The title (above) of my latest contribution to The Guardian‘s Comment is Free Blog is unfortunate.Here’s perhaps why the editors decided to go with it:
One of the big things you hear often about South Africa these days is that it’s heading the way of Zimbabwe. I don’t think so. And one of the reasons may have to do with these social movements and with the way Mbeki was unseated as ANC leader and South Africa’s president. One of the morals I draw from Zimbabwe is how long it took for Zimbabweans to demand accountability from their leadership. For almost 20 years Zimbabweans were held captive by a nationalist project that became more and more bankrupt and incompatible with democracy. South Africa is clearly different. One researcher estimates that South Africa averages more protests per person than any country in the world – at least 16 every day … [T]he impulse for accountability, disdain for unaccountable leadership (though it took eight long years to dispatch Mbeki) and the demands for participatory government, accessible institutions, and an empathetic political leadership are some of the core components of this tradition. Had Zanu-PF had similar instincts in 1984 or even 1990, Zimbabwe’s contemporary political history could have been different as South Africa’s is now, every day.
But how I got to that conclusion involves a nuanced reading of the developments of South African democracy during the last nine years, including the now famous “Zanufication” reference by ANC member of Parliament and Communist Party leader in an interview with a visiting Irish academic in 2002.
I just read your piece Sean and its very very good.
I would take issue with this statement thought “For almost 20 years Zimbabweans were held captive by a nationalist project that became more and more bankrupt and incompatible with democracy.”
That is a very western view of the late or 20th century nationalism as experienced in Europe. 18th and 19th century nationalism – which the west have forgotten about – was seen as a liberating grass roots progressive force uniting the people against the excesses of the monarchies and ushering in democracy.
Zimbabwe never had nationalism this nationalism. Pan Africanism lead by elites mouthing platitudes about African unity – yes. Nationalism no. Africa needs nationalism. Afrikaner Nationalism industrialized South Africa. But they did not define the ‘us’ big enough.
Nationalism is the antidote to corruption and tribalism and big man syndrome.
South Africans should ask not what SA can do for them but what they can do for the country.
I also find it interesting that you think the ANC is irredeemable and that a splinter group will have to come from the left of it. I thought that with the Mbekites gone the ANC might become that.