The capacity to unite around providing a solution to an issue, regardless of whether the solution is practical or sensible, is something that left-wing politicians, activists, academics and fellow adherents often master, but one that centrist South Africans often fail at.
Consider the #FeesMustFall movement.
In mid-October 2015, a student-led protest movement coined ‘Fees Must Fall’ (FMF) got under way throughout South African higher education campuses. The initiative aimed to pressurise the government to increase government funding of universities, as well as pressurising universities to halt increasing student tuition fees. Among other demands made by the movement was the “decolonisation and decolonialisation” of higher education. (N.B. This article aims to show how the left’s unity made the movement somewhat successful, without delving into the merits of the actual calls made by the movement).
The FMF movement, despite being a student-led effort, was overwhelmingly supported by a wide range of individuals and organisations, most notably those with left-wing subscriptions. These included trade unions like the National Education, Health, and Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU), the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), and political organisations and people such as Andile Mngxitama, the Pan African Congress (PAC), and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). It was also supported by some of the most well-known performers and celebrities in South Africa, including Yanga Chief, Thandiswa Mazwai, Tumisho Masha, DJ Fresh, Maps Maponyane, DJ Shimza, and the late AKA, as well as academics, most notably the likes of Dr Lwazi Lushaba, Professor Pumla Dineo Gqola, Dr Nomalanga Mkhize and Dr Richard Pithouse, and others.
In and of itself, the FMF movement brought together a variety of political organisations, individuals from various backgrounds, and adherents to various ideologies. Without a doubt, these were mostly left-wingers. It included the Young Communist League of South Africa (YCLSA), the Pan Africanist Student Movement of Azania (PASMA), the South African Students’ Congress (SASCO), the EFF Student Command (EFFSC), the Azanian Student Movement (AZASM), and many more, as well as regular students who did not participate in any student political organisation but supported the FMF call.
There is no denying that the FMF movement was effective in drawing attention to the tuition fees issue and the “decolonisation and decolonialisation” questions. Undoubtedly, the movement had some influence on many public policies pertaining to higher education in South Africa after it ended, but it also continues to have a significant impact on universities and the current generation of students pursuing higher education, as well as on the general perception that many South Africans have of South Africa and its problems.
Resistance
The FMF movement demonstrated – a lesson we cannot afford to overlook – how organising around a cause ensures that a voice is heard, regardless of how sound that voice may or may not be. Moderate South Africans need to take careful note of this lesson and allow it to guide us in our future dealings with certain issues.
For instance, consider the issue of professionalising our country’s public administration and the Public Administration Laws General Amendment Bill, which Democratic Alliance (DA) member of parliament Leon Schreiber proposed in the National Assembly (NA) in 2021.
The measure, which aimed to eliminate political influence that interferes with the potential efficacy of South Africa’s public administration, was rejected by the African National Congress (ANC) on September 19, 2022, using its majority in the NA.
However, many people outside the ANC supported the amendment that Schreiber proposed. There are many in society who would prefer a meritocracy established in our public administration to guarantee an efficient administration free from political meddling, in contrast to an administration allowing political interference such as the ANC’s cadre deployment policy. The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), the Hugenote Kollege School of Social Innovation, the Institute for Global Dialogue, and all political parties in the NA – aside from the ANC and the PAC’s lone member of parliament – were among those who supported the proposed amendment by the DA’s Schreiber.
Supporters of Schreiber’s proposed amendment, especially centrists, from my perspective, ought not to have abandoned the issue at that juncture, where the ANC used its parliamentary majority to vote against a perfectly reasonable solution that would have improved the country’s public administration and increased its effectiveness. Those who supported the amendment should have banded together, rallied more individuals and organisations to the cause, and applied significant pressure on the ANC to support the proposal. Public administration is a serious matter that directly affects South Africans’ lives and quality of life in many ways. Once the ANC used its majority in parliament to place the issue under the floor, centrists should not have been prepared to abandon the issue.
The citizens of Gqeberha in the Eastern Cape, Johannesburg in Gauteng, Thabazimbi in Limpopo, and other areas of the nation where political squabbles within municipalities impede the provision of adequate services ought to have been mobilised to demand a more professionalised administrative system. Coalition governments frequently change, and incompetent individuals are frequently transferred to other municipal positions.
Local government service delivery is essentially in an execrable state as a result of incompetent management of local municipalities. These include Makhanda, Fort Beaufort and Mthatha in the Eastern Cape; Bethlehem, Vrede, and Bultfontein in the Free State; Vanderbijlpark, Randfontein, and Carletonville in Gauteng; Ulundi, Mooi River, and Impendle in KwaZulu/Natal; Modimolle, Thabazimbi, and Musina in Limpopo; Nelspruit, Standerton, and Witbank in Mpumalanga; Warrenton, Kathu, and Springbok in the Northern Cape; Klerksdorp, Christiana, and Delareyville in North West; Beaufort West, Clanwilliam, and Ladismith in Western Cape. In many other parts of the country, local government service delivery is essentially in an execrable state as a result of the incompetent management of local municipalities.
It would have been appropriate to go out to the people of these communities, inform them about the consequences of cadre deployment, and encourage them to resist the ANC’s cadre deployment policy in favour of a professionalised public administration. (Resistance tactics should, of course, be non-violent but effective. People and organisations should unite to brainstorm ways to oppose bad management and apply sufficient pressure). Owing to their direct experience with the disasters brought about by political meddling in local government, these communities would surely back any effort to exert pressure on the current government to ensure that public administration is transformed into something more efficient.
Unity around sound solutions
The wonderful thing about Schreiber’s proposed amendment bill is that it garnered support from a wider spectrum of people than just centrists. The proposed amendment was also supported by left- and right-wing political organisations in Parliament, including the EFF and Freedom Front Plus (FFP). If these organisations had united to march in one direction, just think of what a fantastic movement this might have become.
Without a doubt, a much larger portion of the populace would have supported (still would, I reckon) such a cause if they had been approached, possibly including the Federation of Unions of South Africa (FEDUSA) and unions affiliated to it such as the Public Servants’ Association of South Africa (PSA). The PSA alone represents more than 235 000 public servants throughout the country. FEDUSA and its affiliates tend to be reasonable. Conversely, trade unions linked with the ANC would almost certainly have backed the ANC.
Even in situations where an essentially centrist public policy proposal is put forth and rejected by the left, right, or both, centrists should still come together, bring the issue to the public’s attention, and mobilise as much of the populace as possible behind a reasonable solution.
As centrists, we must hone our mobilisation techniques. Unfortunately, there are instances when the strongest ideas or signatures on a petition do not prevail over a government. However, the visible mobilisation of masses of the populace against or in support of a cause can sometimes succeed. This is a truth we cannot run away from. Mass resistance is regrettably the only language governments sometimes hear.
[Image: charlesdeluvio on Unsplash] The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend