We in South Africa, especially in the black community, have, for a very long time, pretended to live and die in a classless society. As a result, we have never critically examined the role and impact of class difference in the fragmentation of our elusive unity. We have never been a homogeneous group and thus have always differed in how we see things.
The black rich and poor, for instance, have always been among us. In fact, much as South Africa is the most unequal society on earth, the widest gap is in the African community between black and black. It is easier for us to talk about inequality between blacks and whites than admit that there is a big class difference among us.
Much as some of us want to, we can longer ignore class in the wake of the Marikana tragedy. When we look into the early years of the ANC, especially before 1940 for instance, it’s easy to see that the agenda and perspective of the oldest liberation movement was set by the black bourgeoisie: patriarchal black elites educated in western universities. But this does not mean that they were indifferent to the plight of the poor working class and rural unemployed.
Over the last 20 years since its unbanning, the values shaping our former liberation heroes were bourgeoisie, that is, integrating into the existing supremacist capitalist structure without any fundamental transformation of the economy. Even though the call of our world-renowned Constitution was for economic justice and social equality, former president Thabo Mbeki placed more emphasis on gaining access to resources to create the black middle class or bourgeoisie. It is this desire to become part of the elite or bourgeoisie that has seen not just the former liberation movement but its leaders and top government officials disconnect with the grassroots communities they come from. The desire for upward mobility — which included moving out of the townships, sending kids to multiracial schools, speaking English and only visiting disadvantaged communities to display how some individuals have “made it” – has recreated and re-emphasised the class difference that always existed among blacks.
The aftermath in Marikana has regenerated heated discussions about how leaders who benefit from capitalist interests have forgotten about their responsibility to the poor working class, unemployed and marginalised. Even former freedom fighters who are low-ranking soldiers in the army complain about being abandoned by their alleged fat-cat leaders in the upper echelons.
The miners are deemed as being illiterate, inarticulate, poor, angry and violent. They are a threat to the interests of the bourgeoisie. On the other hand Lonmin executives and other well-dressed and English-speaking shareholders are more acceptable because not only are they talking the language of a “peace accord” but are intelligible and accommodating.
But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to recognise the self-sacrificing courage of the mine workers as part of the centuries-long struggle for economic justice and social equality. These workers are not the first or the catalyst, but are a living symbol of the continuing straggle to make South Africa a country that belongs to all who live in it. It’s a well-known secret that without economic justice there can be no peace in this country. It’s only because this agenda is now seized by people who come from the wrong class that they are being condemned. It’s only when this struggle is under the control of lawyers, pastors, university-trained government officials, executives and other articulate individuals that it becomes acceptable. This is just an example of how class position and perspective has become a great determinant of who owns and sets the agenda for the struggle.
Temporarily, at least, the workers struggle was allowed to take centre stage in the early 1980s, for instance. A powerful but forgotten aspect of this struggle was that it was led by a young black lawyer named Cyril Ramaphosa. He was perceived as not only intelligent but intelligible because he was also a reasonable and accommodating man.
Almost 30 years later, the black bourgeoisie has conveniently forgotten that an important dimension of this struggle has always been a profound critique of the capitalist system. It was well understood in the 1980s – leading up to the formation of the United Democratic Front – that the prevailing economic and social order does not promote justice and equality and thus is untenable. But now that many of the former leaders of the struggle have become bourgeoisie and part of the system they fought against – Ramaphosa, for instance, is a shareholder in Lonmin – the critique of selfishness, greed and individualism of capitalism is virtually absent in the discourse around Marikana. Even those political leaders who appreciate the threat posed by economic inequality and injustice to social cohesion do not publicly condemn capitalist greed and self-enrichment. But we need to talk about the plight of the working poor, unemployed and marginalised in Marikana and their right to conduct their own struggles in the way they deem fit. None but the poor will liberate themselves.
We need leaders to come forward to provide a concrete vision for social and economic change that speaks to ameliorating the deplorable conditions under which the poor working class lives in Marikana and other flashpoints of the country. We cannot allow inhumane conditions — a breeding ground for a revolution — to perpetuate.
There is no doubt that the working class are not only highlighting class divisions but inviting us to critique the consequences of economic inequality. At the recent Social Cohesion Summit in Kliptown, delegates made it very clear that economic inequality and the monopolisation of the wealth of the country by a few leads to poverty, unemployment and marginalisation. They called upon government, business, labour, the church and other relevant stakeholders to work towards closing the gap between the poor and rich in the black community. Above all, they echoed the Freedom Charter when they declared that South Africa and its wealth belongs to all who live in it.
