FURTHER SALVOES ON ‘THE BATTLEFIELD OF IDEAS'

I am glad to see that the Alliance has decided to trundle one of its heaviest pieces of intellectual artillery - Jeremy Cronin - onto what it calls ‘the battlefield of ideas.'  He has come out, canons a-blazing, in response to widespread criticism of Government's threat to curb the freedom of expression by means of the Protection of Information Bill and the proposed Media Appeals Tribunal (see here).  I keenly awaited his defence of these initiatives - but there was none.

He didn't explain why the Government had ignored the clear recommendations of its own Review Commission on the Protection of Information Bill.  The Commission, under the leadership of Frene Ginwala, called aspects of the POIB "Orwellian" and eloquently expressed virtually all the central criticisms that were subsequently repeated in the ‘liberal' press.  He did not point out why it was necessary for South Africa to have a far more draconian government information classification regime than a nuclear super-power like the United States.  He did not try to reconcile this transparent effort to stop legitimate reporting on government activities with the clear requirement for openness and accountability in the founding provisions of the Constitution.

Neither were there any heavy broadsides in defence of the MAT.  Why, for example, did the government want to deviate from the virtually universal preference in genuine democracies for media self-regulation?  How does he square Jackson Mthembu's statement that "we will still use the same journalistic codes (but) if you go against those codes, then we should impose some punitive measures" with protestations that the MAT would be an independent process?   And what about his comrade, Blade Nzimande's, recent statement that the MAT should be established because it was necessary "to protect socialism" against "a huge liberal offensive against our democracy"?

Cronin chose, instead, the easier option of sniping at the press (greedy Irishmen, bad boers, and BEE fat cats) and in laying down a remarkable smokescreen to the effect that the liberal media was wittingly or unwittingly in league with Julius Malema (whose name, like that of Lord Voldemort, he could not quite get himself to utter).  On the battlefield of ideas the outcome is not determined by a vote - as it is in parliament - but by which arguments are the best and which ideas are the most valid.  Anyone is welcome to participate and the only restrictions are those that are set by the Constitution.

Far from defending Alliance redoubts, Cronin made the remarkable concession that "yes, there are rogue elements within our broader movement, and particularly within the ANCYL, who have shown scant regard for media freedom, or any other constitutional or legal nicety. They and others who lurk behind them may well want to censor the media and subvert our Constitution."  Well, who exactly are these sinister elements other than the ANC government itself and his own General Secretary, Comrade Blade? They are the authors of the POIB and the advocates of the MAT.  If Cronin is concerned, why on earth should he be surprised that the press is also agitated? 

I am flattered that Cronin should have used so many of his 3 000 words in refuting some of the points that I had made regarding the ANC's clear mobilization against liberal values.

I stand by my point that those who support liberal values can count on the support of the Constitution.  The founding values are quintessentially liberal and the Bill of Rights protects overwhelmingly the rights of individuals.  Virtually every section begins with the words ‘everyone has the right to...'

However, where I agree most wholeheartedly with Cronin is that the Constitution is, indeed, a transformative document.  I fully support the proposition in Section 9.2 that legislative and other measures should be taken to promote equality.  Unfortunately, the Government has failed dismally to promote equality because the measures that it has taken have focused primarily on advancing - not the genuinely disadvantaged - but its already privileged cadres and associates.  It should instead have taken measures to empower truly disadvantaged people through the provision of employment and decent education and social services.

By far the best way of bringing about genuine transformation is to follow the example of other free and successful societies. We have pointed out that there is an absolute correlation between economic freedom and most desirable social outcomes.    

Predictably, Cronin commented on the fact that I worked for the old public service.  Yes I did.  Together with many of my colleagues I worked extremely hard to extricate South Africa from the ghastly place where we found ourselves in the 1980s to the far, far better nonracial constitutional democracy that we inhabit today.  Our new society is based on a constitution that all of us helped to negotiate - that achieved a fine balance between the interests, the fears and aspirations of all South Africans.  F W de Klerk believes that he owes it to all those who supported him during the transformation process to do everything he can to uphold the agreements that are embodied in our Constitution. That is what our Foundation does and will continue to do.

While we are dwelling on the past, we must consider Cronin's coy admission that when communist regimes "of an earlier period" were in power "bureaucratic authoritarianism often swallowed up revolutionary and democratic impulses (and even cadres)".  He is quite right: millions were ‘swallowed up' during the Russian Civil war; 5 million Kulaks and 6 million others died of starvation following the collectivization of the farms; 14 million were ‘swallowed up'  by the Soviet Gulags and the 1.5 million were liquidated during the purges of the 1930s - not to mention the inexpressible suffering caused by Mao tse Tung and Pol Pot. 

He then claims that this is why the communist left should be "in the forefront of defending a strong constitution that safeguards individual and collective rights"! This is from the representative of a party that as recently as 1962 called for the establishment by "the people" of "a vigorous and vigilant dictatorship ... against the former dominating and exploiting classes" in South Africa. Since then the SACP has moderated its goals: its present mid-term vision is "to secure working class hegemony in the State in its diversity and in all other centres of power."

The current struggle on the battlefield of ideas is about freedom: individual freedom, economic freedom and freedom of the media.  We can show that freedom works, that it brings a far better life to the citizens of countries that embrace its principles.  Lenin, the man so revered by Cronin, has a different view:  he says that "It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed."  He also said that "He who now talks about the ‘freedom of the press' goes backward, and halts our headlong course towards Socialism."

Dave Steward is Executive Director of the FW de Klerk Foundation.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter