THE ANC WOULD BE BETTER OFF WITHOUT MALEMA.

Contrary to popular belief, the recent hate speech trial against Julius Malema produced no fireworks. To the contrary, it has sharpened contradictions that further compromised the ANC in the recent local government elections

Now that the dust surrounding the Afriforum/Julius Malema hate speech trial has settled, it may be just time that we engage in some reflections on the meaning of the trial are justified. The recent dominant narrative as espoused by the media elite and a few political analysts suggest that the trial was a ‘victory' for Malema.

The content of this victory is less pronounced than the claim itself. Justice Malala has claimed that the ‘victory' consisted in Malema's ability to debunk the myth of his perceived idiocy. Malala et al parades this as praise. But Malema's demonstration of any virtues which earned him this praise can hardly be considered praiseworthy. He was measured against a very low standard of his own, from which he simply could not fail.

In his testimony during the hate speech trial, Malema did not do any wonders. He was not extra-ordinary. Only those vaguely familiar with the concept of the National Democratic Revolution (NDR) would have noticed the difficulty with which he dealt with the enquiries directed at the concept.

In fact, some of his historical account of his involvement in the struggle, including his claims about the first time he carried a "gun" left much to be desired. It could only be believed by the likes of the Afriforum Lawyers who have no sense of how we were involved in ANC structures.

But the entire case was a political question which should never have been the subject of litigation in the first place. That the Afrikaners experience an affront to their dignity as a consequence of an old struggle song is in fact hardly a legal issue. That explains why senior and supposedly experienced counsel appeared inept at discharging their functions during the trial.

It was a case of lawyers playing racist politics. TAU & Afriforum lawyers failed to understand the basic origins of a struggle song sung by black people & the context within which this occurred. It is this failure that suddenly elevated an equally inept Malema into some hero.

But there is something deeper, which the case brought sharply into light and which requires proper political context. When Afriforum, later joined by TAU instituted hate speech proceedings, leaders of the ANC, including Gwede Mantashe and Derek Hanekom came into his defence not because they were fascinated by his struggle credentials, but because they were averse to the prospect that a struggle song could be banned and therefore our struggle heritage eroded.

Therefore, Malema did not sing the song in commemoration of any struggle. He was in his usual reckless rhetoric, and as Mantashe puts it during his testimony, it is this "malemaphobia" that has resulted in the hysterical reaction of some Afrikaners.

As an interpreter of statute, the equality court will be faced with an important task. For instance it is not in the meaning of the song that the court will make a determination but it is in the intention of the defendant (Malema) that a coherent assessment of whether he is guilty of hate speech - can be made.

In this instance, the circumstances, the demeanour of Malema & character comes to light. After all, the legal question before the court calls for an examination of intention in order to decide whether the words used amount to hate speech.

It appears therefore, on the preponderance of available evidence, that Malema relishes vulgarity for its own sake. It is this explanation that is consistent with a Malema's bully, disrespectful and chaotic conduct. After all, despite his claims in the hate speech court case, Malema has no reputable struggle credentials.  

For our part, understanding Malema's disruptive behaviour needs some dominant considerations that require us to resort to history. First, South Africans would by now be familiar with Malema's public disregard to the feelings of others.  Not so long ago, he publicly intimidated a BBC journalist.

About two years ago, he mocked the then Minister of Education, Naledi Pandor, for having an ‘American accent'. His comments about the rape case survivor remain distasteful to many women. Similarly, the like of Fllyod Shivhambu imitated him and is reported to have called a journalist a ‘white bitch'. We can refer to this behaviour as a culture of vulgarity.

Differently put, Malema has introduced a culture of disrespect & vulgarity within the ANC Youth League. Such culture is emulated by Gauteng Cosas who have advocated for a "meet fire with fire" campaign against teachers. It was not surprising, for instance, when Vuyiswa Tulelo, called an Eastern Cape judge ‘a drunk', when a judgment adverse to the ANC Youth League was granted.

His followers hail him for "raising the things that many in the ANC dare to say". They say he is a brave leader who challenges the status quo. But the truth is that there is nothing entirely new about Malema's many pronouncements including the calls for economic freedom in our life time. The recitation of freedom charter clauses & calls for nationalization were made long before Malema could even read and write.

Repeating the calls the loudest does not make him any cleverer. The history of the ANC, which promotes rational discourse and which Malema clearly appears ignorant of, is that of a tolerant organisation.

Contrary to popular belief, there is nothing triumphant about the Malema legacy. It is a closer introspection of the implications of his utterances that will in fact reveal that his vulgar has caused the ANC more harm than good. Although Malema's mode of leadership is vulgar, he continues to be portrayed, especially by the media, "as the second major figure (from Zuma) in the ANC campaign during the recent local government elections"?

After all, the minority groups have primarily been offended and irked by Malema's pronouncements. Is it therefore a coincidence that later turn out that the ANC has lost almost all minority wards during the recent local government elections?

It is against this painful background that members of the Youth League attending the forthcoming national conference are faced with a revolutionary twin-task, that of not only removing Malema, but also replacing him with a sound, revolutionary leader whose understanding of the challenges facing the youth of this country is not wanting. The delegates attending this conference know who that leader is.

Thabo Masombuka is a lawyer and former ANC Youth League Leader. He writes in his personal capacity.

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