Lessons from the African Arabic Front

As I watched the historical protests on the TV news about the Arabic African states like Tunisia and Egypt I was reminded of how thin the nature of political authority really is, and how simple to arrive at the democratic dispensation when the will of the people asserts itself.

It also became clear to me that this sclerotic state of affairs in African politics is pervasive, not limited by party, region, ethnicity, or other demographic factors, and reminded me of the poet-prophet who walked the imperial city of London about 200 years ago wondering about the fettering chains of self-imprisonment. This led him to write the poem, London.

I wonder what William Blake would say now as he watched the people of Tunisia and Egypt throw away their chains. Would he be stunned by what he sees and feels - human misery everywhere: " ... mark in every face I meet / Marks of weakness, marks of woe." I often get the same feeling as I walk the teeming and sewerage drenched streets of Phillipi, or Enkanini (one of the shack areas of Khayelitsha).

People Blake saw as miserable were in large part because their minds were radically restricted by oppressive ways of thinking; victims of "mind-forg'd manacles," imprisoned by their own mental limits and the limits imposed upon them by others. In essence this is what the people of Tunisia and Egypt are throwing away. It even looks ridiculously simple; rising up all of a sudden after a docile period to concerted efforts to gain their political and individual freedom. And the right to exercise real democratic control over their future, rejecting all delaying tactics of leaders whose mandates has run out. It tells a story of emancipation as old as mankind of people - people who had accepted inhumane conditions from their rulers for so long, suddenly taking extraordinary risks to say enough is enough.

In our country things are slightly different. We saw the Sharpeville massacre lead to June 16 - people rising up to take the responsibility of their own liberation into their own hands. Even then, despite popular lies now, it was the handful, the rest wanted and continued with their mundane lives under the oppressive regime.

We also saw the second wave of in post liberation struggle, during the formation of the Congress of the People (Cope) - people coming into grief with the failures of the new government trying to find a frame work to structure their grievances. We are seeing it now in the nascent agitations of political parties like Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and Cope, where the majority of the supporters reel against the expired leadership that wants to hold on to power by hook and by crook beyond their allocated mandate, and in the process creating conditions of chaos so long as they extend their tenure illegitimately.

The contemporary struggle, seen here and in places like Tunisia and Egypt, is diffusing the imprisonment of the majority by the elite few, be they of the ruling or capitalist class. As such we may be subjected to "the troubled air that rages" because the elites never surrender willingly power unless it is taken from them through a revolution.

Modern revolutions, as we are witnessing, take different forms: the so-called Facebook revolution in Tunisia; Virgil revolution in Egypt, Internal implosion in our political parties. What they have in common is giving ability to the people to effectively raise their voices against the suppressive elites.

What Africa is slowly realising is that the liberation we believed to be our political redemption has become little more than a veneer for the same forces which we decried. The oppressive "kings and nobles of the land" have simply exchanged clothes with our liberators. Hence the "perfect storm" the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was talking about when she urged Middle East leaders to embrace democratic reforms. She told an international security conference in Munich that there was a "perfect storm" which made democratic change a "strategic necessity".

The "perfect storm" can be interpreted as a self designed constitutional crisis in Ivory Coast and a political party like Cope. Where the ruling parties usually rely on state security power to promote their tenures, the political parties like Cope rely on their official structures to manipulate for the antics of expired leadership to hold on to power indefinitely, and to disorientate the general public by promoting an agenda of revitalising the expired authority. But, as we are now seeing, in the end it all works out to incentivise protests that expose the sheer hollowness and illegitimacy of these leaders.

Those who look for ideological rhetoric to underpin the current agitations in our continent are misled and misinformed. The overriding ideology here is the will of the people and their dissatisfaction with the status quo of their respective leaders. The agitations themselves are a people's vote of no confidence in the ability of the given leaders to guide, or even make a meaningfully impact in the lives of their countries or parties.

It is no coincidence that leaders who do not have the backing of the numbers try to delay the inevitable through violence, chaos, endless postponements of elections, or refusing to accept their outcomes by relying on security forces or even running to the courts of laws to seek the authority they lack in the political democratic process. It is a sign of panic and impotence before the voice of democracy. But all this fear of democracy ever achieves is to tear and exposes the wisp veil of their illegitimacy.

Political leaders in Africa are largely isolated from the social spirit of their people. Hence they have to buy it through violence, chaos or material means. But what is becoming clear is that African politics are entering a maturing age where neither violence, chaos, manipulations, nor nostalgia for the past, etc, can be used to hold people down who want to be masters of their own fate.

Why rock the boat?

Am I missing something here? If Zimbabwe, according to the Zimbabwean Herald, will one day be considered a “shinning example of Black Economic Empowerment” why are Zimbabweans leaving their country in droves? Or are they, in revolutionary language, counter-revolutionary.

“Wisdom should have convinced the white community in South Africa that they need to co-operate with the South African government to address the inequalities prevalent in that country,” the editorial read.

“In the same way that Zimbabweans got frustrated with the willing buyer-willing seller approach, the South Africans will also begin to take what is rightfully theirs by force if they see no progress in land redistribution."

The writer said that the fruits of Zimbabwe’s land reform programme were beginning to be seen.

“The huge payouts that new tobacco farmers are getting from the auction floors are transforming their lives.”


Zimbabwe was seen as the “bad apple” in the region led by a “delinquent leader” because it was dealing with the historic, social and economic injustices of over 100 years of colonial rule.

“But now the chickens are coming home to roost for South Africa.”

The writer found it sad that ANC Youth League president Julius Malema's call for redistribution of wealth was being "myopically dismissed by the whites in South Africa as madness on the part of Cde Malema".

"Yet his frustrations are widely shared across South Africa. Ominously, they point to the struggles for the control of resources that will soon be visiting that country."

Seemingly our comrades in Zimbabwe know more than most of us about what is in the offing in this country.

Recently I had a long discussion with my friend who is an ANC member. He confirmed to me that the wagon was on gear now. When I asked what he meant he alluded to Malema’s visit to Zimbabwe and rambled about China being the only ancient civilization in human history to have re-emerged as a major force in the world. “Africa is on that path.”

This got me thinking about China as the model of modern development.

To justify its monopoly on power, the Chinese’s Communist Party promised and delivered on constant economic growth. There was a lot of talk about patriotism—the Chinese version of the ideology of revolution when they want to be vague or hide something; as Democratic Revolution Movement is ours here.

Supporting the government, alias the Communist Party, is a patriotic act in China, and criticism of it is unpatriotic or, if done by a foreigner, is anti-Chinese. Of Big brother prefers the language of counter-revolutionary here; after our development is through the Soviet bloc, not the cultural veil for tragic politics that was Maoism.

Some people now in China, especially the educated and middle class live in extreme affluence, with a certain cosmopolitan style a Cape Townan suburban snob might find enviable. Capitalists are doing all right in post-1989 China. There’s money to be made, a lot of it, that is if you belong to a right clique, or are connected to the communist party pedigree; or if you rely on your own innovation you must know how to keep your mouth shut and “play the game”, as my friend put when trying to convince me to join their department.

I told my friend I don’t know to be anything else except myself, which is what mostly gets me into trouble. He told me I didn’t have to be shut up about my views; I just need to trim them to fit a bigger scheme of things. When I asked what was the bigger scheme of things he became evasive.

But I must give it to him, he seemed to have thought things through than I had suspected initially; and indeed China seem most likely to be their best model. I just wonder where would they find the technocrats to do all the work when they seem bent on chasing the best brains out of their organisation, or country for that matter. I don’t see Juju and his company as the technocratic types, and that is the group which should have been groomed and educated about a decade ago. They now should have been ready to take the positions of technical skill an interventionist state requires. Juju’s group prefers short-cuts, learning how grab, and they are not alone to blame, after all big brother has never really took the idea of development, educational and otherwise, too seriously. Unfortunately, as China can now boast, it is the only real thing that will turn things around. Perhaps Juju and his cabals should be sending students to study in China, late is better than never.

As it look now we would be in the near future then be ruled with a velvet glove when we behave, and an iron fist for those who refuse to “play the game”—no nice things for them, in Juju’s language.

There’s a lot of talk about Chinese people, especially in the rural areas, not being ready for democracy, that it may create chaos and mess. My understanding is that democracy is a messy thing because it is an aggregation of views and opinion to find the most popular. Ordinary people too, ignorant or otherwise, should have as much control over decision making of who must govern them, or how the national resources should be distributed. Of course this strikes at the heart of the authoritarianism, hence the talks of the party knowing what’s best for its people.

