In whose interests is this Zuma centred 'analysis' done?

WHILE reading Prince Mashele's article ("Failing to lead by example", March 26) I asked myself the critical question all of us may ask: is this how the so-called "intellectual people" think?

Mashele says the ANC believes that its leader, Jacob Zuma, must be an example both to ANC members and non-members.

I agree with his assertion. But where he misses the point is that the onus to lead by example is not only on the shoulders of the president but on all ANC leaders such as premiers, ministers and MECs.

These are people whose conduct is always under public surveillance.

Does Mashele mean, by implication, that people of high standing who are path-pavers in society and whose main purpose is to inspire the nation must fold arms and look up to the "messiah Zuma" for exemplary conduct?

A society of high moral fibre is built on the shoulders of its people who, by their conduct and how they relate to one another, ensure that society's morality remains unshaken.

People who are concerned about the moral decay of their society craft their own solutions which is less about ridiculing and venting anger in the name of analysis.

Mashele in his continuous challenge of Zuma's presidency seems to suggest that Zuma dropped from a wild heaven and fell on the ground only to pronounce himself president of the ANC.

While the ANC's Polokwane conference might have registered discomforting footprints to those within and outside the ANC, its leadership outcome was never a secret.

If Mashele has reservations about the outcome, unfortunately he will have to accept the decision of ANC members.

There is a fallacy in Mashele's claim that "due to the moral soundness of the character of the ANC throughout its history, strong religious believers never felt repelled by the party".

In January, the party celebrated its centenary in Bloemfontein, preceded by a religious ceremony which saw people from all congregations gather for the memorable event.

To Mashele this was a group of religious people rented to pose for cameras so the ANC can be seen with religious people.

It is tempting to venture into naming many comrades of the ANC who are active religious members or hold positions in their churches.

I refuse to do so because Mashele deliberately decided to ignore this fact to feed his own interests.

Mashele demonstrated the worst form of desperation when he ignored the fact that the obsession of cartoonists to mock leaders was not invented in 2009 or 2007 when Zuma became president of the ANC and South Africa respectively.

Mashele has all the required art of analysing who and how one becomes a leader and how therefore they can lead by example.

I wish to direct Mashele to John Maxwell's words: "If you were to take everything you've learned about leadership over the years and boil it down into a shortlist, what would it be?"

While one awaits Mashele's head of wisdom to give birth to more analysis, one cannot resist to pose the question: in whose interests is this Zuma centred "analysis" done?

Who benefits from such an "analysis"?

• Mda is a member of the ANC. She writes in her personal capacity