In what is recorded as his last speech, the extraordinary Anton Muziwakhe Lembede told the gathering, at Leake Hall in Soweto, June 1947, that “the history of mankind is the history of the liberation of the mankind”. Fast-forward to 1961, Frantz Fanon forcefully argued that “what matters today is the need for redistribution of wealth”. Fanon opined that “humanity will have to address this question, no matter how devastating the consequences may be”. The young Karl Marx had argued, in the middle of the nineteenth century, that “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.
The powerful perspectives of these three scholars and activists remain relevant in South Africa today and for many other societies confronted with socio-economic challenges that are proving hard to address. In particular, Fanon’s argument that we must redistribute wealth, “no matter how devastating the consequences may be” calls for further thinking and action, in resolving challenges that seem resolvable but we, as South Africans, are not succeeding. It appears that we are not succeeding because we lack an overarching societal consensus on how to address the socio-economic challenges confronting our young democracy. The main challenges are well-known but the possible solutions are not agreed upon and many South Africans continue to bear the brunt of hardship and marginalisation. Organised formations — labour, business and government — are not making the compromises necessary to turn things around. This is not entirely surprising given our political history. Of critical importance is that trust between organised business and the government remains fragile. Pertaining to organised labour, it would seem that the transformation that needs to take place in their approach and perspective is progressing rather slowly. For government, it appears that decisive leadership is in question and state cohesion remains weak.
To start with, South Africa faces two clusters of challenges. First, unemployment is too high, especially youth unemployment — it is estimated that at least 70% of those unemployed are below 35. The challenge of unemployment compounds the poverty and inequality challenge — about half of South Africans remain in poverty and the economic inequality is the highest in the world. This cluster of challenges — unemployment, poverty and inequality, is probably the easier one to address.
Given SA’s high per capita income and relatively high resourcefulness, poverty could be better tackled. The unemployment challenge, in particular the youth unemployment, is resolvable. Government is doing its part, though not so well. However, labour and business appear to be not doing enough. The wage subsidy programme, which was first proposed about three years ago, can address youth unemployment, to some extent. Granted, the youth unemployment problem in SA is on the demand side. Experiences of countries such as Germany, Canada, the United States and others point to the effectiveness of properly designed wage subsidy programmes, in different contexts. On the broader unemployment problem, country experiences of Ireland and the Netherlands in particular point to ways of addressing high unemployment rates. Jeremy Seekings and Nicoli Nattrass, in their recent book, discuss the experiences of the Netherlands and Ireland in detail. Given how much is known about addressing unemployment, it is baffling that organised labour and government are not debating the substance of how to address this challenge and business is sitting on the fence. The mix of active labour market policies, of which the wage subsidy is but one, can go a long way in resolving the unemployment problem engulfing SA. What should happen is that a consensus should be reached on how to address the youth unemployment problem, and each party must make necessary compromises.
Regarding the poverty problem, the government has done a relatively good job; at least as far as social pensions and public works are concerned — about 30% of people are receiving cash transfers and thousands access job opportunities. However, the problem is huge and the service-delivery bottlenecks constrain progress in addressing poverty. Government has to get its act together and it appears that there are attempts to do this. Business, in particular, and each and every one of us can do something to lighten the burden on those in poverty and underdevelopment. The most complex challenge to address is our extremely high income inequality. This challenge is even more pressing as it is predominantly along racial lines. Lessons from Brazil — a country that has done remarkably well in reducing income inequality — imply that SA should have dented the economic inequality by now, given our relatively significant social provisioning. One plausible hypothesis why we are failing is that the structure of the South African economy has not transformed. Restructuring the economy is a cumbersome exercise, with many risks on the upside. We need to be innovative in addressing this unacceptable challenge, especially given our high unemployment and poverty rates. Again, business must come to the party.
The second cluster of challenges confronting SA relates to race relations, gender relations and the class divide. Regarding race, Michael MacDonald’s recent book, Why Race Matters in South Africa, makes the point that “South Africa’s races originated in political experiences, that the white supremacist state made communities of ‘whites’ and ‘blacks’ by conferring citizenship on the one and denying it to the other. Whites were moulded by the political experience of inclusion and blacks were branded by exclusion … ” The challenge remains, as Adam Habib and Kristina Bentley put it in their recent book, Racial Redress & Citizenship in South Africa, that “South Africa’s democratic experiment is confronted with a central political dilemma: how to advance redress in order to address the historical injustices while simultaneously building a single national cosmopolitan identity”. Indications are that, although race relations have improved we remain a nation divided by race. Therefore, acts or remarks that do not acknowledge this sad reality compromise our rare political settlement. Government has done its part in racial redress by enacting a myriad of laws, making policies and designing programmes. South Africa, as a late-comer in democracy or liberation, learnt a lot from other countries — our constitution is a case in point. However, it would seem that we, as a country, still have a long way to go. We probably need to look at Malaysia and Tanzania, as examples, on how to better redress race-related challenges.
