Destroyed African Family - By Dumile Feni...
Prof. John Henrik Clarke...
We Are The First People To Give Back Our Struggle To Our Former Masters
Apartheid Is Alive And Well, And We African People Of Mzantsi Helped Bring It Back To Life On 2016...
The local elections in South Africa just concluded, and the aftermath has been a loss for the ANC on Key economic cities and other Wards in the once tight, loyal collective of followers and members. 18 million did not vote for any party. 18 million plus voted for the ANC. 8 million plus for the DA. 2 million plus for EFF. All these are national statistics.
Although the ANC retained many of their wards throughout the land, they lost Port Elizabeth, Pretoria, Cape Town and Johannesburg(which DA won through an unstable coalition with the EFF). This comes at a time when the ANC had totally turned a deaf ear to the wailing, moans and cries of the poor Africans they were lording over, and this was their main voting block.
The ANC has been inebriated by the "Gravy Train" for the past 20+ years of their [Kleptocratic rule, as tagged by Malema] and in the process forgot and did not care about their African voters.
They only came to their voting masses, for the past 20 years whenever it was National voting, as was the case in the recent Local elections. And always, whenever the voting was finished, and the ANC back at the helm, it became business as usual, and every time, they became more arrogant and caring less about their polity, and did not even see to it that service delivery was efficiently rendered.
On the other hand, the army the poor was growing restless, and very much disgruntled with their elected leaders and officials. Meanwhile, the ANC carried-on with their devious and corrupt ways in ruling and controlling South Africa. Their followers' decrepit living and other social malaise visited upon them, were ignored or snarled at, and discarded by the fattened handkerchief heads who ruled over them.
The ANC, during the last National Voting period, even arrogantly and disingenuously declared that they are going "To Rule Until Jesus Comes."
It is also important to talk a little bit about the DA, who were a vociferous and feisty opponent to ANC rule. They have accused the ANC of malfeasance, mal-governance and corruption ceaselessly. So that, the results of the 2016 elections were affected by the so-called African middle class, the supposed-'Born Frees,' and many opportunists and disgruntled ANC followers, and Malema's paltry followers, all voted and coalesced with DA in order to defeat the ANC.
This has been a mega-disaster that the ANC created for themselves. The voting African(18 million of them) punished the ANC by not voting for the ANC or any other party. The ANC realized too late that their defeat was going to come at the ballot box by their own followers.
There is a dulled and lulled aching and searing feeling of sadness that the ANC lost, amongst many people(silently or otherwise) that the ANC lost, and some are celebrating this ANC defeat with fully throttled denunciations of the ANC ruling government. Many are celebrating, and happy that the DA is in some key areas and in control of local power, tin the many hard-core ANC followers and loyalists.
Yet, there is a foreboding sense that something dreadful has happened and is going to happen under DA rule. The EFF is under heated attack by many of its followers, as is the ANC, by many of its Youth-league crew and many in the ANC. The ANC is pushing back and will not remove Zuma. Malema is accused as having sold out the struggle by pairing up with the DA…
Many ordinary South Africans have adopted a stance of standing back and seeing what the DA is going to and deliver and govern like-this is more apparent in ANC strongholds that have now been taken over by DA… And now of late the ANC has been accused of sabotaging the rule of the DA in the Key ANC voting areas.
The lessons the ANC has to learn from the recent Local elections debacle is the glaring fact that they have to humble themselves and begin to listen to and respect their own voters. I heard the other day Mantashe saying that his cadre needs to Humble themselves and be amongst the people.
At the same time, the very same ANC is subtly blaming those who did not vote. The ANC still has a long way to go to mend its relations with the African people of Mzantsi. The ANC is going to have a very earth-shaking paradigm shift, as soon as now.
Now, a brief look at the Democratic Alliance.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) was instructed by its London handlers, just like Dr. Mamphele Ramphele, to join hands with the racist right wing party, the Democratic Alliance (DA). Soon after the secret meeting with the agent of the British Queen, Lord Robin Renwick, EFF announced that it would be uniting with other opposition parties.
This was a coded way to say an alliance with the DA shall be formed to advance the anti-BRICS agenda and to defend monopoly white capital.The Sunday Times has revealed that the EFF has held multiple secret meetings with the DA after the London trip. Sources say that the London agenda shall be realized should the ruling party get less than 50% in most municipalities and metros.
According to these sources, the EFF shall promptly enter into coalitions with the DA to co-govern. This claim has been confirmed by the national chairperson of the EFF, Advocate Dali Mpofu, who told weekend newspapers that, “EFF shall go into coalition with anyone but the ANC.”
The implications of this London agenda is that those who are voting for the EFF are essentially voting for the racist and pro-white monopoly of the DA. Voters are being duped with faux radical rhetoric in order to maintain white power.
Lord Robin Renwick: Malema's Handler From London.
Rehad Informs us:
During October 2015, the top leadership of the ostensible“Marxist-Leninist” parliamentary party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) led by its “Commander in Chief” Julius Malema took a tour to London where they met amongst others, ‘Lord’ Robin Renwick.
The meeting with Renwick and other representatives of imperialism happened under the secret rule called the “Chatham House Rule”. Up until now no one knows what was said between the EFF and the representatives of British colonialism.
The media is also not interested to ask the relevant questions. What is known is that after meeting Robin Renwick and others, EFF changed its policy in a number of significant ways. Renwick gloats about being the man who converted Nelson Mandela from demanding nationalization of the economy to becoming a servant of capitalism and private property.
Since meeting with Renwick, EFF has been quite on things like “land expropriation without compensation”and“nationalization”. EFF has been focused on the “Gupta Must Go” and the “Zuma Must Fall” campaigns which are in turn fully supported by British and Afrikaner imperialism.
We don’t know what was said between Malema and Renwick but leaked pictures show the two men in deep conversation. After meeting Lord Renwick, EFF radically altered its anti imperialist stance and has since become an agent of imperialism.
They have also denounced radical land reform as well as Robert Mugabe who is only person who has been able to return land to black people in Southern Africa in recent times.
The Most bizarre, and still to be explained, policy change of the EFF after meeting Renwick is the attack on the late President Mandela’s legacy.
Not even a year before, the EFF was singing praises of Mandela including leading a big procession to his home after his death to pay homage to him. What has led to the change of heart? One explanation is that white global capitalism is worried that it has elevated Mandela to such a high point that he is likely to be regarded as a saint by even the white population.
This is not acceptable as its inconsistent with black representation by white supremacy. In this context Mandela must necessarily be brought down to normal black status as a figure with no legacy to celebrate. Whites have used Mandela when it suited them — now they are abusing him. It’s the same old story. What is shocking is to see the willingness of Julius Malema and company to do the dirty work of white supremacy.
Lord Robin Renwick – Malema’s new friend — is a nasty piece of work. He is a chief imperialist negotiator who was deployed to Southern Africa by the Queen under the Margaret Thatcher administration. He has successfully negotiated neo-colonial settlements consecutively in Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa. In November 1978 he was deployed to Zimbabwe, where he was appointed head of the Rhodesia Department in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
He later served as Political Adviser to the Governor of ‘Rhodesia’. He had clear instructions to find a suitable black successor government that was: amicable to working with the British; willing to keep the economy in the hands of White Monopoly Capital, and willing to accept the neo-colonial constitution drafted by the British that served to protect White minority rights.
As indicated below, in order to delay and confuse the process of negotiations Renwick is not shy to share his strategy:“So we produced a rather wild plan, if you like, rather than recognizing Muzorewa we should change the constitution into a respectable constitution but with protection for minority rights and that we should ourselves take over the running of the country for a period and then de-colonize it as we had in other countries.
In 1987 Robin Renwick was deployed to South Africa by the Queen under similar instructions. South Africa had declared a state of emergency and like Zimbabwe (seven years earlier) was costing European investors billions of rands. Renwick's orders was to find a suitable successor to President PW Botha, for the purpose of freeing Nelson Mandela who the British had identified as the black leader that they could best work with, and drafting a new neocolonial constitution that protected the rights of the white minority who owned the SA economy.
Renwick also had instructions to get SA to agree to giving Namibia its independence. Two conditions were attached to this nominal independence. Firstly, that no radical return of land must be realized and secondly, that SA destroys all its nuclear weapons. South Africa has been allowed to develop nuclear power under white rule, but the global white system was worried that independence would put the bomb in black hands.
