The ANC and Ideology – II

Ye Gods!

I’m out of the country for a week, so busy that I didn’t have time to see a TV or newspaper, stuck with a lousy internet connection that wouldn’t allow me to send or receive emails, much less surf for any news of spawned mini black holes grazing on bits of France and Switzerland, and what do I find?

While my back has been turned the buggers have gone and changed the world!

Only after a thirteen-hour flight home to South Africa, my ears still whistling, mouth as dry as the Sahara, my brain sloshing around in my head and threatening to spill out through my nose and ears, my body relativistically strung out somewhere between the Mediterranean and Johannesburg, was I presented with news of the past week’s events. Trying to come to grips with momentous news at home and abroad while still prone to walking into trees and walls is not something to be recommended, believe me.

Firstly, there was the abandonment of capitalistic principles by good-ole George Dubya (“Gee, I really wish I was Jack Ryan”) Bush and his buddies. Massive bailouts of various financial institutions in the US of A. Rewarding the greedy and reckless bastards on Wall Street (and their equally avaricious cohorts around the world) with a safety net and ‘Get-out-of-jail-free’ card. Saving the bacon of both the small-time and large institutional investors who, Gadarene-like, swarmed to get something for nothing based on the vacuous promises and beguiling words of so-called experts and analysts spouting get-rich-quick crap all over the airwaves, instead of working honestly for themselves and their local communities.

The price of instant, unprotected financial gratification is, very often, the economic equivalent of a hangover and a limp dick – the lessons and consequences of which must be learned in order to avoid future over-indulgence, subsequent pain and embarrassing oozings. Lessons which will be lost if the consequences are not felt – immediately and directly – by the gullible, the credulous and the reckless. Personal and corporate responsibility must be made real and applied. The expectation that the world owes everyone a living is false and dangerous – as is the expectation that Big Brother must always catch the careless and carefree when things go awry. Maybe a bit of financial and economic turmoil, painful as it would be, might not be a terrible thing for a while.

Secondly, and more germane to the subject of this post, South Africa – sans the benefit of an election – had an incumbent president removed from office by the faceless ANC politburo.

Such behaviour is, of course, the logical outcome of the constitutional and political system foisted upon this country by the victorious and arrogant ANC post-1994.

Spearpoint has had occasion, in previous posts, to point out the undemocratic and dictatorial nature of the ANC government of South Africa. The current situation in South Africa further reinforces my earlier position.

In most other democratic countries constituencies are contested by individuals representing either themselves (independents) or a political party. In the latter case the individual, broadly speaking, is on an almost equal footing with the party he or she is standing for, thereby permitting the electorate to judge both the person and the party on their merits. It also allows for the electorate to later judge the performance of both the party and the individual in that particular constituency. If either has failed to deliver on its promises or has not demonstrated publicly acceptable standards of behaviour and decorum, then the electorate has the opportunity (at a later election) to toss the miscreant out on his ear. Financial, sexual and other scandals are often the cause of elections whereby the electorate can pass judgement on their elected representatives.

This is not the case in South Africa. Here a vote in an election is only for one of the parties contesting the seat. In the case of the ANC, at least, the individual who is to represent the constituency is not chosen by the electorate but is assigned by the party winning that seat. The party is not required to field a candidate who has any inkling of politics, or who has any education beyond kindergarten, or who has any conception of the meaning of ‘public service’ beyond equating it with ‘self-service’.

In the case of the ANC there seem to be only two criteria for their candidates – minimal vital signs and membership of the ANC (and not necessarily in that order).

In South Africa we have some ANC Members of Parliament (as well as Provincial and local government councillors) who, seemingly at times, can barely read and write, balance a cheque account or button their shirts evenly. We have some MP’s, having been implicated in or, even, convicted of criminal activity who are still occupying Parliamentary seats.

Thus it is that South Africa, for all the razzamatazz of the past few years, has no acceptable model or hope of democratic, parliamentary governance. Under the carefully crafted and totally illusory guise of ‘collective responsibility’, the ANC has hoodwinked both the people of South Africa and the world at large into the belief and acceptance of a new dispensation which is democratic, fair and just – rather than the one-party state which it effectively is.

