Every human being needs to be treat with respect irregardless how we think of him, whether he is a president who brought it upon himself. Before he is a state president, he is a human being. True, repsect is earned but that is speaking on a personal level, because you will decide from your own conclusion if, he has earned it or not but at the end of the day, Zuma is human who has every right to be treated with dignity. I mean if some people (vegetarians) can treat a pig ( knowing exactly how filthy it likes to be) with humane, then we can treat a person who always falls short of glory with dignity too..
thank you Gail..hope you wont be kept up... Posted on 30 May 2012 16:02
I am the owner of a small building company and would like to express my delight in Tokyo Sexwale's comment to create a state owned building company. The director of the Mba will oppose this as he and his cronies has been enjoying all the benefits up to this day as far as home building in this country is concerned. Posted on 30 May 2012 10:54
Symbols carry meaning. That is their job. The cross carries all the many meanings we understand Christianity to embrace; the Star of David carries all of what Judaism means. What they symbolise is complex but these symbols are mere inert pictures; they do not interfere by their own behaviour with the messages they convey. They are susceptible of manipulation - the Catholic Church’s cross is more ornate than the Methodist's - but there are limits to what can be done with decoration. Contrast the inert symbol with the living human being. Dead ones are bad enough. The founder of the Mormon Church in the USA is a deceased polygamist who causes ripples of anxiety in the church leadership whenever a "historic" document is unearthed revealing some alleged failing in the great leader. Political symbols like the Queen of England are hard-working if exceptionally well paid servants to the meanings they must carry. The values that the Queen represents are not party political though plainly she stands more for Tory than Labour. Her job is to convey national values; the meanings she carries reach across history. What then of Zuma? First let’s look at Mandela. Mandela is a symbol of black pride, dignity and courageous resistance to oppression and perhaps above all of the strength and wisdom of forgiveness. He carries these meanings well and only Winnie threatened to go off message, at which point he parted from her and stayed true to the meanings that are his job to represent for all of us. Mandela was conscious of the visual dominance in the senses of human beings, so he wore appropriate clothes and always looked the part. So what of Zuma? He cannot be asked to attain the status of Mandela, no-one can. Zuma is in the dirty battlefield of electoral politics and a living active politician struggling with a massive national project and all that comes with it. Yet he is a symbol of the same values that Mandela and his party stand for, particularly the dignity of an oppressed people now stepping up to their rightful place as equals to all other races and nations. Unlike Mandela, Zuma represents not only this but the traditional polygamist African set of values. Yet his practice of infidelity, of paying lobola after impregnating a lover does not affirm or express the dignified process of consultation with family members that is prescribed by observance of the traditions. He corrupts the African institutions in the way he flouts them, yet hypocritically calls them in aid when he tries to deflect criticism. His looting of the national coffers, aided and abetted by seducers like Schabir Shaik, is another example of his weakness as a leader. Upholding the law is the first job of a leader. How else does one explain the Zuma family members who have risen to millionaire status in improbably short time? And therein lies the problem with individuals as symbols. Here is a symbol that does not stay peacefully above the altar. This one will go padding around the house at night looking for a house guest to have his way with. There is no more powerful image than the human form. The age of digital photography and broadband facilitates millions of images of the dear leader. Mugabe's portrait all over every institution of public life in Zimbabwe illustrates his insight into the power of reinforcing your brand, particularly where literacy is an issue. Zuma’s image conveys a compromised set of values, that it is ok to dip into the funds meant for the nation to help yourself and your family, even if that means children will go without schools. That it is ok to have a baby or two out of wedlock with a friend’s daughter, even if that means giving ammunition to your peoples’ most bitter critics. The distance between how Zuma behaves and the messages we all need to him to carry is vast, and into this gap falls much that is misconstrued as racism and apparent rejection of traditional African values. When the criticism is of the individual but the individual is a symbol, then the criticism strikes not only at the man but at all that he stands for, even if the criticism is aimed at his failure to uphold what he should stand for. A criticism of the man does not necessarily imply a criticism of what he is supposed to stand for. The narrower the gap between what he stands for and how he behaves, the closer will his people be to each other. We need a leader who is more disciplined about the job of being a symbol. He can't escape being one; he could just be a lot better at it.
You're righ Thabo, PR requires hands-on experience which is just as necessary as the theory learnt or academics. Sad to think a lot of us who study for PR end up doing other jobs which undermine our industry Posted on 29 May 2012 16:23
yes, i agree with the author. i wonder what is happening with skills development act, i beleive this should be implemneted vigorously by employers to ensure that employees are well vested with the financial managemnet of their salaries.overindebted employees will result to stress, and absentism will be high within that company.we beleive more needs to be done. Posted on 29 May 2012 13:10
I heard a radio interview with Ms. Haffajee this morning, and my heart went out to her. What began as a comment on political satire/parody has shown us that the cut inflicted on us during the apartheid years was deeper and more painful than we could have imagined. Posted on 28 May 2012 16:18
And now we conspiracy theorists sit up and ask if his breakdown was real, or publicity spin? Note, we hadn't thought about it before, we really felt for the guy, but this puts it in a different light. Posted on 28 May 2012 15:21