I hope I can be forgiven the liberty of a slight disagreement, Com Prez.
I won't make a habit of it. It's just that this is something having to do with my VC-ness. I do think that reading material must be forthcoming when asked for and that leaders are readers, and readers tend to be leaders. But I also happen to think, like Paulo Freire, that dialogue is far more educational than solitary reading. True, reading enriches dialogue, if shared, but I would never say: stop your dialogue and go and read alone. So I would like to encourage this discussion and not adjourn it. What is occurring to me is this: The vanguard Party is not simply something like a high-quality or top-of-the-range model that is in other respects the same as others. It is something extra and different. Above all it brings the element of free will. In other words, although the communists should have an appreciation of the objective circumstances that is as good as or better than anybody else's, yet this appreciation of the objective is not what creates their vanguard role. What distinguishes the communists is that they combine an appreciation of the objective with a subjective determination that cannot be found in the given bourgeois world. The problem with a conception of a Minister of Government as somebody who "delivers" and who must strictly be judged in such terms and no other, is that it is "utilitarian". By utilitarian I mean that it is solely referenced to the doctrine of the "greatest good for the greatest number", in the inherited objective circumstances. In a utilitarian world, everything is determined by objective material circumstances, and free will does not exist. It is a philosophy that was well-known in the time of Karl Marx, associated with people like Malthus and Bentham, whom Marx contradicted and opposed. "Capital", the book, is many things but among others it is a polemic against utilitarianism. Like the vanguard party, in a general way, the Minister's job is not to enforce a subordination to the received circumstances, but to lead a transcendence of the inherited circumstances. The Minister is the tribune of the people and the representative of the people as political Subject. The Minister is not a manager. The Minister of Health (for example) is not the head doctor. The Minister of Health is there on our behalf to receive reports from the head doctors and all the doctors, and to speak to them on our behalf. If we have Ministers who start to represent the professionals underneath them, and stop representing us (the people) to them, we will have no democracy. We will have a situation like where a shop steward starts speaking for the management, instead of speaking to the management on behalf of the workers. Likewise, with representivity: It is like the discipline of poetry or music, where there is rhyming and the scansion (timing or rhythm) that the poet or musician observes very strictly. But if that was all there was to poetry and music we would only have what is called "doggerel", or in other words an empty form with no content. Yes, we must have women in proportion to their numbers, but if we think that any woman will do we can end up going backwards, as with Margaret Thatcher and Helen Zille. The challenge for the musician is to achieve freedom within the limits imposed by the art, by transcending them. That is our challenge. We must have it both ways. We must have the representivity and the revolutionary politics, both. Yours respectfully, Domza, VC From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of sabelo gina Sent: 27 May 2009 04:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: JZ cabinets Dear Comrades, I thought members of this forum would understand that there are two classes, Helen Zille can never represent our class!. I think we should read what Domza posted before responding further, lest we expose ourselves. Sabelo. On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:58 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: So Hellen Zille is right in a way? > comrades if a minister is capable providing service delivery to the > people be it he/she is white or grey, i think that is the criteria to > choose a minister not on race or religion. because what this cadre is > saying may lead to some wanting a christians and other looking for > khoi sans, but comrades let us be proud and except the decision made > by our leaders and not make silly comments. if a minister is chosen be > it Zulu or Venda lets support the decision. > > On 5/27/09, Mzukisi Ronyuza <[email protected]> wrote: >> *Is this a communist maqabane? Do we need Venda, Xhosa, Zulu or Sotho >> speaking in government? I am disappointed Skizo. * >> >> >> On 5/26/09, Skizo Skizo <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Comrades, am very impressed with our cabinet my only problem is >>> that why there is no Venda minister?Can some 1 give us clarity >>> regarding that matter . >>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- South Africas premier free email service - www.webmail.co.za <http://www.webmail.co.za/> ------------------------------------------------------------------ For super low premiums, click here http://home.webmail.co.za/dd.pwm <br --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
