Submitted by Tristan Gorgens
Listening to the various reactions to Mbeki’s resignation on Sunday I was struck by a the reaction by Archbishop Emeritus Tutu, one of the few ethical, non-aligned leaders left in our country, in which he said, “I can’t myself imagine that a party itself would say its unity is far more important than the stability of the nation.” It got me to thinking that it is precisely these two ideas, unity and stability, which have dominated the official reasoning given for Mbeki’s removal but have also been central to the discourse of the ANC, and Mbeki’s project within it, since the early ‘90s. There is a certain irony that these goals are now being used to justify his removal but I also believe they represent the heart of unresolved dilemmas within the ANC.
An emphasis on unity was an unsurprising aspect of a liberation movement that had been conducting an armed struggle for 30 years against an enemy that had a history of using “dirty tricks”. This need was intensified as the movement began needing to coalesce the element of its extremely ‘broad church’ into coherent political positions and ‘deploy’ its various factions in an equitable, or at very least justifiable, way in the early ‘90s. At the same time the potential for extreme political and social unrest required a ‘negotiated solution’ that would hold the country together during the transition to democracy. This was buttressed with the Mandela presidency’s focus on reconciliation and building a ‘Rainbow Nation’ — sometimes to the point of compromising on key transformative opportunities — and was further reflected in the ANC’s adoption of a self-styled structural adjustment programme in GEAR to signal to international capital the stability and attractiveness of our economy.
It was in this environment that Mbeki began consolidating his position in the ANC and the government. He is often credited (or blamed, depending on who you talk to) for centralising power within and greatly expanding the capacity of the presidency (beginning while he was still deputy president). It was clear from early on, however, that part of this involved only surrounding himself with those he believed shared this vision. President Mandela warned as he handed over the reins: “There is a heavy responsibility for a leader elected unopposed. He may use that powerful position to settle scores with his detractors, to marginalise or get rid of them and surround himself with yes-men and women.” Nevertheless when he became president he had the framework and his fingers on all the buttons he believed he needed to implement the vision he had for South Africa at home and abroad. At home he would be a moderniser and abroad he would reside over the re-emergence of Africa. In his speech on Monday he reminded us of this vision:
“Accordingly, among many things we did, we transformed our economy, resulting in the longest sustained period of economic growth in the history of our country; we introduced an indigent policy that reaches large numbers of those in need; we made the necessary advances so as to bring about a developmental state, the better to respond to the many and varied challenges of the transformation of our country. … our achievements with regard to many of the Millennium Development Goals, the empowerment of women, the decision to allow us to host the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup and our election as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council two years ago …
“All of us are aware of the huge and daunting challenges that face our continent. In the short years since our freedom, as South Africans we have done what we could to make our humble contribution to the regeneration of our continent. We have devoted time and resources to the task of achieving the Renaissance of Africa because this is what has informed generations of our liberators, even before the ANC was formed in 1912. We have done this fully understanding that our country shares a common destiny with the rest of our Continent.”
But it was the failure of key aspects of his domestic project, in combination with his leadership style, that lead to his downfall. His blind spots became those of the government and ANC. The focus on unity and stability within the party and state, which tightened as criticism grew, fed an ever growing momentum towards factionalism and people resorting to protest outside of the normal mechanisms of the party or state. It was precisely the emphasis on unity and stability that forced the public (exemplified by the service delivery riots) and party (including the much maligned alliance partners) to express their dissatisfaction and frustration in a variety of undemocratic ways. Mbeki’s denialism about this created the opportunity for these initially sporadic strands to coalesce around Jacob Zuma and his supporters. The depth of this denialism was most clearly expressed by his standing for re-election in Polokwane — a move that exacerbated the instability in ‘the movement’ and ensured that ‘the two centres of power’ became a problem.
The new leadership has therefore been able to co-opt the very discourses that gave Mbeki his power to ensure his downfall. What, then, can we learn from our second democratic president’s rise and fall? Mbeki has always been aware that a unity of purpose and the stability of our society are important:
“This is the vision of a South Africa that is democratic, non-racial, non-sexist and prosperous; a country in which all the people enjoy a better life. Indeed the work we have done in pursuit of the vision and principles of our liberation movement has at all times been based on the age-old values of Ubuntu, of selflessness, sacrifice and service in a manner that ensures that the interests of the people take precedence over our desires as individuals.”
But the key blind spot of this vision is that leadership requires more than selfless sacrifice by magnanimous leaders. It must actively encourage and engage with alternative visions, opinions and ways of being. The challenge for leadership in our society is not to generate a consensus but to create spaces for and encourage contestation, disagreement and debate so that ordinary people become actively involved in and ‘buy into’ the transformation of our society. However, as I have tried to show, this will require the ANC and the incoming leaders of our country to radically alter the way in which they engage with the citizens of our country — especially considering the ever increasing antidemocratic statements being made by Zuma allies (and his unwillingness or inability to intercede or challenge these statements). Indeed, as Stephen Friedman has pointed out, “the ANC seems to have moved from one extreme to the other — from an organisation in which the president makes all the decisions to one in which he takes very few, leaving it to the loudest and most ambitious to decide”. The leadership we need recognises the immeasurable value to be gained from the rough and tumble of a robust democracy and understands that this will often involve seeking out silenced and dissident views. Unity and stability should never be bought by narrowing public spaces and offering easy solutions. It is only by openly engaging with our differences that we can begin to transform our procedural democracy into a living, participatory democracy. I would therefore like to echo Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu’s call:
“Perhaps now we will call for changes in our Constitution. Let our president be elected directly by all South Africans and let us abolish party lists. They are pernicious and produce sycophants. Let our representatives be elected directly by their constituencies … I pray that we will return to civility in our public discourse. Politicians must remember that even the most powerful parties bite the dust at some point, especially when they forget those who put them in power. We have a wonderful country with wonderful people of all races. For goodness sake let us not sabotage it. Let us remember that the Freedom Charter declares: ‘The people shall govern’.”
Tristan Görgens is a 2006 Mandela Rhodes scholar and studies at UCT.
Author
A prince with dignity and determination
Prince Ngarambe’s goals are to become Rwanda’s first transgender model and to uplift the country’s youth
The EFF’s principles are unshakeable
Unlike the ANC, the core values of the freedom fighters do not change with each leader it elects
