational as burning stav churches to protest against enforced Christianity. Besides, what would a male who had been circumcised right after birth burn or trash to protest against enforced masculinity? I have news for you, bra burning tomboys: you can trash a brassiere but foreskin does NOT grow back and no amount of calamari rings is going to replace that skullcap.

But I digress, as I often do when I start thinking about voluptuous breasts. This post is actually serious. I have no problem with admitting that I am a male chauvinist pig, but I also happen to have a streak of justice in me, so I had to get this off my chest.

Getting abreast of the topic

In a recent thoughtleader entry, Charlene Smith did a post entitled I've had it with men in this country. My reaction was: "Oh, here we go. Another day, another bra burnt". After reading the article – coupled with some forum discussions on the Zapiro cartoon and how serious portrayals of rape are – I was shocked.

The way I was raised implied that a real man was a tough guy who could battle the crocodiles on the muddy banks of the Limpopo river in order to procure leather for home made undies. Sure, this is a very traditional view of masculinity, but it is not only conquering. It is also very nurturing, because bravery and valour imply honour.

An honourable Rambo or Chuck Norris would never in his life even think about forcing a women into the position of Lady Justice as depicted in the recent Zapiro cartoon. Even if she does have a mullet. This is precisely why I was shocked to learn about the dishonourable attitudes and actions of the majority of South African men.

You should read Charlene's post for her take on things, but I did some research and found some more shocking statistics on the People Opposing Women Abuse (POWA) site:

• Every 26 seconds, a woman is raped in South Africa. Guys who treat women like masturbation aids should be kicked in the nuts, by guys bigger and tougher than them.


• 85% of South African rapes are gang rapes. Dude, not even animals do that. This is beyond bloody disgusting. That is someone's mother, someone's daughter, someone's sister! It could be YOURS!


• For every 4 women, 1 is in an abusive relationship. We're not talking emotional abuse here, we're talking wearing shades and telling your friends you fell over the dog kind of abuse. That's a quarter of our ladies. This has to stop.


• Less than 2% of reported rapes are false alarms, yet out of the reported 400 rapes in 2007, only 17 (?!?!?!?!?!?!) even made it to court. Of that 17, only 1 perpetrator was convicted.
  
  That means, of the 400 reported rapes, if 98% were legitimate, 1 out of 392 perpetrators was convicted. That's only 0,25%. And we wonder why most rapes don't get reported! Percentage wise, girls get more calories in rice cakes than the proportion of rape perpetrators getting convicted.


• In 1998, only 7% of the reported rapists were prosecuted. This, coupled with the recent rape case in which Jacob Zuma was acquitted, has seriously damaged the faith our ladies have in the system.

Not having faith in the system is alarming enough when you consider that the government is systematically disarming our citizenry and that political big shots are conveniently unlikely to get a fair trial. It is a much more grave scenario when women are left without the ability to defend themselves and the system which is in place in lieu of weapons is also inadequate.

Most rapes occur thanks to the aid of a knife. Now, to use a rock, paper, scissors analogy, knives are like paper and guns are like scissors. Knives are like rocks and guns are like paper. You could take out an 8 armed rock, paper, scissors champion and rapist with a gun.

While I know some girls who could drink me under the table and who could knock out Mike Tyson (I'd actually like to introduce Mike to them), let's face it: as far as averages go, women are the weaker sex. It is our responsibility as knuckle-dragging, beer guzzling, farting, sniffing, rugby watching Neanderthals to take care of women.

Chivalry does not get old. Don't let it die.

External links of shame

• Act against abuse, one of our government's better ideas.


• One in nine, showing solidarity with women who speak out.


• Women's Net, using technology to empower women.

Zapiro and the Zuma cartoon of the African Renaissance

Zapiro is a controversial cartoonist who rose to fame during apartheid. His nonchalant portrayals of former South African president P.W Botha as a big crocodile was partly garnered from and partly responsible for the groot krokodil (big crocodile) nickname of Botha.

With the advent of our integrated democracy, Zapiro shifted gears and focused on the new boss. First, there were endearing portrayals of Madiba as being more famous than the pope (which, in our part of the world, is in fact the case. Dude, Madiba is bigger than Jesus here. Madiba is bigger than John Lennon here!). Then, there were portrayals of president Thabo Mbeki as an aloof well, loof, who is more concerned with earning Voyager miles and smoking his madala pipe than running a country. None of these bitter satirical portrayals were however pills too bitter to swallow.