Renwick, achieved both objectives within a four year period. In his book ‘Mission to South Africa, Diary of a Revolution’ Renwick details the critical role he played in persuading Nelson Mandela to abandon ANCs policy on nationalization.
'He became close friends with Nelson Mandela who regarded him as his advisor during the negotiation process between 1987 and 1991. The Queen Knighted Renwick in 1989 for his service rendered to the crown in SA. Renwick serves in the House of Lords in the British Parliament and has business links to the Rothchilds, the Ruperts and some of the biggest multinational companies in the world including mining companies in Asia, Europe, Australia and Africa that mine gold, diamonds, copper, coal, natural gas, petroleum , etc.
In Africa he has held director positions in SAB Miller the second largest brewery in the world, Harmony Gold the third largest gold mining company in SA, Gem Diamonds a company linked to forceful removal of Bushmen peoples in Botswana. It must be pointed out that Gem Diamonds also has mines in the following African countries: Angola, Botswana, Central African Republic, DRC and Lesotho.
Here are some of the key changes to policy that Renwick has already achieved with the EFF:Abandoned revolutionary violence to reclaim land. Pledged loyalty to section 25 of the SA Constitution which is about buying land.Attacked Zimbabwean land redistribution.
Announced alliance with the DA. Embarked on an anti-Gupta and anti-duma campaign instead of fighting white capital. Formed an anti Gupta and anti Zuma alliance with the representative of white monopoly capital, Johann Rupert. Malema is attending private meetings in the Chamber of Commerce under the ‘Chantam House Rule
This means that it’s a secret, that one bind oneself to, not to reveal who one is meeting with. This includes meetings with affiliates of the principal party(s). White Power handlers like Renwick are preparing Julius Malema, like they prepared Nelson Mandela in the 1990s, to carry out the mandate of the Queen.In the press conference held after the London tour, the EFF had promised to make the footage of the secret meeting available.
This seems to be the modus operandi of EFF. It knows the media is not interested in its contradictions or lies. The media has for instance up to now not cared to ask what happened to the promise of occupying ABSA which was the key demand of the march to the JSE.
The relationship between the media and the anti Zuma faction is now decidedly unethical. EFF shall not reveal the content of the secret meeting. However we can clearly observe the policy changes that are directly linked to the meeting.
There is little doubt that South Africa is facing real prospects of an anti capitalist and anti settler colonialist revolution in terms of which every sector of black life — the poor, the unemployed, the landless, the black middle class which faces racism everyday and black business that is subverted by white capital.
An important dimension that needs serious consideration here is that Renwick has massive interest in the energy sector. EFF support for the Minister of Finance Pravin Gordhan, who is poised to unleash privatization, explains how the financial interests of Renwick shall be taken care of.
The big question in this context is, what is Renwick giving in exchange? The value of the pound right now is very high and this makes conditions conducive for Renwick to spend for his political and imperialist project. Evidently, Renwick has been very consistent in serving the British Empire.
It must be asked — has Mr Malema now finally agreed to serve Empire, if not, what is he doing with the servant of the Queen?
The Following questions should be asked of EFF leaders and their followers:
What did EFF hope to achieve by meeting a coup plotter and arch imperialist?What did Renwick give EFF and what did they (EFF) promise in return? How is working with Johann Rupert consistent with their stated aim of “land expropriation without compensation” and “nationalization”? Has EFF now changed policy from viewing white monopoly capital as the enemy into seeing it as a strategic partner to topple Zuma? Does EFF care for the billions stolen everyday by white capital? How is working with the DA advancing the interests of the black majority?
Andile Mngxitama wrote:
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) is put in a unique position to either use its share of the vote to demand land expropriation without compensation, free education and other progressive policies, or it can choose to consolidate white racism. The African National Congress (ANC) is in a seriously vulnerable position as a result of the possibility of dropping to below 51% in some of the key metropolitan cities.
This presents the EFF with the opportunity to press for real change. The ANC can be forced to change national policy on land and other key areas in exchange for the votes to keep some metros. A deal could be structured with clear objectives and time frames.
Unlike the initial offer of the 6% national vote to amend section 25 of the constitution (the property clause), which the ANC rejected because it could afford to at the time, the ruling party now needs the votes and it would be more difficult to say no. Forcing the hand of the ANC to take on the land thieves and white capital is the most progressive option to use the mandate given to the EFF by voters.
But the EFF has chosen to rather consolidate white power by deciding to go into a possible coalition with the racist pro-white capital Democratic Alliance (DA).
Only DA benefits from a coalition with EFF and it serves white power. An EFF and DA coalition is in line with the London agenda which is about maintaining white power. See post above I cited about London's interfering with our elections and selection of leaders and white capital's priorities above.
The lack of interest by EFF to use its votes to demand radical change shows how far to the ideological right it has turned as it worries about how its viewed by white capital here and abroad. This is another lost opportunity for using the ballot to push for radical change.The behavior of the banks shows just how exposed and vulnerable black businesses and black people are. African
s do not have a bank of their own.
The South African government has done little to ensure that a state bank is properly developed to counter white monopoly over the financial sector. A black bank is now a matter of absolute urgency if black business wishes to free itself.
A new theory has emerged that seeks to explain this attack on Nelson Mandela by Malema. First, Malema has taken over the position of a trusted agent of the West to carry out their agenda after losing face with Jacob Zuma who is now seen as part of the eastern block of Russia, India and China.
This theory suggests that the western world having elevated Mandela too high and having used him to safeguard their interests no longer needs him, hence, the need to destroy his legacy. Mandela’s image as a saint has to be annulled because it disrupts the logic of white supremacy that reduces all blacks to savages incapable of certain heights of achievement which are the sole preserve of the white greats. White supremacy is inherently conspiratorial against blacks.
Mandela had been elevated above the general black position in the white imagination. Incidentally, it was whites who elevated him, and now they want him cut to size. Malema has become a willing agent in this battle of the white world to re-establish itself and expel Mandela from the symbolic place of greatness. It would appear that the London controllers of the regime change process demanded, amongst other things, the attack on Mugabe, Mandela, Zuma and the Guptas.
The attack on Mandela has been the most difficult to understand but the theory put forward begins to give coherence as to why Mandela’s legacy must be destroyed so that his place in the symbolic order of whiteness is obliterated. That is how white supremacy functions. It uses you and then abuses you.
This is the fate awaiting those who have gone into an alliance with the likes of Johann Rupert – they shall be used and then abused. Malema’s criticism of Mandela has gained him some new admirers even from some Black Consciousness and Pan Africanist quarters. The followers of these ideologies have long and correctly identified Mandela as a leader who had a great weakness for whites.
This criticism of Mandela from such giants as Robert Sobukwe was principled. However the current assault on Mandela is a white project aimed at purifying itself. EFF leaders, wittingly or otherwise, have offered themselves the job of assisting whites to carry out this program of destroying the legacy of Mandela. What those blacks, who work with whites against blacks, don’t know is that, like Mandela they shall be used and then abused.
There is an unbroken link between the assault on Mandela’s legacy and now the calls for armed struggle. The whole of the African continent is littered with rebel armies funded and armed by imperialism. We would do well to remember that Johann Rupert, one of the richest men in South Africa, assisted by the media has called for a coup.
It is now public knowledge that Malema has called out to Rupert to help him topple President Zuma. Rupert has delivered on engineering economic terrorism. What is left to be seen is whether political destabilization, that would include political terrorism so as to impose white control completely again, can be engineered. If they can go for Mandela, who is safe?
Now, Let's talk a bit about DA in Cape Town
Many of the African people, I mentioned at the beginning of this piece, are taken by the DA, and yet, never took time to see how the DA is Doing In Cape Town areas, especially for the poor people in and around Cape Town… I dug up the architectural designs of Apartheid era still prevalent today in South Africa. Johnny Miller's photographic series shows that Apartheid spatial planning is still present in Cape Town.
The legacy of the Apartheid regime is often spoken of in terms of the divide it left behind in South Africa’s economic structure. The national system of racial oppression left people of color without access to adequate jobs, housing, education, or healthcare. Now, 21 years after the abolishment of the oppressive regime, its remnants can still be seen in the country’s spatial planning.
