The Axle

Arise Oh Sleepers ....

2008-01-08T10:59:00.000+02:00

Arise ....

The Real Wounds - a poem in anger

2007-03-20T00:19:00.003+02:00

While the wealthy church rants on about same sex marriages and other 'moral' issues,

children die

and their parents too

while the wealthy church discusses crime at dinner parties

children are raped

abused by poverty

scabs develop into crime and brokeness

While in Elsies River and Nyanga premature death increases

And hunger prevails.

Grannies look after orphans

Scrape together a meal

59% have no income.

And should gay people who want to marry, be permitted to?

The moral issues cry PAIN

The wounds of the city cry out

The church of Christ – the hope of Glory – ignores the cries of their neighbours, if they hear them at all

Linda Martindale, March 07

What will quench the light? Thought from 1890 ...

2007-03-16T05:57:00.000+02:00

It is not scientific doubt, not atheism, not pantheism, not agnosticism, that in our day and in this land is likely to quench the light of the gospel. It is a proud, sensuous, selfish, luxurious, church-going, hollow-hearted prosperity.

- Frederic D. Huntington

Forum magazine, 1890

Climate change and other moral issues

2007-03-09T07:20:00.000+02:00

Jim Wallis: Dr. Dobson, Let's Have a Real Debate

Last week, James Dobson and a number of other Religious Right leaders wrote a letter to the National Association of Evangelicals, claiming that work on climate change was a distraction from "the great moral issues of our time." I responded on our God’s Politics blog on Friday, with the piece Dobson and Friends, Outside the Mainstream. So far this week, we’ve had several other good responses from Brian McLaren, Bill McKibben, and Lyndsay Moseley. And, I’ve invited James Dobson to a debate on the question, "What are the great moral issues of our time for evangelical Christians?"

James Dobson’s letter attacking Rich Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals has caused a firestorm, and maybe the beginning of a really good dialogue. Brian McLaren’s post yesterday pointed out that the letter from Dobson and friends actually acknowledged that there is a real debate among evangelicals about the seriousness of climate change and the reasons for it. So instead of calling for Cizik’s resignation for saying global warming should be a moral issue for evangelical Christians, why don’t Dobson and his friends accept a real debate on whether climate change is, indeed, one of the great moral issues of our time? A major evangelical Christian university should host just such a debate.

But I want to focus on the following very clear statement from Dobson's letter:

"More importantly, we have observed that Cizik and others are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time, notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children."

That is indeed the key criticism, and the foundation for the real debate. Is the fact that 30,000 children will die globally today, and everyday, from needless hunger and disease a great moral issue for evangelical Christians? How about the reality of 3 billion of God’s children living on less than $2 per day? And isn’t the still-widespread and needless poverty in our own country, the richest nation in the world, a moral scandal? What about pandemics like HIV/AIDS that wipe out whole generations and countries, or the sex trafficking of massive numbers of women and children? Should genocide in Darfur be a moral issue for Christians? And what about disastrous wars like Iraq? And then there is, of course, the issue that got Dobson and his allies so agitated. If the scientific consensus is right - climate change is real, is caused substantially by human activity, and could result in hundreds of thousands of deaths - then isn’t that also a great moral issue? Could global warming actually be alarming evidence of human tinkering with God’s creation?

Or, are the only really "great moral issues" those concerning abortion, gay marriage, and the teaching of sexual abstinence? I happen to believe that the sanctity of life, the health of marriages, and teaching sexual morality to our children are, indeed, among the great moral issues of our time. But I believe they are not the only great moral issues, and Dobson says they are.

So Jim, let’s have that debate - the big debate. What are the great moral issues of our time for evangelical Christians? You’re right, a new generation is embracing a wider and deeper agenda than you want them to. I think that is a very good thing. You think it is a bad thing, and want to get people fired for raising broader issues than those connected to sexual morality. So, today, I am inviting you to have that debate about what the great moral issues of our time really are. Again, let’s ask a leading evangelical university to invite us both and host a public debate, and perhaps ask a major evangelical publication to co-sponsor it. Let’s have that debate, Jim, and see what America’s evangelicals think the great moral issues of our time really are. How about it?
Spoke Linda

God hates inequality - Jim Wallis

2007-02-02T08:28:00.000+02:00

A snippet from Jim Wallis on the minimum wage and why it's important that people who work hard, get paid for it. Very pertinent to our South African context where many who labour hard in a full days work .. get paid peanuts. It's unjust and wrong and God does not approve.

