On the doom and gloom of some ANC elders
The advent of democracy has given birth to free and unhindered national dialogue on virtually all issues. There are no holy cows! As Mao once said, "letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress."
Various media platforms purporting to serve the noble ideals of keeping the nation and the world informed, educating the public and, telling the whole truth, compete for every cent and eye of the inquisitive readership.
Slowly but surely, the local voice is also beginning to be heard through local radio stations, local newspapers and the internet. The contending voices in this battle of ideas have grown, and so have the tactics of engagement, with headlines, particularly at national level, suggestive of a world about to come asunder.
The limits of truth and substance are being stretched. The meaning of freedom of speech is being expanded to even suggest freedom to hurl insults at others. The need to evaluate the superiority of an argument has taken a back seat. There has also emerged a trend where some among the elders speak in a manner that is designed to silence the youth. Instead of engaging on the substance of issues, these elders pass value judgments and use what is, or borders on vulgar language.
When responded to in like manner, they suddenly remember the age-old adage that the young should respect the old, while conveniently forgetting that the young learn such respect from their elders. We must hasten to say that not all the elders propagate this skewed and myopic view. An example of such elders is Ntate Don Mattera who has in the recent past defended the right of the young to air their views and to be heard, and not to be silenced whether we agree with them or not.
The very serious issue of crime currently faces our country. Much is being done to confront this situation head on, and among the things under consideration, is whether the police should be a force or a service. The call for the creation of a single police force in the country is both a constitutional imperative and a resolution of the governing party in its last 52nd National Conference in Polokwane.
"The constitutional imperative that there be a Single Police Service should be implemented," Conference said. Members of other parties have all the right to differ with this position, not those who are members of the ANC. This resolution was taken at the highest decision making body of the African National Congress and it is binding to all its members.
Responding to the reopening of this debate, a process which in any event is at its infancy, Professor Asmal's contribution has been to insinuate that the Deputy Minister of Police is crazy.
Instead of providing leadership to society, this elder chose to use obscene language. While we accepted his leadership, he would rather be dead than accept those he disagrees with as leaders.
What kind of informed response is this? What will the youth learn from such utterances? What are the implications for the future of our democracy if respected members of our society prefer death to accepting the prospect of a democratic outcome, if such were to be contrary to their wishes?
In her recent address in Cape Town, Dr Mamphela Ramphele raised the issue of integrity in public life (see here).
She made a well thought out and diverse presentation. Among others, she said, All signs in our society point to the need for us to take stock and ask ourselves fundamental questions about how we have been able to discharge our responsibilities to honour the ideals we enshrined in our founding constitution. We stand at a crossroads yet again as a society struggling to emerge from the growing pains of being a young democracy."
South Africa is presented here as a country or society that is "at a crossroads," "struggling" to emerge from our past. This is a rude summation of our conjuncture. We certainly face many challenges. Some of these were there at the dawn of democracy, while others are the consequence of the progress we have made. But we are, by any measure, definitely not at a crossroads.
The issue about our country's social evolution is a matter of degree and rate, rather than failure to make progress. Unless one was under the illusion that three centuries of deep-rooted socio-economic-political injustice could be undone in a decade, there is, on the balance of evidence, no material basis to suggest that our country and its government is failing. The Ten and Fifteen Year Reviews offer some perspective in this regard.
We cannot agree more with her when she says that much more work remains to be done.
Dr Ramphele further says, "We all grossly underestimated the task of transforming ourselves into a democratic society. We did not reflect enough on the paradigm shift it would entail given our pre-1994 histories. Nor did we appreciate the complexities embedded in our diverse starting points in our journey to the new dispensation."
The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) document, published in 1994, states among others that, "There is not a single sector of South African society, nor a person living in South Africa that is untouched by the ravages of apartheid ... At the same time the challenges facing South Africa are enormous... To reach the RDP's objectives we face many obstacles and we are setting ourselves a great challenge. Each and every expectation will not be met immediately. Hard choices will have to be made."
From the foregoing, it is clear that the assertion that we underestimated the task of transformation is incorrect, and to suggest that we did so "grossly," is completely of the mark.
Dr Ramphele delivered an eloquent tribute to the late Helen Suzman, and among others said, "Helen Suzman's courage was most memorable in fighting a lone battle against this inequity. She was not intimidated as a lone voice: only woman, only opposition MP, only defender of human rights of those without a voice. Hers was an ethical stand in the face of overwhelming belief by white people that these were essential laws for their survival as a group in a country with a predominantly black population."
This reminded me of what Comrade Jeremy Cronin said in Parliament earlier this year. Speaking during the debate on the President's State of the Nation Address, Cronin said, "Comrade President, you spoke generously about the late Helen Suzman, and I think that was appropriate. You said she represented the values of this Parliament in the Chambers of the previous parliament. I think that was a generous comment, but an appropriate one to an outstanding South African. We have no doubt about that. But Helen Suzman was also honest, and she wouldn't want us to be dishonest about what she stood for. The party she represented in the previous Chambers of the previous parliament believed that the majority of South Africans were not yet ready for the vote, which is why they argued for a qualified franchise."
The National Liberation Movement is fully cognizant of the interdependence between the goals of social transformation and national reconciliation. Therefore, those among us, and the youth in particular, who have criticized Professor Jansen, did not do so on the basis of disagreeing with the intended ultimate objective.
The integrity of the process is as important as the goal itself. The point that was being made is that, the victims of the racist acts, and civil society organisations that are representatives of the University community and the people of Free State should have been involved in the process. Excluding the victims in a process that is designed to pardon the perpetrators is a further insult to the dignity of the people whose rights have been violated. The criticism is therefore based on a perceptible fault in the process.
It is perhaps the irony of our times that whilst uTat' uTutu presided over an inclusive TRC process, he today sees nothing wrong with granting a pardon to perpetrators without involving victims in that process. Personalised attacks by our elders to the youth have invited similar counter attacks from the youth. This has not done the debate on issues any good, nor has it benefited society in any way.
However, the youth too, does need to be reminded of the responsibility to take only what is good from the past as we give birth to the future. What is clear though is that a certain strand of thought has reached the limit of its progressive content and has become irrelevant. Sensing its own demise, it now presents its own imminent extinction as that of the whole of South Africa. This is a lie.
Hope galvanizes energy and is a catalyst to action. Loss of hope demobilises. We must then ask what has happened when people who were once proponents of hope have suddenly become prophets of doom and gloom.
We look up to our elders like Madiba to provide honest and wise counsel. South Africa is on the right path for social progress, the future is youthful.
Nathi Mthethwa is an ANC NEC member and Minister of Police. This article first appeared in ANC Today, the weekly online newsletter of the African National Congress, November 20 2009
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
Services Subscribe to newsletters News feeds
|
||||||||||
Facebook
Google
Laaik.it
Yahoo!
Digg
del.icio.us
Comments
SELECTIVE THINKING AND REASONING WHICH SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO MALEMA AND THE KNOW ALL .It does not deserve a reply but for the supposed innoncence of the minister few questions need to be asked.WHO ARE THE ELDERS WHOSE DEMISE are you referring to and . .more
by Joe on November 23 2009, 11:03
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it
Kader Asmal, Mamphela Ramphele, Desmond Tutu, have more integrity, intelligence and ability than the whole of the current ANC "Leadership" put together. You and your deputy are a disgrace to any thinking person.
You are a couple of cowboys. Pooh . .more
by Jeff on November 23 2009, 19:31
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it