Mbeki spoke as a guest of the American Ambassador ahead of that country’s Fourth of July celebrations and was very good. No waffle, no irritating whinging about the unfairness of world, and blessedly, no begging bowl or pained moral grandstanding about debt forgiveness, or asinine references to how many tins of blueberries South Africa exports or doesn’t export to America, or snide remarks about Trump – all of which has been the staple of South Africa’s foreign policy to America for years now.

On the contrary, he got straight to the point, and at a very high level, drawing parallels between the American War of Independence and the frontier wars in South Africa. He made the point that the countries shared a common origin in throwing off the yoke of British oppression, and he was magnanimous about the fact that the liberation movements in South Africa had been inspired by America’s own civil rights culture, invoking both Abraham Lincoln and the United States (US) Constitution. And, in an astonishing statement of diplomacy, Mbeki credited the US Congress and the passage of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act as having played a direct role in South Africa’s liberation.

At this newspaper, we might debate the import of the Act, and argue instead that the real credit should go to Reagan and his policy of constructive engagement, and that the Act threatened to scupper that, but that is neither here nor there – at least there was high-level thinking to debate.

By going high, and being serious, it was at once the opposite of South Africa’s idiotic foreign policy bleating and the sometimes-crass nature of the administration in Washington. Mbeki showed them both up without needing to mention either. It was a joy to listen to because it suggested that here was thinking and strategic ability, that if given the chance, he would certainly restore transatlantic relations to the great material advantage of all South Africans.

The second speech was from Hill-Lewis on the vision of the Democratic Alliance (DA) for the country. We read it and read it again, and shared it with people who think, and the feedback was pretty much all the same. That it was fine and made valid points but seemed burdened.

Billed as a new vision for the country, he explained that apartheid had been very bad, and that, despite its best intentions, the African National Congress (ANC) had not done well in government, and was now a fading power. The DA might do better as it understood the distinction between subjects and citizens and that citizens needed to be free to make choices about their lives.

In answering his own question about what the future might look like he made five points.

“First, a citizen-centred government requires a different understanding of the state … For too long, institutions meant to serve citizens have instead served political power ... A citizen-centred government begins by restoring a simple principle: the state does not belong to any party. It belongs to the citizens …

“Second, a citizen-centred government requires a different understanding of the economy … In the economy the ANC built, the state is at the centre … A citizen-centred economy starts from the opposite premise … driven by the choices of free people …Whether and how to start a business. Who and how people many to hire. These are not decisions that should belong to the state.

“Third, a citizen-centred government requires a different understanding of human potential. Rights and opportunities are not enough on their own. A citizen must also have the capability to seize opportunity when it exists ...”

“Fourth, a citizen-centred government requires a different understanding of safety. People – especially women – walk our streets in fear every day of their lives … A citizen-centred government understands that the rule of law is not an abstract principle. It is the foundation upon which free societies are built.

“Finally, a citizen-centred government requires a different understanding of the social compact. Citizenship is about more than the relationship between the individual and the state … Each of us carries something unique and personal that no category can fully capture, and recognising that in others is what allows us to recognise ourselves in them …”

Hill-Lewis ended by saying, “We cannot go on as normal … The next transition must give us the power to live as citizens: free to choose, free to build and free to flourish.”

Most South Africans would go along with all that – and know it to be true. But it did not invoke the same sense of joy that here is an outfit with the level of strategic understanding to move beyond what has been, and thereby turn the dial to the material advantage of all South Africans, if it were just given a chance – and in that it landed differently to the speech made by Mr Mbeki.