God Hates Inequality

On Tuesday, following the Senate vote for cloture on minimum wage legislation, Jim Wallis joined Sen. Edward Kennedy, Sen. Sherrod Brown, Sen. Tom Harkin, and religious leaders in a press conference. This post is adapted from his remarks. The final vote on a minimum wage increase in the Senate is expected today.

+ Download mp3 audio of Jim's statement

Spoke Linda

Men who need prayer - according to Tony Campolo

2007-01-30T08:52:00.000+02:00

My friend Gilly sent this to me to post on Axle - something we have been grappling with related to Women in Leadership and being free to use their gifts in the church context. Here are two snippets from the interview with Tony Campolo on some of what I believe to be ludicrous and legalistic rules set out by Wayne Grudem of what women can and cannot do in the church context.

"These are taken out of context from an interview by Tony Compolo but I have to admit………… I love it! If you have 5 mins, click onto the web site and read the full interview. http://www.beliefnet.com/story/201/story_20177_1.html

And to be fair this link is the interview with Wayne Grudem on the topic… www.beliefnet.com/story/202/story_20219_1.html

He holds firmly to what he considers the biblical distinction between the scene in Acts where Priscilla and Aquila talk privately about scripture, and then the verses in Timothy and Titus that say women should not speak or lead or have teaching authority in a big church setting. He distinguishes between a private situation and a church situation.

'Most of my fundamentalist brothers and sisters--and I am an evangelical, so I can say most of my fundamentalist brothers and sisters--are quite willing to pack women off and send them as missionaries to dangerous places where they might get killed. They don’t mind them preaching overseas. They just don’t want them to be preaching in their own backyard. I think there’s a subtle racism implied in all of this, namely that white men can speak to white women, but white women can’t speak to white men. Yet white women can speak to black men or Asian men. Aren’t you, in fact, saying black men are inferior to white men?'

Some evangelicals sincerely fear that women preaching and women’s ordination will muddle male-female roles and potentially drive men from the church. What’s your response to that?

'If a man is so intimidated by a woman in a role of leadership, the man has a psychological problem that needs to be healed and cured. He needs counselling and he needs prayer. We can’t control women simply to cater to the insecurities of men who can’t handle this.

If a guy is intimidated by a woman in leadership, he has real problems with his own concepts of masculinity. That’s a harsh statement, but I believe it to be true'

2006-12-06T12:31:00.000+02:00

Posted by Greg
For more of Brandan's work click here.

Lepers, numbness and our own Calcuttas?

2006-11-26T15:50:00.000+02:00

Mother Theresa always said, “Calcuttas are everywhere – if only we have the eyes to see. Find your Calcutta.” I was ready to come home. I knew that my Calcutta was the United States. For I knew we could not end poverty until we took a careful look at wealth. ... I learned from the lepers that leprosy is a disease of numbness. The contagion numbs the skin, and the nerves can no longer feel as the body wastes away. In fact, the way it was detected was by rubbing a feather across the skin and if the person could not feel it, they were diagnosed with the illness. To treat it, we would dig out or dissect the scarred tissue until the person could feel again. As I left Calcutta, it occurred to me that I was returning to a land of lepers, a land of people who had forgotten how to feel, to laugh, to cry, a land haunted by numbness. Could we learn to feel again?

Shane Claiborn, The Irresistable Revolution. (after a stint of serving in a leper colony in Calcutta.)
Posted by Linda Martindale

Democracy

2006-11-22T22:18:00.000+02:00

We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.

- Louis Brandeis

Race and Class -

2006-11-16T08:25:00.000+02:00

I read this today ~ whilst Conley was addressing the US ~ I thought it was a poignant (spelling marc?) statement. Linda

Race is so associated with class in the United States that it may not be direct discrimination, but it ... doesn't mean it's any less powerful just because it's indirect."

- Dalton Conley, a professor of sociology at New York University. The Boston Globe reported this week that data recently released by the U.S. Census Bureau shows "white households had incomes last year that were two-thirds higher than those of blacks and 40 percent higher than those of Hispanics."

Violence in the New South Africa - perspective

2006-11-10T07:31:00.000+02:00

In response to a wildly negative article about violence in the new South Africa last week (by Andre Brink), one of my fellow Safrea members posted this to the group ~ it's a powerful, excellent read ~ and something I will quote to the doomsayers around me: Thanks Babusi, for letting us share this:

"I was robbed at knifepoint two months ago, have had a gun pointed at my head and my restaurant till emptied and experienced numerous violent encounters after 1994. I am a post graduate educated professional (at least i think I am a professional) and , if you stretch the definition a little to include a man sitting behind ten tomatoes next to the bus stop, I am an entrepreneur.

In other words, even as a Black South African, I belong to the social and economic groups that supposedly hold this country together and that are supposed to be scared to the point of emigrating.

But this is not Canada, New Zealand or Australia that where the tradition of peace ( give or take a world war or a colonial insurrection or two) is hundreds of years old. I think I know where the roots of violence in this country are where millions are homeless, jobless etc etc.

Having said all of that, and despite my personal experiences of violence, okusalayo (when all is said and done) I still contend that for more than 80 percent of the people of this country, 2006 is a more peaceful, more hopeful, more exciting, more involving than 1986.

Heck, we can go for a swim in Camps Bay, own property in Rondebosch and even dream in colour.

Besides, and more importantly, the economy is in better shape, democratic institutions (legal, press, civic) are more vibrant, more independent and stronger.

So (with due respect and apologies to those who have personally experinced the violence or lost loved ones) spare us the Armageddon scenarios. Sorry if Brink and others have given up. Maybe they can afford to.

Let us support and contribute to attempts to clean up the police, arrest criminals ( the kingpins of whom wear expensive suits, live in the Camps -and other-Bays, have names like Thatcher and Kebble and complain about crime at dinner parties) and build a hopeful, moral society.

Peace Mon

Respek
--
Babusi M Sibanda

One for the Road: History of Woman

2006-11-07T22:13:00.000+02:00

Tennesse Claflin: “The history of woman is the history of the continued and universal oppression of one sex by the other. The emancipation of woman is her restoration to equal rights and privileges with man.”

GREASE THE WHEEL – Male Dominated Faith? MEN ONLY

2006-11-07T22:07:00.000+02:00

I recently received an email meant for a colleague and friend who is also an elder in the church movement that I am a member of. It read: “There is an elders meeting scheduled for Thursday evening 5 May, 19:00. Men only.” Something stirred in my heart again when I read those words men only. Not anger or resentment – but a kind of deep sadness at what the church is missing when it is led by a single sex leadership team. The Jesus I am coming to know had no hidden prejudices, power issues or worldly attitudes regarding gender. On the contrary, he went against the status quo and reached out across cultural strongholds. I felt sad that the church has been so powerfully affected by the world's tendency towards discrimination and subtle forms of sexism. And I felt sad for the men and women in the church who live under this teaching which at the core, seperates us from genuine 'team' ministry.

One of the first things that is often said in this discussion is that it's only eldership that is exclusive to men, that any other leadership role in the church can be either male or female. The eldership issue is one that could take a book to deal with on its own (my church movement believe that eldership is male only) – I am not challenging that issue, mainly because I know that one could argue scripture back and forth, contextualising and saying that we have to take it for what it says on women or that it was for that culture and time only. (It is interesting that it was only in AD 343 at the Council of Laodicea that it was decided that women could not be elders.) But that is not the purpose of this. What I would like to challenge is how this theology trickles down in the form of male domination, modelling something that is not, in my opinion, Kingdom or team, spirit-led ministry. From the start it's important to state that, similar to race issues, those who are not directly affected (or affected to their knowledge) will generally not see it initially.

