A reply to Julius Malema - Jeremy Cronin

Nationalisation of the Mines... let's try that again

Well...it's not easy these days to have a robust but comradely discussion. The Sowetan of November 20 demonstrated this point graphically. On page four of last Friday's edition of the paper a brief single column story was head-lined "Cronin backs Malema". This story correctly quotes me agreeing with cde Malema that the Freedom Charter, in calling for the "wealth to be shared", was effectively demanding nationalisation as one important means for achieving this objective.

But turn the page of the very same issue of the Sowetan and there you will find a five-column story head-lined "You're no messiah - Malema attacks Cronin over nationalisation". Both stories are referring to exactly the same original intervention (see here) that I made in last week's Umsebenzi On-Line!

I don't blame the journalists involved. (But what were the senior editorial staff smoking on the Thursday night the edition went to the printers?) The confusion in the Sowetan reflects cde Malema's own misunderstanding of what I and many other alliance comrades have been trying to argue on the question of the nationalisation of the mines.

I have no interest in cde Malema's personalised diatribes (see article). They only serve to distract from what are important positive and constructive points that the ANCYL collective, at least, has been making on the topic of nationalisation. Let's rather focus on what I take to be the substantive matters that cde Malema imagines he is raising in his response to me.

Nationalisation vs. socialisation?

"Cde Jeremy Cronin", he writes, "takes issue with the fact that the ANCYL has called for the nationalisation of mines, instead of socialisation". He then quotes from SACP resolutions that call for the re-nationalisation of SASOL, for instance.

But I never said the SACP is opposed to, or doesn't ever use the word "nationalisation". What I did say is that fascist, apartheid and progressive states have all implemented nationalisation programmes. Even neo-liberal states have recently implemented massive "nationalisation" programmes. George W Bush jnr, for instance, took over the giant US mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the tune of $5.4 trillion dollars. This is a national debt with which ordinary US citizens will now be saddled for generations to come.

When we call for nationalisation we need to spell out what KIND of nationalisation we have in mind. We should closely examine whose CLASS interests nationalisation in any particular case serves. And that is why I think it is always useful to link nationalisation to socialisation. 

The ANCYL's important July 15 framework document "ANCYL's Position on the Nationalisation of Mines" (which, I admit, I had not properly re-read before writing last week) makes the same basic point in different words: "Nationalisation is not a panacea for SA's developmental challenges, but it should in the manner we are proposing it, entail democratising the commanding heights of the economy, to ensure they are not just legally owned by the state, but that they are thoroughly democratised and controlled by the people" (see here).

I think that makes the point more clearly than I did. No disagreement.

Is the Freedom Charter calling for nationalisation?

In my original intervention, I spent some time AGREEING with cde Malema and the ANCYL on this point. Although the Charter doesn't literally use the word "nationalisation", it is patently obvious to anyone who knows the mid-1950s context in which it was adopted that the relevant clause had in mind that the mines, banks and other monopoly industries should be nationalised.

Drawing from the ANCYL framework document, cde Malema quotes both President Albert Luthuli (in 1956) and President OR Tambo (in 1969) making this fact absolutely clear. They are wonderful quotations from great leaders, and we should thank the ANCYL for reminding us of them.

Again, no disagreement.

Mineral beneficiation

It is here that I made my own misstep. I was trying to introduce a touch of polemical spice into what can sometimes be a dry topic. I suggested, more in jest than seriously, that cde Malema possibly thought of beneficiation largely in terms of bling. It was a silly comment, and I apologise. I had not realised that cde Malema had such a delicate skin.

But, again, let's not allow polemical flourishes (in this case my own) to obscure substantive issues. Cde Malema correctly asserts that: "Mining as a critical component of the South African economy should necessarily be used to expand and industrialise the South African economy in a more developmental [way], instead [of] a parasitic mechanism pursued by the current owners of mining activities in SA."

