extreme right case does not belong in court

Is invited by the most bizarre cases in recent European history,
beginning this week in the Netherlands, one that indirectly also for
South Africa is important. This is the case against the notorious
extremist-right politician Mr. Geert Wilders.

He is charged with groepsbelediging of Muslims and incitement to
hatred and discrimination. It is based on various public statements
from him in which he compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf,
that prohibited most Muslims want to deport and build mosques appears.

The case is even more bizarre because the public prosecutor's office
Wilders in the first place would not be prosecuted simply because the
considered opinion that he was not in any wetsoortreding guilty.
Following a petition by a group of academics and students, the
Amsterdam prosecutor to the Supreme Court (in a step that South Africa
would be unheard of) tasked to Wilders still complaining.

Some observers are predicting that the prosecutor at the end of the
case itself justification for Wilders asked.

The Dutch constitution - unlike that of South Africa - indeed no
mention of hate speech. What freedom of speech in our hate-speech to
convert the element of violence, but the Dutch Constitution is silent
about it.

The only ground that the prosecutor would have been possible with
Article 1, which is equality before the law field and discrimination
"because of religion, belief, political affiliation, race, sex or on
any grounds whatsoever" prohibited. Wilders encouraged, as was argued
could be because of people to discriminate.

The case comes before the week in which the Dutch coalition government
finally, more than four months after the election, is formed. This is
a unique construction, a minority government by Wilders's party
"patient" will be in exchange for significantly tighter rules on
immigration and integration of Muslims.

The case became even stranger when Wilders's lawyer, Bram Moszkowicz,
Judge Jan Moors asked to withdraw. When it became clear to him Wilders
on his right to remain silent action and not testify, the judge even
said something as critical of Wilders could be interpreted.

A separate bench that was hastily called hearing, but it was rejected.
"Curiouser and curiouser" as Alice in Wonderland experienced. Whatever
the legalities, it's clear that this was a political blunder of the
first order is to prosecute Wilders. As if the public party political
debate by a judiciary can be decided.

Do not make no mistake, Wilders is a real Rottevanger of Hamelin with
a complex problem with simple and fairly extreme methods to approach.
His "solutions" for example, will not only violate Dutch law, but also
several European conventions that the Netherlands was signed.

Moreover, he stigmatize all Muslims as sly, dishonest, indescribably
power-hungry and out to Europe and walk down to the Islam issue. Many
studies that highlight that only a significant minority of his
karikatuurbeeld met and that they most fairly good or very good
change, ignore it.

Through his offensive remarks he really Muslims at a lot of chasing
and let radikaliseer. Limited extent does it already.

But that does not mean that Wilders's statements, the simplistic and
insulting even, part of the harshness with which political debates are
increasingly also in Europe, fought it. It's unfortunate, but it is
so.

A mature democracy is indeed characterized by co recognizing the
rights of even those whose pronouncements your disgust. No wonder that
many highly regarded lawyers their doubts about the court expressed
it. It will be extremely interesting to the conduct of the trial
continue to follow because the judge's eventual ruling will largely
determine the political debate in the Netherlands.

It would be a pity if this debate hofsale conducted and should be
resolved. It does not belong there.

Afrikaans won't die without a huge fight

Afrikaans is still in his life extinct, Breyten Breytenbach has said
this week. Too pessimistic?

The last decades, a new academic field developed taalsosiologie, the
ups and downs of languages ​​in their political and socio-economic
context. When languages ​​die out, and what conditions they must meet
in order to thrive?

Let's look at two examples in Europe, one of a dying language and one
in decline, but saved. It is Occitan, mainly in southern France spoke,
and his sister language across the Pyrenees, Catalonia.

Occitan was the Middle Ages a flourishing language with a rich
treasure of literature and songs. It is even at the court of the pope
in Avignon spoken in the decades that the Vatican was settled.

Until the 18th century French mother tongue of only a large minority
in France, but other languages ​​are passively tolerated. After 1700
the French government actively running at the expense of other
languages ​​promoted, and the other in the death process begins
printing.

If you somewhere in life would come, as you progress on the social
learning or would like to be rich, you had to be French. The language
of the state administration, schools and universities were only
French.

The consequences were disastrous Occitan. Where in 1900 another 10
million first language speakers Occitan was the census of 1999 showed
that there were over 610 000 - all speak French too, and almost
everyone over 40.

Occitan is burnt out. The reason is that his higher functions lost and
without economic utility. It is no longer a language of prestige can
be gained.

Just across the border, it now significantly better with Catalan, the
language in Catalonia and its capital, Barcelona, ​​is spoken. Like
Catalan Occitan were in the Middle Ages a thriving language with a
rich treasure of cultural goods.