I was talking to a male friend of mine who belongs to the same church movement and he said “I just don't see that women cannot run with their gifting in the church”. I had to respond in a way that he would be able to relate to, being black ... we have had conversations in the past where we have discussed how in some environments where racism still pervades, it's only if you are black and feel some of the subtle forms of prejudice that you would understand it. In the same way, unless you are a woman and have felt that 'glass ceiling' or caught yourself shying back (uncharacteristically) in the presence of men, it may be difficult to understand. I asked him how many women had preached in his church during the last year. He said that women do teach and preach --- that there had been a women preacher once in the last year. In a body that is at the very least 50% female, over 52 sundays with two services a week, this is not only bizarre, but a clear indication of how male dominated most of our church leadership is. From the worship to the notices to the preaching to the staff. One only has to look at the paid staff on most church teams to see that men are being raised up to minister in the church context on a far larger and more intense scale than women. How many women are employed by the church? (and I don't mean as secretaries).

I believe it's in the big things, such as the church only employing men in pastoral and leadership capacities, and in the small such as the language used in church meetings. If I preached and kept saying, “We are all the daughters of God.” it would seem weird to men and no doubt, they would feel excluded. It would even feel strange to me to say it, and yet women listen to that language week after week and think it's normal or just say, it's the generic term for humankind. It does not help. And were it the other way around, it would not have lasted this long. Some have said that the call from some women in the church for equality is born out of a tainting from the rise of feminism in the western culture around us. I would say that the sexism in the church is born out of the initial belief system (that most men I know would say is archaic and untrue in theory) that pervaded society over the first centuries of our world's development. So both sexism, which has formed much of the roots of many of our church foundations, and feminism, which is a rising up against that, are worldly, both power-driven systems that I would not espouse to as a Bible-believing Christian.

The world models both extremes – chauvinism and feminism. The church is the community through which God would model something different – something 'kingdom', something 'together', something inclusive that sets people free in their gifting. Not clutching to theology that is somewhat dubious in its interpretation that feeds into the world's way of thinking. We need to guard against cloaking chauvism in scripture and then presenting it to the church as Biblical doctrine (as South Africans we know the danger of that. For decades racism was cloaked in scripture in the form of apartheid). Male domination (chauvinism) in the church is no better or less dangerous than feminism in the world. We are called to be light. Satan seeks to divide – rich and poor, young and old, black and white, male and female. God is breaking through and bringing His kingdom to rule and reign in all of these areas, going against ungodly popular culture as well as church tradition that is unbiblical and exclusive.

So many women I know are leaders in NGOs, development organisations, visionaries who have pioneered ministry in social action and poverty alleviation, and yet their leadership within the church community is almost zero because of this 'eldership is male' teaching, or rather, what trickles down from this theology. As slavery, we would all agree, is an out-dated practice, but one that the Bible neither condemned nor praised, so there are other cultural issues that need to be put in context before the scriptures are used to proport a doctrine that affects the very soul of the church. Should women be blossoming in the workplace and shrinking back in the church? I believe not.

On a purely practical level, can men (or women) alone make the wisest decisions and seek God wholly for the church on their own? The concept of men only meetings (or anything) does not make sense in the light of the rest of scripture or the needs of society today. On the whole, It seems petty and pointless to be trying to work out which parts of ministry I can be involved in in a leadership capacity, and which I would have to 'sit out on' because I am a female. I am convinced that ministry happens best in team. A men-only team lacks the vital ingredient of women, and a women-only team, lacks the equally vital ingredient of men. The Holy Spirit fell on all men and women, young and old. It's the Spirit of God that anoints us for ministry. The Bible is full of so many stories of women who were raised up to fulfil God's purposes for their lives – from Deborah in the Old Testament, to Lydia in the New Testament. At Pentecost the Spirit of God fulfilled prophecy when it fell on all present. “Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days ...” Acts 2:18

Men Only – that is not God's heart. I believe it's time to throw off anything that is hindering us – and throw petty arguments aside, and humble ourselves and ask God how best we can serve His purposes for our generation. We need to be asking God how we can best free every person in Christ to be the most fruitful and liberated man or woman that they can be. If we hold onto a subtle worldly philosophy that, at the heart of it, is rooted in superiority of a gender over another, or race over another, or tribe over another – we are going to miss what God has called us to, and we are going to miss out on the freedom and joy of advancing His Kingdom on earth at this time.
Linda Martindale

Who we are - The Spokes of Axle

2006-11-07T22:04:00.000+02:00

As with many things in our age, it starts over a cup of coffee. In the midst of four busy lives, we grabbed two hours to discuss an idea. Two hours became an ongoing coffee club of discussion filled with laughter, friendship and disagreement: ten years of democracy, terrorism, homosexuality, poverty, unemployment, biblical values, fundamentalism and what it means to be an evangelical. A sense of relief, a chance to ask the questions, to get honest answers and encouraging each other about a relationship with Christ that transforms society. Offering opinion, humour, scripture, debate ...proudly South African, offering reflections on life in SA today, as believers trying to live things out in a world filled with shades of mauve (grey is too boring). Politically left of centre but acknowledging that Jesus isn’t owned by the left, the right or anything in between. Evangelical roots but uncomfortable with what the word has come to mean, restricting it to a limited section of the actual evangelical world.