Enter Jacob Zuma, a dictator in the making. From his all too frequent run-ins with the law, to his all too frequent attempts at censoring the press, to his attempts at sowing discord among our excellent (and, mind you, ANC appointed) judiciary, to his dismal level of education, to the vitriolic company he keeps who threaten to kill those who do not support Zuma's cause, the man is quite frankly just asking to be ridiculed.


This is it: the controversial Zapiro cartoon. That is, the latest one. Hopefully not the last! Used without permission.

Who could be a better man for the job of pulling down Zuma's trousers and giving him six of the best than Zapiro, the man with 'ballpoints of steel' and vanguard of freedom of speech?

How to miss the point of the Zapiro cartoon

• There are many women who have pointed out that rape is not an issue that should be taken lightly. Let me ask you this: if rape is nothing to be taken lightly, then surely you would expect a judicial system that is stable, free from favour and free from prejudice, to fell judgement on those who are guilty of such a vile and barbaric deed?
  
  To respond to the Zapiro cartoon with a beaten wife syndrome knee-jerk reaction, is missing the point.


• There are some (not surprisingly, the same folk who threaten to kill anti-revolutionary forces) who pointed out that the cartoon is racist. Racist? In what way? By portraying Zuma and his cohorts like thugs - as they do come across when one only considers their words and their deeds, without considering their level of eduction, their gender, or their race? If a Taiwanese lady boy threatened to kill people who do not support their cause and they get treated with the indignity they deserve, would it be a racist issue? If the answer is no, it's definitely not a racist issue.
  
  Let's put this in perspective. You could portray lady justice as a cross-dressing Taiwanese lady boy, but I fear not many would recognise lady justice as lady justice. In the same way, you could portray the Mona Lisa as a black man, but then it won't be Mona Lisa. The fact remains that lady justice, along with the rule of law, is a distinctly Western notion and she is traditionally depicted as a blindfolded, white marble statue of a Greek lady. Now, I may not be politically correct here, but to the best of my knowledge, Greeks consider themselves Caucasian.
  
  For the slow readers: the lady in question is not a white madam, it is lady justice. She is an abstract concept, but it does not surprise me at all that the members of the Zuma revolution could not recognise justice if it kicked them in the balls while they try to rape her, let alone being portrayed in a meticulously executed political comic.
  
  To turn the Zapiro cartoon into a race issue is missing the point. Especially when the demographic representation in the cartoon reflects the demographics of our country (five black people to every white person - actually that's too many black people and not nearly enough Taiwanese lady boys).


• Then there are those who argue that freedom of speech should be free, but not that free. This is certainly a debatable point. Many compare this portrayal of Zuma raping the justice system with Malema and Vavi's threats to eliminate and kill anti-revolutionary forces. Not so.
  
  Our constitution holds that freedom of speech is free, except when that speech condones or incites violence. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but suggesting that a public person who is calling for political solutions to his own legal problems is raping the justice system is a far cry from calling for violence.
  
  To turn the Zapiro cartoon into a half-baked excuse for censoring the press, is missing the point. It merely proves us Zuma critics right. There is something fishy brewing around this whole Zuma issue, which we will only be able to lay to rest by allowing lady justice to take her course. That is, with due respect for the rule of law.

How to get the Zapiro cartoon

• One word: satire. Political cartoons are meant to initiate discussion. We are talking about women being abused, reputations at stake, racism, the ruling party's threats to our judiciary and, thankfully enough, about Zuma's fitness for office.
  
  If you've thought or talked about the Zapiro cartoon (preferably in that order), you got the point.


• Rape is disgusting. Short of killing someone, it is the most vile deed you could possibly do to another person. While the manner in which Zuma's obvious disregard of the justice system is portrayed may raise a few eyebrows, it is certainly a very apt metaphor.
  
  If you've considered the message instead of the way the message was portrayed in the cartoon, you got the point.


• Imagine a world without freedom of the press. In this world, South Africa is still under apartheid, because without freedom of the press, no amount of pseudo-military training in Africa would ever have presented a real threat to the apartheid government. Without freedom of the press, South Africa would not have experienced economic sanctions, entertainment bans, sports bans and general upturn of noses due to apartheid.
  
  If you've started discussing what freedom of speech means to you and to the process of democracy, then you got the point.

We need to think very carefully about the leaders we elect. It's time to realise that the days of someone leading our country by divine right are over. Thanks to democracy, we are now directly responsible for our leaders. The government works for us, and not the other way around. Thanks to Zapiro, more of us will realise this.

If you looked at the Zapiro cartoon and you started thinking and talking about the fitness of Jacob Zuma to hold office, you got the point.

