My father danced a dance with dementia, which taught me what the essence of being human is; how there are no masters who can teach us how to die, and that we never really die completely - something always remains, from which new things grow. (previous blog translated)
Twee jaar terug het ek (toevallig) Auschwitz besoek. Dis ’n dag wat ek nie sal vergeet nie. En ek weet nog nie hoe om met my (half-duitse) kinders daaroor te praat nie. Maar dalk is dié skrywe ’n begin.
On the beach regulations: what constitutes a beach, may I surf or swim, may I be arrested for doing so, and will the law save us all?
Regulations for lockdown 3.1 indicated that the Minister of Health will give an indication on what constitutes "vigorous exercise". This still hasn't happened. This post is sweating the small stuff, by relying on the principle that laws must be clear, for us to follow it.
My pa dans ’n dans met demensie, wat my leer wat die essensie menswees is, hoe daar nie meesters is wat ons kan leer hoe om dood te gaan nie, en dat ons eintlik nooit heeltemal doodgaan nie - iets bly altyd oor, waarvan nuwe dinge begin.
It is difficult to predict what will happen, and pandemics have a sly way of reminding us that any prediction remains just that – a prediction. So I have listened to my economist friends and started thinking of the various possible scenarios.
What happens if the law of the indigenous people are asserted in a country that for so long disregarded it, but now has a Constitution that gives full recognition to it? How does one reconcile laws whose normative basis seem to just not be compatible?
So ek is vandag hier. Ek, as (Afrikaanssprekende Suid-)Afrikaner, wie se voorouers deel was, wetend of onwetend, van ‘n sisteem wat Suid-Afrikaners geras en ontmens het. En dié ongeregtighede gaan langer vat as een generasie om reg te stel, so ons beter begin.
Spaces like the agora is important for democracy because it allows for space where people can consider views other than their own. These public spaces, to follow from Aristotle, allows for the awareness of difference, a place where diverse people converse and intermingle in everyday life.
This was part of the issue in the South African Human Rights Commission case, delivered last week. The City of Cape Town argued that the structures the demolished were unoccupied, and as such do not fall under the provisions of PIE. Being unoccupied, there was nobody to evict. The applicants, however, argued that those evicted have been living in the structures (in other words, it was occupied), and therefore they are entitled to the protection of section 26 of the Constitution.