In a photo series titled Unequal Scenes, photographer Johnny Miller presents the greenbelt between wealthy-gated communities and poor informal settlements of Cape Town as seen from the air. During the Apartheid regime, towns and cities were constructed using buffer zones of land, bush, or infrastructure to separate the haves from the have-nots, systematically pushing people of color out of the inner cities where they could easily be dislocated and controlled.
While movement is no longer restricted by law, sprawling informal settlements are still largely occupied by black and colored people.“Many people who have seen the photos, including myself, told me that to see it from the air, was a perspective that they had never seen before,” explains Miller. His first photographs focussed on the two communities, Masiphumelele and Imizamo Yethu, both informal settlements located close to wealthier neighborhoods.
“This series immediately went viral,” he adds.Speaking to the University of Cape Town, his alma mater, Miller said his aim was to encourage a dialogue about the discrepancies in how people live in Cape Town. The legacy of Apartheid and specifically the architecture of separation provides a unique context in which to view this particular form of inequality,” Miller was quoted as saying.
“Not only that, but the extreme inequalities are usually not present in other parts of the world. For example, you can see in Imizamo Yethu, how the shacks — literally, tin shacks — exist just meters away from very wealthy houses with swimming pools.
”This weekend, the residents of Bromwell Street in Woodstock, Cape Town face eviction. Many families who reside there, have called it home their entire lives, fondly remembering the vibrancy of the neighborhood even under apartheid rule. One of the only areas that managed to avoid total segregation under South Africa's former regime, it's classification as a colored community meant that people of different races were able to reside relatively close to the economic hub of the city centre.
As more restaurants and high-rise apartment buildings spring up in the area, poorer residents are finding themselves homeless with nowhere to go. The ever-present XCollektiv wasted no time in pointing a finger at some of the individuals they deem responsible for these forced evictions.
Conflict over housing and land is by no means a new phenomenon — particularly in a city like Cape Town, where the wounds from apartheid-era forced evictions are still somewhat raw. Many people forced from areas like District Six have already died in wait for the return of what was taken from them, they're surviving relatives still battling to reclaim the space.
This new spate of work from the Xcollektiv speaks to what many feel as the root cause of the City of Cape Town’s perceived reinforcement of apartheid-era spatial planning, starkly invoking the group’s adaptation of the city’s slogan:
Cape Town – This City Works For A Few.
On Saturday, June 11 the residents of Woodstock and Salt River held a meeting under the campaign, “We Are Not Going Anywhere” to engage, discuss and consolidate ideas in response to the evictions they face from their homes by the City of Cape Town.
A follow up meeting will be convened shortly where a way forward will be developed. The organizing slogan of the campaign was “resisting gentrification”. Woodstock and Salt River are low and predominantly no income, overcrowded and under serviced areas.
Residents are objecting to the commercial developments in their areas (via gentrification) that have proceeded for a decade now under the guise of urban regeneration in a bid to ultimately get ownership of the said properties.
To this end the urban regeneration program of the government results in increased rentals, rates and property prices which can’t be afforded by the residents who are in turn evicted or forced to move due to non payments of such rentals, rates and property prices.
Gentrification in Salt River and Woodstock – just like in Bo Kaap, De Waal Drive Flats and Zonnebloem – is being pursued in the interests of white capital.It is evident that the City of Cape Town led by the Democratic Alliance (DA), in the context of an African National Congress (ANC) led national government, has adopted a very aggressive stance against the poor on the questions of land and housing.
The contradiction between white supremacy and black oppression finds clear manifestation in the wicked and criminal tactics used by the DA led Western Cape Government to evict the urban poor. Twenty-two years into so-called democracy, affordable housing for the poor in Cape Town’s CBD remains elusive. What is happening is that the City of Cape Town, in cahoots with white capital, has identified Salt River and Woodstock as investment hubs.
Consequently big business is establishing and entrenching itself in these areas. To free the space for white capital to thrive the apartheid method of removing people via direct and open state violence has taken on another more sophisticated form being forced removals via unaffordable increased rates, rental and property prices.
Many families have consequently lost their homes in these areas and have been banished to Bliekies Dorp where conditions are manyfold worse. New commercial buildings are mushrooming all over Woodstock and Salt River. Whites are buying out the property in these areas. The development of the white owned “Old Biscuit Mill” in Albert Road, Woodstock – where expensive food and other stuff are sold — has not amounted to any benefits for the residents.
Moreover it is frequented mostly by whites and other tourists.It is incumbent upon the ANC government to immediately declare a stop to all evictions. The ANC government has a duty to serve and protect the poor and the power to end all evictions. It is obliged to decolonize Cape Town, to decolonize South Africa. President Zuma is urged to declare a moratorium on all evictions nationally.
The poor have a right to land and housing.This is just a smidgen of what I have to write about DA local governance which many of us have not done enough research and homework on. What has happened to us is that we have a powerful White owned media in all its manifestations being fed to us daily without respite, that we are now more or less incapable of processing and deciphering what messages, memes and zines are being promulgated to us.
It is important that we begin to think out of the box. Finding independent information about our real-politick, from information all over the news media, learn what is being said to us, and not what is not told to us… Apply and propagate all this information and knowledge from our own African personal lived experiences
There have been the unenclosed toilet debacles and issues in Makhaza that the DA was taken to court for, and the DA lost, because what is not said is that this was part of the gentrification action against the poor, and the poor are being segregated against, and Cape Town is the Temple of Apartheid, today. I have published a Hub dealing witness issues of toilets built in the open Veld/Field, with no walls of any sort or privacy for their users, here on HubPages.
Since the loss of the ANC in many areas throughout South Africa, we also can now see the rise of racism in Natal, and Pretoria and Johannesburg. The ANC is appalling and dangerously ingorant in helping the poor overcome Apartheid, structurally, mentally, spiritually, politically, socially, and is being unable to helo Africans to practice their freedom as the indigenous of Mzantsi.
But DA, in Cape Town, where they have ruled for many years now - The DA has become too comfortable in the City of Cape Town, ignoring important issues like gentrification, homelessness and inequality.
In an interview leading to the 2016 elections, in Ward 62, which included wealthy areas like Constantia, Bishopscourt, Kirstenbosch, upper Claremont and some of Table Mountain, the DA in these areas, under Elizabeth Brunette, was that of very mindset, they think that Whites will vote for them.
Muizenberg Ward 64 is in an area that has always been DA with people needing help in the community and that residents are ready for change. In an area where property prices range from a modest R750 000 to R14 million, residents are struggling to keep up with high rates and the poor are being overlooked, she said. A fishing community in Kalk Bay was having an especially hard time trying to afford the high school fees in the area.
''I am talking about a beautiful ward, but drive at night and you will see the homelessness,'' said the business science student. Here's a pice written by a collaboration between Kings College London and UCT research project:
The city of Cape Town in South Africa has a population in excess of 3.5 million and is South Africa's second largest city. It has a distinct demographic composition, with half of its inhabitants classified as Colored, almost 20% White, and just over 30% African. Average annual income is 2,000 pounds and the city has an unemployment rate of 23%.
However, this headline rate masks the gross spatial and social disparities in unemployment, and in some of the poorest parts of the city, anything up to 80% of residents are thought to be unemployed. Both the city and the western Cape are governed by the Democratic Alliance, with the ANC as opposition. Cape Town is a city of contrasts — the Central business District and its surrounding neighborhoods have been upgraded, securitized, gentrified(removing Black Spots(Poor peoples shacks, etc.) in Apartheid times), and attracted new residents.
However, while urban upgrading programs in the rest of the city continue apace, the gulf between the rich and poor remains fierce and stark. This divide is equally marked when it comes to drinking. The city's alcohol retailing patterns are a product of its colonial and Apartheid past.
Indeed, under Apartheid, Africans were not permitted to buy European liquor until 1965, leading to a proliferation of so-called illegal bars and drinking 'spots' that got to be known as 'Shebeens', and now of late dubbed 'Taverns'..The construction of municipal beer halls and spaces were supposed to feed back into the development of Townships, instead, it destroyed and dislocated the poor who became alcoholics, en masse, in many poor Townships, nationally. By the end of [Apartheid-which never ended of course] alcoholism is one of the most devastating weapons on the African collective and many poor Boers/wites.
