“POLOTICS”: The uncertainties of the future South African political landscape
Background
Whilst some people are excited about what they see as the beginning of the demise of the African National Congress (the ANC); most South Africans are seriously concerned about the future of this country. Most South Africans are concerned about what they call the “Polotics” of coalitions of desperation, where political parties with extremely different political ideologies jump into bed because of one common factor: the hatred of the ANC as a whole, or an ingrained hatred of Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma the current president of the ANC and South Africa.
There is serious concern that what some people view as a sign of South African political maturity of democracy may be the beginning of a slide towards political uncertainty rather than a sign of more political stability.
“Polotics” came about because of the manner in which Julius Malema and some other politicians pronounce the word politics. It therefore characterizes the current political discourse where politicians say one “radical” thing and yet behave in a paradoxically different manner where it politically suits them.
The tolerance of anarchy in the name of democratic expression
There is a conspicuous tolerance of anarchy and public disorder that does not bode well for the future of South Africa. I will highlight some of these incidences and / or events that people have publicly supported just because they thought these can be used against the ANC and President Zuma.
Marikana
The Marikana killings will always remain a big bad blot on the history of the democratic South Africa. While many people may pretend that this came as a shock to them, most honest people will readily agree that what happened in Marikana could have been easily averted if people were honest from the very beginning.
This was a normal labour matter, where different parties had serious labour disputes which needed to be seriously dealt with in the appropriate labour or legal forums. Unfortunately, some people saw this as a test of power between what they perceived as the Zuma-supporting COSATU and a new trade union formation they perceived as anti-ANC. Consequently, when the AMCU-led strikers were going around carrying very dangerous weapons, people simply supported this as a right of those workers to do so.
When those workers brutally killed some other workers and some security personnel there was hardly any condemnation of these brutal killings by those who always shout the most against the government. Eleven lives had been brutally lost, and no public condemnation. The police, on the other hand, seemed ill-prepared to contain the whole situation, and the rest is history; 34 strikers were killed by the police. You have some people who are now saying August the 16th must be declared a public holiday because of this.
My question is, could we not have saved many lives if we strongly criticized the whole anarchy that characterized the Marikana situation, instead of applauding it as a sign of the demise of COSATU? The deliberate conscious omission of those eleven people who were killed by the strikers whenever people pontificate on the unfortunate police shootings of 34 strikers highlights a dangerous selective morality in our South African “polotics”, where we deem it is an expression of democracy for some people to infringe on the rights of others.
Why do I remember Marikana? It is because when I recently asked one policeman why they do not actively pre-empt some political anarchy that is affecting the rest of South Africa, the simple answer I got was that the police are afraid to confront violent crowds because they do not want to be accused of adopting the Marikana approach, and end up being branded mass murderers.
Of course, some people have made millions of Rand and extracted as much political mileage as they possibly can out of Marikana. But, did those workers get as much out of that labour action? I doubt it.
Service delivery protests
South Africa has seen some few genuine service delivery protests in the past few years; but we have also seen many opportunistic stage-managed protests with very questionable motives.
Let us look at the Vhuwani situation in Limpopo. Many kids have seriously lost some valuable time in their lives being prevented from going to school because of some ward demarcation disputes. As if this was not enough, more than twenty schools were completely burnt down and destroyed. Very few people strongly criticized this anarchy. Most people chose to criticize the government instead for not reversing the decisions of the Demarcation Board.
I am not qualified to pronounce on the wisdom or otherwise of the Demarcation Board decisions, but I am quite clear that no amount of anger on political disputes can justify using the future of the Black child as a bargaining chip for scoring political own-goals. It is an undeniable fact that the majority of Vhuwani youth are now going to start their working lives already with a “handicap” because other kids were going to school and preparing themselves for the future while Vhuwani kids were being used as pawns in a political game.
Of course, some people have extracted as much political mileage as they possibly can out of Vhuwani. But, will the majority of the Vhuwani residents ever get any significant gains out of these political shenanigans? Or is it yet another political own-goal?
In KwaZulu-Natal, some people burnt down and destroyed the Isithebe Industrial Area because they were unhappy about someone who had been nominated by the ANC as their preferred Ward Council Candidate. The people no longer have jobs there. Was this not an own-goal?
I even heard some protesters in Everton, near Vanderbijlpark, demanding free funerals and free tombstones; REALLY? Here in KwaZulu-Natal, even after the elections where the ANC has already won those wards, some people are still causing a lot of mayhem blocking busy national roads like the N2 because they feel the victorious ward councillor was not the one they wanted. This anarchy is costing the South African economy a lot, yet it is not fashionable to criticize it, because people feel it is a democratic right to destroy public property if it is said to be against the ruling party. They even went to court to demand their right to see violent destruction of public property.
What goes around comes around
The ANC has been criticized of many things before and after the recent local government elections. Most ANC supporters are said to have simply stayed at home and did not vote on the 3rd of August 2016, which allowed the EFF backed Democratic Alliance to take over some crucial metros and district council from the ruling ANC.
The question to be asked now is whether the people who are used to taking to the street and engage in public destruction of property, and infringing on other people’s rights, will now stop doing those things in those DA-run areas? My answer is NO. It is precisely for this reason that the EFF opportunistically made a lot of noise about not being in coalition with the DA yet emphasizing they will be putting it in power; the EFF knows the people they have been encouraging to demand everything will continue to do so, and the DA will be unable to deliver on all freebies being demanded, and the EFF will in those instances conveniently disassociate themselves from the very DA they put in power.
Conclusion
Right is right, wrong is wrong. As long as the “polotics” of South Africa continue to support anarchy if it is perpetrated by some people who are perceived to be anti-ruling party, anti-CASATU, or anti-Zuma; this will encourage people to continue to infringe on the rights of others and they will continue doing so even when other political parties take over (before Jesus comes back).
In the United Kingdom, Germany, and other developed countries, political coalitions work because political parties debate ideological positions and economic standpoints. In South Africa, political coalitions do not work and will not work because they are based against personalities or around personalities.
On the other hand, for the ruling party, the ANC must seriously reflect on the words of wisdom by their late former president, O R Tambo, in Angola in 1977, when he sad “Comrades, you might think it is difficult to wage a liberation struggle. Wait until you are in power. I might be dead by then. At that stage, you will realize that it is actually more difficult to keep the power than to wage a liberation war. People will be expecting a lot of services from you. You will have to satisfy the various demands of our people. In the process, be prepared to learn from other people’s revolutions. Learn from the enemy also. The enemy is not necessarily doing everything wrongly. You may take his tactics and use them to your advantage. At the same time, avoid repeating the enemy’s mistakes”.
The ANC has to learn to educate its supporters and the general public that they cannot just always get whatever they want all the time. In doing this, they need to explain why some things may not be possible at a particular time. The perceptions of arrogance and corruption need to be properly and honestly addressed before more political power is lost. The days of the “Polotics of the stomach” must come to an end if lost political ground is to be regained. They must start using more people who will think on their feet rather than more people who just stomp on their feet.
* Professor Bonke Dumisa is an independent Economic Analyst, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of South Africa, and a business consultant.
