#Thabo Mbeki

[readyforevolution]

[cindydacatpink]

B.R.I.C.S. but in 2003 (2000s)

I was inspired with @/viktor_regnsky on Instagram, Eggcountries an CountryHumans version.

That's why I draw them.

[afrotumble]

[neighbourhood-rambler]

Referring to time in presidential administrations only to comment on something totally removed from politics simply because.

: "Cartoons during the Bush Administration were so unhinged."

: "Fashion during the Mbeki Administration was so American influenced"

[himbo-blacksmith]

Eskom (South Africa's power generation & distribution company) has been On One for a few weeks. Or, rather, a few years. More than a decade, really.

Under Thabo Mbeki (called himself the African Thatcher), the state owned entity was forbidden from building more generation capacity in order to make space for the private sector to build generation capacity. During this period, a white paper was released showing that the company needed to add 24 GW of generation capacity, none of which should be coal powered. Rolling blackouts begin in 2007, a year before Mbeki is ousted as President.

Then, under Jacob Zuma (Currently under investigation for multiple corruption related cases), the company sought to build two of the world's largest coal burning power stations, which even international firms refused to undertake because the projects were doomed. Kusile and Medupi were begun in 2011, expected to finish construction in 2017. Neither are finished, and the units that are functioning on both power stations continuously break down and require expensive repairs. The company refuses to build renewable energy. During this period it goes into so much debt that it is at risk of defaulting, and it is only this ill-advised borrowing that allows for a handful of years without rolling blackouts.

Under Cyril Ramaphosa (Tries to be the New Deal Guy, ends up just being Jimmy Carter), the company has been trying desperately to recover from the debt crisis that Zuma's policies put it in. This would not be a problem if the company were just an organ of state, rather than a nominally independent state owned entity. Malcontent contractors have scored maintenance contracts worth millions of rands which they are not qualified for, leading to half-measures which result in breakdowns that require even more repairs, creating a feedback loop of perverse incentives to continue sabotaging infrastructure for ever more money.

We are finally investing in renewable energy, slowly, but things are being severely hampered by Minister for Mineral Resources & Energy Gwede Mantashe, who is widely rumoured to be bankrolled by coal barons. He also brought in a Turkish company that provides grey hydrogen power generation, the Karpowership, which was irregular and which would be environmentally detrimental in the harbour it would be docked in.

Essentially, due to a reduction in state capacity and political paralysis, local elites have been allowed to usurp the functions of state for their own profit. Like wolves nipping at the heels of a sick cow, these robber barons are profiting from the death spiral South Africa finds itself in. Only drastic and punitive action will stave off these scavengers, but due to the aforementioned political paralysis, no one is going to take that necessary action.

[ghost-37]

“I am an African. I owe my being to the hills and the valleys, the mountains and the glades, the rivers, the deserts, the trees, the flowers, the seas and the ever-changing seasons that define the face of our native land.” ~ Thabo Mbeki ✊🏿

[culmaer]

just saw the US American version so I thought I'd ask :

it's interesting just how much you can deduce about the history of the country just by looking at the names and titles

[ptseti]

MBEKI: AFRICAN LEADERS HAVE TO BE HONEST WITH EACH OTHER

The African Union (AU) has become a club to defend the interests of African heads of state, not the people. That’s according to Thabo Mbeki, South Africa’s president from 1999 to 2008.

He said part of the problem lies in a lack of accountability. Take the case of Ivory Coast’s Allasane Ouattara, who performed a constitutional coup to extend his presidential term in 2020. We hear not a murmur from the African Union.

Compare that with the AU’s response to revolutionary coups that have swept Africa’s Sahel region in recent years which were backed by the masses on the streets. The continental organisation suspended Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger for throwing off the neo-colonial yoke, even as Western-aligned African leaders keep their AU seats.