'Shebeens' were prolific and for all extents and purposes, seemingly outside the purview of state control-but bribes are part of the sham and scam, between the tavern owners and the local police departments. The city's two tier system of alcohol retailing for Whites and non-White areas meant that in 1994, there were fifteen times the number of licensed premises in white areas as in non-White parts of the city.
The legacy of Apartheid's form of spatial and social control remains in the drinking halls of many South Africans(Now lately it is no longer Shebeens, but are called Taverns)We also have a drug pandemic and this is destroying communities and many lives. Too many of our youth and young/old adults are unemployed, and days are long and dreary/bleak for millions of South Africans, daily. The Future is dim.
The Alcohol problem pointed to above, amongst the poor of South Africa, is national in scope, and growing by the hour. The alcoholism in the Cape is also a global problem faced by middle-income countries, where liquor regulation is deeply contested and ineffectively enforced. The influence of the liquor industry strong — as in many countries — due to the importance placed on its economic contribution.
In my neck of the Hood, since we are next to an old man-made mountain from the gold being dug in Crown Mines, during the August and September season, we are overwhelmed by the Dust that dots the Eastern side of the Whole of Soweto, and people , children and the elderly, are coughing very much; their eyes are affected by the Dust from the mountains/I only pity those whose houses are built on the foot of these mammoth man-made yellow cream white dumps.
My own Township is a liquor mecca, and sales of alcohol have morphed into many versions of Shebeens and what have you. Drinking is an activity engaged in by many of our people, and it is destroying the frayed basic social cohesion of our people; eroding our collective souls; and drowning our spirits and bodies deeply into the swirling alcohol.
I say this because so many of my peers have died early because of alcoholism, TB, and from the 80s wiped out by AIDS. Many of my relatives have been swiped and devasted/killed by the HIV/AIDS disease, and many are still going to die.Poverty is an issue that the ANC could not control and the people die from hunger and malnutrition. Instead, as has be oft pointed out, we we are dying and killing ourselves selves with the paltry wealth that was left as crumb, by the Apartheid oppressors,s for for to nibble at during the past 20+ years.
The former Apartheid Homelands planted all across South Africa, were not gotten rid off by the ANC. Even today, many of our people still work on Some White farmer's lands, in droves, and we have people living in the Houghtons of Johannesburg; owning yachts; and taking government junkets to shop overseas.
Again, lest we forget that Hellen Zille who characterized the DA's official position on the Employment Equity Amendment Bill as the inadequacy ad classic liberalism in addressing racial justice in post- Apartheid South Africa. Hellen Zille characterized the bill as "Verwoerdian Social Engineering' and that, 'there is nothing progressive about coercion that enforces racial quotas.'
We learn more about Zille from Mandisi Majavu: Additionally, what underpins Zille’s argument is that there is nothing progressive about compelling employers to comply with the Employment Equity Bill. Liberals all over the world mistakenly think that non-racialism or color-blindness is a fundamental principle of justice.
On the contrary, as Amy Gutman, an American philosopher, points out fairness is a fundamental principle of justice; and that principle, especially in a country that is struggling to overcome the apartheid legacy, does not always call for color-blindness with regard to employment and university admissions.
According to Gutman, “To respond to racial injustice with a color consciousness principle or policy is therefore not to commit any wrong at all, provided the principle or policy is consistent with fairness.”
Research findings show that 19 years after the demise of the apartheid, 85 percent of black Africans still remain poor, whereas 87 percent of white South Africans occupy the middle to upper class categories-and the same amount of land.
Further, according to the Commission for Employment Equity 2012 / 2013 Annual Report, “For the past 10 years we have not shaken the stubborn domination of the Whites substantially in the private sector compared to the public sector.” Whites, particularly white males, are over-represented in the top management levels in all the provinces.
The Western Cape Province, the DA’s stronghold, 'Has the most representation of Whites at the top management for both males and females.'
Generally, black professionals in South Africa have always viewed Cape Town in particular as a zone for white privilege—that is, Whitopia. For example, last year, Mail and Guardian’s reporter, Verashni Pillay, wrote about her experiences in Cape Town pointing out that, “What drove me slowly mad was how racism was an elephant in the room that you could not talk about.”
This is consistent with a liberal view that discussing race is unethical because somehow, such discussions, automatically lead to Verwoerdian social thinking.
Historically, the liberal tradition that Zille represents opposed apartheid policies on the basis of the classic liberal principle of possessive individualism. The liberal tradition I am referring to is, Helen Suzman’s Progressive Party. It was an elitist white tradition that has a shameful record of accommodating Verwoerdian Apartheid’s racist policies.
For example, for decades after its establishment, Suzman’s Progressive Party restricted its membership to whites only.
In post-apartheid South Africa this tradition is defended by black liberals such as Lindiwe Mazibuko and Mmusi Maimane. Black liberals in the Party give legitimacy and moral weight to a gentrified race analysis of DA politics. Mazibuko, the DA’s parliamentary leader, is aligned with certain people in the DA who believe that race matters, according to newspaper reports. She admits that “inequality is racialized…”
She further explains that, “We wanted to support employment equity, we thought the legislation wasn't as draconian as it turned out to be…'Similar' to Zille’s appeal to a Verwoerdian false dilemma, Mazibuko uses the word 'draconian' in the above sentence to delineate the perimeters of the debate.
Hence people who support the Bill are by default neurotically undemocratic. On the other hand, Mazibuko and other liberals utilize ‘liberalism speak’ to appear reasonable while in reality they oppose practical approaches to address racial inequality. A free market ideology is thrown in the mix for good measure. Thus, Zille argues that the Bill “will undermine growth, reduce jobs, drive away investment …”
In his seminal work, ‘The political theory of possessive individualism,' CB Macpherson, a Canadian philosopher, highlighted the contradictory logic inherent in the liberalism that subscribe to both democratic principles and market ideology.
What further makes this liberal tradition untenable in post-apartheid South Africa is its lack of intellectual tools to talk about race convincingly. Presumably, the aim of the so-called “black caucus” in the DA is to consolidate a still nascent gentrified race analysis into DA politics.
One of the challenges facing black liberals within the DA is convincing the conservative faction of the Party to give them the intellectual space necessary to further develop a race analysis that is palatable to wealthy whites and, a race discourse that resonates with blacks who have middle-class aspirations.
That is where the future lies for the DA. Obviously, astute political players in the DA understand this. Likewise, Lindiwe Mazibuko and Mmusi Maimane perfectly understand their political roles.
We can now see much dearth given to the phenomena of Malema and DA, that this was long in the making. What the people of Port Elizabeth face similar circumstances of the poor people in Cape Town-is one of the many places that the DA is having a gentrified political feast.
There is no other way around this issue. As I have said, we have given leeway to our detractors, with the hope that they will be better than the ANC. Malema ignorantly believed this, was told to do so, and his 'revenge' mind-set satisfied as he put it, "We have the ANC by its ...,"(unmentionable body part reference).
But questions are looming within his picayune enclave, and some in his group are decrying his coalescing with the White people was simple sell out. I have explained above what has made Malema endure, and the knuckle-head he is, he cavorts with Lords of London… This is way beyond his league and he will never be able to warp his warped pea-brain around it.…
What I have been discussing above was a bit about Malema, the DA, their origins and modus operandi/modus vivendi. It is important to connect the most recent, but past history of how puppets have been crated in order to thwart and derail the African people's struggle, and in the midst of that struggle, it is also import to pay attention to how the White Liberals and their Imperialist cousins operated and wormed their way into dislodging us from our intended struggle and revolutionary goals.
What those who voted for Malema, who sold them to DA, and those who voted for DA, do know or concern themselves about, is the fact that they have not read nor hear what Bantu Biko had to say about such matters.
"No race posses the monopoly of beauty, intelligence, force, and there is room for all of us at the rendezvous of victor." I do not think Aime Cesaire was hinting about South Africa when he said these words. The Whites in this country have placed themselves on a path of no return. So blatantly exploitative in terms of the mind and body is the practice of white racism that one wonders if the interest of Africans and Whites in this country have not become so mutually exclusive as to exclude the possibility of there being "room for all of us at the rendezvous of victory."
