Monday, April 25, 2016

The Toxicity of Nationalism ... Brexit

He is not British … he is not from the United Kingdom … he is a foreigner … he is different … he is black … who the hell does he think he is … ???
so what he has to say is to be disregarded … ignored … resented … poo pooed … hated … because it comes from the mouth from he who is NOT one of US.
This is the attitude on the part of most British folk towards the well meaning advice by President Barrack Obama about Britain possible exiting the European Union. Alas the reaction is as natural as breathing. He is seen as an intruder. His advice is heard as invasive.
It is a humongous case of the British being “us” and Obama being part of “them”.
It harks back to the time when we were in caves, clinging together, fearful, suspicious and guarded against anything and everything that was different … especially if it dared to step onto our turf. It is the outer wall of our instinct of survival.
The herd sticks together and instinctively relies on and trusts members of the herd; conversely being very averse to others.
In modern parlance we do not refer to the herd, or herd mentality. We now reference this phenomenon as nationalism. The herd instinct and mentality certainly ensured our survival when we were still in caves as insular groups struggling and competing against all kinds of odds, most of which we had very little understanding off.
But we have made incredible progress since then, and the biggest progress we have made is to become infused with understanding as to what is a threat and what is beneficial. We have learnt to discriminate between good and bad, positive and negative, beneficial and malignant.
We do this in our daily lives and mostly we succeed, as individuals, as families, as friends … until the trigger of nationalism is sprung. At that point common sense, reason, tolerance and acceptance of that which is different is resented, railed against and even attacked.
The worst example in modern times was master-minded by Adolf Hitler, and his 3rd Reich. He created the “Nazi” brand and by screeching the language of nationalism managed to induce over 12 million otherwise perfectly good German folk to join. There is no need to burden this post with making the obvious point of just how malevolent the Nazi brand was towards “others”.
The other worst example that is with us right now is ISIS with its uncompromising dogma that Islam be the one and only nation on this planet.
Barrack Obama is just another human being. However, he is a very, very credible human being. He certainly has the credibility to proffer advice to the United Kingdom, especially as the UK is America’s best friend on this planet. In fact, had it not been for America, the UK might well have been overrun by Hitler’s 3rd Reich. So America and the UK are indeed closely bonded.
So why in the name of heaven would you want to resent advice from your best friend?? Surely what you should do is to assess the advice and then accept it, wholly or in part, or reject it … but maintain the mutual respect?? Why is well meaning advice from you best friend making you go mad??
Why the frothing at the mouth, stamping of feet, hissy fit and fanny wobbles?? None other than the Mayor of London, and possible future Prime minister of the UK, Boris Johnson, became so irrational as to even drag Obama’s ethnicity into the equation. WOW!!!! It is mind boggling!!!!
I would say to Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage that President Obama is not the enemy and you are not Winston Curchill making "we will fight on the beaches ... " speech. It is NOT time for British nationalism.
Polls are showing that the majority of British people resent Obama ’s advice. It is nationalism that has been triggered. Nationalism is never a good thing.
It is the same malady that has infused the Republican camp. America now has its own and new version of Hitler.
PS: Clinton thanked her own supporters and said, “To all the people who supported Senator Sanders, I believe there is much more than unites us than divides us.”
That lady is right!!!!

Order ---

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

The Case of the Coloured Correctional Service Officers

Coloured officers (and one White) are being denied promotion even though they have been recommended by assessment Boards after very long service.

Government wants the posts filled by "other" South Africans.

