C’mon Heynecke Meyer get on with the job!

-You not inspiring confidence-

The Boks have a new coach so we are told, the name of this coach is Heynecke Meyer, his previous success in the domestic cup competitions as club team made him the preferred choice.   

Some cried foul when he was firstly overlooked for they  even believed that he instead of Pieter  De Villiers should have been the coach. Yet recent mutterings and press briefings from Meyer details and unravels  another story. 

Meyer selected and as others opined loaded the staff compliment with people he believes are competent though many claim it was essentially strongly Blue Bull spiced. In all of this he secured the services of Rassie Erasmus former Cheetahs player and coach, certainly this must count for something given the repute and history of Erasmus. 

The appointment of support staff, is the manager/ coach responsibility and prerogative hence I am all for him finding the right people that would support his vision which is really delivering a successful Bok- Team by winning games and ultimately the coveted world cup dream the same that eluded De Villiers for crazy reasons. 

Given Meyer’s background and success at club level this feat though a cumbersome one therefore should not be an insurmountable one for his history speaks volumes. 

I am afraid that is how far I can give Meyer credit because his recent media statements leave much to explain. 

Meyer firstly complained sbout a lack of options on choosing a captain from the existing crop of players. In Meyer’s mind this problem can only be solved by luring retired players back into the squad to assume the role. He attempted to recall retired players to lead the Bok squad. Everyone knows the importance of a proper leader on the field hence the choice of captaincy constitutes a critical component in the success equation. That is not the point of contention rather Meyers obsession that only a captain of yesteryear will work. 

Understanding Meyer correctly, he bemoans the fact that the current Bok- squad lacks a captain hence his forced romancing of a Matfield to return. 

The error of this lays at levels, firstly Matfield went into retirement by choice having served the nation and participated in two worldcups. He is without any doubt a success story at both club and national level, but the man retired and must be afforded his rightful rest. What may inspire a Matfield more ? 

The error of holding onto players of yesteryear as inspirational as it is understood in the mind of a Meyer does not inspire confidence for one of the young lads to raise their hands to fill the vacant shoes for their coach with these myopic utterances expresses his lack  confidence in them from the start. 

The celebrated Bok- captains all were developed into what they became none of then arrived as the final sellable package. 

Central to this confusion of Meyer thinking is the veiled emerging dialectical tension between country success and personal image. It is time Meyer is told that the success of the Bok- Team comes first and his personal legacy a distant second. His decision to conclude it will be difficult to appoint a  captain does not augur well for developing leaders on the field of play and it does not inspire confidence from the most important man to give us our new leaders. 

Perhaps I could forgive Meyer for searching for a captain in all the wrong places, but his latest media statement or excuse of him having to resort to young players for the England  matches, irks the daylights out if me. Off course Meyer from where did you think you will draft the Bok-Team  if not from the young ones, the same you have shown no confidence in.

Can you for once walk out of the shadow of a Jake White and Pieter De Villiers thinking and prove  your own man. Jake White’s reasons for supporting Meyer on a Matfield appointment is laced with personal pride and not national pride.  Lest we forget White has always believed he is the only coach for the Bok- Team and a resurgence of old players will confirm this testosterone driven ego based belief. White even tried to interfere with a Pieter de Villiers choice as coach in the middle of De Villiers term declaring himself available to coach the Boks. Arrogance sheer arrogance. 

 Meyer please get busy to  develop your own team and succeed or fail, but stop the whining. Good coaches find, develop and build great players and ultimately cups. 

Your latest antics gives me the sense SARU appointed a coach who is much more concerned with his personal image to remain squeaky clean, when coaching demands getting dirty. 

The Bok- Team is not need of a spokesman who gives interviews all the time, but a coach who can deliver, we had enough of the interviews tell us who are the next leaders your eye have spotted. Give us your plan, yes a plan from scratch. 

So coach Meyer, leave the media stunts in which you hog attention for the wrong reasons, please coach and manage the team for which you are handsomely paid. It’s time you earn your fat salary and deliver a team with a captain and vice spotted by you, groomed by you and developed by you.

 I refuse to accept that the young lads have no leadership potential. It’s simply sophistic to claim there is no one to raise their hands in captaincy, get on with your job for that is on what you will be judged. 

You like all coaches will not escape the wrath of us supporters for failing no amount of talking to the media will deny you our wrath if the team falters. 