I agree. I also agree that the majority of our mineral production continues to be exported largely unprocessed and that this reproduces our semi-colonial economic status in the world economy. It also costs SA many potential jobs.

So where, then, if at all, do we actually begin to part ways?

Whose class interests?

When I briefly described the seriously problematic features of the actual beneficiation that occurs currently with Eskom, Sasol, Arcelor Mittal and aluminium smelters, I WASN'T saying "we have already got beneficiation, so let's not worry about more beneficiation." I was making an entirely different point. It is a point that cde Malema seems, for whatever reason, not to want to grasp.

The SACP firmly supports the principle and objectives of broad based black economic empowerment. In fact, it was the Communist Party in 1929 that first pioneered the strategic perspective of black majority empowerment in SA. But the moment you disconnect a class analysis from a national (or, if you like, "race") analysis, then BEE inevitably starts to lose its broad-based Charterist character. If you disconnect a class analysis from a race analysis you run the danger of wittingly or unwittingly serving the interests of monopoly capital in SA and its comprador and parasitic allies - many of whom have been close to, or actually within our movement.

Take the case of the "Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act" (2002). During the parliamentary hearings on the Bill, COSATU and other progressive forces argued that commitment to downstream beneficiation should be made a mandatory requirement for any 30-year mining licence. However, the Department of Minerals and Energy and its then minister, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, resisted this amendment. Many comrades had the distinct impression that key ministerial advisers (some of them now in COPE) were keen to use the legislation as leverage to force mining conglomerates to provide a slice of action to aspirant black share-holders. But they were less keen to "burden" the profit-maximising aspirations of incumbent mining corporations and their future partners with responsibilities for beneficiation.

As a result, the present Act is weak when it comes to requiring beneficiation. We now have a sad irony. The Chinese, for instance, are willing and keen to invest in manganese beneficiation manufacturing plants here in SA. But this possibility is compromised by the fact that many of our manganese deposits have been leased out for 30 years to the same old established mining conglomerates and their new "patriotic" bourgeois hangers-on.

This example raises a number of related issues. For instance, would a legislative amendment to the Act not be a more effective (and affordable) way to leverage developmental beneficiation, at least for any new licences? This is a practical question, not a desperate attempt to avoid nationalisation at any cost.

There are many other job-creating, down-stream possibilities where the use of democratic state power to leverage transformation out of the mining sector should be considered. For instance, some genuinely patriotic emerging black entrepreneurs have been asking me why we do not impose national shipping quotas on the mine monopoly sector. More than 90% by volume of all of our exports (mostly minerals) are by sea. Yet all of the shipping involved is foreign-owned, the crews are overwhelming non-South African, and the shipping lines pay taxes in other countries. SA's once relatively significant maritime sector is now down to one single registered ship. Meanwhile, the rest of our logistics network (roads, freight rail and ports) still dedicates billions of rands of public money to lowering the cost to doing business for the mining conglomerates and their new allies.

None of this means that we should simply rule out the question of nationalising the mines. And the SACP has never ruled this out. But it does mean that you don't necessarily need to nationalise mining operations to achieve major immediate transformational objectives. 

The ANCYL's framework discussion document does a good job in defending the broad principles of the Freedom Charter against all kinds of reformist back-sliding. It does a good job of defending the principled right of a democratic state to nationalise the commanding heights of the economy to advance democratisation. But it remains vague when it comes to the actual detail of what mines should be nationalised, and how they should be nationalised. It doesn't address itself to the question of whether nationalisation would be the most strategic and sustainable use of massive public resources at this point in time.

Above all, the ANCYL's document is not able to allay suspicions about whose class interests would (perhaps unwittingly) be served by nationalising mines in the midst of the current recession.

As the still exploratory shipping example above should illustrate, the SACP has never argued that there cannot be shared, multi-class points of strategic patriotic convergence. Multi-class alliances are exactly what a national democratic revolution is about. But the possibility of convergence does not mean that each and every promotion of black-owned capital always advances national liberation. Such promotion (or bailing out) might result, in specific cases, in substantial broad based black economic DIS-empowerment.

