Bear in mind, t'other 'alf spent 10 years of his life there, from 12 to 22, so I cannot escape being reasonably conversant with the place. He still has family out there too.



The historical fact remains, though, that initial movements against apartheid were non-violewnt – this includes the ANC.

That changed when it became clear that the apartheid regime was not interested in any concessions whatsoever, and was entirely happy to kill even non-violent protestors.

In which case, how do you meet that behaviour if you do not wish to give up your struggle?

Well, according to Maggie.



This is meaningless nonsense, Sal.

Nobody has ever claimed it.

The historical fact, however, is that the ANC – which was founded in 1912, six years before Mandela's birth – was originally a specifically non-violent organisation. That changed only when it became clear that the apartheid regime was not for changing by any non-violent means.



That's a stupid question. Really, Sal, it is.

Those kaffirs – they should just have known their place, eh?

Which Michael Moynihan? The two I can find on Google wouldn't be able to construct a balanced analysis of anyone to the left of Mussolini.

It changed when the likes of Mandela took control - that should not be overlooked.

I ask again is the average life of a black in SA better now than it was despite the struggle - one thing is certain it is a far more violent society now than it was before the ANC took over. They may have the vote and equal rights but is their life better?

You need to read some actual history.

Mandela rose to prominence in the ANC's 1952 Defiance Campaign and was elected president of the Transvaal ANC branch.

Although initially being committed to non-violent protest, he co-founded (note the 'co' bit there) Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation) in 1961, leading a bombing campaign against government targets.

So what "control" of the ANC (as a whole) was this and when did it happen? I'll help.

Mandela was not the president of the ANC until 1991-1997. He was deputy president twice, between 1952 an 1958, and 1985 and 1991. He was never the secretary general of the ANC.

When MK was founded in 1961, the president of the ANC was Albert Luthuli. Deputy president was Oliver Tambo. Secretary general was Duma Nokwe.

I'm afraid that your "it changed when the likes of Mandela took control" is factually incorrect nonsense.

Incidentally, you are ignoring the opportunity to explain what you'd have done in similar circumstances – bow your head and tug your forelock, perhaps?



Well, there's certainly a black middle class that has emerged and developed, and is doing considerably better than before.

There are serious problems in South Africa, but it's fascinating that you consider that equal rights and access to the democratic process aren't really that important. Does this approach occur in all your thinking re politics, or just where black people are concerned? You're massively leaving yourself open to people interpreting what you've written as meaning that they should have known their place/were better off under the strong hand of the white man etc.

Bloody hell mate, did you really mean that?

There is corruption and violence in all society's so you need to be very careful of lumping the necklacing of innocent people with the aims of the Anti-apartheid movement.

I visited South Africa on a Rugby Tour in 2010 and took a tour to Robin Island prison. We were shown round by a former inmate. His crime, firing a rocket propelled grenade at a petrol tanker. It didn't go off. He got a life sentence for that. Why did he fire it? His pregnant girlfriend was killed by security forces enforcing apartheid.

Now that to me has got nothing to do with what kind of violent society South Africa is today or old tribal scores being settled.



And quite a few are genuine. Whether you can be genuine and not be a bit of a swine and assume power is an interesting question. Chavez may have lined his own pockets (I don't know if he did or he didn't) but whatever his faults I reckon his country and people are far better off than had the kind of pro-USA administration the US leadership wanted been installed instead.

That bit stood out for me, too. Wow.

Yes I did - is poverty amongst the black South Africans more now than under white rule, you only have to look at what happened to the taxi driver last week to see all is far from OK.

SA was my first ever overseas place to visit in 1973, cannot remember much about it as I was 16 and only wanted to get pi$$ed or layed (or both !!). Going next year to Gansbai and south of Durban for a diving holiday, so am hoping to see something of the place and maybe at 56, remember more of it.

And a 16-year-old young woman was stabbed to death on a bus in Birmingham this morning – shall we extrapolate that women were better off before they had to go to school?

Democracy is wonderful, but it doesn't necassarily stop people living in squalor or starving from lack of basic food. Would democracy mean the people of Cuba would be better off, currently they have better health care than we do, almost 100% literacy and enough food to live on and having stayed in Havana on a number of occasions, you rarely see them not smiling. All this is likely to go once a pro-American 'free' Cuba becomes reality and all the criminals, drug dealer etc that Castro allowed to 'emigrate' to America make a return.

I would argue that society in this country has gone backwards in the last decade and quality of life has suffered. Are we as humans happier than we were ten years ago - would you say culturally this country is moving forward?