Churches Initiate a Broad Discussion of Same-Sex Marriage

2006-03-21T10:01:00.000+02:00

South African Council of Churches (SACC)Kempton Park Conference Centre, Gauteng, South Africa

7 February 2006

Representatives of a wide range of Christian churches met at Kempton Park Conference Centre 6–7 February 2006 under the auspices of the South African Council of Churches to discuss the issue of same-sex marriages. The seminar took place in the context of the recent Constitutional Court ruling that requires Parliament to revise the Marriage Act to conform to the equality clause of the Constitution.

The gathering included most of the Council’s 26 member denominations, as well as a range of Christian churches that are not part of the SACC. For some denominations, it was their first involvement in an SACC consultation.

Bishop Lunga ka Siboto, Second Vice President of the SACC, said that the Constitutional Court decision had “prompted much soul-searching among Christians”. Despite the intensity of feeling that the topic evokes for many Christians, the two-day seminar was conducted in an atmosphere of openness and mutual respect.

Delegates heard presentations from a variety of speakers, including lesbian and gay Christians, the Marriage Alliance, and the SA Human Rights Commission. Mr Justice Dikgang Moseneke, Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, told those present that “it is quite clear from the Constitution” that “every one of us has the right to be different”.

The gathering was not intended to develop a definitive “church” position on the issue of same-sex unions, but rather to initiate and build a constructive dialogue on issues of sexuality and marriage. This will, in part, inform the Council as it prepares to engage the forthcoming Parliamentary debate on how to respond to the Constitutional Court ruling. The General Secretary of the SACC, Dr Molefe Tsele, emphasized, however, that the dialogue revealed the need for churches to think further ahead and to begin to prepare Christians for likely changes in the law.

Although delegates expressed a wide range of views on questions of sexuality, theology and marriage, a number of common themes and viewpoints began to emerge from small group discussions on the second day of the seminar. Some of the broad areas of consensus included:

* The Bible has always been and continues to be the bedrock of Christian faith and understanding of the world. It remains the church’s primary guide to decisions affecting same-sex unions.

* God is present and active in human society and this shapes our understanding of scripture and its implications for social and political issues. Delegates warned against adopting a strictly literal or fundamentalist reading of scripture or attempting to use the Bible to justify one's own beliefs. They noted that, in many respects, the debate about sexuality in the church is really a struggle over the use and meaning of scripture.

* The church is called by God to accept, affirm and love all people. Christians should therefore be slow to condemn, but must listen carefully to the pain and hurt of lesbian and gay people and to try to understand who they are.

* Delegates expressed a commitment to a secular state as a way of giving all faith groups equal space to articulate their views. The seminar also acknowledged the Constitution as a social pact that has been informed by the values and aspirations of all South Africans. The Constitution must remain the starting point for legal discussions of the state’s obligation to same-sex couples.

* Participants noted that the current definition of marriage does not encourage same-sex couples to establish faithful, lasting relationships or to celebrate their sexuality within the grace of God.

The Seminar agreed that it was essential for churches to sustain and deepen the dialogue on marriage and called on the SACC to continue to facilitate an increasingly inclusive discussion. Some participants said that it was the first time that they had ever thought seriously about the issue of same-sex couples, and they had had their minds “blown open”.

For more information, contact: Fr Jo Mdhlela
(c) South African Council of Churches
Website: www.sacc.org.za

My Credo

2006-03-21T09:56:00.000+02:00

This article is a speech by Albert Einstein to the German League of Human Rights, Berlin, in the autumn of 1932. This short speech appears in the Appendix of Einstein by Michael White and John Gribbin, Dutton, Penguin Books USA Inc., New York, 1994, p. 262.

