Televising the revolution: how 'illiterate' Jacob Zuma outshone educated Professor Barney Pityana

The live coverage of some of the great political events happening in the country will, inevitably, shape the future and influence choices people make. After all, television is a powerful medium that has the potential to influence people’s behaviour and attitude.

Thus it was fascinating to watch the revolution being televised and observe the behaviour of the leaders, especially their choice of language.

Of course, it has become a norm to accept that English, for instance, is the language of politics though there is an opposing school of thought that espouses the view that to influence African voters, a politician must speak the language of the people. Thus the choice of language used at major political gatherings in Soweto and Sandton recently provides an interesting contrast to how politicians may make enemies and turn off potential followers and voters.

For instance, most bourgeoisies agree that Unisa vice-chancellor Professor Barney Pityana is a man of immense talent, great intellectual skill and resolute Black Power traditions. Yet at the same time his key-note presentation at the Sandton National Convention epitomised a mass of contradiction and complexities that confronts successful African high-flyers who seem to have forgotten how to speak indigenous languages.

In fact, Pityana personified a paradoxical mixture of an African straddling two worlds and identities: westernised, educated but with scant regard for African languages. Here was a man occupying what could perhaps been the most powerful political spotlight in post 1994 politics. His much vaunted revolution against the ANC was being televised!
Sadly, his language and message was like a presidential jet flying high above the heads of millions of people glued to their TV sets on a Saturday morning. Pityana missed touching and stirring the hearts and souls of millions of African by his choice of language: English!

As millions gathered before their TV sets for what could have been a life-changing and mind-bending oration, it turned out to be a damp squib because of the choice of language.
The big question that crossed most people’s minds was: WHO was he talking to? Of course, the English speaking African bourgeoisies heard him loud and clear. But what about the people beyond Sandton?

Yet Pityana, an instinctive Africanist who coined the phrase, “Black man, you are on your own,” betrayed himself by showing that he had become “umlungu omnyama,” that is, a “white man in a black skin”. Though his powerful message was punctuated by political morality, quality leadership and accountability, the people who needed to understanding the much vaunted breaking of a new political dawn did not quite get it.
English is not their mother tongue.

This is what happens to highly educated African leaders: they fail to speak the language of the people and thus be intuitively connected to that which moves in their hearts and souls.
Pityana is perhaps the first generation of African leaders and parents to not only raise children who do not speak English, but do not use indigenous languages when speaking to African people.

Of course, ANC president Jacob Zuma was quick to identity this problem later on the same day when he addressed a packed Jabulani Amphitheater in Soweto. Rightfully, he did not pardon Pityana for his choice of venue, friends and, above all, language. The gloves were off as Zuma bludgeoned the political credibility of the yet-to-be-launched new party. He drove his message in indigenous African language, mostly Zulu. Of course, this intuitively connected him to the people whose votes matter.

To paraphrase Nelson Mandela, if you speak to a man in a foreign language, you speak to his mind. If you speak to him in his language, you touch his heart. In contrast to Pityana, this is exactly what Zuma did. He spoke to and touched their hearts.

The choice of language is an important factor to determine who sways the African majority voters as we head to the next elections. A key aspect of transformation, political relevance and impact on the consciousness of the African majority will always include encouraging the use of indigenous African languages in the mainstream.

Zuma becomes more intuitively connected and sympathetic when he presents his speeches in a language that reminds Africans that they have a language of their own.
It is a gesture of what Ngugi wa Thiongo called “decolonisation of the mind” and soul.
It is easier for people to declare their loyalty to Zuma because he showed deep value for African self-love and pride by speaking home-grown languages. Thus there were frenzied outbursts to his Zulu which was punctuated by English, Sotho and Shangaan.

There are millions of Africans out there who are troubled by the continued marginalisation of indigenous languages and thus denying them equal status. This is a matter so primordial that it arouses resentment and antagonism to images of “abelung abamnyama”, that is, “whites in black skins”.

No one can say for sure that, judging by the languages spoken in Sandton and Soweto over the weekend and the types of audiences each gathering attracted, we have reached a point of no return in the schism of the African community into different classes. But, already, there is an assessment that Shikota is the emergence of a “black DA” to protect, promote and preserve white language, wealth and power while the ANC still pursues the total liberation of the African majority.

Of course, a shrewd politician would not have missed out on an opportunity to speak to the people in the language that they understand. After 15 years, Africans have ceased to be what white marketing gurus call an “aspirational group” that looks up to everything white, including language, venue and associates for self-confidence and determination.

As someone who coined the phrase, “black man, you are on your own”, Pityana should have spoken the language of the people when his revolution was televised.
Of course, his loss was Zuma and the ANC’s gain.