Dressing up authoritarianism by talks of patriotism or counter-revolutionarism does not hide the fact that you want people to subordinate their freedom. Others dress this subordination in cloaks of liberal grandeur like development. Why are modern parties so bent afraid of democracy and like to equate it with obedience rather than participation on the basis of equality? I don’t know. The best I can do perhaps is to end this with a quotation from Lasch as hear him scream on my head:

The people are busy–I’ve spent a lot of time around them. I’ve got a pretty good feel for this. Their jobs suck and they’re exhausted. When they get it together to do something amazing like build the CIO or create the Civil Rights movement, it’s a mitzvah composed of all kinds of things, especially incredibly tenacious, labor intensive organizing ... Some of them are wonderful, and some of them are awful, and most of them are in between–kind of like everybody else…. The world has always been a scary place, and it’s always been the fit though few who have undertaken to make stuff better. And, over time, they pick up some fellow travelers, and, oddly enough, things do get better.”

Others may see it strange that I’m very much interested in Lasch, but I think he was “attempt to provide a pedigree for a more radical, more democratic–and more consistent–brand of cultural conservatism,” one that combined economic leveling with traditional and local ways of life.

Things do get better; no thanks to any political party, only because people know exactly what is good for them and when. I trust the people, especially the ignorant ones because there’s far more wisdom sometimes in being ignorant than being clever. I distrust clever people, especially those with a political agenda.



Oh, I must go to sleep now. Paris has gone to sleep, grown tired of waiting for his mom who has just sms me that she’s just been awarded a crown of being the sexiest woman at Hout Bay—and women in Hout Bay are sexy, in an underrated kind of way that I like.

There’s growing wind, threatening to rock the boat. Outside the sea is dark, oily dark imposing a sense of mystery on things.

Lionel Trilling once quoted Charles Péguy’s memorable adage in the Preface to The Liberal Imagination—“everything begins in mystery and ends in politics.”
Perhaps; but everything that ends in politics must eventually return to mystery, or tumble into irrelevance. The times! The times!

Fire next time?

I’m surprised at those who criticize the Congress of the People (COPE) for choosing for its election strategy integrality, moral uprightness and ethical governance. What are they trying to say, that politics should be left to characters of moral dubiousness and corrupt tendencies? May be I’m taking the finger for the moon here, but isn’t the whole exercise of criticizing the venality of Tripartite Alliance politics about wishing for change and better run government? Or are we just barking at the moon to ridicule the ANC without any real end goal.

COPE in bringing Bishop Mvume Dandala as its election presidential candidate has put its money where the mouth is. This could not have been an easy decision for it’s already established leadership, but they showed signs of real leadership by putting aside personal aspirations for power for the good of the party, and ultimately the country. COPE also has shown that it shuns the easy path of attracting popular mediocrity by insisting upon the value of excellence and integrity, something not yet very popular with the black masses. By so doing it made its actions congruent to its words.

Our political life will remain both absurd and corrupt as long as long as the more excellent minds and upright characters are excluded from fruitful participation by the preponderance of mediocrities. Not that our country needs to be ruled by clerics and academics, but our political leadership needs to be in the hands of those who, by their well developed intellectual and moral abilities, are able to discern the common justice and universal good for us all. If these men are, by necessity of training, are to be found in intellectual and religious institutions, so be it.

The truth of the matter is that South African politics within the ruling party have fallen on evil days. They’ve been hijacked by men who have learnt to sublimate immorality into compound group and individual interests. Too much (in dissolving institutions that stand in their venial ways and try to change laws to suit their corrupt tendencies) already has been decided by those who are determined to make us a banana republic. Their weapon is providing bread and circus for the masses while creating ‘sclerotic society’, where the accretion of powerful vested interests robs the economy, thus the country, of its vitality. They care more about empty attachments to hereditary obsolete ideologies that are inimical to wealth-creation than making things work.

Those who officially opposed them up to now on the other radical hand tend to object to the revolutionary strain of socialism for the belief in economy that supposed to prosper when left to the free play of the market forces. Their head of steam is usually yoked to the programme of liberalism. They call their rule laissez-faire economics. There’s an impossibility they do not want to acknowledge, that of trying to build collectivist conclusions on individualistic premises. The buttress of laissez-faire is the necessity for unlimited private money-making as an incentive to maximum effort. The conclusion that individuals, acting independently for their own advantage, will produce the greatest aggregate of wealth is argued/purchased at the expense of facts.

COPE comes with an understanding that each age ought to determine for itself what the state can do, and what the individual must contribute towards the commonwealth of the nation. Private power must be subjected to democracy by decision-sharing, profit-sharing and wider share ownership of wealth. Call it Social Liberalism if you like, what’s important is that we must secure accountability from the government for the collective wealth coming from aggregated production while utilizing the technical private skill for public service also. Captains of the industry must be genially constrained by their undertaking to serve the public in wealth production. Organs of state must be run by qualified people with public service ethics who are professors, business managers, bankers, economists, scientists, etc.

COPE’s political philosophy is not just a compromise between politics of nationalism and liberalism; it involves so much more new ideas that are unfamiliar to both traditions. We can count the vetting of its parliamentary list by an independent panel as just but one example and fresh idea. In essence COPE is about real equality, fraternity, inclusiveness and democracy, and seeks to operate by organic unities that answer the challenges of the day. Call it Obama philosophy if you like, but the truth of the matter is that it is just what is demanded by the times. It is about paying attention to innate qualities of everything while doing away with what does not work.

It might seem, as we look at the Bills being passed in the US that Marx’s predictions are coming true, with Capitalism imploding from what he termed its internal contradictions. Marx was right to some degree when he said; "Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to the bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to Communism. "

But the road leads to an egalitarian (Social Liberalism) society than Communism. The short-run instability of capitalism is a greater threat to the social order than the long-run inequity in wealth and income distribution. Hence for now it is more important to adjust the internal structures of capitalism for macroeconomic stabilisation than it is to start revolutions that’ll almost always end up betraying their causes in any case. The imperative question is, will the captains of industries and government leaders learn? If not, I tell you social uprising shall be worse menace of the 21st century than the terrorist terror. People will not forever content themselves only on shackling themselves to their houses for fear of repossession. In the words of Baldwin, it’ll be fire next time. South Africa is not absolved. A whole lot of integrity is demanded of us all. COPE stands as our fresh political start and meaningful platform to meet each other halfway. How I hope we’d yield the lesson.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

By
Mphuthumi Ntabeni

ABSA stadium in East London, where the African National Congress (ANC) celebrated its 97th anniversary the and launch of its manifesto for the 2009 national elections last week is almost a backyard of my home. I’ll not get into the insufferable noise, the street drunkenness, reckless driving, and dirt such things generate. My mother, a now wavering supporter of the ANC, had serious issues with it though, threatening to tip over her scales against the organisation. “The rowdiness of it all”; her words.

As I went to the ABSA stadium I was listening to Bob Dylans’ song; Desolation Row: ‘They’re selling postcards of the hanging. / They’re painting the passports brown [yellow]. / The beauty palour is filled with sailors [politicians]. / The circus is in town . . .’ I was hoping against experience to hear something fresh, and battling with cynicism, thinking there must be better things to do with one’s holiday than this; ‘[E]verbody is either making love, or else expecting rain. . .’

I had noticed an interesting, even worrying, turn in the ANC campaign; the use of commodity market strategies for the election campaign. [The young lady with flowing braids—mimicking Vodacom—in a consumption pose: My ANC! ]The manufacturing of popular will does not get more narcissist than personalized commercialisation, I thought. The idea, I suppose, is to launch into the subconscious the idea of the ANC as not just a political party but a way of life to be consumed as a cultural statement, hints of suaveness and all. The ANC too now once to be part of modern culture.

The staduim was painted yellow with ANC supporters in jovial mood, ferried for free from all corners of the country. As I sat behind myriads of these t-shirts I was amazed at the irony written at their backs: Better education, health, safety and security, jobs for all, social development. They’re advertising their failures. These are the areas the ANC has proven to be shabby, to say the least. The scandolous audacity of it! I thought. ‘They all play the penny whistle. You can hear them blow; if you lean your head out, far enough from desolation row . . .’ The whole thing looked more like a stock-in-trade of some low comedy whose punch line I didn’t get.