Tragically, this ideal of a caring and proud society glued by economic justice and social equality has diminished simply because a not-so-large number of blacks have entered the ranks of the economically privileged. That in itself is not bad. But it’s time we not only let the poor speak up for themselves but also listened to what they had to say about wage disparities.
“It’s a well-known secret that without economic justice there can be no peace in this country.”
Please can you explain the concept of economic justice?
Is it when everyone earns R10 000 per month? R20 000? Owns a 100ha farm? Able to buy an iPad?
When I picked my career path and saw the salary I would get, I thought all my needs would be more than met. I now earn more than that, and there is never any cash left at the end of the month.
Enough is never enough. Unless you are Bill gates.
Ntate Sandile, I fear that by “economic justice” you mean take from the haves and distribute to the have nots – classical socialism. If so, please tell who you trust unreservedly with this responsibility and explain how our post 1994 political leaders who fed us this “economically just” message to get into positions of power have been able to build vast personal empires while the poor and down trodden are now worse off than pre-1994.
Should economic justice not rather be hinged on the fruit of ones intellect, drive, purpose and labour and supported by a caring government for those who fall through the cracks. “Caring” in this case is a system where all people are given equal opportunity to be self sufficient through a good education, reasonable health, etc. and the social security net a mere safety net to buy those who have fallen through the cracks an opportunity to stand up and pursue their efforts in getting back through those cracks?
Tragically, blaming a system for personal political expedience is an end in itself and we are than hell bent to perpetuate the cycle of poverty because we use the poor to climb up the ladder and dessert them once we believe that we have arrived. In essence we have to keep the majority poor and ignorant because it is in such a state that they will keep us politically relevant!
Your approach, as good as it sounds, will merely allow you to climb the political ladder the top from which you too will perpetuate the cycle of poverty.
Very good analysis Sandile! Makes a change from the normal boring rhetoric which is repeated day after day.
very good articleand truthfull, remember the statement ” I was not in the strugle to be poor ” or I feel for the poor everiday or something to that effect. On the other hand thare are legal routes to negotiate arround labour diferences without resorting to violence that threatens our economy, who or what is behind all this just before the meeting at Polokoane.
Who ever or what ever it is should be charged for high treason.
Tony A
And where do you stand on Zuma allegedly spending many, many millions on his homestead? Using State funds no less. And little Malema accumulating wealth at a rate faster than the chaps in Silicon Valley? No good just fingering those in business.
Overall, however, I agree with your sentiments.
Good analysis indeed. However, I see this not as a racial disparities as between blacks and whites. Even within Whites this economic classification is most luckily prevalent although maybe to a lesser degree due to their benefits from apartheid. Rather I would emphasize the role of current corruption and nepotism as hindrances of “ordinary” citizens using their efforts and dedication to achieve economic self-reliance. It’s an open secrete that majority do efforts worth their economic freedom but only the Zumas who are closer to the president, the associates of the president are more luckily to experience economic liberation in the current government time.
Thanks Sandile, makes plenty of sense. Ironically, its exactly leaders with skills like Cyril Ramaphosa that can make a positive world of difference to the resolution of these problems, so I wouldn’t write Cyril off nor would I compel him to do the work that you yourself are incapable of, as does it appear so of our current elected officials and administration. I also wouldn’t minimise the heinous crimes of murdering NUM shop stewards and others of different persuasion. They were also comrades, fathers, brothers, sons and mob mentality was irrational and unkind, in fact vicious. Atonement works both ways. I don’t remember Cyril murdering anyone in cold blood.
Thanks Sandile. I mostly agree and generally appreciate. Nothing actually wrong or illegal about Cyril’s investments in South Africa. In fact, the opposite – he has the guts to invest here. He would make a damn fine President of South Africa, probably the best to date. And I really wouldn’t go around here ignoring the fact of the violence at Marikana and in other sector strikes on all sides, especially the execution of NUM shop stewards. Sometime we should tour South Korea, see how hard work is done and quality is achieved. For real. There are no sacred cows anymore, no convenient old philosophical and political loyalties and it is for the scoundrels to hide behind the flag. Politicians must either help get the economic engine going or the economic engine must get the politicians going. No more sacred cows.
An idealised economic justice is simply not possible anywhere in the world. It makes the assumption that there is inherent goodwill in all men toward one another, which there is not. History shows that there has always been, and by extrapolation, there always will be a poor class, no matter where you go. Jesus himself said that we would “always have the poor among us”!
The issue for us as South Africans is the obvious disparity – the gap between the haves and the have-nots, which seems so much greater than everywhere else. Until we become a nation who generally cares about each other, I can’t see the gap closing. State intervention in the form of socialism, or direct control through communism has been a disaster, so the evil we know – Capitalism – which has a slightly better track record, is still our best bet. It will take leadership of the status of a Mandela to kickstart that one…..
