A POLITICAL GOLDILOCKS

A contradiction runs through the heart of the EFF, between a party that wishes to overthrow the state by revolutionary means and one that wishes to win power through democratic elections

So what is the EFF, really? This is a confusing and complex puzzle. For example, in its founding document — The Seven Non-negotiable Pillars of the EFF — it describes itself as, among other things, a radical, militant, leftist, anticapitalist, anti-imperialist, economic emancipation movement with an internationalist outlook, and one that draws inspiration from the broad Marxist-leninist tradition and Fanonian school of thought.

That is quite a mouthful, but elsewhere the EFF describes its purpose a little more succinctly.

The party constitution says its aim is to “complete the overthrow of the neo-liberal anti-black state”. It seeks to establish a “dictatorship of the people in place of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie” and ensure “the triumph of socialism over capitalism”. In the final analysis, “the ultimate aim of the EFF is the realisation of socialism”.

That is significantly more clear cut.

The EFF celebrated its four-year anniversary towards the end of July and now is as good a time as any to try to assess how it is doing in realising its goals.

“We must all live by this book, including parliament and all political formations,” EFF leader Julius Malema said in 2016, holding up the SA constitution, “because this is our bible and without it we are nothing.”

But, for all that, democratic SA’S founding document does not feature once in the EFF’S own constitution. Instead, it says the party’s objective is “to capture political and state power through whatever revolutionary means possible”.

It is a curious revolutionary movement that chooses free and fair elections as its primary revolutionary mechanism — for that is the exercise into which the EFF throws all its energy.

This contradiction, between a party that wishes to “overthrow” the state and one that wishes to win power through democratic elections, runs through the heart of the EFF. And it is a paradox that Malema makes great use of in how he goes about positioning the party in the public mind.

The media, prone to seeing only what it wants to see, has done much to facilitate and engender a narrative that would have it that the EFF is a traditional, modern opposition party, much like any other; that is, unconventional at times, occasionally outlandish and sometimes divisive, but really, a run-ofthe-mill organisation.

And so, in assessing the EFF, one is faced with something of a quandary. Is one to gauge its effectiveness on its own revolutionary terms or with the conventional lens through which it is more typically viewed?

Use the former and it is profoundly unsuccessful, for it has categorically failed to overthrow the state. The EFF’S politics, from the court cases it pursues to how its members passionately argue the rules in the national assembly, seem enmeshed in constitutional thought, not insurrection. Constantly it legitimises the state. It does not delegitimise it.. Outside of its rhetoric, it seems happy with the order of things.

Use the latter measure and the party has had some success. This has not been profound but, in feeding off the ANC’S decline, it has established a national base and, certainly, a disproportionately prominent place in the public mind as an opposition party and vociferous critic of President Jacob Zuma.

It won 6.35% of the vote in the 2014 national elections, making it the third biggest party in parliament. In the 2016 local government elections, it secured 8.19% of the

What it means: If you look past the theatrics, there is much about the EFF and Julius Malema that is disturbing