(TRANSLATED VERSION OF AN ENGLISH ARTICLE THAT I HAVE POSTED PREVIOUSLY)
Dit blyk ‘n algemene houding te wees onder meeste Suid-Afrikaners: Amerikaanse politiek is ‘n buitelandse, volksvreemde konsep wat ons as Suid-Afrikaners nie in die minste interesseer nie. Sommige stel dit reguit: “Ek weet nie, en ek gee nie om nie.” Toegegee, Amerikaanse politiek is tog presies dit; politieke kwessies in ‘n land wat letterlik aan die ander kant van die aardbol is. Maar wat meeste mense miskyk, is dat elke politieke besluit en gebeurtenis in the Verenigde State ‘n verreikende rippel-effek het: op die wêreld as ‘n geheel, en op Suid-Afrika self.
Van spesiale belang is die buitelandse beleid van die Withuis. U sal vind dat die Demokrate en Republikeine uiters verskillende buitelandse beleide en manifeste het. Die een wat ons die meeste raak is hulle beleid wat handel met die Afrika kontinent. Hoe reageer hulle op onstabiliteit in Afrika? Wat het hulle ingedagte vir skuldvergewing en hulppakkette vir ontwikkelende lande? Aan die einde van die dag beinvloed al hierdie kwessies Suid-Afrika self. Nader aan die huis: hoe beskou die VSA Suid-Afrika se onlangse vorming van die sterk bande met China? Hoe kan dit handel beinvloed tussen die VSA en Suid-Afrika, indien enigsens?
Nog ‘n baie belangrike faktor is die verhoudings tussen die VSA en lande in die Midde-Ooste. Afgesien van vrede en stabiliteit in die area (wat sodoende vrede en stabiliteit in die res van die wêreld direk beinvloed), moet mens opweeg hoe verskeie beleide en aksies ekonomiese faktore kan beinvloed, soos byvoorbeeld oliepryse. Dink u steeds dat Amerikaanse politiek niks met ons as Suid-Afrikaners te doen het nie? Wat van petrolpryse? Ons voel dit definitief aan ons sak op ‘n daaglikse basis, en dit hou direk verband met wat ookal in die olie-produserende lande aangaan op die oomblik.
Maar ons kan ook kyk na die Amerikaanse ekonomiese beleid. Hoe beinvloed die Amerikaanse regering se ekonomiese plan die welstand en uitgee-gewoontes van die gemiddelde Amerikaner? Hoe beinvloed dit Amerikaanse werkskepping? U kan wel vra hoe die bogenoemde ons in Suid-Afrika raak. Om ‘n voorbeeld te gee: as die gemiddelde Amerikaner nie kan bekostig om items te koop wat vanaf Suid-Afrika ingevoer is nie, of items wat geproduseer word met Suid-Afrikanse materiale, beinvloed dit baie beslis die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie. Om die beurt raak dit ons uitvoermaatskappye en hulle werknemers, en sodoende hulle welstand en uitgee-gewoontes. Sien u hoe dit ‘n eindelose sirkel is?
Waarop dit alles neerkom, is eenvoudig: dinge wat vir ons as “ver weg en onbelangrik” voorkom, affekteer ons direk.
Vanuit ‘n ander oogpunt, kan ons ook baie leer by die Amerikaanse politiek. Die VSA het ‘n volwasse en lang-bestaande demokrasie, en ‘n baie komplekse politieke stelsel. Hulle het n presidensiële stelsel, waar ons n parlementêre stelsel het (Suid-Afrika het n twee-kamer parlementêre stelsel, wat bestaan uit die Nasionale Vergadering en die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies). Maar baie van die konsepte en praktyke is dieselfde regoor altwee stelsels, en heel bruikbaar in ander regerings. My persoonlike gunsteling is die “filibuster”, wat letterlik beteken om ‘n wet “weg te praat”. Wanneer ‘n kontroversiële wetsontwerp gedebatteer word in die Amerikaanse Huis van Verteenwoordigers, kan ‘n verteenwoordiger ‘n toespraak maak sonder enige tydsbeperking en sodoende die sessie vir ure ophou. Dit kan aangevul word met punte van orde, reaksies, vrae, antwoorde, en dies meer – wat die Huis skedule (en sodoende die stemproses) omver werp. Dit mag dalk voorkom as ‘n skelm taktiek, maar dit kan baie handig wees. Mens dink veral aan ons eie parlementêre debat oor die omstrede wetsontwerp vir die beskerming van staatsinligting. Ja, sommige mense kan redeneer dat dit net die onvermydelike sou uitstel, maar dit sou wel ons opposisie-partye waardevolle tyd gee om ander wetlike roetes te ondersoek.
