Malema sacrificed-n Ndletyana… “What is apparent now, however, is that Malema’s expulsion has little to do with the charges against him. The supposed transgressions are not as gross as they’re made out to be. Comparing presidents, for instance, is not unheard of within the ANC. ANC members touted Thabo Mbeki as the most cerebral of ANC presidents, while also conceding that he fell short of Nelson Mandela’s public leadership. Jacob Zuma’s supporters went for him because he was different from Mbeki. Zuma may not be as suave as his predecessor, they admitted, but insisted he had a public touch Mbeki lacked.
That’s the same logic that persuaded previous generations of ANC members to force John Dube’s resignation in 1917 for being too conciliatory to the Union government, electing Sefako Makgatho in his place; to vote out the “radical” Josiah Gumede in favour of the “moderate” Pixley Seme in 1930, only to publicly accuse him of “culpable inertia”, leading them to opt for the steady stewardship of Reverend Zaccheus Mahabane in 1937. And so the cycle has continued. Often even electing a new president is a critique of the incumbent. Pointing out weaknesses in the incumbent isn’t the worst violation that a member can commit, but has been a catalyst in electing an even better individual – at least that’s what they think at the time. Malema is a sacrifice in an organisational bid at renewal. The ANC is in a state of paralysis. The Polokwane Conference represented the height of that paralysis. Previous national conferences had been tense, but none ever descended to such ignominy as the 2007 conference. The Morogoro Conference pitted members, led by the young Chris Hani, against their leaders, whom they accused of ineptitude. The rigor of the exchanges was such that even the normally calm Oliver Tambo offered to resign the presidency. Instead of inflicting organisational degeneration, that 1967 Conference began a renewal of the exiled organisation that had become moribund. The Kwabe Conference in 1985 was preceded by fierce disagreements over membership to non-Africans, but emerged with a compromise. Non-Africans were granted full membership, but could not be elected to the highest three positions at the time: presidency, secretariat and treasury. The Polokwane Conference, however, could not cleanse the organisation of the hubris that defined it. Instead, vulgarity became an organisational virtue. Malema was at the helm, cheered on by the new leadership he had put into office at Polokwane. He came to believe that vulgarity was a mark of leadership. Because Malema couldn’t be anything but uncouth, even the beneficiaries of his venomous tongue turned victims. Seniors in the organisation had come face to face with the monstrous offspring they had spawned. Malema threatened to devour his parentage. His removal is meant to restore some order within the organisation. This restorative process is far from complete, however. Tradition and history are difficult to undo. Militancy and defiance remain celebrated qualities within the ANC. They constitute its revolutionary stature. The risk, however, is that there’s little that separates a militant posture and violent threats. It’s very easy to move from one end to another. Veterans of UmKhonto WeSizwe, for instance, may claim the highest standards of discipline, but are easy to break into war-talk when they want to get their way. They, too, threatened to kill for Zuma, their former commander. And theirs cannot be taken as idle threats. After all, they know how to use guns. Who says they won’t do or say that in future? What will the “national structure” do in that case? Therein lies the crux of the problem for the national leadership: their disciplinary actions may not escape association with the ongoing shenanigans towards the elective conference next year at Mangaung. Malema told us the other day that electing Zuma was a mistake. His executive sent Kgalema Motlanthe birthday wishes, referring to him as “Mr President”. Malema’s supporters may well see his removal as a pre-emptive strike to bolster Zuma’s prospects of re-election. This belief grows even stronger when Zuma is seen dealing unevenly with misdemeanour. Tokyo Sexwale reminded us the other day, for instance, that the ANC had forgiven individuals that committed far more grievous violations than Malema. The list includes, among others, Zuma himself. Malema is thus cast as a victim of political machinations. His sin apparently is antipathy towards Zuma. Other sinners, the suspicion goes, have escaped presidential censure because their misdemeanour benefits the president. All these shenanigans are symptomatic of a much deeper problem, the lack of agreement on leadership succession. They can’t agree on who should succeed the other, nor are they able to follow their own normative prescriptions on appropriate leadership. The ANC is a sum total of disparate parts. KwaZulu-Natal is a reincarnation of Zulu nationalism, the Eastern Cape is a beacon of organisational malfunction and Mpumalanga is a killing field, with hired assassins hunting down local leaders. The only thing they have in common is a membership card. Yet, the organisation will live to be 100 years old next year. Perhaps the leaders might pause and ask themselves: Are we worthy descendants (of our earlier leaders)? What will history say of us?” Source: The Sunday Independent (SA) Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] .
