All sound and fury — with a twist in the tale?
Do the Economic Freedom Fighters have a plan or are they playing to the gallery? evaluates the party and its policies
THE ANC has, at times, been fond of hurling the “sound and fury” speech from Shakespeare’s Macbeth at its parliamentary opponents. And given the appearance, brief flourishing and demise over the years of parties such as the Independent Democrats and COPE, one might well ask whether the Economic Freedom Fighters is “but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets its hour upon the stage and then is heard no more”.
Is it “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”? Or does it have staying power?
After this year’s election, the EFF ended up with more than a million votes, or 6.35% of the total, giving it 25 seats in the National Assembly — about 200 000 votes and five seats shy of COPE’s 2009 performance.
In parliament, the EFF has proved to be a mixed bag. Some of its MPs — notably Julius Malema, Floyd Shivambu, Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala (easily parliament’s best podium speaker), Andile Mngxitama, Mbuyiseni Ndlozi and Godrich Gardee — are top-notch, but too many EFF MPs are mediocre and some are truly weak, as was clear this week in the absence of its leaders.
When taking issue with the ANC, the EFF outshines all other parties because of its fearlessness, plain talk and raw authenticity. It has been aided by the growing indefensibility of President Jacob Zuma’s position and by very weak, partisan ANC chairmanship, which makes the ANC an easy foe to rally against morally.
Thus, this is a honeymoon period for the EFF. Many of its admirers love its criticism of the ANC, but have not studied its policy alternatives. Its questioning of the ANC is magnificent, especially when it defends the constitution. Will its answers to the questions it raises measure up when applied to itself? Is the public tiring of its walkout tactics? Will the workers’ party of the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa be in opposition to the EFF, or will the EFF gobble it up?
The EFF’s true mettle might well be tested if the ANC ever attempted to regain the moral high ground and attack the EFF on its many weaknesses, among which are its own leaders’ historical behaviour, the irrespon-
Much thought and preparation has gone into the elective people’s assembly
sible actions of its members (for instance, its role in the recent Gauteng land invasion), and gaps in its policy platform.
Turning, then, to the EFF’s base policy document recently released for discussion in the run-up to its first elective conference in December. It becomes clear that the document reflects the movement in the unevenness of its quality and content, much like the little girl in the poem: when it is good, it is very, very good, but when it is bad it is horrid. Its policy proposals have not been costed, leaving it open to pie-in-the-sky ridicule.
The abolition of bail and a proposal to decommercialise the legal fraternity — meaning all lawyers must work for the state — are some of the more radical proposals.
The elective conference, which the EFF calls the first people’s assembly, will be held under the theme “People’s power for economic freedom”, and will aim to provide an organisational, democratic and ideological basis for the party.
The policy document provides a frank assessment of the party’s organisational situation and its proposed policies. It will be debated at the assembly, where delegates will choose leaders and decide policy.
Regarding democracy, the document states that “democratic participation and involvement is vital for any organisation to sustain itself and for the leadership to be held accountable. Democracy is vital in that no single individual has the complete prescriptions of what should happen.”
On the May general election, the document holds that “without organisational capacity and strength to match the existing political formations and without resources and proven historical record in governance . . . the EFF recorded what was largely interpreted as success for a new political party. The EFF’s achievement is, however, far below what [the] majority of the members and leaders of the EFF anticipated, but largely reflected the amount of organisational and political work done in various regions.”
The election provided lessons: “Without failure, where work was done, adequate outcomes and results were recorded. Joining into protests the EFF did not start does not automatically translate into electoral support. Winning voters does not nat- urally come on the basis that there were red berets at the forefront of a protest action. What wins the electorate are properly constituted structures, united and cogent campaigns.”
The EFF believes it is contesting the same space as the ANC, which it holds to be disintegrating, with a support base there for the taking.
It sees its parliamentary performance as central to its suc- cess: “Despite the EFF’s relative numerical capacity in parliament, we are currently on a correct path and approach to perform legislative and oversight functions. Our broad aim in parliament is to illustrate that we are indeed a government in waiting and can provide cogent alternatives in the process of holding the executive accountable and passing legislation which will benefit the majority of our people. The EFF’s participation in parliament is indeed a turning point in the history of politics in South Africa.”
It is, however, very critical of its own performance in provincial legislatures, believing there is much scope for growth, especially because the ANC and the DA squabble more about implementation than policy or ideology.
Regarding land, the EFF’s views are largely those of expropriation without compensation advocated regularly by Mngxitama, who plans to introduce a bill to that effect in parliament next year. Should the bill be rejected, the EFF will call for a referendum on the issue. The EFF is also focused on urban agriculture, including school and community vegetable gardens.
The EFF opposes what it calls the current establishment of state propaganda by the ANC. It sets out a plan to counter it, using traditional and social media.
Its proposed health policies are less statist and more lifestyle-oriented than those of its rivals, focusing on nutrition, family planning, immunisation, education and medicine provisioning.
The education policy insists on building universities and providing “free and compulsory quality education up to attainment of a bachelor’s degree” without considering what this will cost.
The EFF’s justice policy, which is really listed as a series of options rather than distinct proposals, is likely to be controversial. Abolition of bail, harsh boot camps for sexual and juvenile offenders and changing Roman Dutch Law to what is called Radical Socialist Fanonian Law in a supposed interpretation of the views of Frantz Fanon are the mainstays of the fledgling policy.
The social development policy is quite nuanced, focusing on job creation instead of social grants. The document also includes less controversial policies for several other terrains of political contestation.
As hefty, contradictory and potentially disastrous as this mishmash of policies might be, what is clear is that much thought and preparation has gone into the elective people’s assembly. Although chaos reigned in the Northern Cape, the other preparatory provincial assemblies have thus far gone well.
Macbeth’s “sound and fury” speech comes at a point in the play when his demise, hastened by his excesses, has been widely foretold and disbelieved, especially by himself, the one in power. He is holed up in Dunsinane Castle, about to be overrun by those once loyal to him.
Anyone dismissing the EFF as “sound and fury, signifying nothing” might want to keep that context in mind. Comment on this: write to tellus@sundaytimes.co.za or SMS us at 33971 www.timeslive.co.za