“bourgeoisie”
What a delightful word that is. It means bog standard middle class but sounds like a camp interior designer’s mandate. It would be nice if it was a fashion term and not just a euphemism for working like a dog to pay the mortgage and keep ahead of the debt collectors.
Class structure has been around since time began. The teacher was always higher on the social ladder than the goat-herder and the preacher was higher than the teacher. That is in every society on earth.
When did the bourgeoisie become associated with the ultra wealthy?
Rich and poor are not just material things – there are leaders wealthy in values and those very, very poor in values. Here are two African leaders – President Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso and ‘Mr’ Zuma of South Africa. Tell me which of these men is ‘rich’ and which is ‘poor’. I have a very strong opinion as I believe one of them is the poorest, most intellectually impoverished leader Africa has ever seen.
Here they are – Thomas Sankara:
• He sold off the government fleet of Mercedes cars and made the Renault 5 (the cheapest car sold in Burkina Faso at that time) the official service car of the ministers.
• He reduced the salaries of all public servants, including his own, and forbade the use of government chauffeurs and 1st class airline tickets.
• He redistributed land from the feudal landlords and gave it directly to the peasants
• Wheat production rose in three years from 1700 kg per hectare to 3800 kg per hectare, making the country food self-sufficient
• He opposed foreign aid, saying that “he who feeds you, controls you.”
• He forced civil servants to pay one month’s salary to public projects.
• He refused to use the air conditioning in his office on the grounds it was a luxury
• As President, he lowered his salary to $450 a month and limited his possessions to a car, four bikes, three guitars, a fridge and a broken freezer
Mr Zuma – I don’t think I need to say anything more. The comparison says…
@Sandile: You say “capitalist greed and self-enrichment.”
Crap. Nonsense. Rubbish.
Greed has to do with people. It is not unique to capitalism. It is found just as much in government, under communism, and even socialism.
So stop the lie of equating greed only with capitalism.
For the rest, I find your views quite insightful. Unfortunately I cannot fully apologise for my rather hefty reaction to further propagation of the false meme of only “capitalist greed.”
@Mamma Cyndi, the term bourgeois came from France and it was used to described a class of people such as; merchants, professional people, bankers,investors, small and medium size business. The bourgeois class of people were producers of wealth because they produced goods and services. In SA the so called rich blacks in SA aren’t producers of goods and they are living off the government. If one do a survey of what the rich blacks produce, one will find that they produce very little in SA or Africa.
South Africa will be as prosperous as Asia when we understand the term “economic freedom”.
Economic freedom is achieved when all citizens have the opportunity to pursue any field to which they are best suited in the hope of maximising their income, providing it falls within the law.
Economis freedom is not redistribution. Economic freedom is also the ability to build a ligitimate estate which one can pass on to ones heirs.
Redistributing money from those that have earned it to those that have not, is not economic freedom; it is economic anarchy.
Every public service employee on or above assistant director level is one of the country’s nouveau riche.
According to your theory: ‘it’s time we not only let the poor speak up for themselves but also listened to what they had to say about wage disparities’, you’re definitely due a sharp salary decrease. A new African perspective, isn’t it?
“@Sandile: You say ‘capitalist greed and self-enrichment.’
Crap. Nonsense. Rubbish.”
What JandrO said is worth repeating and augmenting: Rot. Bunk. Trash.
It is ANC (Arrogance, Nepotism, Corruption) ‘greed and self-enrichment’ that has misappropriated, misused and stolen money meant for the upliftment of all South African citizens – and morespecially the ‘ameliorating of the deplorable social conditions’ of the poor in general ( not only at Marikana).
After 18 years at the helm, they have done nothing except feather their own nests:
(Repeat after me: Nkandla, Mercedes, BMW’s, Johnnie Walker Blue, Breijtling, Illegal tenders, illegal tenders, illegal tenders etc. …. )
It is the stupidity, incompetency, thievery and non-accountability of what the ANC itself has become, that is the disgusting and disgraceful indictment.
As usual, Memela continues to pontificate and pitching his rubbish in the wrong direction.
………..”There is no doubt that the working class are not only highlighting class divisions but inviting us to critique the consequences of economic inequality.”
The positive consequence of “economic inequality” is and has been for centuries the drive of the individual to progress and reach for self betterment.
The current working class has been confronting us with the negative consequence being destruction of functioning infrastructures and murders of their partners who look to achieve the possible positive consequence of economic inequality= “self betterment”.
The increased calls (in many responses) for the police to start using life ammo on the vandalizing strikers could be a sign that people get enough of this actions and stop listening to these people. This makes their strike actions unproductive both for themselves and the nation as a whole.