By: Clyde Ramalaine
Ethical dualism refers to the practice of imputing evil entirely and exclusively to a specific group of people, while disregarding or denying one’s own capacity to commit evil.
The consequence of such stance is the creation of an “Us” versus “Them”, thereby polarizing social configurations into extremes in a way that mutual understanding between the two “poles” is made very difficult or impossible, since the ” them”, the ”Other”, is demonized, dehumanized.
In other words, ethical dualism basically pictures the existence of two mutually hostile entities, the one representing the origin of all Good and the other of all Evil.
South Africa’s discourses on ”state capture” and corruption confirms ethical dualism as a fundamental reality.
Increasingly from some quarters, there is a call to see those mentioned at the State of Capture Commission in the colloquial sense of orange jumper-suits as meaningful punishment for crimes of state capture, that hitherto is still yet to be proved. Absconding in reasoning and a very present constitution that affords rights and privileges, South Africans are duped into thinking if someone’s name is merely mentioned or even is accused by another in his / her evidence it automatically must translate to a guilty verdict and necessary prison sentence. These ”moralists” do not appreciate the rights of those who are accused yet they also will be defenders of a constitution that is seemingly under threat.
What defines this parochial thinking is a claim of justified anger informed by morality. However, we seldom are honest to appreciate what it means to live in a constitutional democracy where the judiciary ought to be independent and not waylaid by emotions but justice. Those who in recent times have bid for the proverbial blood of those accused have abandoned all sanity and are willing to allow the turbulent fluctuations of their emotions and political agenda to lead them. We saw this as led by President Cyril Ramaphosa who in his campaign to become president of the ANC at some stage wanted to coerce and blackmail the NPA to charge and arrest those he in convenience of his personal political campaign deemed guilty of the elusive state capture crime. Others who have over time distinguished themselves in similar calls include politicians in the ilk of Trevor Manuel, Cheryl Carolus, members of civil society and some clergy groups, etc. Then, of course, we have the social media brigade that usually just cuts-and-paste from the media, many of them have outsourced their God-given thinking to a one-dimensional politically funded lusty media. None of these ever try to appreciate the conundrum of their own morality in self-introspection as dubious and highly questionable.
If what we have heard so far in the Zondo Commission, that already is on its second extension, angers you to the point where you have joined the chorus of those who demand to see arrests of those mentioned in confirmation of the crime of “state capture” – why are you not equally perturbed, violently disturbed but comfortable with the R1bn captured president?
It appears you get angry about “state capture” only in scripted frames of your own dualistic morality.
You should get just as angry with a president and his minister(s) who sold their souls to White Monopoly Capital and is leading SA in blindfolded sense down this treacherous ally of destruction while they claim to be fixing SA under the banner of ” inclusive growth” mantra. Why are you so comfortable with the entrenched known state capture of Rupert, Joffe, Koseff but you are angered with Guptas? Rupert is on record to have threatened a Minister Fikile Mbalula during the Zuma presidency that if Pravin Gordhan is offloaded he and his crowd of capturers of a political elite would collapse this country overnight. Is this again the case of classical conditioning?
Let us know why some clergy like Anglican Archbishop Thabo Makgoba, who is fully entitled to his vocal biased opinions and choices from where he sees others as demons, permitted to feed off the trough of the Johann Rupert’s for their projects and foundations and other clergy can’t have Guptas support for their projects and aims.? Yet you will adore and afford a Makgoba a moral custodisnship voice on Guptas as guilty of state capture.
If you can’t see anything wrong with the R1bn president that is prepared to remove a chapter 9 institution public protector in defense of the protection of his donors, don’t ever cry crocodile tears about state capture that we all in sanity know DCJ Zondo will not even remotely prove or find against anyone. If you ignore the open secret what Tokyo Sexwale unequivocally recently in public space of Nasrec as a bought election, made known, why should we take the one who bought the elections serious and trust him.
It does not mean if one repeat something in every speech in one’s political campaign as this president since 2017 has attempted it exists. The SoCC as led by Zondo is yet to establish the state of capture, not state capture. For some this is semantics but we all know words have meaning and we frame things to determine a set of outcomes we may have while the evidence to support it may be absent.
I said from the start there was corruption, even now there is corruption, – so Zondo will find enough corruption but ”state capture” not. Why you ask again? Because ”state capture” is a political campaign that the DA started in 2009 with it’s 3 C’s campaign ( Cadre deployment, Corruption, and Capture). State capture claims and crimes are what the current president used to summit Mt. ANC though he failed at that alone save for the white monopoly capital money behind him that groomed him since 1978. It was 40 year project that ultimately bought an ANC Nasrec election outcomes by way of a sponsored R1bn.
I simply do not buy the naiseating hypocrisy of some across all spheres ( business, NGO sector, clergy, civil society even academics) who are convenient moralists that will be loud about those they don’t like as “demons” portrayed by the media while silent on those they hope to benefit from as “angels” framed by the same captured media. Case in point OUTA was brought into existence we were told to oppose the Tollroad system in Gauteng, today OUTA spends millions as sponsored by big business to have former SAA chairperson, Dudu Myeni declared a delinquent director with a demand of a prison sentence. Where was OUTA when Saki Maqozoma as chairperson of SAA and his board allowed American Coleman Andrews to sell of SAA assets which then were leased again for astronomical figures and Andrews gets a farewell package of R220million for a deal thought with corruption and theft of SA citizens money. Why is OUTA not interested to pursue Maqozoma and Andrews or any other board member that served with Myeni? The answer is simple OUTA’s actions in this regard are mere confirmation of the broader scripted SA dubious morality.
Unfortunately, mainstream media has succeeded to sell most South Africans the lie of its concoction of a political elite in frames of ”angels” and ”demons”. This when all sane people know there are no good and bad guys in our politics. There is only common interest that protests weighing heavier than the truth.
The very makeshift created crime scenes of SOE’s including from Eskom and all others in the current crises are easily and conveniently reduced to the last 10 years [ painted by Ramaphosa and Mboweni as wasted years] when we know the current “messiahs” have an obvious and visible interest in seeing its failure that the true vultures can be first to benefit. They have been there all the time yet today some see them as naturally clean and not part of our problems. This ambivalent morality does not ask any obvious questions as to why we must trust the new self-appointed” messiahs” who held senior positions during the so-called ”state capture” of 10 years.
I think our society remains captured even in their thinking! So your call to have “justice” out of the Zondo Commission is a retarded call if it is still the media scripted Guptas call only!