Is there a Zuma debate on substance or is it all just legal theory?

[“Why is there little real debate over the country’s problems and alternatives?” More pointedly, “Why is there a conscious blindness to [new ANC leader Jacob Gedleyihlekisa] Zuma’s actual positions?” At this juncture, an open debate is needed more than ever. “We fought not only for the ANC to rule but for the freedom to speak our minds, even if that should lead us to conclusions that differ from the ANC leadership.”

How is it that no one in the alliance is debating what the Zuma phenomenon may mean as a programmatic question, and whether and how his leadership differs from that of Thabo Mbeki? Why is it that Zuma has attracted a range of people who do not have clear ideological reasons for their affiliation, but attribute “leftism” to the ANC president? Has the left project absorbed Zuma — or has the official left dissolved in the Zuma “tsunami”?

One of the reasons listed for defeating Mbeki as ANC president was to release the “democratic genie,” to provide an opening, to give voice to those who had been excluded, to combat centralisation and to allow space to the previously marginalised. But if all that is true, what are we to make of the current upheavals in ANC structures and the profusion of intimidating rhetoric in the alliance? Possibly one can dismiss much of this demagoguery, since many are young and obviously know little about history, struggle or revolution, and more about acquisition of wealth and positions. Nevertheless, the air is filled with revolutionary and pseudo-revolutionary phrases, uttered often as (ultimately violent) threats against anyone who might wish to stop the Zuma “advance.”

Many of the ANC and alliance leaders are watching in silence as the inherited traditions of the organisation are destroyed. I do not suggest that the legacy is unproblematic and that what it means “to be ANC” is the same at all times. But who is grappling with this, as we tried to do in the early 1990s, after unbanning, when it was not possible to simply pick up from 1960? Are shortcuts not being taken at the expense of the very masses in whose name the Zuma project purports to speak?]

Extract from “The need for real debate on South Africa’s future” by Unisa professor Raymond Suttner who served 10 years for his underground activities on behalf of the ANC/SACP

http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=742&Itemid=1

This article should be read in conjunction with Justice Malala’s offering in the Sunday Times “Party’s leadership has lost its voice, direction” in which he observes :

For all its faults, at least the Mbeki era brought with it certainty. From 1996 onwards, when he backed and pushed through the Growth, Employment and Redistribution strategy (Gear), there was no doubt what it was Mbeki wanted and intended to do with his presidency.

Even before he assumed the presidency, we knew that he intended to put Africa on the world map. In 1999, when he took over from Nelson Mandela as ANC president, his economics were clear.

To be sure, there was disappointment aplenty. We were and remain disappointed by his support of Zimbabwe’s despot Robert Mugabe. But this much we know: Mbeki does not waver in his support for the man. He has been consistent for 10 years and remains so even in the face of the killing and maiming of Mugabe’s opponents.

We might have been disappointed with Mbeki’s dogged refusal to accept clear evidence of the link between HIV and Aids, but this much we knew: in documents and in addresses, he fought his corner, misguided though it was.

In a sense, we knew who was in charge. Flawed, misguided, blockheaded and brilliant at times, the ANC and its leader were in charge.

Today we have to ask: where is the ANC? What does the organisation of Pixley Kalsaka Seme, Albert Luthuli and Nelson Mandela stand for?)

http://www.thetimes.co.za/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=819374

Nelson Mandela in his inauguration speech :

(That spiritual and physical oneness we all share with this common homeland explains the depth of the pain we all carried in our hearts as we saw our country tear itself apart in a terrible conflict, and as we saw it spurned, outlawed and isolated by the peoples of the world, precisely because it has become the universal base of the pernicious ideology and practice of racism and racial oppression.

We, the people of South Africa, feel fulfilled that humanity has taken us back into its bosom, that we, who were outlaws not so long ago, have today been given the rare privilege to be host to the nations of the world on our own soil.

We thank all our distinguished international guests for having come to take possession with the people of our country of what is, after all, a common victory for justice, for peace, for human dignity.

We trust that you will continue to stand by us as we tackle the challenges of building peace, prosperity, non-sexism, non-racialism and democracy.

We deeply appreciate the role that the masses of our people and their political mass democratic, religious, women, youth, business, traditional and other leaders have played to bring about this conclusion. Not least among them is my Second Deputy President, the Honourable FW de Klerk.

We would also like to pay tribute to our security forces, in all their ranks, for the distinguished role they have played in securing our first democratic elections and the transition to democracy, from blood-thirsty forces which still refuse to see the light.

The time for the healing of the wounds has come.

The moment to bridge the chasms that divide us has come.

The time to build is upon us. )

http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/speeches/inaugpta.html

On this blog so far the overwhelming focus has been on the issues surrounding the Jacob Zuma trial and all its ramifications for the people of our country. The legal and other implications flowing from the trial. I’d now like to expand the debate by sharing my concerns.

At Polokwane Jacob Zuma was elected as the president of the ANC primarily on the basis of transformation and the upliftment of our masses being too slow. Zuma being a man of the people.

I promptly confirmed that if he was the choice it must be respected but could someone enlighten me as to why Zuma is considered the champion of the poor? I could understand that he was popular among the grassroots but that did not make him a champion of the poor per se. What programmes had he championed while deputy president of the country and how did he differ from Mbeki in this regard?

http://thoughtleader.co.za/traps/2008/01/23/is-jacob-zuma-really-the-champion-of-the-poor/

I submitted that it might have been a case of an ideology being fitted onto a charismatic and popular leader rather than any real ideological shift on the part of JZ. As for champion of the poor, this jury was still out.

