Democracy deferred, again.

I have been challenged by Michael Trapido to write my take on the ANC. I have lots to say and lots I feel about the ANC. While we can laud the party for playing a huge role in the struggle against apartheid and certain members have been instrumental in nation building as well as peace initiatives in KwaZulu-Natal, all I can feel is a keen sense of disappointment.

Aids activists have dubbed Mbeki’s denial about the causal link between HIV and Aids as ‘denialism’. This, perhaps, lends a certain undeserved coherence to his thoughts and misdirects the focus onto his failure to recognise one problem instead of his general behaviour of denying crisis after crisis. He has stymied legitimate scientific research and medical practice and probably cost numerous people their lives. Of course Aids and associated issues run deeper than the president’s office. The delay in the roll out of drugs has impacted on this country very deeply and will continue to do so for some time.

This failure to recognise and acknowledge the real extent of the problems is a failure of leadership. It is also due to an increasing centralisation of power in the president’s office. Kenneth Good discussed how elites in Africa strip democracy of any real meaning and put in place severe limitations on popular involvement. Democracy is thus the purview of the elites and full of mass constraints for meaningful engagement by the people. I posit that these factors are interlinked with the absolute denial of any crisis by the elite. Mbeki is not alone in this behaviour.

Firstly, the elite of Africa live on another continent full of luxury sedans, good food and a jetsetter lifestyle. They occasionally descend to make a speech or pretend to care, but largely live external to the real issues on the ground. The African elite are an urban cadre that pander to the masses with populist slogans and appear to have no understanding of Africa. From their lofty perches they overlook the real problems on the continent. If they admit their neighbours have a crisis then they are implicated in the failure to act upon it. It is far easier to deny the crisis and therefore not have to respond.

In Thabo Mbeki’s case and within the ANC, the office of president is vested with a lot of power and the ability to make important decisions. The centralised leadership structures in effect allow one man’s idiosyncrasies and opinions to freeze the entire decision making process. The centralised leadership also means centralised punishment. The South African parliamentarians refuse to criticise their president for fear of chastisement and even the losing of their seats in parliament. The party list system is flawed to say the least and perpetuates rule by the elites.

The Orwellian term democratic centralism is not democratic except in name. It means the party can discuss an issue, but once the leadership has decided the structures must obey.

I don’t have much hope for Zuma either. He was once a great man of peace in KwaZulu-Natal and a fabulous diplomat. His current and recent behaviour tramples his own reputation into the ground. His apparent refusal to call Malema and other followers to task for violent rhetoric is even more disappointing and disturbing. If his court case is not thrown out will he welcome violence in his name – and who is this violence supposed to be against?

This post is getting long and I’ll let it sit here for now. I do promise to write more on this topic and related issues as these issues are very important for South Africans right now.