These elections are serious

Share current article via Email Share current article via Facebook Share current article via Twitter Share current article via LinkedIn Story audio is generated using AI The local government elections will be a defining moment in our country's democratic journey. They present voters with an opportunity and a responsibility, to determine the quality of leadership, governance and public services that will shape our communities for years to come. Across parts of our country, circumstances that should be regarded as unacceptable have increasingly become normalised: households going without water; residents enduring prolonged electricity outages; motorists navigating dangerous potholes; communities living alongside raw sewage; children losing their lives after consuming food or beverages from unregulated outlets; young children dying on a daily basis; and gangs threatening our way of life. This is not acceptable. As voters, we must therefore take our responsibility far more seriously. We must look beyond political party affiliations and scrutinise the individuals seeking our votes. Character matters. Integrity matters. Conduct matters. One of the clearest windows into a candidate's character is their conduct on social media. How do they communicate, particularly with people who disagree with them or hold opposing political views? Do they demonstrate integrity, maturity and respect? Do they use their platforms to inform, engage and unite communities? That is the kind of person worthy of public office. Conversely, if a candidate routinely uses public platforms to insult, humiliate, belittle or degrade others, voters should consider carefully what that behaviour may look like once that individual has the authority of public office. Being elected into public office in spite of their bad behaviour would probably embolden them and worsen their behaviour. Do not knowingly elect the behaviour you later expect to change. This election is about far more than political parties. It is about your children's future, your quality of life, the dignity of your community and the kind of society we choose to build. On November 4, think carefully. Examine the candidates. Question their records. Assess their character. And, above all, vote wisely. The choices we make today may determine whether our communities move forward or continue to accept the unacceptable. Respect yourself. Protect your future. Choose wisely. — Rozario Brown, Mouille Point Pride and prejudice at UCT When Prof Mosa Moshabela was appointed vice-chancellor at the University of Cape Town, I asked myself how long he would last before the noise started. My theory is that white vice-chancellors do not face the level of scrutiny that their African counterparts go through at UCT. UCT has had four African vice-chancellors since 1996. Mamokgethi Phakeng had to take early retirement to move away from all the trouble at UCT. Moshabela was appointed in 2024 and already the dark forces at UCT are up against him. He stood no chance. He came from the University of KwaZulu-Natal and never studied at UCT. Never mind his credentials and his excellent leadership during Covid, the UCT alumni would prefer one of their own. It is not surprising that some people want him out as soon as possible. — Bonga Mthembu, via e-mail Ethics and editors Cornelius Monama asks a pertinent question: 'Who holds political analysts to account?' (Sunday Times, August 30). We have witnessed a proliferation of political analysts in newspapers, television and radio. Monama is correct in saying that there is nothing wrong with holding an ideological preference or advancing an opinion, provided that 'political analysts become worthy of the authority' they wield. But what about our newspaper editors? Shouldn't we hold them to the same high standards that we expect from our political analysts? Shouldn't the South African National Editors Forum (Sanef) enforce ethical standards among its fraternity, because clearly some editors wear their political ideology on their sleeves? One leading Johannesburg daily had an editor who decamped recently to join a political party. He might have done that publication a great favour by leaving, but even before his departure that newspaper stopped publishing letters to the press in its print copy, a time-honoured tradition of any newspaper worthy of its name. It's time Sanef exercised greater vigilance over the content, ideology and political orientation of newspapers in general. — Harry Sewlall, Parkmore Teach our children well Dr John Harold Crowe's letter (Sunday Times, August 30) refers. Past teacher training institutions taught comparative education as one of the disciplines towards qualifying to be a teacher. We studied Western education systems, particularly, with a view to westernising us and perpetuating this teaching to produce like-minded students. Fast forward to today's South Africa, where democracy is distorted with an astonishing number of political parties contesting local and national elections and 18-year-olds not knowing they qualify to vote. Crowe hits the nail on the head by calling for teaching democracy in our schools. His letter highlights the view that we need to revisit our comparative studies in education so that the system answers post-school socioeconomic and political needs. In this way we shall promote skills development for our children so they leave high school with the skills required by the labour market. — Moikwatlhai Seitisho, Phuthaditjhaba Stigma compounds the suffering Every year, more South Africans suffer from mental health problems, for example depression and anxiety. In the last decade problems have doubled among young people, yet attitudes have become more negative. Those who are ill do not dare to talk about their problems publicly for fear of stigma. It can lead to isolation, exclusion from society or even suicide. Suicide is now the second most common cause of death among those aged between 15 and 29. Mental health disorders still seem to define a person today. In our culture, mental health problems have traditionally been swept quietly under the rug, or alternatively, a person has been labelled 'crazy' for the rest of their life. This stigma is still strongly present in people's thinking. Unfortunately mental health disorders today cause prejudice even among general medical professionals. It raises many questions. On an individual level, you can consider the following issues: How does my close circle view me? What about the work community? What is my place in society? Have I lost my position in the eyes of others? Will they understand me and my situation? What should I do from now on? Or is it easier to keep things to myself and try to cope alone? — Aleksi Niiranen, via e-mail