George Orwell observed that "Power worship blurs political judgement because it leads, almost unavoidably, to the belief that present trends will continue. Whoever is winning at the moment will always seem to be invincible."

Democracies such as South Africa's, governed by a single dominant party, seem particularly susceptible to this "mental disease." The perception that ‘present trends will continue' - and the ruling party will always be dominant - can deflate civil society and demoralise most opposition.

In turn the country's rulers can come to believe that they will be in power forever, and start behaving accordingly. Power is centralised, corruption takes root, and rules are formulated which advance the interests of the strong and do not protect the weak.

A point of no-return can be reached for a democracy when those in power have both too much to fear and too much to lose by surrendering power (of which they have far too much in their possession). The temptation to try and subvert the popular will - when it eventually turns against them - can be overwhelming.

It seems that up until November Mbeki's supporters were confident that their man was comfortably ahead of Jacob Zuma in the race for the ANC presidency. When, on November 25, the results of the nomination process revealed that he was actually far behind, they had to scramble. On Friday, November 30, the Mail & Guardian reported that "Mbeki's supporters and strategists have held a series of meetings across the country in the past week, where they discussed how to respond to his humiliating setback at the provincial conferences at the weekend."

Within a week allegations were being made that Mbeki's supporters were using state resources to buy votes, and delegates were being offered bribes to betray their branch mandates. It is an open question whether such under-handed manoeuvres will work or not. But the above board part of the ‘fight back' campaign faces its own difficulties.

City Press reports that this entails Mbeki going on a "publicity drive" and giving "rare interviews to the media." This has included an interview with the Sunday Times in which he gave a detailed account of the goings on within the upper echelons of the party. Senior party and government officials have written articles for the newspapers motivating for a third term for Mbeki, and others have given interviews attacking Zuma. There is nothing undemocratic or improper about all this. The problem for the Mbeki-ites is that up until a few weeks ago they were insisting to the ANC that campaigning in this manner was an anathema to the organisation.

In 2001 the Mbeki leadership of the ANC formulated guidelines for the way in which internal party elections should be conducted. These were contained in the document "Through the eye of the needle: Choosing the best cadres to lead transformation."

Paragraph 66 of this curious document insisted that "it is a matter of profound cultural practice within the ANC that individuals do not promote or canvass for themselves. Historically, this has justifiably been frowned upon as being in bad revolutionary taste."

Paragraph 69 stated, "Nomination and canvassing must be done openly, and within constitutional structures of the movement...Outside these structures, it becomes dangerous and unacceptable lobbying."

And paragraph 74 decreed, "Individuals who operate in the dead of the night, convening secret meetings and speaking poorly of other members should be exposed and isolated."

In July the following year the Mbeki-ites came up with another rule. Jeremy Cronin, an ANC NEC member and senior official in the SACP, was carpeted by the party leadership for incautiously airing - in an interview with an academic several months before - certain concerns at the direction the ANC was going. He was forced to issue an unqualified apology, and the NEC released a statement which "reiterated that it is impermissible for any member to discuss ANC internal issues outside of the structures."

Up until November this year the Mbeki-ites presented all of these rules as belonging to some kind of ancient and sacred tradition, whose violation would seriously imperil the liberation movement. In reality, of course, they were simply intended to hobble any outsider challenge to the incumbent party leadership. As soon as their usefulness expired (on November 26) they were unceremoniously ditched.

In an article in August 1998 the political editor of the Mail & Guardian, Howard Barrell, noted that the National Party's "past sits like a monkey on its shoulder, mocking its attempts to assume any dignity or moral weight" as an opposition. The accusations then directed by the NP against the ANC - such that it was making "skin colour more important than merit, skills or talent" - may well have been well-founded. The problem was that it was difficult to take them seriously when they were voiced by the NP.

One can't help thinking that the same monkey has now popped up on the shoulder of the presidency to mock its efforts to publicly motivate for Mbeki's re-election. In an article in The Star, December 6, the Minister in the Presidency, Essop Pahad, opined that "Democracy requires a process in which leadership positions are robustly contested. That is the ANC way. But these contestations must not degenerate into invective, abuse, dirty tricks, appeals to different forms of chauvinism and ad hominem attacks."

Pahad may well be right. But when this complaint comes from the person behind the effort to smear DP leader Tony Leon as a "white fascist" and "neo-Nazi," and who secretly raised some R2m to bring the venom and vindictiveness of Ronald Suresh Roberts into his service, one doesn't know whether to laugh or just throw up.