Personal responsibility of MP’s, ministers of government and ANC party members and officials is all but non-existent. A constituency – or, indeed, the public at large – is denied any mechanism to hold accountable any individual within the ANC or the government simply because the voters have neither a say in the choice of a candidate nor in the retention or otherwise of that candidate. Responsibility for the actions or omissions of any individual ANC member is referred back to the ANC itself – aloof, unreachable and beyond the ken of mortal man. God-like, (now there’s a bit of imagery to apply to an atheistic, rooted-in-communism political party!) the ANC is self-styled in omnipotence and omniscience; it doesn’t explain or apologise because it doesn’t have to do so. The politburo of the ANC (the ‘National Executive Committee’) is a shadowy, sinister body of nameless and faceless men and women who claim to speak on behalf of all the ANC’s members and – by the default of a dictatorship of the majority – the people of South Africa; because it is hidden in shadows it operates behind closed doors according to unrevealed processes and rules, issuing its edicts from its Olympian heights of disdain and hubris – thereby making it an almost impossible target for criticism and attack.

The ideology and structures of the ANC are monolithic, entrenched through the pseudo-legitimisation of a flawed electoral system and (although good in principle) constitution, propped up by the tacit approval of the Western world pursuing its own agenda and ever eager to partake of the platinum, gold, uranium and other resources of an emerging South Africa – despite the fact that it is governed by former paupers anxious to cut themselves a hefty slice of the cake.

The bankruptcy of the ANC’s ideology is most clearly seen in the recent shenanigans revolving around the person of Jacob Zuma and the factionalism engendered by his naked lust for personal power.

Notwithstanding the ANC’s outward appearance of adherence and subservience to the rule of law, the ANC will, it appears, forgive almost any transgression provided that fealty to the ANC is never, never abrogated. (In this it is maybe not so different from many other political organisations anywhere else in the world where, one suspects, the party in question is merely a convenient outer raiment to be utilised by those hungry for personal power. The nature and policies of the party are not necessarily descriptive of the individual’s personal credo but can serve as a handy vehicle to self advancement.) Thus, Zuma might be under suspicion of various criminal acts – he could even be a convicted felon – but the ANC will imitate Nelson (the English admiral, not Mandela) when viewing Zuma’s flaws as a politician and a man, just so long as he can be used by those faceless politburo members to further the aims of those members. Zuma is but a front-man who may not realise that he is just as vulnerable as Thabo Mbeki to the whims of the power brokers and king makers sitting behind the closed doors of the NEC of the ANC. Zuma (as with Mbeki), together with all the cabinet members and other ANC elite, are but song and dance performers gyrating to the tune of an unknown composer and choreographer; a false note, a misstep, any sign of trying to inject a bit of originality that clashes with the political puppet master’s conception of conformity can result in the abrupt and ignominious removal of even the star of the show.

True to its communist roots and ever fearful of losing its control and grip on power, the ANC is still profoundly centralist in its thinking and actions, both in terms of its internal organisation and its government and control of the country. Individual members and local party committees have very little real power and influence over the national central committee. And because patronage is the only real way for individuals to advance within the ANC the organisation has become one that is characterised by the display of (ANC) politically correct outward behaviour which, in turn, has led to the party being served by sycophants and yes-men.

As a result, therefore, within the ranks of the ANC allegiance and lip-service to the ANC far outweighs loyalty to South Africa. The needs and wishes of the ANC far outweigh the needs of the country despite the presence within the ANC of some (although not enough) genuinely sincere individuals who see their principal duty as being to the country rather than to the party.

This has been openly demonstrated in recent days with the removal by the ANC politburo of the sitting President without reference to the electorate. In his ‘resignation’ speech on national television, Mbeki referred to his loyalty and duty to follow the dictates of the party. He made little or no reference to the possible impact of his removal upon the country save to mention his compliance with the ANC edict was in the interests of unity and stability – but the inference was more to the stability and smooth transition of power for the ANC, rather than the country.