Then came the speeches; the usual recycled self-satisfied fealty bosh and romanticized version of our history, tilting towards revolutionary heroism that lacks proper understanding of the mechanics of our national inherited history. Jacob Zuma (JZ) lacked depth, as usual. Even his leitmotif, umshini wam, seemed to have lost its spark, sounding stale and contrived. Then, in tradition of the organisation, he read the statistics of ANC’s achievements, bringing to mind what Hilaire Belloc wrote; ‘Statistics are the triumph of the quantitative method, and the quantitative method is the victory of sterility and death.’ Mark Twain put it more succinctly in the sentence (wrongly attributed to Disraeli sometimes) I used as a title of this article.

JZ spoonfeeded the masses with optimism, taking his authority from reading birds intensines; poisoned them, in totured self-confidence, with hopes of rooting out corruption, something he has no moral authority over. The masses got distracted, not paying much attention after the automaton chants. With ill equipped habits of culture, nostalgia for the past, they stood no chance to grasp the glaring truths. Overdetermined into redundancy by rehearsed political habits they’ve yet to unshackle themselves from political manipulations. You could sense their human spirit getting resteless, straining to go beyond emotional attachments of the past.

More than any other time I was convinced that attending ANC rallies is a waste of time, and subjecting oneself to verbal wasteland. Only people with vested interests can endure it, after all, gold has no smell and hungry stomachs no noses. Once again though, I doffed my hat to the ‘ill fed, ill housed and ill clothed masses’ for the resilence of their intoxicated hopes in dubious claims of blatant propaganda. ‘And nobody ever thinks too much, about desolation row . . .’

I felt dizzy and tired with going in circles on the fetish ANC wagon that’s stagnated on nostalgia. I guess that makes me elitist. So be it. Having drained my ungratified faculty of curiosity , and in grips of aggressive cynicism, I left before it became apparent I was counter revolutionary. ‘Praise be to Nero’s Neptune; the Titanic sails at dawn. Everybody is shouting, whose side are you on . . . I got your letters yesterday, about the time the dawn’ broke. When you asked how I was doing; was that somekind of joke? All these people you mention; yes I know them, they’re quite lame . . .’ The folk singer echoed in my ears.

Answering Helen Zille

I seem to recall, not so long ago, in the South African National Convention at Sandton last year madam Helen Zille telling the gathered there that in the coming elections the opposition parties should try to rise above petty politics and concentrate on fighting the juggernaut power of the African National Congress (ANC). From reading her 2009 second week letter in the Democratic Alliance (DA), where she castigates the Congress of the People (COPE) for being not better than the ANC, I guess she’s no longer singing from that sheet.

Madam Zille writes; ‘it should be clear to all South Africans that the substantive choice in this election is between the ANC’s “closed crony society for some” and the DA’s “open, opportunity society for all”. . . The emergence of COPE, and the role it plays in breaking down the ANC’s monolith, should not blur this fundamental distinction. If it does, it could do more harm than good.’ Madam Zille further says ‘The split in the ANC is a direct result of the struggle for control between rival factions of a patronage-based system . . .’ And goes on to allege that the leadership of COPE is made of the same people that consolidate ‘the closed, crony system and blur the lines between party and state – a step which often signals the irreversible decline of an emerging democracy.’ Leaving aside the clear electioneering opportunism of madam Zille’s accusation, let’s see if there’s any credence in all this.

The most irresponsible statement Helen Zille makes is this; ‘Ironically, the party’s list selection process that most closely conforms to the “closed patronage model” is COPE’s. A small leadership group chooses every other representative in the party, including themselves.’ COPE ascertains that its leaders should be elected by its constituencies, which means the list of candidates should come from the Voter Districts (VD) [COPE operates on Voter District ground structure, along the Independent Election Council guidelines, instead of Branch system like most South African political parties.]

In Bloemfontein, late last year, when the interim national leadership of COPE was to be elected, it became apparent that most of the provinces didn’t have proper VD structures [It must be remembered that COPE is hardly few months old]. A decision was then made for the province representatives present at the party launch to make lists of proposals for national leadership. Most provinces came up with the required list, with the exception of Western Province that could not come up with an agreed list in time. I won’t get into the details of how that was resolved, its party internal matter. Suffice to say from the lists prepared by the provinces an aggregate was taken, based on proportional representation of all racial, ethnic, gender, age groups. The bulk of people on provincial lists became the present interim leadership structure of COPE. To say this was made by a ‘small leadership group’ of ‘closed patronage model’ is misrepresentation of facts to say the least.

‘While all candidate selection processes create a measure of conflict, it is predictable that the COPE approach will still result in profound ructions for the new party.’ Madame Zille writes. The only ruction COPE’s national election of leadership drew was the duration the structure should take. Some people felt two years was too long for an interim structure. Admittedly, there are tensions in the creation of provincial leadership at present. This because COPE is largely made up of groups from different cultural and political culture. COPE is learning the best ways to accommodate and represent these groupings. Indication is, with some difficulties, the principles of the party are prevailing.

As for the sore loser theory from Polokwane, it is tiring to have to answer this allegation. How is Charlotte Lobe a sore loser for instead, since she was elected in the present ANC National Executive Council from which she voluntarily resigned to join COPE at great political, financial and personal risk to herself. What gains of power is Terror Lekota looking for when he was not even willing to stand on the interim leadership structure of COPE and had to be persuaded in a protracted process to do so for the stability of the fledgling party. For that matter, most people who are in COPE leadership structure are doing so rather at great financial and personal strain; what is so attractive about that? And where does madam Zille feature people the likes of COPE second deputy editor,Odendaal, in her accusations? The fact is, COPE membership as it is now is largely made up of people who’ve never took any interests in politics before, and not of ANC breakaways as wrongly perceived.

Another misnomer is the notion of COPE’s lack of identity as insinuated by madam Zille when she says; ‘COPE now faces the challenge of showing that it is different from the ANC, that it is not merely a bunch of sore losers seeking to hold on to their positions by creating a separate electoral platform for themselves.’ COPE is a movement for the dawn of new era in South African politics, founded on the promise of commitment to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa as a will of the people of democratic values that are sensitive to individual and minority rights. COPE believes human rights overrides even democratic ones. That everyone's right to life, liberty, property, free speech, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights, are given by life and may not be subjected to vote, or depend on the outcome of electioneering.

Having seen how easy it is for majority political parties to manipulate the governing laws of the republic to suite the capricious and arbitrary power of the day, COPE founders saw that it is not enough to merely legislate laws if the values and ideals espoused by legislation for the public good is not robustly defended, or does not become part of the very fabric of political process. By doing so they woke many of us who were apolitical and complacent under the illusion that our country was in a correct political path.

COPE believes all political and legal developments must be measured against the moral principles that lie at the core of our human rights. Thus COPE sees that Rechsstaat, i.e. a society based on the rule of law, is not sufficient. We need to create a society based on social justice and dedicated to higher moral calling. This requires not simply good laws but also leadership of knowledgeable insight who are untarnished by duplicitous moral and ethical dubiousness. Hence COPE seeks to strive to be led by effective, competent, efficient, industrious leaders with organisational qualities and deeper sense of truth; a leadership who must despise personal gains at the expense of the public at large.

Another issue that has recently been in fashion is that of accusing COPE of evasive strategy when it comes to Affirmative action and Black Economic Empowerment. Madam Zille and Jimmy Manyi are examples of different extreme, which suggests that COPE in its endeavour in taking the mean between nationalist and liberal politics must be doing something right. For clarity, COPE’s Draft Policy Document has this to say on the BEE issue: ‘While in the recent past there has arisen a small group of empowered blacks or the so-called black elite, and there are signs that generally the middle-class is on the rise . . . there remains high levels of inequalities in South Africa. Race politics cannot be ignored; they still loom large. However, with class inequalities gaining prominence, race is gradually losing weight as a factor of inequality. What this means is that social tensions are not only limited to inter-race tensions; intra-race tensions along class lines are also slowly emerging. . .’

There’s another reality that is gradually emerging in South Africa – that of ‘poor whites problem’. COPE policy draft document says; ‘This also should not be overlooked on the account of the state’s Constitution imperatives however emotive this issue can be. This should be treated as part of the wider problem of rising class inequalities and poverty in society rather a special case . . . [All] this requires us to revisit some of the elements of economic policy, notably the BEE and give more meaningful effect to its broad-based component as well as to examine its social costs with respect of racial harmony.’ To an extent that it was suggested, by one of COPE’s prominent member, Farouk Cassim, that we should henceforth call this Grassroots Economic Empowerment (GEE) instead of BEE to clarify our stand of wishing to include all disadvantage people for empowerment.

