Some wealthy American Caucasian is credited for having coined the statement: “in the business world, the rear-view mirror is a lot clearer than the windshield”, or words to that effect. In the same vein may I please be credited for: “in South African politics the rear-view mirror often blurs the windscreen”.
I have read somewhere or heard somewhere that, apart from the Polokwane and the Durban High Court outcomes, the apparent split in or of the ANC has to do with some anti-communist sentiment among the dissidents. I am not sure how true all this is but one of the trade union leaders, responding to a question about Sam Shilowa’s departure, said something to the effect that those who are leaving the ANC do so because they had removed themselves from the masses that put them in power in the first place. He said further that they (Shilowa and Lekota) had become an elitist class hence their rejection by the people. What does this have to do with the rear-view mirror you may ask? Well this is where it gets all blurry.
Thanks to Benjamin Pogrund (and he is not the only one), there is some record of the previous split of the ANC which led to the formation of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC). The disquiet within the ANC back then is said to have been as a result of the adoption of the Freedom Charter by the ANC. The very Freedom Charter that Mr Lekota accuses the ANC to have deviated from. Incidentally, a certain Jomo Mogale is of the view that Mr Lekota and Mr Shilowa are the ones that have deviated from the Freedom Charter. Mr Mogale is one of the leaders of the Khutsong Anti Demarcation organisation. He argues that Shilowa was part of the authority that sought to cleave Khutsong from the Gauteng Province and to dump it into the less resourced North-West Province without consulting the people of Khutsong. Please dear reader if you would, have a look at an earlier post commenting on the demonstrations and protest actions that went on in Khutsong. Back to the 1959 split of the ANC.
The ANC was until then a movement born of a union of various factions with different views and political principles but that had one common goal – the eradication of Apartheid. This common enemy was to a large extent the glue that kept the learned class, the Communists, the Africanists, and the Traditionalist all stuck together. The union was largely if not exclusively under the leadership of the intelligentsia. The ANC and its predecessor was to a large extent a movement of the elite rather than of the masses. This element of the ANC continues to trouble it somewhat; at least I think it does. Prior to the adoption of the Freedom Charter there was the 1912 programme of action that had as its goal the emancipation of the Black people, to paraphrase. The Africanists, so the reports of the time go, viewed the adoption of the Freedom Charter, among others, as a deviation by the ANC from the programme of action. The adoption of the Freedom Charter, so the argument goes, was counter to the 1912 programme and would make less of the struggle for the freedom from racial oppression of the Black people. There are also some reports that cite as a reason for the split, the ascendancy to leadership positions by white people. A sort of reverse “who feels it knows it” type of argument. I am no authority on these kinds of things, but I am simply not sold on these latter reports. I am more inclined to buy the reports that make the fact that the white folks were communists an issue and not their being white (something they can’t help). We should bear in mind the number of the then mission school educated leaders within the ANC and their consequential reluctance towards communism.
The Communists and the Charterists carried the day back in 1959 in Soweto and similarly carried the day in 2007 at Polokwane. Similarly, as in Polokwane, disorder and ill-discipline was the order of the day at the special general meeting of the ANC chaired by O R Tambo. I was completely astounded by the realisation that the leadership of the ANC back then as it seems to be the case today, was prepared and in fact was ready to use violence to settle its differences with the Africanists; and by the way, so were the Africanists, who incidentally were out-maneuvered and out-gunned. The threat of violence remains ever present. There seems to be some valour in brute force and violence or at least the threat of violence.
Looking back does not, alas, seem to provide our leaders with foresight; it seems to provide grounds for being more obstinate. Looking back throws up examples of Bantu Holomisa, who it is said has amounted to nothing. The PAC is also mocked in a similar vein. I think, whatever that is worth, that the difficulties of the PAC are much bigger than its split from the ANC in 1959. The rear-view mirror, while providing a clear view of the assassination of Lumumba, the madness of Bokasa, the massacre of the Matebele, the mayhem on killer road Soweto and later that same day, the death around Shell House – does not seem to make the windscreen any clearer. Specifically it does not seem to clear the minds, eyes or windscreens of the leadership. The history keeps blurring the windscreen.
Looking back on South African political history, often times when there was a difference of opinion between two political groups, people died or became subjected to all manner of violence. These clear rear-view mirror events still leave the windscreen blurry. As recent as yesterday, there were threats of disruption of meetings and Mr Mogale (yes he of Khutsong fame) declared Khutsong a no-go area for Lekota and his mates. I ask myself with some exasperation: “do we not see what we are doing?” Do we not at least see the probable consequences of our actions or in some instances in-actions?
With perfect hindsight, we continue down the road that has led to mayhem and slaughter, which will probably end in some protracted power-sharing negotiations following some failed elections.
Maybe I am just being presumptuous, maybe there isn’t even a rear-view mirror on this taxi and the only clear window, is the passenger side window – the windscreen is covered with dead insects from the past. Maybe we are unable or unwilling to look back or maybe, even when we look back we clearly do not see and when we look forward, it is with blurred vision.
