The DA's revisionism on the struggle against apartheid: Goebbels would blush

The DA pamphlet proclaiming its credentials as a party that fought apartheid is a cynical and opportunistic exercise in propaganda - not even worthy of the Nazi psychopath Joseph Goebbels. This ploy is the latest in a litany of examples of its politics of deception and deceit as the DA desperately attempts to woo black voters.

While we acknowledge the role played by Helen Suzman in opposing the NP in the apartheid parliament before 1994, it is debatable whether or not her role can be claimed as revolutionary and more importantly of having any bearing on the values of the DA as a party today.

The DA of today is a conservative, right wing party with the majority of its leaders, members and supporters coming from the ranks of the former Conservative Party, the right wing members of the NP/NNP and the AWB. Its values are therefore not liberal at all, but rather akin to the Tory right wing conservatism which aimed to protect big capital only and which in our case if decoded means the protection of the privileged white communities only.

Similarly, Helen Zille's role as a journalist during the Apartheid era does not in any way mean that the DA is transparent, clean and beyond reproach, let alone a bearer of any revolutionary credentials. Especially since the majority of Helen's colleagues in the DA leadership and amongst its membership and support base today played a pivotal role in entrenching and defending the Apartheid regime.

Therefore, Madam Zilles attempt to bandy about a few names of so-called anti-apartheid activists who have now opportunistically joined her party whilst failing to mention that the majority of its leadership, policies and service delivery record remain right-wing, is tantamount to taking a glass of wine and calling it a vineyard.

Does Zille honestly believe that she will be able to convince the majority of South Africans that the DA as a party has its roots in fighting apartheid when in fact its history and its current service delivery record where it governs tells another story i.e. the protection and perpetuation of white privilege and capital only?

Once again we see the arrogance and paternalistic nature of the illiberal Madam and her spin doctors who think that the majority of black South Africans will be fooled by her futile rebranding exercise in order to woo the black vote while in reality she is protecting and perpetuating the interests of the white privilege classes only.

If the DA wanted to win over the black majority it would need to have policies and practise that protect and deliver to the poor, which is not the case as is clear from the growing body of evidence of its governance trajectory in the Western Cape.

The recent farmworker strikes in the Western Cape unmasked how racist, paternalistic and conflicted the DA are as a party. With many amongst its leadership and membership closely tied to the farm owners and its MEC for agriculture himself a farmer, it was not surprising why Helen Zille has come out in support of farm owners paying slave wages to workers.

While Helen Zille exposed some of the corruption and malfeasance of the NP regime before 1990, the DA has been quite prepared to turn a blind eye to the same behaviour within its party. The DA spin on its business relationships, its donors and it's awarding of tenders, does not convince the general public otherwise. They know that the DA is the party that represents the interests of white monopoly capital and farmers who brutally exploit African and coloured workers. It is the party that gives tenders to white companies in the Western Cape, but criticizes the ANC for trying to promote BEE and SMMEs.

All of this goes to show that what the DA offers in such pamphlets is not what it stands for in reality. It is attempting - rather unsuccessfully - to poach the ANC's history, leaders, symbols, policies and programs. This is because it has none of its own to offer the majority of South Africans. A more honest stance would be for the DA to tell the voters that what they really stand for is; privatization, no more BEE, no more employment equity, removing workers' rights and protection and removing the social welfare provisions that currently insulate the poor from the vagaries and the extremes of the legacy of apartheid and post-colonial capitalism. But let's face it: Who would vote for them if they did that?!

This cynical and transparent attempt to change history and to pretend that most of the DA's members and leaders were not beneficiaries of apartheid but champions against that crime against humanity is dishonest and desperate. It reveals the DA to be little more than a political chameleon. The thing about a chameleon is that it does not matter how many colours it changes to, it is still a chameleon! The fact that there are so few members of the DA that they claim have some anti-apartheid credentials, one of whom has passed away, is a measure of the extent to which the DA can claim any revolutionary credentials.

Here are the real facts about the DA:

• The party leadership, its Western Cape cabinet, MP's, MPL's and councillors remain mainly pale and male;
• Government business the DA is in control of goes to mainly white owned companies;
• Senior management jobs in DA administrations go mainly to white people;
• Transport services in Cape Town by the BRT are delivered in the historically white areas only;
• Service delivery in the white areas is prioritised at the expense of delivering houses and service sites to African and coloured poor;
• The protection of mainly white farmers who super-exploit black workers and the rubbishing of the Human Rights Watch and other reports which documented the exploitation of farm workers;
• The attempt to close down schools which cater for the mainly poor coloured and African communities;
• The attempt to disallow Klopse marches in the City of Cape Town and in so doing attacks the history and culture of coloured people;
• Its attempts to prevent mosques from being built in historically white middle class areas such as Pinelands that boast more churches per square kilometer than most suburbs in the country;
• Its resistance to the recognition of the Khoisan people and their land claims;
• Its unequivocal support for Israel and its failure to support the Palestinian people no matter what human rights abuses they suffer;
• Its closing down of community structures in our historically coloured and African areas and cutting funding for the Provincial Development Council and Community Police Forums;
• Its slashing of funds for Non-Governmental Organisations in our historically coloured and African poorer areas such as the Saartjie Baartman centre; and
• Its blatant racist remarks by referring to black people as refugees, professional blacks and even elephants.

Hardly a revolutionary party! Even Goebbels would blush.

International relations and co-operation deputy minister Marius Fransman is the ANC Western Cape chairperson

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter