ANC doesn't give a damn about the ordinary man and is foisting National Dialogue on us to divert attention
I endorse the views of all those who have criticised the National Dialogue in various media outlets.
The problems South Africans face were created by corrupt, inept politicians who take home fat salaries every month. Now they want a costly diversionary side-show, ostensibly to solve the problems they created, but really intended to keep the naïve and gullible occupied instead of paying attention to the new revelations every day.If they can't solve the problems how can the politically aligned people they have selectively co-opted manage to do it?
How qualified or competent are they? Some might be. But certainly not all of them.
Also President Ramaphosa used the word inclusive (or synonyms) repeatedly. Yet there are communities or faith groups not included in the co-opted men of faith.For example, I did not see a representative of the descendants of Indentured Indians.
I stand to be corrected, but no Hindus were chosen, not that it matters if competent qualified people, regardless of race or faith, were chosen with the assurance they could solve the problems.
Yes, I am aware Ela Gandhi is there, but she is not a Girmitya, nor a Hindu. Even if she were I would have a problem with her because when she was in parliament, what did she accomplish in a parliament with very skewed representation when it came to a heterogeneous 'Indian community'? This is especially so when it comes to the poor and disempowered in Chatsworth, Phoenix etc.
Furthermore, she is a very inconsistent person or a hypocrite. According to a Post article (January 8-10, 2003): 'Ms Ela Gandhi has refused to participate in the PBD (Indian Diaspora get-together) saying it was racist. 'I feel anything based on race I would not like to identify with.' Yet in an inexplicable about-turn, she accepted the Padma Bhushan award from India in 2007, and the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman – the highest honour conferred on overseas Indians by India's Ministry of External Affairs.Incidentally, Fatima Meer went one better: She reviled the notion of an 'Indian Diaspora' in 2003, yet received the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award at the same event in 2003.
We don't need any flip-floppers representing us. | Kamini Prakash Umhlanga
Trump governs by Art Of The Deal
On a daily basis, the mainstream media disparage US President Donald Trump for his style of government, even claiming his actions are wittingly reckless.
But if journalists and readers were familiar with Trump's book, Art of the Deal, they would understand.
The premise of Trump's strategy is leverage. It's his key tool for achieving what he intends. To realise that, he has a range of tactics which he applies to suit the circumstances. Here they are:Walking away from the table; creating a sense of urgency; using his resources to manipulate; strategic timing; appearing unpredictable; doing nothing; delaying; creating uncertainty; keeping the opponent guessing; keeping options open; pivoting on positions; projecting confidence even when his position is insecure; pushing opponents into reactive mode; using information to manoeuvre opponents into positions that suit him or trap them.
Government for Trump means practicing the art of the deal. In so doing he is more than the conductor. He is also the orchestra playing the instruments which is why the discordance he produces on occasions is intentional and why many think he is clueless about what he is doing. Wrong!
We are witnessing an exceptional leader and a master tactician with virtuous intentions in vanquishing Orwellian globalism, salvaging America's sovereignty and its constitutional premise based on, 'We the people'. | DR DUNCAN DU BOIS Bluff
ANC has no intention of saving South Africa
All you have to do is to consider the record of the ANC and Cyril Ramaphosa regarding the success when it comes to commissions of inquiry.
Yet, the general public and private sector is completely in the dark, and we have a resident who refuses to answer questions or be scrutinised.
Not only was Ramaphosa implicated in two other major scandals, Marikana and Phala Phala, but he was second in charge under Jacob Zuma when State Capture version 1 took place. Now we have State Capture a'la Cupcake and a corrupt police force.
The ANC president has seemingly built around him an impenetrable, bullet proof layer of protection, which consists of the police, the judiciary, his own cadres (at least some of them), the media and even political parties too damn scared to ruffle any feathers.