"The White man's quest for power has led him to destroy with utter ruthlessness whatever has stood in his way. In an effort to divide the African world in terms of aspirations, and their powers have evolved a philosophy that stratifies the African world and gives preferential treatment to certain groups. Further, they have buildup several cocoons, thereby hoping to increase inter-tribal ill-feeling and to divert the energies of the African people towards attaining false prescribed "freedoms".
"Moreover, it was hoped, the Africa people could be effectively contained in these various cocoons of repression, euphemistically referred to as "homelands". I predict that a time will come when stooge bodies will prove very costly not only in terms of the credibility of the story the Nationalists, [but the reinstatement of the former oppresors].(DA?)
I Paraphrase here: "Biko said that the legislation of Apartheid, the use of propaganda on Radio Bantu, and promises of freedom granted to the 'homelands' that Apartheid meant well... the mass removals from urban areas by Apartheid goons. The unnecessary harassment of Africans by police, inside and outside the Township, and the ruthless application of the dreaded pass laws, which Biko says just goes to show how much Africans are being 'tolerated' by White people-[this will be the achilles heel for apartheid, but also a victory of having their stooges bring them back to power once they lose it].
Biko closes by stating: "Needless to say, anyone finding himself at the receiving end of such deliberate [though uncalled for] cruelty must ultimately ask himself the question: what do I have to lose? This is what the Africans are beginning to ask themselves."
We learn the following from Biko:
To add to this, the opposition ranks have been thrown into chaos and confusion. All opposition parties have to satisfy the basic demands of politics. They want power and at the same time they want to be fair. It never occurs to them that the surest way of being unfair is to withhold power from the African population. Hence, one ultimately comes to the conclusion that there is no real difference between the United Party and the Nationalist Party.
"If there is, a strong possibility exists that the United Party is on the right of the Nationalists. One needs only to look at their famous slogan, "White supremacy over the whole of South Africa," to realize the extent to which the quest for power can cloud even such supposedly immortal characteristics as the "English sense of fair play". Africans long ago dismissed the United Party as a great political fraud.
"The Colored people have since followed suit. If the United Party is gaining any votes at all it is precisely because it is becoming more explicit in its racist policy. I would venture to say that the most overdue political step in South African White politics is a merger between United and Nationalist Parties.[The reader needs to recall what I have stated above about Helen human and Zille].
"Some Africans argue that at that moment the 'Progressive Party' lost their only chance of attaining some semblance of respectability by not choosing to disband rather than lose their African constituents. Yet, I cannot help feeling that the Progressives emerged more purified from the ordeal. The progressives have never been an African man's real hope.
"They have always been a White Party at heart, fighting for a more lasting way of preserving White Values in this southern tip of Africa. It will not be long before the Africans relate their poverty to the their Blackness in concrete terms.
"Because of the tradition forced onto the country, the poor people shall always be African people. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Africans should wish to rid themselves of a system that locks up the wealth of the country in the hands of [European] few.
Message To The African People Of Mzantsi...
We, the African people of South Africa, those of us who have participated in this effort, to be more specific, i.e., those who voted for EFF and DA in the most recent local elections, have given back our power to rule our country back to the Oppressors(Boers): doing so smiling broadly and hat-doffing.
Many people I have been able to talk to, my friends, relatives, you name it, many of them, and those I overheard in certain settings howling above everyone else, how happy they are that the ANC has lost Key cities and wards throughout South Africa, that, in that celebration, lies a very fundamental point: we, then, as I started saying, have given back power to the Master and are celebrating our dim-witted noble effort, deliriously.
Yes, the ANC got spanked, very hard and badly in the recent 2016 elections, to the point that its detractors even boldly point out that the ANC is finished-it will never recover, and some even say, there is nothing like a people or person called Boers or Whites, and that others gleefully point out that we as a people in Mzantsi have reached our nirvana of racial mixing and equity. Many of our African people feel vindicated after the ANC's losses in the local elections just expired. Life can very strange, indeed.
The DA has held in some contested places by forming a coalition between the EFF. I suppose, for all these people, it's honky-dory. Their venom, those celebrating the DA win in our communities is palpable. It is deep, and seething. What the ANC did or did not do to and for these people, runs so deep, that talking to them, only reinforces their perceived and dedicated hatred for the ANC.
I regard myself as a chronicler of our people stories and history, and what I am doing in this Hub, is to jot down, as to my observations what I am seeing happening to us, as a people. I do not need anyone to give me a title as to what I write about nor stand for. It is in this role that I decided on this part of the Hub to talk about how I see us as , we the Africans of Mzantsi.
Also, to be clear the about my motives, I belong to no political party or expose any type of ideology. Al I am doing, I am using my own life lived experiences and those around me, our people, our nation and struggle as an African people to bring to light and into the viral forefront, what do we have to say or write about what is happening to us.
Many African people have gotten 'very rich' since the ANC took power, and these are clinging to their paltry wealth-albeit a lot for most of the few of us. The 20+ years since the ANC took over, there have been radical changes as to how, we as an African people have evolved, and 20+ years, are what we all see ourselves as, a broken and divided, ultra rich few, and living alongside the armies of the poor. Looking at us pre-ANC and post ANC-grip on its voting polity, some of us, who have lived through Apartheid, do not forget that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
We have been at this stage, before, with the homelands, and Boer shenanigans of the 'petty Apartheid' and the giving of limited controlled forms of government, have finally yielded the desired results, for the former rulers, and they achieved all this, mainly, with the vote and coalitions of their former oppressed slaves. Many of us behave, today, as if giving power back to the DA, is the norm, that is, is what we as people have been doing, and in fact, many believe, it is better to be under the rule of the Whites, than Africans, because, they correctly point out, look at what the ANC has not achieved and is presently lloking and behaving like.
The cacophony brought about by the media and its apparatuses, mobile phones, modern technology, the height of European artifacts and culture, the uncontrollable flow of immigrants from other countries, the bleeding of the cash within the townships by foreigners, foreign companies, like the Beer, cigarette, etc company is a sight to behold. Our preoccupation with sounding and behaving Westerly, or Easterly, but not African South African, is at the top of our priority list, and is funded, shaped and formed by International Public relations operatives and the mega companies, in all spheres of our lives.
We still are the best and gullibly easy market for Western and Eastern vultures, and we welcome them with false 'Ubuntu,' and in the end, that very "Ubuntu" is hawked, and formed and deformed, that, like the African North of South Africa, African tourists guides who walk tourists around Vilakazi Street, whiles our brothers and sisters, children and indigenous of Mzantsi sit and gawk at this spectacle, leaves one at loss for words and thoughts. It's a Dumbing and Numbing lived shared experience, in all respects and spheres.
We have been scared out of our bodies and minds, today, that many of us even refuse to talk about these matters, of the change of the guard, and reenactment of the past, today. Many of us are scared to the extent that we simply sit back, and watch, and die, in droves, and the few surviving, and the ANC being recalcitrant, and the DA diving in for the Dig and Kill, that, at this point, it is important for us to begin to review and talk out of the box about these issues.
The other least spoken about issue are the unseen players I have mentioned above, Like Lord Robin Renwick, who have bent the ANC to admit that it is a multi-class movement composed of capitalists, middle class, workers and the poor. If I were to simplify, it is the ANC, as we see it, in cahoots with Liberal operatives that we find ourselves in this position of the DA now ruling over our lives. I have always regarded the DA as the morphed Nationalsist Party of the Apartheid era) NP, and I know that they claim to come from Helen Suzman. Well, that is why I have cited Biko at length, below, to give people as to what it is they have done by putting the DA in power, again in our communities.
I have already tabulated what the DA and Malema are up to, under whose orders, and what the outcome has been in Cape Town ruled DA, for the readers. Now, For the African people of Mzantsi, I am letting Biko below tell us about Liberals, because Helen Suzman was a Liberal, and Zille swears by her, and as shown above, with along with their mentor,Verwoerd… Typical of Liberals, as explained so plainly and clearly by Bantu Biko Below:
The Liberal Establishment According To Bantu Biko
Biko Talks about Liberals below:
We now come to the group that has longest enjoyed confidence from the African world — the Liberal establishment, including radio and Leftist groups. The biggest mistake the African world ever made was to assume that whoever opposed Apartheid was an ally. For a long time the African world has been looking only at the governing party and not so much at the whole power structure as the object of their rage. In a sense, the very political vocabulary that the Africans have used has been inherited from the Liberals. Therefore, it is not surprising that alliances(Coalitions? Today) were formed so easily with the Liberals.
Who are Liberals in South Africa?
"It is that curious bunch of nonconformists who explain their participation in negative terms; that bunch of do-gooders that goes under all sots of names - Liberals, Leftists, etc. These are the people who argue that they are not responsible for White racism and the country's "inhumanity to the African Man/Woman; these are the people who claim that they too feel the oppression just as acutely as the Africans and therefore should be jointly involved in the African people's struggle — for a place under the Sun; in short, these are the same people who say that they have 'African Souls Wrapped In White Skin".
"The Liberals set about their business with the utmost efficiency. They made it political that all groups opposing the status quo must necessarily be non-racial in nature, They maintained that if you stood for non-racialism you could not in any way adopt what they described as racialist policies. They even defined to the African people what the latter should fight for.(Recall Malema's saga and Lord Robin Renwick talked about above).
"With this sort of influence behind them, most African leaders tended to rely too much on the advice of Liberals. For a long time, in fact, it became the occupation of the leadership to "calm the masses," while they engaged in fruitless negotiations with the status quo. Their whole political action, in fact, was a programmed in the art of 'gentle persuasion' through protests and limited boycotts and they hoped the rest could be safely left to the troubled conscience of the fair-minded English folk.
"Of course, this situation could not last. A new breed of African leaders was beginning to take a dim view of the involvement of Liberals in a struggle that they regarded as essentially theirs, when the political movements of the Africans were either banned or harassed into non-existence. This left the stage open once more for the Liberals to continue their work of "fighting for the rights of the Africans.'
"It never occurred to the Liberals that the integration they insisted upon as an effective way of opposing Apartheid was impossible to achieve in South Africa. It had to be artificial because it was being foisted on two parties whose entire upbringing had been to support the lie that one race was superior and others inferior.
"One has to overhaul the whole system in South Africa before hoping to get African and White walking hand in hand to oppose a common enemy. As it is, both African and White walk into hastily organized integrated circle carrying with them the seeds of destruction of that circle — their inferiority and superiority complexes."
This is what has and is happening with the DA and EFF coalition.
The myth of integration as propounded under the banner of the liberal ideology must be cracked and killed because it makes people believe that something is being done, when in reality the artificially integrated circles are soporific to the Africans, while salving the consciences of the guilt-stricken Whites.
"It works from the false premise that, because it is difficult to bring people from different races together in this country, achievement of this is in itself a step towards the total liberation of the African people. Nothing could be more misleading."
Liberals Are Assuaging Their Guilt-Biko
Biko enlightens us thus:
"How many White people fighting for their version of a change in South Africa are really motivated by genuine concern and not by guilt? Obviously, it is a cruel assumption to believe that all Whites are not sincere, yet methods adopted by some groups often do suggest a lack of real commitment. The essence of politics is to direct oneself the group which wields power. Most White dissident groups are aware of the power wielded by the White power structure.
"They are quick to quote statistics on how big defense budget is. They know exactly how effectively the police and the army can control protesting African hordes — peaceful or otherwise. They know to what degree the African world is infiltrated by the security police.
"Hence, they are completely convinced of the impotence of African people. Why then do they persist in talking to the Africans? Since they are aware that the problem in this country is White racism, and why do they not address themselves to the White world? Why do they insist on talking to Africans?
"In an effort to answer these questions, one has to come to the painful conclusion that the Liberal is in fact appraising his own conscience, or at best, is eager to demonstrate his identification with the African people only so far as it does not serve his ties with his relatives on the other side of the color-line.
"Being White, he possesses the natural passport to the exclusive pool of White privileges from which he does not hesitate to extract whatever suits him. Yet, since he identifies with Africans, he moves around his White circles - White-Only beaches, restaurants, and cinemas — with a lighter load, feeling that he is not like the rest…
"Yet, at the back of his mind is a constant reminder that he is quite comfortable as things stand and therefore should not bother about change. Although he does not vote for the Nationalist(now a majority, anyway), he feels secure under the protection offered by the Nationalists and subconsciously shuns the idea of change.
Karabo Ngoepe wrote:
Pretoria - Black First Land First leader Andile Mngxitama has accused the Democratic Alliance of only serving white people in the municipalities it governs, while leaving black people destitute and in the cold.
"The DA is a party of white monopoly capital and white supremacy. Go to the Western Cape, Cape Town, Khayelitsha, Nyanga. See how DA manages that city that benefits whites, and blacks are excluded,” Mngxitama said during a debate on coalition politics.
"Our people in the Western Cape, as we speak, are using pota-pota. That city has billions of rand. The DA does not put money for infrastructure of black people in the Western Cape.
"Money has been rolled over because they need to give white people tenders. White people's companies in the Western Cape are oversubscribed. All the educated black people are running to Joburg, but unfortunately now they can’t anymore."
Mngxitama was part of a panel that consisted of Women’s Justice Foundation founder Magdalene Moonsamy and DA MP Stevens Mokgalapa. The debate was hosted by the South African Association of Public Administration and Management's Gauteng chapter.
Mngxitama said the African National Congress and Economic Freedom Fighters had let black people down.
"EFF and ANC, you have cost us too much. I’m talking as a black person. For me, from Black Consciousness, this thing of political parties means nothing for me. An EFF comrade without the red regalia in the street is a black person, an ANC person in the streets is a black person.
"When racism deals with us, it does not ask if we are EFF or ANC, it treats all of us the same. We, as black people, need to realize that our enemy is not one another," he said.
People are bombarding the City of Cape Town with letters and emails in solidarity with the residents of Bromwell Street, who face eviction.
The Story Of The Bromwell, In Cape Town
As Cape Town residents continue their fight against property developers and the City, campaigners have stepped in to support their eviction battle to Wolverivier.
Property developers The Woodstock Hub bought land in the area in 2013, with over two dozen residents protesting against the City’s attempts to move them 30 kilometres out of the CBD to Wolverivier as a result.
Activist group Reclaim The City is calling on people to contact councillor Brett Herron, Mayoral committee member for transport & urban development, who represents the ruling Democratic Alliance.
They see the move as a re-enactment of Apartheid planning, with black and colored families pushed out of the CBD to grim wasteland outside the city and away from vital services.
Mayor of Cape Town, Patricia de Lille, has also been accused of being dishonest about the relocations.
Among those to have commented on the Reclaim The City Facebook page so far, Stuart Hoosen-Lewis described the evictions as “morally unconscionable.”
He continued: “As a resident of this city, this is not the kind of place I want to live if we are simply going to follow in the footsteps of a government that my parents fought against, that so many South Africans fought and died against.
“As a representative of our democratically elected government, you should be having sleepless nights about your complicity in this.”
Cara Mazzola, addressing councillor Herron and Cape Town Mayor Patricia de Lille, added: “The obvious truth is that gentrification disproportionately affects people of color. These evictions are eerily reminiscent of the District 6 forced removals.”
This comes a week after a video was published online showing drone footage of the proposed relocation camp for evicted residents, on farmland 30 kilometers north of Cape Town.
On the footage, 29-year-old Charnell Commando, a lifelong resident of Bromwell Street and campaigner against the removals, says: “This is my neighborhood, this is where I grew up, what I know."
“The mayor says, ‘the city works for you, for the people,' but the mayor hasn’t done anything for us in Bromwell.”
Residents have been locked in a court battle to fend off the evictions, with Advocate Sheldon Magardie last week arguing that the accessibility of amenities including public transport, schooling and healthcare was insufficient in Wolverivier.
He said: “While it’s not unique to Cape Town, the City is facing one of the worst housing affordability crises.”
Deeming the argument inadequate, Acting Judge Leslie Weinkove said: “If they are given land in the area, what about the hundreds of thousands of other people who would also love to stay in Woodstock?”
On the residents’ campaign, making direct reference to Commando, he added: “How does this person know what the cost implications will be on these properties?