Our ANC government contends that the issue must be decided on the basis that these "other" South Africans are “black” which Coloureds are not.
  1. This is in terms of the ANC government’s employment equity plan.
  2. The Court is being asked to accept that this is right because “Blacks” suffered more than Coloureds in the past.
  3. History tells us that the suffering for Coloureds actually started from the time a European first visited/landed at the Cape of Good Hope in the 1600s … and that the oppression of African tribes started much later, about 100 – 150 years later.
  4. History also tells us that the suffering of Coloured folk included the genocide of their kith and kin, being the KhoiSan, of whom they are the only direct descendants.
  5. History tells us that the KhoiSan were the original exclusive and/or dominant inhabitants of the whole of the Western Cape (“WC”) … and more.
  6. History tells us that the other African tribes had no claim(s) on the Western Cape and only inhabited it under colonial oppression.
  7. So the historical reality is that the other South Africans have no claim on the WC other than in terms of their so called “blackness”, that they acquired under colonial oppression..
  8. The ANC government contends that the group that is the majority in the whole of South Africa must also be the majority in the workplace in the WC. Since “Blacks” are the majority in the whole of South Africa, so the argument goes, they must be the majority in the WC.
  9. The BLACK BRAND: --- The eleven or so dominant African tribes in the region, Zulu, Xhosa, Pedi, Shangaan, Sotho … etc. have all submerged their once proud individual tribal identities and amalgamated under the “black” brand label.
  10. However, the reality is that Black is not a race, tribe or ethnic group and it did not exist prior to colonialism. It was imported from the USA where it was invented during what is known as the “Jim Crowe era”* for the specific purpose of differentiating mixed race folk with just “one drop”** of African blood in their veins for the purpose of oppression ... and was imported and used for oppression in South Africa.
  11. The label “black” gained acceptance in the USA because all humans with the dreaded “one drop” were forced to join together to confront and defeat oppression in the heroic Civil Rights campaigns under Dr Martin Luther King Jr in particular.
  12. Because of the heroism in the USA and the heroism in South Africa, under the black label, the label has stuck. It is like being forced to wear a sack by a bully and then you get rid of the bully but keep wearing the sack.
  13. Having humans grouped under a label or brand name is not a new phenomenon. Hitler and the 3rd Reich did a similar thing by inventing the label/brand “Nazi”, for the purpose of dominance, which then attracted over 12 million Germans.
  14. So the Court is being asked to accept that a member of the Pedi tribe, for instance, who would otherwise not be a member of a majority group, in relation to the Coloured group, must now be treated as part of the majority just because he has classified himself under the brand name “black”.
  15. if these utterly nonsensical arguments are accepted by the Court, it will mean that: -
  • every employer in the Western Cape will be bound to ensure dominance by members of the so called black South Africans over Coloured South Africans numerically and as regards seniority;
  • Coloured workers will be incrementally shed so as to make way for the influx of these “black” South Africans;
  • as demanded by then Chief Government Spokesperson, Jimmy Manyi#, Coloured folk will be forced to migrate out of the Western Cape;
  • in this way they will lose their numerical dominance in that region;
  • they will lose their homeland;
  • they will lose their ancestral home;
  • they will lose the land of their forebears;
  • they will lose their cultural homeland;
  • the annihilation of the remnants of the KhoiSan original inhabitants will be complete;
  • these proud South Africans will cease to exist as a cognizable ethnic cultural grouping;
  • cultural expropriation of a whole people will be assured;
  • and, yes, the ANC will at last have the juicy WC in its grubby hands in terms of this stinky new kind of colonialism.
What brings out the rottenness and crass hypocrisy of this ANC government is that Coloured folk are actually classified as "black" under the Employment Equity Act; but, as I have argued, ad nauseam, this racial approach guarantees racism.
So Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, I am putting it to you that this is completely inconsistent with “ethical” leadership of government.
It is the vile face of racist bigotry served up as “equity”.
As a Judge, sworn to uphold justice “without fear favour or prejudice”, you will see through this vomitus offering.
This is NOT an "equity plan" for humans.
It is a diabolical plot.
There is no doubt that you will see it for what it is ... that it is “cruel, and/or inhuman and/or degrading” for being the “tyranny of the majority”.
The question is will you then condemn and reject it because that is what judicial "ethics" demand of you and your brother Judges sitting on the Constitutional Court Bench??
Your "ethical" standard is set by your oath of office to act "without fear, favour or prejudice".
Will you????

Please Please Share .. far and wide . .across this planet. !!!!

Also see ----

Free counters!