The result is that the South Africa today is a broken, tired and failed state, captured by the 'untouchable' elites who pretended for 30 years to care about their own people, yet lied to them, abused them and used their votes to get into positions of immense power! | L Oosthuizen Durban
DAILY NEWS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Home Affairs and my journey to a Smart ID card: A positive tale through operational challenges
In recent times, as South Africans look to the Government of National Unity for signs of progress, it's encouraging to see that at least one ministry – Home Affairs – is beginning to deliver tangible results. In particular, we are led to believe that the old green ID books are being phased out in favour of new Smart ID cards. Even as we hear that good news, government promises are met with scepticism: some in the media and many residents claim the improvements are illusory and that systemic inefficiencies persist. My recent encounter with Home Affairs offers a nuanced view, equal parts disconcerting and optimistic. Several months ago, reassured by public statements, I booked a 9am appointment online at my local branch, in George, Western Cape. Upon arrival, I was directed to a short queue of about 10 people with appointments, while a second queue – nearly 10 times as long along the sidewalk — accommodated walk-ins. I felt quite chuffed that I had booked ahead; so far, so good. At the entrance, those of us with bookings were handed a clipboard bearing a printed list. We were asked to find and cross out our names to confirm attendance. While a practical system in theory, the font was so tiny that I had genuine difficulty locating my name. My eyesight is perfectly serviceable; the issue was the microscopic print. Inside, I handed my green ID book to the official who checked his screen and returned my book to me. No, he explained, I was not yet eligible to apply for a Smart ID because I wasn't born in South Africa. But, but… the public announcements! No, my ID book and Permanent Resident certificate weren't enough — yet. He offered two choices. I could — right then and there and for a fee — apply for a new green ID book somehow different from my current one, and once with that in hand, I could then return later, maybe two months, maybe four, for the Smart ID; or I could skip that step and wait to receive a text message confirming my eligibility for the Smart ID. I chose the latter. Smooth, until… The text never arrived but I kept tabs on public updates. A few months later, the ministry announced that non-citizen Permanent Residents could now apply for the Smart ID. That's me. The online application process was smooth and straightforward — until the very last step. I was prompted to sign and enter the location where I was signing. But there was no functionality to do this electronically no matter how I hovered my cursor. I couldn't sign nor input a location. I submitted it anyway, albeit with trepidation. Rejected. I tried again. Rejected. I saved, logged out, returned hours later, and without making any changes tried once more. This time, inexplicably, my application was accepted. Within minutes, I received a confirmation email and text instructing me to bring my green ID book and Permanent Resident certificate to Home Affairs. Right as rain! Naturally, I booked a fresh appointment. I arrived at 9.45am for a 10am slot, with no sidewalk queues at all, for neither the booked nor the walk-ins. The clipboard and its impossible font size returned. Once again, I strained to locate and strike through my name. I approached the same officer from my earlier visit. He noted the time, 9.45am, and asked me to wait until 10am. I pointed out that no one else was waiting, so please… He politely insisted that I take a seat. But, I said, there's no one here, can't you help me now? No, please take a seat. So I sat a mere three metres away, watching him do absolutely nothing for the next fourteen minutes. Uh-oh. I approached his desk at 9.59am. He found my record in the system, and handed me ticket number 70, directing me to the biometrics desk. Onward. The biometrics officer was also unoccupied and signalled that I would need to wait until my number 70 was formally called. Dutifully as ever, I sat in one of the many empty chairs not 10 metres from his desk. Sure enough, two minutes later, number 70. I provided fingerprints and a signature; into the booth for a photo. Done within five minutes. He told me to wait again until my number 70 came up for verification. Within minutes, I was seated with a new officer. Wow, this is now going very well. She asked to take my fingerprints. I pointed across the room to the biometrics chap and said I had just come from there so all was well. No, she said, I must verify that you are you. I can only presume that this was a precaution to ensure I hadn't changed identities in the 20m walk and four-minute wait. Okay, fine. The scan of my fingerprints produced an amber status, not green, not red. She asked me to try again. This time it turned red. I was sent back to redo the biometrics. The entire process was repeated, and once again I was instructed to wait until my number 70 was called. Operational challenges, as it is said. I found a seat close to the same officer, who had by then stepped away, possibly for a tea break. Twenty minutes later, she returned and number 70 was called. Again: amber, then red! She called over her manager and explained the issue. The manager authorised an override with her fingerprint. Then the officer used her own fingerprint to regain access to her computer. Bureaucratic ballet done and dusted. The officer now asked for my original Permanent Resident certificate. I handed it over, protected from wear and tear in the plastic sleeve I store it in. She asked if I had the original. I said yes, that's it, in your hand. With nary a glance, she made copies of both my certificate and ID book. As she reviewed my online application. I braced myself for a rejection or at least a request to sign, thinking back to the signature I'd never been able to provide online. She said not a word and must have used my signature from the biometrics officer. No issue, all in order. She informed me that I'd receive a notification in about six months to collect my Smart ID. It could be sooner, she added, but delays were likely given the newness of the system. Within the hour, I received confirmation of the day's progress via text and email. Pretty good. Weeks, not months And then — who needs six months? Less than five weeks later, I received a text and email telling me that my card was ready. One said my 'replacement ID', the other said 'ID reissue', but I pretended not to be concerned about the slight difference and the absence of the word 'Smart' that Home Affairs has so loudly proclaimed. Another 10am appointment, another tiny font, immediately at the reception chap's counter. Looked at his computer, gave me a number and sent me upstairs for ID collections. Up I go, into a smaller room with desks for three agents. I was second in the queue, and within five minutes I was at the desk of the only agent working, the very same one who weeks before couldn't verify my fingerprints downstairs. Up here, with a different fingerprint scanner, I figured this was going to be easy. No such luck. Several attempts. My fingerprints were not accepted. It seems that though fingerprints don't age, scanning machines can't handle old man skin — that's mine. She escorts me downstairs to a counter to await someone to override the system. Fifteen minutes later, my excitement drained by my impatience, along comes a young agent who slowly makes things happen; logging into the computer at that desk took another five minutes. But then it happened — I signed in a few places, he copied a few documents, and my Smart ID was in my hand! All good! But not fully the end of the story. As he handed me my old green ID book, he said I should keep it in a safe place. I said I'd rather just throw it away. No, he repeated, keep it in a safe place. Once at home I read the letter from Home Affairs that accompanied the card. It said, and I quote: '… and replaces the green barcoded identity document which should be handed in at the Department of Home Affairs when issued with a Smart ID Card'. But wait, the agent just gave it to me, told me to safeguard it, what's a guy to do now? Just smile. On the card itself is printed 'Date of Issue 30 May 2025'. That was a mere two weeks after my application was accepted, not the six months I was warned about, thank you. But if it was issued on 30 May, why did it take three weeks to tell me it was ready for collection? Just asking for a friend. So I now am relishing the last round of a rousing ride — an experience at once off-putting and ultimately positive. While much remains to be improved, my cautious optimism remains intact. Perhaps this is what progress looks like in South Africa: slow, uneven, but moving forward nonetheless. DM
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The challenge of cohesion: Lessons from Singapore for South Africa's diverse tapestry
From 24 to 26 June 2025 I attended the International Conference for Cohesive Societies (ICCS) in Singapore, a global gathering of policymakers, civil society leaders and thinkers committed to the idea that diversity, if carefully nurtured, can be a nation's greatest strength. Held in a city-state widely recognised for its success in managing multiculturalism, the conference offered profound insights, not only into global best practices, but also into the quiet struggles and aspirations of nations grappling with identity, cohesion and belonging. The address by His Excellency Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the president of Singapore, was particularly arresting. He spoke of diverse nations as being like quilts, composed of many distinct patches, each representing a different community, sewn together to create something both beautiful and meaningful. Yet, he cautioned, when storms rage, be they economic, political or social, the quilt may fray, its seams come apart, its integrity tested. Perhaps, he mused, we must begin to weave new cloth, stronger, more resilient, where the threads of our many identities are not merely stitched side by side, but entwined in a shared fabric of common purpose. It was a metaphor that struck deep, not just for its elegance, but for its resonance with the South African condition. South Africa, too, is a patchwork nation. We are black, white, coloured, Indian and many other shades in between. We are Zulu, Xhosa, Afrikaans, English, Tswana, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Christian, African traditionalist and secular. Our diversity is immense. It is