Next time you talk let it be inspiring and confidence boosting for your statements thus far borders on the negative even pessimism. This Mr. Coach simply  does not augur well for the collective morale of a young team less us who believe in them and you to deliver the goods. 

Clyde N. Ramalaine
A concerned Bok- Supporter


Malema expelled – the END!

The End -Malema expelled!

                 –   he came he saw and was slain by his own ego, now buried in political grave –

The long in the making much publicised, almost over analyzed and anticipated end of Malema has finally come. This a few days shy of Freedom Day, April 27, 2012. Thinking on this end of Malema I thought how best to summarize his swift political rise and end and came up with “He came, saw, became intoxicated, swaggered in bombastic arrogance and was slain now he lays buried in a grave he meticulously dug despite several warnings”. This must encapsulate the closing chapter in the Malema commentary.

Julius Malema from Seshego is this morning expelled, politically buried, in a deep grave he meticulously dug for himself. As unassuming as he made his entrance to politics so with less public fanfare the NDCA confirmed the expulsion of Malema as ruled by the NDC, from the party. The very party he joined voluntarily and later confused to be his personal possession. The same he and his cohorts assumed they could control with untimely utterances laced with utter disrespect of an ANC leadership.

Malema is sent into political wilderness and knows this morning like Barcelona notwithstanding the skill of a Lionel Messi, that they are out of the EUFA Cup Finals beaten by a ten men Chelsea (my favourite English Football club) team.

This ‘silent’ no public fanfare handling of the expulsion was the best the ANC could do in my estimation. It is my view that the ANC made too much of its first NDCA findings with a live broadcast, for it afforded Malema and his cohorts a space and place it was not deserving.

In an organisation like the ANC disciplinary hearings happen all the time with less media attention. Affording Malema and ANCYL leaders this media attention was in my assessment and error the same the ANC leadership learnt from as this ruling came almost unnoticed and devoid of fanfare.

In understanding the Malema demise one must understand that his election at the 24th ANCYL conference was never really recognised. The ANC leadership simply never acknowledged or afforded the ANCYL leadership recognition, for it must have known the child it was raising will never respect it.  Perhaps Zuma’s call for discipline at the last NGC in 2010, was the start of the disowning of a Malema ANCYL leadership. The ANC leadership never entertained the ANCYL leadership elected at the last ANCYL Conference. This is  another prove that Zuma in political leadership is streets ahead of many and those who think his grin is one of stupidity do so at their own peril.

Not only is Malema send packing, but his two chief lieutenants Secretary General Sindiso Magaqa and the motormouth spokesperson Floyd Shivambu, are effectively silenced with suspensions of one and three years respectively.  They are suspended on their current appeals, notwithstanding the fact that more investigations against the two are in the offing for their ill-timed latest salvo of insults on Zuma and Ramaphosa respectively.

As the days tick by the political landscape hogged for the last 3 years by an obscure young man from Seshego who became Newsmaker of the 2011 year will yearn for some ‘Juju magic’ and yet such yearning will not be answered. For Malema is no longer wearing green, black and yellow the very  colours that made him such an appetizing and non gratifying diet.

We read how he pleaded even offered to relinquish his post as ANCYL chairperson as long as he was given the right to stay on as a member of the ANC.  It is him as ANC member challenging, defying and disrespecting the ANC leadership that made him so welcome in media embrace. His pleading could not have been sincere because he remained unremorseful and defiant, marked as unrehabitable in ANC constitutional embrace.

Without the ANC the movement that many live to hate, critique, and condemn, yet must contend with as the only organisation in post apartheid consistently trusted with the public vote remains the party to beat, Malema finds out he is just another guy from Seshego.  Others left the ANC thinking they could go on by themselves and found out it is rather cold outside the ANC.

Perhaps the words attributed to Malema as a voicemail message he left for the very media whom he not so long in typical Lady Di manner romanced helps us understand the tragedy of the man from Seshego. “At the end of everything else we will not remember the words uttered by the enemies against us but will remember the silence of our friends during this difficult times…”

This mouthful philosophical summary perhaps becomes Malema’s most pungent attempt at being diplomatic, if only he depended more on this less known philosophical side.

This is really a cry from someone who overestimated the “friendship” shared in political agenda and circles. Malema laments the absence of those who claimed a friendship in promise. Perhaps this is again prove that Malema  in political  childhood misunderstood that in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies, but common interest with unknown but definite expiry dates.