It is perhaps not surprising that those of stagnant and moribund politics feel threatened by COPE’s gain of momentum and strategic positioning. Historical factors, especially its lure of proper mean between nationalist and liberal politics, are on COPE’s side, which is why it is quickly capturing the imagination of South Africans. But one would expect that at least even in politicking parties would be fair and try to criticise from an informed position. The firing pressures directed towards COPE will only serve to clarify its principles and purify its leadership. COPE is not prepared to enter into mudslinging with other political parties. Instead it invites all South Africans of goodwill to remember the rock they were hewn from, and rediscover the hope of the society they sort to build when Nelson Mandela became the president of the country.

Towards building the just society it envisages COPE commits itself towards working for:

• Rapid and sustainable economic growth.
• Distribution of resources in a fair and equitable manner that does not prejudice against others.
• Creation of fair and equal opportunities for all, regardless of colour, gender, age, or creed.
• A Constitutional democracy depending on the superiority of the constitution and committing to upholding it.
• Building a competent and apolitical public service that is composed of qualified civil servants who are committed to taking services to the people.
• Rallying all South Africans behind the idea of hard work and self-uplifment with commitment towards a vision of creating and sustaining conditions for prosperity and peace, especially in the African continent.
• Inspiring the nation with visionary leadership and commitment with moral and ethical values.
• Finding a new political narrative that fits our social needs and times, away from stagnant politics of prejudice, without neglecting our proud history of liberation struggle and individual rights.

An idea whose time has come

Opinion is growing in the South African public that the Congress of the People (COPE) is turning up to be nothing more than taxonomical adjustment of the ANC with same old prescriptions and cadences. Indeed COPE has been taking in a lot of detritus dumped overboard by other political parties, giving them fresh opportunities to reboot. It is therefore understandable when people question its bona fides, after all one of COPE’s rallying points is ethical behaviour. Why, for instance, must it welcome as a heroes convicts like Allan Boesak?

Granted, Boesak was given a presidential pardon that eradicated his criminal record, but COPE sells itself as the guardian of moral principles among other things, and rallies on politics that are built on solid principles. Because of this, more than other political party, COPE is judged harshly when it shows holes on its moral fabric. On the other hand most people tend to forget that COPE also promotes the combination of reforming spirit with its ideals of constitutionalism, defence of democracy and so forth. COPE is about new beginnings, trying to realise the full potential of the country, etc.

It is correct that repentant ex-offenders should not feel left out, but be re-integrated into society and accorded all their rights as enshrined in the Constitution. There’s a danger, seen long ago by Aristotle, of vices sometimes being virtues carried to excess; the error of puritanical organisations. By accepting Boesak COPE, on top of being practical, avoids excessive virtuousness, and the superficial culture of appropriating blame as the sign of virtue. I’m sure COPE is not a post-Freudian political organisation that relaxes moral views, pardoning all on pretence of understanding all. Rather by adopting the more strenuous position that regards real virtue as a thing that require more discriminating, even less immediately gratifying populist stance, COPE put itself in a stronger position, above the slack disposition of self-righteousness by readily apportioning blame to others, and dishing double jeopardy to those who’ve paid their debt to society.

Political parties must find value on people for what they stand for now, how they, heron, conduct themselves. Otherwise they’d have to refuse admission to many people, especially politicians who almost always have shoddy pasts, one way or the other. Once you start preventing people from becoming members of your party simply because of what they did in their previous political parties, positions of employment, family matters, churches, schools, rugby clubs, soccer clubs, etc., where do you end? I’m sure COPE wants membership of great stature and credible leadership with integrity, who respects the rule of law, and will uphold the Constitution, etc. But it does not have to be finicky about these issues. It is hypocritical bêtise, and suspension of reality, to say in politics there are no second chances, as if politics were not part of life. We all believe that everyone deserves a second chance in life. As much as we want to put our country back to sound ethical and moral principles we must avoid the high frisson of reification, treating people as disposable things and demonising them because of their past.

COPE has so far been making right noises towards progressive, pluralistic, consultative, participatory, ethical democracy. It has captured the imagination of South Africans who want to move away from exhortatory passé politics of nostalgia and perpetual myth making. True, if it wants to gain the confidence of the majority of South Africans it must find ways of reducing the disabling gaps between political rhetoric and practise to eliminate performative contradictions. The real test is on whether COPE is able to avoid the cloying carnivalesque delirium of the Tripartite Alliance (TA) they so eloquently criticise. The TA has fallen victim to its own myths making by placing too much credence on its rhetorical slogans, and by conducting itself as a self-appointed messianic custodians of our freedom. Most South Africans seek a fresh break from all the stale about the so called national revolutionary politics that glorifies barren ideologies and superficial radical appeal. COPE’s success will be determined by how much it makes itself platform of expression for the spirit of our times.

COPE has chosen what is termed progressive politics where political leaders acquaint themselves with sentiments and derivations of the masses, and the narrative order of the day. Progressive politics sublimate social tensions by adopting development social spirit for common good. If COPE promotes and practice that with structural integrity of democracy and justice, break the power of stultifying illusions that has been created by the TA, people are in intelligent enough to realise where their best future rest. Sometimes when an idea arrives at an opportune time, and finds right leadership of progressive spirit, it acquires a force of inevitability.

Too much power corrupts

Without belittling the global economic crisis, the shameful xenophobic attacks, the renewed fighting at the Gaza Strip, even the brilliant win of Proteas in Australia and all; this year for me go down as the one the African National Congress (ANC) showed its real intentions and scared the pants out of me with its shenanigans. That woke me out of complacency that our country, politically, was on the golden path.

It is a given fact of history that governments that hold power too long lapse into decadence and corruption. Leaving aside semantic quibbles about the callous meanings of the word corrupt, it is fair to say that the dictum of the English nineteenth century historian, Lord Acton, proved to be applicable to our post apartheid government after the pivotal moment in our modern history at Polokwane. The ANC Government has since been through crisis after another, largely from dearth of vision and lack of proper leadership. It has, in my eyes at least, lost moral authority due to scandals, sleaze, arrogance and incompetence. The worse part is that, instead of attempting to mend its structural flaws it tried to save face by amassing more powers through what can only be termed as tyranny of legislation (changing laws of the republic to suite its designs).

It has become clear that what the ANC Government, with its Tripartite Alliance (TA) partners, is seeking to do by its so called National Democratic Revolution is to establish a society of unified intent, a society where uniformity of thought is enforced by the tyranny of the majority. It is trying to adopt what in historical terms is called the machtsstaat, a state based on might of arbitrary will of the persons in power without the strict observation of the rule of law.

After the horrible apartheid years South Africa chose to follow the rote of a Rechsstaat, i.e. the government that is bound by law with powers limited by the individual rights of its people. This rule of law emphasises the absolute supremacy of law as opposed to arbitrary power, even that of the majority and has been known, since the founding of the United States Republic, as Constitutional democracy. In this system an independent judiciary interprets and enforces provisions of the constitution even when it means overturning the acts of a democratically elected legislature. Of course those within the TA tend to carelessly drum the sacrosanct of democracy even when it violates other rights.

For instance, the ANC National Executive Council (NEC) was at pains trying to justify it’s decision to unconstitutionally recall the president of the republic, Thabo Mbeki. {Our constitution states clearly that only the Constitutional Court may decide that Parliament or the President has failed to fulfil a constitutional obligation. [The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996, sec.172(4)(e).} The ANC NEC disregarded this in the recall, and the fact that in the South African system of governance only the constitution is sovereign. Section 2 of our Constitution Founding Provisions established the supremacy of the constitution above even the government. It says; “This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic; law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid, and the obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled.”

The supremacy of the Constitution was promulgated to prevent exactly these kinds of abuse of political power, and to control government power against the citizens. South Africa is a constitutional republic with checks and balances to minimise the impact of faction, and reduce the risk of the tyranny of the majority. This is the heritage it adopted from the American republic.

The American founding fathers realised the dangers of tyranny even from the majority rule when they established Constitutional democracy as means to control factions that may harm other citizens. James Madison, as if foreseeing what happened in SA since Polokwane, wrote in The Federal Papers that factions are “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” It is easy to control a minority faction by a democratic process. At worst, Madison wrote, a minority faction “may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution.” But what of the majority disguising their abuse of law through manipulation and changing of laws?