Nou is ‘n goeie tyd om geinteresseerd te wees in Amerikaanse politiek. President Obama het, soos waargeneem op 27 November, ‘n goedkeuringspersentasie van 44%. As mens in ag neem dat hy sy presidensiële termyn begin het met ‘n goedkeuringspersentasie van 65%, behoort dit ‘n teken te wees dat ‘n baie interessante stemwerwingsproses voorlê vir 2012 (die Amerikaanse presidensiële verkiesing vind plaas gedurende November 2012). Om ‘n basiese idee te gee van hoe die Amerikaanse verkiesingsproses werk: elke party het kandidate wat probeer om die party se presidensiële kandidaat te wees tydens die November-verkiesing. Om vas te stel wie die party se kandidaat sal wees, word staat “primaries” en “caucuses”* gehou aan die begin van die verkiesingsjaar. Afhangende van die betrokke staat se verkiesingswette, kan geregistreerde kiesers vir 'n kandidaat stem in die staat se “primary” of “caucus”. Elke staat het ‘n vasgestelde aantal verteenwoordigers wat vir die wenner van die “primary/caucus” stem in die party se nasionale konferensie, wat plaasvind in Junie of Julie. Die Demokrate en Republikeine het elk hul eie nasionale konferensie, waar die finale party-kandidaat verkies en aangekondig word.
Daar is ‘n paar dinge wat mens kan opweeg in die opkomende Amerikaanse verkiesing:
1) President Obama is die sittende president. Geskiedenis wys dat die sittende president ‘n voordeel het in meeste verkiesings.
2) Ons moet noukeurig kyk na die Republikeinse kandidate, en hoe hulle vaar in die “primaries/caucuses”. Die Republikeine het in 2008 ‘n fout begaan deur John McCain as presidentskandidaat te kies, en hy het op sy beurt nog ‘n groter fout begaan deur Sarah Palin as sy adjunk te kies.
3) En laastens moet ons aandag gee aan die buitelandse en ekonomiese beleide van die kandidate, en in ag neem hoe dit ons as Suid-Afrikaners kan beinvloed.
Kom ons kyk hoe dit alles verloop. Die “primaries” begin 3 Januarie met die Iowa “caucus” en eindig 26 Junie met die Utah “primary”.
Indien u belangstel om te sien hoe die Amerikaanse verkiesingsproses verloop deur die volgende jaar, maar nie tyd het om die nuus te probeer opspoor op buitelandse nuus-netwerke nie, kan u my volg op Twitter, waar ek opsommende bywerkings sal pos soos dit plaasvind.
Volg my op Twitter: @ReanOpperman
* Ek het nie die woorde "primary" en "caucus" in Afrikaans vertaal nie, aangesien dit Amerikaanse konsepte is waarvan die betekenis meerendeels wegval sodra dit vertaal word.
Thursday, 1 December 2011
Tuesday, 29 November 2011
US politics: Why South Africans should care
It seems to be the general consensus among most South Africans that US politics is a foreign concept (well, they have that half-right, at least) that doesn't interest them in the slightest. Some state it quite explicitly: "I don't know, and I don't care." Granted, upon first impression, US politics is just that... US politics. Issues in a nation that is quite literally on the other side of the globe. But what most people seem to miss is that almost every political decision and outcome in the United States has a far-reaching ripple effect: on the world as a whole, and on South Africa itself.
Of special interest is the foreign policy of the White House. You'll find that Democrats and Republicans have vastly different foreign policies. The one we're most (but certainly not exclusively) concerned with is their policy on Africa. How do they respond to instability in the African continent? What do they have in mind in terms of debt relief and aid packages for impoverished countries? At the end of the day, all of these issues have an effect on South Africa. And closer to home: how do they view the recent kindling of South Africa's strong ties with China? How will it affect trade between the United States and South Africa, if it affects it at all?
