ZUMA: AN AFRICAN CHAVEZ?

COMMENTARY ARCHIVES, 30 Apr 2009

Walter Smolarek

Africa is an infected continent. Its affliction is spread not by bacteria or parasites, but through loans. Delivered by the IMF and World Bank as part of the neo-liberal wave that enveloped the world after the fall of the Soviet Union, it plunged the continent, especially Southern Africa, into the pits of privatized hell. Neo-liberalism struck here at a magnitude only barely surpassed by Latin America1 , and at long last there are at least some signs that the masses may be standing up against capitalist exploitation to affirm their dignity as human beings. Now that he has won last week’s election, could Jacob Zuma, the leftist leader of the African National Congress, turn South Africa into an example of Socialism for the 21st Century?

The Tripartite Alliance

Currently ruling South Africa is what’s called the “Tripartite Alliance”, which consists of the African National Congress, the South African Communist Party, and the Congress of South African Trade Unions. The friendship between these organizations goes back to the struggle against apartheid. During this period of “National Democratic Revolution”, the movement was relatively homogeneous in its orientation towards the abolition of tyrannical white-rule. However, after majority rule was institutionalized following the 1994 all-races election, a rift in the Alliance began to form between those that represented the interests of the impoverished majority and those that represented the interests of the national bourgeoisie: the black elites.

The African National Congress is both a member of the Tripartite and the parliamentary vehicle for all three constituents. The ANC itself is a social democratic organization, which supports some social programs while ignoring the systemic root of the widespread poverty that grips South Africa (although this may soon change). Its true loyalties are made evident in the ANC’s highly touted Black Economic Empowerment program, which gives substantial state support to black capitalists. In doing so, the ANC continues the marginalization and exploitation of workers, especially black workers, that the very apartheid system it fought to overthrow was conceived for.

On the other hand, there exists a wing of the Tripartite that upholds the interests of the working class (both urban and rural). It’s composed of the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions, two organizations closely allied in the common struggle for a socialist South Africa (the former somewhat more vocally than the latter). COSATU is the largest trade union in the country, while the SACP has a rich history of struggle that has earned it the loyalty of many South Africans.

In the aftermath of the 1994 election, the right wing of the Alliance slowly rose to dominance. During the presidency of Nelson Mandela, it became clear that the socialist society many envisioned after the end of apartheid was not going to materialize without further struggle. However, it was not until 1999 and the ascension of Thabo Mbeki that neo-liberalism fully descended on South Africa. Corruption, privatization, and all the other hallmarks of neo-colonialism deepened as a result, leading to a great amount of tension within the Tripartite Alliance and finally a major split.

The roots of the schism go back to 2005, when the Deputy President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, was dismissed by Mbeki. Zuma, a fiery populist, was then faced with several politicized charges of corruption. However, during the course of these high-profile legal battles, Zuma became a symbol of the mass base of the ANC that opposed the neo-liberal betrayal of its founding principles. The Mbeki and Zuma camps fought a definitive battle at the 52nd National Conference of the ANC, held in Polokwane in 2007.

What transpired was an overwhelming victory for the left. Strengthened by the hardships the people have endured under neo-liberalism, the SACP and COSATU flexed their muscles in favor of the leftist Zuma, who won the ANC presidency with over 60% of the vote, defeating Thabo Mbeki. Furthering the defeat of the neo-liberal right was the victory, with nearly 62% of the vote, of Kgalema Motlanthe, a close ally of Zuma, who became deputy president of the ANC and later President of South Africa while Chairman of the South African Communist Party Gwede Mantashe became the General Secretary of the ANC with 62.4% of delegates supporting him.

In response, the most right-wing of the ANC national bourgeoisie left the party in 2008. Led by Mosiuoa “Terror” Lakota, these die-hard opponents of Zuma founded the Congress of the People (COPE), which espouses a mix of neo-liberal and center-left views, much like New Labour in the UK.

But for Zuma to even have a chance to change the nation, he would have to secure a crushing mandate from the people, and that’s exactly what he did. Last week’s election results revealed a landslide victory for the Tripartite Alliance, although it did lose its two-thirds supermajority. Specifically, 65.9% of the vote went to the ANC, 16.66% to the centrist, white-led Democratic Alliance, and an embarrassing 7.42% to COPE. Furthermore, a superb 77.3% of voters participated, which should prompt the social movements that called for a boycott to reevaluate their tactics.

