Response+to+Barney+Pityana+article,+Mxolisi+Mlatha,+Maboku+Mangena


 * //Find Below://**


 * Response to Barney Pityana article, Mxolisi Mlatha, 26 December 2007


 * Pityana should enrol in political education, Maboku Mangena, Letters, City Press, 29 December 2007


 * Lessons of the revolution, Barney Pityana, City Press, 22 December 2007

=Response to Barney Pityana article [in City Press, 22 December 2007 - see below]=


 * By: Mxolisi Mlatha – SACP Deputy Secretary Northern Cape, 26 December 2007**

Limpopo a democratic model
The 52nd Conference of the ANC has in many ways deepened the democratic space within the ANC and beyond. It has affirmed the ANC as a parliament of the people. The Conference preparation was broad and participatory, since the National General Council in 2005 there has been both structural and broad participation building towards the Conference. Discussion documents were well circulated even beyond the revolutionary alliance. Following the NGC at an Imbizo in the Free State, state President Mbeki took the unprecedented step calling on the public to play a role in determining who should lead the ANC. An act that digressed from established norms in the movement. This may have caused many sectors to publicly punt for their preferred candidates. Owing to the public open and sometimes subtle influence that was pursued even through the media the Conference was in many ways a South African event.

Given the outcome albeit still understandably contested from some quarters, we must be apprehensive of attempts that are intended to subvert such a democratic process. In this regard the opinion piece of Professor Barney Pityana may be interpreted as disdainful towards democratic outcomes. He even proposes a changing of the electoral system with the expressed intention of eliminating the possibility of the serving President of the ANC from being elected state president. The so called public intellectuals must engage the public without seeking to usurp the democratic process from the people and create an exclusive space where public processes will be “expert driven”; to the exclusion of the “rampaging lot that has taken over the ANC”. Freedom of expression requires the bounds of public voices to be extended to all, but clearly this is not uncontested.

The predicted apocalypse that was to befall the 52nd Conference of the ANC where Jacob Zuma was elected President of the ANC was still born. Many believed that the outcome of Limpopo would be ruins. Instead the country was treated to an open and robust democratic spectacle. Limpopo was a critical milestone in testing the limits of democratic consent and preparedness to defend the democratic space that has been won. At the end of the day the democracy was the winner. What clearly stands out about the Conference is that both the policies and leadership elections were not stage managed as the Professor would want; they represent the expression of the mandates of the branches of the ANC. It is an affirmation of the fact that the “people are the makers of history”. Contrary to some analysts Conference was not a gathering of hoodlums but passionate leaders of the ANC at all levels, therefore continued slander against them is a frontal attack on the movement.

However it would be imprudent to conclude that the soothsayer’s had been defeated. Some had invented the fictitious end of history for the ANC and now that it did not occur they conclude that it has only been deferred. Max Du Preez amongst others has also sprung to the front jostling for the mantle of chief pessimists in a folktale he tells declaring that “Jacob Zuma’s presidency of the ANC is unlikely to be very long”. He further proceeds to declare “whatever unfolds, it would be safe for all South Africans to fasten their seatbelts right now. Some turbulence ahead is a certainty”. The latter whose views and predictions are shared by Professor Pityana proves that in many instances certain strata’s of our society are not capable of being consistently democratic. Whilst moral regeneration is perhaps an element of nation building, in all societies especially during open contests of the transition it has been shown that we cannot assume that the task of society is simply to assimilate the values of the upper classes. Amongst others these are also composed of values of insatiable greed and a certain level of self importance. The questions of morality that Professor Pityana highlights need a deeper and broader public debate that is not personalized. Intellectuals and leaders in each sector and epoch must not seek to affirm the social distance from the people that may be occasioned through a mirror of the exaggerated self importance; this is in fact the Achilles heel of society today. It is one common cause of dictatorships in Africa since the advent of formal decolonization.

Many who reason like the Professor and Max Du Preez, in fact conscious or inadvertent conspirators by means of folktales which they hope will be self fulfilling can be a dangerous ilk. The danger is that they may be compelled to act out their fantasies having pigeonholed our history to progress towards a definitive straight and downwards line, owing to the Limpopo outcome. The latter affirms this by stating he has inside information from the National Prosecuting Authority that the President of the ANC will be in jail by this time next year or immediately afterwards. So, the man is guilty before any legal process unfolds, so good for the “rule of law”! Strangely this was corroborated by a statement from the NPA which seems to have acted in response to the election of President Zuma. After a prolonged silence on the possible charges previously mooted it came out with a statement supposedly signifying the urgency with which the matter must suddenly be concluded. Those of us who have been following this spectacle for the past seven years heard once more that the NPA had finalized its investigations. This strange coincidence with all its hall marks of a vindictive act at the outcome of the ANC Conference is meant to realize the fiction of the kind of end that some expected but never came at Limpopo.

We must be weary of any disguised process essentially intended to undermine and reverse the democratic processes of the ANC and by extension the country. As South African’s without regard to where we stand in so far as the outcome is concern the Limpopo process affirmed a sort of democratic model that we should aspire for in all spheres. Building towards Limpopo not surprisingly in the overt contest that was no more hidden, not just amongst individuals for positions, we need to concede and affirm the principle of the unity of opposites; so that we heal enough to make our contributions especially the national democratic revolution. We must continue to deepen the debate about how we affirm the celebrated processes and content of our transition. At the heart of which must be the affirmation of the Freedom Charter and the poor people, the working class, that the Conference affirmed as the key motive force. The entire process confirmed that the people will never voluntarily step aside and be passive recipients of a neo liberal democratic model.


 * Mxolisi Mlatha, South African Communist Party, Deputy Secretary, Northern Cape Province**

By e-mail

1148 words



=Pityana should enrol in political education=


 * Maboku Mangena, Letters, City Press, 29 December 2007**

I was forced to reconsider my stance on commenting on the activities of other political organisations when I read Barney Pityana’s tirade on the new leadership of the ANC, particularly its president, Jacob Zuma, in City Press last week.

I cannot understand how a person “steeped in Congress traditions” can summon the courage to insult the president of his organisation in a national newspaper by using the kind of venomous language usually reserved for enemies.

This language shows no regard for ANC protocol and exhibits dis­respect for the elders. It is as unpalatable as it is unpatriotic. Nothing in it demonstrates passion for reconstruction and development. It betrays Pityana’s modest claim to be anchored in ANC traditions.

Pityana has exposed his political hooliganism masquerading as intellectual input in his assessment of the ANC conference.

He refuses to accept the conference’s decision to elect Zuma as president.

His utterances on or about the president constitute gross misconduct. If he is still an ANC member, he should be subjected to a disciplinary hearing. No one has the right or privilege, by virtue of the number of decades he has been a member, to insult the ANC president or its leadership. It is the height of ill-discipline and political immaturity.

Unsatisfied with insulting his president, “the nation’s veteran of the struggle” who, by his own admission, is a political passivist with 12 years of non-active participation in ANC structures, turned his venom on the delegates. He describes them as lacking in substance.

If Pityana cares so much about the ANC and the people it represents, what is he doing to help it “become attractive again to all people of ­substance”?

He should heed his own advice and “be attracted back to branch-level activities” where he will be subjected to constant political education.

Here he will learn that power ­resides with the very people who often go to sleep hungry and who need fundamental change. Only then will he understand why members of the ANC, ­active in its structures and living with poor black people in squalid conditions, acted in the manner in which they did.

I do not expect him to agree with them or with the things they say. But I am certain he will understand why they say the things they say and his views on their delegated representatives will change.


 * **Maboku Mangena, Polokwane**


 * From: http://www.news24.com/City_Press/Letters/0,,186-247_2244561,00.html**

409 words



=Lessons of the revolution=


 * Barney Pityana, City Press, 22 December 2007**

Polokwane should be welcomed if it is to deliver a renewed ANC to the nation, writes Barney Pityana.

I BEG leave to make the modest claim that I am one of this nation’s veterans of the liberation struggle. It is now nearly 50 years since I signed up as a member of the ANC Youth League.

Even before that I can attest to the fact that, because I was brought up in a township in the early 1960s, I was caught up in the revivalist and defiant atmosphere of congress.

I found myself selling copies of New Age from a young age and – to follow the example of Chief Albert Luthuli – joined up to collect passes to be burnt in a huge bonfire in New Brighton.

The ANC that I knew then was all-inclusive, often referred to as the broad church. It was the movement where Vuyisile Mini, Raymond ­Mhlaba and Govan Mbeki, alongside Reverend Tshume and Dr Njongwe, all freely belonged across all class divides.

The youth league was a learning organisation for young minds, but as junior small boys we looked up to our senior comrades like Thabo Mbeki, Chris Hani, Zola Skweyiya and many others who perished throughout the long struggle. And many may not have become names like the ones I cite above.

Remarkably, throughout the most repressive years of apartheid, I continued to receive material at Fort Hare by post – sometimes disguised, but often books. Pamphlets came unsolicited. I remember sharing these with a few of my trusted friends. During that time I learnt a lot about ANC ideology, and indeed, got to appreciate the SA Communist Party from reading the African Communist. From all ­angles, therefore, I can claim to have been deeply steeped in the congress’s traditions.