Regarding gender relations, the class divide and the plight of those vulnerable because of the conditions they live in, progress is equally appalling. Domestic violence and other terrible injustices visited on women and children indicate that something drastic needs to be done. It is about time, in fact it is overdue, that we find a consensus on how to better address this disheartening reality we live in — something that seems peculiarly South African. Similarly, the class question needs a consensus — in essence, it is linked to the unemployment challenge. For those vulnerable, each one of us can do something to ease their pain. Government, again, needs to do better. Business, again, needs to come on board.
Given the confusion and anxiety gripping our young democracy, as captured in WB Yeats’ Second Coming, it seems that “the ceremony of the innocence is drowned; the best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity”. As Yeats laments, “surely some revelation is at hand … ”. Our second coming, perhaps as epitomised by the imminent 2012 national conference of the ruling party, the African National Congress, requires of our young democracy to sharply redefine for itself our future. Presently, it would seem that the centre is not holding, as Yeats would say. As such, the future, especially for the many unemployed young people, is not looking good. The central question, in the context of the “history of mankind” that Lembede spoke of, is what consequences are we able to live with as we further pursue the transformation project that Fanon asked of us, as humanity, to pursue. The class struggles which characterise present-day South Africa, as they were in Marx’s Europe in 1800s, require of our young democracy to rigorously address the two clusters of challenges confronting South Africa 16 years on.
The overarching societal contract, some form of social accord, about how to address challenges such as unemployment, poverty and inequality or the broader project of socio-economic transformation is one fundamental answer to our unending woes. South Africa desperately needs some form of a consensus on how to address the challenges that largely seem resolvable. Organised formations must make necessary compromises. Each and every one of us must do our part, where and when feasible. It should be noted that many South Africans — black or white — are doing a lot in bringing about the necessary social change that our country needs. Government needs to get its act together. Government is doing many important things, and each one of us who get an opportunity to assist or serve should do so selflessly. The daily service delivery protests, as an example, suggest that the country is under siege and requiring more in terms of leadership and action. Lastly, the ruling party has to get its house in order. Attempts to do this are commendable. Fundamentally, it is the strategic posture of the ruling party as it approaches its centenary that could be an answer to its challenges and those of the country. At the core of whatever strategic posture, informed by the balance of evidence, should be a concern about the future for our children and their children: surely, they deserve a better future!
South Africa is a middle income country with already one of the biggest welfare systems in place.
Redistribution is not the problem, we need to grow the pie and ensure that more people are able to benefit from a modern flexible market based economy through education and legislation that are friendly to especially small-medium businesses and those with the skills to make a difference.
The less intervention by the state and government the better, since they have been responsible for most of the mess. It is government’s policies (cadre deployment, corrupt AA, civil service tranformation, nepotism, parastatal management, lack of capacity/leadership…) aimed at addressing these very real systematic inequalities that have been a falure and are responsible for service delivery protests.
The solution lies with empowering people by making it as easy as possible to start businesses, moving around in the labour market and encouraging as much competition and choice as possible.
Not more social engineering and a massive nanny state – all concepts that are central to the ruling party’s ideology.
I think he summed up the challenges well…
* You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
* You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
* You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
* You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
* You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
* You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
* You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
* You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
* You cannot build character and courage by destroying men’s initiative and independence.
* And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.
(Wm Boetcker d.1962, but often wrongly attributed to Abe Lincoln)
Couldn’t agree with you more the DR, Ruling party need to stop this crony system and cadre deployment. It is bringing peopl’s interest lasts int he agenda of issues to be tackled. It does not help to keep pointing fingers whhile the house is burning. JZ need to step the leadership gear otherwise this titanic will eventually sink.
I agree with you that SA needs to get its act together but, after reading umptious lengthy analysis of what is wrong and how to fix it over the last while, and seeing no improvements as a result, I have to go with my first instincts which is the following:
-Government is not listening to any other voices than those of the investors to their grand sceme, which is vengeful selfenrichment.
- Big business, for obvious and logical reasons, are fighting for their perceived fair share and, since we are now living a global village, are not too concerned with this particular street going to the dogs.