In the meantime, the taxi with the broken rear-view mirror and the soiled windscreen keeps hurtling down the one-way street the wrong way.
I have read somewhere or heard somewhere that, apart from the Polokwane and the Durban High Court outcomes, the apparent split in or of the ANC has to do with some anti-communist sentiment among the dissidents. I am not sure how true all this is but one of the trade union leaders, responding to a question about Sam Shilowa’s departure, said something to the effect that those who are leaving the ANC do so because they had removed themselves from the masses that put them in power in the first place. He said further that they (Shilowa and Lekota) had become an elitist class hence their rejection by the people. What does this have to do with the rear-view mirror you may ask? Well this is where it gets all blurry.
Thanks to Benjamin Pogrund (and he is not the only one), there is some record of the previous split of the ANC which led to the formation of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC). The disquiet within the ANC back then is said to have been as a result of the adoption of the Freedom Charter by the ANC. The very Freedom Charter that Mr Lekota accuses the ANC to have deviated from. Incidentally, a certain Jomo Mogale is of the view that Mr Lekota and Mr Shilowa are the ones that have deviated from the Freedom Charter. Mr Mogale is one of the leaders of the Khutsong Anti Demarcation organisation. He argues that Shilowa was part of the authority that sought to cleave Khutsong from the Gauteng Province and to dump it into the less resourced North-West Province without consulting the people of Khutsong. Please dear reader if you would, have a look at an earlier post commenting on the demonstrations and protest actions that went on in Khutsong. Back to the 1959 split of the ANC.
The ANC was until then a movement born of a union of various factions with different views and political principles but that had one common goal – the eradication of Apartheid. This common enemy was to a large extent the glue that kept the learned class, the Communists, the Africanists, and the Traditionalist all stuck together. The union was largely if not exclusively under the leadership of the intelligentsia. The ANC and its predecessor was to a large extent a movement of the elite rather than of the masses. This element of the ANC continues to trouble it somewhat; at least I think it does. Prior to the adoption of the Freedom Charter there was the 1912 programme of action that had as its goal the emancipation of the Black people, to paraphrase. The Africanists, so the reports of the time go, viewed the adoption of the Freedom Charter, among others, as a deviation by the ANC from the programme of action. The adoption of the Freedom Charter, so the argument goes, was counter to the 1912 programme and would make less of the struggle for the freedom from racial oppression of the Black people. There are also some reports that cite as a reason for the split, the ascendancy to leadership positions by white people. A sort of reverse “who feels it knows it” type of argument. I am no authority on these kinds of things, but I am simply not sold on these latter reports. I am more inclined to buy the reports that make the fact that the white folks were communists an issue and not their being white (something they can’t help). We should bear in mind the number of the then mission school educated leaders within the ANC and their consequential reluctance towards communism.
The Communists and the Charterists carried the day back in 1959 in Soweto and similarly carried the day in 2007 at Polokwane. Similarly, as in Polokwane, disorder and ill-discipline was the order of the day at the special general meeting of the ANC chaired by O R Tambo. I was completely astounded by the realisation that the leadership of the ANC back then as it seems to be the case today, was prepared and in fact was ready to use violence to settle its differences with the Africanists; and by the way, so were the Africanists, who incidentally were out-maneuvered and out-gunned. The threat of violence remains ever present. There seems to be some valour in brute force and violence or at least the threat of violence.
Looking back does not, alas, seem to provide our leaders with foresight; it seems to provide grounds for being more obstinate. Looking back throws up examples of Bantu Holomisa, who it is said has amounted to nothing. The PAC is also mocked in a similar vein. I think, whatever that is worth, that the difficulties of the PAC are much bigger than its split from the ANC in 1959. The rear-view mirror, while providing a clear view of the assassination of Lumumba, the madness of Bokasa, the massacre of the Matebele, the mayhem on killer road Soweto and later that same day, the death around Shell House – does not seem to make the windscreen any clearer. Specifically it does not seem to clear the minds, eyes or windscreens of the leadership. The history keeps blurring the windscreen.
Looking back on South African political history, often times when there was a difference of opinion between two political groups, people died or became subjected to all manner of violence. These clear rear-view mirror events still leave the windscreen blurry. As recent as yesterday, there were threats of disruption of meetings and Mr Mogale (yes he of Khutsong fame) declared Khutsong a no-go area for Lekota and his mates. I ask myself with some exasperation: “do we not see what we are doing?” Do we not at least see the probable consequences of our actions or in some instances in-actions?
With perfect hindsight, we continue down the road that has led to mayhem and slaughter, which will probably end in some protracted power-sharing negotiations following some failed elections.
Maybe I am just being presumptuous, maybe there isn’t even a rear-view mirror on this taxi and the only clear window, is the passenger side window – the windscreen is covered with dead insects from the past. Maybe we are unable or unwilling to look back or maybe, even when we look back we clearly do not see and when we look forward, it is with blurred vision.
In the meantime, the taxi with the broken rear-view mirror and the soiled windscreen keeps hurtling down the one-way street the wrong way.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment