Is the democratic honeymoon over?

I’m increasingly feeling that 2007 will be remembered as a seminal year in South African post-apartheid politics. It is shaping up to be a watershed year. I recently discussed the African National Congress’s 2007 as an annus horribilis, but it’s wider than the party. I think 2007 will go down as the year that South Africa’s honeymoon trust in democracy falters, and debate begins on how to test the boundaries of governance. Before I continue, let me be clear, I’m not calling anything near an end for democracy in South Africa, far from it, but rather a more realistic expectation of what democracy means for our nation.

I think this is the crossing of two wider trends in the country. The first being the disillusionment of many of the poorer segments of our society and the resultant move away from liberation party voting, and the second being the increasing centralisation of power in the Presidency and the ANC’s increasing paranoia of power.

The increasing prevalence of service-delivery protests in the past two years, most recently manifested in Cape Town this week, illustrates the growing discontent with the disconnect between what was promised before liberation and the reality of democracy as its exists today.

Discontent breeds revolution, and I am convinced that revolution is not what we need. What is required is a more sympathetic view from the government towards our poorer classes, with the resulting cognisant a direct policy shift to assist them to pull themselves out of their misery. What we do not need is revolution, whereby this discontented group ushers in a new governmental policy of markedly socialist practice and populist leadership. Our current macroeconomic policies have brought the country much success, and while I acknowledge that more must be done to uplift the poor, taking a fundamentally more socialist path is, in my opinion, not the solution.

As a point of digression, it is against this backdrop that one sees the relevance of the so-called black-diamond segment, the rapidly growing black middle class. A strong black middle class is one of the core success factors for our young democracy. It is here that policies like black economic empowerment’s affirmative procurement and affirmative action find their relevance. Middle classes in modern democracies are the tempering influence on the political and economic framework and go a long way to ensuring democratic stability and consistency. A solid future for South Africa will be based on a solid black middle class.

The second key factor in this realignment of democracy’s promise has to do with the ruling party itself. The ANC was very successful in taking control of the mantle of liberation after 1990, and it has enjoyed unabashed power for 13 years. However, in the past two years, it has grown more paranoid, more centralised and more intolerant. The biggest fear of any democracy is when an overwhelming ruling majority can use its power on a governmental level to stifle debate and tread on opposition politics, the very semblance of a democratic system.

A hubris seems to have developed within the ANC that the party owns political power in South Africa, and this allows for the abuse of that power in many cases. We are not alone in this, although we suffer without counterbalances. For examples, Republican and Democratic majorities in the United States House and Senate always try to use power to exert influence over each other, often at the expense of the voter. However, the US is fortunate in having a strong two-party system with an electorate that rewards and castigates on performance. There are no sure wins. In our nation, there exists no current counterbalance to the ANC’s power, and the effects are illustrative.

Much of this must fall unfortunately on the shoulders of our President, Thabo Mbeki. I say “unfortunately” because I personally am a great admirer of our president. His courage to employ strong macroeconomic principles, his determination to protect the party and his foreign-policy prowess (Zimbabwe aside) are all redeeming factors. However, his increasing paranoia and centralisation of power has led to some unfortunate uses of power and some unfortunate policy positions.

The current debacle with the health minister and her former deputy, the encouragement of sycophancy through the personal attack of dissidents, and his penchant for crushing true dialogue with race politics all represent failures to uphold purely democratic ideals. This has led to an ANC-wide testing of the boundaries of fair play. The Western Cape has seen much of this this year in the dogged determination shown by the ANC’s Western Cape branch to unseat the Democratic Alliance-led coalition using any methodology possible, including altering the electoral process in the province. The widening gulf between the party and the press and, most alarmingly, the suggested clamping down on press freedom (thus far thwarted) are other examples. The most recently illuminating issue has been the behaviour of National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete.

National Assembly speakers are supposed to be fair and impartial, foregoing their party for the cause of the National Assembly. Frene Ginwala was an excellent exponent of this. Mbete, however, dived straight into party politics in refusing a question put to Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang about her theft conviction. This was done on the technicality of it being “offensive and of unbecoming language”, a stipulation clearly meant for an entirely different purpose. It’s difficult not to see Mbeki’s hand in it, such is his iron-clad defence of the minister, but this will always remain a moot point. The point is, it’s yet another example of the party changing the rules of a pure democracy to suit its short-term needs.

What we’re seeing is a two converging and potentially negative influences on our pure democracy, one from the ground up and another from the top down. Discontent on one side, power-hungry hubris on the other. Before the “when-wes” run for English or Australian shores, it’s important to comprehend that this is a normal process with any young democracy. The so-called purest democratic principles, practised in the US, have seen many changes to its Constitution and incessant changes to its laws. What we as the electorate need to be aware of is that the responsibility lies with us to be vigilant of the protection of our democracy.

Democracy is about the power of the people; not one segment or another, but the collective. The only way to ensure that our ideals, our very future, is not compromised is to be cognisant of these influences and to stand up and provide solutions, either by voice or by vote. There is no doubt in my mind that our democracy will easily survive these growing pains, but we must ensure that we come up with a final product that meets the needs of the entire electorate, and provides a bedrock for a long, lively and contended democratic future.