I read with interest both a recent article posted on Politicsweb about a meeting of several political parties whose supposed aim is to strengthen democracy and City Press's coverage of an anti-ANC coalition initiative over the weekend. The stated intent about a desire to strengthen democracy couldn't be further from the truth because these are political parties whose leaders are dictators and they subscribe to undemocratic practices.
On the face of it, the intention of circumventing a one party state seems genuine but not if you know the characteristic traits of these opposition party leaders. Again not if one is able to read in between the lines, as I am capable of doing, because a closer look will reveal that this is indeed an anti ANC coalition as the City Press headline screamed.
With all due respect to the opposition party leaders and their small constituencies, they are nothing but a group of power hungry individuals who are class conscious and most disturbingly who either have racial or ethnic prejudice. After analysing them all, I realised that this coalition was concocted with only one intention and that is to ensure that South Africans are denied the only party (i.e. the ANC), which is serious about the plight of the poor.
Perhaps, one needs to magnify each party leader and here I will start with the most vocal anti-ANC patron of the coalition, Mr Bantubonke Holomisa who studied "Counter-insurgency" at Voortrekkerhoogte, as he is a prime example of a dictator. This term "counter insurgency" refers to or is a doctrine about how to smash liberation movements and popular struggles.
Most interestingly, it is the doctrine that informed the apartheid government's destabilisation of Southern Africa and the low intensity warfare which was waged within our country then by the CCB, Vlakplaas and other third force units whose existence one notorious judge Louis Harmse denied at the instruction of FW De Klerk or put mildly as some would prefer to say, "he was commissioned by De Klerk as then President of the Republic of South Africa".
Mr Holomisa is a tribalist and an uncouth leader who is everything to/in his party (i.e. president, spokesperson, secretary you name it). It seems that he doesn't trust anyone else to be competent enough to do things correctly and he is too power-hungry as such he will not be able to submit to being led by someone else. It is worth mentioning that Vlakplaas commander, Eugene De Kock, once claimed in court that "Holomisa was a military intelligence project that went wrong".
In this regard, De Kock was explaining the reason why Vlakplaas and other apartheid dirty tricks structures had become involved in the 1990 coup de tat attempt against Holomisa. Mr Holomisa only became an ANC member for two years, the bulk of which time was spent in the NEC, after he had been elected in December 1994 at the 49th National Conference. Upon his election, he in the process became the most voted and popular additional member but this popularity got into his head.
Thankfully, by 1996 he had been suspended and subsequently expelled on 30 September for amongst other things ill discipline, conduct unbecoming, bringing the party into disrepute and unforgivably having an ethnic rather than a proletarian lean. It was possibly amongst other things the reason why a clause in the ANC's constitution now reads, "a nominee must have been a member of the ANC for at least 5 unbroken years before he/she can be elected into the NEC".
It is opportune to move on to yet another dictator who is just as much "everything to her party" as Holomisa is to his and here I am referring to Mrs Patricia De Lille. The only reason she left the PAC was because she thought that she was above her party and that she could get further on her own or could obtain more votes if she started her own party.
She did momentarily until the South Africans discovered her for who she truly is. She must prior to that have felt that the only way she could become a party head was if she formed her own party and didn't want to go up the party ranks like all other leaders. And so, she chose a short cut which was to parachute herself into party presidency but when that didn't yield the desired results in parliament, she tried albeit unsuccessfully to become a provincial/regional leader.
One thing that is common between Holomisa and Mrs De Lille is her attempt to capitalise on origins too. Whilst Mr Holomisa hoped to capture the Xhosa community's vote, Mrs De Lille; who thrives on playing race politics on which principles her party is built; was hoping to capture the Coloured community (in her failed attempt to become the Premier of Western Cape).
South Africans are no fools though and they quickly realised that they were being used and punished these two leaders. A political party can't be built on controversy as the ID is built and I don't think that one can get votes by merely courting controversy every time or blaming the ANC of corruption as does Mrs De Lille. This is precisely why the South Africans snubbed her hence both of them (Holomisa & De Lille) couldn't muster 2% between them in the last elections.