Madison saw that the real danger arises with a majority faction. “When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” In a democratic system the tyranny of the majority and legislature (which represents the majority) is something always alive and was given colour in our country post Polokwane by the ANC. “[I]t is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.” Admonished Madison.

A person who tabulated clearly the dangers of the “Tyranny of the Majority” was the nineteenth famous French social commentator Alexis de Tocqueville in his book Democracy in America. He warned against the lack of sufficient limitations on majority rule and dire consequences of unfettered democracy. Thomas Jefferson, as Alexander Hamilton, Madison’s co-author, all came to a conclusion that power must be granted to constitutional courts as a barrier against the tyranny of political assemblies, and means of accountability for the government. With that the American government shifted away from majority rule towards constitutional principles, which South Africa inherited and improved in certain areas. To see that thrown down the window by a few elite group elected by political factions was highly disconcerting.

We’ve seen the reshuffles and cathartic upheavals within our government ever since Polkwane. We now find ourselves under the power of leaders with wry perspective and bruised egos whose faces we were never sold into during our last vote. And near moral and political collapse of our democracy that has been hijacked by factions. We’ve seen plotters and mutineers invoking the name of democracy, making us accomplices in their designs. Surely at some stage we have to say enough is enough.

Ripeness is all

The van of political circumstances culminated to most South Africans, who were concerned by the wrong turn the politics of the country under the tutelage of the Tripartite Alliance had taken, answering the call of Terror Lekota to attend the National Convention at Sandton. Most of us who started this year as members of the ANC, albeit uncomfortably so since the purging that followed the present leadership of the ANC at Polokwane, never in our lives thought we could leave the ANC. But the unilateral decision by the NEC of the ANC to recall the former president of the republic, and the comedy of errors that followed that decision, was the last proverbial straw. We found ourselves caught between our beliefs and erratic behaviour of the leadership of our political home we’ve given our lives into, which we felt no longer correlate with our values and beliefs.


After making numerous means to engage our leadership our voice was ignored, nee, marginalised because we happened not to be of certain persuasion, or rallied behind certain individuals during the Polokwane presidential race. Surveying all this we felt we needed to find other means to reinstate the ideas of Freedom Charter we cherish. We felt we needed a consistent political party that must stand outside the lure of false politicking where we’ll be able to identify leaders that’ll take seriously the practise of our democracy, moral imperatives, social and economic justice. Leaders who share our social view and moral principles. Who’ll not just give symbolic self-expression to these values while readily disregarding them in promotion of group interest, or sacrifice them to party interests.


Coming from the National Convention it was clear that the majority of South Africans share our values. It put paid to those who regard us just as disgruntled members of the ANC, bitter because we lost or didn’t get power at Polokwane. The formation of the Congress of the People is not the winter of elite few’s distress but an answer to deeper aspirations of all South Africans. It is birth pangs of something beautiful and sublime for democratic freedom of our country that has long been pining to be born since it became clear that the dream of full non-racialism has not been fully realised even in the governance of the ANC.

The ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, is quoted to have, when asked why he disagreed with Plato, whose protégé he was, answered: Plato is dear to me, but dearer still is the truth. Those of us who emerge from the struggle heritage of the Liberation Movement still hold the ANC dear, but dearer still is the truth. Therefore, sober and free from prejudice of ANC bashing, we’ve decided to forge a new way to consolidate and advance the democratic gains for our freedom. This demanded extensive soul searching and maturity on our part, even emotional and material sacrifices. Like an older child who has decided to leave his parent’s house, following the eternal law of growth, we took on this step that must never be taken for granted, or whose significance must not be underestimated. Ripeness is all, as Edgar remarked in Shakespeare’s remarkable drama, King Lear.

We all know the story; the dementia of the old king, put suspicion and hating against his own children, making impossible for them to remain home. It is with that feeling we left our political home to forge ahead to more freedom and diversity. We repeat. We should be better than our grumpy old men, and try never to use barbed tongues against our parents.

As we leave our home, fate strangles our hearts to free our heads. We take the responsibility of an older child to find our own way. We are aware that we must be vigilant, guard against blowing our inheritance with whores of foreign customs. Instead, like Joseph, we go before our brethren to plough the fields of Egypt, where we must gather granaries to bolster us when the drought comes. There’ll come a time when our fathers will send our brothers to seek food from our granaries. Like Joseph, we should be kind and not vindictive even then. We must share with them what we’ve learned as we all resume our much to a better life for all. For now, Men must endure / Their going hence, even as their coming hither: / Ripeness is all.

The shape of every historical present is structured by anticipation of a possible better future. We believe the Congress of the People is our best available means for the country to move forward against exhausted politics and ideologies. We need vigorous means to promote conditions for our freedom and democracy that are not determined by factional powers of the day, but based on strong ground of constitutional values. We need effective means to combat corruption, to move away from the endless schisms, empty barrelling and petrified vanity.

If anything our recent political experience has demonstrated that we should never again allow ourselves to be mystified by the lure of nostalgia into giving political power that serves power-interests and dead sloganeering. Even at the price of being called reactionary, anti-revolutionary, or labelled counter-revolutionary dissenters; we must never allow it again. Ranting of counter-revolutionary and all have become outmoded to the language and realities of our times. Our conditions have shifted. We need new politics to fit our era and social aspirations. We need ways and means to interpret even to those who do not yet see what the spirit of freedom fluttering within our hearts is doing. For too long we’ve been going in circles around the walls of Jericho, it is time we go to a higher place, to bring down the shackles of our mental slavery.

We must move to the next step of our liberation. Political emancipation, to be final, must also involve the liberation of self also from self. Slavery comes in different forms and is, more than anything, an internal mental disposition. We should not allow ourselves to be blinded by outmoded politics. Times are a changing. Nothing must obscure the complex diffuse of our naturalising social reality towards human dignity for all. Failing which the glories of our past, fast fading into empty sloganeering, would be nothing but just that, past. With the establishment of the Congress of the People the stage is set yet for the new trial of our invention.

South African National Convention

The shape of every historical present is structured by anticipation of a possible better future. That is the answer I give to those who question my support for Mosiuoa Lekota’s call for a NC (National Convention), where he promise will be the discussion of the political state of our country before we go to next year’s national elections. Lekota’s call is the best means available now for our country to move forward against exhausted politics of the left and liberal paternalism. I don’t suppose it to be an anodyne panacea but it sure bits seating around waiting for Julius Malema to take us down vulgar ‘revolutionary’ path.

We need to promote conditions of freedom and democracy in our country that are not determined by factional power of the day, but based on strong ground of constitutional values. And we need to move away from the endless schisms within the ANC between empty barrels and petrified vanity. Nothing shows their impotence as the criticism against the former Premier of Gauteng, Mbazima Shilowa. Resigning as Premier, Shilowa, summed his reasons as follows; “I am resigning due to my convictions that while the ANC has the right to recall any of its deployed cadres, the decision needs to be based on solid facts, be fair and just . . . I also did not feel that I will be able to, with conviction, publicly explain or defend the NEC’s decision on comrade Thabo Mbeki. You stand by your own if you think they've been wrongly dealt with. I'm doing no more than that . . ." Fair enough. It is his individual prerogative.

What puzzled me was the reaction of the YCL Gauteng secretary Alex Mashilo who felt Shilowa’s condemnation of Mbeki’s recall and resignation is a gross misconduct against the ANC. Why? Except that the ANC has become dupe to its own self-generated propaganda. It no longer recognises the discrepancies between official and practical consciousness as explained so aptly by Antonio Gramsci. Shilowa here is a typical individual who feels the party imperatives are unable to be transmuted into forms of routine social behaviour he has grown into; so, instead of living a life of contradiction, gives in to one pull. Such a move is unthinkable to an individual, like Mashilo, who leaves by exhortatory forms of official consciousness. Factual content and moral imperatives means nothing to him so long as he fulfils action-guiding power of formal ideology. And there lies the dividing rub that, presently, is turning comrade against comrade within the TA (Tripartite Alliance).

Terry Eagleton in his seminal book, Ideology, wrote; “It is astonishing how subtle, resourceful and quick-witted mean and women can be in proving themselves to be uncivilised and thickheaded. In one sense, of course, this ‘performative contradiction’ is cause for political despondency; but in the appropriate circumstances it is a contradiction on which a ruling order may come to grief.” Listen to the ever chaotic, ever contradictory opinions of different individuals within the TA and you’ll understand. Things have changed in the South political sphere. Or, rather, judging by their mounting anger and rising porcupine quills, are realising which direction the wind is blowing.