Zuma — Glass Half Empty

So now that Zuma has won, let’s take a closer look at his political orientation. The new president of South Africa is a complex man with complex views, indicative of the ideological schizophrenia of the Tripartite. It’s important to analyze both his progressive and reactionary sides. First: a pessimistic look.

Zuma’s personal conduct leaves a lot to be desired. Although he was quick to apologize, the president made a high-profile homophobic remark, calling homosexuality “a disgrace”. This chauvinistic attitude can also be seen in his repeated participation (Zuma has had four wives) in the lobolo custom. Lobolo involves the payment of a woman’s family for the right to marry her, reducing the bride to a piece of property. Also, the President was a close friend of Schabir Shaik, a capitalist that was convicted of corruption in a high-profile trial.

In word, Jacob Zuma is by no means a model revolutionary. For example, here’s an excerpt from a speech he made to the American Chamber of Commerce at its Thanksgiving dinner in 2008:

"Ladies and gentlemen, I said earlier during some of my business meetings in the United States I encountered a common question, based on media reports back home.

"However, they cannot and do not dictate to the ANC what its policy should be. We also cannot dictate their policies as well. We have a relationship based on mutual respect".

Here Zuma spinelessly goes out of his way to ease the minds of the western bourgeoisie and reveals quite clearly that he is at least partially loyal to the capitalist system that is the bane of the South African people.

Zuma — Glass Half Full

It should also be recognized that the President-elect of South Africa has many qualities that set him apart from the run of the mill career politician. His oratory is inspiring and down to earth; free of the condescending double talk that characterizes the rhetoric of bourgeois statesmen. Zuma is also found of singing the militant anti-apartheid song “Umshini Wami” (“Bring Me My Machine Gun”).

There are plenty of statements Zuma has made that could be cited as support for an optimistic outlook. For example, he stated on December 16th, 2008 at the 47th Anniversary of the formation of Umkhonto We Sizwe (the armed wing of the ANC during the fight against apartheid):

"Comrades, the ANC is a learning organisation. We have learnt from the mistakes of the past 15 years, especially the manner in which we may have, to some degree, neglected the people’s movement in our focus on governance.

"The various problems that developed could have been averted and some of our key structures and sectors would not have been neglected as they have been".

This statement reflects exactly the kind of honest, self-critical reflection necessary to prepare the path for radical anti-capitalist inroads.

Conclusions

Faced with a leader of unpredictable loyalties, what is the left-wing of the Tripartite to do? Abandoning the ANC and starting fresh would consume a tremendous amount of resources and those involved would have to face a long and treacherous path to get their foot in the door of state power. However, should the leftists choose to keep the alliance intact, which they very clearly are doing, the socialist forces will have a good deal of leverage to push Zuma in a revolutionary direction.

It’s important to keep in mind that the future of South Africa rests not with one man, but with the constructive struggle of millions. The organizations potentially capable of leading this struggle are COSATU and the SACP, but for them to reach this potential they must first take a serious look at their actions over the last fifteen years and commit themselves to standing up when rightist elements of the ANC try to exert influence counter to the interests of the people.

Should the progressive forces of South Africa succeed in establishing 21st Century Socialism outside of Latin America , the ramifications will be earth-shattering. No longer will the ideology be confined to a single region, a single national liberation movement, but will spread to all oppressed nations and peoples, becoming the banner around which revolutionary elements the world over will rally. This internationalization is of paramount importance to the struggle against the rule of capital and to establish a just, democratic, and egalitarian world.

That said, we should not become too emotionally and politically invested in the radical trajectory of Zuma, which is dubious. However, working-class victory is, now more than at any other time since the defeat of apartheid, within reach. As legendary freedom fighter and SACP leader Joe Slovo said: “It’s not difficult in South Africa for the ordinary person to see the link between capitalism and racist exploitation, and when one sees the link one immediately thinks in terms of a socialist alternative.”

______________________

Walter Smolarek is a student and supportive of the progressive presidential campaign of Gloria LaRiva and Eugene Puryear.

GO TO ORIGINAL – DISSIDENT VOICE

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Comments are closed.