ANC transformation strides denial is myopic
THIS is the third in a trilogy of columns on transformation denialism. The first was about the great deal of racial transformation despite “slow pace of transformation” mythology. The racism implied by transformation denialism was tackled in the second. The final analysis is on the potentially fatal implications of transformation denialism for the African National Congress (ANC), and how it can defeat negative perceptions.
Before SA’s transition to democracy in 1994, and since, the ANC has been accused by “the right” of being too socialist and by “the left” of being too capitalist. According to both sides, the ANC’s affirmative action policies benefited “elites” at the expense of “the masses”.
Radicals in the ANC and the tripartite alliance accused it of “betraying the revolution”. Their strategy is subversion from within and activism alongside radical elements and break-away factions. The ANC tolerated, even encouraged, transformation denialism because it yielded shortterm benefits. The illusion of insufficient transformation justified increased power and patronage. The interests of megalomaniacs, especially socialists, are served by maximal destitution, to which end they ensure that as little wealth as possible reaches, or is perceived to reach, “the poor”. A steady “rising inequality” drum beat reinforces the illusion.
But denialism’s benefits have a short shelf-life. The ANC cannot endure by saying, in effect: “We haven’t delivered for a generation. We’re no better than apartheid. Keep voting for us because we keep promising we’ll deliver eventually.”
The party’s leadership acknowledges its crisis, and seeks palliatives. Its alliance partner, the Congress of South African Trade Unions, is so badly bruised that the National Union of Metalworkers of SA says it is as “as good as dead”. Former president Kgalema Motlanthe thinks the alliance is dead. The South African Communist Party, says it is considering leaving the alliance (which it is unlikely to do because the ANC sustains its support by conceding disproportionate power to it).
The ANC can continue trying to out-left the left by endorsing denialism and conceding failure, and keep promising intensified anti-market fundamentalism. Or it can refute denialist mythology by proclaiming success. It can cite statistics as having been X in 1994 and X+Y now. It can familiarise people with facts, such as those in the Presidency’s “20 Year Review”.
Denialism is so ingrained that representatives seldom mention what has been achieved on the ANC’s watch. Faced with student demands, Higher Education Minister Blade Nzimande never mentioned spectacular increases in the number of literate youth, qualified teachers, black students in tertiary education, degrees awarded to black graduates, black academics or qualified black professionals. He never mentioned high and rising incomes enjoyed by black graduates, or that cheap or free education can be funded only by diverting wealth from less privileged people.
Faced with allegations of insufficient transformation in rugby, Sport Minister Fikile Mbalula never mentioned increased numbers of black players in club and provincial rugby (or the paucity of white soccer players). When Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa says the government is “open for business” and wants pro-growth policy proposals, he forgets the success of his party’s early pro-market policies, his party’s recent National Development Plan, and vacuous promises that “red tape” would be reviewed.
Where the ANC does not achieve outright majorities in next year’s elections, it can retain power by forming coalitions. If it embraces radical parties, it will extend its shelf life slightly and reduce the country’s shelf life substantially. If it embraces moderates, it will enhance its and the country’s long-term prospects.