ANC gets personal in reply to ‘no vote’ call
Party dredges up SA’s painful past to score a point
CHAPTERS of our painful history have been revisited not to help us reflect, but to strike a blow below the belt. ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe reminded former intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils that “he is the one who led young men, made them jump fences at the border between South Africa and Ciskei, and they were killed in Bisho. The massacre was a result of his recklessness.”
It is true, of course, that the Goldstone Commission condemned Kasrils. But then he was not the only person leading the march. Stalwarts such as the late Chris Hani, Steve Tshwete, Joe Slovo and the ANC’s deputy president, Cyril Ramaphosa, were also there.
I am vehemently opposed to the Vote No campaign. Kasrils and the former deputy health minister, Nozizwe MadlalaRoutledge, have asked South Africans to take a stand against fraud and corruption by not voting for the ANC. They ought to spoil their ballots, they said. They have since modified their position by saying voters must choose any of the smaller parties.
Their concerns about corruption and a lack of accountability are valid. They are expressing sentiments already expressed by many South Africans across the political spectrum. Even ANC supporters have spoken passionately about the obscenity that is Nkandla.
However, I do not agree that individuals should tell people who they should and should not vote for. That is akin to a political campaign — and if this is their intention, then they must be bold and brave enough to form a political party or join an existing one.
The ANC’s response to this call has been infantile and destructive. The party has every right to hit back and rebuke the Vote No campaign. But how it does so leaves much to be desired.
A cerebral response would have been to use its own Good Story to Tell campaign to counter the claims. It prefers to lash out and get personal.
The ANC’s response to this call has been infantile and destructive . . . Who is allowed to criticise the ANC?
Does the party have anything to say about the merits of the argument of Kasrils et al? When did it realise Kasrils was not a good leader? The same party elected him over and over again to its national executive committee (NEC) and the South African Communist Party’s central committee. He was also in the cabinet for 14 years.
Is the ANC telling us it put an unsuitable individual at the head of intelligence and, before that, water affairs and forestry?
By taking this line of argument, the party is demonstrating precisely the point being made by detractors — that the ANC is intolerant and does not engage intelligently with different views.
Similarly, when Trevor Manuel warned that attacks on public bodies, such as the public protector and the courts, would weaken these institutions and erode democracy, he was called “a free agent who refused to take any responsibility in the ANC”.
When did the party realise this about Manuel? At the 2002 Stellenbosch elective conference, he was number one on the NEC list. So pivotal was his contribution as an MP that he was moved to a crucial ministry in the presidency — planning.
Our success as a country rests on policies and plans that take into account the depths of our socioeconomic crisis. The same party trusted Manuel to steer us in that direction. He and Ramaphosa have been the voices and faces of the National Development Plan, the official blueprint of the government. But today he must be silenced.
Madlala-Routledge is said to be bitter because she was not appointed health minister in 2009. Is this for real? Are we in kindergarten here? Let us assume she is bitter, but is she not right about corruption?
Mantashe seems to be sitting on a list of grudges. He is ready to pounce when there is criticism directed at the party.
Who is allowed to criticise the ANC? Can its members do so in the fullest confidence that the criticism does not invalidate their love for the party but actually demonstrates it?