Disclaimer: this post is obviously an attempt at link baiting. I'm discussing the Zapiro cartoon to get sweet, sweet traffic.

If you read this post and thought: "What a cheap way to get hits!", then you got the point.

External links

• Jacob Zuma on Uncyclopedia, more satire than what is healthy. So close to the truth, it's scary!


• Satire on Wikipedia.


• Zapiro in Zuma cartoon uproar, from Mail & Guardian.


• Zapiro's official web site.

The Wicker Man

In ancient Celtic times, the wicker man was a large wicker effigy of a human being. It served as a scapegoat for all the ills of society, such as unwanted pregnancies, stillbirths, drought, warm beer and bearded women. Celts with their Black Sabbath Brummie accents and Asterix hats burnt the wicker man, thus ridding society of all its perceived ills.



The classic British cult horror, The Wicker Man (1973). Not to be confused with the retarded remake which starred Nicolas Cage (from the year that Cthulhu has cursed forever, for that very reason, 2006).

It worked to rid ancient England of its ills, because the villagers actually placed those who caused unwanted pregnancies, stillbirths, drought, warm beer and bearded women in the wicker man before they lit it. Whether those immolated with the wicker man deserved this or not, it certainly worked wonders to lower the amount of unwanted pregnancies and bearded women. When is the last time you saw a bearded woman? I rest my case.

Upon considering the wicker man and the classical logical fallacy of the straw man argument, one can't help but notice the similarities. I mean they're both effigies of men, made of straw (or wicker), and they burn.

The difference is that a real wicker man quickens the return of some men (and bearded women) to dust, while a straw man argument is a form of character assassination.

Here in Mzansi, we never had a wicker man. No, here wicker is far too useful for building shacks and filling the vacuum between your ears. We have a curious practice called necklacing instead. I'll spare you the gruesome detail. Suffice to say you better hope nobody comes knocking on your door when lightning strikes somebody.

I wanted to see either a wicker man or a straw man up in flames, if it's the last thing I did before Egoli. Well, it's currently winter here in a summer rainfall territory, meaning it's hardly necklacing season. I also haven't seen a bearded woman since the last time I went to the traffic department. Imagine my delight then when I found a straw man argument in the news.

"NP is back, itching for a fight"

The NP (the National Party) was the party of the 'architects of apartheid'. This fact is often pointed out by the ANC when they want to do a bit of character necklacing themselves. The fact that the NP was also the party of the architects of our democracy is not so often pointed out in these sessions. They don't serve to instill the sklavmoral, you see.

Regardless, this is not an instance where the ANC spewed forth their habitually obtuse drivel. Nay nay, this is a case where a journalist spewed forth ANC-like obtuse drivel. Of course, this is hardly surprising considering the innate affinity of those in soft sciences for sklavmoral, but damn it, I was looking for a straw man argument and I was going to see it proverbially in flames, immolated by necklacing, if it's the last thing I did before Egoli.

The nature of the yeast

Clearly, the author of NP is back, itching for a fight is brewing.

• The piece is littered with ad hominem attacks which have more in common with infecting Sefrikans with ideology as opposed to being informative. Isn't the media supposed to trust Sefrikans to have the ideologically ideal equal brain capacity each human possesses to formulate our own opinions?


• There are serious journalistic ethics and standards contraventions. There is no clear separation between news and opinion. Competing points of view are not portrayed in a balanced manner, nor are they characterised objectively. It's like a Polokwane conference.


• The presentation is not in a standard, formal variety of English. This is due to the atrociously exaggerated improperly opportunistic use of adjectives.

After a bit of googling, I learned that the author is in fact a columnist. The piece originated as a column in its native Sunday Independent, yet it was syndicated as news for iol.

It is thus not the author who had been negligent, but the editors of iol who decided to present the opinion of a columnist as news against better judgement. All you disinformation conspiracy theorists, reach for your alarm bells. The time is nigh to wear those tinfoil hats.

Dic mihi solum facta, domina (Just the facts, ma'am)

Sticking to the facts, the piece would be much shorter. Next time, think of the trees, you capitalist pigs! This is the same piece, minus the adjectives, plus my own bias:

• National Party spokesman Juan-Duval Uys was an employee of Cape Town councillor Badih Chaaban. Uys is no longer associated with Chaaban. In fact, Uys is currently a witness against Chaaban in an assault case.


• The NP is well aware of its past racially based practices. It is trying to bridge the gap between the races by having a more demographically representative (yawn) membership and launching a youth group to appeal to more black people. The youth group is to be launched by disillusioned ANC youth (read: members of the ANCYL who haven't received a Model C-class Mercedes Benz yet).