No amount of political mystification or wishful thinking will ever again afford the TA opportunity to lure the polity into giving it political power that serves power-interests and effects of false-consciousness. They may howl all they want about the ‘national revolution’, and label dissenters as counter-revolutionary. The revolutionary ranting has become outmoded to the language of the realities of our times. Conditions have shifted. For one, we’ve all become haute bourgeoisie, including the so called revolutionaries. Whoever is not is doing their damn best to be, or living with pretentious internal contradictions. The desire for consumer commodities permeates every aspect of our lives. Anyone who wants to arrest this flow will have to do so by framing their language around social interests of the society.

It really does not matter how men, like Shilowa, manage to escape the ideological conditioning of their former parties, into progressive consciousness of our times. What’s important is we all move to the next step of our liberation. Political emancipation to be final must also involve the liberation of self also from self. Slavery comes in different forms and is, more than anything, an internal mental disposition. We should not allow ourselves to be blinded by nostalgia of outmoded politics. Times are a changing! Bob Dylan would say. Nothing must obscure the complex diffuse of our naturalising social reality towards our human dignity, not even the glories of the past that are fast fading into empty sloganeering. Let’s go to the National Convention and discuss progressive ways to take our politics to the new generation!

Leaving the infested house

On Sunday (19 Oct. 08)afternoon, the breakaway group from the ANC held what it termed a Mass Resignation from the ANC to join the movement for the NC (National Convention) called by the former Defence Minister, Mosiuoa Lekota. The meeting was held at Noluxolo Primary School, Samora Machell (Philippi), one of the poorest townships of Cape Town. A little more than thousand (by estimation) people gathered, among whom, hundreds to hand back their ANC and SACP membership cards, including 11 Councillors.

The atmosphere was charged with emotion, sometimes poignant as long serving members, like Dan Nokhatywa, speaking on behalf of the resignees, recounted his experiences in the ANC of the past 39 nine years. He concluded by echoing the former secretary general of the Dullar Ohma region, Mbulelo Ncedani, earlier accusation that ‘the ANC has been hijacked by people who violate its values, principles and traditions.’ They said they had no choice but to seek new homes who respect values of freedom, and said ‘being a member of the ANC is not about the flag and logo, but the spirit and traditions freedom and democracy.’

The former Premier of Guateng, Mbazima Shilowa, addressed the meeting as the main speaker. He started with an anecdote of a infested house. Speaking in strangling Xhosa he said; ‘When your house is infested by vermin; first you fumigate it. But if that does not work, you are forced to seek another home.’ Shilowa went on to echo the religious song used by the religious minister who opened the meeting; Lizalise idinga lakho, Thixo Nkosi yenyaniso (Fulfil your promise, God King of truth). The mood became sombre at this point as Shilowa went on to counteract those who accused them of being power hungry, elite group, blue lights politicians, and so forth. He invited them to come and see who’s answering their call; ‘poor people who have no water, electricity, formal housing . . .’

At pains to emphasize need for respect and discipline, Shilowa admonished those going to the NC never to intimidate others or use cohesive means to promote their cause. Paraphrasing Ghandi he said; ‘We must be the change we want to see being ruled by.’ He invited the Tripartite Alliance leadership to be democratic enough to allow those of their membership who want to attend the NC. ‘If you say we’re just a few, what are you so afraid of? Those who’re sure of themselves do not go around looking over their shoulders. They walk proudly straight, believing in themselves and their cause.’

‘We, the people of Mzantsi, black and white, rich and poor; need to seat down and say: What is our take on democracy, and discuss it openly, all of us. We need to develop shared values for South Africa, of respect and democracy we can all believe in, even if we have different ideas how to implement them . . . We need to say, for instance, we supported proportional representation, because we believe in its redeeming qualities, but now we’re wiser.’ Shilowa said. He went to narrate how former President of the Republic, T. Mbeki, was dragged through mud by few people who elected themselves by the grievances they had against him. ‘Make no mistake; the president did not resign of his free will, he was pushed. When you ask a person, you do so before the decision to oust him is made.’ Shilowa concluded that perhaps the time has come for us to elect our presidents, members of parliament, councillors, and so forth from the ground. ‘Let’s discuss such things on the coming Convention.’

He admonished those who had decided to resign from the ANC to take another moment and think things through. ‘No one should resign if they’re not ready. I was ready when I did, and am not going back to Egypt again, even if the road ahead gets tough.’ He told those who are ready to go out and spread the news of the NC. He said the present leadership of the ANC has made it impossible for them to remain in the house they so loved, and now they were homeless, gathering bricks and mortar to build another home on principles of freedom, respect for others, democracy, discipline, morally and otherwise.

The meeting started and ended in lively new political songs that had seminal meaning to the situation:
Sasimxelele uSkwasha sathi lo ngunyaka wethu! (We told Skwasha this is our year!)
Viva! Viva! Terror wethu! (Viva! Viva! Our Terror!)

Another song was more to the point after Ncedani told people they must remember that they were not anti-ANC but pro-freedom and democracy:

Samshiya uMantashe, salandela uShilowa! (We left Mantashe, to follow Shilowa!)
Soyika ukutshabalala! Siyoyika! Siyoyika! (We’re afraid of perishing! Are afraid! Afraid!

When in African society songs are used in this manner, you know something significant is in the air. The architects are drawing blue prints and workers gathering building materials.

Clearing the air

The cognitive inflexibility of South African (black) voters has been a long lamented fact, more so now with cloying creative chaos within the ANC (African National Congress). Opposition parties are trying to think of best ways to feed on the carrion of ruling party infightings. Is it still a certain thing that the ANC will win the next election with a big, albeit diminishing, margin? Many are hoping for the break up of the ANC to give voters alternative and spell what is called ‘the normalisation of our politics’, meaning full multiparty, or at least two party, democracy. Helen Zille, the leader of DA (democratic Alliance) said as much: “We have to bring party formations in line with the new reality, the real political divisions of our time. The biggest barrier to this process is the democrats in the ANC who believe their party is redeemable. It is not."

Forgetting a while about know it all liberal attitude, and mistaken assumptions that people do not know what’s good for them; let’s look closer at the psychological reasons (I believe they are the major stumbling block) why black people in South Africa don’t seem too eager to join in the so called political realities of our times. Certainly the element of nostalgia, of regarding the ANC as the author of democracy in this country, is present. But alone, I believe, this is not enough reason holding people back. Economic policies too play a part, after all, to paraphrase Charles Péguy's dictum, everything does end up in politics, or, as the case may be, economics. More than that, South Africa seems to be among countries that make nonsense out of Fukuyama thesis that “There are no serious ideological competitors left to liberal democracy.” The rise of China’s state capitalism in communist creed, the revanchist Russia, and native Venezuelan democracy, being few other examples.

The DA, for instance, is a liberal party, which means that its gestalt is largely Millian. In a nutshell, John Stuart Mill’s promoted a society which at best would be peaceful, open, and creative place, where diverse individuals respect each other's rights and law, while banding together voluntarily to help those in need. He believed in laws for the common good and freedom of association according to vested interests. That, in essence, is a liberal view and what has, quintessentially, come to be known as a social contract. What it does not offer, even at its best, is a deep sense of belonging. This is why the liberal view does not appeal to a black man’s collective mind. Also the liberal view tends to neglect the issue of class struggle, something ingrained in the collective struggle of Africa, hugely influenced by Marxism.

The African view does not regard the individual as the basic social unit, but family structure as a model for all institutions. It respects hierarchal authority, which is why you mostly hear that the ANC is not just an organisation but a home. Individuals in African societies are born into strong and constraining relationships. This sometimes profoundly limit their autonomy—something adverse to the liberal mind—but gives a sense of belonging. “Man cannot become attached to higher aims and submit to a rule if he sees nothing above him to which he belongs. To free himself from all social pressure is to abandon himself and demoralize him." Africans share this view with Emile Durkheim.

African societies strive to be stable networks composed of many nested and overlapping groups that socialize, reshape, and care for individuals who, if left to their own devices, would fall into abjectness. Their shortcoming, for instance, is this collective support can easily fall into suborn cronyism and patronage on those with public authority or social power. The liberal view too has its own short-coming; when left to its own devices, without regulation, for instance, it tends to become a pursuit of shallow, carnal, and selfish pleasures (something the liberal view tend to confuse with freedom of expression).