I have previously written enough about Mrs Zille's characteristic traits hence it will suffice to highlight the similarities between her and Mrs De Lille. These tough talking ladies of South African politics share a common thread and that is their colour bar. Mrs Zille is a racist who remains guilty of racism until she proves herself innocent. This is the doctrine by which she lives, by presuming people guilty until they prove themselves innocent.
Mrs Zille is equally as much a dictator as are all the afore-mentioned leaders who are in love with their own voices. It follows therefore that she (Mrs Zille) won't survive in a multi racial party as the coalition seeks to become because it will ultimately have to choose one leader to lead it. The DA and Mrs Zille in particular realises that the only way she can get close to becoming a threat to the ANC is if she were able to hoodwink and coax the Black voters to vote for her/her party.
In her success in drumming up race politics in the Western Cape, she used the race card, the Red gevaar (posed by the SACP) and president Zuma's supposed threat to our constitution. This is however unlikely to ever work in national politics hence it won't translate to any meaningful encroachment in the ANC's majority - even if she forms a coalition might I add.
The question is: would she allow herself to be led by the presidents of the smaller opposition parties? The answer to this question is a resounding NO simply because she can't allow herself to be led by people whom she regards as being inferior. What does COPE, whose house is on fire and its leaders, have to offer in this coalition?
Sadly it is nothing but confusion, tribalism, rudderlessness, arrogance, anger, being bad losers and lust for power which are all hallmarks of incompatible team mates. I have analysed COPE and its leaders (both their president and the first deputy president) enough in previous articles, therefore I will not give them much more attention than they actually deserve.
It will suffice to say that if Mr Mbhazima Shilowa is undermining his president's (i.e. Mr Mosiuoa "Terror" Lekota) authority because he feels that he should be the one occupying that seat, then he won't be able to submit under someone else too. As they say, "old habits die hard" hence both men would struggle under somebody else which further means that they won't be able to stomach being led by any other party leader than themselves, such is their disregard and disdain for democratic processes.
Of course the other Mickey Mouse political party, namely the IFP (if ever they have any intentions of later joining the coalition) which hasn't been mentioned in the equation deserves analysis. Its leader, umntwana Mangosuthu Buthelezi suffers from the same ethnic sickness as Holomisa - tribalism.
This is a party leader who was once mandated by the ANC or O.R Tambo to start what was meant to be a vehicle to fight against apartheid since when the ANC was banned at the time. All he achieved however was lust for power, once he had tasted it but importantly he usurped power from his older brother Mceleni Buthelezi (an heir apparent to the Buthelezi chieftaincy/throne by virtue of having been a first born), sadly at the assistance of the apartheid government's Minister of Native Affairs and Chief Native Commissioner who didn't recognise Mceleni under the Bantu Authorities Act.
He is probably the worst dictator of them all and therefore, he won't be able to withstand being led, certainly not by a Holomisa or Zille or De Lille. Chief Buthelezi is no longer wanted at his own party, whose Youth Brigade feels that he has gone way past his sell by date. How then would he hope to bring the much needed wisdom, let alone the support base and unity which would be required in order to keep the coalition intact or make it a force to be reckoned with when he can't tolerate dissenting voices in his own party and/or can't stem the decline in their showing election after election?
It is for this reason that some of us continue to believe that the political party which will rival the ANC will not be started in our lifetime. Actually, it'll be started long after our time, by two or three generations after we are no more. This is what informs my subscription to the notion that the ANC will rule until the second coming and I suspect that this is what drives these opposition political parties too, to want to come together to form an unholy coalition which will achieve one thing only - failure to unseat the ANC at the polls, be it 2011 or 2014.
Contrary to what some know-it alls like to say about the South Africans voters, they are very mature and are not only driven by sentiments or emotions but a lot of thought goes into their decision making when they choose a party for vote for. No amount of cheap publicity or politics will change that, at least not in the next two afore mentioned elections.
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