• The NP is well aware that the DA has become a refuge for former Natte who switched from wearing khaki to wearing Nigerian buba without realising that wearing Nigerian man dresses is not exactly showing your ethnic solidarity.
  
  Uys and his party are trying to win back the favour of these voters by claiming to implement non-racial employment policies once they come into power. I'm thinking they'd need bigger Mercedes Benz luxury vehicles if they're going to succeed with this one.


• The NP is well aware that being associated with its Protestant Afrikaner past is going to be a stumbling block for many who adhere to different religious faiths. More specifically, the NP learnt from the blunders of the ANC that the majority of people want the separation of the church and state, or pay lip service to that noble concept at the very least.


• Uys blames Marthinus 'used to be kortbroek but is now tree-hugging buba boy' Van Schalkwyk for proverbially floor crossing (read: taking the standard bribe of a Model C-class Mercedez Benz) to the ANC and disbanding the NP without consultation with the rest of the party members.


• Black diamonds, the rising black middle class, who just like white Africans (read: colonialists in PC terms) my age did not grow up under apartheid and were largely unaffected by it and definitely not responsible for it, are disillusioned by the leading party's talk of revolution.
  
  Most of us are easy pickings to a party who manages to move away from ethnicity issues. The Anglophile black youth are more in tune with Y-fm and Usher than with the ANC and Stalin. They are unashamedly more skilled than their unskilled counterparts, they are unapologetically ready to make money and they rightfully feel that they don't need to rely on BEE to prove that they are worth as much as whiteys with degrees. Uys is trying to sway them to the NP side with his envisioned youth brigade and his talk of more realistic employment policies.


• Uys is trying to cash in on the relative respect former president and Nobel peace prize winner F.W de Klerk enjoys. De Klerk should enjoy this respect for being integral to the transition from apartheid to a social democracy (read: serfdom that realises it needs to keep capitalists on a leash to feed the rest of the animal farm), but in reality de Klerk just has respect because he is associated with another former president, Nelson Mandela.
  
  De Klerk is evasive and weary about being associated with the Neo-New-National Party, but the link has already been forged in the popular press.

Why I will not vote for the NP

"On religion, the NP says it respects the practice of all, but will not tolerate Satanism."

That's like saying you're a non-smoker, except for menthol. As far as I am concerned, this dark Satanic anti-revolutionary legion is yet to be discovered. Of course, you get the odd Slipknot ninja, who is disowned even by Satanists for being an idiot. Next thing Uys is going to tell us that Rodney Seale is going to be the vice president once they come into power.

I am apolitical (libertarian at best), but I do feel that voting for any party except the ruling party at any point is a good idea to prevent a disproportionate amount of power in any party's court. We don't want a de facto single party state like the ANC has run into the ground for the past 15 years.

ANC apologists are quick to point out that we've had an impressive economic growth rate of above 4% for the past couple of years. They are not so quick to point out that in 1995, our GDP was 1 548 100. In 2005, our GDP was 1 523 254. For the period of 1995 to 2000, the average household income actually decreased. The GDP took a huge dump from 1995 and took until 2005 to recover. This means we spent an entire decade just catching up with what the minority managed to achieve all by themselves during apartheid.

We're not anywhere near actual growth. The key to surviving our public health system is not getting sick. We have a serious brain drain, just like the entire world apparently, but our skilled people are leaving to fix the entire world's problems because of our crime and our mampara BEE serfdom (which is bound to get worse if the Tzars of the ANC implement their Hugo Chavez-like nationalising of privately owned property as per the proposed expropriation bill).

Because they retain their skilled people, other emerging economies like China, India and Brazil are riding the wave of the global recession while South Africa is still following the white rabbit after the tired 'rich get richer while the poor get poorer' sloganeering down the socialist dream world rabbit hole.

How can the poor get poorer? They're already rock bottom poor. You can't take nothing away from someone.

From what I've seen, the NP are committed to rectifying these wrongs. They are making a big splash in a small pond, but they are hardly offering anything that other opposition parties like the DA, IFP or the UDM aren't offering already.

The difference is that the DA and the UDM would allow me to be a Satanist if I really wanted (as does our wonderful constitution). If you're going to have an effective group, you're going to have to live with views you don't agree with.

"A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular." - Adlai Stevenson

In other words, a free society is a society without the wicker man. Now if there were a political party with a bearded woman, they'd automatically get my vote!