Protests need a clear plan of action

View

THREE days ago, South Africa celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Soweto Uprising. It can be argued that the impact of the June 16, 1976 uprising has been given due recognition in contemporary post1994 South Africa.

However, what remains a point of debate is how this month is used to make young people aware of how important their role is in the political, economic, and social spheres of South Africa.

Young people often argue that they are excluded from South Africa’s key institutions and as such they are unable to shape their own future. The youths’ disgruntlement was most probably best witnessed during last year’s student protests. To understand the common interests of young people in the country, one must understand the motivations of these protest movements as well as their characterisation.

The youth of today, specifically how it tackles issues, is often compared to that of 1976. Former secretary of the UKZN Howard College Students’ Representative Council, Sanele Mthembu suggests that this is an injustice as these events took place in different sociopolitical contexts.

Mthembu’s assertion is backed by student activist Kgotsi Chikane who states that, “the difference here is the role of the state as an antagonist. Rhodes Must Fall/Fees Must Fall, for example, in its origins never directed its anger at the state but at institutions that exist within our society”. Such statements challenge us to be careful in comparing student/youth activism in the country.

1976 highlighted the power of a youth in unity and 2015 reminded us of this power. The wealth of these youth-led demonstrations lies in the lessons they teach us. 1976 demonstrated a bravery and a political consciousness that was never anticipated. In South Africa today, the fastest growing political parties are those with relatively younger people in their key positions. Last year saw the youth tackling the issues of class, gender, race and sexuality as the movements started gaining traction.

From the issues raised, we get a sense of direction of what issues will continue to form part of the national dialogue.

UKZN law student and participant in the FMF Zwakele Mbanjwa bemoaned the presence of privileged students taking centre stage in the movements.

He said it becomes problematic when the visible presence of privileged students seems to take centre stage, as this shifts the attention from what the movements are about to who is part of them.

From such statements, we can see the influence of Steve Biko’s point that the marginalised must shape their own way to liberation. Biko is also credited to largely have influenced the Soweto Uprising.

The hype around these demonstrations doesn’t always render them successful. Students in 1976 were largely protesting against the imposition of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction. When asked if it was a success, student activist Mandla Mbuyisa responded by saying, “1976 wasn’t a success and recent student protests at Stellenbosch university proved just that.”

Last year students were protesting for fees to fall but the outcome of their protests ended up being a zeropercent fee increment.

Mbanjwa allocates poor planning by the FMF movement for its susceptibility to being exploited and argues that due to its susceptibility, careerists hijacked it.

Molaodi wa Sekake, the national spokesperson of the Young Communist League, agrees with Mbanjwa and says that so long as there is no clear programme of action, movements like the RMF and/or FMF remain doomed for failure. He submits that, “there is no programme of action in all these formations besides citing Biko, Fanon, Marx and Lenin.

At first you might think that there are points of intersection, but as time goes on you find that there are different ideological currents which inform divergent political action, this is what led to disgruntlements and some people fearing that they will be persecuted by their own political parties.

The evident lack of a proper plan by young people to set their own agenda perpetuates vicious social ills. Patriarchy is one of these social ills and UKZN FMF campaigner, Nompilo Mkhize lambastes patriarchy, which she argues was a strong part of the FMF movement. Mkhize says that she found that even within the movements, her compatriots possessed patriarchal tendencies and suggests that even in this generation, there are women who have not only accepted patriarchy as the norm but go as far as to perpetuate it.

According to scholar Lukhona Mnguni another restriction that emerged as a result of poor planning was the suppression of other equally important issues that could have been addressed by the movements. He says the lambasting of RMF by antirape protesters at Rhodes University is a clear indication of failures resulting from poor planning in the RMF movements.

Mnguni states that there is a solution to prevent further failures by suggesting, “young people need to embark on a journey of identifying a point of unity in their intersectional interests, born from their youth realities, they can create an umbrella body that advocates their intersectional interests.”

While the events of 1976 and last year did not achieve their respective set objectives, it is important to acknowledge their successes.

In 1976, young people engaged in mass action that altered the politics of that era for ever. Last year, young people reversed decisions that had been taken by high-ranking members of our society. University senates, political parties, parliament and the judiciary were affected by the actions of young people so much so that they did not operate business as usual.

Nkosikhona Duma is a student at UKZN studying towards a Bachelor of Social Science degree. He is former Rotary youth ambassador who represented South Africa in Brazil.