Protesters marching from District 6 to Parliament in Cape Town |
Yesterday, on Friday 7 April 2017, South Africans took to the streets in their tens of thousands to protest against the presidency of Jacob Zuma and the failure of the ANC to hold him to account for reckless decision-making that has sent shock waves through the economy and threatened the livelihoods and household budgets of the bulk of society. They took to the streets amidst a background of intimidation and the threat of state violence and the ANC Youth League and recently formed veterans association who effectively positioned themselves as the ANC’s extra-state militia.
The International Workers Vanguard Party cut a lonely figure |
The marches were most notable for the absence of organised labour, and that middle and lower middle class marchers made up the bulk of the protest actions across the country. Yet this is nothing new in the tradition of protest in South Africa. In contrast to the nostalgia impregnated versions of South African history, citizen-based anti-Apartheid protest actions were largely constituted of middle and lower middle class pockets in different communities. Organised labour usually took to the streets under their own banners and with their own demands.
The romantic visions of the working class
rising up from their homes and workplaces to hit the streets is an obfuscation
of historical fact; indeed, their vulnerability often precluded them from being
able to take such action. It is mainly within organised labour that they found their
expression. In the 1980s working class youth did engage in riotous activities
in the quest to “make the country ungovernable” but it was not organised in the
same way as labour organisations, the churches and the United Democratic Front
(UDF).
The reality of protest action in South Africa
under Apartheid was that the middle classes, in particular black and brown
middle classes, played a huge role in mobilising the resources, people and leadership
within society to facilitate citizen-based action. What is different about
yesterday’s marches is that the white middle classes came out in greater
numbers than they ever have before.
This has drawn a fair amount of criticism. “Where
were they during Apartheid?” the critiques go. “Where were they when Marikana
happened, when the Esidemeni deaths occurred … where were they when services
were failing in black townships across the country?” The debates around the
legitimacy of protest action have largely revolved around the racial and class
dimensions of the protests.
It is true that for many years the white middle
classes have been apathetic about the state of politics and the plight of poor
black citizenry in South Africa, preferring to dwell exclusively on issues that
affect them directly such as black economic empowerment, transformation and
land reclamations. Yet the profound irony is that the black middle classes were
also largely absent from the streets when all the aforementioned events and
issues arose in South Africa. Apart from social media exhortations of
solidarity with the working classes, cross-class unity between the black and
working classes has largely proved mythical.
Moreover, there is a paradoxical reaction to
white middle class politicisation that appears to have escaped the many cynics
that have raised their voices. It is this; that the white middle classes have
long been the subject of criticism for their inaction in the political realm,
yet now that they have taken to the streets to express their political dissent
they are criticised for taking action. It appears that they are damned if they
do and damned if they don’t. Finally, white South Africans may begin to
understand one of the greatest difficulties of being black in white dominated
organisations, institutions and the like; that you are actively delegitimised
no matter what you do or say.
You have to fight for your place, and yesterday’s
showing from the white middle class was a declaration of intent to do just
that. For the first time in my life I heard white people chanting the
anti-Apartheid slogan “Amandla Awethu!” with vigour. It is still too early to
tell exactly where it will lead, and what kind of politics they will rally
around, but it is a good first step. Multi-racial middle class unity was also
on display, and that is a profoundly positive step in the right direction for
South Africa, as it is precisely that kind of unity – with all its
contradictions and fraught interactions – that is needed to build the
foundation for longer term political contestation of key top-down decisions and
governance failures.
There was also a sense that middle class South
Africans – who for the past twenty years have largely been sold on the rainbow
nation narrative – were displaying what it means to them; that they do inhabit
spaces in which their understanding of non-racialism is put into practise. They
clearly do not interrogate its shortcomings and contradictions adequately, and
are largely in denial about the systemic and structural racisms that inhabit
South African society, but what they were displaying was their understanding of
the political project that the new South Africa embarked on under the
now-hallowed leadership of Nelson Mandela in 1994.