But in 1700 was ordained that no official document is written in
Catalan may be. And during the dictatorship of Gen.. Francisco Franco
(1936-1975), Catalan and other minority languages ​​as dialects
considered immature and Spanish at the expense of the other promotion.
Catalonia has gone quickly kreeftegang. Its use in state institutions,
including schools and universities, are prohibited.

What it has done the demographics are unknown - the first taalsensus
is only done in 1975 and then to Barcelona limited. Today there are,
depending on your definition, between 7 and 9 million Catalan speakers
first language television and radio stations, newspapers, magazines
and books in that language.

The University of Barcelona, ​​with the support of the regional
government, Catalonia unashamedly, without other languages ​​at once.

The story of Occitan and Catalan illustrates how a language can die or revived.

The taalsosioloog Joshua Fishman has eight stages in taalsterfte
identified. Afrikaans, it seems, is in the transition from stage one
to two, fortunately far from dead. But Afrikaans is being driven
slowly into the abyss.

In this process, the retention or loss of Afrikaans's higher functions
as a cultural, academic, government and commercial language an
important role.

It is against this background that the hazard lights flashing for
Afrikaans by the way the University, despite the solemn pledges,
hopelessly English.

The tragedy of the situation is that those in the university authority
for verengelsingsproses responsible, can not or will see that the
program's ultimate African funeral planned. All the fine words about
how Afrikaans will be cherished, means just about a round zero while
the practical actions the opposite effect.

Parallel education to the process to a standstill, if the will exists.
All suggest that the slow back on Bosch will not succeed.

Either way, Afrikaans to the U.S. and elsewhere must undergo it
without a huge fight to be. We do owe to our mother.

Capitalism is not a silver bullet

When the Iron Curtain in 1989 split, the capitalist battle cry: This
is the final proof that socialism is bankrupt and that the future
belongs to capitalism!

Now that capitalism itself in a crisis, the sound battle cry the
opposite direction: This is proof that capitalism does not work!

That capitalism in the worst crisis since the early thirties of the
last century, is certain.

I'm not sure South Africans know exactly how close Europe - and with
it the rest of the world - currently the abyss moved, I would count
two millimeters is not too far out.

But let a man in the reflection on these matters only with a different
starting position: Do the world a view not ideological.

I define an ideology as a thought structure that you prescribe what
reality should look like, instead of the fact that he himself declared
lit.

An example: When I was in 1989 the first time in the former East
Germany, wash the air pollution intensity of all the stinking smoke,
caused by the low-grade lignite that the elektrisiteitsentrales
driven. But no, according to the prevailing communist ideology was
environmental pollution exclusively a problem of capitalism, it could
not under socialism happen.

And so I lied to my nose. And I was just imagining that my eyes
watered and my throat burned.

So, again: Do not look at the world ideologically. Use only your
sober, common sense.

Apartheid was such an ideology. And capitalism can be.

An example: As a half decade ago, the buzzword in Europe
privatization. In the Netherlands, including the privatized railways.

But the whole business is to sell one private company, without
competitors operate. And so many unprofitable routes closed, and put
certain communities without or with inadequate rail transport.

Service has almost disappeared as a motive and was replaced by an
almost exclusive focus on profit.

Well, profit is not a curse word. If a company does not make any
profit, he played bankrupt, and we can all along the street sat
begging.

But the one-sided focus on profit has a negative effect.

The books look better and the price to rise is excessive bonuses paid
to all managers.

For at least some of those people bonuses - their wallet - become more
important as the company where they work or service to the business
society must provide.

It was one of the main causes of the credit crisis of 2008, which
itself has an underlying role in the current financial crisis plays.

Now we go a step further. You, dear reader, is the breadwinner in a
family, say, R20 000 per month net to bring home. You do not want
within that limit live, you take too much of all luxuries. And so will
give you R22 000 per month.

If you do not want to rob bank, you need each month R2 000 loan. It's
money with interest to be repaid, and if your behavior does not
change, you will sooner or later bankrupt.

That's what many countries in the world happened.

Countries such as Greece and Italy for many years beyond their
capability lived, their deficit still be increased, with the result
that they are so close to bankruptcy as dammit to a swear word.

America do the same, and the process under Pres. Barack Obama even accelerate.

What does it all for capitalism? It says that capitalism is no magic
formula is, that one is still common sense to use.

The free market approach is correct. But as Adam Smith (1723-1790)
have learned, it must be accompanied by shared interests of rich and
poor, employers and employees, governments and citizens. Other cases
go wrong. Like now.

)? The author is Media24's correspondent in Europe.

Onder Konstruksie

Hierdie webwerf is onder konstruksie. Wees asb. geduldig!