The theory behind democracy is that the collective population joins their fee thinking minds in order to elect a person who shall best serve them through the rule of governance. This theory works on a global scale and is essentially infallible as the governments of the independent nations are accountable to their people. So why then has this "democracy", which has been glorified to such an ideological status, left us as South Africans with such authoritarian ineptitude and near autocratic rule? Who are we to question the now all-powerful, all-caring, all-bullshit ANC? The people have spoken and now Jacob is dancing. Because it was all a democratic process we're hailed as the jewel of Africa, which is kind of like winning a gold at the special Olympics, but hey, we all love the Blade Runner right? Forget the corruption, forget the nepotism, and forget the fact that a song about a fully automatic weapon is slowly becoming our new national anthem. Out of just under 50 million people is this the best possible individual to lead this country? I think you can postulate as to what my answer shall be. So is our democratic process working? Is it as watertight as it claims to be? The single criteria that someone needs to fulfil in order to have their say is to be a South African citizen over 18 years of age, and that's a test even Julius could pass. I have a few different hypotheses about what should qualify a voter to mark his or her X, because at this point in time there is something very wrong about a system that allows this idiot to power, something very wrong indeed. And before I am chastised and labelled a racist colonialist for my suggestions please bear in mind one thing: the ANC is part of the tri-partite alliance. They are controlled by Blade Nzimande and his communist comrades, and ask North Koreans how that kind of democracy is working for them.

The country is run on the funds generated by taxes in all their illustrious forms of glory. In the last financial year of 2007/2008 the South African Revenue Service collected 599.3 billion rands through the various forms. This was contributed by 5 204 805 different individual's income tax and through about 3 million other institutions (Company tax, VAT, syntax etc.). The country is functional on a potential level purely fuelled by these contributions and thus is nothing without the 17% of the population that form the basis of the country's wealth. My proposal is that one vote is equivalent in weight to the amount of tax paid and thus their functional importance within the country. People who fail to chip in are still given a vote based on the amount of VAT they pay, so if youre downing crackling from the bottle and falling asleep in your own bile, then in practice your voice will still count. Think of it like a group of shareholders in a company. If a business wishes to grow, the valued players make informed decisions in order to ensure that gross income (or in this case our GDP) expands exponentially through correct procedure. However I do realise that this is open to criticism. The problem in SA is that realistically only 17% of people do pay tax and who is to say they wont make decisions that benefit themselves rather than the public as a whole. What about students? The vocal youth would condemn such an exercise and to be honest, rightfully so. It also disenfranchises the vast majority of our country and, with an unemployment rate of just under 40%, is practically unsound given our current climate. This is not to say once some sought of equality has been realised it would not be a brilliant implementation. It would force people to get a job instead of living through social grants and welfare and would reduce tax fraud dramatically. This country is being run on our, as taxpayers, money. It is our cash and this would give us a way to ensure it is handled properly, as opposed to the blatant malfeasance on the part of the current administration.

The logic applied behind the legal voting age being 18 is that by the time you reach this age you are educated enough to make some sought of informed rational decision. You have reached some level of social maturity and base your vote on facts and on a critical evaluation of the candidates. However this becomes grossly void when examining the South African demographic. Voters fall victim to propaganda, free t-shirts, free food and broken promises. The masses aren't concerned about about mis-treatment and poor delivery, theyre too focused on the past. What I propose is voting based on an educational level. For instance all that might be required is schooling on a basic secondary level so that true leaders are elected through rational thought as opposed to a blind following. The problem arises when we see that the average adult has only had 6.1 years of schooling and why would the ANC want to change that? They thrive off the fact that the majority of the country remains blissfully ignorant to their mismanagement. They have insisted on keeping the OBE structure that has proven the world over to be a dismal failure. They have failed to create free schooling and in most rural towns there are more than 40 pupils per teacher. This is a tragic situation with no real hope in sight. These poor people are being deprived of a basic human right and its abominably affecting the way our beautiful land is run. But the logic behind having to be 18 to vote does not change the real facts. Why not even a mandatory grade 9 degree? And why, if this is the case, can a straight ‘A' pupil who is aged 17 not play critical role in developing the nation? One year separates cognitive lateral thinking from an ANC voter who cant even spell ANC. How can one possibly justify giving a 56 year old man a vote who has never had any form of education and is not exposed to any media besides illicit propaganda, while a formally learned student with a grasp of macro socio-economics has no say? It is counter productive and exceptionally dysfunctional if you ask me. But then again how many vibrant politically aware youths will vote for the ANC without a staunch history of party loyalty? It simply just doesn't serve the government to implement strategies of this nature, however seemingly logical they may be!

Then you have the flip side of the coin. People who despise the notion of self-enriching politicians and take a humorous outpost as opposed to a serious one (what a novel idea). In Britain in 1981 a political movement began, known as the Monster Raving Loony Party. They are distinguished by having a deliberately bizarre manifesto, which contains things that seem to be too impossible or too absurd to implement - usually to highlight what they see as real-life absurdities. They initially succeeded in bringing down the voting age from 21 to 18 even though it was through highly satirical means. They highlight blatant plights in British society through humour in order to prove a point. One example of their outtake on democracy was that only men and women who owned a dog could vote. Pet sales more than doubled that year. They used the notion of being a "protest-vote party" to gather support and it worked brilliantly. Instead of the public abstaining all of a sudden there was an outlet for dissatisfaction. They even managed to win seats in various town councils causing havoc for the notoriously right-winged conservatives. This brought to light many instances of mismanagement and left the public with a smile, for more than one reason. They became so successful that often candidates of "serious" parties would drop out of regional elections purely because they could not stand to lose to a "Loony Party". This working of Democracy to highlight its apparent failure slowly became successful and they remain influential in politics to this day. One of my favourite bits from their manifesto is used to emphasize the excessive hyper-activity facing the youth of Britain today, especially those kids too afraid of receiving injections: : "I propose that highly trained nurses should be given free reign on the playground with specially modified tranquillizer rifles which apply vaccinations as well as a tranquillizer. This would have two main benefits: It would be less scary for the children as they will not know what hit them, also it will be more fun for the nurses."

When I think about the current administration I cant even eat as much as I want to vomit. My skin crawls at the fact that such conniving manipulative individuals have taken power. Of course the proposals I have laid forward are extremist to say the least and although I agree with a lot of their principles I acknowledge that they are largely riddled with flaw. But admittedly I am nothing but a computer warrior, fighting political injustice one size 12 Times New Roman font at a time. Who am I to question the great African Congress's omnipotence? However one cannot agree with how this country is being run and how this circus has come to power with complete disregard for law. I want to grab ANC supporters by the shoulders, shake them with vicious intent and scream "What are you thinking?!?!". God forbid I impede on the hallowed tomb of constitutional rights. Should I be a good little patriot and sit submissively on the sidelines? Or do I stand up and make sure that I don't become a tool of this "democrazy"!?

~Stroob~