But I have never held any political office; I was never a leader of the ANC. I am proud to say that I have always been a “rank and file” activist. I’ve never been trained to carry a gun; I’ve never been a guerrilla fighter.

In the eyes of some I may not be a cadre of the movement. That probably explains why I am uncomfortable with Umshini wam i. I’ve never held a machine gun. I don’t know the song and I cannot sing it. But, like many of my contemporaries, I can claim to have endured banning ­orders, been imprisoned and eventually driven to exile. I came back from exile in 1993 with a passionate desire to join in the reconstruction and development of our country.

I returned not because I had nothing to do, but because I knew that if I remained in Europe I would have had no moral capacity to join hands with and criticise from the safety and distance of Europe.

On my return I also made the point that I did not wish to become a professional politician, and that I preferred to remain in education.

I can also say that, to the best of my knowledge, I have never benefited from political patronage. I am not among the nouveau riche.

In fact my history of involvement in the ANC has never necessarily been a passport to privilege.

To illustrate the point, I have a recollection of the little fact that a previous ANC minister of education sought to prevent my appointment as vice-chancellor of the University of South ­Africa.

I can say though that ­while I ceased to take any active part in ANC structures from 1995, I remain part and parcel of the movement. I care passionately about its vision for this country, the quality of its leadership, the integrity of the ­application of its developmental strategies.

Polokwane this week was, as Pandit Nehru said at the independence of India 1947, a “tryst with destiny”.

A new leadership of the ANC has been elected by all accounts with an overwhelming mandate from the branches of the ANC.

A new president of the ANC has now been installed at Luthuli House. I was rather cynical when Blade Nzimande, the general secretary of the SACP and well-known Zuma acolyte, wrote recently that Polokwane was to be a revolution for the ANC.

I guess I dismissed that because I could see nothing progressive in any of what Jacob Zuma had ever said or done. After all, he is a proud cultural traditionalist, a practising polygamist, well documented as one who views women as sex objects. He calls for the reintroduction of the death penalty, is a declared homophobe and has no clue about economic policy.

I therefore could not understand the ideological affinity between the SACP and Zuma.

I have also heard Fikile Mbalula and Zwelinzima Vavi speak in animated terms about a need for change but I could not understand how because Zuma was part and parcel of the Mbeki leadership in the ANC.

I was frightened by Mo Shaik’s pontifications about the inevitable Zuma presidency. I noted that, especially on the first day, delegates ­appeared to have come to Polokwane spoiling for a fight; unruly, disruptive and showing no regard for the protocols for meetings that the ANC had adopted.

We saw the all-too-familiar sight in South Africa these days of very young people exhibiting disrespect for elders. I feared that under Zuma we would be confronted by purges and a settling of scores.

I observed the six top positions and noticed that some able and proven ANC cadres were cast aside for no other reason than that they were ­associated with the Mbeki slate. Then I say to myself, Polokwane was truly a revolution.

Ostensibly, the revolution was for the removal of Thabo Mbeki as ANC president. That may have been justified but it did not mean that whole blocks of delegates should vote uniformly.

After all, in his political report Mbeki demonstrated that the ANC government that he led executed the mandate given to it by the last conference. He also illustrated the achievements and challenges of the ANC in the government. We must guard against a wholesale rubbishing of the achievements of the ANC government under the able leadership of President Thabo Mbeki.

Commentator after commentator, the so called independent analysts, were feeding into this notion of the Mbeki personality, the aloof leader lacking in warmth and passion! But where is the substantive critique of Mbeki’s leadership? ­Adam Habib, writing in the Sunday Times, even resorted to the spurious notion of the “party-attending middle class” of the suburbs disenchanted with Mbeki. It is clear that I do not attend the same parties that ­Habib so loves. I have no illusion that there has been a dark side to Mbeki’s leadership. That is surely not unique to Thabo Mbeki.

Like all revolutions, however, Polokwane did not need to have substance.

Often revolutionaries consider only thereafter what to make of the victory they have prised out of situations. Post-modernist sociologists have developed a chaos theory to try to understand the phenomenon.

What happened at Polokwane was not unexpected on two fronts. First, for three years the ANC unleashed Jacob Zuma to sow division and to link up with the disgruntled and to establish himself as the leader of that motley crew of counter forces whose ­motivation for a new ANC was best expressed in terms of their personal circumstances and personal dislike for Thabo Mbeki. ­Zuma has been engaged in a campaign for the leadership of the ANC at a time when everyone else was ­being admonished about the traditions of the ANC.

Second, so many African states post-uhuru experienced similar upheavals some 10 years or so after the liberation movement became the government: Algeria, Ghana, Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde Islands and Nigeria, to name but a few instances.