Another very deciding factor is US relations with countries in the Middle-East. Apart from stability and peace in the region (and subsequently the rest of the world), one has to consider how various policies and actions can affect straight-forward things like oil prices, embargoes, and the like. Still think it has nothing to do with us? How about fuel prices? We certainly feel that on a daily basis, and it's quite directly tied to whatever's happening in the oil-providing regions at any given moment.
Moving away from foreign policy, one can just as well take a good look at the US economic policy. How does the US administration's economic plan affect the spending habits of the American people? How does it affect American job creation and sustainability - which, by the way, in turn affects their spending habits? Now, you may well ask how their spending habits affect South Africa. To give one example: if the average American can't afford to buy items that are imported from South Africa, or items that are made from materials imported from South Africa, it hurts the South African market. This, in turn, hurts the companies that export, their employees, and subsequently their spending habits. See how this becomes an endless circle?
The moral of the story is quite simple: things that may seem far away and removed from our everyday lives do in fact affect us directly, in one way or another.
But from another angle, we can also learn quite a bit from US politics. They have a long-established democracy and a very complex political system. Granted, they have a presidential system instead of a parliamentary system (South Africa has a bicameral parliamentary system, meaning the parliament consists of two houses; in our case, the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces), but some concepts and practices are uniform across all government systems, and quite usable in different governments. My personal favourite would be the "filibuster", which literally means "talking out a bill". When a controversial bill is being debated in the House, a member of the House can in some cases request to have the floor with no time limit, and tie the proceedings up for hours with a random speech. This can be interspaced with questions, points of order, responses and the like, and can disrupt the House schedule (and subsequently, the voting process) considerably. While this may seem like a devious tactic, something like this would've come in handy during our very own parliamentary debate on the Protection of State Information bill. Yes, some can argue that it would be a case of postponing the inevitable, but it gives opposition parties valuable time to pursue other legal avenues.
This is indeed a good time to be interested in US politics. President Obama has, as of 27 November, an approval rating of 44%. Considering that he started his presidential term with an approval rating of about 65%, this should make for interesting campaigning during the next year (the US presidential election takes place during November 2012). I'm not going into the whole election process in detail, but let's just cover the basics. Each party will have candidates battling for the party's one candidacy. In other words, who the party puts on the ballot in November. In order to decide who gets the party candidacy, state caucuses and primaries are held between January and June in the election year. Depending on the election laws of the specific state, registered voters can vote for a candidate during their state's primary or caucus (there's a slight difference between a primary and a caucus, that we won't go into now). Each state has a predetermined number of delegates, and whoever wins the primary/caucus will have those delegates vote for them in the National Convention, that takes place in June/July. The Republicans and Democrats each have their own National Convention, where (by the use of delegates), a final party candidate is chosen and announced. These "final" candidates then appear on the ballot in November.
Sounds a bit confusing, I know. But then, I did mention they have a very complex political system. There are a few things to consider for the upcoming US elections:
1) President Obama is the incumbent president. History shows that the incumbent has an advantage in most elections.
2) One should have a very close look at the Republican candidates, and how they fare in the primaries. In 2008, the Republicans made a blunder by nominating John McCain to run against Obama. It would be interesting to see who clinches the nomination this time. One can only hope it's not Donald Trump (I wish I was kidding - he hasn't explicitly ruled out running for President yet).
3) And finally, but most importantly - we should have a look at especially the foreign and economic policies of the candidates, and consider how they will affect us.
Let's see how it pans out during the next year. The primaries/caucuses begin on January 3rd with the Iowa caucus, and ends on June 26th with the Utah primary.
When I initially planned this article, it wasn't my intention to go into a breakdown of the US election system (as I have done in almost the entire second half of this article), but I realised that in order to fully understand the point, some background would be beneficial. If you've read this far, thank you for bearing with me.
If you're interested in seeing how the US election process goes this coming year, but don't want to follow the primaries and caucuses that closely, I'll be providing summarising updates on my Twitter feed (@ReanOpperman) during the primaries and conventions.
