A long view of SA needed
AT the time of writing there are three weeks until the ANC elects a new leader, the putative next president of the country.
The next president has the unenviable task of cleaning up the mess left by President Jacob Zuma, who will, surely, be released from all accountability and protected from consequences while a new deck chair is found for his retirement.
The events north of our border over the past two weeks certainly showed the pervasiveness of “braskap”, that most corrosive blend of loyalty and support we give to our friends regardless of their tendencies towards greed, callousness and cruelty.
It’s not hard to imagine the refrain: “Let Comrade Zuma retire in peace. He is an old man. He is a revolutionary. He sacrificed all for our liberation. If we let PW Botha live and die in peace, why not Comrade Zuma?”
Back to the ANC’s elective conference.
There is, generally, any number of reasons why people vote.
Among others, people may vote out of unflinching loyalty and commitment to a person or a party; out of perceived moral obligation, where voters know that their party will never win, but cast their ballots anyway; or for utilitarian reasons, where the voter expects “something in return”.
What seems clear is that ANC leadership elections are a combination of loyalty and commitment (braskap, and whimsical ideological solidarities and affiliations) and unabashed utilitarian reasons.
The utilitarian motive is directly linked to notions of entitlement.
In this case, entitlement includes the belief that the ANC has the sole right to govern because of its valiant struggle against an unjust system and the egregiousness contained in the phrase, “it is our turn to eat”.
As such, a large part of the entitlement motive is based on the understanding that voting for a particular candidate holds the promises of access to power, influence and, well, financial opportunities.
This is where the ANC and the rest of us part ways.
For the rest of us – workers, the unemployed, business people, students, investors and people of all persuasions – there is a set of problems that have to be addressed urgently.
It starts with the clear and present dangers detailed by Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba in October’s mediumterm budget statement.
It includes the country’s biggest tax revenue shortfall since 2009 (an estimated R50.8-billion), a rising debt-to-GDP ratio (currently at 54.2%, forecast to top 61% by 2022) and poor projected growth (revised down from 1.3% to 0.7%).
In his budget statement, Gigaba explained that per capita GDP had declined for two consecutive years, that millions of South Africans were living in poverty, that unemployment was at 27.7% – the highest level since September 2003, with the country’s young carrying a disproportionate burden – and everwidening inequality.
Evidence for the ever-widening inequality showed that 95% of the country’s wealth is owned by 10% of the population, according to Gigaba.
All is not lost, though. At least not in theory.
We can begin to address these issues systematically, deliberatively and courageously.
These issues lie in three broad areas and another which has direct bearing on the ANC.
The first is the economy; the second is reform of the public sector, including its agencies; the third is the promotion of social cohesion and the fourth, closely related to each of the first three, is to get rid of the unsavoury characters within the ruling party, especially those that have been implicated in the worst ethical transgressions.
We can expect reform of the public sector to have bloody consequence: just who will employ those who need to be dismissed for non-performance or corruption is anyone’s guess.
It will not be easy, but through them we may begin to roll back the worst of poverty, inequality and unemployment, and establish food security, and consistent supplies of water and energy.
The next president has to take the long view.
The cold fact is that we will not create 14 million jobs in the next five years.
The best we can hope for is that the government’s Youth Employment Service initiative will bring an estimated one million young people into internships over the next three years. This is not paid employment. Like social grants, they are shortterm measures that are unable to fully address structural inequality or unemployment.
What, then, of the two main candidates, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa?
Sadly, neither will be judged on their actual abilities.
The case for Dlamini-Zuma is too narrowly focused on her gender as the fundamental reason why she ought to be elected. To paraphrase feminist author and professor bell hooks, on Hillary Clinton, I cannot support Dlamini-Zuma “in the name of feminism”.
There was, of course, the small thing of Sarafina II which, arguably, set the tone for graft and the absence of accountability and consequences for the next two decades.
Dlamini-Zuma is too close to what we want to break away from – and I don’t mean her former husband.
Ramaphosa’s problem is that whatever vision he may have for the country, whatever leadership qualities he may have, Tinky Winky and The Rowdy Bunch will never let him forget Marikana, that he is a millionaire, that he has white people as friends and colleagues, and that he once bid on a very expensive bull while people are homeless and starving.
Zweli Mkhize seems like a fine fellow, but let us wait and see.