“She doesn’t know what the City’s budget is; she is just a kitchen assistant.”
In the following piece below, Biko gives the sum of his thoughts as follows:
"The limitations that have accompanied the involvement of Liberals in the African man's struggle, have been mostly responsible for the arrest of progress. Because of their inferiority complex, Africans have tended to listen seriously to what the Liberals had to say. With their characteristic arrogance of assuming a 'monopoly on intelligence and moral judgment,' these self-appointed trustees of African interests have gone on to set the pattern and pace for the realization of the African man's aspirations.
"I am not sneering at the Liberals and their involvement. Neither am I suggesting that they are the most to blame for the African man's plight. Rather, I am illustrating the fundamental fact that total identification with an oppressed group in a system that forces one group to enjoy privilege and to live on the sweat of another, is impossible.
"White society collectively owes the Africans so huge a debt, that no one member should automatically expect to escape from the blanket condemnation that needs must come from African world. It is not as if Whites are allowed to enjoy the privilege only when they declare their solidarity with the ruling party. They are born into privilege and are nourished and nurtured in the system of ruthless exploitation of African energy.
"For the 20-year old White Liberal to expect to be accepted with open Arms, is surely to overestimate the powers of forgiveness of the African people. No matter how genuine a Liberal's motivations may be, he has to accept that, though he did not choose to be born into privilege, the Africans cannot but be suspicious of his motives.
"The Liberal must fight on his own and for himself. If they are true Liberals, they must realize that they themselves are oppressed, and that they must fight for their own freedom and not that of nebulous 'they' with whom they can hardly claim identification.
"What I have tried to show is that in South Africa, political power has always rested with White society. Not only have the Whites been guilty maneuverers, they have managed to control the responses of the Africans to the provocation .
"Not Only have they kicked the African, but they have also told him how to react to the kick. For a long time the African has been listening with patience to the advice he has been receiving on how best to respond to the kick. With painful slowness, he is now beginning to show signs that it is his right and duty to respond to the kick in the way he sees fit."
In The Belly Of The ANC: Sinking Into The Darkness Of Corruption
This much we know and have seen:
As such it is a host to class struggle within a society imbued with capitalist values and consumerist temptations. Despite the early efforts of Congress of South African Trade Unions and the South African Communist Party to shift policy to the left, many within their own ranks have fallen victim to the temptation of following a political path to personal enrichment. In such a situation, it is not surprising that it is the rich and the powerful who have benefited overwhelmingly from our fledgling democracy.
Biko foresaw the whole saga. The ANC has been and is till in cahoots with big money, because the ANC has long ago claimed the mantle of non-racial society, and that very ideology has come to haunt and topple them. Bantu Biko has aptly and succinctly addressed the point of being friends with the colonizers. As Biko instructs, they were groomed into a rich life, and in the end try to assuage their guilty by becoming involved with the struggles of the African poor, and dictate how they should act and react in their pursuance of their cause.
The ANC was derailed because it lost its moorings and itself in its meandering with the Powerful rich western countries and their companies, that they forgot whence they emerge, and became astute students of Vulture Capitalism. Greed and opportunism held sway within the ANC ranks, that looting the public coffers became so endemic that half of their supporters did not Vote for the ANC, nor anyone else. I am not talking about those who voted for DA and EFF. The juice flowing from the Gravy Train, oozed so much, that the people sucking it, found no time for the armies of the poor.
Power And Money
One of the things that has people scared is that they can see for themselves the role of power and money in their lives, and what that can mean or means, that many are trying to get that power, whatever it is, and money, no matter how much [but at least be in the loop], that many have given away their humanity in order to achieve that aim and ends.
One of the key challenges is that the South African political economy continues to revolve around an odd combination of new (political) power without money and old money without power. Each needs the other to advance its interests. This is structurally disposed to favor corruption, as is indicated by the incestuous relationship which has developed between Chancellor House and parastatals. Chancellor House is listed as a charitable trust designed to facilitate economic transformation. However it has become clear that its intent is to fund the ANC
And the need for party funding is more likely to increase than diminish. Although the case for public disclosure of private funding of political parties is by no means so strong as its supporters proclaim, it remains difficult to exclude influence peddling from this particular terrain.
Many seem not to realize that upkeep of ANC, by foreign interests and investors is still in force, and this is the nub of the issue. In its attempts to try and recapture its credibility as a party that can lead, ANC is going to have to find a way to distribute the wealth, power and be accountable to its voting polity.
At base, the ANC was a nationalist movement whose principal focus was on the capture of the state and the pursuit of democracy. Within this formula was embedded the commitment to the overthrow of “internal colonialism” (the domination of whites over the majority African population). It followed that capture of the state and internal decolonization would require the rapid growth of the African middle class and indeed, the expansion of a class of African capitalists. This was true both in terms of social justice and the needs of the economy.
However, the problem facing an emergent black capitalist class was its lack of capital and capitalist expertise. One of the solutions was that, from the moment the ANC moved into office, the ANC viewed its control over the civil service and parastatals as the instrument for extending its control “over the commanding heights of the economy”. Parastatals accounted for around 15% of GDP.
This included the strategy of transferring state-owned enterprises on discounted terms to blacks via privatization. In the event, this did not prove to be particularly successful simply because the amounts of capital required for the purchase of all but non-core assets was too large for aspirant black capitalists to raise.
Nonetheless, the national democratic revolution charged the ANC with using state power to deracialize the economy. This predisposed the ANC to regard the parastatals as “sites of transformation”. The ANC’s control of the state machinery became a source of tenders for its cadres. This aspect has lent itself to corruption, patronage and the monetarization of relationships within the ANC.
The extent of corruption in tendering is difficult to estimate. The ANC is appropriately anti-corruption in its official stance, and indeed has put in place important legislation and mechanisms to control malfeasance. Equally, however, it has proven reluctant to undertake enquiries which could prove embarrassing.
There have also been two other activities at work. First, certain corporations have distributed financial largesse to secure contracts and favor from government. (Their success in so doing is hard to prove given the secrecy of party funding.) Second, ANC politicians at all levels of government have sought to influence the tender process in their favor.(ENCA)
What we are seeing today, then, is what the ANC has always touted, but with the other half of its mouth, Liberation and Revolutionary rhetoric, in hopes of appeasing its followers, but in actual deed, carried out the instructions of its partners: Western And Eastern Bidding, Commands And Will.
Bribes and favor to the bribers has been the ANC modus operandi-a cardinal sin and the ones calling themselves a revolutionary and conscious party. They are then only conscious so long as there is a pay-for-play — when there is a tit for-tat — when there is rubbing/scratching each other's backs — to receive large amounts of cash for certain favors or overlooking the laws of the land, and keeping all of it away from its voting polity and other African people in Mzantsi; also, leaving them in the dark and confused.
This might look like a factional battle with good guys on one side and bad guys on the other. But I would argue that the challenge of economic transformation within a racially polarized capitalist economy provided opportunities for careerism, personal enrichment and corruption.
At the heart of the morality problems faced by the ANC are fundamental forms of relations it has carved with capital as driven by two principal factors. Firstly, as a political party the ANC has needed funding. Secondly, there is the factor of how the ANC has chosen to promote what it terms the National Democratic Revolution, most notably through Black Economic Empowerment[famously known as BEE(Black Economic Empowerment).
There are suggestions that the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa lost the plot after the ascension of Jacob Zuma as the party’s president in 2007. There may be important elements of truth in this. However, there are compelling reasons that situate the morality challenges faced by the ANC – and by extension the country — in the 1994 political transition.
Recent developments do indeed place Zuma, who is now also the president of the country, at the centre of the web of corruption at the present time[I have written a Hub on this story]. And it is clear that some within the ANC hold him personally responsible for the drastic decay in the party’s morality. For many, the present battle between Zuma and his minister of finance Pravin Gordhan is viewed as the culmination of between those who view the ANC as a machinery for accumulation and those who hold true to its historical mission as a vehicle of liberation fighting for a more socially just society.