His saying to his “friends” in ANC and ANCYL embrace you dropped us; you have not honoured what you promised to do. These unseen “friends” that Malema refer to  previously begged for opportunities to speak at ANCYL events know themselves and must not be surprised if Malema later on mention their names, for he has nothing more to lose and is a wounded one. He is saying if we had enemies these made themselves known if we had friends these too made themselves in this season unknown.

Could this be a veiled reminder to a Motlanthe, Phosa, Sexwale, Mbalula etc, all pretenders to the various thrones promised, again only Malema’s friends know themselves? What did Malema really want his ‘friends’ to do in  this season, or is he reminding them to honour their promise of NEC intervention?

Now the proverbial curtain is drawn, with a bunch of legal cases and investigations shading Malema’s future he is perhaps memorialised in political museum immortalised as one who came, saw, got inebriated, swaggered in bombastic arrogance and was slain by his own ego, banished to the political wilderness from where no one who left the ANC has ever made a comeback.

Indeed the end of Malema and any hope of NEC motivation to overturn this NDCA ruling remains a mirage which with time will evaporate into oblivion as self-interest the trading commodity of politicians weighs more than an expelled ex comrade, from Seshego and his lieutenants.

ANCYL will soon as foretold by Zuma appoint a new leader and continue with the business of its youth programme the same which was left in abeyance dwarfed by the personality politics that became a defining characteristic of the modern day ANCYL dictating its role and purpose.

As Malema rides off into the sunset of possible farming the jostling for ANCYL leadership has long begun and those who never really supported a Malema leadership lifted their hands availing themselves for the post. Yet this morning with one proviso the ANCYL is a much slender in size, an even lighter in weight and a trimmed down entity who will never again become the playground of defiance of an ANC constitution or leadership.

Perhaps Mbalula’s true legacy is that he produced an ill-disciplined Malema because the latter was his handpicked successor.  Malema’s true legacy is that he perhaps eternally robbed ANCYL from its so called claimed ‘kingmaker status’, a militant thinking structure to a  toothless young lion, a disciplined structure of the ANC, for no one ever will dare what Malema dared in ill- discipline.

The media must now find its next newsmaker for Malema is done and dusted and the word former ANCYL leader is already ringing in our ears. My question what makes  anyone with so much potential, who literally raised the critical economic redress debate, die such a premature political death, the answer the EGO or pride, that which makes and equally can kill us.  Indeed pride do comes before the fall….

Clyde N. Ramalaine

Dissecting Shivambu’s flawed factional thinking on the NDCA chairperson!

Reading Floyd Shivambu in the Sunday Independent of today helps one understand the flawed, mischievous thinking of the factionalised mind pervasive in modern day ANCYL politics. His latest salvo speaks volumes of the low state of thinking ANCYL politics has degenerated to.

His tirade against Cyril Ramaphosa as the NDCA chairperson decries the foolishness of a cornered “teenager” who clutches on straws. Out of the quagmire of this he continues the emotional blackmail trying to buy sympathy, yet attempts to direct ANC thinking. Shivambu like a Magaqa is moving swiftly to the same position as their leader Malema. Perhaps they want to claim a political martyrdom that would memorialise them in South Africa’s list of heroes.

Shivambu’s publicised predictions on who the ANC will choose to lead attest that it will not be the NDCA chairperson. He chronicles a history that reflects Ramaphosa’ s personal interest, making him a  sell-out, benefactor of billions etc. He uses this to make the case that the NDCA chairperson has already sacrificed principle on the altar of politics convenience.

Mine is no defence of a Ramaphosa, I have my own vocal views of the post-apartheid SA “billionare black elite” yet Shivambu’s warped thinking and cheap blackmail warrants unpacking.

I shall attempt to dissect this warped thinking that has become synonymous with modern day ANCYL politics. In which the ANC organisation is divided for cheap politicking reasons by those who claim they represent in self appointment the vanguard interest of the true ANC membership.

Shivambu firstly confirms the utter obsession with a Mangaung elective conference that has kept the mind of the ANCYL immured. It appears Mangaung is the only subject on the agenda of ANCYL.

Secondly he advances the argument that the ANC is a convenient factionalised organisation, which lacks the aptitude and presence of mind to engender organisational discipline. In the mind a of Shivambu there are many ANC’s, at least he knows one who disregard discipline and one who will get even with among others the NDCA chairperson, the secretary general and off course the president, and all those who fall in ANCYL mind in the dictator definition.

Thirdly his attack on Ramaphosa is an argument informed by personality politics, a characteristic trademark of ANCYL politics.  It is the same personality cult politics that informs the blank defence of the indefensible the actions of its president Julius Malema.
In case we all forgot in defence of its wrong ANCYL attacked the NDC Chairperson Derek Hanekom seeking to show him out conveniently as “white” in the ANC trying to punish a so called “black” Malema and company. When that fails he is made out as biased against them for disagreeing with their stance on nationalisation

When this failed they as predicted take their attack to the chairperson of the NDCA. We all know ANCYL, attacked members of the NDC and NDCA for disagreeing with them on a non policy matter of nationalisation. The personality politics suggests the chairpersons of both the NDC and NDCA are unilaterally ruling the respective structures. All other members of the structures according to the ANCYL are either puppets, stooges and clearly not thinking according to ANCYL and its spokesman. It is the same flawed reasoning they advance on a Zuma led administration. According to ANCYL all those around Zuma do not think independently and therefore are controlled by the ANC president as puppets on strings to fulfil his political agenda.  He therefore echoes the antics of virtually expelled Malema, who argues for the existence of the Zuma dictatorship.

ANCYL must own up to the creation of this ‘personality cult’ of leadership as mistaken identity for legitimate and democratic structures of the ANC. ANCYL must own up that it cannot claim a victimhood for it is the ANC who has taken against the ANCYL leadership, it is the legitimate structures of the ANC that has acted o the matter of ill-discipline

Shivambu, claims the ANC he  knows will not trust a Ramaphosa in leadership, he throws everything at the NDCA chairperson as a means of discrediting him as one who is out to serve the interest of self. He draws an embolden line between the hearings and Ramaphosa’s political future, these may have by default a bearing yet it is simply questionable to see this as by design.  Perhaps ABCYKL must tell us who they want to hear their cases, they must tell us who in the NEC must constitute the NDC and NDCA for those currently deployed according to the ANCYL are without reason biased against ANCYL.

The truth is the “ANC” of Shivambu will not trust a Ramaphosa or any member of those who disagree with them for that ‘ANC’ he talks about is not the African National Congress but the figment of the factionalised mind of Shivambu. His unequivocal claim on the distrust of Ramaphosa remains undeniably his views and those on whose behalf he opines.

Lastly what Shivambu seeks to do with this personal attack on Ramaphosa, is play mind games in which he seeks to create a doubt in the mind of some and more so in the mind of potentialy the NDCA and its chairperson to feel compromised with the hope of getting a sympathetic verdict.

Shivambu still adamantly hold on to the claim that they are victims of those who are out to get them. He regardless to the fact that he apologised and applied for granted appeal remains stubbornly convinced we all live on another planet where his appeal is no prove of an acknowledged ill-discipline case against him and his cohorts.

This notion pits the ANCYL as an independent, structure deriving its identity outside the ANC for it certainly disregards the constitution of its mother body, effectively rendering it outside the ANC. As the days drag on we must expect more of this wildcat statements, for it is indicative of the last days of perhaps the worst  ANCYL leadership we have seen.

In all of this it will become clearer that this ANCYL is led by anyone who has a microphone in front of its mouth or has an audience, and warrants serious sanction, for its spokesman like its secretary general and president, in my assesment deserve to be outside the ANC today.

What informs the SACC’s condemning of the place of worship for the Rhema West church?

The Sunday Times of April 8, 2012 carried an article by Candice Bailey on the place of worship for the Rhema West congregation. We are told that weekly church services are conducted in the Platinum Ballroom at the Silver Star Casino West of Johannesburg. As controversial as this may sound for those of us  with a certain perspective of church, we must contend with the fact that the Rhema Church West congregation is on record for condemning gambling, and therefore we can ill afford to rush to our own judgmental conclusions. Very vocal in condemnation of the choice of place of worship is the SACC, which warrants consideration.

The SACC has slammed this practice by the Rhema West in words such as “unbecoming”,” immoral” and “unethical”. The SACC president Right Reverend Thomas Seoka is quoted as saying “there is no way you can associate faith an institution that has a gambling aspect”. He goes on and remonstrates, “while there is a commitment on the part of the Christian Church to be there where there are working communities….. I am not sure we can do it there. There are ethical and moral questions”.

Professor Thias Kgatla moderator of the Uniting Reformed Church of SA is of the view: ” the teaching of the Word is clear: you can’t serve God and mammon- The church has nothing to do with the casino; they do not go together. That is unacceptable. That place (the church) is a place of worship. There should be a lot of places they could have gone to”.

