Power-drunk Rupert's illusions of virtue

 

 

Pinky Khobane, The New Age, Johannesburg, 29 March 2016

 

Cry our beloved country: a newspaper front page on Johann Rupert lashing the
ANC about state capture.

 

The son of a Broederbonder, a National Party member and an apartheid
supporter who made his money from ill-gotten wealth, calls for the removal
of a democratically elected president to the deafening silence of our
intellectuals. 

 

Emboldened by calls by some sections of the media that have also called for
Zuma's removal, Rupert thinks he can order and direct the course of South
Africa's history. In a strongly-worded statement at the weekend, the ANCYL
lambasted Rupert, insisting that only ANC branches could remove Zuma from
office. 

 

Here's the little bit that South Africa and Rupert conveniently forget.
Johann is the son of billionaire Anton, who in 1966, was mentioned as a
possible National Party prime minister as part of "Verwoerd must go,"
campaign according to Wikipedia. 

 

The Cape Province of the NP chose Rupert over Verwoerd as a moderate who
could change the image of South Africa abroad. Within a month, Verwoerd was
murdered and the leadership taken over by John Vorster. The Ruperts have
been able to rehash their image as that of a family that emerged shortly
before the democratic dispensation and to which they contributed positively.
In its amnesia, this country conveniently forgets that the Stellenbosch
businessmen who approached the ANC while in exile didn't do it out of
goodwill but due to the financial squeeze emanating from the imposition of
economic and political sanctions on South Africa. 

 

Rupert suffers from the arrogance of power which confuses itself as virtue. 

 

The discourse on state capture is nothing more than the battle for South
Africa's economy and the economic policy that will be driven by the
presidential candidate who will emerge from the ANC's elective conference
next year. 

 

Will the ANC remain beholden to white capital and the Washington Consensus
or will it take a progressive shift towards dealing with the unfinished
business of 1994 and deliver the second phase of the National Democratic
Revolution to its people? 

 

The past twenty-two years have been about establishing political democracy,
establishing a constitution that protects the rights of citizens,
establishing democratic institutions, transforming the military and so
forth. 

 

That era is now over as the largely black marginalised have run out of
patience. We cannot continue to have 80% of the land and the economy being
run by a few; 60% of all income in South Africa is in the hands of 10% of
the population. 

 

A combination of recent events must make those, like Rupert, who want to
hold onto economic power, very nervous. 

 

South Africa's relations with China and Russia, the recent passing of the
expropriation of land bill and Brics ,all point to an economic shift which
will see the West and institutions like the World Bank and IMF, relinquish
the stranglehold they have on the economic policies of developing countries.


 

The establishment of the New Development Bank will bring to an end the
ZionistAnglo-American financial and geopolitical hegemony. 

 

The race for the next president of the ANC is in full swing. As we approach
the elective conference, newspapers and journalists will have the mammoth
task of sifting through the barrage of information that will come their way
to ascertain what is fact. 

 

My column on March 18, carried allegations of Rupert's intervention in the
sacking of then minister of finance, Des Van Rooyen, has opened the debate
on where SA's economy lies albeit slightly. Instead of dealing with the
matter headon, the quarrel is on whether the said meeting between the
billionaire and Deputy President, Cyril Ramaphosa took place. This is a
distraction. Both have denied the meeting took place. The finer details of
the meeting may be incorrect but I stand by our sources that Rupert had an
influence over Van Rooyen's sacking. 

 

The Sowetan on Monday March 21, reported that Zuma had told the ANC NEC
meeting that Rupert influenced the Cabinet reshuffle. The City Press, this
weekend, also confirmed that the President had told the ANC NEC that a
member of Rupert family had flown in from London and had told an ANC
official of the market's unhappiness with van Rooyen's appointment. 

 

As I said in my column of that day: "The story may be apocryphal, but
subsequent events showed that it was true". Joe Thloloe, Press Ombudsman at
the time, when assessing a City Press' story, "Mbeki is Back" said:
"Newspapers and journalists are allowed to throw their sangoma bones and
speculate on what is likely to happen but their readings should clearly
indicate they are speculative". I did at the beginning of my column ask the
reader to: "Connect the dots". 

 

 

.    Khobane is a writer and columnist

 

 

From: http://tnaepaper.co.za/DRIVE/main%20edition/29032016/epaperpdf/4.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"YCLSA Discussion Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to