The SACP certainly wants to pursue the discussion around the ownership and control of the economy with the ANCYL and with the rest of our alliance. Hopefully cde Malema in his busy schedule will find time to be part of this discussion some time before June next year.

Asikhulume!!

Jeremy Cronin is deputy secretary general of the South African Communist Party. This article first appeared in the Party's online journal, Umsebenzi Online, November 25 2009

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

Services Subscribe to newsletters News feeds Share this article Facebook Google Laaik.it Yahoo! Digg del.icio.us

Comments

If you come across comments that are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate; contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs, please report them and they will be removed.

 

responses to this article

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha "The SACP certainly wants to pursue the discussion around the ownership and control of the economy with the ANCYL and with the rest of our alliance. Hopefully cde Malema in his busy schedule will find time to be part of this discussion some time before . .more June next year." . .less by Juliusthe3rd on November 25 2009, 15:11 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Squized in between the ANCYL and ANC Jeremy u'r article is now worse...SACP alliened with the ANC which is the mother body of ANCYL. ANC put it clear that the Freedom C doesn't say anything about nationalization of mines and u now defy that by running away from cde Malema. The days of u'r . .more (SACP) allience with the ANC are numbered. Be carefull . .less by ANC4ever on November 25 2009, 15:57 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

not in my name It should be a lie if I told you that those who are fighting for self aggrandizement are doing it in my name. Let it be known that those who are doing it for themselves but not for the masses they are not doing it in my name. In principle nationalisation . .more is a noble concept as I have stated before but I cannot imagine the nationalisation of mines when our parastatals are in such shambles, take for instance SABC and ESKOM. Jacob Zuma should step up his efforts of clamping down corruption as promised which has become the order of the day in the eyes of ordinary people. The crux of the problem here is nepotism which has created a fertile ground for those leaders who are addicted to corruption, blinded by greed, allergic to the truth and who resort to lies and propaganda to make a point or to defend themselves. But I still have hope that the president, the premiers, the ministers and DG's in co-operation with the opposition parties will rein in these unruly elements. . .less by King Zwakala on November 25 2009, 17:04 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

sacp please correct me if i am wrong, but the sacp has less than 100k members?.....they are in such a minority, yet they seem to think that their importance is of enormous proportion......what is sad is in our democrazy generally minority interests don't get . .more the same ear as they do???????? . .less by onlooker on November 25 2009, 21:12 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

double speak Owned by the State - controlled by the people - so, who are the people? None other then your local BEE billionaire, I mean ANC cadre. by Lux Occulta on November 26 2009, 06:32 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Debate down to ANC dregs of logic You swim upstream against a Piranha. Your article was the first time I agreed with SACP. I tolerate debate with rationale, Malema does not have a thinking organ nor a dictionary to tolerate it. A barking dog with a poisonous bite - beware Jeremy ! by old, female on November 26 2009, 06:40 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

The word "freedom" in "Freedom Charter" says it all. The blacks want to nationalise the mines because it is perceived to be in white hands, and they want to be free from white control. by SH on November 26 2009, 07:39 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

PERSONAL ATTACKS Although we promote freedom of expression and debating on issues but personal attacks should be discouraged.I am here referring to some calling others uneducated baboons surely this is not on and should not be published. just in case you don't understand . .more what i mean please read the above comment "EDUCATING JULIUS" . .less by LUCKY NKHWASHU on November 26 2009, 07:51 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

mines cannot be nationalised: our environment tainted I am one of those who advocated the idea of nationalisation before it was championed by the ANCYL. Yes nationalisation is a great concept and it would have made sense to implement if it was not that our environment is tainted. Shiver goes down my spine . .more when I ponder upon the question (whilst taking into account the current state of affairs of our parastatal) of who will manage these mines. It pains me to say mines at this juncture cannot be nationalised because the poor are once again being robbed. The crux of our problems is that those who occupy high positions all claim to have knowledge, wisdom and expertise in the rush to defend their competencies; yet there is no one who is willing to take blame for the mess. For instance who has come out to take blame for the mess at SABC and ESKOM. I urge the government of the day to come to grips with these deplorable shenanigans before the debauchery of our society goes berserk. . .less by King Zwakala on November 26 2009, 08:35 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

