The Death of Liberation Politics

 

By Dumisani Tembe

South Africa’s politics and its leadership bar is low. Such is the case within the individual political parties, and across political parties. This renders the entire multiparty system non progressive for the interests of the masses. This leads to the masses to withdrawing from the formal political participation in the form of voting. 

The low voter turnout in the recent local government elections, is not simply the rejection by the masses against the ruling African National Congress (ANC), but overall disillusionment against the entire post-94 conservative political system. Disillusionment against the ruling party within a working multipartyism, would have led voters to choose other parties. 

When the entire system does not work for the masses, it becomes immaterial which party is ruling, or who is the political leader at the helm. When the masses vote by staying at home, it is not the liberal voter, or liberal democracy education the masses need, rather, it is the quality of individual political parties, and the quality of party-political contestation across parties that needs elevation. 

This situation is rather dire in the traditional liberation movements. This includes the ruling ANC,  the South African Communist Party (SACP), the Pan African Congress (PAC), and the Azanian People’s Organisation (Azapo). 

These liberation parties are besieged with the following weaknesses: the inability to think outside the prescribed post-94 textbook liberalism; the inability to redefine a real new South Africa, and the innovative contours to achieve a prosperous society for the majority; the lack of  internal party cohesion; and the lack of internal party discipline. 

The consequence of the above, is political parties with poor membership and leadership. Steeped in factionalism, both the membership and the factional leadership tend to reinforce the poverty of each other, and one another. This manifests itself in lack of solid ideologies, strategies, progressive internal discussions, and the inability to lead in public discourse and opinion. 

This poverty within these erstwhile liberation political parties, results in very poor political contestation across political parties, thus, the poverty of South Africa’s multipartyism. Simply put, South Africa’s multipartyism has the numbers, but lack substance. It does not inspire the masses to vote. 

The sum total is the death of liberation politics. It is the arrested development of the black struggle to be in the mainstream of the socio-economic life of society. In the absence of an astute liberation leadership, individualism has become the norm. Even the emerging nonproductive black elite, seek individual space around the tables of monopolies. The black masses, collate themselves in the corner of survival – just to make it through the day. Every five years, they ought to be black leaders of the struggle, go to the masses  to renew the black hope in exchange of their vote. And so, the system reproduces itself every other five years, whilst the quality of life of the masses deteriorates. 

There is a direct relationship between the growth and prosperity of peoples on the one hand, and the quality of the political leadership. The growth and prosperity of countries such as China, Singapore, and Rwanda are directly linked and drawn from the strength of their respective political leadership. 

The growth and prosperity of the white minority in South Africa during apartheid has a direct correlation with the strength of the political leadership of the National Party (NP). Backed by its own intelligentsia, the NP progressively penetrated all aspects of white lives: education, social, sports  and economic upliftment, among others. The NP also adversely castrated black people’s lives in all its manifestation. This NP legacy is well entrenched in the economic pillars of South Africa today, and the black political leaderships, seems very crippled to address this. 

For this reason, the conservative white dominated Democratic Alliance (DA) does not necessarily need strong leadership, for two reasons: firstly, the white political leadership of the NP, entrenched apartheid in institutions, values, and education system, among others. Secondly, the black political leadership lacks the political will to untangle the system, either by design or mere weak leadership. The rhetoric of change is not matched by the actual change. Rather there is more concerted effort to convince the haves that in the pursuit of “radical change”, apartheid beneficiaries will not lose their wealth. 

There is no need for black political parties to unite and form one political party. There is no single black homogenous thought and world view. However, the majority of black people share a common history of marginalization and disenfranchisement. This historical problem needs to be addressed. It requires an astute black political leadership. 

There could be as many black political parties as possible, but they must exhibit substantive character, sound strategies, visions, and capacity to perform and deliver change. There could be as many black political leaders, but they should carry realistic hopes for the black marginalized masses. 

Thabo Mbeki aptly spoke about South Africa’s two nations: one white and wealthy; and another black and poor. As is the case in all prosperous nations, the black nation needs its own black astute political leadership. 

Tembe is Political Analyst and Executive Director of Kunjalo CDR

Twitter Page @KunjaloD