Hello,
Herman Toerien se vraag:
Presies waar staan die eertydse ridders teen apartheid nou?
André Brink in die New York Times van 11 September 2010.
A Long Way From Mandela’s Kitchen
By ANDRÉ BRINKTWENTY years ago the most famous prisoner in the world, Nelson Mandela, walked out of jail and began the process of leading his people to democracy. Today, that new South Africa faces its starkest challenge yet in the form of two pieces of anti-press legislation that would make even the most authoritarian government proud. One, cynically named the Protection of Information bill, would give the government excessively broad powers to classify information in the “national interest”; the other, which would create a “media appeals tribunal” to regulate the printed and electronic press, is written in language chillingly reminiscent of that used by the apartheid regime to defend censorship in the ’70s. This was not Mr. Mandela’s vision: the new South Africa was meant to be synonymous with freedom and openness on all levels....How a government that owes its very existence to its faith in the indivisibility of freedom can now so easily betray that faith is beyond belief. It is not just an act of foolishness, but of apocalyptic arrogance.
André Brink in die Financial Times van 30 November 2011:
Blundering past the tombstones of apartheid
By André BrinkSouth Africa is no longer the place of new hope introduced by Nelson Mandela. Over the past week, after a number of chilling premonitions, the country abruptly turned away from his footprints, preferring instead to blunder past the tombstones and debris of the apartheid era. It dented the proud new constitution built on a foundation of human rights admired all over the world, besmirched the legacy of Mr Mandela and Desmond Tutu, and insulted the legacy of millions who had dedicated their lives to the construction of a future built on the hope of a new beginning. It glorified the myopia, greed and selfishness of a handful of third-rate politicians focused only on their own gain and advancement. Perhaps the ANC has been too lucky, or too spoilt, for its own good. How could one expect any leader to step into the shoes of a Mandela. Still, perhaps his radiance could outlast even an ordinary successor, and Thabo Mbeki was not to be scorned (even if, admittedly, his father would have added more gravitas to the role). But Jacob Zuma? Had he not brought with him the shadow of unfinished business in the shape of allegations over a corruption scandal all might not have been as distressing as it now is. I know that in the years before our political changeover, whenever I met the ANC leadership in exile I could always return with a profound faith in the quality of that leadership. There was always, of course, Mr Mandela. But there were others, and behind them, the shining shades of Albert Luthuli and Oliver Tambo, political leaders imbued with moral force and philosophical depth. But today? Who are the leaders in the ANC who, truly, think?
Nadine Gordimer in die New York Review of Books van 24 April 2013.
South Africa: The New Threat to Freedom
By Nadine GordimerThe regime of racism in South Africa was maintained not only by brutality—guns, violence, restrictive laws. It was upheld by elaborately extensive silencing of freedom of expression. The Suppression of Communism Act of 1950 had definitions of communism that were vastly inclusive. What was forbidden included advocacy of industrial, political, economic, and social change. In 1982 an updated version of the Suppression of Communism Act, the Internal Security Act, was passed, which banned the African National Congress and the Pan African Congress along with the South African Communist Party. It retained almost all of the previous definitions of what was forbidden. In the new South Africa that was reborn in the early 1990s, with its freedom hard-won from apartheid, we now have the imminent threat of updated versions of the suppression of freedom of expression that gagged us under apartheid. The right to know must continue to accompany the right to vote that black, white, and any other color of our South African population could all experience for the first time in 1994. But since 2010 there have been two parliamentary bills introduced that seek to deny that right: the Protection of State Information Bill and the Media Tribunal.
Hierdie is slegs 'n antwoord op 'n enkele vraag van Herman Toerien. Hierdie bevestig ook dat dit moontlik is om die verlede net soos die hede te kritiseer en dat die hede nie die verlede ongedaan maak nie en morele kwytskelding van die verlede bied nie.
Soos nou al bekend, die wet is deur en rapporteer die Financial Times soos volg:
Press freedom fears as S Africa parliament passes ‘secrecy bill’
By Andrew England in LusakaSouth Africa’s parliament has passed controversial legislation that activists and journalists fear could be used to muzzle the press and restrict freedom of information. Critics of the protection of state information bill – dubbed the “secrecy bill” – acknowledge that some improvements have been made to the legislation since it was last tabled in parliament in November 2011 after a public outcry against it. The bill, which was first drafted in 2008, passed in parliament by 189 votes against 74 on Thursday.
Jacob Zuma, the president, must now decide whether to sign it into law or refer it back to parliament or the Constitutional Court.“[The improvements] take us some of the way towards where we need to be but they don’t quite get us over the constitutional threshold and we still have serious concerns, both about the content of the bill and the way it is likely to be employed,” said Nic Dawes, chairman of the South African National Editors Forum. If necessary, Sanef would go to the courts to have the bill reviewed, he said.
The Right2Know campaign group said passing the bill “would add to the generalised trend towards secrecy, fear and intimidation that is growing in South Africa today”.
The governing African National Congress, the driving force behind the legislation, says it is necessary to replace old apartheid-era laws and protect the country’s security interests. But the bill has evolved at a time when the former liberation movement, which has testy relations with South Africa’s vibrant media, is facing mounting criticism over alleged corruption, patronage and cronyism.
Right2Know said the bill only gave narrow protection to whistleblowers and public advocates “that excludes a range of matters in the public interest, like shady tendering practices or improper appointments within key state agencies”.
The campaign “remains committed to challenging this legislation through any means necessary – including taking legal action – should the National Assembly vote to pass the bill and the president sign the ‘secrecy act’ without defanging this draconian legislation”, the group said ahead of the vote.
Hierdie beaam ek.
En nee, ’n mens hoef nie lang hare, ’n baard en ’n kopdoek te hê om dit te kan skryf nie. ’n Mens hoef nie “eksentriek” te wees nie. ’n Mens mag maar Sondae kerk toe gaan.
Amen daarop.
George Steiner, en ek kon dit nie spoor nie, het geskryf van die vyf groot skrywers na aanleiding van 'n bespreking van Fernando Pessoa, in lewe en in werk 'n klerk, maar ook 'n grootse skrywer.
Te veel kere wil 'n skrywer 'n beeld skep van hoe daar dink geword 'n skrywer daarna sou uitsien.
Steiner noem die skrywers, die vyf nou, die vyf 'vaal manne' in hul grys pakke.
Die belangrikste vraag, wat is 'n regte skrywer?
Die weet ek nie, maar sal Jaco dit sekerlik vir ons gaan opsoek op Wikipedia.
Baie dankie
Wouter
Kommentaar
Hello,