I chose the psychological underpinnings to avoid Max Weber’s cultural determinism (the wrong belief that culture is the cornerstone of economic development. Weber thought Confucianism was incompatible with economic growth, yet South Korea and Taiwan has put paid to that theory. His followers today say Islam impedes development but do not know how to explain Turkey and Indonesia). If everything sooner or later ends in economics then the majority of South Africans do not believe market forces can deliver optimum result for social interests of the majority. They want the state to legitimately intervene and endorse some form of wealth redistribution in ensuring a minimum standard of living for all. Perhaps opposition parties will do well in harping on these points, until, at least, the psychological ambience and historical baggage is cleared.

Breaking Bulk

Listening to varied, even contradictory statements, by ANC officials about why they felt it necessary to recall the president of the republic, Thabo Mbeki, before his term expired next year, one is reminded of the imperative of moral psychology: Feelings come first and tilt the mental playing field on which reasons and arguments compete. In simple terms, this means when one wants to reach a certain conclusion, they can usually find a way to do so.

The Secretary General of the ANC, Gwede Mantashe, admitted in the Morning Live program on Monday that in order to unify the party they had to make the decision, so that all ANC members may start rallying after the current president of the party. It is unfortunate that the president of the ANC himself continues to insult the intelligence of the general public by denying that factionalism exists inside the ANC. The reasoning behind these varied voices within the ANC leadership betrays the fact that the decision to recall Mbeki was an emotional one, done to satisfy vindictive revenge by those whom he crossed lines with during his reign. In truth, from a distance at least, the whole thing appears more like a tragic comedy of errors akin to Shakespeare’s Macbeth.

The lesson Shakespeare wanted to teach in the play Macbeth is the inexorable and inescapable vindictive power of the moral universe, and the folly of revenge. That whatever means you take to achieve your ends will come back to haunt or vindicate you in the end. Former President Mbeki got a stark reminder of that at Polokwane. And now Jacob Zuma, clearly not in control of the party he leads, is starting to realize he might burn by the same fire that ushered him in Polokwane. The mobile vulgus are indisputable in control, and he has no means to turn the tide. There’s a sense of political anarchy, dislocation, disorientation, compulsion, pre-emptive grovelling and manipulative scare mongering he does not know how to deal within the Tripartite Alliance.

It might be, for the ANC membership, that all this is done to (speciously) recover the unity of the party, but from where we’re standing on the ground, it looks like the present administration of the ANC and its echelons are ‘breaking bulk’ (Remember that term from the English revolution of the seventeen century describing when the majority in a ship decide to loot the captured ship, and distribute among themselves the wealth without waiting for proper authority).

Talk about English revolution, ever notice how akin our situation is to them? Remember how the return of the new king, Charles II, spelt that ‘all good men and good things,’—as Samuel Pepys pithily put it—were discouraged. Doesn’t it feel like that in our country now? To top the similarities, Charles II was fond of French dances, which grated the gentlemanly class the wrong way. During the revolution, everything was subject to the caprices of the elite. Heads rolled, rich rewards were reaped; opponents of the previous government were got ridden of; key positions filled with supporters of the king as reward to their good behaviour. The astute changed with times and circumstances; drank and danced to the king’s health on their knees, negotiating their tricky change of coats with finesse. Everyone had to identify for themselves what compromises or betrayals they were prepared to take; policies were no longer pointers for anything. Terminal confusion settled in all things, and the only alliance politicians respected were to their wallets. Meanness and deviousness acquired the Machiavellian streak.

It was no time for those attached to elegance and gentlemanly pursuits. Things acquired a ghoulish streak. Heroes of yesteryear were beheaded, and for six pence you could watch their headless body at Westminster Hall. Political violence returned to the streets, and shops pulled down their shutters. Cynicism and opportunism became the order of the day. The people, simmering in resentment, bewildered and exhausted by never ending political conflict turned their backs to politics, and were the worst losers for it. Of course things didn’t go that far for us, and there signs they are getting better.

In his first national address to the nation President Montlanthe thanked the nation for its resilience and patience, saying it is in times like this our true character shines through. Me thinks the true character of the nation would be revealed during the coming elections next year. For far too long the ANC has taken the support of the South African public for granted. I’ve a feeling things will change, change utterly in the coming elections.
Meanwhile all we can do is to keep silent, watching these powerful and organised lobbies, compete in complete disregard for public sentiments. We continue in the path of justice, peace, human dignity and development in these uncertain times; but time hath my lord, a wallet at his back; our time will be on the ballot box where will opportunity of giving our alliance to the founding and developing truths of our Constitution. That is the only thing that must prevail over political fads; and, perchance, tame the murdering cry and the comedy of errors.

If chance will have me king, why chance may crown me without my stir

I spent last Saturday, like most South Africans, watching the political occurrences of ANC’s recall of the president of the republic with growing forebodings. Whomever asked me for my opinion I pointed to the article I wrote in April here on my blog.
Under normal circumstances I’m averse to quoting my own writings, but these are not normal times:

The lesson Shakespeare wanted to teach in the play Macbeth is the inexorable and inescapable vindictive power of the moral universe [and the folly of revenge]. That whatever means you take to achieve your ends will come back to haunt or vindicate you in the end. Our present [outgoing] president might be a stark reminder of that .
Lady Macbeth, while still convincing her husband to murder the irreprehensible King Duncan, accuses him of wanting to win without dirtying his hands. She says he’s not without ambition, but lacks the “illness should attend it ... that he would not play false, and yet would wrongly win.” Macbeth’s conscience is still healthy then as he replies in a monologue:
I have no spur
To prick the sides of my intent, but only
Vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself
And falls on the other. . .

Let’s look at this in the light of our country and times, especially since ruling’s party’s last conference. The greenflies have it that a certain gentleman, who is now the vice president of the ANC has been responsible for the bad karma between their out going president and the present. It is also rumoured that at the first meeting of the ruling party’s newly elected NEC the blood was so heated their president had to be assuaged for more than twenty minutes after walking out of the meeting accusing the delegates of planning to get rid of him through his coming trial.

It turns out also that there are people in the higher echelons of the ruling party who want to win without playing false in the public eye. It’s rumoured that Lady Macbeth occupies the Parliamentary Speaker seat, and that she eggs and fire the passion of the present [ANC] deputy president to overcome his repugnance for the end to justify the means: Thou'dst have, great Glamis, / That which cries "Thus thou must do if thou have it; / And that which rather thou dost fear to do / Than wishest should be undone." Hie thee hither, / That I may pour my spirits in thine ear / And chastise with the valor of my tongue / All that impedes thee from the golden round / Which fate and metaphysical aid doth seem / To have thee crowned withal.

Lady Macbeth is here saying Macbeth fears to do what must be done, even though he would not wish it undone, if it were done. I hope our Macbeth has enough sense to quote and stick to the words of sober Macbeth: "If chance will have me king, why chance may crown me without my stir."

It might just seemed like speculation and conjecture then, but now, with what is happening recently in the ANC political circles, that the signs are getting clearer everyday? The deputy president of the ANC, Kgalema Montlanthe, is soon to be the acting president until next year elections. The sublimity of Shakespeare is perennial. The ANC leaders say they’re doing this to recover the unity of the party but you and I know they are ‘breaking bulk’. Remember that term from the English revolution of the seventeen century when the majority in a ship decide to loot and distribute among themselves captured wealth.

Overcoming the grasping self

When our usually jocular Minister of Finance, Trevor Manuel, puts aside entertaining panache and attention-grabbing hype you know all is not well and rosy. He intimidated as much when delivering the 9th Steve Biko Memorial lecture at University of Cape Town. “This lecture takes place at a time when, as a country, we are going through some trying growth pains; together we are searching for inspiration, seeking guidance and yearning for leadership. Our country is undergoing a complex and sometimes painful examination of its foundations, its values and its institutions. It is at times such as this that a nation has to dig deep within itself, take careful observations and focus on repairing its soul.”

Inspiration, aplenty, he found on the writings and works of Steve Biko. The gist of his lecture was the need to give the poor material support to develop their lives. The minister touched the core of our present predicament when he mentioned need to look at people’s responsiveness to democratic empowerment and freedom. He seemed to have rightly come into conclusion that the most important challenges for our government and public institutions are now internal; involving ethics and “values [that] must have at their core, the principles of people-centred development, of freedom, of conscientisation of mobilisation and of high energy democracy.”

There’s duty to foster intelligence as a moral obligation needed to counteract the leadership dearth in the global politics of our era. We need the infusion of public and personal morality in our democratic and aspirations of freedom. Public morality is interlocking value system, practices, institutions, and psychological mechanisms that work together to suppress or regulate selfishness, and make social life possible. I trust we all know what is meant by personal morality, which can be summed in one word; virtue. We need also to re-learn principles that bind us together, not only as groups of certain vested interest, but as humans concerned with human dignity. Supporting essential institutions of democracy is well and good, but we have an added responsibility of being our brother’s keeper, especially the familiar faces of indigence and strife in our own backyards (rural and township areas) we’ve grown numb against.

The problem of development cannot readily be remedied alone by finance and educators, judges, soldiers, policemen, and other professionals that necessarily make for the modern idea of successful society. There are other problems that make for inertia against our development, like inherent attitudes and values, which sometimes often even define communities’ very identity. Hence Biko was more concerned with the ‘psychology and consciousness of the oppressed.’

Commitment to self-reliance in what minister Manuel calls ‘social compact’ must be reemphasized. Not only the ‘oppressed’ need a psychological re-consciousness, but the oppressor too. And this was always Nelson Mandela’s concern, which lately has been relegated aside for another important message of his, that of reconciliation. We need to learn that a majority of people in this country were not simply segregated; they were methodically disenfranchised, stripped of their dignity and identity. Until that has been restored nothing will ever be normal in this country.

Minister Manuel concluded; ‘let me repeat the lesson that Biko taught us. Democracy is something to fight for, constantly. Development is not something handed out at the welfare office. It is a conscious process of building capabilities, giving communities power to change their lives, empowering young women and men to make a contribution to our beautiful country. At the root of Biko’s teachings and the thread that runs through the references from Marx and Unger is the concept of consciousness, the deep understanding of the self worth of people and the power of communities. The poor must be given the power to change their lives . . . An energised democracy is one where each element, business, labour, government and communities balance their rights with their responsibilities. This moment could define our collective future. Let us utilise it for a national catharsis. Let us work together as advised by Unger who writes, “Social solidarity must rest (instead) on the sole secure basis it can have: direct responsibility of people for one another. Such responsibility can be realized through the principle that every able-bodied adult holds a position within a caring economy – the part of the economy in which people care for one another – as well as within the production system.”’

As Allen Tate put it, "the full language of the human situation can be the vehicle of truth." Our recent situation has brought the truth of who we are glaringly before our eyes without screeds of false nostalgia. Who we become yet is still in our power to choose, but not for long. We have not attained the hallmark of Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed, when he hoped a day would come when men and women were judged not by the colour of their skin, but instead by their individual deeds and actions, and the content of their character? There’s still too much baggage in our historical backs to get rid of, but we must take the initiative and reclaim the momentum of the Mandela years, with less superficial notions this time.

We need to face our history square on, albeit in a manner more conversant with the language of human values and respect for the dignity and expressive capacity of the human ¬spirit. We need to understand more fully what it means to be human, and to permit that knowledge to shape and nourish the way we ¬live. To respect each other’s rights; be concerned and work for each other’s welfare. We need to make our democracy and freedom a little more than triumph of commerce and the victory of materialism, which would make us nothing more than what is usually referred to as ‘a nation of shoppers’. In the end what is important as foundation to social institutions are internal values that overcome the lower, grasping, carnal self; i.e. self-control over greed, duty over rights, and loyalty to values of humanity over concerns for outgroups. That’s the message I took from Minister Manuel’s lecture.

The Jacob Zuma Debacle

The JZ (Jacob Zuma) debacle has caused a lot of hurly-burly about fears of the ruling party riding rough-shod over the constitution of the country to save the ANC president from prosecution for corruption charges. It has fostered different views from different people for various reasons. For instance, Hellen Zille—the leader of DA and mayor of Cape Town—in a talk she gave at Wits School of Law in July, was of the opinion that the ANC is divided amongst 'verligtes' (the enlightened, who wants reform) and the 'verkramptes' (who wants to continue the modus operand of Liberation Movement) 'Broedertwis' she said, divides the ranks of the ANC like the old National Party towards the end of its rule.



Madam Zille further conjectured that there were constitutionalists within the ANC who've more in common with the DA than they do with the anti-constitutionalists (read Zuma supporters) in their own party who are power hungry and prepared to do anything to achieve their goals. One understands the bases of the fears for eccentric repeal of the constitution, but to project these concerns as if they were reality is paranoia. The constitution bent twig snaps back in the face of those who use to foster scare mongering tactics. It is rather fresh to hear people who are prepared to change the constitution when it suites their purposes and inclinations, like the case of death penalty, suddenly take the sacrosanct stance towards the constitution. We need to learn, in the words of Barack Obama, not "to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality."



Madam Zille says the ANC, through the revolutionary movement ethos, is failing to achieve the next step of development, which she calls the limitation to its power to promote constitutionalism. This deliberate misuse of facts is worrying. Has the ANC, despite gaining the majority that legally allowed it to change the constitution, elected to exercise that right? I'm not promulgating that majority rule must mean the creation of a one party government with unlimited powers that overrides general laws for a specific purpose of party politics. But a majority rule does mean the ruling party is allowed to design 'outcome-based' laws with specific purposes or remedy in mind when the occasion arises. France and Italy have recently done it to protect their leaders, and we didn't here any large outcry about it.



There's a tendency in this country of projecting the constitution as a sacrosanct tablet revealed to the enlightened few at Mt Sinai, and not the product of reflection by the people for guidance towards the protection of people's freedom. Alexander Hamilton, in his book, the Federalist, set out to explain what the Constitution of 1787 in his country was all about: "To decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force." Reflection and choice are the operative words here. The constitution, for it serve meaningful purpose, must serve the needs that promote the stability of the republic.



Indeed, had JZ been a man of sterling integrity and responsibility he who would not have qualms taking the nation into confidence by doing one or two things, rather than this waste of taxpayer's money in protracted legal evasiveness. He could say; 'Yes, I've been involved in some very bad judgements through the influence of my financial advisers. For that I beg your pardon, and ask that the country give me second chance to pay back the debt I owe it.' Then those in government would have to devise means to pardon him in honouring the clear wishes of the majority. Or, if he's convinced of his innocence, he must not make himself available for the presidency of the republic until he clears his name. And now that he has won yet another historic battle in court, are we ready to let him govern?



With the risk of sounding sententious, JZ is a man of serious faults; weakened by moral short-comings and corruption shenanigans due to his indiscriminate associate with shady characters. But the majority within the Tripartite Alliance seem to want him as their president. The rest of us, if we respect majority rule, have no choice but to accept that. Naturally, there'd be those who'd say that would be giving in to political blackmail by JZ cabals. So what? What else is new in politics? We've been blackmailed by the National Party's army generals into establishing means of pardon for the nefarious deeds of the apartheid security forces and we caved in, for the stability of the country. We're blackmailed by different groups for different reasons all the time; if not threatening to take their skills and money outside it's another thing. And we give in, for the sake of the country.



As for what madam Zille wishes that "We have to bring party formations in line with the new reality, the real political divisions of our time. The biggest barrier to this process is the democrats in the ANC who believe their party is redeemable. It is not." No! The biggest barrier is the politics of grovelling within opposition parties, and the attitude of cynical self-involved pessimism of a South African liberal mind. The political realities of this country rest deeply on socio-economic factors. For one, the majority of the constitutionalists within the ANC are social democrats who do not believe in radical liberation of economics without meaningful state regulation. What madam Zille and her cabals do not see is what is about to happen in this country. French historians call it, le passage à l'acte; the moment when a recently free society passes into revolutionary violence. The confluence of negative forces, like post-oppression trauma, poverty and Frantz Fanon's 'motherless rage' are already precipitating it.



Still, no matter how gloomy the situation maybe, it is nothing compared to the mostly torturous, even murderous, complex course other countries, especially in Western history, had to undergo to achieve transformation to proper democratic states. Yes, now is a difficult time of introspection, even disenchantment in our country. Yes, the vulgar element breeds political weariness and disappointment. But I've a feeling this country will gain instead by going through this experience. The ruling party, with all it faults, is facing things head on, which is more than can be said about other parties who think dwelling on ivory towers, waiting for the 'barbarians' to gain insight into the 'enlightened' liberal point of view is the way to go.

The sooner we let Zuma govern the better it be for all of us.