Usually, the head of state is overthrown by his close comrade; there is a military coup d’etat and blood letting.

In Zimbabwe there is the infamous fifth Brigade Matabeleland disaster where hundreds of people were killed to keep Robert Mugabe in power, but in Lesotho, Ntsu Mokhehle expelled his own party from the government and established a new party. On this reckoning, history will perhaps judge that Polokwane delivered the ANC’s coup de grace.

The Polokwane revolution should perhaps be welcomed if it is to deliver to this nation a renewed ANC, but on current projections there does not appear to be any chance of such happening.

The ANC of Polokwane was anti-elite, alienating so many people who drive the economy of our nation. Polokwane was anti-intellectual and hostile to the professional classes, alienating many who have a contribution to make to the development of our country.

Frankly, what I observed at Polokwane was not so much about the “people” as it was about a few political activists grasping for a share of the spoils of government.

Polokwane appears to be a drive towards a monochrome ANC, not the broad, inclusive ANC, not just a party where this nation’s working classes find a home, but an ideologically workerist party.

Where the ANC that Mbeki inherited was a party of substance, the Zuma ANC is bound to be long on demagoguery and thunder but, as Shakespeare would have it, “signifying nothing”.

The new general secretariat of the ANC in particular must pay ­attention to activities in the bran­ches. The ANC must become attractive again to all people of substance from all races that care for this country and its future.

People must be attracted back to branch-level activities instead of ­being alienated by evidence of ­entryism – the infiltration of an organisation to change or subvert its policies, practices and objectives – with a set agenda of ideological suspicion and power grab.

Secondly, every effort must be made to weed out the elements of cronyism and corruption that have become endemic in ANC structures, and which president Mbeki has courageously addressed to an unlistening ANC for some time.

I fear that under Zuma such corruption may become not just the norm but an expectation.

The ANC must embrace in its life and work, and in the practice of its leaders, the challenge of moral regeneration it has put to this nation. The ANC should be the agent for social cohesion rather than a cover for any organised looting of state resources.

The ANC under Zuma must undertake to respect the conventions of a constitutional order and democracy. That means separation of powers must be honoured in all ­respects. Members of Parliament must have the integrity of the legislature restored to them and the judiciary.

The interference in the prerogatives of and professional judgments of independent bodies like the national directorate of public prosecutions and the public protector must be ­respected.

Under Mbeki we have seen blatant interference at some of these levels. That must stop.

The ANC must be courageous enough to address its own internal democracy. The management of succession culminating in Polokwane was by any measure shambo­lic. The ANC must establish a commission of experts to devise a new system of management of leadership elections in future.

A recent visit to Ghana found us in the midst of primaries for the ­aspirants to the leadership of the ruling party. There, all who declared their candidature gather nominations, or are eliminated, before the party congress due by the end of December. That is truly democratic.

Clearly there can be no serious justification for a party list system more than 10 years into our democracy, with the sophisticated electorate that we have. There is hardly a government in Africa that uses this archaic system much loved by South African political parties.

With evidence of a Zuma candidacy for president and head of state, and the possible alienation of a Zuma ANC from a large segment of the voting population, the person of Zuma should be uncoupled from the party which many of us have served for so long.

Calls for a directly elected president and head of state should now be sounding like a trumpet call. Unless that happens, one can foresee a huge abstention vote which would threaten the authority and effectiveness of an ANC government under Zuma.

Alternatively, nominations for one to serve as head of state should be uncoupled from the party presidency. That may be forced on the ANC should Jacob Zuma be charged for criminal offences. In the light of this, it seems clear to me that the new ANC has much to say to this nation in its January 8 statement.

The party must pledge to this ­nation respect for the Constitution and the rule of law, advancement of the ­social and economic reconstruction agenda, and upholding the moral ­fibre of this nation.

The situation we find ourselves in as a nation is untenable. On the evidence of Polokwane, the ruling party has lost confidence in the head of state. This is a serious matter ­because it is not simply that the president is retiring. He stood for election and was voted out of office by a large margin.

Many of those who exercise executive authority in government have also demonstrated individually that their party has no confidence in them. I suspect that a large percentage of the members of Parliament are equally out of sync with the ­Zuma party – and 18 months is a long time in the government.

What might happen is that reversals of policy might be enforced by the party and gridlock might result simply because the party may no longer freely use its levers of power through its elected representatives.

In situations of this nature, the ­only honourable thing for president Mbeki to do is to ask Parliament to dissolve so that a general election can take place as soon as is practical.


 * **Pityana is the principal of Unisa**


 * From: http://www.news24.com/City_Press/Features/0,,186-1696_2242651,00.html**

2294 words