[thehollowwriter]

Wide awake because of stupid fucking loadshedding omg. It's midnight and there's absolutely no power and I'm so hot and uncomfortable. For those wondering what loadshedding is:

"South Africa's energy crisis or load shedding is an ongoing period of widespread national blackouts of electricity supply. It began in the later months of 2007 towards the end of Thabo Mbeki's second term as president, and continues to the present." -Wikipedia (I'm too tired to look elsewhere)

There are multiple stages and the highest we've gotten to is stage 8 which is 8 hours of no power. Currently, we have a very important substation that is at risk of breaking. And if does, loadshedding will be ramped up to stage 13. I'm just lucky I live an area where it isn't as bad and we have a wi-fi box.

God damn it this is annoying

[rubberizer92]

🌍 Thabo Mbeki: An Environmental Visionary in OBEY Season 11! 🌿🌟

Gentlemen, prepare to embark on an eco-conscious journey with Thabo Mbeki from South Africa 🇿🇦, an Environmental Scientist who's dedicated to preserving the planet's beauty. In OBEY Season 11, Thabo's mission is to raise awareness about environmental issues and inspire change.

In the world of OBEY, where passion meets purpose, Thabo shines as a beacon of hope for our planet. His commitment to sustainability goes beyond his profession; it's a way of life. Get ready to witness the power of environmental consciousness!

Now, let's discuss how you can support Thabo in his mission to protect the Earth. Your votes on Instagram, Tumblr, and Twitter are like a breath of fresh air for the environment, ensuring that his message of conservation reaches far and wide. Every like, comment, save, and share contributes to a greener future. Join us in celebrating Thabo Mbeki's visionary dedication!

Stay tuned for more updates and eco-friendly initiatives as we follow Thabo's journey in OBEY Season 11. Prepare to be inspired by the transformative impact of environmental awareness! 🌍🌟 #OBEYSeason11 #EnvironmentalAdvocate #MeetTheContenders #ThaboMbeki 🏆🔥

[badley]

just got reminded that thabo mbeki was an aids denialist jesus christ

[heysatanitsyourgirl]

Hello this is a great chance to talk about a story I love to tell: The Dunnes Stores Strikers.

I’m the 80’s Irish unions ( The IDATU ) voted to protest the apartheid regime in South Africa. Stores across the whole country were made aware that union workers wouldn’t be handling/selling any South African goods or produce. Most stores/management were okay with this and allowed its workers to implement the ban.

Except Dunnes store on Henry street Dublin.

Mary Manning, a young girl working at the till, followed her unions directive and refused to sell a South African Grapefruit. She was told by management to leave. Her floor supervisor, a woman named Karen Gearon, ordered a full walk out on the spot in solidarity.

The two of them aswell as other workers;

Liz Deasy, Michelle Gavin, Vonnie Munroe, Alma Russll, Sandra Griffin, Theresa Mooney, Cathryn O’Reilly and Tommy Davis. With Union representative Brendan Barron.

spent just over 2 years on strike, working against Dunnes and it’s selling of South African produce. They protested along side a refugee from the apartheid named Nimrod Sejake and for 2 years they spent every morning outside of Dunnes store, holding up the picket and encouraging people to boycott the store until they stopped selling the produce.

They were invited to go to South Africa by Desmond Tutu to see the situation with their own eyes, however the government treated them with extreme hostility and were forced to leave the country after being held within the airport with guns for hours.

They were so dedicated that Vonnie Monroe even chose to loose her house rather then break the picket like a judge had suggested.

Their strike lead to a nation wide ban and the creation of new laws. It contributed to the end of the regime, they were even recognised by Nelson Mandela who said “ordinary people far away from the crucible of apartheid cared for our freedom”.

There is even now a street in Johannasburg named after Mary manning and a Plaque on Henry Street seared by President Thabo Mbeki.

The Irish stand against apartheid and always will.

If you're going to do something similar you have to make sure the store knows you're targeting Israeli products specifically

[titou-nz]

Johannesbourg - South Africa

Criminalité

Johannesbourg est l'une des villes les moins sûres du monde en temps de paix, notamment au centre-ville. La ville est souvent citée dans des études pour avoir l'un des taux d'homicide le plus élevé au monde. Il y a en moyenne 20 meurtres par jour. La majeure partie de la population y circulant vient des townships miséreux, connaissant eux aussi de forts taux de criminalité.