Let me in the beginning make it clear I am in no way associated with the Rhema Church; hence this is no defence of the particular church formation but a challenge of what the SACC leaders argue.

What the leaders of the SACC share as doctrine in my assessment constitutes stringed personal views with semblance of categorical dictatorial tendencies.

Firstly the learned friends would accept that the definition of church is intrinsically linked to people as opposed to infrastructure or buildings. The Christian church is constituted of people who embrace the teachings, identity, life, death, resurrection of Jesus Christ and His Lordship as the only means to salvation and reconciliation to God. It is the comprehensive redemptive work of Christ finalized on Calvary that holds sway in describing who the church is. It is innately a living being not trapped in a building to give it identity, purpose or meaning.

Secondly the church takes it queue from the Redeemer of Salvation who unequivocally instructs in what we deem the great commission as contained in Matthew 28: 18-20, ” All authority has been given unto Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to observe all things that I have commanded you, and lo I am with you always, even to the end of the age” ( NKJV). The church is instructed to GO and make disciples, it therefore must reach out to people. This instruction makes emphatic that the focus of Jesus Christ was not a building but people. Not only is this the case but His very earthly ministry took place in diverse places; one would imagine the same our SACC leaders no different to the Pharisees and Sadducees would have struggled to reconcile with. Scriptures are replete with a Jesus fellowshipping with tax collectors, prostitutes, the poor, those that society rejected. He even associated with a place called Samaria (the scorn of the then Jewish religious mind). The text in John 4: 4 is clear “He ( Jesus Christ) had to go to Samaria”.

Thirdly, the idea of church buildings for places of worship in the Christian Faith is a much later development as church history dictates. It is clear that the initial gathering of believers assumed what is commonly called ‘oikos’ or ‘home based’ fellowships.  The actual idea of buildings as a place of fellowship was a much later evolvement. This argument does not suggest places for worship is bad or not scriptural but merely seeks to contextualise the advent of the first church building as that as we commonly have come to accept as a second century phenomenon.

Reading the slamming on the part of the SACC leaders, one is not sure what to make of it, for they straddle between condemnation, judgment and dictate. The truth is the SACC never represented all Christians in South Africa and neither can any structure make this claim. The leaders quoted attempts to superimpose their personal views of church defined with infrastructure as base. They furthermore prove less sensitive for the reality of what we call the missio-dei (mission field). They attempted to conjoin the place of worship that Rhema West occupies with perhaps a veiled held view of independent churches as associated with a love for mammon.

Prof. Kgatla categorically assumes the church has nothing to do with the casino. May we help Professor Kgatla in saying the same ones who frequent casinos constitute the object of God’s love and the subject of his redemptive plan? Also  throughout the known and unknown history of the Church (not a building – but people) secular buildings are transformed into places of worship, in fact ungodly places were made places of worship, this attests to the power of the Gospel to transform people regardless where they may find themselves or in what place they may gather.  Prof. Kgatla also adopts the right to dictate that there is a correct place for the church to gather.

The condemning of any place where people find themselves, the same who is the object of God’s love and the subject of his redemptive grace appears to be in the case of the SACC leadership a subject of preference more than a theological sound defence. Those quoted in the interview conflate issues to share their personal views and preferences as doctrine. These personal views are given credence because of a historically powerful name of a SACC who played a significant role in our collective political liberation, but in post-apartheid context proved less leading and at times lost in parenting the proverbial child called liberation.

Let us hope the condemnation of the place of worship has little to do with the change of religious face under the Zuma administration which is a clear break from the hallowed position and place the SACC use to hold. I said in a previous article Zuma made his choice for the less liked Pentecostal and  so- called Faithbased – Charismatic churches as opposed to the traditional so called ‘mainline churches’.

Perhaps we must applaud the Rhema West congregation leadership for taking the church where church truly  belongs on the streets, in places of reject, in that which is considered immoral among those who are sick, needy addicted and those who need help regardless of economic or social standing. The traditional views parading as uncontested truth as to where and how the church must gather remains debateable any attempt at reaching people (the object of God’s love and the subject of His redemptive work) remains celebrated. For He (God) does not only meet his people in cathedrals, temples, church buildings or the places our learned friends advocate but He God is on the street corners, he has people in the dingy areas and He loves all gamblers.

So let us take His presence to the places where His loved ones dwell, with the explicit hope of transforming lives and ultimately closing down the  very casino and putting up a ‘kerk – klok’ chiming bell that will ring harmony and music in the ears of our learned friends.

