Gwede Mantashe, ANC secretary general and communist showed us again this week just how politics and principle do often part ways.
Mantashe, regarded as an intellectual heavyweight and Marxist Leninist – who generaly do not believe in property rights - this week called on ANC’s trademarks, its intellectual property to be respected.
Reports the Sunday times:
‘ “The ruling party also turned to the courts this weekend in a bid to make life difficult for the breakaway party — by lodging an urgent interdict in the Pretoria High Court on Friday afternoon. It sought to restrain the national convention from using the name South African National Congress or SA National Convention or the acronym SANC because these were “confusingly similar” to the ANC.
ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe said in a 28-page affidavit that the splinter group’s proposed name would “confuse or deceive” the public, including donors and potential donors into believing that it was associated with the ANC.
Mantashe, who trumpeted the ANC’s achievements since its establishment in 1912 in his affidavit, said the conduct of former Gauteng premier Mbhazima Shilowa, Lekota and George, cited as respondents , amounted to “trademark infringement”. ‘
I’m sure Gwede will defend himself by saying we are in a capitalist system and therefore the ANC has to use bourgeois capitalist tools to defend itself. Fair enough. Mhambi likes practical communists.
Related deployments:
I fail to understand what point were you trying to drive home with this post and what is it you expected Mr Gwede Mantashe to do in the face of the Convention`s intended mischief.
What does this have to do with Mr Mantashe`s known intelligence and Marxist-Leninism?
Ligthen up Frank, the post was tongue in cheek.
I can fully understand the reason why the ANC feels the need to protect their – wait for it – ‘brand’. But it’s a little funny when a communist talks about protecting trademarks, don’t you think?
But the ANCYL sure beats Gwede with this claim reported on News 24!
The ANC Youth League wants the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) to stop breakaway leader Mosiuoa Lekota from referring to its president Julius Malema’s controversial “kill for Zuma” comments, saying it violated the league’s integrity.
“We believe that the continued allegations and utterances by Mr Lekota that the ANCYL or any of its members are potential murderers and/or assassins violate our rights to integrity as individual members of the ANCYL and as an organisation,” the league said in a statement on Monday.
PS: I like your blog.
Baie dankie Kameraad. Two quick ones:
1. Kameraad Mantashe is no communist. Being a member and/or leader of a party calling itself communist doesn`t necessarily make one a communist.
2. I am sure that even Kameraad Mantashe would be uncomfortable if he were to be called a communist.
Bonus. You may actually be more communist that our Kameraad Mantashe.
Dis ‘n plesier Kameraad Frank.
1. Joe Slovo and Chris Hani will turn in their graves if the leader of the SACP came out and said he was’nt a communist me thinks. Why be a member of the SACP if your not a communist??
2. I doubt it. And if he is uncomfortable with the label I’d suggest he join another party.
How come I am more communist? I am pro a plural multi-party democracy, on that point alone I can’t possibly be a communist. Furthermore I believe that a free market is the best way to allocate resources in most (but not all) of the economy.
But underlying what you say is an important point. Do we still need a SACP? Does anybody really believe in that discredited ideology? Should South Africa not get a social-democratic party to the left of the ANC? Now that’s a thought. Hope your reading this Jeremy Cronin.
I have personally been invited by a city councillor belonging to the SACP, to attend in her company, a so-called “virginity checking” ceremony, supposedly as part of checking the spread of AIDS.
The same person, when asked (after she invited me to join the Party) when the next stage of the revolution, i.e. to socialism, was scheduled, told me to join first and I would then be privy to plans for the future.
Needless to say I declined in both instances.