Sociologist, Michael Schudson, concurred with my previous article on Julius Malema when he wrote: "Democracy may sometimes require that your interlocutor does not wait politely for you to finish but shakes you by the collar and cries "Listen!" After 15 years of slow transformation and covert resistance to social redress by the minority elite - contained in anti-affirmative action sentiments and others - South Africa has reached this particular phase, and Julius Malema has become a pioneer of this new social order.
Schudson further points out that through misrecognition of democracy, "we call the people who initiate such departures from civility...unreasonable, self-serving, rude, hot-headed, self-absorbed..." It is not a secret that the South African media and their opinion leaders - in their efforts to forge an "illusion of social and/or racial consensus" on issues of black empowerment - find confrontational politics - Malema's brand of politics - repugnant and undesirable. "It is a threat to democracy", they argue.
This "illusion of consensus" - which has the unfortunate outcome of distorting reality - is best captured by former Archbishop Desmond Tutu's "Rainbow Nation" fantasy. Ironically, the sum total of all diversity - as per the rainbow colors - results in "whiteness", which expresses itself through self-serving concepts like civility (e.g. how to think, behave and act), and advocates a fallible perception that genuine and stable democracy should be underpinned by "an exchange of niceties".
For as long as we have opposition parties who champion sectoral interests at the expense of social reform, there will always be a Julius Malema to remind everyone that we are still living in an unequal society which places black people and Africans in particular at the periphery. Thus the interests of these particular social groups must be thoroughly and radically addressed as a matter of urgency.
I also alluded, in the previous article, to the fact that the black majority - through their leadership in the CODESA negotiations - made huge compromises for the sake of building a prosperous South Africa for all. A question then follows: what have the minority elite compromised then, and what are they willing to compromise today?
Was it a culture of entitlement? Was it the ideology of racial superiority? Was it the torture, abuse and repression of the majority? Was it their pension funds and ill-gotten wealth? Was it the stolen land? Any answer to these questions would succinctly craft the necessary role for the minority towards the general social and economic empowerment of the previously disadvantaged. It would also define our democracy, provide stability and usher in a new era of racial relations.
It must be emphasized that the collapse of apartheid cannot be equated to a compromise. It was an inevitable event which would have been propelled by the international economic sanctions and an uprising by the oppressed. Within this context, it must be understood that F.W. De Klerk did not just cease power out of goodwill and conscience of what is right, as suggested by one "concerned young citizen" in an open letter to President Jacob Zuma. The ultimate outcome of CODESA (i.e. the agreement to leave apartheid structures in tact) points precisely to De Klerk and the National Party's prime interests during the process of negotiations.
It is therefore an insult to suggest that the majority must be content with political freedom alone, and everything else must be subject to the competitive advantage of an individual. This kind of thinking demonstrates that many in the minority elite still find it difficult to adapt and come to terms with the special and unique requirements of our present society.
It would be way too early for the minority elite to claim any rights against any measure of social redress. On the contrary, the continued comparison of affirmative action to "reverse apartheid" could only raise suspicions that there is no intention to repent and/or compromise. Expressions that reflect nostalgia about the apartheid era do not help either.
In conclusion, the new social order as led by Julius Malema is one of necessity and an integral phase towards the achievement of African Renaissance.
Setumo Stone is a writer, social commentator and youth activist
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
