Can Christians Be Politicians?

We thrashed out a number of election strategies for the ACDP over the weekend, with a teamwork and strategy workshop for the KZN provincial executive councils (PEC's). It was a productive weekend where we highlighted a wide set of areas we can work on in the party, including more affirmation of those who are doing a good but unseen job, and more in-depth discussion on emotionally sensitive topics.

One very interesting view was the apparent clash of Christian values and political strategy. For instance, should we be blowing our own trumpet? The Bible seems fairly clear in suggesting that "the right hand should not know what the left is doing", but if you work hard behind the scenes, will people vote for you? When we were manning an ACDP stall at Pietermaritzburg's Royal Show, we had people coming and saying: where have you been all these years? What!? We've been working hard, running our administration, planning for the elections, etc, etc. But it hasn't been visible.

In the same way, we've had to admit that if you want to get into the media, you have to be controversial. You have to grab the headlines with outrageous statements and actions that grab people's attention. It seems like a nice, well-rounded media release that makes perfect sense is not good enough - you have to exaggerate, use strong words and be "larger than life".

This has led to the suggestion that we should be leaving our Christian principles in church and walk a different talk in the political realm. I beg to differ.

The political arena is notorious: it attracts powermongers and thieves and it quite rightly aggravates the public. Not only that, but the worldwide voting audience are instinctively critical, and no administration passes unscathed beneath the vengeful eyes of a public who will remember your one failure more than your ten successes. This forces political parties to take a short term view and to make promises that will win an election rather than preserve long-term good. Frankly, the word "politician" has quite rightly earned the personal application of a cattle branding iron across one's forehead.

I believe that Christian values are exactly what are needed to transform politics. Honesty means telling the public what they need to hear and not what pleases them. Personal responsibility means acknowledging failure instead of pouring out weak excuses that further discredit yourself among the discerners. Fear of God is what keeps you on the straight and narrow when nobody is watching. To suggest that we shed aspects of good Christianity along the way is what will rob us from being the very solution that our country needs.

Having said that, politics does give us the opportunity to re-evaluate church practices. For instance, to say that prayer is the answer for everything might be seen as a Christian principle, but the Bible imparts personal responsibility for action in addition to prayer (see the book of James). Perhaps if we look more closely at the Bible, we'll find that all the qualities needed to win an election are well prescribed. Perhaps we just need to work harder, improve our strategies, stop blaming our failures on our Christianity and do exactly what the Bible recommends: step out in faith ... and prayer helps too!

It's Time to Pray: Get the Prayer Newsletter

Because the ACDP is very much a Christian party, we do believe strongly in the importance of prayer and we believe that our prayers do make a difference with things that are seen and unseen. And like most churches, we know that we need to pray even more than what we do.

In my role as the prayer coordinator for KZN, we are setting up a number of prayer meetings around the province. It helps that the ACDP is something of a neutral agent that can help to bring churches together across the denominations, and we all share the same desire: to see our country come right and set on the right path.

If you're interested, I coordinate a monthly email prayer newsletter which highlights important prayer matters. Additionally, our involvement in the key decision making processes of the country gives us "inside info" into urgent prayer needs like bills that are about to be passed through.

If you would to receive this prayer letter, send a request to ericsavage@gmail.com. Also, if you would like to assist in organising regional prayer functions, even just for your area, please contact me as well. Thanks.

Eskom Report Confirms Failure of BEE

Independent Online published the findings of a new Eskom report investigating the reasons for Eskom's failures. Of course with any such report you have to ask yourself on what authority the reasoning is done. Just because a recommendation is made or blame is laid doesn't somehow stamp finality on it. We still need to examine the logic used and the evidence presented.

BEE is a hot issue, and my experiences with blogs that discuss these topics has shown that the discussion can get distinctly race-based. While an unfortunate side effect of apartheid is that we're still tolerating race-based legislation, for one group to want zero bias when they had benefited from previous bias leaves you sitting uncomfortably.

Frankly, we're all well aware that apartheid prejudiced the development of certain race groups and that there is a backlog to make up - what really sets the views apart is how we move forward from here.

