A FAMOUS GROUSE

WADING through the foamy spew that is the weekend newsfeed, I came across this startling peach of a headline: “ANC leader calls for review of Freedom Charter.” 

Surely not? I mean, the Freedom Charter, as we’ve been informed on many an occasion, is the foundational document of a liberated South Africa. It’s right up there with the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Magna Carta and to tinker with this most sacred tract would be unthinkable, akin to painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa or something even more heinous, like renaming Winnie Mandela Drive after Dr William Nicol, the old Nat administrator of the Transvaal.

But, upon reflection, perhaps a review wouldn’t be that heretical, and a redrafting of key passages is quite necessary; a clutter of codicils could realign the Charter with certain 21st century realities. ___STEADY_PAYWALL___

This is much needed. The document, after all, was drawn up in 1955. History is history and all that, but the tweedy idealism has not aged well and an overhaul could help regain relevance, particularly where the young radical of today is concerned.

A number of appropriate changes spring to mind.

The rights of the people shall be the same, regardless of race, colour or sex — except, of course, where they are not the same.

All bodies of minority rule, advisory boards, councils and authorities shall not be replaced by democratic organs of self-government but will instead be blanched dry by selectively deployed beneficiaries or cadres.

The state shall not help the peasants with implements, seed, tractors and dams to save the soil and assist the tillers; the peasants will be abandoned as the revolutionary leadership focuses its attention instead on luxury imported goods and high-end motor vehicles.

And so on and so on. 

But sadly a redrafting was not really the crux of the matter here. Despite the fact that this “review” in question was the subject of a report in the Sunday Independent — not a newspaper we should trust at the best of times, or even the worst — I felt compelled to follow through and read on. 

And lo, an altogether different but no less weird picture emerged.

The ANC “leader” of the headline is Supra Mahumapelo, described by the newspaper as a member of the party’s national executive committee. Some readers, on the other hand, may recall he emerged from the backwater of the old Western Transvaal to succeed Thandi “Animal Farm” Modise as North West premier in May 2014. 

His was not a happy tenure, and he was compelled to resign four years later following widespread violent service delivery protests. He was replaced by Job Mokgoro — an appointment that Mahumapelo appeared to welcome. In a case of unintended self-deprecation, the former premier told reporters: “We are happy as the ANC that indeed today we now have a premier and there is no longer a vacuum.”

Such was the incompetence, maladministration and corruption on the vacuum’s watch that his entire provincial government was placed under administration. This was the first time such a measure had been applied to a province, an achievement the ANC acknowledged by employing Mahumapelo as the head of the North West branch of the OR Tambo School of Leadership. 

According to its bumf, the school builds “ideological, intellectual and organisational capacity” not only in the ANC but also in the “broader progressive and democratic movement as well as interested members of the public”. 

Now, more than six years later and to bring us back on point, it would appear that Mahumapelo’s concerns are not really about the Freedom Charter per se but rather the ANC itself. Reading between the lines, it is clear that it is his party, and not this document, that is in need of “review”.

It is also obvious that the time spent at the OR Tambo School of Leadership has not been wasted. There has been advanced thinking, rumination of the deepest sort and with synapses wildly fizzing in the cranium, regarding the ANC’s poor showing in the May 29 elections; Mahumapelo has come to the conclusion that the party urgently needs to assess whether its various structures “remain relevant” to the electorate. 

Or, in normal English: voters handed the ANC its arse on a plate and the ANC wants to know how the heck this could be.

Unfortunately, they don’t do normal English at the OR Tambo School of Leadership. This much is apparent from a document written by Mahumapelo, entitled Another Perspective on ANC Repositioning and Renewal, in which he suggests a review of the Charter was “one of the possible options to explore in order to shape the future”. 

The goal here, he added, would be a document “whose major content should be based on South Africa as a country pursuing developmentalism with its own characteristics”.

Developmentalism, by the way, is an economic theory which holds that the best way for poorer economies to develop is through fostering a strong and varied internal market and imposing high tariffs on imported goods. It’s now largely discredited by economists but the concept has in recent years been revived by populist leaders of developed countries, Donald Trump being the obvious example.

Which is neither here nor there. What is alarming is that all this smacks yet again of an elusive “social cohesion” and the ANC’s long-cherished “revolutionary” ideal of leading a grateful and supine nation. As Mahumapelo put it:

“The broad consultation to review the Freedom Charter will not only assist in ensuring active citizenry, but ensure that the ultimate final document, ‘SA Freedom Charter for a Developmental State’, is something that all society can own, internalise, collectively implement, defend and review after every three decades.”

As for the party itself, major spring-cleaning was needed, from a grassroots level upwards. ANC branches are not fully functional, Mahumapelo has declared. They have no community programmes, are “politically fractured” and easily corruptible. What’s more, he added, branches have a “tendency to self-suppress due to a wrong understanding of democratic centralism”.

Frankly, this “wrong understanding” is entirely rational. You don’t want to be found wanting out there among the lumpy proles where democratic centralism is concerned, this being the organisational principle whereby communist states maintain a dictatorship of the proletariat. 

History has shown that it is something of a contradiction in terms: very little or no democracy and, given how Lenin and then Stalin dealt with critics and potential Soviet rivals in the pursuit of power and personal prestige, not much centralism either. The message here, then, is that is best for the sheeple to stay in their lanes.

Instead of branches, Mahumapelo suggested, the party should establish various bodies and fora that would, as the Sunday Independent put it, cater for “ANC fans, voters, activists, members, supporters, senior citizens, stalwarts and veterans as well as former public representatives such as those who served as presidents, deputy presidents, ministers, deputy ministers, members of Parliament and provincial legislatures, premiers, MECs, mayors, whips and councillors”.

That, you will agree, is a whole bunch of people. Bizarrely, it appears that literally everyone in the ANC is out of step with the ANC. If, however, the leadership truly wishes to identify the problems that bedevil the party, it only needs to look in the nearest mirror. It won’t be pleasant, but all will then be revealed.

Keir beer cheer here

Much consternation here at the Slaughtered Lamb (“Finest Ales & Pies”) at news from the Labour Party’s conference in Liverpool that Downing Street is planning to cut pub opening hours. As the Daily Mail thundered, “Is Nanny Keir after your beer? Labour minister suggests pubs could be forced to SLASH their opening hours in bid to tackle harmful drinking.”

Those who managed to reach the end of the tabloid’s lengthy report, which came complete with dire warnings of economic havoc from the UK’s hospitality honchos and all-round denunciations of the prime minister, would have found this final sentence, a comment from a government health and social care spokesman: “It is categorically untrue that the government is considering changing alcohol licensing hours.”

So, all bullshit and lies then — and typical of the bilge the right-wing press has written about Starmer. This includes the confected outrage regarding the freebies the PM has received. The optics, as they say, are not good, and never are where such gifts are concerned, but still, there has been nothing untoward or unethical in Starmer’s behaviour.

In fact, the total amount of all gifts and hospitality declared by Starmer in the five years he has led Labour is some £12 500 less than the amount that Boris Johnson accepted from a Tory donor for home decor. Rather than declare this donation, BoJo instead tried to keep it secret by claiming he couldn’t remember who paid for what and, besides, he had lost his telephone and couldn’t access certain text messages, forgot his passwords, the dog ate his homework, and so on. 

So, some perspective, please. And, no rush, but mine’s a large Chateau Oxter if you’re heading to the bar…