Herein lies another danger to South Africa. In the minds of the ANC and its members – and, sadly, far too many of the ordinary citizens of South Africa – the ANC and the Republic of South Africa are perceived and promoted as being one and the same thing. In such a mindset, therefore, the ANC is, almost by definition, solely capable of determining what is in the interests of South Africa and can do no wrong. Extension of this pattern of thought and peculiar logic leads inevitably to the conclusion that South Africa serves the ANC. The danger comes then from the actions and aspirations of what is, to all intents and purposes, an unaccountable central committee or politburo whose shadowy and anonymous members view and treat South Africa as their own private fiefdom to plunder and pillage at will – in short, becoming another Zimbabwe or similar banana republic: a view apparently shared on this matter by one as exalted and respected as Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

The flaws in our Constitution and our version of ‘democracy’ are now coming into stark relief as the bully boys and revenge politicians of South African politics and society now begin to shed their veneer of decorum and civility with increasing confidence as they begin to scent their ultimate and – as they see it – inevitable victory. Now within their grasp are the spoils of the internecine contest – personal power, great privilege (and consequent private wealth) and the annihilation of their political foes. South Africa is poised to repeat the abuses and horrors of Eastern Europe post-1945.

Perhaps Mbeki, if he is true to his claim of wishing to serve South Africa, should re-examine his blind loyalty to the ANC. Perhaps he should resign his membership of that organisation and create his own political party in order to provide the country with a foil to the ANC as it now stands. Only in that way (maybe), and at least until the vast majority of the people of South Africa have been educated into what democracy truly entails, can this country have any chance of an effective and credible opposition to the juggernaut that is the ANC today; existing opposition parties tend to be paper tigers owing to their small parliamentary numbers that result from the distressing tendency of the electorate in this country still to vote along mostly ethnic/racial lines.

Spearpoint.

23^rd September 2008

The ANC and Ideology – I

It’s strange how even the best of intentions can produce results contrary to what was planned.

It’s also strange how the most meticulous planning and foresight can fail to predict outcomes at variance with what the planners had hoped to achieve.

Strange, too, is the fact that the more motivated and inspired the planner the more likely is the plan to go awry and the less likely the planner is to admit that the plan is not working.

The more ideologically pure is the plan then the more likely it is to come off the rails. The world is noted for its penchant to inject varying degrees of reality into the best thought-out and executed of Man’s schemes, dousing dreams with hefty sluices of ice-cold sanity. There are always those, however, who – regardless of the teeth-chattering shivers and goose bumps of the Arctic chills of real life – will persist in their cherished and cockeyed perceptions of the world as they believe it should be. Like the KFC advert in South Africa, showing two grown men sitting on a park bench in the depths of winter, both consuming some iced KFC confection and progressively shedding items of their warm winter clothes (down to their underwear), each seeking to show the other that he is not cold and is, in fact, quite warm, thank you very much, the ideologues and the proud will go to almost any lengths to deny the existence of the reality of the situation they find themselves in.

Recent South African history has more than its fair share of such idiocy.

The episodes earlier this year of xenophobic violence between different national, cultural, racial and economic groups within the townships and squatter camps of South Africa are but one example.

Having had the images and stories of the brutal black-on-black savagery that was perpetrated in the townships of South Africa flashed around the world – to the astonishment of the global population, given the previous propaganda of the ANC government that all was sweetness and light in the new ‘democratic’ and ‘egalitarian’ South Africa under the benevolence of the ANC – the government of South Africa was, initially, just as surprised as the rest of the world and failed to act in any meaningful way against the hatred and violence for a couple of weeks.

When, eventually, the government began, slowly and inadequately, to address the problem, the official line was merely that the attacks were merely spontaneous and random criminality – ignoring the widespread nature of the onslaught throughout much of the country.

As, finally, the scale of the problem began to be realised the government then turned to one of its old favourite lines of reasoning in times of crisis – viz; the attacks were said to be the result of the work of some unidentified and shadowy ‘third force’ (by implication, disaffected whites and their lackeys lusting after a return to the pre-1994 days of perceived power, privilege and glory) conspiring towards the destabilisation of the country and the overthrow of the ANC government. At which point, notably, the army was called in and troops were put on the streets in support of the police.

(Strikingly similar arguments had very quickly been produced by the ANC government when the country’s only commercial nuclear power station had been crippled by a technical failure, just prior to the realisation that the government and Eskom (the national parastatal solely responsible for the generation and distribution of electricity in South Africa) had blithely led the country into an economically disastrous power crisis. These politically bankrupt, inept and transparent arguments were quietly – and quickly – abandoned in the face of the incontrovertible evidence of the rank incompetence and stupidity of both Eskom and the government.)