beautiful. But it is also the source of some of our deepest tensions. The fundamental question we face is this: Are we, first and foremost, South Africans, a single people forged in shared destiny, or are we, still, primarily members of our separate communities who just happen to coexist within the same borders? Put another way, are we one nation regardless of race and culture, or are we still proud white, black, coloured and Indian South Africans, united, working together to forge a nation for all that live in it? The central challenge of our democratic project This is not merely a question of semantics. It is the central challenge of our democratic project. The Freedom Charter's enduring promise that 'South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity,' is an aspiration that has yet to be realised. In Singapore, I observed a nation that has answered this question with quiet determination. Rather than erasing cultural identity, it has built systems, policies and symbols that reinforce shared citizenship while celebrating difference. Civic identity takes precedence, but not at the expense of personal heritage. They have found, in many ways, a formula for unity without uniformity. For South Africa, the road is more complex. Our history is more painful, our inequalities more entrenched, our wounds more recent. Yet that does not absolve us from the responsibility to forge a stronger social compact, one in which we weave new cloth rather than simply mending the old quilt. What might that cloth look like? It would be woven from threads of shared values, non-racialism, mutual respect, ubuntu and justice. It would draw strength from the fibres of local languages, customs, histories and rituals, but bind them into a fabric of common purpose. It would move us beyond coexistence into co-creation. Beyond tolerance into solidarity. Importantly, this new cloth does not require us to shed our cultural identities. Rather, it asks that we bring them to the loom, consciously, willingly and in the spirit of building something that transcends each of us individually. In this way, we do not become less coloured, less African, less Indian, less white — we become more South African together. Of course, weaving new fabric requires leadership, trust and a willingness to act with moral courage. It demands that we interrogate our education system, our media, our political discourse and our civic rituals. Difficult questions It means asking difficult questions: Why do so many still feel excluded from the national story? Why do young people in townships and suburbs grow up worlds apart? Why do we default to racial categories rather than civic ones? At the conference, I saw nations grappling with these same questions, each in their own context. Yet the most successful examples, Singapore among them, demonstrated one truth repeatedly: cohesion is not an accidental by-product of democracy. It is a deliberate act of national imagination and political will. For South Africa, the time has come to reimagine our social fabric. The old quilt, stitched together in 1994, was a powerful start. But it has been weathered by time, torn by inequality, frayed by neglect. Now, we must begin to weave anew. Let us not be afraid to dream of a cloth that is stronger, more resilient, more inclusive. A cloth where every thread matters, but where what binds us is even stronger than what differentiates us. A cloth we can call South Africa, not as a collection of patches, but as a single, purposeful, living nation. DM
TimesLIVE
2 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Trump, Xi might meet ahead of or during October APEC summit in South Korea, SCMP reports
US President Donald Trump might visit China before going to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit between October 30 and November 1, or he could meet Chinese leader Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the APEC event in South Korea, the South China Morning Post reported on Sunday citing multiple sources. The two countries have been trying to negotiate an end to an escalating tit-for-tat tariff war that has upended global trade and supply chains. Trump has sought to impose tariffs on US importers for virtually all foreign goods, which he says will stimulate domestic manufacturing and which critics say will make many consumer goods more expensive for Americans. He has called for a universal base tariff rate of 10% on goods imported from all countries, with higher rates for imports from the most "problematic" ones, including China: imports from there now have the highest tariff rate of 55%. Trump has set a deadline of August 12 for the US and China to reach a durable tariffs agreement. A spokesperson for Trump did not respond to a request for comment about the reported plans for a meeting with Xi in the fall. The two countries' most recent high-level meeting was on July 11, when US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had what both described as a productive and positive meeting in Malaysia about how trade negotiations should proceed. Rubio noted then that Trump had been invited to China to meet with Xi, and said that both leaders "want it to happen." On Friday, China Commerce Minister Wang Wentao said China wants to bring its trade ties with the US back to a stable footing and that recent talks in Europe showed there was no need for a tariff war.