The subtitle of the article should be : Jeremy Cronin with his tail between his legs defers to Comrade Julius Malema. Question : If one is not a Communist, why do communists still refer to one as "comrade"? No matter what intellectual gloss Cronin et al try to put on it, . .more Nationalisation of any enterprise by the ANC government will be an unmitigated disaster. We have ample of this all around us, our hospitals, our education system, SABC, Denel, Eskom, Transnet, Land Bank, SAA, Armscor, all Government Departments excluding SARS, although I must say there is evidence of the rot creeping into SARS as well now. And now these creeps want to get their mitts on what we really cannot afford to have screwed up. . .less by Oompah on November 26 2009, 08:45 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Lucky "Never argue with an idiot; they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Anonymous by XdeMourin on November 26 2009, 08:57 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

@ Jeremy Cronin Shame on you for apologising to Julius! All you achieve by doing so is lend credibility to his inane, vacuous, ill-informed and misguided 'policy" proposals. What makes you think that nationalising of the mines will in anyway foster or guarantee an . .more acceleration of beneficiation activity in South Africa? The causal chain you suggest so discursively in your article, does not exist, and to suggest that it does, is disingenuous, to say the least. I suspect this will fall on deaf ears, since you are, after all a Communist, but your assertion "...the principled right of a democratic state to nationalise the commanding heights of the economy to advance democratisation" is contradictory. Nationalisation implies forced removal (no pun intended) of assets, with or without compensation. That is hardly democratic, now is it? And finally, in this vein, may I remind you that until November 1989, there was a slew of countries named "The Peoples Democratic Republic of (whatever)" that were, without exception, anything but. My eternal wonder at Communists is their dichotomous belief that democracy can only be achieved by centralised control. . .less by Norman McFarlane on November 26 2009, 09:09 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Communism, only in Africa do you get idiots wanting Communism Africa, the ungovernable Continent full of failed countries. You have to say that almost (or is it everything?) EVERYTHING they touch they break. So nationalise the mines and break them and then what? Nationalise the farms and break them and then what? . .more They nationalised the police justice health education etc etc etc (all governement depts) and look at the complete nightmare? Total collapse. Massive daily murders rape aids crime corruption - oh dear that is what they do in Africa so nationalise the mines now so we can get over it while they close down and put a few hundred thousand people out of work. With their track record you would think they would be asking someone for help about how to not break everything going forward. Nightmare. They must be so happy they got rid of Bobby Godsell. . .less by Lets break the mines Julius, you can do it all on your own on November 26 2009, 09:50 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Inconsequential Nationalisation of the mines won't happen due to pure economic reasons. Too much vested interest from a lot of serious money. The nationalisation debate is really just inconsequential people (I'm looking at you Cronin - communism is this day & age? . .more Really?) shouting to get attention. . .less by Reality Check on November 26 2009, 11:04 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Do you think Do you think JuJu-boy understood anything past the first sentence? by sias on November 26 2009, 11:18 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Jees like.... I think "ANC4ever" might be right, at least I hope he is. Besides- I can't believe that there are still commies around. Surely by now they (as the rest of the world) have realised that the concept does not work. It breeds corruption, and lets be frank, we . .more already have more than enough of that. Perhaps buying a new whip to flog the dead horse will get a better result out of the horse hey mr Jeremy, or perhaps the concept of communism is just that...dead. In my opinion communism is not far from slipping into obscurity. Malema deserves no mention . .less by Johnny V on November 26 2009, 11:37 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Croninist marxism Cronin is not apologising at all, wat he is doing, is using intellectual marxist rhetoric to respond to a disillutioned youth league. by Arthurius on November 26 2009, 11:50 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Is this a climbdown Jeremy? Seems that way to me. Malema insulted you. And the spat started between ANCYL and SACP. So what happened next? Did Zuma call you in and tell you to apologise, or be fired as minister, much like Barbara Hogon over the Dalai . .more Lama? Shame on you! Do you have no honour? . .less by Al on November 26 2009, 12:18 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