Slogans chanted from the balcony were echoed by the crowds below |
To underestimate the strength and power of the
rainbow nation narrative is politically naïve and strategically inept. It is
still a powerful driving force behind middle class South African society
identity. Indeed, it is precisely the narrative that the official opposition
party in South Africa – the Democratic Alliance – has successfully wrested away
from the ANC, whose politics now revolves around racial polarisation and
divisiveness. The DA, however, is not without its race politics challenges as
some members and the former leader – Helen Zille – have increasingly exhibited
precisely the systemic and structural racism that its new black leader – Mmusi Maimane
– is working furiously against (this has brought him into conflict with the
outspoken ex-leader of the party).
Yet drawing the middle classes in the new South
Africa out onto the streets – whether white, brown or black – is an incredible
achievement. Moreover, the protests drew people out locally, that is; they took
to the streets in their various neighbourhoods and areas across the country, in
addition to converging upon major state venues such as parliament in Cape Town,
as well as Church Square and the Union Buildings in Pretoria. It is from this
that the seeds of active, local citizenry can be built in South Africa,
especially within middle and lower middle class neighbourhoods and areas.
The absence of a coherent ideological or
political project that they can articulate or motivate for, at this stage,
should come as no surprise. The protest actions of yesterday are but a starting
point. They are not yet a movement or set of movements of any recognisable
description. They are largely united by a joint frustration with corruption,
the lack of political accountability and the inaction of politicians and the
ruling classes (one might also add traditional activists and left intellectuals
to this). So what is the plan moving forward? What can actors within society
draw upon to keep the momentum of mobilisation and protest action?
Often overlooked, but fundamental to building
active citizenry, is the experience of power that citizen-based action
engenders in people. People who are ordinarily atomised and have retreated into
the personal realm, becoming focused on the day-to-day affairs that occupy
their personal lives and ambitions, are rendered powerless under political
structures and leaderships. When they come together and act in concert,
especially in large numbers, their feelings of frustration with the status quo
is exorcised and legitimised. It is a liberation of sorts, that is; a
liberation from the sense of one’s personal inadequacy and powerlessness in the
face of political power. They begin to understand that only by acting together
can they bring significant pressure on prevailing systems of power, and bend
them to their will. Their politics then becomes meaningful, as it is no longer
constituted only of a collection of personal frustrations. Indeed, they are
less likely – in the South African context – to make plans to emigrate when
they make the realisation that they do in fact possess the capacity to take
action and exert political pressure on the matters that they find agreement
around.
Indeed, it is not ideology that brings people
together in the political sphere. Most ordinary people in liberal democracies
are largely unaware of the ideological frameworks that govern their political
lives, whether tacit or explicit. Rather, as the political theorist Hannah
Arendt intuited from her observations of the political realm, it is the
experience of power derived through “acting in concert” that awakens people and
societies to their political power.
So what is the way forward for middle and lower
middle class society in South Africa? How do they continue to build momentum so
that a more active and engaging polis is actualised? Well, it is rather simple
in theory, but requires great practical effort at grassroots levels. Mobilising
beyond protest at the local level is key. Protest action is critical, but the
key to awakening a dead polis is to get active engagement going between local
citizenries.
First, gathering in town-hall meetings to
discuss and debate what kind of society they want to live in and how to
actualise it, as well as their priority actions and the reasoning behind them,
is critical to building active citizenry. That is, both protest and sincere
engagement is required. Leaders, experts and respected individuals and groups
can also visit and occasionally participate, sit on panels and field questions
from the citizenry, and engage them on their terms, taking time to flesh out
and explain their differing perspectives, allowing the citizens to make more
informed political choices.
Second, citizens can also take initiative to
constitute their own forums, where they can discuss and organise around particular
issues, interests and ideological perspectives. They can then represent these
issues, interests and ideological perspectives more effectively when gathered
with the larger community, as well as when gathered in large formations (e.g.
when embarking upon mass action in major cities and locations). Indeed, large
protests around the world, and in anti-Apartheid protests, usually brought
together a wide range of local, regional and national groups (e.g. labour,
political, religious, interest based, issue based, etc.); they often marched
under their banners.