To the Rhema West leadership as an expression of the body of Christ, do what you believe you are led to do  to reach those that God love and Christ died for, often in doing that you may offend others no different to how the Pharisees and Sadducees found Jesus Christ the eternal Head of the Christian Church offensive for associating in less religious places.

Respectfully submitted.

Bishop Clyde N. Ramalaine

ANCYL suffers of “Acute Teenage Spoilt Brat Syndrome” (ATSBS) mindset !

      Teenagers must be allowed to grow not without reprimand and rebuke !

The attitude of the ANCYL regardless to how real an economic redress debate is necessary in post-apartheid South Africa, consistently lends itself to what I call for nomenclature “Acute Teenage Spoilt Brat Syndrome-mindset”, ATSBS

We all can identify with being teenagers once. The attitude of believing the world owes you something is common during this period.  It is a time known for defiance of parent’s advice, counsel even proving disrespectful to older ones. It is usually a stormy time in one’s life for your parents sees you as a child and yet you have started to date, unbeknown to them.  If you a girl, guys whistle at you due to hormones you developed the curves of  womanhood, yet  your mind is still very much a teenager.

Not only is it a stormy period in the life of the youth but it’s known for defiance, as the teenage mind seeks to assert itself on others. As it is said children assume their parents were born parents. This period is also known for utter irresponsibility as the concoction of blind ego and attention-seeking is confused for an independent identity. In my assessment the ANCYL youth suffers of “Acute Teenage Spoilt Brat Syndrome” ATSBS.

A critical aspect of this syndrome is it affords one a right above others. This claimed right in selfishness entitles one  to abuse others yet invoke a right to play victim and condemning those who call you to order is typical of the ATSBS. It is disingenuous for the ANCYL Leadership to claim victimhood when it has been dishing out expulsions and sanctions of ANCYL members in provinces since  2008 under the  Malema leadership.

Anther prove of the ATSBS in ANCYL is seen when the Youth League expects of NDC members to recuse themselves accusing them of bias only because these members have publically expressed a different position and mind then the youth. ATSBS demands that no one in the ANC or ANCYL critique the youth for if any does they are perceived as anti-ANCYL.

ATSBS, in the ANCYL is prevalent when the Youth League has convinced itself it can singularly by birth and a god-claimed right determine who must lead the ANC and also when. A right it attempts to invoke informed by dislike and like.

ATSBS is at play when campaigns are run in the name of individuals to divide the ANC leadership, yet one claims to love the ANC. An ATSBS mind often pits adults against each other for one’s personal gain, no different to what we are seeing with the ANCYL.

ATSBS is at play when the Youth League leadership confuses lobbying for a specific position for abusive personal attacks on democratically elected officials.

There is a justifiable need for proper political education in ANCYL, for the current utterances of Malema, Shivambu and Magaqa is a clear indication of a new culture in the ANC. Insulting democratically elected leadership simply because you don’t like them, and equally claim a love for the ANC is a contradiction. Disagreeing has little to with being insulting.

The ANC, the Youth League claims to love has always welcomed robust open and constructive debate on any aspect of it’s policies which never are arrived at unilaterally but through a process of consensus. The new emerging tendency of hurling insults against a sitting leadership warrants condemnation and a response devoid of any form of sympathy. For the record, the ANCYL has been instrumental to bring the issue of nationalisation from the periphery to the centre, the ANC has assigned a team to conduct research on the viability of it, yet this is not currently ANC policy and it cannot pretend it is.

The truth is a vibrant, thinking and on point youth is necessary and very welcomed in our political discourse but spoilt brats must be disciplined if not expelled. Militancy has little to do with disrespectfulness and cannot be confused for one for the other. The ANCYL leadership cannot argue that they are victims and hope for sympathy from South Africa, when it in organisational context refuse to adhere to its own constitution.

I am on record for questioning the logic of ANCYL thinking for it condemns the ANCYL leadership in a myopic Zuma identity when it truthfully is condemning the entire ANC leadership exemplified in the TOP 6. If Zuma as is claimed has failed, the TOP 6 which he leads has failed.

My unsolicited advice to our Youth grow up, lobby for your position, quit the spoilt brat teenage mindset in which you want to determine who must call you to order, who must adjudicate when you on the wrong,  and seek to play victim when you act as a bully of other ANCYL members.

We must not allow teenagers to get away with this for they usually become grown ups with the same attitude. The word is DISCIPLINE !!!