In terms of policies we were reminded that the ANC acts as a collective and that Zuma was a far better team player than Mbeki. He would adhere to the ANC policies without being as aloof as the president. Along the way we have seen that “the collective” has a way of ignoring accountability regardless of the mismanagement or corruption that manifests itself … The only area where accountability seems to apply is when you fall out of favour with the faction directing “the collective”. This failure to hold people accountable has as its victim the whole country, with the main victims being our poorer communities.

What for example could we have done with the arms deal money and the cost of our policies on Zimbabwe? Again the masses suffer the most as a result of non-delivery.

Of course watching the Zuma trial unfold many South Africans would be justified in the mistaken belief that some members of the ANC are more collective than others and that the ANC/SACP/Cosatu Alliance is in fact a Zuma/SACP/Cosatu Alliance. It is my personal view that Zuma is indeed by far our most popular leader but in no way the champion of the poor.

The champion of the poor? :

Allow ongoing threats against the people of this country by people pledging allegiance to him go unanswered? If he is the president of the ANC and the Mbeki faction comprises a large component of that and the ANC is a collective, why isn’t its president saying: “The ANC is bigger than me. You will not insult it by placing me above it. I am the president of all its members and if you threaten those who oppose me within the ANC or otherwise you are threatening me.” What about the masses within the ANC who support Mbeki and what about the actual financial cost to the nation of this ongoing internal war? Who do you think is paying the heaviest price for that?

When the parliamentary caucus of the ANC started making racist remarks why didn’t the ANC president call them into line or at least admonish them? Does the future president of South Africa not see himself as the leader of the country in waiting? I applaud the Obama-like recognition that poverty is rife in all races but the overwhelming poverty resides within our poorer black communities. They can no longer afford to indulge the follies and financial cost of the leadership.

Are the threats being made against the media, attempts to control the public broadcaster and start an ANC newspaper in the interests of the masses? We have a fine example of what happens when you do that in Zimbabwe. There, without any legal way for the masses to express themselves, five million people are starving to death and even as we speak Mugabe and the ZANU-PF are denying aid agencies access to feeding them. Is this the champion of the masses we can expect? Masses of dead bodies? It’s one thing to say we won’t be like Zimbabwe all the while ignoring the fundamental principles of the ANC and following the Mugabe road map to disaster. In terms of media freedom Mbeki has shown great courage in allowing robust debate to continue. JZ sounds more like Mugabe in the making in terms of the media. A champion of the poor means doing the right things by them and, when you do wrong, accepting blame. Not carrying on the corruption and mismanagement and hiding it from the masses by closing down the media who highlight it. Where’s their protection?

The Land Expropriation Bill. Is it in the interests of the masses or is it in the interests of the elite? Are we going to see more action and fewer promises? Are they going to carry on the example of Zimbabwe or rather call in our traditional farmers, the Afrikaans community, to help build it up so that the masses get the full benefit and the ANC delivers. Or is it going to be used to reward cronies while the masses starve? Will they ensure that the farmers who are given land have the necessary access to skills and funding or are we going to see Zimbabwe II. Landbank I wasn’t very promising. What percentage of the masses benefited from that bank’s implosion? How many fat cats made millions out of those loans without any regard for sustained job creation?

In terms of BEE are we going to see true black empowerment or a handful of cronies still walking away with everything? In terms of Affirmative Action will assessment be made of where the skills of other races or even overseas imports are needed in addition to just handing out jobs. In Eskom we saw that a handful of jobs, in terms of our economy, was created while millions were affected by the damage caused by the incompetence in appointing staff and designing strategy.

I support true transformation in sport, affirmative action and BEE (subject to many amendments) but they must be used to uplift the masses and handled responsibly. A good example is the Eastern Cape feeding scheme. By the time the fat cats had finished with all their demands the scheme collapsed. How does that help the masses? The children lose vital assistance while the cronies move onto their next project of stealing the money designated for the poor. I’ve hammered those who fix the food price already. I’m waiting for the day when someone investigates how much of the aid designated for our masses is lost to the cronies along the way. Want to bet it will dwarf the food price fix? At what point are we going to see cronies cut out of the chain between funding and delivery? When will we see tenders on aid to the masses being awarded to competence without racial requirements? The beneficiaries are the masses. The only contract should be between government and supplier with major oversight and massive penalties for stealing that aid.

When are we going to start addressing these issues and when does the ANC government in waiting plan to apologise to the masses for the wastage of the collective and the ongoing move away from all the principles that the ANC stands for? It is one thing to have ideals that people can subscribe to but something else when leaders spit on everything of value that the ANC stands for.

If Jacob Zuma is the ANC president, national president in waiting and champion of the poor then it is time to start acting like it. Instead of standing in a huddle after the court hearing and lambasting the media for reporting to the country, rather stand proud for the principles that the ANC fought for and rise above rabble rousing and impetulance.

It is not adherence to the principles of the ANC that is causing the bulk of the consternation as much as this bankruptcy of leadership and pursuit of personal agendas ahead of the interests of the party and the country.