Then, as the violence and xenophobia reached its height, the ANC government declared that, once the orgy of hatred had subsided, the victims of the attacks seeking refuge and safety in hastily set up tented camps away from the townships and squatter camps would, as a matter of government policy and ideology, be (forcibly, if need be) re-integrated back into the very same areas and neighbourhoods that had attacked, dispossessed and killed the poor bastards in the first place.

Such is the ideology and illusion of ANC thought and propaganda. The desperate need of the ANC to promote and defend its communist ideas of what, according to their cherished conceptualisations of the world, should be – rather than what actually is – drives them into a denial of reality. The sad part is that they then drag everybody else who is subject to their power into a world that does not exist – much to the discomfort and danger of those who do not share or enjoy the benefits and privileges of the ANC leadership and their ivory tower ideologues.

The concept of different tribes, races and socio-economic groups living peacefully side-by-side in joy and harmony is alluring. It should, perhaps, be an ultimate goal of mankind’s. But in the here and now of human social life on this planet opposites tend to repel and likes attract. It is a simple fact of human behaviour in this day and age, as well as throughout our history.

Elsewhere in Africa where refugees seek shelter from whatever political, military or economic storm they wish to avoid they are usually placed together in camps away from local populations where frictions could ensue. Even without coercive factors such as wars and famines to drive people away from their own homes, those fleeing less life-threatening situations have, historically, tended towards one another; the economic migrations of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in America and Australia saw Italians, Jews, Greeks, Poles, Germans, Chinese, Russians, Armenians and Slavs naturally coalescing into their own communities and neighbourhoods because that was what they felt most comfortable with and where they felt safest until, after a number of generations, they were able to assimilate enough of the predominant local culture to be able to venture out into that culture without undue threat.

So, the ANC and its government is intent upon farting against the thunder of human nature. Already many of those displaced during the xenophobic attacks have been returned to their previous abodes. (Others, seeing the writing on the wall, chose to return to their home countries, preferring the known evils and hazards of life in Zimbabwe, DRC, Mozambique, Somalia and Sudan to the uncertain hospitalities of South Africans.)

Already the rumblings in the townships and the squalid squatter camps have begun. Already the voices of dissent and despair over the re-integration have begun as mumbles of the ordinary people. Already have begun the not-so-quiet and subtle statements of local councilors that the ‘nkerekwere’ are not welcome – especially, for example, those Somali shopkeepers in the Western Cape townships who are seen to be too hard working and undercutting the prices of the local spaza store owners. It will only be a matter of time.

Criminality aside, it is only the ANC and its dogmatic and slavish adherence to its unrealistic and disgraced theories of a Marxist Utopia that is to blame for the initial outburst of xenophobic and genocide-intended violence and dispossession. It was the ANC and its inept and corrupt government that admitted millions of illegal migrants into the country and it was the same crowd that failed then to put in place the necessary social structures to police and care for those immigrants. And it is the ANC that, as with the Zimbabwean situation, continues to steadfastly maintain that no problem exists – as if ignoring or wishing away anything that is inconvenient to one’s perception of the world is really going to achieve something.

Nor is it any good to say that the USSR and the old Soviet bloc managed to keep racial and social peace in a wide-flung empire. That was only achieved at the point of a gun and under the constant threat – and utilisation – of ruthless repression from state organs such as the KGB and the Red Army. Despite recent talk from the ANC of instituting so-called ‘street committees’ as a means of doing what the South African Police Service clearly are unable to achieve – controlling and reducing crime – the ANC has neither the skills nor the stomach for such direct social repression, to say nothing of its lack of desire to admit to the world that only force could integrate a tribally diverse society and that its theories are valueless.

But such are the consequences of any system of political, social and economic control that is applied, willy-nilly, as a complete solution to the theoretical ills of mankind rather than as a set of aspirations and objectives which need to be realised within the context of the real world and the differing sets of circumstances in which different people find themselves from time to time. Such systems, applied without care and consideration, de-humanise and alienate those they are intended and theorised to more fully humanise and empower. Human beings are, first and foremost, individual beings within a social environment – not the other way around. And therein lies the danger of systems of thought in which people are primarily catagorised as, variously, (and by way of example) ‘the masses’, ‘serfs’, ‘consumers’, ‘the proletariat’, ‘peasants’, ‘communists’, ‘Democrats’, ‘Republicans’, ‘Tories’, and so on.

De-humanise humans for long enough and, eventually, they will behave as animals.

Spearpoint.

9^th September 2008