- Labour? I have met quite a few recently matriculated “labourers” who were complaining bitterly about earning not much less than my 30 yr work experience is getting me. What happens when there is not enough pie to go around?
malaysia is a very good example to use.
the malaysian chinese and whites who only held malaysian citizenship and not dual-citizenship with anywhere else were not allowed to leave the country, but were largely “forced” to stay and create their own businesses, after training ethnic malays to replace them in the workplace.
read that again — after training their replacements in government and large businesses, they were encouraged [some would say forced] to go into businesses for themselves because emigration was not permitted. something like that should have happened here.
crime would probably be a lot lower, given the number of white policemen that would have been sacked but would have had to stay in south africa instead of being mercenaries in, say, iraq, elsewhere in africa, and even guarding new orleans during katrina.
that said, many of the most vocal supporters of the anc, pac and azapo feel that non-blacks have no reason/right to be here or anywhere else in africa, so their rhetoric is therefore self-defeating.
oh well.
When are black South Africans going to start opening their own business enterprises?
White males, forced out of corporate life are being forced outof meaningless managerial positions and are putting their skills to work by opening SME business and the wealth gap keeps on growing.
Do black decision makers not see the seeds of the problem?
I am delighted Dr. that you have identified the three key parties who must closely work together in addressing unemployment, poverty & inequality. I however, think that the political power of organized labour in SA contributes to the country’s inability to expand the labour absorption capacity of the economy. For the economy to absorb the large masses of unskilled & semi-skilled labour, all parties should be willing to compromise. The government should tweak labour legislation to make it easier for the private sector to create “low wage” job opportunities for the low-skilled labour. “Low wage” does not necessarily mean exploitative wages. All parties should show willingness to address these challenges. Organized labour can temper its often-high wage demands & assists in promoting labour productivity. The government can also offer wage subsidy & procurement programmes favouring job creators. The business sector can cut the fat-off their often-high profit margins & increase low-skill employment. This can become a “win-win” situation while enhancing the competitiveness of the economy. Interestingly the failure to address this quagmire will have devastating effects to all of us. On race relations, I feel the white people should come on board & fully embrace the country’s diversity. For example, they should partake en masse in all national celebratory events, be they historical or otherwise. As long one or some groups feel insulated from the countries challenges, our problems would persist. Yes, we should all be equally involved in addressing the country’s key challenges. Sphamandla
Surely our kids deserve a better future, in fact we all deserve better now and not tomorrow. Dear Prof, I remain somewhat irreconcilable to the idea of founding a feasible social contract under the current political and administrative structure of governance, it just won’t happen. South Africa’s pressing socio-economic headaches may be chronic, but I refuse to admit that all is beyond repair and if I were to suggest an immediate panacea, that would be an immediate change in our electoral system. Representative democracy is just not working for us. If anything, the current scourge of all-encompassing corruption, poverty, crime, inequality, and so forth is a direct consequence of our collective renouncement of the power and authority of our vote to policians (deliberate misspell). In simple terms, we are happy to entrust our future and wellbeing to people we hardly know anything about. A political party slogan, logo and face of the leader is enough for us to believe that overnight the state will transform us into proud owners of big houses, enjoying access to clean water and electricity and our kids will be afforded an opportunity to shape the pace and direction of their career development and success under a safe and conducive environment. Proportional representation is killing our country slowly but surely. We must move in the direction of direct representation, after all this is the only true form of demokratia! When we can directly elect those we are convinced that they posses the relevant
…….academic skills, personality and experience to secure us the kind of a better life we all aspiring to, then the possibilities are that there won’t be any more shenanigans as those that we have witnessed unraveling at Eskom, Denel, SABC, Cipro, Transnet, and all other state departments and organs that have clearly taken us for a ride. Magic bullet = Demokratia!
What is the point? Without border control the jobs will be snapped up by very motivated immigrants (legal and illegal). The only solution is to increase motivation. Education and opportunities only take you half-way.
After the recession, we need another census. I am so tired of that old line: ‘the money is all with the whites’. Although I don’t for one moment suppose that census questions regarding income would be answered truthfully by any of the newly rich, you might find that the white generations (since the ’80s) are now are considerably poorer.
The benefits of apartheid? We bought land and tied ourselves to high bonds, while our poorer black brethren could not, but had far cheaper housing. And good education that was cheap. For the rest, most worked like dogs to achieve; it wasn’t all roses.
We now have free housing for the majority (and there are many who park expensive cars outside their shacks because they don’t choose to spend their income on better housing and legal electricity connections).
The ANC has found it virtually impossible to supply decent education to the entire population on the minority’s tax, as with healthcare, etc.
Fact is, unless you get people in jobs, the tax doesn’t travel far enough. Also, family men and women are far more likely to spend their earnings on their children, rather than children who would probably fritter their money away on cell phones, clothing, etc. If parents have enough, they pay for education for their children and those children are automatically a rung higher on the ladder of life. Skills and qualifications are less necessary than a decent attitude to working and learning. Pity…
Good work and thumbs up for this work! To address the first challenge you outlined, the second challenge must first be taken good care of. Tender rigging, lack of adequate leadership is about to cripple and destabilise the walls of the system.Race relations and class divide remains a hard nut to untie. The Government needs to listen to the cries at the back door. Listening is not enough but acting and proper evaluation should also follow suit. Proper use of resources should also prove to be the only way to eliminate unempolyment among youths.
Vusi — I am glad that you continue to place inequality in the center of your scholarship on social change in South Africa and around the world. It remains one of the greatest challenges of our time.
But, Atlas Reader’s list above invokes a little discomfort when s/he states that ‘you cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong”. If I understand this sentiment correctly, it lends itself to the hegemonic preoccupation with making Pareto optimal choices that invariably maintain the status quo at the expense of social justice. I am persuaded that candid efforts that empower the poor need not wait for national pies to grow because existing ones can still be shared equitably. Granted, this might mean that the more fortunate may have to suck up significant economic losses as we shore up those who are typically regarded as the undeserving poor. Besides, history is unequivocal about issues of redistribution in the absence of state intervention (land reform is a case in point here). We know that in contexts where wealth is concentrated among the few, the rich seldom lose sleep worrying about how best to share their resources in ways that fundamentally transform the life chances of the poor. With that commonsense wisdom in mind, I am all for growth and progressive redistribution, regardless of how much caviar the fortunate among us may have to forgo. Sadly, serious gain will inevitably come with considerable pain and the question is: Are we ready to live with this fact?
Dr. Gumede,
Yes, Inequality is indeed on of the biggest problems, but I don’t thing the racial nature of it is the biggest concern. A recent calculation and racial breakdown shows that the Gini coefficient among black South Africans alone is 0.62.
I find it appalling, that the income inequality among black South Africans is worse than that of Brazil (0.56 in a recent report) as a whole, where rich Brazilians are mostly white and most black Brazilians are very poor.
Income inequality has increased within all race groups in SA.
While talk of wealth distribution finds favour with many, the reality would probably be that the middle income gets taxed more, resulting in the very wealthy keeping much of their wealth.
The economy needs to enable a sizeable number of the unemployed to become employed. Taxing the middle classes more heavily (many of whom are heavily indebted anyway)is not the solution.
In his book “Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification” economist Timur Kuran writes: ” …politics interferes with directly productive activity. That is why most people devote little time to it. Highly politicized societies, observes Giovanni Sartori, fall behind economically….”.
SA is highly politicized, I believe. Many in the ANC regard it as a liberation movement more than post liberation ruling party. Luthuli House is a “revolutionary house” Malema stated recently.
Inflexible policies do inhibit job creation. I once informed an engineer, one of the best I have met, of an opportunity. He studied the BEE conditions, and was prepared to partner with a black friend, also an engineer. Both of them however baulked at taking on a black female partner, to meet the 30% black female target. Experienced, competent black female engineers are very scarce in SA, and they did not know any who were available to partner in that project. I proposed a suitable female technician, but they were not prepared to partner with a stranger (from their perspective) who may not work as hard as they did, but would enjoy 1/3 of the benefits regardless.
The product will now be imported, contributing to jobs and value add overseas, whereas this engineer could have created new, value adding manufacturing or assembly jobs in SA. There are probably hundreds, if not thousands of cases like this where economic activity/job creation takes a backseat to inflexible policies.
Well said Prof. G, I think government need to get its act together if we need to achieve these challenges as a country.
This mandate has been long overdue,indeed South Africa really need to get its act together.We are becoming the joke of the world now and those given the task and privillege to serve the public should do so from their hearts.
If I may… I am of the opinion that, in order to get our ‘act together’ we need to take a look at our education system. Rather ‘long-winded’ but bear with me please… If we are as a people, as a nation, to progress, the only way in which to do so is through education. That said, we need to change the manner in which we are perceived by the rest of the world and indeed, the manner in which we have been ‘taught’ to perceive ourselves as a direct result of same. This ‘perception’, suggesting that Africans are/were ignorant savages and the white man, the savior was created due to the fact that the history of Africans in South Africa has been carried to the world by descendants of the British or Dutch settlers and from their point of view. This needs to be rectified! Our children are being educated, today STILL, in institutions promoting the philosophy I refer to above! They are taught that no African has ever achieved anything noteworthy or worthwhile! There is no African Education System. What we NEED is an education system written by Africans for Africans from the perspective of Africans; one which instills in us a sense of pride, teaches our youths about African culture, African history and educates them as to the real heroes, Africa’s freedom fighters, great African scholars, etc