Our situation on this earth seems strange. Every one of us appears here involuntarily and uninvited for a short stay, without knowing the whys and the wherefore. In our daily lives we only feel that man is here for the sake of' others, for those whom we love and for many other beings whose fate is connected with our own. I am often worried at the thought that my life is based to such a large extent on the work of my fellow human beings and I am aware of my great indebtedness to them. I do not believe in freedom of the will. Schopenhauer's words: 'Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills' accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me with the actions of others even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of freedom of will preserves me from taking too seriously myself and my fellow men as acting and deciding individuals and from losing my temper. I never coveted affluence and luxury and even despise them a good deal. My passion for social justice has often brought me into conflict with people, as did my aversion to any obligation and dependence I do not regard as absolutely necessary. I always have a high regard for the individual and have an insuperable distaste for violence and clubmanship. All these motives made me into a passionate pactfist and anti-militarist. I am against any nationalism, even in the guise of mere patriotism. Privileges based on position and property have always seemed to me unjust and pernicious, as did any exaggerated personality cult. I am an adherent of the ideal of democracy, although I well know the weaknesses of the democratic form of government. Social equality and economic protection of the individual appeared to me always as the important communal aims of the state. Although I am a typical loner in daily life, my consciousness of belonging to the invisible community of those who strive for truth, beauty, and justice has preserved me from feeling isolated. The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavour in art and science. He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is a something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious. To me it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that there is.

“Black Economic Empowerment is just reverse racism!”

2005-10-19T22:09:00.000+02:00

The heated debates about employment equity and affirmative action have over the years centred on the principle of whether these policies are racist or not. Criticism has been levelled against such policies because they appear to entrench racism in society rather than create new values for a non-racist society.

At the root of this debate is the question: “Is racial prejudice the same as racism?”

Prejudice is something all human beings have. It is a necessity. Our brains must cope with a deluge of information every second and the only way to do so is to neatly package information according to simple algorithms based on past experience. Humans are masters of categorisation. It is part of the reason we have become such a powerful species: we neatly capture similar traits in collections of information called stereotypes and are able to infer characteristics or even predict the future based on observations in the past.

A hunter can predict the behaviour of the prey. A weather forecaster can give reasonably good assurances of fine weather tomorrow. A child can learn from parents how to be a good Scot or Zulu.

This same skill when turned to examine other humans leads us to categorise people according to a range of stereotypes. We recognise patterns in peoples’ behaviour and we type these behaviours according to the people who use them. For the most part this is harmless if not always useful.

But it is limiting. We can stunt our ability to relate widely by making choices based on our prejudices. We can even find ourselves making unfounded assumptions about others. Normally this will result in some form of conflict which can be resolved if people are prepared to revise their assumptions or prejudices.

We categorise according to race, because it is a relatively easy identifier. The colour of one’s skin is obvious and secondary racial features like noses and hair can help make a type even more obvious. We associate behaviours with certain race groups too. Sometimes this is playful, sometimes harmless, but when does it become racist?

It becomes racist when these prejudices are used to create a societal system that deliberately disadvantages those who apparently fit the prejudice. It becomes racist when a person who has power over another uses that power to enforce the application of a prejudice to the disadvantage of that person.

Apartheid was racist because it used skin colour to keep sections of the South African population in poverty. A black women who avoids white people’s parties because she thinks their music is silly and white people can’t dance, is being prejudiced, but not racist.

So is BEE racist? BEE is based on the assumption that black people are poor and white people are rich, which is true for the most part. As to whether it is racist or not, that depends on to what extent it is a deliberate use of power to push a segment of the population into poverty using a prejudice which negatively defines them.

Black people are supposedly meant to benefit from BEE. Some black people do, many do not… not yet at least. While the intention of BEE is to lift black people out of poverty, it does not seem to be working and if the SACC, Cosatu and others are correct, it never will. By defining a sector of society according to past stereotypes BEE is clearly prejudiced. By using power to enforce that stereotype BEE is in danger of becoming racist as it further entrenches the poverty of the vast majority of black people in South Africa, however unintentional such an outcome may be.

In this issue of Axle, we take a brief look at some of the issues of racism and prejudice. We hope you find material that is interesting and challenging.