The ANC has given democracy a bad name, but it’s still the only game in town

There are two ways to look at the proliferation of new political parties in the run-up to the 2024 elections. One is to despair at the prospect of swindlers and fraudsters taking advantage of the political process to earn an easy livelihood while, more importantly, dividing the opposition and making it easier for the ANC to retain power. The other is to celebrate the fact that many people are prepared to participate in the political process, thus ensuring the durability of the system. Our democracy needs all the friends it can get. So much was expected from it, but 30 years later we have very little to show for it.

We have seen regression on so many fronts. For instance, the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) recently announced the resumption of longdistance train services from Johannesburg to Durban and Cape Town. But these are things that we used to take for granted, even under apartheid. Now we’re expected to celebrate this development as if it is some improvement. It is common these days to hear people say that they were oppressed under apartheid, but at least they could get medication at the clinic, and the trains ran on time.

ANC misrule has not only taken the country to the edge; it has unfortunately succeeded in sanitising apartheid and left many questioning whether they’ve been duped into embracing a system that has, thus far, brought them little or no benefit. If not yearning for the past, some see salvation in a benevolent dictator in the mould of Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

The disillusionment, however, has nothing to do with the system. It is simply the way it is been applied — and abused. The ANC has given democracy a bad name. People’s understanding of the system is informed by their experience under the ANC — the looting, rampant crime and corruption, devious politicians on the take or living off unexplained wealth, lawlessness and unsafe neighbourhoods. People can be forgiven for thinking: “If this democracy, I don’t want any part of it.”

But democracy is not to blame. It is by no means a perfect system, but it remains by far the only appropriate mechanism that affords people the right and responsibility to freely elect their public representatives and to hold them accountable. But it is not a spectator sport.

Democracy can only survive — and thrive — when people participate by either voting during elections or offering themselves as candidates. The mushrooming of new parties should therefore be a welcome development. Some may see their little stokvels as an easy way to make a living. No matter. Let them all join the dance floor. Ultimately the people will be the judge.

The increase in smaller parties is also a function of our electoral system, which remains unfinished business. A party requires around 40,000 votes, sometimes even less, to gain a seat in the National Assembly. That is an open invitation to abuse of the system. It encourages individuals, or a small coterie, to go it alone rather than make common cause with a wider group of like-minded people to mount a political campaign. Instead of co-operation and compromise we have divisions and dispersions. And while the opposition cannibalise each other, the ANC easily seizes the day.

It is the realisation that the disunity in opposition ranks only benefits the ANC that has led to the formation of the so-called multiparty charter. It is a welcome undertaking, but its arrival provokes a few questions. Aren’t they putting the cart before the horse? Isn’t this going to be seen as an attempt by political leaders to divvy up the spoils before a single vote is cast? And what will the election campaign look like? Will the signatories to this pact go hammer and tongs at one another during the campaign or will they pull their punches? We’re entering uncharted territory.

Another hotly debated issue occasioned by this conciliation is whether it’s acceptable to have a white person run for president. It brings to mind the debate a few years ago, when Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma stood for the ANC leadership, on whether the country was ready for a female president. It is a stupid question, and only exposes the prejudices of those who pose it. One of the things the ANC has successfully done, except looting the country, of course, is to create boundaries in our national discourse. Certain issues or ideas are deemed out of bounds. It controls the narrative.

The ANC often argues that the DA or any mainlywhite party would reintroduce apartheid if it were voted into power. It is an argument devoid of any logic. Any party seeking to run the country can only do so with significant support from black voters. And black people are not about to vote for their own oppression.

We are on a dangerous slippery slope once we start to pick and choose which racial or ethnic group is acceptable for which positions. And, one may ask, acceptable to whom? It is a self-serving argument. If there is something in the constitution that says a white person is ineligible to be president, please point that out to me. Surely those who harbour such a belief should have had the courage and foresight to include such an injunction in the constitution.

Such short-sightedness narrows the pool of talent available to the country. One of the reasons for poor leadership is that the electorate, in its wisdom, has given overwhelming power to the ANC, and those occupying critical positions are therefore drawn from that narrow base. The country is in a precarious position. We can’t afford to be selective. We need all hands on deck.

It’s very simple. Let the people decide. Let them take their aspirations — and their prejudices — to the ballot box. It’s democracy, innit?