The harassment suffered by Gordhan at the hands of the Hawks, an elite police unit, is seen as an extension of the “state capture” agenda that led to the firing of Nhlanhla Nene in December 2015. This comes after a host of allegations that the country’s key state owned enterprises, like South African Airways and the power utility Eskom, have been captured by the Zuma faction of the ANC elite.(Roger Southall) I have discussed the role played by Pravin above, the reader could back and refresh)
In the mid-1980s, South African capitalism had begun to lose faith in the capacity of the National Party government to stem the rising tide of revolution. Increasingly, therefore, business looked for an accommodation with the ANC. For its part, the ANC leadership recognized the unreality of strategy premised on a revolutionary seizure of power. It presented itself as a partner with which large scale capital could play.
While it was the political negotiation process which grabbed the attention, much was happening behind the scenes. Individuals at the top of the corporate ladder struck up relationships with the incoming ANC leadership. Above all, this was exemplified by a focus on Nelson Mandela, who after his release from jail came to enjoy the 'company of the very rich'. He forged strong relationships with both Harry Oppenheimer, Chairman of Anglo-American, and Clive Menell, vice chairman of the rival Anglo-Vaal mining group, Lord Robin Renwick and Rupert.[The latter two have been discussed in the first part of this Hub above.]
Just as the ANC was unable to overthrow the political power , so it was unable to overturn the economic order. The collapse of the Soviet Union, one of the ANC’s principal supporters, fundamentally changed the international landscape. This played to the strengths of those leaders within the ANC who were less than enamored with state socialism. Such factors, along with pressure from bodies like the International Monetary Fund, underlay the shift away from the left.(Roger Southall)
ANC's Poor Practice Of Capitalism
In the mid-1980s, South African capitalism had begun to lose faith in the capacity of the National Party government to stem the rising tide of revolution. Increasingly, therefore, business looked for an accommodation with the ANC. For its part, the ANC leadership recognized the unreality of strategy premised on a revolutionary seizure of power. It presented itself as a partner with which large scale capital could play.
While it was the political negotiation process which grabbed the attention, much was happening behind the scenes. Individuals at the top of the corporate ladder struck up relationships with the incoming ANC leadership. Above all, this was exemplified by a focus on Nelson Mandela, who after his release from jail came to enjoy the company of the very rich. He forged strong relationships with both Harry Oppenheimer, Chairman of Anglo-American, and Clive Menell, vice chairman of the rival Anglo-Vaal mining group.
Just as the ANC was unable to overthrow the political, so it was unable to overturn the economic order. The collapse of the Soviet Union, one of the ANC’s principal supporters, fundamentally changed the international landscape. This played to the strengths of those leaders within the ANC who were less than enamored with state socialism. Such factors, along with pressure from bodies like the International Monetary Fund, underlay the shift away from the left.(South all)
These last two paragraphs above by Southall, need to be deealt in much in-depth below.
The Economics Of The Unfree...
I have addressed this issue of the control as imposed upon the ANC by The IMF and World Banks elsewhere in my Hubs. I will cull from one of them I titled "Post June 1976 Revolution: The Continuing Struggle to Date..."
If Mandela led the ANC to power and nationalized the banks and the mines, the precedent would make it far more difficult for Chicago School economists to dismiss such proposals in other countries as relics of the past and insist that only unfettered free markets and free trade had the ability to redress deep inequalities.
On February 11, 1990, two weeks after writing that note, Mandela walked out of prison a free man, as close to a living saint as existed anywhere in the world. South Africa’s townships exploded in celebration and renewed conviction that nothing could stop the struggle for liberation.
Unlike the movement in Eastern Europe, South Africa’s was not beaten down but a movement on a roll. Mandela, for his part, was suffering from such an epic case of culture shock that he mistook a camera microphone for “some newfangled weapon developed while I was in prison.”
The ANC went into negotiations with the ruling National Party determined to avoid the kind of nightmare that neighboring Mozambique had experienced when the independence movement forced an end to Portuguese colonial rule in 1975.
On their way out the door, the Portuguese threw a vindictive temper tantrum, pouring cement down elevator shafts, smashing tractors and stripping the country of all they could carry. To its enormous credit, the ANC did negotiate a relatively peaceful handover.
However, it did not manage to prevent South Africa’s apartheid-era rulers from wreaking havoc on their way out the door. Unlike their counterparts in Mozambique, the National Party didn’t pour concrete—their sabotage, equally crippling, was far subtler, and was all in the fine print of those historic negotiations.
The talks that hashed out the terms of apartheid’s end took place on two parallel tracks that often intersected: one was political, the other economic. Most of the attention, naturally, focused on the high-profile political summits between Nelson Mandela and F. W. de Klerk, leader of the National Party.
De Klerk’s strategy in these negotiations was to preserve as much power as possible. He tried everything—breaking the country into a federation, guaranteeing veto power for minority parties, reserving a certain percentage of the seats in government structures for each ethnic group—anything to prevent simple majority rule, which he was sure would lead to mass land expropriations and the nationalizing of corporations.
As Mandela later put it, “What the National Party was trying to do was to maintain white supremacy with our consent.” De Klerk had guns and money behind him, but his opponent had a movement of millions. Mandela and his chief negotiator, Cyril Ramaphosa, won on almost every count.… But in the smoke-filled backrooms of negotiations, the Apartheidizers won all what they wanted
Running alongside these often explosive summits were the much lower profile economic negotiations, primarily managed on the ANC side by Thabo Mbeki, then a rising star in the party…South Africa’s whites had failed to keep blacks from taking over the government, but when it came to safeguarding the wealth they had amassed under apartheid, they would not give up so easily.
In these talks, the de Klerk government had a twofold strategy. First, drawing on the ascendant Washington Consensus that there was now only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making—such as trade policy and the central bank—as “technical” or “administrative.”
Then it used a wide range of new policy tools—international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs—to hand control of those power centers to supposedly impartial experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the National Party—anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC.
It was a strategy of balkanization, not of the country’s geography (as de Klerk had originally attempted) but of its economy. This is one fact/strategy/modus operandi of the creation of the present-day South African government that is still being unknown/misunderstood by many would-be revolutionaries in South Africa today.
This plan was successfully executed under the noses of ANC leaders, who were naturally preoccupied with winning the battle to control Parliament. In the process, the ANC failed to protect itself against a far more insidious strategy—in essence, an elaborate insurance plan against the economic clauses in the Freedom Charter ever becoming law in South Africa.
“The people shall govern!” would soon become a reality, but the sphere over which they would govern was shrinking fast… And ultimately, that approach was dumped by the ANC
“We were caught completely off guard,” recalled Padayachee, now in his early fifties. He had done his graduate studies at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. He knew that at the time, even among free-market economists in the US, central bank independence was considered a fringe idea, a pet policy of a handful of Chicago School ideologues who believed that central banks should be run as sovereign republics within states, out of reach of the meddling hands of elected lawmakers.
For Padayachee and his colleagues, who strongly believed that monetary policy needed to serve the new government’s “big goals of growth, employment and redistribution,” the ANC’s position was a no-brainer: “There was not going to be an independent central bank in South Africa…” All fiscal ownership, control and holding were party to, and controlled by foreign Banks and multi corporations, with the assistance of the powerful governments.
Padayachee and a colleague stayed up all night writing a paper that gave the negotiating team the arguments it needed to resist this curveball from the National Party. If the central bank (in South Africa called the Reserve Bank) was run separately from the rest of the government, it could restrict the ANC’s ability to keep the promises in the Freedom Charter.
Besides, if the central bank was not accountable to the ANC government, to whom, exactly, would it be accountable? The IMF? The Johannesburg Stock Exchange? Obviously, the National Party was trying to find a backdoor way to hold on to power even after it lost the elections—a strategy that needed to be resisted at all costs. “They were locking in as much as possible,” Padayachee recalled. “That was a clear part of the agenda.” Attested by most accounts, to date, that strategy has succeeded.
Padayachee faxed the paper in the morning and didn’t hear back for weeks. “Then, when we asked what happened, we were told, ‘Well, we gave that one up.’” Not only would the Central Bank be run as an autonomous entity within the South African State, with its independence enshrined in the new constitution, but it would be headed by the same man who ran it under apartheid, by Chris Stals.
It wasn’t just the central bank that the ANC had given up: in another major concession, Derek Keyes, the white finance minister under apartheid, would also remain in his post—much as the finance ministers and central bank heads from Argentina’s dictatorship some