Proudly Conservative

WE LIVE in interesting times, whether it’s discussing climate change, Julius Malema rants, the AWB and Mr Visagie there is no doubting that life in South Africa is not dull. I recently bore witness to a conversation in which one individual was verbally abused and berated for having conservative ideas about marriage and the certain liberal practices evident throughout this city, I was astonished at the ferocity of the attack on this individual and started wondering why being conservative is considered a bad thing.

To be tagged as a conservative in today’s world is to be associated with being anti-gay, anti-abortion, to have arcane biblical inspired ideas about wrong and right and to have morals and standards which you judge others by. I must admit that I find this dim and narrow view of conservatism silly. I am a proud conservative who believes in some of the principles that conservatism advocates but I cannot say that I have any of the aforementioned beliefs.

I am a conservative who detests the decline of readers over television watchers and thinkers over generic young people who are preoccupied with fashion and the latest trends. I am against the flagrant promotion of violence and sex on television along with the promulgation of some American television programs that encourage the idea that it’s okay to be dimwitted. I am against soft treatment of people who break laws and expect human rights in exchange, I am against ill-equipped people getting jobs in high positions simply because they have connections and mostly I am against the people on campus who walk around without shoes on.

That may upset some people but it is what I am strongly against, for if the environmentalists can protest for trees and if prisoners get to vote, then I have surely done no harm in stating these views.

Conservatives at this university probably feel threatened or scared because of their supposedly narrow views, but as Robert Kennedy said, “you must speak out,” and state what you believe without fear.

Detractors and critics argue that to be conservative or to believe in some of the things associated with conservatism is to be narrow-minded and ignorant, but I respectfully disagree. Conservatism is the only pragmatic approach to a world that has become overrun by generic thinking and standardized foolishness. To be conservative does not mean that one is ignorant or daft, tags which liberals are happy to throw around, it just means that their views are different.

With the British election scheduled for the 6th of May and the polls showing David Cameron’s Tory party ahead of Gordon Brown’s Labour, I for one will be thankful for the return to power of a conservative government in a powerful Western nation.

In this fast paced and interconnected world conservatism is too quickly branded as being representative of prejudicial thinking yet the self same liberals who are quick to make these charges are quick to also state that they are open-minded and tolerant of views different from their own. If someone is against abortion, homosexuality and disagrees with feminism then that is their right and they should not be adversely judged or treated for believing it. The world, indeed liberals need more people who adhere to the bible saying that says “let those who are without sin cast the first stone”.

Written by Tatenda Goredema, Deputy Editor of Varsity Newspaper.

The Birth Pains of Bureaucracy

IN RECENT months I have had the privilege of attending some parliamentary committee meetings and if there is one thing that is prominent throughout these meetings, it is the occasionally irritating and pedantic nature of these meetings.

It is often said that parliament is merely the rubber stamp of government and approves of all or most of the legislation proposed by the body. From what I have witnessed in my time at parliament sittings, that does not seem to be true. Members are genuinely interested in interrogating policies and proposed legislation before it is approved. Most committees are interested in carrying out their oversight role and ensuring that the taxpayer’s money is spent wisely and used for realistically helpful projects.

The processes and machinations of committee meetings are however painfully slow and often raise the ire of ordinary citizens who cannot understand why good policies and proposals take so long to implement or be approved. Members of parliament are sometimes prone to talking simply for the sake of talking and endangering the climate and ozone with the amount of hot air that emanates from their mouths.

Time is wasted on asking sometimes repetitive and unnecessary questions and nitpicking on small issues of little consequence. Legislative bodies and their regulatory rules across the world are frustrating and annoying but when committee meetings drag on simply for the sake of people wishing to hear the sounds of their own voices it becomes necessary to ask whether these meetings are necessary. In a country such as this with great socio-economic challenges, slow delivery is unacceptable and has in recent times been widely decried.

Showing an interest in legislation and policy proposals is commendable and should be widely encouraged among Members but the slow pace and bluster shown in some sessions should be done away with and replaced with a sense of urgency. Social justice demands immediate action in this country and the bad reputation parliament has for being slow and boring needs to change if it is to live up to the billing of the highest law making body in the country as opposed to being a rubber stamp for the ANC government.

Parliamentarians need to move away from the perception that they are superior and removed from ordinary people and their problems. One of the best ways to do this is to take parliament to the people, an initiative already being undertaken by the body, and increase member visits to their constituencies in order to gauge what the problems affecting them are. In my view this would assist in improving the overall imagery and outlook people have of the body.

Ultimately however South Africa must move away from a Proportional Representation electoral system to a more direct system in order to ensure that MP’s exist to serve their constituents as opposed to serving their respective parties. If people are the main intended beneficiaries of legislation then surely the people who work on legislation should serve them directly. Changing the electoral system would improve service and hold members more accountable to the people. Only after this shift shall parliament truly be for the people.


Written by Tatenda Goredema, the Deputy Editor of Varsity Newspaper.