Les gens de classe moyenne et supérieure habitent dans des maisons protégées par de hautes clôtures, munies de barbelés, de fils électriques, et surveillées par les compagnies de sécurité privées aussi appelé gated communities. Dans les quartiers pauvres comme Hillbrow et les townships environnants, la violence est importante. Les maisons de briques ne sont pas toujours protégées par des clôtures avec barbelés. Les maisons de tôle d'acier sont généralement sans protection.

Économie

Au XXIe siècle, l'activité minière n'est plus le secteur principal de l'économie locale. L'essor des services, ainsi que la construction d'un aéroport international, ont fait de Johannesbourg une cité de première importance pour le commerce africain et mondial. L'agglomération de Johannesbourg (Gauteng) assure 40 % du PIB de l'Afrique du Sud.

L'héritage de la période d'apartheid a maintenu une crise du logement pour les noirs, gravement touchés par le chômage, lequel, selon le gouvernement, avoisine les 40 %, entretient les rancœurs à l'encontre des immigrés accusés de rafler les emplois, de faire baisser le coût du travail, voire de faire augmenter la délinquance. Le gouvernement de Thabo Mbeki, qui a succédé à Nelson Mandela, a sous-estimé la crise au Zimbabwe limitrophe. Cette crise a précipité trois millions de clandestins de l'autre côté de la frontière. Les écarts de revenu et les tensions raciales créent d'importants problèmes d'insécurité dans le centre-ville, déserté par les blancs, et abandonné par les investisseurs. Ce centre-ville tente actuellement de se restructurer autour d'un nouveau quartier administratif et culturel à vocation touristique.

En 1999, Johannesbourg nomme un manageur pour la ville afin d'améliorer sa mauvaise situation financière. Ce dernier, conjointement avec le conseil municipal, élabore un plan de réforme stratégique appelé « Igoli 2002 ». La ville passe ainsi de la quasi-insolvabilité à un surplus de 153 millions de rands (23,6 millions USD).

[andizi]

Thabo Mbeki Tribute to Tito Titus Mboweni

[lboogie1906]

Bishop Desmond Mpilo Tutu (October 7, 1931 – December 26, 2021) was a South African Anglican bishop and theologian, known for his work as an anti-apartheid and human rights activist. He was Bishop of Johannesburg (1985-86) and Archbishop of Cape Town (1986-96) he was the first Black African to hold both positions. He sought to fuse ideas from Black theology with African theology.

He was ordained as an Anglican priest and moved to the UK to study theology at King’s College London. He returned to southern Africa, teaching at the Federal Theological Seminary and then the University of Botswana, Lesotho, and Swaziland. He became the Theological Education Fund’s director for Africa. He served first as dean of St Mary’s Cathedral in Johannesburg and then as Bishop of Lesotho, taking an active role in opposition to South Africa’s apartheid system of racial segregation and white-minority rule. He was general secretary of the South African Council of Churches, emerging as one of South Africa’s most prominent anti-apartheid activists. Although warning the National Party government that anger at apartheid would lead to racial violence, as an activist he stressed non-violent protest and foreign economic pressure to bring about universal suffrage.

He became president of the All Africa Conference of Churches. After President F. W. de Klerk released the anti-apartheid activist Nelson Mandela from prison in 1990 and the pair led negotiations to end apartheid and introduce multi-racial democracy, He assisted as a mediator between rival Black factions. President Mandela selected him to chair the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He has campaigned for gay rights and spoken out on a wide range of subjects, among them the Israel-Palestine conflict, his opposition to the Iraq War, and his criticism of South African Presidents Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma. In 2010, he retired from public life.

He was popular among South Africa’s Black majority and was internationally praised for his anti-apartheid activism, receiving a range of awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize. He has compiled several books of his speeches and sermons. #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence

[raleighrador]

I almost totally agree with this. Lucas clearly had opinions (though those options are not necessarily themselves super clear) that informed his material.

Disney's only goal is to make money. That said, I do think the Disney material does actually have an emergent ideology (deliberate or not), one that feeds directly into its corporate aims of profits.

This article is a fascinating read https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2024/02/disney-adult-superfan-industrial-complex

It basically postulates that Disney content (Star Wars or otherwise) is not only escapist in nature but actively pushes individualism & escapism as ideologies, as the only sensible reactions to the world.

I think this brutally nihilistic world view is evident in Disney Star Wars. I won't attempt to link this to any kind of real world agenda, but I will look at the textual content of the films (and maybe refer to series) themselves.

I think the basic thesis of the sequel trilogy is: evil will always exist, will always return. Efforts to confront it are basically fruitless if the goal is to actually make things better in a systemic, sustainable way. The only hope that exists is personal - maybe MY life (or your life or Rey's life) can be one worth living, but the environment around us will likely not change. Democracy and centralised states are fundamentally incapable of addressing the material concerns of their citizens.

It is genuinely bleak as hell.

TFA opens with: actually the bad guys won. Off screen, between ROTJ and this film basically all the achievements of Luke, Leia, Han have been wiped off. The New Republic is on its last legs, the First Order (2 Empire 2 Furious) is on the rise (and in the course of this film will successfully totally wipe out the Republic). Luke's new Jedi Order has failed - wiped out. Darth Vader's legacy has proven inescapable, his redemption and return to the light (and rebirth as Anakin Skywalker) has proven futile and meaningless. None of the lessons of his life have been past one, his grandson has instead fallen just as deeply as he ever did and has helped draw tyranny back over the galaxy.

The only person/people doing anything about this are Leia and the Resistance. It is worth reflecting that Leia's treatment in TFA should, in my opinion, have triggered at least as much gnashing of teeth and wailing as Luke's in TLJ.

Leia, the steadfast believer in democracy, the champion of the republic, the woman who has repeatedly risked life and limb and family, suffered unimaginable loss in service of restoring the republic, has left/been forced out of politics and decided to take up arms rather than rely on the very democracy she built.

Holy fuck. This is like if Thomas Jefferson/Nelson Mandela (or pick whichever founder of democracy you prefer) was forced out of retirement to lead another war of independence against the English/NP because James Madison/Thabo Mbeki and congress/parliament had just failed dismally to prevent them from coming back and conquering a chunk of the country.

How badly has the democratic experiment, the dream of freedom, failed if this is what Leia has settled on as the best course of action?

The film ends with with ambivalent personal success/tragedy amidst devastating strategic and systemic loss. Sure, Starkiller base is destroyed but not before the ENTIRE Republic is wiped out. The First Order still has its fleet. No one (meaningful) is left to defy them. Han Solo is dead (killed by his son/naive belief that love and family matters). Kylo Ren is injured but not in a way that matters.

Where ANH's ending is unambiguously triumphant, TFA's ending is bleak. The Rebellion were ascendent, had scored an incredibly meaningful victory, the 3 heroes lived and grew, and their success would engender further support. TFA's ends with no one left to support the Resistance and the main characters traumatised and brutalised. Even Rey finally finding Luke turns out to be a source of misplaced optimism.

Contrast ESB and TLJ - the ESB opens with the Rebels seemingly well equipped and competent. Luke has been promoted, sure he has a brush with death and Hoth is a net loss for the Rebellion but the key messages of the first act are that the trio is more tightly bound and competent then ever, Luke is coming into his powers (with more training to come), and while the Empire won at Hoth it is an empty victory. The Rebellion at large survives and escapes. Vader (and the Empire) are left with nothing but the sight of their foes escaping.

TLJ opens (and this continues throughout the entire movie) with the Resistance on the brink of annihilation, with no resources or allies. Poe's gamble is (spot a theme?) individually heroic but strategically devastating. There is a lot of dialogue dedicated to this point. The whole chase plot is a long exercise in the Resistance bleeding off fuel, lives, ships to keep the First Order off their back in the hope that once they get to Crait their allies will arrive. This of course doesn't happen.

