2005-10-30,+Letters+on+Zuma,+Mail+and+Guardian

Letters, Mail & Guardian, Letters, //October 21-27 2005// = Letters on Zuma =

Media analysts have made a lot of noise about the support some of us have demonstrated for Jacob Zuma before his trial.

In class societies, the dominant ideas are those of the ruling class. In South Africa, the ruling class -- the white bourgeoisie, certain African National Congress elements, black economic empowerment capital and opposition politicians -- are so hell-bent on asserting their views about who must succeed Thabo Mbeki that many ANC activists are concerned.

After realising the ANC will dominate the political landscape for the foreseeable future, the opposition now seeks to influence the internal processes of our movement from outside. Tony Leon’s audacity in saying the Democratic Alliance is obliged to take sides in the current crisis facing the ANC is unbelievable.

The sooner the ubiquitous analysts realise that Mbeki’s successor will be elected by delegates at the ANC’s national conference in 2007 the better. A recent poll published in the media showed most South Africans support Mbeki’s sacking of Zuma. Unfortunately, few of the pollsters, analysts and other elites in society will be conference delegates.

After hoping that the tripartite alliance would splinter for more than a decade, some in the media and opposition now claim there is a split between the ANC and its left-wing allies -- with the former supporting Mbeki and the latter Zuma. They persist with this misrepresentation even though the ANC itself says it will support Zuma throughout his trial.

The ANC has accumulated much experience in dealing with internal crises, but the fact that so many people outside the movement have vested interests in the succession of its leaders makes it harder to overcome the current impasse. To them I say: join the ANC or stay the hell out of our movement’s internal debates.


 * //Luthando Nogcinisa, South African Communist Party, Khayelitsha//**

There was a hysterical edge to your editorial “Be afraid -- be very afraid” (October 14) where you concluded that Zuma is “not qualified” to be South Africa’s first citizen, and “should not be allowed to take us back to an earlier and darker age”.

This ominous warning followed Msholozi’s court appearance last week, which you said was a “clear snapshot” of a Zuma presidency.

If you mean the people would passionately support president Zuma and that he will take time to share his feelings -- no matter how painful -- with his people, you are spot on.

Comrade Zuma, it should be blatantly clear, is a man of the people who relates to the masses in a way that is perhaps alien to you and others in the coterie of hired guns who parade as objective commentators.

This is why you perceive him as a “populist rabble-rouser”, and remark on the “question marks over his personal integrity”. Thanks to the media, there are no “question marks”, only exclamation marks.

The National Prosecuting Authority is complicit in the media onslaught against Zuma, so it is not surprising that you defend it with such vigour.

Ever wonder what the cost would be to the //Mail & Guardian//’s reputation if you are wrong about Zuma or are found to have been used in the political crusade against him?

You have gone to such lengths to convince readers of Zuma’s guilt before due process that you now have a vested interest in the trial’s outcome. But judging by how ordinary people are responding, you have been barking at the moon.

Perhaps the desperation that underscored your editorial last week is the result. You yourselves are afraid.

**//Sizwe Shezi, board member: Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust//**
The M&G is biased against JZ. The paper is not speaking for the masses but for a section of ruthless intellectual capitalists.

Zuma is a victim of a political conspiracy. He did not squander government funds meant for the people, and that is why they support him.

**//Zolisa Cebo Soji Ka Mbokazi, South Hills//**
Two of the finest opinion columns I have seen in your paper, or any other, in a long time were side by side in your last edition.

In the lead letter, “Mitchell” quietly but firmly put you in your place in your ravings against Zuma. Why not populism? Why only Zuma? Why can’t he express his feelings? Why are you canvassing? Indeed. And a final crisp suggestion that you “retain the credibility [you have] painstakingly established over the years”.

I am dismayed that you and other serious opinion-formers should join this witch-hunt. You are speeding up the dangerous spin our democracy is being sucked into, and for all your exposés of this-gate and that-gate, you insist Zuma embodies our corruption problem. Bollocks! Time you stopped hyperventilating, or a growing number of us will suspect you are part of a wider conspiracy.

However, your editorial “Dear Hugo”, is spot on, in every phrase, and delivers a powerful message. Chavez, as you say, a genuine anti-imperialist leader with a genuine popular programme and popular support, should know better than to make common cause with Mugabe, “that brutal old charlatan, on the strength of his anti-imperialist rhetoric”. Bravo!


 * //Tony Hall, Mpumalanga//**


 * From: http://www.mg.co.za/articleflat.aspx?area=mg_flat&ArticleId=10182**