ANC hogs civil society terrain

An important aspect of the African National Congress’ mythology is that it alone liberated South Africa. This nonsense is a useful brush with which to tar as illegitimate any alternative vision of the country’s future.

It is not only the parliamentary opposition parties that have experienced this denial of democratic space. When the Congress of SA Trade Unions recently attended a gathering of civil society groups, the ANC was outraged at its ally’s “oppositionist” stance and warned that any mass civic movement outside the ANC would be frowned upon as “attempts for regime change”.

It is always dangerous when one starts believing one’s own propaganda — in this case, that the ANC is the only legitimate custodian of the people’s aspirations — and this is breathtakingly arrogant stuff. As Sipho Pityana, chair of the Council for the Advancement of the SA Constitution pointed out this week, the seizure of state power in SA was “not a result of gallant military actions of a marauding liberation army but largely popular struggles and resistance” by a myriad of organisations and groups, as well as international pressure.

Pityana said the subsequent co-option and dismantlement by government of civil society after the first democratic elections in 1994 was “a grave strategic mistake” culminating in a “rush for access to resources” in the ANC, by “self-serving careerists and opportunists seeking personal advancement and gain”. He bemoans the subversion of the Freedom Charter’s values by “a new, venal conservative faction that straddles the right-wing of the ANC alliance and a broader political establishment formed over the past decade”.

SA is fast becoming gripped by the “politics of cronyism and patronage”, he said, “where at times political connection and loyalty rank ahead of technical and administrative competency”. Pityana, speaking at a donor conference, expressed regret also that “active citizenship” has been lost, with civil society’s response to unhappy developments in the ANC “muted” and “instead of taking their futures by the scruff of the neck, the majority of South Africans have become passive spectators”.

Pityana’s views are significant, coming as they do from an ANC stalwart and former director-general of foreign affairs. But vexingly Pityana appears to accept the ANC’s sinister stance that criticism is only acceptable when it comes from “progressives” who are broadly aligned with them.

He asserts, astonishingly for the chair of an NGO set up to defend the Constitution, that SA’s problems are not only because of weak and marginalised civil society structures, but also the absence of a “legitimate” opposition party capable of challenging the ANC.

The Democratic Alliance is dismissed by Pityana because they are “seen as relics of the erstwhile white politics of the apartheid era”. The other opposition parties are negated “by bitter internal divisions and personality politics”.

Pityana’s assessment of the problems of the opposition parties is largely accurate. It is troubling, though, that he blithely parlays these inadequacies into a supposed absence of legitimacy, especially since opposition supporters comprised a third of the vote in the last election. In doing so he plays directly into the hands of those who claim sole legitimacy for the ANC, in perpetuity.

Pityana ended with a call on donors to support civil society organisations “able to stand up to the ruling party when necessary but also capable of constructively engaging with it”. It is indeed true that “there are dark clouds above us and we cannot ignore them”, so one must hope that these donors remember that while constructive engagement is fine and dandy, NGOs very often need to give ruling parties a kick in the balls.

Otherwise there will not be a revival of civil society. It will instead merely be a revival of essentially ANC-aligned fraternal organisations, now sucking at the philanthropic teat instead of the taxpayer one.

Pityana speech: www.casac.org.za