Third, planning and mounting large and small civil disobedience and other protest campaigns. These need not always be confrontational; they can be creative and enjoyable, and can bring people together in the public sphere in such a manner that they leave better informed and inspired to take action themselves. It can serve to induce a multiplier effect in society. What is critical about protest, however, is that while it does not always have to be confrontational, it should always contest power i.e. it must not merely amount to a pointless gathering of people with no clear demands.
Fourth, it takes concerted action from
individuals and groups who are motivated to gather people and prepare all the
logistical and organisational criteria that is critical to successful
attendance and engagement. Literally this means getting on the phone and
calling up each neighbourhood member and asking them to attend. It also means
going door-to-door in neighbourhoods to engage with citizens directly and rally
support. Nowadays there is also social media and a range of other mechanisms
through which to organise, but person-to-person interaction should never be
underestimated for its power to bring people together. It takes time and
effort, and a lot of the organisational tasks are mundane, but it is key to
facilitating successful and broad engagement.
To recap; gathering as a neighbourhood or
community, gathering in smaller focus groups or forums, mounting civil disobedience campaigns, and paying careful
attention to logistical and organisation criteria, are key to activating local citizenry
in the political sphere. There are other
factors that may prove important in different local and other contexts, and it
is certain that a lot of learning-by-doing will be required. The important
thing is to get on with it. In order for political action to be successful and
relevant it requires sustained, long-term engagement and protest activities. It
needs to recognise that there is no end to the pursuit of an accountable and
robust democracy, it is an ongoing one.
South Africa effectively requires a reformation
of its political sphere, one in which ordinary everyday citizens begin to make
their voices heard and can exert their political will on its leadership and
within society at large. This can only lead to positive and healthy outcomes
for democracy in the long term. There will no doubt be problems and
differences, but an active citizenry is without doubt the foundation of a
healthy democracy. The very first step has been taken by the middle classes,
and despite the detractors, it is a necessary and immensely positive step in
the right direction.
What happens after this, is up to society itself. It has tasted its political power, and we can only hope that its appetite will grow, as only through active engagement can South African society overcome the deep polarisation that its politicians have subjected it to and which it has become infected with. It cannot, and will never be overcome through retreating into individualism, or splitting into self-reinforcing groups; it can only be overcome through direct interaction with one another.
What happens after this, is up to society itself. It has tasted its political power, and we can only hope that its appetite will grow, as only through active engagement can South African society overcome the deep polarisation that its politicians have subjected it to and which it has become infected with. It cannot, and will never be overcome through retreating into individualism, or splitting into self-reinforcing groups; it can only be overcome through direct interaction with one another.
To focus on whether Jacob Zuma is ultimately removed from power (and who he is replaced with in the short term) by these protest actions is to miss the point of these protests, and constitutes an overly reductionist understanding of why citizen engagement and action is necessary. Indeed, it renders one immobilised by hypothetical considerations that go back and forth and offer no hope of change. By now, the vulnerability of government and the state in South Africa cannot be solved by short term actions; the rot has gone too deep and has spread too wide to simply be removed by getting rid of the president. It will take sustained action from broad cross-sections of society to rectify. The removal of the president, if it is achieved, will merely be a symbolic show of the power of the citizenry (although an important one at that no doubt, and with significant political implications). Sustained long-term action will prove necessary to reconstitute the integrity of government and the state in South Africa.
In this respect, picture a society that discusses its priorities, interests and issues with their neighbours regularly, and can mobilise within a
week or two to get massive numbers out onto the streets, and you begin to grasp
what South Africa could be if it can build on the momentum that has gathered in
previous weeks. Will there be challenges, and are there risks? Indeed, but the
risk of not building the base for active citizen engagement is orders of
magnitude greater, as the past twenty-two years has proven beyond any
reasonable doubt. Like our bodies, the polis - or the body politic - is only ever healthy if it is regularly exercised.
No comments:
Post a Comment