Of special interest is the foreign policy of the White House. You'll find that Democrats and Republicans have vastly different foreign policies. The one we're most (but certainly not exclusively) concerned with is their policy on Africa. How do they respond to instability in the African continent? What do they have in mind in terms of debt relief and aid packages for impoverished countries? At the end of the day, all of these issues have an effect on South Africa. And closer to home: how do they view the recent kindling of South Africa's strong ties with China? How will it affect trade between the United States and South Africa, if it affects it at all?
Another very deciding factor is US relations with countries in the Middle-East. Apart from stability and peace in the region (and subsequently the rest of the world), one has to consider how various policies and actions can affect straight-forward things like oil prices, embargoes, and the like. Still think it has nothing to do with us? How about fuel prices? We certainly feel that on a daily basis, and it's quite directly tied to whatever's happening in the oil-providing regions at any given moment.
Moving away from foreign policy, one can just as well take a good look at the US economic policy. How does the US administration's economic plan affect the spending habits of the American people? How does it affect American job creation and sustainability - which, by the way, in turn affects their spending habits? Now, you may well ask how their spending habits affect South Africa. To give one example: if the average American can't afford to buy items that are imported from South Africa, or items that are made from materials imported from South Africa, it hurts the South African market. This, in turn, hurts the companies that export, their employees, and subsequently their spending habits. See how this becomes an endless circle?
The moral of the story is quite simple: things that may seem far away and removed from our everyday lives do in fact affect us directly, in one way or another.
But from another angle, we can also learn quite a bit from US politics. They have a long-established democracy and a very complex political system. Granted, they have a presidential system instead of a parliamentary system (South Africa has a bicameral parliamentary system, meaning the parliament consists of two houses; in our case, the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces), but some concepts and practices are uniform across all government systems, and quite usable in different governments. My personal favourite would be the "filibuster", which literally means "talking out a bill". When a controversial bill is being debated in the House, a member of the House can in some cases request to have the floor with no time limit, and tie the proceedings up for hours with a random speech. This can be interspaced with questions, points of order, responses and the like, and can disrupt the House schedule (and subsequently, the voting process) considerably. While this may seem like a devious tactic, something like this would've come in handy during our very own parliamentary debate on the Protection of State Information bill. Yes, some can argue that it would be a case of postponing the inevitable, but it gives opposition parties valuable time to pursue other legal avenues.
This is indeed a good time to be interested in US politics. President Obama has, as of 27 November, an approval rating of 44%. Considering that he started his presidential term with an approval rating of about 65%, this should make for interesting campaigning during the next year (the US presidential election takes place during November 2012). I'm not going into the whole election process in detail, but let's just cover the basics. Each party will have candidates battling for the party's one candidacy. In other words, who the party puts on the ballot in November. In order to decide who gets the party candidacy, state caucuses and primaries are held between January and June in the election year. Depending on the election laws of the specific state, registered voters can vote for a candidate during their state's primary or caucus (there's a slight difference between a primary and a caucus, that we won't go into now). Each state has a predetermined number of delegates, and whoever wins the primary/caucus will have those delegates vote for them in the National Convention, that takes place in June/July. The Republicans and Democrats each have their own National Convention, where (by the use of delegates), a final party candidate is chosen and announced. These "final" candidates then appear on the ballot in November.
Sounds a bit confusing, I know. But then, I did mention they have a very complex political system. There are a few things to consider for the upcoming US elections:
1) President Obama is the incumbent president. History shows that the incumbent has an advantage in most elections.
2) One should have a very close look at the Republican candidates, and how they fare in the primaries. In 2008, the Republicans made a blunder by nominating John McCain to run against Obama. It would be interesting to see who clinches the nomination this time. One can only hope it's not Donald Trump (I wish I was kidding - he hasn't explicitly ruled out running for President yet).
3) And finally, but most importantly - we should have a look at especially the foreign and economic policies of the candidates, and consider how they will affect us.
Let's see how it pans out during the next year. The primaries/caucuses begin on January 3rd with the Iowa caucus, and ends on June 26th with the Utah primary.
When I initially planned this article, it wasn't my intention to go into a breakdown of the US election system (as I have done in almost the entire second half of this article), but I realised that in order to fully understand the point, some background would be beneficial. If you've read this far, thank you for bearing with me.
If you're interested in seeing how the US election process goes this coming year, but don't want to follow the primaries and caucuses that closely, I'll be providing summarising updates on my Twitter feed (@ReanOpperman) during the primaries and conventions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)