The Canto Bight/hacker/infiltrating the dreadnought plot line has... a lot going on. For me what sticks out is the implication that a) both sides are kinda the same (in as much as the weapons dealers are selling to both the Resistance/Republic and the First Order) b) that none of this matters. The war doesn't matter to the rich in the casino or the poor stable hands or the horse things or really at all. Life continues on as is (despite literal Space Nazis about to take over the galaxy). The whole plot line is itself a shaggy dog ie it takes fucking ages and goes in circles and ultimately adds nothing to the story, nor do the characters achieve anything... except individual heroics. Finn gets a hell yeah moment vs Phasma but nothing they do has any bearing on the outcome of the wider chase.

Instead, after dozens of lines of dialogue about how hot headed individual heroics aren't the answer, how we all need to pull together, this is resolved by one woman undertaking a kamikaze bombing run.

What we are being told is very different to what we are being shown.

Rey and Kylo and Luke. The best acted and (for me) most rewarding scenes to watch. Everything on Ach-To and in Snoke's throne room is great to watch.

What is the idea that these scenes and plot attempt to articulate?

Who fucking knows. In isolation I think there is some great stuff - Rey being revealed as just Rey, with nobody parents (which is echoed in the final shot of the movie when the stable hand uses the force). Anyone can be a hero. There is no divine lineage.

Cool, love it. It is also deeply individualistic. It is very "pull enough bootstraps and even a waif from Jakku can become a Jedi". Rey's success, ultimately, comes from ceasing to rely on Luke and just going it alone (which confusingly is also what Luke did but Luke now thinks that bad and he tells Rey that. There is a lot of dialogue about how one hero cant solve the world's evil with a swing of their sword and yet the movie contradicts that message by having Rey go off and do just that - and very nearly succeed in this film, and then definitively succeed in the next).

Even Kylo (who yes is the bad guy so maybe we are meant to think poorly of him and his choices) serves himself over anyone else. Bad guy behaviour, yes. But how are we meant to read his rejection of Rey? Rey tried to do the "good " thing and save him with love, convince him to work for the betterment of the galaxy, and that strategy failed.

Should she just have swung her sword? Is that the point?

Crait is a series of scenes that definitely happened. In isolation the confrontation between Luke and Kylo is some of my favorite Star Wars ever.

But are we meant to conclude that doing the right thing is ultimately performative, at best a trick, that doesn't actually do much? Sure, in this instance, it gave the Resistance the opportunity to fight another day but it can't actually be sued to combat evil.

It is also worth recognising that the whole long chase to Crait was a failure. The whole point was buying time so the Resistance could get somewhere they could call for help and wait for their allies.

Those allies never show. The Resistance is alone in the Galaxy.

The ending is again one of ambiguous personal triumph and tragedy (yay we all won our various 1 v 1 boss fights but Luke died along with like every other named character) & devastating strategic loss.

The First Order lost the "Fleet Killer" and the dreadnaught but the rest of the fleet is fine. The Supreme Leader is dead, long live the Supreme Leader.

Rey has some books though.

Even the last shot contrasts so starkly with the last shot of ESB. ESB gave us Luke and Leia, together, looking at the bright centre of the galaxy, with hope for the future and a plan to rescue Han.

They have come back together as a group, a family, and that is where their hope lies.

TLJ gives us a poor kid, by himself (and abused? weren't these kids living in the stables?) using his incredible natural talent to help him sweep faster.

That is a deliberately cynical take, I know, but I don't think excessively so. Are we meant to believe he will escape his lot in life and become a Jedi? How? That being force sensitive will make it better somehow? I don't know.

It is superficially a great shot (the first time I saw TLJ it was my favorite scene in the whole film) but it is incredibly shallow. It also - even optimistically - is deeply individualistic.

TROS - who even knows but I will focus on the how the ending differs to ROTJ in a few key ways.

Rey 1 v 1 solos Palpatine, which doesn't work until she gets the avatar power up and decides where one one sword failed two will work (which they do) and dies in the attempt (or is dying? She isn't well). Ben (who has now come back to the light because Rey killed him then saved him then he hallucinated his dad) then sacrifices his own life to save hers.

Luke 1 v 1 solos Vader (high diff until Vader makes a yo sista joke and Luke gets the anger buff, then low diff) and then spares him. Then he throws away his weapon. Palpatine is then killing him and Vader chooses to save his son, in so doing comes back to the light, and kills Palpatine. He then dies in Luke's arms.

There are several key differences that are important. Vader becoming Anakin good is a function of him choosing to do good. ie he actually DOES SOMETHING HELPFUL and it is that choice, that action that makes him good. Goodness is an outcome of good actions. Kylo Ren becomes Ben Solo because he decides to. Him sacrificing himself for Rey comes AFTER he has already become good (and goodness is defined seemingly as a state of being or mindset rather than an emergent outcome from the choices you make and actions you undertake).

Vader becomes good. Ben Solo... identifies as good?

Vader's choice to do good, Vader once again becoming Anakin, is what saves the galaxy. HIs choice to do good (save his son) is the same choice that defeats the Emperor (yeet).

Anakin's choice to do good has huge, objective, explicit utility. It is deeply personal and selfish because Anakin is incapable of being otherwise but it does actually save the galaxy. He saves his son and in so doing saves everyone.

Ben Solo's sacrifice is purely personal - saving Rey is clearly a good thing but it doesn't solve any wider problem. It didn't defeat the Emperor. It happens after he is already gone. It is (charitably) a selfless and heroic and good act but it doesn't achieve much in the grander sense.

It is also a deeply personal, individual sacrifice and reward. One person died, one person lived, and ti was meaningful to them even if it didn't really matter in the grand scheme.

Luke throws away his lightsaber. Rey draws a second one. Luke knows that evil is not defeated by killing, evil is defeated when people (good or even more importantly bad) choose to do good. He knows it's a gamble but it's the only shot they have.

And it works. Luke's decision to be peaceful, to use the Force for knowledge and defence actually WORKS in ROTJ, in a way that it does not in TLJ.

Rey defeats evil by duel wielding. Evil not being defeated? More lightsabers.

The other key difference is of course a slightly meta one. Luke (or so we believed for 36 years) did actually defeat evil. We knew that. We believed that. He triumphed over evil, he had his friends with him, the future was bright.

We have no reason to believe Rey actually achieved anything. In fact, we should probably expect that the return of evil is inevitable and the galaxy has no real means of fending that off or defeating it. In fact Palpatine himself might be back. And if not him, Mace Windu's nephew or Pro Koon's cousin, or Dooku's grandson or someone similar will become evil.

The last shot of ROTJ is Luke at a celebration with his friends, who are in love, looking at the ghosts of the past and smiling because he believes the future is bright.

The last shot of TROS is Rey, alone, on the worst planet in the galaxy, on the site of at least 2 incredible tragedies, smiling at the ghosts of the past because... it's no longer their problem? None of their family or friends are alive but don't worry this young woman who you have know for about a year (remember, TFA and TLJ all take place over the course of a few days total, and the TROS is less than a year after TLJ) has taken your surname.

What is Rey's triumph? It is again, one of personal transformation and experience. She becomes a Skywalker, she self identifies, she moves past her heritage as a Palpatine. This is all good and I am happy for her but it once again is an individual success amongst systemic loss.

Yes, Lando got a bunch of people to help, and Palpatine is taking his regularly scheduled nap. But that isn't what the film centers on and we have no reason to believe any of this will last.

I am not convinced any of this is necessarily what Disney intended (although the theme of individual experience being the only good does tie into their broader messaging across all their IPs, please see the linked article earlier in this post) but it is certainly a conclusion you can draw from their films.

i think the key difference between george lucas’s star wars and disney’s star wars is that lucas is a man with an ideology. someone with a point of view, and all that entails. which comes with ideas of revolution, anti-imperialism, challenging the status quo, cultural appropriation and racist stereotypes. complex and contradictory ideas because that’s how artists are: complex and complicated people. disney is not. disney is a corporation. a corporation can’t have ideology, because ideology defeats the purpose of profit. and when the only thing you do is to turn on the movie manufacturing machine before you sit down and plan what ideas are you trying to convey to the audience, then your results are going to be washed out corporate garbage. and because when you’re a giant corporation who only cares about selling to the widest audience possible, you can’t take sides. you can’t decide on an idea. because you want to sell your product to people who are on the entire political spectrum. which results in movies without ideology, without purpose, without soul.