The key issue I want to address here is skills development - the very crux of BEE, its engine room. And here is exactly where BEE has failed. While BEE has been used to enrich some black sections of the population, that really is the sideshow. The idea was that giving someone an important role, ahead of schedule, would give them the opportunity to grow into that role and learn a skill needed for that role. Now how do you learn that skill? Where do you get it from and who teaches it to you?

There are three main forms of skills acquisition in industry: study for a degree or diploma, do personal research through books or internet surfing, or learn skills in apprenticeship. When I say "apprenticeship", I refer to any role where you work under someone for a while and then take over when you are ready. If you have any business or industry experience, you'll know that this is probably the leading form of skills development. And yet, that system is bypassed by BEE.

There are two results of the BEE system. Firstly, the ones who need to learn the skills are in authority over the ones they need to learn the skills from. But who ever wants to learn from a junior? It rarely works in practice. Secondly, those who do have the skills and have now been shunted pack up their bags and leave, and take their skills with them - there is no transfer. Eskom will testify that this has happened, and several departments like Public Works are experiencing exactly the same.

The end result is huge. Very little skills development results in badly run business, failed projects and bankruptcy. BEE benefactors are placed in senior positions, companies struggle, and the very people that should have been enriched are now in failing operations and bearing the brunt of criticism.

Let's paint a different scenario. Those without skills go through the proper apprenticeship process and when they are ready they are promoted and get a good new salary. The business stays strong. The former BEE benefactors do get the promotion, in the longer term, and when they do, they carry out their function in a sustainable business.

Simply put, BEE is short term and apprenticeship is there for the long term. No surprise then that BEE has benefitted a few but leaves the majority short. For this reason, the ACDP believes it is time for the sunset clause on BEE, so that the very objectives of BEE can be attained: skills development, leading to long-term, sustainable wealth. The 10 year turnaround that the ANC envisaged was never realistic and it's time to recognise that the South African skills problem needs a longer term solution that promises less and achieves more.

The IOL report can be read at: http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20080715120929767C145654

Time to Get Your Hopes Up

Hope is a fragile thing these days in South Africa. Can you dare to hope?

Scores have left these shores to craft their lives overseas because their hopes in the future of South Africa had diminished to the point where they could not see a decent lifestyle for themselves or their children in the future. Those that have remained try hard to hope, certainly I do, but every now and then on a rainy day our grasp on the dream seems to weaken.

It's difficult to bring yourself to the point of saying: that's it, this country is doomed and there's nothing we can do. We talk easily of being the next Zimbabwe, but I'd say most of us still cherish a little bit of hope that South Africa might still come out okay.

The problem comes here: do you take risks? Do you buy a house which will take 20 years to pay off? Do you start a multi-million rand business? Do you invest in a pension plan? Do you do anything that could be jeopardised if things went haywire in 15 years time?

The problem is ... the very decision to hedge your bets is what accelerates the downfall. When the good guys keep battling away, the country manages to keep ticking over. To stop trying because you believe there is no hope becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The simple truth is that an effective country and economy depends on the many individuals each playing their part. It doesn't depend ultimately on a government, although government can certainly have a huge influence. South Africa's long-term failure would be partly down to government failure, but it would also be down to those who decided to stop trying.

This is a memo to self: get your spirit up regardless of your circumstances, take managed risks, dare to dream, step out and do what needs to be done, hope eternally.

Why the Media Misrepresent the Real Picture

Perched on the edge of his leather chair, the chief editor of the local newspaper weighs heavy decisions. He's been presented with three articles: the city's favourite sports team won their third game in a row, pothole-ridden Oak Avenue got repaved, and a city policeman was seen getting drunk at a city party. There are only two slots available. Obviously sports always sells. Of the two remaining stories, which one is more likely to sell? It's easy.

Frankly, when it comes time to tell stories, an editor is always likely to choose something more dramatic and more sinister. Take a topical issue like global warming for example. Ten university professors submit their opinions on climate change. One says: "The coastal cities are going to be swamped within 15 years if we don't do something right now." I'll be honest and admit I'd find that more interesting than his colleague who wrote: "Climate change could result in reduced health over the next two hundred years."

So you pick up the newspaper the next morning and read the headline: "City Policeman Drunk at Local Party". You breath in sharply and sigh: "What is this world coming to?" What you didn't know is that the other 254 policemen have had an impeccable record. But when was the newspaper ever going to report that? How would they craft it into an interesting story? What would the headline be? Would the newspaper sell?

Quite simply, you can very easily get a wrong picture of the state of the world by watching a news bulletin or reading a newspaper. Of course we need to stay abreast with current affairs, but we need to keep perspective.

The problem for the ACDP is that we don't have dramatic, sinister stories to hide. People who put their heads down and work hard don't make the news. And this is an intense struggle for us. While we cringe like everyone else at the thought of "selling" ourselves, with the way the media works, it would seem that's the only way to communicate to the average Joe. Even really good deeds get reported less often than scandalous ones. In fact, in South Africa you could do a wonderful job with what you have and never get heard of.

Why Narnia Is Different

Having seen the new Prince Caspian movie just released as part of the Narnia series, we pondered just how clearly the Christian message was portrayed. Anybody "in the know" will realise that the movie remains faithful to C.S. Lewis' intention of illustrating the Christian message through stories. However, much of the general public will remain clueless to the real thread behind the Narnia series and its "rival", the Golden Compass, which was of course written by arch-athiest Phillip Pullman.

For a moment, I reluctantly admitted: without understanding, this movie could simply be regarded as another of those good versus evil stories, a vague grasp at this intangible current of good will that moves us all. Then the difference struck me...

At the moment of the movie's greatest crisis, a true-blue Hollywood blockbuster would have the heroes and heroins look inside themselves, discover their inner strength, decide to do what they owe to the world, and go and save it. In Prince Caspian, however, at the point of greatest crisis, the heroes realise that their own abilities and good intentions have failed. As the opposing troops march forward in ominous power, Aslan the lion comes to the rescue.

This is no coincidence. In fact, these two different resolutions present the fundamental difference between Christianity and humanism and between Christianity and most other religions. Christianity portrays man as fallen and in need of a saviour. Most other religions portray man as inherently good and capable of finding sufficient inner ability to resolve a problem. In fact, secular humanism, in its own way, holds man up as a god unto himself. The bill of human rights, drawn up by man himself, becomes the new commandment. Each to his own is the new absolute relative.

That Disney could have put their name behind such a courageous statement of support for Christianity is intriguing. And in retrospect, while Christians would have loved the two Narnia movies to be even more literal in their metaphors, I'll happily put my stamp of approval on Prince Caspian.

ps. For all the complaints of the movie being "dark" - I'm unconvinced. More violent and tense, yes, but in a "darkly sinister" way like the Harry Potter movies, no.

Let Prisoners Work for Food

We're often asked to name the policies of our party, especially beyond the "moral" issues like abortion and gay marriage. In fact, the party has some very interesting and innovative policies, and crime and prison reformation is certainly one area of attention. In fact, the ACDP is very interested in implementing the Taiwanese model of work for prisoners.

My home town, New Hanover, has a family prison with very limited security. Frankly, if a prisoner wanted to escape, he would have ample opportunity. I gave a lift to one of the prison wardens recently, who told me that the prisoners are quite happy there - they get big meals and watch DSTV.

Let's pause for a moment and take in the picture. Law abiding citizens are working eight hours a day to put food on the table, and the majority of South Africans would consider DSTV a luxury. In contrast, the prisoners have committed a crime and enjoy a better life (apart from freedom of movement of course) than the majority. It's simply not right.

At the very least, prisoners should have to earn their food in the way that normal citizens do. However, the Taiwanese model goes a step better than that, and here is where it becomes interesting. Income is obviously earned from this work - part of it goes to covering the expense of housing and feeding the prisoners, and the other part goes into an investment fund. The prisoners are learning a skill while they are working in the prison, and when they are released, those funds are used to help them start a new business of their own. As a result, Taiwan saw a massive reduction in prison returnees.

Unfortunately we still have an image of the ball-and-chain convicts in black and white doing slave-type work for the prisons. The reality is that all of us have to work to earn our keep and feed our families, and prisoners should not be exempt from that. The other concern is that this could be regarded as a lucrative scheme - a guaranteed job with real rewards. Even so, this scheme would still be a superior alternative to what we have now.

Either way, the work for prisoners scheme benefits both parties: the prisoners and the public. It helps in the prison's role of redirection and reformation, and it takes pressure of the taxpayers.