who let the dogs out? Two little pr1cks playing "broken telephone" games. Cronin's attempts at irony and humour fall a full Communist mile behind the lightness and wit required-- that's what happens when your vocabulary is full of four syllable words which neither . .more you nor anyone else understands the contextual meaning e.g "has never argued that there cannot be shared, multi-class points of strategic patriotic convergence." Give an English translation and a meaningful example--- the only patriotism Cronin and Malema want is of the kind "monkey see, monkey do". The underlying tragedy which is about to enfold us all is that these two cretins actually mean what they say in a sort of Queen of Hearts ( Alice in Wonderland) way and they are likely to be able to convince the great unwashed to toyi toyi down the dusty road to a bitter, starving, disease-ridden early death whilst they become ever more closely allied to the despicably evil character of Mugabe . .less by Plutarch on November 26 2009, 12:20 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Who's the boss To the proles, no matter how much JC tries to wrap his apology in cottonwool, the Clown Prince and the Dancing King has shown who calls the . .more shots. See http://letterdash.com/g.annandale/caustic-comments-26-Nov-2009 http://letterdash.com/g.annandale/malema-fool-or-force http://letterdash.com/g.annandale/malema-despot-in-training . .less by Geanann on November 26 2009, 13:42 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Poor Jeremy Got his a$$ whupped by an illiterate with man boobs by Fred on November 26 2009, 14:14 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

@ Geanann "Clown Prince & Dancing King..." bwha hahahahahahahahahaha! Quality mate! by Johnny V on November 26 2009, 14:30 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Communism/Capitalism Why is it that you promote a system that has collapsed everywhere else in the world, causing economic destruction and destroying people and why do you and the black majority shy away from capitalism where you are rewarded for the effort you put . .more in.......afraid of hard work and competition???? The most successfull countries are the ones with the most economic freedom and the least meddling by government. That is how jobs and true wealth is created. . .less by Euroboy on November 26 2009, 14:58 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Opportunity knocks Khaya, Jacob and cronies will be queing for the bonus & remuneration potential that this would be bring by Cynic on November 26 2009, 15:16 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

NATIONALISATION The Russians nationalised all business enterprises in 1917. When this took place ,the international capitalists & financiers lost huge sums of money which they had invested in or lent to Russia. They then denied Russia access to international . .more capital markets until the 1990`s. After all do you lend money to a country which has stolen the the money you have lent or invested in enterprises in that country ? Not unless you are a moron . This lack of capital & investment was a major factor which led to the downfall of Russia`s communist experiment . Nationalisation of mines without compensation, is the fastest way in which to convert RSA into a Zimbabwe clone & to bring an end to the ANC .............. . .less by TUT on November 26 2009, 15:28 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Confussed Communists : say 1 thing and do another The funny thing is that China which is a supposed Communist country in theory and words is more of a Capitalist and Freemarket state than those that call themselves Freemarket Democracies. Then you have these Democratic Republics of (africa) who . .more are anything but Democratic These guys are confused.... So if China is communist then viva Freemarkets Viva... oops should I say... Viva Communism viva . .less by Stalin on November 26 2009, 17:14 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Jermy you forgot to close your letter to Comrade Julius with Boggom. boggom begghoooooooooOOOOOO. by whataphoezisjulius on November 26 2009, 18:29 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Name
Subject
Comment