That bad things still happen doesn't mean that black people were 'better off' being treated like animals by white people. That you would even suggest such a thing is mind-blowing.

That is one in this country compared to 40-50 every day in South Africa, the occurrences of rape - something you quite rightly hold dear - are rising annually. I ask again is the average black South African in a better place now than they were?

Do only black women get raped?

No, I wouldn't, culturally we are being more and more Americanised ... and not just Americanised but the dumb-end of Americanised.
But, as we were granted universal suffrage nearly a hundred years ago, I fail to see the correlation bwteen violent crime and democracy in the UK.

Well there you go - always willing to poke a stick at the politically correct lefties on here.

T'Other Half got back here in 1983 and wouldn't return until the end of apartheid. We went together then, in 1988 – my first real trip out of the country (I'm excluding four hours in Dieppe). We've been back together once since.

He still has family in Pietermaritzburg, so that was where we were based, although the first trip, we did quite a bit of travelling around.

It is very beautiful – but what I saw most of was also quite bonkers.

The Afrikaners are a right snotty lot in my experience – and stuck decades in the past. My faux pas on the first trip included buying a round when I considered it my shout and wearing football shirts. These are not things that respectable women do – in the case of the latter, that's the sport that the 'blecks' watch.

We had some really weird experiences – and I mean weird. On the second trip, the exchange rate meant that we could spend a week at a resort in the Drakensberg – which is an amazing area. It's a big, rather posh resort, and the majority of guests were Afrikaners, with a smattering of Europeans. The former will not talk to you – simple as.

The various Europeans chatted with each other, in a variety of pidgin tongues, and made that effort at informal pleasantries.

There were two bars. The cocktail one, which the Afrikaner guests used, we tried and then abandoned. Stilted, false, insanely quiet – the 'sports bar' was used by staff and almost entirely European guests and was a massively better place to be; sociable and with atmosphere.

After one trip, I read Tom Sharpe's first two novels – [iRiotous Assembly[/i and [iIndecent Exposure[/i. Sharpe had started writing shortly after being deported by the South African government of the day for sedition. Ex-Marines, he'd moved to SA in 1951 and was a teacher in Maritzburg. The books are a kind of vicious, angry revenge on the apartheid regime, which he came to be appalled by.

The extraordinary thing is that all the years in between don't stop you recognising Maritzburg itself – and I swear I actually met one of two of the characters, including one ex-school acquaintance of The Other Half's with whom I developed what was clearly an entirely mutual dislike.

I met him and some of his other old friends at a [ibraai[/i. They included the occasional religious fundamentalist, and – although none of them had ever supported apartheid, oh no – some of their comments suggested that, if they hadn't supported it, they'd certainly imbibed the core ideological point of superiority.

Mind, that [ibraai[/i was an experience in its own right. We were guests of honour, but I was expected to sit with the female relatives and children at one end, with no booze and in silence. I presume that they didn't talk because I was a stranger.

As I said, weird on so many levels.

Mind, I hate the f**king cockroaches!

Given the blacks make up 80% of the population it doesn't take a huge leap of faith to suggest that the majority of those subjected to rape will be black women. Maybe you are going to pull a rabbit out of the hat to suggest otherwise.

I'd say that this country has gone backwards in the last 30 years, as the income gap has widened, along with inequality; as job security has diminished and as the push and pressure for everyone to be überconsumers has grown.

Of course, under apartheid, that blonde broad might not have been shot to death by her crippled boyfriend.

Anything you fancy extrapolating from that?

While you're at it, perhaps levels of homophobia in, say, Jamaica, which result in rape and murder, would be removed if it was still ruled by the Empire that introduced the buggery laws?

As your society descends culturally the higher values of that society decrease - the way we treat each other our respect for other citizens reduces. I never suggested it had anything to do with democracy - it is about the culture of a country. Is black on black violence more prevalent now than it was under whites?

On the face it the drugs he was taking to remain a public figure and maintain all the millions he was earning had an affect - roid-rage, perhaps if he had relied on natural talent she might still be alive?

In Jamaica?

Who knows all superstition - the truth is you have no more idea than I do?

Of course not, you blithering idiot, but to suggest that an increase in sexual crimes means that black people would have been better off under apartheid is just bonkers. What needs to happen is that black people continue to have equal rights AND that instances of rape are reduced. There was probably a lot less unemployment amongst black people when white people were allowed to keep slaves. Maybe we should have left well alone, eh?

And if rape is increasing, it's likely to be increasing for all women. Of course, if there are more black women there will be more black victims, but that's really not the point.